Rufinus

ON ST. RUFINUS, MARTYR,

BISHOP OF THE MARSI IN ITALY

Fourth century.

CRITICAL COMMENTARY.

Rufinus, Martyr, Bishop of the Marsi in Italy (S.)

BY THE AUTHOR J. B. S.

§ I. St. Rufinus M., who is venerated on the XXX of July, is to be distinguished from the present St. Rufinus.

We slip back onto the same rocks from which we had scarcely well emerged on the day XXX of July, A distinction among the Rufini where we had to treat of St. Rufinus of Assisi the martyr. In vain were the people of Assisi asked to supply some light, namely more tolerable documents, whence that could be resolved which was there inquired by us: whether one or several St. Rufini are celebrated at Assisi, and on what days each? Concerning the Martyr whom we recorded on the said XXX of July, I at least have no doubt that he is the one whom St. Peter Damian praised in the famous sermon transcribed by us, when he wrote thus: The body therefore of this blessed Martyr was afterward translated from the suburb of the town of Assisi, where it had anciently been placed, within the walls, through the terror of a pagan attack: where we also roundly refuted Ughelli, who asserts that bishop Hugh

translated the body of St. Rufinus in the year 1050. You have in the same place, at number 4, the rejection of Ferrarius's assertion, by which on the same day he obtruded another St. Rufinus, wholly different from that holy Martyr.

[2] as also a confusion to be avoided; It now remains to seek out the Bishop who was also crowned with martyrdom at Assisi, of whom Jacobilli, in On the Saints of Umbria, volume 1, from page 701, thus writes: The Life of St. Rufinus the martyr, bishop of the people of the Marsi, who planted the holy faith at Assisi and was martyred and buried in that city, and is its protector. Here Jacobilli seems clearly enough to have colluded with Ughelli, whom it is well to hear under the title On the Bishops of the Marsi, volume 1, from column 955, where in the first place he sets Rufinus, and, in a longer discourse recording I know not what Acts, he says: And these indeed are the things which summarily concerning the life of St. Rufinus seem able to be adduced. But how much those Acts are to be valued both Baronius long since and Ughelli himself sufficiently declare; to me certainly they are not of such value that I should wish to bring them in here. This one question alone must here be settled by us, proposed so long ago: whether one or several St. Rufini are celebrated at Assisi? Let us speak more precisely: Is he whom we gave on the XXX of July to be confounded with him who is venerated on this day? For of the other Rufini of Assisi, whom Ughelli mentions in the same place, we are not here treating. Hear him speaking:

[3] But that there was only one Rufinus, who illuminated with the Gospel both the Marsi and the people of Assisi in Umbria, and presided as Prelate over both peoples, I HOLD FOR CERTAIN, although the manuscript monuments of both churches seem to disagree about the kind of death and the place, yet in the rest they agree. in which the opinion of Ughelli St. Peter Damian in his sermons, not sufficiently skilled in those times, seems to have introduced two Rufini, when he narrates that his death fell on the XXX day of July, and affirms that his feast is wont to be celebrated at Assisi on the same day. Wherefore the Roman Martyrology, relying on the authority of Peter Damian, recorded St. Rufinus on this day as bishop of Assisi, but on the XI day of August another Rufinus, bishop of the Marsi; whereas nevertheless it is established that the Acts of each Rufinus are either most similar or the same, and that among the Marsi and at Assisi the feast of St. Rufinus is celebrated on the XI day of August with the same lessons and office, in which it is narrated that the same Rufinus, distinguished with the episcopal office, presided first over the Marsi and then over the people of Assisi. Wrongly therefore does one and the same seem to have been cut in two through the error of Peter Damian.

[4] By Ughelli's good leave, neither did St. Peter Damian introduce two Rufini, nor did the Roman Martyrology record St. Rufinus on this day (XXX of July) as bishop of Assisi. is refuted Behold his very words: At Assisi in Umbria, of St. Rufinus the martyr; and in the notes: There exists a sermon of St. Peter Damian concerning the same. But out of the whole sermon of St. Peter Damian, which we gave at that day, you will not hammer out a word from which it may be understood that a Bishop is treated of even most remotely. Why then does he rise up with so great an effort to accuse St. Damian, and from him Baronius, of doubling St. Rufinus the bishop? Let him, I beseech, allow the holy Martyr — concerning whose stone lip or urn alone the dispute was in the year 1050 between bishop Hugh and the citizens of Assisi — to enjoy his cult simply as a Martyr, and let him boldly establish a Bishop different from him, of whom, discovered not in the XI but in the XIII century, Damian could not even have dreamed. I call Ughelli himself as witness, in his article on Guido bishop of Assisi, when he speaks thus: And he deserved to discover St. Rufinus, the first bishop of Assisi and unconquered martyr, who until that day had lain hidden from mortals, and, having discovered him, to place him in the Cathedral in a more honorable place, on the III day of the month of August MCCXII.

[5] Here you have St. Rufinus, first bishop of Assisi and unconquered martyr; you have his sacred body first discovered in the thirteenth century, and then exposed in the Cathedral itself to the veneration of the whole people, which before that day had lain hidden from mortals. and are attributed to Assisi as its own. But certainly that holy Martyr of the same name had not lain hidden of whom St. Damian speaks in his sermon, since seven men, seizing his urn (number 6), carried it forward to the basilica of St. Rufinus with such speed. There stood therefore at Assisi in that eleventh century a most well-known basilica of St. Rufinus, held by the people in such veneration that, although Hugh the bishop of the place resisted in vain, they carried thither also his discovered urn — who accordingly must be reckoned altogether other than that St. Rufinus the bishop, who two centuries later was first discovered and laid up in the Cathedral. Concerning that former one, whom we recorded on his proper birthday, the XXX of July, the things have been said which could be said from St. Peter Damian; now it remains to inquire who that St. Rufinus is, likewise bishop and martyr, who is recorded on this day, XI of August, in the Roman Martyrology.

§ II. St. Rufinus, who is venerated at Assisi on this day, seems to be called bishop of the Marsi.

He who is venerated on this day, The present announcement of the Roman Martyrology is conceived in these plain words: On the same day, the passion of the holy Rufinus, bishop of the Marsi, and his companions, under the emperor Maximinus. To which this note of Baronius must here altogether be premised, in these words: Treatment is made of the same (Rufinus the bishop) on this day in the church of the Marsi. I have read the Acts of the martyrdom both of him and of St. Cæsidius his son, received from that same church, which nevertheless need no slight emendation. But we have found others more faithful than they, though imperfect, imparted to us by the church of Pistoia, carried forward only as far as the prison of Rufinus, into which he was thrust at Rome. But the rest, which were wanting in the first copy, were added on by some other, who preferred to bring them to an end by his own wit rather than to leave them imperfect … The old tradition of the aforesaid church and its ancient monuments contradict it; from which it is established that St. Rufinus, together with Silo and Alexander, was beheaded at Rieti on the third of the Ides of August, but that Cæsidius suffered at Transaqua near lake Fucinus on the day before the Calends of September. There flourishes in the same place the religious memory of both martyrs, illustrated by many miracles. Hence it is manifestly gathered that in those Acts which Baronius saw no mention at all is made of Assisi.

[7] seems to be claimed for the Marsi, Nor indeed does Ferrarius greatly dissent from what has been said, so twisting his own account that he does not seem to wish to depart from Baronius. Behold his text: Rufinus, bishop of the Marsi, when under the emperor Maximinus he was preaching the faith of Our Lord Jesus Christ to the Gentiles in the city of the Marsi, was denounced before the Emperor by a certain Lucian, a minister of the Emperor, who was passing from Picenum to Rome through Valeria, when at the Arch of Augustus, 75 miles distant from the city of Rome, he had seen a great multitude of the people converted by the preaching of Rufinus, together with Cæsidius the priest, who was preaching at Transaqua. He sent thither Ascanius the Cornicularius, who, having brought Rufinus bound to Rome, shut him in prison; but Cæsidius, when he had heard that Rufinus had been taken and was detained in custody at Rome, coming to the City and speaking with Rufinus by night, entered to him through the window. After some days, being sent out of prison with other Christians, Rufinus returned to his own church. And when by preaching and by signs he was daily converting many of the Gentiles, being again seized by the worshippers of idols together with Alexander and Silo, and variously harassed, at length at Rieti, beheaded, he consummated his martyrdom on the III of the Ides of August.

[8] Many things Ferrarius there cites, far more Jacobilli, which would that it were possible to inspect more clearly from the sources themselves. various circumstances being set aside But however they may be, Jacobilli certainly departs as far as possible both from Ferrarius and from Baronius, as is shown clearly enough from his title alone, reported above. Let us repeat the words: The Life of St. Rufinus the martyr, bishop of the people of the Marsi, who planted the holy faith at Assisi, and, martyred and buried in that city, is its protector. Further he so weaves the history that he mingles many things incongruously, bringing Rufinus from Amasea, the metropolis of Cappadocia, to Rome in the time of the emperor Maximian, whom he ineptly connects with St. Fabian the Pope; for the rest so mixing in things of his own that it is manifest enough that he wished to serve as a substitute for Ughelli. Yet he did not go so far as the erring Ughelli, so as unskillfully to weave the famous martyrdom of the holy Nicea and Aquila into the history of Rufinus, and to bring to Rome those who, it is established, underwent martyrdom in Lycia; concerning whom see what we said at the day XXIV of July, on which they are celebrated by the Church.

[9] For the rest, Ughelli had gone before in beginning the passion of St. Rufinus at Amasea, either in Cappadocia, not easily reconciled or perhaps in farthest Germany, where, the Proconsul with others having been converted to the faith, he, freed from prison, fled into Italy, and there, preaching the Gospel to the people of the Marsi with fervent zeal, being seized again and brought to Rome, did not cease to animate that Proconsul Andrew, formerly converted by him, to undergo martyrdom bravely; and then indeed, by a divine nod, the prefect permitting, he shook off his chains, happily returned to his own Marsi, and, having for a while consoled his little flock, is said to have shown himself with the same ardor of piety a bishop and an apostle to the people of Assisi in Umbria, then still immersed in the darkness of idolatry, and thus the first preacher of the Gospel in that region.

[10] Discharging which office (they are Ughelli's words) more ardently, and therefore with the incredible admiration of the people, he was again punished with a most foul prison, and, abominating the burning of incense to Apollo, with his companions he received the sentence of fire; and again rejected but, an angel blowing upon it, when the scattered fire had let fall its heat, the furnace lay open at its mouth to men free and unharmed; and by that plain miracle, when many, being convinced, had come out Christians, Aspasius the prefect alone, having conceived a more obstinate hatred against the Christian cause, did not suffer Rufinus and his companions to live, whom the deaf and devouring fire, forgetting its voracity, had spared; since indeed, when he had ordered Rufinus to be led outside the walls of Assisi, with a millstone tied to his neck he cast him headlong into the maw of the river Eloasius, and slew all to a man, most savagely tortured, on the XI day of the month of August. Thus Ughelli with his Jacobilli contends to establish Assisi as the arena of St. Rufinus's martyrdom, the Roman Martyrology opposing it in vain.

[11] Ughelli's conjectures. But the same Ughelli afterward goes on with equal magisterial air: And these indeed are the things which summarily concerning the Life of St. Rufinus seem able to be adduced — would that with greater credit and authority. You have already heard above: But that there was only one Rufinus, who illuminated with the Gospel both the Marsi and the people of Assisi in Umbria, and presided as prelate over both peoples, I HOLD FOR CERTAIN, although the manuscript monuments of both churches seem to disagree about the kind of death and the place. I am indeed mistaken unless they rightly disagree, and unless they ought to disagree in this, that there was only one Rufinus. We have already asserted two of that name for the people of Assisi, namely the Martyr of whom St. Damian makes mention, and another, the first bishop of Assisi, but not of the Marsi, whose

sacred body we have shown was discovered in the year MCCXII; so that the people of Assisi can be content with those two, and leave to the Marsi the one of whom we are now treating, and thus both churches can deservedly celebrate their own bishop of the same name, even on this same day, however much, from I know not what time, they seem to have been confused. But which of the two the people of Pistoia, of Spello, and the others enumerated by Jacobilli should venerate as patron, I leave to themselves to inquire more curiously.

* perhaps: had driven off