BasilLetter 210To the Notables of NeocaesareaI am really under no obligation to publish my own mind to you, or to state the reasons for my present sojourn where I am; it is not my custom to indulge in self advertisement, nor is the matter worth publicity. I am not, I think, following my own inclinations; I am answering the challenge of your leaders. I have always striven to be ignored more earnestly than popularity hunters strive after notoriety. But, I am told, the ears of everybody in your town are set a thrilling, while certain tale-mongers, creators of lies, hired for this very work, are giving you a history of me and my doings. I therefore do not think that I ought to overlook your being exposed to the teaching of vile intention and foul tongue; I think that I am bound to tell you myself in what position I am placed. From my childhood I have been familiar with this spot, for here I was brought up by my grandmother; hither I have often retreated, and here I have spent many years, when endeavoring to escape from the hubbub of public affairs, for experience has taught me that the quiet and solitude of the spot are favorable to serious thought. Moreover as my brothers are now living here, I have gladly retired to this retreat, and have taken a brief breathing time from the press of the labors that beset me, not as a center from which I might give trouble to others, but to indulge my own longing. 2. Where then is the need of having
recourse to dreams and of hiring their interpreters, and making me
matter for talk over the cups at public entertainments? Had slander
been launched against me in any other quarter, I should have called you
to witness to prove what I think, and now I ask every one of you to
remember those old days when I was invited by your city to take
charge of the education of the young, and a deputation of the first men
among you came to see me. Afterwards, when you all crowded round me,
what were you not ready to give? what not to promise? Nevertheless you
were not able to keep me. How then could I, who at that time would not
listen when you invited me, now attempt to thrust myself on you
uninvited? How could I, who when you complimented and admired me,
avoided you, have been intending to court you now that you calumniate
me? Nothing of the kind, sirs; I am not quite so cheap. No man in his
senses would go on board a boat. without a steersman, or get alongside
a Church where the men sitting at the helm are themselves stirring up
tempest and storm. Whose fault was it that the town was all full of
tumult, when some were running away with no one after them, and others
stealing off when no invader was near, and all the wizards and
dream-tellers were flourishing their bogeys? Whose fault was it else?
Does not every child know that it was the mob-leaders? The reasons of
their hatred to me it would be bad taste on my part to recount; but
they are quite easy for you to apprehend. When bitterness and division
have come to the last pitch of savagery, and the explanation of the
cause is altogether groundless and ridiculous, then the mental disease is
plain, dangerous indeed to other people’s comfort, but greatly and 3. There is going on among you a movement ruinous to the faith, disloyal to the apostolical and evangelical dogmas, disloyal too to the tradition of Gregory the truly great, and of his successors up to the blessed Musonius, whose teaching is still ringing in your ears. For those men, who, from fear of confutation, are forging figments against me, are endeavoring to renew the old mischief of Sabellius, started long ago, and extinguished by the tradition of the great Gregory. But do you bid good-bye to those wine-laden heads, bemuddled by the swelling fumes that mount from their debauch, and from me who am wide awake and from fear of God cannot keep silence. hear what plague is rife among you. Sabellianism is Judaism imported into the preaching of the Gospel under the guise of Christianity. For if a man calls Father Son and Holy Ghost one thing of many faces [πολυπροσωπον], and makes the hypostasis of the three one, what is this but to deny the everlasting pre-existence of the Only begotten? He denies too the Lord’s sojourn among men in the incarnation, the going down into hell, the resurrection, the judgment; he denies also the proper operations of the Spirit. And I hear that even rasher innovations than those of the foolish Sabellius are now ventured on among you. It is said, and that on the evidence of ear witnesses, that your clever men go to such an extreme as to say that there is no tradition of the name of the Only-begotten, while of the name of the adversary there is; and at this they are highly delighted and elated, as though it were a discovery of their own. For it is said, “I came in my Father’s name and ye received me not; if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.” And because it is said, “Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” it is obvious, they urge, that the name is one, for it is not “in the names,” but “in the name.” 4. I blush so to write to you, for the men thus
guilty are of my own blood; and I groan for my own soul, in that, like
boxers fighting two men at once, I can only give the truth its proper
force by hitting with my proofs, and knocking down, the errors of
doctrine on the right and on the left. On one side I am attacked by the
Anomoean: on the other by the Sabellian. Do not, I implore you, pay any
attention to these abominable and impotent sophisms. Know that the name
of Christ which is above every name is His being called Son of God, as
Peter says, “There is none other name under heaven given among men,
whereby we must be saved.” And as to the words “I came in my Father’s
name,” it is to be understood that He so says describing His Father as
origin and cause of Himself. And if it is said “Go and baptize in the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost,” we must not
suppose that here one name is delivered to us. For just as he who said
Paul and Silvanus and Timothy mentioned three names, and coupled them
one to the other by the word “and,” so He who spoke of the name of
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,” mentioned three, and united them by the
conjunction, teaching that with each name must be understood its own
proper meaning; for the names mean things. And no one gifted
with even the smallest particle of it intelligence doubts that the
existence belonging to the things is peculiar and complete in itself. For
of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost there is the same nature and one
Godhead; If, however, they deny that they so say, and so teach, my object is attained. Yet I see that this denial is no easy matter, because of our having many witnesses who heard these things said. But let bygones be bygones; let them only be sound now. If they persist in the same old error I must proclaim your calamity even to other Churches, and get letters written to you from more bishops. In my efforts to break down this huge mass of impiety now gradually and secretly growing, I shall either effect something towards the object I have in view; or at least my present testimony will clear me of guilt in the judgment day. 5. They have already inserted these expressions in their own writings. They sent them first to the man of God, Meletius, bishop, and after receiving from him a suitable reply, like mothers of monsters, ashamed of their natural deformities, these men themselves brought forth and bring up their disgusting offspring in appropriate darkness. They made an attempt too by letter on my dear friend Anthimus, bishop of Tyana, on the ground that Gregory had said in his exposition of the faith that Father and Son are in thought two, but in hypostasis one. The men who congratulate themselves on the subtilty of their intelligence could not perceive that this is said not in reference to dogmatic opinion, but in controversy with Aelian. And in this dispute there are not a few copyists’ blunders, as, please God, I shall show in the case of the actual expressions used. But in his endeavor to convince the heathen, he deemed it needless to be nice about the words he employed; he judged it wiser sometimes to make concessions to the character of the subject who was being persuaded, so as not to run counter to the opportunity given him. This explains how it is that you may find there many expressions which now give great support to the heretics, as for instance “creature” and “thing made” and the like. But those who ignorantly criticize these writings refer to the question of the Godhead much that is said in reference to the conjunction with man; as is the case with this passage which they are hawking about. For it is indispensable to have clear understanding that, as he who fails to confess the community of the essence or substance falls into polytheism, so he who refuses to grant the distinction of the hypostases is carried away into Judaism. For we must keep our mind stayed, so to say, on certain underlying subject matter, and, by forming a clear impression of its distinguishing lines, so arrive at the end desired. For suppose we do not bethink us of the Fatherhood, nor bear in mind Him of whom this distinctive quality is marked off, how can we take in the idea of God the Father? For merely to enumerate the differences of Persons is insufficient; we must confess each Person to have a natural existence in real hypostasis. Now Sabellius did not even deprecate the formation of the persons without hypostasis, saying as he did that the same God, being one in matter, was metamorphosed as the need of the moment required, and spoken of now as Father, now as Son, and now as Holy Ghost. The inventors of this unnamed heresy are renewing the old long extinguished error; those, I mean, who are repudiating the hypostases, and denying the name of the Son of God. They must give over uttering iniquity against God, or they will have to wail with them that deny the Christ. 6. I have felt compelled to write to you in these terms, that
you may be on your guard against the mischief arising from bad
teaching. If we may indeed liken pernicious teachings to poisonous
drugs, as your dream-tellers have it, these doctrines are hemlock and
monkshood, or any other deadly to man. It is these that destroy souls;
not my words, as this shrieking drunken scum, full of the fancies of
their condition, make out. If they had any sense they ought to know
that in souls, pure and cleansed from all defilement, the prophetic
gift shines clear. In a foul mirror you cannot see what the reflection
is, neither can a soul preoccupied with cares of this life, and
darkened with the passions of the lust of the flesh, receive the rays of
the Holy Ghost. Every dream is not a prophecy, as says Zechariah. “The
Lord shall make bright clouds, and give them showers of rain,. . . for the
|