§ 141. Василий в трудах для благочиния церковного и для богослужения.

St. Basil, throughout his entire reign over the church, tried hard to protect the metropolitan churches with his constant rules of deanery. At the very beginning of governing the flock, he wrote, a) canon. message to subordinates to bishops about not charging bribes for initiations, b) to chorebishops - about the restoration of ancient rules regarding the election of clergy; c) to Rev. Gregory - about behavior appropriate for a presbyter. In 373, a letter was written to Diodorus, Bishop of Taras, in which he defended the decree on not allowing marriage with the sister of a deceased wife 528. St. Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium, encountered some perplexities regarding the administration, and in 374 he asked the great shepherd to write rules to resolve the perplexities. St. Basil, as he himself writes, paid special attention to considering the customs of the ancient Church, the definitions of the ancient shepherds, believing and supplementing them with reflection, and at the end of 374 the first canonical letter was sent to Amphilochius with 16 rules. The second similar letter to Amphilochius was written to St. Vasily after illness 529, which brought Vasily to the grave in 375 530. In this epistle, in addition to the new rules, some of those that were proposed in the first epistle are proposed more clearly and fully, for example. about fallen virgins (pr. 18), about the Baptism of heretics (pr. 47). From the content of the rule it is clear that St. Amphilochius, having received the first canonical letter, encountered some bewilderment in it, especially regarding the Baptism of heretics 531, and asked St. Vasily to resolve these confusions and write rules regarding other cases. At the end of the same year 375, St. Basil, burdened with sorrows, but consoled by the new letter of Amphilochius, sent him a third canonical letter, which determined the only penances for the penitents 532. One of the letters of Basil himself, where he points to his rules as the current rules of the Church, clearly shows that the rules written at the request of Amphilochius were introduced not only in the Iconian Church, but in the entire Caesarea Metropolis 533. In the 6th century. John Climacus referred to the canonical images of the Great Basil, and at the same time John Scholastic placed them in his collection of rules. The Council of Trullo recognized them as the current rules of the Universal Church 534. Chapters 27 and 29 are also included in the canonical articles. from the book about the Holy Spirit 535. St. Basil the Great. He also worked to organize church services. 1) The Liturgy, now known with the name of the Great Basil, undoubtedly belongs to St. Vasily. St. Gregory of Nazianzus, speaking of the works of St. Basil, writes that the fruits of his labors include “monastic institutions, written and unwritten” and εὐχῶν διατάξεις – εὐκοσμίαι τοῦ βῆματος: “rites of prayer, splendor of the altar” 536. Here, a) no matter how we understand the words - εὐκοσμίαι τοῦ βῆματος: everything is obvious that, according to St. Gregory, St. Vasily arranged the rite of the liturgy; b) in connection with the speech it is clear that St. Nazianzen, in the place from which we borrow the testimony about the order of the liturgy, describes the works of St. Vasily is still a presbyter. But it is natural in itself that St. Basil, having become an archbishop, again revised and put in order the service, which, at the will of his bishop, he revised in the rank of presbyter. After St. Nazianzu St. Proclus 537 (about 430), Leontius (about 590), Peter the Deacon 538 (6th century), Council of Trullo 539 (691), St. John of Damascus 540 and the 7th Ecumenical Council 541 testified that St. Vasily wrote the order of the liturgy. St. Proclus writes that St. Vasily, wishing to heal human weakness, who refused to attend services due to the length of the service, shortened the ancient rite of the liturgy; and Peter the Deacon says: “the prayers of Basil’s liturgy are repeated throughout the East.” It remains to be added that the liturgy of St. Vasily came to us in very ancient lists; and those who are offended by the discrepancies in the lists must keep in mind that in order to verify the lists, they should most of all be guided by the Constantinople and Asia Minor lists, and not the Sicilian ones, as Goar did 542. 2) St. Basil, in addition to the order of the liturgy, transformed the order of morning and evening services and wrote prayers. In this matter, he had at one time exactly the same dispute with the neo-Caesarians, in which Orthodox pastors are now forced to enter into with the unreasonable zealots of antiquity. The Neo-Caesareans did not want to have communion with their main church - with Caesarea, precisely because St. Vasily introduced antiphonal singing into this latter, and made some other changes in the order of the church service. The Neo-Caesarians said that they did not have all this under the wonderworker Gregory, and therefore they now do not want to accept news. The great teacher, in a special letter to them, proved that antiphonal singing had been in use even before that time, that in the Neo-Caesarean Church there is now quite a lot of what was not there under the miracle worker, he copied his order of worship to them, and finally wrote that the object of their temptation was not at all such that it was worth terminating the union of fraternal communion because of it. “If they are asked, the saint wrote, about the reason for their irreconcilable enmity: they answer: the psalms and the way of singing in your charter have been changed, and they present other similar things, which they should be ashamed of.... See if you are not sucking on a mosquito, engaging in subtle studies of the sounds of the voice used in psalmody and at the same time violating the most important commandments” 543. But what is especially worth noting is that the neo-Caesarians, just as happens now, were victims of deception by cunning people who intended to spread a false teaching about faith among them. The first letter to the neo-Caesarians was written in 374, and the following year St. Vasily, returning from one Council, stopped to rest in a neo-Caesarean monastery, which was under the control of his brother, the blessed one. Petra. The Neo-Caesarians, hearing about this, became agitated; clever people, fearing for themselves, hastened to divulge that Vasily wanted to introduce a new church order among them by force. In a new letter to St. Vasily, having explained to the neo-Caesarians the case and the reason why he stopped at their monastery, opened their eyes to the people who were confusing them; he showed them that these were none other than the Sabellians condemned by the Church, and he was the last to write that if they did not stop embarrassing others, he would hand them over to the Church court 544. Ap. Garnier. 53, 52 and 53–160, a letter to Diodorus written in 373 shows that St. Basil gave rules regarding marriage; 18 approx. canon. The Epistle to Amphilochius says that the oath was previously prescribed. These decisions are currently unknown. But the mentioned four epistles still remain part of the church rules, taking place after the epistles to Amphilochius. In the Syrian list of church rules of the 10th century. letters from Basil the Great to various persons are included; and in the Arabic list of canons of the 14th century the 13th and 106th rules of Basil the Great are placed (Bickel Geschichte d. Kirchenvechts. Gissen 1843 s. 202, 209). In the Slavic list of Helmsmen of the 13th century. After Basil's Epistle to Gregory, the remark was added: “This St. rules led Vasily, to the great and small cathedrals, venerated the Lord.” (Vostokova's description of music, p. 292). This remark is no doubt Greek: but when are rules attached? See note. 65. See the preface to this message and letter 200 from Garnier. “Although this custom of rebaptism is not accepted among you, like the Romans, for some reason, let our winemaking have force” and justifies his definition before Amphilochius by the fact that it is about people who violate the faith. See preface. to this message from Garnier r. 324 and 325. In letter 270 he writes: “and those who participated with him, in accordance with the rule we have issued, excommunicate them from prayer for three years.” This is a definition (κηρυγμρα). at 30 rights. canon. letters to Amphilochius. Unfortunately, the inscription of the letter has not been preserved; but from the content we can conclude that it was written to the chorebishop. After St. Basil refers to his canonical letters to Amphilochius (see note 64), which, moreover, are in mutual connection, and after external evidence of their authenticity there is no need to refute Molkenbuur's objections to them, repeated recently by Benterim Denkwürdigk. cathol. kirche V. Th. 3. (376). But one cannot but agree that the letters to Amphilochius, and even more so others, received the force of canonical letters in the Churches at more than one time. John Scholasticus says in the preface: “there are also the canons of St. Vasily, numbering 68", i.e. second and third letters to Amphilochius; Climacus has the same rules in mind. After the Council of Trullo, Theodore the Studite, Photius (Bibl. cod. 141), Zonara and others, all three letters to St. Amphilochy is called canonical. In the Syrian list of churches. rules (Cod. Paris, ori. germ. 38) of the 10th century contains letters from Basil the Great to various persons. See note. 59. These chapters are among the churches. the rules are placed in Balsamon, also in the ancient. hands Viennese ar. Lambec. Comm. 8 p.m. 883. Medical ap. Bandini Catal p. 74. Turin Catal. p. 196. Moscow Manhaei. notit. p. 35. Tract. de trad. Liturgine. Bibl. M. Patr. T. 6, p. 617. Leontius, in reproach to Nestorius, writes: “he performs a different liturgy, and not the one that the fathers gave to the churches and does not respect the liturgy of the apostles, nor the one that the Great Basil composed in the same spirit” COnT. Nestor. Bibl. M. P. T. 2, p. 100. Peter the Deacon in the work de incarnatione p. 8, int. op. S. fulgentii p. 633. Exposition faith book 4, ch. 14. Concil. ed. Bibii T. 3, p. 643. Goar published the liturgy of Great Basil in his Euchologium Graecorum (Paris. 1624. Venet. 1730) showing various readings, which he saw in manuscripts mostly Sicilian. Lambez, saluting Gohar's work, noted that Gohar did not have any of the Vensks in his hands. hand; and Vienna RKP. mostly Constant. Geivr. Mayo published (Bibliot. Uffenbac. Halae.) another copy. Liturgy of St. Vasily from his hands. very ancient and at the same time wrote that this liturgy is completely different from Goar’s; but when comparing it, it turned out that its difference is limited to almost one diptych. Synod. manuscript written in the 14th century. presents to us the liturgy of Great Basil in exactly the same form in which it is known today, with the exception, as is understandable in itself, of the rite of proskomedia, which is not in the manuscript. Both the liturgy of the Great Basil and his rite of Divine services in general require special study. See also what is said about the liturgy of Chrysostom. Letter 203 to Neo-Caesar. to the clergy. Letter 20 to the Neo-Caesareans. You might be interested in: