.

THE SOCIAL
DOCTRINE OF ST. BASIL
THE GREAT
Duchatelez

by Kamiel Duchatelez
Basils social doctrine is grounded in the conviction that all
people are equal and share the same human nature. The
poor, the rich and the emperor are all companions in slavery,
that is, they are all dependent on God. Moreover, human
beings are social creatures and communal life and
interaction with one another require a generosity that can
alleviate the needs of the destitute. The scriptural command
to Give to anyone who asks calls us to a sharing and a
mutual love that are characteristic of human nature. The Acts
of the Apostles teaches us how this is to be put into practice.
In the first ecclesial community of Jerusalem, the Christians
sold their goods and gave the money to apostles to distribute
to those who needed it.
Basil encouraged the faithful Christians of his time to
respond to the Gospel injunction to sell your possessions
and give to those in need. He had long ago responded to
this call and committed himself with all his heart to a life of
voluntary poverty. In the Acts of the Apostles, the giving
away of ones possessions is presented as a free choice,
and in the Gospel it is seen as a condition of perfection.

However, Basil became even more radical and saw it as a

rule of life for all Christians. Moved by the extreme social
needs of the population, and enlightened by the Scriptures,
Basil insisted that the produce of the earth was intended for
all. While God the Creator had indeed distributed it unevenly,
he had done this with the intention that the rich should share
with the poor.
Basil simply swept aside such objections as To whom am I
unjust when I keep what is mine, asks the rich man. His
response: Tell me, which things are yours? Where did you
get them from at the beginning of your life? It is like someone
who has a seat in the theater, and who objects when others
also take their places. He claims that he owns what is for the
common use of all. So too with the rich. They claim in
advance that which is common property and make
themselves the owners of it. Moreover, if everyone acquires
what they need and leave the excess over for the destitute,
then there will be no rich and no poor. Did you not come
naked out of your mothers womb? Are you not going to
return naked to the earth? Where did you get your present
possessions from? If you say from fate, then that makes you
an atheist who neither acknowledges your Creator nor gives
thanks to your Benefactor. If you acknowledge that they
came from God, then tell me the reason why He gave them
to you. Is God unjust that He gives the things of life to people
unequally? Why are you rich while another is poor? In any
case, is it not so that you can receive the reward for good
and faithful stewardship, and the other can receive the

reward for his patient effort? But you, who grasps at

everything in your insatiable greed, do you really think that
you are doing nobody injustice by plundering so much? Who
is the greedy one? The one who is not satisfied with that
which is enough. Who is the plunderer? The one who takes
that which belongs to all. Are you greedy? Are you a
plunderer? The one who steals clothes off someones back is
called a thief. Why should we refer to the one who does not
clothe the naked, while having the means to do so, as
anything else? The bread that you have belongs to the
hungry, the clothes that are in your cupboard belong to the
naked, the shoes that are rotting in your possession belong
to the barefooted, the money that you have buried belongs to
the destitute. And so you commit injustice to so many when
you could have helped them.
Nice words, but money is nicer, thought the rich in reaction
to Basils harsh charge. Basil viewed the goods of the earth
as a gift of the Creator. God had entrusted their stewardship
to a number of people who were intended to share them with
others. With his theory of stewardship, Basil went beyond a
prevailing understanding of almsgiving in his day to lay a
new foundation for the Churchs social work.
We can see in this a plea for the recognition of what we
might call human rights, although Basil also goes further
than this. In situating the inequality between rich and poor in
Gods ordering of salvation history, so that the former are
called to love of their neighbor and the latter to patience,
Basil clearly saw that there is no such thing as private

ownership in the strict sense. And, there should really be no

such categories as rich and poor.
This radical approach sounds revolutionary in the face of
corruption and excess. But it is an evangelical radicalism that
we are meant to strive for nonviolently. This is not so
surprising considering that Basil upheld the one same ideal
for all Christians. He was realistic enough to realize that not
everyone would follow that ideal, but it was lived out among
ascetics and in monastic communities. Jesus and the
scriptures held up certain ideals to which all were invited, but
to which not all would respond.
The author is a Catholic priest living in Belgium. This is an
extract from Basilius de Grote: Een Evangelische
Revolutionair (Averbode, 1999, pages 110-112). The
translation is by Macrina Walker. For more on the topic, see
C. Paul Schroeders translation of St. Basil the Great: On
Social Justice.