Basil of Caesarea versus Eunomius of Cyzicus on the Nature of Time: A Patristic Reception of the Critique of Plato
In: Vigiliae ChristianaeSearch for other papers by Mark DelCogliano in
Current site
Google Scholar
This paper investigates rival views about the nature of time that were articulated in the fourth-century controversies over the Trinity. In his Contra Eunomium Basil of Caesarea refuted the definition of time put forward by his opponent, Eunomius of Cyzicus, and presented his own views on its nature. This study seeks to contextualize the views of both contestants polemically, theologically, and philosophically. It is argued that Eunomius’s definition of time has a Platonic pedigree. In addition, it is demonstrated that, in both his critique of Eunomius’s definition and the positive presentation of his own views on time, Basil draws upon his familiarity with the philosophical critique of Plato’s views, as found in Aristotle, the Peripatetics, the Stoics, and the Middle Platonists (and perhaps even Galen). Basil’s own views on time have been most immediately influenced by Middle Platonist, Peripatetic, and Stoic concerns.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
7
On Basil’s theology, see Kopecek, A History of Neo-Arianism, 361-440; Volker Henning Drecoll, Die Entwicklung der Trinitätslehre des Basilius von Cäsarea: Sein Weg vom Homöusianer zum Neonizäner, Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte 66 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996); Bernard Sesboüé, Saint Basile et la Trinité: Un acte théologique au IVe siècle. Le rôle de Basile de Césarée dans l’élaboration de la doctrine et du langage trinitaire (Paris: Descleé, 1998); Stephen M. Hildebrand, The Trinitarian Theology of Basil of Caesarea: A Synthesis of Greek Thought and Biblical Truth (Washington d.c.: Catholic University of America Press, 2007); Radde-Gallwitz, Divine Simplicity, 113-174; and DelCogliano, Theory of Names, 135-260.
-
14
Julian, Comm. Job 38.7 (Hagedorn, Der Hiobkommentar, 254, 1-7): οὐκοῦν εἰς καιροὺς ἐτάχθησαν οἱ ἀστέρες ἀλλ’ οὐχ ἵνα ἐνεργῶσι τὰ κακά, καὶ εἰς ἐνιαυτούς, ἀλλ’ οὐκ εἰς γενέσεις καὶ <ράξεις• ἐ<’ ἀνθρώ<οις γὰρ τὸ βιοῦν εὖ ἢ κακῶς ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἐ<ὶ τοῖς ἄστροις• οὐ γάρ εἰσι τὰς τῶν ἀνθρώ<ων γνώμας ἡνιοχοῦντες, ἀλλὰ τὰς τῶν χρόνων <εριόδους διι<<εύοντες. χρόνος γὰρ δι’ αὐτῶν, ὡς ὁ Πλάτων φησί• χρόνος γάρ ἐστιν ἀστέρων <οιά τις κίνησις συμ<αρομαρτούντων ἡλίῳ καὶ σελήνῃ. οὐκοῦν εἰ ταῦτα ἐνεχειρίσθησαν δρᾶν, οὔτε <ρὸς ἀρετὴν οὔτε <ρὸς κακίαν βιάσασθαί τινα οἷοί τέ εἰσιν• οὐ γὰρ ἐ<ετρά<ησαν.
-
15
Richard Sorabji, Time, Creation, and the Continuum (London: Duckworth, 1983), 268-276.
-
51
Alcinous, Didaskalikos 14.6, 1-14 (P. Louis, Albinos. Épitomé (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1945)): Ἐδημιούργησε δὲ ὁ θεὸς καὶ ἀστέρας τε καὶ ἄστρα, καὶ τούτων τὰ μὲν ἀ<λανῆ, κόσμον οὐρανοῦ τε καὶ νυκτός, <άμ<ολλα ὄντα τῷ <λήθει, τὰ δὲ εἰς γένεσιν ἀριθμοῦ καὶ χρόνου καὶ δεῖξιν τῶν ὄντων, ἑ<τὰ ὄντα. Καὶ γὰρ τὸν χρόνον ἐ<οίησε τῆς κινήσεως τοῦ κόσμου διάστημα, ὡς ἂν εἰκόνα τοῦ αἰῶνος, ὅς ἐστι μέτρον τοῦ αἰωνίου κόσμου τῆς μονῆς. Τὰ δὲ μὴ ἀ<λανῆ τῶν ἄστρων τῇ δυνάμει οὐχ ὅμοια. Ἥλιος μὲν γὰρ ἡγεμονεύει <άντων, δεικνύς τε καὶ φαίνων τὰ σύμ<αντα• σελήνη δὲ ἐν τάξει δευτέρᾳ θεωρεῖται ἕνεκα τῆς δυνάμεως, οἱ δὲ ἄλλοι <λανῆται ἀναλόγως κατὰ μοῖραν ἕκαστος ἰδίαν. Καὶ σελήνη μὲν μηνὸς μέτρον <οιεῖ, ἐκ<εριελθοῦσα τὸν ἑαυτῆς κύκλον καὶ καταλαβοῦσα τὸν ἥλιον ἐν τοσούτῳ• ἥλιος δὲ ἐνιαυτῷ• <εριελθὼν γὰρ τὸν ζῳοφόρον κύκλον <ληροῖ τὰς ὥρας τοῦ ἔτους• οἵ τε ἄλλοι καθ’ ἕνα ἕκαστον <εριόδοις ἰδίαις κέχρηνται, αἵτινες θεωρηταὶ οὐ τοῖς τυχοῦσιν εἰσίν, ἀλλὰ τοῖς <ε<αιδευμένοις. Trans. [modified] by John Dillon, Alcinous. The Handbook of Platonism (Oxford: Clarendon Press,1993), 24.
-
54
Aëtius, Plac. 1.21.2 = 318.4-5 Diels DG. See Dillon, Alcinous, 129.
-
55
Dillon, Alcinous, 129-30. He admits that it is hard to make sense of how there can be a measure for something unextended and not subject to change of any kind.
-
59
John M. Rist, Stoic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969), 274-6, speculates about Zeno’s view of time.
-
68
Rist, Stoic Philosophy, 276-78, 281-2. He seems (p. 282) unaware that there is evidence for the Stoic view that there is time during the conflagration (see ls 28O4, 46O, 52A2).
-
84
Basil, Eun. 1.21, 1-16 (Sesboüé, Basil de Césarée, vol.1, 246-248): Ἐ<εὶ μέντοι ἀφορίσασθαι ἡμῖν τοῦ χρόνου τὴν φύσιν ὁ σοφὸς τὰ <άντα <ροήχθη, καὶ ἐντεῦθεν αὐτοῦ τὸ βέβαιον καὶ <εριεσκεμμένον τῆς διανοίας ἴδωμεν. Χρόνον τοίνυν εἶναί φησι <οιάν τινα κίνησιν ἀστέρων• ἡλίου δηλονότι καὶ σελήνης καὶ τῶν λοι<ῶν, ὅσοις καθ’ ἑαυτοὺς κινεῖσθαι δύναμίς ἐστι. Τὸ τοίνυν ἀ<ὸ γενέσεως οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς μέχρι τῆς <οιήσεως τῶν ἀστέρων διάστημα τί <οτε ἄρα εἶναι ὁ δεινὸς τὰ μετέωρα οὗτος ἀ<οφανεῖται; Σαφῶς γὰρ ὁ τὴν κοσμογονίαν τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ Πνεύματος ἀναγράψας τῇ τετάρτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τοὺς μεγάλους φωστῆρας καὶ τοὺς λοι<οὺς ἀστέρας γεγενῆσθαί φησι. Χρόνος οὖν οὐκ ἦν, ὡς ἔοικεν, ἐν ταῖς κατό<ιν ἡμέραις• οὐ γὰρ ἐκινοῦντό <ω οἱ ἀστέρες. Πῶς γὰρ, οἵ γε μηδ’ ἐγεγόνεισαν τὴν ἀρχήν• Καὶ <άλιν,ὅτε ἐ<ολέμει τοῖς Γαβαωνίταις ὁ τοῦ Ναυῆ Ἰησοῦς, ἐ<ειδὴ ἀκίνητος ὁ ἥλιος ἔμεινε τῷ <ροστάγματι <εδηθεὶς, καὶ ἡ σελήνη κατὰ χώραν εἱστήκει, χρόνος οὐκ ἦν τηνικαῦτα; Translation from DelCogliano and Radde-Gallwitz, Basil of Caesarea, 121-2.
-
87
Basil, Eun. 1.21, 17-21 (Sesboüé, Basil de Césarée, vol. 1, 248): Τί οὖν ἐκεῖνο τὸ διάστημα τῆς ἡμέρας εἴ<ωμεν; τίνα <ροσηγορίαν ἐ<ινοήσεις; Εἰ γὰρ ἡ τοῦ χρόνου φύσις ἐ<ιλελοί<ει, αἰὼν ἀντεισῆλθε δηλονότι. Αἰῶνα δὲ μικρὸν ἡμέρας μέρος <ροσαγορεύειν τίνα τῆς ἀνοίας ὑ<ερβολὴν ἀ<ολεί<ει; Translation from DelCogliano and Radde-Gallwitz, Basil of Caesarea, 122.
-
88
Basil, Eun. 2.13, 19-22 (Sesboüé, Basil de Césarée, vol. 2, 48): ἡ μὲν γὰρ κοινὴ συνήθεια ἢ χρόνοις ἢ αἰῶσιν ἅ<αν διάστημα ὑ<οβάλλει• ἐ<ειδὴ ὅ<ερ ἐν τοῖς αἰσθητοῖς ὁ χρόνος, τοῦτο ἐν τοῖς ὑ<ερκοσνίοις ἡ τοῦ αἰῶνος φύσις ἐστίν. Translation from DelCogliano and Radde-Gallwitz, Basil of Caesarea, 147.
-
91
Basil, Eun. 1.21, 21-28 (Sesboüé, Basil de Césarée, vol. 1, 248): Ἀλλ’ ἔοικεν ἐκ <ολλῆς ἀγχινοίας ἡμέραν μὲν καὶ νύκτα ἐν τῇ <οιᾷ τῶν ἀστέρων κινήσει νομίζειν γίνεσθαι, ταῦτα δὲ εἶναι τοῦ χρόνου μέρη• ὅθεν τὸν χρόνον <οιάν τινα κίνησιν ἀστέρων ἀ<εφήνατο, οὐδὲ αὐτὸ τοῦτο συνεὶς ὅ τι λέγει. Οὐ γὰρ <οιὰν, ἀλλ’ εἴ<ερ ἄρα, <οσὴν, μᾶλλον ἦν εἰ<εῖν οἰκειότερον. Ἀλλὰ τίς οὕτω <αῖς <αντελῶς τὴν διάνοιαν, ὥστε ἀγνοεῖν, ὅτι ἡμέραι μὲν, καὶ ὧραι, καὶ μῆνες, καὶ ἐνιαυτοὶ, μέτρα τοῦ χρόνου εἰσὶν, οὐχὶ μέρη; Translation from DelCogliano and Radde-Gallwitz, Basil of Caesarea, 122.
-
92
Basil, Eun. 1.21, 28-34 (Sesboüé, Basil de Césarée, vol. 1, 248-250): Χρόνος δέ ἐστι τὸ συμ<αρεκτεινόμενον τῇ συστάσει τοῦ κόσμου διάστημα• ᾧ <ᾶσα <αραμετρεῖται κίνησις, εἴτε ἀστέρων, εἴτε ζώων, εἴτε οὑτινοσοῦν τῶν κινουμένων, καθὸ λέγομεν ταχύτερον ἢ βραδύτερον ἕτερον ἑτέρου• ταχύτερον μὲν τὸ ἐν ἐλάττονι χρόνῳ <λεῖον διάστημα μεταβαῖνον, βραδύτερον δὲ τὸ ἔλαττον ἐν <λείονι χρόνῳ κινούμενον. Translation from DelCogliano and Radde-Gallwitz, Basil of Caesarea, 122.
-
94
Cf. Basil, Homiliae in Hexaemeron 2.8, 45-47 (S. Giet, Basile de Césarée. Homélies sur l’hexaéméron, 2nd ed., Sources chrétiennes 26 bis (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1968)): “Having established the nature of time, God set as measures and signs for it the intervals of the days” (ὁ τὴν τοῦ χρόνου φύσιν κατασκευάσας Θεὸς, μέτρα αὐτῷ καὶ σημεῖα τὰ τῶν ἡμερῶν ἐ<έβαλε διαστήματα).
-
103
Cf. Basil, Homiliae in Hexaemeron 1.5, 20-28 (Giet): “So then, connatural with the cosmos, and to the animals and plants in it, the passage of time came to subsist, always pressing forward and slipping away, and nowhere resting from its course. Indeed, is this not time, whose past has disappeared, whose future is not yet here, whose present escapes perception before it is recognized? Such is the nature of produced things, either growing or decaying, without a clearly settled state and stability” (Συμφυὴς ἄρα τῷ κόσμῳ, καὶ τοῖς ἐν αὐτῷ ζῴοις τε καὶ φυτοῖς, ἡ τοῦ χρόνου διέξοδος ὑ<έστη, ἐ<ειγομένη ἀεὶ καὶ <αραρρέουσα, καὶ μηδαμοῦ <αυομένη τοῦ δρόμου. Ἢ οὐχὶ τοιοῦτος ὁ χρόνος, οὗ τὸ μὲν <αρελθὸν ἠφανίσθη, τὸ δὲ μέλλον οὔ<ω <άρεστι, τὸ δὲ <αρὸν <ρὶν γνωσθῆναι διαδιδράσκει τὴν αἴσθησιν; Τοιαύτη δέ τις καὶ τῶν γινομένων ἡ φύσις, ἢ αὐξανομένη <άντως, ἢ φθίνουσα, τὸ δὲ ἱδρυμένον καὶ στάσιμον οὐκ ἐ<ίδηλον ἔχουσα).
-
104
Basil, Eun. 1.21, 31-34 (Sesboüé, Basil de Césarée, vol. 1, 248-250); translation from DelCogliano and Radde-Gallwitz, Basil of Caesarea, 122. See n. 92 above.
-
106
Basil, Eun. 1.21, 33-40 (Sesboüé, Basil de Césarée, vol. 1, 250): Ὁ δὲ, ἐ<ειδὴ ἐν χρόνῳ οἱ ἀστέρες κινοῦνται, χρόνου αὐτοὺς εἶναι δημιουργοὺς ἀ<οφαίνεται. Οὐκοῦν κατὰ τὸν τοῦ σοφωτάτου λόγον, ἐ<ειδὴ καὶ κάνθαροι ἐν χρόνῳ κινοῦνται, ὁρισώμεθα τὸν χρόνον εἶναι <οιάν τινα κανθάρων κίνησιν• οὐδὲν γὰρ τούτου τὸ <αρ’ αὐτοῦ λεχθὲν διαφέρει, <λὴν τῆς σεμνότητος τῶν ὀνομάτων. Translation from DelCogliano and Radde-Gallwitz, Basil of Caesarea, 122-3.
-
107
See Basil, Homiliae in Hexaemeron 2.8, 45-47, cited above in n. 94.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 343 | 65 | 5 |
| Full Text Views | 211 | 5 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 71 | 12 | 0 |
Basil of Caesarea versus Eunomius of Cyzicus on the Nature of Time: A Patristic Reception of the Critique of Plato
In: Vigiliae ChristianaeSearch for other papers by Mark DelCogliano in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
This paper investigates rival views about the nature of time that were articulated in the fourth-century controversies over the Trinity. In his Contra Eunomium Basil of Caesarea refuted the definition of time put forward by his opponent, Eunomius of Cyzicus, and presented his own views on its nature. This study seeks to contextualize the views of both contestants polemically, theologically, and philosophically. It is argued that Eunomius’s definition of time has a Platonic pedigree. In addition, it is demonstrated that, in both his critique of Eunomius’s definition and the positive presentation of his own views on time, Basil draws upon his familiarity with the philosophical critique of Plato’s views, as found in Aristotle, the Peripatetics, the Stoics, and the Middle Platonists (and perhaps even Galen). Basil’s own views on time have been most immediately influenced by Middle Platonist, Peripatetic, and Stoic concerns.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 343 | 65 | 5 |
| Full Text Views | 211 | 5 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 71 | 12 | 0 |
