ON BB. LIBERATUS OF LAURO AND HUMILIS AND PACIFICUS, OF THE ORDER OF FRIARS MINOR,
IN THE MARCH OF ANCONA IN ITALY,
XIII century.
COLLECTION.
Liberatus of Lauro, confessor, of the Order of Friars Minor, in the March of Ancona in Italy (Bl.)
Humilis, confessor, of the Order of Friars Minor, in the March of Ancona in Italy (Bl.)
Pacificus, confessor, of the Order of Friars Minor, in the March of Ancona in Italy (Bl.)
BY J. P.
§ I. The cult of the Blessed ones; this Liberatus confounded with another.
The March of Ancona, a sufficiently well-known province of Italy, The situation of the place: which is so called from the city of Ancona, once the chief city of that district (but now the chief is Macerata, and its capital), is situated in the dominion of the Church, where formerly was the greatest part of Picenum, as Baudrand has it, describing its situation at greater length. Further, in this province the name of those three Blessed ones is in benediction, as Wadding witnesses, as will presently be seen, who writes thus: In the March, in the place of Suffianum, in the territory of San Ginesio of the custody of Fermo, etc. The most illustrious Gonzaga, On the origin of the Seraphic Franciscan Religion, part 2, in the 25th convent of the province of the March, confounds this Liberatus with his namesake, as will afterward be said, when he records these things: This place also, sacred to saint Liberatus, formerly belonged to the Clarene Fathers, and from these was transferred to our brethren … It has its situation in a certain solitude, and is subject to the jurisdiction of San Ginesio, a town of Picenum, from which it is five miles distant, and three from the town of Sarnano. For which cause also it greatly favors the leading of the contemplative life, and has brought forth for us very many fathers notable in life and virtues; among whom was the blessed father Liberatus, a Clarene by profession, from whom the adjacent region took its name.
[2] Bl. Liberatus confounded with another: But lest the name Clarene detain the reader, Pietro Ridolfi of Tossignano, Histories of the Seraphic Religion, book 2, folio 155, thus expounds it: The Clarenes had their origin from the parts of Gaul (as others hold) in the time of Celestine V, supreme Pontiff, in the year MCCXCIV. There was at that time a certain family of Hermits of saint Francis under brother Angelo Clareno of Cingoli, who together with others obtained from the aforesaid Pontiff leave to live apart. And they were called Clarenes from Clarus Mons, from which both he and his followers were called Clarenes. They obeyed the bishops. I prefer the etymology from Wadding, presently to be cited, at the year 1302, number 8: Angelo of Cingoli, he says, … went into the March, where beside the river Clarenus, between Ascoli and the Alps of Norcia, he acquired another dwelling, in which with certain of his disciples he lived peaceably; from whom afterward arose the congregation of the Clarenes, the surname being taken from the river flowing by. Then the same Ridolfi treats of certain of their places in Italy, and of their habit; and he records that in the time of Sixtus IV, Pope, they were brought back to the observance of the rule by brother Peter the Spaniard, and were received by Francesco Sansone under the obedience of the General of the Friars Minor. These things, which we have said on occasion of the place, will be of use to us below. Bl. Angelo Clareno we wove into our Work on the XV day of June, volume 2 of that month, page 1091 and following, where the reader will find very much concerning the reformation of the Clarenes, and their society united to the Order of Friars Minor. But let us return to our purpose.
[3] Of the public cult of the three Blessed ones few things indeed have come to our knowledge, the public cult of the three Blessed ones but sufficient nevertheless, as it seems to us, that they may be numbered with the other inhabitants of heaven whom on this day we have woven into our Work. Arthur on the said day announces another Liberatus; and although it is not clear to us for what cause he records him then rather than on another day which should have some nearness to the feast of the Lord's Resurrection, as Hueber does, referring him to the XIV day of April, nevertheless the same Arthur furnished us with occasion of seeking further knowledge of Bl. Liberatus. Wadding in the Annals of the Minorites at the year 1234, number 9, page 369 of the latest edition, treating of BB. Humilis and Pacificus, says: There flourished about this time among the Minorites most holy Men, some of whom we shall here recount. In the March, in the place of Suffianum, in the territory of San Ginesio of the custody of Fermo, there died brother Humilis of Picenum, whose own brother Pacificus, dwelling elsewhere, saw his soul ascending straight into heaven. Being presently made an inhabitant of that place, when after some years, at the instance of the lords of Brufort, he was being transferred to those convents, and the bones of the brethren were being exhumed, he gathered those which were his brother's, washed them with the best wine, wrapped them in silk, and did not cease to kiss them. Being asked why he clove so closely to his brother's bones, and did not show a like reverence to the pious relics of the other brethren, he humbly answered that he was not moved by flesh and blood to render to his brother what he did not bestow upon the rest; but that from that vision made to him some years before it was certain to him that those bones would be in paradise, and therefore he said that what was to ascend thither where God is, ought on earth to be venerated with every honor. A little after, he himself died in the same place, and was buried beside his brother's tomb. But of saint Liberatus Wadding subjoins the following:
[4] With these lies brother Liberatus, a most holy and most noble man. He was count of the place by various which is now called saint Liberatus, out of reverence and memory of the holy Count; for he lived in religion with such humility and sanctity, the riches and honors of the world being despised, that he was proclaimed a saint by all. The feast of these three is kept in the said place every year, with a great concourse of people, on the first day within the Octave of the Paschal Resurrection; on which day there flows from their sepulcher a manna, from the sixth hour of the day until Vespers, and that in such quantity that it is gathered by the people. We place great force for proving the public veneration of BB. Humilis and Pacificus (for of the cult of Bl. Liberatus it is sufficiently established from elsewhere also) in the concluding clause of the text which we cited upon Wadding's credit, which reports that a public, annual, and great concourse of flowing people takes place, and that a feast is celebrated on a fixed day at their sepulcher — and that too in that very place where every year by that wondrous prodigy the devotion of those who come toward them must needs be renewed and confirmed. These things being thus set, let it be permitted me for a while thus to reason with myself. First, it is not known that that feast with its accompaniments was prohibited or forbidden by any higher ecclesiastical power, namely either by the Apostolic See or by the bishops of the place. Second, from what time that festive cult began is not found handed down to memory. Third, it is presumed to have been begun from a time immemorial, according to what was premised from Wadding, in which all three of those Men are indicated to have flourished in the thirteenth century.
[5] arguments: Fourth, their cult persevered down to the times of the aforesaid Wadding, who died in the year 1657, as is noted in his Life prefixed to volume 1 of the Annals of the Minorites cited before, page CLIV; nor do I see ground for doubting that the same cult perseveres even to this day, because those pious and ancient customs among peoples, in which they have been in some sort nurtured, are not wont easily to be extinguished. Fifth, who would believe that in a place of the March of Ancona, which is situated within the very dominion of the Roman Church, after so solemn a Decree passed by Urban VIII, Pope, the festive cult of these three Blessed ones should have persevered, none of those whom it concerned, and who could not be ignorant of this matter, opposing himself to it, so far as we know? Who, I say, would believe that that veneration was left in the state in which it was, without the tacit or express consent of the Roman See or of the local bishop, or without a title of possession from time immemorial before that Decree? Since these things are so, and since it is our part to favor the honors of the Citizens of heaven so far as we can, truth being always and everywhere preserved, and the authority of the Apostolic See — to conclude the above reasoning, it has seemed to us that we should act wrongly if we were to remove those three Friars Minor from their ancient possession of public cult, and exclude them from the other inhabitants of heaven who are inserted into our Work. But why on this day the memory of BB. Humilis and Pacificus is revived, I shall say below. Now the cult of Bl. Liberatus stood thus down to the year 1709, in which it was suspended; but in 1713 it was permitted. See §2.
[6] Liberatus of Macerata by Gonzaga But above, when we were treating of the place
of their cult, we noted that Bl. Liberatus, of whom we treat, is confounded with another of the same name by the most illustrious Gonzaga; who at the place cited before again confounds Liberatus the Clarene with the other, who is called Liberatus of Lauro, and Saint. Let us hear Gonzaga: This blessed Father, sprung of a most illustrious birth, was renowned for miracles; and he is said, both by the brethren and also by the neighboring seculars, to have been buried in the church of this sacred house; by whom also the place of burial is shown, and it is stubbornly affirmed that the title of sanctity was conferred upon him by a certain supreme Pontiff by an oracle of the living voice, and that from that time both the convent and also the territory next to it came to be marked with the name of saint Liberatus. They will have it that this supreme Pontiff, having seen his miracles, said: This venerable Father is to be called with the best right not only blessed, but also a saint. But who that Pontiff was is altogether unknown. For which cause also I should not dare to affirm anything certain in this matter. Thus Gonzaga.
[7] and by Arthur Arthur in his notes on the XXVI day of August copies out this text from Gonzaga, and makes the Liberatus of Suffianum of today one with him of Macerata, who does not belong here, as is concluded from his words which he has at the said day: Who, perceiving too great a relaxation of living in the Seraphic Order, being led by zeal for a stricter and purer regular observance, upon the counsel of upright and holy fathers determined to go into the presence of the supreme Pontiff St. Celestine V. Wherefore, Bl. Peter of Macerata being taken as companion, he went to the Roman curia, and obtained from the Pope a pontifical diploma, by which leave was given to him and to his followers, by apostolic authority, to bestow labor upon a reformation and to observe the rule exactly, etc., notwithstanding anything whatsoever to the contrary. And thus, being appointed superior by the Apostolic See, he made no small increase, especially in the March of Ancona, where he remained a long time not without an altogether admirable example of life. He died in the year MCCCVII. Thus far Arthur; who, how ill-cohering things he says, attributing to one and the same Liberatus what he ought to have ascribed to the other of the same name, we thus show.
[8] St. Celestine V, Pope, was made supreme Pontiff in the year of Christ 1294, confounded from which dignity he abdicated on the XIII day of December of the same year. How, then, could our Bl. Liberatus have obtained the aforesaid diploma from that supreme Pontiff, who, as Wadding alleged above witnesses, flourished about the time which regards the year 1234, together with BB. Humilis and Pacificus, distinguished for holiness of life? How likewise, as Arthur would have it, does brother Liberatus lie buried with the same, as Wadding asserted? How did he die in the year MCCCVII, as Arthur wrote? How, finally, does the same Martyrologist announce him thus: In Tuscany, at the town of Sant' Angelo de Vena, of blessed Liberatus, confessor? And lest anyone should suppose that on this day Arthur is announcing one different from him of whom we are speaking, let him hear what he premised in his notes on the VII day of August: Of the blessed Humilis and Pacificus, confessors … he said, whose feast, and that of Bl. Liberatus (of whom below at the XXVI of August), is kept in the convent of St. Liberatus every year with a great concourse of people, on the first day within the Octave of the Paschal Resurrection, etc.
[9] But now we cannot wonder enough that two men named Liberatus were melted into one by Arthur, with another of the same name: since he had before his eyes the places in Wadding's Annals which the same Martyrologist cites in his notes on the XXVI day of August, from which he could easily have perceived that Bl. Liberatus of Suffianum is altogether different from the other of the same name of Macerata, both in time, and in deeds, and finally in public cult and in the place of his deposition or death. Of the time we have already noted some things, to be further confirmed from what is presently to be said. As regards the rest, Wadding at the year 1294, number 9, writes this: Certain Fathers, into whom too great a desire of a stricter life and purer observance had crept, counsel being taken among themselves, while Celestine held the Pontificate, having seized the occasion from his piety and inclination toward those who dwell in hermitages and live in austere places, resolved diligently to advance their affairs with him. He then relates that for this cause brother Liberatus was sent to the Pontiff with another companion, whom he names, and that he obtained what they asked of him; and that Liberatus, of whom it has been spoken, was set by that same Pontiff over those hermit-dwellers. See what was premised by us above at number 2 concerning the Clarenes. Wadding, aforesaid, at the year 1301, number 1, treats of the same Liberatus as having set out with his companions to the parts of Achaia. But at the year 1302, number 8, he again treats of him, as also at the year 1307, number 2, to which year he attaches his death, which he affirms to have befallen in the town of Sant' Angelo della Vena, making no mention of any particular holiness of life, or of miracles, on account of which there was ever a thought of paying him the public honors of the Blessed after his death. What has been said concerning this Liberatus in our work at the place cited above at number 2 may be consulted.
[10] [into which error others also have fallen. Why the other two Blessed ones are here joined to him.] From these things, therefore, it is altogether concluded, first, that two men named Liberatus were confounded into one by Arthur — namely him of Macerata, or the prefect of the aforesaid Hermits, and the Blessed one of the same name of Suffianum, or of Brunfort, or called of Lauro. Second, that Gonzaga, who fell into the same error, as is plain from his words brought forward above, is to be corrected. Third, that Benignus Fremaut struck upon the same stone of hallucination, when in his Legend of the Seraphic Order on the XVII day of April he makes both of the same name into one — yet so that he then writes as though in doubt: Unless we should wish to say that he (the Liberatus of the convent of Sant' Angelo della Vena) was another blessed one of the same name. Fourth, that the two men named Liberatus were mingled by Hueber, whom we cited above. You have, reader, what has occurred to us to be said concerning Bl. Liberatus, whom on this day Arthur announces; and by the same occasion we lighted upon BB. Humilis and Pacificus, whom, when we saw that in our work on the VII day of this month, on which the same Arthur relates them, they were noted only among the Passed Over, it seemed good to us on this day to render them the public honor which had not been given them on the other day; so that those to whom fell the same place of burial with Bl. Liberatus, and concerning whom the same tokens of public veneration occur, should also be given the same place in this our Work. But that they flourished toward the times which regard the year 1234 Wadding indicated above; but since he left unstated in what year they died, we have set them above in the 13th century.
§ II. The Roman Acts concerning the cult of Bl. Liberatus of Lauro.
The sacred Congregation of Rites The formerly most eminent Cardinal Prospero Lambertini, who now with the highest praise presides over the chair of St. Peter, having taken the name of Benedict XIV, in his most praiseworthy Work On the beatification of the Servants of God and the canonization of the Blessed, book 2, chapter 24, §35, page 265, subjoins to this title, A prohibition of innovation concerning the cult of the Servant of God Liberatus of Lauro, called Saint, and the confirmation of the Decree of the sacred Congregation by letters in the form of a Brief of Pope Clement XI of happy memory, the following instrument: Pope Clement XI, for the future memory of the matter. Formerly, and lately, there issued from the Congregation of our Venerable Brethren the Cardinals of the holy Roman Church set over the sacred Rites, in the cause of the servant of God Liberatus of Lauro, called Saint, of the Order of Friars Minor of St. Francis called of the Observance, at the supplication of our beloved son Lucius of Turricella, a Friar expressly professed of the province of the March of the said Order, and lector jubilate, and postulator of this cause, two decrees of the following tenor, namely: "Of Camerino. Of the Servant of God Liberatus of Lauro, of the Order of Minors of saint Francis, called Saint.
[12] The Congregation The removal of the images of the aforesaid Servant of God from the altars, churches, and cloisters of the convents of the aforesaid Order, in which he was painted lying upon a couch, to whom the most blessed Virgin, accompanied by virgins and by angelic choirs, was administering a draught with her own hands, having been enjoined by the sacred Congregation of Rites under the date of the XXII of June MDCXCVII, the fathers of the same Order interposed a recourse to the same sacred Congregation, alleging that a cult had been shown to that same Servant of God within and outside the aforementioned Order, in this and in other ways, and in manifold manner, not only for a hundred years before the decrees of Urban VIII of happy memory, but for four centuries and more; and therefore they humbly urged for the maintaining of the aforesaid Servant of God in the same cult without any innovation which should injure the possession in which he peaceably was from the aforementioned immemorial and lawful time. Whence the same sacred Congregation, a time being appointed and several times prolonged for the same Order for proving that same immemorial possession, under penalty of the removal of any cult whatsoever in any way rendered to that same Servant of God, most graciously took upon itself the cognizance of the same cause.
[13] Wherefore, an authentic process having been brought to it by the Religious of the same Order and of the province of the March, in this cause issues a decree which does not favor it: in which there is a convent with a church under the title of saint Liberatus, where, as is asserted by the most reverend bishop of Camerino, his bones and those of the blessed Humilis and Pacificus rest, together with a sentence upon the aforesaid cult duly pronounced by the authority of the same bishop of Camerino, Ordinary of the place of the said convent; and a judgment being instituted upon all the aforesaid; and the postulators thereupon pretending that in like cases a commission for the repelling of contrary matters, signed by the hand of His Holiness, was not necessary — the same sacred Congregation of Rites, weighing that many things were brought forward in proof of the aforementioned cult which in the present case needed a special elucidation (for there were produced certain things attributed to that same Servant of God by historians as to one anonymous or unknown, and others likewise which could confound him with a certain other Liberatus of Macerata of the Congregation of the Celestines, or of the Clarenes of that very Order), upon the report of the most eminent and most reverend lord Cardinal Vallemani, for the most eminent and most reverend lord Cardinal Carpineo the Ponent, having heard both in writing and by word the lord Prospero Lambertini, Advocate of the sacred Consistorial Court, and coadjutor of the most reverend archbishop of Myra, Promoter of the Faith, judged that it should be rescribed that the cause needed the signature of a commission in the case of which it is treated. On the VII day of September MDCCIX. So it is found in the registers of the Decrees of the Congregation of sacred Rites. In witness whereof, etc. On the III day of August MDCCXIII. In place of the ✠ Seal. Gratis. N. M. Tedeschi, bishop of Lipari, pro-secretary of the Congregation of sacred Rites."
[14] And this indeed is the first decree concerning the non-innovation of the cult of Bl. Liberatus. but the second decree But the other permits that he should persevere in his former cult, which he is indicated to have had from time immemorial, this whole matter being left in the same
possession in which it had been from ancient time, as is indicated at greater length in the later decree, in which it is said that nothing is to be innovated concerning the cult rendered to that same Servant of God. Here now for you is the decree itself, which the aforesaid most eminent man brings forward at page 266: Of Camerino. Of the Servant of God Liberatus of Lauro, of the Order of Minors of saint Francis, called Saint. A controversy having arisen in the sacred Congregation of Rites whether the cult rendered from time immemorial, according to the sense of the postulators, to the aforesaid saint Liberatus was, or was not, to be permitted, or rather to be removed, the same sacred Congregation of Rites, under the date of the VII of September MDCCIX, judged that, before it should come to the discussion of the doubt concerning a case excepted from the Decrees of Pope Urban VIII of happy memory, it was necessary that the doubt concerning the signature of a commission be proposed;
[15] leaves this Blessed one in his ancient possession of cult, And therefore, the doubt having been disputed whether the commission should be signed, the same sacred Congregation, upon the report of the most eminent and most reverend lord Cardinal Ptolemei, for the most eminent and most reverend lord Cardinal Carpineo the Ponent, and at the instance of Brother Lucius of Turricella of the Order of Minors of the Observance of saint Francis, postulator of the said cause, having first heard both by word and in writing the reverend Father lord Prospero Lambertini, Promoter of the faith, answered that for the present there was no place for the signature of a commission, and that nothing was to be innovated concerning the cult rendered to that same Servant of God — the decree issued in this cause on the XXII day of July MDCXCVII, concerning the removal of the images of the said Servant of God, to whom as he lay upon a couch the most blessed Virgin, accompanied by angelic choirs, was administering food, nevertheless remaining firm — if it shall please our most holy Lord. On the XXVIII day of January MDCCXIII. And a report of the aforesaid having thereafter been made to our most holy Lord by the undersigned pro-secretary, His Holiness graciously assented on the XVII day of February of the same year MDCCXIII. G. Cardinal Carpineo. In place of the ✠ Seal. C. Collicola, pro-secretary of the sacred Congregation of Rites.
[16] the matter being approved That a most firm strength might accrue to these things, Pope Clement XI confirms the above, from page 266: But whereas, as the aforesaid Lucius thereupon caused to be set forth to Us, he greatly desires that decrees of this kind, that they may the more firmly subsist, be fortified with the protection of our Apostolic confirmation: We, wishing to attend that same Lucius with special favors and graces, and absolving him by the tenor of these presents from any sentences of excommunication, suspension, and interdict, and from other ecclesiastical sentences, censures, and penalties inflicted by law or by man on any occasion or cause whatsoever, if he stands bound by any of them in any way — for the effect only of obtaining the present letters — and judging him to be absolved, being inclined to the supplications humbly offered to us in his name upon this matter, by Apostolic authority by the tenor of these presents approve and confirm the decrees inserted above, and add to them the strength of inviolable Apostolic firmness; yet the authority of the aforesaid Congregation of Cardinals being always preserved in the premises:
[17] and confirmed by Pope Clement XI. Decreeing that these same present letters be and shall be always firm, valid, and effectual, and shall obtain and take their full and entire effects, and shall most fully avail those whom they concern and shall for the time concern; and that thus in the premises it must be judged and determined by any ordinary and delegate judges whatsoever, even by auditors of causes of the Apostolic palace; and that it be void and of no effect if anything otherwise upon these matters shall happen to be attempted by anyone, by any authority, knowingly or unknowingly: notwithstanding Apostolic constitutions and ordinances, and all other things whatsoever to the contrary. But We will that to transcripts or copies of these same present letters, even printed, subscribed by the hand of some public notary and fortified with the seal of a person constituted in ecclesiastical dignity, the very same credit be given which would be given to these presents themselves, if they were exhibited or shown. Given at Rome at Santa Maria Maggiore under the Fisherman's ring, on the II day of September MDCCXIII, in the thirteenth year of our Pontificate.
[18] These Decrees being brought forward, the most eminent Cardinal Lambertini subjoins various difficulties [Various difficulties are related which could have been objected against that cult.] which could have been raised in this cause, if it had come to the commission of the signature, as they call it, which the same most eminent man, as then Promoter of the faith, wished, the sacred Congregation supporting him, as is there narrated at greater length from page 267: For indeed, he says, besides the Process, difficulty seemed to be caused by what Father Arthur writes in the Franciscan Martyrology on the XXVI day of August — namely that this saint Liberatus, who is honored in the convent of the Friars of the Order of Minors near the town of Sarnano of the diocese of Camerino, and from whom the neighboring region took the name of St. Liberatus, went in zeal for a stricter observance to the supreme Pontiff Celestine V, etc. See the passage of Arthur adduced by us above in §1, where we also endeavored to show that this Liberatus is unskillfully confounded by the same Arthur with another of the same name. The same most eminent man goes on: For, granted that this Liberatus was he who obtained from Celestine V the aforesaid leave of reforming the Order, it was inferred that he could by no means be marked with the title of Saint or Blessed, as being the author of the abominable heresy of the Fraticelli and Bizzochi; and that he, who before was called Peter of Macerata, forsook this name and assumed that of Liberatus, as after Jordan, whose Work stands in the Vatican library, Rinaldi related in the Ecclesiastical Annals, volume 14 at the year MCCXCIV, number 26, and volume 15 at the year MCCCXXXI, number 7.
§ III. Answers to the objections framed against the cult of Bl. Liberatus of Lauro; whether he is to be multiplied on account of different names.
Various things likewise To the objection concerning Liberatus of Macerata the postulators of the cause said … first, that neither Liberatus of Macerata nor any other of the Seraphic Order, but, speaking more probably, a certain Hermann surnamed Pangilupus, was the author of the abominable sect of the Fraticelli, from Antonio Hicquey there cited. Second, that Liberatus of Macerata was neither a heretic nor an apostate, but rather a man of the best name, from the testimony of Franciscan authors who are there assigned; to whom without doubt greater credit is to be given than to Jordan, whom moreover, without any examination or discrimination, Rinaldi followed in the Ecclesiastical Annals. Third, that the present question regards not Liberatus of Macerata, but Liberatus of Lauro, of whom the latter is not to be confounded with the former; for Liberatus of Lauro led a solitary life in the place of Suffianum, and then his body was translated from the convent of Brunfort to the place where he is now honored, which from his name has been called St. Liberatus's. But Liberatus of Macerata died in the convent of Sant' Angelo de Vena near Viterbo — besides that the deeds of the one by no means agree with the deeds of the other, from Mariano of Florence and Wadding there cited, and from a marginal note in the manuscript autograph of the book of the Conformities of Bartholomew of Pisa. There follow certain other answers of the postulators, which likewise must presently be related by us.
[20] answers to the same are brought forward. For the postulators of the aforesaid cause, in the often-mentioned Cardinal Prospero Lambertini, page 269, affirm, fourth, that Arthur, asserting that the convent of Brunfort took its name from Liberatus of Macerata, was deceived, as being a French author, and, what seemed to them to follow, little instructed in the territories of Italy and in the registers and monuments of the Order which exist both in Picenum and at Rome. Fifth, that the more celebrated writers from Crescenzi down to Pisanus have related that a certain anonymous one is honored in the said convent, whom Mariano and others say to be saint Liberatus of Lauro. Finally, that this saint Liberatus of Lauro obtained an immemorial cult in the cities and places of the province of Picenum, and was always reputed to be the same as that anonymous Saint of whom the cited authors made mention, as seemed capable of being gathered from the documents and witnesses existing in the process. To these is subjoined this clause by the same most eminent Lord: All which things, namely, being set forth and discussed in the sacred Congregation, seemed sufficient for decreeing that nothing should be innovated concerning the cult even then rendered to the servant of God Liberatus of Lauro, called Saint.
[21] St. Liberatus of Lauro is one and the same, From what has hitherto been set forth in the preceding paragraphs we can judge nothing else than that Bl. Liberatus of Suffianum, or of Brunfort, or of Liberato, is that same one who by another name was called of Lauro, and by surname Saint; and that the postulators of the cause meant him, and not another, to be understood, and set him forth as such to the sacred Congregation of Rites, as is concluded from what was said before at number 19. But the surname of Lauro raises some difficulty for us; for under that name this Blessed one of whom we speak did not appear above in §1 among the Franciscan authors there alleged. Nor indeed did Wadding sufficiently know the Liberatus who is in Gonzaga, much less did he supply documents concerning him which might bring light to these darknesses. For the same author, in volume 8 of the Franciscan Annals of the latest edition, at the year 1374, number 26, treating from Gonzaga of the convent of St. Liberatus, of which we also above, subjoins the following: Who this Liberatus was, I do not ascertain; I reckon him altogether different from Liberatus of Macerata, of whom we have very often made mention; yet each of them was a follower of Angelo Clareno.
[22] although called by various names. Here therefore again one gropes in darkness; so that it is strange that in the index of the cited volume that Liberatus is called St. Liberatus of Lauro, which name we do not read in Wadding's own text. But that an end may at last be set to these entanglements, we have from what has been said a St. Liberatus who was buried in the place of Suffianum together with BB. Humilis and Pacificus, and was called Saint by all, and left his name imposed upon the place of St. Liberatus, according to Wadding, mentioned above at numbers 3 and 4. With which agrees what is related in the decrees of the sacred Congregation of Rites at numbers 13 and 14; but in the answers of the postulators at number 19 he is called Liberatus of Lauro, who lived in the place of Suffianum, and whose body … was translated from the convent of Brunfort to the place where he is now honored, … of St. Liberatus. Above, §1, number 3, I said from Wadding that Humilis and Pacificus flourished about the year 1234, to which time I also brought back Liberatus, who lies buried with them, since no other different time is added. But if he died afterward, say in the 14th century, it is not sufficiently established historically that he was confounded with another by Gonzaga and by the others cited in the Commentary, and that he was not a Clarene: since Wadding at number 21 acknowledges two men named Liberatus, one of whom, however, not sufficiently known to him, he thinks is to be distinguished from him of Macerata.