Praxedes

ON ST. PRAXEDES, VIRGIN,

AT ROME.

Second Century.

Praxedes, Virgin, at Rome (S.)

BY THE AUTHOR J. B. S.

Of this most celebrated Saint Papebroch left scarcely anything remaining, when at May 19 he so illustrated the Acts of St. Pudentiana her sister, everywhere connected with her deeds, that here it is permitted to subjoin only a few things about the peculiar cult of St. Praxedes. The Acts of this Saint and of her holy Sister having been illustrated on May 19, That it is most ancient the Calendars of Fronto and Allatius prove, besides the exemplar of the Gregorian Sacramentary, which Menard reports in his notes. This indeed I especially marvel at, that in all the Sacramentaries her memory is not commemorated, since the Saint was most probably from the first centuries a titular of a church, to be reckoned among the most ancient of the Roman ones. This is certain, that in the fifth century itself, at least in the year 499, that famous antipope bore that title, elected by the arts of the Greek faction against St. Symmachus, as had to be narrated a little more fully on the 19th of this month. You have his subscription in the first place among the presbyters in Labbe volume 4, column 1315: Caelius Laurentius, archpresbyter of the title of St. Praxedes; to whom it is permitted to join another of the very same title, by name Peter, forty-seventh in order.

[2] The most ancient sacred memory of St. Praxedes in the Martyrologies is to be repeated from the small Roman and from Bede, there remains this singular memory of her since those things which in the Hieronymian codices, the Epternach and Corbie, are added or inserted seem at the least very doubtful. Thus the small Roman speaks of her most briefly: At Rome, of Praxedes the virgin; and in nearly the same terms Bede: The birthday of St. Praxedes the virgin; whom Ado, following, from the current Acts contracted a eulogy into these words: At Rome, the birthday of St. Praxedes the virgin. She, together with her sister Potentiana or Pudentiana, having been instructed in all chastity and the divine law by her most holy father Pudens—who was taught in the faith by the Apostle Paul—after the passing of her parent, assiduously devoting herself to vigils and prayers and fasts, expended her whole patrimony, together with the aforesaid blessed sister, in the sustenance of the poor and of the Saints of Christ. But in the title-church which their father Pudens had dedicated in the name of blessed Pastor, the sister, herself also striving, with the counsel of Blessed Pius, Bishop of the Apostolic See, to build a font of Baptism, that their household might be baptized on the holy day of Easter.

[3] St. Ado did not sufficiently observe that an entanglement is here involved, her memory in the ancient Martyrologies namely that the father of the Virgins was taught by the Apostle Paul (which deed must be supposed to have happened about the year of Christ 62 or 63), but that they themselves survived to the times of Pius; concerning whom see at May 19. The eulogy proceeds: Whom, to the number of 96 manumitted, Blessed Pius washed with the saving waters. Thence, after innumerable works of piety, after the burials of many Martyrs (among whom she buried with her own hands Blessed Symmetrius the presbyter, with 22 others at the aforesaid title-church) who had passed by the palm of martyrdom to the kingdoms of the heavens: the same most blessed Virgin migrated to the Lord, to receive the crown of justice, on the 12th day before the Kalends of August. Buried in the cemetery of Priscilla on the Salarian Way, and placed beside her sister, and her holy father Pudens. More briefly and more elegantly these things are rendered by Usuard and his whole progeny, and placed beyond controversy; as may be seen in our already cited edition, as also in the Roman of today.

[4] What is to be judged concerning the Acts. For the rest, the things here given from Ado easily supply the place of Acts, the remainder to be sought from the already mentioned May 19. But there will perhaps be one who thinks it can be asked of me whether I am ignorant of the judgments of critics, published after our May, concerning those same Acts of the holy Sisters? To him I answer in few words that I both saw them and more than once weighed them, yet in such a way that I did not observe them to have brought forward anything much more solid than what had been noted at the aforesaid day, for the saving, up to a point, of the substance of a narration not sufficiently accurate; which Tillemont, sifting with a harsher pen, nearly proves that very thing which in the observations on Usuard at May 19 I ingenuously confessed. For the rest, the changing of one word or another in the very text, with previous warning, ought not to have been turned into a fault, since the ignorance of copyists has intruded several errors of this kind into other Acts also; but here it seems most evident that the times of the Apostles are confounded with the age of Blessed Pope Pius, as again at July 11 was cursorily indicated by us; likewise in the Usuardine Observations at June 20, where we promised nearly more things than it is easy here to carry out, because no notices have since that time accrued which greatly allure us to cook this matter over again.

[5] Another question is today agitated between the Reverend Fathers of the Vallombrosan Order, The present controversy between two Orders for so many centuries possessors of the Praxedian church, and the Reverend Reformed Bernardine Fathers (commonly called Feuillants) at St. Pudentiana's; no longer about the authority and value of the Acts, or about like matters pertaining thereto, but about a matter certainly of less moment in itself; namely, which of those two churches excels in antiquity, while meanwhile they contend that both were in a manner consecrated by the presence of St. Peter the Apostle; which opinion or tradition whether it can be sufficiently reconciled with the Acts, such as they are, and certainly with historical truth, I should in vain undertake to examine here anew; from those things which at May 19, June 20, July 11, and elsewhere we have said were already observed, the learned reader will easily understand that many things are here asserted, or rather supposed, which ought to be supported by somewhat firmer arguments, before the cord of a contention, however pious, about the prerogative of priority be drawn out further. Some instruments pertaining thereto were sent to me not long ago, of which if I here even in passing make mention, I judged that I should do enough for both parties according to our design.

[6] I have at hand the new Offices published at Rome in 1707 from the printing house of the reverend Apostolic Chamber; about the priority of the church of St. Pudentiana or St. Praxedes, one for May 12, On the feast of the dedication of the church of St. Pudentiana in the City, where by the four lessons of the second Nocturn the whole history is so deduced that the aforesaid priority of the church of St. Pudentiana cannot but be vindicated. The other Office is On the feast of the translation or elevation of the relics of St. Pudentiana the virgin, for July 20; in which the fifth lesson of the second nocturn thus begins: This house of the holy senator Pudens, of old first adorned with divine worship and the ministry of the Sacraments by the most blessed princes of the Apostles, from a private dwelling was made the most ancient of all the churches of the City, and above others most worthy of the chiefest cult of veneration. For here is seen the well in which the sacred blood of very many martyrs, slain under the emperor Antoninus, was collected by a sponge by the most pious virgin Pudentiana and hidden away. You see here again the prerogative of priority most openly attributed to the church of St. Pudentiana; although her age be connected with the times of Antoninus.

[7] The occasion of asking for those Offices was the last discovery of the sacred relics, whose long instrument it is in no way worth the trouble to describe, the priority of the churches, since the eighth lesson embraces the whole matter in these words: But when in the year of restored salvation 1699, for the reducing of the same high altar into a more graceful and ampler form, the foundations were being dug from the bottom, on the thirteenth day before the Kalends of August, on the very eve of St. Praxedes, there was found a leaden chest containing those same relics of the blessed virgins Pudentiana and Praxedes, and certain particles of the memorable vessels, reddened with the precious blood of the holy martyrs. Which, duly recognized, were honorably exposed in the very altar to the public sight and cult of the faithful, this discovery of the relics being presided over by

John Mary Gabrielli, abbot general of our congregation of St. Bernard, and a little after cardinal presbyter of this same title, who, that the memory of that translation or elevation of the relics might be solemnly commemorated every year by a peculiar feast and Office, obtained the faculty and indult from the Holy Apostolic See.

[8] That it is here said a leaden chest was found containing those same relics of the blessed virgins Pudentiana and Praxedes, as also concerning the relics of both, you should not so understand it as that all the relics of St. Praxedes are asserted to be at St. Pudentiana's, but that probably parts of the relics of each Saint were long ago honored in both churches; for neither is there in the manuscript instrument itself any mention at all of relics of St. Praxedes being found; for it is thus read there: The marble box being found was opened, and within was found another leaden box, of the length of two and a half palms, and of both breadth and height one and a half palm, having on the lid the sign of the most holy cross impressed, which being lifted, and carried with due reverence to the sacristy of the said venerable church by the same Illustrious and most Reverend Lord Vice-gerent, was opened, and within were found very many bones, and some of the ashes of the body of the said holy virgin of Christ, Pudentiana. And below: He drew out from the said leaden box, soaked with moisture, the said sacred relics of the body of St. Pudentiana, and laid them away in a certain wooden box, etc. Thus far the words of the instrument.

[9] as reposited in one or the other, or in both, But with what has been said the things which I see handed down by others do not altogether accord, and which it is difficult to reduce to a right standard. The Sanctuary of Piazza, at May 19 treating of St. Pudentiana, confesses indeed that her relics are in that church, yet adds that the body of the Saint herself rests at St. Praxedes'. "At St. Praxedes on the hill, where her body reposes": and in the Hemerologium at the said May 19 you will find the same words roundly repeated. Nevertheless he says that the sacred head is exposed at St. Pudentiana's; that one, I think, which under the beginning of the last century, Paul V sitting, was obtained from the praetorium of the Count of Stanga, at the prayers of Cardinal Borghese; brought thither from Bavaria, but hither from the convent of the virgins of the Deep Valley (Dieffental) in the Rhineland, as the instrument of the Most Serene William, Duke of Bavaria, attests, given at Munich in the year 1592. And these things too I have set out at length, but which teach nothing that could be pleasing to the learned reader: besides that they lead us further from St. Praxedes. Nor do we here wish anything to be defined by our own judgment concerning the relics of the holy Sisters: let both churches rejoice in their sacred treasures, and others too, both at Rome and elsewhere; it remains that we recall in a few words what the Reverend Vallombrosan Fathers adduce in favor of St. Praxedes for the prerogative of priority.

[10] to be defined by us here Among these the most Reverend Father Lord Benignus Davanzati of Florence, formerly for the space of sixteen years parish priest of the church, or rather basilica, of St. Praxedes in the City, then for four years abbot of the same monastery, and at present the present abbot of the arch-monastery of Vallombrosa, sets forth to us that during the time of his stay in the City he found many documents, from which he wove a history of the aforesaid basilica, and which, in compliance with the obedience owed to others, he is soon compelled to commit to the press, whence he thought it not unfitting to send us the present compendious notice of the same church, by which the author does not hesitate to show that the aforesaid church of St. Praxedes was the first of all, by priority of time, erected at Rome, and in which St. Peter first began to perform sacred rites. This is the very exordium of the letter written to me from the monastery of Vallombrosa on May 30, 1724. Furthermore, for the proof of his assertion, he adduces the ecclesiastical writers Ciacconius, Oldoinus, Gorlianus, Martinellus, Bosius, Hugonius, Severanus, Panvinius, Piazza, etc., but more specially, he says, Cardinal Baronius.

[11] is not accepted. His words he recites from the year 44 (I could wish he had added the number): By the firm tradition of our elders it is prescribed that the house of Pudens at Rome was the first lodging of St. Peter, prince of the Apostles, and that there the Christians first assembled into a church gathered for the synaxis; and that the most ancient title of all was called by the name of Pudens. From which words, he says, it clearly appears that this church founded by St. Peter was the first before all others. To prove the consequence, a little lower he affirms without hesitation that the house of Pudens, first converted into a church by St. Peter before all others, under the title of Pudens, is situated on the Esquiline, and that it is St. Praxedes'. But I read in Baronius at the year 44 number 61, that St. Peter was received by Pudens the senator, who believed in Christ, into his house, which was on the Viminal, where afterward a title-church was erected, called by the name of Pastor. Again at the year 57, number 100: It is established that the house of Pudens the Senator, disciple of Peter, was changed into a church for the performing of sacred rites; that is the title of Pastor. What need of many words? At the year 59, number 18, he most expressly asserts that the house of Pudens was placed at the foot of the Viminal, so that I do not see that any aid can accrue to the most Reverend Davanzati from Baronius's opinion: the rest I do not pursue, let it suffice to have tasted these things cursorily.

[12] A few things here I am compelled to subjoin: Tamayus's discourse on St. Praxedes, worthy of its author, Tamayus's dreams are more safely refuted. by which he dares not indeed to snatch the Saint herself from the Romans, but asserts that her sacred body was carried off to Majorca, in these words: At Majorca in the Balearic islands of Spain, the deposition of the sacred remains of Blessed Praxedes the virgin … whose body, carried to Majorca and honorably placed, is commemorated with the highest cult of the islanders. I marveled, I confess, at the bold announcement, and this the more, that he makes our Ribadeneira the author of this thing, so rendering his Spanish Legend into Latin that toward the end he impudently and faultily sews on these words: Afterward the sacred pledges of the Virgin were translated from Rome to Majorca in the Balearic islands of Spain, where, enclosed in an honorable shrine, and laid up in the sacristy of the greater basilica, she is worshiped with the highest veneration. I myself consulted the Spanish text itself which we have of the edition of the year 1604, I consulted the versions, where of those words there is neither trace nor vestige, so that with what face Tamayus attributes these to him, I utterly do not understand. As for the Majorcans, let them themselves look to what relics of that Saint, or perhaps of a synonymous one, they at some time obtained, and let them defend them by what reason they can, or at least religiously venerate them; concerning St. Praxedes, what I should say further separately, nothing remains.

* lid