Religio Philologi: St. Basil of the Blogosphere
Basil of Caesarea (330-379) is among the greatest of the early fathers. Born in the early 4th century, not long after the Edict of Milan granted immunity from persecution to the Church, Basil and the other great Cappadocian fathers (his brother, Gregory of Nyssa, and his good friend Gregory of Nazianzus) come between the generation of Athanisus (b. 297) and the generation of St. John Chrysostom (b. 347). He is a major figure in the history of Christian theology, brilliant opponent of the Arian heresy, but he was also known for the depth of his charity. Basil is the real founder of cenobitic monasticism, and St. Benedict pays tribute to his influence. His letters are particularly valuable, for their charm, their enormous but easy erudition, and for the clear and non-technical presentation of theological issues. His 8th epistle is a breath-taking refutation of Arianism, rooted both in the Scriptures and in logic.
Basil formed the first monastic community, and several of his letters are addressed to the question of how Christians should live together, both at the mundane level of what to eat and what to wear and at the higher level of good manners. In the 2nd epistle, he gives the following advice:
This, too, is a very important point to attend to—knowledge how to converse; to interrogate without over-earnestness; to answer without desire of display; not to interrupt a profitable speaker, or to desire ambitiously to put in a word of one's own; to be measured in speaking and hearing; not to be ashamed of receiving, or to be grudging in giving information, nor to pass another's knowledge for one's own, as depraved women their supposititious children, but to refer it candidly to the true parent. The middle tone of voice is best, neither so low as to be inaudible, nor to be ill-bred from its high pitch. One should reflect first what one is going to say, and then give it utterance: be courteous when addressed; amiable in social intercourse; not aiming to be pleasant by facetiousness, but cultivating gentleness in kind admonitions. Harshness is ever to be put aside, even in censuring. The more you show modesty and humility yourself, the more likely are you to be acceptable to the patient who needs your treatment. There are however many occasions when we shall do well to employ the kind of rebuke used by the prophet who did not in his own person utter the sentence of condemnation on David after his sin, but by suggesting an imaginary character made the sinner judge of his own sin, so that, after passing his own sentence, he could not find fault with the seer who had convicted him.
This is not the only passage where Basil gives good advice on Christian behavior, but it should be sufficient to grant him the paradoxical title of "Patron Saint of the Blogosphere."
Entries(RSS)
I have reason to believe that it is I who inspired this posting, I extend my thanks to TJF. I shall print this out promptly, post it next to my computer... and adopt St Basil as my own patron saint in the blogosphere.
Thank you TJF, for your kind admonishment. I am a Christian. I'm glad you pointed out a hole in my armor. Jonathan
Admonitions, especially when coming from a notorious curmudgeon, had better be kind. I especially like what Basil says about offering correction by describing a real case in hypothetical terms.
This bit is from the 22nd epistle, again on the monastic life. Note that he is not at all non-judgmental. Jerks have to be stopped. (He is also quite merciless on recalcitrant Arians, though he generously gives the benefit of the doubt to semi-Arians who either made an honest mistake or were too fond of compromise:
The Christian ought not to grudge another's reputation, nor rejoice over any man's faults; 1 Corinthians 13:6 he ought in Christ's love to grieve and be afflicted at his brother's faults, and rejoice over his brother's good deeds. 1 Corinthians 12:26 He ought not to be indifferent or silent before sinners. 1 Timothy 5:20 He who shows another to be wrong ought to do so with all tenderness, 2 Timothy 4:2 in the fear of God, and with the object of converting the sinner. 2 Timothy 4:2 He who is proved wrong or rebuked ought to take it willingly, recognizing his own gain in being set right. When any one is being accused, it is not right for another, before him or any one else, to contradict the accuser; but if at any time the charge seems groundless to any one, he ought privately to enter into discussion with the accuser, and either produce, or acquire, conviction. Every one ought, as far as he is able, to conciliate one who has ground of complaint against him. No one ought to cherish a grudge against the sinner who repents, but heartily to forgive him. 2 Corinthians 2:7 He who says that he has repented of a sin ought not only to be pricked with compunction for his sin, but also to bring forth fruits worthy of repentance. Luke 3:8 He who has been corrected in first faults, and received pardon, if he sins again prepares for himself a judgment of wrath worse than the former. Hebrews 10:26-27 He, who after the first and second admonition Titus 3:10 abides in his fault, ought to be brought before the person in authority, if haply after being rebuked by more he may be ashamed. If even thus he fail to be set right he is to be cut off from the rest as one that makes to offend, and regarded as a heathen and a publican, Matthew 18:17 for the security of them that are obedient, according to the saying, When the impious fall the righteous tremble. He should be grieved over as a limb cut from the body. The sun ought not to go down upon a brother's wrath, Ephesians 4:26 lest haply night come between brother and brother, and make the charge stand in the day of judgment.
The Fathers never cease to amaze.
Saint Basil the Great is also the author of the Anaphora (Canon) of the Divine Liturgy used on Lenten Sundays and certain great feasts in the Byzantine Catholic and Orthodox churches. The late Pope John Paul II praised this anaphora for its historicity and the depth of its theology.
Is (Western) conservatism necessarily Christian? I mean, must it rest finally on a Christian theological base? If so, then (as I've asked before) how can conservatism be thought to be different from either Biblical reconstructionism, or Papal supremacism?
I am leaving for France in a few hours and have to bow out of this discussion for a few days. My point was on manners, and had nothing to do with "conservatism." The term "conservatism" has had its uses and may still have, to refer to a predisposition to order, prudence, loyalty to decent existing institutions and respect for the past. As a term of political ideology, it can mean everything and therefore means nothing. I know what Christian Recontsruction is--the kooky cult of Rushdoony and North--but I fail to see any relevance for anything I have ever written or talked about, and as for "Papal supremacism," I can only imagine you mean the tendency of a fairly small number of ignorant Catholics to exaggerate the powers of the papacy. To employ these two terms in this place and in this discussion is to disclose a deep-seated, uninformed, and irrational hatred of Christianity in the two forms it is known in the West. I have already wasted too much time on this intentionally insulting question, but I will add one more thing. The two Catos were men of distinction, whose name should not be invoked by an anonymous poster whose opinions would seem to have nothing in common with the name he has assumed and abused. Since his email is "catatonic," let him stick to that. Otherwise his posts will not be allowed entrance