ON S. SULPICIUS SEVERUS, ARCHBISHOP OF BOURGES.
Year of Christ 591.
CommentarySulpicius Severus, Bishop of Bourges in Gaul (S.)
BHL Number: 7934
From various sources.
Section I. The deeds of S. Sulpicius Severus.
[1] We said on 17 January that two men named Sulpicius presided over the Church of Bourges: the first surnamed Severus, the other Pius, whose Life we gave there. Although the deeds of both are found confused by many writers, since when they found only two Sulpicii, Bishops of Bourges, in the sacred records, and judged one of them absolutely to have been a disciple of S. Martin, they concluded that the other, surnamed Pius, had lived in the times of King Guntram. But we shall presently treat of that more ancient Sulpicius, the disciple of S. Martin. Two SS. Sulpicii: Pius on 17 January, Severus on the 29th. Besides him, two Sulpicii flourished at Bourges with the praise of piety: the first at the end of the sixth century, under the reign of Guntram; the other somewhat later, under Clothar II and Dagobert. The first is venerated on this 29th of January; the second, called Pius, is venerated on the 17th. The errors of various writers concerning both were related and refuted at greater length in section 1 of the Life of Sulpicius Pius. Here we shall merely collect what is proper to that first Sulpicius (since there is no point in going over that discussion again): for his acts, as far as we have yet discovered, have not been committed to writing.
[2] We have read no ancient author who gave the surname Severus to this Sulpicius: it seems to have arisen from writers of a later age who thought him the disciple of S. Martin. For the fact that Jean Chenu of Bourges writes his surname that the disciple of S. Martin was called Severus by his proper name, and Sulpicius by surname; while this man was called Sulpicius by his proper name and Severus by surname -- is of little weight: for let us grant that that Severus was called Sulpicius by surname, which Gennadius writes in chapter 19, and Victor Giselin in his Life of Sulpicius Severus either refutes or otherwise explains with plausible argumentation; but whence will he establish the surname Severus for the Bishop Sulpicius? We have nevertheless retained this, both to distinguish him from Pius and because it has become established.
[3] His name is inscribed in the Roman Martyrology on the fourth day before the Kalends of February thus: "At Bourges, of S. Sulpicius Severus, Bishop, his feast day, distinguished for his virtues and learning." The old Cologne Martyrology: "At Bourges, of S. Severus, Bishop and Confessor, disciple of S. Martin the Bishop." The same is expressed by the Carthusians of Cologne and Molanus in the additions to Usuard, Felici, Canisius, and the manuscript Florarium. Constantine Ghini also says he was a disciple of S. Martin, and the twenty-seventh Bishop of Bourges, and that he was present at the second Council of Macon; although it is established that that Council of Macon, to which Bishop Sulpicius subscribed, was held by the order of King Guntram in the year 585; and the published catalogues of the Bishops of Gaul make S. Leo, who occupied the see in the times of Pope S. Leo and attended many councils, only the twelfth Bishop of that See; how then could Severus, if he sat before him, have been the twenty-seventh? But in those same catalogues the twenty-seventh is placed as the Sulpicius who is the subject of our present discussion, a contemporary of S. Gregory of Tours.
[4] Du Saussay records not the feast day of Sulpicius on this day, but the translation; for he writes thus: "On the same day at Bourges, the translation of S. Sulpicius surnamed Severus, Bishop and Confessor of that same city, whose feast day dawned to be solemnly celebrated on the seventeenth day of this month." But on the 17th he recorded not this Sulpicius, but the Pius. Concerning the translation of Severus we shall presently speak.
[5] Who this Sulpicius was and by what manner he was elevated to the episcopate, S. Gregory of Tours records, book 6, History of the Franks, chapter 39: "Remigius, Bishop of Bourges, died: after whose passing, the greater part of the city was burned by a great fire; and those things which had been left from the pillage perished there. After this Sulpicius was pre-elected to the priesthood in that same city, Election to the episcopate, with simoniacs rejected, with the favor of King Guntram. For when many were offering gifts, the King is reported to have answered those who were seeking the episcopate thus: 'It is not the custom of our sovereignty to sell the priesthood for a price; nor is it yours to purchase it with rewards: lest both we be branded with the infamy of sordid gain and you be compared to Simon Magus. But according to God's foreknowledge, Sulpicius shall be your Bishop.' And so, having been brought to the clerical state, he received the episcopate of the aforesaid Church. For he is a very noble man, one of the foremost Senators of Gaul, well instructed in letters and rhetoric, and in the metrical arts second to none."
[6] From this it is clear that Wion is greatly mistaken, who, although he establishes two Sulpicii called Pius on 17 January, of whom one, the successor of S. Austregisilus, is venerated on 16 January, and the other, somewhat older, on the 17th (which older one, as we said there, is called Severus by others, He had not previously been a monk, Pius by Wion himself, and is venerated on this 29th day, while the other on the 17th), yet writes that the older one was a monk, then Abbot, in the monastery of S. Nicetius at Lyon. But S. Gregory of Tours says he was one of the foremost Senators of Gaul and was then for the first time brought to the clerical state. Hugh Menard acknowledges that he was still a Senator when he was elected to the episcopate.
[7] Baronius believes that election took place in the year 587. But from the date of the second Council of Macon, to which he subscribed already as Bishop, it is clear that That election was made in the year 584 it did not take place after the year 585. And Gregory of Tours himself indicates the time, for after having written what we have just related about the election of Sulpicius in book 6, chapter 39, he adds in chapter 40: "An ambassador named Oppila came from Spain, bearing many gifts to King Chilperic. For the King of Spain feared that Childebert might stir himself to avenge the wrong done to his sister, because Leuvigild had seized his son Hermenegild, who had married King Childebert's sister, and had thrown him into prison." Now both Chilperic was killed in the year 584, whom Leovigild was striving to win over to his side against Childebert; and Hermenegild was thrown into prison by his treacherous father in the year 584, and was crowned with martyrdom on the very night of Easter of the year 585: in which year his father also died. In addition, Bishop Sulpicius of the Church of Bourges was present at and subscribed to the Council of Macon in the 24th year of King Guntram's reign, the year of Christ 585. But Baronius himself reports in the same year both the election of Sulpicius and the death of King Chilperic: yet the latter occurred in 584, not 587.
[8] With what solicitude Sulpicius administered the episcopate is shown by the same Gregory of Tours, who, addressing him personally in the Preface to the history of the Seven Sleepers resting at Tours, which we shall give on 4 November, writes thus -- a most holy man, who was never accustomed to flatter any Bishop or King: "To the most blessed Father Sulpicius, by the grace of God Archbishop of Bourges, Gregory, unworthy Priest of Tours, sends perpetual greeting in God our Savior. Among the Poet's verses, the virtue and prudence of the Saints are praised under the figure of bees, when he says:
'The more exhausted they have been, the more keenly all Press to repair the ruins of their fallen race.'
This, He admirably cares for the salvation of his flock, most blessed Father, let it be permitted to have prefaced at the head of this letter, as I consider with what prudence, with what solicitude you strive to strengthen the state of the tottering Church and to repair its ruins. This you do not cease to accomplish by the shining examples of your own life, by the honeyed words of your exhortations, and finally by the deeds of preceding Saints brought forth in the midst. For hence it is that among other things your Sublimity has commanded my humble self (for the admonition of a friend is a pressing command) to commit to writing the manner of life and the end of the Seven Sleepers, who are said to rest at Marmoutier, whose fame most widely spreads far and wide, if I could find it anywhere."
[9] In order to quell the growing rivalries between Innocent, Bishop of Rodez, and Ursicinus, Bishop of Cahors, he brought it about that a synod was convoked at Clermont for that purpose. The same Gregory testifies to this, book 6, chapter 39: "This man," he says, "urged that the synod of which we have made mention above be held concerning the parishes of Cahors." But in chapter 38 he had written: "Theodosius, Bishop of Rodez, He convenes a synod for the peace of the Churches, who had succeeded S. Dalmatian, died. In which Church rivalries and scandals concerning the episcopate grew to such a degree that it was nearly stripped of its sacred vessels of worship and all its better substance. Nevertheless *Transobadus the Presbyter was rejected; and Innocent, Count of the Gabali, was elected to the episcopate, with the support of Queen Brunhild. But having assumed the episcopate, he immediately began to harass Ursicinus, Bishop of the city of Cahors, saying that he was retaining dioceses owed to the Church of Rodez. Whence it happened that, as the dispute festered over time, after some years the Metropolitan, having assembled with his provincial bishops and sitting in judgment at the city of Clermont, issued a decree that the parishes, which the Church of Rodez was never recalled to have held, should be recovered: which was done." Thus Gregory. Both the Bishop of Cahors and the Bishop of Rodez are subject to the Metropolitan of Bourges. Sirmond believes this council was held about the year of Christ 588.
[10] At last, in the 30th year of Guntram, the 16th of Childebert, the 7th of Clothar II, he dies, the year of Christ 591, Sulpicius died. The same Gregory, book 10, chapter 26: "Sulpicius, Bishop of the city of Bourges, also died, and Eustace, a Deacon of Autun, was allotted his chair." He is translated. Claude Robert testifies that he was buried in the basilica of S. Julian, but was translated to S. Ursinus, and that his feast is solemnly celebrated there on the fourth day before the Kalends of February, while throughout the entire diocese with an office of ten Lessons.
AnnotationSide Note: *others read Trusibaldus.
Section II. Was Sulpicius Severus, the disciple of S. Martin, a Saint?
[11] Sulpicius Severus was a great man, in birth, in learning, in Christian humility, The Sulpicius who was the disciple of S. Martin was not a Bishop, adorned with the most distinguished praises by S. Paulinus of Nola, a man most worthy of praise. A threefold controversy can be raised concerning him: whether he was Bishop of Bourges, whether he at some time held wrong beliefs concerning the faith, and whether he has been enrolled among the Saints by the Church. But unless this last point concerning the public honor which is usually paid to the Blessed is established, the other two are not of great relevance to our purpose. Nor did he die in heresy. Nevertheless, it is now almost universally agreed among the learned that he was only a Presbyter, not a Bishop; that he did not obstinately adhere to the error of the Millenarians, which in his Dialogues he seems to have followed; and, as Gennadius of Marseilles writes in chapter 19 On Writers, that "when in his old age he had been deceived by the Pelagians, recognizing the fault of his talkativeness, he maintained silence until death, so that the sin which he had contracted by speaking he might thoroughly amend by keeping silent."
[12] His name had been inscribed in certain Martyrologies, as was said in the preceding section, and about fifty years ago it crept into the Roman Martyrology, through someone's negligence. But it was recently expunged by the authority of Pope Urban VIII. Du Saussay, however, in the Gallican Martyrology writes these things about him: "On the same day in Aquitaine, indeed, enrolled among the Saints, in the district of Primuliacum, of S. Severus Sulpicius, Presbyter and Confessor, most illustrious for the praise of his learning and holiness, who wrote the deeds of S. Martin in polished style and expressed them no less in actions than with the pen; an outstanding cultivator of poverty and a most sincere lover of humility, whose praises, on account of his brilliant gifts of wisdom and his sublime way of life, S. Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, pursued with magnificent commendation." Peter de Natalibus also numbers him among the Saints, book 3, chapter 67, the title of which chapter is: "On S. Severus, Presbyter and Confessor."
[13] It is reported that Guibert Martin, Abbot of Gembloux (not S. Guibert, the founder of that same monastery, as Baronius supposed), wrote an apology for Severus, Apology for him by Abbot Guibert, which is said to exist at Gembloux and at Louvain in the monastery of S. Martin. We have not seen it, unless it is the same as that encomium of Severus which, written by Guibert, was once communicated from an ancient manuscript codex to our Rosweyde by the Reverend Martin of Saint-Trond, a Canon Regular in the same monastery of S. Martin; which, because it is very old (for Guibert is said to have died in the year 1208), we have decided to give here. It reads as follows:
[14] "Sulpicius Severus, first a disciple of the Blessed Martin, afterward Archbishop of Bourges, according to Gennadius in the book he wrote On Illustrious Men, or rather as is clear from his deeds, which I read while residing at Marmoutier, the writer says he was a monk, was born in the parts of Aquitaine and shone illustriously both in the learning of the liberal arts and in the nobility of his birth. And so, excelling in the twofold glory of lineage and of wisdom and knowledge, and -- what is the chief thing among men of this sort -- conspicuous for the virtue of moderation, when he had grown to the manly years of middle age, as a prudent man, perceiving that the world lies in wickedness, and regarding it as death and folly to live or think according to the flesh, having left his home and kindred and spent his possessions for the use of the poor, he betook himself to the Blessed Martin; by whom he was received graciously and thankfully, and without delay submitted himself to his discipleship; and while the holy man was still in the flesh, he lived in the greatest familiarity with him in the aforesaid Marmoutier.
[15] "After the most blessed Martin had been received into the secrets of heaven, this Sulpicius Severus, then a Bishop, who had always clung wholly to his discipleship, held the cell of his Father by inheritance, that is, as its illustrious pious heir and inhabitant, for five years. This Sulpicius, though very reluctant, the Clergy of Bourges drew forth from that cell, moved by the holiness and learning of the man and equally by love of the Blessed Martin his master, and raised him to be their Archbishop.
[16] "That, having been seduced by the Pelagians, he deviated in some way from the rule of the orthodox faith or that he did not fall into heresy is found absolutely nowhere except in Gennadius alone, and I do not know whether he himself read this somewhere or learned it only from rumor, which speaks both of what has been done and what has not. This, however, I faithfully believe: that this error of his did not diminish his merits before the pious Judge Christ, who mercifully pardons the penitent, just as in the Church we see that it did not obscure the glory of his holiness; since the same author who reports that he was deceived also testifies that he was corrected, saying that he imposed upon himself a penance, namely to maintain silence until death, so that by keeping silent he might thoroughly amend what he had sinned by speaking incautiously. Or that he did penance. And this must be all the more wonderful, because although he was distinguished in birth, exalted in dignity, a Bishop by office, and thereby owing himself to many, he abandoned public life, sought retirement, and condemning himself beforehand to a prison-like hiding place, and at the same time mortifying the flesh with vigils, hunger, and cold, he made satisfaction to God in a spirit of humility and a contrite heart. Who, therefore, unless he doubts the mercy of Christ, would dare to doubt, I do not say his salvation, but his very great sanctity? Faithful is the saying and worthy of all acceptance. And why should not his heart grow warm within him toward the love of God in that solitary silence? Why should not the fire of compunction burn in his meditation? Why should not the grief of his offense be renewed, while he devotes himself to nothing else? Tested by this fire, as it were, in the furnace of long trial, and sprinkled with the purifying hyssop of humiliation from the fountain of tears with which, through each of those nights -- that is, the recollections of his offense -- and that he died in holiness he watered the bed of his conscience, he was assuredly cleansed from his greatest sin and made whiter than snow. And so, in a certain sense passing through fire and water, he was led forth at the best time into refreshment. Therefore this fruitful tree, even if at some time it was carried toward the North when the wind of deceit stole upon it, did not fall there, nor did it remain there; but turned again toward the South by the blowing of God, there it fell at the end, and there it will remain without end."
[17] "But if my assertion alone on these matters is not believed, let the entire holy community of Marmoutier be believed, which celebrates the solemnities of his sacred deposition each year with a festal office: and venerated as a Saint, in the celebration of which I myself, while dwelling among them, participated both once and again, and observed it with the other Brothers on the fourth day before the Kalends of February, as it is kept, with no small devotion. Let the faith of so great a Church, therefore, be held as authoritative, as is fitting, and let that iniquity which brazenly strives to abrogate from the Saint the confession and beauty which the Lord gave him, and his exalted glory in the word, stop and seal its mouth. I give you thanks, O Almighty Wisdom, teacher of the ways of God, for in him you conquered malice, and did not abandon him when he had slipped into the pit and was placed in the bonds of sin; but standing by him amid the fraud of those who circumvented him, you freed him from the sinners who were the adversaries of your grace, and raised him to such glory that he is counted among the children of that same grace, and his lot is among the Saints."
[18] "Moreover, lest anyone be deceived through ignorance, or charge that I too was deceived and attributed the holiness of one to another, let him know that this is one Sulpicius and that is another, that he is different from Sulpicius Pius, whose feast is celebrated on the sixteenth day before the Kalends of the aforesaid month of February, in many churches. Both, however, were Archbishops of one and the same city of Bourges; and this one indeed, for the sake of distinction from the other, is called Sulpicius Severus; the other, Sulpicius Pius. The diligent counter of years will also find that this one is much earlier in time than that one, since this one lived in the days of the Blessed Martin, who was the third to preside over the Church of Tours, while that one lived in the days of S. Gregory, who was the nineteenth to govern that same Church. Let therefore our Sulpicius, that distinguished and elegant writer of the studies and works of the most blessed Martin, be judged worthy not of a word of reproach, but of the highest praise; who, setting the most splendid gem in the golden setting of brilliant and eloquent language, carried so illustrious and polished a mirror in the midst of the Church, that all good emulators, who carefully caring for themselves desire to be saved in truth, may most clearly perceive in it what is to be avoided, what to be sought, and how God is to be pleased."
[19] From this it is clear that for 400 years now the opinion had settled in the minds of many that the Sulpicius who is venerated on 29 January was the disciple of S. Martin. It will perhaps be permissible to suspect He seems to have been confused with the other Sulpicius Severus that both this man and the Bishop of Bourges who was a contemporary of King Guntram, being customarily venerated by the Church on the same day, when the deeds of the Bishop were unknown, were thought to be one, who was both a disciple of S. Martin and a Bishop. Or rather, when the monks of Marmoutier learned that, besides Sulpicius Pius, another Bishop of Bourges named Sulpicius was venerated on 29 January, whose deeds were obscure, they presumed that he was their ancient colleague, and under that name began to venerate his memory.
[20] These things about Sulpicius Severus we have been pleased to touch upon briefly, lest we seem either to have taken away from him his heavenly honors, if they have been legitimately bestowed anywhere, His Life, or to have bestowed them on one who did not deserve them. Baronius testifies that he read his Life in the Vatican Library, shelf 4, number 234. We have read this Life, transcribed from a Vatican codex written in the time of Nicholas V, number 1188, and sent to our Rosweyde. Besides the encomium from Gennadius and certain things from a spurious epistle of S. Augustine, which is found in the appendix of volume 2 of his works, it contains scarcely anything. If it were established that he was a Saint, we could bring forward other things about him from S. Paulinus and others.