ON ST. Adeodatus
Notice from Ferrarius and Castiglione.
Adeodatus, Confessor of Galliano, in the district of Milan (St.)
BY THE AUTHOR J. B. S.
[1] Hither has St. Adeodatus been remitted from the 23rd of June, and from the 25th of the same month, on which day he is mentioned by Galesinio, Molanus, and Ferrarius in the General Catalogue. But the same one here, in his other Catalogue of the Saints of Italy, placed St. Adeodatus on this 2nd of July, This Saint marked on various days, with this very brief elogium, indicating the reason of that matter: St. Adeodatus, priest, who, in the fourth consulship of Probus the Younger, when he had lived about 85 years, departed from life on the 9th of the Kalends of July, as his epitaph informs, buried in the church of St. Vincent of Galliano near the village of Cantù of the district of Milan, close to Como; there he is venerated on the 6th of the Nones of July, on which day his body was translated in the same church. Long ago Papebroch wished the obscure marks of time noted in the epitaph to be more distinctly explained. But that would have been attempted in vain. The first to have unearthed that epitaph, engraved on a rude stone and in exotic characters, seems to have been Carlo from the basilica of St. Peter, Bishop of Novara, according to Castiglione, who, equally with Ferrarius, not only did not explain those marks, but reported both the epitaph and the other inscription of the translation in different ways, so that the later Castiglione omitted the more necessary chronological marks.
[2] Thus Ferrarius rendered the epitaph: HERE RESTS ST. ADEODATUS, PRIEST, from the ancient epitaph reported in different ways, WHO LIVED IN THE WORLD ABOUT 85 YEARS, DEPOSITED IN A SHROUD ON THE 9TH OF THE KALENDS OF JULY, IN THE 4TH CONSULSHIP OF PROBUS THE YOUNGER, PERPETUAL CONSUL, INDICTION III. But Castiglione, among the Milanese Antiquities, treating of his Vincentian basilica on page 130, seems to have wished to restore it to integrity: HERE RESTS IN PEACE ST. M. ADEODATUS, PRIEST, WHO LIVED IN THE WORLD 85 YEARS PLUS OR MINUS. DEPOSITED IN A SHROUD ON THE 9TH OF THE KALENDS OF JULY. Which of the two read rightly, what arbiter will determine? Furthermore the times of the Saint, how they may be gathered, I for my part do not perceive. That Probus, fourth Consul, nay Consul in perpetuity, Ferrarius did not investigate, but Castiglione slips off into commonplaces, while he recounts many things all too well known concerning the bodies of Saints resting in various places; led to this alone, that his Vincentian basilica might claim for itself something of the sacred relics of St. Adeodatus. Better, I think, and more candidly, he would have written with Ferrarius: Nothing else could be known of him.
[3] which Castiglione further entangles from elsewhere. Equally does anything conduce to the explanation of the matter, which on the cited page Castiglione adduces, the testimony of a very ancient manuscript Martyrology of the monks of St. Francis, in which things quite different and contrary to the cited inscriptions are handed down. Have the text, concerning which from the very beginning you may pass judgment: On the 31st of June, the translation of the venerable Adeodatus, priest and confessor. He died on the 9th of the Kalends of July, and lies in the church of St. Vincent of Cantù of Galliano. He was 35 years old. Concerning him there is a glorious legend. Whatever this pretended very ancient MS. Martyrology be called, it was similar to that which Galesinio so often re-echoes to us. For indeed here almost all things deceive, at least they are diametrically opposed to the inscriptions. But that he sought out the legend, and did not find it, the praised Bishop of Novara testifies, says Castiglione in the same place, so that consequently his sanctity, age, and day of translation had to be proved from the aforesaid inscriptions, engraved on a rude stone in exotic characters, which not even they could be rendered faithfully enough. For the rest, that I may not linger longer in discussing these trifles rather than in illustrating the Saint, I subjoin the other inscription concerning his translation.
[4] Nor does the other inscription explain the matter, Hear Ferrarius again: ON THE 6TH OF THE NONES OF JULY, THE TRANSLATION OF ST. ADEODATUS AND THE DEDICATION OF THIS CHURCH, AND THERE REST IN PEACE OF BLESSED MEMORY ELISIASTICUS AND MANIFREDUS, PRIESTS, AND SAVINUS, DEACON: WHO WERE FOUND NEAR THE SEPULCHER OF THE SAME ST. ADEODATUS IN THE YEAR 1056, INDICTION VI, IN THE TIME OF LORD ERIBERTUS OF ANTIMIANO, SUBDEACON OF THE MILANESE CHURCH AND CUSTODIAN OF THIS CHURCH OF ST. VINCENT, OR IN THE TIME OF KING HENRY. The difference in Castiglione is, that instead of "of this church" at the beginning, he reads "of the same"; instead of "Elisiasticus," better perhaps, "Ecdesius." Moreover, in Castiglione the year 1056 is not expressed, but simply is read "in the year of the Lord," from which last abbreviated word someone may have formed 1056. Finally, the words "of the church of St. Vincent" are missing in Castiglione, perhaps that he might favor his own basilica, although from the cited Martyrology the same is dug out. From the time of King Henry nothing is settled, since in the eleventh century there were three of the same name; so that if in truth the year be not distinctly appended, it cannot be known at all when the translation was made. If by Eribertus were designated the Bishop, it would not be far from the year 1056. Something of light it would bring to one groping, the marked Indiction VI, if it could be reconciled with the year 1056. Let us confess, therefore, that the aforesaid inscriptions are imperfect, many things doubtful and obscure; nothing solid, except the proof of the ancient cult exhibited to St. Adeodatus, relying on which, we have thought that he should be placed in these Acts.
[5] Other things Castiglione entangled, when on page 128 he wished with many arguments to persuade nor was this Saint the son of St. Augustine. that the aforesaid St. Adeodatus was the son of St. Augustine. Wherefore, he says, let me not allow my opinion in this part to be wanting: I would not without reason have judged that the Blessed Adeodatus resting in our church is he who was initiated by St. Simplician, not by baptism but by catechism, together with the Blessed Augustine and Alypius, and baptized with the same by St. Ambrose, etc. It is clear that no other Adeodatus is here indicated than the son of St. Augustine, whom it is established was baptized with his father and Alypius by St. Ambrose. But deservedly is Castiglione thrashed by Thomas de Herrera in the Augustinian Alphabet, page 2, thus writing: Castiglione, in his book on the Milanese antiquities, believes him to be the Blessed Adeodatus, whose body rests at Milan in the Vincentian church, and somewhere his feast is held on the 23rd of June, and a chapel was consecrated to his name in the aforesaid temple. Yet this author is mistaken, because our Adeodatus neither died at Milan, nor was initiated into the priesthood, which two things are attributed to the Milanese Adeodatus. The rest I do not pursue, nor does it please me to dispute with Castiglione, what and how much of the sacred relics of St. Adeodatus was ever, or now remains, in his Vincentian basilica.