Saint  Basil  the  Great

                     Bishop of Caesarea, and 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.

                                                LIFE

                     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 littéraire 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 us (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 had
                     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, Mém., 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, Mém., 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.

                                              WRITINGS

                     Dogmatic

                     Of the five books against Eunomius (c. 364) the last two are classed as spurious
                     by some critics. The work assails the equivalent Arianism of Eunomius and
                     defends the Divinity of the Three Persons of the Trinity; it is well summarized by
                     Jackson (Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, Series II, VIII). The work "De Spiritu
                     Sancto", or treatise on the Holy Spirit (c. 375) was evoked in part by the
                     Macedonian denial of the Divinity of the Third Person and in part by charges that
                     Basil himself had "slurred over the Spirit" (Gregory Naz., Ep. lviii), that he had
                     advocated communion with all such a should admit simply that the Holy Ghost
                     was not a creature (Basil, Ep. cxiii), and that he had sanctioned the use of a
                     novel doxology, namely, "Glory be to the Father with the Son together with the
                     Holy Ghost" (De Sp. S., I, i) The treatise teaches the doctrine of the Divinity of
                     the Holy Ghost, while avoiding the phrase "God, the Holy Ghost" for prudential
                     reasons (Greg. Naz., Or. xliii. Wuilcknis and Swete affirm the necessity of some
                     such reticence on Basil's part. (Cf. Jackson, op. cit., p. XXIII, note.) With regard
                     to Basil's teaching on the Third Person, as expressed in his work against
                     Eunomius (III, i), a controversy arose at the Council of Florence between the
                     Latins and the Greeks; but strong arguments both external and internal, availed
                     to place Basil on the side of the "Filioque". The dogmatic writings were edited
                     separately by Goldhorn, in his "S. Basilii Opera Dogmatica Selecta" (Leipzig,
                     1854). The "De Spiritu Sancto", was translated into English by Johnston (Oxford,
                     1892); by Lewis in the Christian Classic Series (1888); and by Jackson (op. cit.).

                     Exegetical

                     These include nine homilies "On the Hexaemeron" and thirteen (Maran) genuine
                     homilies on particular Psalms. A lengthy commentary on the first sixteen
                     chapters of Isaias is of doubtful authenticity (Jackson), though by a
                     contemporary hand. A commentary on Job has disappeared. "The Hexaemeron"
                     was highly admired by Gregory of Nazianzus (Or. xliii, no. 67). It is translated
                     entire by Jackson (op. cit.). The homilies on the Psalms are moral and hortatory
                     rather than strictly exegetical. In interpreting the Scripture, Basil uses both the
                     literal and the allegorical methods, but favours the literal system of Antioch. His
                     second homily contains a denunciation of usury which has become famous.

                     Homiletical

                     Twenty-four sermons, doctrinal, moral, and panegyrical in character, are looked
                     upon as generally genuine, certain critical difficulties, however, remaining still
                     unsolved. Eight of these sermons were translated into Latin by Rufinus. The
                     discourses place Basil among the very greatest of Christian preachers and
                     evince his special gift for preaching upon the responsibilities of wealth. The most
                     noteworthy in the collection are the homilies on the rich (vi and vii) copied by St.
                     Ambrose (De Nabuthe Jez., v, 21-24), and the homily (xxii) on the study of pagan
                     literature. The latter was edited by Fremion (Paris, 1819, with French translation),
                     Sommer (Paris, 1894), Bach (Muuml;nster, 1900), and Maloney (New York,
                     1901). With regard to Basil's style and his success as a preacher much has
                     been written. (Cf. Villemain, "Tableau d'éloq. Chrét. au IVe siècle", Paris, 1891;
                     Fialon, "Etude Litt. sur St. B.", Paris, 1861); Roux, "Etude sur la prédication de
                    &