SOURCE: "Basilius of Caesareia" in A Dictionary of Christian Biography, Vol. I, A-D, Little Brown, and Company, 1877, pp. 282-97.

[In the excerpt reprinted below, Venables provides a detailed narrative of Basil's life and career, highlighting the tactics Basil employed to gain the episcopate of Caesarea, consolidate his power and authority, and defend the orthodox faith against a variety of challenges. The abbreviations "Ep." and De Sp. Sancto used throughout stand for "epistle" and De Spiritu Sancto, respectively.]

Basilius, bishop of Caesareia in Cappadocia, commonly called Basil the Great, the strenuous champion of orthodoxy in the East, the restorer of union to the divided Oriental Church, and the promoter of unity between the East and the West, was born at Caesareia (originally called Mazaca), the capital of Cappadocia, towards the end of the year 329. His parents were members of noble and wealthy families, and were Christians by descent. His grandparents on both sides had suffered during the Maximinian persecution. His maternal grandfather was deprived of his property and life. Macrina, his grandmother on his father's side, and her husband, were compelled by the severity of the persecution to leave their home in Pontus, of which country they were natives, and to take refuge among the woods and mountains of that province, where they are reported to have passed seven years (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. p. 319) [Macrina]. His father, whose name was also Basil, was an advocate and teacher of rhetoric whose learning and eloquence had brought him a very large practice. He was also celebrated for his Christian virtues. Gregory Nazianzen speaks of this elder Basil in terms of the highest commendation as one who was regarded by the whole of Pontus as "the common instructor of virtue" (Orat. xx. p. 324). His mother's name was Emmelia [Emmelia]. Basil and Emmelia had ten children, five of each sex, of whom a daughter, Macrina, was the eldest, and a son named Peter, whose birth was almost contemporaneous with his father's death, the youngest. Basil was the eldest of the sons, two of whom besides himself, Gregory Nyssen and Peter, attained the episcopate. One son died in infancy. Naucratius, the second son, died a layman when about 27 years of age [Naucratius]. Four of the daughters were well and honourably married. Macrina the eldest embraced a life of devotion, and exercised a very powerful influence over Basil and the other members of her family [Macrina, No. 2]. Basil had a paternal uncle named Gregory, who took his father's place after his decease, and was present with other bishops of Cappadocia at his nephew's ordination. Basil was indebted for the care of his earliest years and the formation of his opening mind to his grand-mother Macrina, who brought him up at her country house, not far from Neocaesareia in the province of Pontus (Bas. "Ep. 210," 1). The rule on which Macrina sought to form her grandson's religious character was the teaching of Gregory Thaumaturgus which she had received from those who had been his auditors. On leaving infancy the boy Basil passed to the hands of his father, probably at Neocaesareia, who was his instructor not only in rhetoric and secular learning, but also in religion and the virtues of a Christian life. The date of Basil's baptism is uncertain, but it hardly admits a doubt that, according to the prevalent custom, his admission into the church was deferred until he reached man's estate, and did not take place until he formally renounced the world after his return from Athens. For the completion of his education, Basil was sent by his father first to his native city of Caesareia, where he soon gained great reputation not only with his tutors and fellow pupils, but also among the people of the city, for the brilliancy of his talents and his virtuous life (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. p. 325). From Caesareia he passed to Constantinople where, if the correspondence between Libanius and Basil is genuine, which has been questioned by Garnier on insufficient grounds, he studied under that famous sophist. The letters of Libanius shew that there was a close intimacy between them, and express a high degree of admiration of Basil's eloquence and his life of gravity and self-restraint in the midst of the temptations of such a city as Constantinople (Bas. "Ep. 335-339"; Liban. Vita, p. 15). According to Socrates and Sozomen (Socr. iv. 26; Soz. vi. 17) the scene of the intercourse between Libanius and Basil was Antioch. But there is no reason to believe that Basil ever studied there, and these writers have evidently confounded him with his namesake, Basil of Antioch, Chrysostom's early associate. On leaving Constantinople Basil proceeded to Athens, where he prosecuted his studies from the year 351 to 356, chiefly under the sophists Himerius and Prohaeresius. He had as his fellow-student and inseparable companion Gregory Nazianzen, whom he had known previously at Caesareia, who had entered the university of Athens a short time before. Gregory's report of the eminent qualities and high attainments of his old friend, strengthened by the influence he had already gained over his fellow-students, secured Basil from the boisterous reception and rough practical jokes which were the lot of most freshmen. The acquaintance between the two young men speedily ripened into an ardent friendship which subsisted with hardly any interruption through the greater part of their lives. The painful estrangement that followed Gregory's forced consecration to the see of Sasima will be narrated in its proper place. The feeling was more enthusiastic on the side of Gregory, who looked on his friend with the most absorbing admiration, but it was returned with no degree of coldness by Basil. The most complete union subsisted between them. They occupied the same chamber and ate at the same table. They studied the same books and attended the same lectures, and stimulated each other in the pursuit of the highest Christian philosophy. In the midst of the distractions and excitements, the shows and the games of Athens, they lived a life of sobriety and self-restraint, seldom leaving their lodgings except for the schools or for church. Gregory's funeral oration on his friend (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. 328 sq.) and his poem de Vita Sua (tom. ii. p. 4, 15) supply many other interesting details of their joint college career, presenting a curious picture of university-life in the 4th century. Athens afforded Basil the opportunity of familiar intercourse with a fellow-student whose name was destined to become unhappily famous, the nephew of the emperor Constantius, Julian. The future emperor conceived a warm attachment for the young Cappadocian, with whom—as the latter reminds him when the relations between them had so sadly changed—he not only studied the best models of literature, but also carefully read the sacred Scriptures ("Ep. 40, 41"; Greg. Naz. Orat. iv. adv. Julian. p. 121 sq.). Basil remained at Athens till the middle or end of the year 355, when with extreme reluctance he quitted the scene of his studies, tearing himself from the fellow-students and friends who by their expostulations, entreaties, and tears endeavoured to retain him. His friend Gregory confesses his own inferior strength of mind in yielding to the urgency of his companions and allowing Basil to depart alone (Orat. xx. p. 334). Basil's first object in quitting Athens was to profit by the instructions of a philosopher named Eustathius, a native of Cappadocia, who still adhered to the old pagan faith, probably the same spoken of with high commendation by Eunapius (de Vit. Sophist. c. iii. iv.) whom he had hoped to find at Caesareia. He passed through Constantinople without halting, and reached his native city, but was disappointed of meeting Eustathius ("Ep. 1"). By this time his father was dead. His mother Emmelia was residing at the village of Annesi, … near Neocaesareia. Basil's Athenian reputation had preceded him, and he was received with much honour by the people of Caesareia, who, when he consented to settle there as a teacher of rhetoric, are said, in the tumid language of his panegyrist, to have regarded him as "a kind of second founder and protector of their city" (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. p. 334). He practised the profession of a rhetorician with great celebrity for a considerable period (Rufin. ii. 9), and, according to a letter of Libanius, assigned to this period, was not unwilling to undertake the troublesome charge of the education of boys (Basil, "Ep. 358"). So great was Basil's reputation that the people of Neocaesareia sent a deputation of the leading persons of the city to entreat him to remove thither and undertake the education of their youth. Basil declined. But on a subsequent visit to his mother the citizens endeavoured to overcome his objections, and used all measures short of actual force to detain him ("Ep. 210," 2). Gregory Nazianzen repudiates the idea of either Basil or himself—for by this time he had joined his friend—having been in any degree influenced by ambition or love of human praise, asserting that they had only yielded for a while to the importunities of their fellow-citizens and sacrificed themselves to the world … (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. p. 334). But Basil's excellent sister Macrina judged him less indulgently and more truly. His brother, Gregory Nyssen, reports that she found him on his return from Athens inordinately elated, puffed up with the pride of philosophy and science, and looking down with contempt on his superiors in dignity and rank (Greg. Nyss. Vit. S. Macr. p. 181). At this time also, we may gather from an amusing letter of the other Gregory, Basil had adopted something of the airs and habits of a fine gentleman, and without being stained with the vices of the city was not altogether insensible to its pleasures (Greg. Naz. Ep. 6). It was a period of some peril to the young and ardent rhetorician, the object of universal admiration. Macrina proved his good genius. Her warnings and counsels were effectual to guard him from the seductions of the world, and eventually to induce him to abandon it altogether and devote himself to a religious life (Greg. Nyss. u. s.). Basil in a letter to Eustathius of Sebaste describes himself at this period as one awaked out of a deep sleep, and in the marvellous light of gospel truth discerning the folly of that wisdom of this world in the study of which nearly all his youth had vanished. His first care was to reform his life corrupted by long intercourse with evil. He sought eagerly for some one to take him by the hand and lead him into the doctrines of godliness. Finding in the Gospels that nothing tended so much toward perfection as to sell all that he had and free himself from worldly cares, and feeling himself too weak to stand along in such an enterprise, he desired earnestly to find some brother who might give him his aid ("Ep. 223"). No sooner did his determination become known than he was beset by the remonstrances of his friends entreating him, some to continue the profession of rhetoric, some to become an advocate. But his choice was made, and his resolution was inflexible. His resolution in favour of a Christian life called forth the admiration of his old instructor Libanius (Bas. "Ep. 336"). Basil's baptism may be placed at this epoch. He was probably baptized by Dianius bishop of Caesareia, by whom not long afterwards he was admitted to the order of reader (De Sp. Sancto, c. xxix. 71). Basil's determination in favour of a life of devotion would be strengthened by the death of his next brother, Naucratius, who had embraced the life of a solitary, and about this period was drowned while engaged in works of mercy (Greg. Nyss. de Vit. S. Macr. p. 182). About the year 357, when he was still under thirty, Basil left Caesareia to pursue his search after the most celebrated ascetics, who might exhibit a model of the life he had resolved to embrace. For this purpose he visited Alexandria and Upper Egypt, Palestine, Coelesyria, and Mesopotamia. He records his admiration of the abstinence and endurance of the ascetics whom he met with in these countries, their mastery over hunger and sleep, their indifference to cold and nakedness, as well as his desire to imitate them ("Ep. 223," 2). His feeble health and frequent sicknesses interrupted his journeys, and prevented his pursuing Eustathius, whom he was still anxious to meet, to his place of retirement ("Ep. 1"). The year 358 saw Basil again at Caesareia resolved on the immediate carrying out of his purpose of retiring from the world. He and his friend Gregory had already resolved to abandon the world together, and Basil having fixed on Pontus as his place of retirement wrote to his friend to remind him of his engagement. But Gregory had a father and mother both advanced in years, and filial duty forbade his leaving them (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. p. 334). His eager desire for the companionship of his early associate led Basil to propose to exchange Pontus for the district called Tiberina, in which Gregory's home, Arianzus, was situated. But he found the place on trial cold and damp, and intolerably muddy, "the very pit of the whole earth" ("Ep. 14"), and he quitted it in disgust, and returning to his original destination, selected for his retreat a spot near Neocaesareia, close to the village of Annesi where his father's estates lay, and where he had passed his childhood under the care of his grandmother Macrina. To Annesi his mother Emmelia and his sister Macrina had retired after the death of the elder Basil, and were living a semi-monastic life. Basil's future home was only divided from Annesi by the river Iris, by which and the gorges of the mountain torrents a tract of level ground was completely insulated. A wooded mountain rose behind. There was only one approach to it, and of that he was master. The natural beauties of the spot, with its ravines, precipices, dashing torrents, and waterialls, the purity of the air and coolness of the breezes, the abundance of flowers and multitude of singing-birds ravished him, and he declared it to be more beautiful than Calypso's island ("Ep. 14"). His glowing description of its charms at length tempted Gregory to visit him. But he did not find the place so much to his taste, and in a bantering epistle addressed to Basil after his retum, he reproached him with the wretchedness both of the lodging and the fare, and the severity of the toil he had compelled him to share. "But for Basil's lady-mother he would have been starved to death" (Greg. Naz. Ep. 7, 8).

A more serious letter written to soothe Basil's somewhat wounded feelings shews that he sojourned some considerable time with his friend and studied the Scriptures with him (Ep. 9), together with the Commentaries of Origen and other early expositors. At this time they also compiled their collection of the 'Beauties of Origen,' or 'Philocalia' (Socr. iv. 26; Soz. vi. 17; Greg. Naz. Ep. 87). In this secluded spot Basil passed five years, an epoch of no small importance in the history of the church, inasmuch as it saw the origin under Basil's influence of the monastic system in the coenobitic form. Eustathius of Sebaste had already introduced monachism into Asia Minor, but monastic communities were a novelty in the Christian world, and of these Basil is justly considered the founder. To his calm and practical mind the coenobitic life appeared much more conducive to the exercise of Christian graces than that of the solitary. "God," he said, "has made us, like the members of our body, to need one another's help. For what discipline of humility, of pity, or of patience can there be if there be no one to whom these duties are to be practised? Whose feet wilt thou wash—whom wilt thou serve—how canst thou be last of all—if thou art alone?" (Basil. Reg. Resp. vii.). His rule, like that of St. Benedict in later times, united active industry with regular devotional exercises, and by the labour of his monks over wide desert tracts, hopeless sterility gave place to golden harvests and abundant vintages. Not the day only but the night also was divided into definite portions, the intervals being filled with prayers, hymns, and alternate psalmody. The day began and closed with a psalm of confession. The food of his monks was limited to one meal a-day of bread, water, and herbs, and he allowed of sleep only fill midnight, when all rose for prayer ("Ep. 2, 207"). On his retirement to Pontus Basil devoted all his worldly possessions to the service of the poor, retaining them, however, in his own hands, and by degrees divesting himself of them as occasion required. His life was one of the most rigid asceticism. He had but one outer and one inner garment; he slept in a hair shirt, his bed was the ground; he took little sleep, no bath; the sun was his fire, his food bread and water, his drink the running stream (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. p. 358; Greg. Nyss. de Basil. p. 490). The severe bodily austerities he practised emaciated his frame and ruined his already feeble health, sowing the seeds of the maladies to which in later years he was a martyr. His friend describes him as "without a wife, without property, without flesh, and almost without blood" (Greg. Naz. Or. xix. p. 311). Basil's reputation for sanctity collected large numbers about him. Monasteries sprang up on every side. He repeatedly made missionary journeys through Pontus, and the result of his preaching was the establishment of many coenobitic industrial communities, and the erection of monasteries for both sexes, by which the whole face of the province was changed, while the purity of the orthodox faith was restored by his preaching (Rufin. ix. 9; Soz. vi. 17; Greg. Nyss. de Basil. p. 488). Throughout Pontus and Cappadocia Basil was the means of the erection of numerous hospitals for the poor, houses of refuge for virgins, orphanages, and other homes of beneficence. His monasteries had as their inmates children he had taken charge of, married persons who had mutually agreed to live asunder, slaves with the consent of their masters, and solitaries convinced of the danger of living alone (Basil, Regulae, 10, 12, 15).

After two years spent in these labours Basil was summoned from his solitude in 359 to accompany Basil of Ancyra and Eustathius of Sebaste, who had been delegated by the council of Seleuceia to communicate the conclusions of that assembly to Constantius at Constantinople. Basil seems from his youth and natural timidity to have avoided taking any part in the discussions of the council that followed, 360, in which the Anomoeans were condemned, the more orthodox Semiarians deposed, and the Acacians triumphed. But when Constantius endeavoured to force those present to sign the creed of Ariminum, Basil left the city and returned to Cappadocia (Greg. Nyss. in Eunom. p. 310, 312; Philost. iv. 12). Not long after his return George of Laodiceia arrived at Caesareia as an emissary of Constantius, bringing with him that creed for signature. To his intense grief the bishop, Dianius, a gentle undecided man, whose creed always inclined to that of the strongest, and who valued peace above orthodoxy, but for whom Basil felt great respect and affection, was persuaded to sign the heretical document Basil felt it impossible any longer to hold com munion with his bishop, and fled to Nazianzus to find consolation in the society of his dear friend Gregory ("Ep. 8, 51"). He denied with indignation the report that he had anathematized his bishop, and when two years afterwards (362) Dianius was stricken for death and entreated Basil to return and comfort his last hours, he at once acceded to his request, and the aged bishop died in his arms, protesting with his last breath that he had never intentionally departed from the faith as declared at Nicaea, and had signed the creed of Ariminum in the simplicity of his heart ("Ep. 51"). [Dianius.] The choice of Dianius' successor gave rise to violent dissensions at Caesareia. The clergy were divided into parties, each urging the claims of a favourite candidate. At last the populace, wearied with the indecision, took the initiative, and chose Eusebius, a man of high position and eminent piety, but as yet unbaptized. In spite of his reluctance, they forcibly conveyed him to the church where the provincial bishops were assembled, and compelled the unwilling prelates first to baptize and then to consecrate him. The subsequent desire of the provincial bishops to annul the election on the ground of violence was overruled by the elder Gregory of Nazianzus, and Eusebius occupied the episcopal seat of Caesareia for eight years (Greg. Naz. Or. xix. 308. 309).

Shortly before the death of Dianius Julian had ascended the throne (Dec. 11th, 361). It was the desire of the new emperor to surround himself with the friends and associates of his early days (Greg. Naz. Or. iv. 120). Among the first whom he invited was his fellow-student at Athens, Basil. Basil at first held out hopes of accepting his old friend's invitation. Julian was delighted at his readiness, and placed the public conveyances at his disposal, begging him to come as soon as he could and stay as long as possible, but giving him full liberty to leave whenever he might be so inclined (Julianus Basilio, Basil. "Ep. 39"). Basil delayed his journey, and Julian's declared apostasy from the Christian faith soon gave him sufficient cause to relinquish it altogether. Julian concealed for a time his indignation at the non-fulfilment of his promise, which however stung him to the quick, as an implied censure from one whom he knew to be worthy of all respect. The following year afforded Julian an opportunity of displaying his irritation. On his progress through Asia Minor to Antioch he received the intelligence that the people of Caesareia, so far from apostatizing with him, and building new temples as he had desired, had pulled down the only one still standing, that of Fortune (Greg. Naz. Or. iii. 91; xix. 309; Socr. v. 4). His indignation at this contempt of his authority knew no bounds. He expunged Caesareia from the catalogue of cities, made it take its old name of Mazaca, imposed heavy payments, compelled the clergy to serve in the police force, and put to death two young men of high rank, named Eupsychius and Damas, who had taken part in the demolition of the temple. Before reaching Caesareia he despatched a minatory letter to Basil demanding a thousand pounds of gold, for the expenses of his Persian expedition, and threatening in default of payment, to rase the city to the ground. The letter ends with the familiar paranomasia, also (according to Sozomen, H. E. v. 18) addressed by him to Apollinaris, who had remonstrated with him on the folly of idolatry … (Bas. "Ep. 40"). Basil's dauntless reply reminds the apostate emperor of the time when they two studied the Holy Scriptures together, and nothing escaped him. But now Demons had raised him to so proud a height that he exalted himself against God and the church, the nurse and mother of all. He upbraids him with the folly of demanding so vast a sum from him, the poorest of the poor, who had not enough to purchase himself a meal; and concludes by retorting his play upon words on himself—… (Bas. "Ep. 41"). The displeasure of Julian against Caesareia was still further exasperated by the election of Eusebius as bishop, a choice which had robbed the state of a valuable magistrate (Greg. Naz. Or. xix. 309). The principal responsibility for this election lay with Basiland Gregory. These therefore he reserved with the cruel kindness of the Cyclops (Hom. Odyss. i. 369, 370) to be the last to suffer on his triumphant return from his Persian campaign (Greg. Naz. Or. iv. 132). The death of the apostate (June 26th, 363) delivered Basil from this imminent peril and preserved him for future labours in defence of the orthodox faith and for the promotion of the unity of the church.

It has been remarked that Julian considered Basil to have been one of those chiefly responsible for the choice of Eusebius as bishop of Caesareia. Nor is it at all improbable that his belief was well grounded. Basil, keeping in the background, may have secretly directed the popular movement, hoping thereby to secure a triumph for the cause of orthodoxy, and promising himself to have in the new bishop, suddenly raised from the ranks of the laity to an office of such great difficulty, a pliant instrument for carrying out his own purposes. The result will shew how far his anticipations were realised.

One of the first acts of Eusebius was to compel the reluctant Basil to be ordained priest. His friend Gregory had been ordained a little before, and his language seems to indicate that, as was by no means uncommon, both had been the victims of artifice, if not of violence (Greg. Naz. Ep. 11, p. 775). Eusebius was very naturally desirous to avail himself of the theological knowledge and intellectual powers of Basil to compensate for his own deficiencies. At first he employed him very largely. But when he found himself completely eclipsed he became jealous of his popularity and treated Basil with a marked coldness, amounting almost to insolence, which awoke a feeling of hostility to himself in the majority of the Christians of Caesareia, of whom Basil was the idol. A rupture was the consequence. We are ignorant of its immediate cause, but probably both parties were more or less to blame. If Eusebius's personal dignity was wounded by Basil's too evident superiority, Basil himself fretted under the official priority of his intellectual inferior, and yielded unwilling submission to his claims to obedience (cf. Bas. in Esaiam, i. 57). A schism was imminent, which Basil might have easily precipitated. It happened that at this time some western bishops, Eusebius of Vercelli being probably among them, were at Caesareia. They warmly espoused Basil's cause. A word from him was only wanted, and they would have ordained him bishop, a step which would have been received with enthusiasm not only by the populace, but by the chief inhabitants of the city. But Basil had strength of mind to resist the temptation. He refused to strengthen the hands of the heretical party by creating divisions among the orthodox, and retired with his friend Gregory to Pontus, where he devoted himself to the care of the monasteries he had founded (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. p. 336, 337; Soz. vi. 15).

Basil had passed about three years in his Pontic seclusion when, in 365, the blind zeal of the emperor Valens for the spread of Arianism brought him back to Caesareia. As soon as it was known that Valens was approaching that city, the popular voice demanded the recall of Basil as the only bulwark against the attack on the true faith and its adherents meditated by the emperor. Eusebius sought to make a compromise by inviting Gregory to his side. But Gregory, true to his friendship, refused to come so long as Basil was rejected. He acted the part of a wise mediator. Soothing the irritation of Eusebius, softening Basil's offended feelings, leading each to regard the conduct of the other in a more friendly light, he finally brought about a complete reconciliation (Greg. Naz. Ep. 19, 20, 169; Or. xx. p. 339). Nothing could surpass the Christian temper and wisdom manifested by Basil on his return to Caesareia. He treated Eusebius with the honour due to his position and his age, and by his deferential conduct dissipated the unworthy suspicions he had entertained. He was always at his side as his counsellor and sympathizing friend. He proved himself, in the words of Gregory, the staff of his age, the support of his faith; at home the most faithful of his friends; abroad the most efficient of his ministers (ib. 340). The consequence was that while the one had the name, the other had the reality of power, and while all was being really done by him, with happy adroitness he persuaded his superior that he was doing all himself (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. 340).

The first designs of Valens against Caesareia were interrupted by the news of the revolt of Procopius (Anum. Marc. 26, 27). He left Asia to quell the insurrection which threatened his throne. Basil availed himself of the breathing-time thus granted in organizing the resistance of the orthodox against the Eunomians or Anomoeans who were actively propagating their pernicious doctrines through Asia Minor; supporting the weakness of some, awakening the consciences of others, healing divisions, and uniting the Cappadocians in loyal devotion to the truth. The year 368 afforded Basil occasion of displaying his large and universal charity. The whole of Cappadocia was desolated by drought and famine, the visitation pressing specially on Caesareia on account of the largeness of its population and its distance from any seaport. The poor were the chief sufferers, and Basil devoted his whole energies to their maintenance. Some rich merchants having sought to turn the famine to their own profit by buying up all the remaining corn, Basil employed all his powers to bring them to a better mind, never ceasing from his expostulations until he had led them to open their stores to the famishing multitude. Setting an example himself, he sold the property he had inherited at the recent death of his mother, and devoted the sum thus realised to feeding the poor. Not content with this, he raised a large subscription in the city with which he purchased stores of provisions, the distribution of which he regulated himself. None were refused. He gave his own personal ministrations to the wretched, feeding them with his own hand and washing their feet, and while he fed their bodies he was careful to nourish their souls also with the bread of life (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. 340-342; Greg. Nyss. in Eunom. i. 306).

Eusebius died towards the middle of the year 370, breathing his last in the arms of Basil (Greg. Naz. Or. xix. 310; xx. 342). Basil persuaded himself, and not altogether unwarrantably, that the cause of orthodoxy in Asia Minor was involved in his becoming his successor. His election must be ensured at all risks. Unable to assert his claims personally, he at once sent for his friend Gregory, by whose influence and exertions he hoped his election would be put beyond doubt. But fearing lest Gregory, if apprised of the real nature of the business for which his services were required, would decline to undertake a task of so much delicacy, Basil employed artifice to cloke his design. He happened to be suffering from one of the attacks of illness to which he was subject, and he wrote to his friend begging him to come and see him before he died, and receive his last commands. The affectionate heart of Gregory allowed no delay. He started instantly, before the news of Eusebius's death had reached him. But halfway to Caesareia the sight of the bishops hastening to that city for the election of a new prelate disclosed the deceit that had been put upon him. With very natural indignation, instead of pursuing his journey, he wrote a letter of earnest remonstrance to Basil, not only refusing to come to Caesareia himself, but urging him, if he wished to avoid unfriendly suspicions, to leave the city until the election was over. Such affairs were not managed by men of piety, but by men of power and popularity: nor could it be fitting that Gregory should be prominent in a business in which Basil was unwilling to appear. When all was over he would visit his old friend, and upbraid him as he deserved (Greg. Naz. Ep. 21). Basil, disappointed of the assistance he had confidently anticipated from the younger Gregory, now betook himself to his father, the aged bishop of Nazianzus of the same name. The momentous importance of the juncture was more evident to the elder man. Orthodoxy was at stake in Basil's election. "The Holy Spirit must triumph" (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. 342). No exertion therefore was spared by him; no means of influence left untried. Using his son as his scribe, he dictated a letter to the clergy, monks, magistrates, and people of Caesareia, calling on them earnestly to lay aside all party feeling and choose Basil as bishop, and followed this up by another to the electing prelates, exhorting them not to allow Basil's weakness of health to counterbalance his marked pre-eminence in spiritual gifts and in learning (Greg. Naz. Ep. 22, 23). He felt himself too old to venture on so long a journey, while he clearly saw that the delicate temperament of his son was unsuited for the guidance of a factious constituency and a successful resistance to cabals and intrigues. No orthodox prelate had at that time a deservedly greater influence than Eusebius of Samosata. Gregory wrote to him and persuaded him to visit Caesareia and undertake the direction of this difficult business (Bas. "Ep. 47"). On his arrival, Eusebius found the city divided into two opposite factions. All the best of the people, together with the clergy and the monks, warmly advocated Basil's election, which was as vigorously opposed by other classes. The bishops were jealous of his superior powers: the rich were uneasy at his uncompromising preaching of charity: the authorities looked with alarm on a prelate of his resolute will, and dreaded the displeasure of Valens. The influence and tact of Eusebius overcame all obstacles. The people warmly espoused Basil's cause; the bishops were compelled to give way, and the triumph of the orthodox cause was consummated by the arrival of the venerable Gregory, who on learning that one vote was wanting for the canonical election of Basil, while his son was still hesitating full of scruples, and refused to quit Nazianzus, left his bed for a litter, and had himself carried to Caesareia at the risk of expiring on the way, and with his own hands consecrated the newly elected prelate, and placed him on his episcopal throne (Greg. Naz. Ep. 29, p. 793, Or. xix. 311, xx. 343). Basil's election filled the orthodox everywhere with joy. Athanasius, the veteran champion of the faith, congratulated Cappadocia on possessing a bishop whom every province might envy (Athan. ad Pallad. p. 953, ad Joann. et Ant. p. 951). At Constantinople it was received with far different feelings. Valens regarded it as a serious check to his designs for the triumph of Arianism. Basil was not an opponent to be despised. He must be either forced to bend to the emperor's will, or be got rid of. As bishop of Caesareia Basil's power extended far beyond the limits of the city itself. He was metropolitan of Cappadocia, and exarch of Pontus. In the latter capacity his authority, more or less defined, extended over more than half Asia Minor, and embraced as many as eleven provinces. Ancyra, Neocaesareia, Tyana, among other metropolitan sees, acknowledged him as their ecclesiastical superior.

Basil's first disappointment in his episcopate arose from his inability to induce his dear friend Gregory to join him as his coadjutor in the government of his province and exarchate. He wrote to Basil expressing his exceeding delight at his election, but excusing himself from coming to him both on Basil's account, lest he should seem to be collecting his partisans about him with indecency and heat, and for his own peace and reputation. He feared that he should excite jealousy, and only increase his friend's difficulties (Greg. Naz. Ep. 24, Or. xx. 344). When at last he yielded to Basil's importunities, he sedulously kept himself in the background, and declined all the public attentions and marks of dignity which Basil was anxious to confer on him. He refused all that Basil offered, and made Basil approve his refusal (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. 344). His sensitive and retiring disposition unfitted him for life in a large city, and Eusebius's affection for Basil and the sense of the services he might render him in his difficult charge, were insufficient to retain him long at Caesareia, and he returned to Nazianzus. Difficulties soon thickened round the new exarch. The bishops who had opposed his election, and who had manifested their ill-feeling by refusing to take any part in his consecration, now exchanged their open hostility for secret opposition. While professing outward union, they withheld their support in everything. They treated Basil with marked slight and shewed a complete want of sympathy in all his plans ("Ep. 98"). He complains to Eusebius of Samosata that they refused to help him, and were of no real use to him in anything. It was impossible to please them. They were angry if he neglected to invite them to the commemoration of the martyrs, and if he did invite them they would not come. On one occasion the report of his death having got abroad, they hastened to Caesareia to choose a successor. But finding him alive, they had to receive from him a sharp admonition. They manifested extreme contrition and lavished promises of amendment; but no sooner had they got back to their dioceses than they resumed their former opposition (Bas. "Ep. 48, 141, 282"). This disloyal behaviour filled Basil with despondency, and was the cause of repeated attacks of illness. It is true he overcame all his opponents in a few years by firmness and kindness, but their secret opposition and half-hearted support greatly increased the difficulties of the commencement of his episcopate. The alienation of his uncle Gregory, whom he had reason to regard with affection and respect as a second parent, who had superintended the completion of his education after the death of his father, was extremely painful to him. The aged bishop for some unknown cause took offence and joined the party of opposition. Basil's brother, the simple-minded but unadroit Gregory Nyssen, tried to put an end to the estrangement, but only made matters worse. With an almost inconceivable want of judgment he wrote forged letters to Basil in his uncle's name. Basil acted on them, and when they were repudiated by the aged bishop the estrangement was deepened. Each heartily desired reconciliation, but neither would take the first step. The uncle refused to humble himself to his nephew: the metropolitan to his suffragan. Basil, on discovering the deception that had been practised, wrote with just indignation to his brother upbraiding him with his unbrotherly conduct. He does not refuse to visit his uncle, but he declines to come until he has been properly invited (Bas. "Ep. 58"). At last the love of peace and a sense of the scandal of a quarrel between such near relations prevailed with Basil, and he wrote a letter breathing affection and duty to his uncle. The old Gregory had only waited for this. He at once sent back his other nephew with a pacific reply. Basil answered thanking him for his forgiveness, and leaving all arrangements as to the time and place of the interview to him (Bas. "Ep. 59, 60"). The misunderstanding was thus happily healed and peace restored. Basil had been bishop little more than twelve months, when he was brought into open collision with the emperor Valens, who was traversing Asia Minor with the fixed resolve of exterminating the orthodox faith and establishing Arianism. No part of Basil's history is better known, and in none do we more clearly discern the strength and weakness of his character. While every unprejudiced reader will repudiate Gibbon's offensive verdict, that Basil's assertion of "the truth of his opinions and the dignity of his rank" was due to "inflexible pride," rather than to an uncompromising zeal for the truth as declared by the Nicene Fathers, a calm review of the circumstances may lead him to accept the judgment of a later historian. "The memorable interview with St. Basil," writes Dean Milman, "as it is related by the Catholic party, displays, if the weakness, certainly the patience and toleration of the sovereign—if the uncompromising firmness of the prelate, some of that leaven of pride with which he is taunted by St. Jerome" (Milman, Hist. of Christianity, iii. 45).' Four years before, A.D. 367, the designs of Valens against the Catholics of Caesareia had been interrupted by the revolt of Procopius. Bat he had never relinquished them, and he was now approaching with the determination of reducing to submission one whom he knew to be the chief champion of orthodoxy in the East. The progress of Valens hitherto had been one of uniform victory. The Catholics had everywhere fallen before him. Bithynia had resisted and had become the scene of horrible tragedies. The fickle Galatia had yielded without a struggle. The fate of Cappadocia depended on Basil. His house, as the emperor drew near, was besieged by ladies of rank, high personages of state, even by bishops, who entreated him to bow before the storm and appease the emperor by a temporary submission. Their expostulations were rejected with indignant disdain. A band of Arian bishops headed by Euippius, an aged bishop of Galatia and an old friend of Basil's, preceded Valens' arrival with the hope of overawing their opponents by their numbers and unanimity. Basil took the initiative, and with prompt decision separated himself from their communion (Bas. "Ep. 68, 128, 244, 251"). These prelates were followed by the members of the emperor's household, who indulged in the most violent menaces against the archbishop. One of the most insolent of these was the eunuch Demosthenes, the superintendent of the kitchen. Basil met his threats with quiet irony, bidding him go back to his kitchen fire. The archbishop was next confronted by Modestus, the prefect of the Praetorium, commissioned by the emperor to offer Basil the choice between deposition or communion with the Arians. This violent and unscrupulous imperial favourite accosted Basil with the grossest insolence. He refused him the title of bishop: he threatened confiscation, exile, tortures, death. But such menaces, Basil replied, were powerless on one whose sole wealth was a ragged cloak and a few books, to whom the whole earth was a home, or rather a place of pilgrimage, whose feeble body could endure no tortures beyond the first stroke, and to whom death would be a mercy, as it would the sooner transport him to the God to Whom he lived. Modestus expressed his astonishment at hearing such unusual language (Greg. Naz. Orat. xx. 351; Soz. vi. 16). "That is," replied Basil, "because you have never before fallen in with a true bishop." Modestus finding his menaces useless changed his tone. He counselled prudence. Basil should avoid irritating the emperor, and submit to his requirements, as all the other prelates of Asia had done. If he would only yield he promised him the friendship of Valens, and whatever favours he might desire for his friends. Why should he sacrifice all his power for the sake of a few doctrines? (Theodoret, iv. 19.) But flattery had as little power as threats over Basil's iron will. The prefect was at his wit's end. Valens was expected on the morrow. Modestus was unwilling to meet the emperor with a report of failure. The former interview had been a private one. The aspect of a court of justice with its official state and band of ministers prepared to execute its sentence, might inspire awe. But judicial terrors were equally futile (Greg. Nyss. in Eunom. p. 315). Modestus, utterly foiled, had to announce to his master that all his attempts to obtain submission had been fruitless. "Violence would be the only course to adopt with one over whom threats and blandishments were equally powerless" (Greg. Naz. Orat. xx. p. 350). Such Christian intrepidity was not without effect on the feeble impressionable mind of Valens. He refused to sanction any harsh measures against the archbishop, and moderated his demands to the admission of Arians to Basil's communion. But here too Basil was equally inflexible. To bring matters to a decided issue, the emperor presented himself among the worshippers, in the chief church of Caesareia on the Feast of the Epiphany, A.D. 372. The service had commenced when he arrived, and he found the church flooded with "a sea" of worshippers whose chanted psalms pealed forth like thunder, uninterrupted by the entrance of the emperor and his train. Basil was at the altar celebrating the eucharistic sacrifice, standing, according to the primitive custom, behind the altar with his face to the assembled people, supported on either hand by the semicircle of his attendant clergy. "The unearthly majesty of the scene," the rapt devotion of the archbishop, erect like a column before the holy table, the reverent order of the immense throng, "more like that of angels than of men," overpowered the weak and excitable Valens, and he almost fainted away. When the time came for making his offering, and the ministers were hesitating whether they should receive an oblation from the hand of a heretic, his limbs failed him, and but for the aid of one of the clergy he would have fallen. Basil, it would seem, pitying his enemy's weakness, came forward himself and accepted the gift from his trembling hand (Greg. Naz. Orat. xx. p. 351). The next day Valens again visited the church, and listened with reverence to Basil's preaching, and made his offerings, which were not now rejected. The sermon over, Basil graciously admitted the emperor within the sacred veil, and discoursed with him at considerable length on the orthodox faith. He was rudely interrupted by the cook Demosthenes, who was in attendance on the emperor. Demosthenes was guilty of a gross solecism. Basil smiled and said, "We have, it seems, a Demosthenes who cannot speak Greek; he had better attend to his sauces than meddle with theology." The retort amused the emperor, who retired so well pleased with his theological opponent, that he made him a grant of lands for the poorhouse Basil was erecting (Theod. iv. 19; Greg. Naz. Orat. xx. 351; Basil. "Ep. 94"). The vacillating mind of Valens was always influenced by the latest and most imperious advisers, and when Basil remained firm in his refusal to admit them to his communion, the Arians about the emperor had little difficulty in persuading him that he was compromising the faith by permitting Basil to remain, and that his banishment was necessary for the peace of the East and the maintenance of the faith. The emperor yielded to their importunity, and ordered Basil to leave the city. Basil at once made his simple preparations for departure, ordering one of his attendants to take his tablets and follow him. He was to start at night to avoid the risk of popular disturbance. The chariot was at his door, and his friends, Gregory among them, were bewailing so great a calamity, when his journey was arrested by the sudden and alarming illness of Galates, the only son of Valens and Dominica. The empress attributed her child's danger to the divine displeasure at the treatment of Basil. The emperor in abject alarm sent the chief military officials of the court, Terentius and Arinthaeus, who were known to be his friends, to entreat Basil to come and pray over the sick child. Galates was as yet unbaptized. On receiving a promise that the child should receive that sacrament at the hands of a Catholic bishop and be instructed in the orthodox faith, Basil consented. He prayed over the boy, and the malady was alleviated. On his retiring the Arians again got round the feeble prince, reminded him of a promise he had made to Eudoxius, by whom he himself had been baptized, and the child received baptism from the hands of an Arian prelate. He grew immediately worse, and died the same night (Greg. Naz. Orat. xx. 352, 364; Theod. iv. 19; Socr. iv. 26; Soz. iv. 16; Eph. Syr. opud Coteler. Monum. Eccl. Graec. iii. 63; Rufin. xi. 9). Once more the unwearied enemies of Basil returned to the attack, and with the usual result. Valens always yielded to pressure. Again Basil's exile was determined on, but the pens with which Valens was preparing to sign the decree refused to write, and split in his agitated hand, and the supposed miracle arrested the execution of the sentence. Valens left Caesareia, and Basil remained master of the situation (Theod. iv. 19; Ephr. Syr. u. s. p. 65). Before long his old enemy Modestus, attacked by a severe malady, presented himself as a suppliant to Basil, and attributing his cure to the intercessions of the saint, became his fast friend. So great was Basil's influence with the prefect that persons came from a distance to secure his intercession with him. We have as many as six letters addressed by Basil to Modestus in favour of different individuals (Basil. "Ep. 104, 110, 111, 279, 280, 281"; Greg. Naz. Orat. xx. pp. 352, 353). Another striking evidence of Basil's power is recorded by his friend Gregory. A rich widow, whose hand had been vainly demanded in marriage by the judge's assessor, took refuge from his violence in Basil's cathedral. The vicar of Pontus demanded the fugitive, and ordered a domiciliary visit of the archbishop's residence. Failing to discover the lady he commanded Basil to be brought before him, and menaced him with tortures and a horrible death. On his threatening to tear out his liver, Basil calmly replied that he should be very much obliged to him to do so, since where it was it gave him a great deal of trouble. The news of Basil's danger spread through the city. The populace rushed to the prefect's court to rescue their beloved bishop. So violent was the commotion that Basil had to calm the mob and rescue the vicar by his intercessions from the consequences of his own rash insolence (Greg. Naz. Orat. xx. pp. 353, 354; Greg. Nyss. de Bas. p. 435).

The issue of these unsuccessful assaults was to place Basil in a position of inviolability, and to leave him at leisure for the internal administration of his diocese and exarchate, where there was much that needed his firm and unflinching hand. In the course of his visitation many irregularities were discovered which he sternly repressed. The chorepiscopi were in the habit of admitting men to the lower orders of the ministry who had no intention of proceeding to the priesthood, or even to the diaconate, merely to purchase immunity from military service ("Ep. 54"). Too many of his suffragans were guilty of simony in receiving a fee for ordination ("Ep. 55"). Men were raised to the episcopate from motives of personal interest, and to gratify private friends ("Ep. 290"). The perilous custom for unmarried priests to have females … residing with them as "spiritual sisters" called for animadversion ("Ep. 55").

A fanatic deacon, named Glycerius, who had collected a band of professed virgins, whom he forcibly carried off by night, and wandered the country dancing and singing to the scandal of the faithful, caused him much trouble ("Ep. 169, 170, 171"). To heal the fountainhead, he made himself as far as possible master of episcopal elections, and steadily refused to admit any but those whom he deemed worthy of the office. So high was the reputation of his clergy that other bishops sent to him for presbyters who might be their coadjutors and become their successors ("Ep. 81"). Marriage with a deceased wife's sister he denounced as prohibited both by the laws of-scripture and of nature ("Ep. 160"). Feeble as his health was, Basil's activity was unceasing. He was to be found in every part of his exarchate, and maintained a constant intercourse by letter with confidential friends who kept him informed of all that passed, and were ready to carry out the instructions they received. He pushed his episcopal activity to the very frontiers of Armenia. In 372 he made an expedition by the express command of Valens, obtained by the urgency of his fast friend the count Terentius, to strengthen the episcopate in that country by the appointment of new bishops and the infusion of fresh life into those already in office ("Ep. 99"). He was very diligent in preaching, not only at Caesareia and other cities, but in the country villages. The details of public worship occupied his attention. Even while a presbyter he arranged forms of prayer …, probably a liturgy, for the church of Caesareia (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. p. 340). He established nocturnal services, in which the psalms were chanted by alternate choirs, which, as a novelty, gave great offence to the clergy of Neocaesareia ("Ep. 207"). These incessant labours were carried out by one who, naturally of a weak constitution, had so enfeebled himself by austerities that, "when called well, he was weaker than persons who are given over" ("Ep. 136"). His chief malady, a disease of the liver, caused him repeated and protracted sufferings, which often hindered him from travelling when most needful, the least motion bringing on a relapse ("Ep. 202"). The severity of the winter often kept him a prisoner not only to his house but even to his room ("Ep. 27"). A letter from Eusebius of Samosata arrived when he had been fifty days ill of a fever. "He was eager to fly straight to Syria, but he was unequal to turning in his bed. He hoped for relief from the hot springs" ("Ep. 138"). He speaks of himself as having received "sickness upon sickness, so that his shell must certainly fail unless God's mercy extricate him from evils beyond man's cure" ("Ep. 136"). At forty-five he calls himself an old man. The next year he had lost all his teeth. Three years before his death all remaining hope of life had left him ("Ep. 198"). He died prematurely aged at the age of fifty. Seldom did a spirit of so indomitable activity reside in so feeble a frame, and, triumphing over its weakness, make it the instrument of such vigorous work for Christ and His church.

The year 372 saw Basil plunged into a harassing dispute with Anthimus, bishop of Tyana, touching ecclesiastical jurisdiction, which led to the chief personal sorrow of his life, the estrangement of the friend of his youth, Gregory of Nazianzus. The circumstances were these. Towards the close of the year 371 Valens determined on the division of Cappadocia into two provinces. Podandus, a miserable little town at the foot of Mount Taurus, was named at first as the chief city of the new province, to which a portion of the executive was to be removed. The inhabitants of Caesareia, who would thus lose much of their gains, and be subjected to double civil burdens, were stunned with the blow. They entreated Basil to go to Constantinople himself, and petition the authorities to rescind the edict. The weakness of his health prevented Basil from acceding to their desire, and he wrote letters to Sophronius, a native of Caesareia, who held a high official position about the court, and a man of influence named Aburgius, begging them to employ all their power to alter the emperor's decision. They could not, however, prevent the division of the province. All they could obtain was the substitution of Tyana for Podandus (Bas. "Ep. 74, 75, 76").

This was only the commencement of Basil's troubles. Anthimus, bishop of Tyana, insisted that the ecclesiastical division should follow the civil, and claimed the rights of a metropolitan over several of Basil's suffragans. Basil appealed to ancient usage in vain. The new metropolitan called a council of the bishops who having opposed Basil's election continued secretly his enemies, and were not indisposed to exalt his rival. Anthimus strengthened his faction partly by flattery, partly by intimidation, and partly by the removal of those who opposed his wishes. Basil's authority was at a blow reduced to a nullity in one-half of his province (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. p. 355, Ep. 31, 33; Bas. "Ep. 259"). In his difficulty Basil at once summoned his friend Gregory. He replied that he would come to his assistance, though Basil wanted him no more than the sea wanted water. He warned Basil at the same time that his difficulties were increased by the suspicions created by his intimacy with Eustathius of Sebaste and his friends, whose reputation for orthodoxy was not undeservedly low (Greg. Naz. Ep. 25). On Gregory's arrival the two friends started together for the monastery of St. Orestes on Mount Taurus, in the second Cappadocia, the property of the see of Caesareia, to collect the produce of the estate. This roused Anthimus's indignation, and notwithstanding his advanced age, he occupied the defile through which the train of mules had to pass with his armed retainers, and a serious affray took place, in which Gregory fought bravely in his friend's defence (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. 356, Ep. 31, Carm. i. 8). To strengthen himself against his rival, Basil determined to erect several new bishoprics as defensive outposts. One of the new sees chosen was Sasima, a miserable little posting station, and seat of a frontier custom-house at the junction of three great roads not far from the source of the disputed revenues, St. Orestes; hot, dry, and dusty, vociferous with the brawls of muleteers, travellers, and excisemen. No place could have been more distasteful to one of Gregory's delicate temperament; but here Basil, with disregard to his friend's sensitive nature, determined to place him. Gregory's weaker character bowed to the iron will of Basil, and he was most reluctantly consecrated bishop of Sasima. Basil's object, however, was not gained. Anthimus appointed a rival bishop, and Gregory took the earliest opportunity of escaping from a position into which he had been thrust by the despotic will of a friend from whom he had expected far other treatment, and which he could only maintain at the risk of continual contest and even bloodshed [Gregory Nazianzen, Anthimus]. A peace was ultimately patched up between the contending bishops, apparently through the intercession of Gregory, assisted by the mediation of Eusebius of Samosata, and the senate of Tyana. Anthimus was recognized as metropolitan of the new province, each province preserving its own revenues (Bas. "Ep. 97, 98, 122"). Basil's conduct at this juncture Gregory could never forgive or forget. He attributed it to a high sense of duty, and admired and reverenced him even more than before. But the wound inflicted on their mutual attachment was never healed, and even after Basil's death he reproaches him with his unfaithfulness to the laws of friendship, and laments the perfidy of which he had been the victim. "This lamentable occurrence took place seven years before Basil's death. He had before and after it many trials, many sorrows; but this probably was the greatest of all." ²

The Ptochotropheion, or hospital for the reception and relief of the poor, which Basil had erected in the suburbs of Caesareia, afforded his untiring enemies a pretext for denouncing him to Helias, the new president of the province. This establishment, which was so extensive as to go by the name of the "New Town" … (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. p. 359), and subsequently the "Basileiad" after its founder (Soz. vi. 34) included a church, a palace for the bishop, and residences for his clergy and their attendant ministers; hospices for the poor, sick, and wayfarers; and workshops for the artisans and labourers whose services were needed, in which the inmates also might learn and practise various trades. There was a special department for lepers, with arrangements for their proper medical treatment, and on these loathsome objects Basil lavished his chief personal ministrations. By such an enormous establishment Basil, it was hinted, was aiming at undue power and infringing on the rights of the civil authorities. But Basil adroitly parried the blow by reminding the governor that apartments were provided in the building for him and his attendants, and suggesting that the glory of so magnificent an architectural work would redound to him³ (Bas. "Ep. 84").

Far more harassing and more lasting troubles arose to Basil from the double dealing of Eustathius, the unprincipled and time-serving bishop of Sebaste. Referring the reader to his own article for further particulars [Eustathius of Sebaste], it will be enough here to state that the heretical antecedents and connexions of Eustathius, who had been a pupil of Arius at Alexandria, and had been ordained at Antioch by the Arians, failed to close the large heart of Basil against him. The austerity of his life, his seeming holiness, his strict adherence to truth, his zeal against more developed Arianism, gave him a high place in Basil's esteem, which after-intercourse warmed into real friendship. Eustathius visited Basil at his monastery on the Iris, where, as well as during the journeys they took together to visit various religious communities, he acquired an intimate knowledge of Basil's mind and character, which he afterwards employed against him. Eustathius was one of those who are always found on the side of those in authority. A semi-Arian under Constantius, he professed Arian doctrine under Valens. Basil was slow to believe evil of one to whom he was so much attached, and maintained his intimacy with him notwithstanding the suspicions it caused of his own heterodoxy, and the hindrances created in the effective management of his diocese. He attributed his heterodoxy to over-subtlety or want of clearness of mind, not to unsoundness of belief—sought to detach him from his old Arian connections, and to confirm him in the true faith.

Basil's intercourse with Eustathius was productive of many mortifications and disappointments in his episcopal work. Towards the middle of June 372, the venerable Theodotus, bishop of Nicopolis, a metropolitan of Lesser Armenia, a prelate of high character and unblemished orthodoxy, deservedly respected by Basil, had invited him to a festival at Phargamon near his episcopal see. Meletius of Antioch, then in exile in Armenia, was also to be there. Sebaste was almost on the road between Caesareia and Nicopolis, and Basil, aware of the suspicion entertained by Theodotus of the orthodoxy of Eustathius, determined to stop there on his way, and demand a definite statement of his faith. Many hours were spent in fruitless discussion until, at three in the afternoon of the second day, a substantial agreement appeared to have been attained. To remove all doubt of his orthodoxy, Basil requested Theodotus to draw up a formulary of faith for Eustathius to sign. To his mortification not only was his request refused, but Theodotus plainly intimated to Basil that he had no wish that he should visit him at Nicopolis. Basil had already felt hurt at the want of due formality in the invitation, and the absence of the usual escort. While hesitating whether he should still pursue his journey, he received letters from his friend Eusebius of Samosata stating his inability to come and join him.

This at once decided Basil. Without Eusebius' help he felt himself unequal to face the controversies his presence at Nicopolis would evoke, and he returned home full of despondency at the ill-fortune which for his sins rendered his labours for the peace of the church unavailing ("Ep. 98, 99"). A few months later the sensitive orthodoxy of Theodotus prepared another mortification for Basil. In carrying out the commands of Valens, mentioned above, to supply Armenia with bishops, the counsel and assistance of Theodotus as metropolitan was essential. As a first step towards cordial co-operation, Basil sought a conference with Theodotus at Getasa, the estate of Meletius of Antioch, in whose presence he made him acquainted with what had passed between him and Eustathius at Sebaste, and his acceptance of the orthodox faith. But Theodotus could tell him of the effrontery with which Eustathius had denied that he had come to any agreement with Basil. To bring the matter to an issue, Basil again proposed that a confession of faith should be prepared on his signing which his future communion with Eustathius would depend. This apparently satisfied Theodotus, who invited Basil to visit him and inspect his church, and promised to accompany him on his journey into Armenia. But on Basil's arrival at Nicopolis he spurned him with horror … as an excommunicated person, and refused to join him at either morning or evening prayer. Thus deserted by one on whose co-operation he relied, Basil had little heart to prosecute his mission, but he continued his journey to Satala, where he consecrated a bishop, established discipline, and promoted peace among the prelates of the province. Basil well knew how to distinguish between the busy detractors who rejoiced to find a pretext for their malevolence in his intercourse with Eustathius, and one like Theodotus animated with a true zeal for the orthodox faith. Generously overlooking his former rudenesses, he reopened communications with him the following year, and visiting Nicopolis employed his assistance in once more drawing up an elaborate confession of faith embodying the Nicene creed, for Eustathius to sign (Bas. "Ep. 125"). Eustathius did so in the most formal manner in the presence of witnesses whose names are appended to the document. But no sooner had this slippery theologian satisfied the requirements of Basil than he threw off the mask, broke his promise to appear at a synodical meeting called by Basil to seal the union between them and their respective adherents, and openly assailed him with the most unscrupulous invectives ("Ep. 130, 244"). He went so far as to hold assemblies in which Basil was charged with heterodox views, especially on the Divinity of the Holy Spirit, and with haughty and overbearing behaviour towards his chorepiscopi and other suffragans. At last Eustathius pushed matters so far as to publish a letter written by Basil 25 years before to the heresiarch Apollinaris. It was true that at that time both were laymen, and that it was merely a friendly letter not dealing with theological points, and that Apollinaris had not then developed his heretical views and stood high in the esteem of Athanasius. But its circulation served Eustathius's ends in strengthening the suspicion already existing against Basil as a favourer of false doctrine, by proving that he had not scrupled to hold communion with an acknowledged heretic. The letter as published by Eustathius had been disgracefully garbled, and was indignantly repudiated by Basil. By a most shameful artifice some heretical expressions of Apollinaris, without the author's name, had been appended to Eustathius's own letter accompanying that attributed to Basil, leading to the supposition that they were Basil's own. Basil was overwhelmed with distress at being represented in such false colours to the church, while the ingratitude and treachery of his former friend stung him deeply. He restrained himself, however, from any public expression of his feelings, maintaining a dignified silence for three years (Bas. "Ep. 128, 130, 224, 225, 226, 244"). During this period of intense trial Basil was much comforted in 374 by the appointment of his youthful friend Amphilochius to the see of Iconium [Amphilochius]. But the same year brought a severe blow in the banishment of his intimate and confidential counsellor Eusebius of Samosata. At the end of this period (375) Basil, impelled by the calumnies heaped upon him on every side, broke a silence which he considered no longer safe, as tending to compromise the interests of truth, and published a long letter nominally addressed to Eustathius, but really a document intended for all the faithful, in which he briefly reviews the history of his life, describes his former intimacy with Eustathius, and the causes which led to the rupture between them, and defends himself from the charges of impiety and blasphemy so industriously circulated ("Ep. 223, 226, 244"). It was time indeed that Basil should take some public steps to clear his reputation from the reckless accusations which were showered upon him. He was called a Sabellian, an Apollinarian, a Tritheist, a Macedonian, and his efforts in behalf of orthodoxy in the East were continually thwarted in every direction by the suspicion with which he was regarded. Athanasius, bishop of Ancyra, misled by the heretical writings that had been fathered upon him, spoke in the harshest terms of him ("Ep. 25"). The bishops of the district of Dazimon in Pontus, giving ear to Eustathius's calumnies, separated themselves from his communion, and suspended all intercourse; and were only brought back to their allegiance by a letter of Basil's, written at the instance of all the bishops of Cappadocia, characterized by the most touching humility and affectionateness ("Ep. 203"). The alienation of his relative Atarbius and the church of Neocaesareia of which he was bishop, was more difficult to redress. To be regarded with suspicion by the church of a place so dear to Basil, his residence in youth, and the home of many members of his family, especially his sainted grandmother, Macrina, was peculiarly painful. But the tendency of the leading Neocaesareians was Sabellian, and the emphasis with which he was wont to assert the distinctness of the Three Persons was offensive to them. They took umbrage also at the favour he showed to monasticism, and the nocturnal services he had established. To heal these offences Basil wrote in terms of affectionate expostulation to the church of Neocaesareia, and took advantage of the existence of his brother Peter's monastic community at Annesi to pay the locality a visit. But as soon as he was known to be in the neighbourhood a strange panic seized the whole city; some fled, some hid themselves; Basil was everywhere denounced as a public enemy. Atarbius abruptly left the synod at Nicopolis which he was attending, on hearing of Basil's approach. [Atarbius.] Basil returned from his visit mortified and distressed ("Ep. 126, 204, 207, 210"). Among other charges Basil was widely accused of denying the proper divinity of the Holy Spirit. Gregory Nazianzen tells an amusing story of an old monk who at a feast at Nazianzus, while the rest of the company were lauding Basil to the skies, vehemently charged him with unsoundness on this point, inasmuch as at the recent festival of St. Eupsychius he had passed very superficially over the Godhead of the Spirit while declaring that of the Father and Son most explicitly. Gregory warmly defended his friend's orthodoxy. But the company at table declared themselves against him, and mockingly applauded Basil's discreet silence (Greg. Naz. Ep. 26, 27; Bas. "Ep. 71"). This charge which when made by some Cappadocian monks had been already sternly reproved by Athanasius (Athan. ad Pall. ii. 763, 764) was revived at a later time on the plea that he had used a form of the doxology open to suspicion, "Glory be to the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit"⁴ (De Sp. Sanct. c. 1, vol. iii. p. 3). Self-defence was again reluctantly forced on the victim of calumny. He prayed that he might be deserted by the Holy Ghost for ever if he did not adore Him as equal in substance and in honour … with the Father and the Son (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. 365). Similar charges made at the festival of St. Eupsychius in the year 374 were the occasion of Amphilochius requesting him to declare his views on this subject, which led to his writing his treatise de Spiritu Sancto (1; "Ep. 231"). Maligned, misrepresented, regarded with suspicion, thwarted, opposed on all hands, few champions of the faith have had a heavier burden to bear than Basil. The history of the Eastern church at this period is indeed little more than a history of his trials and sufferings.

Basil's was not a nature, however, to give way before difficulties the most tremendous and failures the most disheartening. The great object he had set before himself was the restoration of orthodoxy to the Eastern church, and the cementing of its disorganized fragments into one compact body capable of withstanding the attacks of hostile powers. And this object he had pursued with undaunted perseverance notwithstanding the constant interruptions caused by his feeble health, "which might rather be called the languor of a dying man."

Cut to the heart by the miserable spectacle which surrounded him, the persecution of the orthodox, the triumphs of false doctrine, the decay of piety, the worldliness of the clergy, the desecration of the episcopate by ambition and covetousness, rival bishops rending asunder the venerable church of Antioch, Christians wasting in mutual strife the strength that should have been spent in combating the common foe, feeling himself utterly insufficient in his isolation to work the reformation he desired, Basil had looked round eagerly for effectual aid and sympathy.

He naturally turned first to that "great and apostolic soul who from boyhood had been an athlete in the cause of religion," the great Athanasius ("Ep. 69, 80, 83"). In the year 371 he begged his assistance in healing the unhappy schism of Antioch by inducing the Western church to recognize Meletius, and persuading Paulinus to withdraw. He called on him to stir up the orthodox of the East by his letters, and cry aloud like Samuel for the churches ("Ep. 66, 69").

In his request about Antioch, Basil "was inviting Anthanasius to what was in fact impossible even to the influence and talents of the primate of Egypt; for being committed to one side in the dispute he could not mediate between them. Nothing then came of the application" (J. H. Newman, Church of the Fathers, p. 105). Basil had other requests to urge on Athanasius. He was very desirous that a deputation of Western prelates should be sent to help him in combating the Eastern heretics and reuniting the orthodox, whose authority should overawe Valens and secure the recognition of their decrees. He asked also for the summoning of a council of all the West, which should confirm the decrees of Nicaea, and annul those of Ariminum ("Ep. 66, 69").

Basil next addressed himself to the Western churches. His first letter in 372 was written to Damasus, bishop of Rome, lamenting the heavy storm under which almost the whole Eastern church was labouring, and entreating of his tender compassion, as the one remedy of its evils, that either he, or persons like-minded with him, would personally visit the East with the view of bringing the churches of God to unity, or at least determining with whom the church of Rome should hold communion ("Ep. 70"). Basil's letters were conveyed to Athanasius and Damasus by Dorotheus, a deacon of Antioch, in communion with Meletius. He returned by way of Alexandria in company with a deacon named Sabinus (afterwards bishop of Piacenza) as bearer of the replies of the Western prelates. These replies were eminently unsatisfactory. They abounded with expressions of sympathy, but held out no definite prospect of practical help. Something, however, was hoped from the effect of Sabinus's report on his return to the West, as an eye-witness of the lamentable condition of the Eastern church. Sabinus was charged with several letters on his return to Italy. One bearing the signatures of thirty-two Eastern bishops, including besides Basil, Meletius of Antioch, Eusebius of Samosata, Gregory Nyssen, &c., was addressed to the bishops of Italy and Gaul; another was written in Basil's own name to the bishops of the West generally. There were also private letters to Valerian of Aquileia and others. These letters give a most distressing picture of the state of the East. "Men had learnt to be theorists instead of theologians. The true shepherds were driven away. Grievous wolves, spoiling the flock, were brought in instead. The houses of prayer were destitute of preachers, the deserts full of mourners. The faithful laity avoided the churches as schools of impiety. Priestly gravity had perished. There was no restraint on sin. Unbelievers laughed, the weak were unsettled.… Let them hasten to the succour of their brethren, nor allow the faith to be extinguished in the lands whence it first shone forth" ("Ep. 92, 93"). No help, however, came. A Western priest named Sanctissimus, who visited the East towards the end of 372—whether travelling as a private individual or deputed by Damasus is uncertain—again brought assurances of the warm attachment and sincere sympathy of the Italian church; but words, however kind, were ineffectual to heal their wounds, and Basil and his friends again sent a vehement remonstrance beseeching their Western brethren to make the emperor Valentinian acquainted with their wretched condition, and to depute some of their number to console them in their misery, and sustain the flagging faith of the orthodox ("Ep. 242, 243"). These letters transmitted by Dorotheus—probably a different person from the former—were not more effectual than those which had preceded them. The only point gained was that a council—confined, however, to the bishops of Illyria—was summoned in 375 through the instrumentality of Ambrose, by which the consubstantiality of the Three Persons of the Trinity was declared, and a priest named Elpidius despatched to publish the decrees in Asia and Phrygia. Elpidius was supported by the authority of the emperor Valentinian, who at the same time promulgated a rescript in his own name and that of his brother Valens, who dared not manifest his dissent, forbidding the persecution of the Catholies, and expressing his desire that their doctrines should be everywhere preached (Theodor. iv. 8, 9). But the death of Valentinian on November 17th of that same year frustrated his good intentions, and the persecution revived with greater vehemence.

The secret of the coldness with which the requests for assistance addressed by the Eastern church were received by the West, was partly the suspicion that was entertained of his orthodoxy in consequence of his friendship with Eustathius of Sebaste, and other doubtful characters, and the large-heartedness which led him to recognise a real oneness of belief under varying technical formulas, but principally the refusal of Basil to recognize the supremacy of the bishop of Rome. His letters were usually addressed to the bishops of the West, and not to the bishop of Rome individually. In all his dealings, Basil treats with Damasus as an equal, and asserts the independence of the East. In his eyes the Eastern and Western churches were two sisters with equal prerogatives; one more powerful than the other, and able to render the assistance she needed; but not in any way her superior. The want of deference in his language and behaviour offended not Damasus only, but Jerome and all who maintained the supremacy of Rome over all churches of Christendom. Jerome accused Basil of pride, and went so far as to assert that there were but three orthodox bishops in the East, Athanasius, Epiphanius, and Paulinus (ad Pammach. 38). The most impassioned appeals proving ineffectual, and no heed being paid to his warnings that heresy unchecked might spread and infect the West also, Basil's tone respecting Damasus and the Western prelates underwent a change. He began to suspect the real cause of the apathy with which his entreaties for aid had been received, and to feel that no relief could be hoped from their "Western superciliousness," … and that it was in vain to send emissaries to "one who was high and haughty and sat aloft and would not stoop to listen to the truth from men who stood below; since an elated mind, if courted, is sure to become only more contemptuous" ("Ep. 215, 239"). But while his hope of assistance from the West lessened, the need for it increased. The persecution of the orthodox by the Arians grew fiercer. "Polytheism had got possession. A greater and a lesser God were worshipped. All ecclesiastical power, all church ordinances were in Arian hands. Arians baptized; Arians visited the sick; Arians administered the sacred mysteries. Only one offence was severely punished, a strict observance of the traditions of the fathers. For that the pious were banished, and driven to deserts. No pity was shewn to the aged. Lamentations filled the city, the country, the roads, the deserts. The houses of prayer were closed; the altars forbidden. The orthodox met for worship in the deserts exposed to wind and rain and snow, or to the scorching sun" ("Ep. 242, 243"). In his dire extremity he determined once more to make trial of an appeal to the West. He now adopts the language of indignant expostulation. "Why," he asks, "has no writing of consolation come to us, no visitation of the brethren, no other of such attentions as are due to us from the law of love? This is the thirteenth year since the war with the heretics burst upon us. Will you not now at last stretch out a helping hand to the tottering Eastern church, and send some who will raise our minds to the rewards promised by Christ to those who suffer for Him?" ("Ep. 242"). These letters were despatched in 376. But still no help came. His reproaches were as ineffectual as his entreaties. A letter addressed to the Western bishops the next year (377) proves that matters had not really advanced a single step beyond the first day. We find him still entreating his Western brethren in the most moving terms to grant him the consolation of a visit. "The visitation of the sick is the greatest commandment. But if the Wise and Good Disposer of human affairs forbids that, let them at least write something that may comfort those who are so grievously cast down." He demands of them "an authoritative condemnation of the Arians, of his enemy Eustathius, of Apollinaris, and of Paulinus of Antioch. If they would only condescend to write and inform the Eastern churches who were to be admitted to communion and who not, all might yet be well" ("Ep. 263"). The reply brought back by the faithful Dorotheus overwhelmed him with sorrow. Not a finger was raised by the cold and haughty West to help her afflicted sister. Dorotheus had even heard Basil's beloved friends Meletius, and Eusebius of Samosata, spoken of by Damasus and Peter of Alexandria as heretics, and ranked among the Arians. What wonder if Dorotheus had waxed warm and used some intemperate language to the prelates? If he had done so, wrote Basil, let it not be reckoned against him, but put, down to Basil's account and the untowardness of the times. The deep despondency which had seized Basil is evidenced by his touching words to Peter of Alexandria: "I seem for my sins to prosper in nothing, since the worthiest brethren are found deficient in gentleness and fitness for their office from not acting in accordance with my wishes" ("Ep. 266").

Foiled in all his repeated demands; a deaf ear turned to his most earnest entreaties; the council he had begged for not summoned; the deputation he had repeatedly solicited unsent; Basil's span of life drew to its end amid blasted hopes, and apparently fruitless labours for the unity of the faith. It was not permitted him to live to see the Eastern churches, for the purity of whose faith he had devoted all his powers, restored to peace and unanimity. "He had to fare on as he best might—admiring, courting, but coldly treated by the Latin world, desiring the friendship of Rome, yet wounded by her superciliousness—suspected of heresy by Damasus, and accused by Jerome of pride."⁵

Some gleams of brightness were granted to cheer the last days of this dauntless champion of the faith. The invasion of the Goths in 378 gave Valens weightier cares than the support of a tottering heresy, and brought his persecution of the orthodox to an end on the eve of his last campaign, in which he perished, after the fatal rout of Hadrianople (Aug. 9, 378). One of the first acts of the youthful Gratian was to recall the banished orthodox prelates, and Basil had the joy of witnessing the event so earnestly desired in perhaps his latest extant letter, the restoration of his beloved friend Eusebius of Samosata ("Ep. 268"). Basil died at Caesareia, an old man before his time, Jan. 1st, 379, in the fiftieth year of his age. Though so far from advanced in years, his constitution was worn out by labours and austerities, as well as by the frequent severe diseases from which he had suffered. He rallied before his death, and was enabled to ordain with his dying hand some of the most faithful of his disciples. "His deathbed was surrounded by crowds of the citizens, ready," writes his friend Gregory, "to give part of their own life to lengthen that of their bishop." He breathed his last with the words "into Thy hands I commend my spirit." His funeral was attended by enormous crowds, who threnged to touch the bier or the hem of his funeral garments, or even to catch a distant glimpse of his face. The press was so great that several persons were crushed to death; almost the object of envy because they died with Basil. Even Jews and Pagans joined in the general lamentations, and it was with some difficulty that the bearers preserved their sacred burden from being torn to pieces by those who were eager to secure a relic of the departed saint. He was buried in his father's sepulchre, "the chief priest being laid to the priests; the mighty voice to the preachers; the martyr to the martyrs" (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. 371, 372).

In person Basil is described as tall and thin, holding himself very erect. His complexion was dark; his face pale and emaciated with close study and austerities; his forehead projecting, with retiring temples. A quick eye, flashing from under finely arched eyebrows, gave light and animation to his countenance. His speech was slow and deliberate. His manner manifested a reserve and sedateness which some of his contemporaries attributed to pride, others to timidity. Gregory, defending him from the former charge, which seems to have been too commonly urged to be altogether groundless, says that he supposes "it was the self-possession of his character, and composure and polish which they called pride," and refers not very convincingly to his habit of embracing lepers as a proof of the absence of superciliousness (Or. xx. p. 360). Basil's pride, indeed, was not the empty arrogance of a weak mind; but a wellgrounded confidence in his own powers. His reserve arose partly from natural shyness—he jestingly charges himself with "the want of spirit and sluggishness of the Cappadocians" ("Ep. 48").—partly from an unwillingness to commit himself with those of whom he was not sure. It is curious to see the dauntless opponent of Modestus and Valens charged with timidity. The heretic Eunomius after his death accused him of being "a coward and a, craven skulking from all severer labours," and spoke contemptuously of his "solitary cottage and close-shut doors, and his flustered look and manner when persons entered unexpectedly" (Greg. Nyssen. adv. Eunom. i. p. 318). Philostorgius also speaks of Basil as "from timidity of mind withdrawing from public discussions" (H. E. iv. 12). The fact seems to be that Basil was like many who, while showing intrepid courage when once forced into action, are naturally averse from publicity, and are only driven by a high sense of duty to leave the silence and retirement in which they delight. Basil was a great lover of natural beauty; his letters display abundant proofs of his delight in scenery. The playful turn of his mind is also shewn in many passages of his familiar letters, which sufficiently vindicate him from the charge of austerity of character. In manner he united Oriental gravity with the finished politeness of the Greeks, and was the charm of society from his happy union of sedateness and sweetness: his slightest smile was commendation, and silence was his only rebuke (Greg. Naz. Or. xx. 260, 261).

The voice of antiquity is unanimous in its praise of Basil's literary works. To adopt the words of Cave (Hist. Lit. i. 239) "plenae sunt omnium paginae, totus veneratur antiquitatis chorus, plaudit tota eruditorum cavea." His former tutor, Libanius, acknowledged that he was surpassed by Basil, and generously rejoiced that it was so, as he was his friend (Bas. "Ep. 338"). Nor has the estimate of modern critics been less favourable. "The style of Basil," writes Dean Milman, "did no discredit to his Athenian education. In purity and perspicuity he surpasses most of the heathen as well as Christian writers of his age" (Hist. of Christianity, iii. 110).…

Notes

¹ The passage of St. Jerome referred to by Milman is quoted from the Chronicle, A.D. 380. It is not found in Scaliger's edition, but was exhumed by Isaac Vossius who, to quote Gibbon's words, "found it in some old MSS, which had not been reformed by the monks." The Benedictine editor allows the genuineness of the passage, but asserts that the words refer not to Basil but to Photinus. Jerome, however, was no friend to Basil, who had incurred his displeasure by espousing the cause of Meletius against that of Paulinus, the favourite with the Western church, and by want of deferential behaviour towards pope Damasus. The passage as given by Gibbon from Vossius runs thus: "Basilius Caesarlensis Episcopus Cappadociae clarus habetur.… qui multa continentiae et ingenii bona uno superbiae malo perdidit."

² J. H. Newman's Church of the Fathers, p. 144.

³ Basil had established similar almshouses in the country dioceses of his province, … placed under the care of a chorepiscopus ("Ep. 142, 143").

⁴ Compare Hooker's remarks on this subject (Eccl. Polity, V. xlii. 12), "Till Arianism had made it a matter of great sharpness and subtilty of wit to be a sound believing Christian, men were not curious what syllables or particles of speech they used. Upon which when St. Basil began to practise the like indifferency, and to conclude public prayers, glorifying sometime the Father with the Son and the Holy Ghost, sometime the Father by the Son in the Spirit, whereas long custom had inured them to the former kind alone, by means whereof the latter was new and strange in their ears; this needless experiment brought afterwards upon him a necessary labour of excusing himself to his friends, and maintaining his own act against them, who because the light of his candle too much drowned theirs, were glad to lay hold on so colourable a matter, and exceedingly forward to traduce him as an author of suspicious innovation."

⁵ J. H. Newman, Church of the Fathers, p. 115.