Letter 128: 1. Hitherto I have been unable to give any adequate and practical proof of my earnest desire to pacify the Churches of the Lord. But in my heart I affirm that I have so great a longing, that I would gladly give up even my life, if thereby the flame of hatred, kindled by the evil one, could be put out.

To Eusebius, Bishop of Samosata [a city on the Euphrates in southeastern Turkey; Eusebius was one of Basil's closest allies in defending Nicene orthodoxy] I haven't yet been able to do anything concrete to bring peace to the churches. But I want you to know: I want it so badly I'd give my life if it would extinguish the hatred the devil has stirred up. That longing for peace is the only reason I agreed to come to Colonia [a town in Cappadocia]. The peace I'm after is the real peace — the kind the Lord himself left us. What I've asked for as reassurance is only what any honest peacemaker would ask, even if some people twist my words to mean something else. Let them talk. They'll regret it eventually. Now, please — remember my original questions, and don't get sidetracked by answers that dodge them. Don't give weight to people who are clever at distorting the truth but have no real arguments. My questions were perfectly simple and clear: Will we refuse communion with anyone who rejects the Nicene Creed [the statement of faith from the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, affirming that the Son is fully divine and "of one substance" with the Father]? Will we refuse fellowship with anyone bold enough to call the Holy Spirit a created being? Instead of answering directly, he [likely Eustathius of Sebaste, a bishop whose theological position kept shifting] produced the evasive statement you forwarded to me. This isn't naivety — he knows exactly what he's doing. He's calculated that if he rejects my position openly, the people will see his true colors. But if he accepts it, he'll have to abandon the comfortable middle ground he's been occupying. So let him stop trying to deceive me — or you. Get him to send a straight answer: does he accept or reject communion with the enemies of the faith? If he does that, I'll admit I was wrong about everything. I'll take all the blame. Test my humility however you like. But if he won't answer clearly, then forgive me, dear father — I cannot approach God's altar as a hypocrite. Why else would I have separated myself from Euippius, a man I respect deeply — learned, elderly, someone I genuinely love? If I was right to break with him, it would be absurd to then unite with people who hold the same views, just because some charming intermediaries smooth things over. That said, I don't think we should simply cut off everyone who hasn't accepted the faith. We should follow the old law of love: write to them together, urge them with compassion, present the faith of the fathers [the Nicene Creed], and invite them to unity. If they come around, wonderful — we'll share communion. If they refuse, we'll have to be content with each other, drop the ambiguity, and return to the simple, straightforward fellowship of the earliest believers, who "were of one heart and of one soul" (Acts 4:32). If they listen to you, that's the best outcome. If not, at least you'll know who's really responsible for this war — and please stop writing to me about reconciliation.

ST. BASIL OF CAESAREA To Eusebius, bishop of Samosata. 1. Hitherto I have been unable to give any adequate and practical proof of my earnest desire to pacify the Churches of the Lord. But in my heart I affirm that I have so great a longing, that I would gladly give up even my life, if thereby the flame of hatred, kindled by the evil one, could be put out. If it was not for the sake of this longing for peace that I consented to come to Colonia, may my life be unblessed by peace. The peace I seek is the true peace, left us by the Lord Himself; and what I have asked that I may have for my assurance belongs to one who desires nothing but the true peace, although some perversely interpret the truth into another sense. Let them use their tongues as they will, but assuredly they will one day be sorry for their words. 2. Now I beseech your holiness to remember the original propositions, and not to be led away by receiving answers that do not fit the questions, nor yet to give practical weight to the quibbles of men who, without any power of argument, very cleverly pervert the truth, from their own ideas alone. I set out propositions which were perfectly simple, clear and easy to remember; do we decline to receive into communion those who refuse to accept the Nicene Creed? Do we refuse to have part or lot with those who have the hardihood to assert that the Holy Ghost is a creature? He, however, instead of answering my questions word for word, has concocted the statement which you have sent me:— and this not from simplemindedness, as might be imagined, nor yet from his inability to see the consequences. What he reckons is that, by repudiating my proposition, he will expose his true character to the people; while, if he agrees to it, he will depart from that via media which has hitherto seemed to him preferable to any other position. Let him not try to beguile me, nor, with the rest, deceive your intelligence. Let him send a concise answer to my question, whether he accepts or repudiates communion with the enemies of the faith. If you get him to do this and send me such a distinct answer as I pray for, I own myself in error in all that has gone before; I take all the blame upon myself; then ask from me a proof of humility. But, if nothing of the kind come to pass, pardon me, most God-beloved father, in my inability to approach God's altar with hypocrisy. Were it not for this dread, why should I separate myself from Euippius, so learned a man, so advanced in age, and bound to me by so many ties of affection? If, however, in this case I acted rightly, it would, I am sure, be absurd to appear united with those who maintain the same views as Euippius, through the mediation of these amiable and charming persons. 3. Not that I think it is absolutely our duty to cut ourselves off from those who do not receive the faith, but rather to have regard to them in accordance with the old law of love, and to write to them with one consent, giving them all exhortation with pity, and to propose to them the faith of the fathers, and invite them to union. If we succeed we should be united in communion with them; if we fail we must be content with one another and purge our conduct of this uncertain spirit, restoring the evangelical and simple conversation followed by those who accepted the Word from the beginning. They, it is said, were of one heart and of one soul. Acts 4:32 If they obey you, this will be best; if not, recognise the real authors of the war, and, for the future do not write me any more letters about reconciliation. About this page Source. Translated by Blomfield Jackson. From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 8. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1895.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. <https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3202128.htm>. Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is feedback732 at newadvent.org. (To help fight spam, this address might change occasionally.) Regrettably, I can't reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.