ON THE HOLY MARTYRS CAECILIUS, BISHOP OF ELIBERIS, AND HIS COMPANIONS, IN SPAIN
In the first century.
HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.
Caecilius, Bishop of Eliberis, Martyr in Spain (St.) Companions, Martyrs in Spain — BHL Number: 4058, 4067, 4069
By the author I. B.
§ I. Whether St. Caecilius was a disciple of St. James.
[1] On the Ides of May the feast is celebrated of the holy Confessors Torquatus, Ctesiphon, Secundus, Indalecius, Caecilius, Esicius, and Euphrasius; who at Rome were ordained Bishops by the holy Apostles and, for the purpose of preaching the word of God, the seven Apostles of Spain, were sent to Spain, which was at that time still entangled in the error of paganism. And when they had preached the Gospel in various cities and had brought innumerable multitudes under the yoke of the Christian faith, Torquatus at Acci, Ctesiphon at Vergium, Secundus at Abula, Indalecius at Urci, Caecilius at Eliberis, Esicius at Cartesa, and Euphrasius at Eliturgi, came to their rest. So writes Usuardus; with whom the Roman Martyrology and most others agree. The old Breviary of Rome, published by Rosweydus, states more briefly: Of Torquatus, Ctesiphon, Secundus, Indalecius, Caecilius, Esicius, and Euphrasius, who at Rome were ordained by the Apostles. Wandelbertus also, in his metrical Martyrology, commemorates them thus:
Seven bishops adorn Spain together on the Ides.
Bede (the common edition), Ado, Notkerus, and others treat of them at greater length, as we shall state below.
[2] Writers on Spanish affairs record that these men were disciples of St. James the Greater, the Apostle; as do also certain more recent Martyrologies. Thus the manuscript Florarium states: The feast of the holy Confessors Torquatus, Ctesiphon, Secundus, Indalecius, disciples (as is commonly believed) of St. James the Greater, Caecilius, Esicius, and Euphrasius: who were disciples of St. James the Greater, and having been ordained Bishops by the holy Apostles, were sent to Spain; where they preached Christ. Franciscus Maurolycus and Constantius Felicius have the following: On the same day the commemoration of nine disciples, of whom Torquatus of Gades, Ctesiphon of Almeria, Secundus of Abyla, Indalecius of Urci, Caecilius of Eliberis, Hesychius of Carthesia, and Euphrasius of Turris Iulia were Bishops. These James the Apostle, son of Zebedee, had brought with him from Spain to Jerusalem; and they carried back the body of their Master, slain by Herod, to Galicia. Thence proceeding to Rome, they were appointed by Blessed Peter to the aforesaid cities, as Pope Callistus writes. The two remaining companions of this Apostle, Athanasius and Theodorus, were left behind in Spain and lie buried beside the tomb of their Master at Compostela, as we read in a certain letter of St. Leo. By these men the doctrine of the Christian faith was first propagated in Spain. Galesinius writes nearly the same, except that he appears to assert that St. Caecilius was ordained Bishop before the rest: he has it thus. In Spain, of the holy Confessors Caecilius, Indalecius, Euphrasius, Secundus, Torquatus, Hesychius, Ctesiphon, Athanasius, and Theodorus. Of these, Caecilius, a disciple of Blessed James the Apostle, consecrated Bishop by Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, presided over the Church of Eliberis. The rest likewise, after they had transported from the city of Jerusalem to Spain the body of the same St. James, whom Herod Agrippa had slain, proceeded thence to Rome, and being made Bishops by the same Peter, were sent to Spain, which was enmeshed in the superstitions of the nations. There Indalecius over the Vergitan, Torquatus over the Accitan, Hesychius over the Cathesian, Secundus over the Abylan, Ctesiphon over the Almerian, and Euphrasius over the bishopric of the city of Eliturgi, were appointed; and each in his own region recalled a vast multitude from darkness to behold the light of the Gospel. By those other two also, Athanasius and Theodorus, who had never departed from Spain, the discipline of the Christian religion was propagated through many parts of that province.
[3] That St. James the Apostle went to Spain and there converted some to the faith is the tradition of the churches of that province; as is stated in the Lessons of the Roman Breviary on his feast day, the twenty-fifth of July. Concerning his disciples, writers are not of one mind: some record that they were converted by him there; others, that they were brought by him for the purpose of spreading the Gospel. The former opinion is maintained by Maurolycus in the encomium already cited. converted by him there, And the Breviary, after the words we have already quoted, adds: Of their number, seven were afterwards ordained Bishops by Blessed Peter and were the first to be sent into Spain. Lucius Marineus Siculus, in his work on Spanish affairs, book 5, writes: In Spain, St. James chose nine disciples from the province of Galicia; of whom seven, while two others remained in Galicia for the sake of preaching, and followed him to Jerusalem, went with him to Jerusalem: and after his passion they transported his body by sea to Galicia. Of these, as the same Callistus and Blessed Jerome have written, after some had buried the body of Blessed James in Galicia, they betook themselves to Rome and, adorned with episcopal crowns by the Apostles Peter and Paul, were sent to preach the word of God in Spain, which was still entangled in the error of paganism: and by their preaching they converted an innumerable multitude of Spaniards to the worship of Christ. Joannes Vasaeus in his Chronicle of Spanish affairs writes: St. James the Apostle, son of Zebedee, preached the Gospel of Christ in Spain, and is said to have converted only nine in the whole province to our faith. Although Blessed Callistus, in the letter on the Translation, says that he had more disciples, but twelve in particular, of whom he chose nine while still alive in Galicia. And a little further on: The Apostle, having left two disciples in Spain for the sake of preaching, returned with the rest to Judaea. And a little below, having recounted the Apostle's death and the translation of his body to Galicia by those same disciples, he says they thence proceeded to Rome, and adorned with episcopal insignia by the Apostles Peter and Paul, were sent again to Spain to preach the word of God, and there suffered martyrdom for the Christian faith which they preached. He then enumerates their names and the cities in which they either established their episcopal see or reached the goal of their labors. Concerning St. James's preaching, and the transport of his body to Galicia, and its discovery at the beginning of the ninth century in the time of Alfonso the Chaste, we shall treat on the twenty-fifth of July; where we shall also present the miracles described by Pope Callistus II, and examine the Letter of Leo III which is commonly cited.
[4] whence they brought his body to Galicia. We have a threefold history of the Translation of St. James: none of them asserts, nor indeed denies, that the disciples by whom his body was brought to Spain were themselves Spaniards. The first, which begins thus — "Let no one think that this is that James who is surnamed son of Alphaeus," etc. — contradicts all the Martyrologies and Spanish histories when it says: In that same place (in which the body of the Apostle had been buried) three of his disciples, whose names are these — Torquatus, Thesifons, Anastasius — merited the lot of resting with their beloved Master. The others, having returned to Jerusalem, Some of them are said to have later returned to Jerusalem, recounted these things which we have described, and many more which we have omitted for the sake of brevity, in the holy Synod with truthful accounts. In the second Narrative, which begins with these words — "After the Passion of our Saviour, the most glorious trophy of his Resurrection, and his wondrous Ascension," etc. — no names of the Apostle's disciples are given; only this is found near the end: others say that some remained at the tomb, Three attendants of the Master, out of reverence for him, while they kept vigilant and unceasing watch at the aforesaid tomb with the greatest devotion, having reached the appointed end of their uncertain span of life, paid nature's debt and with a blessed departure breathed forth their spirits and joyfully bore their souls to heaven.
[5] The third account is found in the Bibliotheca Floriacensis of Joannes Boscius, composed by an ancient monk of Fleury some six hundred years ago, as he reckons, and beginning thus: "We know that the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, spoke long ago through the mouth of David the Prophet." In this version, the men are not said to have been disciples of James, nor are they said to have been ordained Bishops by him or at Rome by St. Peter, others say they were ordained Bishops at Jerusalem, but at Jerusalem by the Apostles; for it reads as follows: When the whole world was held oppressed under the yoke of demonic servitude, and was blinded by the darkness of its own ignorance, the most holy Apostles, desiring to rescue it from the squalor of its faithlessness in accordance with the command of the Lord and Saviour, sent forth to all parts of the world men most valiant in the faith of Christ and most learned in the holy law, to proclaim the grace of the Divine Word. Whence it came about that they chose a most prudent man, equipped with every spiritual discipline — the most holy Ctesiphon, whom they ordained Bishop; and to him they joined fellow-Bishops as companions, men most vigorous in this work. These envoys of the Lord and sent into Spain, were dispatched to Spain: so that the stony hearts of a barbarous people, anointed with the balm of the Holy Spirit, might soften and become ready to receive the grace of Christ. These most true and most upright servants of Christ, eager to fulfil as swiftly as possible the grace of preaching entrusted to them, hastened to proceed thither by sea. And so, having fitted out a small vessel and loaded on board what seemed necessary, suddenly, by the gift of divine providence granted them, they formed the plan to bring with them the body of the most holy James: they took the Apostle's body with them, as an aid to preaching. so that, while they themselves attended more diligently to the office of preaching, with the holy Apostle shining forth in miracles, the minds of that savage nation's people might gradually grow tame and accept the faith of baptism. And so it was done, as the following events make clear. For Blessed Ctesiphon with his companions, hastening to the tomb of the glorious Apostle, with immense honor of devotion and trembling, raising up that most precious pearl of inestimable worth from its lowly place in the earth, with great and spiritual joy, praising the Lord in hymns of pious jubilation, they reverently placed it aboard their ship.
[6] In truth, it seems to us more probable that Saints Ctesiphon, Torquatus, Caecilius, and their companions were ordained Bishops neither in Judaea by the other Apostles, nor in Spain by James: but either they were converted by him there, as the Roman Breviary and the authors cited above have it — and perhaps some of them, as they bore Roman names, were also of Roman stock — or else they were selected from the Roman clergy and ordained Bishops by the Apostles Peter and Paul, and sent to Spain.
§ II. Whether the Bishops were ordained in Spain by St. James.
[7] Nor should anyone be greatly moved by the Spanish Chronicle which, collected by a diligent man of slender learning and judgment in earlier centuries, According to the Chronicle attributed to Dexter, has been rashly ascribed to the most learned Dexter. In that Chronicle many things are related concerning St. James which we shall examine elsewhere (if that seems worthwhile): here we shall transcribe only those few details which pertain to his disciples, and specifically to Caecilius, with whom we are here concerned. It thus writes for the year of Christ 36 — although in the age of Dexter no nation (much less Spain, which for many centuries afterward still used its own Aera), nor the Church, marked the epoch of years by the span of time elapsed from the birth of Christ, but rather by consuls. But grant that Dexter was the first author of that custom which we now follow; the Chronicle certainly reads thus: In the year of Christ 36, Spain, the first of the provinces of the world after Galilee, Judaea, and Samaria, in the western regions embraced the faith of Christ: and its pagan population, converted to the faith, was the true firstfruits of the other Gentiles. For the holy Apostle James, son of Zebedee, having traversed the cities of Spain and erected many churches, St. James ordains Bishops in Spain and having appointed Bishops from among foreigners, left Peter as the first Bishop at Braga; and erected a temple or oratory to the Blessed Virgin, at her command and in her presence upon a pillar, at Zaragoza. He also performed many miracles, and by the power of his preaching brought the fierce spirits of the Spaniards under the gentle yoke of Christ. Many Jews there were also converted, from the twelve tribes of the deportation from Babylon, to whom he also preached there at that time.
[8] In the year 37: He also brings many disciples with him into Spain, but chiefly twelve in number, after the Apostolic custom: namely, Bishops Basilius, Pius, and Athanasius; Priests Maximus and Chrysogonus; Readers Theodorus, Caecilius, Ctesiphon, Iscius, and Calocerus; Exorcist Torquatus; and Doorkeepers Secundus, Indalecius, and Euphrasius. Of these, Basilius succeeded Peter at Braga: in great number: Athanasius was the first Bishop of Zaragoza; Pius of Seville. St. James also appointed other Bishops: another Basilius, who was the first Prelate of Carthago Spartaria; Eugenius of Valencia, Agathodorus of Tarragona, Elpidius of Toledo, Etherius of Barcelona, Capito of Lugo, Ephrem of Astorga, Nestor of Palencia, Arcadius of Juliobriga. All of these are from among the exiles, and in all these cities, and in others of Spain, St. James preached with marvelous speed. Afterwards Calocerus, having gone to Italy, attached himself to Apollinaris, Bishop of Ravenna, and having been made Priest by him, succeeded Marcianus, and became Bishop when over a hundred years old, yet still vigorous. Seven others, appointed Bishops by Blessed Peter, were sent back to Spain...
[9] In the year of Christ 41: Having honorably completed his mission and having arranged the affairs of Spain most holily, and having left the Church which is called "of the Pillar" to the care of Theodorus — which the Blessed Virgin had blessed, honored, and consecrated by her presence, and where she had also left her celebrated image (which heavenly shrine has from that time been frequented by the devotion of the faithful) — James, amid the tears of the Spaniards, returned to Jerusalem. he visits Gaul and Britain: On his return, James visited the Gauls and the Britains, and the towns of the Veneti, where he preached; and he returned to Jerusalem, intending to consult the Blessed Virgin and Peter on matters of the greatest importance... In the year of Christ 42... St. James, preaching most vigorously to the Jews (he had first been present this year at the consecration of the sacred house at Nazareth, he is killed at Jerusalem: in which the Virgin conceived God, with some of the Apostles present), having been beheaded by Herod, having recently returned to Jerusalem, gloriously endured a noble martyrdom on the twenty-fifth day of March. The disciples of St. James, by divine warning and the counsel of the Virgin, placing the body of their Master aboard a ship at Joppa, the body is carried to Spain: reached Iria Flavia, a city of Galicia, by a fortunate voyage. They erected an altar over the sacred body, and in sacred fashion Basilius, Athanasius, Chrysogonus, Agathodorus, and Elpidius (who, on receiving news that the body of their Father had been brought to Spain, immediately hastened to Iria) consecrated and dedicated it to the Apostle. In the year of Christ 43: After the body of their most sacred Master had been buried, seven of his disciples, made Bishops by St. Peter, Torquatus, Ctesiphon, Caecilius, Iscius, Secundus, Indalecius, and Euphrasius went to Rome: and having been consecrated Bishops by Blessed Peter, they returned to the southern parts of Spain, namely to the coastal Baetica... In the year 54: Caecilius preaches at Eliberis and round about, and shows himself admirable, and by his teaching advances the people entrusted to him in the fear of God and in faith.
[10] Such are the words of whoever it was — by no means dexterous — who stitched together that Dextrine rhapsody. Concerning the coming of St. James to Spain, we do not wish to dispute at present; nor to overturn the tradition of those peoples, which carries far greater weight with us than the assertion of that writer. but concerning the Bishops created by James, nothing is certain: Let us grant the ancient migration of the Jews to Spain which he alleges, carried out under the auspices of Nebuchadnezzar — of which not even the Spaniards themselves have been persuaded by the lengthy disquisition of Franciscus Bivarius, the Commentator on Dexter. But who would believe that so many Bishops were ordained by St. James in Spain, in the so brief a time he was there? Who would believe what Julianus Petri writes in his Chronicle, number 5, for St. Peter of Braga was a disciple of St. Peter the Apostle; that he distinguished metropolitan sees? The people of Braga can indeed boast that Peter was given them as their first Prelate by the Apostle: namely, as a teacher of the faith; whom afterwards Peter the Prince of the Apostles, or someone else by his authority, after many years of proven virtue and tireless zeal in disseminating the faith, made Bishop. What of the fact that certain learned men, and indeed Portuguese ones, making no mention of James, simply call that Peter a disciple of Peter the Apostle? So either Didacus de Rosario the author, or Stephanus Sampayus the translator, of the Life of St. Gonsalus of Amaranth, January 10, chapter 1, number 3: "Braga Augusta, today the Primate of all Spain, which merited to have St. Peter, a disciple of the Apostle Peter, as its first Pastor and Martyr." But we shall treat more fully of this Peter of Braga on the twenty-sixth of April, where we shall also refute the fable recounted by Bivarius, that he was the son of St. Uriah the Prophet and Martyr, of whom Jeremiah 26 speaks, and was deported to Spain with other Jews, and there died, but at length, nearly six hundred years later, was recalled to life by St. James, and made Bishop.
[11] We shall also inquire elsewhere whether Basilius, Eugenius, Elpidius, Agathodorus, Ephremius, Capito, and Aetherius — whom the Roman Martyrology records as having been crowned with martyrdom on the fourth of March in the Chersonese, and whom Dexter places in Spain — were Bishops of Spain. But the Greek Menaea for the seventh of March record that they were sent by Hermon, Bishop of Jerusalem, in the time of the Emperor Diocletian, into Tauroscythia: Ephraemius and others lived long after in the Tauric Chersonese, Basileus to Cherson. When the latter was killed by the impious, Eugenius, Agathodorus, and Elpidius were sent in his place; and when these too had won the palm of martyrdom, Aetherius was sent, who by the edict of Constantine saw to it that the adversaries of religion were restrained, though he himself was also killed by them on the journey; and Capito was given to the Chersonese as Bishop, who ended his life on the eleventh of the Kalends of January. certain ones in Cyprus. The Menaea say more at length that Nestor and Arcadius were Bishops of Trimythus, and rested in peace. Trimethus (τριμηθοῦς, as it is found in Ptolemy, book 5, chapter 14; but in the Ecclesiastical Notice which Carolus a Sancto Paulo published from Vatican codices, τριμηθοῦντων, that is, πόλις, the city of the Trimethuntians, just as the Menaea also have Ἐπίσκοποι τριμυθούντων; and in the other Notice, which the same editor received from the Library of the Most Christian King, it is called τριμιθούς, Trimithus) is a city of Cyprus. So that it is not easy to conjecture why the fabricator of the Chronicle of Dexter supposed that they belonged to Spain. What of the fact that in the tables of the Bishops of Spain compiled by Franciscus Padilla, neither is Ephrem found among the Bishops of Astorga, nor Basilius among those of Carthago, nor Capito among those of Lugo, nor is Aetherius found among those of Barcelona — unknown also to Hieronymus Paulus of Barcelona, as Elpidius of Toledo is to Franciscus Pisanus? And the Toledan Breviary expressly asserts that St. Eugenius was the first Bishop of that See.
[12] How ridiculous and forced, then, is the interpretation of the words of this Chronicle in Bivarius! Other things in the Chronicle, and its commentator, not approved. "He brings many disciples with him into Spain," says the Chronicle. The meaning of these words, says Bivarius, is not that he brought them all into Spain — men whom he had obviously converted before arriving there, for this is not true — but that he brought them within Spain, that is, from one province of it to another as he passed through. The same Chronicle, when it enumerates twelve chief disciples of James,
actually makes a total of fourteen, as can be seen here in number 8. What kind of itinerary was it, then, for James, that while preparing to return to Judaea to consult the Mother of Christ, who was well versed in all the mysteries of our religion, and Peter the President of the apostolic college, he should have made an excursion into Gaul and Britain? I pass over the carelessness either of the commentator or the printer, in placing the Armorican Veneti in eastern Gaul, when they are in fact nearly the most westerly of all.
[13] Of all writers, the one who pronounced most solidly, or doubted most prudently, The judgment of Mariana on the preaching of St. James, concerning the preaching and disciples of St. James was our own Joannes Mariana, in book 4 of his work on Spanish affairs, chapter 2, writing as follows: James, son of Zebedee, surnamed the Greater, having traversed Judaea and Samaria, came to Spain, on the authority of Isidore. And when the new light of the Gospel had been spread in that province, a temple was built at Zaragoza in the name of the Virgin Mother, at her admonition, as a belief handed down from ancient times confirms: it was not our intention to disturb received opinions. But when he had returned from Spain to Jerusalem — for what reason is uncertain — by martyrdom, in that city he was killed by Herod Agrippa, who was eager to inaugurate with a grateful spirit the kingship of the Jews recently received from Claudius, in the year of salvation forty-two, on the eighth of the Kalends of April, at the time when the Jews were celebrating the feast of unleavened bread during those days: the time designated by Luke for the death of James. His body, taken up by his disciples and placed on a ship, by translation, came to rest at Iria Flavia in the far reaches of Galicia (the town is now called Padron), on the eighth of the Kalends of August. Thence, in what year is uncertain, but on the thirtieth day of December, it was transferred to Compostela. The anniversary of the second and third events is celebrated with solemn festivity, especially throughout Spain. For in the month of March, at the time when he was killed, since all were occupied with the austerity and gloom of the Christian fast, the Fathers did not think it fitting to exchange mourning for joy. Around the year eight hundred, in the reign of King Alfonso, who was called the Chaste, by discovery, the sacred body, long buried in oblivion, was found by a heavenly sign, and honored with a dedicated temple, as is explained in that place. The devotion was increased when, shortly after, he granted King Ramiro victory at Clavijo over an innumerable multitude of barbarians, by miracles, and freed the Christians from a most grievous tribute, by which they had been accustomed to hand over one hundred chosen virgins annually to the Moors. Whence it began to be the custom, in the clash of battle, to invoke his name and patronage: by veneration; and Spain, being under a vow, was obligated to pay a measure of grain per yoke of land annually to the temple of St. James at Compostela. This custom, often alternating, was also often restored by the Roman Pontiffs through issued diplomas.
[14] It is reported that few disciples attached themselves to St. James during the time he was in Spain. Those who count the most name nine: Peter, Bishop of Evora in Portugal, for whom some substitute Ctesiphon, Prelate of Bergitanum, his disciples, a city that was situated not far from Almeria; Caecilius of Eliberis, Euphrasius of Illiturgi, Secundus of Avila, Indalecius of Urci (Verga, a town believed to be on the borders of the Basques), Torquatus of Acci, that is, Guadix, Hesychius of Carthesa, not far from Astorga: and lastly Athanasius and Theodorus, guardians (so report has it) of the sacred tomb, whose sepulchres are shown there on the right and left. whom others say were sent from Rome to Spain by Saints Peter and Paul, There are those who think all of these were sent from Rome into Spain by the Apostles Peter and Paul for the purpose of promulgating the Gospel. Indeed, Pelagius, Bishop of Oviedo, who wrote the history nearly five hundred years ago, makes Calocerus, Basilius, Pius, Chrysogonus, Theodorus, Athanasius, and Maximus the disciples of James. As for ourselves, since the antiquity of events deprives the written account of certain credibility, he himself pronounces nothing. let us leave the judgment on this entire matter free to the reader. So says Mariana (about whom, on another occasion, Baronius remarks, volume 8, at the year 688, number 3) — a lover of truth and an excellent guardian of piety, who with his learned pen put the finishing touch to the history of Spanish affairs. But it is neither necessary for us to confirm each thing he says with our own approval, nor to refute them with the arguments of others. Let it be permitted to consider not entirely established those matters about which a Spanish writer himself has expressed doubt.
§ III. St. Caecilius and his companions, Bishops sent into Spain by Saints Peter and Paul.
[15] Martinus Carillius, in book 2 of his Annals, at the year of Christ 46, writes that those err who suppose that Saints Caecilius, Ctesiphon, and their companions were sent into Spain by the holy Apostles Peter and Paul: since Paul was not then at Rome, St. Caecilius and the others were ordained not by St. Peter alone, nor did he come there before the year of Christ 58; and indeed it properly belonged to Peter, as the supreme head of the Church, to send forth apostles and heralds of heavenly doctrine into the provinces: by him, therefore, those seven were sent into Spain, as being more familiar with Spanish affairs. He says that Maurus Castella Ferrerius and Joannes Vasaeus handed down this account. Castella asserts the same in book 2 of his history of St. James, chapter 11. But it is not surprising that he, and other more recent writers, should hold this view, since they wish to maintain that the Chronicle of Dexter is of established credibility; in which, in the year of Christ 43, after the body of St. James the Apostle had been buried in Galicia, those seven men are said to have gone to Rome and, having been consecrated Bishops by Blessed Peter, to have returned to the southern parts of Spain. They consider this even more beyond doubt, after they learned from lead tablets found in some cave near Granada that in the second year of Nero — the very year in which Paul was brought as a prisoner to Rome — Caecilius and his companions suffered martyrdom. But we shall inquire below concerning the martyrdom.
[16] Joannes Vasaeus (whom Carillius cites as supporting his opinion concerning the Bishops sent into Spain, whom we have mentioned, before Paul had arrived at Rome) expressly writes that they were adorned with episcopal insignia by the Apostles Peter and Paul, but also by St. Paul, and sent to preach the word of God in Spain; as we reported above in §1, number 3, where we also quoted the words of L. Marineus Siculus affirming the very same thing. Franciscus Tarapha, in his work on the Kings of Spain, reports the same, but makes Paul come to Spain earlier, before the reign of Nero, which is contrary to all the ancients and, I am not sure, perhaps also plainly to the Acts of the Apostles as written by Luke. Under Claudius he writes as follows: James the Greater, Apostle of the Lord, in these times traversed all of Spain by preaching, in which he won only nine disciples... Paul, Apostle of the Lord, the vessel of election, during this time, having traveled through many cities, is thought to have sailed to Spain for the purpose of preaching, and coming to Narbonne to have converted many. Then concerning St. Caecilius and his companions under Nero, he has the following: A certain Torquatus, Caecilius, and Euphrasius, most holy Confessors of Christ, and they also on one day at this time in Spain, at the command of Nero, were crowned with martyrdom. All of these, moreover, having been ordained Bishops by the Apostles Peter and Paul at Rome, had been immediately sent to preach the word of God to the unfaithful Spaniards. So he writes. Nor does he explain whether they are the same men whom James had earlier converted. Mariana, cited in the preceding section, admits that there are some who think all of these were sent from Rome to Spain by the Apostles Peter and Paul for the purpose of promulgating the Gospel.
[17] Indeed, that this was formerly the accepted and by no means ambiguous opinion of the Spaniards and of the Roman Church is clearly evident from the Letter 64 of Blessed Pope Gregory VII to Alfonso VI, King of Castile, and Sancho IV, King of Aragon, which we have thought fit to give here in full. It reads as follows: Gregory, Bishop, servant of the servants of God, to Alfonso and Sancho, Kings of Spain, and their peers, and to the Bishops established in their dominions, greeting and Apostolic benediction. Since the blessed Apostle Paul signifies that he went to Spain; and since afterwards seven Bishops, sent from the city of Rome by the Apostles Peter and Paul to instruct the peoples of Spain, after his return from Spain; who, having destroyed idolatry, established Christianity, planted religion, showed the order and office to be observed in the performance of divine worship, founded churches there. and with their blood dedicated churches — as your diligence is well aware — how great a harmony Spain maintained with the city of Rome in religion and in the order of divine office is sufficiently plain. But after the kingdom of Spain had long been polluted by the madness of the Priscillianists, corrupted by the perfidy of the Arians, and separated from the Roman rite — first by the invading Goths, and then by the attacking Saracens — and the order of divine office. not only was religion diminished, but worldly resources too were undermined. Wherefore I exhort and admonish you as most dear sons, that you — as good children, even if after long-standing divisions — should at last acknowledge the Roman Church as truly your Mother; in which you may also find us as brothers; and that you should receive the order and office of the Roman Church, not that of Toledo or any other, but of this one, which was founded by Peter and Paul upon the firm rock through Christ, and consecrated with blood, against which the gates of Hell, that is, the tongues of heretics, have never been able to prevail; just as the other kingdoms of the West and North maintain. For whence you do not doubt that you received the beginning of religion, it remains that from the same source you should receive the divine office in ecclesiastical order. This the Letter of Pope Innocent directed to the Bishop of Gubbio teaches you: this the decrees of Hormisdas sent to the Bishop of Seville indicate: this the Councils of Toledo and Braga demonstrate: this also the Bishops who came to us recently promised to do, in accordance with the decree of the Council, through their writings, and confirmed by their hand in ours... He adds certain matters concerning the excommunication pronounced by Gerald, Bishop of Ostia, together with Rembaldus, against Munio, the simoniacal usurper of the See of Huesca... Dated at Rome, the fourteenth of the Kalends of April, Indiction XII, that is, in the year of Christ 1074, when the first year of Gregory had not yet been completed, since he had been appointed successor to Alexander II on the tenth of the Kalends of May, Indiction XI, in the year of Christ 1073.
[18] It is established, therefore, on the authority of this most holy and most wise Pontiff, that the Apostle Paul went to Spain for the purpose of disseminating the Gospel; a thing he had promised he would do in chapter 15 of the Epistle to the Romans, writing thus: St. Paul went to Spain, "When I begin to set out for Spain, I hope that in passing I shall see you, and be conducted thither by you, if first I shall have enjoyed your company in part." And a little later, more emphatically: "I shall set out for Spain by way of you." That he subsequently fulfilled this — though perhaps later than he had hoped when writing — is evident both from this and is solidly proven by our Thomas Massuet in his Life of St. Paul, book 13, chapter 7. There he also refutes the arguments of those who hold the contrary view, and especially the argument drawn from the authority of Pope Gelasius, whose words are quoted in Gratian's Decree, 22, question 2, chapter 5: "The blessed Apostle Paul is not therefore to be believed (God forbid) to have deceived, or to have been self-contradictory; since, although he had promised the Spaniards he would come, being occupied by greater matters through divine disposition, he was unable to fulfil what he had promised. For so far as his own will was concerned, he declared what he truly wished to accomplish. But so far as the secrets of divine counsel are concerned (which, as a man, he could not fully know, even though filled with the Spirit of God), he was prevented by the intervention of a higher disposition." Here the Pontiff teaches only this: that even if Paul had not gone to Spain, he would not have been lying, because it was not through any fault of his that he failed to carry out what he had promised, Pope Gelasius does not deny this; as the Gloss on that passage also notes. nor does St. Thomas; And in the same manner St. Thomas also excuses Paul in his Commentaries on the Epistle to the Romans, chapter 15, lecture 3. There, however, he seems to have thought that St. Paul was killed two years after he was brought to Rome as a prisoner from Syria. but other Fathers affirm it. The arguments of others carry less weight. The same Massuet, however, and Sigismundus Laurentius of Cremona in his Life of St. Paul published in Italian, produce many testimonies of the holy Fathers, by which the journey of St. Paul to Spain is expressly confirmed.
[19] After Paul, therefore, had visited those peoples — perhaps already somewhat imbued with the light of truth through James or his disciples — and had returned to Rome, then at last seven Bishops were sent to them by him and by St. Peter, either selected from the Roman clergy, or brought by Paul from Spain to Rome: for this is nowhere stated with certainty. From this one may refute what we cited above from the Chronicle of Dexter, that in the year of Christ 43, Caecilius and his companions went to Rome and, having been consecrated Bishops, were sent back to Spain by the Apostle Peter. St. Peter came to Rome in the 2nd year of Claudius. For Peter had indeed come to Rome a little before, as St. Jerome has it in his work On Illustrious Ecclesiastical Writers, chapter 1 — namely in the second year of Claudius, the year of Christ 42, in the consulship of Claudius himself for the second time and Caecina Largus — or at least at the beginning of the following year, when on the Kalends of February the second year of his reign was completed, in his own third consulship and the second of L. Vitellius. Baronius, in fitting the years of Christ to the Consular Fasti, differs by two years from the rest; and accordingly records that Peter arrived in Rome in the year of Christ 44, yet still the second of Claudius, in the consulship of Claudius II and Largus. But Paul was not yet at Rome at that time, St. Paul in the 2nd year of Nero, for he did not arrive until the second year of Nero, as St. Jerome writes in the same book, chapter 5. That was the year of Christ 56 according to the common reckoning; after the Passion of the Lord, as Jerome himself says, the twenty-fifth year: whence it is clear that the Passion of Christ occurred in the year 31 of the epoch now accepted in the Church.
[20] After two years, Paul, having been released from custody, set out for Spain through Gaul, and two years later to Spain, through Gaul, as is reported. or at least is believed to have put in at certain cities of Gaul on his journey. For concerning St. Paul, Bishop of Narbonne, whose feast is celebrated on the twenty-second of March, Blessed Ado of Vienne writes in his little book on the festivals of the Apostles: The feast of St. Paul, whom the blessed Apostles ordained and sent as Bishop to the city of Narbonne. He is reported to have been the same Sergius Paulus the Proconsul, a prudent man: from whom the Apostle Paul himself took his name, because he had brought him under the faith of Christ; and who, left by the same holy Apostle at the aforesaid city of Narbonne when he was proceeding to Spain for the purpose of preaching, having zealously fulfilled the office of preaching, was buried, illustrious with miracles. And concerning St. Trophimus, Bishop of Arles (whom Ado writes was ordained Bishop at Rome by the Apostles, in the same little book; but in his Martyrology he calls him a disciple of the Apostles Peter and Paul), Usuardus has the following entry for the twenty-ninth of December: At Arles, the feast of St. Trophimus, of whom Paul makes mention when writing to Timothy: who, ordained Bishop by the same Apostle, was the first to be sent to the aforesaid city for the purpose of preaching the Gospel of Christ. From whose fountain, as Pope Zosimus writes, all Gaul received the streams of faith. Although it does not follow from this that Paul himself was at Arles. But Ado, from an older tradition or perhaps from written records, testifies to this in his Chronicle at the year of Christ 59, which was the fifth of Nero, writing thus: At which time it is believed that Paul reached Spain, and left Trophimus at Arles and Crescens at Vienne, his disciples, for the purpose of preaching. We shall treat of St. Crescens on the twenty-seventh of June and the twenty-ninth of December.
[21] It is fitting here to transcribe from the Letter 1 of St. Pope Innocent I to Decentius, Bishop of Gubbio — cited above by Blessed Gregory VII — certain passages that pertain to this matter. That Letter was written on the fourteenth of the Kalends of April, in the consulship of Theodosius Augustus for the seventh time and Palladius, most illustrious men, that is, in the year of Christ 416. In it he writes, among other things: For who does not know or observe that what was handed down by the Prince of the Apostles, Peter, to the Roman Church, and is preserved to this day, ought to be kept by all, and that nothing should be imposed or introduced that either lacks authority or seems to draw its example from elsewhere? Especially since it is manifest that no one established churches in all of Italy, the Gauls, Spain, All the churches of the West and Africa were founded from the See of Peter, Africa, and Sicily, and the intervening islands, except those whom the venerable Apostle Peter, or his successors, appointed as priests? Or let them read whether any other of the Apostles is found or recorded to have taught in these provinces. If they do not read of any, because they will find none anywhere, they must follow what the Roman Church preserves, from which there is no doubt they received their beginning: lest, while they pursue foreign assertions, they seem to abandon the head of their institutions.
[22] From the words of these Pontiffs we consider it manifestly concluded: 1. That Bishops were not consecrated by St. James in Spain and assigned to particular sees; but that from the Roman See all Christianity there was founded, religion planted, the order and office to be observed in the performance of divine worship was shown; and that churches were established and priests appointed. 2. That those err who record that St. Caecilius and the other first Bishops of Spain suffered martyrdom in the second year of Nero, since they were not sent into Spain before the fifth year of that Emperor. 3. That Paul truly carried out his intention of going to Spain. Nor does Innocent deny this in the words cited; otherwise Blessed Gregory VII would have cited him ineptly, asserting that Paul had gone to Spain, while showing by Innocent's words that he had not gone: and by the same argument it would be proved that Paul had not even taught at Rome, which nevertheless is established from Sacred Scripture. Innocent was not separating Paul from Peter, says Massuet in the passage cited above, when he said that Peter alone — that is, the Roman See of Peter — had brought the faith to those western regions and established churches there; not other Apostles, who had their own chairs fixed, as it were, in certain places, as St. James at Jerusalem and St. John the Evangelist at Ephesus. whose helper was Paul. But St. Paul was long attached to no particular Church, but was only joined to the Roman Church under Peter in his last years. 4. It is concluded that those seven Bishops were not sent by Paul alone, but chiefly by Peter, perhaps on the advice of Paul, by whom, together with Peter, they were ordained. 5. Hence it is established that Paul returned from Spain to Rome, whence he departed to visit other regions of the Roman world, until in the last years of Nero he returned again to Rome for the triumph of martyrdom.
§ IV. When were St. Caecilius and his companions sent to Spain? The conversion of the people of Acci.
[23] Besides the authors and arguments we have already adduced, Rodericus Mendez Silva, an eloquent and inquisitive writer, in the book he wrote on the peoples and cities of Spain in the year 1645, chapter 5 of the Description of the Kingdom of Granada, when he treats of the city of Acci or Guadix, writes that St. Torquatus, the first Bishop of that city, [St. Caecilius and his companions were sent as Bishops into Spain after the year of Christ 58,] one of the disciples of St. James, was sent there from Rome by Saints Peter and Paul in the year 56 or 66. We think he meant to indicate that they were sent after the year 56, when Paul entered Rome, but before 66 — namely after 57, when Paul was released from custody. These facts were not unknown to the diligence of the Spaniards six hundred years ago, as the most grave Pontiff Gregory VII confidently affirms: and they were manifest, according to the testimony of Innocent, more than 1,150 years ago and more. Now we must inquire into their arrival in Spain and the events that took place there. Would that the Acts of those men had been either committed to writing or preserved! We have only a few details, handed down by reliable authors, and only after eight hundred years.
[24] Ado of Vienne, in his Martyrology for the fifteenth of May, has the following: The feast of the holy Confessors Torquatus, Ctesiphon, Secundus, Indalecius, Caecilius, Esicius, and Euphrasius. Who, having been ordained Bishops at Rome by the holy Apostles and sent to Spain for the purpose of preaching the word of God — which was still entangled in the error of paganism — from the fury of the people of Acci when they had come to the city of Acci, and were resting briefly on account of the weariness of their journey, and had sent disciples into the city for the purpose of buying provisions; immediately a multitude of pagans, who happened at that time to be celebrating festivals in honor of their gods, pursued them all the way to the river: over which a bridge of marvelous size and strength had been built, but when the Saints had crossed, miraculously delivered, they convert the illustrious woman Luparia, by the will of God it collapsed utterly, together with the entire multitude of pursuers. At this miracle the rest were terrified, and following the example of a certain great noblewoman, Luparia (who, divinely inspired, received them kindly and believed), they abandoned their idols and believed in Christ the Lord. After this, preaching the Gospel in various cities and converting many others: and bringing innumerable multitudes under the yoke of the faith of Christ, Torquatus at Acci, Ctesiphon at Vergium, Secundus at Abula, Indalecius at Urci, Caecilius at Eliberis, Esicius at Cartesa, and Euphrasius at Eliturgi, came to their rest. There remains to this day an illustrious miracle in commendation of their precious death. an annual miracle there. For on the same solemnity, at the aforesaid city of Acci, at the tomb of St. Torquatus, an olive tree, flowering by divine power, is laden with ripe fruit.
[25] The same account is given by Blessed Notkerus, the manuscript Martyrology of the imperial monastery of St. Maximin, and the most ancient Martyrology of the Church of Lyon, cited by Joannes Boscius in part 2 of the Bibliotheca Floriacensis; and, omitting the miracle of the olive tree suddenly producing flowers and fruit, the common edition of Bede. Petrus de Natalibus, book 5, chapter 3, records the same facts in other words; and adds that by the oil of those olives diseases are healed. Constantinus Ghintus, in his work on the Feast Days of the Holy Canons, says that the bridge which was broken for the preservation of the Saints was of marble: that Luparia (whom he calls Lupanaria, as do Petrus de Natalibus and certain others), having received the Saints into her home, built an oratory: that the Saints put in at a port near Acci; which we do not quite understand. Did they put in at a port that was not far distant from Acci? Or did the city of Acci itself have a port? where the city of Acci, now Guadix, was situated, Neither seems capable of being affirmed, since Guadix is situated at some distance from the sea, reckoned among the inland cities of the Bastetani by Ptolemy, book 2, chapter 6, as Ἄκκι, and called by Pliny, book 3, chapter 3, Colonia Accitana, and placed among the sixty-two peoples subject to the Conventus of Carthago. It is situated among rugged and nearly impassable cliffs, on the river called Fardes, in a most pleasant and fertile valley, and its territory extends for eight leagues, divided into fifteen villages, as Rodericus Mendez, cited above, has it. He conjectures that the name Guadix, which signifies "River of Life," was imposed on it by Muhammad Guadix, King of Granada, by whom he writes the city was enlarged and adorned around the year of Christ 1380. An ancient Episcopal See was established there by St. Torquatus, from ancient times an Episcopal See, whose Bishop Felix subscribed to the Council of Eliberis in the Aera 362 (as Garsias Loaisa has it), and Lilliolus to the Third Council of Toledo in the Aera 627, or the year of Christ 589.
[26] Furthermore, the fact that the people of Acci are said to have been celebrating festivals in honor of their gods when those holy Bishops came within their walls may perhaps receive some light from Macrobius, book 1 of the Saturnalia, chapter 19, where he writes: The Accitani also, formerly devoted to the cult of Mars, called Neton or Necyon, a Spanish people, celebrate with the greatest devotion a statue of Mars adorned with rays, calling it Neton. So reads the Paris edition of 1585, the Leiden edition of 1597 and 1628 from the recension of Joannes Isacius Pontanus. Ortelius, in his Geographical Thesaurus, under the word Acitani (where he questions whether they are the same as the Accitani), writes that the Accitani called Mars Necyn. Which reading is to be preferred, we need not inquire. Both words can seem to be derived from a Greek origin: the latter from νέκυς, meaning "dead person" or "corpse" — and whence more corpses and deaths than from Mars? The former from νῆτος, meaning "last," or νητός, meaning "heaped up" or "accumulated."
[27] In the history of the Translation of St. James, mention is made of another powerful woman named Luparia in Galicia, of whom we shall speak in its proper place. Franciscus Padilla, in his Ecclesiastical History of Spain, century 1, chapter 17, because in both cases a bridge — or a vault built over a culvert — is said to have collapsed and drowned those who were pursuing the Saints; Were there two St. Luparias? and because in both cases Luparia takes the lead, suspects that the two histories were confused by their authors, and that what happened at the Saints' first arrival is said to have happened at the second, or what occurred at the second is transferred to the first. This assumes, however, that the body of the holy Apostle was indeed transported to Spain immediately after his death, and not perhaps at the time when the destruction of Jerusalem was impending. The Chronicle of Dexter, whatever credibility it may deserve, recognizes two Luparias; for it says under the year of Christ 60: "The holy Luparia of Baetica was living, the daughter of the other Luparia of Galicia." Franciscus Bivarius, in his Commentary on the Chronicle of Dexter, at the year of Christ 43, cites a manuscript codex of the monastery of Mount Sion outside the walls of Toledo, in which the history of the arrival of the holy Bishops, the collapse of the bridge, and the conversion of Luparia and the people of Acci is narrated somewhat more fully than in the Martyrology of Ado; but he presents only a portion of it, which may be seen in his work. He also recites in the same place a hymn of St. Isidore on Saints Torquatus and companions, in which all the same events, and specifically the conversion and baptism of St. Luparia, are commemorated.
§ V. St. Caecilius came to his rest at Eliberis, not at Granada. Apocryphal writings found concerning his death.
[28] Because those seven first Prelates of Spain are commemorated together in the Martyrologies the memory of the arrival of St. Caecilius and his companions, on the fifteenth of May, Bivarius considers, and confirms with sufficiently probable arguments, that on that day the memory of their arrival in Spain is celebrated with an annual festival, together with the conversion of the Gentiles begun not without miracles. For each has his own proper day, on which his triumph of martyrdom is celebrated. Caecilius is venerated on the first of February; his feast day: Hesychius on the first of March; Indalecius in some places on the third of March, in others on the thirtieth of April; Ctesiphon on the first of April; Secundus on the second of May; Torquatus on the fifteenth, and Euphrasius on the sixteenth or eighteenth of the same month. On those respective days we shall treat of the episcopal city of each: here we deal with Caecilius.
[29] The Chronicle of Dexter, at the year of Christ 54, number 4, has the following: St. Caecilius came to his rest at Eliberis, Caecilius preaches at Eliberis and round about, and shows himself admirable; and by his teaching advances the people entrusted to him in the fear of God and in faith. More briefly, but with greater certainty, Usuardus and the Roman Martyrology record that Caecilius brought an innumerable multitude under the yoke of the faith of Christ, and came to his rest at Eliberis. This was a city of Baetica, more commonly called Eliberis, but by Ptolemy, book 2, chapter 4, ἰλλιβερίς, which is different from Caucoliberis; to which corresponds another city of the Volcae Tectosages in Gallia Narbonensis, ἰλιβερίς. The latter is called by Pliny, book 3, chapter 4, Illiberis, "the faint trace of a once great city." Livy, decade 3, book 1, calls it oppidum Illiberim. By others it is called Caucoliberis: in the vernacular Collioure or Colyure, a maritime city of the province of Roussillon. Franciscus Tarapha, in his book on the Kings of Spain, under Nero, writes that the other Illiberis of Baetica is now Granada; as also do Rodericus Mendez Silva and Franciscus Bermudez de Pedraza in their Antiquities of Granada, and both of these assign some legendary figure of fabulous antiquity as its founder. it is not, however, Granada: It is more agreeable to us to assent to the most learned Ludovicus Nonius, who was, during his lifetime, a most dear friend of ours, writing in chapter 22 of his Hispania Illustrata that Illiberis was not far from Granada, on that hill which is now called Elvira, whence also a gate of the city took its name — and not from a woman, as some fancy. But concerning Granada, which in the title of the chapter he calls a work of the Moors, for this is a work of the Moors, he adds the following: The city, however, is new, a colony of the Carthaginians, which some wish to have been so named from the kermes berry, which the Spaniards call "grana," found in outstanding abundance in this kingdom; others, however, from a resemblance to the pomegranate, which is also called "granata." For just as that fruit is full of seeds and packed with the densest grains, so this city, in the manner of a splitting pomegranate, has the most densely packed buildings: add that the inhabitants bear pomegranates as their ancestral insignia, to represent the etymology of the name. So says Nonius.
[30] Carolus a Sancto Paulo concurs in his Sacred Geography when enumerating the bishoprics of the province of Hispalis, or Baetica, where he has the following: Eliberis, or Illiberis, commonly Elvira, whose Episcopal See was transferred to Granada. which itself also recently obtained an Archbishop. Or rather, after Eliberis had been destroyed, after seven hundred and seventy-seven years a new See was erected at Granada, when that city was wrested from the Moors in the year 1492 by Ferdinand the Catholic, and an Archbishop was established there, Fernando de Talavera, as Mendez Silva records, and our own Joannes Mariana more fully in book 25, chapter 18. Padilla enumerates ten Bishops of Eliberis besides St. Caecilius, of whom the most celebrated is Gregorius Baeticus, praised by St. Jerome in his book On Illustrious Ecclesiastical Writers, chapter 105. The last is Centurius, who subscribed to the Sixteenth Council of Toledo in the Aera 731, twenty-one years before the irruption of the Moors into Spain. Whether the Council of Eliberis, which Garsias Loaisa records as having been held in the Aera 362 — some dating it several years later, more dating it somewhat earlier — was celebrated in this Eliberis or in Caucoliberis, some dispute: it does not concern us here. Martinus Carillius discusses this question in his history of St. Valerius, chapter 15, and shows that more writers support Eliberis of Baetica. Pedraza, cited above, enumerates twenty bishops of Eliberis, or Granada (for he considers them to be the same city), who administered Christian affairs at Granada under the Moors.
[31] The death of St. Caecilius, together with its time and manner, is considered to be indicated by Franciscus Bivarius and Rodericus Carus in the Chronicle of Dexter at the year 57, where the following is found: Some of these disciples of St. James, under Alotus, the judge of Nero, while they assembled for a Council at Eliberis, [St. Caecilius is said to have been burned with his companions in the second year of Nero, according to discovered lead tablets:] were burned in the flames, despoiled of all their own goods and those of their people, and dying nobly were crowned for the faith of Christ. And indeed both they and other more recent writers on Spanish affairs consider it sacrilege to doubt this matter; since, as Carus writes, the sacred ashes and half-burned bones in the very hollow furnaces and crematories of the martyrdoms, then covered over by the priest Patricius, were found with inscribed lead tablets containing their names and martyrdom — found by the supreme providence of God. And, what is pertinent here, on a certain lead tablet these words were written in the most ancient Latin letters: "In the second year of the Emperor Nero, on the Kalends of February, St. Caecilius, a disciple of St. James, a man distinguished in letters, languages, and holiness, suffered martyrdom in this Ilipulitan place: he wrote commentaries on the Prophecies of St. John, which are placed with other relics in the lofty part of the uninhabitable Turpiana Tower; as his disciples St. Septentrius and Patricius, who suffered with him, told me. Their ashes lie in the caverns of this sacred mount. Let them be venerated in their memory." These words are recited in the Commentary on the cited passage of Dexter by Bivarius, and by Gregorius Lopez Madera, who published an entire volume on that discovery and the authenticity of those relics.
[32] Although the examination of such matters ought to be referred to the judgment of the Apostolic See, since they pertain not only to the approbation of relics and the cult of Saints unknown to all antiquity, but also to dogmas of faith; nevertheless it is permissible to confess that neither these nor other particular matters that we have recounted have been able to satisfy us thus far. but he was not yet a Bishop in that year; For how could St. Caecilius have suffered martyrdom in the second year of Nero, when he was not sent as a Bishop to Spain before the fifth year of that same Emperor, or even later, after Paul had returned to Rome from Spain, as we proved above on the authority of the most holy Pontiff Gregory VII?
[33] Lest it be necessary to amass more arguments to refute those monuments which are said to have been discovered, the most weighty Decree of the Roman Inquisition, issued in the presence of Pope Urban VIII and confirmed by his authority, settles the matter. and the tablets declared apocryphal This Decree was published by Fabius Chisius, Bishop of Neriton, Domestic Prelate and Assistant of the same Pontiff, and Nuncio of the Holy See to the Rhineland and other parts of Lower Germany, with the powers of a Legate a latere — a man of outstanding piety, learning, and humanity — in the year of the Nativity of Christ 1641, the nineteenth year of the pontificate of Urban VIII, on the twenty-fifth day of August, at Cologne. It has seemed fit to insert it here as well, so that those who read these pages may understand that it was neither necessary nor perhaps even lawful for us to say more about those Granadan monuments.
§ VI. Decree of the Roman Inquisition, prohibiting the writings and other items found near Granada.
[34] On Thursday, the fifth day of May, 1639, in the general Congregation of the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition, held in the Apostolic Palace at St. Peter's, in the presence of our most Holy Lord, the Lord Urban, by divine providence Pope VIII, and the most Eminent and most Reverend Lord Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, General Inquisitors against heretical depravity, specially deputed by the Holy Apostolic See.
[35] Our most Holy Lord, the Lord Urban, by divine providence Pope VIII, attentively considering that no care holds the Roman Pontiffs more anxious and solicitous than that the tares and weeds of adulterated doctrine should not spring up in the field of the Lord in place of the pure wheat of Catholic truth; and that for this reason Clement VIII of happy memory, as soon as he learned that in a certain ancient tower of the city of Granada called the Turpiana, demolished in the year 1588 for the more convenient construction of a new temple, The tablets and writings found near Granada, a certain writing attributed to the most holy Apostle and Evangelist John, inscribed in Arabic, Greek, and Latin letters on parchment, had been found; and that afterwards in the caves of the Ilipulitan mountain, called the Sacred Mount, near the same city in the kingdom of Granada, certain books and lead tablets written in the Arabic language and in ancient characters, treating of various matters pertaining to the faith, attributed partly to Blessed James the Apostle and partly to certain others said to be his Disciples, Clement VIII forbade their publication in Spain; had been dug up in the years 1595 and 1596; he had, by repeated letters in the form of a Brief, commanded Pedro de Castro, formerly Archbishop of Granada, to abstain not only from passing judgment on such books, but also from publishing and disseminating them, and furthermore to enjoin and command all and sundry persons of whatever authority, in virtue of holy obedience and under penalties and censures to be imposed at his discretion, that they should not dare or presume in any way to affirm or deny anything concerning the said books and their contents, or otherwise to pass judgment upon them, since it was permitted to no one but the Roman Pontiff to judge or determine concerning the said books and their doctrine: and finally that he should search out from every quarter all materials pertaining to these matters, but ordered them sent to Rome, and see to it that they were forwarded to the Apostolic See together with the genuine originals themselves, so that after mature deliberation, it might at last be determined what should be established concerning the said books and tablets — so obscure, doubtful, and complex on account of the antiquity of the language and the character of the letters, far removed from present-day usage, that even the Archbishop himself confessed that he had found a great variety among the interpreters and no few difficulties. Considering further that his subsequent predecessors had with intense solicitude bent their minds to this same concern, as did other Pontiffs: that the aforesaid books and tablets, brought to Rome, might be explained and examined by men skilled in languages and learned theologians — well aware that no translations whatsoever could be subjected to a perfect and unquestionable examination and judgment without the originals themselves; His Holiness, following in their footsteps, labored diligently with the same care, and left nothing untried so that the said books and tablets might be transmitted to Rome for the aforesaid end and purpose.
[35] But since the outcome of the affair has by no means thus far corresponded to these wishes, Urban VIII, until this should be done, and since they are now being honorably cited by many authors in printed books, and by others in public sermons, even for the purpose of establishing dogmas, and are daily acquiring greater veneration as if possessing some divine and canonical authority; although most weighty men, skilled in languages, have raised objections and difficulties of great moment to the contrary, asserting that not a few things are contained in certain of the said writings and tablets which savor of impiety, superstition, and error; all those things, therefore His Holiness, wishing in the meantime to take precautions lest under the fictitious name of the Apostles and their Disciples, adulterated doctrines should perhaps creep into the Church of God, after grave and mature deliberation, and having heard the votes of the most Eminent and most Reverend Lord Cardinals, General Inquisitors against heretical depravity, on these matters, decreed that the aforesaid books, writings, and tablets, by whatever name called, should be suspended, and by the force of the present Decree suspends them: and entirely prohibits any credence being given to them, or any veneration or worship being paid to them or to their translations or interpretations; and writings composed expressly about them, until the Apostolic See should define what is to be held and followed, both concerning the quality and doctrine of the tablets and concerning the truth and fidelity of the translations and interpretations. Likewise it suspends entirely and prohibits all books, treatises, responses, consultations, commentaries, glosses, additions, or annotations, and any other works whatsoever, whether only handwritten or printed, which treat expressly of the said tablets and writings, it suspends and prohibits: and declares that they may neither be read nor retained; but commands that they be immediately handed over to the local Ordinaries or to the Inquisitors of heretical depravity, until it shall seem fit to the Apostolic See to determine otherwise.
[36] If, however, there be any books, treatises, or any other works, whether manuscript or printed, things said incidentally elsewhere about them, which pertain indeed to other subjects but incidentally or in passing make mention of the said tablets or their doctrine, from all of these likewise, with respect to that part, it wholly abrogates and decrees to be abrogated all credence and authority, and orders such books and treatises to be expunged; it orders them expunged: otherwise they are to be reckoned among the suspended and prohibited, until they are purged. Furthermore, because learned men are said to have been sometimes individually summoned at Granada by the aforesaid Archbishop, and elsewhere by others, for the purpose of interpreting, confirming, or otherwise in any manner explaining the said tablets; His Holiness declares that those convocations, assemblies, it forbids consultations to be held about them, sessions, consultations, opinions, and judgments, if any have followed therefrom, were and are of absolutely no weight or authority; and strictly forbids the like to be done hereafter. Finally, he commands all and sundry of the faithful of Christ, of whatever state, condition, dignity, and preeminence, however exalted, and even if individual and specific mention should be made of them, or anything to be published for their approbation: that they shall not in the future dare to write anything, principally or incidentally, in approval of the said books or tablets, or to print what has been written by themselves or by others, or otherwise to disseminate it, or to cause it to be written, printed, or disseminated, or to translate the said books and tablets from Arabic or any other language into any other whatsoever; or in books, sermons, lectures, congregations, consultations, or responses given orally or in writing, to treat of the same or their doctrine, or to cite authors who treat of them with respect to that part. If any, however, should have a copy of the said tablets, or any part of them, they are obliged to hand it over to the local Ordinaries or to the Inquisitors, as aforesaid, and may not hereafter make or cause to be made another copy. And thus it was decreed, and it was commanded to be inviolably observed by all throughout the world.
[37] Transgressors, moreover, whether ecclesiastical or lay, of whatever state, rank, condition, dignity, penalty established against transgressors, of whatever order, or preeminence, however worthy of special note, it subjected ipso facto to excommunication, from which they cannot be absolved except by the Roman Pontiff, save at the point of death. Furthermore, it willed that Regulars should ipso facto incur the penalties of loss of their offices and dignities, and of active and passive voice, and perpetual incapacity for the same; and secular Clerics likewise the penalties of deprivation of dignities and offices and perpetual incapacity for them: and it commanded that laypeople, besides excommunication, should be coerced with other penalties, even pecuniary and corporal, to be inflicted at the discretion of the Ordinaries or the said Inquisitors, according to the measure of the offense. Printers also shall be punished by the same penalties, if they have printed anything from among those things prohibited or suspended above; and moreover they shall forfeit everything printed. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary. And lest ignorance of the foregoing might be claimed by anyone, it willed that this Decree, or a copy of it, posted on the doors of the Basilicas of St. John Lateran and the Prince of the Apostles in Rome, and at the edge of the Campo dei Fiori, should bind and affect all just as if it had been personally served on each individual. Joannes Thomasius, Notary of the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition.
In the year of the Lord one thousand six hundred and forty-one, in the ninth Indiction, in the eighteenth year of the pontificate of our most Holy Lord Urban, by divine providence Pope VIII;
on the thirteenth day of the month of May, the above-mentioned letter or Decree was posted and published on the doors of the Basilicas of St. John Lateran and the Prince of the Apostles in Rome, and at the edge of the Campo dei Fiori, The Decree published at Rome in the year 1641. as is customary, by me, Giovanni Battista Ricci, courier of our aforesaid most Holy Lord the Pope and of the Holy Office.
§ VII. The apocryphal writings of St. Caecilius, his feast day, and his relics.
[38] It would scarcely be worthwhile to inquire into the writings of St. Caecilius, which, cited or seen by none of the ancients, have been eagerly celebrated for fifty years now by the great zeal of Spanish writers, but have been declared apocryphal by the Decree of the Roman Inquisition and the judgment of the Pontiff himself: The writings of St. Caecilius are apocryphal; not in the sense in which Pope Gelasius, in the canon Sancta Romana, reckons certain works among the apocryphal — that is, forbidding them to be read in the churches, but permitting them to be retained and read privately — but rather, those writings which were found in the caves of Granada may not lawfully be possessed or read by anyone. Nor was our opinion of them any different before this Decree. The most learned old man, our Antonio Possevino, had already given his judgment in his Apparatus Sacer in these words: Under the names of Caecilius and his companions, Councils held in Spain by order of the Apostles, and written in the Arabic or Ethiopic language, have recently appeared, as if discovered in Spain (as has been written from there) on the Sacred Mount of Granada. Thence they were brought to Pope Clement VIII, covered with lead and bound with bronze wire: concerning whose authenticity, however, nothing certain has yet been established, so far as I know. And indeed among these was a Council entitled: the First of Eliberis; the Second of Ilepulitum — each containing sixteen large folios. Third, the Life and Miracles of St. James, of sixteen folios. Fourth, concerning the Kingdom and House of Hell, of sixteen folios. Of the same author, on Supreme Providence: another on Mercy: a third on Justice, and on all the things which God did in creating the world; which seem to contain Theology: a fourth on the Creation of the Angels: each containing sixteen folios. Moreover, attributed to the name of the same St. Caecilius, translated from the Arabic such appeared to Possevino: and contained in twenty-two folios, is a book inscribed: Miracles of the Faith, and on the Ring of King Solomon, dictated by the Blessed Virgin Mary to St. James son of Zebedee: which there is hardly anyone who would not think to be apocryphal. So writes Possevino.
[39] Franciscus Bivarius describes some of these books differently in his Commentary on the Chronicle of Dexter at the year of Christ 54, number 4: On the excellencies and miracles of Christ the Lord and his Mother, from the Incarnation of the Word to the Ascension, book 1. On supreme providence, mercy, and justice, which God exercised in the work of the Incarnation, books 2. On the angelic nature, book 1. On punishment and glory, book 1. On the life, pilgrimage, and miracles of St. James, book 1. To which add (the same Bivarius continues) the truly miraculous commentaries composed by the same author, among these certain things in the modern language of the Spaniards. on the Prophecies of St. John, which were found in the lofty part of the uninhabitable Turpiana Tower in the year 1595 — not indeed in the Hebrew, Greek, or Latin language, but in the common Spanish tongue which we now use, after so great a variation of words. The said man, eminently learned but who would have labored far more usefully in another subject, writes much more about these. What Christ promised in Mark 16:17, that those who believed would speak in new tongues, this he claims happened in this remarkable work — namely, the Prophecies of St. John (whether the Evangelist, he is uncertain), distinct from the Apocalypse, interpreted into the Spanish language, which did not yet exist, by St. Caecilius and illustrated with a commentary. Gregorius Lopez Madera contends that the same language now used by the Spaniards was always in use in former times under the Romans, although many Gothic and Arabic words were later interspersed: and he attempts at length to refute the arguments raised by learned men against those writings, tablets, and relics. But his own enormous volume on these matters was prohibited by that Roman Decree. We, as we said before, have held and continue to hold those writings among the apocryphal, until the holy Apostolic See should decree otherwise.
[40] Nor is what the same and other Spanish writers have handed down concerning the death of St. Caecilius, its manner and time, drawn from those same tablets, any more certain — namely, that they were killed by fire in the second year of Nero, the year of Christ 57. St. Caecilius (it is uncertain in what year or by what manner of death) For in the first place, the second year of Nero and the year of Christ 57 do not agree. Nero assumed the imperial power on the thirteenth of October, in the consulship of Asinius Marcellus and Acilius Aviola, in the year of the common Christian Era 54; and thus the Kalends of February in his second year fell in the year of Christ 56. According to Baronius, who places the death of the Emperor Claudius and the consulship of Aviola and Marcellus in the year of Christ 56, those Kalends, on which they assert St. Caecilius suffered martyrdom, fall in the year of Christ 58. And we have shown above that those seven Bishops, of whom Caecilius was one, did not come to Spain before the fifth year of Nero.
[41] Confessors indeed are Saints Ctesiphon, Torquatus, Caecilius and their companions called in the Roman Martyrology for the fifteenth of May, as we said above; yet, as Baronius writes in his Annotations for the same day, some of them are found to have been called Martyrs by certain authorities, although the Acts of their martyrdom are not extant. Indeed, concerning all of them collectively, Gregory VII declares above that they dedicated churches with their blood. A Martyr nevertheless, But by what kind of punishment, and in what year of Christ this occurred, is not clear. Joannes Marietta assigns the feast of St. Caecilius to the first of February. For that day, the Order of reciting the Divine Office in the churches of Spain, printed at Madrid in the year 1635, has the following in the Calendar of the Church and diocese of Granada: Of Caecilius, Bishop, Martyr, and Patron, venerated on February 1 with his companions: and of his disciples. Double of the first class, with Octave. The companions (on the authority of those Granadan lead tablets) were named by Philippus Ferrarius in his General Catalogue of Saints, writing thus: At Eliberis in Spain, of St. Caecilius, Bishop and Martyr, together with Patricius and Septentrio. which ones? Indeed, on the Granadan tablet quoted above, the latter is called Setentrius. But since those tablets and inscriptions have been declared apocryphal, we have also struck out these two names of Martyrs. Just as before, when the seven holy Bishops arrived in Spain, they had disciples, some of whom they sent into the city of Acci to buy food; so each of them afterwards retained some of these as their own, or recruited other disciples, as assistants both for domestic and for ecclesiastical duties. And from these perhaps were drawn, or certainly others from among the people, those whom the Church of Granada venerates as companions of his martyrdom.
[42] Concerning their relics we can pronounce nothing, until the Apostolic See shall determine something. They are not expressly repudiated by the Decree of the Inquisition: concerning their relics, nothing is clear. but since all their probability was derived from those tablets, which have nevertheless been rejected, who would dare to expose them to public veneration without the certain authority of the Apostolic See? The city of Granada has twenty-three parish churches, of which one is dedicated to St. Caecilius, A church dedicated to St. Caecilius at Granada. and it is believed that even during the time when the Mohammedans held power, it was frequented by Christian assemblies, as Joannes Marietta writes, book 1 of his Ecclesiastical History of Spain, chapter 14; Maurus Castella Ferrerius in his History of St. James, book 2, chapter 16; and Franciscus Bermudez de Pedraza, book 3 of his Antiquities of Granada, chapter 15, who in the whole of book 4 treats of the Ilipulitan Mount and the relics and other monuments found thereon, and the writings of St. Caecilius, which (as we have said) are to be counted among the apocryphal, until the Apostolic See should render a different judgment concerning them. And indeed we have recently learned that those tablets and other monuments found near Granada have been transported to Rome, The writings found at Granada are now being examined. and are being gradually examined there by learned men. We have also seen a book published in the year 1632 by Adam Centurione, son of Giovanni Battista, grandson of Marco, Marquis of Estepa, in the Spanish language, dedicated to the Archbishop of Granada, President of Castile, which bears this title: Information for the History of the Sacred Mount, called the Valley of Paradise, in antiquity Ilipulitan, near Granada: where the ashes of St. Caecilius, St. Ctesiphon, St. Hiscius — disciples of the Apostle and sole Patron of Spain, James — and the relics of other Saints who were their disciples, and books engraved on lead tablets, were found. Part One. Whether he afterwards published a second part, or further investigation, we do not know.