ON ST. MAXIMUS, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR,
AT PADUA IN ITALY.
Second Century.
The age, discovery, canonization, and translations of the Saint.
Maximus, Bishop and Confessor, at Padua in Italy (S.)
BY THE AUTHOR P. B.
The Paduans reckon St. Maximus as the second among their bishops after St. Prosdocimus, and they say that he held the see for about 25 or 27 years, and that from the year of Christ nearly 139; as may be seen in Ughelli, Italia Sacra, tom. 5; No Acts of this Saint survive: Scardeone, On the Antiquity of the City of Padua, book 2, class 6; Cavaccio, History of the Monastery of St. Justina of Padua, book 1; Orsato, History of Padua, part 1, book 1: although there are not lacking those who assign him far fewer years, as Ferrari testifies in his Catalogue of the Saints of Italy at this day. And so we do not marvel that the Acts of so ancient a Saint, if there were any, have perished; and that even those few things which certain moderns affirm about him are proved by an authority not sufficiently secure: as when they hold that he was born at Padua of the noble family of the Vitaliani; when they say that he wrote the Acts of St. Prosdocimus, his predecessor, and two sermons besides for the solemnity of Bl. Justina; when they make him illustrious by miracles performed in his life. Certainly these writers do not indicate his lineage and homeland, whence they learned it; and the Acts of St. Prosdocimus which now exist, although they attest that they were written by Maximus, are nevertheless rightly disallowed to him by the cited Scardeone, by Cavaccio (book 1, page 6), and by others, as being much more recent (and perhaps composed after the discovery of St. Maximus). And yet upon these very Acts alone, unless I am mistaken, rests the opinion of those who think there were more ancient Acts which St. Maximus actually composed. As for the sermons for the solemnity of St. Justina, Cavaccio in the same place (page 11) attributes them to a monk, an author of later times. Finally the miracles, which the same Cavaccio proves from the Roman Martyrology alone, we think are not to be understood as those which the Saint, while yet living, displayed; but those which occurred at his invocation and tomb, after the middle of the eleventh century, as will appear below.
[2] His cult flourished again in the eleventh century This is the more to be wondered at, that the cult of St. Maximus, which it is most likely flourished in the centuries nearest his death, could afterward so fade away, that not only among the ancient Martyrologists, but not even among the Paduans, did any memory of him survive down to the year of Christ 1053; so that for duly restoring it there, Pope St. Leo IX judged there was need of a new canonization. But indeed, by as much as it had been more obscure before that, by so much did it afterward become more illustrious, and now not only of Padua, where it is celebrated on this day with a double rite, but of the whole Church, to which on this day it is set forth in the Roman Martyrology in these words: At Padua, St. Maximus, bishop of the same city, who, renowned for miracles, rested in a blessed end. In the very same words there had gone before Molanus, Bellinus, and the Strozzi codex of about the fifteenth century in our Usuardine Supplements: for we have found no older copies of this eulogy; unless perhaps the tablets of the church of Padua, which Baronius cites in his notes to this text of the Roman Martyrology, had something similar: and if this is so, that eulogy may indeed be referred to the year already mentioned, 1053; but by no means further back: for if before that time St. Maximus had been noted in the tablets of that church in this manner, then his recent enrollment in the register of the Saints by St. Leo ought surely to have seemed superfluous; since in it he would have found him already described from time immemorial, as celebrated there with an annual observance.
[3] But indeed; although we may readily suspect that the occasion for conceiving an annunciation of this kind was seized from the tablets of the church of Padua, [on the occasion of the discovery of his body; as is clear from the following manuscript document] we do not think, however, that it was ever there so expressed; first, because by it the second of August seems to be indicated as the birthday (natalis) of St. Maximus; whereas in the church of Padua it has always been held as the day of the discovery or canonization; hence also today in the Directory of the cathedral church it is prescribed that the third verse in the hymn at Vespers be changed; and in the lessons of the second nocturn, as our Fr. Giovanni Battista Romagnoli testifies, this is read: He (St. Leo IX) canonized the discovery on the fourth of the Nones of August; which feast day is yearly kept by the church of Padua under the title of the discovery of St. Maximus, bishop and confessor. Secondly, because in this annunciation the miracles of the Saint are so asserted as though they had been performed by him while living: but if the tablets of Padua had made mention of these, why did Scardeone, who wrote before the reform of the Roman Martyrology, make no mention of those miracles? Why did Cavaccio, who related these things in the year 1608, passing over the tablets of the church of Padua that were much more ancient, produce for himself and by itself the most recent Martyrology of the Roman Church? Thirdly and finally, because those tablets seem to be nothing else than either the history of his discovery and canonization, preserved in the archive or manuscripts of Padua, or some eulogy composed from it and entered into the Fasti of the same church. This latter we gave from Cavaccio—since his History was not yet here—citing it in Ughelli, tom. 2 of March, page 610. But since from the archive of the monastery of St. Justina of Padua we obtained, by the kindness of Fr. Romagnoli, in the year 1688, that very document which had served as source for Cavaccio and the rest, we here again present it from this, with the errors of the copyist, in which it abounds, expunged. It runs thus:
[4] In the year one thousand fifty-three of the Lord's Incarnation, They are revealed by divine agency in the year 1053 in the sixth Indiction, Henry the Second reigning as emperor, it came to pass by divine will that a certain good and upright man, by name Bernard, was prelate of this bishopric: giving to orphans, widows, and pilgrims suffering want out of those things which God had entrusted to him, he persevered in vigils and prayers and fastings: he did not cease daily to vow sacrifices to God. While he was doing these things, by the working of divine grace, he saw in a dream an old man beautiful in aspect, of comely face, clothed in a white garment, thus speaking to him: The Lord has sent me to you, that I may show the places in which the bodies of the holy Julian, Maximus, Felicitas, and the Innocent children have been carefully hidden away; that, taken thence, and more diligently received by you and by the faithful Christians, those things which had long been unknown may thenceforth remain known to all worshippers of Christ with the highest reverence; and that this city, which of old was ruined by an anathema, may be raised up and enriched by their merits. Having said this, he suddenly caught him up into the basilica of St. Justina; and pointed out the place in which the bodies of the holy Julian and the Innocents rested together, between the altar of the Mother of God and the ark of St. Prosdocimus. But the bodies of the holy Maximus and Felicitas he marks as lying near the doors on the left side: and suddenly he was taken from his eyes.
[5] and they are dug up When morning came, he rose terrified; and having gathered venerable clerics and religious laymen, he declared everything in order. And when they, rejoicing, heard these things and received them in their inmost heart, they exhorted him to follow up what had been revealed with fastings and prayers and almsgiving. A fast being proclaimed, all persevering for three days, putting on hair-cloth, chanting hymns and spiritual songs, and going in processions, did not cease to beseech God. But on the third day, all the people assembling in the church of St. Justina, the bishop with all the clergy celebrated Mass and with the highest reverence communicated the Body and Blood of the Lord. And when Mass was over, he came to the place shown in the divine vision, and prostrating himself to the ground, prayed at length. His prayer completed, taking a mattock, he began to dig: and when he had dug about six feet, he found marble arks bound with iron fastenings, from which a most sweet odor breathed forth; at which all rendered praises to God; and those who were there detained by various infirmities, made whole by the odor, all ceased not to bless God.
[6] the bodies of Sts. Maximus, Julian, the three Innocents, and Felicitas, With fear beating upon him, the bishop opened the arks, that he might with joy receive the treasure revealed to him in so many ways. Meanwhile there came an unbearable light throughout the whole church; so that no one could see before him for the brightness: and for about the space of half an hour they lay prostrate on the ground as though dead. The bishop, having received the relics (something is wanting here, since the syntax is mutilated), at whose heads were stones inscribed by a divine finger, each of which retains its own title, thus speaking: Here rests Maximus, second bishop after Prosdocimus, who gave up the life of this world to the Lord, that he might merit to have life everlasting in heaven. The other bore this: Here is laid Julian, a most Christian man, who, when he had many times returned from the Sepulchre of the Lord, and had at last brought back with him three Innocents, went forth to Christ. Wherefore, placed together, they here rest. And the third declares thus: Here is buried Felicitas, an illustrious woman, devoted to God, dedicated by the sacred veil; who, persisting day and night in the service of God, was received into heaven.
[7] Pope St. Leo IX soon decreeing a cult for them. The fame increasing, all who had heard of the discovery of the Saints assembled, and, driven by various infirmities, upon invoking their names, were healed. Meanwhile, while these things were being done, it happened, by the provident mercy of God, that the most blessed Pope Leo, Apostle of the Roman See, took his journey through the city of Padua to subdue the kingdom of the Hungarians who submitted of their own accord [and], honorably received by Bishop Bernard, [and] staying with him for two days, celebrated the sacred Mysteries for the people in the church of St. Justina the virgin, where the bodies of the Saints were venerated, and sanctified the city, which was said to have been of old bound with the chain of anathema. He, yielding to their most reverent prayers, having said Mass in the church, confirmed the people by the word of life in the Catholic faith, and canonized the discovery of the Saints, and restored the city to its former blessing. So far the document; to which we append some things to be observed; first about this manuscript itself; then about the discovery narrated in it; lastly about the canonization of the discovery.
[8] As to the first: to this manuscript history,
and to the other documents following it in our copy, this is subscribed: As to the age and authority of this document I, Giovanni Domenico Cellegari, monk of Monte Cassino, keeper of the library of St. Justina, attest that these copies have been faithfully extracted from the manuscript book of the Annals of the monastery of St. Justina; which book contains documents legalized by a public notary concerning the holy bodies which are kept in the aforesaid church of St. Justina: which I attest with my own hand. We have found no other narration of this discovery in the old manuscripts of the Paduans; and so we think that this is the very one which Scardeone followed in book 2, class 6; though too freely, and with too little fidelity, as will appear from what has been said in tom. 2 of March, page 610, num. 5. He indeed praises it as a most ancient monument worthy of trust. Cavaccio, the historiographer of the monastery of St. Justina, distinguished among the few, expressed the same both in a more polished style and with greater fidelity in book 2, at the year 1031; except that he says St. Leo did on his return from the Hungarian expedition what the Anonymous author narrates was done on the journey out. And so, leaving Scardeone here, the more recent writers Ughelli and Orsato, indeed also our Predecessors, not yet having reached the source itself, not undeservedly preferred that author. Cavaccio moreover does not doubt that the anonymous author of this manuscript belonged to the times of the discovery which he describes. To which we ourselves would more willingly assent, if that Anonymous did not so openly assert that, after the bodies of the Saints were found, St. Leo was present in person at Padua. For the rest we readily believe that no monument older than this has long survived on this matter; and therefore that whatever Scardeone, or those younger than he, have published less consistently about this discovery, must be measured against it.
[9] We do not therefore approve of Wion, when in his Monastic Martyrology at this day, the more recent writers must yield. he refers the discovery already described to the year of Christ 1050, but the canonization to the year 1053: for both happened in the same year, not 1050 (as Ferrari errs on this day), but 1053. Nor does the inscription help Wion, which he recites as carved on the base placed to the right of the choir in the church of St. Justina thus: In the year after the birth of Christ 1050, Henry II being emperor, Bernard, bishop of Padua, a man of exceptional both learning and holiness, was the first to find the most august bodies of the Saints…, unknown for many previous centuries through the various calamities of this city, etc.: for this inscription, having been set up only in the year 1562, must yield to our far more ancient document. Add that Orsato, History of Padua, part 1, book 3, page 238, read the same inscription thus: In the year after the birth of Christ 1053, Henry II being emperor, etc. In Scardeone, besides those things which have been noted in tom. 2 of March, this too must be corrected, which he says in book 2, class 6, page 108, in the eulogy of Bernard Maltraversi, that the old man who appeared to that Bernard was St. Maximus himself; for this is established no more than what Orsato affirms in the index of his History, that St. Prosdocimus appeared to Bernard.
[10] Furthermore these words of our Anonymous, "and he canonized the discovery of the Saints," What the canonization of the discovery is; Scardeone thus explains: And he (Pope St. Leo IX) decreed that thenceforth both Maximus and the others found in the same place should be venerated as Saints, and should be held as the chief and tutelary Holy Ones of the city of Padua. And he adds: Which was both confirmed by the people, and kept by the church of Padua down to the present time. To almost the same effect Cavaccio writes thus: That the memory of the Saints might also be everywhere more famous, he enrolled them in the register of the Holy Ones, and honored them with a feast day, which down to now is held solemn among us on the fourth of the Nones of August, namely on which their relics were found. Which interpretation of both writers sufficiently intimates that the cult of those Saints, if ever it had been known before, was at least at the time of the discovery utterly unknown, as we have already said above.
[11] and at what time this happened, and through whom. That the discovery was prior to the canonization, the Anonymous clearly indicates; wherefore Cavaccio, who fixes the discovery on the fourth of the Nones of August, must place the canonization somewhat later, of necessity. Somewhat later, I say: for that a few days flowed between the two, all except Wion affirm. Yet the proper Office of St. Maximus, cited above at num. 3, does not favor Cavaccio; where it is expressly said, He canonized the discovery on the fourth of the Nones of August. The inscription too, just assigned to Wion and Orsato, runs thus: Leo IX, Supreme Pontiff,… having beheld the same bodies, and indeed many of their miracles, on the fourth of the Nones of August entered them in the register of the Holy Ones: which last words, rendered into Italian, Eusebius of Modena, an author of the sixteenth century, adopts as his own in a writing which Wion likewise reviews there. It seems therefore that the canonization was made on the fourth of the Nones of August; but the discovery some days earlier. But indeed a serious difficulty arises here: for it is agreed among all (if you except Ferrari, supported by no testimony) that this canonization did not happen before the second day of August in the year 1053. How then can St. Leo IX be said to have carried it out himself, present at Padua at that time; when it is most certain from what was said in tom. 2 of April, page 647 and following, that that holy Pontiff did not set foot out of Benevento from the 23rd of June in the year 1053, until the 12th of March in the year 1054, when, scarcely conveyed thence to Rome sick, he flew away to those above? Since therefore our Anonymous affirms this before all others, I for my part do not see by what reasoning so open an error of his can be defended; nor accordingly do I judge him to be so ancient as Cavaccio contends. Far be it from me, however, to doubt about the canonization, of which its anniversary celebration is a shining testimony; but I believe it was, in the manner elsewhere customary, entrusted by St. Leo, then absent, to the bishop of Padua and the neighboring bishops.
[12] Whether Sts. Urius, Arnald, etc. pertain to it. It is not rightly announced by Wion in the Monastic Martyrology on 2 August: At Padua, the canonization of all the Saints who rest in the monastery of St. Justina: for no others were enrolled on that day in the register of the Saints, except those whose bodies we have already said were found here; namely Maximus; Felicitas, of whom we treated on 26 March; Julian, of whom mention will recur on 3 September; and three of the boys whom Herod once slaughtered at Bethlehem. There is therefore no place here (although Ferrari believed with Wion that there was) for St. Urius, whom we in tom. 2 of March, page 610 and following, through the scarcity of monuments received later, wrongly confused with St. Julian; none likewise for St. Arnald the abbot, who lived nearly two centuries after St. Leo IX, as was shown in tom. 2 of February from page 499, and again in tom. 2 of March, page 370: none finally for the other Saints, much less for all who rest in the monastery of St. Justina but do not pertain to the discovery here recorded.
[13] The translations of the relics of St. Maximus. Two translations of relics survive, celebrated at the monastery of St. Justina in the years 1502 and 1562 with the greatest ceremony; and the latter indeed not without several miracles. The documents of both are at hand, both written by hand and printed in type by Pietro Saviolo at Padua in the year 1682 in the Treasury of the City of Padua, pages 116 and 120, which deserve their place here, as supplying a knowledge of the relics of St. Maximus by no means to be neglected; but since they are not so necessary for demonstrating his cult as the history of the discovery given above; and since they deal with the relics not of this Saint only, but also, on the same occasion, place, and time, of many others twice translated; it has seemed more fitting to report them all together at the day 7 October, when we shall have to treat of St. Justina, who was herself then translated at the same time, and to whose church all the rest pertain. In the meantime, if you please, consult Cavaccio at the years just assigned.