Gumbert

ON ST. GUMBERT, CONFESSOR,

AT ANSBACH IN GERMANY.

8TH CENTURY.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

Gumbert, confessor, at Ansbach in Germany (S.)

BY THE AUTHOR J. B. S.

§ I. Various confusions in the Saint's name, dignity, and the places where he is venerated.

The name of St. Gumbert, variously inflected, marked on various days, once afforded occasion to many confusions, which to remove today is not so very easy. In our Acts, from various more recent Martyrologies, he is referred on the XI of March under the name of Gumpert, The Saint of whom, among those of the same name, it is here treated, as bishop-elect of Würzburg, and is remitted to this day. Again on the XVI of the same month there recurs Gumbert, bishop and confessor, who is supposed to be also ours. Then on the XX, Gudbert or Gundebert, priest in Germany, is marked from the manuscript Martyrologies, the Roman of Cardinal Barberini and the Neapolitan of Antonio Caracciolo, who has been here again translated, namely as a bishop, who lived and died a layman. But why he is recorded on days so various, who could sufficiently divine? Add the inflections of others into Guntbert, Guntpert, Gondebert, such as is venerated in the Acts as a martyr on the XXIX of April, Gundelbert, Gumbert, etc., which all pour mere darkness upon a matter otherwise very obscure, as you will presently understand. Nor perhaps is it improbable that St. Gumbert, bishop of Sens, afterward a monk in the Vosges, who was recorded in the Acts on the XXI of February, was wrongly brought to Würzburg by unskilled men. To remove these confusions, in some measure, we prefix this paragraph, beginning from the place where the Saint was formerly chiefly venerated.

[2] Ansbach, commonly Anspach, is a margraviate subject to the present king of Prussia, At Ansbach he was certainly venerated; the Elector of Brandenburg, occupying almost a middle territory between the dominions of the Bishops of Würzburg and Eichstätt, whose metropolis of the same name Francis Irenicus thus describes in the Exegesis of Germany, book 11, page 201 verso, where he calls it Anolspachium (elsewhere Onolspachium): Anspach, he says, is called by a corrupt word, a city distant five miles from Nuremberg, between the Franconians and the Bavarians, the seat of the margrave of Brandenburg, named from a certain small river which flows past the city, called Anolspach. This city was once under the dominion of the lords of Dornberg, from whom it came to the margraviate. Here St. Humbert founded and erected a church, who also, ending his last day there, laid up his relics. Why not "laid down"? As also St. Gumbert for Humbert? That that edition is sprinkled with many typographical errors, our Father Johann Seyfrid, professor of historical reading in the Academy of Würzburg, rightly observed before me, whose friendly and liberal help I have used in gathering those things which pertain to the Saint of whom here it is treated.

[3] In that city, therefore, in the church of the monastery founded by him, although his memory has been somewhat obscured, afterward collegiate, that he was buried and once venerated with the veneration of the Saints, the Life to be given below teaches, and Merian confesses in his topography of Franconia, page 44, from which some things will have to be drawn in §3. There, I say, the Saint was celebrated with a chief cult, however for a long time, namely now for two centuries, the Lutheran and afterward the Calvinian heresy raging, the traces of the Catholic rite have been almost abolished, and so the memory of St. Gumbert there, as also at Würzburg, has been not a little blotted out, as the letter of the Reverend Father Jacob Streinius, given to Father William de Wael, Rector of the College of Brussels, teaches. Behold the words of the letter: What Your Reverence inquires concerning St. Gumbert has hitherto exercised very many wits. To our forefathers we owe this worst occupation, to whom it was a greater pleasure to act laudably than to write. This is manifest, that his body, from which a part was stealthily taken by a certain N. N., rests at Ansbach, a heretical place, in the parish church, which was built by him, as may be gathered from Egilward, the encomiast of St. Burchard. Concerning the things wondrously done by him, his canonization, etc., there is a huge silence; nay, his name is commonly unknown. For his holiness two things make: one is, that the writer of the Life of St. Burchard not obscurely indicates certain benefits obtained through him when already dead; the other, that in the Litanies which the clergy use in processions, "St. Gumbert, pray for us" is found. To those asking who that St. Gumbert was, a bishop or a confessor, a monk, etc., no one answers.

[4] as a letter written to Belgium taught long ago. William de Wael had asked Streinius, being, as I said, Rector of Brussels, to supply information concerning St. Gumbert, or Cumbert, unknown among the Belgians, since about that time (in the year 1639) he had received the Saint's head as a gift from Queen Clara Mechelmans, widow of Theodore van Reynegom, once patron of causes in the supreme council of Mechelen, as we shall set forth a little more fully below; but from the cited letter of reply it is sufficiently clear that at Würzburg, at that time, the cult of St. Gumbert, though a distinguished benefactor of that church, was plainly neglected, which became known to Streinius from the Litanies alone. The letter proceeds: As regards the Martyrologies, I was able to see three in which that name is; those of Usuard, Canisius, and Walasser, which authors, on the XI day of March, make mention of him as bishop of Würzburg. Canisius and Walasser assert that, before confirmation was obtained, he was buried in military habit; confirmation being obtained, he was found splendid in episcopal ornaments. Indeed, in the Catalogue of our Bishops there is numbered as seventh, by some as eighth, a certain Hunebert; of his holiness no mention is made; nor, in my judgment, do all the circumstances befit that Gumbert whom the writer of the Life of St. Burchard praises, whose relics Your Reverence obtained. For what reason can be devised, why one who wrote after Gumbert's death should have been silent concerning the episcopal election and the miraculous burial, so well known to all?

[5] It is true which Streinius observed from the adduced most recent Martyrologies, Whatever various titles have accrued to him, as will be clearer below; nor is it less true that there was introduced (in the fifteenth century, I suppose) some confusion between some bishop of Würzburg, or another, and our St. Gumbert, which was adopted by John Gamans, even in the title of a meditated work, although it seems to bear a fiction on its front: for thus has the little leaf, transmitted to me by the praised Seyfrid, in which both other titles, and without doubt new confusions, have accrued. The title is: The divine Gumbert, from Duke of Franconia, count of Rothenburg, Lord of Onolspach, Vice-lord of the church of Würzburg, at last bishop-elect, but snatched away by death entreated for himself, yet clothed from heaven in the tomb with the episcopal robe in the year 800. These things indeed Gamans, always most esteemed by us; but whatever he, or the Martyrologies, or others have related concerning the miraculous mitres of St. Gumbert, most rightly does Streinius observe, that the silence alone of Egilward, whose words we shall give below, concerning the pretended episcopate, is to be made more of than the announcements of all the more recent Martyrologies, unless older sources be assigned, from which it can be demonstrated by sure arguments that that history flowed.

[6] I should believe that that history concerning the Saint's corpse, clothed with the episcopal habit, arose thence, he can be no other than the disciple of St. Burchard. that, the first fiction being laid down, namely that he was a bishop; since afterward, the reckoning being more accurately entered upon, the people of Würzburg found that a place could by no means be given to St. Gumbert among the bishops of their city, they devised a way by which the dignity of bishop could to some extent be saved, namely by saying that he was indeed elected, but, prevented by death, did not ascend the Chair destined for him. Something similar I judge is to be established concerning the duchy of Franconia, the county of Rothenburg, and the Vice-lordship of the church of Würzburg, all which were unknown to Egilward and to the author of the Life, who without doubt would not have omitted such distinguished prerogatives of the Saint, if he had ever possessed them. Let us hear the rest of the words of Streinius: Besides, since St. Burchard died in the year 791, but Hunibert or Chunibert is related to have been elected bishop in the year 832; who does not see that so great a distance of years does not befit that Gumbert of whose relics we treat, whom it is clear from the Acts of the same Saint to have been a disciple of St. Burchard?

But now, if we admit two Gumberts, the darkness is increased, since neither will our clergy be able to say which of them they invoke, nor will anyone else be able to indicate the sepulchre or tomb from which relics could have been plucked: but to me it is certain that they were taken from the one at Ansbach, who without doubt is he of whom the author of the Life of St. Burchard makes mention. These things Streinius rightly and truly, unless I am most vehemently mistaken.

[7] But another, and even greater, not to say inextricable, confusion is bred by a note found here in Latin and German under this title: The whole matter is more involved from other notices, The monastery of St. John, commonly called Unterwildberg, once of the Cistercian Order, situated in the diocese of Würzburg, founded by a certain Palatine countess, by name Gebra (who died in the year 1209 and was there buried). Whence these things were received, is not indicated; I have not found this monastery in the Catalogues of monasteries. Thus the note proceeds: Concerning the sepulchre of St. Gunibert there. Then: In the church of the aforesaid monastery, near the high altar, a certain sepulchre was found, which was always by the inhabitants thought and esteemed the sepulchre of St. Gumbert (whom they report to have been born of the stock of the dukes of Eastern Francia, a religious of the Order of St. Benedict and bishop of Würzburg, at last to have resigned this episcopal dignity, and to have betaken himself to this monastery, and there, for a long time having rendered his services to God, piously and holily to have died in the Lord); whence for many, nay for almost immemorial years, as also even in these times, both animals and not a few men, wounded by the bite of raging dogs or other venomous animals, and deprived of the use of reason, being led to the relics of the aforesaid St. Gunibert, suppliantly praying to almighty God, and taking food and drink beside the sepulchre of this Saint, have obtained the vigor of their former health.

[8] But he adds that the skull of that Saint, from which pilgrims were wont to drink, was shown a few years past; whether perhaps it was stolen and carried elsewhere, is not known. which seem to indicate another Saint; Then: Indeed I find as yet one Gunibert, born of the same stock, and once count of Rothenburg on the Tauber, he says, who at the petition of St. Burchard in the year 751 founded the monastery of St. Andrew, now called the collegiate church of St. Burchard; whether that aforesaid Gunibert was the same, and betook himself to the religious state, though diligent inquiry has been applied, I cannot be made certain. I do not wonder that that writer, whoever he be, here hesitated. What the praised Seyfrid wrote to me does not explain the difficulty. He himself saw in the ancient chapel of the ruined monastery of St. John, St. Gumbert painted on the altar in episcopal habit. Before the same altar he is said by the neighbors to have been buried. The sepulchral stone has many fissures and cavities: for the neighboring rustics, when they are seized by disease, are wont to scrape off some dust from the stone, and take it by way of medicine, often with the desired effect. In the same place, from iron chains, hang two stones enclosed in iron. On what occasion they were suspended there, what they mean, is not known. But the rustics, both in their own diseases and in those of their beasts, are wont to pour water over the said stones, and drink the same, and give it to their beasts to drink, health being often obtained.

[9] Whether here perhaps a third St. Gumbert is indicated, let the people of Würzburg see, but the inventor of such things, to whom we leave these knots to be untied. Of the Brussels skull, most certainly found at Ansbach and nowhere else, the discourse, as has already been said, will recur below. That Gunibert could very easily be turned from Gumbert, m being changed into ni, there is no one who does not see; but to admit a double or triple one, no reason hitherto sufficiently persuades. For what if the relics were translated from one monastery into another, whence both thought themselves to possess the whole body? But what the note narrates, concerning the episcopate of Würzburg left, and the Benedictine religious habit taken up, can savor of some ampler fable, or confusion, forged by an ignorant man, who, finding Gumbert both a saint and a bishop and afterward a monk, by no unusual disturbance of things, places, and times, summoned from the Vosges the Saint of the same name, before bishop of Sens, to Würzburg, whom we know truly to have put on the monastic habit from our Acts on the XXI of February, where Henschenius adduces several who in the seventh century, their mitres cast off, betook themselves into solitude, such as were St. Arnulf of Metz, Deodatus of Nevers, and Hildulf of Trier, of which last it was treated not long since on the XI of this month, of St. Deodatus on the XIX of June.

[10] To return to the Note, most patent is the writer's error; he is convicted of manifest error. for who can sufficiently understand that Cunibert or Gumbert, who founded the monastery of St. Andrew in the year 751, at the petition of St. Burchard, can be the same with that other, who was a monk in the monastery of St. John, first founded by the Palatine countess Gebra, who died in the thirteenth century, almost five hundred years after the death of St. Burchard? No long inquiry was needed for the impossible connection of such epochs to strike the eyes; just as Streinius rightly established, that Hunibert or Chunibert, though he had also been called Gumbert, who is related to have been elected bishop of Würzburg in the year 832, can in no way be connected with the disciple of St. Burchard, although this one were supposed to have prolonged his life even to the year 791, which we have shown to be false in the preliminary Commentary on the Acts of St. Kilian, number 14, and shall more fully demonstrate afterward in its place on the XIV of October. Wherever you turn, so are false things mingled with true, that to discern them one by one does not yet seem sufficiently easy. Passing over, therefore, all these confusions, let us endeavor to depict at least the one true St. Gumbert, of whom here it must be treated, and who was contemporary with St. Burchard, in his native colors, as far as it can be done.

§ II. The Saint's profession, cult from the Martyrologies, age, and Acts.

That we may set before the eyes of the readers the true and genuine image of the real St. Gumbert, it can be sought from no other source better than from a writer nearest to his age, The true image of St. Gumbert, such as exists, though he does not surpass the eleventh century, namely from Egilward, of whom we have treated also elsewhere, the author of the Life of St. Burchard, of which the tenth chapter of the second book our Seyfrid took care to have copied from the manuscript codex of the monastery of Amorbach, which was collated by us with the edition of Mabillon, century 3 of the Benedictines, part 1, page 709, the original phrase being preserved, from which Mabillon sometimes departed. The title of the chapter: Concerning the religious man Gumbert, converted. The text then is: There shone amid these things and after these things, without intermission, the light of so great a lamp burning with faith and love, shining with word and action, nor could it be hidden, a lamp placed upon the candlestick of pontifical honor, kindled with the fire of the Savior: whence very many flocked together from every side to the hearing of so great a teacher, of diverse sex, age, and condition, the soul also thirsting for the fountain of life. Of whom a most illustrious man, by name Gumbert, distinguished by every honesty of manners and nobility, was joined to his fellowship, that by his living-together and conversation, as by certain medicaments, softened from the swelling of secular pride, he might sometime be able to grasp the ascents of the highest philosophy, which is the contempt of the world.

[12] But because he who walks with the wise shall be wise, taken from the Acts of St. Burchard alone, as, on the contrary, the friend of the fool shall be made like to him; not long after he made over his estates, in which he abounded above all who dwelt in that region, into the property of St. Kilian; and presently, his arms laid aside, he renounced the world: and thus naked, bearing his naked cross after Christ, he began by no means to desert blessed Burchard. But these are the possessions with which he largely enriched the bishopric of Würzburg: Altimoin, Onoltesbach, each with revenues and appurtenances, of which the former, since it was once a most fortified castle, now declares its magnificence by its very ruins. But the latter, which is now a provostship of canons, that it was once a not ignoble abbey, even to this day the testimony of that province, inherited through many generations by the elders, does not conceal. Moreover the aforesaid elder Gumbert, from that time ever cleaving to the footsteps of a most perfect master, to the good beginnings of his conversation added successes so praiseworthy, that concerning his conversation the mouths of all everywhere resounded: This is the change of the right hand of the Most High!

[13] it shows that he was a layman, rich and pious, For the hearts of many were provoked to his imitation, so much that in a short time the church of Würzburg ceased not to be enriched with very many gifts and offerings of the faithful, until now, from a very small and poor one, it became, by the grace of God, a great and ample commonwealth, nor does the abundance of things yet cease to grow, the number of the faithful namely growing. To whose progress that apostolic saying seems not inconveniently to be adapted: Kilian planted, Burchard watered, but Christ gave the increase. But that same excellent man Gumbert, as once in the honors fasces of secular dignities he had proved himself strenuous, so after his conversion in spiritual conversation suffered himself to be held second to none among the followers of Burchard; ever undeviatingly aiming at his form, he more frequently ruminated that of the Gospel: Everyone shall be perfect, if he be as his master. He too, after the course of the present life well consummated in the service of Christ, according to the promise of blessed Burchard, possesses a sepulchre in the same monastery which he had bestowed on the Church of Christ. There sometimes, he himself interceding, the benefits granted make manifest how much it profited him to have followed the admonitions of blessed Burchard.

[14] who was buried in the monastery founded by him: You have here whatever can safely and securely be admitted concerning St. Gumbert, though handed down after two centuries and more; where it is asserted expressly enough that he was buried, not at Würzburg, nor in the monastery of St. John, but at Onoltesbach or Ansbach, in the same monastery which he had bestowed on the Church of Christ, and which in Egilward's age was even then a provostship of canons, or a Collegiate church under the dignity of a provost; once a not ignoble abbey, as even to this day, says the writer, the testimony of that province, understand of the territory of Würzburg, does not conceal. But how long the abbey subsisted, in what year it passed to secular Canons, has been sought by me in vain. But that in that church of Ansbach both the body of the Saint was buried, and either wholly, or at least for the greater part, was there venerated, is plainly established; but that thence was taken the skull which is preserved at Brussels in our temple, will be demonstrated by most certain testimonies below in §4. You see also that here is described not a bishop, priest, or monk, but a mere layman: again not a duke of Franconia, count of Rothenburg, etc., but a soldier, a most illustrious and rich man, so that consequently it can neither be desired hitherto nor understood, whence so many titles were affixed to him in the very Martyrologies, some of which assign a wrong position or place of burial; most announcing the Saint at Würzburg. Concerning their age, and so also authority, we shall here discourse in few words, when we shall have first attempted to conjecture some occasion of the confusion.

[15] The place of Seyfrid will to some extent be supplied by Bruschius, On the Bishops of Würzburg, that it was restored by Bishop Henry, thus describing Henry, seventeenth in order: Henry, count of Rothenburg on the Tauber, on account of the short stature of his body, from earliest infancy called count Hezelinus, and afterward also bishop Hezelinus, is substituted for his kinsman, called out of this mortal life, by the consent of the whole Clergy. He presided most wisely and most usefully for twenty-two years, five months, twenty days. He built and founded in the suburb of Würzburg the Collegiate churches of St. Stephen and St. John: but at Onoldsbach the magnificent Benedictine monastery of St. Gumbert, which in this our century is a college of secular Canons. Things not unlike these were related to me from the Chronicle of Würzburg by my praised helper, so that from that source these must have been received by Bruschius. More truly it is noted elsewhere that Henry did not found these, but only enlarged and adorned them. Someone might have read (as those were the centuries of ignorance) only the former words of the said Chronicle, where, finding the count of Rothenburg the founder of those churches, and at the same time bishop of Würzburg; but having explored from elsewhere that the true founder was St. Gumbert, connecting disparate things without examination, he may have judged that he was to be at once pronounced both count of Rothenburg and bishop of Würzburg: whence by no improbable conjecture you may deduce that that notable confusion had its origin.

[16] But moreover, since the enlargement and adornment ascribed to that Henry Hezelinus, count of Rothenburg, gave occasion for transferring his titles to the Saint. is most expressly referred to the abbey of St. Gumbert, still at that time existing, and subject to the Benedictines, as the words expressly sound; but at Onolsbach the magnificent Benedictine monastery of St. Gumbert; and that toward the end of the tenth century (the Chronicle has it in the year of Christ 995), it is plainly a wonder that Egilward should so speak, as if he treated of a provostship of Canons, substituted for the monks many centuries before: for if these things are true, in the eleventh century itself there must have survived monks there; but if in the same century Egilward lived, it follows that not many years before the monastery could pass to the seculars; which is another knot to be untied by the learned natives, unless Egilward be drawn back to a later century, which Mabillon opposes with various arguments, but here it is not worth the while to discuss it at length: to the Martyrologists, certainly later in age, and consequently preoccupied with confusions of this kind, we shall now proceed, the other things pertaining thereto to be discussed in the following paragraph.

[17] I have hitherto found no codex in which he is better and more simply depicted, The announcements of the Martyrologies, than in a manuscript addition received I know not whence, which is added on the XI of March to some edition of Belinus of Padua, which is extant among us, in these words: In the territory of Würzburg, of St. Gumbert, soldier and confessor. True likewise is the announcement of Wion and Menard on the same day: In the territory of Würzburg, of St. Gumbert the confessor, which seems taken from the other edition of Molanus, who there corrected what in the first he had written, Of Gumbert, bishop of Würzburg. But that simplicity did not seem to please the author of the manuscript Florarium, who about the middle of the fifteenth century melted together various eulogies, not to be adopted at once without severe examination; where to the Lübeck-Cologne edition, the Viola Sanctorum, Greven, Canisius, Walasser, and others, he paved the way to devise those things which we have already abundantly rejected. Thus indeed he begins very well: In the territory of Würzburg, of St. Gumbert, patron of the church of Onolspach: but the following, in which the episcopate is asserted, whence he borrowed, I for my part cannot divine. Thus he proceeds: Who first a most Christian soldier, afterward, the bishop of Würzburg being dead, was requested for the episcopate, although he himself requested and obtained the contrary from the Lord; for while the report was pending, in the intermediate time he died. But when he was buried, letters of the granting were brought: whom, when the clergy wished to honor as their confirmed bishop, by placing his bones in a more honorable place, he was found by all adorned in the pontifical robes, who nevertheless had been buried a soldier or layman.

[18] at first simpler, they wondrously grew, Here, unless I am mistaken, is the fountain from which the rest drew, following not the words but the sense. The beginning of the Lübeck-Cologne edition and of Greven differs a very little: In the territory of Würzburg, the birthday of St. Gumbert the confessor. First he was a most Christian and faithful soldier, to whom the administration of the whole bishopric of Würzburg was committed, which charge he usefully bore: but the bishop being dead, he was unanimously elected bishop by all. But he, reputing himself unworthy of so great an honor, from the Lord the contrary, etc. A little more closely to the Florarium adheres the Viola Sanctorum, printed in the year 1508, but after "administration" is inserted; and the government of the whole bishopric of Würzburg, as to a provident syndic, was committed; which charge he bore very humbly and usefully. But it came to pass that, the bishop of Würzburg being dead, the votes of all unanimously agreed on him, and a legation being sent to the Pope to request him for the prelacy; he himself not worthy, etc. Canisius, the position being omitted, roundly pronounces the Saint bishop of Würzburg, contracting the eulogy into fewer words. Galesinius abstained from the title of bishop, thus writing in few words: At Würzburg, of St. Gumbert the confessor, whom Ferrarius almost followed: At Würzburg in Germany, of St. Gumbert the confessor: most briefly of all, Dorganius in the Benedictine Calendar: Of St. Gumbert the confessor.

[19] It would be in vain here to heap up more authorities of the Martyrologies from every quarter, and they are marked on various days. since none but more recent ones occur, and most sound the episcopate, at least posthumous, which that neither Egilward nor the author of the Acts to be given below knew, is manifest from their silence; but for proving the cult the testimonies of many already adduced abundantly suffice, but the remaining indications of the cult, both in the sacred Mass and Ecclesiastical Office, and in the veneration of the relics, we remit to the next following paragraph. Why St. Gumbert is everywhere referred to the XI of March could be disputed, if even the least traces concerning the year or day of his death survived, at least if it could be known whether on such a day he was formerly celebrated in the church of Ansbach. Indeed I think the festivity was deferred hither, because on this day his solemnity is kept among the people of Würzburg, who probably transferred to themselves the cult abolished at Ansbach, choosing this day at their discretion, although perhaps on neither day did he lay aside the spoils of the flesh: which that it was certainly unknown to Egilward is sufficiently clear, so that consequently it remains doubtful whether the author of the Life found somewhere certainly noted the V of the Ides of March marked by him. That the Saint lived with St. Burchard is undoubted: that he prolonged his life to the times of Charlemagne the Anonymous intimates, since by him power was given to him of founding a monastery; but in what year at last he flew to the heavens is uncertain.

[20] The aforesaid Life of St. Gumbert, already more than once mentioned, was once procured for us by the most diligent and often-praised helper of our work, Father Johann Gamans, Father Gamans once procured the Life. who took care to have it copied from a notable parchment manuscript Lectionary of the library of the Fathers Conventual of St. Francis at Würzburg, and collated it with another manuscript of the Charterhouse of the same city, with Variant readings added by his own hand, of which by us such account has been taken that we have observed the more notable ones in the annotations, the minutiae not much pertaining to the matter being neglected, such as are the modes of writing in "ammonicione," "servicium," "cepit," and barbarisms of this kind. The things added from the Carthusian codex are enclosed in their own brackets. For the rest, know that the things which the Anonymous writer of the Life inserted at numbers 3 and 4 concerning the consecration of St. Burchard at Rome by St. Zacharias the Pope, are both digressions and foreign to the truth, as has been shown elsewhere, and will be more fully said at the Life of St. Burchard itself on the XIV of October, where it will again be proved that he was inaugurated not at Rome, but by St. Boniface himself in Germany. The whole matter, after the manner of very many Legends, is rather an oration or panegyric to be recited to the people, than a historical series of the Life, whose whole substance we have already given from Egilward; so that the composer of this oration cannot be older at least than the twelfth century, in this to be praised that he rightly placed the episcopate of St. Gumbert.

* the fasces.

§ III. The other monuments of the cult; the relics, whether and which survive.

That there was once a singular veneration toward their founder and patron St. Gumbert among all the people of Ansbach or Onolspach, then still Catholics, Other arguments of the cult from St. Stephen at Würzburg, but that the Clergy or Canons solemnly venerated the same with a peculiar festivity and Ecclesiastical Office, I judge to be by no means doubtful; and that this was put in use on not one day only, is proved by the things which the often-praised Seyfrid communicated to me, from whose letters I shall chiefly cull those which will seem to conduce to the ecclesiastical cult exhibited to the Saint: concerning which more could be said, if he had sent hither the documents themselves, long since promised. That there was not one solemnity of St. Gumbert is shown by the documents which he found in the celebrated monastery of the Fathers Benedictine at St. Stephen at Würzburg, where there is even now extant an ancient manuscript paper Martyrology in which on the V of the Ides of March is placed: Of St. Gumbert the bishop, but on this day, namely on the Ides of July, Of St. Gumbert the bishop and confessor. Whether that Martyrology was once in use in the church of Ansbach, I have not the means to determine; but a double, or at least twin, festivity it is easy to deduce from the things which very lately, namely on the XXVI of November 1723, the same Seyfrid signified.

[22] He writes, therefore, that he saw a proper Mass with a prolix Sequence, as they call it, of the translation of the body of this Saint, from the proper Mass of the Collegiate of Ansbach, which, while I was lately at Onolspach, I took care to have copied from an ancient Missal which is still preserved in the sacristy of the once collegiate church of Onolspach, dedicated to the honors of St. Gumbert. I could wish he had added on what day that Mass was wont to be celebrated, that the translation of the sacred body might be more securely distinguished from the natal day, although those festivities too seem instituted arbitrarily enough, since in another letter he relates that in an ancient parchment manuscript codex, and that an elegant one, of the eleventh century (I think it is of a somewhat later time), which he lately received from a friend, is placed on the XIII of the Kalends of April, Of St. Gumbert the bishop and confessor, no mention being made of the same on the Ides of July, on which day nevertheless he commemorates St. Reginswind, virgin and martyr, who in the aforesaid Missal and Martyrology is set beside St. Gumbert; and in the Mass indeed of the Octave of St. Kilian a second commemoration of St. Reginswind is added. Behold for you the XX of March, as also above the XVI of March was noted, consecrated to the cult of St. Gumbert, of which festivity no reason can be assigned, besides the mere choice of the various churches in venerating the Saint.

[23] and an ancient Gothic Missal; There survives also in the aforesaid monastery of the Benedictines at St. Stephen at Würzburg a most elegant Missal, printed on parchment, in the character now called Gothic, bound in shaggy velvet of a violet color, in which the feast of St. Gumbert is placed on the Ides of July. In the Mass of the Octave of Kilian and his companion martyrs is placed the following commemoration of St. Gumbert the confessor: O God, who

hast bestowed on us this present most sacred day in the solemnity of blessed Gumbert thy confessor, be present, propitious, to the prayers of thy Church, that it may be fortified by the intercessions of him in whose merits it glories. Through the Lord. The Secret is of this kind: We offer to thee, O Lord, a sacrifice of praise, for the solemnity of St. Gumbert thy confessor, that we may attain thy propitiation, which we do not merit by our works, through the pious intercessions of our advocate. Then indeed the Postcommunion: Receiving thy holy things, we beseech thee, O Lord our God, that the continual protections of blessed Gumbert thy confessor may cherish us. I scarcely doubt that those very prayers are today in use in the church of Würzburg, the title of bishop being most prudently expunged, which another codex of Seyfrid so expressly expressing, cannot altogether savor of the eleventh century.

[24] to which the Office ought to be added. What we have said of the ancient Mass once used at Onolspach, we think can be asserted of the proper Office, although copies of the same perhaps do not survive, certainly Seyfrid did not find it there. Some traces of the aforesaid Office Merian left us in the above-praised Topography of Franconia, when among other things which he compendiously recounted concerning St. Gumbert, he cited a parchment leaf in which he found these words: The first foundation concerning St. Gumbert, which most probably are referred to the building of the church of Ansbach or of the ancient monastery. But what more closely pertains to our matter, there is also there exhibited a specimen of some antiphon which savors of more recent centuries: Gumbert, prelate and confessor, magnified by pontifical authority: finally is subjoined a responsory, which could only be taken from an Office: The most blessed confessor of Christ Gumbert, solicitous in the disposition of the talents received, benevolent in dispensing the measure of wheat, merited to be set over many in the joy of his Lord, since in few things he was faithful. It would not have been ungrateful labor if Merian had collected more antiphons and responsories, which without doubt were set down in the same leaf or codex, now certainly somewhere neglected, by the carelessness of him who thought it enough to taste a few things from those monuments, as you will understand from the words of Seyfrid.

[25] There is in his hands a compendious, but very imperfect, description of the church of St. Gumbert at Onolspach, Concerning the church of St. Gumbert, in which are enumerated the several chapels and the patronage of the Saints of the said church, the anniversaries of the deans, canons, vicars, princes, counts, knights, etc., buried there. The little book was published in the German language in the year 1612 by Vitus Erasmus Hoffman, an antiquary, as he names himself, and dedicated to Julius, bishop of Würzburg, but communicated to me by the most illustrious Lord David Köhler, professor of history in the academy of Altdorf. From this epitome Merian seems to have excerpted the things which in the Topography of Franconia he wrote concerning the principal church of Ansbach. And would that the author had given the documents entire, which, as he confesses, he had in manuscript on parchment, from which he drew so few things. My wishes I gladly add to those of Seyfrid, that concerning the monuments of St. Gumbert, and especially concerning his relics, I may be a little more distinctly instructed. In passing you will note that the Deans of Ansbach and their tombs in the church are enumerated, but of the Provosts none at all, so that I do not sufficiently perceive why Egilward calls it a provostship of Canons, unless that dignity was afterward abrogated (as in the following number it will perhaps seem to be intimated, when Gottibold is said to be the first dean in the twelfth century) and perhaps the number of the Canons was made greater, which is said by Merian to have risen to nineteen. Seyfrid proceeds:

[26] With two Lords Canons of the collegiate church at Herrieden (it is a town of the diocese of Eichstätt, and its ancient sepulchre, distant only one league from Ansbach) I accurately surveyed the said church of Ansbach, but I found not even a trace of St. Gumbert. The Lutheran sacristan said that the tomb of the Saint had been behind the high altar, but in my opinion he is mistaken, both because the vaultings of the crypt beneath the choir scarcely gave place for a burial, and because the aforementioned Hoffman testifies that the bones of the Saint were in the year 1165 placed by Herold, bishop of Würzburg, in a stone sarcophagus, in the year 1195 elevated by Gottibold the first Dean, and in the year 1610, when the temple was renovated, found in the high altar. There is, however, behind the high altar a very narrow, but not inelegant, chapel, to which one ascends by twelve steps, and that this was St. Gumbert's, is gathered from Hoffman's description. Behind the oft-mentioned altar there stood, said one of the canons who inspected these things with me, a great chest, in which a smaller casket was kept enclosed, full of bones, which the sacristan then reported to be St. Gumbert's. This casket is now in the sacristy, one foot long and half a foot broad: that it was once covered with ivory or silver is clear from the cavities and clefts of the oaken tablets. Within it is lined with striped silk cloth of yellow and blue color; a few little bones of the Saint remained, as the sacristan confessed to be Gumbert's: but what trust is there in a heretic?

[27] I had hoped for more documents from Seyfrid concerning also the sacred relics of St. Gumbert, not so, I think, and the relics now scattered. scattered but that they are still in some Catholic temples in Franconia itself, and perhaps elsewhere through Germany, exposed to veneration: for I should wonder most vehemently that the nearby orthodox (for they are not so remote) had neglected so great a treasure, and left it contemned and despised in the hands of heretics. But what those relics are of which we spoke above, and which were honored in the ruined monastery of St. John, whether of this St. Gumbert or of another, whether they still exist there, or perhaps have been translated elsewhere, we have left for the people of Würzburg to inquire. If they be said to be the remains of St. Gumbert of Ansbach, by whom and at what time received, or there laid up, it is abundantly clear to be no less ambiguous; so that it must be confessed that very few things survive, at least that have come to my hands, after all diligence applied, from which we can be more fully instructed concerning the sacred relics of the Saint. What was faithfully rescued at Ansbach, and carried into Belgium a century and a half and more ago, and in what honor it has hitherto been held, the following two paragraphs will explain, with which we shall complete our whole treatise on St. Gumbert.

§ IV. A part of the skull carried into Belgium in 1575, and afterward given to the temple of the Society of Jesus at Brussels.

The skull of St. Gumbert, That St. Gumbert was venerated with constant Catholic veneration among the people of Ansbach or Onolspach, until the madness of the heretics began to rage against the Saints and their sacred relics and images, the surviving relics once proved, wont to be held there in honor, as the most illustrious princess Margaret of La Marck, Countess of Arenberg, testified, the fortunate finder of the same in the year 1575, as the instruments presently to be subjoined will more clearly demonstrate, from which will be confirmed the following narration, which I think should be premised in few words. That memorable Princess was passing that way, a widow, I think, of the most celebrated John the Count, of whom Strada is to be consulted at the year 1568, intending Rome, probably for the sake of gaining the Jubilee; and, having entered the temple of St. Gumbert, at the persuasion of a good old Catholic, she of her own accord received the rejected treasure, and, returning into Belgium, among other sacred remains of the Saints, with which in that journey she had been enriched, for her exceptional piety she preserved it, until by a singular favor she gave the same as a gift, before her death, to her attendant or maid of honor (whom they call the damsel Ranst); this one to Lord Lapidanus, Dean of Naaldwijk in Holland; thence afterward translated to the family van Reynegom, whence at last they came to our temple at Brussels.

[29] given to our church at Brussels, Among our old papers I find one, written by the hand of Bolland, in which he notes that the last possessor of the sacred pledge, Lord Theodore van Reynegom, had in mind to give that precious treasure to Cardinal de la Cueva, if he had found anything concerning the life or cult of the Saint, concerning which then, he says, he consulted me and Father Rosweyde, so that this must have been done before the year 1629, in which Rosweyde ceased to live, and so before Bolland thought of illustrating the Acts of the Saints; unless these things are to be understood to have happened successively. We have already shown above that not one inquiry was on that account instituted by our people of Brussels, when Father de Wael had obtained the sacred deposit from the widow Lady van Reynegom, without doubt before the year 1639, since in that very year it was written to Würzburg, although the testimony of the Lady Donor was first given in the year 1641. Here now the testimonies are to be recounted in order, proving the brief series of the whole matter thus, so that concerning the identity and truth of the sacred relics it can by no means be doubted; beginning from the primary deposition of that Princess of Arenberg herself, transcribed by the hand of Lord van Reynegom from the autograph and sent to Bolland.

[30] The Belgian title is: A copy of the little note to be annexed to the relics of St. Combert (so the name is everywhere expressed, The princess of Arenberg testified that she brought it from Ansbach, or Cumbert), and written by the proper hand of the Princess of Arenberg herself. The note itself is written in French, which I thus render into Latin: A part of the skull of St. Cumbert, buried in the temple of Ansbach, in the dominion of the Margrave of Brandenburg, which skull had before been covered with silver; but this being torn off thence, and cast behind some cupboard, was exhibited to me in that very temple by a certain old man still soundly Catholic: thence I received it, all testifying that it is altogether the same part from which they had drawn the silver namely the heretics, and so a true part of the head of that same Saint, who had been margrave of Brandenburg. Understand, as then the opinion of the common people held. Moreover, concerning the entire sincerity of the autograph itself, written in an ancient little note, two men beyond all exception testified, and intimates of the family of Arenberg, whose instrument, given in Latin, exists as follows:

[31] We, James Boonen, Dean of the metropolitan church of Mechelen, the truth of whose testimony is demonstrated; bishop-designate of Ghent, and Theodore van Reynegom, advocate of the supreme senate of Mechelen, attest that the contents of this little note were written by the proper hand of the most illustrious Princess Lady Margaret of La Marck, once princess Countess of Arenberg, etc. The reason of our knowledge is that the writing of the said Lady is very well known to us, who before this for many years were of counsel to the most illustrious Lady of Arenberg. In faith of which we have inscribed these things on the back of the same writing, and signed the same, and fortified them with our seals, on the penultimate of December 1616. It was subsigned J. Boonen, and T. van Reynegom, and sealed with two seals, as above. All the aforesaid the same Theodore van Reynegom had confirmed on the preceding day by a longer Belgian attestation, and had explained the history of the whole matter a little more fully; which here for ampler elucidation we have also turned into Latin.

[32] Thus he speaks: The undersigned, advocate in the supreme council of Mechelen and domestic counselor of the family of Arenberg, hereby attest and it is more fully explained, that the character expressed in the old little note was written by the proper hand of the most illustrious princess Margaret of La Marck, once Countess of Arenberg, etc., which note I, turning over the old papers of the same family, found annexed in the last place to a longer list of names of various Saints, whose relics the aforesaid Lady princess had obtained in the year 1575, while she was journeying through Germany and Italy to Rome.

But the aforesaid Catalogue was almost wholly written by the hand of the same Princess, from which I myself cut off that last little particle. Moreover, I bring forward as ground of my knowledge, that both while the aforesaid Princess was still living, and after her death, I saw more than a hundred letters written by her hand, which even now, if there were need, I could produce, so that from the comparison of the writings the truth of my statements might be plainly evinced.

[33] I testify moreover that a certain skull, or part of a human head, enclosed in a turned wooden box of annular form, glasses of transparent material being fitted on either side, with this inscription written on a little note in golden letters, by what reasoning the aforesaid skull "a part of the skull of St. Combert," which at this time possesses the Lord Cornelius van Reynegom, Doctor of Theology and Dean of the collegiate church at Naaldwijk: I testify, I say, that this skull was found by me in the mortuary house of good memory the Lord Anthony Lapidanus, once also Dean of the aforesaid church, there deceased, and that I, as executor of the last will of the same Lord, reserved for myself that very reliquary casket from his house, and afterward handed over the same to the aforesaid Lord Cornelius van Reynegom my brother.

[34] came to the husband of the donatrix. I testify likewise that the damsel Judoca van Hooft my mother, still surviving among the living, very often heard me say that the aforesaid reliquary casket was given to the said Lord Lapidanus, bequeathed as a memorial, by a certain damsel, by name Ranst, once attendant and of the chamber of the praised Lady princess of Arenberg, deceased afterward in the house, commonly te Werve, at Rijswijk, not far from The Hague in Holland, while she was dwelling with the Lord and Lady van Gheysteren; to which damsel van Ranst the oft-mentioned reliquary had been given as a gift by the Lady Princess while still living. All which aforesaid things I the undersigned, as far as I recall in memory and know, declare to be true. In faith of which I have subscribed these with my own hand, and confirmed them with my usual seal, on this XXIX day of December 1616. And it was subsigned Theodore van Reynegom, with a seal as above. To these I add last a testimony turned from the Belgian into Latin, from which it may be established by what way and reason the venerable skull of St. Gumbert of which we treat came to our temple at Brussels.

[35] The instrument of the donation. I, Regina Clara Mechelman, widow of the Lord and master Theodore van Reynegom, once patron of causes in the supreme council of Mechelen, and domestic counselor of the family of Arenberg, hereby declare that when there had come to my aforesaid husband of good memory a part of the skull of St. Combert, such as the princess Margaret of La Marck, while she lived Countess of Arenberg, had obtained at Ansbach in the year 1575, intending Rome that way through Germany and Italy, which afterward had devolved into the hands of the Lord Anthony Lapidanus, Dean of the church at Naaldwijk, and after his death had passed to Lord Cornelius van Reynegom, Doctor of Sacred Theology and Dean of the same church, in whose mortuary house my aforementioned husband obtained the said relics and, dying, left them to me; I declare, I say, that I have kept and venerated the same part of the Skull with what care and devotion I could. But that such relics might be honored with the veneration due to their merit, it seemed good to me to transfer them into the hands of the Fathers of the Society of Jesus at Brussels, that, preserved in their temple, they might be exposed to the veneration of all. For whose knowledge and faith I willed the present instrument to be drawn up, and subscribed it with my hand in the year 1641. And it was subsigned Regina Clara Mechelman; and confirmed with a seal.

§ V. The relics recognized and approved by the Ordinary, and solemnly brought into our temple at Brussels in the year 1641.

Abundantly instructed concerning the whole matter from the preceding instruments, our Fathers of Brussels held nothing more to heart The recognition and approval of the same skull, than that they should take care to have the precious relics happily acquired recognized and approved by the Ordinary, and thence exalted and solemnly translated into the temple; in what order these things were done, it remains here also to be narrated in few words. Opportunely, about the same time, there had been brought from Rome the relics of St. Sevilianus the martyr, which, as well as those of Gumbert, the most illustrious Archbishop of Mechelen, James, judged could be exposed, by the following diploma: James, by the grace of God and of the Apostolic See Archbishop of Mechelen, to all who shall see the present letters, health in the Lord. Since the relics of the Saints, as salutary examples, are set before the eyes of the faithful, that to their imitation they may compose their life and manners, because they were living members of Christ and a temple of the Holy Spirit, there were very lately exhibited to us by the Reverend Fathers of the Society of Jesus very many bones from the body, as they asserted, of St. Sevilianus the martyr, and a part of the skull of St. Cumbert, that we would deign to visit the same, and, a due examination being made, to approve them as true relics and to decree them to be exposed to the public veneration of the faithful of Christ, by the authority attributed to us through the sacred Council of Trent.

[37] We, not wishing in this matter to be wanting to our Office, by the Archbishop of Mechelen, James Boonen. with the intervention of pious and grave men, the informations and documentary evidences which the aforesaid Reverend Fathers at the same time exhibited being diligently discussed and examined, judge and decree, as far as in the Lord we can, that the same are true and lawful relics of the Saints Sevilianus and Cumbert; which, as such, we permit to be exposed to public veneration, and we exhort all the faithful of Christ that they exhibit to the same relics the reverence which is fitting, and piously acknowledge and reverence them for such. Which that it may be done more zealously, to all who before the said relics recite five times the Lord's Prayer and as many times the angelic salutation, for the present necessity of the Church, we mercifully in the Lord bestow an indulgence of forty days. In faith of which we have given these, fortified with the hand, seal, and subscription of our secretary, at Brussels, of our diocese, on the eighteenth day of the month of May of the year one thousand six hundred forty-one. It was subsigned James Archbishop of Mechelen, J. Herregouts Secretary, and sealed with one seal of red wax.

[38] The rest will be supplied by a longer letter of our Father Charles Alexander of Manderscheydt, Charles of Manderscheydt clearly explains the matter, a distinguished lover and helper of hagiographers as long as he lived, which, asked by Bolland, he gave at Brussels on the XI of July 1659, so that it may plainly be clear that a surer knowledge could not be had from elsewhere. Thus he writes, an eyewitness of almost all: I hoped to write immediately after the feast of the Mother of God, but so many occupations intervened that I could not sooner. Now I answer to those things which Your Reverence asked of me. First, what I could have concerning St. Cumbert, that Your Reverence has in the adjoined writing; namely all those testimonies concerning the aforesaid relics and their approval which have already been described above. More closely to the matter comes the praised Father Manderscheydt: The Lady van Reynegom says that not by the margrave of Ansbach, but by the Princess of Arenberg, that sacred head was given as a gift to her family. The little note in which was written in golden letters the name, condition, age, time of life, etc., of St. Cumbert, was once given to Father Heribert Rosweyde, and lost by him, which the Lady Reynegom greatly grieves. She says that the deceased Archbishop of Mechelen left nothing undone that this sacred head might be given to him as a gift. The damsel Mechelman also would have wished to have it, who, if she had obtained it, had resolved to give it to your Professed House.

[39] adding a miraculous healing, The Lady Reynegom says that she greatly grieves that she did not take care to have confirmed, or at least established by fit witnesses, the miracle which was the occasion and final cause why at last we received it. The aforesaid Lady had a nine-year-old son, who, already wholly consumed by a slow wasting, yet did not seem able to die. Our Father William de Wael visited the Lady mother: the mother relates to him the state of her son, and at the same time says that she had invoked St. Cumbert in vain, nor could obtain health for her son. That perhaps, says Father de Wael, happens for this reason, that the Saint wishes to be honored in a temple and not in your house. If it is so, says the mother, I from now give to Your Reverence and to the college the sacred head. Father de Wael was preparing himself for departure, and was already going down, when the sick son calls his mother, and asks that clothes be given him, that he may rise. The mother answers, You ask for clothes, who for I know not how many weeks could scarcely move yourself. Yet the son persisted, nor rested before the clothes were given him. He rose, therefore, and from that time, he who seemed already about to die, in a moment so began to convalesce, that a few days after he was plainly restored to himself.

[40] the son of the giver herself in the boy. He is now at Mechelen in the house of the Lord Fierlant, Counselor, his brother-in-law. A certain priest who dwelt in the neighborhood was called that he might behold in person a thing so new, namely the son, whom he knew to be given up for lost, asking that bread be given him. It is altogether to be lamented that it came into the mind neither of Father de Wael nor of the mother to have this matter examined. Rightly does Father Manderscheydt observe; so stupendous a healing certainly deserved to be legitimately proved in due form. For the rest, from the adjuncts I seem able to gather what I lately said, that already from the year 1639 and perhaps earlier, the sacred relics were granted to our temple, although later is the attestation of Lady Reynegom related above. The letter proceeds: That priest is now dead, dead also are the servants and maids, as also the medical doctors who were eyewitnesses of that boy so thoroughly healed. Father de Wael is not now capable of bearing testimony concerning this. At most the mother and son will be able to testify, but this one was then only nine years old. Meanwhile in the following year I shall endeavor to bring it about that on the XI of March we say the Office of the Saint. A few things then being interposed, there follows the narration of the more solemn translation of the sacred pledge, in this manner:

[41] Your Reverence desired now to know with what solemnity the head of St. Cumbert had been brought into our temple, The solemn translation of the relics, to which I answer that I was present at its solemn translation instituted in the year 1641 on the day before Quinquagesima. There was then finished the first altar, which, of marble, the Count John of Nassau had by the tablets of his testament ordered to be made to the Mother of God, Mother of mercy; wherefore, that her miraculous statue might be brought into it, it pleased the Reverend Father William de Wael, then Rector of the College, that this should be done with some notable apparatus; which that it might be greater, at the same time also the sacred skull of St. Cumbert was then first exposed to public veneration. About the fourth hour after noon, therefore, a solemn procession was instituted through our temple. There sounded flutes and other musical instruments. When first the sacred statue was brought into the temple from the sacristy of the Mother of mercy, received by the musical choir with that solemn salutation, Mary, Mother of grace, Mother of mercy. Before the sacred statue of the Mother of God was carried the head of St. Cumbert, and next followed the sacred statue itself.

[42] Both the sacred head itself and the statue were escorted by very many boys in angelic habit and the nobility of our titular gymnasium, into our temple at Brussels in the year 1641. which was then most numerous. Among them were then the Prince of Robecq and the Count of Steenhuffel his brother of the family of Montmorency, the Prince of Nassau, the Marquis de Warembon of the family of Rye, the Marquis now of Aiseau, then Count of Beaurieu of the family of Gavre, the Marquis of Renty son of the Duke of Havré, the Baron of Pamele, the Counts Ernest and Philip of Boussu, and some others. The sacred statue was followed by the Countess of Nassau and very many noble women of this court. The concourse of people was huge, the music most exquisite, nor was anything wanting which could commend the solemnity of this translation. These things I have to write to Your Reverence, concerning those which you asked of me; would that I could perform more to the glory of the Saints. Nor does anything remain to me which I can add to these; our people of Brussels possess to this day their sacred treasure, and venerate it with due cult. This alone now remains, that we exhibit the Life itself, which, transcribed by Gamans at Würzburg, and once transmitted to our Elders, we noted above.

LIFE

From the parchment Lectionary of the Fathers Conventual of St. Francis at Würzburg, copied by the care of Father Gamans, and collated with another Manuscript of the Charterhouse there.

Gumbert, confessor, at Ansbach in Germany (S.)

BHL Number: 3691

FROM MANUSCRIPTS.

Blessed ^a Gumbert, begotten of the stock of parents noble according to the flesh, so tamed the wantonness of the flesh, Gumbert, noble and powerful in Franconia, that he regarded not that line of high blood which is wont for the most part to excite men to pride; but, poor amid riches, sober amid delights, he thought on those things alone which are of God, and showed himself a servant to all who piously served God. That, therefore, he might be able to extinguish the concupiscences of the flesh against the spirit, he took care to admit no delights of earthly pleasure at all, reckoning with himself that no one warring for the Lord entangles himself in secular affairs. But because he knew that whatever a man shall sow, that also shall he reap; he began in his pious breast with provident solicitude to imagine how he might leave temporal things for eternal, and reasonably expend all the abundance of his riches in the service of God. For indeed, since he was very wealthy, he demanded rather to be enriched in the Lord; and therefore, laudably declining the desires of worldly cupidity, he loved the true riches. Committing himself, therefore, assiduously to God, for whom he had resolved to war, and seeking the help of God alone, with fear and reverence he besought His mercy, that He would deign to inspire him how he might worthily enough expend the resources of his possessions in His ministry.

[2] how he was converted to God, But while he incessantly revolved these things within himself with pious deliberation, God, the delighter in good minds, and the benevolent hearer of the good, clemently attended to his just prayers, and the holy man obtained what he had asked in His name; but how these things came to pass, the series of what follows will explain. At that time, namely, the splendor of divine illumination had kindled the world, and the effect of the sacred faith excited the works of holy charity in the breasts of the faithful of Christ. And lest faith without works should be dead, whatever well sprouted through faith, that same also germinated abundantly in the works of charity. For because the Lord stretched out his shoe over Idumea, that is, because through the benefits of his Incarnation he had become known to the nations, he willed his name to be praised from the rising of the sun even to its setting, until, as the Apostle says, the fullness of the nations should enter. Thus, therefore, the whole world had now received the word of God from the Lord ^b, so that even the unbridled barbarism of the Teutons was honored with most holy men.

[3] For there then presided over the see of Mainz the most holy Archprelate Boniface, after St. Burchard, but the diocese of Würzburg the venerable prelate Burchard governed. For he, forsaking England, which was his native country, for the love of his Creator, and pilgrimage being undertaken, came at length to the excellent Archbishop of the city of Mainz, kindled long since by the fame of whose holiness, he desired to enjoy his conversation and familiarity: whom the holy Archbishop, no less desired, received with the highest congratulation; for at first sight, as they relate, he foreknew by a prophetic spirit that he would be the pastor of souls in the bishopric of Würzburg, and declared it to those who stood by him. Then, after some space of time had passed, the pious prelate Boniface presented the man of God ^c Burchard, brought to Rome, to Zacharias the supreme Pontiff, and indicated to the most holy Pope, asking who and of what sort he was. The matter, therefore, being made known, and the Archprelate Boniface being recognized, the Roman Pontiff was gladdened with very great joy, because he burned with a great desire of seeing him whom he had known by fame alone spreading it abroad. He therefore consecrated blessed Burchard bishop ^d, with much thanksgiving rendered to God, and destined him to the care of the church for which he had been substituted, the sheep of the Lord's flock ^e being more attentively commended to him.

[4] For it had been done by the provident dispensation of God, by St. Boniface he was given as Bishop to the church of Würzburg; that in gathering the peoples into one to serve the living God, and the diverse nations of the world growing together into one solidity and integrity of faith, the very preeminence of the Roman dignity should fortify them with concordant stability, lest, the schism of any error being interposed, either some members should disagree from a less sound head, or the union of the sound head should be at variance from the infirm frame of its members. Finally, the prelate Boniface of clear goodness, having obtained his wish and effected his purpose, when, the benediction being received, he had resolved to return to the Apostolic city, was unwilling as yet to desert his most beloved brother Burchard, a bishop indeed of new ordination, but a man of ancient piety, not unmindful of that true saying, that it is good and pleasant for brethren to dwell in one. Thus, therefore, not slothful in a good work, he set out on the journey together with him; since he was unwilling to send his spouse, that is, the church whose government he had undertaken, alone, and to show himself as it were ungrateful to a people still unknown to him. And so the venerable father Burchard himself, with his most choice companion, entered the place of the aforesaid city. Where, he being venerably received by all the inhabitants of that province, and laudably enthroned, the benefactor Boniface briskly returned to his own.

[5] Moreover the reverend man Burchard, honorably raised to the office of the pontificate, with continual memory ruminated the words of the Apostle saying: who, leading all to Christ, Since a bishop must be without crime, as the steward of God's family. That, therefore, he might the more ardently excite the family committed to him, brought to the knowledge of truth by the most blessed martyr Kilian, to the love of the heavenly country, he studied in a wondrous manner to lead an irreprehensible life, that what he taught beforehand with his mouth, he might strengthen by the example of good action: and thus it came to pass that an innumerable multitude of promiscuous sex flocked to him without intermission; that through the doctrine of saving admonition they might be fed with heavenly nourishments, and receive the emoluments of eternal retribution. Whom he, kindly receiving, exhorted to leave earthly things for heavenly, promising for earthly things heavenly, for temporal eternal, for transitory things things to abide without end. The lamp, therefore, placed upon the candlestick could not be hidden, which, sparkling with the spirit of the Lord's ardor, illumined from heaven those laboring with the blindness of ignorance, and therefore deviating to the right or left from the royal way, and without ceasing instilled the warmth of the true faith into those tepid in faith.

[6] And so ^f when the life of the holy prelate Burchard, praiseworthy in God, grew frequent far and wide, among the many he especially gained this one: whom the erudition of the pious pastor led to the Lord's sheepfold, he more closely bound also Gumbert, an illustrious and religious man, to the rules of Christian discipline ^g. For when the sound of his most sweet preaching went out into all the earth, and also the most pleasant odor of his holiness was everywhere diffused, the aforementioned man Gumbert, who then among the magnates of Eastern Francia was a man of great name and of great power, by the inspiration of divine grace, betook himself to the Pontiff, and most devoutly made himself over to his tutelage. But the most holy prelate Burchard, like a shower poured from heaven to water more diligently the field of the new plantation, poured into the attentive ear of the heart of blessed Gumbert the mysteries of the divine secrets, and, exhorting him again and again to emulate chastity and the holiness of the other virtues, opened what fruit he would attain from these. But because he knew that admonition was there more fruitful, where the exhibition of work followed the voice of the monitor, whatever by the disputation of his sacred mouth ^h he set forth, that same he confirmed by the example of holy working.

[7] for, despoiling himself of all his goods, Effectively informing, therefore, his hearer with the saving precepts of life, he assiduously instructed him to sow of the blessing, that he might also reap of the blessings: adding that he should not become a boy in his senses, but, according to the Apostle, should be a child in malice, but perfect in senses. Admonishing these things, he found him obedient and benevolent to all. That good disciple of a good master, therefore, receiving in the breast of pious sagacity the admonitions of the saving doctrine, committed them to faithful memory, and faithfully carried them into work. For when he had thirstily approached the fountain of life, he drank charity, faith, truth, and meekness, as rivulets flowing from the vein of one spring. But when he had now been instructed ⁱ in all the precepts of the sacred erudition, and when, as we said, he was strong with an infinite possession of estates, and could rightly have gloried among his proud kinsmen with the elation of proud blood; yet he ever recalled to memory that saying ^k of the wise man, That he who communicates with the proud shall put on pride, and he who touches pitch shall be defiled by it. But he who walks with the wise shall be made wise, undeviatingly persevering with his wise instructor, was made holy with the holy, and innocent with the innocent.

[8] Now he was a layman in habit, and a soldier by profession: but then, when he had heard that of the Gospel; he gave a part to St. Kilian, He who has not renounced all that he possesses, and, bearing his cross, follows me, cannot be my disciple, he resolved to take up his cross, and naked to follow the Lord, and for the recompense of heavenly goods deserted all earthly things. His estates too, in which, as we said, he abounded not moderately, he most honorably enriched the church of the most blessed martyr Kilian; nay, he copiously increased the very bishopric. For although he embraced with pious affection the promotion of all the churches of God through the world, yet, bound by a more special devotion to the aforesaid church ^l, he wholly subjected himself to its dominion, and obligated himself to it in mind and body alike, with all his possession, with filial love. And so, warring for God alone with spiritual arms, he laid aside all the insignia of the military life, and, renouncing the world, escaped naked from the pompous whirlpool of this world. But the resources of all his goods being prudently distributed in the name of God, the holy man had as yet retained to himself only so much of estates as he believed would suffice for the building of a monastery at Onolspach of the diocese of Würzburg, which he had long since preconceived in mind. For the structure of this church also he had chosen a place which seemed opportune; in which even today the relics of his most sacred body are laid up.

[9] But at that same time the most Christian

Emperor Charles governed the summit of the Roman empire, and, the other, he founded the monastery of Onolspach, who, fortifying the borders of his kingdom with sanctions, pursued the enemies of justice with due punishments, but embraced the followers of good works with the arms of mercy. The servant, therefore, and friend of God, Gumbert, went to the aforementioned Emperor, and asked of him and received liberty of building a church, reckoning that it was strengthened with greater firmness, which had been granted by the authority of so great a prince. But the most pious Emperor, seeing that the blessed Man kept the zeal of God, whom indeed the zeal of the house of God consumed, who also most truly loved the beauty of both houses of God; granted him the choice of placing the temple where he wished. His mind, therefore, and the favor of the most liberal prince toward him being found, he built from the foundations a noble church in a certain village of his own, and gathered thither no contemptible adornment. The basilica being built, as we said, that blessed servant of God, of whom our discourse is, gathered together a not small collection of monks, serving almighty God under the rule of St. Benedict, to whom he supplied most abundantly the necessity of food and clothing, that they might be able the more freely, without the occupations of external cares, to serve the Lord Jesus Christ; and lest these could in any way be diminished, or at certain times not administered, he established for them estates and bondmen under privileged testimony, from which the daily stipends of the brethren of that monastery might be exacted. But that very church at Onolspach ^m was honorably dedicated in honor of the most holy Mother of God and inviolate Virgin Mary.

[10] But there was in the aforesaid cell of blessed Gumbert a frequency of prayers, in whose temple he was buried and shone with miracles. and a continual observance of all those things which pertain to the veneration of God. For the very presence of the holy Man admonished those cenobites to be watchful, and his blessed religion excited also their religion. Finally, the most happy confessor of God, Gumbert, verging into old age, feared not the death of the body, which to all is most grievous; because, having prudently made for himself friends of the mammon of iniquity, who might receive him into eternal tabernacles, he was certain of the recompense. For he knew that he would be happily admitted into the joy of his Lord, when, the gains of the talents being required, he would be recompensed with the money of the interest paid over. Desiring, therefore, to be dissolved and to be with Christ, on the V of the Ides of March he laid down the burden of the flesh, and resigned his victorious soul, to be placed in perennial beatitude, to his Creator. But after the happy death of the blessed Man, the relics of his sacred body were placed in the church which he had founded to God: where the benefits exhibited to the peoples through the mercy of God declared by heavenly signs of what prerogative he had been, of how great merit Gumbert, who glitters with such notable miracles in this world; our Lord Jesus Christ granting it, to whom is honor and glory through the infinite ages of ages. Amen.

ANNOTATIONS.