ON ST. RUFUS, BISHOP AND MARTYR,
AT CAPUA IN ITALY,
Toward the end of the first century.
HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL SYLLOGE.
Rufus, bishop and martyr, at Capua in Italy (St.)
BY J. S.
On this day, the XXVII of August, the Roman Martyrology assigns a twofold Rufus to Capua, Two Rufuses venerated in the church of Capua to this day: of whom the one is believed to have been a bishop, the other a deacon, both of them martyrs. Both the people of Capua venerate to this day under the titles mentioned, yet on different days: namely the Bishop on the XXVII, the deacon with another companion on the XXX of August. But since the distinction of the two Rufuses has not always been known even to the Capuans themselves, and since formerly only one Rufus was held there in veneration, without the title of bishop, there are not wanting learned men who even now doubt of their distinction and of the episcopate of Rufus of Capua. Their doubt therefore lays upon us the necessity of inquiring in this place whether in truth the one Rufus governed the church of Capua, and whether he seems to be distinct from the other Rufus. Nor is only the episcopate of St. Rufus and his distinction from the other called into doubt: another controversy also will come to be handled, whether Rufus the bishop is different from Rufus the patrician, whom St. Apollinaris converted to the Christian faith; for here too some acknowledge a distinction. These things premised, let us hear what writers and martyrologists bring forward concerning St. Rufus, bishop (as the Capuans believe) and martyr, that from them it may in some fashion become known what should be determined concerning the twofold controversy already mentioned.
[2] In the first place, the most ancient Martyrologies published by various men under the name of St. Jerome one of them very well known in the ancient Martyrologies, announce on the XXVII of August St. Rufus, martyr; and among them not a few copies are found which ascribe him to Campania and Capua. The Rhinau and Reichenau copies, published by us after volume VII of June, have only: In Campania, of Rufus. The one published by D'Achery in volume 2 of the Spicilegium, page 17: At Capua, the birthday of the holy Rufus and Magnus. That companion Magnus has been found in no other manuscripts than the Corbie one, from which this edition was made. The Gellone copy, published in the same place, page 33, mentions Rufus the martyr, and then Rufinus on the same day, although mention of a certain Rufinus is also made on the XXV of August, as I have found in others also. The most ancient Martyrologies too, published by Martène in volume 3 of the Anecdota, mention Rufus. The Auxerre copy, column [ ]: Of Rufus the martyr. The Murbach copy, column [ ]: Of Rufus. The Tours copy, column [ ]: Of Rufus the martyr. The ancient Corbie Calendar, column [ ]: At Capua, the birthday of St. Rufus the martyr. The Calendar of the monastery of Lyre: Of St. Rufus, martyr. Finally the Hieronymian in Florentinius: At Capua, the birthday of St. Rufinus — concerning which Florentinius doubts whether one should read Rufus. You see, I suppose, reader, from these Martyrologies heaped together, how variously the memory of St. Rufus is announced; and yet all these calendars agree in this, that nowhere is mention made of the episcopate of St. Rufus; nowhere likewise is a twofold Rufus announced, one alone, the other with his companion Carponius or Carpophorus, as they are today commemorated by various authors. This argument, however, is thus far of little weight against the opinion of the Capuans.
[3] [whom various martyrologists teach to have been a patrician and to have been converted by St. Apollinaris;] The old Roman Martyrology, which was Ado's forerunner, comes nearer to the sense of the Capuans, when it announces the Saint's memory on the XXVII of August thus: At Capua, of Rufus the martyr, disciple of Apollinaris. Ado added more, in this manner: At Capua, the birthday of St. Rufus the martyr, whom blessed Apollinaris, disciple of Peter the apostle, taught and baptized, since the same Rufus was of patrician rank. Usuard is nearly in accord with Ado. But certain supplements of Usuard set forth the matter more fully in our edition on the said day. Take, for all, the words of the Lübeck-Cologne edition: At Capua, the birthday of blessed Rufus the martyr, a patrician of the Romans. He held the dukedom at Ravenna; whose daughter, being dead, blessed Apollinaris, disciple of Peter the apostle, raised from the dead: whence he too, with his wife and daughter and all his household, to the number of CCCXXIV, were baptized in Christ. But blessed Rufus consummated his martyrdom at Capua. I pass over the Plantin Bede, Notker, Wandelbert, and others agreeing with these as to the substance; and I add the words of our manuscript Florarium, in which the time of the martyrdom is added: At Capua, the birthday of St. Rufus the martyr, whom Apollinaris, disciple of Peter the apostle, taught. Since the same Rufus was of patrician rank, his daughter was consecrated to Christ, and remained a virgin. It was reported to Cæsar by the pagans that a certain man coming from Antioch had by magical incantations brought the name of Jesus Christ into the city of Ravenna, and that a great multitude obeyed him, even the house of Rufus the patrician: to whom Cæsar, sending a successor, wrote to the vicar named Messalinus that he should either bend such a presumptuous man to the gods, or send him far away into exile. But blessed Rufus the patrician was baptized by holy Apollinaris, bishop and martyr, and being taught and renowned for countless virtues, after many contests, was crowned at the city of Capua with the glory of an illustrious martyrdom for the confession of Christ, and obtained the palm of unfading life in the year of salvation LXXVIII. These things seem to have been taken from the Acts of St. Apollinaris, where they are reported somewhat more fully, as may be seen in our Work, volume V of July, pages 346 and 347. Yet there the martyrdom of St. Rufus is not reported, much less is the year of it added; these have been received from elsewhere.
[4] Here we must pause a little, in order to settle, if it can be done, to which Bacchini opposes the authority of Agnellus, the controversy indicated above, whether that Rufus the patrician is the same as the St. Rufus whom the Capuans believe to have been their bishop. We see the agreement of the chief martyrologists, asserting that Rufus the patrician was crowned with martyrdom at Capua. Yet against these sets himself Benedict Bacchini, who published and illustrated with notes the Work of Agnellus On the Lives of the Pontiffs of Ravenna. These words of Agnellus in the Life of St. Apollinaris, page 125, furnish Bacchini his argument: He also raised up the dead daughter of Rufus the patrician; and in that patrician's house we behold to the present day the episcopal residence of the church of Bologna: and that house so whole and unharmed as it was of old. And now for nearly five years Theodoric of Bologna
the bishop carried off the stone chest in which Rufus the patrician was laid with his daughter, and bore it away to his own church of Bologna, so that when he died he might be buried in it. Hence, on page 131, Bacchini infers thus: What follows concerning Rufus the patrician is especially to be noted: for it is now established, Agnellus being at last rescued from obscurity, that Rufus the patrician died at Ravenna and was buried there with his daughter, whom Apollinaris had once recalled from the dead, in a marble chest, which, Rufus and his daughter having been cast out of it, Theodoric bishop of Bologna carried away to Bologna, while Agnellus himself saw it and was alive, that by fitting it to himself he might prepare a tomb. It follows therefore that this Rufus is different from the Rufus who has been believed to this day to be the same, and whom Peter the prince of the apostles is said to have consecrated bishop of Capua, and who in those times died at Capua crowned with martyrdom. This is the whole force of his arguments, although he adds various things about Rufus bishop of Capua, in order to explain the matter further against Baronius and Rossi.
[5] I really do not see why the authority of Agnellus could have moved Bacchini so greatly [but that authority does not seem here of such weight that one must depart from the martyrologists.] that he preferred it to all the others, and thought that by it alone it was sufficiently proved, against the common persuasion, that Rufus the patrician is to be distinguished from Rufus of Capua. For if we weigh the words of Agnellus, we shall clearly understand that nothing is reported by him but a certain popular tradition, by which he believed a thing little likely or credible; namely, that Rufus and his daughter were buried in their own house in a marble tomb: for it is well known that among the Romans it was forbidden by the law of the Twelve Tables for anyone to be buried within the city, as Aringhi observes in Roma Subterranea, book I, chapter 2, number 9. Some indeed were excepted on account of distinguished services to the commonwealth, as the same author has it in book 5, chapter 1, and Cicero in book 2 On the Laws, where he recites this law: but from this it does not become likely that Rufus was buried in his own house by his daughter, or the daughter by him, as Agnellus seems to have believed when he wrote the words adduced above. Wherefore I marvel that this passage pleased Bacchini, and seemed to him fit to furnish an argument against the martyrdom and death of Rufus the patrician at Capua, asserted by authors who are older and better than Agnellus. Certainly Agnellus's critical judgment in writing was not so great that much seems to be due to his authority. Hear Muratori in the preface to the Work of Agnellus reprinted in volume 2 of the Writers of Italy, page 4: Intolerable anachronisms, he says, present themselves in that Work, and little fables such as that age easily embraced, but which we either laugh at or accept with difficulty. One of these fables, I suspect, is that which he brought forward concerning Rufus the patrician as having died at Ravenna, and having been buried there — as would follow from his words — in his own house; and so there is no reason why we may not believe the authors reported above, that the martyr of Capua is the same as Rufus the patrician.
[6] The episcopate of St. Rufus, of which modern writers doubt, But there is a greater difficulty, whether that Rufus the patrician, whom with the author of the ancient Roman Martyrology, with Ado, Usuard, and the other praised writers we believe to have suffered at Capua, was also bishop of Capua. For of his episcopate the writers mentioned, together with all the ancients, keep deep silence: yet very many more recent authors assert that he was a bishop, and the Capuans do not seem to doubt of it. The first, so far as I know, to attribute the title of bishop to St. Rufus was Galesinius in his Martyrology; whom Baronius seems to have followed in the Roman Martyrology, except that he weaves a shorter and more exact eulogy for him, in this way: At Capua in Campania, the birthday of St. Rufus, bishop and martyr, who, being of patrician rank, was baptized with his whole household by blessed Apollinaris, disciple of St. Peter. Bellarmine also, while he presided over the church of Capua and was revising its prelates, numbered St. Rufus among them, and ordered his feast to be celebrated on the XXVII of August, the feast of the martyrs Rufus and Carponius being deferred to the XXX of the same month. Add Ughelli in Italia Sacra, volume 6, column 297, and various more recent martyrologists, whom I pass over. Finally Michael Monachus in the Sanctuarium Capuanum, page 133, does not hesitate to assert that the episcopate of St. Rufus is most certain to the Capuans. But I could wish he had produced those arguments by which we too might be equally certain of it. For thus every doubt about that title would have been removed.
[7] appears at least probable: For not a few learned men have since doubted of Rufus's episcopate. Florentinius, in his notes on the Hieronymian Martyrology, page 781, discusses him doubtfully; Tillemont, volume 5 of the Ecclesiastical Monuments, page 128, affirms that few or no proofs are brought forward for that episcopate; Sollier too, in his Usuard on the XXVII of August, hints that Ughelli's arguments are not such as to convince those who oppose them, and refers the matter to be discussed further in this place. Take then, reader, what seems chiefly capable of being brought forward for claiming the episcopal dignity for St. Rufus. In the church of St. Priscus, in the diocese of Capua, an ancient work was found in which the images of many Saints are to be seen: some of them represent old men, others men in their prime, others youths, others striplings, as the praised Monachus explains more fully on page 132 and following. Of the eight who are shown as old men, six were certainly bishops: whence it becomes highly likely that the remaining two also, of whose rank there is not sufficient evidence from elsewhere, were bishops; and so that St. Rufus, who is there painted in the figure of an old man and bearing in his hands a crown, by which martyrdom is indicated, was a bishop and a martyr. Hence the episcopate of St. Rufus appears, not indeed altogether certain, but at least probable. Perhaps those who first asserted the episcopal dignity for St. Rufus had other arguments as well. Nor can the silence of the ancients about this dignity of St. Rufus greatly stand in the way: for the ancient martyrologists not rarely omitted the episcopal dignity in the case of other bishop-martyrs, whose episcopate is sufficiently established from elsewhere. I have therefore left the title of bishop as probable, though I confess that it is not altogether certain to me.
[8] Furthermore, out of this opinion and the Acts of St. Apollinaris assigned above, a lesson concerning him from the Capuan Offices: the following lesson has been composed in the proper Offices of the church of Capua for the XXVII of August: Rufus, a patrician, former consul, and commander of the soldiery of Ravenna, was converted to the faith by this miracle. For when he had resolved to expel holy Apollinaris from the city, the daughter whom he loved most dearly began to sicken: and when the holy bishop had been summoned to heal her, by God's disposing she died. But Apollinaris, pouring forth prayers, called back the dead girl to life. By which miracle Rufus, converted to Christ, was baptized with his whole household. But for this cause he was sent into exile, and in course of time was promoted to the bishopric of the city of Capua: where, when he was converting many to Christ, he was seized by the governor Messalinus, and at his command struck with the axe, and consummated his martyrdom on the sixth Kalends of September. Thus the Capuans concerning St. Rufus. As for the consulship, the consular calendars in the first and second centuries reckon very many Rufuses; but the time fits none better than that Rufus who in the year of Christ 67 held the consulship with Capito, and is called C. Julius Rufus in Pagi at the same year.
[9] Concerning the time of the martyrdom the Capuans themselves do not agree. Monachus, in the Sanctuarium, page 50, writes the time of the martyrdom uncertain. that he was ordained bishop by St. Peter about the year 60; and on page 51 he thinks he was crowned with martyrdom under Nero: but he alleges no reasons of any weight, resting as they do on the authority of writers whom in so ancient a matter we do not trust. Ughelli, volume 6, column 297, places his death about the year 80; Antonio Caracciolo, in the Monuments of the Church of Naples, page 70, says he was sent to Capua about the year 80, adding these words: As is marked in the catalogue of the bishops of Capua revised by the most learned Cardinal Bellarmine while he held that see. This latter opinion is more approved by me, since Rufus is commemorated by Ughelli only in the third place among the bishops of Capua, and since his image was placed in the ancient church of St. Priscus after St. Priscus and St. Sinotus, whom the Capuans believe to have been their prelates: yet neither does this appear altogether certain, for want of ancient monuments. Monachus, in the Revision of the Capuan Sanctuary, page 82, adds the following concerning the cult of St. Rufus: The Rufus who is venerated at Capua is venerated also in the Vallo di Diano, in the diocese of Capaccio. There is there a township under the invocation of St. Rufus, and in it also an archpresbyteral church under the title of St. Rufus, and on this very day the feast of St. Rufus is kept there, as I have more than once learned from the archpriest Paul Terno, when he passed this way.
[10] Rufus, who is called bishop of Capua, At last we come down to the controversy hinted at in the beginning, whether this St. Rufus is other than the Rufus, martyr, who together with Carponius or Carpophorus is held in veneration by the Capuans. The Capuans indeed do not doubt of this matter, who venerate both to this day separately, the Roman Martyrology agreeing with them, in which since the time of Baronius there is announced Rufus, bishop and martyr, and Rufus the deacon with his companion Carponius, who are said to have suffered in the persecution of Diocletian. If the things which are reported concerning each Rufus deserved undoubted credit, the distinction of the two would also be beyond doubt. But certain learned men have begun to doubt of their difference, because they noticed that the credit of the Acts wavers, and that two Rufuses were not formerly known even among the Capuans themselves. Certainly in the Breviary of the church of Capua, which was printed in the year 1489, there is no mention of Rufus the patrician or bishop, but only an Office is set forth to be recited on the XXVII of August concerning St. Rufus, deacon and martyr, and Carponius his companion. Hence the same writers, whom we have said to doubt of the episcopate of Rufus, doubt also of the distinction of the twofold Rufus. Nevertheless we are confident that we shall sufficiently show that a twofold Rufus may be admitted, and that the one is distinct from the other.
[11] seems distinct from the Rufus who was Carponius's companion. First, although the Capuans formerly venerated one Rufus, and do not seem to have known the other, yet the ancient martyrologists assigned the other Rufus to the Capuans — namely Rufus the patrician, whom they were unaware of, since no mention of him is preserved in the Office. Hence it seems that we must say that the one Rufus was known to the Capuans, the other to the said martyrologists, and that afterward both were discovered: especially since those martyrologists assign no companion to their Rufus, while the Capuans attribute to theirs the companion Carponius. Secondly, in the Vatican codex of Usuard, in Sollier at the XXVII of August, besides Rufus the patrician announced by Usuard himself, another Rufus with a companion is commemorated in this manner: At Capua, the birthday of the holy martyrs Rufus and Carponius. Therefore in that codex they are read as distinct; from which I suspect Baronius drew when he distinguished them in the Roman Martyrology. A third reason for the distinction is drawn from two ancient churches,
which Monachus mentions. Of these, the one in the Vallo di Diano is sacred to Rufus alone, as was said above; the other was dedicated to Rufus and Carponius, which Monachus mentions in the Sanctuarium, page 538, thus: In the diocese, near St. Tammarus, there was formerly a church of SS. Rufus and Carponius, and it belonged to the chapter of Capua. Whence the conjecture of Monachus does not seem improbable, who on page 398, in the Calendar which he there exhibits, thinks that Rufus the patrician is marked, because Rufus is commemorated without Carponius, whom his other Calendars join to him. Finally, the chief reason for the distinction is drawn from the ancient image of Rufus already mentioned: for among the Saints whose images are there preserved, Carponius is not found; from which it seems to follow that another Rufus, and he a most ancient one, was at some time venerated at Capua, besides the Rufus who had Carponius as the companion of his martyrdom. These considerations persuade me that the Rufuses venerated at Capua are in truth distinct: which follows most clearly from the Acts themselves; and although the credit of these, as I have warned, wavers, yet thus far they deserve some measure of credit.