Mykyta Rakytnianskyi | February 12, 2026
The icon shows them side by
side – yet life pulled them apart. A story of friendship shattered on the rock
of church politics, and of unity that had to be invented seven hundred years
later.
On the icon they stand together –
three venerable elders with similar beards and halos, almost like brothers:
Saints Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, and John Chrysostom. Three
luminaries of Orthodox theology, three pillars of the faith.
But look more closely at their
lives, and another story emerges – one of a deep friendship broken against the
stone of ecclesiastical politics. One in which a saint could not forgive
another until death. One in which the unity we see on the icon was anything but
simple.
It began with Sasima – a dusty
postal station at the crossroads between Caesarea and Tyana. A place where
traders changed horses and hurried on. No temple, no library, not even a proper
source of water. Only toll collectors and bandits waiting for stragglers.
Saint Gregory the Theologian was
appointed there – a subtle poet and melancholic who had longed all his life for
the silence of the desert and the freedom to compose theological verse. The
appointment came from his closest friend, Basil the Great.
It was not merely an
unfortunate posting. It felt like betrayal. And Gregory experienced it as such.
Later, in an autobiographical
poem rarely quoted in textbooks, he would write with undisguised bitterness:
“Such was your friendship, Basil… A throne in Sasima! A place without water,
without greenery, full of dust and noise… inhabited by vagabonds and executioners…
You sacrificed me for your power.”
A saint writes to a saint. And
between the lines one hears the cry of a man who felt used – transformed from
friend into a pawn on the chessboard of church politics.
Three unlike men
To understand how this happened,
one must see how different they were.
Basil the Great was a man of
action and iron will – an administrator who governed his diocese as a seasoned
minister governs a state department. He built the Basiliad – a vast complex of
hospitals and shelters, a prototype of public healthcare. He drafted rules,
composed dogmatic formulas, organized the Church with relentless energy.
When the Arian emperor Valens
tried to coerce him into renouncing Orthodoxy, Basil answered with such
firmness that the imperial prefect marveled: “No one has ever dared to speak to
me like this.”
Basil burned himself out in this
service. He died at forty-nine, already resembling an old man. Illness,
overwork, sleepless nights over documents – he became a living sacrifice to his
own sense of duty.
Gregory was his opposite. An
introvert, a poet, a man who physically suffered from noise and administrative
bustle. He was ordained against his will – twice.
First, his own father dragged him
into the altar and made him a presbyter. Later, Basil appointed him bishop of
that very Sasima. Both times Gregory tried to flee, to hide, yet returned out
of obedience.
He is the only Church Father who
wrote autobiographical poems about his depressions and disappointments – not
polished hagiography, but honest testimony of pain.
John Chrysostom, who lived later
and never met the other two personally, embodied a third type – the orator and
the conscience of his age.
He told the rich to their faces
what others dared not whisper: your marble baths are built on the bones of the
poor; the second cloak in your wardrobe was stolen from someone who has none.
A radical ascetic, he was exiled
twice for his sermons. On the second journey he died before reaching his
destination, whispering, “Glory to God for all things.”
Three men. Three temperaments.
Three ways of serving God.
If the Church had been composed
only of men like one of them, it would have become either a bureaucratic
apparatus, a philosophical circle, or an unceasing blaze of revolution.
The wound of Sasima
But why did Basil send his friend
to such a place?
In 372, Emperor Valens divided
Cappadocia into two provinces, stripping Basil of half his territory. It was a
geopolitical maneuver. Basil urgently needed loyal bishops in new cities – men
who would stand firm in councils.
Sasima was one of those cities.
Basil chose the man he trusted most: his closest friend.
He knew Gregory would suffer
there. He knew his temperament, his longing for quiet. Yet political necessity
outweighed personal affection.
Basil judged that the
interests of the Church were more important than his friend’s happiness.
Strategically, he may have been right. But Gregory could not forgive him.
He never set foot in Sasima.
Formally he remained its bishop, but he refused to go. A silent protest – a
saint’s passive strike against what he perceived as injustice.
The resentment remained until
Basil’s death.
When Basil died in 379, worn down
by labor and illness, Gregory came to the funeral and delivered his famous
Oration in honor of Basil – one of the most luminous texts of patristic
literature. He called him the greatest saint of his time. He spoke with love
and with grief.
Death reconciled them.
There is something profoundly
human – and profoundly Christian – in that. Forgiveness came not because the
offender asked for it – we do not know if he ever did – but because death
stripped away the trivialities. The pain dissolved before the truth that this
man had given his life for the Church.
A feast that had to be
invented
Seven centuries later, in 1084,
Constantinople was torn by a strange dispute. Byzantine intellectuals divided
into parties: Johannites, Basilians, Gregorians. Each insisted their saint was
the greatest. Families quarreled; neighbors stopped greeting one another.
Metropolitan John Mauropous,
unable to bear the division, had a vision. All three saints appeared to him and
said: We are equal before God. Stop dividing us on earth when we are united in
heaven.
He established a new feast – the
Synaxis of the Three Hierarchs. The quarrel subsided.
But the irony is striking. The
feast had to be invented because people could not accept that saints had
disagreed in life. They needed an icon where all three stood peacefully
together. The reality was more complex – full of wounds that healed only in eternity.
Unity born through pain
The icon tells the truth – but
not the whole truth. It shows the result: their place in the Kingdom, where
resentments are gone and differences transfigured. It does not show the process
– the painful road through misunderstanding and fractured friendship.
And that may be the most
important lesson.
Holiness is not the absence of
conflict. It is not flawless relationships or perpetual agreement. Holiness is
the capacity to remain within the unity of the Church, before the same Chalice,
even when pain and misunderstanding persist.
Gregory could not forgive Basil
during his lifetime. Yet he remained in the same Church, served the same
Liturgy, confessed the same Christ. That proved more important than personal
grievance.
We live in an age when the Church
is again divided into parties. Some speak of strictness and discipline; others
of theological depth; others of social justice.
Different emphases breed tension,
suspicion, accusation. The story of the Three Hierarchs reminds us that such
tensions have always existed – even among saints. They, too, struggled to
agree. Serious conflicts arose between them.
But they remained in one Church.
The feast established seven
centuries after their deaths teaches something simple and demanding.
Unity is not automatic. It is
an ascetic feat. It requires the constant overcoming of our urge to divide
people into right and wrong.
We may wound one another, as
Gregory was wounded by Basil. We may differ in temperament and calling. Yet if
we stand before one Chalice, we remain one – even if that unity is forged
through pain and self-denial.
Source:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.