ON SS. FELIX THE PRIEST AND ADAUCTUS, MARTYRS,
AT ROME ON THE OSTIAN WAY.
Under Diocletian.
HISTORICAL-CRITICAL COLLECTION.
Felix, priest and martyr, at Rome on the Ostian Way (St.)
Adauctus, martyr, at Rome on the Ostian Way (St.)
BHL Number: 2878, 2884
BY J. S.
§ I. The most ancient cult of these Saints: their Acts from Ado: certain benefits and relics in various places.
The names of Saints Felix and Adauctus are inscribed in nearly all Martyrologies and Calendars, nor can there be any doubt The memory of these Martyrs in the ancient Calendars: that the cult of these Martyrs is most ancient. Most of the Hieronymian copies announce them on the XXX of August, but some, by a transposition of letters, have Audactus for Adauctus. The Reichenau copy, in our edition after volume VII of July, has it thus: At Rome on the Ostian Way, the birthday of Saints Felix and Adauctus. The Rheinau copy, however: At Rome, the birthday of Saints Felix and Audactus. In the same manner it is written in the old Roman Martyrology published by Rosweyde: On the Ostian Way, of Felix and Audactus, martyrs; and in the Roman Calendar illustrated by the care of Fronto, SS. Felix and Audactus, and elsewhere. On which the praiseworthy Fronto observes this: Further, Audactus and Adauctus are the same name: but the transposition of letters is frequent enough in those times. See Rosweyde's Glossary at the end of the book which contains the Lives of the Fathers. The same Martyrs are found in the Sacramentary of Gregory on the XXX of August, as also in other ancient Calendars, whose catalogue there is no need to weave together. I observe, however, that in the ancient Calendar of the Gauls which d'Achery published in volume 10 of the Spicilegium, page 138, they are called Felicissimus and Audactus.
[2] St. Damasus the Pope honored them with an epitaph: All these things clearly show that the cult of these Saints is very ancient. It is confirmed from poem 24 of Pope Damasus, which is the epitaph of our Martyrs, and which in the Works of Damasus, page 88, under the title On the holy martyrs Felix and Adauctus, is recited in this manner:
O Felix, once and again truly named of thy name, Who with unstained faith, despising the prince of the world, Confessing Christ, didst seek the heavenly kingdoms. O truly precious faith! know, brethren, That Adauctus likewise hastened victorious to heaven. The priest [*] Verus, at the command of Damasus the ruler, Built the tomb, adoring the thresholds of the Saints.
Tillemont, volume 5, in the Persecution of Diocletian, article 49, speaks of this epitaph from Baronius, who had recited it in the appendix of volume 4 as being Damasus's, just as Aringhi, to be cited by us presently, had likewise attributed it to Damasus. Tillemont, however, brings in not Damasus but Verus the priest as speaking, as if the verses were his. But there is no doubt that they are Damasus's, since they agree excellently with his style, and were published among his Works. These verses, moreover, imply that already about the middle of the fourth century, in which Damasus lived, Felix and Adauctus were held in veneration by the Romans.
[3] Aringhi in his Roma Subterranea, book 3, chapter 4, treats of the cemetery and church of SS. Felix and Adauctus, their ancient cemetery with its church discovered in our century: built of old on the Ostian Way. And that cemetery was also named Commodilla's
he shows. At what time this came about is not established. But it was restored in the sixth century by John I, in whose life Anastasius the Librarian has it thus: Likewise he renewed the cemetery of Felix and Adauctus. The same writer, concerning the restored church of the same Martyrs, writes this in his life of Leo III: And likewise he renewed the roofing and repairs of blessed Felix and Audactus the martyrs, next to St. Paul the Apostle. Francesco Bianchini, in the prolegomena to Anastasius the Librarian recently reprinted, volume 2, page 127, expounding the Itinerary of a certain anonymous writer through the City and around the City, relates that a notable part of the cemetery of SS. Felix, Adauctus, and Emerita — whose name was added afterward — was found in our century outside the Ostian Gate, at the place designated by the said Itinerary. Take his words: This notable cemetery was uncovered a few years ago in this very place indicated by the Itinerary, namely, from the church of St. Paul, after passing the nearest slope on the road leading to St. Sebastian's. It is first seen from the aforesaid slope in the Mandosi villa, lately discovered by the evidence of ancient paintings observed in a chamber of the cemetery, which distinctly gave the names of three Saints beneath their images. These same the oft-to-be-praised Fr. Giovanni Marangoni drew and communicated, as the canon Boldetti — mentioned above with equal praise — clearly described in his Observations on the Cemeteries of the Martyrs, book 2, chapter 18, page 541. Wherefore not undeservedly does the Librarian, number 361, in the Life of St. Leo the Third, call this place, distinguished by the church and cemetery of Felix and Adauctus, Next to St. Paul the Apostle.
[4] To these things, which abundantly demonstrate the most ancient veneration of our Martyrs, eulogies from Usuard and Notker, I subjoin certain fuller eulogies. Usuard presents such a one: At Rome on the Ostian Way, the passion of blessed Felix the priest, under the emperors Diocletian and Maximian, who, after the torment of the rack, sentence having been given, when he was being led to be beheaded, was met by a certain Christian. This man, when he freely professed himself a Christian, was presently beheaded together with him. Christians, not knowing his name, called him Adauctus, because he was added to St. Felix for the crown. The Roman Martyrology has quite the same. Notker composed this eulogy on the same day: At Rome on the Ostian Way, of Felix and Adauctus, martyrs. This Felix, when he was being led to the images of divers gods — of Serapis, Mercury, and Diana — to be compelled to sacrifice, threw down the statues by breathing upon them. For which reason he was hung upon the rack, and being taken down alive from the gibbet, was ordered to be beheaded. And as he was being led thither, a certain Christian met him, who by divine instinct suddenly cried out: "I too worship him whom this holy Priest confesses, the Lord Jesus Christ." Presently he too was seized and beheaded with blessed Felix. Him afterward the Christians, because his name was unknown, called Adauctus, because he was added to Felix the martyr for the crown; and to himself, for the confession of the faith, the crown of martyrdom was added. These two eulogies are drawn from the Acts, which Ado transcribed entire, as also does our manuscript Florarium.
[5] But the Acts are recited entire Hear Ado: At Rome, on the Ostian Way, at the second milestone from the city, the birthday of the most blessed martyrs Felix and Adauctus, under the emperors Diocletian and Maximian, Draccus being prefect and judge. Now there were two brothers, Felixes in name and in deed, both priests. The elder of these, Felix, when by the command of the emperors he had been brought to the judge's chamber beside the temple of Serapis, and was being compelled to sacrifice, breathed upon the face of the bronze statue, and immediately it fell. Likewise, being led to the statue of Mercury in another shrine, he breathed upon it in like manner, and presently it fell. Likewise to the image of Diana, which he cast down in the same way. Being brought back to the prefect, he was placed on the rack, and being asked by what sorceries he had done these things, blessed Felix replied: "Not by the sorceries of the devil, but by the benefits of almighty God have I done this." And so the prefect, inflamed with fury, ordered him to be led outside the City on the Ostian Way, because there stood there a very lofty tree consecrated to demons, beside which was a temple, that he might there be driven to sacrifice. Being brought thither, after making his prayer, he said to the tree: "I command thee in the name of my Lord Jesus Christ, that thou fall down by the roots, and utterly shatter the temple and the image and its altar, so that souls may no longer be deceived by thy worship." And at his words it was at once so overturned that it both shattered the temple and the image, and what had been there no longer appeared.
[6] from Ado, When this had been reported to the prefect, he at once ordered him to be beheaded, and his body to be left unburied for dogs and wolves. Sentence having been given, there met him a certain Christian man, hidden indeed from men, but manifest to God. When he had learned that blessed Felix had been ordered to be led away, he began to cry out and say: "I too am of the same law, and I worship him whom this holy Priest confesses, the Lord Jesus Christ." Presently he too was seized by the prefect's officers, and, a kiss having been given him, he was beheaded together with blessed Felix. Because the Christians did not discover this man's name, they afterward called him Adauctus, because he was added to the holy martyr Felix for the crown, and to himself, for the confession of the faith, the crown of martyrdom was added. And so the Christians, coming by night, buried them in that same place where the tree had stood, which in falling had opened a very great depth in the earth. And when the pagans wished to dig up their bodies from thence, whoever laid hands upon them were seized by the devil. Afterward, in time of peace, a basilica was built there, and the memory of the Martyrs worthily cultivated. Now they completed their martyrdom on the III Kalends of September.
[7] These Acts are found in very many manuscript codices, and have been published in Mombritius, volume 1, with which the manuscript codices agree, except for a few things here noted: folio 307, and in Surius on the XXX of August. Moreover, with Ado, even as to most of the words, agree the edition of Mombritius, our codex marked P Ms. 18, and the Trier transcript of St. Maximin's. But the edition of Surius, along with our codex P. Ms. 6 and the Saint-Omer transcript, which have been collated with certain others, not seldom disagree from Ado and Mombritius in the wording; yet they contain altogether the same facts. Another transcript was once sent to our predecessors by Don Andrea Maroquin, which departs more in wording from the aforesaid: for in it the judge is nowhere called Draccus, Dracus, or Drachus, as in the others, but everywhere Dracontius. Besides, two brothers named Felix are not mentioned at the beginning, but only the one of whom the account treats. Finally, apart from discrepancies of words which do not change the sense, at the end this is read: At length, peace being restored to the churches, a great basilica was built over the sacred relics of the Martyrs, and a cemetery was added, where their prayers flourish unto this present day. These Acts Marbod, bishop of Rennes, expressed in elegant verse, as may be seen in the edition of the Works of Marbod, prepared by Antoine Beaugendre, after the Works of the venerable Hildebert, bishop of Le Mans, where it is read under this title: The Passion of the holy martyrs Felix and Adauctus. We have the same in the codex marked Q Ms. 5, as also in a transcript received from elsewhere.
[8] Since Marbod's little work has already been published, and since it narrates the same things as the Acts mentioned, [Marbod, bishop of Rennes, expressed the same Acts in verse: from which certain benefits are given,] I shall not reprint it; but I subjoin only the conclusion, in which the author, addressing the Saints, relates certain benefits obtained by their intercession. And so he addresses them thus:
Holy Felix and Adauctus, precious martyrs, Who by faith overcame the savage princes of the world, Obtain for me pardon of my sins by your prayer, You who are wont to give rain to the thirsting earth. Twice have I seen, when the crops were dying of drought, The fields cleft with thirst, and men in despair, That after your most sacred pledges were brought forth, Straightway the longed-for rain came from on high. Again I have seen, when the fields were swimming with great showers, And the bowed harvests were crushed by harmful weeds, That after we brought forth your most sacred relics, Straightway fair weather shone, obtained from heaven. You have the power to close the gates of heaven, And again thence, when you will, to pour out abundant showers. Water, I pray, my thirsting soul, Not by rain, but by that grace which may cleanse me. Such as it is, my pen has served you; Through you may the Preserver of the world be gracious to me. Amen.
[9] [which seem to have happened at Angers, where the heads of the Martyrs are said to have been found: yet these] It does not seem altogether certain whether the benefits just related happened in the church of Angers or in that of Rennes, since Marbod was bishop of Rennes, and before his episcopate long served in the clergy of Angers. But I think it more likely that they happened at Angers; for in the Breviary of Angers of the year 1624, in which on the XXX of August the festival of our Saints is prescribed to be celebrated with a semidouble Office, this is related of their relics in the fourth lesson: Their heads, found in the church of Angers, were laid up with the relics of St. Serenedus by Bishop Gabriel, in the year of salvation one thousand five hundred and fifty-one, on the tenth day of April; and there they are religiously venerated. Nevertheless the people of Cologne also claim for themselves the heads of SS. Felix and Adauctus: for Gelenius, in his On the Greatness of Cologne Agrippina, book 3, page 297, describing the treasury of the collegiate church of the Holy Apostles, not only enumerates the relics of SS. Felix and Adauctus the martyrs, which in the year MCCXXV, on the Ides of July, Walter, bishop of Carlisle, placed with others in a silver sarcophagus adorned with gems, but then continues thus: The third and fourth precious herms (that is, reliquary cases), enclosing the heads of SS. Felix the priest and Adauctus the martyrs, are each inscribed with a several verse telling whose head each contains, namely:
I am called Felix; honor me if thou wouldst be happy. I increase things increased, I who am named Adauctus.
[10] [the people of Cologne also claim for themselves, as do those of Bec the head of St. Felix:] And lower down he says: Through whom the people of Agrippina received the sacred remains of the holy martyrs Felix the priest, and of the other most happily added to him for the crown, Adauctus, the apostolic clergy commemorate weekly in an ecclesiastical hymn:
Whose heads, of these Saints, This clergy of the Apostles Holds in its keeping, These first brought from Rome The once pious Pilgrim, Prelate in Cologne: Whose body here becomingly Lies, and of whom frequently The memory is kept.
Of Pilgrim, bishop of Cologne, there is an account in the new Gallia Christiana, volume 3, from column 655, where his death is set in the year 1035. In Usuard, of the Lübeck-Cologne edition, on the IV day of March, the following is read of these Saints: Likewise the translation of the holy martyrs Felix and Adauctus; namely, their heads are now held at Cologne in the church of the Holy Apostles. But whether the people of Angers or those of Cologne have with better right claimed for themselves the heads of these Martyrs I do not dispute, but I should prefer to think that a portion was granted to both, since nothing occurs more frequently in the matter of sacred relics than that a part of a body or head is taken for the whole. This explanation is here so much the more necessary because also in the Chronicle of Bec, published after the Works of Lanfranc,
under the year 1152 the following is read: In the same year John the Roman, who from boyhood had been a monk of St. Sabas, and afterward abbot of St. Mary in the Roman Capitol, and who, having left that abbey, had become a monk of Bec, journeyed to Rome, and returning thence brought with him the head of blessed Felix the martyr, the companion of Adauctus, and gave it as a free gift to the church of Bec.
[11] Their bodies assigned to various places: certain other relics. The bodies of these SS. Felix and Adauctus are attributed to various places. Saussay in the Supplement to the Gallican Martyrology on the XXX of August mentions this: In the monastery of St. Peter of Ferrières, in the diocese of Sens, the veneration of the holy bodies of the blessed martyrs Felix and Adauctus, who today, their last struggle accomplished on the Ostian Way, triumph at Rome; which bodies, carried hither entire and there laid up, are honored with a distinguished cult. But Bucelinus, in his Benedictine Sacrarium on the same day, having briefly set forth the martyrdom of our Saints, subjoins this: These two Saints rest at Andechs (it is a monastery in Bavaria, otherwise called Holy Mountain, commonly Heiligenberg.) But the monastery of Ferrières contends for both bodies. Mabillon in the Benedictine Annals, volume 3, page 16, writes of the empress Ermengarde: She is said to have brought from Rome the relics of St. Sixtus and of SS. Felix and Adauctus, granted to her by Leo IV, and to have placed them in her monastery, the epitaph not obscurely attesting it. That monastery is the convent of Erstein in Alsace. Moreover, the Gelenius just praised, page 310, assigns small bones of Saints Felix and Adauctus to the Cologne church of the Blessed Virgin Mary ad Gradus. Finally Piazza, in the Sacred Hemerologium of the City on the XXX of August, asserts that an arm of St. Felix is preserved at Rome in the church of St. Lawrence in Lucina.
§ II. Those things which have been objected against the Acts are examined, and there is discussion concerning St. Felix the brother of our Martyr, whom we prove to be other than St. Felix of Nola, and to be named Felix in Pincis.
Some reject the Acts of SS. Felix and Adauctus; but allege no reasons, Tillemont, volume 5 of the Ecclesiastical Monuments, in the Persecution of Diocletian, article 49, roundly declares that the Acts of SS. Felix and Adauctus, which we have recited from Ado, are of no value whatever. But he brings forward not so much as a word by which to prove so rigid a censure. Yet Baillet adheres to him on the XXX of August in his Critical Table of the Acts, and in the Life itself of SS. Felix and Adauctus. I confess indeed that the Acts are not by a contemporary author (for this is plain from those words at the end of the Acts: Afterward, in time of peace, a basilica was built there), and so that they do not have the same authority as have the proconsular Acts or writings by coeval authors. But I do not sufficiently perceive what in these brief acts could have displeased Tillemont and his followers so greatly that they thought them altogether to be rejected; especially since holy Ado and Marbod, prelate of Rennes, so far approved these same Acts that they adopted them entire as their own; and since from a style not barbarous we may judge that they were written not long after peace was given to the Church, that is, in the fourth or fifth century. And so Tillemont ought to have alleged some reasons for his censure, that we might more easily judge of its fairness. But since he has passed over those reasons, I shall by conjecture subjoin what I suppose displeased him in the Acts.
[13] The statues of Serapis, Mercury, and Diana overthrown by a mere breath, nor in fact can sufficiently suitable reasons be alleged. and the tree torn up, which is said also to have shattered the temple, did not please Tillemont, I think, who could with difficulty put faith in prodigies of this sort unless they were related by witnesses of outstanding authority. But truly, if the Acts of the Martyrs are to be thrown aside on account of certain prodigies related in them, it will be necessary to throw aside many others which are held authentic by all, as Honoré de Sainte-Marie excellently proved in his little work On Observations on the Rules of Criticism, Dissertation 4, articles 3, 4, and 5, where he exhibits various Acts of Martyrs, and those genuine, which teem with prodigies and miracles. Another thing which could have displeased in the said Acts is Draccus, or Drachus, or Dracontius the judge, who is called prefect: for no one of that name is found among the prefects of the City. This difficulty indeed is a real one, which can render the Acts suspect. Yet it may be answered that the name of prefect is perhaps used improperly, and that a judge of lower rank is meant; or that the name of Draccus was an addition to the names by which the prefects of the City of that time are designated in the catalogue of prefects. Finally, since sometimes there were several prefects in the same year, it could have happened that this one is not reckoned in the published catalogues. Whatever the case, this reason does not suffice for rejecting the Acts entirely; nor do others occur by which the Acts might be rendered suspect, save that one which I shall now examine at greater length, because it bears upon the distinction of Saints of the same name.
[14] Felix the martyr had a brother, another Felix, whose Acts Bolland gave: Perhaps also it displeased Tillemont that in these Acts mention is made of another Felix, who is called this Martyr's brother and a priest. But the Acts of that Felix have already been published by Bolland, volume 1 of January, on the XIV day, page 951; and those Acts agree with these so aptly that it must be said either that both are fictitious or that both are genuine. For the same prefect Draccus occurs in them, and mention clear enough is made in them of the idols overthrown by our Felix. Take the beginning of those Acts: It came to pass, after the consummation of the most blessed Felix the priest, that another Felix, his own brother, younger in name and in deed, and himself a priest, when he had been brought before the most iniquitous Draccus, prefect of the City, the latter began to compel him to sacrifice to the idols. To whom blessed Felix the priest said: "I think you have become enemies of your own gods; to whichever of them you lead me in the temples of the gods, that will befall them which befell those to whom you now repent of having led my Brother. But if you wish to prove the power of my Lord Jesus Christ, bid me go to the Capitol, that I may make Jove himself, the prince of your demons, fall." These things so clearly imply that that Felix was the brother of Felix the martyr, of whom we now treat, that I marvel that Ruinart in the preliminary Admonition to the Acts of St. Felix of Nola asked on what foundation Bolland affirmed it, since he could scarcely be ignorant that the foundation for Bolland's assertion was the Acts of both Felixes.
[15] Florentinius wrongly denies that that Felix was the brother of Felix the martyr Florentinius in his Observations on the XIV of January also dissents from Bolland, and thinks that by the words cited above some Felix of Nola is designated, who was brother of the younger Felix; and in favor of that opinion he adduces the authority of an ancient Breviary of Capua, in which on the XIV of January three Felixes are set down. But that very Breviary of Capua utterly overturns Florentinius's opinion and confirms Bolland's judgment. For the first lesson of that Breviary on the XIV of January is about our Felix, the Roman martyr, as is plain even from these words: Meanwhile one of them (the brothers), by name Felix, who was the elder brother, when he had been led to the temple of Serapis, breathed upon its face; and immediately it fell and was reduced to dust. The second lesson is about the younger Felix, his brother, and begins thus: After these things another holy and venerable man, the younger brother of the aforesaid Martyr, was brought before Draccus. He ordered him to sacrifice to the idols. Then holy Felix said: "As I see, you have become enemies of your own gods; to whichever of them you lead me, that will befall them," etc., as above. But the third lesson is about Felix of Nola, whom St. Paulinus celebrated in his verses. And so the first lesson is a summary of the Acts of our Roman Felix, the second of the Acts of Felix his brother, the third sets forth certain deeds of Felix of Nola. The Capuan Breviary therefore contains Bolland's very opinion, so that Florentinius does not appear to have compared it with the Acts when he wrote the aforesaid Observations.
[16] Ado and certain others confounded the younger Felix, our Felix's brother, with that famous Felix of Nola and Ruinart: whom St. Paulinus praised in his poems. But Bolland distinguished the Acts of both. Ruinart, cited above, and Tillemont, volume 4 of the Monuments, note 4 on St. Felix of Nola, do indeed admit that confusion; but they think so little is to be attributed to the Acts published by Bolland that they do not believe that that younger Felix was either the brother of the Roman Martyr or that he died at Nola, as is said in the Acts. Each relies on a negative argument that is plainly weak. Hear Ruinart: Saint Damasus asserts in poem 24 (which I gave in number 2) that the tomb of Felix and Adauctus was built by the care of Verus the priest; but of Felix, this Felix's brother, there is no mention. But from this it cannot be inferred that Felix the martyr had no brother, since a short epitaph did not require that mention be made of him.
[17] Tillemont reasons no better in this fashion: Tillemont no more rightly denies that several Felixes died at Nola. Saint Paulinus could not have been ignorant of that Felix, and so would have said something of him in order to distinguish him from the other: for he himself had presently refuted that very reasoning, when he was inquiring whether Felix of Nola had contended against heretics, as some have asserted of him, answering to the silence of Paulinus in these words: Is it not more credible that Paulinus, who divided the History of St. Felix into several poems, reserved his contests against the heretics for one of those (poems) which have perished? For out of fifteen which at the least he composed, we have only ten entire, and little or nothing at all of the other five. By what consistency, I ask, does Tillemont turn the silence of Paulinus against the Felix who was our Felix's brother, of whom he was not treating, while he will not have that same silence tell against the contests of Felix of Nola, of whom alone Paulinus sang? To this negative argument, which has no force in this place, he adds a manifest error toward the end of note 6, where from certain words of Ambrogio Leone cited by Bolland he infers this: This author (Ambrogio Leone) therefore seems not to have known more than one St. Felix at Nola, and no one would be more worthy of credit than he in this matter. But Tillemont would not have said this if he had read Ambrogio himself; for he, in book 2 On Nola, chapter 13, enumerates six Felixes, and writes that two of them died and were buried at Nola. Hear a few of his words: Of these six holy men (Felixes) two bodies are held at Nola. Hence therefore I shall conclude more rightly that the arguments objected against the two brothers Felix — of whom one died a martyr at Rome on the Ostian Way, the other a confessor at Nola — are not of such weight that we ought to throw aside the brief Acts of both, which rightly agree with one another, and various Calendars and
ancient Breviaries be convicted of error.
[18] Further, light will be added to the foregoing if we can find out Several Felixes are reckoned on the XIV of January where that younger Felix, the brother of Felix the martyr, was venerated, and by what name he was anciently distinguished from others of the same name. The old Roman Martyrology published by Rosweyde has this on the XIV of January: At Nola, of Felix the priest, buried in Pincis. The Roman Calendar of Fronto, on the same day: The birthday of St. Felix in Pincis. The Roman Calendar of Allatius, on the same day: The birthday of St. Felix the confessor. The Sacramentary of Gregory celebrates Felix the confessor on the same day, and sings thus of him in the preface: It is truly meet and just … not to be silent about the memorable confession of St. Felix, who could be turned aside from the uprightness of his state neither by heretical depravities nor by the blandishments of the world. Menard in his observations, page 36, affirms the following: In the codices of Rodradus, Rem., and Rat., and in Pamelius, there is added (to the name of St. Felix) in Pincis. It is a place at Rome, in which a church of St. Felix was built. Michele Monaco in the Sanctuarium Capuanum published five ancient Calendars. In the first, on the XIV of January, it stands thus: The deposition of St. Felix in Pingis, priest and confessor. In the second: Of St. Felix the priest and Felix the M. The third is mutilated for the month of January. But the fourth has it thus: Of the holy martyrs Felix in Pincis, priest and martyr, and Felix of Nola, bishop and confessor. The fifth: Of Felix and Felix, and of Felix of Nola the bishop.
[19] in various Calendars, and one of them is called Felix in Pincis: Usuard, on the aforesaid day, in the most ancient Prato codex first records Felix of Nola, celebrated by St. Paulinus; then another in these words: Likewise on the same day, of St. Felix the priest and confessor. Which announcement, if it is not Usuard's, as our Sollier thinks, is certainly very ancient. Rabanus on the same day admits two Felixes: for having first celebrated that Nolan patron of Paulinus, he subjoins: On the same day is the birthday of Felix, his own brother (rather, the brother of St. Felix our martyr, as what follows plainly teaches) whom Dracus, prefect of the City, compelled to sacrifice to idols, and beat with clubs, and ordered to be carried away into exile, etc. This is a synopsis of the Acts of the younger Felix. All these things which we have thus far adduced clearly prove that some other Felix, besides that famous patron of St. Paulinus, was known and venerated on the XIV of January. But that the reader may understand what I intend to prove further: I judge outright that that Felix who is so often surnamed in Pincis is the younger Felix, brother of Felix the martyr, and that he indeed died at Nola, as his Acts have it, but was buried at Rome in Pincis, and there venerated, until by the correction of the Roman Breviary Felix of Nola was substituted in his place, whose Life was better known to the correctors of the Breviary from St. Paulinus and others. In order to show this, the place called in Pincis must first be investigated: for some have set it at Nola, others at Rome.
[20] But the church of St. Felix in Pincis was at Rome, not at Nola: Fronto in his observations on the place of the Calendar cited discusses it thus: Pincis is a place at Rome. For the Pincian palace is mentioned in the Life of Silverius in the year DXXXVI, which a little after is called the palace in Pincis: for it was the palace of the senator Pincius, from whom the Pincian hill was named, near which was the church of St. Felix in Pincis, as may be learned from the Roman Antiquities of Lucio Fauno, book IV, chapter XI. In the Life of Hadrian, who sat in the year DCCLXXII, it is said that he restored the basilica of blessed Felix situated in Pineis. We must read in Pincis. For in the Life of Benedict III, who sat in the year DCCCLV, it is read clearly: In like manner also in the church of the blessed martyr Felix, which is situated in Pincis, he made a vestment, etc. Since these things suffice to show that Pincis is a place at Rome, named either from the Pincian hill or from the palace of Pincius, from which even now the Pincian gate takes its name, then this surely proves it: that Paulinus, among so many poems sung to his Felix in the recurring years, never makes mention of the Pincian place, even when he describes the place where he was buried. With these things the learned now generally agree, admitting that the church of St. Felix in Pincis was not at Nola, as some once thought, but at Rome.
[21] But not all conclude from this that Felix, to whom this church was sacred, [but hence it does not follow that that Felix died at Rome, since he is proved to have died at Nola.] did not die at Nola but at Rome, as Fronto seems to infer when he censures the old Roman Martyrology because it has: At Nola, of Felix the priest, buried in Pincis; as though that Felix, whoever he was, could not have died at Nola and been buried at Rome, or afterward been translated to Rome. I for my part do not see that the author of that Martyrology erred in this matter, but rather suspect that he wished to imply that that Felix died at Nola, and that his body was translated to Rome either at once or afterward, and there buried. This exposition of the said Martyrology can be confirmed from various considerations. First, Martyrologies and Calendars generally announce the memory of St. Felix in Pincis on the XIV of January. But no Felix is known who is said to have died at Rome on that day; whereas two are said to have died at Nola on the XIV of January. One of them therefore is designated by the Roman martyrologist. Secondly, Ado and other martyrologists, who confounded the Acts of both of these Felixes, relate of their own Felix, thus confused, that he was buried in the place which is called Pincis. They imply, therefore, that one or the other of those whose Acts they mingled was buried in Pincis. Thirdly, that Felix in Pincis is by some called a martyr, but by others a confessor. Now either title fits either Nolan Felix, since each bore many things (yet not the same things) for Christ, and at last rested in peace. These reasons scarcely allow me to doubt that St. Felix in Pincis is one or the other of the Nolans. It remains, therefore, that we investigate which of these was buried in Pincis.
[22] Tillemont, volume 4, note 4 on St. Felix of Nola, judges that that church in Pincis was at Rome, That famous Felix of Nola was not buried in Pincis, and sacred to Paulinus's Felix. His reason was that he acknowledged only one Felix as having died at Nola. By which reason also I should believe that others who judged the same were moved. But this single reason of Tillemont's has already been abundantly refuted. Take therefore arguments both more numerous and better, which may persuade that the Felix in Pincis is he whom the Acts attest to have been the younger brother of Felix the Roman martyr, and to have suffered much from the persecutors, and at last to have died in peace at Nola. First of all, it is shown by a negative argument that Paulinus's patron Felix was not buried in Pincis, since Paulinus nowhere makes mention of that place, although he describes the Saint's burial at length in the sixth Natalis, and often speaks of the tomb in other places, and has enumerated the basilicas of the same Saint. This argument, even though negative, presses vehemently here; and it alone sufficed for Ruinart to distinguish Felix in Pincis from the Nolan. Hear him in the preliminary Admonition to the Acts of Felix of Nola: For nowhere does Paulinus mention the place called in Pincis, although in fifteen poems he has touched on the deeds, death, burial, and miracles of Felix, and has enumerated five basilicas built at this Saint's tomb… Whence it is better to confess that the Felix who was celebrated at Rome in Pincis was different from Felix of Nola. Nor can it now be answered that some poems of Paulinus on Felix still lie hidden, since all have been brought to light by Lodovico Muratori, and are now reprinted in the new edition of the Works of St. Paulinus.
[23] Secondly, Paulinus frequently repeats that his Felix's tomb is at Nola, but by Felix in Pincis the ancient Calendars and Tillemont confesses that the place in Pincis is at Rome. And so the old Roman Martyrology designates another Felix when it says he was buried in Pincis. Hence it seems must be gathered that another likewise is designated in the Calendars of Fronto and Allatius, as also in the Sacramentary of Gregory: for since all these Calendars are Roman, they probably designate the same person as the Roman Martyrology of nearly that same time, and two of them make mention of the place in Pincis. These points will presently be strengthened, when we shall say that Felix of Nola was unknown in the Roman Breviaries down to the middle of the sixteenth century. Thirdly, Michele Monaco in the Sanctuarium Capuanum, page 450, has this in his observations on the fifth Calendar: In a manuscript Martyrology, Felix in Pincis is said to be not he who is venerated at Nola, but he who is venerated at Rome. Other manuscript Martyrologies have it too.
[24] [and certain Breviaries seem to designate the Felix who was the Roman Martyr's brother:] In an ancient manuscript Breviary, which among us is marked W 156, on the XIV of January the Office is of Felix the priest and confessor, and the single lesson which is found there is the beginning of the Acts of St. Felix the younger, and thus begins: It came to pass that, after the consummation of the most blessed Felix the priest, another Felix, his own brother, younger in name and in deed, etc. The Breviary of Speyer of the year 1478, on the same day, included in three lessons almost the whole Acts of the same Felix, as they were published by Bolland. That of Osnabrück of the year 1516, under the title of Felix in Pincis, sets forth a summary of the same Acts in three lessons. To these are added the Breviaries of other churches also of nearly the same time, among which, however, some are found in which the Acts of both Felixes are confounded; but I have found none which set forth the Acts of Felix of Nola pure.
[25] [Formerly for Felix in Pincis at Rome the lessons were from the Acts of Felix the martyr,] The Roman Breviaries published in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries down to the pontificate of Paul III present, for the feast of St. Felix in Pincis, three lessons from the Acts of St. Felix the martyr who suffered with Adauctus, in which mention is made of his brother Felix the younger. Hence the Breviary of Speyer of the year 1507, in the third lesson, where it openly sets forth our opinion, has it thus: Now when twelve years were completed, holy Felix the younger, on a Sunday, after the sacred Mysteries had been performed and peace given to the people, prostrating himself on the pavement in prayer, passed away in peace to Christ, being buried in the place which is called Pincis, whence he obtained his surname. Of this same younger Felix the church of Speyer today keeps the feast under the title of Confessor, but the Roman Church keeps that of the Elder under the title of Martyr; both of whom, however, the common collect joins together in the plural number. The Roman Breviaries corrected by order of Paul III omitted Felix in Pincis entirely, and mention no Felix at all on the XIV of January. Finally, the Breviaries which came forth corrected by order of Pius V and the following Pontiffs commemorate on the XIV of January
began to commemorate St. Felix of Nola, and to assert of him that he was buried in the place which is called in Pincis; nor before the year 1569 have I found any mention in the Roman Breviaries of St. Felix of Nola.
[26] [which is not probable of Felix of Nola; but less surprising of that Martyr's brother:] Further, since Felix of Nola had such famous heralds of his praises that his Acts could not be unknown to the Romans, it appears to me in no way probable or credible that the lessons for Felix in Pincis should so long have been recited at Rome from the Acts of Felix the Roman martyr, with whom that most celebrated Felix of Nola had no connection, if Felix in Pincis had been the same as the Nolan. This is not so surprising in the case of the younger Felix, the Martyr's brother, both because his Acts were less known, and because he was treated of also in his brother's Acts, so that we may suspect that it came about from ignorance of his Acts that his brother's Acts were in part read out also on his festival.
[27] Someone here might indeed suspect that Felix the martyr himself, the companion of Adauctus, was venerated by the Romans under the name of Felix in Pincis, [It is proved that Felix the martyr was not venerated at Rome on the XIV of January, but his brother.] which we have seen asserted above in the Breviary of Speyer. But this opinion is abundantly refuted from the ancient Calendars of the Romans, which manifestly distinguish Felix in Pincis from the Felix who was Adauctus's companion. For their old Martyrology relates that he died at Nola, and omits the title of Martyr. So too the Calendar of Fronto and the Sacramentary of Gregory treat of him as of a Confessor. Besides, the festival of St. Felix with Adauctus is celebrated in the same Breviaries which raise this doubt on the XXX of August, and so it is not probable that it was again celebrated on the XIV of January. From all this, therefore, it may be permitted to conclude that it seems scarcely doubtful that St. Felix in Pincis, to whom both the title of confessor and that of martyr are suited, is the younger brother of our Felix the martyr; or at least that no Felix is known of whom this can more probably be affirmed.
[28] Before we set an end to this Commentary, it remains to refute the rash criticism of Baillet, Felix and Adauctus have nothing in common with the African martyrs. who on the XXX of August wished to make Africans out of our Roman Martyrs, because in the Martyrology of Bede on the same XXX of August certain African Martyrs are announced in these words: In the city of Venusia in Apulia, the birthday of SS. Felix, bishop of the city of Tubzoca, and of Audactus and Januarius the priest, and of Fortunatianus and Septiminus the lectors, etc. For hence he gathers that perhaps out of Felix the bishop and Audactus the priest were fabricated Felix and Adauctus the Roman martyrs: Which, he says, we shall see more fully on the XXIV of October, on which day these African martyrs are recorded by other martyrologists. But Baillet himself, I think, repented of his rashness, since on the XXIV of October, in the Acts of the said martyrs, he does not touch upon this even by a word. Wherefore it will suffice to adduce the words of Sollier in his Observations on Usuard for the XXX of August, by which he has already refuted that assertion in this manner: Certainly the ancient Calendars of Allatius and Fronto, so often cited, the Sacramentary of Gregory, the Hieronymian transcripts, the Little Roman, Rabanus, Ado, Notker, Wandelbert, as well as our own author (Usuard) most expressly mark today Felix only and Adauctus, or by metathesis Audactus, on the Ostian Way, and distinguish them besides by so many characteristics and circumstances that thus far I do not see what they can have in common with the aforesaid, all Africans. Of that Felix the African bishop and his companions we shall treat with the Roman Martyrology on the XXIV of October, on which day also they are mentioned in most other Martyrologies.
Annotations. Perhaps his*.