Aogu "Nick" Iida: St. Basil of Caesarea’s Christological Understanding Pertaining to His Rebuttal Against Eunomius

This paper will focus on St. Basil of Caesarea’s writings—mainly Against Eunomius and his letters—in conjunction with his rebuttal against Eunomius. It will examine Basil’s Christological understanding as he refutes Eunomius for his Arian perspective on his understanding of the nature and substance of the Son. My examination in this paper will mainly attempt to assert that the Incarnational understanding of the Son was one of the key concepts for Basil to expand his theological understanding. While not explicitly distinguishing the notion between an economic Trinity and an immanent Trinity, this paper will argue that it was the Incarnation of the Son that was crucial to Basil’s rebuttal against Eunomius as well as for Basil’s formation of his theological assertion. For this paper, I will mainly focus on Book II of Against Eunomius and Epistles 20 and 231 to 236 (written to Amphilochius) as Basil reflects and develops his thoughts. I will also make a brief reference to Basil’s usage of the term, philanthropia, in other writings to bolster my contention, referring to Kenji Doi’s assertion on this theme and his findings and indicate that Basil’s core notion was controlled by his understanding of the Incarnation of the Son, which eventually helped him not only refute Eunomius but also expand his pastoral and practical operations such as monasteries and hospitals.