Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Unbroken Friendships.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
IX.—Unbroken
Friendships.
Brighter and happier intimacies were those formed
with the older bishop of Samosata, the Eusebius who, of all the many
bearers of the name, most nearly realised its meaning,227
| 227 Bp. in
361. cf. Greg. Naz., Ep. xxviii. and xxix., and
Theod., Ecc. Hist. xxvii. | and with Basil’s junior, Amphilochius
of Iconium. With the former, Basil’s relations were those
of an affectionate son and of an enthusiastic admirer. The many
miles that stretched between Cæsarea and Samosata did not prevent
these personal as well as epistolary communications.228
| 228 In 369, it
is to the prayers of Eusebius, under the divine grace, that Basil
refers his partial recovery from sickness (Ep. xxvii.), and
sends Hypatius to Samosata in hope of similar blessing.
(Ep. xxxi.) | In 372 they were closely associated in
the eager efforts of the orthodox bishops of the East to win the
sympathy and active support of the West.229
In 374 Eusebius was exiled, with all the picturesque incidents so
vividly described by Theodoret.230
He
travelled slowly from Samosata into Thrace, but does not seem to
have met either Gregory or Basil on his way. Basil contrived
to continue a correspondence with him in his banishment. It
was more like that of young lovers than of elderly bishops.231
| 231 cf.
Principal Reynolds in D.C.B. i. 372. | The friends deplore the hindrances
to conveyance, and are eager to assure one another that neither is
guilty of forgetfulness.232
| 232 Epp.
clvii., clviii., clxii., clxvii., clxviii., cxcviii., ccxxxvii.,
ccxxxix., ccxli., cclxviii. |
The friendship with Amphilochius seems to have
begun at the time when the young advocate accepted the invitation
conveyed in the name of Heracleidas,233
his friend, and
repaired from Ozizala to Cæsarea. The consequences were
prompt and remarkable. Amphilochius, at this time between thirty
and forty years of age, was soon ordained and consecrated, perhaps,
like Ambrose of Milan and Eusebius of Cæsarea per
saltum, to the important see of Iconium, recently vacated by
the death of Faustinus. Henceforward the intercourse between the
spiritual father and the spiritual son, both by letters and by visits,
was constant. The first visit of Amphilochius to Basil, as
bishop, probably at Easter 374, not only gratified the older prelate,
but made a deep impression on the Church of Cæsarea.234
| 234 Epp.
clxiii., clxxvi. | But his visits were usually paid in
September, at the time of the services in commemoration of the martyr
Eupsychius. On the occasion of the first of them, in 374, the
friends conversed together on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, now
impugned by the Macedonians, and the result was the composition of the
treatise De Spiritu Sancto. This was closely followed by
the three famous canonical epistles,235
| 235 Epp.
clxxxviii., cxcix., ccxvii. | also addressed
to Amphilochius. Indeed, so great was the affectionate confidence
of the great administrator and theologian236
| 236
“Pace Eunomii,” whom Greg. of Nyssa quotes.
C. Eunom. i. | in
his younger brother, that, when infirmities were closing round him, he
asked Amphilochius to aid him in the administration of the
archdiocese.237
If we accept the explanation given of Letter
CLXIX. in a note on a previous page,238
Gregory the
elder, bishop of Nazianzus, must be numbered among those of
Basil’s correspondents letters to whom have been preserved.
The whole episode referred to in that and in the two following letters
is curiously illustrative of outbursts of fanaticism and folly which
might have been
expected to occur in Cappadocia in the fourth century, as well as in
soberer regions in several other centuries when they have
occurred. It has been clothed with fresh interest by the very
vivid narrative of Professor Ramsay, and by the skill with which he
uses the scanty morsels of evidence available to construct the theory
which he holds about it.239
This theory is
that the correspondence indicates a determined attempt on the part of
the rigidly orthodox archbishop to crush proceedings which were really
“only keeping up the customary ceremonial of a great religious
meeting,” and, as such, were winked at, if not approved of, by
the bishop to whom the letter of remonstrance is addressed, and the
presbyter who was Glycerius’ superior. Valuable information
is furnished by Professor Ramsay concerning the great annual festival
in honour of Zeus of Venasa (or Venese), whose shrine was richly
endowed, and the inscription discovered on a Cappadocian hill-top,
“Great Zeus in heaven, be propitious to me.” But the
“evident sympathy” of the bishop and the presbyter is
rather a strained inference from the extant letters; and the fact that
in the days when paganism prevailed in Cappadocia Venasa was a great
religious centre, and the scene of rites in which women played an
important part, is no conclusive proof that wild dances performed by an
insubordinate deacon were tolerated, perhaps encouraged, because they
represented a popular old pagan observance. Glycerius may have
played the patriarch, without meaning to adopt, or travesty, the style
of the former high priest of Zeus. Cappadocia was one of the most
Christian districts of the empire long before Basil was appointed to
the exarchate of Cæsarea, and Basil is not likely to have been the
first occupant of the see who would strongly disapprove of and
endeavour to repress, any such manifestations as those which are
described.240
| 240 The description
of Cæsarea, as being “Christian to a man”
(πανδημεὶ
χριστιανίζοντας.
Soz. v. 4), would apply pretty generally to all the
province. | That the bishop
whom Basil addresses and the presbyter served by Glycerius should have
desired to deal leniently with the offender individually does not
convict them of accepting the unseemly proceedings of Glycerius and his
troupe as a pardonable, if not desirable, survival of a picturesque
national custom.241
| 241 In the
chapter in which Professor Ramsay discusses the story of Glycerius
he asks how it was that, while Phrygia was heretical, Cappadocia, in
the fourth century, was orthodox: “Can any reason be
suggested why this great Cappadocian leader followed the Roman
Church, whereas all the most striking figures in Phrygian
ecclesiastical history opposed it?” In Phrygia was the
great centre of Montanism, a form of religionism not unfavourable to
excesses such as those of Glycerius. But in Letter
cciv., placed in 375, Basil claims both the Phrygias, i.e.
Pacatiana and Salutaris, as being in communion with him.
By the “Roman Church,” followed by Cappadocia and
opposed by Phrygia, must be meant either the ecclesiastical system
of the Roman Empire, or the Church at Rome regarded as holding a
kind of hegemony of Churches. If the former, it will be
remembered that Cappadocia boldly withstood the creed patronized and
pressed by imperial authority, when the influence of Valens made
Arianism the official religion of Rome. If the latter, the
phrase seems a misleading anachronism. In the fourth century
there was no following or opposing the Church of Rome as we
understand the phrase. To the bishop of Rome was conceded a
certain personal precedence, as bishop of the capital, and he was
beginning to claim more. In the West there was the dignity of
the only western apostolic see, and the Church of Rome, as a
society, was eminently orthodox and respectable. But, as
important ecclesiastical centres, Antioch and Alexandria were far
ahead of Rome, and the pope of Alexandria occupied a greater place
than the pope of Rome. What Basil was eager to follow was not
any local church, but the Faith which he understood to be the true
and Catholic Faith, i.e., the Faith of Nicæa.
There was no church of Rome in the sense of one organized
œcumenical society governed by a central Italian
authority. Basil has no idea of any such thing as a Roman
supremacy. cf. Letter ccxiv. and note. |
Among other bishops of the period with whom Basil
communicated by letter are Abramius, or Abraham, of Batnæ in
Oshoene,242
the illustrious
Athanasius,243
| 243 Epp.
lxi., lxvi., lxvii., lxix., lxxx., lxxxii. | and
Ambrose,244
Athanasius of
Ancyra;245
Barses of
Edessa,246
| 246 Epp.
cclxiv., cclxvii. | who died in
exile in Egypt; Elpidius,247
| 247 Epp.
ccli., ccv., ccvi. | of some unknown
see on the Levantine seaboard, who supported Basil in the
controversy with Eustathius; the learned Epiphanius of
Salamis;248
Meletius,249
| 249 Epp.
lvii., lxviii., lxxxix., cxx., cxxix., ccxvi. | the exiled
bishop of Antioch; Patrophilus of Ægæ;250
Petrus of Alexandria;251
| 251 Epp.
cxxxiii., cclxvi. | Theodotus of Nicopolis,252
and Ascholius of Thessalonica.253
| 253 Epp.
cliv., clxiv., clxv. |
Basil’s correspondence was not, however, confined
within the limits of clerical clanship. His extant letters to
laymen, both distinguished and undistinguished, shew that he was in
touch with the men of mark of his time and neighbourhood, and that he
found time to express an affectionate interest in the fortunes of his
intimate friends.
Towards the later years of his life the
archbishop’s days were darkened not only by ill-health and
anxiety, but by the death of some of his chief friends and
allies. Athanasius died in 373, and so far as personal living
influence went, there was an extinction of the Pharos not of Alexandria
only, but of the world.254
| 254 cf. Epp.
lxxxii. and note. | It was no
longer “Athanasius contra
mundum,”255
| 255 The
proverbial expression is conjectured by Dean Stanley to be derived
from the Latin version of the famous passage concerning Athanasius
in Hooker, Ecc. Pol. v. 42. Vide Stanley,
Grk. Church, lect. vii. | but
“Mundus sine Athanasio.”
In 374 Gregory the elder died at Nazianzus, and the same year saw the
banishment of Eusebius of Samosata to Thrace. In 375 died
Theodotus of Nicopolis, and the succession of Fronto was a cause of
deep sorrow.
At this
time256
| 256 The date
of the Council is, however, disputed. Pagi is for 373, Cave
for 367. Hefele and Ceillier are satisfied of the correctness
of 375. cf. D.C.A. i. 813. | some short
solace would come to the Catholics in the East in the synodical
letter addressed to the Orientals of the important synod held in
Illyria, under the authority of Valentinian. The letter
which is extant257
| 257 Theod.,
Ecc. Hist. iv. 8. | is directed
against the Macedonian heresy. The charge of conveying it to
the East was given to the presbyter Elpidius.258
| 258 Mansi, iii.
386. Hefele, § 90. | Valentinian sent with it a letter
to the bishops of Asia in which persecution is forbidden, and the
excuse of submission to the reigning sovereign anticipated and
condemned. Although the letter runs in the names of
Valentinian, Valens, and Gratian, the western brother appears to
condemn the eastern.259
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
