Bruno

ON ST. BRUNO, BISHOP,

AT SEGNI IN LATIUM.

IN THE YEAR 1123.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

Bruno, Bishop, at Segni in Latium (S.)

BY THE AUTHOR J. B. S.

§ I. The birth of the Saint, controverted among the writers of his Life.

Since some things must be repeated from the writers of the Life of St. Bruno which pertain to the controverted circumstances of it; so this commentary had to be begun in such a way that a somewhat fuller knowledge of them might be had, before a progress should be made to the cult. Concerning the Saint there wrote Peter the Deacon and an anonymous author, Nor was there need to labor at describing Segni, sufficiently depicted in Ughelli. I confess indeed that it contributes not greatly to establishing the truth of the Acts, which of the two biographers of whom the question is treated wrote more correctly; but a few points seemed of such moment that I have not thought they should be neglected. That Leo of Ostia edited the former part of the Cassinese Chronicle, and furnished the matter for the rest of the work to Peter the Deacon, or at least paved the way, is held for ascertained. Which of them wrote the things which concern the Acts of St. Bruno, or, if you prefer, Brunus, there is no need to inquire more diligently, since it is manifest that both were nearly contemporary with Bruno, although it is known that the Ostian was a little older, but Peter, surviving Bruno, was somewhat younger. In various chapters of the said Chronicle the deeds of this holy Bruno are narrated, but a little otherwise than the other anonymous writer put them together and arranged them, whom why I altogether think preferable to that Chronicle, I undertake to explain in order. For I have not thought the Italian Life, edited at Rome in the year 1698, worth caring for, whose value can be none, except in the part in which it is taken from the aforesaid sources.

[2] Occasion for the discussion was of his own accord afforded by the Reverend Lord Filippo Malabaila, a citizen of Asti and formerly visitor of the Cistercian congregation of St. Bernard, to the first of whom Malabaila adheres, in these our Acts long since and often praised for his singular merits, by a disquisition edited on these matters which I find prefixed to the works of St. Bruno, collected and begun to be edited by Mauro Marchese the Benedictine monk, but illustrated and published by Aloysius Squadrone at Venice in the year 1651. The aforesaid Malabaila had once sent to Bolland the very Acts of the Saint written by the anonymous author, and taken from the archives of the church of Segni itself, to which with his own hand he had already then subjoined those notes which afterward gave the foundations to the said disquisition. Some relate that those very Acts were once printed, but with us they do not exist, two handwritten copies supplying the defect, of which one our Father Jacob van Quaille sent from Rome to Rosweyde in the year 1623, the other Malabaila himself furnished with the added manuscript annotations of which I was already speaking; to which at last was added the Venetian edition, which, collated with the manuscripts, we shall shortly exhibit.

[3] but the anonymous author is deservedly to be preferred. Malabaila reduces the whole argument of the dissertation chiefly to four articles, which before I weigh, it will not be beside the purpose to preface a few things about the anonymous author, that the reader may more securely judge of his faith and sincerity. He did not express his own name, nor add those features whence you may sufficiently certainly recognize his office or dignity. To me indeed it becomes probable that he was a canon of the church of Segni, from that singular obedience which he professes to the bishop of Segni. "Know," he says, "that I have begun this at the mandate of the venerable man Peter, bishop of the same see (of Segni), who succeeded the aforesaid saint (Bruno) fourth in the pontifical dignity: to whom not undeservedly I believed obedience was due, since it is written, 'Because obedience is better than sacrifices.'" So the anonymous author in the prologue, from which you will conjecture his age, in that he relates that he lived under Peter, the fourth bishop of Segni from St. Bruno. But since Peter, created by Alexander III, is read in Ughelli to have been present at the Lateran council already from the year 1179, it follows that our anonymous author flourished before the year 1180, as will be more declared below, and so was very near to the age of St. Bruno, since he died in the year 1123, as we shall say in its place. But that the memory of the holy Man was then still most recent at Segni is clearer than that it can be called into doubt.

[4] The four points of the controversy, These things thus premised, I come to the points of the controversy, which I have already said are reduced by Malabaila to four chief ones. The first is about the birth or family of St. Bruno; and akin to this the second about his homeland. The third pertains to the canonicate, namely in what church he obtained that office or prebend. The last about the causes of his withdrawal from Monte Cassino: all which have been consigned to memory in a far different manner, on the one hand by the authors of the Cassinese Chronicle, on the other by the anonymous author. Here now it is asked, whose faith is more sincere, whose authority is to be preferred, that of the Chronicle or of the anonymous author? For the Chronicle Malabaila contends keenly, as being one whose authors were both Cassinese monks, and both knew Bruno by face, or at least could have known him. To which purpose he brings forward that most common saying: "That one claims for himself a stronger place among historians, who either was present at the very facts, or received them from those who were present; or at least lived nearer to the memory of the events, as Livy says; even though those later than he in time are otherwise of greater authority." I indeed of my own accord concede to that opinion and rule, but what it contributes so greatly to the matter I do not see; since Peter the Cassinese Librarian, whom it is established wrote the fourth book of the Chronicle, and who could have seen St. Bruno only as a boy, differs so little in age from the anonymous author that it cannot come into consideration: whence from this head no protection of any moment accrues to Malabaila.

[5] He heaps up many other things to weaken the faith of the anonymous author and increase that of Peter, Malabaila did not rightly explain, which if you accurately weigh, you will find contribute nothing more. I have not leisure to pursue each, who am led by no party zeal, from which you will not easily render Malabaila immune, who, for his citizen and countryman, as he wishes, immoderately extols whatever he thinks pertains to the splendor of illustrious birth and other things of this kind. I would not have anything, not even a jot, detracted from the Chronicle or its authors; but he who shall have attentively considered the Acts, sincerely and candidly written by the anonymous author, which we shall shortly weigh, will observe in them so great simplicity, integrity, and faith in all things, that even unwilling he will be compelled to confess with me that they surpass all ill-will of anyone: but on the contrary, that some errors so palpable have crept into the Chronicle, that it is scarcely credible that they could escape either Leo or Peter. Let the beginning and end of the things which concern St. Bruno serve as a specimen, where the coming of Bruno to Rome and his designation as bishop of Segni are referred by the Chronicle to the times of Urban II, and his death on the day before the Kalends of September is in the aforesaid Chronicle much better consigned by the anonymous author, in which Malabaila confesses that the Cassinese Librarian altogether erred from the truth.

[6] These things, I say, are conceded of his own accord by Malabaila for a specimen, nor can they be explained from elsewhere. worthy of no sufficient excuse, to which are added other things not accurate enough from the Chronicle, which meanwhile are diligently as well as faithfully narrated by the anonymous author. To pass over now those things in which Trithemius, Bucelin, and others hallucinated, where concerning the deeds and writings of St. Bruno they establish or conjecture, rather at their own discretion than from certain monuments, and not very probably. And Trithemius indeed seems to attribute to him works other than he wrote, and denies to him, I know not for what cause, others proper to him. But Bucelin in his Menology so confuses matters that he must be said to have consulted neither the anonymous author nor the Chronicle itself. He asserts that Bruno, the world being renounced, put on the cowl before he was set by St. Gregory VII over the church of Segni. He says that, while still a monk, in a full Roman council he met with Berengar, the leader of all the Sacramentarians, a most accurate heresiarch, namely at a time when it is established well enough that Bruno had not even thought of the monastic life. I omit other things also handed down by domestic writers, that it may appear how unfaithfully whoever departed from the anonymous author followed the Acts of our Saint.

[7] No one, in my judgment at least, has woven a briefer and more accurate elogium of St. Bruno than his countryman Filippo Ferrari in the Catalogue of the Saints of Italy, Sufficiently accurate is Ferrari's elogium of the Saint; whose words it has seemed worth while to transcribe before we come to the arguments of Malabaila. Thus it has on the day July XVII. "Bruno, born at Solero, a not obscure village of the territory of Alessandria, of Andrew his father and Scylla his mother, pious parents, gave his attention to letters first in the monastery of St. Perpetuus, then at Bologna: and when he had profited both in morals and in letters, he was made canon of the cathedral church of Siena. Thence, having set out for Rome, when he had disputed against Berengar thinking perversely of the Sacrament of the Eucharist, and had confuted him, he is created bishop of Segni by Gregory VII the supreme Pontiff. Having discharged this pastoral office for some years, seized by the desire of contemplation, he betook himself to the monastery of Monte Cassino: where, when he had professed the monastic life, he is compelled, unwilling, to return to his church, the people demanding it. He is sent by Paschal II the supreme Pontiff as legate, first into Gaul, then into Sicily, to reform those churches. Which when he had excellently performed, returning to the church of Segni, when he had for some time holily presided over it, and under the same Pontiff had been present at the general Lateran council, and when he had piously and learnedly written several things, at last, worn out with ecclesiastical labors and age, under Callixtus II the supreme Pontiff, about the year of salvation 1120 (nay, 1123), he departed from life on the XVI (nay, XV) Kalends of August, famous for many miracles," etc.

[8] but rather from the anonymous author than from the Chronicle, Further, Ferrari's note on these things is of such moment that it deserves to be transcribed here, being about to be of use for more securely weighing those things which Malabaila urges with so great effort. "But the monastery," he says, "of St. Perpetuus in the aforementioned village of Solero, which is nearest to the village of Oliva, whence we are sprung, does not exist, being changed into a collegiate and parochial church, over which a provost with some canons presides,

converted." Thus far Ferrari, plainly in conformity with what the anonymous author wrote, and which Baronius and others judged far to be preferred to the authority of the Chronicle. Thus that one begins his Legend: "Blessed Bruno drew his origin from the province of Lombardy, from the villa which is called Solero, sprung indeed from a humble stock of parents, as in a poor man's little garden a lily or rose is usually born." The Chronicle on the contrary asserts a birth from the illustrious stock of the people of Asti. And this is the first knot of the controversy laboriously discussed by Malabaila. And indeed he contends that the anonymous author erred in two things; namely both about the homeland and about the condition of the parents. The former he says was Asti, but the parents not only not ignoble but sprung of illustrious blood, and that they long bore the surname of Asti not as a national name but as proper to the family. By what arguments he tries to make this probable, I prefer that the reader perceive from his own disquisition, rather than that it be here vainly refuted by me.

[9] is to be established concerning the origin and homeland of the Saint, I shall easily concede both the splendor of the stock and the most illustrious birth to St. Bruno, although I invent no Asti family, unknown to all writers before Malabaila. Arnold Wion in the Tree of Life almost transcribes the Chronicle, when he says that Bruno was sprung of the illustrious blood of the people of Asti. From him Camillo Pellegrino scarcely differs, in the series of the Cassinese abbots, proclaiming him begotten of the illustrious stock of the citizens of Asti. And so the rest contend for the nobility of St. Bruno, yet in such wise that no one thought that for his sake an Asti family should be devised. Ughelli enters upon another path: "He was born at Asti," he says, "of the most noble Solero family, lady of the castle of Solero." Ughelli is followed by Giovanni Battista Mari in the annotation on Peter the Deacon's little book On the Illustrious Cassinese Men. Others mingle other things which you would not easily reduce to the truth unless, entering upon a middle path, you somehow reconcile the anonymous author with the Chronicle. By what reasoning this can be done I do not see, except if you confess that Bruno's parents were both noble and pressed by some straitness of family and domestic affairs. Hence it could happen that you both call them citizens of Asti sprung of a noble stock, and yet compelled to live in the country, so that he who was ignorant of the ancestral nobility—the anonymous author—received them as born in a humbler place. In that way likewise Bruno was by origin of Asti, although brought forth to light in the village or villa of Solero. Nor shall I gainsay if you call the parents lords of the castle of Solero, whence Ughelli and others thought that St. Bruno's family should be named from a lord of whatever kind.

[10] How frequently, not to say daily, it happens that families well noble are reduced to the hoe, as also concerning the condition and names of the parents. to say nothing of other regions, is taught in this our Belgium by too mournful and deplorable experience, from which the other provinces, especially the Insubrian, are not exempt. For the rest, if to anyone our conjecture is less pleasing, he may for me find out another way by which he may reduce both the Chronicle and the anonymous author's Acts to concord. I have no wish to dispute with Malabaila, although he has resolved to trace the origin of the Asti stock not only from the age of Trajan but even from that of Augustus. Other are the ornaments of Bruno than those which he borrowed from his race and ancestors, as one who, according to the anonymous author, "raised his race by virtues, adorned it by upright acts." Of the name of the parents the Chronicle is silent, the anonymous author and all the other writers unanimously call the father Andrew, no surname being added. In the naming of the mother they vary somewhat, some writing Scylla, some Squilla, some finally with Baronius Vuilla. Yet that slight diversity seems to proceed from no other than the fault of the copyists, as happens when, from the varied formation of the letters, one is easily substituted for another. If you ask what I think should be preferred; I prefer the mode of writing of Baronius, namely Willa, once a celebrated name of a marchioness in Etruria, as may be seen in the Florentine Chronicle of Puccinelli from page 195, which, easily transferred to other provinces of Italy, became proper to women, perhaps by diminution derived from Guilielmus, otherwise Willelmus, or some other man's name; whence also Guilla, in French Guillemette and Guillemin. But now let us come to the third point of the controversy.

§ II. He must be said to have been a canon of Siena, not of Asti, and why he withdrew from Monte Cassino.

The often-cited Chronicle, after the words related by us about the illustrious stock of the people of Asti, immediately subjoins, "but possessing from infancy more illustrious morals, That he was a canon not of Asti but of Siena, and from boyhood sufficiently instructed in the liberal studies, he became canon of the bishop of Asti (others read, of the bishopric)." Nothing about that canonicate the anonymous author records, but after he has diligently pursued the boyhood passed in the monastery of St. Perpetuus, and the studies of the higher disciplines run through at Bologna, he adds this: "Having therefore obtained the name and grace of doctor, he sought Siena, and there was honorably received by the bishop and canons, and gladly admitted as canon of the greater church." Here again Malabaila fights against the anonymous author for the Chronicle. "Who," he says, "would persuade himself that a youth of so distinguished a disposition, sustained by his parents in the academy of Bologna with fitting expenses for several years, after obtaining the laurel of the doctorate, was not indeed recalled to his homeland by them and by his own bishop, and co-opted among his fellow-citizen canons; but, they being ignorant or unwilling, turned aside elsewhere, and, unknown, was then enrolled by strangers among the canons of Siena?" What these things prove, let the judgment be with you, reader. As if forsooth so distinguished a doctor, who already at the request of the Ultramontanes (according to the anonymous author) had run through the Psalter according to the Gallican translation with a compendious exposition, could not have become known to the bishop of Siena and the canons, perhaps his fellow-students, and, invited by them, have carried around the rays of his doctrine and virtues at Siena rather than in his homeland.

[12] is proved from the writings of the Saint himself, Other things are not lacking by which I might most aptly answer the interrogations of Malabaila. But why say much? This dispute the Saint himself will settle, expressly testifying in the preface to the Apocalypse that he was a canon of Siena, and that in such a place and manner that if he had ever been of Asti he would without doubt not have dissembled it. Behold his words: "And indeed before I ascended to the dignity of the episcopate, Christ the Lord, not by my merits, calling me, to Ingo bishop of Asti I expounded, as I could, the Psalter, but to the canons of Siena, with whom I too, a canon of whatever kind, lived, the Canticle of Canticles." Malabaila plays on this word "of whatever kind" (qualiscumque) and on the other "lived" (victitabam); "which words indeed," he says, "show him rather to have been sustained by them, than to have been of their number, or, as it is said, bosom." By no means; but those words, joined to others, openly demonstrate that St. Bruno was a true canon among the canons of Siena; nay, unless I am greatly mistaken, from the whole context alleged by me, it is no less openly proved that he never obtained any other canonicate. For what? Could a more opportune place be offered for speaking of his Asti canonicate than where he expressly affirms that he expounded or dedicated the Psalter to Ingo bishop of Asti? He would at least have said "my Lord," "my Bishop," or something similar, whence even by a slight conjecture it might be gathered that he possessed some ecclesiastical benefice in the bishopric of Asti.

[13] So express an affirmation of the Sienese canonicate, so deep a silence about the Asti one, against the quibblings of Malabaila, in those circumstances of things that there appears no reason for indicating the one before the other, so openly, in my judgment at least, confirm the narration of the anonymous author, that whatever Malabaila attempts, it in no way infringes his authority. "But," he says, "no memory of St. Bruno's canonicate exists at Siena": be it so: but can he himself bring forward the memory of all others who in that whole and perhaps the following centuries were canons of the cathedral of Siena? It has fallen out altogether happily that the Saint himself remembered a benefice once received at Siena, which no one, I think, will doubt to be more than enough for our purpose, unless he labor under the prejudices of Malabaila. Yet, lest I pass over anything untouched, let us hear his other arguments by which the church of Asti claims its canon. And first, his image anciently painted on a panel set over the altar, on which, on his birthday, which is the XVIII of July, the solemn rites in his honor are performed. What or of what kind that image is, he does not sufficiently explain. But if he means that which is seen prefixed to his works with this epigraph, "The effigy of St. Bruno of Asti, bishop of Segni and abbot of Monte Cassino," representing him in the habit in which the canons of the cathedral of Asti, called cardinals, then walked, and leading a common life adapted to the rule of St. Benedict, of whom he himself was one, when he expounded the Psalter to their bishop Ingo: if he means this, I say, he will prove nothing greatly.

[14] For that epigraph seems composed at discretion, and perhaps by Malabaila himself. which prove nothing at all, The image itself, fashioned according to the painter's fancy, represents the Saint scarcely past youth, already then furnished with a crozier and adorned with other features in such a way that you would not easily recognize so great an antiquity from which the pretended canonicate might be claimed for Bruno. Nor does it prove the matter more, that in the archive of the same church (of Asti) is studiously preserved a public document of a donation made to it of the places of Canali and St. Stephen, by the countess Adelaide; where among those who appended their signature is read subscribed "Brunus," whom the canons constantly hold to have been St. Bruno. Certainly the name of Bruno or Brunus was not so singular in that age that it could not have been common to many, as is established from those whom in that very century we know to have been illustrious for sanctity. "But the canons constantly hold that he was St. Bruno." Let them hold it, for me it is allowed, and constantly hold him sprung of a most illustrious family, and of Asti both by race and by surname; I envy our Saint none of these ornaments: what I have said thus far has been adduced only to this end, that the faith of the anonymous writer may be defended against the disquisition of Malabaila.

[15] But the things which we have thus far tried to establish are excellently confirmed from the very Office of St. Bruno, revised, restored to the Roman norm, and approved by the Sacred Congregation, printed at Rome in 1592, the Office of the Saint himself settling the whole matter. in which the fourth Lesson is thus proposed: "Bruno, born at Solero in Insubria, not far from the city of Asti, of Andrew and Scylla, honorable and religious parents, quite a boy, delivered to the religious men of the monastery of St. Perpetuus of the diocese of Asti for instruction, profited wonderfully in all ecclesiastical doctrine. Thence sent to Bologna for the sake of studies, when he had given excellent labor both to secular and to divine letters, he obtained the name of doctor. But when into Etruria, from a desire of visiting the bishop of the city of Siena, whose name at that time was most celebrated (he was Radulph, of Cologne by homeland, whom Tintus and Thomasius in Ughelli call a most holy man), he had betaken himself, he was both kindly received by him and, to the public joy of all, enrolled in the college of the canons of the greater church."

Nor indeed do all the Benedictines agree with Malabaila, not to say that several gainsay him. Marcantonio Scipione, in the elogia of the Cassinese Abbots, roundly declares that Bruno, the course of studies being finished, now already advanced in age, departing into Etruria, at Siena in the greatest church, with great approbation of the members, acted as canon for some time. Of the Asti canonicate not a word.

[16] There remains the last point of the controversy, in which that one nettles the anonymous author more sharply, The anonymous author, having spoken somewhat harshly of the Cassinese monks, as if by his inventions he greatly detracted from the sanctity and reputation of the Cassinese monks. I shall dispatch the matter in few words, when I have compared the words of the Cassinese Chronicle with the commentaries of the anonymous author. There was between Pope Paschal II and St. Bruno, then abbot, no small dissension, from this, that the Pontiff, although compelled by force applied, granted the privilege of investitures to the emperor Henry: and from this, perhaps from the too great liberty of the Saint, it had so flared up that, according to the Chronicle, the Pope declared: "Unless I remove him from the administration of the monastery, he himself by his arguments will take from me the government of the Church." It is to be noted, moreover, as will afterward appear from the series of the life, that the administration of the church of Segni was committed to St. Bruno before he put on the monk's habit at Cassino. And so to the same abbot Bruno the Pontiff Paschal directed an epistle, by which he forbade that he should any longer be bishop and abbot. "For the Apostolic see could not bear any longer that a bishop should preside over so celebrated a monastery. To the brethren also, through Leo the Ostian bishop and monk of this monastery, he sent letters, commanding that they should no longer obey that man." Hence it is easy to conjecture that from the diverse zeal of the monks no small tumults arose in the monastery. But when the anonymous author traces these more deeply and mingles other things, which although they are not honorable to the monks, yet ought not straightway to be traduced as false and fictitious. He says therefore that in the Cassinese monastery, "except a few who washed their hands among the innocent, there was an assembly of malignants, who professed the monastic profession by their habit, but denied it by their works," etc.

[17] is easily reduced to a sound sense, These things are harsher, I confess, than that they ought to be taken to the letter, or, as they say, in the rigor of the words: but if they be reduced to a sound sense, they can be so understood that those few, wholly devoted to their abbot and to the divine service, cared nothing for the machinations of the others. The greatest part, as happens, attached neither to the ill-natured nor altogether to the good, yet secretly favored the party of the malignants more, or at least consented: whence it happened that, instigated by diabolical suggestions, making a conspiracy against their abbot, they accused him before the supreme Pontiff, "knowing that he had gravely incurred the indignation of Lord Pope Paschal," etc. Then, those things following which we related from the Chronicle, "from the tenor of those letters the same monks (I understand only the malignants), occasion being taken, affecting him not only with insults but even with blows, with an irreverent and foolish mind, cast him out of the monastery." I hold it for undoubted that not all, nay, not even the greater part, consented to so foul a crime, perhaps not even those very ones who before did not gainsay the tumultuous. Wherefore the anonymous author rightly subjoins: "Very many of the monks who were led by the spirit of God, moved with great grief over the injury to their Father, would gladly have recalled him, had they not feared to go against the Apostolic mandates." In these words "very many" (plerique), and in the above-cited "except a few" (exceptis paucis), Malabaila, insulting, boasts that he has detected a manifest contradiction. Undeservedly indeed, for since "very many" is stated not of all the monks, but of some only of the number of those who were led by the spirit of God; if you weigh both particles with a more exact balance, you will without difficulty conclude that those "very many" of those who were led by the spirit of God are referred to those few whom a little before he had mentioned.

[18] These things be said for saving the contradiction: the causes of the tumults being referred to the national spirit, for I would not dare to think that in so celebrated a monastery, and so great a seminary of Roman Pontiffs and bishops, there were few who were led by the spirit of God. I would rather believe that some national spirit, a little more ardent, flourished among those religious, however otherwise pious and good, which the anonymous author, not so well perceiving, interpreted in a worse sense. It is certain that to Monte Cassino from the diverse parts of the world men of every nation flowed together (as Leo of Ostia testifies in the prologue, and Angelo de Nuce in the notes), not all free from that propensity by which we are wont to be borne toward our countrymen more than toward men of another kind. But since the other Italians are not wont even at this time to make so much of the Insubrians or Lombards, it will seem by no means wonderful if the Saint himself perhaps loved more tenderly those sprung from those parts, and they were more devoted to their abbot, not without some ill-will of the rest, which instigating, contentions, rivalries, discords arose. But lest you think these things rashly imagined by me, an argument is the words recited by the Chronicle, chapter 42 of the edition published by Angelo de Nuce in 1658, from which also we took the foregoing. Namely, when now by the Pontiff's command St. Bruno ought to withdraw from Monte Cassino; "he convoked the brethren … and at the same time also admonished them, that, if they wished the abbot whom he himself should choose, he would protect and defend both them and this place to his power. There was then in this monastery a certain brother, Peregrine by name, a Ligurian by nation (namely of that Liguria from which the Saint himself is said by the Chronicle to have been), crafty with worldly cunning, to whom he had resolved to give the same abbey. Which when the brethren had learned, they said to the Abbot," etc. There followed a violent inroad of armed soldiers, summoned by Peregrine to his aid, into the abbey, whom the Brethren, bearing this too indignantly, and unanimously rushing upon them, cast out of the monastery. Some of these Matteo Laureto had cut off, which Angelo de Nuce did not hesitate to restore, an observation being added from which our conjecture is not a little strengthened: "Even granting," he says, "that Bruno was either deceived by a prejudiced mind, in that he reckoned Peregrine more worthy than the rest: or, prevented by a private affection toward a Ligurian citizen and countryman, resolved to adorn him with the infulae of the abbey, fear being struck into the monks by the soldiers—will therefore the whole sanctity of Bruno straightway irreparably go to ruin? Holy men were indeed holy, but men: nothing human was alien from them."

[19] From these things, unless I am mistaken, shines out what I was saying, St. Bruno's zeal toward his countrymen, by which without doubt he rendered the minds of the other monks not a little alienated from himself. because the Saint had preferred his countryman Peregrine to others. To me certainly it is most probable that hence the first sparks of ill-will flared up, which, gradually increasing, other causes or pretexts easily acceding, so exasperated all the Italians that, recourse being had to the Pontiff, they openly conspired to expel St. Bruno, and actually cast him out ignominiously, as the anonymous author will afterward more fully demonstrate: in which I think only this is to be desired, that he ascribed to the corrupt morals of the monks what most probably seems to have drawn its origin from their mere national spirit, by no means to be excused from a graver fault, and such that they deserved the punishment which the anonymous author describes in the Acts. Nor indeed is there need to think each single one tainted with that blemish of whatever kind; for we know it to be very common, as it is wont to be attached not only to religious but to any communities, that what can deservedly be ascribed to a few persons at times. Let what has been said thus far suffice for rightly expounding the opinion of the anonymous author and reconciling it with the Chronicle; things not, I think, about to displease fair estimators of matters. Certainly that seditions of this kind, though perhaps for other causes, were not so rare at Monte Cassino, he will easily establish who shall have unrolled the Chronicle a little more attentively. Let the reader meanwhile see only chapter 29, book 4, whose title is this: "How the monks tried to depose the abbot Otto." But since he immediately preceded holy Bruno, what wonder if some survived, zealous for innovating and disturbing affairs. It does not please to treat an invidious matter at greater length: the things which pertain to the cult of the Saint and the other circumstances of his life we shall pursue in the following paragraph.

§ III. The canonization, cult, Office, and series of the Life of St. Bruno.

The true time of the Saint's canonization, Many things here again occur to be reduced to concord, the Chronicle and the anonymous author varying not only, but also those who wrote about the Saint's subsequent canonization and other things pertaining to his cult. It is indeed beyond controversy that St. Bruno, famous for miracles both in life and after death, and held for a Saint both by the people of Segni and by the Cassinese monks, began to be honored, at least with a private cult, immediately from his death, until, by legitimate authority, fifty-eight years after his decease, he was numbered among the Saints by Lucius III. So the Segni monuments bear, from which the Office, cited above by us, the most reverend Lord Joseph of Verona, bishop of Segni, without doubt composed. Ughelli relates, and from him others, that in the cathedral of Segni an inscription is seen for the perennial memory of the matter, by which the aforesaid canonization is said to have been accomplished. It is of this kind:

TO THE ETERNAL MEMORY OF BLESSED

BRUNO,

WHOM LUCIUS III SUPREME PONTIFF,

IN AN ASSEMBLY OF CARDINALS AND BISHOPS

AT SEGNI IN THE CHURCH OF THE BLESSED MARY,

WHERE HIS DEAD BODY

RESTED, ORDERED TO BE ENROLLED

AMONG THE SAINTS,

IN THE 58TH YEAR FROM HIS DEPARTURE.

THE SENATE AND PEOPLE OF SEGNI.

Hence you may gather that manifest errors crept into the appendix subjoined to the Acts of the anonymous author, when it is said: "That Lord Lucius the third Pope, in the church of Segni, in the fortieth year after the death of blessed Bruno, canonized the same holy Bruno." And it is added: "That the same canonization was made in the time of Lord Bartholomew bishop of Segni."

[21] is to be defined from the year of death, To refute these things, and to explain some others in this matter doubtful enough, it is altogether necessary to explore those things from which it may be established in what year the holy man migrated from this life. Matteo Laureto the Spaniard, a Cassinese monk, in the notes on the often-cited Chronicle, edited by himself at Naples in 1616, thinks that according to the truer computation the death of Bruno should be consigned to the year 1125, in which he has not a few agreeing with him, led, unless I am mistaken, by this argument, that Angelo Rocca, in the book on the Canonization of the Saints, somewhere testifies that there is preserved at Rome in the library of the Fathers of the Congregation of the Oratory the bull of the canonization of St. Bruno made by Lucius III in the year of the Lord 1183. But this year, since it ought to be 58 from the death of Bruno, it would follow that he died in the aforesaid year 1125. For the rest, neither by Rosweyde long since, nor by our other predecessors, could any copy of that bull thus far be obtained. I suspect that nothing else is found there than what I just related from the appendix to the Segni Acts, namely that St. Bruno was numbered among the Blessed by Lucius III in the fortieth year after his death, no year of the Christian era being assigned in which this happened. I find also in the Roman Office, praised above, the canonization of Bruno attached to the year 1183. But all these things will of themselves fall together, when we have established the year of St. Bruno's death.

[22] But it cannot be more certainly defined than from the Acts of the Anonymous author himself, who certainly fell in the year 1123, in which toward the end it is thus read: "He migrated to the Lord on the fifteenth Kalends of August in the fifth year of the Pontificate of Lord Callixtus II, but in the forty-fourth of his own episcopate." These marks note not the year 1125, but 1123: for since Callixtus II was created in the month of February 1119, his fifth year was running when St. Bruno on the XVIII of July 1123 closed his last day, nor can these be deferred further. There is added the unanimous consent of all the writers who place the beginnings of his episcopate in the year 1079 under Gregory VII, in that very year namely in which in the sixth Roman Council Bruno had disputed with Berengar. But from that head it is openly proved that the life of Bruno is not to be extended beyond the year 1123. Finally, since it is admitted, from the other appendix of the Acts, that Honorius III in the year 1223 erected and with his own hands consecrated an altar to Bruno, but that year is expressly said to be the hundredth from the death of Bruno, it again follows that he migrated from life in 1123. And this you will also confirm from this, that, as the same appendix asserts, that year 1223 was the 7th year of Honorius, as one who was elected Pontiff in 1216.

[23] These things being thus established, without difficulty are refuted the things which from the first appendix we said above to be false, whence several things are refuted, concerning the canonization made by Lucius III in the fortieth year after the death of Bruno, and concerning the time of Bartholomew bishop of Segni still worse connected with that canonization. The creation of Pope Lucius III is more known than that it can be called into doubt. It happened on the XXIX of August 1181, and so it could only be unskillfully written (I know not by whom) that the canonization of Bruno was made forty years after his death by Lucius III, since his creation is fully 58 years distant from the death of Bruno. And if this Pontiff truly adorned him with sacred cult in the 58th year after the Saint's death, it must have been done in the first year of his pontificate, of Christ 1181. But what you may marvel at more, Bartholomew is joined to Lucius III as bishop of Segni, who is nearly seventy years later than that Pontiff. Let the faith rest with Ughelli in the Catalogue of the bishops of Segni, producing none of that name before the year 1256. There is no need of more, that the often-mentioned appendix, at least in the part which touches chronology, may be utterly overthrown. Perhaps not even in the catalogue of Cardinals, whom it relates to have been present with Lucius III at the canonization, is it accurate enough; but where the truth of the matter itself is abundantly established, we should vainly put effort into inquiring more diligently into those names.

[24] Behold now the whole appendix, as it stands, from which the canonization may be verified, from the Marchese edition collated with both manuscripts. It bears this title: "Here ends the Legend of St. Bruno. which are ill mingled in a certain appendix. There follows his canonization, together with the dedication of the altar, with its Indulgences, as below." Then it is thus subjoined: "Lord Lucius the third Pope, many Cardinals being present with him in the church of Segni, in the fortieth year after the death of Blessed Bruno, canonized the same St. Bruno, and granted a year of Indulgence to all visiting his threshold on his feast. But the Cardinals who assisted at the said canonization with the said supreme Pontiff were these: Lord Conradinus of Porto, of Albano, Lord Paul of Palestrina, bishops (so I think it should be read, although both in the printed and in the other manuscript I find the word 'bishops' transposed), Lord Vincent of the title of St. Stephen on the Caelian hill, Lord Arduinus (the printed has Adrianus) of the title of St. Cross, Lord Lambert of the title of St. Mary in Trastevere, Lord Albert Vice-Chancellor of the Holy Roman Church, Lord Stephen of the title of the Holy Apostles, Lord Octavian of the title of St. Chrysogonus, Lord James of the title of St. Mary in Navicella, Lord Ranerius (the printed reads Zeinerius) of the title of St. George, Lord Gratian of SS. Cosmas and Damian, Lord Godfrey of St. Mary in Via Lata, Lord Gerard of St. Adrian, Cardinal Deacons. But the canonization itself was made in the time of Lord Bartholomew bishop of Segni, who enjoined (would it be better, granted?) to all coming to the said feast, by visiting his threshold, forty days, and it lasts through the whole octave, and likewise the other bishops granted the same." Thus far the first appendix.

[25] The age of the anonymous author is established against Malabaila. But who wove that to the Acts, at what time, on what occasion, I have no foundation for distinguishing by sufficiently grounded conjecture. This I cannot sufficiently marvel at, that it was not written by the anonymous author himself, whom yet it is necessary to have reached the times of Lucius III, if we believe those writers who make him younger than is just. To me it seems undoubted that the anonymous author would not have omitted it, if he had still then been living, as one who left it testified that he collected the Acts of St. Bruno by command of Peter the bishop, contemporary of Lucius III. Hence certainly you may refute both Marchese and Malabaila, who, that they may prolong the age of the anonymous author, boldly cite Ughelli as one who reduces the times of that Peter to the year 1190, whereas meanwhile he affirms in most express words that the aforesaid Peter was created by Alexander III, predecessor of Lucius III, and from the year 1179 was present at the Lateran council. Forsooth it was in the interest of those writers to remove the anonymous author as far as possible from St. Bruno, to lower his faith, which they might claim for the Cassinese Chronicle. But of these enough elsewhere. Here I only wished to insinuate in passing that the often-mentioned appendix is much later than the writer of the Acts, and probably was not joined to those Acts before the other, now presently to be exhibited, when the consecration of the altar had been accomplished by Honorius III, which is there thus described:

[26] The dedication of the altar by Pope Honorius III. "In the name of the Lord, Amen. In the year of the Lord 1223, of the Pontificate of our most holy Lord Honorius III the Pope in his 7th year, on the 16th day of the month of July, in the hundredth year after the death of Blessed Bruno bishop and confessor of the city of Segni, the altar of the same Blessed Bruno, existing in the church of Segni, was dedicated to the honor of the same Saint, by the hands of the aforesaid supreme Pontiff, the following Cardinals being present, serving him in the said consecration or dedication, three bishops, namely Lord Peter of Palestrina, Lord Nicholas of Tusculum, and Lord Andrew of Porto: and four Presbyters, Lord Stephen, Lord Gregory, Lord Honoratus, and Lord Stephen. In which altar indeed by the said Pontiff were laid up these relics, namely: of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul; of St. Lawrence M.; of St. Vincent M.; of St. Caesarius M.; of St. Maurice M.; of St. Sebastian M.; of SS. Cosmas and Damian MM.; of St. Saturninus M.; of the Four Holy Crowned Ones; of St. Silvester the Pope; of St. Gregory the Pope; of St. Bruno bishop and confessor; of St. Mary Magdalene; of St. Agatha V. and M.; of St. Lucy V. and M.; of St. Martina V. and M. But to all the faithful of Christ coming to this dedication on the said day, the said supreme Pontiff relaxed in the Lord one year of the penance enjoined on them, lasting through the whole octave, whose feast shall occur on the third day after the dedication, which will be on the 18th day of the month of July. And all the bishops of the diocese of Segni each year enjoined 40 days on the said feast. Thanks be to God."

[27] I have already said it probable that both these little additions to the Acts, Enrolled in the Martyrology and his approved Office whoever at last be their author, were conceived and joined at the same time. But as neither the writer is recognized, so neither could anyone easily say what age both savor of. To me it is probable that they pertain to the XIV or perhaps XV century, both from the style and from that most gross error by which we saw Bartholomew bishop of Segni combined with Lucius III. Yet I shall not gainsay if anyone says their author was different, and wishes those appendices to have been added successively. For whenever this happened, of the exceptional sanctity of Bruno, the miracles wrought, the perpetual cult in Monte Cassino and the church of Segni, no one, I think, will doubt, who shall have noted the most ancient Legend, distributed into Lessons through the Octave, and long in use at Segni; so that Baronius deservedly thought he should be inserted into the Martyrology, and the sacred Congregation of Rites approved the Office, as we said, reduced to the Roman norm, after Gregory XIII some years before had given power for it, as will be clear from the following decree. "We, William Sirleto, priest Cardinal of the title of St. Lawrence in Panisperna, give faith and attest that our most holy Lord Pope Gregory XIII, by an oracle of the living voice made to us, granted and gave license to the bishop and clergy of Segni in the city and diocese of Segni to recite publicly and privately in choir and out of it the underwritten Office of St. Bruno bishop and confessor, under a double Office and with an Octave. Given in the Apostolic palace in the place of our residence on the 11th day of June 1584, of the pontificate of our most holy Lord Pope Gregory XIII in the 13th year." In the ecclesiastical fasti or Martyrologies no more ancient memory of St. Bruno exists; what that Breviary of Cassino is, or of what kind, which Marchese and Malabaila say is very ancient, I have not yet been able to see; this I know, that the most learned Mabillon, questioned long ago by Papebroch, who had brought it from Monte Cassino to Paris, whether it had lessons of the Saints, answered that none were contained in that book. Now let us set forth the series of the Life in a few words.

[28] The year in which our Saint was brought to light, The age of the Saint, none of the writers has expressed. If it be permitted to conjecture anything, I shall not fear to say that he had reached or surpassed the thirtieth year of age when, having met Berengar in the Roman council of 1079, he obtained so great an esteem with Gregory VII and Blessed Peter the Cardinal, surnamed the Fiery, that he was destined bishop of the church of Segni, then widowed, as you will yourself soon perceive from the Acts. If therefore about thirty years be attributed to him then, it will follow that he was born about the year 1049. We have already proved above from the forty-four years of episcopate passed that its beginnings are altogether to be traced back not to Urban II, as is wrongly read in the Cassinese Chronicle, but to Gregory VII and the aforesaid year 1079. Nor let anyone object to me what is read in the sixth Lesson of the Roman Office just cited, namely that Bruno held the episcopate only thirty-four years: for all the writers whom I have been able at least to consult confess by unanimous consent that this crept in there by error. Let us follow the course of his life. He diligently administered the church of Segni, before he put on the monk's habit, for twenty-three years. During which time that he gave excellent service to Urban II is testified in more than one place by Baronius. And especially that he approved in 1092 the privilege granted by the same Urban to the monastery of Cava, as is openly gathered from his subscription. Marchese adds

that it is certain that Bruno was led into Gaul by Urban about the year 1095, in which year, he says, he was present at the council of Clermont, and at the consecration of the church of Cluny, in which, when the Pontiff himself, by pontifical rite, consecrated the chief altar, three others were consecrated by his command by three other bishops, the bishop of Lyon, of Pisa, and Bruno of Segni, as is had from the Cluniac Library.

[29] and some chronological series of his deeds He was present at the council of Tours in 1096, as the praised Baronius relates at that year; where, when Urban II, says Marchese, was about to consecrate on the VI Ides of March the church of the Greater monastery of Tours, he ordered the chapel of the infirm to be consecrated the day before by St. Bruno. Which was skillfully observed from ancient monuments by the Reverend Father Jacques Sirmond of the Society of Jesus, a most learned man, in a letter given to the most reverend abbot Constantine Cajetan. In what year he returned into Italy is uncertain; I would believe that, returning to his church with Urban II himself in that same year 1096, he resumed his pastoral office, and persevered in it, until he withdrew to Monte Cassino in the year, as I lately said, 1102. There are those who defer the monkhood two years, but since it is established from the chronological order of the Cassinese abbots that Bruno succeeded Odo or Otto in 1107, nay, the anonymous Cassinese Chronicle edited by Antonio Caracciolo notes the year 1106, but our anonymous author expressly affirms that he, the five-year period of the monkhood being completed, undertook the prelacy of the monastery, the reckoning of the epoch established by us is manifestly clear. The causes, moreover, of the aforesaid withdrawal the reader will find in the Acts themselves. The chief one I think to be the love of solitude, which yet he could not perpetually enjoy, being compelled to undertake a legation into Gaul with Bohemond prince of Antioch, most celebrated in the sacred wars. That legation Baronius consigns to the year 1104, not rightly: since Labbe, volume 10 of the Councils, column 747, recites the words of Suger in the Life of Louis the Fat most clearly noting the year 1106, in which "Lord Bruno bishop of Segni, legate of the Roman Apostolic See, having accompanied Lord Bohemond, sent by Lord Pope Paschal to strengthen the way of the Holy Sepulcher, held a full and celebrated council at Poitiers, at which we too (Suger speaks of himself) were present," etc. There is added the Chronicle of Maillezais and other things memorized by Pagi too at the said year 1106.

[30] The other legation into Sicily too he executed with like diligence, a chronological series, the words are the anonymous author's, before he returned to Monte Cassino, without doubt toward the end of the same year or the beginning of the following 1107. But having duly discharged it not long after, namely in the month of November, as Peregrine wishes, he undertook the abbey, being set as prelate fortieth in order, and held it three years and ten months, or rather eleven, according to the Cassinese Indices, which hint that Bruno abdicated the abbey in the month of October 1111, when at the command of the Pontiff Paschal he dismissed it. Before this happened, Bruno gave another service to the Pontiff. For, according to the Chronicle, "in the year of the Lord 1108 in the month of October, the same Apostolic came to Cassino, and, our abbot being joined to him, came to Benevento for the sake of celebrating a synod … but when he had come to Capua, being asked by the same abbot, he solemnly dedicated the church of St. Benedict, which the abbot Desiderius had renewed within the same city." For the remaining time Bruno is to be judged to have persisted in office, until, dissensions with Paschal having arisen, which we treated above, he was compelled to return to his church by postliminy, and there rested in peace in the year 1123, on the XVIII of July: whence it may be gathered that he died in a good old age, namely as one who reached the seventy-fourth year, even on this hypothesis that he was not more than thirty years old when he obtained the episcopate of Segni.

[31] All these things being thus far sufficiently explained, this one thing remains, The Acts, which and whence they are edited. that we subjoin in order both Lives, of which we have already above abundantly treated. The little work of the anonymous author I collated from the two manuscripts cited above with the Venetian edition of Mauro Marchese, infected with many errors, where however the whole title too is preserved, which I have here in our manner preferred to prefix. So it begins: "In the name of the undivided Trinity of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen. This book contains the Legend of Blessed Bruno, registered and copied word for word from an ancient original book existing in the cathedral church of St. Mary of Segni, in the time of the Reverend Lord bishop Bernardin Caunus, in the year of the Lord 1543, of the pontificate of Lord Paul the third." I think "in the tenth year" should be added, although it exists neither in the manuscripts nor in the printed; but rightly here is noted the year 1543 for 1541 put by Marchese. But he who here is called Caunus, in the other manuscript and in the printed is a little better called Calinus, perhaps best by Ughelli Callinius, who from the Order of Minorites was assumed to that dignity in the year 1541. There follows the prologue of the anonymous author, to which the Life itself is subjoined, distributed into thirty lessons, which I have exhibited so explained that I have thought it superfluous to illustrate it with more annotations.

THE LIFE

By an anonymous author, from two manuscripts collated with the edition of Mauro Marchese.

Bruno, Bishop, at Segni in Latium (S.)

BHL Number: 1474

BY AN ANONYMOUS AUTHOR, FROM A MANUSCRIPT.

PROLOGUE.

The reason of the writing is rendered. Being about to describe, with the help of the Savior, the life of Blessed Bruno, venerable bishop of glorious memory of the see of Segni, I with suppliant mind beseech him who makes the tongues of infants eloquent, and opens the mouths of the dumb, that he may grant me, to his praise and the edification of the hearers, to compose this work in fitting speech, that it may not be a weariness to the readers, but may profit them to the fruit of souls. You also, readers, I ask, that if unpolished speech strike your ears, you give pardon to the rude style, because the wise seek not eloquent but strong things. Remember also that the kingdom of God consists not in eloquence but in faith: and that salvation was foretold to the world not by orators but by fishermen. For I, as poor in genius, have with shame undertaken the present business, because gold and silver are not mine, since I am unskilled in speech and knowledge; but lest perchance I may be accused by some of presumption in this work, know that I have begun it at the mandate of the venerable man Peter, bishop of the same see, who succeeded the aforesaid Saint fourth in the pontifical dignity. To whom not undeservedly I believed obedience was due, since it is written, 1 Kings 15: "Because obedience is better than sacrifices," whose virtue is so great that it usually reduces even impossible things to a possible facility.

THE THIRTY LESSONS

Into which the whole Life is distributed.

ON THE FIRST DAY.

Among precious trees Lesson I. In the paradise of God manifold and diverse trees continually spring up, adorned not only with copious foliage, but also with fragrant flowers and salubrious fruits. For what else are holy men, but as it were certain trees planted in the house of God; whose words of abounding doctrine, like the leaves of spreading trees, protect those resting under them from the heat of vices? Whose fragrance of most pleasing repute, and examples of holy manner of life, like certain flowers, unceasingly draw us to the love of the heavenly homeland, and feed the hungry for good works; of whom it is said in the Canticles: "Thy shoots are a paradise of pomegranates with the fruits of apples" (Cant. 4). Among these precious trees Blessed Bruno, bishop of the see of Segni, like a tall cedar of Lebanon, went forth by the divine will.

[2] Lesson II. Whose not only flowers and fruits, this Saint is to be numbered, that is virtues and works of charity, both allure us by odor and refresh us by taste; but even the leaves, that is the words of holy preaching, bring to readers and hearers a great odor of sweetness. To whom that little verse of the psalm can not incongruously be adapted: "The just shall flourish like the palm, and shall be multiplied like the cedar of Lebanon, planted in the house of the Lord" (Ps. 91). And that: "And he shall be like a tree which is planted by the running waters: its leaf shall not fall off; and all whatsoever he shall do shall prosper" (Ps. 1).

[3] Lesson III. Blessed Bruno therefore drew his origin from the province of Lombardy, from the villa which is called Solero, from boyhood adorned with virtues: sprung indeed from a humble stock of parents: as in a poor man's little garden a lily or rose is usually born: whose father was called Andrew, but his mother Squilla. But blessed Bruno raised his race by virtues, adorned it by upright acts. For from the very time of his boyhood he had so prepared in his breast a seat for humility and the fear of the Lord, which is the beginning of wisdom, that not undeservedly the spirit of the Lord was believed to have rested more fully in him, as it is written, Isaiah 66: "Upon whom shall my spirit rest, but upon the humble and quiet, and him that trembles at my words?" But in all his acts, not, as boyish age is wont to be, light or insolent, but grave and mature, he appeared with daily progress.

[4] Lesson IV. Accordingly, when in the monastery of St. Perpetuus, afterward instructed in all disciplines, which is situated in the bishopric of Asti, he had been delivered by his parents to be instructed in the ecclesiastical offices, in a short space of time, as a boy of capacious genius and singular memory, he was more diligently taught not only the ecclesiastical offices, but also the singular disciplines. Then, by the will of his parents transferring himself to Bologna, he showed watchful care for the doctrine of the liberal arts. But after he had more fully attained, by the gift of heavenly grace, the knowledge not only of the trivium but also of the quadrivium, he gave more readily his attention to the divine page. And already then he drank with thirsty breast the streams of evangelical doctrine, which he might in fitting time belch forth with honeyed throat to the thirsting people.

[5] Lesson V. But when in the doctrine of the divine books he had profited beyond even his elders, he explains the Psalter, and becomes canon at Siena; so that he could say with the Prophet, Ps. 118: "I have understood above the ancients, because I have sought out thy commandments," being asked by certain Ultramontanes, he ran through the psalter according to the Gallican translation with a compendious exposition. But after he was raised to the episcopal dignity, he was zealous to explain it according to the Roman translation with a fuller and loftier style. Having therefore obtained the name and grace of doctor, he sought Siena; where, honorably received by the bishop and canons, he was gladly admitted as canon of the greater church.

[6] Lesson VI. But after this, certain affairs drawing him, whence he goes to Rome against Berengar. he came to the Roman Curia, and was kindly received in hospitality by the venerable man Peter bishop of Albano. At the same time, blessed Pope Gregory VII residing in the Lateran palace, a very grave question was agitated concerning the Sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, by a certain master Berengar, who thought less faithfully of the same Sacrament. Nor was anyone found who presumed to dispute with the same master about the mystery of so great a Sacrament: both because that master was too much exercised in the conflict of questions: and because in matters of this kind faith has not

merit, for which human reason furnishes proof.

ON THE SECOND DAY.

Berengar being overcome, he is destined bishop Lesson I. But because the time had now come in which the probity and knowledge of the athlete of Christ Bruno should become clear to all in the Roman Curia, by the will of the supreme Pontiff, having entered upon the contest of disputation with the same master, he recalled him from his error to the way of truth by rational assertion, and by the grace of God brought him back to the unity of the Catholic faith: for the pilot is recognized in the storm, the soldier is proved in the battle-line; and the ship which is solidified with a strong joining is not pierced by rushing storms; and the tree which is founded with a firm root is not moved by beating winds. Then the supreme Pontiff, having considered the constancy and virtue of Bruno, the man beloved by God, the bishop of Albano being called to him, said: "The man of God, whom thou hast received with thee into hospitality, I affectionately commend to thee. For I esteem that through him great services can, the Lord granting, accrue to the Church of God." But on another day the Lord Pope, by the counsel and will of his brethren, commanded the same bishop that, going to the city of Segni, which was then widowed of its proper pastor, he should by salutary counsel persuade the canons of the church of St. Mary to choose such a man, and so prudent, for their pastor.

[8] to the widowed church of Segni, Lesson II. Then the bishop of Albano, glad and cheerful, returning to his lodging, said to him: "Brother Bruno, an Apostolic mandate presses upon us, that we should set out to the parts of Campania for certain causes; I ask that thou accompany us, and show us thy pleasing company." Who said, "I am ready," and, mounting their horses, they came together as far as the foot of the mountain of the city of Segni. Then the bishop said to holy Bruno: "In the city which is situated on this mountain certain affairs await us to be dispatched: and there, if it please, we can honorably lodge today." To whom the Saint answered: "What is good in your eyes, do; for I am ready to do what shall please your will." Then, ascending into the city, at the church of St. Mary he was received with honor by the canons, and there they lodged. But in the evening, when St. Bruno, the canons of the same church assisting him out of reverence and honor, being about to give his limbs to rest, had lain down in the bed, he is said to have said: "This is my rest." To whom the bishop of Albano answered: "unto the age of the age." At which answer indeed blessed Bruno began to marvel, and to consider more attentively what such an answer meant: whose cause he learned after the fact.

[9] to which being led, he is soon elected, Lesson III. But when morning dawned, blessed Bruno, at the suggestion of the bishop of Albano, made in the chapter a splendid sermon on the red heifer. The sermon therefore being completed, the bishop immediately, apart from Blessed Bruno, spoke to the canons, and began to persuade them to choose such a man, and so prudent, for their pastor. And forthwith the canons, salutary counsel being deliberated among themselves, unanimously agreed on the election of blessed Bruno. For it was of the divine will that the lamp set upon the candlestick should shine with manifest light to all dwelling in the house of the Lord. And that, as a faithful and prudent servant, he should faithfully dispense to the subject flock the talents of heavenly gifts committed to him: the course being happily consummated, about to receive from the heavenly father of the family the rewards of eternal blessedness. The bishop of Albano therefore, the will of the canons being learned, counseled them to destine some of the canons to the supreme Pontiff, who should lay open to him their concord and unanimity concerning the election of the pastor.

[10] Lesson IV. The bishop of Albano therefore, with Blessed Bruno, having returned to the City, and is confirmed by the Pope, the canons of the church of Segni directed some of their more prudent brethren to the supreme Pontiff, who should suppliantly demand from him the confirmation of their election. And forthwith blessed Pope Gregory secretly commanded the bishop of Albano to induce holy Bruno, by whatever means he could, that he should not oppose the petition of the church of Segni, and should not hide in a napkin the talent of knowledge committed and delivered to him, which he could usefully expend in the episcopal office, and opportunely multiply. Then St. Bruno, although he asserted himself unequal to this burden and honor alike, and reckoned himself less fit; yet lest he should seem to resist the divine will, to which he had recognized the vows of so many to agree, humbly consented to the election made of him. But to undertake this burden of the office, certain visions especially induced him, which he testified that he had seen on the past nights.

[11] Lesson V. For a certain virgin of wondrous beauty appeared to him in a vision of the night, first admonished by a vision, who, his hand being taken, led him through the Lateran palace as if for the sake of walking, and, a golden ring which she bore on her hand being put on the ring-finger of St. Bruno, the virgin of Christ returned to her own. By which ring, namely, he afterward understood that as it were the pledge of a betrothal was signified, because the church of Segni had been betrothed to him. But on the following night he related that the same virgin appeared to him, and offered him in one basket seven other baskets. For in the greater basket, he said, the city of Segni: but in the seven smaller baskets, seven castles subject to the church of Segni were signified. Having therefore received from the hand of the supreme Pontiff the gift of consecration, accompanied by his clerics, he came to the church of Segni: where by the whole clergy and people he was received with the highest honor and great gladness, and placed in the episcopal see. And all, both clerics and laymen, men with women, small with great, in hymns and praises glorified the Lord, who granted such and so great a Pastor to the church of Segni.

[12] Lesson VI. Blessed Bruno therefore, having obtained the office of bishop and the name of Pastor, greatly took pains that his life should agree with his name, and instructs that church excellently. that his profession might be recognized in his work; that his life and doctrine, his hand and tongue, might agree; because if life does not disagree with the voice, if the voice does not rebuke the life, then the reverence of divine praise is a sweet symphony. For he was not ignorant that the action of a prelate ought to transcend the action of the people, as much as the life of a pastor is wont to differ from the flock. First therefore, according to the Apostolic mandate, 2 Tim. 3, he began to show himself irreproachable in all things, sober, chaste, humble, meek, and kindly. In his gait too, in his bearing, in his habit, and in all his movements, he never offended anyone's sight: but always moderated all his acts and speeches with modest gravity. For he was truthful in speech, just in judgment, provident in counsel, industrious in disposing, discreet in commanding, and distinguished in all honesty of morals.

ON THE THIRD DAY.

Intent on works of charity, Lesson I. Accordingly he showed a watchful care and most attentive diligence about the custody of his flock, lest the ravening wolf under his custody could burst into the sheepfold of the Lord, and in any way disturb the sheep committed to him. But about works of charity and of alms he was so attentive that he seemed to think of nothing else. He clothed the naked, fed the hungry, received pilgrims in hospitality, and took care to succor all the needy alike. For with full hands he always succored the poor. So that with blessed Job he could say, Job 31 and 29: "The pilgrim did not stay outside. My door was open to the traveler. I was an eye to the blind, and a foot to the lame. I was a father to the poor, and the cause which I knew not I most diligently investigated." Besides, he showed the diligent service of Christ, and neither by day nor by night did he cease from divine converse and from prayer. He continually applied himself to the reading of the divine volumes, and meditated on the law of the Lord day and night: as one who not only perspicaciously understood the sacred Scripture, but also elegantly expounded it; as they will manifestly be able to experience who shall be zealous to read or hear his expositions and sermons both in the New and in the Old Testament.

[14] Lesson II. Blessed Bruno indeed, not according to the killing letter, shows the understanding of the sacred Scripture, but according to the quickening spirit, bore assiduously in his breast the rational, which befitted the high priest, in which namely was contained manifestation and truth, because in his mind was always the manifest knowledge of the truth. For he was not ignorant that it was commanded in the Old Testament that the bars by which the ark of the covenant was carried should be continually inserted in the rings of the ark itself, that when the ark was to be carried to some place, there should be no delay in putting in the bars. Because namely the doctors of the Church, who are signified by the bars, ought incessantly to apply themselves to the reading and doctrine of the four Gospels, that they may be able to carry round the ark of the Church of the Lord, that is the Church of Christ, through the whole world. For hence it is that when the Savior of the human race wished to feed the crowds with five loaves, he first blessed and broke them, and then caused them to be set before the crowds by the hands of the disciples, because he first by himself, by discoursing, expounded the sacred Scriptures, and afterward dispensed their doctrine through his disciples and the doctors of the Church to the faithful peoples. Hence it is also that the doctors of the holy Church are likened to the eyes of doves, which are washed with milk, and sit by the fullest streams. The good doctor Blessed Bruno therefore, who had drawn the waters leaping into eternal life from the fountains of the Savior, ceased not to derive his fountains abroad, and to divide the waters of salvation in his streets.

[15] Lesson III. He fed the little ones with the milk of simpler doctrine: which he divides to all. but the grown ones he fed with solid food. He received the infirm, consoled the faint-hearted, reproved those sinning publicly before all: to princes and tyrants he showed himself a John, to the Egyptians a Moses, to fornicators a Phinehas: an Elijah to idolaters, an Elisha to the avaricious, a Peter to liars, a Paul to blasphemers, a Christ to the traders: so that he could say with the Apostle: "I became all things to all, that I might gain all" (1 Cor. 9). But because precious unguents cannot fully give their fragrance unless stirred, and the aromas of choice spices spread the fragrance of their odor only when they are bruised or burned; I have thought to touch with a compendious style how strong and patient this holy Man was in persecution, lest a more prolix discourse should generate weariness in the minds of the hearers. The sacrosanct mother Church, like the little ship of Peter amid the storms and whirlwinds of this world, remains inviolate and unharmed, that pilot who commands the winds and the sea ruling her and directing her to the port of salvation. When therefore at that time she sustained very many persecutions, not only from strangers, but even from her own, who ought to have defended her, whom she herself had nourished and exalted, so that she could say with the prophet, "I have nourished and exalted sons, but they have spurned me."

[16] Lesson IV. One of the sons of Belial, namely Aynulf, once count of the city of Segni, Captured by the tyrant Aynulf, by a rash presumption dared to lay violent hands on the anointed of the Lord, namely blessed Bruno, and to consign him to prison custody. For when the same Saint on a certain day was returning from the city, where

he was wont to be present at the Apostolic councils, and to treat ecclesiastical affairs by the mandate of the supreme Pontiff, the aforementioned count met him on the way, and, like one of those who speak peace with their neighbor, but evils are in their hearts, saluted the Bishop with crafty fraudulence: by whom, when he had been saluted in return, they came together, conversing, as far as the foot of the mountain on which the fortress of Viculo was situated. Where, when the malignant count had invited the Bishop to his lodging, and he, suspecting no evil, gave thanks, saying that he wished to return to his church; the aforesaid son of iniquity, nay, servant of sin, revealed by the showing of his work the fraud which he had covered in his mind, saying to the Bishop: "Willing or unwilling, thou shalt come with us, nor shalt thou first escape our hands than thou cause the city of Segni to be restored to us, which is established to belong of right to our county." And these things said, the grace of so great a person not considered, the fear of God set aside, and the reverence of the ecclesiastical Order, seizing the servant of the Lord Bruno with his clerics serving him, he violently brought him into the fortress of Viculo, and consigned the Saint himself to prison custody in the tower of the same fortress, where for a footstool on which he might sit, he is recorded to have given a pavilion of a hundred solidi ^b. But because, as it is written, Prov. 28, "the just, confident like a lion, shall be without terror," blessed Bruno, as he was not lifted up by prosperity, so neither was he broken by adversity. For what the scourge does to the grain, the furnace to gold, the press to wine or oil; this persecution does to a holy man. For the furnace proves the potter's vessels, and the temptation of tribulation just men.

[17] he manifests himself by miracles, Lesson V. But while the Saint was held in custody, to declare the constancy of his faith, the Lord deigned to work a great miracle. For when on a certain day the Saint suffered great thirst, he commanded a certain maidservant of the house to bring him some water of the fountain; which when it had been brought, immediately, when the Man of God, the sign of the cross being made, tasted of it, recognizing it to be the best wine, he reproved the woman, saying: "I had ordered water to be brought, why hast thou carried me wine?" But she began to affirm with an oath that she had brought of the water of the fountain. Then the Saint again ordered water to be brought. Which again, at the blessing of the Man of God, was turned into wine. And this was done a third time. For the almighty Lord, who is wont to magnify his Saints, willed to show the constancy and virtue of Blessed Bruno by the showing of this miracle; for by water in the sacred Scripture is usually understood persecution or any adversity, which holy men are wont to sustain with great desire for the sake of justice. Whence it is written: "Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake" (Matt. 5). And that: "The Apostles went rejoicing from the presence of the council, because they were counted worthy to suffer reproach for the name of Jesus" (Acts 5). But by wine the virtue and constancy of the Saints, or even the eternal gladness which is promised to them after the course of this life, is not incongruously signified. Whence the Lord says to the Disciples in the Gospel: "Your sadness shall be turned into joy." It can also be by water the Mosaic law, by wine the spiritual understanding, be signified: as of the first miracle of the Lord, by which he made wine of water, a certain good versifier says: "He changes the water, furnishes the wine, so does the divine word manifest itself. The law is water, grace wine."

[18] but a little after is dismissed. Lesson VI. For blessed Bruno turned water into wine, because he not only expounded spiritually the five books of Moses, but also the Psalter, the Prophet Isaiah, the books of Kings, Job too, and very many other things in sacred Scripture, quite elegantly, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, explained ^c. The aforementioned malignant count therefore, seeing himself wholly frustrated of his intention: considering also that from the injury done to the Saint more perils threatened him, having received from him some money, and retaining for himself the mounts which he had taken away, dismissed the holy bishop Bruno with much shame and blushing, carrying away nothing but sin and infamy, except those things which we have said, from the iniquity perpetrated. When the same count greatly feared lest his Bishop should gravely recall this deed to mind, and more gravely avenge his injury; blessed Bruno, whom the grace of the Holy Spirit had filled, whose mind perfect charity possessed, forgave that sin to the same count with all his heart, asserting that, his own merits requiring it, it had been of divine permission that a son should lay violent hands on his father. He exhorted also the same count that on account of this he should not hesitate to ask his help in his opportunities, promising that he would in no way be lacking to him and his sons.

ON THE FOURTH DAY.

Lesson I. He commanded also all his friends and parishioners that they should not in this respect render evil for evil to the same count, The tyrant being divinely punished, and inflict on him no loss or injury on account of this deed. Nevertheless God, the just judge, who as he leaves no good unrewarded, so leaves no evil unpunished: who renders to each according to his works (Rom. 2). The injury done to his Servant he did not leave unavenged in the present age. For not long after, he permitted grave snares and persecutions to be stirred up against the same count by his enemies: so that he lost the fortress and tower in which he had imprisoned the Saint: and although he often recovered that fortress, and more often lost it, yet he could never possess it in peace for the space of one month. Finally he came to such want of poverty that he could scarcely have the stipends of life. To whom nevertheless holy Bruno, as he had promised, took pains more than once to succor in his necessities; and to him, and also to his sons, he often bestowed clothes, money, and other necessary things; fulfilling that evangelical mandate by which it is said: "Love your enemies; do good to those who hate you. Pray for those who persecute and calumniate you" (Matt. 6). Thus far concerning the crime and punishment of the said count, and also the patience and charity of the Bishop shown toward him, I think enough has been said. Now concerning the passing of the same Saint to the Cassinese monastery, and the execution of two legations, one of which he discharged in France, the other in Sicily, concerning also the persecution of the pseudo-monks and false brethren which the same holy Bishop sustained on Monte Cassino, I shall narrate with a succinct discourse, as the Lord shall grant.

[20] Lesson II. When therefore, in course of time, the Lord Pope Paschal the second had led blessed Bruno with him into Apulia, he pants for solitude, it happened that he was greatly weighed down by a great burden of sickness: in which infirmity indeed, desiring with burning desire to withdraw from secular cares, and to migrate to the solitude of the cloister, he asked license for this from the Lord Pope. But the supreme Pontiff, although it was very grievous to him and to the whole Curia, because such and so great a person was to him useful and necessary beyond the rest at that time both in counsels and in dispatching all the affairs of the Church; yet, because he was unwilling to sadden him, lest perchance by this occasion the languor of infirmity should grow strong, after much instance of prayers heard his petition ^d. The Bishop therefore, health being recovered by divine grace, soon took his journey to the Cassinese monastery. But the Lord Pope, unwilling that he should be too far removed from the confine of the City, commanded him to receive the habit of religion in the Cassinese monastery. Where when St. Bruno, according to the Apostolic mandate, had arrived, both by the abbot Oderisius, who then presided over the same monastery, and by all the brethren of the same church, he was very honorably received, and there, according to the rule of blessed Benedict, profession being made, he received the habit of religion.

[21] and being made a Cassinese monk, Lesson III. Made therefore a monk, he began to be strong with great virtues in the same place, and, like a vessel of aromas, from the fragrance of the heavenly unguents he breathed upon his companions the odor of sweetness, so that the whole house was filled with the odor of the unguent. All his brethren who were led by the spirit of God, invited and drawn by him, ran in the odor of his unguents. To his abbot he showed himself devout and obedient, but to the brethren meek and humble. About the divine services timely and devout, he was continually diligent in vigils and prayers. Toward all he offered himself an example of good works, and like a fruitful olive in the house of the Lord, and as an abounding vine, from his holy manner of life he propagated the shoots of virtues. Whence it happened that from great necessity he was sent by the supreme Pontiff, with the license of his abbot, to the parts of Gaul, that he might there discharge the office of a legation.

[22] he is compelled to discharge legations: Lesson IV. Where, having discharged a legation for Christ, he went not after gold, nor hoped in the treasures of money, seeking not, according to the mandate given by the Apostle, but fruit everywhere. By the authority of the Apostolic See he celebrated a synod, in which he was zealous to correct errors, and usefully to ordain salutary statutes, and labored, relying on the right hand of heavenly aid, to reform in those parts peace to the peoples, order to the churches, discipline to morals; for he could not teach otherwise, in whom spiritual grace abounded to merit, and the efficacy of works was not lacking to example. The other legation into Sicily too he executed with like diligence, both in correcting morals and in engrafting virtues, carrying back to the almighty Lord manifold fruits of good works. But when he was returning from Gaul, on the way robbers set snares for him, wishing to spoil him of his goods. But when the Saint had approached them, they were struck with so great a terror at his aspect divinely, that, falling with reverence at his feet, they asked pardon for their evil purpose, and showed him service in the conduct of his journey, as much as pleased him.

[23] whence, returning, he is elected abbot, Lesson V. After this, having returned from the legation, the five-year period being completed ^f, Odo also being dead, who had succeeded Oderisius in the prelacy, blessed Bruno by the common counsel of the brethren is elected abbot, and he who, fleeing of old the companionship of blear-eyed Leah, aspired to the embraces of Rachel, the office of Mary sitting by the feet of the Lord being interrupted, was again compelled to minister with Martha, who is occupied about many things. Although therefore unwilling he put his shoulders under this burden, rather than honor, yet at the common instance of the brethren, the government of the abbey being undertaken, in the love of his sons indeed he showed a paternal affection, but in the doctrine of morals and the discipline of the rule he did not omit the office of master. In receiving guests he discharged the debt of charity with all diligence: for through the increments of times and offices there grew in him continually the graces of gifts, and the gifts of heavenly virtues. I do not think that miracle should be passed over which the Lord deigned to demonstrate, to declare the merits of this Saint, in the same monastery: for when on a certain day, solemnly dedicating the church of St. Thomas outside the fortress of Valle Fredda, he had offered there the saving Host to the almighty Lord, and a possessed woman had tasted of the water of its aspersion, the unclean spirit immediately went out of her, and to her

presumed to return no more.

[24] Lesson VI. But as among fragrant flowers the unhappy tares and barren wild oats domineer; as the rose which is fragrant grows with the thorn which pricks; so also in the threefold order of the faithful the evil are found mingled with the good, by whose exercise the just profit, and, like gold in the melting-pot, from the persecution of the evil shine more clearly. For hence it is said of the spouse in the Canticles, Cant. 2: "As the lily among thorns, so is my beloved among the daughters." Hence also to Ezekiel the Lord says, Ezech. 2: "Son of man … the unbelieving and the subverters are with thee, and thou dwellest with scorpions." Hence it is that in the Apocalypse the Lord says to the angel of the church of Pergamum: "I know where thou dwellest, where the seat of Satan is, and thou holdest my name, and hast not denied my faith" (Apoc. 2). In the Cassinese monastery therefore, except a few who washed their hands among the innocent, there was an assembly of malignant monks, who professed the monastic profession by their habit, but denied it by their works: because, when in their profession they had renounced the carnal desires which war against the soul, with all the affection of their mind they had returned into Egypt, to the melons and the garlic: who, the cloak being left, had fled from the Egyptian woman, they bore indeed the cross of the Lord, but as a compulsory service; the abbot's doctrine was hateful to them, and the salutary medicine seemed to them a cup of death.

ON THE FIFTH DAY.

Lesson I. For the unclean spirits, who had left them for a time, seeing their houses outwardly adorned with the habit of religion, Accused before the Pope, inwardly empty of the virtue of charity, taking with them seven other spirits more wicked, returning to them, began to possess them more fully, and the latter things of those men became worse than the former. These indeed, instigated by diabolical suggestions, making a conspiracy against their abbot, accused him before the supreme Pontiff: knowing that he had gravely incurred the indignation of Lord Pope Paschal, because blessed Bruno had publicly reprehended him about the privileges granted to king Henry, against the liberty of the Church and the canonical statutes; saying that they ought to be utterly annulled and made void. For these and such assertions the supreme Pontiff, indignant, sent Apostolic letters to the aforesaid monks, commanding that they should no longer obey Blessed Bruno, but should choose another abbot for themselves, asserting in the same letters that he could not be both abbot and bishop. From the tenor of which letters the same monks, occasion being taken, affecting him not only with insults but even with blows, with an irreverent and foolish mind, cast him out of the monastery. Yet very many of the monks who were led by the spirit of God were moved with great grief over the injury to their Father, and would gladly have recalled him, had they not feared to go against the Apostolic mandates. The pseudo-monks indeed in the cloister are like a reed outwardly gleaming, inwardly empty in a garden: like a foolish woman in a house; like a feathered ostrich in the desert ^g.

[26] he returns to his former see, Lesson II. And so when St. Bruno, about to return to his episcopate, took his journey, the aforesaid brethren, who lamented the departure of their Father with filial affection, are said to have asked him whether they should see him more in this pilgrimage of life? To whom the Saint answered with an evangelical sentence: "You shall not see me from now, until you say, Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord" (Matt. 21). Which prophecy indeed is known to have been fulfilled after his death. For the sons of iniquity, who had raised their heel against their father, a divine vengeance followed. For of them some were struck with the darkness of blindness; some deprived of the office of feet or hands: but others were contracted with an incurable weakness of limbs, so that none of them was immune from punishment who would not be immune from fault, that from the infirmity of the body the atrocity of the crime might be laid open, and the bodily infliction of punishment might show in them how execrable before God and men so horrible a commission of fault had been. Whence it happened that some of them, recognizing their guilt, did penance. And when in course of time John of good memory, bishop of the see of Segni, who succeeded the same Saint third in the episcopate, had turned aside to the Cassinese monastery, the aforesaid monks confessed to the same bishop the sin which they had committed against blessed Bruno, with great contrition of heart, suppliantly asking and demanding from him that he would deign to grant them some little portion of the relics of the blessed Prelate, so that they who had by no means satisfied him living for the guilt committed, might at least after his death, venerating him in his bones, be able to earn pardon from the Lord by his prayers.

[27] where he was received with the highest applause. Lesson III. These things being briefly run through, let us turn the matter of our discourse to the return of the aforesaid Prelate. When therefore the voice of exultation and gladness had sounded to the clergy and people of the city of Segni concerning the return of their Pastor, they rejoiced with very great joy, nor was there anyone among them from whose mouth thanksgiving and the voice of praise did not resound. For all alike in hymns and confessions blessed the Lord, who deigned to restore to them the Pastor and Bishop of their souls. But when he had approached, going out to meet him outside the city, with great gladness and exultation, they led him to the church of the glorious Mother of God Mary, where, prayer being completed in fitting order, the clerics first being received by Blessed Bruno in the kiss of peace, then the laymen falling at his hands and feet in rivalry, there was made a great mutual congratulation, such as sons are wont to show to fathers, or parents to sons, returned from a long pilgrimage.

[28] Lesson IV. But then, the blessing being received, all returned to their own with joy, The highest reverence of the people of Segni toward him, praising and glorifying God. It is not to be passed over in silence how his people, and the sheep of his pasture, while he remained in the monastery, and the Apostolic writings invited them to the election of another, answered. For they are said to have given such an answer to the supreme Pontiff on this: "We," they say, "are not conscious of a sin, for which the church of Segni ought to be widowed of its pastor. Whence know that, he living, we shall by no means receive another: but him, him we ask again, him with desire we continually await, hoping from the mercy of God that the Lord will hear the desire of the poor, and he will understand our cry, who does judgment to those suffering injury, and does not forsake those hoping in him." But every year, as long as he remained in the monastery, they received from his hand the chrism and the holy oil, because they venerated him with most dear affection.

[29] Lesson V. Blessed Bruno therefore, considering that he would render an account of the flock committed to him in the strict judgment of God, and his mutual zeal for them, with watchful zeal took care to correct the errors of his subjects, and to incite them to the fruit of a better life with salutary admonitions, and, like the chariot of Israel and its driver, sustained his sons by patience, and ruled them by discipline. For in the manner of a skilled physician, according to the diversity of diseases, he applied wine and oil for curing wounds. For always in the archive of his breast, with the tablets of the testament, were joined both the rod of strictness and the manna of sweetness. But especially he exhorted his subjects to the endurance of temptations and passions: showing that he shall not be crowned except he who has striven (2 Tim. 2). Because unless the fight precede, there cannot be victory. But where victory has preceded in the engagement of the fight, then the crown will be given to the conquerors. But all who wish to live piously in Christ shall suffer persecution (2 Tim. 3). And he said that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the future glory which shall be revealed in us (Rom. 8). But when the time had come in which the Lord had resolved to call his Saint from the pilgrimage of the present exile to the heavenly homeland, blessed Bruno, foreknowing his passing by divine revelation, caused the clergy and people of the city of Segni to be called to him, being about to exhort them to the way of eternal salvation.

[30] Lesson VI. And when the people had come together to him, until his death, which he dies most piously. because the febrile heat had now invaded the limbs of his body, sustained by the hands of his ministers, and leaning on the window of his house, he admonished the people awaiting and thirsting for the streams of his doctrine, concerning the constancy of faith and brotherly love, and also the perseverance in good works, with a compendious and salutary discourse, showing that salvation is of him who perseveres, nor is he believed fit for the kingdom of heaven who looks back after he has put his hand to the plow. Hence it is that the Apostle of the nations, forgetting the things that are behind, is always stretched forth to the things before, until we attain the prize of the heavenly calling. In the Old Testament too the virtue of the holocaust is diminished, if the tail with the other members is not burned. Joseph, unless he had put on the tunic reaching to the ankles, would not have pleased his father in the many-colored tunic. Hence it is also that the evening sacrifice is declared to be more pleasing to God. Because, as the Scripture sounds, "the end, not the fight, crowns. The rewards of the just depend on the end of their labors." For our Savior promises that he will persevere with his faithful until the end of the world, that he may teach us to persevere so long, until the better state of the age be consummated in us. But the discourse being completed, he foretold them that no tyrant henceforth should build in the city of Segni a tower or any fortification to their loss or oppression, and that they should rejoice, by the gift of the divine bounty, in a pleasing liberty for perpetual times. And these things said, bidding farewell to all, with hand extended he blessed them. Then, returning to his bed, confession being made, and fortified by the reception of the heavenly Sacraments, he migrated to the Lord on the fifteenth Kalends of August, in the fifth year of the Pontificate of Lord Pope Callixtus the second, but in the forty-fourth of his own episcopate. But his body was buried in the church of Segni, with due reverence and honor: in which God continually works miracles through him, to whom be glory and honor unto the ages of ages. Amen.

ANNOTATIONS.

* perhaps Willa

THE EXCERPTS

From the Cassinese Chronicle, book IV.

By the author Peter the Deacon.

Bruno, Bishop, at Segni in Latium (S.)

BHL Number: 1473

BY THE AUTHOR J. B. S.

PREFACE.

In the Preliminary Commentary, §1, there was more than once discourse about this Chronicle, namely in the part in which it pursues the Life and deeds of St. Bruno. The things which are said of St. Bruno in the Cassinese Chronicle, Filippo Malabaila in the dissertation cited in the same place seems to be wholly bent on extolling beyond measure the credit of this Chronicle, at least in those things which concern our Saint. Namely he contends that they were written not merely by a contemporary, but by an eyewitness, and to this end invents at his discretion that the fourth book, of which we treat, edited under the name of Peter the Deacon, had for its chief and proper author the same who had written the three former, Leo of Ostia. Hear by what argument. In the dedicatory epistle to Rainald abbot of Cassino and Cardinal, the aforesaid Peter the Deacon thus speaks: "For I, submitting my neck to the command of your bidding, shall begin to write the fourth division of your Chronicle, which the most eloquent man Leo bishop of Ostia, prevented by death, could not complete, as you had disposed." These things Malabaila reported a little otherwise, following perhaps the edition of Matteo Laureto, which as disfigured, maimed, diminished, cut short, Angelo de Nuce proscribes in the most recent printing of 1668. This last I have used thus far, and from it I shall pluck those things which will seem to pertain more nearly to the Life of blessed Bruno, although I have a thousand times observed that it differs very greatly from the other editions and from the manuscript sent by Malabaila to Bolland. Further, the words of the Deacon, already related from it, Malabaila reads much otherwise, cutting short especially one particle in which he placed all his force.

[2] Peter, addressing Rainald, professes that he undertook the work by the command of his abbot, and accordingly at the end of the cited period, to be attributed not to Leo of Ostia but to Peter the Deacon, "as YOU HAD DISPOSED," he says, "I shall begin to write." That it should altogether be so read, everyone sees. But Malabaila, whose interest it was somehow to make Leo the author of the fourth book too, whether by his own fault or Laureto's, wrote "HE HAD DISPOSED," so that the sense is that Leo of Ostia had already before his death so prepared and disposed the fourth division of the Chronicle, that Peter is to be understood not as author, but rather as collector or arranger. How incorrectly Malabaila here grasped Peter's meaning is more than clear from the whole context of that prologue, and most clear from this, that Peter testifies that he composed a great part of the third division, namely from the renovation of the church of Blessed Martin, or from the 34th chapter, where Leo had made the end of writing. Behold his words: "And because the series of abbots from the times of Father Benedict up to the renovation of the church of blessed Martin had been written by the aforesaid Leo, we, taking the beginning of writing from the renovation of the same church, took care to add to the same history those things which had not been described of the Life of most holy Desiderius, lest the third book should seem for the greatest part truncated."

[3] More things of this kind could be brought forward if it were worth while to refute Malabaila's fiction at greater length. To me it is certain that is shown by several arguments. whatever in the often-mentioned Chronicle is handed down about St. Bruno, all these have only Peter the Deacon for author, namely him who in the year of the Lord's Incarnation 1115, under the abbot Girard, at five years old was offered by his parent to blessed Benedict. To what age he prolonged his life, is plainly not clear, says de Nuce: this is established, that, Aegidius of Venosa being deposed from the abbacy by Alexander III, Peter the Deacon was substituted in the government of the monastery, only with the title of procurator, until a successor should be provided. But Alexander sat from the year 1159, in which Peter was nearly fifty years old. Thus de Nuce. From which you may gather that the author of the Chronicle could easily have survived to the seventieth year of that century. This at least is manifestly clear, that he is plainly contemporary with the anonymous author often praised by us above; whence it follows that, as regards age, the credit of neither is to be postponed. Nay, the anonymous author ought to be preferred by us for the sincerity of his narration, integrity, and other things drawn out by us in the Preliminary Commentary.

[4] How great is the authority of that Peter. For the rest, since there I tried to reduce the discrepancies of the Chronicle and the anonymous author to concord, I now pass over them. Nor is there leisure to examine at length with what authority Peter the Deacon avails, whom Angelo de Nuce depicts in a few words in the notes on the prologue of book 4 of the Chronicle. "He wrote many things," he says, "but without selection and without criticism, for he was of a lively genius, but of a hastening, and sometimes headlong, judgment." These things are said, in my judgment, most mildly; he who wishes more, let him go to Baronius, with whom the Deacon is often beaten, and not undeservedly: certainly in this very Life of Bruno he has erred so palpably that it is a wonder that Malabaila wished to prefer his authority to our anonymous author. I shall pluck from that Chronicle only those things which pertain to the Life of Bruno; those being passed over which Malabaila had judged should be added concerning the controversies of Pope Paschal with the emperor Henry. But if anything be wanting for clarity, I shall take care to illustrate it with brief annotations. The beginning of the Life is taken from the end of chapter 30 joined with chapter 31 of the edition of Angelo de Nuce, as I have already forewarned. In our manuscript codex only the beginning of the Life exists.

Concerning the coming of St. Bruno to this place (Cassino) and concerning his good works.

By the author Peter the Deacon.

The most blessed Bruno, fortieth abbot of this monastery, After the studies being finished, having set out for Rome, sat three years, ten months. He, sprung in the province of Liguria from the illustrious stock of the people of Asti; but possessing from infancy more illustrious morals, and from boyhood sufficiently instructed in the liberal studies, became canon of the bishopric of Asti. Who, from desire of the heavenly kingdom, leaving his homeland and parents, to come to this place, that he might more freely serve God under the monastic habit ^a, hastening, came to the city of Rome. In these days moreover Pope Urban II presided over the universal Church. But it happened that at the time in which the same Man was tending to this place, the bishop of Segni departed from life. Whom the same most reverend Pontiff, seeing to be fervent in the divine service, said to him: "As the tranquillity of the sea often brings peril to sailors, so also to monks removed from the whirlwind of the world, rest and security itself is wont to bring a most pernicious shipwreck, whence it is fitting for thee to obey our admonitions: and be zealous to rule the care of the church of Segni, which is enjoined on thee by us, so much the more religiously and diligently, as thou art strong in knowledge and wisdom." To whose words when he by no means gave assent, he commanded him to go to the aforesaid city; and there, ordaining a bishop in the place of the Roman Pontiff ^b, to go where he wished.

[6] Then the aforesaid Man, coming thither, when he was busy fulfilling the things enjoined on him, he is destined bishop of Segni by the Pope; the same Pope, secretly sending letters to the people of Segni, ordered him to be ordained bishop. When such things had come to his knowledge, in the silence of deep night, going out from the church of Blessed Mary, he took flight. And so when he was busy fulfilling his plans, at a certain crossroads a certain virgin adorned with an imperial robe, whose face shone like the sun, stood before him at a distance. Whom, when he had asked whence, of what kind, or who she was, and whither she was going; she answered: "Know me to be the spouse whom thou dost not well flee. Wherefore, that thou return to the church, on the part of almighty God I command. And beware, lest thou will further to resist the will of God." And these things said, she disappeared. Struck at these things by so great a speech of the virgin, and perceiving the will of God in his ordination, Bruno yielded: and, all rejoicing, received the chair of the pontificate. But being ordained, he remained in the same intention of mind which he had had. Whence, opportunity being found, under the aforesaid abbot Oderisius, coming to this place, those who had come with him weeping, and suspecting nothing of the kind of him, he was made a monk. But the people of Segni, bearing his absence grievously, go to Pope Paschal II: they ask that he would rather compel him to bear the care of his episcopate, than permit him, consulting only for himself, to dwell quiet in the Cassinese monastery, and removed from the whirlwind of the world.

[7] But the Pontiff, moved by their words, destines strenuous men from his side ^c; but withdrawing thence to Cassino, through whom he commands the same Bruno, on the part of the Apostolic See, that he should be zealous in the care of his sheep, and always adhere to the Roman Pontiff for ecclesiastical causes. Reproving him besides, and rebuking; why, without the license of the Apostolic See, he had dared to seek a monastery, in which he himself would by no means permit him to be. To these things the aforesaid Bruno wrote back: "All without doubt who are in the Roman Church know that, unless the madness of the schismatics raged against the Church, this which I have now done I would have fulfilled in deed already many years ago. But now, because in the Roman Church, Peter ruling the helm, the whole Church of Christ our God rejoices throughout the world: the whirlwinds of the winds are now silent: the seas, pacified, are at rest: therefore I am compelled to render what I once vowed to God. For it is better not to vow, than to vow and not to render."

[8] "But if perhaps anyone should object to me that I ought not to leave the episcopate once received, difficulties being overcome, he puts on the monk's habit, I freely answer: That there are many who do not desert the rights of the pontificate: and they are of the left hand, the Lord saying: 'They were princes, and I knew not: they were judges, and not through my spirit.' But those who with right intention have laid down the episcopate, it is certain that they perennially rejoice with Christ in eternal happiness. To me, moreover, examples of the Saints are not lacking, whose footsteps I have followed: who, the tumult of the world being left, attained a quiet life. Whence through you the supreme Pontiff I earnestly beseech; that henceforth he be no more troublesome to me: and the quiet port to which, Christ ruling, I have come, that he compel me not to leave, I suppliantly ask." And when by no reasoning he could bend the same Apostolic, nor the people of Segni, the aforesaid abbot Oderisius asked the same Pontiff that he would permit the aforesaid Man to serve God under the monastic habit in this monastery, to whose prayers the same Pope, lending an ear, was at rest.

[9] and then is elected abbot. But after this, sent by the same Pontiff, together with Bohemond, into Gaul, he held in those parts, in the place of the Roman Pontiff, a synod according to the ecclesiastical tradition. Thence too, returning to Rome, on the forty-fourth day existing from the deposition of the abbot Otto, he returned to this monastery: and by the brethren was set as prelate in the government and care of this monastery. But the same Apostolic, afterward coming to this place, not only declared in the assembly of the brethren that he was a worthy abbot; but also testified that he would be a worthy successor to himself in the Apostolic See. But the same Man is not to be believed to have lived here idle, who

expounded to us such and so great books of the Scriptures. Of which we have taken care to set forth the sum, namely of those which came into our hands. On Genesis, on Exodus, on Leviticus, on Numbers, on Deuteronomy, on the Psalter, on Isaiah, on the Canticle of Canticles, on Judges, on the Apocalypse. On the festivals of the whole year, and on the Lord's days, he composed sixty-nine sermons, one hundred and fifty-five homilies ^d.

CHAPTER XXXII.

[10] He recovers a fortress occupied by the counts of Aquino. At this time moreover Adonulf, Lando, and Atenulf, counts of Aquino, drunk with a diabolical madness, entering the fortress of Terame by the betrayal of the country-folk, and making the inhabitants of the same fortress swear into their fealty, began to plunder the towns belonging to the monastery. When this was announced to the aforesaid Abbot, sending to the same counts, he began to admonish that they should restore the fortress to the monastery, and cease from such iniquities and depredations. But they, spurning not only to do but even to hear his words, threatened to do worse things day by day. Then the Abbot, counsel being communicated with the brethren, separated the same sacrilegious men from the thresholds of the Church. And forthwith, calling Robert the Prince, he invited him to the recovery of the same fortress. Who, a very copious army being gathered, coming upon the same fortress, began to besiege it in every way. And when he had sat there in hostile manner for nearly fifteen days, the same counts sent to the same Abbot: that if he would permit them to go out thence with their arms, they would forthwith restore the same fortress to the monastery without any controversy. Which when the abbot had granted, he received the aforesaid fortress into the power of this monastery, on the day of the Ides of August, in the year of the Lord's Incarnation 1108. For which fortress, namely, the same Abbot gave to the prince of Capua two hundred pounds.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

[11] The month of October therefore coming on, the same Apostolic, coming to this place, He is present at the synod of Benevento with Pope Paschal. our Abbot being associated with him, being about to celebrate a synod, proceeded to Benevento. In which, namely, following the footsteps of his predecessors, he decreed: that whosoever should receive the investiture of a Church, or an ecclesiastical dignity, from the hand of a layman, both the giver and the receiver should be deprived of communion. But secular and precious garments he reproved in the clerics, and forbade them to use such. But when he had come to Capua, being asked by the same Abbot, he solemnly dedicated the church of St. Benedict, which the abbot Desiderius had renewed within the same city. In which also he laid up some of the vestments of the most holy father Benedict: and so, coming to this monastery, he returned to Rome.

FROM CHAPTER XLI.

[12] In these days too, when our Abbot Bruno had solemnly dedicated the church of St. Thomas the apostle, He frees a possessed woman from the evil spirit. situated outside the fortress of Valle Fredda, a certain woman, whom an unclean spirit sharply vexed, was brought to him. Compassionating her calamity, prayer being sent before, he gave the water with which he had washed his hands to the suffering woman to drink: and soon drove the devil from her.

CHAPTER XLII.

[13] For the aforesaid Abbot, Guala bishop of Reggio, Altercation with Pope Paschal. and Robert of Pavia and other Cardinals being joined to him, began in every way to press the Pontiff to break the privilege which he had made to the Emperor: and to knot him with the bond of anathema ^f. But those who had been with the Pope in chains said: "What we before preached, we preach, with one and consonant voice, and what we condemned, we condemn." But others not only did not condemn the things which had been done against the Apostolic and universal Church; but even quite impudently tried to defend them. Therefore, while by dissensions of this kind the Apostolic Church was shaken, it was reported to the same Pontiff that the aforesaid Man was the leader and standard-bearer of that discord and scandal. Which when the aforesaid Abbot heard, opportunity of time being found, he said to him: "My enemies say to thee: that I love thee not: and that I speak evil of thee: but they lie. For I so love thee, as I ought to love a father and lord, and I wish, while thou livest, to have no other Pontiff, as I with many others promised thee. Yet I hear my Savior saying to me: 'He who loves father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me.' Whence also the Apostle says: 'If anyone loves not the Lord Jesus, let him be anathema maranatha.'

[14] "I ought therefore to love thee: but more I ought to love him who made both thee and me. For nothing ought ever to be preferred to this so great a love: but that so foul, so violent compact, concerning the investitures granted to Henry; made with so great a betrayal, so contrary to all piety and religion, I do not praise. For who can praise that, in which faith is violated, the Church loses liberty, the priesthood is taken away, the one and single door of the Church is closed, many doors are opened, through which whoever enters is a thief and a robber? We have canons, we have the constitutions of the holy Fathers, from the times of the Apostles up to thee. We must walk in the royal way: nor turn aside from it to any part. All the Apostles condemn, and separate from the communion of the faithful, whosoever should obtain a Church through secular power. For laymen, however religious they be, have no faculty of disposing of a Church. For this constitution of the Apostles is holy; which whoever contradicts, is not Catholic. But everyone who defends a heresy is a heretic. But no one can say that this is not a heresy, which the holy and Apostolic Church in many councils named a heresy: and at the same time with its authors condemned and excommunicated."

[15] on account of which he is compelled to leave the abbacy. Such an address between the Pontiff and the Abbot furnished the fuel of ill-will and hatred. But among the other things which he then spoke against the same Abbot, he said: "If I do not hasten to take away the abbacy from him, it will come to pass that he by his argumentations will take away from me the Roman pontificate." Wherefore to the same Abbot he directed an epistle from the City, by which he commands that a bishop ought not to be at once abbot, nor could the Apostolic See any longer bear that any bishop should preside over so most famous an abbacy. To the brethren also, through Leo bishop of Ostia and monk of this monastery, he sent letters: in which he ordered that they should no longer show obedience to the same Man: but should, according to God, regularly elect an abbot for themselves. But if they should act otherwise, in all the cells subject to this monastery he would ordain proper abbots. When the Abbot heard this, convoking the brethren, he began to show them the dissension which was between himself and the Pontiff over ecclesiastical causes, and at the same time also admonished them, that if they wished the abbot whom he himself should choose, he would protect and defend both them and this place to his power.

[16] Tumults on account of the election of a new abbot; There was then in this monastery a certain brother, Peregrine by name, a Ligurian by nation, crafty with worldly cunning; to whom he had resolved to give the same abbacy ^g. Which when the brethren had learned beforehand, they said to the Abbot: That as long as he himself wished to preside by the right of abbot, they would all obey him as father and lord: but if he wished to leave the abbacy, the election which was due to them by the precept of the rule, they would deliver to no one at all: but they themselves, by ancient custom, would elect an abbot for themselves. When he heard this, thinking to fulfill it by violence, he calls to his aid armed soldiers to guard the monastery. But on another day, the brethren entering the church in peace to celebrate Mass, suddenly there came a multitude of raging men armed with diverse weapons: and asking who those were who would not fulfill the will of the abbot. But the brethren, bearing these things too indignantly, and unanimously rushing upon them, cast them out of the monastery.

[17] When this had been announced to the Abbot, he ascended to this monastery; return to the episcopate and most pious death. and, calling the brethren to himself: "I do not wish," he said, "that on account of me, between you and the Roman Church, a scandal should arise. Therefore receive the pastoral staff which you delivered to me," and soon, placing it upon the altar, and making absolution for the brethren, he returned to his episcopate. Where, living in holy manner of life happily up to the times of the second abbot Oderisius, he departed from the world on the day before the Kalends of September. But he was buried in the city of Segni, in the church of the holy Mother of God and Virgin Mary; at whose memory the Lord ceases not to work miracles, up to the present day.

ANNOTATIONS.

A LITTLE APPENDIX ON THE WRITINGS OF ST. BRUNO.

Bruno, Bishop, at Segni in Latium (S.)

It is not my mind to institute a laborious disquisition about the lucubrations of our St. Bruno. If a desire come upon anyone of knowing more of them more accurately, Some works of St. Bruno, let him consult the apparatus to his works edited at Venice in 1651 by Mauro Marchese, cited by us more than once in the Preliminary Commentary. Let him see also Arnold Wion in the Tree of Life, page 19, Peter the Deacon On the Illustrious Cassinese Men, edited by Mari, page 82, Labbe, and others treating of the ecclesiastical Writers. It has seemed good to indicate in few words that many of them were attributed to Eusebius of Emesa, to St. Bruno the parent of the Carthusians, to St. Bruno of Würzburg, as Miraeus testifies in the supplement On the Ecclesiastical Writers, and finally also to St. Bruno the apostle and martyr of the Russians, for whose sake especially I had prepared this little dissertation, that the knowledge lately acquired might not perish concerning the Bruno or Brunus and Boniface, by all writers, so far as I know, as well as by my Elders, hitherto distinguished,

when yet they seem to be one and the same. To one inspecting the Acts of the Saints there will straightway occur the things which were written on the XIV of February concerning St. Bruno, and on the XIX of June concerning St. Boniface, as of diverse apostolic archbishops of the Prussians or Russians. I shall therefore premise in few words the things which pertain to the writings of St. Bruno of Segni, and then indicate, when it shall have been proved, that the apostle of the Russians is not twofold, but one and undivided.

[2] are wrongly ascribed to other writers. Trithemius, book 2 On the Illustrious Men of the Order of St. Benedict, chapter 85, in Bolland on the XIV of February, treating of St. Bruno, apostle of the Prussians or Russians, or rather of both nations, asserts that he wrote "a distinguished work on Genesis, and some others which have not come to our hands." The same he relates in the book On the Ecclesiastical Writers, and after him Eisengrein and Sixtus of Siena. "But that error," says Wion, page 261, "begot another more absurd, that they said he was a Cassinese monk … and at last flew to the heavens through the glory of martyrdom. Which all, the kind of death excepted, are to be attributed not to this one, but to St. Bruno abbot of Cassino. For since Trithemius and Sixtus, who follows him, had read Bruno's commentaries on Genesis, and were ignorant who that Bruno was, from the equivocation of the name they took one for the other, not rightly, and inserted this error into their papers." The homilies, once read under the name of Eusebius of Emesa, the praised Marchese also restores to Bruno of Segni. Likewise the work of Sentences, On the praises of the Church, etc., which had been published among the works of St. Bruno the Carthusian, he claims for our Saint by many arguments. That St. Bruno wrote the Life of St. Peter of Anagni, Baronius relates, which accordingly is reckoned among his works, volume 2, page 153: you would more rightly call it an elogium, which whether it be not better handed down by Ughelli, is to me thus far uncertain enough. What was singly ascribed to Bruno of Würzburg, you will find expressed in the Gesner Library, where, unless I am mistaken, he wrongly attributes most of the writings of our Bruno to that one of Würzburg: erring also in this, that he affirms that the other Bruno of the Russians, that is of the Ruthenians, the apostle, wrote on Genesis, and was an Italian by nation. Other works besides these are believed to be of the one of Segni, which in various places, still in manuscript, have not yet seen the light. That Bruno the martyr among the Russians, however much Trithemius proclaims him illustrious for knowledge and doctrine, wrote anything that is commended to posterity, neither Bolland nor other writers could detect. Nor do more things remain for me to say of the works of St. Bruno of Segni: the other things which I had prepared concerning the distinction of the Brunos, and the identity between Bruno and Boniface, you have already printed in volume VI of June from page 217.