Princes of the Apostles

ON THE HOLY PRINCES OF THE APOSTLES,

PETER AND PAUL

A.D. LXV.

PREVIOUS COMMENTARY.

Peter Apostle, at Rome (S.)

Paul Apostle, at Rome (S.)

§. I. The Lives of these Apostles written by various authors;

some of these are rejected, and others are indicated as to be given.

BY THE AUTHOR G. H.

Even as the solemnity of this day has always been most well known to the whole world, nor could the most celebrated devotion to the birthday of these Apostles lie hidden from any part: Besides those things which are contained in the New Testament, so innumerable written monuments are reported concerning their Acts and Passion, but which differ among themselves no less in matter than in words, and are to be discerned with great discretion and care. Of the first note and of preeminent credibility, which they would rightly hold as most certain among all Christians, could be gathered from the four Gospels and the book of the Acts of the Apostles, written by S. Luke the Evangelist: but because the sacred text is everywhere known and in the hands of all, it is not pertinent here to describe and reprint it; and the less so because most of it is read below inserted into the Greco-Latin Acts.

Nearest to the sacred writers would be S. Clement, who perhaps wrote the Periodi or Itinerary of Peter, Clement wrote the Itinerary of S. Peter, from Antioch to Rome. For from there he is believed to have followed Peter. But that Itinerary, Epiphanius in heresy 30 not only demonstrates to have been corrupted by the Ebionites, who are convicted of having substituted the rest for a few true things through the then-extant true circular Epistles of Clement himself, teaching far different things from those they themselves invent: but neither these, nor that, are extant any longer. For the work which is now read written under the same Clement's name, the Recognition divided into ten books, corrupted by the Ebionites, and now lost, neither has the form of an Itinerary, leading the Saint only from Jerusalem to Antioch; nor does it contain the errors which Epiphanius refutes, nor is it of S. Clement at all; but wholly supposititious, and as it were composed in the manner of a drama, ingeniously put together, usefully enough composed by some Christian Philosopher, having undertaken acutely and learnedly to dispute and confirm the matters of faith: which itself however, because it had Rufinus of Aquileia, a follower of Origen, as interpreter, can be held suspect in some things.

[2] After Peter's death, by the voluntary cession of Clement, S. Linus succeeded in the Pontificate, whom in the preliminary tract to the first volume of April we showed to have been for nine years the Vicar or Chorepiscopus of S. Peter, and after the latter's martyrdom to have presided over the Church as true Pontiff for two years, two months, twenty-six days. He in the ancient Acts of SS. Nereus, Achilleus and Domitilla, S. Linus also wrote some things, illustrated by us on the XII day of May, is said in num. 14 to have written in Greek the whole text of their passion (of SS. Peter and Paul) to the Churches of the Easterns. But in the Roman Breviary, edited by command of Pius V, it is read on XXIII September that he only wrote the deeds of B. Peter, and chiefly those which were done by him against Simon Magus. But sincere examples of such Acts seem long since to have perished, and in their place, under the name of S. Linus, not however those which Faber Stapulensis published as such, writings of a twofold kind are found, which Jacobus Faber Stapulensis first illustrated by Commentaries on the Epistles of S. Paul, and completed the work in the year 1512; but it was first printed at Paris in 1531. In this, because Faber had repeatedly cited the said little books of S. Linus, he appended them to the end of the Commentaries, found in a very ancient codex of the library of Marmoutier among the Tourangeaux, under these titles; The first book of Linus the Bishop on the passion of Peter, delivered to the Churches of the Easterns, and then translated into Latin. Likewise; The second book of Linus the Bishop on the passion of Paul, delivered to the Churches of the Easterns, and then translated into Latin. Similar things are repeated at the end of each book. The other editor of these little books, Guillaume Malerbault, Theologian and Prior of the Sorbonne, succeeded, Guillaume Malerbault, asserting in the prefixed letter, that the Acts of Linus on the passion of SS. Peter and Paul, edited by the said Faber, had been besprinkled with heretical depravity, and on that account rejected, and therefore he had edited the same, examined among all the noble libraries of the whole world, and Laurent de la Barre separately at Paris in the year 1566: and so they were afterwards reprinted in the Libraries of the Fathers, from the year 1575 down to our times: they are also reported by Laurent de la Barre, Doctor of the Sorbonne, in his Christian history of the ancient Fathers, printed at Paris in the year 1583. But neither are these reckoned sincere by Baronius, rejected by Baronius and Bellarmine, at the year 69 num 6; but are judged tainted with the soot of the Manichaeans. Bellarmine, on Ecclesiastical Writers under Linus, charges that many things openly false have crept into them in these words: Among other things the author writes, that Agrippa was Prefect of the City at the time of S. Peter's passion, and that by this Agrippa Peter was killed without the consent of the Emperor Nero, by whom also that deed afterwards was disapproved. But neither does it appear that the Prefect of the City was then Agrippa: and that the slaying of S. Peter displeased Nero, is opposed by all the ancient Fathers. In the same narration the author writes, that the wife of Albinus, according to the doctrine of S. Peter, repudiated the bed of her husband for love of chastity, against the protesting will of her husband. But this cannot be the doctrine of S. Peter, since it opposes the doctrine of his Co-apostle Paul 1 Cor. 7.

[3] somewhat more approved things are extant in the Gladbach Ms., These things Bellarmine. And these suffice concerning the earlier Acts thrust forward under the name of S. Linus: from which we have both Lives of the holy Peter and Paul in our illustrious Ms. codex, and in a double Ms. of the Cathedral Church of S. Audomar (St. Omer), but in none of those codices is mention of Linus as author found. In the ancient Ms. of S. Vitus at Gladbach the Author is indicated under this title: Life and Martyrdom of S. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, composed by Linus Bishop of Rome in the Greek tongue, and by him destined for the Eastern Churches. Where this beginning of the Preface is had: Although the sacred history of the Gospels narrates many things about the Apostolic signs, or that history which received its name from the Acts themselves. The history begins thus: Therefore after the bodily advent of the Lord's nativity, when the Lord Jesus Christ himself, the true light of the world, had shone upon worldly darkness. So there.

The same Acts are extant, Barberini, as written by Linus, at Rome in the Barberini library in the great Sanctuary marked 926 fol. 181, with the same beginnings. Jean-Jacques Chifflet, in part 2 of Vesontio p. 14, asserts that the Acts of SS. Peter and Paul written by Linus the Pope are had in the most ancient Besançon codices, Besançon, sincere and worthy of so great an author. But that these are the same which we have already indicated, we seem to follow by some conjecture: which is confirmed by a very ancient codex, written in square ductus of letters, and with the distinction of vowel diphthongs accurately preserved, by which signs the book is understood to have been written six hundred years ago. Of old it belonged to the monastery of SS. Peter and Paul at Wissenburg in the diocese of Speyer: and Blum, but afterwards belonged to the most ample Lord Henry Julius Baron of Blum, Counsellor of His Sacred Caesarian Majesty in the tribunal of Appeals at Prague while he lived, often mentioned by us, for the ancient apograph of the Hieronymian Martyrology, communicated to Florentinius. The said ancient codex of his, containing the Acts of the virtues and passions of the Apostles, was transcribed for us by his own hand in the year 1666 by our Reinold Dehn, rightly judging it to be of interest to ecclesiastical antiquity; that, since very few sincere things are extant of those which the Apostles did, at least those things may be produced as emended as possible, which it appears were once corrupted, when not even the Cretans invent all things. But these begin, as I said, the Apostolic Acts, from the virtues of SS. Peter and Paul: but taken from the books of Clement. which, so far as they pertain to Peter, can so little be judged to be by Linus that, when compared with the Latin version of the Recognitions of Clement, adorned by Rufinus, they are clearly shown to have been taken for the greater part from those, and indeed verbatim, as is easy for anyone to recognize. Yet we give them from the said Mss., especially the Blum, that we may follow Dehn's judgment in this. As for what is held under the name of Abdias as Acts of S. Paul, and which the same Dehn transcribed for us from the Blum Codex, they contain scarcely anything which is not read more distinctly in the Acts of the Apostles, and therefore we entirely omit them.

[4] In the same first century lived Marcellus, son of Marcus Prefect of the City, at first a disciple of Simon Magus, then of S. Peter the Apostle; who, being asked by SS. Nereus and Achilleus, wrote for them a certain altercation held at Rome, Other things under the name of Marcellus are omitted between Simon Magus and S. Peter the Apostle, and a boy raised by the latter, and other things which are recounted in their Acts on XII May, chapter three, and most are noted here in other Acts. Meanwhile under the name of the same Marcellus, disciple of S. Peter, there is extant the Passion of the Apostles Peter and Paul, in the Mss. codices of S. Vitus at Gladbach, of S. Martin at Trier, the aforesaid Wissenburg or Blum, a double of Queen of Sweden marked num. 482 and 1603, likewise a double of our own also very excellent. The same was published in print in the year 1531 by Friedrich Nausea among the rhapsodies of the Anonymous Philalethes Eusebianus, into the lives, miracles, and passions of the Apostles. Again in the year 1668 the same Passion was published by Giovanni Maria Florentini, before the Hieronymian Martyrology in the Index of the Apostles from p. 103, and he added his Notations. This is the exordium of this Passion: When Paul had come to Rome, all the Jews convened to him. Soon by these, but in vain, Paul is incited against S. Peter; and there follows a long altercation, in the presence of Nero, between Simon

Magus and the Apostles; and his flight being impeded by them, the death first of Simon, then of the Apostles, and their burial: and toward the end there is added in some Mss. I, Marcellus, disciple of my Lord Peter the Apostle, wrote what I saw. But this clausula is missing in the Wissenburg or Blum Ms.: and in Friedrich Nausea there are added various things about the Emperor Constantine, how he, a leper cured by Sylvester, granted temples to the Christians, chiefly that of S. Peter in the Vatican, and another of S. Paul; and arranged that their sacred bodies be deposited, and adorned them with various gifts: from which it is understood that such things were written long after the times of the Apostles; and so it is not surprising that it is there fabulously said that Nero in his flight was devoured by wolves: that his wife Libia, of whom mention is not found elsewhere, and Agrippina the wife of Agrippa Prefect of the City, were taken from the side of their husbands. But these are nearly such things as we above in num. 2 rejected with Bellarmine. The long altercation itself before Nero displeases, together with the Epistle of Pilate, as given to the Emperor Claudius; whereas it is said to have been written to Tiberius by Tertullian, Eusebius, Gregory of Tours and others; and Pilate himself is reported to have died under Gaius Caligula, before the times of Claudius. Finally the truer Marcellus, in his response to SS. Nereus and Achilleus, asserts that he reckons the conflict of the Apostles with Simon superfluous to relate, since they themselves saw him, and the text of the passion has been written by Linus.

[5] There are extant five books On the Jewish War and destruction of the city of Jerusalem under Titus the son of the Emperor Vespasian, which are also found attributed to Hegesippus, in which, when in book 3 chapter one the crimes of Nero had been indicated, in chapter two certain Acts of SS. Peter and Paul are described, the contest with Simon Magus, the apparition of Christ exhorting Peter to undergo death, and the martyrdom of both. Trithemius in his book On Ecclesiastical Writers attributes those books to S. Hegesippus, who flourished in the second century of Christ, whose Acts we gave on April VII. This S. Hegesippus wrote a history divided into five books from the Passion of the Lord down to his own age, weaving narrations of the Ecclesiastical Acts: but these have perished, with great damage to the Christian commonwealth, except for some fragments, which Pierre Halloix collected in vol. 2 On the Lives of the Eastern Ecclesiastical Writers. To this Hegesippus therefore were attributed the five books above indicated On the Jewish War, from the times of the Maccabees down to the ruin of the holy city and temple of Jerusalem; and in most parts they are a pure and simple compendium of Josephus the Jew, who perhaps being called by some Josippus, the name Hegesippus was formed from there, whom Baronius calls the younger Hegesippus, and to S. Ambrose as interpreter. others Pseudo-Hegesippus. Such books are extant, first printed at Cologne in 1525, and as is added on the title page, with the divine Ambrose Bishop of Milan as translator: they are also extant reprinted by Laurent de la Barre, in the Christian History of the ancient Fathers, and here and there in the Libraries of the Fathers; but without mention of S. Ambrose as translator. Meanwhile Gronovius, in the Monobiblos of observations on Ecclesiastical Writers, printed at Deventer in 1661, judges S. Ambrose to be the author of those books, because various things in the same words and sentences are read both in those books and in other works of S. Ambrose. Philippe Labbe On Ecclesiastical Writers under Hegesippus reckons Gronovius's opinion not improbable. Whatever may be of the matter, the author seems to have lived about the time of S. Ambrose, who in lib. 3 ch. 5 when he had described Antioch, metropolis of Syria, adds these things: The city of Antioch was reckoned in the third place from before among all cities which are in the Roman world, now in the fourth, after Constantinople grew up the city of the Byzantines. Now this prerogative was conferred on Constantinople in the Council held in that city in the year 381; to which time the particle now alludes. We would therefore give from the said author the things recounted of S. Peter, except that all those things are contained in the narration ascribed above to S. Linus, of which some, as we note in the same place, are read in other works of S. Ambrose.

[6] In the Medicean Greek Ms. of the Most Christian King there are extant other Acts, and they were sent to our Rosweyde under this title; Hypomnēma, dialambanon merikōs tous agōnas kai athla, apodēmias te kai teleiōsin tōn hagiōn kai koryphaiōn Apostolōn Petrou kai Paulou. Commentary, A Commentary on both Apostles is prefixed which treats individually the contests, labors, peregrinations and consummations of the Holy and Chief Apostles Peter and Paul. The same in Greek, found at Rome, was translated into Latin by Guglielmo Sirleto, whose translation, found among his Manuscripts in the Vatican Library, we preferred to give here, rather than another less elegant one, edited by Aloysius Lipomanus from the Venice Ms. in the sixth volume of the Lives of ancient holy Fathers, and reprinted from Lipomanus by Laurence Surius on this XXIX June. The Greek exemplar of this Commentary also, brought from Greece to Britain, Patrick Junius cites in his Notes on the Epistle of S. Clement to the Corinthians p. 14, where he treats of the Preaching of S. Peter among the Britons. Who was the author of this Commentary is not indicated in the autographs. edited under the name of Metaphrastes, But because the name of Simeon Metaphrastes was prefixed by Lipomanus and Surius, this seems to have been disapproved by Leo Allatius On the writings of the Simeons p. 76, in these words: Men well deserving of Ecclesiastical antiquity have claimed for Simeon, not without note of error and ignorance, all the Lives of Saints which do not bear an Author prefixed to them, which are truly not of Simeon. And p. 79 he repeats these things: Truly if you should claim all those Lives for Metaphrastes, you will most bitterly rave; whereas it is by an anonymous Author. if none, you will impiously and wickedly have committed many things. But it must be observed before other things, that it is badly said by some, when the name is not prefixed to some Life of a Saint, that that Life is read in Metaphrastes; as though all the collections of Lives were composed by the same Metaphrastes, which I judge to be most false. Thus there. But because the author of the said Commentary prefaces, that he has collected from various sources what he says about SS. Peter and Paul, and meanwhile inappropriately compresses into one and the same time things done at different times, therefore both for this and other sphalmata (errors) committed by the same we judge him rather to have been another than Metaphrastes: we give them however, because they hand down various things accomplished by S. Peter in Asia and Syria, as far as one may conjecture, collected from the traditions of various Churches; and exhibit a fairly elegant compendium of the Acts of S. Paul from the Acts of the Apostles.

[7] Now as for the holy Greek and Latin Fathers, of those who wrote Homilies, there is scarcely any who has not particularly taken up the holy Apostles for himself to praise: yet S. John Chrysostom surpasses all by a certain most celebrated Oration in Combefis, which Wastelius wrongly ascribes at least to his John of Jerusalem. Orations of the holy Fathers are indicated, To the Homilies edited in the year 1666, was added a Sermon of S. Sophronius, Archbishop of Jerusalem, rendered into Latin from a Ms. of our Francis Turrianus deposited at the Professed House in Rome, by the zeal of the then most illustrious adolescent learning the potter's art in the jar (as he prefaces), and placing the rudiment of interpreting Greek in that very little composition. He afterwards Cardinal of S. R. C. John Francis Albani of Urbino, and while we print these things, Clement by Divine providence Pope XI, to whom may God add many years for His greater glory and the utility of the Catholic Church. Of his concerning this work of the Saints there is extant with us a splendid Monument, namely the Larger month of the Basilian Synaxarium rendered in Latin. I am silent moreover about the Homilies, which Allatius and others recount; of Asterius, Bishop of Amasea; Hesychius and Leontius the Presbyters; Proclus, Patriarch of Constantinople; Nicetas the Rhetor; Theodoric Scutariotes. and more recently composed Lives.

[8] The Latins are everywhere at hand: among whom, later in age, but first in diligence above all, was Paulo Emilio Sartorio of Caserta, kinsman of Giulio Antonio Sanctorio Cardinal of S. R. C.: by whom was written learnedly and elegantly the Life of both Apostles, by Paulo Emilio Sartorio, and obtained by Aldo Manutius, restorer of purer Latinity among the Italians while acting at Rome in 1597, and published in print, which, if it were not too prolix, even for that reason would deserve a name in this work, that of these chief Saints, of whom the Anonymous Greek treated more succinctly, at least this monument would be extant, by which they should be refuted who deny that sacred things can be celebrated by a style of distinguished eloquence. Charles Stengel, They deserve also at least to be named in this place Charles Stengel, and Thomas Massucci; of whom the former, of the Order of S. Benedict at Augsburg professed at S. Ulric's and afterwards Abbot, in the year 1620 published an ample Commentary of the deeds done by S. Peter, from the sacred Scriptures, the holy Fathers and the most approved Writers, Thomas Massucci, distinguished into more than 60 chapters, and dedicated to Pope Paul V; the other, Priest of our Society, ten years later wrote at Rome, and in 1633 gave forth published in Lyon in Gaul, Paul the Apostle, or his Life, historically and dogmatically explained in fifteen books. Sigismondo Lorenzi, Something similar Sigismondo Lorenzi of Cremona also attempted at Rome, of the Congregation of the Clerics Regular of saint Paul, who are vulgarly called Barnabites, by publishing in 1641 two treatises in folio, one of which embraces the Acts of the Life deduced according to the Chronology of Baronius and Spondanus, the other the Virtues adorned with fifty symbols, both in Italian. Michelangelo Lualdi, Nor is Michelangelo Lualdi the Roman Priest to be omitted, who in 1651 published two volumes in Italian, under the title of the Propagation of the Gospel through the West, the greater part of volume 2 he filled with the Acts of both Apostles, and the matters of these at Rome and the things pertaining there, examined most minutely and explained most copiously. Finally P. Hieronymus Xavier, Apostolic missionary of our Society in the Mogor Mughal empire, Hieronymus Xavier. wrote in the Persian tongue the Life of S. Peter in the year 1600; which together with the Life of Christ, similarly written two years later by the same, a certain Hollander, sower-of-words of a new and deformed Gospel, rendered into Latin not unfaithfully; with Notes added however by which he detracted from the Pontificate of Peter, and insulted the writer, because for weaving the history he had also received the Recognitions of Clement and other similar things of not most certain credit: as if that were a great crime at the beginning of this century, the chaff not yet so sifted, from which we strive to purge ecclesiastical history. Others perhaps will suggest others occupied with no less zeal and praise on this argument. I, obeying Henschenius's mandate, after the Lives shall give some Analecta on the Relics, miracles and churches of the Apostles, by which this whole treatment about them shall be closed.

§. II. Time of the life and Martyrdom of the two Apostles.

[9] Five years being added to the common Era The foundation of this dissertation was laid in the Preliminary Tract to the first volume of the Acts of April, in which we treated of the ancient Roman Pontiffs, and established their times from ancient

catalogues of the same Pontiffs, and the more certain Acts of theirs, but we drew our beginning from Christ, supreme Pontiff and Priest forever: whose Vicars were S. Peter and his other successors. We showed in the same place that Christ was incarnate for the redemption of the human race on March XXV in the virginal womb of Mary most sacred, and was born December XXV, with D. Laelius Balbus and C. Antistius Vetus as Consuls, anticipating the common Era by five whole years. Christ is said to have died in the year 29, But because Christ remained in this life thirty-three years and three months, we establish with the ancient Fathers that the same in the year XXIX of the common Era, with Rubellius Geminus and Rufus Geminus as Coss., on March XXV, on Friday in Parasceve, died on the cross, and on the XXVII day rose victorious from the dead. The older Catalogue proposed in the said preliminary Tract, sent by S. Damasus the Pope to S. Jerome: its earlier part seems to have been reduced into that order by or under S. Anterus the Pope, around the year CCXXX, and has this proem: and after the Ascension S. Peter took up the Episcopate

While Tiberius Caesar was emperor our Lord Jesus Christ suffered, under the two Geminus Consuls, on VIII Kalends of April, and after his ascent the most blessed Peter took up the Episcopate. From that time it was arranged by succession, who was Bishop, and for how many years he presided, or under whose rule. Thus there. The years themselves are indicated by a most certain method through two pairs of Consuls, by which the beginning and end of each Pontiff are constrained.

[10] But S. Peter's Episcopate, taken up after Christ's ascension, was of no particular place, but signified his preeminence above the other Apostles, and the power conferred of feeding the sheep and lambs of Christ. How many years old S. Peter then was, is nowhere exactly indicated. What then if for that time about thirty years of age be attributed to him? then about 30 years old, Then he who after Christ's ascension still lived thirty-seven years, would have come to sixty-seven years of age, still sufficient for bearing labors and completing journeys. Therefore three years younger than Christ the Lord, born at Bethsaida, and brought up under his father Jonah or John in the fishing trade, having taken a wife he lived some time in matrimony; afterwards called by Christ, he was in his company for three years, instructed in the most holy science of the new Law. After the Ascension of Christ being constituted Prince of the Apostles, he gave the speech among the others about substituting one in the place of the traitor Judas: where prayers being premised, Matthias was chosen by lot. But after the Holy Spirit was poured upon the disciples on the day of Pentecost, S. Peter, having held a sermon, converted about three thousand: he healed the lame at the Beautiful gate of the temple, in the year of Christ 30 S. Paul is converted, and punished Ananias and Sapphira with death. In the same year still, after the seven Deacons were elected, S. Stephen was stoned on December XXVI, Protomartyr for the faith of Christ: and in the great persecution then arisen the faithful were dispersed, Saul devastating the Church: but he, with the Lord Christ appearing on the Damascene road, was converted in the next year after Christ's ascension. How many years of age Saul, afterwards called Paul, then had, is not indicated in the Acts of the Apostles. S. Chrysostom, in the Oration on SS. Peter and Paul, has these things on his age: For thirty-five years Paul the Apostle served Christ the Lord with all promptness: but he consummated the course of piety, when he was sixty-eight years old. of his age 33. Thus he. We take the said thirty-five years from the year thirty of the common Era down to the sixty-fifth year. But the thirty-three of age which remain, to arrive at sixty-eight years of life, are those which he had at his conversion to Christ. But, you will say, how are those about to stone Stephen said to have laid their garments at the feet of Saul the adolescent, if he was then thirty-three years old? I answer: that in Greek for Adolescent is read Neanias, which word often signifies fierce and bold, or one endowed with youthful boldness and ferocity. Consult the Thesaurus of the Greek tongue, constructed by Henri Estienne, and the Interpreters generally agreeing with him. Indeed in the same chapter Ananias calls him a man: I have heard, he says, of this man, how many evils he has done to the Saints in Jerusalem.

[11] SS. Peter and Paul meet at Jerusalem in the year 33. In the year of the common Era thirty-three, S. Paul, after three years from his conversion (which Massucci, book 3 ch. 4, judges to have been spent almost entirely in Arabia), came to Jerusalem to see Peter; for the cause, as Ambrose writes, of paying honor to the first Apostle. To which year also we gather S. Peter to have placed his chair at Antioch from Anastasius the Librarian on the Lives of the Pontiffs, asserting, Peter first sat at the Cathedra of Episcopacy at Antioch for seven years: who however after the ascent of Christ had taken up the Episcopate, as we said above from the Proem of the principal Catalogue: in which this elogium is had about S. Peter. Peter twenty-five years, one month, nine days. He was in the times of Tiberius Caesar and Gaius, and Tiberius Claudius and Nero, from the Consulate of Vinicius and Longinus, to that of Nerva and Vestinus. He suffered moreover with Paul on the third day of the Kalends of July, with the Consuls above said, in the reign of Nero. Thus there, which is to be somewhat elucidated. With the two Geminus Consuls Christ ascended, to whom the Consulate of the Geminuses for the sake of dignity is said to be left behind; and although Peter then took up the Episcopate and preeminence above the other Apostles; yet the Consuls of the following year, namely C. Cassius Longinus and M. Vinicius Quartinus, who in the year of the common Era thirty bore that dignity, are attributed to the beginning of S. Peter. Which mode of proceeding we noted in the same place was always observed in the prior part of the said Catalogue, that the same Consuls should not be repeated. In the Ms. codex of Anastasius the Librarian, which was once kept among the books of Cardinal Mazarin, these things are read: S. Peter had the Cathedra of Antioch from the year 33 to 40, After the passion of Christ Peter the Apostle held the Cathedra in the parts of the East for four years, namely from the year of the common Era XXIX to the year XXXIII. Then he came to Antioch, where he sat for seven years, eight days, namely to the year fortieth. Then he came to Rome, then at Rome to 65, where he sat twenty-five years, seven months, eight days, namely to the sixty-fifth year: when the Consuls were P. Silius Nerva and C. Julius Atticus Vestinus above indicated, but in place of Vestinus by an easy lapse Verus was read.

[12] Of this last year of martyrdom we shall presently treat more broadly. But first we note, meanwhile he traveled to various regions: S. Peter neither continued at Antioch seven continuous years, nor at Rome twenty-five, but having traveled to various regions occasionally visited Jerusalem. Meanwhile, with Gaius Caligula the Emperor, who in the year XXXVII had succeeded Tiberius, having been killed by Chaerea and the other conspirators on IX Kalends of February of the year XLI, his uncle Tiberius Claudius was substituted; who amplified the kingdom of Herod Agrippa, son of Aristobulus, with Judaea and Samaria added. He, when he held Judaea in the third year, struck by an Angel perished, in the year XLIII or at the beginning of the next. This is he, at Jerusalem in the year 42 he is freed from prison by an Angel, who (in order to afflict some of the Church) killed James the brother of John with the sword. But seeing that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded to apprehend Peter also, wishing after Easter to bring him forth to the people; but he, led out by Angelic aid, went into another place. There was moreover in the year XLII a great famine, predicted by the Prophet Agabus, when SS. Paul and Barnabas carried the alms collected to Jerusalem, which is placed before the killing of S. James and the captivity of S. Peter in the Acts of the Apostles ch. XI, and the rest is narrated in the following chapter. But as is reported ch. 15, a sedition having arisen at Antioch on account of the Jews, who wished the Gentiles converted to God to be circumcised; Paul and Barnabas set out for Jerusalem: where an inquiry being held, after the suffrages of Peter and James, by common decree they established that the converted Gentiles are not bound by the law of Moses. The time seems able to be gathered from the Epistle of S. Paul to the Galatians, and in the year 47 he presided over the Council of Jerusalem. where he first wrote, that after three years he came to Jerusalem to see Peter, namely from his conversion, in the year of the common Era XXXIII, then after fourteen years he says he ascended again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, which therefore happened in the year XLVII, and according to the witness of S. Jerome in ch. 2 to the Galatians, in the year XVII from the conversion of S. Paul.

[13] Paul and Barnabas departed thence to Antioch, and remaining there preached the word of the Lord. S. Paul then goes to various regions, A dissension having afterwards arisen, Paul, with Silas chosen, set out, was walking through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the Churches, charging them to keep the precepts of the Apostles and Elders. Thence he came to Derbe and Lystra… But passing through Phrygia and the region of Galatia, they were forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word of God in Asia. But when they had come into Mysia, they tried to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them. But when they had passed through Mysia, they came down to Troas… and sailing from Troas, they came to Samothrace, thence to Neapolis and Philippi. They are received as guests at Lydia's, but with the spirit Python cast out, they are beaten with rods, and sent to prison: but dismissed, when they had walked through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica: and a great fruit having been made by Paul's preaching, a sedition is stirred up against him by the Jews, likewise also at Beroea. Thence he was led to Athens, where he disputed with the Jews and the Philosophers, and converted Dionysius the Areopagite with certain others. All which things are recounted in ch. 15 and the two following among the Acts of the Apostles: but they were done from the year XLVII to the year XLIX, which is the ninth of Claudius the Emperor; when, according to the witness of Orosius lib. 7 ch. 6, the Jews were expelled from the City by Claudius. In the same Acts of the Apostles ch. 18 these things are read; After these things Paul departing from Athens came to Corinth, in the year 49 when the Jews were driven from Rome, he came to Corinth, and finding a certain Jew named Aquila, a Pontic by birth, who recently came from Italy, and Priscilla his wife (because Claudius had ordered all Jews to depart from Rome) he went to them… He sat there a year and six months, teaching among them the word of God. Thus there, without any mention of S. Peter, of whom what was done is uncertain, whether he had then returned to Rome and remained there, and if he had departed, in which direction? At least then he did not hold the Council, although with Baronius many have thought so, for we said this was done two years before.

[14] after other peregrinations again Meanwhile S. Paul, having departed from Corinth about to sail into Syria, came to Ephesus, thence to Caesarea and Antioch, whence he carried to the Brethren in Judaea the alms. Then having returned to Galatia and

Phrygia, he came again to Ephesus, where he spent two whole years teaching. Afterwards again about to sail into Syria, he set out into Macedonia and Greece, where he remained three months. Hence he came to Troas, where he raised up Eutychus dead from a fall. Then touching at the islands and shores of Asia, having exhorted the Presbyters summoned from Ephesus, after various sailing into Syria, then to Tyre, and at length came to Jerusalem.

But Claudius the Emperor in the meantime having been removed by poison on October XIII of the year LIV, Domitius Nero was reigning: he visits Jerusalem, Felix the Procurator however was in charge of Judaea: to whom S. Paul, after various injuries inflicted by the Jews at Jerusalem, was sent to Caesarea, because he had appealed to Caesar. From Felix handed over to the successor Portius Festus, and bound in the year 55 sails, and by him destined for Rome, Jerome in the book On Writers asserts that Paul was sent in the twenty-fifth year after the Lord's passion, that is the second of Nero; where he would have written better the twenty-sixth from the Passion of the Lord; yet he confirms our opinion, of those teaching that Christ suffered in the year XXIX, not XXXIII or IV: otherwise Paul's voyage would be deferred to the year LVIII or IX, which would have been the fifth or sixth year of Nero begun in October. In that voyage, undertaken at a plainly unsuitable time, Paul suffered shipwreck about the beginning of February, and escaped to the island of Malta, where after three winter months, he came to Rome, in the year 56. he sailed to Syracuse, then Rhegium, thence Puteoli; and at length came to Rome in the year LVI, kindly received by the Christians. He remained for the whole two years in his hired lodging, he is acquitted, in the year 58. and received all, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching the things which concern the Lord Jesus with all confidence without prohibition. And with these words Luke concludes the Acts of the Apostles in the year of the common Era LVIII.

[15] He wrote Epistles Before this LVIII year were written by Paul most of the Epistles, of which the first of all is reckoned that directed to the Thessalonians in the name of Paul, Timothy and Silvanus, who in the Acts is called Silas: for they were present with him both at Athens and at Corinth, where he stopped for a year and a half, and seems to have had leisure for writing. Therefore that one was written about the year XLIX, two to the Thessalonians, and in the following year the second to the same Thessalonians, before he departed from Corinth. But the first to the Corinthians was written at Ephesus, two to the Corinthians and Titus, when he stopped there for two years, in the year LI or following. That which was sent to Titus, and in which he calls him to Nicopolis, where he had determined to winter (as it is said ch. 3 v. 12) seems to have been composed still at Ephesus or in some nearby place in the year LII, in which year still at Nicopolis the second to the Corinthians was written. The first to Timothy however, at Laodicea metropolis of Phrygia, as is added at the end in the Greek and Syriac tongue, first to Timothy, and Theodoret agrees. But Saint Athanasius says it was sent from Macedonia, and that around the year LIII, at which time he came from Macedonia into Greece, and there spent three months: but then he seems to have written to the Romans, when in the last years of Claudius the persecution had ceased against the Jews, to the Romans, and Aquila with his wife had returned to Rome. At Rome from chains he wrote several, and perhaps in the first place the second to Timothy, second to Timothy, to the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, by which he summoned him to himself; then to the Ephesians through Tychicus the Deacon; to the Philippians through Epaphroditus, sent by them; to the Colossians and to Philemon through one and the same bearer Onesimus, all in the year LVI or nearly following. That to the Galatians was also written from Rome, the Greek and Syriac at the end maintain, likewise Jerome, Athanasius, to the Galatians, Theodoret: but because he does not mention chains, he seems to have written around the year LIX, after he had been restored to liberty, and this was now everywhere known. Finally that to the Hebrews is reckoned newest, to the Hebrews. and at Rome, in the said or following year, dictated.

[16] The Apostle Peter among his labors left two Epistles to the Church, S. Peter wrote 2 Epistles: written at Rome, the first under the first years of his Pontificate at Rome, he inscribed to the chosen sojourners of the dispersion of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia; the other to those converted from Judaism, and perhaps near the end of his life. Meanwhile when he had constituted the Church at Rome, and wished to illustrate other regions also with the light of faith, he ordained Linus his successor Bishop, he constituted S. Linus Vicar in the year 56, and constituted him his Vicar or Chorepiscopus in the city of Rome. The time the aforesaid ancient Catalogue indicates, namely the Consulate of Q. Volusius Saturninus and P. Cornelius Scipio, who bore that dignity in the year of the common Era fifty-sixth. he travels, Then the Acts add, translated from the Greek, that S. Peter came to Terracina, and ordained Epaphroditus Bishop: and they then indicate his various peregrinations through Africa, Egypt, Britain and Spain: whence very many cities and regions of the West glory that the faith of Christ was brought to them by S. Peter, and by Bishops sent by him: and we throughout this whole work very often treat of various Saints of this kind, judging however that many are said to have been ordained or sent by Peter, the first Bishops of certain Sees, whose definite beginnings were unknown, either because they were ordained by some successor of Peter or sent for other reasons. But Eusebius lib. 2 of the Ecclesiastical History ch. 22 observes, that Nero around the beginnings of his Empire conducted himself more leniently, and benignly undertook the defense for our faith, when the Christian religion and true faith seem to have been widely diffused and propagated throughout the whole Empire. But indeed, Eusebius adds, a persecution arising when Nero afterwards broke out into the most loathsome crimes, the Apostles also with the rest experienced his cruelty. Various causes of this persecution are adduced: of these one is, the City burned in the year LXIV, and, on the testimony of Tacitus lib. 15 Annals, the fire could not be stayed, but both palace, and houses of Nero, and all around were consumed. That Nero in the very time of the burning city had entered his domestic stage, and sung the destruction of Troy, after the city burned, a rumor had spread: and he seemed to seek the glory of founding a new city and naming it after himself, and so the fire was believed to have been ordered. Therefore to abolish the rumor he subjected as guilty, and afflicted with the most exquisite punishments, those whom the crowd, hated for their crimes, called Christians. To those perishing mockeries were added, that covered with the skins of beasts they perished by the laceration of dogs, or affixed to crosses, or about to be burned, were burned for the use of nightly light. These and other things Tacitus. By Suetonius ch. 16 Christians are said to have been afflicted with punishments, a kind of men of new and harmful superstition. The Martyrs, then killed, are venerated on June XXIV.

[17] Behold the first cause of the persecution stirred up. There came in the Apostles another, on account of Simon Magus extinguished, on account of Simon Magus overcome and through S. Peter cast down to earth from his presumed flight and dead, as will be related at length below. There is added also a third cause on account of the chastised impudicity and lasciviousness of Nero, and the impeded incest and impure intercourse of a Christian woman, and Nero's mistresses baptized, whom as a mistress desired by him, Paul had turned away, will be said below from S. Chrysostom: where also S. Peter had imbued with faith two women of the Emperor, who had determined to live chastely, on which account the most libidinous and impudent Nero raged against the whole Church, especially against S. Peter, as one who had been the author of preserving chastity for the women, who had believed in Christ. We have therefore the causes; he is killed with saint Paul in the year 65. we have also the year of persecution begun against the Christians, namely the tenth of the Neronian Empire, the sixty-fourth of Christ, in which very many Christians were crowned with martyrdom; to whom S. Leo the Pope in sermon one On the Birthday of SS. Peter and Paul seems to prefer these, or at least to add them, while he so writes: How great a progeny these two illustrious seeds of the divine offspring sprouted, thousands of blessed Martyrs attest, who, emulators of the Apostolic triumphs, encompassed our city Rome with peoples purpled and shining far and wide, and as it were from the honor of many gems joined together crowned with one diadem. Thus there. But that in the second year of the persecution the Apostles were crowned, the ancient Catalogue of the Pontiffs expressly teaches in these words: Peter suffered with Paul on the third day of the Kalends of July, with the Consuls above said (Nerva and Vestinus) in the reign of Nero: in which year, on account of the detected conspiracy against Nero himself, very many were killed: among whom C. Piso, the head of the conspiracy, the poet Lucan, Seneca the Philosopher, and Vestinus the Consul, in whose place Cerealis Anicius was substituted. All these Tacitus pursues at length lib. 15 Annals, and lib. 16 concludes that tragedy with this exclamation: So much blood spent at home wearies the mind, and restrains it with grief.

[18] Therefore SS. Peter and Paul suffered in the year of the common Era sixty-fifth, the eleventh of Nero, The reckoning of time is confirmed in the Acts of the successors. who in October was about to begin the twelfth year of his Empire. This time of Martyrdom is confirmed by the successors in the Pontificate, Linus, Clemens, Cletus, Anacletus, Evaristus and Alexander; from whom Linus ordained Bishop in the times of Nero, and constituted Vicar of S. Peter, in the Consulate of Saturninus and Scipio in the year LVI, departed a Martyr in the Consulate of Capito and Rufus in the year LXVII. Then Clemens presided to the Consulate of Vespasian VII and Titus V, that is the year LXXVI, when he yielded to Cletus, whose last year is assigned to the Consuls Domitian IX and Rufus, but in the following year LXXXIV the same Cletus departed a Martyr on April XXVI. His successor Anacletus survived to the Consulate of Domitian XVII and Clemens, or to the year XCV. Evaristus being then ordained sat to the year CVIII, in which the Consuls were Gallus and Bradua: whom there succeeded in the following year S. Alexander crowned with Martyrdom, on May III in the year CXVII, under Trajan who in the same year after the death of S. Alexander died by the will of God, as the sincere Acts of the said Alexander indicate, illustrated by us on the said May III: and the ancient Catalogues of the Pontiffs agree in all things hitherto produced with Anastasius the librarian, and other monuments produced in the preliminary tract before the first volume of the Acts of April; where in the Preface we showed that Eusebius does not deserve credit concerning the Roman Pontiffs, who omitted two, Cletus and Marcellus, and arranged for others the time of the See from mere conjecture.

§. III. Anamnesis by D. P. on his own and Henschenius's Chronology concerning the Passion of Christ and the years of Peter.

D. P.

[19] To this Henschenian commentation, already prepared for the press, Whether Christ suffered in the year 34 when April was sweating under the press, after no perfunctory labor expended on the ancient Catalogues of the Pontiffs, produced before the aforesaid month around the year 1670, to add or

to remove anything scarcely presuming, I preferred separately elsewhere to propose my later thoughts on the same argument; the sum of which consists in this, that whether Christ is established to have died in the year of the common Era XXXIV with the common opinion, or with the ancients in the year of the common Era XXIX, under the two Geminus Consuls, which opinion, resuscitated by Henschenius (notwithstanding the arguments of our Grandami briefly collected by Possinus) most learned men have undertaken to defend, or 29 of the common Era Emmanuel Schelstrate in Antiquity illustrated, Henry, now most Eminent Cardinal Noris, in the Pisan Cenotaphs; Antoine Pagi in the Critique on the Baronian Annals: whichever of these, I say, you establish; I try to teach, that on both hypotheses the Apostolic History subsists, taken from the book of Acts; and that what remains of time from the year LVIII, where it ends, up to the year and day of Peter's death, is so certain that it can in no way be overturned; and that the series of following Pontiffs flows most orderly from there; only that in the common opinion care must be taken that all things which Henschenius said from the Passion of Christ to the leaving of Antioch by Peter, be deferred to a five-year period.

[20] This leaving he affixes to the year of the Christian Era XL, and from thence immediately reckons the XXV years, ascribed to the Roman Cathedra in the older Catalogue: which number could in no way be retained, the beginning of the Roman Cathedra is wrongly taken from year 2 of Claudius, if Peter had stayed at Antioch beyond the said XL year. But I judged that the number of XXV years was taken from the erroneous calculation of those who from year II of Claudius, the same as XLII of the common Era, to the last of Nero, prolonged Peter, and so from a principle undermined by Henschenius, nothing follows against the common opinion: likewise that the twelve years of Apollonius, during which the Apostles before division remained at Jerusalem, or (as Henschenius benignly interprets) in Syria, are not greatly to be made of; but rather to be held as two, which he alone had written, but others transcribing him wrongly enlarged them to twelve. I said therefore that Peter sat at Rome for XV years only; but what flowed of time from the leaving of Antioch to the year L of the first century, this should be left to Peter's free preaching through the world; whether that Cathedra was left in the year XL, as Henschenius will, or XLVI, as would follow from the common opinion concerning Christ's death and the twelve-year period of Apollonius. Nor was I moved at all by that reason, [since Peter had previously long devoted himself to free preaching through the world,] by which Natalis Alexander is greatly moved to hold the second year of Claudius, that otherwise it could not be said of what Church meanwhile Peter was Bishop, if he was not of the Antiochene which he had left, nor of the Roman which he had not yet undertaken. For he was, as from the beginning, even before he undertook the Antiochene Cathedra, not only Bishop of the universal Church, like the other Apostles; but also supreme Pontiff, and Head of the rest. Why indeed does Alexander wonder that this one is led around for several years, affixed by the title of no particular Church; when of the other eleven Apostles none fixed his own See anywhere; for we do not number among these James the Brother of the Lord, ordained Bishop of the Jerusalem Church by the Apostles. For we judge him a supernumerary Apostle, distinct from the Jameses son of Zebedee and son of Alphaeus; just as supernumerary were Paul and Barnabas, who themselves nowhere placed a Cathedra for themselves.

[21] And these things I then indeed: but now, by the most learned Pagi at the year 43 num. 3, I see Firmianus Lactantius, in the book on the deaths of the persecutors, the year 29 however is also proved from Lactantius. adduced as author for establishing the beginning of the Roman Cathedra more certainly: which book Henschenius could never see, since it had not been brought to us before his death. Lactantius wrote it around the year CCCXVI, indeed by a whole century younger than Tertullian (who is the first cited from those published, as author by Henschenius, for ascribing the Consulate of the Geminuses to Christ's death) but then older by a whole century similarly than the other cited Fathers, and therefore worthy that his whole passage be transcribed here, for the confirmation of the Henschenian, or more truly of the most ancient opinion in the Church, from which, that later authors departed, Pagi says at the year 32 n. 7 happened, from too great neglect of the history of the nations, and from too great confidence in astrology. And indeed as to history he says it was sinned in doubly, first in explaining the year of the Olympiad, mentioned by Phlegon; then in confusing the Proconsular Empire of Tiberius with the year of his monarchic dominion after the death of Augustus, which anyone can read for himself: meanwhile I confess I would not have wavered in the opinion of my Master Henschenius, if I had then believed that great obscuration of the sun noted by Phlegon could be reduced to the year XXIX. Now receive the passage of Lactantius, thus beginning his second chapter.

[22] In the last times of Tiberius Caesar, as we read written, asserting that Christ suffered under the two Geminus Coss. our Lord Jesus Christ was tortured by the Jews, after the tenth day of the Kalends of April, under the two Geminus Consuls: and when he had risen on the third day, he gathered his disciples, whom the fear of his apprehension had turned to flight: and remaining with them for forty days, opened their hearts and interpreted the Scriptures, which until that time had been obscure and involved; and ordained them and instructed them to the preaching of his dogma and doctrine, disposing the solemn discipline of the new Testament. Which office being completed, a storm of cloud encircled him, and took him away from the eyes of men and snatched him into heaven. and that Peter came to Rome after 25 years from there, And thence the disciples, who then were eleven, with Matthias and Paul taken in the place of the traitor Judas, were dispersed through every land to preach the Gospel, as the Master Lord had commanded them: and for XXV years to the beginning of the Neronian Empire, through all provinces and cities they laid the foundations of the Church. And when Nero now reigned, Peter came to Rome; and after some miracles were performed, which he was doing by the power of God himself, with the power given to him by him; under Nero, and by him to have been killed with Paul. he converted many to justice, and established for God a faithful and stable temple. Which thing being reported to Nero, when he observed that not only at Rome, but everywhere daily a great multitude was falling away from the worship of idols, and was passing over to the new religion, with antiquity condemned; as he was an execrable and noxious tyrant, he leaped forth to destroy the heavenly temple and abolish justice; and first of all having persecuted the servants of God, he affixed Peter to the cross, and killed Paul.

§. IV. The clarity of the Henschenian Chronology in Peter. The statue erected to Simon Magus at Rome. He is convicted by Peter under Nero.

BY THE AUTHOR C. J.

[23] This Anamnesis of P. Papebroch being added to the Henschenian Commentary; some things seem able to be desired pertaining to the same argument, Lactantius favors us about Peter's arrival at Rome; and pertaining to the context of Lactantius cited by himself. Nero began to reign in the year of the common Era LIV, after October XIII, on which Claudius died. From that year LIV if you go back through the XXV years, which Lactantius says the Apostles after the Passion of the Lord and his Ascension spent, laying through all provinces and cities the foundations of the Church; you will come to the year of Christ of the common Era XXIX, attached to the Consulate of the two Geminuses, under which Christ the Lord suffered and ascended to heaven, the whole of antiquity cries out, with the learned men whom Papebroch just named agreeing, partly recently deceased, partly still surviving. Moreover by this opinion, also resumed by P. Papebroch, as truer, I send the Reader back to Henschenius's preliminary Diatribe on the old Catalogues of the Roman Pontiffs, prefixed to the first volume of April, in which with received everywhere opinions concerning Peter's years in the Antiochene and Roman sees, his coming to Rome and other things pertaining to it, he so verisimilarly reconciles the chronotaxis, that nothing more apt seems able to be said; and it will appear in the few specimens, which I subjoin.

[24] When therefore Christ was taken up to heaven after his passion, as also Apollonius's twelve-year period; in the year of the common Era XXIX, with the two Geminus Consuls, Peter began to bear the supreme Pontificate. In the following year XXX a persecution arose against the Disciples; and Saul, then converted into Paul, after three years came to Jerusalem to see Peter, namely in the year XXXIII. Apollonius wrote in Eusebius lib. 5 ch. 18, who under the year CLXXXV was crowned with martyrdom, as if from the tradition of the ancients; that Christ had commanded his Apostles, that they should not depart from Jerusalem within twelve years of his Passion; with the primary city taken for the whole region of Palestine and neighboring Syria; so that through intervals they should return to Jerusalem. The twelfth year moreover from the Passion of the Lord, in our opinion is the fortieth of the common Era. In that year therefore the Apostles were divided and dispersed; and the memory of that thing in several churches and Martyrologies is celebrated on July XV, under this formula, the Division of the Apostles; and then with each going to diverse parts of the world, their sound went forth into all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.

[25] Meanwhile however Peter in the year XXXIII, in which Paul saw him at Jerusalem, seven years of the Antiochene See, which is the fourth from the Passion of Christ, had placed the Pontifical See at Antioch in the metropolis of Syria, holding it for VII years, as the common opinion has with the Pontifical book. But these being ended in the year XL or in the Division of the Apostles, Peter having soon set out from Antioch, after he had constituted there in his place Euodius the Bishop, the years of the Roman See, to which he was tending, rightly began to be reckoned: whether Peter went straight to Rome, the 25 years of the Roman See, or on the way announcing Christ also to other nations, came there first in the second year of Claudius, the forty-second of Christ, which is the doctrine of Eusebius and Jerome. Certainly from the leaving of the Antiochene See and the Division of the Apostles to the year LXV of Christ, the XI of Nero not yet ended; in which we maintain Peter underwent Martyrdom, there flowed XXV whole years, which are attributed to him for the Roman See, after Eusebius and Jerome, by common consent almost of all. and the 37 years of Peter's life after the Passion of Christ. Finally the whole span which Peter survived from the Passion of Christ the Lord, is circumscribed by XXXVII years, according to the calculation of Jerome, the Roman Pontifical, Chrysostom, Honorius, Isidore, Bede, Rabanus and others, in Henschenius in the cited Diatribe num. 35: but the same number is counted from the year XXIX in which Christ suffered, to the year LXV in which Peter died, so that here as well as in all the above said, they are most aptly reconciled with our opinion, which from ancient times as by a certain continued tradition in the Church were more retained.

[26] Nor does the above-cited text of Lactantius oppose us; And when Nero now reigned, It does not oppose us, that Peter came to Rome under Nero, Peter came to Rome. For with this standing he could also earlier, and more

than once have come there. But this coming of Peter to Rome seems indicated by Lactantius as the last, after which then he did not depart from Rome, at least for any long distance; because he then converted there many to justice, and established for God a faithful and stable temple, not only because the church which he then placed there was to be stable and persevere to the end of the world (for he had already placed such from his first entrance into Rome) but because Peter himself thenceforth remained stably in the same place: which is also most agreeable to reason. For Peter had founded in the space of XXV years after the Passion of the Lord through Asia and Europe very many Churches both by himself and through his Disciples: in which it was necessary that doubts repeatedly arose and contentions arose, whether among the faithful of the same Church, or among different Churches, some contending that one thing, others another should be followed (as is wont to happen especially at the beginnings). But for the decision of doubts and contentions of this kind, since one had often to have recourse to the primary and infallible Master; he, namely Peter, ought to be able to be met in a certain place; but he could be met nowhere more easily than at Rome, whence through the whole world the commerce of letters was open. If anyone however from the Greek-Latin Commentary, which we shall presently give, should prefer to maintain that Peter to the last years before his passion traveled, and ran through far-off regions; he will equally admit that Linus was ordained at Rome by Peter as his Vicar and left; to whom other Churches could have recourse.

[27] But now how and when Peter undertook and again convicted at Rome Simon Magus, by which also he came earlier after Simon Magus. whom convicted and confounded he had long since compelled to leave Palestine and Syria, whether before or after he himself last came there, must be seen. Eusebius although in those things which pertain to the Roman Church, is not of great authority: yet when he teaches things pertaining there from the holy Apollonius, Justin, Dionysius Bishop of the Corinthians; he ought altogether to be of so much authority as those Saints themselves are. Eusebius therefore teaches lib. 2 Hist. Eccl. ch. 13, citing the words of Justin, in his Apologetic to the Emperor Antoninus, thus addressing him: After our Lord's ascent into heaven certain men were sent by the demon, who would say themselves to be gods. Whom indeed men so far were you from having persecuted, that rather you affected them with the greatest honors. Of these was a certain Simon a Samaritan, sprung from a certain village, which is called Gitton, who in the principate of Claudius Augustus, when through the operation of demons he had published many miracles of magic art in your city, which is the head of the empire; was held a God by you, and you placed a statue to him as to a God, on the Tiber island between the two bridges, with this inscription: To Simon the Holy God.

[28] These things about Simon and others about a certain Helena, his most impure follower, whom also he convicted. reported from Justin, Eusebius subjoins few things on the heretical doctrine of the same Simon, and ch. 14 denies that things flowed prosperously to him from his wish for long. For at once, he says, in the very times of Claudius Augustus, the benign and most clement providence of God leads to Rome against that stain and pest of the human race Peter, the strongest and greatest among the Apostles, and by the merit of virtue Prince and Patron of all the others. Who as a strenuous leader of the divine soldiery, fortified with heavenly arms, carried the Evangelic light from East to West: and when by the doctrine of God he had illustrated the Romans by his coming, the force and power of Simon together with the author himself was shortly extinguished and destroyed. But so great a splendor of truth shone forth in the minds of those who had heard Peter, that they thought it not enough to have heard once… but earnestly begged Mark the follower of Peter, whose Gospel still exists today, that he leave with them some written monument of that doctrine, which they had received by hearing: which also being asked he left, the Gospel written by himself, approved by Peter; as Eusebius pursues.

[29] His interpreter Valesius attributes so much to that passage, that he thinks Simon's conviction at Rome and destruction, Valesius denies, without sufficient reason, ought to be ascribed to the times of Claudius: but the Icarian flight of him, and headlong fall from flight, he calls into doubt. On the contrary moreover he denies that a statue was erected to Simon at Rome as to a God. The reason why he denies it, is; because long since learned men have observed (yet he cites none) that Justin lapsed by ignorance of the Latin tongue, who thought a statue placed to Semon Sancus had been consecrated to Simon Magus, deceived by the closeness of the names. And he goes on: Certainly that statue, which Justin had seen on the Tiber island, was not long ago dug up, with that inscription, which I have said, To Semon Sangus God Fidius: who among the Sabines presided over compacts and treaties, called from sanctioning. If not long ago that statue was dug up, a statue was placed to Simon at Rome, learned men could not long ago have observed an error of Justin, which they suspect to be founded on that statue. I would also wish to be taught with some verisimilitude; first, that Justin saw that statue of God Fidius, or in his time it stood on the Tiber island. Then, that he was deceived in this, that he thought the statue of Semon Sangus God Fidius, to be of Simon the Holy God. Certainly ignorance of the Latin language, however great, could not bring it about that a wise man should not discern the difference between those two Epigraphs. Besides, Justin knew at least Latin characters. For these very he turned into Greek, with the Latin words retained, thus writing them in the context of Greek speech, Simōni deō sankto, and this he soon interprets to the Greeks in Greek, Simōni Theō hagiō; as can be seen in Eusebius at the cited place. Finally, who would believe, that Justin, born in Samaria, a subject of the Roman Empire, imbued with many sciences, even divinely infused (as in his Life on April XIII num. XI can be read); who tarried very long in the city of Rome, daily dealing with the Romans, and championing the truth of the Catholic faith; should have been so ignorant of the Roman tongue, that he could not read three of their words, or distinguish from four?

[30] But some Samaritans deceived Justin, who persuaded him that that statue had been placed for Simon the Samaritan. and it is refuted, As if indeed the Romans would have consecrated a still-living Magician and impostor; or have called a God, with the epithet added, Holy. Why most of all should the Samaritans have deceived Justin? Because more inclined to the praise of Simon, their countryman? But Justin was equally their countryman, and himself a Samaritan by nation. Wherefore the same cause, which would move the Samaritans to commend their countryman Simon; ought to deter them from deceiving Justin. Furthermore, either the statue survived at Rome in Justin's time, which they persuaded him had been placed to their Simon; or it survived no longer. The first seems able to be gathered from this, that Justin so accurately took up the Latin words in Greek characters. Indeed they themselves who here oppose us suppose it survived, when they say, that Justin was deceived in the inscription of the statue which then existed; and which they without foundation, as we have seen, persuade themselves was of Semon Sangus God Fidius. Granted therefore that the statue survived, there is no need of further disputation to show that it was placed for Simon as God holy. For the statue itself spoke that to Justin, describing the epigraph. If the statue did not survive; it must be said that Justin learned what he wrote from public report, which had much authority then, with not yet a hundred years elapsed from Simon's destruction; and which was propagated not by Samaritans alone, a vile race of men, but chiefly by Christians and the Roman pagans themselves; by whose authority Justin dared to set it forth in writing, and in some manner upbraid the Emperor himself.

[31] That the Romans placed a statue to Simon while still living, Justin does not say, but Eusebius by his own authority, the truth of that fact confirmed; explaining the context of Justin more broadly than the words sound. But suppose Justin himself had said it: what from that against the truth of the matter? It was not new in those times for statues to be placed to men, even then living, as to gods: indeed altars were also consecrated to them. Hear Eusebius in the Chronicle at year 1 of Gaius Caligula the Emperor. Gaius, he says, refers himself among the gods. And again at the third year of the same: Gaius commanded Petronius the Prefect of Syria, that at Jerusalem he should set up his statue under the name of Jupiter Best and Greatest. And a little after Eusebius continues thus to speak: Throughout the whole Roman world, as Philo and Josephus write, in the Synagogues of the Jews, statues and images and altars were consecrated to Gaius Caesar. Indeed Simon was a most cunning magician and impostor: but he did not appear such to those who placed a statue to him as to a God, deluded and deceived by his works, which they saw, miraculous. And truly of what sort were the chief gods and goddesses of the Romans? were they not impostors, criminal, wicked? Finally, they often added various epithets to various gods, calling Jupiter thundering; Apollo, unshorn; Janus, two-headed; Mercury, winged; Juno, Queen; Diana, chaste; why should they not also have called someone holy? And, if the wise Greeks at Athens erected an altar to the unknown God, what shall we wonder at, if the Romans erected a statue to the holy God? in that city, which even then for the most part ignorant of the author of its advancement, when it dominated almost all nations, served the errors of all nations; and seemed to itself to have assumed a great religion, because it rejected no falsity; as truly S. Leo preached.

[32] as also Pagi, Pagi having seen Valesius's critique, immediately approves it in his Baronian Critique at the year XLII num. VI: but since he brings nothing new to the proof of the argument, his approval is not to be refuted by any new reason. I am so far from thinking the opinion of both most learned men is to be followed; that I persuade myself, nothing thereafter in human history could be prudently believed, if credibility were to be denied to that Justinian assertion concerning the statue placed for Simon the holy God on arguments so light. For Justin was a most wise and prudent writer, as his extant works teach. The matter, which he affirms, was public, done in the full light of the city of Rome, with not yet a hundred years elapsed; inscribed on marbles, probably preserved to the times of Justin, which could be known to all. Would Justin, a holy man, soon to be the glorious Martyr of Christ, in a public Apology, offered to the Emperor himself, soon to be published throughout the whole city, while he wishes to prove the truth of the Catholic Religion, have invented this? (for his prudence could not be deceived or err in a matter so certainly true or certainly false) but to invent his sanctity did not allow, nor would impudence itself have dared to invent so impudently. Whoever wishes me to recede in the present question from Justin and his follower Eusebius, the most ancient authors; let him produce

either stronger arguments than have been brought; or witnesses contrary to these, equal in authority.

[33] Whether Simon Magus flew. More likely would be Valesius's opinion, not admitting Simon's flight, and consequently his fall; resting on the silence of both Justin himself, and Irenaeus and Eusebius. For these, nearest in age (when they treat at length about Simon and his conviction) making no mention of his flight, which the reason of their plan demanded should be made, if Simon truly had flown; what authority remains suitable or sufficient for persuading that? The same Valesius maintains, judging the opinion of Eusebius truer, that Simon Magus's destruction happened at Rome in the principate of Claudius Augustus. But this is against the common opinion; Whether under Claudius, or under Nero with Baronius and Sigonius maintaining that that destruction of Simon happened under Nero; and having also as authors of their same opinion, Severus, Augustine, Philastrius, and Maximus of Turin; as Valesius himself confesses, who nevertheless prefers to all these the cited passage of Eusebius: because Justin and Irenaeus affirm that Simon came to Rome under Claudius, and published fraudulent miracles. And since also it is established, he says, that Peter in the times of the same Claudius went to Rome to confute the frauds of Simon, it is not verisimilar that Simon for so long, with Peter present and pressing, insulted the Christian faith.

[34] Let both Simon Magus, for deceiving, and Peter the Apostle, for confuting him, have come to Rome in the reign of Claudius; it is not yet established that under the same Claudius they had the last encounter, and Simon perished. convicted by Peter, perished. What Eusebius writes, parachrēma briefly, as Valesius interprets, or even, at once, if you so will, that the power of Simon together with the author himself was extinguished and destroyed, has latitude; nor must it necessarily be restricted to the fewest years. Justin and Irenaeus can perhaps be explained of Peter's coming to Rome in the last years of Claudius; and thus, with him dead, Peter encountered the Magician under Nero. Certainly neither says under Claudius Peter and Simon Magus encountered each other; even if they say that both came to Rome under him: and so their authority, which is most valid for one, obtains nothing for the other. Nor is Eusebius more to be heard, when he writes, at the beginning of ch. 15, that when Peter had illustrated the Romans by his coming, the power of Simon together with the author himself was shortly extinguished and destroyed. For if anyone is unwilling to permit, that this, briefly, be extended to the times of Nero, let him remember, that Eusebius in Roman matters is not of so great authority, as he is in oriental ones, nearer to himself; especially where he speaks in his own person, destitute of the authority of others better versed in Roman matters.

§ V. On the time and place in which the Apostles suffered.

[35] After Eusebius had taught lib. 2 Hist. Eccl. ch. 25, from Tertullian; that Nero, the Apostles Peter and Paul, first of all the Emperors against the Christian Religion, then especially rising at Rome, raged with the Caesarian sword: and from Gaius, a Catholic man, who flourished in the time of Zepherinus, Bishop of the city of Rome, at the beginning of the III century; that the Apostles Peter and Paul suffered at Rome, and their trophies remain in the Vatican and the Ostian Way: he proceeds further to teach from Dionysius Bishop of the Corinthians, who was famous in the second century; that both Apostles at one and the same time underwent Martyrdom, citing these words from his Epistle written to the Romans: Both Apostles, having entered also into our city of Corinth, with the seed of Evangelic doctrine sown instructed us; and having set out together for Italy, when they had similarly instructed you, at the same time bore Martyrdom; in Greek, Kata ton auton kairon. To which passage Valesius so notes p. 42: Dionysius does not openly say, that Peter and Paul suffered on one and the same day; but only, at the same time: which can be explained of an interval of several days.

[36] I confess it, if there is sufficient or necessary reason for so explaining. suffered on one and the same day, It can however also be understood of the time; just as the same Greek words, placed by Eusebius before the context of Dionysius, were himself interpreted by Valesius: but he who simply says, that something was done at one and the same time, by those who were together in the same place, seems no more to wish another and another day understood, than another and another year. But since Valesius dares not to extend that Kata ton auton kairon, to diverse years, as is plain from his cited explanation, I do not know what argument he can have, for extending it to diverse days against the common opinion of all, asserting that the Apostles suffered on the same day of the month; not even with Prudentius, Augustine and Arator dissenting in this; who are cited by Valesius, and place only the year of the passion as diverse, not the day of the month; maintaining that Paul survived one year after Peter. Take here for the greater elucidation of the matter the texts of such illustrious Authors, whom Valesius did not transcribe.

[37] Aurelius Prudentius, Spanish by nation, born in the year of Christ CCCXLVIII, and surviving at the beginning of the following century, Hymn 12: peri Stephanōn, sings thus: Prudentius denies, The festal day of the Apostolic triumph returns to us here, Noble with the gore of Paul and Peter, One day saw both, yet renewed by a full year, Laureated with proud death. Augustine the African and Doctor of the Church, surviving to the year XXX of the same century V, in Sermon 28 on the Saints; Each Apostle runs, he says, Augustine, to the palm of Martyrdom, and each reach the crown; not indeed in the same course of time, but at the same meeting of the revolving year. Arator Subdeacon of the holy Roman Church in the year DXLIII offered to Pope Vigilius, and Arator: and by his command recited in the church of S. Peter ad Vincula, the poem composed by himself in two books on the Acts of the Apostles, and in the second so speaks: This also fraternal love, by which they were more acted, Than nature gave: twins which he added to the stars, Not the same, yet one day; with the year's turning Time, the Passion consecrated the repeated light: And societal glory holds the eternal palm.

[38] Great truly is this authority; and apt to drag a prudent man into assent to the same thing, if considered apart. Yet three hundred and perhaps fifty years had flowed from the Martyrdom of the Apostles, when the first of them in age, Prudentius, wrote these things; but they say, Dionysius the Cor. Bp. from which Martyrdom Dionysius Bishop of the Corinthians, of whom I mentioned above, was distant scarcely a hundred years, asserting, Kata ton auton kairon, the Apostles suffered at one and the same time: which must much more be understood of the same year, than of the same day of the month, Eusebius Bp. of Caesarea, and was understood by Eusebius, writing perhaps a hundred years before Prudentius, and that a historian, to whom it more closely pertained to know such things more distinctly than to Poets. But that Eusebius understood by the cited place of Dionysius, the same year, he himself declares more manifestly in his Chronicle; where under the year XIV of Nero he writes, Peter and Paul gloriously died at Rome.

[39] The same thinks the Author of the most ancient Catalogue of the Roman Pontiffs, The most ancient Catalogue of the Roman Pontiffs written while Damasus Pope sat under the year CCCLIV, or rather put together from other older Catalogues: which, when it treats Chronology professedly, and defines the beginnings and ends of each Pontiff by the Roman Consuls, ought to be of greater authority indeed, than any other; who speaks of them only in passing and as it were through a lattice. He has thus: Peter suffered with Paul on III Kal. of July under the Consuls above written, Nerva and Vestinus, in the reign of Nero. Idatius Bp. of Lemica. Idatius also Bishop of Lemica and an accurate Chronologer, who in the same century V in which Prudentius and Augustine died, flourished and died, in his Chronicle, which he carried to the year of Christ CCCCLXVI; under the Consuls Nero III and Messalla Corvinus places the passion of Peter and Paul on the same III Kal. of July. Add a third Chronologer, Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus, Cassiodorus Roman Consul, who was Secretary to Theodoric King of the Ostrogoths, and in the year DXIV was sole Roman Consul; so writing. Under Silvanus and Otho Coss. at Rome SS. Peter and Paul the Apostles were slaughtered by Nero. In these things it is worthy of remark, that the cited Authors ascribe the Martyrdom of the Apostles to diverse consulates and to diverse pairs of Consuls; from which it is deduced, that none of them transcribed another, but each learned his own from elsewhere. And yet they agree in this, that all and each affix that Martyrdom to one and the same year; as to one and the same consulate, and to one and the same pair of Consuls.

[40] Jerome, who also To the Chronologers can rightly be added S. Jerome, where he treats of Ecclesiastical writers; specially intent, that he correctly defines the time of each one's death; whose order he follows in placing one Writer before or after another. He in Paul the Apostle so speaks: Paul in the fourteenth year of Nero, on the same day on which Peter, was beheaded at Rome for Christ, and was buried on the Ostian Way; in the year XXXVII after the Passion of the Lord. They who above wished to extend that Eusebian phrase, that Peter and Paul suffered at the same time, to diverse years; why not also here extend this, on the same day, to the same day of June recurring in diverse years? interpreting Jerome's words, that Paul was beheaded in the fourteenth year of Nero, on the same day on which Peter, in the preceding year had been fixed to the cross.

[41] But Jerome himself closed off that escape, since a little before in Peter he said, that he at Rome held the Sacerdotal Chair for XXV years up to the last year of Nero, that is (he says) the fourteenth; by whom also being fixed to the cross, he was crowned with Martyrdom: and again a little after in Seneca: He, he says, two years before Peter and Paul were crowned by Martyrdom, was killed by Nero. Therefore Jerome's, on the same day, sounds, as it ought to sound to anyone, simply a space of time, circumscribed by the same XXIV hours; nor can it be extended to another and another month, much less to another and another year, unless perhaps adjuncts clearly determine that. For if I should simply enunciate: Paul died on the same day on which Peter: what pray in that enunciation according to itself is there, that should denote another year or month? The day of one year, Eusebius's interpreter here. determined by a certain motion of the sun, or by a certain number of the month, is not the same as that of another year, although it recurs under a similar motion of the sun and an equal number of the month. From what has been said it is confirmed also, that that of Eusebius, at the same time, must be constrained to the same year and month and day, because Jerome in those things which pertain to Peter and his coming to Rome, the time

of the See and death; follows Eusebius closely, and is his interpreter, where he may seem somewhat obscure to anyone preoccupied with other opinions.

[42] And these things abundantly suffice to prove that the Apostles suffered in the same year, month and day. But for refuting the Authors objected to us, Prudentius, Augustine, Arator, and others who stand with them; there will suffice, saint Leo the Great Pope in the Preface to the Codex of Canons and Constitutions vol. 2 of his Works from the edition of Quesnel at Paris 1675; S. Maximus, Bishop of Turin Sermon 1 on the Birthday of these Apostles; S. Asterius, Bishop of Amasea, Homily on the same Apostles in Combefis in the Auctarium of the Greek Fathers of the year 1648: who all were contemporaries of saints Prudentius and Augustine; and far more ancient than Arator; and to none of them do they yield in sanctity. I produce only the passage of Leo, because he is the Roman Pontiff; and who therefore ought to have greater authority here. He so writes in the cited place: Paul on one day, and at one time, in glorious death with Peter, agonizing under Prince Nero, was crowned. And almost a hundred years before Leo, Epiphanius in the Panarion heresy 27, num. 6 from the edition of Petavius wrote, the death of Peter and Paul into the year XII of Nero: which at least is one and the same to befall.

[43] But whence had Prudentius, traveled from Spain to Rome, drawn these things, and others after him written the same? the opinion of diverse year Certainly such opinion seems first to have arisen in his age, both because no one more ancient is known to remember it, and because his contemporary Jerome; and soon Leo the Great, and Pope Gelasius with a Council of LXX Bishops, more distinctly expressed the time and day on which the Apostles died, than their predecessors did, determining it by the article one, or same; that they may be seen in that way to have wished to refute those who thought otherwise. And the Roman Council indeed, attributes to heretics the Council of Rome which I said, with Gelasius, attributes the origin of the ill-founded opinion to heretics, in the Decree on apocryphal scriptures so pronouncing: To Peter was given also the society of the most blessed Apostle Paul, vessel of election, who not at a diverse time, as the heretics babble; but at one time, on one and the same day, agonizing in glorious death with Peter in the city of Rome, under Caesar Nero, was crowned; and equally consecrated the above-said holy Roman Church to Christ the Lord.

[44] Our opinion being established, and it alone known to the most ancient times; Whether the Apostles suffered on Feb. 22, that the Apostles underwent Martyrdom on one and the same day, of the same year and month; it was sufficiently established by the same labor, that day to be the third Kal. of July, or June XXIX. For this all the holy Fathers, Chronologers, and Catalogues of the Roman Pontiffs, whom we cited and produced, express; with none of them naming another day. There has been however in Pagi in the Critique at the year 258, who thinks the Birthday or Martyrdom of the Apostles should be transferred from the said day III Kalends of July to VIII Kal. of March; led by the authority of Polemius Silvius in the Laterculus, containing sacred and profane feasts, and published in the year of Christ CCCCXLIX; as Silvius's Laterculus has; in which, on VIII Kal. of March is read the Deposition of saints Peter and Paul; likewise by the authority of the Indiculus, containing Depositions of the Martyrs, in Bucherius; where thus: III Kal. of July of Peter in the Catacombs, and of Paul on the Ostian Way, Tuscus and Bassus Coss. For if on VIII Kal. of March, or February XXII the Deposition or Martyrdom of Peter and Paul was anciently celebrated: on the day III Kal. of July or June XXIX it ought from another cause to have been festal, and consecrated to their memory, namely on account of some translation of the bodies, which was done of Peter to the Catacombs, of Paul to the Ostian Way, under the Consuls Tuscus and Bassus; that is in the year CCLVIII. Which being granted, will also be saved the opinion of many after Eusebius and Jerome, asserting that the Apostles suffered in the year XIV or last of Nero. For that cannot be saved, if they were killed on day XXIX of June: because Nero did not live so long, as one who on the IX of the same had violently laid hands on himself: but he was still living XXII February, when in the Laterculus the Deposition of the Apostles is noted.

[45] But to save that opinion of Peter and Paul killed in the XIV year of Nero, which is now everywhere absurd to learned men, another more absurd ought not to be admitted. But whoever wishes to ascribe their Martyrdom to the day XXII February, which can prove nothing here because in the one Laterculus of Silvius is read that their Deposition was then made, will contradict himself, unless he ascribe the same Martyrdom also to the day XXIX June: because that, On the Third Kal. of July of Peter in the Catacombs, and of Paul on the Ostian etc. comes also by the name of Deposition in the Indiculus in Bucherius, just as all the rest, which are enumerated in the same place. For there is read there the general title, Deposition of the Martyrs: as also previously in the same place can be seen another Indiculus, with the title prefixed, Deposition of the Bishops of the Roman city, to which Indiculus no more names of Deposited are subscribed there, than twelve; with adjoined cemeteries, in which they were deposited: but under the title, Deposition of the Martyrs, the names of somewhat more are recounted, with cemeteries similarly ascribed: and in three places besides are ascribed Consuls, under whom the Deposition was made.

[46] He has therefore who here wishes to obtrude on us with Pagi the day XXII February, against the unanimous consent of all times, on which the Apostles were crowned by Martyrdom; in his own allegations, a twofold Deposition of the same Apostles; one of Peter and Paul on the said day XXII February: the other of Peter in the Catacombs, of Paul on the Ostian Way, on the day XXIX June. This XXIX June all antiquity, the middle age, and all the Churches even today, have venerated and venerate as the legitimate day of Deposition or Martyrdom of saints Peter and Paul. Who would dare even to mutter against so great authority, and the use of the universal Church without interruption continued; on account of Polemius's (I scarcely know whose) Laterculus profane to the sacred, with no one before or after him thinking the same? Let him say, please, unless perhaps, that the Apostles died twice. whoever wishes to follow that Laterculus, led whether by Catholic or heretical spirit; whether Deposition in either of the adduced places signifies another thing; or in both, the same. If he wishes another to be signified by one, another by the other, he himself must explain it to us. If he prefers the same to be signified in both, it is necessary that he confess that Peter and Paul twice suffered and died. For that is the notion everywhere received, especially in ecclesiastical writings, of the word Deposition, that it signifies the day on which someone died, or certainly on which he was committed to the earth.

[47] If further he should wish, by that Deposition of Peter in the Catacombs on June XXIX, The Bodies of the Saints were often translated to be signified a Translation; besides that he has nothing here particularly to prove it: yet if it should be gratis conceded, he will have no more argument for denying that the Apostles died as Martyrs on the same June XXIX. For on the same day on which they were first crowned with Martyrdom; afterwards also their Bodies could have been translated: and it is most verisimilar (if however a translation can be there understood) that they were also translated on the same day. For it has always obtained and was most usual in all Churches, on their own feast day; in making Translations of their Saints, to choose some feast, and often of the same Saint; that with a greater concourse of people and solemnity the matter might be carried out. Let the witness be the IV day of July, on which through Gaul the Ordination of S. Martin Bishop of Tours was recalled. B. Perpetuus the fifth after him saw that the Body of his Saintly predecessor was not honorably enough buried, and built a magnificent basilica, into which about to translate that sacred deposit, by a miracle he was prohibited from translating before the same IV July; on which also he dedicated the new church; and so on one and the same day a threefold festivity was thereafter celebrated in the same place, the Ordination of S. Martin, the Translation of his Body, and the Dedication of the church, built to his name.

[48] as is read also done concerning SS. Parthenius and Calocerus, But more pressing is what is placed in the aforesaid Indiculus in Bucherius, XIV Kal. June, Deposition of Parthinus and Calocerus in the cemetery of Callistus, Diocletian IX and Maximian VIII Coss. which passage is altogether similar to this concerning which we dispute; and is one of the three already said, in which throughout the whole Indiculus the Consuls are ascribed. Let here therefore the Deposition of Parthinus and Calocerus signify death, Martyrdom, burial, translation, elevation of the body or whatever else you wish. Certainly such Deposition was made on the same day XIV Kal. June or May XIX, with Diocletian IX and Maximian VIII Consuls, that is in the year of Christ CCCIV: on which day LIV years before under Decius they had obtained the palm of Martyrdom: and so by a double title that day was thenceforth festive. In like manner also, whatever in the end was done to saints Peter and Paul under the Consulate of Tuscus and Bassus, in the year of Christ CCLVIII (which I prefer to confess, and was done in S. Peter's. that I do not sufficiently attain, than to gather many things by conjecture) it is noted to have been done on the day XXIX June, the same namely on which they were formerly venerated and once under Nero had been killed for Christ: as it is established that some kind of Deposition of Parthenius and Calocerus made under Diocletian and Maximian, fell on the same day XIX May, on which they had formerly been killed under Decius, and on which we have illustrated their Acts in vol. 4 of May.

[49] But let us a little more attentively consider the word Deposition, what notion is in it in the aforementioned Indiculus. I have already said, Deposition in the Indiculus that the title is prefixed to the Indiculus Deposition of the Martyrs; so that the word Deposition is to be understood to the individuals, which are then recounted through individual months, except in two places, namely, VIII Kal. January, Christ born at Bethlehem of Judah. And, VIII Kal. March, Birthday of Peter from the Chair: where the word, Born Christ, and the word, Birthday, placed in Nominative case, signify of themselves another thing, than deposition; as is manifest to anyone. In the rest are expressed in Genitive case the names of the Martyrs, with the title Deposition understood, in this manner: XIII Kal. January. Of Fabian in Callistus's, and of Sebastian in the Catacombs, namely Deposition. And here indeed, as also in most others, that word can be taken in its proper signification, for death, Martyrdom, burial: it can sometimes be taken for Translation, but universally everywhere so it cannot be taken. For VI Ides of August, is read in the Indiculus; Of Cyriacus, Largus and Smaragdus. But that day VI Ides of August, is not of properly so-called Deposition or death or burial: since their Martyrdom is established to have fallen on XVII Kal. April: but is of Translation, made by Pope Marcellus; and therefore

that day remained festive thereafter, and was such even in the time in which the Indiculus was written in the year CCCLIV.

[50] Similarly in the Indiculus is had; V Ides of September. Of Gorgonius in Labicana. But that day seems rather to be that on which the Body of S. Gorgonius was translated from Thessalonica (where with S. Dorotheus he had suffered) to Rome, than the day of his Passion itself: even if Baronius indicates otherwise. Consider also that VI Ides of July the Indiculus most carefully distinguishes the Cemeteries, it often seems taken for burial, or elevation where each of the seven sons of S. Felicitas, who all together on the said day suffered, were deposited and given to burial; namely, of Felix and Philip, in Priscilla's: of Martial, Vitalis, Alexander, in the Jordans': of Silanus, in Maximus's: of Januarius, in Pretextatus's: so that it does not seem so much to wish to express the day of death, as the place of burial, or the translation of the Body to that place, or certainly the festivity which there was chiefly then held annually. and everywhere almost for festive celebration. And such festivity the Author of the Indiculus seems chiefly and everywhere to have had before his eyes, whenever he indicates the place of Deposition, noting namely the feasts which in those places were more solemnly celebrated, that the people could come together there; from whatever cause the celebration of such feasts had had its origin. I do not dare to dwell longer on these things, lest I be tedious to good Catholics, who because of the Laterculus of one Polemius Silvius will never venerate on February XXII the Martyrdom of saints Peter and Paul; which the whole Church is accustomed to celebrate on June XXIX.

[51] But what after all does the aforesaid Laterculus pretend? It says: VIII Kalends of March (that is February XXII) Deposition of SS. Peter and Paul. And so on that day they underwent Martyrdom; as some indicate. Vain indeed both the criticism and the proof! We have already seen, in the Bucherian Indiculus of the year CCCLIV, that the word Deposition is not received for the day of death or burial alone; but also signifies translation, and festivity. Why in that Laterculus, written almost a hundred years after, ought we believe, that by the same word its Author wished to signify only the day of death? What if he wished nothing else to be indicated, than the festivity, which then (as also now happens) was held on that day, of S. Peter indeed, on account of his Antiochene Cathedra, of Paul however through concomitance and commemoration in the divine Offices? No Martyrologies, whether older than the Laterculus, or more recent, no Catalogues of the Pontiffs, no writings of the Fathers remember; that any other feast of the holy Apostles was celebrated on the day February XXII, than that of the Cathedra of Peter; joining his Martyrdom, as also Paul's, on the day June XXIX, as has often been said already.

[52] [It is uncertain whether the Apostles about to die went forth together by the Trigeminian gate,] It remains to add a few things about the place where the Apostles suffered. Baronius writes at the year 69 num. 9: Tradition has rather than the truth confirmed by certain assertion of ancient Writers (for the writing which is read on these things published by some under the name of Dionysius the Areopagite is not approved, as most inept) that the Apostles themselves about to undergo the punishment of death, brought out from prison together, were led outside the Trigeminian gate. … But why rather outside that gate they were led to undergo the punishment, we can affirm nothing certain, except what conjecture shows through some slight chinks. And he soon adds, however not together in the same place they were affected with punishment, but by those who led them, with their plan changed, they were separated from each other; that Peter, for the favor of the Jews, in that region where the Jews dwelt, they wished to be crucified: but Paul among the Christians, however not to be crucified, but (because he was a Roman citizen) it pleased that he be subjected to the sword. Thus Baronius, again declaring, that he proposes these things by conjecture rather than by affirming with certain assertion: and they suffered in different places. and he adds, that the Apostles divided from each other outside the Trigeminian gate, Paul proceeded straight by the same way to Aquae Salviae; but Peter was led to mount Janiculum; from which namely he was as far away, when he began to go out from the Mamertine prison, as he was distant when he was separated from Paul; and he had to retrace part of the way and cross the Tiber, to arrive there. Nor does it seem probable, that it was in the power of those, by whom they were led to punishment, to change the plan and separate the condemned from each other, whom (certainly by command and sentence of the Judge) they led together, that together in the same place they should be affected with the extreme punishment, who had been condemned for the same cause.

[53] I would rather assent to Prudentius, who was at Rome at the end of the IV century or the beginning of the following, and there seems to have composed Hymn XII of the book peri Stephanōn, That they died in the same place, in which beginning from the festive day of the Apostles, and its joy and the concourse of the people to it; he soon describes the time and place of Martyrdom: and the time indeed he makes diverse by a yearly interval, as we have already said; but the place he makes altogether the same, so singing: The Tiberine marsh knows, which is licked by the nearby river, The sod dedicated to twin trophies, Prudentius writes, And the witness of cross and sword: by which watering, the same Twice flowed a rain of blood through the herbs. The same, says Prudentius, through the herbs, and through the same field flowed the blood of the Apostles, and twice flowed, because Peter in one year, and Paul in the following, according to his opinion, were killed. And the Tiberine marsh, one and the same, is witness of both Martyrdoms, in one consummated by the cross, in the other by the sword: and thence saw the same sod or place glorious and consecrated by their twin trophies and victories.

[54] But Prudentius, as in establishing the diverse time of the Martyrdom of both he is not admitted, so seems not to deserve more credit, with none of the ancients contradicting. in defining the place of both as the same. For he does deserve, because of himself he is a grave Author, ancient, prudent and holy, and was in the place of which he writes; nor does he have before or after him any writer, except perhaps one risen in these last times, who teaches the contrary: but he has several both more ancient, and treating chronology professedly, who teach that in the same year and day the Apostles underwent death, as we have at length deduced. But where, pray, is that Tiberine marsh, witness of cross and sword and Martyrdoms? This I do not presume to define. There is one place, according to Prudentius, in which through the cross by one, through the sword by the other victory was carried back by Martyrdom: Whether the place which he designates, and only this, in the darkness of so many centuries, and the ambiguity of Baronius, through the light which Prudentius brings, I wished to show; leaving to the Roman antiquaries a more accurate investigation of such a place. Tiberine marsh, perhaps the place was so called, because in rainy weather or winter time with the bed of the river overflowing it was inundated; or otherwise the Tiber was let into it; or rather water led from higher places, as today the Paulina (as it is called from Pontiff Paul V) is collected on the top of mount Janiculum; so also that was there collected and sent down. For in the same place not far from the mount below in the plain near the Tiber, as Baronius writes at the year 69 num. 18, there was placed the naumachia, which by some is ascribed to Julius Caesar, by others to Augustus. For Dio is the author, that the naumachia was made by Augustus. But Tacitus calls the same place the pool of Agrippa, where on ships Nero exhibited a most sumptuous feast. Thus Baronius. Which being granted, would he stray far from the truth, is the Janiculum? who should say that that place was called by Prudentius the Tiberine marsh (certainly it is washed by the nearby Tiber;) and by the same right can be called Marsh, as it is called Pool by Tacitus: and further should judge, that the same was witness not only of cross, but also of sword, by which on the same nearby Janiculum the Apostles killed twice watered the same herbs with their blood: with the bodies afterwards, of one being borne indeed to the Ostian Way, or even to Aquae Salviae, if you so prefer; but of the other to the Vatican? I desire to be taught more certain things.

COMMENTARY ON SS. PETER AND PAUL

From the Greek Medicean Ms. of the Most Christian King, and the translation of Jacobus Sirletus, Ms. in the Vatican Library.

Peter Apostle, at Rome (S.)

Paul Apostle, at Rome (S.)

FROM THE MS.

CHAPTER I.

The fatherland of S. Peter. His Acts under Christ and in the years next after his Ascension.

[1] We accept not only those who at the beginning discovered the arts, Prologue of the one professing to give these things nor do we embrace only their labors; but if anything else has been added by later men to things invented, we cherish and embrace that also; and those whom we said above, we affect with honor and recall by famous memory for no other reason, collected from various sources. except that, what was scattered and severally found by others, those very things connecting and composing, the arts themselves reduced into a body and one form, more perfect, they left to posterity. And so we also, by their example, consecrating what pertains to fulfilling the vows of the faithful, as it were grasping some unformed matter, which is carried about sung by this or that author; we compose and join together a form for them, and exhibit a body perfect with members to others. Since therefore this is our purpose, and we study to say these things; we must begin from that point from which Christ's first Disciple entered into life.

[2] Peter therefore (to mention first him to whom the Church was first entrusted) S. Peter born at Bethsaida, was by race a Hebrew, who inhabited Galilee the region of Palestine. But his fatherland was Bethsaida, a small and humble little town, and he was even of their tribe his father Jonah, who glory in tracing their race back to Simeon the patriarch: his father Jonah, not he who was swallowed by the whale and given back, but he who through his son drew many from the intelligible whale, and called them back to the upper realms. He existed under Hyrcanus the King, from whom together with the kingdom also his ears were cut off by his brother. his brother S. Andrew, But Jonah did not have only this son, but also Andrew the brother of Peter. But when Peter had taken a wife, the daughter of Aristobulus, brother of Barnabas the Apostle, from her he begot two children, one male, the other female. Andrew, when he had chosen for himself a quiet and celibate life, becomes a disciple of John the Forerunner; which John preached the baptism of repentance. From whom when Andrew had heard; Behold the Lamb of God, with finger pointing to the Savior Christ; from the disciples of S. John the Baptist following Christ, and had left John the Baptist, he followed Jesus. But that great Peter, since he was more ardent and skillful in conducting affairs, was occupied rather with the business of life; as one who lived with a wife, and bore with an old father.

[3] But when Andrew met him sometime free from business, and led him to Christ: he, receiving him, named him Peter, is led to him, by that name signifying the solidity and constancy of his mind and spirit. After he was added to the number of Christ's disciples, he showed himself a good man and fervent in spirit: wherefore also the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed to his faith, is applied to chief affairs, and on the back of the sea as some incorporeal one he walks with his own footsteps, and becomes a spectator of the Lord's Transfiguration, and a hearer of the paternal voice: likewise he is taught this, that he should patiently bear sinning men, and the prefecture of the world is delivered into his hands. But these and more than these the sacred book of the Gospels narrates more broadly and distinctly, which indeed expounds also the causes of the matters themselves more manifestly, which we have for the present omitted, since we study to be briefer, not longer.

[4] But when the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ recently by his salutary torments, which he willingly suffered, and by the rising Christ constituted Master of the rest, had destroyed the devil holding the empire of death, and made him empty, and broken the bonds of his own death, and risen on the third day; Peter himself, the highest of the Apostles, made master of that Prefecture which he received from the Master, is constituted the mouth of the remaining Apostles, or (to speak more properly) their teacher. And when thereafter he had filled up the twelfth number of the disciples, Matthias being introduced in the place of Judas; by the orations, very many of which he held in the presence of those Jews, he converts three thousand; who were present when the effusion of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles was made, and who criminated them that they were full of new wine, because in diverse tongues they were speaking the magnalia of God (as Scripture says), having testified to them with many other discourses, he forthwith drew three thousand men to the faith of Christ: and the one who had been lame from his very birth, at the gate of the temple, which is called Beautiful, together with John the Evangelist he made whole; and again, he heals the lame man: instructing by refutation those who had gathered, and calling them to salvation, and openly demonstrating that our Lord Jesus Christ is the true God, both from Moses and from the remaining Prophets; not only by the magnitude of the miracle, but also by the vehemence of his oration affected all with astonishment, and drew them to the faith of Christ; and constituted a Church in Jerusalem, punishes Ananias and Sapphira with death, which would consist of an almost infinite number. Ananias also and Sapphira his wife, who had committed that new fraud of taking by stealth, withdrawing those goods which they had of their own accord consecrated to God, most severely rebuking, immediately deprived of life.

[5] The same Peter not only drove away various diseases from men by his shadow, performs other miracles, but also called back the dead to life. At Lydda he healed the paralytic Aeneas with a word; at Joppa he raised Dorcas a woman zealous for the poor, who had died. At Caesarea he converted Cornelius the Centurion, an ethnic man, with his whole family to the faith of Christ, and filled them through baptism with the Holy Spirit: indeed he opened the gate of faith to the gentiles, instructed by that vessel like a certain linen sheet through a vision, in which vessel were all the wild beasts of the earth itself; likewise by a voice, which together with the vessel sent down from heaven, announces faith to the Gentiles: exhorted him, that rising he should sacrifice and eat, and reckon nothing common. By Herod Agrippa being bound with two chains, and cast into prison, and cautiously guarded by four quaternions of soldiers, by a divine

Angel he is delivered from the chains and custody, the doors being opened of their own accord. Then on account of that detestable Simon Magus, he traverses all the cities of Coele-Syria, also Pontus and Asia, and even the region of Galatia: and when there he had sown the word of faith, he came down to Rome. But that we may enumerate these regions as if running through them; they are these.

[6] From Jerusalem having set out to the city of Caesarea of Straton, when he had constituted there as Bishop one of those Presbyters who followed him, he comes to Sidon: where having healed many, and constituted a Bishop, he comes to Berytus. Here also having chosen as Bishop one of those whom he was leading with him, traversing various regions, he constitutes Bishops. he sets out for Byblos, then to Tripoli, and stayed with a certain Maron, a prudent man: whom he constituted Bishop for the faithful of the Phoenician city Tripoli, and comes to Orthosias; then to Antaradus; and soon to the island called Aradus; then to Balaneae, from there to Paltus, thence to Gabala, then to Laodicea: where when he had cured many vexed by diseases and held by demons, and had constituted a Church and a Bishop; he comes to Antioch of Syria; there Simon Magus, when he had avoided those ministers of the Emperor who had been sent to inquire after him, had set himself to flee to the cities of Judaea. But Peter, the Apostle of the Lord, when he first entered the city, performed many cures at Antioch; and announced one God in three persons to those who had gathered, and chose Bishops, Marcian for the city of Syracuse in Sicily, and Pancras for Tauromenium. After these things he came to Tyana a city of Cappadocia, and from there to Ancyra of Galatia: where when through prayer he had raised a dead man, and had initiated many through faith and baptism, and had constituted a Church and a Bishop, he came to Sinope a city of Pontus: then to Amasia, of the inland Hellespont; from here to Gangra of the Paphlagonians, then to Claudiopolis of Honorias; and to Nicomedia of Bithynia, and to Nicaea. But when he was hastening to ascend to Jerusalem for the cause of the festal day, he came to Pisinus.

ANNOTATIONS OF G. H.

CHAPTER II.

S. Peter's meeting with S. Paul. Various Bishops constituted. Acts at Rome against Simon Magus.

[7] Then through Cappadocia and Syria he again sets out for Antioch, and from there departing comes to Jerusalem; where he is visited by Paul, Peter visited at Jerusalem by S. Paul, who had now been converted to the faith for three years, as he himself testifies in a certain passage: After three, he says, years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days. Gal. 1, 18. In these days when they had published Ecclesiastical Canons and constitutions, the blessed Paul indeed returned to the work to which he had previously been called; but the great Peter returns to Antioch, where constituting Euodius as Bishop, he comes to Synada a city of Phrygia: then to Nicomedia, where choosing Prochorus as Bishop, he comes to Ilion a Hellespontian city; where when he had constituted as Bishop the Centurion Cornelius, he returns to Jerusalem. after various Bishops ordained in various places, But the Lord appeared to him by night through a vision; Rising Peter, he says, occupy the West: for it needs you, showing the way with a torch of light, and I will be with you. For that Simon, soon caught by those by whom he was sought, as we said above, is led to Rome, that he might pay the penalty for what he had dared to the judges. When he had come there, and had deceived many by his tricks, and reduced them to stupor, he not only did not pay the penalty; but was also by many held as a God, for so much did the precursor of Satan render stupid the Romans by his tricks, indeed Claudius himself; that establishing his effigy between the two bridges of the Tiber, they inscribed, To Simon the Holy God, of which inscription the Greek interpretation is this, Simōni Theō hagiō. And these things indeed Justin and Irenaeus relate at greater length: but let us follow the rest.

[8] When therefore the great Peter had announced the vision to the Brethren, and left them constitutions; he came to Antioch, Peter comes to Rome, and converts many. to visit the Churches. Where when he had found the great Paul, he is rebuked by him in a manner of dispensation. But when he had put Urbanus as Bishop over the Tarsians, and Epaphroditus over the Lycian city Andriaca, and Phygellus at Ephesus (whom they say defected from the right, and followed the dogmas of Simon) and at Smyrna Polycarp's brother Apelles; he comes to Macedonia; at Philippi also having constituted Olympas as Bishop, and at Thessalonica Jason, and at Corinth Silas, whom he found there expecting the great Paul, and likewise at Patras Herodion; he sailed to Sicily. There coming to Tauromenium, he stays with Pancras a most wise man; where when he had instructed and baptized a certain Maximus, and chosen him also as Bishop, he comes to Rome: where holding a sermon daily, and teaching one God Father omnipotent, and one Lord Jesus Christ the true son from the true God, and one Holy Spirit Lord and life-giver, both in the Synagogues and at home, he attracted many to the faith of Christ, and through holy baptism made them free from the vanity of idols: so that in a short time almost all rushed to holy baptism, and attracted by his Apostolic teaching believed in God.

[9] When that Simon Magus saw these things, he was not content to be silent and conceal his wickedness; but judging that something would be detracted from his own glory, he dissolves the tricks of Simon Magus, if he should permit the Apostle to announce the truth with all zeal to those who were at Rome; boldly and at the same time ignorantly in the middle of the city he began to speak more freely, and was undertaking foolishly to contradict Peter; when he showed certain shadows to follow and precede him, which he said were the souls of the dead, namely raised from the dead, and giving honor to him as a God; and that lame and maimed men were made whole by him, walked rightly and leaped; finally as Proteus, who is in the fables, he turned himself into many forms; sometimes indeed showing himself two-faced, soon he was transformed into a goat, a serpent and a winged thing, such as is fitting to be seen one who serves appetites lacking reason; he often made himself similar to fire, and in no way ceased to deceive simpler men in any way whatsoever. But that great Apostle of our Saviour, when he first appeared, dissolved all his machinations most easily, and reduced them to nothing. Therefore many contentions, as is fitting, having been made by both, when Simon had nothing remaining, which he might further do; crowned with laurel he ascended a certain altar, from which having more angrily first held a speech to the crowds; Since, he said, Romans, you have become so insane, that, with me abandoned, you wish to follow Peter, behold, with you watching, I will command the Angels, and they will lift me in their hands, and to the Father who is in heaven I will ascend, and from there will afflict you with extreme punishment; as you who would not stand by my words. Soon clapping his hands, casting himself into the air, he began to fly; with certain shadows, indeed rather depraved demons, impelling and bearing him upward.

[10] But that great Apostle Peter, with Paul delayed, with all listening, began to say; Lord Jesus Christ, and casts him down hurled from the air. do not permit him to complete what he has set forth for himself, lest this evil one cast a rock of scandal and a stone of offense on those who have believed in you. And when he had lifted his eyes to Simon, crying with raised voice; To you, he said, ministers of Satan I command, no longer to bear him, but to dismiss him there in whatever place he now is. And immediately, what seemed to be around Simon, with the shadows slipping away and vanishing, Simon himself fallen from the air, by a miserable and unhappy fall is carried headlong to the earth; and when he had his whole miserable body broken, on the next day he broke off his unhappy soul, with bitter pains and intense torments. Which thing being done, with the crowds for many hours crying; A great God is he who is preached to us by Peter; Peter when he had ascended to some lofty place, and beckoning with his hand had indicated silence to the people, from Moses and the Prophets preached our Lord Jesus Christ to be God, who is before the ages; and drove away very many demons from men; and when he had cured various diseases, he dismissed the crowds.

ANNOTATIONS OF G. H.

CHAPTER III.

The last peregrinations, return to Rome, and Martyrdom.

[11] When Peter had remained at Rome no long time, and had regenerated many with holy baptism, and had constituted a Church, and had put Linus over it as Bishop, he sets out for Terracina. Where having chosen Epaphroditus as Bishop, Linus the Bishop being ordained he went to Sirmium a city of Spain; where with Epaenetus constituted Bishop, he goes to Carthage a city of Africa, over which having put Crescens as Bishop, he comes to Egypt; and when he had left at Thebes named Heptapylis Rufus, but at Alexandria Mark the Evangelist as Bishops over those whom he had made Christ's disciples; he ran out as far as Britain, he returns to Jerusalem, to be present at the passing of the Mother of God Mary, which he had learned by revelation. Then having returned to Egypt, through Africa again he came to Rome: thence to Mediolanum (Milan) and Photica, inland cities, in which having constituted Bishops and Presbyters, he goes to Britain; where having remained a long time, when he had attracted innumerable nations to the faith of Christ, he was warned by an Angelic vision, which said such things to him; Peter, the time of your resolution is at hand, and you must return to Rome; where when you have undergone the death of the cross, you will receive the crown of justice.

[12] About which matter when he had given thanks to God and glorified him, returning to Rome and had stayed in Britain for some days, and had enlightened many with the word of grace, and had constituted the Church, finally chosen Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons, in the year XII of Caesar Nero he returns to Rome, where finding Linus himself made a Martyr; he chose Clement in his place, however much refusing and refusing the prefecture. he ordains Clement, Whom when he had persuaded with sufficiently many words, and had bidden to be of good cheer, he leads him by his oration to the chair. Who as a certain calf submitting his neck to the sweet yoke of Christ, together with the master of preaching drew the wagon: from which thing many illustrious men with prompt mind obeyed the faith, and many noble women came to those who are saved.

[13] But two women, from those with whom the Emperor had affairs, and who beyond the others were loved by him, under Nero, on account of his mistresses converted, coming to the faith, and setting before themselves henceforth a chaste life; since Nero himself was in a marvelous manner most incontinent and lustful, against the whole Church, but especially against Peter Prince of the Apostles he raged; as he who had stood forth as the author for those women of living chastely. Wherefore inflamed greatly with fury, against all who believed in Christ he decrees the capital penalty. Therefore the soldiers seizing them, lead them where the place of the condemned was. But they spared Clement, as Caesar's blood-kin: but Herodion and Olympas, together with a vast multitude, they subjected to the stroke of the sword; but Peter, is crucified, the great Apostle of Christ, with his head turned to the earth, they affix to the cross. Where when he too had borne both the pains of the nails, in the manner in which Christ our God had borne, he deposited into the hand of God that pure soul, weakened by no stain. Clement his disciple and Bishop magnificently burying that precious and holy body, and is buried by S. Clement. deposited it in a notable place. But concerning the life, preaching, and martyrdom of the Prince of the Apostles, may these things compendiously said by us, suffice. It is necessary, now also in the manner we can to run through the deeds of the famous and blessed Paul the Apostle.

ANNOTATIONS OF G. H.

CHAPTER IV.

The persecution by S. Paul, his conversion, peregrinations to Thessalonica.

[14] The great therefore and blessed Apostle of the Lord Paul also himself was Hebrew by race, of the tribe of Benjamin, S. Paul having persecuted the Church, sprung from noble parents, a Pharisee by training, his fatherland ascribed to Tarsus a city of Cilicia. Instructed in the law of Moses by his teacher Gamaliel to the highest degree, a fervent emulator of the paternal constitutions; from very boyhood called Saulus a Roman, persecuting and devastating the church unwittingly: wherefore he approved the killing of Stephen the Protomartyr, when he had received the garments of all those who stoned him to be kept, that in slaying him he might use the hands of all. Moreover he was the first present everywhere with those who were stirring up sedition, zealously striving to destroy the new Religion: and many and great were the things which were done by him against the Church, and nothing was lacking to him for the highest madness. For in this he thought to exercise piety, and to bear himself nobly, as he himself confesses in his Epistles, and Luke recounts in the book which is inscribed Acts of the Apostles. For not only did he, as many Jews, hold in hatred and turn from the true Religion; but also provoked the greater wrath of the whole nation against its Preachers. For after he saw it had suddenly shone forth, and the heralds of faith had risen superior to threats, stirred by emulation, and judging himself to be affected by the greatest injury, if the heralding were to be spread through the whole earth, but the preachers should make light of the danger from persecutors; he applied all zeal, to remove these from the midst, and to retard and repress that. Wherefore when from the Priests and Doctors at that time he had received letters to the Jews who were at Damascus; he entered the journey against the disciples who were in it.

[15] converted, But he who from his mother's womb separated him for his own ministry, seeing him held by unjust madness, while he thought himself to have a just purpose of mind, and appearing on the middle of the road as he hastened, deprives him indeed of his bodily eyes, by the magnitude of the most pure light which appeared; but enlightens his mind and soul to such a degree, that the man himself, who had once been a persecutor, and baptized by Ananias he forthwith made his beloved and most faithful preacher. The name of Saul therefore being changed into the name of Paul, and he having been led from the surge of persecution to the rest of his faith, he sends to a certain disciple Ananias in the city of Damascus. From whom when Paul had received holy baptism, and had communicated in the unsullied Sacraments of Christ, preaches at Damascus, he is made the faithful associate of preaching. So great a change therefore did this Blessed one show after his calling, and to such a degree did he burn with desire for Christ, that he confirmed the preachers of truth not only by words, but also by deeds: who still feared him, and held him suspect; showing himself to have broken out with all zeal of mind into the love of the Lord. Wherefore when he had been with those who were at Damascus disciples; immediately he began to preach Christ in the synagogues, confuting the Jews, and again confirming, that he is the Christ.

[16] at Jerusalem, Caesarea, Antioch, But when the snares prepared against him by the Jews had been known to him, through the wall in a basket he is let down by the disciples, and to Jerusalem comes to the Apostles. In which speaking openly in the name of the Lord Jesus, he discoursed and disputed against the Gentiles. But when snares were again signified to him, by the Brethren he is led down to Caesarea, and from there comes to Tarsus: where when Barnabas had come, and had found him, he led him to Antioch. And when for a whole year they had had assemblies there, and had taught a sufficiently great multitude, and had first called the disciples Christians; they are sent to the Brethren in Judaea with a ministry, on account of the famine, which was in the time of Claudius Caesar. When they had completed the ministry, they returned to Antioch; offering to the Lord the sacred ministry, and fasting, by the Holy Spirit they are segregated for the work, to which they had been called. Being sent forth then, at Seleucia, they came to Seleucia, and from there sailed to Cyprus: at Salamis, and when they had been at Salamis, they announced the word of God. But when they had crossed the island to Paphos, at Paphos, they blind the pseudoprophet Bar-Jesus, who was perverting many: which being done, it happened immediately that many believed, and even the Proconsul himself, who was in the island. at Perge, Antioch in Pisidia, But setting out from there, they come to Perge of Pamphylia, and from there to Antioch of Pisidia: in which when on the Sabbath day Paul had preached in the synagogue, he drew many to faith in Christ. Wherefore the Jews full of emulation, drove him and Barnabas out of the city: but they going out from it, shook off the dust from their feet, according to the precept of the Lord.

[17] at Iconium, And when they had come to Iconium, and had there occupied themselves for a long time, and had called many Jews and Gentiles, and also blessed Thecla, to faith in the Lord; from the Jews who had not believed, and the Gentiles, they are affected with contumelies, and attacked with stones. at Lystra, Derbe, And when they had fled to Lystra and Derbe, which are cities of Lycaonia, they heal him who had been lame from his mother's womb; and when therefore they were thought to be gods by the barbarians, they prohibited sacrifices being offered to them. Then when Jews from Antioch and Iconium had come, and had inflicted many injuries on them, the crowds persuaded by them stoned Paul, and dragged him outside the city. Whence he himself says; What things happened to me at Antioch, Iconium and Lystra; what persecutions I sustained, and from all the Lord delivered me. With difficulty rising in the morning, he returned to the city: and going out again with Barnabas he came to Derbe: and they preaching to the city, and making many disciples, again they returned to Lystra and Iconium and Antioch: in which place when they had ordained Presbyters, and had crossed Pisidia, they came into Pamphylia. And when they had spoken the discourse at Perge, they went down to Attalia. But when they had come to Antioch, and had gathered the Church, at Antioch of Syria, they announced whatever the Lord had done with them. Sent off from there, they crossed Phoenicia and Samaria, narrating the conversion of the Gentiles. But when they had come to Jerusalem, they returned to Antioch, bringing from the Apostles a letter, that it is not fitting to be circumcised, nor to eat blood, and to abstain from what is strangled and from things sacrificed. Where when they had come, and had spent a sufficiently long time there, they departed, Barnabas indeed to Cyprus, taking Mark; but Paul into the parts of Syria and Cilicia, having chosen Silas, and confirmed the Churches which were in the city; and having come again to Derbe and Lystra, and having taken Timothy as a disciple; he circumcised him. Then when they had visited Phrygia and Galatia, and various places, being prohibited by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia, coming through Mysia, they tried to set out into Bithynia, nor did the Holy Spirit allow them.

[18] But Mysia being crossed, they went down into Troas: and when from there he had passed into Samothrace, at Troas, Philippi, they come to Neapolis: and arriving at Philippi of Macedonia, they spent some days there. In which place when Lydia the purple-seller had believed, they came into her house for the sake of prayer, and cast out a pythonic spirit from a maidservant. Wherefore being attacked by her Masters with curses, as those who announced foreign customs, they are beaten with rods by the Magistrates, and thrown into prison, and their feet bound carefully and diligently with wood. Where when about midnight they were praying and praising God; [a great earthquake occurred, and with the doors of the prison thrown open, all the bound were loosed]; and the keeper of the prison, made faithful with his whole household, received saving baptism from Paul. But going out of the city, when they had crossed Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica: at Thessalonica. in which many being taken into discipline, they provoked the Jews to wrath: who also having collected a multitude, disturbed the city. And when they had come to Jason's house, they sought to bring them out to the people: but these not being found, they dragged Jason, and some of the Brethren before the Magistrates of the city, who with satisfaction received, dismissed them.

ANNOTATIONS OF G. H.

CHAPTER V.

The remaining journeys of Paul to Rome.

[19] at Beroea, But Paul going out from there, with those who were with him, came to Beroea. In which place when he had received many disciples, Timothy indeed and Silas remained there, but the great Paul came by sea to Athens. at Athens, But going through, and contemplating those things which were worshipped by them; he also found an altar, on which was written, To the unknown God: from which having taken a small occasion, he announces to them in the middle of the Areopagus our Lord and God Jesus Christ, taking his beginning from the very inscription of the altar: and immediately baptized enough into faith in Christ. Among whom Dionysius also the Areopagite, and a certain honorable woman by name Damaris, and with them others. After these things Paul departing from Athens, came to Corinth: and when he had found Priscilla and Aquila, at Corinth, of the same trade as he himself was, he stays with them. In which place when he had spent a year and five months, and had illuminated many both of the Jews and of the Greeks with the word of grace, and had called them to faith of the Lord, with Priscilla and Aquila and Timothy taken with him, he came to Ephesus; at Ephesus, and leaving them there, to Caesarea together with Timothy. And when he had saluted the Church, he went down to Antioch: in which having stayed some time, he went out, then passing through Galatia and Phrygia.

[20] But when through the upper parts he had come to Ephesus, he performs more miracles. for three months disputing with the Jews in the synagogue about the kingdom of God, he persuaded them not to attend to those things, which were said in shadow by the Law, but to translate them to the spirit. And when he had remained two other years and a little more with them, and had drawn nearly all of Asia to the faith of Christ, and had performed by no means common virtues, not through himself alone, but also through his sweat-cloths and aprons, and had driven out every kind of disease and demons, and had constituted Timothy as Bishop for them; he went out, to go into Macedonia. With those parts crossed, he came into Greece: and when he had spent three months there, and had received many disciples, he came to Troas. In this place Eutychus, who had dozed off during the sermon, and had fallen down from the third story, and was dead; he raised, and went to Assos, then to Mitylene: and when on the following day he was opposite Chios, on the next day he reached Samos.

he summoned the Presbyters of the Church. But after they had come, he discoursed with them concerning humility and bearing of evils, then concerning ecclesiastical constitution, and care of the flock. And again, when he had foretold those things which were to happen both to himself going to Jerusalem, and to them after his departure; and had charged them to be watchful against those, who like wolves are about to greedily tear the flock apart, and had commended them to God, and prayed, ascending the ship, he immediately set sail. Borne by which, when he had come to the Island Cos, he sailed to Rhodes: and from there to Patara. In which place when he had boarded another ship, with Cyprus left to his left, he sailed past Syria; and when he had come to Tyre (for there the ship was unloading the cargo placed) and had found disciples, he stayed with them seven days. comes to Jerusalem; And using the ship again, he came to Ptolemais, and from there to Caesarea, staying with Philip the Evangelist, who was one of the seven Deacons. And after some days, with baggage taken up, he came to Jerusalem: and being purified for seven days, enters the temple, announcing the days of purification fulfilled.

[22] Here those Jews who were from Asia, when they had looked upon him, disturbed the whole multitude, and laid their hands on Paul, crying: Men of Israel, bring aid. With a great concourse of the people having been made; they began to say: This is he, who against the law and this place, teaches all everywhere: indeed even brought Gentiles into the temple, and shared with them. The multitude therefore being immediately stirred, was incited to remove him from the midst: but soon the Tribune Lysias coming, frees him, and with military aid sends him to the Governor Felix, whom Festus succeeded. But when Paul had perceived snares being prepared against him by the Jews, before the tribunal he immediately appeals to Caesar. And then indeed he is dismissed from judgment, but the snares which were being prepared against him by the Jews cease, he appeals to Caesar; and thereafter by the Governors he is sent to Caesar. But when it had been determined, that Paul should sail to Italy, and a certain Centurion, by name Julius, having received him, together with other bound men had ascended an Adramyttian ship, he came to Sidon, and from there to Cyprus. The sea being then sailed past, which is opposite Cilicia and Pamphylia, they come to Myra a city of Lycia. And when they had ascended an Alexandrian ship, on the journey to be conveyed to Rome with difficulty they arrive at Cnidus. From which sailing under Crete by Salmone, they came to the place, which is called Fair Havens. From which when they had set sail, and were coasting Crete with a typhonic wind blowing, which is called Euroaquilo, they run down near the island so called Cauda.

[23] But when, troubled by a violent storm, they had cast out the tackle of the ship with their own hands, and all, affected with great sorrow, were expecting death; Paul rising in the midst of them, suffers shipwreck ordered them to be of good cheer, because no loss of life was to be made, but only of the ship; and exhorted them, to take food, because they had already remained fasting for fourteen days. And when those who were with Paul had been saved, with the ship dissolved by the violence of the waves, descending to land, they knew the island to be called Malta. In which place while Paul was gathering a multitude of brushwood, a viper seized his hand: which shaking off into the fire, and having suffered no evil, he was considered a God by the Barbarians. Indeed when he had freed the father of Publius from the bowel pain by which he was suffering, and had done many other miracles, with those who were sailing with him, in another ship he came to Syracuse, and from there to Rhegium, then to Puteoli, and finally to Rome itself. But when the Brethren had known of his arrival, at Rome bound he preaches the kingdom of God. they went to meet him as far as Appii Forum, and Three Taverns. And the Centurion delivered the rest of the bound men to the captain of the camp, but Paul for the whole two-year period was kept by one soldier, receiving all who came to him, and preaching the Kingdom of God with all confidence without impediment.

ANNOTATIONS OF G. H.

CHAPTER VI.

Paul's setting out for Spain, return to Rome, and Martyrdom.

[24] And these things up to here Luke narrated in the Acts of the Apostles, who composed the book at that time: but those things which afterwards followed, He preaches in Gaul and Spain, after Paul was left at Rome and he set out for Thebes of Boeotia, he did not at all compose. But Eusebius, who in the second book of the ecclesiastical history accurately searched these things out, says, that Paul, when he had then pleaded his cause before Nero, was absolved, and when he had been released preached the word of God acting at Rome for ten whole years: through which he is said to have gone abroad into Spain, Gaul and Italy, the herald of Christ to have disseminated the word, and to have led many away from the paternal gods, and joined them to the flock of the Lord. Now when he was in Spain, they say something of this kind happened.

[25] A certain woman distinguished both by birth, and wealth, and learning, when she had long ago received the Apostolic report, desired with her very eyes to look upon the herald of truth, and with her ears to be instructed in the dogmas of true piety. When it had therefore seemed good to her, by some divine inspiration, to set forth to the forum, at which time he who from rumor alone was loved by her, Paul was passing through the middle of it; she is said to have seen him, gently and quietly walking (as one who not only had the rest of his manners full of grace, but even the very gait) and divinely impelled, persuaded her husband (whose name was Probus; and of those who were from there, he was easily the chief) to receive the guest within his house. But after he had been sent for and was near them, such a miracle is said to have happened to the woman. With the eyes of her mind opened, she saw on the forehead of him who had been received as guest, golden letters, which said, Paul the herald of Christ. But on account of the unexpected vision joy and fear invaded her: and full of tears she fell at the feet of the Apostle, and with catechesis from him instituted, first indeed received baptism, called Xanthippe. But afterwards Probus her husband, who was known to Nero; then also Philotheus the Prefect, and thereafter all who inhabited that region. But that Paul preached in Spain, this he openly says in the Epistle to the Romans, so writing: But now no longer having place in these regions, but having desire of coming to you from many years, when I shall set out for Spain, I will come to you: for I hope passing through to see you. Since therefore even before he had been at Rome, he had in mind to preach in Spain: when it had successfully happened to him, that he came to the first, as I said, city Rome; he did not neglect, what before he had determined for his soul, to come into Spain: although having afterwards returned to Rome he ceased there from his long labors. But how, and for what cause, I am now about to declare. 15 v. 23

[26] When Nero had proceeded to the highest madness, first indeed he removed Agrippina his own mother; Nero rages against his own, besides also his father's sister, and Octavia his own wife, and others innumerable, who belonged to him in family. But afterwards he set in motion a general persecution against the Christians: and orders S. Paul to be killed by the sword, and so came to the slaughter of the Apostles. For at the same time it happened that Paul also, in the thirty-sixth year of the saving passion, but the thirteenth of Nero, was made a Martyr, his head cut off with the sword. But a certain Gaius an Ecclesiastical man, and Zephyrinus Roman Bishop, and Dionysius Bishop of Corinth, write, at one time, and together Peter and Paul underwent martyrdom, in the thirteenth year of the Empire of Nero. and this on account of his mistresses converted by him, For they say that Nero at that time had been moved against the Christians, on account of the women who had believed in the Lord, and had determined to live modestly and chastely, nor would thereafter abide to consort with him; but not on account of Simon Magus. To which is said by them, John also that golden of tongue gives testimony, distinguished in divine matters, and whose mind is full of spirit; writing in the oration against those who prohibit that monks should be made: You all hear of Nero: for he was a man notable for lust, who first and alone found in such empire certain new manners of intemperance and turpitude. This Nero therefore charging blessed Paul (for he was at the same times as he) in this manner, as you now charge these holy men (for he persuaded his beloved concubine, that she should at the same time receive the word of faith, and be freed from that impure intercourse) in this way (I say) he charging him, and calling Paul corrupter and seducer, and those things which you now speak, first bound him shut in prison; afterwards however he did not persuade him to desist from giving the maiden counsel, and cut off his head. And these things indeed he, who in manners and speech is an Apostolic man, on the blessed end of the divine Paul.

[27] The chief therefore and divine (as we said before) Apostles in the thirteenth year of Nero are consummated: but the execrable Simon about the middle of the years of Claudius they say underwent a most loathsome death. as he had preached for 35 years like Peter also. But some say, that Peter preceded by one year, and received that blessed and Lord-like Passion, when he had laid down his soul for the sheep: but the great Apostle Paul followed him, as Justin and Irenaeus say, when through whole five years they made assemblies and disputations by themselves before the resolution to Christ. And I indeed assent rather to these. But Eusebius of Pamphilus says, Peter indeed spent twelve years in the East, but twenty-three years lived at Rome, and in Britain, and in the cities, which are in the West: so that the whole time of Peter's preaching is thirty-five years. But that Paul himself also for twenty-one years preached piety in Christ, and other two years spent at Caesarea in prison. With these he joins also the two earlier years, which he spent at Rome, and the last ten: so that of his preaching and calling the entire time also is thirty-five years.

[28] And these things ours are of such a kind, that they may show our desire toward you, O Apostles, and brotherly love toward those who are gathered: for this is your law, and that of the common Lord and master, that we love one another, and seek the utility of many. Epilogue, But may you also in turn take care of our matters; help us, that we may carry off victory from the depraved affections of mind, and may resist demons; give us quiet of mind, peace toward all, and indeed even toward those, who for no cause are our enemies, gentleness of mind together with patience, beneficence and mutual love. We certainly ask you, in whatever place of the universe finally you may be, or even in the whole universe, as we believe; look upon us also, and lead our life to tranquility of mind, free from sins, full of right acts and good works, worthy of the divine eyes: that in this life perpetually celebrating the feast with you, in the future we may also obtain the goods promised: by the grace and benignity of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom to the Father together and the holy Spirit, glory, power and honor be, now and always and unto ages of ages. Amen.

ANNOTATIONS OF G. H.

ACTS OF S. PETER

Attributed to S. Linus his disciple and successor.

From the Ms. of Henry Julius Baron de Blum.

Peter Apostle, at Rome (S.)

Paul Apostle, at Rome (S.)

BHL Number: 6663

FROM THE MSS.

After collecting what concerning the calling of Peter, his acts with Christ, and after his ascension, partly Evangelical, partly Apostolic history relates, down to his liberation from the Herodian prison, all of which, can be read in the sacred letters and more entire, the following the Author, whoever he was, adds; whose opinion how much better is held in that Ms. which we follow than in the editions under the name of Abdias, the diversity of readings will show, marked in the margin by **. But the genuine text proceeds thus, after what I have already indicated:

[1] These things being thus accomplished, there arose a certain Simon, a Samaritan by race, who having long ago seen the miracles of Peter, wished to obtain the spiritual gift with money, who said himself to be great and perpetually standing, promising that those who believed in him absolutely could not be loosed. For he, desiring to overturn the ways of Peter, and to make void the things he taught, set a day on which, with the crowds gathering, he should be present to dispute with Peter. But Peter was then at Caesarea of Straton. Peter called out at Caesarea of Straton against Simon Magus, Therefore when the appointed day was dawning, Zachaeus, who was the Prior of the city, stood by Peter, saying: It is time you proceed to disputation, Peter: but the crowd, gathered in the middle of the court, is being pressed waiting for you, in the midst of whom supported by many followers stands Simon. Then Peter when he had heard these things, for the sake of prayer ordering some to withdraw, who had not yet been washed from the sins which they had committed in ignorance, says to the rest: Let us pray, brethren, a prayer being made to Christ that God through Christ his son out of his ineffable mercy may help me going out for the salvation of men, who were created by him. And when he had said these things, after prayer was made, he went forth to the court of the house, in which was gathered a very great multitude of people.

[2] When he sees all to be attentive with the greatest silence, and the magician Simon in the middle of them like a standard-bearer; and an exhortation to the people, immediately he began in this manner: Peace be to you all, who are prepared to give right hands to the truth. For whoever obey it, seem indeed to themselves to confer some grace upon God; furthermore however they themselves obtain from him the gift of the highest service, walking the paths of his justice. On account of which it is the first of all things, to seek the justice of God and his kingdom: justice, that we may be taught to act rightly; the kingdom, that we may know what is the reward proposed for labors and patience. In which there is for the good indeed the remuneration of eternal goods; but for those who shall have acted against his will, according to each one's deeds, a worthy restitution of punishments. Here therefore, that is placed in the present life, it behooves you to know the will of God, where also is the place of acting. For if anyone wishes, before he should amend his acts, to inquire about those which he cannot find; foolish and inefficacious will be such an inquiry. For the time is short, and the judgment of God is conducted concerning deeds, not concerning questions. And therefore before all things let us seek this, what we or in what manner we ought to act, that we may deserve to obtain eternal life. This therefore is my opinion, as it has also seemed to the true Prophet, that first concerning justice it be sought, by these especially who profess that they know God. If therefore anyone has what he thinks more right, let him say it, and when he shall have said, let him hear, but with patience and quiet: for on account of this from the beginning of the salutation I prayed for the appearance of peace to all. To these Simon answered: We have no need of your peace. For if there be peace and concord, we shall be able to profit nothing toward finding the truth. For both robbers and fornicators have peace among themselves, and every wickedness agrees with itself. And so if for this we have met, that for the sake of peace we should give assent to all things that are said; he accuses him of having refused peace, we shall confer nothing on the hearers: but on the contrary, having mocked them, we depart friends. On account of which do not invoke peace, but rather battle: and if you can overthrow errors, do not seek friendship, prepared by unjust flatteries. For this above all I wish you to know, that of two fighting between themselves, then there will be peace, when the one shall have fallen overcome.

[3] And Peter said: Why are you afraid frequently to hear peace? Or are you ignorant, that the perfection of the law is peace? For from sins are born wars and contentions: but where sin is not done, and selling his vain miracles, peace in disputations, truth in works is found. And Simon: These words which you speak contain no weight: but now I will show the power of my virtue and divinity, that you may suddenly fall and adore me. I am the first virtue, who am always and without beginning. But having entered into the womb of Rachel, I was born of her as a man, who can be seen by men. I have flown through the air, mixed with fire I was made one body, I have made statues to move, I have animated the inanimate, I have made stones bread, I have crossed from the mountain by flight, I have been borne up by the hands of Angels, I have descended to earth. These things I have not only done, but can do them now also; that I may be proved by the very things that I am son of God, standing forever, and I will make those believing in me likewise stand in perpetuity. But your words are all vain, nor can you show any work of truth; just as also he who sent you, the magician, who could not free himself from the punishment of the cross. For I can make myself not to appear to those wishing to apprehend me, that again wishing to be seen I am openly; if I should wish to flee I would pierce mountains, and pass through rocks as through mud. If I should give myself headlong from a high mountain, as if carried up I will be borne to the lands unhurt; bound I will loose myself, but those who shall have placed chains I will return bound, gathered in prison, I will make the bars open of their own accord, I will make statues animated, so that they may be thought by those who see to be men; I will make new trees suddenly arise, I will produce sudden shoots; I will throw myself into fire that I may not burn, I change my face that I may not be recognized. But also I can show to men that I have two faces; that I become as a sheep or goat, a small boy I shall produce a beard, flying in the air I shall be carried, I shall show very much gold, I shall make kings, I shall be adored as God, publicly with divine honors I shall be endowed, so that placing an image to me they may worship and adore me as a God. And what need is there to say many things? Whatever I shall wish I shall be able to do. For many causes have been intimated to me already by experience. Finally sometime, he says, when my mother Rachel was bidding me to go out to the field to reap, I seeing the sickle placed, ordered it to go and reap, and it reaped tenfold more than the rest. Many new shoots already I have produced from the earth, and I have made them leafy in a moment of time, and the nearest mountain I have pierced for the second time.

[4] These things being said by Simon, Peter responded: Do not assign others' things. For that you are a magician, shows him to be a magician from the very things which you have done you have confessed and have been made manifest. But our master, who is the son of God and of man, is manifestly good. But that he truly is the son of God, was said and is said to whom it was fitting. But you if you do not wish to confess that you are a magician, with all this crowd let us proceed to your house, and then it will appear who is a magician. and on account of sedition stirred up by him But Peter saying these things, Simon began to act with blasphemies and curses, and with sedition made everyone disturbed, he could not be refuted. And Peter, lest as if for the cause of blasphemy he should seem to withdraw, stood immovable, and began to refute him more vehemently. Then the people indignant, Simon being cast out of the court drove him out beyond the doors of the house: and with him driven out, one alone followed. With silence made, as victor he remains, Peter began to address the people in this way: Patiently, Brethren, you must endure evil men; knowing that God, when he can cut them off, suffers them however to endure unto the appointed day, in which judgment will be made about all. How therefore shall we not endure those whom God endures? You therefore who are turning to God through penitence, bend your knees to him. When he had said these things, the whole multitude bent their knees to God. And Peter looking up to heaven, and prays for the rest. with tears prayed over them, that God by his goodness might deign to receive them, fleeing to him. And after he had prayed and instructed, that on the next day they should gather earlier, he held Mass: then thereafter according to custom he rested.

[5] But when morning was made, a certain one of Simon's disciples coming, was crying out saying: I beg you, Peter, receive me wretched, the disciples of Simon and deceived by the Magician Simon, to whom I was attending as if to a heavenly God, on account of those wondrous things which I saw done by him: but having heard your discourses, the man has now begun to seem to me, and indeed evil. Yet when he had gone out from here, I alone followed him, for I had not yet clearly known his impieties. But when he had seen me following, calling me blessed, he led me to his house. About the middle of the night, he said to me: I will make you better than all men, if you shall wish to persevere with me to the end. To whom when I had promised, he exacted from me an oath of perseverance; and having received it placed upon my shoulders certain polluted and execrable secret things

his own, after his crimes heard from this man to carry, and followed me. But when we came to the sea, having entered a ship which happened to be at hand, he took from my neck what he had ordered me to carry; and a little later going out, he brought nothing, certain that he had thrown it into the sea. He was asking me therefore, to set out with him, saying that he was making for Rome: for there he would so please, that he would be thought a God, and would publicly be granted divine honors. Then, he says, I will send you back filled with all riches, if it shall please you to return here, supported by very many ministries. Hearing these things, seeing nothing in him according to this profession, but understanding him to be a magician and deceiver, I responded: I beg you, forgive me, because my feet hurt, and therefore I am not able to go out from Caesarea. Besides I have a wife, I have little children, whom I am altogether unable to leave. But he hearing these things, and accusing me of cowardice, and his departure for Rome, set out for Rome, saying; When you shall have heard, how much glory I shall have in the city of Rome, you will repent. And after these things he indeed, as he said, made for Rome: but I forthwith returned here, praying that you may receive me to penitence, because I was deceived by him. When he had said these things, he who had returned from Simon, Peter ordered him to sit in the court. admits him: But going forth himself, and seeing crowds much greater than on the preceding days, he stood in the accustomed place; and showing him who had come from Simon, said: This man, Brethren, whom you see, came to me a little before, announcing to me of Simon's evil arts, how he had cast the very workshop of his crime into the deep; not as if led by penitence, but fearing, lest detected he should lie under public laws. Peter saying these things, the people seeing the man, who had come from Simon, were amazed.

[6] Therefore Peter having departed from Caesarea, came to Tripoli, at Tripoli he preaches Christ, and entering the house of Maron, saw a place apt for disputation. But when he saw the crowd as if a huge river had inundated a gentle stream; ascending upon a certain platform, which happened to stand near the wall of the garden, first by the custom of religion he saluted the people. But some of those who were present, and had long been troubled by demons, he frees the demoniacs: fall to the ground; with the unclean spirits beseeching, that even for one day it should be granted to them to remain in the possessed bodies. Whom Peter rebuking, he cures the sick: immediately ordered to depart, and without delay they departed. After these others, afflicted with long languors, asked Peter, that they might receive health. For whom that he would supplicate the Lord, he promises the people, when first the discourse of doctrine should have been completed. But immediately as he promised, they were loosed from their langours, and he ordered them to go aside with those, who had been cured of demons, as if after fatigue of labor. But Peter departing from Tripoli was making for Antioch, and came to an island by name Antaradus, where in a certain shrine were vine columns, of wondrous size. To gaze at which when many had gone with Peter, at Antaradus he heals a crippled woman: and Peter having admired them had gone out, before the doors he saw a certain woman demanding alms from those entering; whom considering attentively he said: Tell me, woman, what member of body is lacking to you, that you have subjected yourself to this injury, that you may seek alms, and not rather working with your hands, which you received from God, seek food? But she sighing said: Would that I indeed had hands which could be moved! But now only the appearance of hands is preserved: for they themselves are dead, and from my motions rendered feeble and without sense. Then Peter taking hold of her hands healed them: but this woman was the mother of Clement, by whom also in the same place she was recognized. For through the virtues of Peter she also received her other sons, Faustinus and Faustus, who with their names changed, were called Aquila and Metia: and her husband Faustinianus, who had long been separated from her.

[7] And when they wished to sail from that island, the mother said to Clement: Sweetest son, it is right that I say farewell to the little woman who received me: for she is needy and paralytic lying in bed. likewise a paralytic woman: Which being heard, Peter and all who were present, admired the goodness and prudence of the woman; and immediately Peter ordered some to go, and bring the woman in the bed as she lay. When she had been brought, and placed in the middle of the standing crowd, in the sight of all Peter said: If I am the herald of truth, for confirming the faith of all these who are present, that they may know and believe that there is one God who made heaven and earth; in the name of Jesus Christ his son, let this woman rise. And immediately as Peter said these things, the woman rose healed, and fell at the feet of Peter; and seeking with kisses her friend and acquaintance, gave thanks to the Lord. These things being completed, and he frees a possessed woman raging: with Peter wishing to go to the lodging, the Master of the house said to him: It is base and impious for such a holy man to stay in a stable, when I have nearly the whole house vacant, and very many beds spread, and what things are necessary, prepared. But with Peter contradicting, the wife of the householder, together with her children, prostrated herself before him, and was beseeching saying: I beg you, stay with us. But not even thus indeed did Peter consent: until the daughter of those asking, by an unclean spirit for many years vexed and bound with chains, who had been shut in a chamber, with the demon driven away from her and the doors opened, coming with her chains, fell at the feet of Peter, saying: It is right, my Lord, that you should perform here today my salutary things, and not sadden me, nor my parents. But Peter inquiring the cause of her chains and discourses; the parents, made joyful beyond hope at their daughter's health, and as if astonished by some stupor, themselves indeed could not say; but the household standing by say: This woman from the seventh year of age tempted by a demon, all who tried to approach her, she tried to tear, to mangle, even to break by bites, and from twenty years until the present she never ceased to do this, nor could she be cured by anyone, but no one was even able to approach her: for she rendered many useless, killed others: for she was stronger than all men, doubtless leaning on the strength of the demon. But now, as you see, by your presence the demon indeed has fled: but the doors, which had been closed with the greatest fortification, are open; and she herself stands sound before you, asking that you make the day of her salutary things joyful both for herself and her parents, and stay with them. When these things had been thus narrated by one of the household, and the very chains had been released of their own accord from her hands and feet; Peter, certain that through him this health had been given back to the girl, consented to stay in her father's house.

[8] But after these things Peter coming to Rome, in those very days in which he felt his end of life to be imminent for him; placed in the gathering of the Brethren, having taken Clement's hand, suddenly rising up, at Rome he ordains S. Clement Bishop; in the ears of the whole Church he uttered these words: Hear me, brethren and fellow servants of mine, because, as I have been taught by him who sent me, the Lord master Jesus Christ, the day of my death is at hand; this Clement I ordain Bishop for you, to whom alone I entrust the Chair of my preaching and doctrine; who was a companion to me in all things from the beginning to the end, and through this knew the truth of all my preaching; who in all my temptations was an associate faithfully persevering; whom above the rest I have known worshipping God, loving men, chaste, given to studies of learning, sober, kind, just, patient, knowing how to bear injuries even of some of those who are instructed in the word of God. Therefore to him I hand over the power given me by the Lord of binding and loosing, that of all whatsoever he shall have decreed on the earth, this shall be decreed in the heavens: for he shall bind what ought to be bound, and loose what ought to be loosed. And when he had said these things, he laid his hands upon him, and compelled him to sit in his own Chair; much instructing him, how either he should rule the Church entrusted to him, or feed the sheep undertaken. Then also Paul the Apostle coming to Rome, preached Christ the Lord. In the times therefore of Nero Caesar there were at Rome health-bringing teachers of the Christians, Peter and Paul the Apostles; through whom while the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ grew in the mind of all, and the augmentations of religion were propagated, because they were sublime in works, illustrious in mastery, on account of the virtue of Divine grace; Nero through Simon the magician began vehemently to oppose the Apostles; the absurdities and crimes of Simon Magus, gracious before Nero, he reveals; because through the various illusions of demons the magician had so obtained the mind of Caesar, that with ambiguity removed he was confident of him as the President of his salvation and the guardian of his life. For he believed that victories of wars, and subjugations of nations, and prosperity of affairs he was to have through him in all things. But Peter the Apostle uncovered his vanities and all crimes, because the light of truth, and the brightness of the divine word, which had recently shone forth for the salvation of men, with the fog of all lying shaken from human minds through the Apostles, was driving away the darkness of ignorance. Then Simon the magician, struck by the brightness of true light, immediately incurred the blindness of an ill-sound mind: he as one who already in Judea through the Apostle Peter had been confuted of the crimes he was committing, entered into a transmarine flight, and who in other parts of the lands had experienced the power of Peter, yet preceding to Rome, dared to boast of himself, that he could raise the dead.

[9] At that time there was a certain dead noble youth, a kinsman of Caesar: where when a great crowd of kinsmen had come together, a dead boy, they were inquiring among themselves, if there was anyone, who could raise the dead. The most celebrated indeed then was Peter held in these works: but among the gentiles no faith of this kind was confirmed; sorrow however demanded that a remedy be sought. They proceeded to Peter. There were indeed, who thought Simon also should be summoned, that both should be present. Then Peter said to them; that Simon, who was boasting about his own power, should first if he could raise the dead: if he should not be able, that he was not doubtful, that Christ would bring help to the deceased. But Simon, who was thought among the Gentiles to be of great power, interposed the condition, that if he should raise the dead, Peter should be killed, who had inflicted injury on so great a power by provoking it with bold words; but if, with him doing nothing, Peter should raise the dead, the Magician of the sentence,

which had been pronounced on the Apostle, should lie under.

When such a condition had been interposed, Peter remained quiet. Simon began, whom the Magus only makes to move his head, approached the bed of the deceased, began secretly to chant dire incantations and mutter spells. It seemed to those standing around that the head of the deceased was moving; a great clamor of the gentiles was raised, that he now lived, that he was now speaking with Simon. A marvelous indignation against Peter began to arise in all, because he had dared to compare himself to such a power. Then S. Peter demanded that silence be made, and said to them: If the deceased lives, let him speak, if he is raised, let him rise, walk, talk. This I say is a phantasm, not a truth, that you discern the head of the deceased to be moved. Finally, he says, let the magician be separated from the bed, and the fictions of the devil will be fully unmasked. Therefore Simon is led away from the bed; without any hope of life the deceased remains immobile. Peter stood at a distance, and intent for a little while on prayer within himself, with a great voice said: Youth, I say to you, arise: the Lord our Jesus Christ heals you. And immediately the youth rose, and spoke, and walked, Christ being invoked he raises; and Peter gave him living to his mother. Who when he was asked, that he might deserve to be guarded thereafter living by him who made him rise from the dead, said: Let the Lord Jesus Christ guard him, whose servants we are. And he said to the mother: Be secure, mother, about your son, and do not fear, for he has his own guardian. And when the people wished to stone Simon the Magician, Peter said: It is sufficient punishment for him, that he recognizes himself overcome in his arts: let him live, and let him see the kingdom of Christ grow even against his will.

[10] The Magician was tortured, and struck by Apostolic glory departs, and rouses himself to all the power of his enchantments. He gathers the people, says himself offended by the Galileans, and that he was about to leave the city which he was wont to protect. He set a day, on which through flight he boastfully enough promised that he would be borne to upper seats; and even, when he should wish to seek heaven ascending, it would consist in his own power. On the appointed day he ascends the Capitoline mount, the same flying from the Capitol and casting himself from the rock began to fly. The people began to wonder and venerate. Most were saying, that this was the power of the Lord, not of man, who so flew in body to heaven; and they say that Christ had done nothing such. Then Peter standing in the middle said: Lord Jesus, show your power; and do not permit the people, who will believe in you, to be deceived by these vain arts. So let him fall, Lord, that living he may know that he could do nothing against your power. by prayer he casts down, who soon expires: And when he had prayed these things with tears, he said: I adjure you in the name of Jesus Christ, who bear him, that you now release. And immediately at the voice of Peter being released by the demons, with the oars of the wings which he had assumed entangled, he fell. Nor was he immediately killed, but with his whole body broken and his legs weakened, after a short space of hours expired there. When this had become known to Nero, grieving that he had been deceived and abandoned, and indignant that a man useful and necessary to the republic had been taken from him: he began to seek causes by which he might kill Peter. Finally with a command given by Nero, that Peter be apprehended, the holy Apostle was asked by all, that he should take himself to another place. But he resisted saying, that he would in no way do this, that as if terrified by fear of death he should flee: as he knew that the glory of immortality came to himself and all for the passion of Christ. about to depart on account of the prayers of the Christians And when Peter was making these such pretexts, the people weeping that he not leave them, that with a storm imminent he not despise the tears of the Christians, conquered by the weepings of the people he yielded, and promised that he would go out from the city.

[11] On the following night therefore having saluted the Brethren, with a prayer celebrated, he began to set out alone. When he came to the gate, he saw Christ coming to meet him, and adoring him said: warned by the appearing Christ, he returns. Lord, where are you going? To whom the Lord: I come to Rome to be crucified again. Peter understood this to be said about his own passion, in which Christ would be seen to suffer, who is established to suffer in individuals, not by pain of body, but by contemplation of mercy and affection of piety. And so Peter returned to the city, Taken, he consoles the faithful, and being caught by the guards was adjudged to the cross. Which being heard, a vast concourse of people suddenly was made, so that the squares could not hold the people of either age and sex, who were crying with the highest voice saying: Why is Peter killed? what crime has he committed? what has he harmed the city? It is wicked to condemn the innocent; and it must be feared, lest Christ avenge the killing of so great a man, and order us all to perish.

[12] But Peter was soothing the minds of the people, that they not rage against the Prince, saying to them: Roman men, who believe in Christ, and hope in him alone, hold in mind his patience and consolation. How many signs and remedies have you seen through me? Sustain therefore him coming, and rendering to each according to his works. But this, which now you see being done in me, has already before been declared to me by the Lord; that the disciple is not above the master, nor the servant above the Lord: and this very thing makes me to hasten, that already stripped of flesh I may stand by the Lord. Matt. 10, 24 But why do I delay, he said, he is affixed to the inverted cross, and not approach the cross? Let the persecutors hold the body, I will adhere with spirit to my Lord. And approaching the cross he asked, that he be fastened to the cross with inverted feet, with that reverence, lest the servant be seen crucified thus as the Lord. Which when done, he began to speak from the cross to the people: O ineffable and profound mystery of the cross! O inseparable bond of charity! this is the tree of life, in which Jesus the Lord exalted drew all things to himself. This is the tree of life, on which the body of the Lord Savior was crucified: but in it death was fixed, and the whole world was loosed from the bonds of eternal death. O incomparable grace, and inseparable love of the cross! Thanks therefore to you Lord Jesus, son of the living God, not only with voice and heart, but with the spirit by which I love you, by which I address you, by which I call upon you, by which I hold you, by which I understand you, by which I see you. You are all things to me and in all: you are everything to me, and nothing else to me except you alone, who are the good and true Son of God, God, he dies, to whom with the eternal Father and the Holy Spirit is honor and glory, into all ages of ages always. And when with a great voice all the people had responded, buried by Marcellus in the Vatican. Amen, he sent forth his spirit. Whose body Marcellus, one of his disciples, not waiting for anyone's sentence, with his own hands took down from the cross, and prepared with most precious aromatics, placed in his own sarcophagus in the place which is called Vatican, near the triumphal way, where it is celebrated in peace by the veneration of the whole city.

ANNOTATIONS OF G. H.

* magum (magician)

* dissolvi (be dissolved)

* ad se (to himself)

* diluti (washed)

* digestorum (of those digested)

* imprecatus (called down)

* intrans (entering)

* inanimatas (lifeless)

* sacrificium (sacrifice)

ANALECTA OF D. P.

On the monuments, Relics, miracles, apparitions, feasts and churches of Saints Peter and Paul.

Peter Apostle, at Rome (S.)

Paul Apostle, at Rome (S.)

§. I. On the places consecrated to the memory of the living Apostles in Syria, and some also to Peter in Italy.

BY THE AUTHOR D. P.

[1] Francisco Quaresmius will suggest the earlier of those places, The House of Caiaphas turned into the church of D. Peter, Elucidator of the Holy Land vol. 2: whom as the most recent writer I shall the more willingly allege, because in him can more easily be found, both whence he received his information, the authors, and many other circumstances, to be passed over here for the cause of brevity. And first at Jerusalem occurs the House of Caiaphas, in which Peter denied Christ: for this Helena the mother of Constantine converted into a Christian temple, dedicated to D. Peter… but also a monastery was built there, which the Armenians inhabit. … Outside the church, before it a column with a bronze cock, near its doors on the right, to one entering there appears part of a column, above which the cock crowed, or more truly, above which stood a bronze cock, placed in memory of him, who at the time of the denial by crowing made Peter remember the word of the Lord, Because before the cock crows twice, you will deny me thrice. But this column or its upper part, with the bronze cock itself translated to Rome, when it had long stood in the Lateran basilica, and was crassly received by the common people, as if Peter's cock had stood upon that column while it crowed; and from this had begun to produce laughter rather than devotion, translated afterwards to Rome, especially among heretics, accustomed to receive the holiest things, not to say such, in derision of Catholics; it pleased Innocent X, restorer of the same Basilica in the year 1650, that this and certain other similar things, be removed from sight. Rasponus writes lib. 1 ch. 14 on the Basilica and Patriarchate of the Lateran, that that column was porphyritic: and judges it had been placed there only that the Pontiffs might be admonished of human weakness, and might more easily forgive others their faults, when even the Prince of the Apostles was not immune from fault … But in the middle of the court, where he was standing at the fire warming himself, in the open is a tree of the golden apple… much esteemed by the inhabitants and pilgrims. From this house, about a quarter of a mile, and before the city a cave, where the Apostle wept. to the right, at the roots of a certain hillock, which we ascended, when we wish to enter the city, through the gate which is now called Sterquilinea, is a certain small place, or modest cave; in which (as ancient tradition has it) S. Peter, after the threefold denial of the Lord, wept bitterly: in order that the memory both of the deed and of the place might be preserved, there was built there a noble chapel, which however is now wholly destroyed: only the cave with certain ruins is visited.

[2] As these things are celebrated at Jerusalem on account of the penitence of Peter, so others at Damascus on account of the conversion of Paul; The place of the Conversion of Paul, which is a more probable opinion to have happened about half a mile from the city: and today, says S. Augustine, in those regions even the places themselves testify what was then done, and now is read and believed. And first where he is thought to have been divinely cast to the ground, grateful posterity erected a temple in his honor, where even now the Christians who inhabit Damascus are wont to be buried. I find this place is called by the Syrians Mangisafer; and the Christian army, seeking Damascus, on the very day of the Conversion arrived here, and there stayed two days. … About the feast of the conversion, when and how it was instituted, will be said below where on the Translation of the body under Silvester; because from his commemoration it took its own origin. the lodging at Damascus, Paul further having entered the city through the gate, which now remains closed, turned to the house of Judas in the Street, which is rightly called Straight: for of a mile in length and more, like an arrow, it stretches, furnished on both sides with buildings and workshops … entirely covered and high, for the convenience of merchants, but somewhat dark… There is a house large enough and convenient, which is called the House of Judas to this day … in which there was a church built, as its signs manifestly show: but this is now converted into common dwellings … There is shown in it a small dwelling; its breadth, as much as a man stretches with his arms, is twice that. In that small cell Paul stayed three days, not eating nor drinking: at which time many think that vision happened to him, the baptismal font, of which 2 Cor. 12 he writes, I know a man … taken up to the third heaven… Not far and almost at the beginning of the street is the fountain, in which the same Apostle was baptized. … Of old there was there a great and beautiful Christian church, now converted into a Turkish mosque: and hiding-place. and it is probable that this was formerly the baptistery of the church. … Again outside the aforesaid gate, besides the aforesaid Christian sepulchres, on the road itself occurs a projecting mass of material, composed of small stones and earth, within which is a small cave, in which, it is said, D. Paul hid himself and rested for some time, when dismissed by the Brethren, through the window from the city, he fled toward Jerusalem.

[3] Meanwhile Peter had run out to Lydda, and from there is summoned to Joppa; At Joppa the house of Tabitha, from the ruins of which not far going toward Jerusalem, the foundations and remnant of the house of Tabitha are shown, who was called back from the dead by him; but in the city itself the house of Simon the Tanner, placed under the rock near the sea, in which place afterwards a chapel was built in honor of S. Peter. He returning to Jerusalem, is read to have been thrown into prison by Herod. But this is in that part which anciently was called the Lower City, not far from the temple of the Lord's Resurrection, as much as twice a bow shoots … A great and wide prison, lofty but dark, illuminated through the arched ceiling through a small hole or little window only modestly. There is to it an entrance through a small door, which looks toward the walls of Jerusalem to the North. Within is a projecting rock, where there is still a ring, in which were inserted chains by which the guilty were bound. Before it, the prison at Jerusalem, is a great court. Of old the pious faithful built on its right side and toward the East an excellent church, of which still, besides great foundations, the upper part remains, much in ruins. It contains three chapels: that in the middle is greater than the rest; to which others are very similar. Above its door are figures of Angels and others stamped in stone: but because much destroyed, the mystery cannot easily be apprehended. … It is believed that Helena built it, the church at Antioch. and it extended to the prison itself. And these things there: for of the chains will be spoken below; but at Antioch, where the Apostle placed his first Chair, on the other side of the city above the mountain his church was built; now, the upper part excepted, fallen entirely.

[4] Antioch being left, and many Churches founded through Asia, at length Peter thought of Rome, He landed on the Tarentine gulf and (as John Juvenis writes lib. 8 On the various fortune of the Tarentines) by force of winds turned from the journey begun, he entered the Tarentine gulf. There is seen today at 12 m.p. from the Iapygian Cape a most ancient temple, dedicated to S. Peter himself, which place he is believed to have first touched in Italy, and there (as they say) he performed the divine service. This place when Carlo Rozzi, a noble of Lecce, indicated to me by letter in the year 1674, on the occasion of certain Saints of his fatherland, distant from the place by about 30 p. m., he added that the Bivanian Gate is so called, and there is an ancient tower there, where he has a chapel, commonly called San Pietro di Vagna, to which from the whole region on the days of the first, second and third of April there is a great concourse, in memory of the aforesaid arrival, for the cause of washing in the river there entering the sea, not only of men but also of animals, by which they hope all together their infirmities will be washed away, leaning on the confidence of frequent experience. In the same river on the same days, certain white pebbles are sought and gathered by the faithful among the sands, which the common people call tears of S. Peter, nor outside those days is it easy for those seeking to find them. Of which devotion someone might assign no foundation besides ancient tradition; famous for the pebbles to be gathered at the beginning of April. to which is supported by very frequent health, reported by the sick, taking the pebbles ground into powder. Thus he, and he enclosed some number in the Letter, from which I learned their form; similar to greater and smaller peas, but compressed and mostly slightly twisted on one side.

[5] John Juvenis continues further, and to the islands, he says, opposite the Tarentine city, There also was a stone signed by his knees, Peter was exposed, and looking from there at the city, judged that by Christ's power he had been carried there. The Apostle therefore bent his knees for prayer: the stone pressed by the weight of the servant of God, was rendered so soft, as if it were of wax, and received the impressions of the holy knees. The common people of fishermen call him today the Saint, Peter the Veteran, on a more eminent place of the greater island, from which enemy pirates are wont to look out, lest they themselves become prey. I have heard from many, saying by the tradition of their elders, that the stone so hollowed by the Apostle's knees, was taken by Venetian sailors, and carried to Venice. Juvenis then adds many things about a colossal statue, broken at the prayers of Peter, and about a hunchback raised by him; and how, with him baptized, Peter again entering the boat came to that part of the city, and another from which he preached. where the Great Gate was so called: and there between the city and the most ancient citadel, on a vast marble reverently preserved by posterity to these very times, he began to preach the word of God to the people: and spent some months on this work, not without great fruit, which the miracles performed there procured, and namely the daughter of Eucadius the Regulus, freed from a demon by S. Mark the disciple. And these things, he says, are so written, as received from the tradition of our fathers; and also from the reading of a certain manuscript codex, which the Clergy of Tarentum kept in the choir for the Office of S. Cataldus. We treated of S. Cataldus on May X; and content with having given the history of the body found and translated, we tasted only the last part of the Life; the rest being omitted, as quite doubtful and uncertain, wherefore also I prefer those things on S. Peter's acts among the Tarentines to be read in Juvenis rather than in this work.

[6] It would also have to be said, says the same Juvenis, of the coming of B. Peter to Naples, and the conversion of the people; The altar on which he sacrificed at Naples: of S. Candida, who first met him as he came there; of S. Asprenus, who being cured of infirmity by the Apostle himself and afterwards baptized, was ordained Bishop of the same city; and of the basilica, whose name is, S. Peter ad Aram, where the same Vicar of Christ offered the Sacrifice to God, and where dwell the religious men, who, called Canons Regular, fight under D. Augustine: but these

all things, written by many others, as he has enough merely touched on; so we judge they should be reserved to III August and IV September, on which the aforesaid Saints Asprenus and Candida are venerated. Moreover there are at Terracina who believe, that their ancestors, converted by the Apostle on that journey, first received their Bishop S. Epaphroditus from him, of whom see day XXI March of ours; but at Rome that he was received as guest by S. Pudens the Senator; also at Rome at the church of S. Pudentiana; and hence it came about, that in his house the Apostle first offered the sacrifice; and afterwards, at the request of S. Praxedis, S. Pius the Pontiff consecrated it as a church under the title of S. Pudentiana, who there stayed and died. There certainly, as Panvinius in his little book On the seven churches says, on the right side is a Chapel, decorated with mosaic work, founded by a certain illustrious Maximus, in which it is commonly handed down that S. Peter celebrated the first Mass in the city: likewise the wooden table on which the Prince of the Apostles celebrated is an ancient and received tradition; as the book of the Visitation has, instituted by Prelates deputed by Urban VIII in the year 1627, and several inscriptions sculpted in the same place.

[7] But, from the Acts of the same Pudentiana and Praxedis, Florentini objects, that Pudens their Father is said to have been a disciple not of Peter, but of Paul. I add besides, but brought from the house of the elder Pudens, that this same their father, when he heard Paul, was younger, and was the son or nephew through a brother of another Pudens Senator of Rome: which elder Pudens could have been the host of Peter; and therefore nothing prevents but that his house was the same, which Peter first made a church at Rome, under the title of Pudens, then converted into the title of Pastor, now S. Peter ad Vincula. and at last into the church of S. Peter ad Vincula, of which below. See meanwhile what was said by us on XIX May, and Florentini at 1 August, when the Dedication of the first Church built and consecrated by B. Peter is commended in the most ancient Hieronymian Martyrology. But it could very easily have happened that Praxedis obtained the aforesaid wooden table, to be transferred to the Title of her holy Sister. Nor is it objectionable that S. Silvester is said to have placed in the Lateran church a wooden Altar hollow like an ark, which S. Peter and his successors had used for the Sacrifices; where today it is so kept, that only to the Roman Pontiff it is lawful to sacrifice on it. Nothing of this, I say, prevents the truth of the prior table: Another in the Lateran basilica: for he could afterwards have made the altar in that form, when he had already placed his Chair at Rome: but before he used the table, not the ark, especially under his first coming to the city: but also in the church of S. Prisca another altar is said to be preserved, on which S. Peter sacrificed, when he baptized her, the saint, there. Which Pope Innocent III confirms, in his epistle to Abbot Amelius, reserving for himself the freedom of promoting Cardinal Presbyters to the Title of the church granted to him, so that on the altar of B. Peter they may perform the customary Office, as was established by the holy Fathers with provident deliberation.

[8] Wilhelm Lindanus Bishop of Roermond in Belgium; and at S. Prisca's church in the Apology for the Liturgy of S. Peter ch. 17 on Pudens (the one namely whom I think the elder) so writes: So dear a guest was that Pudens to B. Peter, that he gave him a tablet, which had the effigy of the Lord Jesus, not painted with colors, but tessellated by Mosaic work: a fragment of which can still today be seen at S. Praxedis's. But the very face of the Lord (the tesserae taken away by the pious cupidity of pilgrims looking on) is mangled, indeed wholly torn away. There are also celebrated by ancient writers the places, in which S. Peter baptized. And first from the Acts of SS. Liberius and Damasus the Pontiffs Torrigius in the Sacred Trophies ch. 1 alleges these words: There was not far from the Cemetery of Novella, the cemetery of Ostriani, on the Salarian way, as Baronius says, where B. Peter the Apostle baptized. Secondly in the Acts of SS. Papias and Maurus XXIX January is read, that John the Presbyter collected their bodies at night, and buried them on the Numentana way at Nymphas, where Peter dwelt and baptized. But Panvinius places those in the estate of Severa, between the seventh and eighth milestone from the city. Finally, as Ugonius writes in his History of the Roman Stations, in the church of S. Prisca at the wall of the minor nave and the right hand above the capital of an old column there is placed a vessel (the book of the aforesaid Visitation calls it a baptismal Font) in that place, as tradition has it, where S. Peter baptized.

§. II. On S. Paul's shipwreck at Malta, and his cult there.

[9] With Peter laying these and other beginnings of the Church at Rome, Paul, From which the serpent bit Paul at Malta, who had appealed to Caesar, that he might escape the violent hands of the Jews, is sent bound to Rome. But with shipwreck made at the island of Malta, he converted it, by the miracle of the serpent, which had seized his hand, shaken into the fire without harm; but so venomous, that all soon believed him about to be killed. From this time, says Baronius at the year 58, all there are without venom, and the earth itself cures him. num. 172, divinely it was imparted to the place, that all the serpents should lack venom, and however much they may have bitten anyone, they bring no harm at all … but also the earth there prepares an antidote against venoms. It is white clay, and is dug out from a crypt near the old city, The place of shipwreck, and almost adhering to the walls; and being compacted into little lumps variously signed, is distributed through the world among the faithful devoted to the Saint. The very gulf thence named S. Paul's, where he suffered shipwreck, expressed by rude art is set before us by the Commander John Francis Abela, Vice-chancellor of the sacred Order, in the description of Malta published in the year 1647 p. 225: a more accurate and elegant one could be made from the Atlas Blavianus, and in it from that ruder one be noted in what places there now stand the churches dedicated to the holy Apostle, and the metropolis itself, where the house of Publius the Prince of the island, and first afterwards Bishop there, as is reported, has been converted into a Cathedral.

[10] The same Abela p. 252, from the Messana Archive produces an excerpt about the Martyrdom of SS. Peter and Paul, the translator being Constantine Lascaris, where it is said, that the Jews, his arrival at Rome, who were then at Rome, soon as they understood Paul would be there, decided to go to Nero; and that, offering gifts, they persuaded him to write through all places, that Paul not come to the parts of Italy: wherefore Peter sent two of the Brethren to him at Malta, about to announce, having heard from the Masters of the Jews, that they had sought from Caesar, that he write to all the Provinces, that he be killed wherever he should be found. Which however notwithstanding, whether forbidden by Nero? on the twentieth day of the month of May, being made ready, after a three-month stay on the Island, and sailing from Malta and Gaudisium (next to Malta commonly called Gozo) not through Africa to the parts of Italy, but to Sicily to Syracuse he betook himself, with the two men, sent to him, and from there to Rhegium of Calabria. The day noted for the departure is not displeasing, for Panvinius also so calculates the times, that on July VI the Saint entered Rome; but before that he reached Malta in the month of February, after fourteen days of storm endured, arisen at the beginning of February. For the ship had set sail from the island of Crete, whether the day of departure from the island the 20 of May? contrary to Paul's advice; when navigation was no longer safe, because the fast had also passed; namely the fast of the tenth month, which to the Hebrews who reckon April as the first month (Peter Comestor ch. 118 on the Acts of the Apostles being witness) was held in the month of January. So far therefore the Greek writer's Chronology, whoever he was, proceeds well: but what he says, that the Jews suggested to Nero against Paul, saying: It is not enough that all our Brethren have been afflicted with trouble in Judaea, Samaria, and Palestine, unless he come here too, this the first of the Jews themselves convict of falsehood, Acts XXVIII, answering Paul; We have neither received letters from Judaea about you, nor has anyone of the Brethren coming announced or spoken any evil of you.

[11] Before the aforementioned Ms. Abela alleges the hitherto unpublished history of S. Publius, that Prince of Malta whom I mentioned and whom the tablets of the Roman Martyrology recall on XXI January, The lodging of the Saint there, as if the same had afterwards been Bishop of Athens: which Bolland rightly reported as doubtful. The Author by whom the book was written, Abela indicates as a certain P. Manduca of his Order, and on p. 250 he adduces these words of his: That the hospitable Villa of S. Paul, near the rocks Dithalassis (in which Acts XXVII the ship shaken by the storm of the sea, stood transfixed until it was loosened) was on the slope at the ruins of a very large building above the view of the sea: there I believe, where on the tablet now a church is noted next to the sea Paul's little shrine; where also Abela represents Paul standing by the fire, from the direction of the rock to which the ship was driven. From this shrine, going three p. m., is noted another church of the same name; and finally at the fifth mile from the sea the Old City, near which I said the crypt of Paul is; so called, not because the Apostle dwelt there, or held Synaxes, as some think; the crypt of the same; but because he was wont to withdraw there for nocturnal prayers, as Abela judges more probable. He also on p. 26 indicates, that on that place even in the year 1610 stood a chapel, built by the Desquanezia and Bordina families; but afterwards by the Master of the Order Wignacurt, restored from the foundations with greater scope, and into the form of a church. About the other, nearer to the city, he says nothing; nor about the third, which next to the Episcopal gardens beyond the city the tablet notes.

[12] But about the crypt already mentioned, Abela on p. 348 and following indicates that its veneration greatly increased, to which in the year 1607 was added the chapel of S. Publius, from the year 1607, when there arrived a certain Noble of Cordova, under the appearance of a Pilgrim, naming himself Fr. John of S. Paul; who chose to dwell there in the very Crypt, and above it had built a chapel dedicated to S. Publius, which he was about to hand over to certain Religious to be guarded, and obtained in the year 1611 from Pope Paul V a Brief, by which it should be exempted from the jurisdiction of the urban Parish: and various Relics being brought there, another Brief, by which the same Pontiff wishing to provide for the conservation of the sacred Relics, which are kept in the crypt of S. Paul, reduced into the form of a church, being inclined to the supplications of John of S. Paul, a Cleric of Cordova, to whom he had recently granted the same Crypt in administration; that no one of the aforesaid Relics or any part of them dare to extract in any way, he forbids. Then the same

crypt, now Church, and in the year 1620 a part from the arm of S. Paul. offered to his Order by the founder John, Master Wignacurt accepted in the year 1617; and the Clerics established there by himself in the second year after he endowed with a large estate on the island Gaudisia: and finally from the Duke of Mantua he obtained a part of the Apostolic Arm, under this testimony, signed by the Duke himself and others on the last day of the month of July 1620: I make faith and attest, I Aemilius Mascara, Canon of the Ducal church of S. Barbara of Mantua, and Prefect of the Relics consisting in the said church; that on the XXVI day of the month of May, of the current year 1620, in the said church of S. Barbara, with the Most Serene Ferdinand, Duke of Mantua and Montferrat, present, and by his express command, and further, with the Most Reverend D. Gregory Carbonelli, Bishop of Diocesarea and Abbot of the said Church, assisting, and the Most Illustrious D. Octavius Morbiolo Archdeacon of the same church, I cut the bone of the arm of S. Paul the Apostle, which was kept in the place of Relics of the said church destined for that purpose; and that, separated from the other greater part, which remained in the buildings of the said church, I handed over to the Most Serene one, to be transmitted, as he asserted, to Milan.

[13] Finally Abela describes on p. 331 and following the Cathedral church of the whole island, In the same place the Cathedral church. located in the old city, which holds as its center, five or six p. m. from the sea, also dedicated under the title of the Conversion of S. Paul, in that very place indeed probably, which the Apostle himself once destined for the construction of the church; but of nearly Gothic work, built after the expulsion of the Saracens: whose roof, as of nearly the rest of that island's churches, almost humble and obscure, immediately rested on eight columns. Afterwards he says, that it was extended, and reduced into the form of a Cross, with work begun before the year 1419, and completed about the year 1509; but he says the roof of the middle nave was raised higher in the year 1520, and the side aisles in the year XV after that; and so the whole church was rendered more luminous; then he explains its treasure and economy, more at length than it would be fitting either to taste here.

§. III. The remaining Trophies of both Apostles at Rome.

[14] One stone and another, to which the knees of Peter, I call them Trophies with Francis Maria Turrigius, having followed the example of Gaius, an ancient Theologian under S. Zephyrinus the Pope, in the little book which Turrigius himself published in the year 1644, under the title of Sacred Roman Trophies. Let the first be the Church of SS. Peter and Paul in Silice on the Sacred Way, of which Anastasius in the Life of Pope Paul I writes thus, who sat from the year 757 to 67. He newly made a church below this Roman city, on the Sacred Way, near the temple of Romulus, in honor of SS. Apostles Peter and Paul, where the most blessed Princes of the Apostles themselves, at the time when they were crowned with martyrdom, while they poured forth prayers to our Redeemer, were seen to bend their own knees: in which place to this day their knees, for the testimony of every generation to come in the future, are known to be marked in a certain very strong flint. The more common opinion holds, that there was the temple of Romulus, where now is the church of SS. Cosmas and Damian on the same Sacred Way, in the field, as it is now called, Vaccino; not rightly called by Turrigius S. Cosmas's, although it were true, what he says, that it is so read in an old inscription in the Church of S. Martina. For there is another Church of SS. Cosmas and Damian, called Cosmas's once and now generally, far removed from there, in the Golden Street at the roots of the Janiculum mount under the very place, where Peter is believed to have been fixed to the cross, and the monuments of that thing remain today.

[15] Turrigius indeed says from Anastasius, that the Apostles led out from prison, against the Magus praying prayed there, and left the impressions of their knees on the rocks: but others assert that this happened earlier, when in the same place praying Peter (there are those who affirm Paul also was then present, prayed, and impressed his knees on the stone) with knees placed cast down headlong Simon Magus. But Turrigius preferred to multiply such miraculous stones, although he confesses that his aforesaid one is not known where it is; rather than to explain the text of Anastasius. For he writes ch. 14, in the Church of S. Maria Nova, which itself also is near the aforesaid temple of Romulus, that there is preserved today a stone with the marks of the knees impressed by S. Peter praying, while the Magus was flying, fixed in the wall, were impressed; and with an iron grate placed over to defend from the rapacious hands and chisels of the pious people; with this inscription placed above: Upon this rock S. Peter bent his knees, when the evil demons carried Simon Magus through the air. About the same or a similar one, S. Gregory of Tours lib. 1 ch. 28 on the glory of the Martyrs: There are today at the city of Rome two little hollows in stone, upon which the B. Apostles with knee bent, against Simon Magus himself, poured out a prayer to the Lord. But he also adds this: In which hollows when waters from the rains are collected, they are sought by the sick; and being drunk soon they give health. And this miracle of the knees then impressed in the stone by Peter praying, many of those acknowledge, who admit the flight of Simon. And there are so many, not only writers of these times, but also holy Fathers, and indeed ancient, a third stone upon which Simon fell: who admit that flight, that it would seem it cannot prudently be called into doubt, on account of the silence of those who in the previous Commentary num. 33 are cited. The same Turrigius mentions also a third rock, which received Simon falling headlong, and was stained with his blood; and he cites for it Canon Benedict, who in the year 1143, in his Ms. Ceremonial, which is in the Archive of S. Peter, describing the way of the Pontiff from the Vatican to the Lateran on the second day of Easter; He passes, he says, through Silice, where Simon Magus fell, near the temple of Romulus; about which place Nicephorus Callistus. The place itself indeed in which this mournful spectacle happened, to the present day is called Simonium: and Petrarch in his epistle to Philip de Vitriaco; You will discern a stone, stained with the unspeakable brain of Simon: but not far from this was the rock marked by the Apostolic knees, about which above.

[16] The chapel, Domine quo vadis? S. Ambrose writes against Auxentius, that, when Peter with Simon conquered was sowing the precepts of God to the people, and was teaching chastity, he stirred up the minds of the Gentiles: with whom seeking him, Christian souls begged, that he yield for a little while: and although he was desirous of suffering, yet he was bent by consideration of the people praying: for he was asked, that for instructing and confirming the people he reserve himself. What more? At night he began to go out through the wall (so Ambrose continues) and seeing Christ coming toward him in the gate and entering the City, he said; Lord, where are you going? Christ responded, I come to Rome to be crucified again… Peter therefore understood, that again Christ was to be crucified in his little servant: and so of his own accord he returned, and gave a response to the Christians asking, and immediately seized through his cross he honored the Lord Jesus. Hence outside the gate of the Appian way the piety of the elders consecrated a chapel, commonly called, Domine, quo vadis? whose drawing see on the following page from tablets of about the year 1602.

[17] In the Acts of the Visitation of the year 1624 that Oratory is called S. Mary of the Footsteps, and the footsteps of Christ on the stone, whose footsteps the Lord is believed to have left impressed in the Silice. And that stone is today preserved in the church of S. Sebastian among the other relics, with an example left here in the form of the original. John Lupardus adds, that this stone is preserved here in the privileged altar where very many Relics are preserved. But that tradition of Christ's footsteps is more attested, elsewhere also of Angels' — is it true? than that which in the church of SS. Silvester and Dorothy at the Septimian gate, beside another stone placed there, is read sculpted thus in the marble: This stone, on which Angels were seen with knees bent at the martyrdom of B. Peter, taken from the ruins of S. Angelo on the Janiculum by Julianus de Dathis, Bishop of S. Leon and Penitentiary of the Lateran Basilica, was exposed to your piety as the Antistes of this church in the year of Jubilee 1500. Of that vision Peter de Natalibus mentions lib. 6 ch. 22, and the Dominican Breviary of the year 1530: but as nothing is to be doubted, that it is wholly apocryphal, so also such must be judged the tradition leaning on it, and the footsteps that are marked in that stone, must be judged the work of human hands: although otherwise it is not impossible, that Angels, even in an aerial body only appearing, leave true monuments as of true bodies.

[18] The Title of Fasciola, whence taken. The Acts of SS. Processus and Martinianus, prefects of the guard placed for the Apostles in the Mamertine, and converted by them there, reported on day 11 July, suppose, that both Apostles were bound at once, and dismissed secretly at the same time; and then what is narrated happened. But on the following day about to treat of S. Lucina, I will show, how slight of credit those Acts are; certainly insufficient to prove, that the Apostles were together in that prison, and went out together either for flight or for death. Meanwhile from them is taken, that from the most blessed Peter the Apostle, whose feet the iron fetters had worn, the little bandage fell off, with which he had bound the wound, near the hedge (sepem) on the new way: other Mss. near septem; and Turrigius understands seven solia, or septi solia, or septi zonium. This stood at the Clivus Scauri, and what was remaining of it was demolished by Sixtus V; but there remains the church of SS. Nereus and Achilleus, anciently bearing the title of Fasciola; which Baronius having obtained as Cardinal Deaconry there, restored notably.

[19] But the pen too quickly left the Mamertine Custody: The Mamertine prison therefore one must return to it, and from the aforecited Baronius on XIV March learn, that this prison is found so called, which was ennobled by the chains of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul and other holy Martyrs, at the roots of the Capitol, above the place which today they call the forum, located; having subterranean descents, by Christians, on appointed days, for the cause of religion is visited with frequent gathering, and is held in honor. Then below: turned into a church: The Mamertine prison therefore … from which the Emperors of superstitious Gentility ceased, ceased to be a workhouse of criminals, and was changed into a church. For since Christian men took the reins of the Empire, you will no longer find anyone thrust into the Mamertine prison, but the guilty of atrocious crimes were thrown into the Tiber island. The Church itself is called S. Peter in the prison, where still (as John Baptist Paulianus writes lib. 3 on the Jubilee) on account of the striking of Paul's (Turrigius orders Peter's to be substituted) head, where the trace of the head struck on the rock, made by the impious guard, in marble stands an effigy cut, while by a miracle the rocks

themselves yielded to so great a man. John Lupardus in his book on the marvels of the City calls it the form of the head of S. Peter. the column to which the Apostles were bound; In the same place, says Turrigius, is the column which I saw, surrounded by an iron grate, to which Peter was bound with chains. About which on a tablet hung, and often approved by the Apostolic Visitors, it is read, that those devoutly touching or kissing it receive many graces from Christ.

[20] In the same place also, says Paulianus, by an Apostolic miracle, for the baptism of those converted there, and an unfailing fountain elicited by Peter. a most healthful fountain rose in the pavement: about which fountain Bzovius notes lib. 1 ch. 15 on the signs of the Church as another miracle, which also Cardinal Baronius at the year 68 notes; namely after the year 1520 (let us say 1627) flowing from dry marble it has not dried up. But what surpasses all, he says, and anyone can experience, and by very many experiments has been ascertained, however much you draw from it, yet it never happens that it is drawn out. Its height is one cubit, its width nearly a palm. Every year there is a concourse of the whole city of Rome to it: there is no one who does not drink or take of its waters: yet nothing is diminished. And that you may be more astonished, even if no one draws from it, yet it remains in the same state, neither rising nor overflowing.

[21] Two other columns, at which both were scourged, Furthermore, before the Apostles were afflicted with the punishment of death, both are reported to have been beaten with rods according to Roman custom, with Baronius as witness. And of Peter, he says, that he was held as a low person, there can be no doubt; since by the custom of the ancestors, those who were condemned to the ultimate punishment, were first beaten with rods: but of Paul, that he was a Roman citizen, and by the Valerian Law first, and then by the Porcian was held immune, it could be doubted. But it is established, both from the Law of the twelve Tables, and also from the sacred Law, when some monstrous crime had been perpetrated by citizens; then the same condemned in the centuriate comitia, were first afflicted with blows, then to have their heads cut off. Since therefore among all impiety is held a most grave crime, that Paul, demanded and condemned by judgment of that crime, before he was subjected to the final punishment, in the Transpontine church of the Carmelites was beaten with rods no one can rightly doubt: especially since even at Rome, in the church of S. Maria across the bridge, there stand, and are held in honor, those columns, to which both Apostles are reported to have been bound and beaten with rods. That church is now of the Carmelite Fathers chief in the City, across the bridge of S. Angelo, where one goes to the Vatican, where (as is had from the aforesaid Visitation) on both sides of the altar there are two stone columns, covered with walnut wood tablets, on which it is asserted that the blessed Peter and Paul were scourged: John Lupardus adds; Next to which certain verses are read sculpted in marble, namely these: Here are the columns, shining with the blood of Peter and Paul, now the monuments of such great men.

[22] What has so far been tasted is the substance of what Turrigius in his little book of Trophies has deduced at length, The bronze statue of Peter, indeed in Italian, but quoting the words of the Latin Authors in Latin; there follows in the same place an Appendix, not unworthy of mention, about the bronze image of S. Peter, which is visible in the Vatican Basilica, about which Maffeo Vegio, in his Ms. on the antique memorable things of the Vatican Basilica, which is kept in its very archive, so says: Let us come to the left part of the entrance of the Basilica, and we shall find there a place, than which none is nearer to the main altar, where the monastery of S. Martin was situated … whose oratory also, with some adjoining little houses, we have seen before these times: now everything … has been cast down to the foundations. [from the Oratory of S. Martin translated to another of SS. Processus and Martinianus,] That oratory indeed was of the greatest devotion among all, especially because there was placed in it the bronze image of S. Peter; afterwards transported to another oratory of SS. Processus and Martinianus. Nor in the whole basilica, after the main altar, was there any place, to which a greater concourse of peoples was made out of devotion, and where greater conveniences of offerings even given were received. Maffeo flourished in the time of Pope Martin V, at the beginning of the XV century: but Cardinal Richard de Oliveriis, whose insignia are expressed in the base, was first granted the Purple by Callistus III, about the year 1456; so that it is necessary to say, that he was the author of the base alone, it is rightly believed most ancient: not also of the statue, which was held already long in such veneration: and rightly suspected Fr. Nicholas Richardus, of the Order of Preachers, so celebrated an Orator, that from the portentous excellence of his ingenuity he was surnamed Monster, that it is itself the one, about which the most impious Leo Isauricus to Gregory II threateningly was writing; I will send to Rome, and will break the image of S. Peter: there are also those who judge, that it was cast from the statue of Capitoline Jupiter, with the metal turned to better use by Constantine the Great, or by some of his nearest successors.

[23] Anastasius the Librarian about Pope Leo IV writes, That Oratory had been near the old basilica, that as a boy he was sent by his parents for studies of letters into the Monastery of B. Martin the Confessor of Christ, which is situated outside the walls of the Roman city within the church of B. Peter the Apostle, until he learned sacred letters, given over voluntarily. But this, in a certain ancient and manuscript instruction for Pilgrims, is so explained, that by the name of Church is understood the district around it, when it is said, that the monastery is at the iron grate behind the Basilica. Indeed, according to the ground-plan of the old and new basilica to be given below, the apse of the Oratory placed at the end of the monastery was distant from the Confession of S. Peter, by no more than three hundred palms; and the whole with the monastery was situated between the aforesaid Confession and the apse of the new basilica; and indeed, if it now stood, it would truly stand within the very church. Julius II could not therefore lay the foundations of the new temple, unless he leveled all those things to the ground, which Maffeo recalls he had seen at the beginning of the XV century. and therefore for the new one to be founded had to be destroyed, But the image taken thence was suitably translated to the old and still entirely standing Basilica, into the oratory of the aforenamed Saints: because that was placed in the southern aisle of the basilica itself, where around the choir stood the Oratory of S. Hadrian, with the Chair of S. Peter, as in the same ground-plan and from things to be said below it will appear.

[24] But when with the work proceeding the posterior part of the old church also had to be destroyed, as also the oratory of SS. Processus and Martinianus, having the form of a cross, of which one arm the aforesaid aisle made; elsewhere the altar of those Martyrs with the statue was placed in the anterior part, which remained intact, in the middle nave of the basilica toward the Northern side, and this by Paul III, who sat between the years 1534 and 1549. Tiberius Alforanus, Beneficiary of that church under Gregory XIII, testifies this, to whom also he dedicated his book unpublished until now: On the left side of the Basilica, which together with the statue Paul III translated to the anterior nave he says, to the North Paul III had the organ transferred from its prior place, supported by six porphyritic columns; under which he had transferred also the bodies of SS. Processus and Martinianus the Martyrs, together with the altar, and the statue of B. Peter sitting on the throne, from the prior oratory, where formerly they were. The same altar on account of the statue, before and after this Pauline translation is found in the Instruments of the year 1484 and 1579 named, the Altar of S. Peter de Bronzo, otherwise of SS. Processus and Martinianus. A worthy statue therefore, whose example here the reader may have, from the book of Paul de Angelis, often to be cited below.

[25] The same statue under Paul V about the year 1620, with the rest of the work of the new Basilica now completed, and finally also Paul V. was placed at one of the four greater pillars supporting the dome; namely that, which to one entering the temple is on the right, before one arrives at the Confession under the middle dome. But it stands there in the same base of Cardinal Richard, elevated to such a height, that anyone of those approaching can conveniently kiss its foot, which generally do as many as approach the Apostolic Confession, standing within the aforesaid pillars: to which pious devotion about to make sport in the year 1628 John Antony Stafetta, Its mocker is punished. a wanton youth, when he had besmeared the foot itself with a certain stinking milk, to catch a laugh from the movement of those turning away after kisses; he fell from that bronze machine which stands above the Confession, and with his brain dispersed with blood polluted the whole pavement, for an example to others, truly horrendous, reported by Turrigius.

§. IV. Where the Apostles were first buried after death, when and by whom translated to the Catacombs?

[26] Gaius about the year 200 called them the Trophies of the Apostles, Eusebius son of Pamphilus, lib. 2 of the Eccl. History last but one chapter, having related the passion of the Holy Apostles; This narration, he says, abundantly confirms the monuments distinguished by the name of Peter and Paul, which are still seen in the cemeteries of the city of Rome. But also Gaius a certain Catholic man, who flourished in the times of Zephyrinus Bishop of the city of Rome (that is on the border of the second and third century) in the book which he wrote against Proculus, the patron of the sect of the Cataphrygians, about the place in which the sacred bodies of the aforesaid Apostles are deposited, so speaks. Egō de ta tropaia (for it is pleasing to give the very original words of so ancient a writer) tōn Apostolōn echō deixai; ean gar thelēsēs apelthein epi ton Batikanon, their tombs known to Christians: ē epi tēn hodon tēn Ōstian, heurēseis ta tropaia tōn tautēn hidrysamenōn tēn Ekklēsian. I can show the Trophies of the Apostles: for whether it is pleasing to go to the Vatican, or to the Ostian way, there will meet you the Trophies of those who founded that Church. These things in whatever way you may have understood; either of the places of their first burial, as Eusebius understood; or of the places of passion, as may seem more verisimilar to someone (if indeed in diverse places, as is now generally believed, with Prudentius otherwise once feeling and writing, both Apostles suffered) those places were rightly called Trophies; since they always remained venerable to pious Christians even during persecutions both, this above, that below the earth.

[27] As to S. Peter: he had from ancient times on the summit of the Janiculum, which is contiguous to the Vatican, namely of Peter who suffered on the Janiculum, and often comes with the same name as it (as Baronius shows by many things) he had, I say, Peter a church, called S. Peter in Montorio, that is, on the Mons Aureus, or Aurelius, from the Aurelian gate now S. Pancras's gate near to it; to which before the restoration adhered a round little chapel, drawn (as is reported) around the trace of the Cross formerly there fixed, the memory of which trace the Christians always kept fresh, until it, with Constantine reigning, was adorned by such a little chapel and afterwards by a church. When this had fallen completely, from the foundations a new one rose at the beginning of the century

XVI, which an inscription of marble of this kind testifies: Sacred to the martyrdom of B. Peter Prince of the Apostles. Ferdinand King of the Spains and Isabella the Catholic Queen, where there still is the trace of his cross, after the building erected by them, placed in the year of salvation 1502. And a hundred years after, as another inscription testifies on the front of the chapel: To the Prince of the Apostles Philip III King of the Spains, the building of this chapel, falling from age, by the diligence of the most ornate man John Fernandez Paceco Marquis of Villena, with hereditary religion renewed the pious memory of the ancestral work 1605.

But Peter taken down from the cross, was buried on the Aurelian way in the temple of Apollo near the Neronian Palace in the Vatican, and entombed in the Vatican: between the Zetarium, that is, the triumphal Triclinium: nor many years after Anacletus the Pontiff constructed and arranged the Memorial of B. Peter, where also the Bishops should be buried; and so both he himself and most of his successors, to S. Zephyrinus, are said to have been buried beside the body of B. Peter in the Vatican, as is read in the second Catalogue which Henschenius gave, written in the time of the Emperor Justinian after the year 530.

[28] Similarly also S. Paul is reported to have been beheaded here on the Ostian Way, Of Paul beheaded at the Salvian Waters; at the place called At the drop continually flowing; which perhaps after the killing of Paul, because many infirm there were obtaining health, At the Salvian (saving) Waters, but now At the three fountains; which they say sprang up from the triple leap of the cut-off head. I saw the place, and considering the disposition of the fountains, of which the first to the second, whether these were then raised by a miracle, the second to the third gushes at an equal interval; I came to the suspicion, that those waters, already before S. Paul's time continually flowing, and then on account of the memory of the Apostle beheaded or buried in the same place frequented and made health-bringing, as they said, and from there called Salviae, were finally led by human industry into three receptacles or basins, for the greater convenience of those using; which then covered in the manner of fountains discharge themselves each by its own pipe, and offer the appearance of three fountains; or rather led by hand from one fountain into three? when in reality one and the same fountain can seem, born not by miracle but by nature in the slope of the hill, rising in that place. There would be greater authority for another Tradition saying, that when the Apostle's head was cut off, milk flowed out instead of blood; if the Acts which we gave under the name of Linus, apocryphal, could prove this (certainly Baronius did not wish to allege that authority here) or if it were proved that the writings, which under the names of Ambrose and Chrysostom testify such things, are truly of those authors, and not rather of Anonymous ones, who had no other foundation for so writing, than the apocrypha, which I have mentioned, and Acts of the Apostles attributed to Linus.

[29] However these things are: The body of the Apostle Paul soon after the killing seems to have been translated (wherever indeed that was done) into a sand-pit on the Ostian way, Thence the bodies were translated to the Catacombs suitable for a cemetery; until from there it was drawn out and joined to the Body of S. Peter in the Catacombs, between the Ostian and Appian ways; yet much nearer to this latter than to the former; above which is built the Basilica of S. Sebastian. But here it is asked, when and how the Apostles were carried to the Catacombs: for that they were there at some time, is the common consent: S. Gregory lib. 3 Epist. 30 given in Indiction XII, that is, in the year of Christ 594 writing back to Augusta Constantia, asking for the head of S. Paul, for the church which she had built at Constantinople under his name; and giving causes why he thinks it wicked to move the Relics of the Saints from their place; after other arguments of divine prohibition concerning other Saints, But about the bodies of the blessed Apostles what shall I say? whether secretly taken away by the Greeks, he says, since it is established, that at the time in which they suffered, the faithful from the East came, who sought their bodies, as those of their own citizens: which led down to the second milestone of the city, were placed in the place which is called the Catacombs. But while the whole multitude of them gathered tried to take them up, so a force of thunder and lightning held them with excessive fear and dispersed them, that they presumed to attempt such things again in no way. But then the Romans going out, took up their bodies, of those who deserved this from the Lord's piety, and placed them in the places where they are now hidden.

[30] Lualdus tortures himself, that he may make the phrase 'the time at which the Apostles suffered' be understood as some anniversary of their Passion, with the church now pacified through Constantine, under whom or some of his successors such things were done. But this is mere violence. I would rather admit, that the holy Pontiff, most of the time more solicitous about the matters which he treats, than about the time, in which the things precisely happened; here also understood the time at which the Apostles suffered, with some latitude, which can also be extended to the following times, in which other and other Christians under various Persecutors suffered after their example. Certainly the theft cannot be so restricted to the time of the Passion, that the bodies were not deposited in the Vatican and on the Ostian way before than they were (as is pretended) taken up by the Easterners. which seems unable to have happened, For how would these have come to Rome at the very precise time of the Martyrdom, having traversed so long a journey, that they might seize the bodies, of whose killing they could yet have heard nothing in their own country or even on the journey itself; when it is supposed, that with them now present at Rome, the killing was carried out and the bodies were taken away at the same time? How also S. Anacletus the Pope (which our second Catalogue of the Pontiffs distinctly asserts, about which before the first volume of April, and the Book of the Pontiffs) constructed and arranged the Memorial of B. Peter, when he had been made Presbyter by B. Peter, where also the Bishops were buried, and he himself was finally buried, namely in the Vatican; if already at the time of the Passion, the Easterners had stolen the body of the Apostle? How finally, with the aforesaid theft standing, could there be buried beside the body of B. Peter in the Vatican (which the same Catalogue and the book of the Pontiffs asserts) all his successors from Linus to Zephyrinus, with only two or three excepted, who for a special cause had burial elsewhere?

[31] B. Peter therefore remained in the Vatican and in the Memorial, by Anacletus erected there, but rather to have remained in the place of the first Deposition up to Zephyrinus, or rather up to his successor Callistus, who made another Cemetery on the Appian way (as the cited Book of the Pontiffs has) and into it brought the Body of his predecessor Zephyrinus, not into the Vatican; indeed here no Pontiff henceforth is read to have been deposited up to Leo the Great, when again the successors of Peter began to be buried with him in his Basilica in the Vatican: namely Leo himself, Simplicius, Gelasius, Anastasius; and thereafter all to the end of the Catalogue except one John, who died at Ravenna. Whether therefore the long-standing first custom of burying the Pontiffs beside the body of B. Peter in the Vatican, was interrupted and changed for no cause? I do not think so. The very place was changed, where the successors of Peter were buried, who hitherto had been deposited beside him in the Vatican; because Peter himself was no longer in the Vatican, but translated to the Catacombs: where also most of his Successors were borne much later in time; about to rest in the same place with their head after Christ, just as the first Successors had been deposited with him in the Vatican, where then he himself lay, and to have lain even in the year two hundred of the common era and somewhat after, up to Pope Callistus, Gaius the Roman theologian in Eusebius is witness, cited by us here more than once. This translation of Peter at this time to the Catacombs, will seem much more probable to one considering, first, that Callistus made a new Cemetery: 2 that thereafter to Pope Cornelius no mention, as far as I know, is made among suitable authors of Peter in the Vatican: 3 that no Pontiff afterwards, as hitherto custom had obtained, is mentioned as having been buried in the Vatican, except after the body of B. Peter was brought back there: 4 that the Successors of Callistus to Cornelius and beyond, Urban, Pontian, Anterus, Fabian, Cornelius himself, and others after him, were deposited in the cemetery of Callistus (which also goes by the name of Praetextatus) at the Catacombs: fifthly finally that it is read in the second Catalogue and the Book of Pontiffs, that Cornelius took up the bodies of the Apostles blessed Peter and Paul from the Catacombs at night, and placed one in the Vatican, the other on the Ostian way.

[32] Perhaps profane History will pour some light on us here, and will teach the causes for which the Bones of the Apostles, at least of one, who presided over the Church under Heliogabalus had to be moved from their place; and indeed both had to be hidden in a more secret place, and more withdrawn from the eyes and notice of the gentiles, than were the tombs and trophies, as Gaius calls them, of Peter in the Vatican; of Paul on the Ostian way; then commonly known to all. Aelius Lampridius in his Heliogabalus furnishes us with two causes, under whom S. Callistus presided over the Church from the year of the common Era 218 to 223. That Emperor was a most vain man and most addicted to the cult of the Sun, from which he took his surname; and among many other follies it is said in Lampridius, that he drove four quadrigae of elephants in the Vatican, with the sepulchres which obstructed destroyed. Why would not also the Memorial of S. Peter, at the same time destroyed, or for fear of so near a ruin his sacred bones have been taken thence in time and placed in safety? Moreover the cited Author writes, that the Emperor, when he had first entered the city, omitting things which were being done in the Province, consecrated Heliogabal on the Palatine mount near the Imperial buildings, and made him a temple; striving to transfer into that temple the symbol of the Mother of the Gods, and the fire of Vesta, and the Palladium, and the Ancilia, and all things venerable to the Romans; also wishing to transfer Christian sacred things to his idol, and acting that no God at Rome but Heliogabal should be worshipped. He was saying moreover, that the religions of the Jews and Samaritans and the Christian devotion should be transferred there, that the Priesthood of Heliogabal might hold the secret of all cults. And when, as he was thinking and saying, so also he was doing, as the same Lampridius describes in many places; nor extinguished only Roman Religions, but was striving even that throughout the world Heliogabal one God should be worshipped everywhere … for he was saying all the gods were ministers of his God; some he called his chamberlains, others servants, others ministers of various things. When, I say, he so raved; a just fear could and ought to have invaded the Christians of that time, Callistus providing for it. and their highest Pontiff Callistus; lest the bodies of the holy Apostles, venerable beyond all others, Heliogabalus should seek out, and move him to take them away in safety to a secret place, with very few being conscious,

where they should be hidden from all the other Christians, nor could be betrayed at any time by the weaker ones occasionally returning to gentilism; and for that reason the Catacombs seemed suitable.

[33] But the Catacombs are so called by a Greek name from katakyptō, I depress, I dig down, I excavate; or from kata beside, at, and kymbos, a hollow recess, whence are the Catacombs so called? such as the cemetery of Callistus has many, beside which are the Catacombs, so described by Aringus lib. 3 of Subterranean Rome ch. 12, a subterranean place, with a vault drawn above, and constructed in a semicircular form; and as from its very appearance it becomes credible to us, was a certain edifice of the Ethnics, which by those most ancient Pontiffs was thereafter reduced to sacred uses of ecclesiastical matter: their form, and use in the time of persecutions: by which the worshippers of Christ, for whom the means of performing the unspoiled rites of the Christian religion was not yet freely available, according to the opportunity of the time were gathering for the sacred Synaxis, as was the custom. Hence further it is conjectured that there was access to the next cemetery (namely Callistus's on the Appian way), since that is situated on the level of the same place. Furthermore to the Catacombs, of which there is mention, one descends by two staircases which indeed consist of many steps. Of these one looks toward the church of S. Sebastian, the other toward the Ardeatine way. Windows in the same place, or certainly holes, drawn into an oblong and rather narrow form, were seen above, which sent down light to the lower places.

[34] That place once contained within its scope fourteen monuments, which monuments there of which however at present only twelve are visible. And these indeed not in tufa, dug out in the manner of cemeteries, although to those looking at them they bear the same form, but of brick work coated with lime around, with very few excepted, which, having been once elegantly adorned by the hand of artisans, is manifestly known from certain traces still. and seats. Furthermore in the circuit of the same monuments, certain marble seats stretch here and there, in the middle part of which the most ancient Pontifical and marble Seat stands, in which the highest and holiest Pontiffs of old (as the venerable tradition of pious men holds) were wont to sit, while those fatal times of persecutions were raging; but in the rest of the circuit of seats the Priests, who stood by the Pontiff, and the Roman Clergy besides, especially at that time when the sacred synaxes were performed there, are piously to be judged from the appearance of the place itself to have sat.

[35] The old altar, A certain marble altar opposite the Pontifical seat itself, and indeed redolent of antiquity, is still discerned (such as I myself saw in the year 1660, and is represented by this scheme) above which altar the sacrifice of the Mass was wont to be celebrated by none other than the Roman Pontiff, by received and inveterate tradition among posterity we have received. But on the same sacred altar, in this our age, by the indulgence of Paul V Pont. Max., to any approved Priest performing sacred mysteries, the faculty has been imparted.

[36] Here besides, under the very altar, a hole in the manner of a well is seen, and under it a well, where the bodies lay hidden where once the venerable bodies of the blessed Apostles … for some time lay hidden. About S. Damasus the Pope, Anastasius the Librarian writes in his Life, that he made a Basilica on the Ardeatine way, where he himself buried rests in the Catacombs; and built a platonia, that is a marble pavement, where the bodies of the Apostles lay, and adorned it with verses, of which from Gruter's inscriptions take this beginning: Here previously you must know that the Saints dwelt, whoever you are who seek the names of Peter and likewise of Paul. Which although it should be understood of the dead, not of the living; yet sufficient cause appears, why this place was chosen over others for hiding that precious treasure, and why Callistus there buried the body of his predecessor Zephyrinus, and the other Pontiffs after him, to Marcellinus, were buried next to the cemetery or in the cemetery of Callistus on the Appian way.

[37] But the cemetery of Callistus seems to have been a certain continuation of that, which outside the Appian gate on the same way had long before been dug, and was called Praetextatus's, and next to Callistus's cemetery. already of old ennobled by the burial of S. Quirinus and Balbina, then of SS. Cecilia, Valerianus and Tiburtius, and even of Urban the Pope himself: but Callistus himself was buried in the cemetery of Calepodius on the Aurelian Way. But lest because of the diversity of the two ways, to which the Catacombs are ascribed, you remain ambiguous, read the same Anastasius in Hadrian I writing thus: The Church of the Apostles, outside the Appian gate at the third milestone, in the place which is called the Catacombs; where the body of B. Sebastian the Martyr rests with others, anticipating in ruin, he restored anew: and in Nicholas I; On the Appian way the cemetery of saint Sebastian the Martyr of Christ in the Catacombs, where the bodies of the Apostles lay, which from many years had fallen, he renewed. In a word, that I may say it, the Catacombs looked to the Ardeatine way; the church to the Appian, both placed between the two ways.

[38] To the Catacombs therefore already described the Bodies of the Apostles were translated rather in the time of S. Callistus, than at any other, on account of the reasons we have adduced. The Bodies brought back from the Catacombs But now when from there they were brought back and restored to their first Memorials, let us see; and as long as more certain truth does not shine forth from elsewhere, let us follow the second often-mentioned Catalogue, which both the book of the Pontiffs and Anastasius followed. So it is read there of Cornelius, from the year 251 to 53 Roman Pontiff, under the tyrant Decius and his successors Gallus and Volusian: This Cornelius in his times asked by a certain Matron, by S. Pope Cornelius about the year 252, took up the Bodies of the Apostles blessed Peter and Paul from the Catacombs at night; the Body of B. Paul indeed received the blessed Lucina placed in her estate on the Ostian way, near the place where he was beheaded. The Body of B. Peter the Apostle the blessed Bishop Cornelius received, and placed near the place, where he was crucified, among the bodies of the Saints, in the temple of Apollo on the Golden Mount in the Vatican palace of Nero, on III Kal. of July. Though these and other things reported in the Catalogue about S. Cornelius were taken from his Acts, (notwithstanding that his Acts are apocryphal) in which they say Cornelius was struck with the sword at Rome and under Decius, of slight credit and alien from the truth; it does not immediately follow that all the rest, and these very things, which I have just produced, deserve no more credit than those. For since it is established, that the Bodies of the Apostles for some time lay hidden in the Catacombs, and then to the places, where they are today, were brought back, and that before the empire of Constantine the Great; nor by the Author of the Catalogue or any other of suitable authority, as far as I know, is any other Pontiff cited than Cornelius, who brought back the Bodies, or another time of bringing them back indicated; we shall believe this Catalogue, and the Book of Pontiffs, and Anastasius the Librarian, as long as a stronger reason for believing otherwise shall not have been produced.

[39] The occasion of bringing back the Bodies could have given to Cornelius the death of both Decii, cruel persecutors of the Christian name, the death of the Decii providing the occasion. and the hoped-for some sort of cessation of the bloody storm: which though it did not entirely cease under their successors; yet did not so rage, that Cornelius could not call one or another synod at Rome for extinguishing the schism of Novatus, of which the last was extremely numerous, so described by Eusebius son of Pamphilus lib. 6 of the Ecclesiastical History ch. 43 of the Valesian edition: Under Cornelius was gathered at Rome a very great Synod, in which sixty bishops; but priests and deacons many more came together. Now if such things could be done, and were done at Rome by Christians, despite the persecution of the Gentiles continued after Decius: how much easier was it to translate two bodies secretly, at night and outside the walls of the city, safely from one place to another.

[40] One could however judge, that both bodies, as they had hidden together, were thus hidden together in another, Whether S. Peter was again brought back to the Catacombs? but one and the same place; but after a few years again from there were translated, the Body of Paul indeed was granted to Luciana or Lucina, to be hidden in her estate on the Ostian way; but the Body of Peter brought back to the Catacombs: one could, I say, so judge, moved by the Indiculus, containing Depositions of the Martyrs in Bucherius (of which we in the previous Commentary § V) and having these: Third Kal. of July, of Peter in the Catacombs, of Paul in the Ostian, Tuscus and Bassus Cosl. For these, he will say, seem to mark a translation, and indicate its time through the Consuls Tuscus and Bassus, that is the year 258. They can indeed, I confess, and we have confessed in the cited paragraph, mark a Translation of the Apostles to the Catacombs and to the Ostian way. But what cause can be devised, why they were then chiefly translated, and indeed a second time, at least Peter to the Catacombs? Why must this translation chiefly be expressed in that Indiculus, where not even the Martyrdom itself of the Apostles is expressed, or the place of their first deposition? What reason for Peter alone to have been brought there, where before he had hidden with Paul, as we suppose; or certainly was in the same place with him, before Peter to that place, Paul to the estate on the Ostian way migrated? Why were they separated? Finally when and by whom did Peter return to the Vatican? Pour in something, even through a chink of light, if you wish me to admit that second translation to the Catacombs; otherwise I am to confess rather, that I do not grasp, what the cited words from the Indiculus wish to signify.

§ V. How reverently and far from sight thereafter the holy bodies were kept; and therefore most Relics, which are said to be had of them, are doubtful.

[41] One could thereafter from Anastasius and others mention Pontiffs, With the suburbs being infested by the barbarians, who restored and adorned the Basilicas of the Apostles, situated outside the city, and having suffered various fortune from the frequent injuries of barbarians and times; but these being omitted, and with the reader referred to those Authors who have treated of the Roman churches professedly, Onuphrius, Pancirolium and Severanum; I begin this Paragraph on Relics, by observing, how great caution was used in renewing and adorning the Confessions of the Apostles, under which their bodies once buried lie, and are honored, so that they cannot be seen or touched by anyone, indeed not even the tombs themselves can be definitely shown. But this, the Apostolic tombs began to be held more secretly. if not under Sylvester, certainly will have been done then, when Rome began to suffer the incursions of barbarians, to which because the Basilicas of the Apostles were chiefly subject, as excluded from the walls of the City, a provision of this kind seemed necessary, which should exclude all hope of taking away the treasure in any way, far from the eyes and hands of men, and removed from their very awareness. And so we venerate the sacred crypts of the aforesaid Basilicas, under which we believe the Saints to be kept hidden; and we judge it part of religion, not to require more distinct knowledge of the place.

[42] How that matter stood in the time of S. Gregory the Great in the VI century, Those from the time of S. Pope Gregory he himself declares in a certain Epistle to the Augusta Constantia: The Bodies of SS. Peter and Paul the Apostles in their churches shine with such great miracles and terrors, that not even for praying can one approach there without great fear. While my predecessor of blessed memory wished to change the silver, which was above the most sacred body of B. Peter the Apostle, far however from the same body, by almost fifteen feet space; a sign of no small terror appeared to him. almost inaccessible But I also wished similarly, at the most sacred body of S. Paul the Apostle, to improve something: and because it was necessary that near the sepulchre of this kind it should have been dug deeper, the Provost of the place himself found some bones, not indeed joined to the same sepulchre: which because he presumed to lift up, and to transpose into another place, with certain mournful signs appearing, he died by sudden death… Who therefore now, Most Serene Lady, could be so rash, that, knowing these things, he should presume not to touch their bodies, but even somehow to inspect them?…

[43] So Gregory the Great; with whom consonant is his synonym and contemporary the Bishop of Tours lib. I Mirac. ch. 28, after enumerating the columns of the Vatican temple and of the Ciborium impending over the Apostolic sepulchre; This, he says, only through a small window cloths or brandea were admitted. sepulchre placed under the altar, is held very rarely. But he who desires to pray, the railings being unlocked by which that place is surrounded, approaches above the sepulchre, and so, with a very small window opened; with head sent in, asks what need brings: nor does the effect delay, if only a just prayer of petition is offered. But if anyone desires to take away blessed pledges, he casts in a little cloth, weighed (that is balanced) by weight: then watching and fasting, most devoutly prays, that for his devotion the Apostolic virtue may give support. Wonderful to say! If the man's faith shall have prevailed, the little cloth lifted from the tomb is so imbued with divine power, that it weighs much more than it had weighed before: and then he knows who has lifted it, that by his grace he has received what he asked. Gregory the Great himself moreover, in the aforecited Epistle, excusing to the Augusta, why he cannot obey her command, that for the sake of the Church, which was being built in the palace in honor of S. Paul, he ought to transmit the head of the same S. Paul, or something else of his body… But the sudarium, he says, which similarly you ordered to be transmitted, is with his body, which cannot so be touched, The same excusing himself to the Augusta, as neither can the Body itself be approached… Let her know, most tranquil Lady, that it is not the custom of the Romans, when they give Relics of Saints, to presume to touch anything from the body; but only in a pyx brandeum is sent, and placed at the most sacred bodies of the Saints; which lifted, in the church that is to be dedicated, with due veneration is hidden away; and through this so great are the virtues that happen there, as if their bodies were brought there specially… asking the head of S. Paul, For in the Roman or all the Western parts it is intolerable and sacrilegious, if anyone perhaps shall have wished to touch the bodies of the Saints: but if he shall have presumed, it is certain, that this rashness will in no way remain unpunished.

[44] Proceeding further Gregory to the objection, to be made to him from the contrary example of the Easterners; he disapproves that the Greeks lift the bodies of the Saints, About the custom of the Greeks, he says, who claim to lift the bones of the Saints, we marvel vehemently, and scarcely believe. For some Greek monks coming here two years ago, in the silence of the night near the church of S. Paul, were digging up bodies of the dead lying in the field, and hiding their bones, keeping them for themselves until they should depart. Who being caught, and diligently examined why they did this; confessed, that they were going to carry those to Greece as Relics of Saints. From whose example, as has been said, greater doubt was born for us, indeed he doubts whether they truly do that, whether what they are said truly to lift the bones of the Saints is true. But it is too great rigor, from such an example universally to doubt of the custom of the Greeks, founded on the zeal of Constantine the Great, transferring many bodies of illustrious Saints for the ornament and protection of his new city, whom his successors and especially Theodosius the younger, Leo, Justinian imitating, enriched the Royal city with such pledges; but almost sought from the East, not from the West: that for this at least may remain true, what Gregory says, at least concerning Western Saints: that up to his times it seemed intolerable and sacrilegious to the Romans, once collected and assigned to some church, to take the bodies of the Saints away from there or to subtract; always except in cases of ruins or fires, or some similar necessity, such as was, when Pope Callistus carried the holy Apostles to the Catacombs, to be hidden; who were again restored to public veneration at the opportune time.

[45] But it could have happened on some such occasion, or under Pope Sylvester, although under Callistus or Sylvester parts could have been taken from them, that some parts, even notable, separated from the rest of the bones, were carried to other churches inside and outside the city, and there now they truly glory in the possession of such things. And the same once separated Relics could have migrated to various transalpine churches: although in general there remains a just fear, lest many of them through some fraud similar to that which Gregory detests, are supposititious. Yet such when in the good faith of those possessing them they are set forth to be venerated, God does not disdain to attend to the faith of those venerating them rather than the immediate object of that worship, which is always borne to its primary object, namely the Saint, whose Relics they are believed to be in Christian simplicity. but to be proved there is need of moderate examination: As therefore it is opposed to the virtue of true liberality, to inquire too anxiously into the necessity of the poor whom you wish to benefit, and yet those are reprehensible who lie about it; so neither ought the damnable fraud of some to render suspect all Relics, of whose legality after the course of so many centuries are neither had, nor can be had suitable proofs. Meanwhile yet while the histories of translated Relics are exhibited, learned men do laudably in examining them, how verisimilar they are, because against truth no prescription of however great a time is granted.

[46] So, without injury to anyone, will be discussed a certain writing, so the manner seems incredible, called Canonical, in the Pennensian monastery of S. John among the Aragonese; of which a good part Jerome Blancas transcribes from the most ancient Latin original, at the beginning of his Commentary on Aragonese matters; but the whole was had by John Brixtus Martinez, in the history of that monastery of his lib. 4 ch. 20. But he had enough to render its more important substance in Spanish, and so we cannot, except summarily exhibit from Jerome the portion of the first part, in which is narrated, by which the Aragonese say themselves how, in the time of S. Pope Gregory and Recaredus the first Catholic King of the Spains, the Arm of S. Peter was brought, with S. Isidore the Bishop of Seville working for it, and Cyriacus of Saragossa undertaking the legation in the common name. But it is said, the petition having been heard, Gregory certain not to consent to it, nor to open the sepulchre, asking by prayers for delay from God; and meanwhile in dreams warned by the Apostle appearing to him, not to doubt to go there for that cause most secretly, and to satisfy the Spanish Bishop. But it is added that the Pontiff approaching saw placed upon the sepulchre the bone of the arm, which rejoicing he gave to Cyriacus, who indeed brought it back to Seville; but finding Isidore dead, took it with himself to Saragossa; where it remained to the invasion of the Saracens, to have received the arm of S. Peter. when Bencius, Bishop of Saragossa, fleeing with the holy Arm and other Relics of his Church, betook himself to Count Armentarius, who received him with those into the church of S. Peter de Taverna, of his own jurisdiction; but Bencius consecrated this church in the presence of seven Bishops and the Count Armentarius himself, and in the presence of the one who dying dictated all things to Belascutus, Monk of the same place, in the time of Charles King of the Franks: to whom the same Belascutus was sent for obtaining aid against the Saracens; And I swear to you, he says ending the dictation, my most beloved Brothers, by the day of the dreadful judgment, that what I have set forth to you, I have said in truth, because with my eyes I saw, and some things which I did not see, from the mouth of the faithful I heard.

[47] To the last part, of which as an eyewitness Belascutus could report, Jerome Blancas also doubts about it, and which alone Jerome described, because it alone pertained to his argument, Jerome subjoins; What credit should be given to which, I dare not affirm: but I will affirm too truly, that I have found all those things so written, described in ancient letters and on very old parchment, that they bear great appearance of truth … But I have observed no other mention of them besides that … But I am astonished that so many Relics of Saints, and what is great, the arm of S. Peter the Apostle was ever brought to us; and he suggests S. Peter the Hermit, whose perhaps it is, and so long (if it is so) kept in the same monastery of Taverna; since of so great a matter we find no memory, neither in the ancient Annals, nor in the later ones either ours, or even foreign. I hear however, while I write these things, in the monastery of Ovarra, to which the said monastery of Taverna was attributed, that a certain Arm is held in the highest honor, under the name of S. Peter the Hermit, not however the Apostle. Perhaps the error has arisen from similarity of name.

[48] So writes the writer of sincere and ancient faith, in the Commentary first published at Saragossa under the year 1588: certainly this seems not to have been able to be obtained from S. Gregory, who perhaps did not so omit to report the earlier part of the Latin writing, because it pertained less to his matter; than because he judged the miracle incredible, so contrary to the prior judgment of Gregory about Relics not to be transferred, must have been silent about in the books of Dialogues, which nearly all about such argument he wrote at the end of his life, and sent to Theodolinda Queen of the Lombards and Apostle of her people. There came accordingly just arguments of doubting, that S. Isidore, although consecrated Bishop in the time of S. Gregory, yet survived him by more than thirty years: but no Cyriacus is found to have been Bishop of the church of Saragossa, indeed at that time Vincentius is found Bishop, under Leovigildus indeed Arian, but under Recaredus Catholic: in whose place meanwhile Cyriacus ordained for the Catholics, afterwards held the bare title, and in the report the persons indicated do not agree with the time. although it is not impossible, with examples to prove it not being lacking; yet that it was done is not certainly enough proved, from an author narrating from hearsay, not without confusion of names and times. But I do not know what the name of Cyriacus has, that beyond others he seemed suitable for ornamenting fables; for so we find Cyriacus the Roman Pontiff, unknown to others, joined to the Ursulan Martyrdom; and another

of the same name Bishop of Jerusalem, shower of the Lord's Cross and Martyr under Julian, under whom there is no place for him in true history.

[49] But as the Spaniards, Brixius, Tamayo and others even after reading Jerome Blancas, So Clement IV rightly denied, are deceived in the Arm of S. Peter, as if it certainly were the Apostle's; so some Greeks attempted to deceive the Franks, carrying into Gaul some Head, perhaps of S. Paul Bishop of Constantinople (if indeed of any Saint), as if it were the Apostle's, by the same gift they wished to oblige B. Isabella, Sister of S. Louis King of the Franks, foundress of the monastery of Longchamp near Paris, holily deceased in the year 1270, on day XXIII February, when in the Supplement we shall treat about her life and cult. Lest she be further deceived, Pope Clement IV wrote to her the following Epistle; To the beloved daughter, the noble woman, Isabella, sister of the dearest in Christ Son, illustrious King of the Franks. Know daughter, that the heads of the Apostles are indubitably held at Rome, the true Head of S. Peter to be there; which Pope Gregory IX of happy Memory our predecessor, taking out with his own hands from the Saints of Saints, exhibited openly to the Roman People, and restored to its own place with due reverence, with all present and knowing. But if perhaps you think the head of B. Paul the Apostle to be with you, lay down your conscience, lest you be deceived, lest you place a scandal for your Mother the Roman Church, which could not equanimously tolerate deception of this kind. But if the Greeks at some time shall have said themselves to have it, do not be surprised: for hating the Latins, they easily fashioned the lie for you, who about Catholic faith, what is greater, did not at all hesitate to lie.

[50] You will do well, if, what you have, you give to our beloved Son Simon, Cardinal of the title of S. Caecilia, Legate of the Apostolic See, in our name, to be sent likewise to us; which the Greeks brought as such into Gaul, lest, if it should come to other hands, scandal could from there, with danger of error, be aroused. Given at Viterbo on XIV Kal. May, in the IV year of the Pontificate, begun on VI February 1265, and so in the year of Christ 1269, the penultimate year of Isabella's life: who, I would not doubt, accurately fulfilled the command of her Apostolic Father. Certainly no such mention of a Head is found in the French writers. More credible is what John Molanus suggests lib. 3 On Pictures and sacred images ch. 22, about the nails by which Peter was affixed to the cross, when he says, that the Nail of B. Peter is shown to Christ's faithful at Limoges in the basilica of B. Martial, more likely will be believed the true nails of the crucifixion are there, and that he also saw another at Mortaing, in the convent of Nuns of the Cistercian Order of the diocese of Avranches. A third also in the Cathedral of Speyer among the Franks or East Franks, William Lisengenius indicates in the Chronicle of that diocese: and perhaps a fourth will be found elsewhere. For as it is nearly certain that the Apostle was fastened with nails; as also elsewhere the wood of the cross, so it is altogether credible, that they either were buried with his body and afterwards dug up, or otherwise preserved by the faithful; equally as the wood of his Cross, of which several Roman churches say they have some; or the knife which S. Gregory gave to the Lombard Queen Theodelinda, and the knife of S. Peter. through Peter the Deacon, as Bartholomew Zucchi writes in the Glory of the city of Monza, where that knife is preserved, ch. 22.

[51] From what has been said, it appears how it is not worth while to refer one by one all those churches, Many other Relics from brandea, in which something of Relics under the name of S. Peter is said to be, or actually is shown. For as for older ones, applied for the consecrations of very many altars, and never unwrapped; we can judge most of these to have been taken from Brandea, of which Gregory mentions: in which way also Sixtus IV sent to Louis XI King of the Franks the Corporal, which the Apostle used at the Mass, as Philip Argentonius writes; or from ashes occasionally collected, when the bodies were moved by Callistus or Sylvester; from ashes, or finally from their sepulchral earth. Thus when Paul V in 1615 was adorning the Confession of S. Peter with marbles, the earth dug out from there was reverently carried into a decent place, within the Vatican crypts under a triple vault, and probably also distributed to many. This certainly was done in 1626, in the time of Urban VIII, when for laying the foundation of the very large bronze machine above the same Confession, much of the neighboring earth had to be necessarily removed, or sepulchral earth: when many Canons present, and other ministers of that Basilica devoutly took from it for themselves: but the rest was deposited similarly, under a title sculpted thus: Earth dug out from the foundations near the sepulchre of S. Peter under Urban VIII, as Turrigius reports in his book On the Vatican Crypts p. 344. about bones one will doubt more prudently, If it is a matter of bones, e.g. of a tooth, rib, jaw or arm, broken or entire; there will be just cause for doubting, whether that is not of another saint Peter or altogether of someone; yet to be retained in the place where it is found; nor should the credulity of the faithful, leaning on the tradition of the elders, be rashly disturbed. I would say the same of the Relics of S. Paul, which in no fewer places are believed to be had.

[52] But whatever bones of SS. Peter or Paul are tolerably displayed, and especially about the Throat of S. Paul at Catania. and in the good faith of those possessing them are received as true; such as at Catania among the Sicilians the Throat of S. Paul, in the Basilica of S. Agatha; as John Baptist de Grossis has, in the Catanian Decachord p. 52. We read the Passion of S. Paul adorned with some miraculous circumstances, for instance that the cut-off head three times pronounced the name of Jesus, and by a triple leap drew forth as many fountains, of which we believe one can without sacrilege doubt, on account of the silence of the ancients; how much more about a fleshy or cartilaginous part, such as is the throat, which could not be had except from a still entire body: but no one yet has said that Paul's body remained incorrupt for any time.

§. VI. On the Heads of the Apostles to Urban PP. V.

BY THE AUTHOR C. J.

[53] To the Trophies of the Apostles, of which above, can also be referred, what Turrigius, in another of his books in Italian, inscribed Le sacre grotte Vaticane, The Bodies of the Apostles divided by Sylvester, and printed at Rome in 1635, teaches, in those Grottos or Crypts, among six hundred monuments of Christian antiquity, a porphyritic stone is kept, eight Roman palms long, five wide, gracefully cancelled by a bronze grate, on which in ancient characters sculpted is read an epigraph of this kind: ✠ Upon this porphyritic stone were divided the bones of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and weighed by blessed Pope Sylvester, in the year of the Lord 319, when this church was made. About that division, says William Durantus, Bishop of Mende, who flourished in the XIII century, in his Rationale of Divine Offices lib. 7 ch. 15, that some make a festive Office on the Nones or the eighth Ides of July: because on such a day it was done. Meanwhile the aforesaid epigraph is not the most ancient, but of the middle age; when more certain knowledge of the fact that is reported could yet be had, than was had of the year in which the church was founded by Constantine: and it is very verisimilar, after the Emperor had built the three chief basilicas, to Christ the Savior in the Lateran palace, to Peter Prince of the Apostles in the Vatican, and to Paul Doctor of the Gentiles on the Ostian way; that Pope Sylvester with solemn rite elevated the bodies of the two Apostles, and distributed them through the new basilicas, and placed them in a safe place, from which they could not be taken away: just as those also believed, who above the main altar in the church of S. Paul on the Ostian way wrote the following, The Heads are brought to the Lateran, cited by Turrigius p. 49: Under this altar rest the glorious bodies of the Apostles Peter and Paul for one half: but the other half is placed in S. Peter's: but the Heads in S. John of the Lateran. Similar things to those Nicholas Processus wrote in Soresinus, easily three hundred years before him, so reporting: This excellent thing Pope Sylvester accomplished, that upon a porphyritic stone the bones of the holy Apostles divided and the portions in the basilicas, dedicated to their names, he placed back; with the Heads retained in the building of his residence at the Lateran. We have already said enough about the Bodies: it remains, that we treat of the Heads.

[54] It is doubted, where in what places of the Lateran those Heads were first placed, but it is doubted, in what church they were hidden: whether in the Patriarchal church itself of the holy Savior; or in the church of S. Lawrence, afterwards called Sancta Sanctorum; or finally in the church of Theodore. For these two churches themselves also, were in the Lateran; and, as I judge, in continuous, certainly in contiguous building all. About the last named, which no longer exists, Martinellus Floravantes thus writes in his Roma sacra ch. 12, on the obsolete temples of the Saints: The basilica of S. Theodore was within the curtain near the cultivated Sulpitian house, was in the Lateran, and was renewed from the ground by Hadrian I: and to the same basilica (which, in Sabello, with the word corrupted the Librarian calls) Stephen V gave a Cross of gold. But the church of S. Lawrence at Sancta Sanctorum the same Author places near the Lateran basilica, indeed once within the Lateran palace founded from the foundations by Nicholas III; with the earlier one already fallen from age: and also he adds, that the same Nicholas, hid in the same place the heads of the holy Peter and Paul, until the restoration of the Constantinian basilica was completed. But here Floravantes will have erred. For it ought to have been said, that the Heads, which Nicholas, about to renew the church of S. Lawrence collapsed from age from the foundations, had for the time deposited in the Lateran palace, were then by the same brought into the new church; as we shall see below.

[55] Those who desire to persuade that the sacred Heads were first hidden in the church of Theodore, not in the church of Theodore, lean chiefly and uniquely on that text of Anastasius the Librarian, in Sergius I, so reported in Soresinus p. 67: Then Pope Sergius going outside the basilica of Theodore, with the doors opened sat under the Apostles. Which Rasponus in his Lateran Basilica lib. 4 p. 366 so reports: Sergius going outside the basilica, which is called of Pope Theodore, with the doors opened sat in the seat under the Apostles; and he adds on his own within parenthesis, I do not doubt that they were the Heads of the Apostles. But Anastasius himself calls it the basilica of Lord Pope Theodore: and about the seat, in which Sergius sat, he says, which commonly is called under the Apostles. Hence I note 1, that the church, which we above gave described from Floravantes, is not of saint Theodore, from whom as its Patron it might be named; but is of Pope Theodore, dedicated to S. Sylvester: from whom as its founder it is so called, dedicated through the same to S. Sylvester. About this the same Floravantes (for we judge it to be the same in both places)

the church must be understood) so writes on p. 401: Pope Theodore made an Oratory to S. Sylvester within the Lateran Bishopric. Note 2, it will scarcely come about that those considering the cited texts may be persuaded that Sergius, while he sat in the seat under the Apostles, or which is commonly called under the Apostles; sat under the Heads of the Apostles. Nor indeed is it easily conceivable, how outside the church, or in an open and public place, or under some portico, the Pontiffs would have wished so most sacrosanct a treasure to be kept: certainly the Pope having gone out from the basilica, sat outside it. Note 3, that even if it were more strongly proved from elsewhere, that in that church of S. Sylvester, built by Theodore, the sacred Heads of the Apostles were at some time; yet they could not have been first deposited there: since the builder of the said church Theodore, made Pontiff in the year 642, could not have built it, except three hundred and more years after, than the Heads are believed to have been translated to the Lateran under Pope Sylvester.

[56] Therefore elsewhere they will have been preserved through all that time. But where rather, but rather in the Patriarchal itself, than in the Patriarchal itself and primary church of S. Salvator? For as the halved bodies of the same Apostles remained in their own chief church, built by Constantine; not however were placed in another church or oratory outside them: so equally it is verisimilar that the Heads were not placed outside the principal church. Indeed he who would wish to maintain that, must first show, that in the time of Pope Sylvester or Emperor Constantine or somewhat after, there were smaller churches in the Lateran so near the Patriarchal, except perhaps in the baptistery; in which yet the aforesaid Churches of Pope Theodore, and of S. Lawrence at Sancta Sanctorum were nowhere. Moreover the congruities which after some centuries persuaded Pope Urban V, to deposit the Heads found by him in the oratory at Sancta Sanctorum, in the Patriarchal church; could also have moved Sylvester, to place them there from the very beginning; because namely it was fitting (Nicholas Processi reports those in Soresinus p. 65 as said by Urban) that the Heads of the Apostles, who with their blood planted the Catholic Church in the world, should rest in the first Mother and Head of all the Churches. And indeed how much from its primaeval institution the Lateran church had preeminence above all the rest of the churches; it could greatly confirm to it the presence of the Apostolic Heads, which to all Christendom in some way would make attested, that its church excels the rest in the world, as much as the head in the human body excels the rest of the members.

[57] For the same opinion are also cited by Soresinus other Authors, unknown to me, p. 62 in these words: as also other Writers testify. Rutilius Benzonius, Sebastianus Fabrinus, and others, want the said Heads translated not to Sancta Sanctorum, much less to the church of Pope Theodore; but say they were placed by S. Sylvester in the sacrosanct Lateran Church. Indeed the same says, there is and is cited by Cardinal Rasponus, who asserts they were placed by Sylvester under the altar, above which by the wondrous devotion of all to the present they are venerated; and that the same Joannes Severanus also affirms. Less therefore stand, at least for the first part, the things which in the same Soresinus p. 68 Nicholas Processi has, although his Codex from easily three hundred years, as Soresinus says, was written; when he asserts, the Heads were preserved up to Sergius I in the basilica of Pope Theodore, above the Pontifical Seat, commonly called under the Apostles: until they were translated to the basilica of S. Lawrence at Sancta Sanctorum.

[58] That they were at some time translated to Sancta Sanctorum, is most certain: Thence they were translated to the building of S. Lawrence, but when and by whom translated there, is most obscure. Perhaps this happened in the year 896 under Stephen VI, when, on the testimony of Ciaconius, the Constantinian basilica shaken by a vast earthquake, fell down in great part, and the whole from the altar to the door lay in ruins; wherefore the Relics had to be translated to another place, and were translated to S. Lawrence, surnamed Sancta Sanctorum. The Heads of the Apostles certainly were there with Gregory IX sitting in 1227, who taking them with his own hands from the Sancta Sanctorum exhibited them openly to the Roman people, shown there to the people by Gregory IX, and restored them to their place with due reverence, with all present and seeing; as Clement IV wrote, in 1265 created Pope, in his Epistle, about which above to Isabella, sister of the holy King Louis of the Franks. But more ancient is the Ritual of Cencius the Chamberlain, in the year of the Lord 1192, as Soresinus says, written, when Celestine III was presiding over the Church. In it is read thus among other ceremonies wont to be performed on the Friday of Parasceve at S. Lawrence's at Sancta Sanctorum: At the sixth hour the Lord Pope with all the Cardinals enters the basilica of S. Lawrence, where after prayer is made he approaches the altar, and with it opened draws out from it the Heads of the Apostles Peter and Paul, and two Crosses; and before him by other Pontiffs. all of which after the Lord Pope with the Cardinals shall have kissed, he places back in the same place, except one Cross. Thus Cencius, who afterwards was Roman Pontiff, under the name of Honorius III, created in 1216: and nearly the same things he has about the aforesaid Relics or Heads, among the Ceremonies, which at that time were performed at the Exaltation of the holy Cross in the month of September: when also, both the heads, and the wood of the holy Cross, were given by the Pope to the Cardinals to be carried to the nearby church of S. Sylvester, and there also the Pontiff with his retinue approached; and the divine Offices finished, before the door on a certain board, placed by the Ostiarii, with cloths, as is fitting, honorably covered, those very Relics were laid down: which first being adored by the Pope and Cardinals, then all the people in the same place adored them. From which is gathered that even then the church of S. Sylvester survived; the same I think, which we saw from Floravantes had been built for it by Pope Theodore.

[59] Before the Pontificate of Honorius already mentioned, Innocent III himself also venerated the Relics of the Apostles, about which we treat, Innocent III honorably encloses the same, and several others in the same church of S. Lawrence; and enclosed them under one of three altars, which were there at that time, honorably in bronze cases, as from various authors and the ancient Ms. Codex of Nicholas Processi Soresinus reports, so saying: The altar, which now is there, hitherto retains in the middle two bronze plates, in which are anaglyph Heads of them with names engraved, and below the Head of divine Paul from characters not entirely obsolete is read: Pope Innocent III caused this work to be made. Of the same cases and other things pertaining here mentions also Ciaconius in Nicholas III; The chapel of S. Lawrence, he says, which is called Sancta Sanctorum, as also Nicholas III, with the church renewed: in the Lateran portico, demolished from the foundations, he wholly rebuilt, and adorned with vermiculated work and paintings, and covered with marble tablets; and in it in bronze cases, made by Innocent III, he reverently hid the Heads of the Apostles Peter and Paul, enclosed in silver shrines, under an altar above which stands the image of the holy Savior acheiropoiētē, that is, not made by hand, with many other Relics with the solemn supplication of the whole Roman people. On which day, which was the day before the Nones of June, he dedicated the same basilica.

[60] From these things can appear the error, which in num. 54 I noted in the words of Martinellus, after he had deposited it temporarily following Platina; who write, that in the time of Pope Nicholas aforesaid, the sacred Heads were as if for a time deposited in S. Lawrence at Sancta Sanctorum, until the Patriarchal church should be rebuilt; whereas in this Patriarchal church, or rather in the Palace, they had only a temporary station, until the destroyed church of S. Lawrence was again repaired. For it is plain from what has been said, that for a long time before Nicholas the Heads had their own and fixed seat and veneration, in the Lawrentian, not in the Patriarchal church. The same thing most clearly explains Nicholas Processi often cited, in these words: Nicholas III Ursinus, with the basilica at Sancta Sanctorum collapsed from age, in the basilica, himself ordered the most holy Heads of the Apostles to be kept with guards at the Lateran basilica, until the said basilica at Sancta Sanctorum should be wholly renewed. With which rebuilt, openly with the whole Curia and the Roman people standing by, he reverently placed back with his own hands with the Cardinals the aforesaid most holy Heads under the altar of the same basilica at Sancta Sanctorum. Indeed more accurately, and from the contemporary author Ptolemy of Lucca, Bishop of Torcello he hands down the same matter; and confirms what we have said Onufrius Panvinius lib. 4 ch. 21 fol. 169 in the mentioned Soresinus thus writing: Nicholas III, Ursinus stabilized the ruinous oratory at Sancta Sanctorum, or rather in the Lateran palace. from the ground, with perpetual work with marble bricks; and in the upper part of the vault, adorned with most beautiful paintings, ordered to be founded again, with the Heads of the Apostles placed separately with the Foreskin of Christ, Hairs of the blessed Virgin and Head of blessed Agnes: of which Relics each one was in its own shrine, and then by hand of the Pontiff into the new Lateran palace renewed by him at night transferred, and to be guarded by religious persons, until the oratory should be completed, he ordered. When this was finished, with all the Roman people standing by, all the Prelates and Cardinals, he with his own hands placed back the same silver shrines of Relics at the altar of the same basilica, which altar he had consecrated on the day before the Nones of June. So brother Ptolemy of Lucca of the Order of Preachers, who lived at that time. These things Panvinius from the Ms. of Ptolemy.

[61] So far very celebrated was, not only the religion of the people, but also of the Pontiffs themselves toward the most sacrosanct Heads, The annual religion of the Pontiffs and people, which according to the Ritual of Cencius the Chamberlain, of which above, every year on the feast of the Exaltation of the holy Cross, with the wood of the venerable Cross of the Lord, were drawn out from their cases in the church of S. Lawrence, by the Pontiff himself were handed over to the Cardinals, to be carried to the church of S. Sylvester; were exposed before its door to public veneration; were borne by the younger Cardinals processionally, with the seniors and the Pope accompanying, through the common way to the basilica of S. John Lateran; with the Canons of it coming to meet at a long distance with the Cross, Primicerius and the School of Singers: but in the basilica with the Relics placed upon the altar, the Pontiff celebrated Mass: which duly performed, with the same Relics through the palace to the basilica of S. Lawrence he returned. And these things indeed were performed annually.

[62] But it also happened that the same sacred Heads were carried to more remote basilicas; if at any time some grave necessity of the universal Church or of the city of Rome occurred, and the Pontiff himself with bare feet to accompany them, and extraordinary things concerning the holy Heads; with Cardinals, Clergy and people. Thus in the year 1217 Honorius III, having heard that the army of the Christians

signed with the Cross, under the auspices of Andrew King of the Hungarians and Leopold Duke of Austria, had entered Syria and the very land of Babylonia; for the safety of them and the propagation of the faith, we summoned the people of the City, says the Pontiff in a certain Epistle of his in Raynaldus at the year 1217 num. 28, into the basilica of the Savior, and from there to the venerable church of his glorious Mother, with the Heads of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul carried before, with bare feet processionally we went; that for the aforesaid Athletes of Jesus Christ, by the intervention of his Mother, we might obtain heavenly aid. Similarly with bare feet the same Heads of the Apostles Gregory IX carried in supplication to S. Peter in the Vatican in the year 1239, imploring from heaven aid against the assaults of Frederick II the Emperor, depopulating Italy and hostile to the Romans. But there with the Heads themselves he ascended the ambo; and exhorted the people, by the sight of them no less than by his own tears and paternal oration, to the defense of the Church and City with wonderful emotion of minds. At length bringing back the Heads to the Lateran, in the cases, made by Innocent III under the altar, from which he had taken them, he restored them.

[63] Such religion endured at Rome up to Nicholas III, and the new church of S. Lawrence repaired by him from the foundations, or even longer; until they migrated to Avignon. until the Pontiffs migrated from Rome to Avignon: from which time the City widowed of its Shepherd, began to fail in wealth, to be squalid, and to forget former piety; so that the venerable Heads of the Apostles seem to have lain hidden without veneration in their cases; unless perhaps they were hidden in a more abstruse place, less safe in the cases during those calamities of the times; until at length Urban, by name the fifth, but by number of those, who had stayed at Avignon, the seventh, from there visited Rome in the year 1367; and entering it about the middle of October, on the day before the feast of All Saints, which then was Sunday, celebrated Mass in S. Peter's: and in the same year still, or certainly at the beginning of the next, found the Heads of the holy Apostles sought by him.

§. VII. The Heads found and adorned by Pope Urban V.

[64] Joseph Maria Soresinus, Apostolic Protonotary, Soresinus writes about the Heads Doctor of both Laws, and Beneficiary Priest of the church of S. John Lateran, had printed at Rome in 1673 a Little Work on the Heads of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, kept in the sacrosanct Lateran church. That Author, whom we have often already cited, begins his little work with the discovery and translation of the aforesaid Heads, done under and by Pope Urban V, in the year 1367 setting out from Avignon to Rome; from Leo Casella, and immediately produces for proving those things the text of a certain Leo Casella, formerly in the Oratory Sancta Sanctorum (it almost ceased to be called by the name of S. Lawrence in these last centuries) Chaplain from a Ms. codex, and another of Francis Bosquet Francisco Bosqueto, from the life of the same Urban, printed with the lives of other Pontiffs of the French nation. Then thus he proceeds: But here are not to be passed over the words of the Vatican codex, Nicholas Processi, of the age of Urban V, indeed with him living and acting at Rome, written by Nicholas Processi, Beneficiary of the Lateran; who composed a compendious account of the sacred Heads, which, although divided and distinct, we shall report in suitable places. Rightly indeed he for his plan: but better will deserve of ecclesiastical History, whoever shall publish that whole Relation of the contemporary Author in continuous series.

[65] From that Codex Ms. therefore which he calls miscellaneous, and says is in the Vatican library, he produces these things about the discovery of the Heads and the new and old silver cases: whose context is given, At length on account of the injuries of the times when the said most holy Heads lay hidden from the peoples, in this our time, with the great applause and joy of all, they were found in silver chests. Pope Lord Urban, may God preserve him, watching over their dignity, with precious silver statues with golden Heads, sapphires, diamonds, and gems, by his own expense by the hands of the goldsmith John Bartholus of Siena fabricated, then in the Lateran Basilica on a marble bier, under the greater arch he solemnly placed; saying it was fitting, that the Heads of these Apostles, who with their blood planted the Catholic Church in the world, should rest in the first Mother and Head of all the Churches, and he fulminated the penalty of excommunication concerning those carrying off the aforesaid goods of the most holy Heads by his diploma, beginning: The damnable presumption of sacrilegious men, under Given at Montefiascone V Kal. August in the eighth year of our Pontificate: which diploma he ordered to be kept in the Lateran Archive.

[66] After these things Soresinus brings forth several more things on the same subject, from the Process for the canonization of Urban V, and another from the Process for Canonization, in the secret Vatican archive fol. 123. We have also such a Process, which I myself had transcribed about XX years ago from a Vatican Codex of not the best writing, marked 4026; and in the place itself collated with the original carefully, as much as I could, corrected. That Process of ours, is called in the mentioned Codex, the Book on the Life and miracles of blessed Pope Urban V, and is rather the beginning of the Process, and the Articles, which the Procurator in the cause of Canonization, Peter Olivarii, offers to the Deputies of the Apostolic See for the same cause; asking that upon them witnesses and other proofs be received and examined by them; and the proofs themselves and attestations be reduced to writing; and besides ever again declaring, that of all and each, which he deposes, there was and is public voice and report.

[67] In this Process of ours therefore on the Life of Urban, fabricated not long after his death, which has been described to us from the Vatican. is read fol. 17 according to the division of the Vatican codex; that the Lord Urban at the Chapel, which is called Sancta Sanctorum, with the Senator and the Greater Ones of the City present, with certain of his Lord Cardinals, the most sacred Relics of the Saints there from antiquity rather secretly hidden, personally with humility and the greatest devotion sought, Urban found the Heads and at length among the other Relics found and discovered the Heads of the Apostles in silver vessels rather small, and in his judgment less noble than was fitting, which humbly and devoutly on bended knees he reverently kissed in reverence of God and of the Saints themselves.

[68] Likewise also the aforesaid Lord Urban, after certain Antiphons and Orations said, shows them to the people as venerable, reverently with his own hands and through the hands of the Lords, then Cardinals of Ostia and Urgell, publicly announced and caused them to be shown to be venerated by the universal clergy and Roman people in the great plaza below the said Chapel specially convoked for this.

[69] Likewise the aforesaid Lord Urban for greater reverence of God and of the aforesaid Saints immediately had made at his own expense two cases or silver statues, and orders new silver chests to be made, namely one in the form of a half person of B. Peter, namely from the navel above, weighing one thousand seven hundred marks of silver; and in like manner another, in the form of S. Paul, in like weight of silver; and ordered and made that in each of them be placed each of the aforesaid Heads of the Saints, and afterwards that they be placed in an open and eminent place, where by Christian peoples they would be more devoutly honored and seen.

[70] which Princes, men and women Likewise that the aforesaid Lord Urban asked by his letters the most illustrious Prince Lord Charles, then King of the Franks, and Lady Joanna formerly Queen of France and Navarre, and Lady Joanna then Queen of Sicily and Jerusalem, that they would wish to be participants in the aforesaid so great work. Which indeed Lord King two golden flowers with gems and precious stones of great value beyond four thousand florins, and the Queen of France a golden Crown with pearls and precious stones of great value, and the aforesaid Queen of Sicily a Royal hat with gems and precious stones also of great value, for the love of God and the adornment of the Heads of the aforesaid Saints transmitted. Likewise that some Lord Cardinals out of piety at the request of Lord Urban, gave some precious stones for the aforesaid work.

[71] in various ways decorated, Likewise the aforesaid Lord Urban placed all and each of the above-said jewels and the aforesaid precious stones with a great quantity of his own gold and many of his own precious stones and pearls of great value in beauty and adornment of the aforesaid chests, and adorned them most beautifully and nobly, decorated and ennobled; so much and to such a degree, that the silver and gold and precious stones, by Lord Urban himself in the adorned structure and added of the aforesaid chests or statues, by easy and true common estimation among the experts of that art were estimated to be worth above thirty thousand florins of the Chamber, and beyond.

[72] Likewise that said Lord Urban in the Papal Chapel at the Palace of S. Peter, and the Pope himself with solemn rite blessed in S. Peter's. the aforesaid two chests or statues in adornment and form, as is aforesaid, perfected and consummated, according to the form, contained in the Pontifical, with joy and devotion with his own mouth and hand blessed, and immediately to the universal clergy and Roman people, specially convoked for this, to the Lord S. Peter's and Ursine Cardinals he handed them: who receiving them devoutly, with very many lights had them carried publicly, processionally proceeding with the clergy and people above-said, to the Lateran; and there according to the aforesaid ordination of the aforesaid Lord Urban, and ordered them carried with supplication to the Lateran church, the Head of B. Peter in the image or statue of S. Peter aforesaid, and the Head of B. Paul in like form of B. Paul or statue aforesaid devoutly and reverently placed and put back, and consigned with certain rings and seals, and firmly closed, and afterwards above the main altar of the Lateran Church in the place above four columns specially prepared for this, the aforesaid images or statues with the aforesaid Heads of the Holy Apostles enclosed in them honorably placed; where they still stand placed to the glory and honor of God and of the Saints themselves, and the devotion of the whole Roman people. Likewise that of all and each of the aforesaid there was and is public voice and report.

[73] Meanwhile it happened, that to the Pontiff by some it was said (the words are of the same Process) Holy Father, why do you leave those precious Heads in that place, not strong? And it is doubtful, that by some unruly men they may be torn away, where the Apostles defend themselves from injury, stolen and pulled down on account of their preciousness. Then the same Lord Urban responded and responds, with a certain devoutly playful humility: Do you not see, that S. Peter has in his hand those great keys; and S. Paul has a great sword? Let them defend themselves. And it is to be hoped well

that they will do so, because they are near enough to God. And truly what the holy Pontiff religiously joking predicted, the Apostles in the very thing performed. In the year 1438 (as Soresinus reports p. 53 from a Ms. of the Lateran archive of the same time, and other writers of great authority) certain sacrilegious Ministers of the Lateran church, Dominic de Tito, Capocciola of Apulia, and John Christopher Garophalus of Castro Vallis Montana, certain most precious gems, estimated at thirty thousand gold pieces, from the adornment of the sacred Heads secretly stole; and the theft having been deposited with his uncle Nicholas Andreuccius of Perugia, they departed for Campania.

[74] But the Apostles did not bear the crime, nor did they fail themselves. For it happened (I report Soresinus's words) that a certain Venetian noble was gravely ill; to themselves through the sacrilegious theft inflicted, who when with despaired health he was hastening to death, for the cause of recovering health, with all his heart and affection poured forth most humble prayers to the blessed Apostles; and wishing to show some sign of his service and reverence to them, by divine disposition, a pearl of the greatest value, secretly by sacrilege sold to him by the aforesaid thieves, which he was keeping among gems dearer to him, he sent as a gift, to be placed among others, adorning the Heads of the aforesaid blessed Apostles. Which done, because that infirmity truly was not unto death, but that the glory of God might be made manifest, he immediately recovered. The Canons joyfully received the submitted pearl, with the authors condemned to death: and about to put it back in a suitable place, they found an empty hollow there, of the same magnitude and form as the pearl, so that it manifestly appeared that it had at some time been inserted there. From here it is inquired with the aforesaid Noble, donor of the pearl, whence he had it: they come to knowledge of the seller: the thieves are detected: and condemned paid deserved penalties; which can be read in Soresinus narrated at length.

[75] Nor indeed did the Apostles know how to vindicate themselves alone and their own from injury; but the church itself also from plundering; they also preserve the church and those devoted to themselves and in it the people fleeing to themselves from imminent death, amid military tumults, they marvelously preserved. The matter worthy of mention, which our Soresinus, Joseph Maria, p. 88 brings forth from his uncle's Miscellany Mss. lib. 2. tit. on the prodigies of bells, so writing: Nicholas Soresinus of Milan, Canon of the Liberian basilica of the City, distinguished Theologian, and my uncle, reports a case, in which the divine virtue in preserving the Heads of the holy Apostles, and the Lateran Church from the incursion of the impious and sacrilegious shone forth marvelously.

[76] For he wrote, that when on a certain time, with the city captured, from plundering and killing; the troops of the victorious enemy, divided here and there, rushed to plundering and killing, and all the citizens, and Ministers of the Churches terrified, were seeking hiding places; it happened, that while with great impetus soldiers gaping eagerly entered the Lateran basilica; a Cleric, who alone in the Church had remained, between iron grates, surrounding the Heads of the blessed Apostles, took himself; and trembling, rather by divine impulse, than by purpose, the little bells, which are wont to serve as a sign for venerating and adoring the Heads of the aforesaid Apostles, the soldiers, who were attempting such things, whose cord at that time hung between the grates, rang; at which sound unexpectedly heard, no less than if they had heard the clangs of obstreperous enemies, the soldiers were filled with such great fear and trembling sent from heaven, that with no one pursuing turning their backs they fled headlong.

[77] In that flight when they had met other military forces of the same army, turning their mutual arms upon their own. which also desired to plunder the Lateran Church; but those, from the violent meeting had judged, that the citizens prepared for battle had assailants, or desiring to possess part of the spoils, or from another cause known only to God, in the manner of the Philistines, with swords drawn here and there, contending among themselves they fell. A worthy vengeance of so great a crime; with the Lord saying: I will give fear in their hearts, in the regions of their enemies, the sound of a flying leaf will terrify them, and so they will flee as if from a sword; they will fall with no one pursuing, and each will fall upon his brethren, as fleeing wars. These things from tradition my aforesaid uncle Soresinus drew. Yet it is certain that the aforesaid Heads of the blessed Apostles from that time when they were placed back in the place, where at present they are venerated, have incurred no loss in so many and so great depopulations of the City, and evils to which Rome in past centuries was subjected: from which it appears that the same venerable Heads were preserved by the manifest virtue of God.

[78] So far Joseph Maria Soresinus. But let us return to the aforesaid translation, which happened, The Office of the Translation 16 April. and every year is recalled in the Lateran church by an Office of double rite XVI Kal. May: and the Ciborium, as they call it, where the sacred Heads with the silver busts and their precious adornment were placed, let us inspect, described by Soresinus p. 31 in these words: The Ciborium, where the Heads are kept, The Ciborium into which the venerable Heads of the Apostles were translated, stands above the altar pyramidal in appearance terminating, and with various figures sculpted in Gothic architecture, and this Clement the Eighth gilded, and it is well fortified and closed, and made firm with twelve keys, of which three are with the Supreme Pontiff, three with the distinguished Lateran Chapter; three the Lord Conservators of the City, and three the Lord Guardians of the most holy Savior at Sancta Sanctorum have.

[79] A more minute description of the same Ciborium also a little after Soresinus brings forth in Italian from the Ms. of Lord Urban Millini, who in the year 1649 by command of Innocent X performed there the office of Visitor and all things minutely and accurately, both what pertains to the aforesaid Ciborium, here engraved in bronze, and what pertains to the Heads themselves, perhaps deserving at other times, that they be edited in Latin by us. Now let it suffice to set before the eyes of the readers the busts themselves with their adornments, just as they are today, and are represented by Soresinus, engraved in bronze.

[80] Many things there can be considered. I note a few: and first of all the epigraphs, Some things to be noted in the foregoing images which by the art of the sculptor could not be expressed on account of the smallness of the work. There is read therefore under the statue of Peter at the top of the base edge: Pope Urban V made this work, in honor of the Head of blessed Peter the Apostle in the year of the Lord 1369. But at the lowest edge: Charles, by the grace of God King of the Franks, who was crowned in the year of the Lord 1464, gave the present lily, in honor of the Head of blessed Peter, which is placed on his breast. From the side, the goldsmith John Bartoli of Siena left his name to posterity. Similar things plainly are read under the bust of S. Paul, only with the names of the Apostles changed. Before the breast of each glistens a lily of gold, around the inscriptions, under which hangs a small circle, like a bull or silver coin, and in Peter indeed above the Archiepiscopal or Pontifical pallium with these verses: That he may raise his own See, into thine, Peter, he will return Here, the Shepherd from the Vatican citadel of Peter. In the other, which adorns the breast of S. Paul, similarly inscribed are these verses. The Apostolic Prince yields to thee, Paul, thou art called, For of the right hand the Son, the Vessel, the Bright Trumpet to God.

[81] and that Paul holds the right hand of Peter. And hence they judge, Paul holds the right hand there, as often elsewhere, where with Peter he is represented; because Benjamin (which is interpreted Son of the right hand) is of Christ, in the last place called to the Apostleship, and as he himself confesses, the least of the Apostles: besides that he is known to have been born of the tribe of Benjamin. Others devise other reasons of this preference of Paul; which do not fully satisfy, nor those adduced. In the prior distich for, into yours, as we judge must be read for confirming some suitable sense; it is read in Soresinus, tua, without preposition; which renders all obscure and not rightly intelligible. In our conception the Author of the distich seems to have wished to express, that Urban, from when he was acting at Rome, inhabiting the Vatican palace, joined to the basilica of S. Peter; from there here to the Lateran, as his own and his own house, where formerly the Pontiffs dwelt, would migrate; after he had brought back his See from Avignon, which it was believed he would have done, if he had survived.

[82] Meanwhile he wished provided, in the better way he could, The Pontiff provides for the security of the statues, for the sacred Heads through a bull, given at Montefiascone, by which under penalty of excommunication and other most grave things he forbids, that anyone dare to take even the least of the ornaments, much less of the Relics; and he premises some description of them, in this diverse from the report which we gave above from the Process, that he says the silver statues or busts weigh twelve hundred marks, not seventeen hundred, as is read there; nor one thousand seventy, as Ciacconius writes. The exordium of the Bull is such:

[83] Urban Bishop Servant of the servants of God: to the perpetual memory of the matter. through Bull and penalty of excommunication. The damnable presumption of sacrilegious men is the heavier, and deserves to be punished more harshly, the more it shall have been perpetrated in venerable places, and holier things. Since therefore we for the reverence of God, and of his most blessed Apostles Peter and Paul two of their gilded silver images, and adorned with pearls, and precious stones of weight of twelve hundred marks of silver (above one of which, namely the head of B. Peter, is a small golden Cross, adorned with precious gems, in which is of the wood of the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ) with elegant and sumptuous work had fabricated, and in the Lateran Church above the main Altar had venerably placed, and in them the most sacred Heads of the said Apostles, and other Relics of the Saints, there for the greater veneration of the same Apostles, and the devotion of the faithful had hidden to remain in perpetuity; it is fitting, and we judge it expedient for caution, that, as the Cross itself, Heads, Relics, and Images, two small silver chests, in which the aforesaid most sacred Heads formerly in the Church of S. Lawrence at Sancta Sanctorum, near that Lateran Church standing, in past times had been; preserved, guarded, and intact may remain; we may impose grave penalties on those presuming the contrary. All therefore, and each of whatever preeminence, dignity, state, grade, order, or condition shall be, even if with Royal, Imperial, Pontifical, or any other dignity they shall shine, who the said Heads … Given at Montefiascone v. Kal. August in the VIII year of our Pontificate; that is of Christ 1370.

§. VIII. On the discovery of the Arm of S. Paul at Meissen in Saxony, thence translated to Poland.

[84] Although what was said §. 5 about the Relics of the Apostles, commonly hold place in any whatsoever, In the year 1633 P. Frederick Schembek S. J. yet more in larger and nobler parts; nevertheless I judge that not even to this is to be denied pious credulity, as long as God deigns to hold acceptable the cult shown to the Saint in them. Thus to the Mantuans is left undisturbed possession and veneration of the Arm of S. Paul, from which a part received by the Maltese, as above I said, the Mantuan Duke Ferdinand himself communicated, holding it from his elders, although he is not able to demonstrate, when, from where, by whom they received

it. The same may hold for another similar bone, which how in our memory was found at Meissen in Germany, and translated to Cracow in Poland, will be taught by the following Instrument, sent by our P. Frederick Schembek, also otherwise mentioned for the various Lives of native Saints which he wrote in Polish, sent to P. Bolland, in the beginning of the work undertaken in the year 1634.

[85] In the name of the Lord. Amen. Through this present public Instrument let it be open and known to all, that in the year from the nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ one thousand six hundred and thirty-third, in the first Indiction, of the Pontificate of our Holy Lord Urban by divine providence Pope the eighth in the tenth year, on the Saturday after the second Sunday of Lent, which was the twenty-sixth day of February; about the fourth hour after noon in the presence of me the public Notary and the Witnesses below written, specially called and asked for this, at Cracow in the Oratory of the Congregation of B. Mary Virgin Assumed at the Church of S. Barbara Virgin and Martyr, of the Professed House of the Society of Jesus, situated above the Sacristy of the aforesaid Church; personally appearing the Rev. Father Frederick Schembek, Professed of the Society of Jesus and Provost of the aforesaid House, brought forth in open form a writing of commission, from the sacred and most serene Royal Majesty Vladislaus the fourth, King of Poland and Sweden etc. committed to him; with the signature of his Majesty's hand, and the Seal of the same in the Chancery of the Kingdom marked, safe and entire: and had it read by me the public Notary, in the presence of all who were present, with loud voice; the tenor of which word for word is such.

[86] Vladislaus the Fourth by the grace of God King of Poland, Great Duke of Lithuania, ordered by Vladislaus King of Poland Russia, Prussia, Masovia, Samogitia, Livonia etc. and also of the Swedes, Goths, Vandals hereditary King, elected Great Duke of Moscow. To the Reverend Frederick Schembek of the Professed House of the Society of Jesus at Cracow Provost, Our Royal Grace. To us sincerely beloved Generous Jacob Butler, Hibernian, native of this Kingdom of ours, when in the year next past one thousand six hundred and thirty-second, he had strenuously by the law of war occupied various places of the Saxon Dominion, for Ferdinand the Emperor our dearest uncle; among other spoils from the hostile region, the most noble before all others bone of the arm of S. Paul the Apostle, nearly entire he brought back: which in the city of Meissen, metropolis of the Marquisate of Meissen, the soldiers subject to his power (with the zeal of finding gold and silver, examining the cavities of the walls of the castle, and of the other buildings in it) in a certain little cavity of a wall of the Deanal House, of the Cathedral Church there, formerly enclosed in the wall, and to men in this time entirely unknown, they found. Of which half since in promises, from the aforesaid Butler (for our Cracow Basilica, to legitimately accept a part of the Arm, erected to the same Doctor of Gentiles and Prince of Apostles Peter by the Most Serene of pious memory our parent King) we have; and well we know, that the same most pious begetter of ours, more than once used your work, in seeking various sacred Relics for the ornament of the same Basilica; this business, of the pious gift promised to us, we have judged should be committed to you beyond others; just as through these presents we commit; wishing, and requiring it of you, that with what faith and dexterity formerly, in similar matters for our Most Serene parent your effort and industry you exerted, now in this same occasion for us you may exert the same; and the part of this sacred pledge promised to us, either yourself with your own hands divide from the rest of the bone; or being an eyewitness, have it divided by another suitable; with a public Notary called for this work with you, suitable witnesses; and a person constituted in Ecclesiastical dignity, one or more: and a public Instrument concerning the discovery of so great a treasure, the carrying back into this our kingdom of Poland, and the donation to us from the present possessor, you arrange to be accurately composed; about to do a thing very opportune for divine honor and for propagating the cult of the Saints, most pleasing to the pious shades of our Most Serene parent, most grateful to us: and to you of great merit before God and the Saints to come, to whom we promise Our Royal Grace. At Cracow in our citadel, in the year 1633 on day XIX February, in the first year of our reigns. Vladislaus King ✠ Place of the Seal.

[87] By the force of which commission the aforesaid Reverend P. Frederick Schembek, from the aforesaid Magnificent Lord Colonel Jacob Butler, from Colonel Butler he inquires how it was found: a man of forty years, called by purpose into the aforesaid Oratory by will of the sacred Royal Majesty, in the name of the same Majesty required, that first of all, the occasion, manner, time, and indications and signs of certainty or truth of the discovery of this sacred Relic he should report, and these faithfully for the memory of posterity should narrate. Who most promptly obeying the will of the Most Serene Majesty, asked R. P. David Kinardus a Scot, for him his Confessor responds in Latin: Priest Professed of the Society of Jesus (whom for many years as Confessor, both himself, and the Hibernian soldiers of his cohort used) there present, that in his name the whole series of this matter, as eyewitness and great part, he should copiously expound, and the request made by the authority and name of the Most Serene King perfectly satisfy; since he himself when required was not able to speak the Polish language fluently; the Latin he did not know; the very subject neither the Reverend Royal Commissary, nor the witnesses called for this would understand. At whose instance the same R. P. Kinardus, in the sixty-third year of his age, the whole matter in Latin speech immediately reported in this manner which follows.

[88] When the Most Serene Lord John George, Elector Prince Duke of Saxony, Julich, Butler moving arms for Ferdinand Imp. against the rebels in Meissen Cleves and the Mountains, Landgrave of Thuringia, Marquis of Meissen etc. having entered an alliance with Gustavus Pseudo-king of Sweden, and the other conspirators, enemies of the Catholic cause in the Roman Empire, against Ferdinand the second Emperor and the Catholic Church, had together powerfully risen up, and was persisting tenaciously in his attempts; and from this cause the Army of the same Caesar, in the year of the Lord 1632, was hostilely depopulating Saxony and the other Provinces, subject to the aforesaid Prince; and various cities, citadels and towns was subjecting to the power of the Emperor; the Magnificent Lord Jacob Butler the Hibernian, here present, in the year 1632 to have occupied the Metropolis, follower of the Catholic Religion from boyhood, one of the Colonels of the same Caesarian Majesty there, among other celebrated places occupied in the same warlike expedition, of the City of Meissen too, the metropolis of the Marquisate of Meissen, fortunately took possession: about the middle of October of the aforesaid year 1632. In which Meissen city, among other noble monuments of ancient Catholic piety, stands a most ancient and still entire Cathedral church, with the sepulchre of S. Benno its Bishop (who now in the Duchy of Bavaria is worshipped as a singular Patron against the plague, resting there) through many centuries of years, of old most celebrated, enclosed within the walls of the citadel, situated on a hill and contiguous to the city; and to it various buildings of Canons formerly of the same, named from various titles of anciently Ecclesiastical Prelates, and to this point retaining the same surnames, which the Lutheran pseudo-clergy hitherto inhabited, rejoicing in the same denominations of Ecclesiastical dignities and Offices, those things to themselves as to a certain external species rashly usurping, like apes imitating men.

[89] In these therefore Canonical Houses while the soldiers of the Butlerian cohort, where on day October 27, commonly called Dragoons, were searching all crevices most curiously; that for fear of the enemy they might investigate things hidden by the inhabitants, and in various places various things with military exultation they might find; at length on the twenty-seventh day of the month of October of the aforesaid year 1632, about the eighth hour before noon, in the Deanal house of the aforesaid metropolitan church, when they had by force extracted a certain old wooden cabinet, anciently inserted in the wall; they saw behind it in the same wall a hole the size of the palm of a human hand. Which they judged to be the indication of some hiding-place, immediately breaking the further brick wall, in the Deanal house they found a chest or small cavity, within the thickness of the aforesaid wall of length nearly one ell and a half, they found a long-ago casket walled up, of height about half an ell; and of width nearly equal to the height; and in it a little chest or wooden case, made of simple work, with a wooden lid not affixed similar, long nearly two palms, but high and wide about four fingers.

[90] Which when Maurice Valles the Hibernian, a Catholic man, Stationarius of the Butlerian cohorts, by the military term Quartermaster, and in it a radius from the arm of S. Paul: but in our language called Stanowicty had received it into his hands, brought forth from darkness into light by one common soldier; looking within he found it inwardly covered with clean paper, and enclosed in it, also wrapped in similar clean paper, the bone of the arm of the most holy Doctor of the Gentiles Paul the Apostle, from the shoulder to the elbow, which Anatomists call the Radius, of length nearly a palm and a half; on the part by which it was joined to the elbow entire, but somewhat worn down and diminished by age or the devotion of the pious, on the other not so; wrapped around its middle with red silk, of no small antiquity by its qualities a witness, of width of seven fingers, sewn with white thread by very simple ancient work; and above the silk a membrane or parchment paper, white, old, of the same antiquity a witness, long seven fingers, wide a human thumb; drawn around in the manner of a shell to the aforesaid bone; and sewn (with white thread similarly but somewhat reddening) to all its extremities to the same wrapping, in twenty-two places: but on the membrane, with a great old character (which the common people call Monastic) with ink written these formal words: From the ARM OF SAINT Paul the Apostle.

[91] There was lying then in the same Meissen citadel sick one of the Butlerian comrades, also a nursling of the Orthodox faith, Captain Donatus Patrick the Hibernian: who on that day desiring to cleanse his soul by the Sacrament of Confession and to be refreshed by the sacred Bread, had me, David Kinardus, Priest of the Society of Jesus, here narrating these things, which the Father Confessor receiving from the Legion's Stationarius, called to himself for this end. To whom when called I had entered the citadel; immediately I saw the aforementioned Maurice Valles, Quartermaster, a Catholic man, running to me with joy, carrying in his hands this sacred Arm, and handing it to me; only the paper in which it was found wrapped, the wooden case to the little cavity or chest, from which it had been extracted, left behind. Which when I had received from his hand, immediately from the citadel I descended to the city, and directly to the lodging of the Magnificent Lord Colonel Jacob Butler coming, I showed it to him. Soon brought to Colonel Butler, Who exulting much over so great and so holy a prey captured, together with some Captains and Hibernian Catholic Soldiers present, with great reverence kissed it. There was also the Vicar of Meissen, or place-holder of the Most Serene Duke of Saxony in that City (whom they called judge), a man

[92] There had then immediately invaded the same Magnificent Lord Jacob Butler a just desire, who sent him back to the same place to examine all things duly: of understanding the whole matter as it had been done as well as possible, and not at all to be deceived in the discovery of so great a treasure: and therefore he asked me, now here narrating these things, that to the aforesaid citadel from which immediately bringing that sacred pledge I had come, I should at once return; should approach that Deanal house, the hiding-place in which the aforesaid Arm had been concealed, I should diligently consider, the whole matter and all its circumstances accurately I should investigate: finally the Quartermaster Maurice Valles himself, first occupier of so great a matter, I should gravely examine; and to recount all the truth about it, with the authority and name even of the same Magnificent Lord Butler, as Colonel, by oath sacrament I should compel. Which when I had exactly performed, and the Quartermaster had confirmed the truth of the whole business (as is related above) by oath; and I had reported this whole thing to the same Magnificent Lord Colonel; there arose between him and me his Confessor a pious controversy about the possession of this so great thing; to whom namely of us two this sacred spoil pertained; whether to him, as Colonel, and after some controversy about whose it was, and primary Lord of the chief spoils in the city by him reduced to power; or to me, his Confessor, to whom it had been handed over by the inventor or first occupier soon after the discovery and coming to the matter into my hands. There was not lacking to either of us foundations and reasons of pious pretension: but to this controversy the inventor himself Maurice put an end: for ordered by the Magnificent Lord Butler his Colonel to confess sincerely, in the manner of a deposition, or truly of a gift, had he handed me so great a thing, he confessed candidly, not as a gift, but a deposit handed by him to me. Wherefore at length between us it was agreed, that I should keep this sacred spoil and faithfully guard it, as an Ecclesiastic and Religious, should hand it to him to be guarded; and companion by will of my Superiors from so many years inseparable of the military peregrination, of the piously contending Lord Colonel and his Comrades; but he himself, as Lord, should possess it: which also was done.

[93] When therefore this sacred pledge was with me, called out from Germany into Poland, by letters of the most serene King of Poland and Sweden Vladislaus the Fourth, most recently after the death of his most pious parent Divine Sigismund the Third elected King of Poland, and that I together with the Colonel returned to Cracow, was the same Magnificent Lord Colonel Butler, that faithful and strenuous service to his most serene Majesty, against the treaty-breaking Muscovites pressing the citadel of Smolensk with most grievous siege, as native of that kingdom also, he might strenuously render, and a part of the Royal army should lead into hostile provinces. With him coming to Cracow, I also came in the year of the Lord 1633, on the second day after the feast of the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Octave of S. John the Apostle and Evangelist (which was the third day of January) bearing with me this sacred Bone; and brought the holy bone to the House of the Society: and turning aside to the Professed House of our Society at S. Barbara's, there for some weeks decently enclosed in a chest I kept it with due diligence: meanwhile yet to various, both Ecclesiastical and Secular, asking it of me piously, reverently showing it.

[94] At that time had come to Cracow the aforementioned Most Serene King Vladislaus the Fourth, which the King understanding, that he might take possession of the Royal Throne in this metropolis of the kingdom, and be crowned with the sacred diadem. He when he had understood that so great a thing, recently brought into the kingdom, was at Cracow; kindled with the desire of propagating Divine worship, incited by zeal for adorning with such honors the paternal Cracow Basilica, built in honor of the Prince of the Apostles; calling to himself in the citadel the so often aforenamed Magnificent Colonel Butler, asked of him a great part of that arm for the said ends. Which when he with most willing mind offered to his sacred Royal Majesty, immediately the same Majesty through a special writing, made firm by the signature of his hand and the Royal seal, gave the business to R. P. Frederick Schembek, Provost of this Professed House of the Society of Jesus at Cracow at S. Barbara's, that in the name of his sacred Majesty he should receive the part promised him of this sacred Bone for the aforesaid Basilica; asked for and obtained a part. and a public Instrument of the whole series of that business diligently and legitimately he should arrange to be composed, as is sufficiently plain from the very tenor of the Commission now here publicly read.

[95] Which when the aforesaid R. P. David Kinardus, Priest Professed of the Society of Jesus, in the name of the Magnificent Lord Butler asking it, faithfully and sincerely had narrated, and the same by sacrament of oath, touching the breast in the custom of Priests, The Father Camp Companion confirms the same, duly all had confirmed; R. P. Schembek, as Royal Commissary, urged, that in confirmation of the truth of these things, said by Reverend Father David Kinardus, the same and in the same way by his attestation R. P. John Braun the Prussian should approve, also Priest of the Society of Jesus, of age of thirty-six years, and of the same Father David in the Caesarian Camps companion; and eyewitness of the things narrated in the Meissen City. Which when he had willingly openly and publicly immediately performed, the same Reverend Father Frederick Schembek, all these things by these two Religious Priests, reported and confirmed by oath, repeated in the maternal tongue to the Magnificent Lord Colonel Butler, that these, if they had so happened, as had been reported, and the Colonel himself. he also before God legitimately by his testimony might prove the matter, insofar as in the mouth of three witnesses the word of this truth should consist. He did promptly and alacritously what was asked; and so in the mouth of three witnesses the same word of truth was found, and the commission of the King, as to the first part of the business; (namely understanding the whole series of the matter of so great a discovery) was satisfied.

[96] Wherefore proceeding to the second the same R. P. Schembek, by force of the same Commission, asked of the same Magnificent Lord Butler Colonel, P. Schembek asks from him the part promised to the King. that standing by the promises made to the Most Serene Royal Majesty, of donating a part of that Arm for the Cracow Basilica, built to the Princes of the Apostles by Divine Sigismund his father formerly; he should order the same Arm to be brought, and to him, in name and authority Royal asking it, to be handed over to be divided. To which request immediately the same Magnificent Colonel signaled to Reverend Father David so often aforenamed, that this sacred pledge, hitherto kept with him, to the place aforenamed of the Oratory of the Congregation of the blessed Mary Virgin Assumed he should bring. Who having gone out from the same Oratory, briefly returned, The Father Confessor presents the whole, clothed in a surplice and Sacerdotal Stole, with preceding and accompanying him linen-clad of the Society of Jesus Fathers and Brothers, lit candles devoutly in their hands carrying, bearing in a gilded silver basin with due honor, within various coverings excellently elaborated, the aforesaid Bone.

[97] Which when on a table, for this before the altar of the aforesaid Oratory specially prepared, and decently covered, with various candles of white wax above silver candlesticks for this end lit, he had reverently placed; first of all, and swears that it is the same which he brought from Meissen: before further to dividing it would be proceeded, the same R. Father David Kinardus, with the Royal name requiring and the same R. P. Frederick Schembek urging, holily swore, that this Bone which he had brought was the very same in number, in the citadel of the city of Meissen and the Deanal House in the chest or hiding-place of its wall, with its red silken wrapping and inscription, by Maurice the Quartermaster (as above) in the year of the Lord 1632, in the month of October found, faithfully hitherto by himself kept, and to Cracow (as is said) into the Professed House of the Society of Jesus at the buildings of S. Barbara brought, the same wrapped around its middle with red silk, intact and hitherto not unsewn, as it was found; and the membrane or parchment paper, (that is with title indicating the very thing,) entire, intact, and not torn off ever after the discovery, surrounded.

[98] Which thus asserted by R. P. David all and singular, both the Magnificent Lord Colonel Butler, and R. P. John Braun, Priest of the Society of Jesus above named, The Colonel and Companion swear the same; of the same R. P. David Kinardus in the Mission to the Camps of Caesar in Meissen companion, with the same Reverend Royal Commissary asking, with similar oath confirmed. With these so performed, the same R. P. Frederick Schembek, with the Surplice and Stole first received, adorned in the manner of Priests, with due reverence premised, received the aforesaid Bone from the hand of Reverend Father David: and piously kissing it, diligently inspected the inscription or those words, From the Arm of Saint Paul the Apostle: and before the witnesses they judge all things true P. Schembek and the Notary, prudently considered the aforesaid wrapping of red silk, to which the aforenamed title had been sewn: he palpated it with hands, and found all things from antiquity entire, intact, unharmed: and in all things and through all conformable to the report of the Magnificent Lord Butler and his Confessor Father David and Father Braun his Companion; and that he first to me the public Notary below written, then to the Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord George Tyszkiewicz, by the grace of God and the holy Apostolic See Bishop named of Metone, Suffragan of Vilna, Bishop nominated of Samogitia, to this act by force of the above-placed Royal Commission invited; afterwards to the witnesses above named, called and asked for this, to be seen and considered diligently offered. Who reverently and devoutly kissing it, observed all things to be true, and singular things which both R. P. Schembek and I the public Notary had noticed, themselves observed and with their eyes saw.

[99] At length the same R. P. Frederick Schembek, satisfying the office enjoined on him by his Sacred Majesty, the same Bone of the Arm of S. Paul the Apostle (with the membrane of the Inscription or title first torn off, and that silken veil drawn off, the same then he divides the sacred bone, by which in great part anciently it was covered) he from the Head or the top of the same Bone with his own hand, then the rest, on account of its excessive hardness, with another aiding, through the middle, by an iron saw lengthwise, but not crosswise divided; and a great part of it, of length nearly one palm, in the Royal name he received, to the Basilica of Saints Peter and Paul at Cracow, at the College of the Society of Jesus, in due time to be handed over, and to the same with solemn rite to be translated. And at length about all and singular these things, the same so often aforenamed Royal Commissary R. P. Frederick Schembek, of the Professed House of the Society of Jesus at Cracow at the holy

Barbara Provost, and that an instrument should be made of the whole. from me the public Notary one or more public Instruments in the usual manner asked to be made. In faith of all and singular of these acted there were present: The Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord Lord George Tyszkiewicz Bishop of Metone Suffragan of Vilna, Nominated of Samogitia; the Very Reverend Fathers, Christopher Tizcinsky Mitred Archpresbyter of the church of the most blessed Virgin Mary of Cracow; Martin Hinca, of the Society of Jesus throughout the Kingdom of Poland; and Nicholas Lancicius, of the same Society, throughout the Great Duchy of Lithuania, Provincial Provosts, witnesses specially called and asked for this, with many others.

§. IX. On the Chains of S. Peter, and the memory of the first church dedicated by him, turned into his feast Ad Vincula.

BY THE AUTHOR D. P.

[100] About to be led out by Herod, intending to gratify the Jews, to death, Peter, The Greeks celebrate the Adoration of one Chain on 16 January, on that very night was sleeping bound with two chains; which, with an Angel striking his side, fell from his hands. The Adoration of one of these the Greeks celebrate on January XVI, with the full Office of that day, and indeed with a double Canon. The author of the first Canon seems to be Byzas or Byzantius, for he is the Author of the following Tract after similar Verses, which beginning three by three each day. That Canon is Acrostic, with single strophes fitted to single letters of this trimeter: Petrou ta desma proskynoumen ek pothou. Devoutly, Peter, we adore your chains. The other, S. Joseph the Hymnographer's name: enclosed in his Acrostic, thus claims: Petrou geraírō tēn alysin Iōsēph. Joseph in verses sings the Chain of Peter. To the Historical Lection, by custom to be recited after the sixth Ode, such a Distich is prefixed: Sēn proskynountes, Petre, seiran timian, Seiras makras lyson mou egklēmatōn. Adoring your holy Chain, Peter, Loose me from the long chain of my offenses.

[101] The Historical Lection is this. On this very day, we make the adoration of the precious chain of the holy Peter, which (as the Apostle Luke recounts in the Acts) Herod the Tetrarch placed upon him; but loosed by the appearance of an Angel, and they say themselves to have received it at Jerusalem. some of the faithful finding it, by succession have preserved it; which afterwards was brought back by the pious to the city of Constantinople, and was placed in the chapel of S. Peter, which is within the great church; where also his feast is celebrated. On the present day we adore the Chain of S. Peter; which (as the Apostle Luke narrates in the Acts) the Tetrarch Herod placed upon him; but by an Angelic apparition loosed, some of the faithful finding, preserved by tradition. But afterwards translated to Constantinople, it was placed in the oratory of S. Peter, which is within the greater Church, where also his feast is held.

[102] For this feast there was composed an Oration, which under the name of saint John Chrysostom is had edited, The Oration which is had on that feast, but to Baronius and others seems rather to be of S. Proclus or S. Germanus, equally as he, Patriarchs of Constantinople, but later in age. The Greek context we indeed have found in the Vatican and Vallicelline Libraries of Rome, also at Florence in the Laurentian; we did not however take care to have it described, because its prolixity would not suit our institute: nevertheless if anyone shall wish to publish it Greek-Latin with a new translation, I think, he will do a publicly grateful and useful thing; and to one having familiar use of Chrysostom, will give the faculty of judging from the style, whether it is his or another's. To his judgment I willingly will yield; by the argument of Baronius I am not moved: for he presumes, that Chain of this kind was brought, with other Relics, by Eudocia wife of Theodosius the Younger, and so after the death of Chrysostom himself. Nicephorus Callistus lib 14 ch. 2, treating of Eudocia's Jerusalem journey, and the Relics brought by her, does not mention the Apostolic Chain; nor anyone else of the Greeks that I know.

[103] The words of the Synaxaries we have already given: the Author of the aforesaid Oration also nowhere names Eudoxia: but he leans on words, why it is not of John Chrysostom is not yet apparent, which the compiler of the Synaxary could have had before his eyes: for thus he or: Those Chains left in the prison, the very ministers of Herod, on whom the light of divine knowledge shone, secretly took up; and among themselves, as a certain treasure, preserved them. But what from his father (as is said) handed down, and about those chains narrated each one had received for himself, then handed on to his posterity, and in a safe place kept those chains hidden: until the Jewish nation also being conquered in war, with Jerusalem taken was reduced to nothing; and the superstitious error of idolatry being removed, the scepters of the Romans were transferred to Emperors, who followed the faith of Christ. But these striving to follow the deeds of Christ and the Apostles with all honor, this Chain too of the Apostle Peter was made manifest (note in singular Chain is said, as above in the Verses) and from those to this royal city translated, since in it no mention is made of Eudocia who brought the Chain. was placed in the temple of the Apostle Peter: which as the worker of his miracles we both venerate and embrace. With the Greeks therefore silent about Eudocia, as is gratuitously said, that the Chains of Peter had not yet been known in the time of Chrysostom, since the Author supposes them always to have been known at Jerusalem, nor does he have anything from which it can be understood that the Chain was brought to Constantinople either before or after the time of Chrysostom. To him why that Oration is disallowed, and is said to be of another later, hitherto no cause occurs among the Greeks.

[104] Meanwhile it is pleasing to taste a few things from it, deduced by the Author for the praise of the Apostolic Chains. It brings the elogium of the sacred Chains If the shadow and linen drove away diseases, certainly the Chains, which touched the venerable body of the Apostle, the closer touch they had, the more abundant power of miracles they participated: chains, I say, those altogether venerable and precious, which bound that Apostolic and blessed body, which constrained those hands the workers of miracles, which divine grace from them were filled; from which miracles abundantly gush forth, which liberate sick men from diseases, which make those men holy, who with faith approach them; by which the spots of souls in some mystical way are cleansed, morbid influences are repressed; which finally extended into aerial height, and reaching to the heavens themselves, from that lordly and divine throne, as from some anchor, are extended. These Chains the prince of powers, which fell away from God himself, dreaded, and now also dreads, and with much fear fleeing them is repressed. These the aerial multitude of spirits fearing and trembling, and struck by javelins thence sent in, is further put to flight: for it cannot bear the grace of the Holy Spirit, overshadowing these very Chains, nor does it endure the sparks leaping out from their divine fire; but is set on fire by them and burned. These the Word of God the Father composed, partaker of the same eternity and beginning, that they might be the reward of his confession concerning God. Those fiery rendered that coal, before seen by Isaiah, and most efficacious for beholding God. The Holy Spirit Paraclete by his afflatus, the fire, leaping from that coal, rendered most apt for perfecting the work: wherefore although they are of iron nature, yet divine grace and power are full.

[105] a distinguished elogium it brings. By these the depraved spirits of demons bound are killed; by these the prince of this world drawn through, is led captive, by faithful men is mocked, that is by those who before bound by the snares of sins, were loosed and freed; and before surrounded by the nets of death, passed to life. These girdling the boundaries of the divine inheritance, and fortifying on all sides, make that they cannot be conquered by enemies. The same crowning the heads of Christians, from the snares of those enemies, which are not discerned by corporeal eyes, keep them intact. For though they were applied by malignant men as a kind of torment against the Apostle; yet for repelling those, who wish to inflict some evil, they have been made suitable, not so much tormenting, as keeping and fortifying that venerable body of the Apostle on all sides. With these Chains the Apostle was adorned, with these exulting and rejoicing himself was delighted, and as if carrying some royal ornament, he exulted in mind. These both he knew as an instrument of punishment, and esteemed as the conciliatresses of many crowns. With these now also the most holy, on every side incorrupt and pure Bride of Christ the Church, as with a splendid necklace and a certain golden ornament clothed, as with some crown woven of intact flowers, is adorned, and stands at the right side of her Spouse. These, I say, chains we also the most copious people of Christ embrace on this present day: these reverently we venerate and worship, and have for the amending of souls: applying every sense and member to them, by their sanctity we are filled, and through the understanding of mind we admit the grace of the Holy Spirit into the souls themselves. It would befit certainly, it would befit not only the chains, which bound those hands, greatly to venerate; but also all the signs, to which the members of the Apostle came, individually to embrace and revere, and on each of them to celebrate a festal day and panegyric.

[106] As to the Latins, in similar manner to that in which the Christians made from Jews preserved the Herodian Chains at Jerusalem, The Latins preserved the Neronian Chains, the Neronian also seem to have preserved the Romans, converted by the Apostles; at least from the year 116, the penultimate of S. Alexander the Pope; when to S. Balbina often kissing the iron collar by which she had been saved, S. Alexander said; Cease to kiss this collar; but rather seek the chains of B. Peter, and kiss them, and cease to kiss my collar. Then with effort applied, with zeal and great desire, S. Balbina came to them, and gave them to Theodora the most illustrious, sister of S. Hermes Prefect of the City. in the year 116 found by S. Balbina, What this woman did about them, is not expressed by the Acts of S. Alexander, illustrated by us on May III. The Venerable Bede, Sermon on the Chains among the Various, supposes those Chains were sought at Jerusalem; which I judge he conjectured gratuitously; since after only fifty years, in which the Apostles had lain bound in the Mamertine prison, it would have been easier for them to be found either there, or among the hands of Christians. Wherefore I think it must be applied to the Roman chains, and S. Alexander is said to have established a feast for them on 1 August, what the same Bede then adds: And so B. Alexander going out from prison (perhaps by similar miracle, by which before he had gone out to heal Balbina) established this festivity to be celebrated on the Kalends of August, in honor of S. Peter; and in his name built a church, which is called ad Vincula; or rather dedicated the one built by Theodora; in which his Chains are kissed by the devout people. But these things I would believe Bede took from the books of that very church.

[107] when S. Peter had dedicated the first church at Rome. But that very church is said to have been the first in Europe to be built

by S. Peter: on which matter a distinguished Exercitation Francisco Maria Florentini wrote after the Notes on day I August, teaching, that not unlike the truth this is, although it burned in the Neronian fire: and therefore perhaps in it, restored by the faithful, the sacred Chains, rather than elsewhere, Alexander ordered to be deposited. Indeed I would not dare to affirm, that that feast is so ancient: yet I cannot doubt, that the sacred Chains, at least from that time, were in great veneration with the faithful; and either from then, or from the time of S. Sylvester Pope, or his nearest successors, the Roman Pontiffs began, for singular blessing, to impart something from their filing, and to distribute it also among remote Churches: for of this, or the feast of the Chains Augustine seems to speak, Serm. 39 on the Saints, S. Augustine commends them: when he says, that worthily through all the Churches of Christ that iron of the penal chains is held more precious than gold: in whose praise then running, Happy, he says, Chains which clinging to the bones almost stripped, snatched living relics from the sweat of blood, with flesh already worn down; and by the touch of the members the instrument of his torment is sanctified; in which while the affliction grows to punishment, the cause of punishment proceeds to glory. Happy chains, which the guilty even to the cross of Christ, not so much condemned as consecrated, sent! Where it is plain that it is treated of the Neronian chains.

[108] The Empress Eudoxia restored the church. But although under that name an older Oratory was at Rome, whose Dedication had already long begun to be celebrated from the very times of Alexander or Sylvester, yet the title of Eudoxia to it from some new dedication first came in the V century, when the Empress of this name lived, wife of Valentinian III the Emperor and daughter of Theodosius the Younger and Eudocia; about whom is read in certain old Mss. containing a certain miracle of S. Caesarius the Martyr of Terracina, performed in the daughter of the aforesaid Valentinian, and to be brought forth November 1, who had so progressed in faith and love of Christ, that out of love of B. Peter the Apostle she built the Basilica, which is called ad Vincula, in the City, which to this day is called Eudoxia's.

[109] The author of that Ms. confounds Valentinian III husband of Eudoxia, with Valentinian I coeval of Pope Damasus, and then Hadrian first, so that he seems to have lived in the IX or X century; yet in what he says about the Title, he deserves to obtain credit; since Pope Adrian I, in his Life in Anastasius, is read, in the VIII century tending to the end, to have restored from new the temple of the Apostles, which is called Eudoxia's ad Vincula. The earlier restoration under Eudoxia Baronius refers to the year 439; because in that year the wife of Theodosius Eudocia was at Jerusalem, yet it is not proved that her mother Eudocia and received the Relics above mentioned; among which the Herodian Chain was, the tradition of the church itself has; according to which the Reformers of the Roman Breviary a hundred years ago, for the Lections of the second Nocturn, customarily taken from a certain Homily of S. Ambrose, substituted the history, which today is so read: With Theodosius the Younger reigning, when Eudocia his wife had come to Jerusalem for the cause of fulfilling a vow, there she was affected with many gifts: above the rest she received the distinguished gift of an iron chain, adorned with gold and gems, which they were affirming to be that, by which Peter the Apostle had been bound by Herod. Eudocia having piously venerated the Chain, then sent it to Rome to her daughter Eudoxia, who carried it to the Supreme Pontiff; and he in turn showed her another Chain, by which under Nero the Emperor the same Apostle had been bound. to have sent the Chain received at Jerusalem, When therefore the Pontiff had brought the Roman Chain together with that, which had been brought from Jerusalem; it happened that they were so connected between themselves, that not two, but one chain seemed to have been made by the same artisan.

[110] This miracle, and the very carrying of the Herodian Chain to Rome, therefore by others better said were inscribed in the renewed Breviary from Peter de Natalibus. For he, when lib. 7 ch. 3 he had said that this feast was instituted, in memory of the liberation of Peter, and in memory of the discovery of the Chain under Pope Alexander; and that, the Romans might be turned away from the in some way divine honors, to be shown to Octavian Caesar, who on such a day had received the appellation of Augustus, as they did until the time of Theodosius the Emperor, namely the Younger and Valentinian III, who began to reign in the year of the Lord 425 (for so must the defect be supplied and the error of the number 325 corrected) when, I say, Peter de Natalibus had said these things, thus proceeds: Eudoxia therefore daughter of that Theodosius, wife of Valentinian, set out for Jerusalem on a vow, where a certain Jew for a great gift offered her the Chain, by which under Herod Peter the Apostle had been bound. When therefore she had returned to Rome, and saw the Romans solemnizing in honor of Augustus Caesar on the Kalends of his month; Eudoxia herself to have gone to Jerusalem judging that not easily she could call them back from such error, by thinking she dealt, that the observance should so stand, but be made in honor of B. Peter, and the day itself the people should name, Ad Vincula. And having had a conference with Pelagius, with many exhortations they induced the people, and to have brought the Chain, miraculously united to the Roman, that the memory of the Prince of the pagans should pass to the memory of the Prince of the Apostles. Then the Empress brought forth the Chain, which she had brought from Jerusalem, and the Pope drew out that, by which Peter had been bound at Rome. This therefore associated with that, so miraculously one chain was made, as if always one and the same had existed. The very chains therefore the Pope and the Queen placed in the church of S. Peter Ad Vincula, and enriched it with many privileges, and decreed the aforesaid day to be celebrated everywhere, namely on the Kalends of August, in the year of the Lord 440.

[111] but in this report some errors must be corrected. This year is the last of S. Sixtus III, whom I taught to have lived to July XXV, although he is venerated on March XXVIII, in some following year buried in the crypt at S. Lawrence. In his place, I do not know by what reason, Pope Pelagius would have crept in, a hundred years younger than the aforesaid Eudoxia; unless Pancirolius alleges an inscription, from which that Pontiff is understood to have repaired that church. Meanwhile as in this Equilinus (Peter de Natalibus) lapsed in memory must be corrected, so the same rightly corrected the error of the ancient manuscripts about that feast, in which for Eudoxia wife of Valentinian, is placed her grandmother, Eudoxia, wife of Arcadius the Emperor, and indeed as if already widow of her husband: neither of which is consistent with history. Although however nowhere is it read that the younger Eudoxia made pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and it is known her mother Eudocia did this, I do not see however the necessity of correcting Equilinus in this that he says the Chain was brought by the daughter: since with the same zeal as the mother, the daughter also could have been led, to see and honor the holy places; and the Greeks are silent about the Chain or Chains, which Eudocia brought back.

[112] But would that of such journey, and of the miracle that followed in the Chains, an older and more certain witness could be found, The old Legendaries are silent about the miracle than either Peter de Natalibus, or the Mss. which he corrected; although not even in these is the miracle read; but this only, that a certain Jew among others, more precious than topaz and pure gold, gives iron Chains … which Eudoxia brought into Roman wealth, and said to the people; that under Neronian custody the Apostle bore the Chain, which also saint Alexander, fifth in order of the ministry of the Papacy, into the fruit of medicine and the whitening of the soul salutary, taught: which the Pontiff sought, made a triad of Chains; and in a founded and anointed temple, as a monument of the Apostolic victory, hid; and on the Kalends of August at the first light gave these sacraments. Thus from an iniquitous beginning a saving religion was forged: but to the Augustus-worshippers that it might be more dearly cultivated (because on the day of the laurel of Octavian it was the custom, that no one from the flowing crowd should go away, except he should have offered a simple taking of bread and wine) this form the Pope imaged for the Churches, that the Nazarene people on that day with the Body and Blood of Christ should be refreshed. So that old Writing, perhaps composed in the X or XII century, for the use of the same Church, of which we treat; described from the use of that very church, and from there found in Roman Legendaries by Baronius, Neapolitan by Beatillus, Belgian by Rosweyde; whence we have taken the words, from the Marchiennes, Audomarensis and Metz Codices collated among themselves. But I do not think this should be objected to them, that the Romans dedicated the whole August to Caesar Octavian, not only the Kalends. For on the first day of the month could have been proper that festive libation of bread and wine, which alone among Christians also was continued, just as today the festive sending of New Year's gifts on the Kalends of January is continued.

[113] Two apographs of the Hieronymian Martyrology, the Corbey and the Lucca, The Doubled Feast, inscribed to the ancient Fasti, after the Passion of the seven Brethren Maccabees, also commemorated in the most ancient Epternach and Blum, add; At Rome the Dedication of the first church, built and consecrated by B. Peter; and his absolution from the Chains. And to this doubled title of one feast S. Pope Leo, the next successor of Sixtus III, referred, thus beginning the Homily, then said to the people: Thanks, most beloved, let us give to the Lord our God, that how great is the solemnity of this day, even if I am silent, your gathering shows. For so with concurring zeal and devout mind have you gathered, that the magnificence of the festivity, although speech does not indicate, the congregation itself testifies: for the cause of joy is twofold, in which we both honor the Birthday of the Church, and rejoice at the passion of the Martyrs. is commended by S. Leo I. But scarcely can I doubt, but that this day is, not only of the first dedication made by Peter, on whose own cause and the chains restored by Alexander, was also called the Absolution of Peter from the chains (although it is established that this was done around Easter) but also of the third, if not also of the second. For not of S. Peter should be understood Leo's words at the end of the same Homily, but of Sixtus, you celebrate this solemn day, and not only the Martyrs and the mother of Martyrs; but also venerate his memory with due honor, from the cause of the dedication, made by Sixtus III, who on this day with the consecration of this place doubled the ancient festivity; magnificent indeed builder of walls, but more magnificent builder of souls, extending beyond the limits of his age the works of piety, that the utilities of the substructions and of his institutions also in himself the devout posterity might enjoy, both inhabiting what he founded, and doing what he taught.

[114] Indeed the magnificent, which is here indicated, structure of walls, neither to the primitive Religion under Peter, nor to the three first centuries spent amid persecutions agrees, although even then Christians had churches built for meeting, but frequently to be repaired, because frequently overturned, and much smaller than those which afterwards under Constantine were founded with plain magnificence

royal, such as this Sixtine was, adorned with the title of Eudoxia the foundress. after which came the Title and the Station, For whatever church there was before, did not have a Title: and there are those who derive the beginning of the Title from the aforesaid Leo: to which when S. Gregory the Great had added a Station, for the II Feria after the I Sunday of Lent, he also ordained a proper Mass, for the feast of the Chains, to be inserted in the Roman Sacramentary, such as in the older Gelasian and the old Franco-Gothic, none is found. From here truly the notice of the feast seems also spread outside the city, and the proper Mass on the Chains. through Martyrologies even Hieronymian, described in various authors. And so also the old German Calendar rather than Martyrology, recently published at Augsburg by Bechius, exhibits the Chains of saint Peter, and of the VII Brethren, and indeed a Rubricated feast, like SS. Lawrence, Bartholomew and Paulinus the Bishop (namely of Trier) with the Beheading of S. John; while the Assumption of S. Mary is noted in Black, as being still then of a lesser order.

§. X. On the Apostolic Chains, and the rings and filings of them enclosed in keys, called S. Peter's.

[115] That Peter was kept at Jerusalem bound with two Chains, the Apostolic history asseverates: Many Chains of both Apostles; wherefore one of them was carried to Constantinople, the other to Rome, the tradition of both cities can be believed without scruple: although the times and authors of the aforesaid translation cannot certainly be designated. Similarly also Paul Acts XXI the Tribune ordered to be bound with two Chains. But this was of more abundant caution; otherwise one chain sufficed for individuals bound, and indeed mostly bound to one of the shins by a numella, the other end of which was affixed to the wall of the prison or to a stocks; or, if liberty of walking was granted, it could be drawn around the neck or loins, that it might less impede the walker: and so the same Paul Acts XXVIII, bound brought from Jerusalem to Rome, with the Jews called to himself, For the hope of Israel, he says, I am surrounded by this Chain, and the same Chain in his Epistles to the Ephesians and Timothy he mentions.

[116] And this I judge to be the Chain, by which I think he was loosed at Rome, soon as he presented himself to Nero, and with no one acting against him was found innocent. one brought by Paul to Rome, The same, or another, or several Pancirolius says are kept in his Basilica outside the walls of the City: and from there seems to have wished to receive, I judge, S. Gregory, when he wrote to Augusta Constantia thus: About the Chains, which saint Paul the Apostle himself carried on his neck and in his hands, from which many miracles are demonstrated in the people, I will take care to transmit some part to your Excellence; if however I shall prevail to take this away by filing. Because when frequently, from the same Chains, many coming ask a blessing, that they may receive a little something from the filing; it seems to be kept in his church, the Priest stands by with a file: and to some asking it is so quickly shaken out from those Chains, that there is no delay; but to some asking the file is led through the Chains for a long time, and yet that something may come out from there, is not obtained. Where Gregory seems to intimate several chains, one namely, which was bound to the neck; another, and perhaps another. which to the hands: and it can be believed, that he was bound with one along the way, when from the East he was led to Rome, as we said; with another, when shut up he sat in the Mamertine prison; unless you prefer, that he wore both in this place, one on the neck, the other on the hands: just as the two chains of Peter (and perhaps more) once were placed in his church, with the title of Eudoxia, ad Vincula, one Jerusalemite, the other Mamertine; which are also believed to have been miraculously united.

[117] The miracle of the year 969, which Sigebertus of Gembloux narrates in his Chronicle, By the contact of Peter's Chain in the year 969 a possessed man is freed, and from him Equilinus and the Breviary, so mentions one Chain, that two formerly were, or only one alone then was preserved at Rome, you cannot draw out from it. The same is narrated thus. A certain count of the Emperor Otto, by this name the Third, and a familiar, at Rome before the eyes of all by the devil being seized, that he tore himself with his teeth; by command of the Emperor was led to Pope John (XXIII), that the Chain of S. Peter should be put around his neck. When by deceitful Clerics once and twice another Chain was applied, and no remedy came forth, and the Bishop of Metz receives a ring from there, where there was no virtue; at length the true Chain of S. Peter was brought, and put around the neck of the raging man; the devil, crying and foaming and much wailing, departed. Which Chain Deodericus of Metz seized, when he was saying that he would not let it go, unless with his hand cut off; at length the Emperor, with the dispute calmed, obtained from Pope John, that the Bishop should deserve a ring of this Chain cut off. The same things we have in the same words in an old Saxon Chronicle Ms. of the same time, so that we do not doubt but that these are the words of a nearly contemporary writer, transcribed by Sigebertus and that Chronographer.

[118] Not however was this Chain first diminished at this occasion by one ring or even more. Indeed in the Life of S. Bruno Archbishop of Cologne, written within the first century from his death, is read in Surius October IX ch. 26: With what fervor, with what joy he brought to Cologne the staff and the Chain of S. Peter, one from Metz, the other from Rome, all know. Aegidius Gelenius in his book on the Magnitude of Colonia Agrippina p. 237 treating of those, where on the Metropolitan church: The second hierotheca, he says, contains the staff of S. Peter, not entire, but its upper part, namely of that staff, by which S. Maternus (others say S. Martial) is reported on the journey to have raised the dead … From it hangs an eye, yet not those which Gregory sent to Charles Martel, in which are contained some hooks of the Chains of S. Peter. The same Gelenius adds: I believe this to be part of the Chain, which Pope Gregory transmitted to Charles Martel King of the Franks, holding the palace at Cologne, together with the keys of the Lord's sepulchre and the fasces of the Roman Consulate. It would have been Gregory II: who as at the end of his Chronicle says the continuator of Gregory of Tours Fredegarius ch. 110) twice from the Roman See of S. Peter the keys of the venerated sepulchre, namely the Apostolic, not accustomed to send except filing enclosed in keys: not the Lord's, with the chains of S. Peter, that is with the filings of them, destined to the mentioned Prince, with this pact made, that from the parts of the heretical Emperor the Pontiff should withdraw, and the Roman Consulate to the aforesaid Prince Charles he should sanction. Far therefore is it removed, that hence his Chains, that is, the rings of them Bruno would have received, whom, the Life says, themselves to have received at Rome.

[119] In the Catalogue of the Avignon Relics, sent to us from there by Richard Joseph de Cambis Lord of Fargues, five other iron rings at Avignon, likewise at Aachen. five iron rings, from the Chains of S. Peter the Apostle, are noted, kept in the same place in their Collegiate church. Neither the author nor the time of the gift is expressed, as also at Aachen it is not known by whom or when was brought part of the Chain of S. Peter the Apostle, noted in the Indiculus of Relics of the place. It would yet be verisimilar, that as most of them, as that one, are owed to Charles the Great, if it were established, that the series began then to be truncated with rings removed. The same I would say of other such Rings to be found elsewhere, of all of which if anyone had the measure and form delineated, he could, with a collation of them among themselves, and with the true Chain made, judge, which rings are of the same chain, which of different; which of the true, which of another, but perhaps by contact of the true, or from another cause, held in veneration: who therefore also (as often happens in similar things) are simply called the Chains of Peter, or Rings of the Chain of Peter, with usage so obtaining.

[120] Baronius in the Notes on the Martyrology; About the filing, he says, The filing customarily sent to Princes, of the Chains of Peter, as a vast gift, to Kings and Princes and other primary men well deserving of the Church of God, was wont to be sent by the Roman Pontiff, which very many Epistles of S. Gregory make faith. For it was the custom to enclose it in a golden key, received from the altar of Peter the Apostle, and to transmit to the absent: but these to whom it was sent, religiously receiving, hung it from the neck, that being protected by the Apostle's defense they might be safe from impending evils. So he lib. 5 Epist. 6 writing to Childebert King of the Franks; The keys, he says, of S. Peter, in which is enclosed from the chains of his Chains, we have directed to your Excellency, which suspended from your neck may protect you from all evils. And lib. 6 Epist. 25 to Theodore the Physician of Constantinople, We have transmitted to you the Blessing of S. Peter… a key from his most sacred body, in which is enclosed iron from his Chains, that what bound his neck to Martyrdom, may loose yours from all sins.

[121] So also Gregory's successor Vitalian, in Bede lib. 3 ch. 19, which of how much esteem to be made writes to the wife of S. Oswiu King of the Northumbrians, that he sends to her a golden Key having of the most sacred chains of the most blessed Apostles Peter and Paul. Nor did Pope Hormisdas send more, I believe, to Justinian, then Consul, afterwards Emperor, when about to found at Constantinople a temple of the Apostles with the title of Hormisdas, and asking their Relics, he sent the desired Sanctuaries, according to his Epistle, ascribed to the year 519 by Baronius. How much in price Keys of this kind were to be held, the same Gregory declared lib. 6 Epist. 23, to two primary men with Emperor Mauritius, Theoctistus and Andrew, thus writing: I have transmitted the Blessing of S. Peter the Apostle, a Key from his most sacred body, about which Key namely this miracle that I narrate happened. While a certain man, having entered a city of the Lombards in transpadane parts, had found it; because he despised that it was the key of S. Peter, but because he saw it was golden, wishing to make from it something else for himself, drew a knife to cut it. the Lombards learned by a distinguished miracle. Who soon the knife, with which he wished to send it through parts, seized through the spirit fastened in his throat, and at the same hour fell dead. And while there the King of the Lombards Authari and many other of his men were present, and he who had struck himself, dead, lay apart, the Key truly lay apart on the ground; there became a vehement fear for all, that no one presumed to lift up the same key from the ground. Then a certain Lombard Catholic, who was known to be devoted to prayers and almsgiving, by name Minulfus, was called, and he himself lifted this from the ground. But Authari, for the same miracle, made another golden key, and with it likewise to my predecessor of holy memory (Pelagius II) sent, indicating what miracle through it had happened. The same

I therefore have studied to transmit to your Excellence, that through it you, who fear and love him, may be able to have him both present at least and eternal.

[122] But as those lesser keys, taken from the sepulchre of S. Peter and to be worn from the neck, had enclosed something of the filings of the Chains, Greater also some were made, so seem also other greater ones, in the ball which succeeds the head after the handle, to have contained something of this kind, by which they might be more venerably received. So Pope Gregory III in the year 740 asking aid from the aforesaid Charles Martel; I adjure, he says, you by those most sacred keys of the Confession of B. Peter, which we have directed to you. So Pope Leo III to Charles the Great in the year 796 gave gifts, namely golden keys from the Confession of S. Peter customarily received, says Baronius num. 16. But this also proves the contemporary of Gregory the Great the Bishop of Tours in these words, lib. 1 mirac. ch. 28: Many also make even Golden Keys for opening the railings of the blessed sepulchre, which carrying, for a benefit they receive the first ones, with which they may cure the infirmity of the afflicted: for entire faith provides all things.

THE FORM OF THE KEYS OF THE CONFESSION OF S. PETER

from which S. Servatius brought a silver one from Rome But twice as large

[123] We believe such a one is that, which is kept in the sacrarium of the Servatian basilica at Maastricht on the Meuse, and one of these seems brought by S. Servatius to Maastricht, commonly believed to have been given by S. Peter himself, to S. Servatius returning to Belgium; about which we treated on May XIII ch. 3 of his Acts num. 24 and following, where we judged, it to be the gift of S. Damasus the Pope. But its virtue, in driving away mice from the fields, often proven; and by what miracle the same secretly taken away and broken, the Maastricht people received entire, famous by miracles. read in the same place ch. 8 num. 67. Now indeed contemplate its form faithfully expressed, that from it you may be able to conceive in mind a distinct idea of others similar: for it is credible, that nearly all were similar, both lesser and greater. In this whether I think truly, having seen this the Corsicans could estimate, with whom the praised Father John Baptist Verax once preached, wrote in the year 1643 to have found such a Key in a certain church of S. Peter, a most present instrument for the cure of diseased sheep; and by this more wonderful, that in the place of one once lost another substituted receives the same power. When he was narrating this to Pope Urban VIII on a certain day, he exclaiming for joy, asked solicitously; Have you also written this to P. Bollandus? But if that Key is not individually the same, as that which was first brought from the City, it cannot effectively serve our intent. But the use, says Verax, of that Key is such. It is hung at the little door of the sheepfold, in which the sick flock is contained; and necessarily touching each of those passing through, imparts sudden health to all: but about this matter I am procuring authentic testimony, he says; which yet either he did not obtain, or did not come to us, himself having died at Milan about the year 1660.

§ XI. On the Key of S. Peter; which is kept at old Lodi, an antidote against the bites of rabid dogs.

BY THE AUTHOR C. J.

[123] Bolland in the beginnings of his work, on day 19 January about to treat of S. Bassianus, Bishop of Lodi, at the same time when S. Ambrose was at Milan, Laus Pompeia, now old, thus begins: Laus Pompeia was a town of Insubria, the work of the Boii; but by Cn. Pompey Strabo, father of the Great, either restored or augmented; whence also the name in the XII Christian century by the Milanese was overturned, with the inhabitants also dispersed, lest they again coalesce. But Emperor Frederick Barbarossa rebuilt it in a safer place at the river Adda, with the prior name, of Laus, or Lauda, commonly Lodi. From there three miles a village of Lodeve (as you would say old Laus) in the ruins of the prior town is seen: which here Bolland calls Lodeve, and rightly interprets old Laus, is now also more explicitly called by the Italians, Lodi vecchio.

[124] There were in that place already in ancient times Bishops, of whom the third in order is believed to have been S. Julian; but the third whose names are extant is S. Bassianus, the temple consecrated by SS. Bassianus and Ambrose the Bishops, of whom presently. To him, as is read in his life, when at a certain time he was revolving in mind, that he might offer to the Lord some gift acceptable beyond the usual; it pleased him in the eastern suburb, to the honor and reverence of the Apostles, to found an oratory: and the expenses given for completing the fabric, the work which he had begun, he did not long delay to complete. But for its dedication, the most blessed Ambrose Bishop of Milan, who also of this dedication mentions in his Epistle 60; and Felix, Bishop of Como, he persuaded to come: and it is narrated moreover, that during the dedication the holy Bishops with their prayers cast out a demon, much wailing, from the body of a certain girl, present there.

[125] That oratory (as I read in a certain Ms. of old Lodi submitted to me, about which presently) or church of S. Peter, which was anciently Canonical, in the year of the Lord's incarnation 832, in the X Indiction, in the time of Pope Gregory [IV], [in the year 832 given by Emperor Louis to the Monks, at the request of the Bishop.] and of Raglettus Bishop of Lodi, Lord Louis the Emperor, son of Lord Charles the Great Emperor; through Imperial authority, enriched, established and ordained into a monastery: and these things he did at the requests of the aforesaid Bishop and Ambrose and Guidester and other Clerics of the same church; according to what is contained in one Privilege, made by command of the aforesaid Lord Louis, which thus begins: In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, eternal God. Louis by the grace of the Omnipotent etc. The same monastery with its estates and revenues Pope Gregory XIII applied to the College of the Hungarian and German nation at Rome instituted by him, for the vast good of the Catholic Religion.

[126] Of that place for the aforesaid College now Procurator from our Society is P. Francis Marianus, That the Key of S. Peter had been brought there by S. Sylvester, zealous for advancing the glory of the Saints, if any other; from the archive of the monastery he recently communicated to me two certain Mss. in the XII century compiled by Anselm Vairano, then a Monk there; not because he himself judged much faith should be owed to those writings; but rather that he might inquire our sense about the same. Among other things those writings make mention of the Key of S. Peter, on whose cause we have so deeply deduced these things about the origin of the place, where it is preserved. The author in those things, which from Diplomas of Princes (as above from the Privilege of Emperor Louis) and other writings of approved character he produces, deserves all faith: is had in the writing but what he commemorates of the origin and first times of his monastery, or rather church, are such, that they neither can be believed, nor deserve to be refuted, although he cites older books; and affirms that what is contained in them, and many other things, were confirmed through the manifestation of a demon, remaining in a certain most noble Lady Beldies, daughter of Lord Robacastellus of the Arminulfi of the city of Milan; and that same Manifestation was approved by the Bishop of Lodi Albert de Rivalta, who died in the year 1179, and with him were present more than three hundred persons, when the possessed woman was freed.

[127] For what are those things, which in one of the aforesaid Mss. are immediately subjoined to the Exordium? Therefore it must be known, that it is the report, and that it has always been, incredible on many titles. that the church of S. Peter (he speaks of the oratory, which we said was dedicated by S. Bassianus) is one of the seven first churches, which were built by the Apostles. Whence it is said, that S. John and S. James built this church with an altar in honor of holy Mary the Virgin and of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul and other Saints. In which altar they placed of the Veil of the glorious Virgin Mary; and the right arm with the hand of S. Peter the Apostle; and of the members of the aforesaid Apostles are said to have placed. And I Anselm with many other Brethren saw and read a certain mentioned writing, in a book which is called Bonzino, in which Canons are contained, declaring the aforesaid edification and the rest: as also in the Martyrology of the dead of the Rule; in which are written the Relics of this church. And all these things and many others a certain demon affirmed, by name Peneclaustrum… who for the sake of making this manifestation, by the virtue of S. Peter and S. Mary the Virgin is said to have entered that Lady. Who would not give credit to such books, with the manifestation of the demon set aside; and to such a Writer, testifying of things seen by himself, unless those we have cited were plainly adynata? Of what sort are also those, which in the other Ms. about the holy Apostles John and James, pretended founders of the church, are read; as if they had said: As we are companions in temporal life, so we wish of our members with the arm of S. Peter to be enclosed in this altar: and so saying they cut off for themselves the two little fingers; which they also placed on the altar with the aforesaid Relics.

[128] Furthermore as to our matter and the key of S. Peter; the demon said again, The Key cannot, in the way it is here narrated, that our Lord Jesus Christ sent his Angel to Rome to B. Sylvester Pope: and the Angel said; It is the will of God, that you have made one key and consecrated in the likeness of the key of Paradise; and that you bring it into Italy to the city, which is called Pompeiana, into the place where S. John the Apostle and Evangelist, and S. James the Apostle constituted a church to the honor of S. Mary the Virgin and S. Peter the Apostle, and you shall consecrate the same church with that key; and when the church shall have been consecrated, you shall place the key upon the altar: and from that day, if any shall be possessed, signed with that key, he shall be freed, and if any shall be suffering the evil of rabies, touched by that key shall be freed. And S. Sylvester did as the Angel had said to him, and with S. Helena came to the Pompeian city etc. Furthermore by the Key of Paradise the Author understands a material key, which Christ the Lord is judged to have given Peter, when he conferred on him the power of loosing and binding; as he explains elsewhere, writing, that with a great voice the demon was crying through the woman, that he wished to see the key of paradise. But there was a certain key above the altar of the Apostles, which S. Pope Sylvester at Rome ordered to be made and caused to be consecrated in the likeness of that key, which our Lord gave to Peter the Apostle: which as B. Peter the Apostle binds and looses whom he will; so, with the same demon manifesting, if any shall be signed with this key with the sign of the Cross, and if any one suffering rabies, shall be touched with this key, he shall be freed. Then one of the Monks took the key from the altar and brought it into the sight of the possessed woman, who prone adored it

and kissed it: and being asked, for what cause the Lord had sent that key, she answered, or rather the demon through her mouth: Because the Lord wished, that men should know the virtues of S. Peter, which are in this place, that they might visit him.

[129] And hence we would have the origin of the key, and a certain author, who brought it into that place, if we believed the demon. to have been brought into the Lodi temple, But what we have said about the Key consecrated by S. Sylvester, and about its virtue, which was and is even to this day, the Author says; they were read also before in the book Bonzino, in which are written the Relics of this church; and also in the Martyrology of the Rule they seem to be approved. However it is; the matter narrated could not have been done with those adjuncts, with which it is clothed: nor can be believed in the cited books a simple consecration of the key, which S. Sylvester would have made; and its sending by himself to the Lodi church; much less the very access of the Pontiff, and indeed in the company of S. Helena, to that place. For from no other source is any indication had, that in the time of Sylvester, or much after, amulets of this kind began, sacred by the contact of the sepulchre of S. Peter, or bearing enclosed the filings of his chains, to be sent to Princely men or to sacred buildings; as is read frequently to have been done by S. Gregory the Great and thereafter. Meanwhile from whatever tradition, founded on those writings, the people of Lodi remains in nearly the same opinion, somewhat more chastened however and less alien from the verisimilar; as we learn from the letters of our P. John Baptist Verax, who saw that key, and heard various things about it personally, given to Bolland at Milan in 1653; which thus have: That key brought from Jerusalem by S. Helena, after the Cross was found returning to Rome, to see her son Constantine; and at Lodi-vecchio on the way deposited for the dedication of the Apostolic temple there, the inhabitants assert, who daily experience from it benefits in those, and it is uncertain when it was brought before the 12th century who whether rabid dogs or serpents bit, soon as above the affected part the sign of the Cross with that key has been formed.

[130] I, about the time and manner, in which the church of S. Peter at Lodi-vecchio received that its key, would rather not conjecture more, than to bring forth equally uncertain things. This can be founded with certainty on the aforesaid Mss.; before the XII century the Key, called of S. Peter, and worker of marvels against venomous bites, in his temple at Lodi, had honor and sacred use: but that the same was the one with that, which in the same place at this time is in similar honor and use, prove, both more certain tradition, and common sense, and the same salutary effects in curing venomous bites. Its image drawn on parchment was sent to me by the same P. Marianus as above, but three times larger, than what I here subject to the eyes of the Readers. You see almost nothing of a key there in the iron; and it is very dissimilar from the previous Servatian one: yet it is commonly called a Key, equally as that; nor does it have less virtue against rabid dogs, than that against mice. About its present state, and uncertain origin and some other things, which we have said, testifies in compendium the most Rev. D. Francis Maria de Poverello, perpetual Vicar Parson of the land of Lodi-vecchio, of the Lodi diocese and Vicar Forane, in a certain writing of his of the year 1699, authenticated by James Andrew Finetti Apostolic Notary, with his usual sign also added. But the writing is such.

[131] In the state of Milan is a Town, commonly of Lodi-vecchio, in Italian Lodi vecchio, where formerly Laus Pompeia, at last destroyed in the year 1158; with rubble, Authentic Testimony about its presence and virtue there. which is dug up here and there through the fields, testifying to the city. Its parochial temple, dedicated to B. Peter the Apostle, is the title of an Abbey, united to the German and Hungarian College of the City, at whose expense, fallen from age, it was restored from the foundations. In this temple both the Body of S. Tytianus Bishop of Lodi Confessor is kept under the main altar; both ashes of some SS. Innocents killed by Herod in a silver shrine; both especially the Key of S. Peter the Apostle is preserved. Namely an iron which could have been of use for closing handcuffs, or fetters, as is the figure, which is added. When and from where it was brought into this temple, neither by any monument, except pictures not sufficiently old, nor by tradition sufficiently firm can we be taught. Yet that is certain, and singular, that against bites, especially of rabid dogs it is held as a most present remedy, with those affected by that bite coming together even from far, that they may be touched by that key devoutly by the priest: nor do we know in the twelve years back, while we write these things, and while we act as Parson here, of the many infected by that bite, and piously sealed with this key, anyone except only one, to have died of that plague. Indeed a girl nearly XIV years old, struck by the bite of a viper, and foaming with the poison, which had drained some space of an hour; signed duly and piously with this key, we sent her uninjured. To public veneration it is exposed twice in the year, on the feast day of S. Peter ad Vincula, and on the day of S. Sylvester the Pope, from which Pope namely this gift to this Church proceeded, is some, but not firm tradition. On these days indeed great is the concourse from the neighboring villages, and with that key the Priest before the altar, with the sign of the Cross made, piously touches each. In faith of which, we have subscribed this page with our hand. At Lodi-vecchio, on the twentieth day of the month of February in the year of the Lord 1699.

[132] It pleases still, although they pertain in no way to S. Peter, here to subjoin, Whether S. Tytianus, what in the same Writings are read about S. Tytianus the Bishop, especially on account of his epitaph there exhibited: because when we treated of that Saint on day IV May, on which he is venerated, having died the 1 of the same; we had no notice of that epitaph: and what we now here ascribe, may give occasion to others of investigating more certain things. So therefore is there written read: At the time when S. Helena and S. Sylvester came to that place, Lodi-vecchio and to the church of S. Peter, they carried the aforesaid Relics, and sent various messengers through various provinces, intending to bring Archbishops and Bishops here, called by Helena to Lodi, and to receive of the wood of the holy Cross: of whom one of Titia Bishop holy and religious, by name Tytianus, came, and there at the altar of the holy Cross celebrated Mass: which celebrated his spirit ascended to heaven, and his body there at the altar of the holy Cross was honorably entombed, as is read in his epitaph, which thus says: Tytianus the seer, skilled in the doctrine of Christ, retired soldier, seeking of the Cross of Christ, placed his members on the ground, there died in the year 475: proceeded to the stars of heaven, gathered lofty wealth, and of the world the Priest for two years ruled the peoples; after years in number of life LV he rested in peace, on the day Kal. May with Lord Basiliscus ** Aug. Bes. and Armatus Vic. Coss.

[133] Almost nothing of these can be proved for us except the epitaph; nor even this on every side. Where two asterisks ** are here printed, in the Ms. are placed two PP. having below a semicircle a transverse little line: which form our types do not express. If with Basiliscus II and Armatus Consuls, as the epitaph seems to note, Tytianus rested, he rested in the year of the common era 476, whether he was Bishop of Lodi. not 477, as Ughelli places in the Bishops of Lodi. Meanwhile I do not see how with those years can be reconciled, what is said in the foregoing, that Tytianus was called with other Bishops by Helena mother of Constantine; and is suggested in the epitaph, that he came to inquire about the Cross of Christ. For Helena had already a century and a half before perished. Moreover, if faith is given to the foregoing, that Tytianus does not seem to have been Bishop at Lodi, but called from elsewhere to have come there, and there to have died after no long stay. Meanwhile of his Lodi Episcopate Ughelli has no doubt; and ascribes to him just as many years, both of the Episcopal See, and of age, as are recounted in the epitaph. The Brescians also venerate their saint Bishop Tytianus on day III March; who at least will deny that he was called to Lodi, and there ended his last day, as maintaining their own to at least the twentieth, of the VI century, year, to have survived, and to have been buried with themselves: nor will they wish from this, that both peoples confess their Tytianus came from Germany to Italy, to concede anything to the others from theirs. They themselves, who are nearer, if each shall have more illustrated his own Tytianus, both more manifest diversity will appear, and the Saints will be more honored.

§ XII. On the wooden Chair of S. Peter in the Vatican.

BY THE AUTHOR D. P.

[134] If the Chair of James was kept at Jerusalem, Cardinal Baronius, in the Notes on the feast of the Roman Chair, of whose institution it will be treated § XIII; having prefaced many things about the Birthdays or Anniversaries of Ordinations of Episcopal Chairs; about the material itself or wooden Seat of S. Peter, on which he sat at Rome, says, that it is still kept in the Vatican Basilica. Nor let anyone wonder at this, he says: for if the wooden seat itself, the chair of S. James the Apostle of Jerusalem Bishop, after so many and so great shipwrecks of the Jewish people, after that fearful destruction of Jerusalem, why not also of Peter at Rome? has nevertheless been kept entire to the times of Constantine the Great, as Eusebius writes lib. 7 ch. 14, which also the successor Bishops with becoming honor cultivated have venerated: what is so wonderful that the Chair of the Head of the Apostles was preserved with at least equal diligence? For it indeed, who has sat upon it, by the virtue of miracles preaches, having obtained in dry wood the green grace of cures; since through it God does not cease to bestow benefits on those imploring divine aid. We know also there is preserved at Alexandria the Chair of Mark, the disciple of Peter, in which the successors, on account of the heavenly splendor in it divinely shown, Its form dared not to sit thereafter.

[135] Francis Maria Phoebus from the year 1636, Master of Ceremonies in the Pontifical Chapel, after the XXX year from there, or of Christ 1656 from a certain greater work of his and not yet published, drew off a Dissertation about the identity of the Chair in which S. Peter at Rome first sat: to which he prefixed its effigy, not a little diverse from that which Francis Maria Turrigius prefixed to his Sacred Trophies in the year 1644. Although however for that which is later in time, as more accurate, the presumption rightly stands, in the prior however I do not know what greater appearance of antiquity appears. It pleased therefore, before to either to hand over to the sculptor, here

to be appended; to write to Rome, and a new and ampler one, where even the old engravings would be more distinctly expressed, delineation to expect, if it could be obtained from the more closely viewed and inspected prototype, by the authority and favor, of the most illustrious Emmanuel Schelstrate, Canon of the Vatican Basilica, and Custodian of the Library. But he responded, that long since it is shown to no one to be viewed, nor easily to be hoped for the license of again delineating it. We give therefore here that, which the Author of the Dissertation about the identity of the Chair mentioned above prefixed to his work.

[136] You have here the sculpted image of the Chair, according to the type of Phoebus: receive now also from himself the verbal description of the same Chair, drawn out from three excellent and eye-witness authors. First Maffeo Vegio in his Ms. on the memorable things and excellence of the Vatican Basilica; It is wooden, he says, and the anaglyph adornment of ivory. adorned with emblems and certain ivory seals. James Grimaldus in the Table of Relics kept in the same place, described under Urban VIII; it is adorned with ivory phrygia, two fingers wide, most elegantly sculpted with flowers and men and heads of animals. The whole front, as much as the square contains, is decorated with beautiful ivory works artificially engraved and equally with gold segmented. And these indeed in Latin: but the praised Turrigius from his Italian treatise on the same Basilica ch. 21 is so rendered in Latin: The anterior and lower part is four palms wide, three and a half high, from the sides it has two palms and a half of width. The posterior with the dorsal is six palms high, supported by small columns sustaining small arches, which little columns are one palm high, two inches; but the arches extend over the space of two palms and a half, anteriorly appear sculpted in ivory and bronze eighteen little histories, within just as many tesserae of most exquisite anaglyph work, with many small figures. The dorsal four inches thick, because however with age it is cracking, surrounded with iron bonds, also is propped by certain woods. So he, having forgotten to count the arches which the tablets, from behind four, on the sides three represent; also deceived in the estimation of the metal running over the anaglyph, which under Pope Alexander VII more curiously explored was found to be gold.

[137] From this description of the Roman Chair Phoebus passes to inquiring of what sort and whence it is. There are those who think it was brought from Antioch, And first he produces a certain little book about the marvels of Rome printed in the same place in the year 1511 and saying, that to the left part of the choir is a tabernacle, in which today (that is in 1511) is kept that Seat or Chair, which was made for B. Peter, when he still held the seat at Antioch. Hence Angelus Rocca, of the Augustinian Order Bishop of Tagaste and Prefect of the Pontifical Chapel, in the Append. of his book on the Vatican Library, says it was translated from Antioch: which following Turrigius in the App. to his book On the Vatican Crypts, tries to prove by the words of S. Clement of Rome, lib. 10 Recognit. reporting, that with Simon Magus driven out of Antioch and as many sick as had offered themselves healed, with the Antiochenes also within seven days about ten thousand baptized, Theophilus, who was higher than all the powerful in the city, consecrated his vast house with the name of a church: in which to Peter the Apostle was constituted by the whole people a Chair. But that this very one was carried elsewhere, the books written before (if however they are truly of Clement) than Peter would depart from Antioch having stayed there for seven years, cannot be proved.

[138] another that it is a curule Chair, This opinion therefore rejected, Phoebus judges, that which is seen at Rome to be of the kind of those, which Roman antiquity granted to the greater Magistrates, and called curule ivory Seats; although the same not only placed in a chariot carried the seated one, but, with bars passed through the lateral rings, were also gestatory, in which manner Procopius lib. 2 on the Vandal war says; that the triumphing Belisarius was carried in by a curule seat on the shoulders of captives. That many such were with Pudens the Senator, first, as is believed, host of Peter at Rome, and generally believed father of saints Praxedis and Pudentiana, granted at Rome to Peter by S. Pudens, truly however (as I taught on May XIX) grandfather or paternal uncle, is rendered verisimilar by the largeness of the family, and so great brightness, that it can be presumed he often had borne curule Magistracies: and such a one could the same Pudens have lent to Peter for Pontifical uses and he then have used it. Nor does it matter that of the year 517 the Consular seats, sculpted on Diptychs illustrated by Wiltheim, are much taller, and appear more adorned with raised signs: because in the course of five centuries the form could have varied much and splendor be increased; others also could have been for Consuls, which no Pudens is found; others for Aediles in use, that from the form of the seat the Magistracy might be recognized.

[139] But also the Antiochenes, transferred entirely to Roman manners, could have used similar seats: and the anaglyphs of that Chair about which we treat, but why could one such not have been used also at Antioch, expressing the labors of Hercules, savor of Greek artistry rather than Latin. Nor does it seem alien from all verisimilitude, but rather fitting, that Peter, now certain to constitute the Pontificate at Rome, also his very own material Chair, which he had used at Antioch, ordered to be brought there, and so took away from the Antiochenes the occasion at some time of contending with the Romans about primacy, and ordered it transferred to Rome? that for this reason more founded may seem the use of formerly a single feast in the month of February, on which also the Chair of S. Peter was seen placed before the railings in the greater Choir in the year 1411 through the whole Mass, afterwards placed in a place near the Crucifix, as is the custom, and below will be said. Michael Lonigus, who under Urban VIII composed a book about the site of the Confession of S. Peter, as the Ms. exists in the Barberini Library, the same predecessor of Phoebus in the Office of Master of Ceremonies, asserts, that the Roman Chair of Peter was formerly buried near his body and from there dug out. Phoebus confesses indeed that he does not know, from what Author Lonigus took this: he judges however this is rendered verisimilar by the example of S. Stephen the Pope, whose body they buried with the Seat itself, sprinkled with his blood. But there is no parity of argument, and the solicitude of other Apostolic Churches the Jerusalemite, Aquileian and Alexandrian, It is not credible that it was buried with the body and afterwards dug out, about preserving the first Chairs, prevents believing the Roman did less, since about all equally Tertullian says lib. on Praescription ch. 36. Run through the Apostolic Churches, with whom the very Chairs of the Apostles still preside in their places … representing the face of each one.

[140] That it was the custom nearly in those places, where Apostolic Chairs were preserved, since it must have served for enthroning the successors, to place the recent Elected Bishops in them, and so to speak to be enthroned, and then often to sit upon them, both by many examples can be proved, and most clearly from the Acts of S. Peter of Alexandria, whom even dead, when he was to be brought out for burial, they placed in the Seat of S. Mark; worthily indeed, since alive he sometimes had refused to sit on it, and seated on its footstool to the Clergy and people acclaiming, in your seat of Chair, Bishop, was reported to have responded; Often when I wish to approach that Throne, I see a certain divine virtue sitting in it, radiating exceedingly with the splendor of light; and soon between joy and dread I recognize myself altogether unworthy of so great a session. Therefore about the Roman Chair of Peter also similarly may be understood what was written by Anastasius about Pope Benedict III, in the year 855 created, that on Sunday at daybreak into the Basilica of B. Peter the Apostle, by Bishops, Clergy, Nobles he was led, and in the sight of all on the Apostolic See (as custom and ancient tradition dictates) was consecrated and ordained Pontiff. So Otto of Freising ch. 67, in the year 1159 writes, and for some other offices. Octavian Cardinal of S. Cecilia, elected and mantled, and placed in the Chair of B. Peter; and again ch. 72; the Bishops of the part of Victor (by which name that Antipope was called) maintained that he eleven days before Alexander (III) was mantled, had been mantled, and had sat in the Seat of B. Peter without protest. Nor only then, but also in the Chair of S. Peter, the Lord Pope ought to sit in the Chair at Mass, says Benedict Canon of the same Basilica, in the little Ms. book to Guido, created Cardinal Presbyter of S. Mark in the year 1130. When therefore Peter de Natalibus, where about the aforesaid feast he says, that no Pope at any time presumed to sit in that Seat, is to be understood of his own age, in which it had now grown obsolete in use, after Clement V, crowned at Lyon in Gaul, began to govern the Church from there; and by his example preceded the successors to stay in the same Gaul; about the material Chair of S. Peter, kept at Rome little solicitous. But since nevertheless on stated days the Canons continued to bring it forth before the Cancels, the piety of the faithful began even then more to venerate it as a Relic; and therefore the Roman Pontiffs returning did not dare to sit upon it any longer, but left it to veneration alone.

[141] These things, which we have briefly tasted, having been learnedly deduced, Phoebus begins on p. 41 Chronologically to propose those Authors, from whom he judges it can be proved that the very material Chair of S. Peter was always preserved. Of that Seat Tertullian mentions, And first, for the year 202, he alleges Tertullian, already above cited; then for the year 465 he cites Optatus of Milevis, from Africa a witness: who against Parmenian the Donatist writing; If, he says, it should be said to your Macrobius (Bishop of Rome), where there he sits; can he say, In the Chair of Peter, which I do not know if he has known even with eyes; but it cannot be known with eyes except a material thing. For the year 503 is alleged Ennodius, whose words below we shall consider, Optatus of Milevis, Ennodius, Leo I, indicating the use of sending the recently baptized to the Chair of Peter; and to this is judged to look S. Pope Leo I, when he says, that Peter, who in his own seat sits and lives and presides, gives to those seeking the truth of faith. I omit Pope Hadrian I, in the year 772 created, of whom James Grimaldus asserts, that in the right arm of the temple in honor of S. Hadrian the Martyr, where after death he was buried … in a place most decently for this fabricated, the aforesaid Chair of B. Peter exposed to the devotion of the people. Accurately Anastasius the Librarian recounts, whatever this Pontiff did in the Church of S. Peter, and in the Church and Deaconry of S. Hadrian, and it was in the 15th cent. in the oratory of S. Hadrian, situated very far from the Vatican in the 1 Region of the city, called Campitelli from the Capitol; but nowhere does he make any word about the Little Chapel of S. Hadrian, or the Chair there placed by him. And so I prefer to be ignorant, at what time it was placed in that place; it is enough for me from Maffeo Vegio to know, that in his time, that is about the middle of the XV century, in the very altar of S. Hadrian

(but the ground-plan will show this under num. 15) a place was made excellently adorned, where was placed the Chair, upon which B. Peter, while he was performing solemn things, had been accustomed to sit.

[142] Previously that had its place near the Crucifix, as is noted from the Diaries of Antony Peter Beneficiary of the Vatican Basilica, which previously had stood near the Crucifix, describing, how in the year of the Lord 1411 in the month of February, on Sunday, the XXII of the same month, which was the Sunday of Quinquagesima, and also the feast of the Chair of S. Peter, the Cardinal … Legate in the City for then absent John XXIII, celebrated Mass at the main altar of S. Peter, that is above his very Confession, fully Pontifically. Likewise the Chair of S. Peter was placed before the railings in the greater choir through the whole Mass, which the Lord Cardinal celebrated. Likewise after the Mass it was placed in its place near the Crucifix, as is custom, namely, in the first nave on the left side of one entering the temple through the middle doors of the frontispiece; and on the feast of the Chair it was wont to be exposed before the Choir, if by the name of Crucifix I rightly understand the altar of the Crucifix, which in the ground-plan can be seen by number 65, in the aforesaid nave, marked with letter D. Furthermore the antiquity of that custom of placing the Chair near the Crucifix Pope Nicholas II notes, in 1279 decreeing, That the denarii, which were given to the Canons, carrying to the altar and carrying back the Chair of S. Peter, should not be reckoned among the residual things applied to new Canonical portions to be erected, but should be divided, and of them should be done as had hitherto been customary.

[143] The Author of the Marvels of Rome, already cited, writes in 1511: To the left part of the choir is a tabernacle (I judge it to be the one, for public veneration. which Vegius above writes was excellently adorned at the altar of S. Hadrian) in which today is kept that Seat … beautifully decorated, and on the feast, which is called the Chair of Peter, it is placed outside at the Choir, with solemnity; where all men according to their devotion can touch it. But how often and how this sacred Seat changed place, most distinctly Turrigius explains in his book On the Vatican Crypts, when on p. 564 he says; that anciently the altar of it stood, where now nearly is the Holy Door; Then translated to the sacristy, but from there it was translated to the altar of Pope Hadrian I, in nearly the place where now is the altar of the holy Face or Veronica: but afterwards it was translated to the oratory of S. Mary, called of Fevers, where now is the sacristy, and the altar of S. Anne: and finally to the chapel of SS. Servatius and Lambert, near the altar of Relics. Thus he with the cited Mss. of Tiberius Alfaran and James Grimaldus: when before he had broadly expounded, with what rites from the sacristy to the railings of the Apostolic Confession the same Chair was wont to be carried by the Canons on each feast of the same Chair.

[144] The Holy Door, as now and formerly, is the outermost in the frontispiece of the temple toward the North and the Pontifical palace; previously however adorned by Sixtus IV, in which place if formerly the Crucifix stood, as now stands near, fabricated of wood by Peter Caballino painter and sculptor of the highest piety; the Chair stood, before it was moved to the altar of S. Hadrian, at the entrance of the church, that to those entering and about to venerate S. Peter, it might first as it were be offered on the right. From there in the XV century, in the time of Vegius, that was translated to the left side of the Choir or the altar of S. Hadrian, under Pope Nicholas V, that it might be nearer to the sacred Confession; and there Pope Sixtus IV found it, when, as in his Ms. Diary Raphael Volterra reports in Phoebus p. 82 in the year 1480, on the day XXII February he visited the Basilica of S. Peter, and offered to the Sacrarium of the basilica a golden cloth for covering the Chair of the Apostle Peter, which in the same temple with the greatest veneration is preserved; and in his presence ordered it to be covered with that gift, and so adorned ordered it to be carried into its place by the greater Priests of the temple, with lit candles preceding, also singing some things pertaining to the ceremony.

[145] But when Julius II, about the year 1505, about to lay the foundations of the new basilica, had to destroy the chapel of S. Hadrian; then in the year 1634 given its own Little Chapel, the Chair was carried to the oratory of S. Mary, of which above, now turned into the sacristy, as I have said, and first placed on the altar of SS. Servatius and Lambert; then transposed to the next of S. Anne; where it stood until the year 1634, and beyond. Then indeed, as Turrigius writes on the Vatican Crypts p. 564, opposite the altar of the Crucifix, in the chapel where is the baptismal font, by command of our holy Lord Pope Urban VIII began to be built an altar for the Chair of S. Peter, more decently and in a place visible to all to be placed. That chapel now first occurs, placed on the left of those entering, to which on the opposite responds the chapel of the Crucifix above said, finally translated here; in which chapel we venerated it in the year 1661, when already was being erected that admirable work, by which Alexander VII Pont. Max. placed and adorned more decently the Chair of S. Peter in the inner front of the temple, and finally in the front of the basilica in the year 1666 to those entering from the very threshold visible from the front. The holy Doctors of the Church Athanasius, John Chrysostom, Ambrose, Augustine, of colossal stature, expressed in a single bronze figure, sustain the case, in which it is enclosed. Angels, clouds, rays, from heaven surround. The Holy Spirit, most magnificently placed. in the form of a dove standing above, crowns the work. The base of Jasper, distinct with various and precious stone. The rest of bronze with gold overlaid, in the year 1666, as is read under the most elegantly sculpted iconism, which here it is more pleasing to exhibit renewed in lesser form, than to explain in many words the majesty of the work, with no words sufficiently to be praised.

[146] Peter Manlius, who lived under Pope Alexander III, in the year 1159 created, narrates that he in John Caballinus (certainly more ancient, It is miraculously preserved from fire, although an unknown to us Author) read in Phoebus p. 51, that under Alexander II, after the year 1061, the wooden Chair, with a fire arisen by chance and devouring everything around broadly, in the midst of the flames, by divine (as we believe) virtue, remained unharmed. This therefore among other miracles you may number, of which in general Baronius mentions; and this being alleged, it will not be superfluous to know, says Phoebus p. 77, that on the solemnity of each Chair (Roman and Antiochene), and sometimes on other days of the year also, to the basilica by the faithful are brought belts of various color, both holosilk, and of other material, which applied to the Chair of S. Peter, and afterwards brought back home, as if they have drawn divine virtue from that touch of the Chair, belts moved to the same help women in childbirth. everywhere perform miracles; and especially help women laboring in childbirth, deliver them from the danger of life; and, with offspring happily brought into the light, restore to former health: which by the intercession of B. Peter to happen is more certain, than that they need proof; and this above the rest in his Tabularium Grimaldus narrates more distinctly. Of this matter I am a witness, says Phoebus, as a Canon of the Vatican Basilica, who saw it very often, and not once to the Chair itself, applied belts offered by the faithful flowing there for the cause of devotion.

§. XIII. On the feasts of both Chairs of S. Peter.

[147] The Birthday of the Antiochene S. Jerome first ascribed to the Fasti, The Birthday of the Antiochene Chair (which for a long time only the Antiochenes had celebrated; by the example perhaps of the people of Jerusalem, recalling the Chair of S. James under the title of Ordination on December XXVII: in which way also other churches throughout the East each one their own Birthday probably recalled, caring nothing about the Birthdays of others; for this proves the silence both of the Greeks and Copts and Abyssinians in the Fasti about that Chair) the Birthday I say first S. Jerome, what at Antioch and Jerusalem he had seen being done, inserted into his Martyrology; with which spread through the West, S. Ambrose seems, on account of his affection toward S. Peter, to have so approved the matter, that to his Sacramentary also a Mass to be inserted he composed, with those Orations or Collects, which now also from the Roman Missal we use, and with the preface: Omnipotent eternal God, S. Ambrose ordained the Mass, both to praise you the wonderful God in your Saints, in whom you are vehemently glorified, through whom you adorn the sacred body of your Only-Begotten, and in whom you constitute the foundations of your Church, which you founded in the Patriarchs, prepared in the Prophets, established in the Apostles: from whom B. Peter Prince of the Apostles, on account of the confession of your only-begotten Son, through the mouth of the same Word of yours called into the Apostleship, and with name changed confirmed in the foundation of your house, you made president and guardian of the heavenly enclosures: for whose honor and glory today we pay these feasts to your Majesty, and immolate the host of thanks, through Christ etc.

[148] Augustine carried the cult to Africa The African Churches also were ignorant of that feast (as from the very ancient Carthaginian Calendar in Mabillon appears) until Augustine coming from Milan, introduced it there; and on it held a Homily, the beginning of which, now inserted in the Roman Breviary, indicates the cause of the cult taken up thus: The institution of today's solemnity has taken the name of the Chair, because today Peter the first of the Apostles is reported to have taken up the Chair of the Apostleship. Rightly therefore do the Churches venerate the Birthday of that See, which the Apostle took up for the salvation of the Churches… Because therefore today the Birthday of the Chair is venerated, the Sacerdotal office is honored. Then he proceeds to disapproving the custom left from gentilism, by which the faithful also above the tombs of the deceased brought food and wines, as if the souls gone out from bodies required carnal foods. This very thing namely that his mother Monica also at Milan had done, he reports elsewhere, and that she therefore was reprimanded by Ambrose: not because she was held by the prenoted error, yet disapproving the feasts customary over the dead on that day, who brought those foods to the poor only in memory of the deceased, that these might pray well for themselves; but because doing equal things with the gentiles, the same things which they thought she seemed to be thinking to the simple; whether to those then there were known the Feasts of S. Peter, of which above; or whether their use had not yet gone out of the City (if however it is truly so ancient), I do not have whence I may define.

[149] The Gauls also, and through the Gauls the Spaniards and Germans took up the same feast. The Germans also received it For the Germans testifies the most ancient Calendar published at Augsburg by Beckius; where the Chair of S. Peter is noted in Rubric, as one of the chief. For the Gauls and Spaniards makes the Gallo-Gothic Missal, where a plainly solemn liturgy is described, here worthy to be reported. The Introit is such. The day of solemnity to be preached, especially noble, and the Gauls, and Goths in Spain on which by preeminent faith, the Son of the most high God was shown by the mouth of Peter; and among the Co-apostles, with

Christ asking about himself who he was, Peter truly confessed, when the Blessed Son of Jonah, by the voice of the Redeemer, by devout voice was preferred; and through this rock of Peter the base of the Church was fixed; let us venerating, most beloved Brethren, beseech, that as he set forth the faith of Peter with glorious praise; he himself the author of beatitude may strengthen the people, through O. L. The Collect follows. with proper Introit, God, who on this day gave B. Peter after you as Head of the Church; since he truly confessed you, and he himself was worthily preferred by you; we suppliants beseech, that as you gave the Shepherd, lest he lose any of the sheep, that the flock may flee errors, by his intercession save him whom you perfected. After the Names. Let us implore with prayers God, who conferred such great power upon B. Peter in this age, that if he himself bound, there might not be another who would loose, and what on earth he loosed, likewise in heaven be loosed; that the spirits of the deceased being led out from tartarus, the gates of hell may not prevail against those buried in the tomb through crimes, which through the Apostle's faith the Church believed to be conquered. Collect at the Peace. Most clement Father, who with so great love founded the disciple, Collects, that he cast from the ship to you might hasten swift with bare foot through the sea; and seeing this love, you give him the keys of the stars; look upon the voices of those suggesting, that whoever from precept are joined for the kiss, with the rancor of the heart excluded, may be led there through grace, of whose heaven Peter is doorkeeper.

[150] The Contestation finally or Preface in the same Missal, embracing the synopsis of the Acts of the Apostle, for the Preface so proceeds: Worthy and just is it, who rich in infinite clemency, you deign the figment of your creature so far to raise up, that … to a man of earthly composition you committed the keys of heaven, and for judging tribes you placed on high the throne of an exalted Seat. Witness is the present day, exposed the Episcopal Chair of B. Peter, in which by the merit of faith confessing by the mystery of revelation the Son of God, the Apostle preferred is ordained: in whose confession is the foundation of the Church, nor against this rock do the gates of hell prevail, nor does the serpent imprint a track, nor does death obtain triumph. But what came to B. Peter, at diverse time, of praise and glory, what voice what tongue may explain? Hence it is that the trembling sea he tramples with fixed footprint, and among liquid waves he walks with hanging sole. Hence to the beautiful gate he directs his steps; and touched by the finger of Peter, the lame man does not need a staff. Hence imprisoned while he sleeps, Christ with him keeps watch; and shut up in the dungeon, he proceeds outside through an Angel. Hence he raised the paralytic lying in bed, and to the weakened gave a step by his word. Hence he called back the woman Tabitha from death; and [for] virtue commanding, to be plundered Ananias and Sapphira was not allowed. Hence with such dowry of faith he preceded among the Apostles, that he cured all languors while he passed by; and corpses lived, following the example finally of saint Gregory. the salutary shadow which touched them. Through Christ O. L. to whom etc. With all those Churches, on the Birthday of the aforesaid Chair to be venerated, thus preceding; the Roman did not disdain at length to follow the example under Gregory the Great; who it, together with the Collects of the Ambrosian Mass, and the Preface now also having ceased to be used, took up into his own Sacramentary. Before Gregory nothing such is found among the Romans, neither in the Gelasian, which we have, Sacramentary, nor in the Calendar which perhaps written before Gregory John Fronto published at Paris.

[151] Much less is anything found there about the Birthday of the Roman Chair, Mention of the Roman in the Hieronymian on 18 January, on the XVIII of January: where not even in the Gregorian is noted such feast, although it is noted in the Hieronymian, the Epternach and the Lucca immediately after the Deposition of B. Mary: in the Corbey and the Blum without it, already translated to August XV by the law of Emperor Mauritius. The Epternach has thus: Deposition of S. Mary, and of the Chair of Peter at Rome; where it ought to be read, and Dedication of the Chair of Peter at Rome, and by the fault of the scribe alone it happened, that the word Dedication is absent, the other three apographs persuade. So to the writer of the Blum Codex it fell out to omit placing, at Rome. The Corbey, in fuller phrase thus: Dedication of the Chair of S. Peter the Apostle, under the title of Dedication: on which he first sat at Rome. The name Dedication meanwhile renders me uncertain, whether here is to be understood at all the very constitution of the Chair made by Peter; or rather its bringing into the Vatican Basilica, from the place where before it was kept, and most truly called Dedication. But this because it was wholly a local festivity, was not venerated in other churches of the city; and therefore not only S. Ambrose and the Compilers of the Gallo-Gothic Missal abstained from receiving it; but even S. Gregory himself passed it over.

[152] And truly, since S. Peter receiving the Episcopal Chair at Antioch, yet for a long time it lacked its own feast, did not affix it to the city itself, but then translated it to Rome; he does not seem to have had cause for celebrating two Birthdays: and so the observance of February XXII must have seemed and remained chief. But a double Chair then first began to be named, when the material Seat itself, on which he had sat at Rome, was also at Rome dedicated, perhaps even by Sylvester or by some of the nearest successors. From this certainly that to Peter's Roman Pontificate, above the years attributed to him, only one month and eight or nine days are ascribed, in all the Catalogues entirely; nor could be called Birthday. it sufficiently appears, that from June XXIX cannot through them be gone back to January XVIII, and indeed that day cannot be said the first of Peter sitting at Rome. Understanding this Bede and Florus, did not wish to ascribe this festivity to their Martyrology; although VIII Kal. of March is noted by them; At Antioch the Chair of S. Peter. Otherwise it seemed to Ado, who when he the venerable and very ancient Martyrology, sent from the city of Rome to Aquileia to a certain holy Bishop (the same namely which we call Hieronymian, Ado simply wrote the Chair, certainly the most ancient of the Western Church) at Ravenna had transcribed, with the title Dedication omitted, wrote simply at the head of day XVIII January; The Chair of S. Peter, on which he first sat at Rome.

[153] Ado in his manner was followed by his epitomator Usuard, and other later writers, among whom also the supposititious Bede. With Usuard's Martyrology received into common use, and after him others; both at Rome, and generally throughout the West entire, commonly also the Chair of S. Peter at Rome began to be commemorated everywhere, but without any special or further cult; unless perhaps in the Pontifical Chapel, if those older Breviaries served his use, whence Baronius recites this proper Oration: Omnipotent eternal God, who by ineffable Sacrament conferred on your Apostle Peter the primacy of the Roman city, whence Evangelic truth would diffuse itself through all the kingdoms of the world; grant we beseech, that what flowed through his preaching into the orb of the lands, the universe of Christian devotion may follow. But it is difficult to divine in what Breviaries Baronius found that. For if he speaks of those printed (as he persuades to be: because in the same place citing a Ms. Martyrology, he would not have omitted to say the same about Breviaries, if he himself had also found them Mss.) I do not believe these are older, than we have printed at Venice in the year 1479, at Nuremberg 84, at Capua 89, again at Venice 1490; likewise at Venice 1508, yet it was always absent from the Calendars 11, 22, 24, and at Cologne 36: in all whose Calendars, XV Kal. February only the name of S. Prisca is read, with this Rubric: Before the day of S. Prisca the Alleluia is never laid aside. The same name alone is had in the Breviaries of Cardinal Quignon printed at Lutetia of the Parisians in 1541, Antwerp 42, Louvain 46; and again Paris 56, and Antwerp 57; so that it can truly be said for the XV and XVI century this sacred solemnity, not only in some churches, but generally in all had grown obsolete.

[154] But in the very year, in which the lastly cited Breviary appeared at Antwerp, Pope Paul IV restored, indeed instituted it to be common to all, until the year 1557, giving Apostolic letters on this matter, in the year of the Lord 1557, on the eighth Ides of January: and so in all Calendars afterwards published it is noted in Rubric, Chair of S. Peter at Rome. Double, and Commemoration of S. Prisca V. and M. Baronius also alleges in the Notes the Sermons of Saints Augustine and Leo: but those authorities concern the Antiochene Chair: but it is of pious thought only, not of weightier import, that he so adds: But on this day, not only that solemnity seems to be performed, when Paul IV ordered the feast to be, in which Peter began to sit at Rome: but also that most sacred institution is recalled, by which from the Lord Peter, the fundamental rock of the Church constituted, received the promise of perpetual stability, and the keys of the heavenly kingdom: which in all things bears before itself the sacred Ecclesiastical Office, and especially in the ancient Preface, which is found written in the Sacramentary of S. Gregory, which is held most ancient in the Vatican. So indeed; but to the month of January? by no means do I judge: but to February: whence if in some Curial Missal also for January that Mass with its Preface is found, it must be found twice; or, as in the present Missal happens, the Priest must be admonished that it should be sought in one or the other month.

[155] The whole Decree of Paul Bolland gave in January and therefore is not to be repeated here: it suffices to hear the reason for instituting his feast, which the Pontiff gives, namely that, although, the City itself owes much more to the same Peter, with the example of other Churches adduced. who founded it, to be inserted into the heavenly kingdoms through the Episcopal Chair constituted in it, than to those by whose zeal the first foundations of its walls were laid; from whom he who gave it its name, defiled it by fraternal slaughter; yet the festivity of the very Chair, which, according to the testimony of our most ancient holy Fathers, was on the fifteenth Kalends of February, and in diverse parts of the Christian world, and especially of Gaul and Spain, is solemnly celebrated on the said day, in no way observes, and celebrates only the festivity of the Antiochene Chair, which on the eighth Kalends of March, according to the testimony of the same Fathers was; as if the same our Saviour, who often chooses weak things, that he may confound strong things, has reserved the festivity of the Chair, on which Peter the Apostle himself first sat at Rome, in our times to be celebrated or rather to be restored to ancient celebrity.

[156] What the Pontiff says, that the festivity of the Roman Chair was anciently celebrated, can be confirmed from John Beleth Parisian Theologian, who flourished at the beginning of the XIV century. For he treating in his Rationale of divine Offices, of the feasts, which are in the beginning of Septuagesima, places among them also the Chair of S. Peter, and so begins Chapter 83: This likewise

at this time is wont to be celebrated the Chair of S. Peter, both that which was at Rome, and which is later in time; and that which was at Antioch. It is not equally clear, that that festivity was solemnly celebrated before the times of Paul on day XV Kal. of February in diverse parts of the Christian world and especially of Gaul and Spain; although on that day it is commemorated in the most ancient Martyrologies, But what those were, does not appear to us, as I have said. If in the Breviaries, produced by the work of the Friars Minor or for their use anciently, that feast were noted; through them I would believe it had come about, that for more Churches on this side and across the Alps it had once been made common; if, with Radulphus de Rivo as witness, Pope Nicholas III, who began in the year of the Lord 1277, had in the churches of the City removed Antiphonaries, Graduals, Missals and other ancient books of the Office to the number of fifty, and ordered that for the rest the Church of the City should use the books and Breviaries of the Friars Minor: if, I say, in the ancient Offices of the Minors the feast of the Roman Chair were noted; it would also seem consequent, that other Churches on this side and across the Alps followed them, especially after the discovery of types, by whose benefit nearly each one in the XV century began to print its own Breviaries. But now it does not appear of which churches Paul should have said he was following the example: for none have I been able to find hitherto either Ms. or printed, where the Chair of S. Peter, of which we treat, would be placed, except a single one of Ratzeburg of the year 1506; where after the Office of S. Prisca of three Lections, are prescribed Suffragia, that is the Commemoration of S. Peter the Apostle, with the same very Collect, which above Baronius, I said, found in some old Breviary.

[157] We have however from almost all of Europe Breviaries and Missals printed, namely very many from Italy, the Roman of the year 1479 and others thereafter, having the Breviaries of very many gathered from everywhere. above alleged; from Spain the Burgos and Eborese, of the years 1502 and 1548; from Gaul the Autun, Amiens, Apt, Avignon, Auxerre, Besançon, Évreux, Fréjus, Laon, Langres, Reims, Rouen, Sées, Toul and Vermandois, from the very beginning of the XVI century to after the Tridentine Decree of Paul IV, and the year 1630, of which the newest Reims also is: but having diligently scrutinized all and each, I have found no trace of this feast; as neither in the Mainz, Würzburg, Speyer, Passau, Constance, Regensburg, Worms, Bamberg, Strasbourg, Erfurt, Cologne, Hildesheim, Osnabrück, Minden, Warmia, Schleswig, Camin, Lübeck, and the Calendar of the Northern Kingdoms; not also in the Belgian Antwerp, Arras, St. Omer, Bruges, Lille, Morinensi; or in the older ones of the very Canons Regular of the Lateran and Premonstratensians, Carthusians and Preachers, that I may be silent about the Breviaries of the Franciscans.

[158] But by this argument I am forced to believe, that very few Churches from Gaul or Spain could be named to Paul, Even the most ancient Fathers alleged by Paul seem to be only Martyrologists. of which this was truly the custom; and perhaps even the testimony of the most ancient holy Fathers, on which the decree leans, does not extend itself beyond the use of the Martyrology, in which already from the age of S. Jerome the Roman Chair had begun to be commemorated. Meanwhile Saussay, lest he dismiss this occasion offered him by Paul of commending his Gaul, wrote, that the very day of the Roman Chair, blessed among the worshippers of Christ, and held celebrated through the whole world began long ago, and in solemn cult endured for a long time in Gaul: which I would have wished from him not simply to be said, but to be proved. Tamayo, in such things accustomed to yield nothing to Saussay, yet omitted by this title to praise Spain; I believe because after the Spanish Breviaries had been printed, Yet the feast was rightly taken up. which the more Calendars he alleges in the whole work, he found nothing anywhere, by which he could confirm or illustrate the words of Paul. Meanwhile its sanction now has its weight and effect everywhere rightly, in all the Churches, which by the counsel of the Tridentine Synod took up the Roman Breviary, with their own abolished: but those which did not do this, lacked that Office for a long time; nor have I seen any proper one hitherto before the Constance in Germany of the year 1610, which inserted in its Calendar the new feast.

* discipulo (to the disciple) * dans (giving)

§. XIV. On the Swords of the Apostles, and other Relics of the same.

[159] The Author of that Sermon, of which we have treated above, whether he was S. John Chrysostom, or some one younger than he; after he had treated of the Chain of S. Peter brought to Constantinople, asks, But what indeed the sword? and answers himself: With this sword Peter, The sword of S. Peter with which he struck Malchus, when Jesus was being seized by the Jews, struck the Pontiff's servant, and cut off his ear. Then when he had explained why the Lord ordered the Apostles to buy swords: Thus, he says, possessing the sword Peter brought it with himself in preaching, both that if anywhere it should be necessary he might use it, and especially, that seeing it, by the admonition of the Master he might be recalled to remember; and in that way that time, when Jesus suffered the cross, and what afterwards followed, he might think over with himself; namely envy, hatred, snares, betrayal, unjust judgment, the more unjust sentence of death, the cross, burial, and all the rest, which the homicidal Jews dared to do. These things, when the Apostle saw that sword, he contemplated: these constantly in mind he revolved: these repeating with himself he meditated, as if kept by him for memory of the passion, with the sword itself suggesting the memory, and making him more alacritous for executing the preaching. With this sword the Apostle was both armed for undertaking every danger for Christ, and for undertaking all dangers, both especially for putting on those sacred chains, and for inhabiting the prison of wicked men; finally for undergoing the martyrdom of the cross he was made firmer and more prompt.

[160] Wherefore this sword, as a certain precious thing, and altogether venerable, and serving Apostolic hands, and touching them, is held in honor at Constantinople: with the same honor and veneration, with which also the chains themselves in the Royal palace, where to the Apostle Peter a sacred temple is erected, as a certain sacred and heavenly treasure, in an innermost place placed is preserved, as we know: which is wont to be set forth for sanctity to faithful Emperors and the multitude of faithful men. For it confers heavenly grace, supplies the abundance of various cures, guards its worshippers salutarily, raises those embracing it, elevating their souls. But if that sword seems short and unshapely, it is not therefore to be despised: for it contains in itself the Apostolic power and might of miracles. For this the Apostle, as the framea of powerful God possessed, and as a two-edged sword knew; so also other Apostolic vestments and garments, are indeed very humble and abject: but if anyone shall have inspected their beauty and magnificence, which is comprehended by mind, he will find them filled with divine and heavenly grace, and not inferior to Apostolic miracles. But it equally avails, when someone remembers these very things, as if he were to invoke the Apostle. I also judge the very prison, in which the Apostle was guarded, worthy of every preaching, since it is full of every veneration: for it was held worthy, that it received within itself such a domicile of sanctity. I also judge the very ground, on which he lay, and bound he slept, decorous with sanctity, and replete with Apostolic grace.

[161] The same is the sense of the Clergy of Namur in Belgium, religiously preserving a certain very ancient Cap, The Pileolus of the same at Namur in Belgium, oblong in the manner of a helmet, which they call of S. Peter; and considering it more accurately, I judge it had the use of an Episcopal mitre, in the first centuries of the Church not yet pointed. Arnold Rayssius in the Belgian Hierogazophylacium, where on the Cathedral of Namur, dedicated to S. Alban Martyr of Mainz, p. 8 says, it is a remedy for driving away fevers; and from the subsequent instrument we understand, brought in the 13th century, efficacious against fevers; that it was brought there from the old Collegiate church of S. Peter. When John Baptist Gramaye, in vol. 2 of the Namur History says it was built before the XIII century, on the occasion of the head of S. Petronilla being brought there; raises in me the suspicion, that with that was brought such a Pileus, and for the sake of this the temple was dedicated rather to S. Peter than to S. Petronilla. That matter, although supported by tradition alone, without more distinct notice of some old writing, deserves, to be read in the words of the Bishop himself, in the year 1651 explaining the whole matter on public faith, and confirming with this tenor.

[162] Engelbert Desbois, by the grace of God and the Apostolic See Bishop of Namur, to whom translated from the Collegiate of saint Peter, to all about to inspect the presents we make testified, that we have examined the Pileolus of S. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, celebrated with great resort of peoples, and illustrious by very many graces: which in our Cathedral Church of S. Alban we religiously preserve, having received it from the citadel of Namur from the church of saint Peter Collegiate, founded there by the Counts of Namur; and that in the presence of RR. DD. Remigius du Laury Dean, Gaudentius de Pollein Archdeacon, Canons of our Cathedral Church; John Adrian Rector of the College of the Society of Jesus of Namur, and James Swerts Priest of the same Society; and of me the below-written Secretary of the aforesaid Most Reverend Lord, and recognized by him, also Canon of the aforesaid Cathedral Church: and have observed it to be in this form. The top of the Pileolus is adorned by a crest, modestly rising; as if it would only be thicker. The width is of the middle thumb, where it more eminently rises at the apex: so that it seems to be of the form of a helmet pressed to the head. Its interior part, supported by much cotton, is covered with thicker cloth of blue color: which from long use and sweat of the head is imbued and stained. the Bishop attesting in the year 1651, describes its form, The exterior material is thin leather of red color, sewn from six parts, of which the two lower make the brim, the four other higher of figure as it were rhomboidal so gently rise, that for containing the head they offer a concave: you would say it is the half part of a melon cut lengthwise. The color by great lapse of time is so obscured, that it approaches black. Those six parts are covered with elegant meanders, painted from gilded and silvered leather, so that they reflect Phrygian work. By alternate series, the lower part is covered with silver, the other with gold. The golden color of the meanders still has its dignity: the silver, has nearly all faded. The Pileolus itself, however small and however great, in its eyes reflects most ancient antiquity: now it is preserved wrapped in noble holosilk material. In faith of all of which we have signed these with our hand, and caused them to be confirmed with our seal; and we have arranged that it be painted by the brush of a painter on a tablet, that it might truly be represented. and sends it painted. Given at Namur in our Episcopal Palace, in the year 1651, on the Ides of May. So far that Bishop: whose words have described the Cap, or if you prefer Mitre, here also engraved in bronze it is pleasing to exhibit for viewing.

[163] John Pessina de Czechorod, Dean of Prague, afterwards Bishop of Samandria in Hungary, in the Phosphorus of his metropolitan church of S. Vitus, weaving a Diary of Relics kept in it, after the named

certain distinguished parts of the bones of SS. Peter and Paul, brought from Rome by Emperor Charles IV; At Prague part of the Pall of S. Peter, he indicates also part of the Pall, sent there by the same Charles; not however whence or when it was received; only from the Epistle written to the Dean, Scholastic, and the whole Chapter of Prague, can be conjectured, that long ago such a part of the Pall was at Prague. For when in enumerating the Relics received at Trier, about the middle of the Epistle the Emperor said; likewise of the staff received at Trier, We had part of the Staff of B. Peter in the breadth of three fingers, namely of the lower part of the staff; which we cut off with our own hand with a saw, by which B. Maternus was raised, as you know; when, I say, he had said these and other things, thus he concludes: Besides, you should know, that it is of our intention and of every kind of will, that that part of the Staff you insert into the Pastoral Staff of the Archbishop of Prague; that as he is known to be vested with the Pall of B. Peter, so also with his Staff the same Archbishop and his successors, in the very Prague church, may use in perpetual times in the future: which will be new in the aforesaid Prague church, nor elsewhere in the whole orb of the lands do we believe similar to this can be found; about to give us in all and singular and any of the premises singular joy. Given at Trier… on day XVII of the month of February, in the VIII year of our Reigns, that is in the year of Christ 1354. The entire Epistle is extant in the aforesaid Phosphorus p. 438 and following, where something more seems to be understood, than the Archbishop's Pall, taken from the sepulchre of S. Peter by the Roman Pontiff, and customarily sent to any Archbishop. But in the Diary it is added, that in the year 1370 was brought part of the Staff of S. Paul (together with a distinguished part of the Arm) which the same Emperor in the monastery of S. Paul at Rome received as a gift, and the staffs of saint Paul brought from Rome. and enclosed in the Staff or Pastoral of the Archbishop of Prague: with which Staff (so the Martyrology of the Prague Church has) when the Archbishop of Prague is officiating, the Subdeacon is wont to concelebrate with him.

[164] Finally as the Greeks believe themselves to have the Sword of S. Peter, so the Spaniards glory in the Sword of saint Paul, which to the Sisla convent of the Hieronymites near Toledo is reported to have been given by the Most Eminent and never sufficiently praised Aegidius Albornoz, The same's sword in Spain, Cardinal of S. R. C., Legate and Defender, as in the Notes on this day Tamayo writes, after in the Notes on January IX having prefaced some things about the antiquity of the monastery, he wrote thus: Here with due veneration is kept the sword, by which S. Paul the Apostle was beheaded. This I visited in the year 1645. About it B. John Chrysostom is reported to have said: What sword pierced your holy throat? The Lordly instrument, I say, which is held in admiration from heaven, and which the earth reveres. Let that sword be to me as a crown, and the nails of Peter as gems fixed in the diadem. The form of this either point, or sword, from the tip to the pommel has four palms (which measure to the Spaniards is called Vara) two fingers in width. Its form is as it were ancient Periconium, but in this it differs, that it has a point. It is not yet wholly straight, but rather lunar-wise is bent at the point. As a marca (as we say) is a two-headed serpent, and around the upper edges are little letters, as if interlined with crocus-colored metal, which on one part of the point show this particle: Sword of Nero Caesar. On the opposite are these: With which Paul was beheaded in Era 108.

[165] P. Siguença judges, this sword was signed for the work of judgment, whether it was Nero's own? and the killing of the condemned. Don Francisco de Quevedo in the Prologue to the Life of S. Paul, contends that it was Nero's own sword. For the impious Emperor inflamed by anger, on account of Paul's resistance in betraying the woman, by whose love he was burning, not only orders him to be beheaded, but also himself provides the sword by which he should be beheaded. To this he alleges Tertullian in the Apol. ch. 5 thus: Consult your Commentaries, there you will find, that Nero first too, against this sect, then especially rising at Rome, raged with the Caesarian sword. With such a dedicator of our damnation we even glory: for who knows him, can understand, that nothing except some great good was condemned by Nero. But I rather adhere to the opinion of Father Siguença, for whose confirmation I judge irrefragable the text, taken from the Roman Martyrology on March XIV, in these words: At Rome the birthday of the Holy Martyrs, who were baptized by B. Apostle Peter, while he was held in the custody of the Mamertine, with his Co-apostle Paul, where for nine months they were detained, who all under the most devout confession of faith were consumed by the Neronian sword. Behold the sword of Nero, striking the necks of other Martyrs besides Paul. Therefore not particularly for the killing of Paul, as Quevedo, but commonly for the punishment of all the condemned it was consigned. So far Tamayo against Quevedo, taking certainly too materially and crassly the words of Siguença, Tertullian and the Martyrology; for whoever then by whatever sword of whatever lictor was killed by the command of Nero Caesar, he is altogether understood to have been struck by Caesarian and Neronian sword, equally as he, who thus strangled by a noose, could be said to have perished by Caesarian and Neronian noose.

[166] As to the form, from it altogether can be understood, its form and use, that such a Sword is, as unknown to the Romans before Cicero was born, from the silence of Polybius Lipsius gathers in his On the Roman Military lib. 3 ch. 3 with simple blade and slightly curved above; but he says in the age of the Caesars not infrequent it appears in ancient monuments, suitable for inflicting a wound by cutting rather than by stabbing, and therefore more similar to the Persian Acinaces than to the Spanish sword. But what Tamayo calls ancient Periconion, I do not grasp; how to him sculpted Era 108. because such a word I have not yet found elsewhere. But whoever caused it to be sculpted with letters, by noting the Spanish Era 108, which corresponds to the year of Christ 70; clung to the common Chronicle of Eusebius through Jerome doubly false, both that he defers the death of the Apostles to the last year of Nero, and that he places the same two years later than is fitting, a writer in the history of the West by no means accurate. And so above the words inscribed on the Pauline sword, perhaps not of great antiquity, I would prefer to read the instrument of the donation made by the Cardinal, if any is extant, to be taught from it whence he himself received it; who in the year 1627 endowed with the Purple, in the same survived to 49, I do not know in what year precisely having completed the Spanish Legation.

§. XV. Some appearances of the Holy Apostles, and namely of S. Peter.

[167] It is not my intention to gather from every side all the appearances, by which the blessed Princes of the Apostles now in the heavens, are read to have aided men still living a mortal life; much less the benefits of cures obtained through the same, since even the Indices alone of our books can supply very many. Yet it is permitted to select some more distinguished, of which sort especially seems that, which Bede the historiographer of the English nation writes lib. 4 ch. 14, as the most reverend Bishop of Hexham Acca himself (about whom we shall treat on day XX October) was wont often to relate, and was wont to assert that it was reported to him by the most faithful Brethren of the Hill monastery, founded by S. Wilfrid. About the same time when the very province of the Southern Saxons, with Wilfrid preaching (as in the preceding chapter Bede narrates) had received the name of Christ, With pestilence raging in England, a fierce mortality was seizing many provinces of Britain. Which when by the nod of divine dispensation it reached the aforesaid monastery, over which the most religious Priest of Christ by the name of Eappa then presided as ruler; and many, whether of those who had come with that Bishop, and with a three-day fast of the Monks begun, or of those who from the same province of the Saxons had recently been called to the faith, everywhere from this life were being snatched away; it seemed to the Brethren to hold a three-day fast, and to constantly implore the divine clemency, that it might deign to extend mercy to them, either to free those imperiled by this disease from present death, or to keep those snatched from the world from perpetual damnation of soul.

[168] There was at that time in the same monastery a certain little boy of the nation of the Saxons, The Apostles appear to a sick boy, recently called to the faith, who being touched by the same infirmity, for no small time reclining, was lying in bed. When therefore the second day of the mentioned fast and supplications was being held; it happened by chance that the boy himself, about the second hour of the day, in the place in which sick he lay, was found alone. To whom, by divine dispensation, suddenly the most blessed Princes of the Apostles deigned to appear: for the boy was of very simple and gentle soul, and preserving with sincere devotion the Sacraments of faith which he had received. and they promise that mortality would cease in him, Saluting therefore him with most pious words the Apostles, were saying: Do not fear, son, the death about which you are anxious: for we today shall lead you to the heavenly kingdoms: but first you have to wait, until Masses are celebrated; and the Viaticum of the Lord's Body and Blood being received, so freed at once from infirmity and from death, you may be raised to eternal joys in heaven. Call therefore to you the Presbyter Eappa, and tell him; That the Lord has heard your prayers, and has favorably looked on the devotion and fasts; nor any of this monastery, or of the little properties adjacent to it, by this destruction further is going to die: but all, who anywhere of yours labor with this sickness, are about to rise from langour, and are to be restored to former health; except you alone, who today are to be freed from death; and for the vision of the Lord Jesus Christ, whom you have faithfully served, to be led to heaven: which divine mercy has deigned to confer on you, through the intercession of the religious and to God beloved King Oswald, who once over the nation of the Northumbrians, both by the authority of temporal kingdom, and by the devotion of Christian piety which leads to the perennial kingdom, sublimely presided. For on this day the same King, by the infidels in war corporally extinguished, for the merits of S. King Oswald, soon was assumed into heaven to the everlasting joys of souls, and was associated with the bands of the elect. Let them seek in their codices, in which is annotated the deposition of the deceased: and they will find him, on this (as we said) day, whose anniversary it then was. to have been snatched from the age. Let them celebrate therefore Masses through all the oratories of this monastery, both for thanksgiving of their petition heard (or also in memory of the aforesaid King Oswald, who once over their nation presided; and therefore for them, as advenae of his own nation, suppliantly prayed to the Lord) and with all the Brethren gathered to the church, let all communicate in the heavenly Sacrifices; and so, with the fast loosed, let them refresh the body also with their food.

[169] When the boy had narrated all the words to the Presbyter called to him; The matter is announced to the Abbot, he asked him solicitous, what were the appearance or form of the men who had appeared to him.

He responded, Of altogether distinguished habit and countenance they were, most joyful and most beautiful, such as I had never seen before, nor did I believe any of men could be of such beauty and gracefulness. One indeed was tonsured, like a Cleric; the other had a long beard; and they were saying, that one of them was called Peter, the other Paul; and they were themselves Ministers of the Lord and our Saviour Jesus Christ, sent for the protection of our monastery by him from the heavens. The Presbyter therefore believed the words of the boy: and immediately going out, sought in his Annal, and found, on the same very day, the boy dies, King Oswald to have been killed: and with the Brethren called, ordered the meal to be prepared, Masses to be done, and all to communicate in the usual manner; together also for the sick boy, he commanded a particle of the same sacrifice of the Lord's oblation to be brought. With these so done, not long after, on the same day the boy died; and by his death proved that the words were true which he had heard from the Apostles of Christ. the others recover. But this also gave testimony to his words, that no one besides him, at that time, from the same monastery was snatched from the world. From which vision indeed many, who could hear these things, were marvelously inflamed for imploring divine clemency in adversities, and for undertaking the salutary remedies of fasts: and from that time, not only in the same monastery, but also in very many other places, began the natal day of the same King and Soldier of Christ, to be venerated yearly with the celebration of Masses.

[170] And here indeed both Apostles appeared together; but Peter alone in that case, Selling the estate which paid balsam for the lamps which S. Peter Damian, lib. 3 Epist. 20, reports in these words: In the parts of Babylonia (Egyptian, as I think, today Cairo) the Apostolic See had a possession, from which it took only so much income of balsam each year, that it would suffice with unfailing fuel for the lamp, which namely before the altar of the blessed Prince of the Apostles burned hung: which possession the Pope, with money received, distrained; and lost the canon of aromatic, which he was wont to receive. Some time after, when the same Pope was as if devotedly assisting at the aforesaid most sacred altar and praying; the Pontiff selling is punished by death by S. Peter, behold a certain terrible and aged old man, in whose face also a beardless cheek was seen, with arm raised struck him with a great blow, and said: You extinguished my lamp before me, and I will extinguish your lamp before God; and soon disappeared. But he indeed immediately collapsed, and a little after closed his last day. Although Peter abstains from the name of the deceased, it is yet easy to understand, that the matter happened before the year 634; in which the Saracens occupied Egypt, never thereafter recovered by the Christians. perhaps Sabinian. But what about Pope Sabinian, deceased about the year 606 of his Pontificate II, the fable grew strong as if he so by his predecessor S. Gregory was struck in dreams, on account of badly administered office, not long after died; perhaps it took its origin from there; although otherwise he was a laudable Pontiff, and perhaps for the cause of relieving public famine alienated that estate. But if S. Peter is believed to have appeared, how an unusual to his pictures and statues beardless cheek appeared in him? Such perhaps was it as of the Clerics above indicated by Bede: partial certainly, not total, nor similar to monastic: perhaps also by appearing in that aspect the Saint wished to show, that he himself was stripped of his beauty by him whom he chastised; and therefore that as an unusual thing it was written. Meanwhile Turrigius On the Crypts p. 463 notes that even in the year 1632, 1633, and 1634 lamps burned there, full of balsam, offered by the devout.

[171] On other occasions also S. Peter showed, what care he took for his Basilica: Similarly appearing S. Peter, which in the very words of Pope Innocent III, to Octavian Bishop of Ostia, left by him as Vicar when he set out for the Duchy of Spoleto to be inspected, it pleases to set forth. A few days before our departure from the city, a certain Priest of advanced age, fearful, as is believed, to our presence approached, secretly proposing, that in a nocturnal vision through sleep B. Peter the Apostle appeared to him, saying: Go to Pontiff Innocent, and from my part signify to him, that from his birth I loved him as if a son, and promoted through diverse grades, at last constituted in my see: wherefore he himself the beauty and honor of my house ought to love, and with vigilant zeal to promote. Let him therefore know, that in my church few altars are consecrated: whence it happens that on unconsecrated altars the divine Mysteries are celebrated. Let him therefore have these at least consecrated with due reverence, orders Innocent III to be admonished, above which he shall know more frequently the divine Office is celebrated. But when once and again the same vision had been revealed to him, and he did not himself fulfill what was commanded; at last for the third time the same Apostle, as if offended, brought saying: Because you have not obeyed my command, I will take away from you your hearing. From then he was made so deaf, that he did not at all hear.

[172] Therefore groaning vehemently and weeping, to the Confession of B. Peter he devoutly approached, that the still unconsecrated altars he should consecrate. with tears asking, that having pity he might restore his hearing, because he would at once fulfill his command. With this through God's mercy heard, what had happened to him, he indicated to us in order. Although however according to the Apostle one must not believe every spirit; because however in such a business an angel of Satan would not transfigure himself into an angel of light, and it is better to believe piously than rashly to doubt; since it is honorable what is proposed to be done, even if it were not true what is asserted to be revealed; to your Fraternity, of which we have full confidence, through Apostolic writings we command, that the altars of SS. Philip and James, Simon and Jude, B. Gregory and S. Andrew, which are said to be unconsecrated, you yourself consecrate, or through others by our authority have them consecrated: for we believe, that through these the fruit of eternal retribution accrues to us. These things pertain to the year 1198, the first of his Pontificate; as can be seen in the Continuation of the Annals of Baronius, by his worthy successor in so great a work, Odoricus Rainaldus, reporting the same things.

[173] The same in the year 1332 Another, more than a hundred years later, occurred in Swabia, reports Martin Crusius in the Suevian Annals Decade 3 lib. 4 ch. 9; but he reports in these words: If it pleases, to know also of this time some legend, as they call it: let it be recited indeed which from some old Missal, of the Monastery in the town of Eccensi Ouva, obtained by the procurement of M. Levius Schentzius, I have so abbreviated more briefly, but in good faith. In the year of the Lord, on Feria II after Pentecost (says Henry once Dean in Ouven) during the public Mass, in Swabia appearing, after the Canonical bell, a certain old pilgrim appeared to Adelhaid, afterwards the wife of the deceased Clysrenius at home, when she was alone. He sitting at the cradle of her little son, removed the cloth, by which the face of him was covered, and said; Hail dearest boy, and immediately he was healed, since before he had been suffering from hernia. He ordered the woman to tell the Dean, that he should command his subjects to do penance: for the Lord now would show more abundant fruits, heals the boy with hernia, and leaves the traces of his staff, than before for twenty years; of which no one, who would not do penance, would taste. He did not wish to eat the food, which willingly the woman was about to give: but he went out through the back door of the house, through which he had entered, from the adjacent garden. He said, the traces of his staff, to the Dean would be sufficient evident sign that he had been present. Then he vanished. But from the woman sadness and horror was taken away, judging some demon had been; and from the house she ran out: to whom were coming people from Mass already finished. Thirteen tracks were found; two in the house near the hearth, and eleven outside the house, in ground because of the summer parched hard. Their depth was as much as the width of the index finger, next to the finished nail: and their circles were entire without any rupture.

[174] which recognizing the Dean of Ouva, All these things (says the Dean) were entirely unknown to me: until after dinner the honest man Geroldus Lamershaim, and others indicated to me: whom I sharply chided, why they so quickly believed such things. At their request however, I came to the present matter. I judged from the impression and figure of the tracks that it could not have happened, that a simple man would have made them with a staff in so hard earth. I feared to contradict from fear of God: I feared also the fraud of the devil. In the evening I exhorted the people to penance (whether the matter of the woman was true, exhorts the people to penance. or not) by the example of the Ninevites: and what John says, that he lies, who denies he is without sin: therefore confess your sins, my people. To each as satisfaction I impose, that you pray a hundred times Our Father; a hundred times, Hail Mary; and that you fast on the fourth day, the sixth, and the Sabbath day by the precept of the Church; and that you give common alms. So I absolved them, blessing them: nor did I know any more of the secrets.

[175] The mother of the boy narrates to the Parson the iterated vision of the Saint, On the next Feria third, I Henry, went to Kircham for business: and there I stayed from morning to the evening bell. When returning from there, twenty men of both sexes met me, and said that to the woman, of whom I spoke, S. Peter had again appeared, and indeed in the form of a Priest. She was sitting with other women before the house: and rising went to meet me. She was congratulating herself, that I had returned, nor could she utter anything else, except the name of the Virgin Mary, and the Angelic Salutation: as often as she wished to say anything else, in her heart she felt the greatest torments. So I was forced also myself to weep with her. Afterwards her mother told me, that she had narrated all the things, which had happened to her, to D. Conrad Pfaff. Then I going to the parish Church, asked him about the matter. He responded, with the public Mass completed, while he himself still stood before the altar of the Virgin, the parents of the woman had come, saying, that she, when she rose in the morning, had been made mute. I went therefore (says Conrad) with them to the woman, who could speak nothing, before from her hypocaust the people went out.

[176] Then at last, with her mother, and Conrad remaining within, she began to speak, but with difficulty. I could not (she said) sleep (sad indeed) until midnight, who refusing to obey him had been struck dumb. but afterwards firmly. But roused by the wailing of my little boy, I received him to me. For I saw an old man in priestly habit most shining. He sitting on the nearest bench, reproached me, that yesterday I had opened the business to other men sooner, than to the Dean. He gave pardon however to my simplicity entreating: and added that the Dean had done rightly, who had given that exhortation to the people. For the Lord (he said) accepts the penance of the people, and to it wishes to do benignly. This

grace our Lady obtained from her son, peace having been made between him and you. You will tell the Dean, that he also exhort others to penance. The woman denied, that she would say anything; because she had received very much grief. Therefore you will be mute, he said, until you shall have said it. I am S. Peter, sent to you by the holy Virgin, not James, or Nicholas, as the common people think. If the Dean and Priest are unwilling to speak, they themselves will be mute. To the Dean therefore let Conrad narrate: and he himself let preach to others. These things said, he vanished. These things he said to me, says the Dean, D. Conrad.

[177] Then I, with the bell rung again in the evening, in a sermon said these things to the multitude. The matter spread they confirm by a miracle. To the woman therefore the faculty of speaking returned: and she said: Truly all things, which you have said, are so. Then others to praise God, others to be terrified, and weep; miracles from there followed. About eight children (as their parents asserted) dead, life was restored. The epileptic were healed, those with hernia, and those laboring with other diseases. Many offerings were made: which I faithfully collected, nor did I reserve anything for myself: nor did Lord Louis, Duke of Eck, of good memory, in any matter impede me: but advanced the honor of S. Peter according to his powers. From the gifts offered I built a Chapel in the place, where S. Peter had walked, making tracks with his staff. These things were testified by the citizens of Ouva, Vischlinus and Kletter, and likewise three women, from the neighboring village of Tettinga. These things Crusius, after he had said many things in lib. 1 of the same Decade Ch. XI about the origin of the Eccensian Citadel and the Dukes named from it; and had taught that the Eccensian Duchy was joined to that of Württemberg, takes its name from a mountain, Eck, that is Angle so called; because it is made the angle of the Suevian Alps, and from it the whole region beneath is called Under d'Eck, that is Under the Angle, and that Ouva is the head of that once Duchy.

[178] Let one more recent close this Paragraph, which because in S. Ignatius, S. Ignatius in the year 1521 lying ill Founder of our Society, was done, who therefore venerates S. Peter as Patron, cannot be passed over by me, professed in the same Society, that I should pass over all the rest. All our writers narrate it, as many as have touched the Life of the holy Patriarch; briefly Peter Maffei lib. 1 ch. 12 in these words: When already Ignatius, lying ill from the wound received at Pampeluna in his fraternal house at Loyola, in the year 1521 was rejecting nearly all foods and drinks with his stomach loathing, and other lethal signs were discerned in him; at the warning of his own, with the sacred things which pertain to expiating the soul duly procured, on the very vigil of B. Peter the Apostle, with all mourning he was brought to such a state, that the doctors plainly affirmed it was finished, is healed by S. Peter appearing. unless before midnight the force of the disease should remit. Ignatius had long been venerating with some particular cult the Prince of the Apostles, indeed had once militarily celebrated his praises in Spanish verse; of which piety indeed he bore not small fruit. Since on that very decisive night, through quiet he seemed to see the same Apostle, divinely bringing him the desired health. Nor indeed in vain did that vision fall, since immediately to be lightened of pains, and to be refreshed with food he began.

§. XVI. Some singular appearances of Paul.

[179] No less than Peter for his own church, Paul shows himself solicitous for his own. Take a memorable example from Glaber Rodulphus lib. 1 ch. 4. Appearing to Otto III S. Paul, It happened at the time (in which Otto III raised Gerbert of Ravenna Pontiff of the Roman city Gregory V, and he himself in turn was crowned by the same as Emperor, that is in the year 996) that the same Emperor, with both the Pontiff himself, and others, bearing zeal of advancing religion of the house of God, suggesting, that in the church of B. Paul Monks in name only, otherwise living perversely, he ought to expel; and of another institute, whom we call Canons, in the same place to serve he was about to substitute. forbids that he should substitute Canons for the Monks in his church And when he sought to fulfill this decree, there appeared to him through a vision the most blessed Apostle Paul, and the same Emperor with such words he took care to admonish: If truly, he says, the zeal of divine service and of the best work burns you, see that you do not presume to change the institute of this purpose by expelling the Monks: for it is not at all expedient, that the institute of any ecclesiastical Order, although in part depraved, ever be cast away or changed: for in that Order each is to be judged, in which he first vowed to serve, it being permitted only to amend whatever is corrupted in the same lot of his own vocation. Thus admonished the Emperor reported to his own what he had heard from the Apostle: and taking care how the institute of the same Monks he could to the better inform, not to expel from the place decreed but to change. And so to this point there persevere there the Monks of the Cassinese Congregation.

[180] Four and more centuries after, in Spain happened an apparition, as to its fruit plainly similar to that, which we have seen above reported from S. Peter appearing in Swabia; At Ecija in Baetica since the matter happened in the XV century in Baetica, in the city of Astigi commonly called Ecija. It from the apograph of Jerome de Guzman scribe of the Chapter, Martin de Roa distinguished writer of our Society produces in his work on the Saints and Antiquities of Astigi, lib. 2 ch. 2, and I from Spanish into Latin here render. Since ingratitude is the mother of all vices and sins, placed especially in this, that man forgets to render thanks to our God, for benefits received from his Majesty, and by this makes himself unworthy of receiving further ones: then that the faithful and Catholic inhabitants of this city of Astigi for so singular a benefit may not be found ungrateful, for public edification it is written, but to our God and Lord may render perpetual thanks, because he gave them so excellent a Patron, as is the glorious and blessed Apostle Paul; in the name of Jesus Christ our Redeemer and the glorious Virgin S. Mary his Mother and our advocate, and S. Dominic our most worshipful Father, and the whole heavenly Court; there follows the miracle which happened in this city, and the tenor of which is such.

[181] In the noble city of Astigi, on the day of the moon and the same twentieth of the month of February, how in the year 1436 in the year from the Nativity of our Lord Saviour Jesus Christ 1436, at the hour of Tierce more or less, with there gathered in the Chapter place noble and honored men, D. Guiterio de Sotomayor Master of the Order of Calatrava, and other Knights of the same Order; and Tello de Aguillar, Praetor of this city; Lorenzo de Figueroa, Roderigo Martinez de Prado, Pedro Fernandez de Saavedra, ordinary Justiciaries; Alfonso de Zayas, Ferdinand Diaz de Eslava, John de Godos, and Diego de Malaver, Rectors of the city; in the presence of many witnesses Alfonso Coronado and John Sanchez, Jurors of the Collation of S. Crucis; Sancho Garcia and John de Ortega, Jurors of the Collation of S. Mary; John Gonzalez and Gundisalvus Martinez, Jurors of the Collation of S. Barbara; Diego and Roderigo Fernandez, Jurors of the Collation of S. Aegidius; John de Santaella and Ferdinand Martinez, Jurors of the Collation of S. James; before me Alfonso Fernandez de Guzman, public scribe of the King our Lord and of the Council of this City, appeared and stood before the Chapter of the said City Diego Fernandez de Carmona, appearing with his father a boy of 14 years, inhabitant of this city in the Collation of S. James; leading with him a certain son of his, by name Antonio, of about fourteen years.

[182] The youth said to the aforesaid Lords and made known, that on the preceding night, a little before dawn, still lying in bed, well awake he saw with his eyes a man of wonderful beauty, dressed in white: and added, that he, gazing at him, was seized with great fear; asserted that S. Paul had been seen by him, but he who appeared, ordered him to set aside fear, and said himself to be S. Paul, Apostle of Jesus Christ our Redeemer, who first had been persecutor of the Catholic faith and Church of Christ, but afterwards so great preacher of the same. He was commanding moreover that he should go and say, to be made public throughout the whole city, that the Lord was greatly angry with the people, both for many other sins, and especially for the neglect of observing the Lord's day and feast days; who announcing God angry with the people, then because so many perjuries and blasphemies against his divine Majesty and his Saints were tolerated; and finally for the defect of charity toward the poor, who ought to be helped with alms, even with own convenience subtracted. He should say therefore to them in the name of God, all should do penance, should confess and communicate devoutly, and correct their vices and sins, by taking away occasions of blasphemies, for instance gaming tables and similar games; should order them to do penance; for unless they themselves should amend, it would be that a memorable vengeance divinely would involve the whole city. But that those about to hear such things might not doubt to give credit to the boy, the Saint said he had ordered, that he should stretch out his right hand to him: which he holding firmly, bound his fingers to each other, and showed four of them so immovably cohering, that it sufficiently appeared to be the work of a higher virtue, and bound two fingers to him insolubly as a sign. than of art or human industry. Moreover the glorious Apostle commanded him, that after he had so made known the case, he should go to the monastery of S. Dominic of the Order of Preachers of this city; and there should lead the hand so bound above the Cross, which is kept in the said monastery; and immediately his fingers were to be loosed to the prior motion and use. The boy also said the same, that meanwhile while the glorious Apostle was speaking with him, he himself for great consternation could not speak; The father added, that the same before deprived of sight, indeed even after he had disappeared, for some time he himself was unable of speech. Then the aforesaid Lords asked the aforesaid Diego Fernandez, whether the aforesaid son of his had had a sound hand before. He affirmed, and added, that the same son of his, on a certain day of the Conversion of S. Paul, was deprived of sight: wherefore his wife had promised to have a Mass taken care of in honor of S. Lucy. But this said when nothing was obtained, a certain neighbor of hers said to her, that she should offer her son to S. Paul; for to him perhaps that evil had happened, because she herself by spinning had violated his feast. But the woman obeyed the well counseling, by promising at her own expense a tablet to be painted, which should contain the history of S. Paul, and be placed in the monastery of S. Dominic; because the mother on the feast of the Saint had spun. finally that the measure of him had been taken with a waxed thread, and sight had immediately returned to the boy. And when from him again speech was taken away; with knees bent the wife had again invoked the aid of the Saint, and the use of tongue freely had immediately returned.

[183] These things heard, immediately the aforesaid Lords decreed certain commonly useful things to the service of God and correction of sins, and for the next day of Mars they indicated a procession, And the procession being indicated to be led by the whole Clergy and People of the city to the monastery of S. Dominic, for imploring divine

clemency, that it might deign both to remit offenses, and to declare the truth of what the boy was saying. But on the following day all the aforesaid Lords, with the whole populace of both sexes accompanying, instituted the procession: and with Mass celebrated and Sermon finished, some of the Religious and some of the Clerics reverently placed the Cross of that monastery received on the main altar: to which the boy proceeding, with knees bent before it adored, then touching with his hands the globe placed beneath the Cross, gradually raised them upward toward the image of the Crucified: which as soon as he touched, he opened his hand, equally sound as before he had ever had it, except that to the memory of the miracle two fingers remained to him somewhat thicker: which all the aforesaid saw, with all the people who were present bearing witness. This was done on the year and day aforesaid. In memory of which so great a miracle, the fingers were loosed to the boy. and because through it the glorious S. Paul seems to have declared himself Patron of this city, which the city itself ought to count as great happiness; the same Lords decreed every year a solemn procession should be re-established on his feast of Conversion on day XXV January, to which all the Rectors of the city with lit candles would gather, and the entire people would devoutly come together, which they also confirmed by vow. Thanks be to God.

[184] Let this Paragraph also be closed by another appearance, more privately done, than those have been hitherto reported. It thus relates S. Gregory of Tours lib. 1 on the Mirac. of Martyrs ch. 29. It happened in a certain place, Tying a noose for himself and meanwhile invoking S. Paul, that a man prepared a noose for himself, for extorting his life, with the devil instigating. And when he had found the secret of a little cell in which he would do this; he began to fasten a rope passed through a beam into a noose; yet he always invoked the name of Paul the Apostle, saying; Help me S. Paul. And behold a shadow, squalid and deadly, which simulated in countenance nothing less than the devil, appeared to him, urging and saying; Come on now, do not delay: expedite quickly what you have begun. But he when he was preparing this work, with the tempter put to flight he is freed. that is of extorting life; always said; Most blessed Paul be my helper. Finally with the noose now expedited, when he was being more vehemently urged by the shadow, that he should put in his neck; suddenly there appeared another shadow similar to this, saying to that one who was with the man, Flee, most miserable; behold Paul the Apostle coming here: for invoked by this man, behold he is present. Then with the shadows vanishing, he returning to his sense, and depicting the Cross of the Lord's virtue on his wavering breast; was doing penance, with cheeks bathed by a rain of tears, why he had attempted these things. Whence it is manifest, that this same man, through the virtue of the blessed Apostle was saved from this precipice of cruel death.

§. XVII. The feast of the Conversion of S. Paul, and old liturgies on both Apostles.

[185] On occasion of the Astigitan apparition memorated in the upper § , on account of which it was decreed in that city, that the patronage of the Apostle solemnly taken up should be renewed on the Feast of Conversion; In the Hieronymian on March it pleases here to treat at greater length about the same: but before all things it must be noted, that it itself under such a title is unknown to all four apographs of the Hieronymian Martyrology, and only on VIII Kal. of February, after these first words, At Nicomedia of Bitus, are read the following, At Rome the translation of Paul the Apostle, namely that which we shall say below was done by Pope Sylvester: but because such a feast was wholly local and proper to the Pauline Basilica, is noted 25 Jan. the Translation of S. Paul, therefore in the Gelasian Sacramentary, which was common to all the Churches of the city, nothing about it was placed. But Gregory the Great, moved by examples to be set forth below, instituted on that day a Mass to be read under the title of the Conversion of S. Paul, with the title of Translation omitted, which would be common to all those about to use his Sacrament. Yet long since that day was consecrated by the faithful to the memory of such a mystery, and perhaps not without certain foundation, received from the Damascene Church: since the Conversion of Paul, not long after the stoning of S. Stephen succeeded, perhaps then made for the memory of the Conversion, which is recalled to have happened December XXVI; and therefore I would believe the aforesaid day VIII Kal. Feb. was chosen by S. Sylvester for performing the aforesaid Translation.

[186] Furthermore in arranging that Mass S. Gregory seems to have followed S. Ambrose, older than Gelasius by one century, whose Sacramentary he intended to supplement; as also in many other things we recognize the Roman from the Milanese to have been enriched. For both the Collects are the same in both places, such as today are also recited; and the proper (now abolished in the Roman) Preface, after the words, for which a Mass from the Ambrosian Omnipotent eternal God, in the Milanese is so continued: Who allow your Church, constant in the preaching of your blessed Apostle Paul, to be violated by no deceit: because nothing in true religion is reckoned to remain, which has not been consistent with his disciplines: whom today made a vessel of election, master and teacher of the gentiles to be called, S. Gregory took up with the Preface augmented, with the name changed into Paul, you established. In the same way therefore Gregory begins, but in fuller progress about to use an encomium, the rest he so turns: And as nothing in true religion is recognized to remain, which his discipline has not seasoned; so for performing those things which he taught, by his intervention to the Faithful may be granted efficacy; and may the multitude of believing gentiles feel, him as intercessor for itself before you, whom it knew to have as master and teacher. Also a proper formula of Benediction, such as we find ascribed only to certain chief solemnities, and Benediction added. the same Gregory so ordained: God who by his grace made B. Paul from a persecutor an Apostle, may himself deign to impart to you the spirit of compunction and pious conversion. Amen. And who deigned to reveal to him the mysteries of heavenly secrets, may himself deign to open to you the hidden things of his scriptures. Amen. And who deigned to give perseverance of faith and inflexible constancy in persecutions, may deign to strengthen and fortify your infirmity with the same gifts. Amen. Which may he himself deign to bestow etc.

[187] Other things in the old Gallo-Gothic, Furthermore not only the Milanese, but also the Gauls, in so solemnly recalling the conversion of S. Paul, seem to have been earlier than the Romans; from the Gauls indeed the Goths converted in Spain received the Sacramentary ordered by most ancient institute and of which the beginning cannot be found, such as now is extant printed at Rome from the most ancient Ms. of the Queen of Sweden, and the Mass begins from this Oration: God who make the dignity of B. Paul the Apostle glorious everywhere; grant we beseech, that we may always be cherished by his teaching and merits. Whoever wishes to know more distinctly the whole order of that Gallo-Gothic Liturgy, afterwards preserved among the Musarabs, let him read what we gave on S. Pelagius the Martyr on day XXVI June, since all is composed to the rite and form of the Isidorian Missal; here it will be sufficient for us, and seems worth the labor, to describe the old Collects of that Liturgy for this feast, or (as they are there called) Collections, which in that very ancient Codex are such. The Collection after the Ingress, or as we say, Introit.

[188] with proper Collects, Glory of the Saints, remunerator of the just, God; who are above all, and through all, and in all to us, and to whom the sacrifice is a contrite heart, and prayer pure incense: grant us, through the intercession of the most blessed Paul the Apostle, sanctification of heart, fervor of spirit, purity of body: that with earthly vices mortified, with unblemished spirit and body we may always bring to you the hosts of praise, which you yourself may deign to bestow, who with the eternal Father live and reign. Collection after the Names. God who to your Apostle Paul, insolent against the piety of the Christian name, struck with a heavenly voice with terror, on this day of his calling, you changed his mind with his name; and whom the Church before feared as persecutor, now rejoices to have as teacher of heavenly commands; and whom you so blinded outwardly, that you made him seeing inwardly, and to whom after the darkness of unbelief was taken away, for calling forth the gentiles you conferred the knowledge of divine law; but also when shipwrecked the third time, for the faith which he had attacked now devoted, in the liquid element you made him to escape the danger of life; so to us we beseech, venerating both his change and faith, after the blindness of sins, give us to see you in heavens, as you illuminated Paul on earth; and receive willingly the present gifts, which by the prayers of your Apostle may be accepted. Collection after the Peace. God who write the laws of Justice on the hearts of those writing with your finger; and who in Paul, on this day of his calling from the heavens, not with ink, but with your living Spirit, the fervor of your charity so imprinted, that he handed over his own body to be broken for the members of your Church, who had once destroyed the members of the same Church; so to us, by the intervention of the same teacher and faithful master, give the consortium of fraternal charity sincerely; and of your love, which he had, of the manifold flame deign to bestow even one spark; that we may follow through fervent love the Master, whose fragrance in charity we frequent his precepts.

[189] No less here worthy to be read is the Immolation of the Mass, or Preface (as we call it) after which all the rest are done from the common order of the sacred Liturgy among the ancients, and singular Preface, and elsewhere (as I have already said) noted. So therefore it has, after the Worthy and just is, response of the minister. Truly equitable and just it is, that we give you thanks, holy Lord, Almighty Father, eternal God. Who that you might show yourself wishing to indulge to all in sins, the persecutor of your Church, at the one word of your calling, you gained, and immediately made for us from a persecutor a teacher. For he who had received foreign epistles for the destruction of the Churches, began to write his own for their restoration: and that he might show himself made Paul from Saul, suddenly the wise architect, laid the foundation, that your holy Catholic Church might rejoice in him building, by whom it had before been laid waste; and so great a defender he was, that all sufferings of body, and the very killing of head he did not fear. For he was made head of the Church, who had shaken the members of the Church: he handed over the head of the earthly body, that he might receive Christ as head in all his members: through which also he deserved to be a vessel of election, who the same O. L. Jesus Christ received into the dwelling of his breast. Through whom Angels praise your Majesty etc.

[190] The Author of this Preface seems to have had another older one before his eyes, and indeed that, which S. Ambrose for the common feast of Peter and Paul so composed, that from there the said Author could take, but to some extent taken from the Ambrosian, which pertaining to Paul alone we have given to be read: wherefore receive also the Ambrosian here entire. Equitable and salutary, that we always here and everywhere in honor of the Apostles Peter and Paul, give you thanks: whom your election thus deigned to consecrate

that the secular art of fishing of B. Peter should be converted into divine doctrine; insofar as to free the human race from the depth of hell by the nets of your precepts. For the mind of his co-apostle Paul you changed with the name, and whom the Church before feared as persecutor, now rejoices to have as teacher of heavenly commands. Paul was blinded that he might see, common to each Apostle: Peter denied that he might believe. To the latter the keys of the heavenly empire, to the former for calling forth the gentiles you conferred the knowledge of divine law: for the latter introduces, the former opens: both therefore have obtained the rewards of eternal virtue. The latter your right hand raised up, walking on the liquid element, when he was sinking; the former when shipwrecked the third time, you made to avoid the deep dangers of the sea: this one conquered the gates of hell, that one the sting of death: and Paul is beheaded, because head of the gentiles in faith he is proved: but Peter with footprints sent before followed Christ the head of all: whom together with Angels etc. So Ambrose; the same all of which for the very common feast of the Apostles, are read in the Gallo-Gothic: and so is confirmed what I said in the beginning, that the Ambrosian Masses penetrated into Gaul; the Collects however in both places are diverse, both among themselves and from the Gelasian and Gregorian, which it will be permitted to read printed, and to compare among themselves.

[191] But you will find no Vigil before feasts noted in the Gallo-Gothic either here or elsewhere; which yet Ambrose did not omit to distinguish with a proper Mass, where also the Vigil has its proper Mass. of which this is the Preface. Eternal God, with whom although of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul there is a continual festivity and eternal happiness, and a perpetual Birthday of heavenly triumph; yet to us, recalling the beginnings of the blessed confession, you grant to rejoice with frequent devotion: that the more frequent honor repaid to the most sacred Passion, may bestow on us greater grace of retribution. Through Christ etc. Similarly the Vigil was ordained by Gelasius; and Gregory followed him, The Gallo-Goths added Benedictions who also to him and Ambrose unusual proper Benedictions for the feast seems to have instituted by the example of the Gauls; since such in the Gelasian and Ambrosian Missal none are found, frequent in the Gallo-Gothic, where for the Birthday of the Apostles these are prescribed: God who made the tears of Peter and the letters of Paul to shine as a twin light to the members of the Church, by which darkness should be avoided. Amen. Look upon this people peacefully, who make the heavens to be opened by Peter in the key, by Paul in doctrine. Amen. That with the leaders going before, the flock may be able to approach there, where they equally arrived, both that Shepherd by hanging, and this Teacher by the sword, in the encounter. Amen. Through O. L. But the Gregorian Benedictions, now ceased to be used, were so brought forth: May Almighty God bless you, who founded you by B. Peter's most healthful confession in the solidity of ecclesiastical faith. Amen. And whom B. Paul instructed by his most holy preaching, and after these Gregory: may protect by his most grateful defense. Amen. That Peter by the key, Paul by speech, both by intercession may strive to introduce us to that fatherland, to which they, one by cross, the other by sword, on this present day arrived. Amen. Which may he himself deign to bestow, whose kingdom and empire remain without end into ages of ages. Amen. The Blessing of God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and the peace of the Lord be always with you. But these were said either after the Our Father before the Lamb of God, or after the Postcommunion before the Collects, which are prescribed for the completion.

[192] But if in those Gregory had whom he might follow, he went before the rest in S. Paul, to whom through communication of cult and Office with Peter could seem not to have been fully made satisfaction, who also instituted the Commemoration of S. Paul on 30 June; by honoring him again on the next day; when he ordered his cult to be renewed under the title of Birthday; which the present use with the Roman Martyrology has turned into the title of Commemoration, with Usuard providing the example; who, otherwise wont to follow Ado, here seems to have less approved, when he wrote, Birthday and celebration again of S. Paul the Apostle. Another phrase too was chosen by Notker, and at the same time openly made the Gregorian institute received everywhere with these words: At Rome, indeed throughout the whole world of Christ, the festivity of S. Paul the Apostle. The cause of instituting the new feast is gathered from Prudentius's Hymn 12, Peristephanōn, where the twin festivity of one day, or, as he himself in the last verse calls, the bifested day, commends in these words: Look how through the cleft streets the Romulan people pours out, One light grows hot in two feasts: Yet to each let us hasten with quickened step, And of these, and those, let us enjoy the hymns. We shall go further, where the way of the Hadrian bridge leads, Then to the left of the river we shall seek. Across the Tiber first the vigilant Priest fulfills vows, Soon hither he runs (to S. Paul's) and doubles vows. Enough is it to have learned these things at Rome: returning home Remember thus to venerate the bifested day.

[193] Hence Baronius gathers, that it was customary in the time of Prudentius, that is beyond the beginning of the V century, for the Roman Pontiff on one and the same day to exercise Pontifical functions in each Basilica. on one day a double Office was performed, But since this, on account of the excessive distance of the places between themselves, which even for a swift pedestrian is of one hour, could not seem to be performed without excessive and almost intolerable labor, and that through summer heats; it seemed more advisable, after the feast performed in the Vatican, where especially S. Peter seemed to be venerated, on the first day from there, in the Basilica of Paul to perform the sacred things, and more abundantly to fulfill, what on the preceding day for that cause seemed there to have been omitted. But not only on the feast itself before was the Pontiff accustomed to celebrate twice, with these on the same day the Pontiff sacrificing, but this too was free for him on the Vigil; not however thus, as if he held a double Vigil, as by twice celebrating Mass he was celebrating a double feast; but by reason of S. Leo, whose Birthday to be celebrated through the whole city, and especially in the Vatican Basilica, concurred with the aforesaid Vigil, in which case in all greater churches two Masses are wont to be said, but by diverse Priests, one of the Feast, the other of the Vigil. But that in such a case, and namely then, which he did also on the Vigil, on account of S. Leo. it was permitted to the Pontiff to binate, as we commonly say, the Rubric of the Gregorian Sacramentary proves, placed between the two Masses thus: When the Apostolic celebrates two Masses on one day, between them he does not wash, except after the Office: but without interval with the prior finished, the other is begun, in the same place certainly.

* R. edoctam (taught) * Apostolum etc. (Apostle) * Crudelitatis (of cruelty) * fac (make) * qui (who) * Paulum (Paul) * scribis (you write) * Corporis (of the body) * Petro (to Peter) * Paulo (to Paul) * præviantur (let them be led)

§. XVIII. On the three chief Basilicas, ordered to be built by Constantine, and dedicated by Pope Sylvester.

BY THE AUTHOR C. J.

[194] Anastasius the Librarian, with the Pontifical book, in the Life of S. Pope Sylvester so writes: In his times Constantine Augustus built those basilicas, which he also adorned. The Constantinian basilica, where he placed these gifts. Which described, he proceeds: Likewise in these times, Constantine in the year 312, he built at the request of Bishop Sylvester a basilica to B. Peter the Apostle in the temple of Apollo: and afterwards: At the same time he built a basilica to B. Paul the Apostle, at the suggestion of Bishop Sylvester. It is established among Chronologists, that Constantine in the year 312 defeated Maxentius near the Milvian bridge, almost half a league from the City spread on the Tiber; from which he being thrown headlong, or involved in its ruins, perished in the waters. The day, on which these things happened, the ancient Roman Calendars seem to express, and written firstly with the son of Constantine reigning; not only the Hervagian, with Maxentius conquered on day 28 October, cited by Godefroy in the Chronology to the Laws of the Theodosian Codex, but also the Philocalian, by Furius Dionysius Philocalus, who titled it, so to be called; which our Bucherius in his Commentary on the Paschal Canon of Victorius, mutilated; but Lambecius in his Commentaries on the Caesarian Library lib. 4, entire, edited. These three Calendars on V Kal. November (on which day Maxentius had invaded the empire, and, as is known from elsewhere also, was killed) have, Eviction of the tyrant, and on the following day, IV namely of the Kalends of the same, Arrival of the Divine: which about the conquered tyrant Maxentius, enters Rome on the following day; against whom by the Romans Constantine had been invoked and invited; and about the arrival on the next day in the City, from which he was nearly absent, of the Victor most conveniently can be understood, and altogether ought to seem; and worthy were, if any others, that they should be ascribed to the public Fasti by those, who therefrom themselves to have obtained the highest happiness, publicly professed; and the memory of the benefit received with a triumphal monument erected to posterity and our age have transmitted, with these verses sculpted in marble: To Imp. Caes. Fl. Constantine the Great. P. F. Augustus. S. P. Q. R. Because at the instinct of divinity, with greatness of mind with his army, both from the Tyrant, and from all his Faction, at one time he avenged the Republic with just arms, dedicated the distinguished triumphal Arch. Within the vault of the arch besides is read on one side, To the Liberator of the City, namely through the killing of the Tyrant; on the other, To the Founder of Quiet, through justice and clemency of the new Empire.

[195] The cited Godefroy mentions also another Calendar, which described, he says, makes his own buildings at the Lateran a temple on 9 November, from the Fasti of Ambrose Navidius Fraccus of Ferentino, and so has in the month of November: On day IX Constantine endowed a Church and made his buildings a temple; and on day XV. Constantine carried earth in baskets. Which in the same year 312, and within a month from his arrival as victor in the City, Constantine did, is most certain, as I shall presently show. Namely the pious Emperor would not, prevented by very many heavenly benefits, urged by the grace of the Holy Spirit, be slow in acting and rendering thanks to God the Benefactor: but soon on the fifth Ides of November, which was the eleventh from his entry into the City and Sunday, made his buildings a temple, and had them consecrated by Melchiades then Roman Pontiff, until a more ample basilica he should raise there from the foundations, to be consecrated to the Saviour, called Lateran from the place, Constantinian from the founder perpetually afterwards; for whose foundations to be laid he himself, on the sixth day after, XV of the same month of November and year 312, wished to carry out earth in baskets. But these things, until a more ample basilica should be built there; to have been done in the year indicated, is plain from what has been said: because in that alone Constantine is known to have been at Rome in the month of November. To this his very Chronology of Godefroy reduces, in the years 315 and 26, in the same place is held, that he had set out elsewhere before November, indeed before October, in each of those years.

[196] And this was the first basilica, which the pious Emperor built; and is inscribed now for many centuries from the exterior part of the portico, extended before the frontispiece, of all

mother and head of churches. which begun under Melchiades Sylvester dedicated, Who dedicated it, is not altogether established: I judge, Pope Sylvester. For begun to be built in the year 312 at the end, it does not seem before February of the year 314, on whose Kalends, or the day before Sylvester took up the Pontificate, that so great and royal a work could be completed; and so here he would have performed the solemnities of Dedication, as was fitting; and indeed on that very V Ides of November, on which we said Constantine had first made his buildings a temple: or rather on the Sunday he would have dedicated it itself, but the annual memory of dedication to the aforesaid day V Ides of November he would have left. That certainly, its Dedication is also now recalled every year throughout the universal Church, and seems to have been perpetually celebrated in the Lateran: into which also that Sylvester brought the sacred Heads of the Apostles, we have already said §. 6. With this work completed and dedicated under the title of the Saviour, the Emperor would have proceeded to building the basilicas of the Apostles Peter in the Vatican, and Paul on the Ostian Way, and this at the request and suggestion of Sylvester, at whose request the Emperor also builds then Bishop or Roman Pontiff, as at the beginning of this Paragraph indicate the words of Anastasius, having nothing similar, where about the building of the Lateran basilica he speaks, as if he had wished to indicate that this was built by Constantine, not at the request or suggestion of another, but by his own motion and zeal.

[197] Furthermore if at Rome Constantine, at Sylvester's request, began to build the churches of the Apostles, or having taken up a mattock, as tradition has it and the Roman Breviary, dug up earth, for laying the foundations; and from there carried out twelve baskets of earth, for the honor of the twelve Apostles; the basilicas of SS. Peter and Paul in the year 315, this must have been done in the second year of Sylvester, 315 of Christ; when again Constantine came to Rome, and there for some time, in the months of August and September stayed, as the Chronology cited many times teaches, nowhere indicating, that he returned there before the year 326, when last he sat there, almost the whole summer; in which also his mother Helena there died and was entombed; and the Senate and Roman people, as Godefroy speaks in the historical Chronicle on this year, "Disinclined to himself on account of his zeal for eradicating in it pagan superstition. Hence also afterwards the plan of raising Constantinople; hence the translation of ornaments from Rome afterwards; hence the abuses of the Roman people against him; about which Libanius in the Oration to Theodosius 13 p. 412." This he says, which could not persuade the Emperor, to add then new ornaments, churches so magnificent at Rome; but neither the zeal of Sylvester for the glory of Religion and the Apostles would have deferred so long to ask the Emperor for the building of the Apostolic basilicas; nor would the piety of the Emperor have borne this to be so far deferred, so ardent in this matter, that scarcely having entered Rome, he raised the Lateran.

[198] In the year 315 therefore let us place, until more certain things should become known to us, the foundations of the basilicas of Peter and Paul to have been laid; and they, with the four-year period built, could in the year 319 be solemnly dedicated, and the bodies of the holy Apostles, in a more adorned place or Confession, there hidden. Yet the dedication of neither is found ascribed to ancient sacred Fasti; but remained private and proper to the very churches, as also to others afterwards built throughout the City, each its own dedication, dedicated in the year 319, until the XIV century. For then, before the year 1360, as from certain indications can be gathered, we have written on parchment a Martyrology for the use of the Friars Minor of the province of Denmark; which in the year 1688 found in our Prague House of Professors, with the faculty of Superiors from there to Antwerp I myself with me brought. In it, XIV Kal. December, in the last place, but in the same hand, whose annual memory is preserved only in the proper churches in which the rest is read in manuscript: Dedication of the basilicas of the Apostles Peter and Paul. Lesser double: as on V Ides of November, similarly in the last place is had: On the very day. Dedication of the basilica of the Saviour, with no rite here added, in which it should be celebrated. The same (namely that those Dedications were not before the XIV century introduced into the sacred Fasti) confirms one who flourished at the beginning of the XV century Radulphus de Rivo, Dean of Tongeren, in the book On the observance of the Canons, Prop. 22, teaching, the Feast of Snow, both Dedications of the three greater basilicas, and other local Roman things, did not pertain to the Roman Order or Missal. until the 14th century, Nor without mystery, he says, of all the aforesaid nothing of property is had in the Gregorian Office, as if generally they should not be observed. Meanwhile yet it is credible, that from the beginning the feasts of those dedications were inserted into the Roman Pontifical, because they pertained to the Office of the Pope: and from there the Friars Minor afterwards transferred them to their ritual books and sacred Fasti; and propagated more broadly their observance is found in the Roman Breviary brought already from the year 1550, and indeed under the rite of Double, by command, as I think, of Pope Julius III; the Dedication indeed of the basilica of the Saviour, on V Ides of November; but of the holy Apostles, on XIV Kal. December.

[199] But whether on those days also of the dedications were the solemnities first performed? About the Lateran basilica I have already said, that it was dedicated on day V Ides of November, insofar as on that day the buildings there were converted into a temple, certainly through dedication and celebration of Mass. then also passed to public use for the day 18 November. Of the Apostolic churches, certainly the dedication of S. Peter's first on the same day, on which now it is celebrated, XIV Kal. December occurred, the Roman Breviary testifies, when on day November XVIII Lect. V it says, the new basilica of S. Peter on the same day, on which the old was once dedicated, recurring, by Urban VIII, in the year 1626 with solemn rite was consecrated. In that year was the Sunday letter D, and day XVIII November, and thus the Dedication of Urban fell on Feria IV; in which Feria if also Sylvester formerly dedicated his (which I scarcely think) as it is said he dedicated it on day XVIII November; this was done in the year 319, 24, although on that day this basilica perhaps was not dedicated, or 30: for in those alone with him holding the Pontificate, is had the Sunday letter D, and so also day XVIII November falls on Feria IV. Those moreover being admitted, the year 319 to the Silvestrine dedication should be attributed rather than the other two; and would best fit our opinion above all; as we have established, that the foundations of the basilicas of each Apostle were laid by the Emperor in the year 315, then there present; and we desire to show, that the dedication of the same, and the deposition of the Apostolic Bodies there in the new Confession, was made in the year 319.

[200] But even with these admitted, a scruple would cling to me, that such solemn actions in the first centuries of the Church were performed outside Sunday: but because before there stood an oratory there, for I judge actions of this kind on account of their celebrity then were no less wont to happen on Sunday, than were happening on such day the ordinations of Bishops. But that these were wont to be performed on Sunday, at least in the Western Church, the most Eminent Card. Norisius teaches at length in his History of Pelagius lib. 2 ch. 24 and others. Wherefore let me be permitted to opine that the Memorial of S. Peter, which Anacletus built, and Constantine afterwards converted into a basilica, was indeed once consecrated on XIV Kal. December by Anacletus or another, but in such a year, where that day fell on Sunday; and so the very day XIV Kalends of first dedication for the annual festivity of dedication, made by Sylvester, through him was retained; although on another day, either Feria, or rather Sunday, on account of the greater solemnity, he dedicated it itself. As also now obtains throughout the whole Church, that with solemn consecration of some temple made, the very day, on which this was done, ought not necessarily to be celebrated with annual memory and feast of that matter; but another may be chosen with the approval of the consecrator. And as Urban VIII, as the Roman Breviary speaks, consecrated the newest basilica of S. Peter on the same day recurring, whose anniversary day is retained. on which Sylvester once had dedicated his, or, as our opinion bears, had commanded the feast of dedication to be celebrated every year: so also Sylvester would have looked to the day, on which first the oratory, or Memorial of S. Peter had been consecrated, and it, if less for his new most solemn dedication he could keep; he would have wished it however for its annual memory to be retained: just as also he seems to have established, as a little before we have insinuated, in the dedication of the Lateran basilica, since of its dedication another anniversary day is not known, than that on which before in the Lateran palace some buildings of the Emperor had been changed and consecrated into a temple V Ides of November; and the same day even today in the Roman Breviary is recalled for the annual memory of the dedication of the same Lateran basilica.

[201] But if the very solemn action of dedication of the basilicas of Peter and Paul was not done by Sylvester on day XIV Kal. December, on what day, pray, was it done? I judge first both were done, The Dedication of the basilicas. in one and the same year 319: secondly, each was done separately and on diverse days: thirdly, the basilica of S. Paul was consecrated by Sylvester on the feast of his conversion on XXV January; but the basilica of S. Peter on the feast of his Chair on XXII February, with both those feasts in the year 319 falling on Sunday; and on the same likewise also were deposited and enclosed in both places the halved bodies of the Apostles. I judge fourthly, that the memory of each dedication then by Sylvester was ordered to be henceforth recalled together on one day; that as the Apostles had suffered on one day, and on the same as their birthday were venerated in the Church, and who together, with their half part, in each basilica rested, of the same basilicas they should have the dedication on one day, with mutual solemnity common. The reason of these opinions of mine from what has been said can be had nearly sufficiently; and further will be gathered from things presently to be said about the deposition of the Bodies of each Apostle.

§. XIX. On the time of Deposition of the sacred Bodies in the basilicas of each Apostle, and the feast of the Feasts of B. Peter.

[202] This Deposition of the Bodies, never afterwards to be moved, I judge must also be ascribed, on account of the reason already said, and for the greater solemnity of an action so sacred, Besides the Dedication was also done the Deposition of the Bodies, to Sunday, or another, of the Apostles themselves festive day, or to both at the same time concurring: and therefore to this action equally with the dedication of the basilicas I choose the year 319: in which having the Sunday letter D, two feasts of the Apostles, the Conversion of Paul, and the Chair of Peter, ascribed already then to the most ancient Ecclesiastical Fasti, fell on two Sundays. on day 22 Feb, in S. Peter's, To these very ones therefore I affix the deposition of the double halved bodies of each Apostle, not from mere conjecture. The Deposition indeed, which was made in the church of S. Peter in the Vatican, I affix to day VIII Kal. of March, then Sunday, and to the very Chair

of Peter consecrated: since on that day I read in the Laterculus of Polemius Silvius; embracing sacred and profane festivals among the Romans, and written about the middle of the V century, Deposition of S. Peter and Paul, namely by reason of the half of each body, in the church of S. Peter deposited on such a day. But to the day VIII Kal. February I affix the deposition done in the church of S. Paul on the Ostian way of the other half part of each body; 25 Jan. in S. Paul's, which also the most ancient Fasti of the Roman Church, attributed to S. Jerome, confirm; whose four most ancient exemplars on the aforesaid day VIII Kal. February so write: At Rome the Translation of S. Paul the Apostle: mentioning only Paul the Apostle as the more important, because the translation was done to his very church: and the same day remained perpetually consecrated to his name, although in subsequent times the feast of Translation was changed into that of Conversion, by which name even now it is celebrated, every year, as was said at the beginning of paragraph XVII.

[203] why on those days especially Finally I refer that, Deposition of S. Peter and Paul, rather to the Vatican church, than to the Pauline outside the walls of the City; and that, Translation of S. Paul, rather to his church, than to the Vatican; both because the Deposition of bodies is more conveniently understood as done in the same place, where already they were present: and they were present in the Vatican. But Translation generally indicates the terminus to which, more remote from the place where before they rested: both also, because as the Deposition of both is affixed to the feast of Peter alone, namely of his Chair; so it seems also more aptly referred to his church: and similarly the Translation, affixed to the feast of Paul alone, namely his Conversion, will be more aptly referred also to his church. Nor ought I to refer the aforesaid Deposition in the Vatican church, rather to the feast of the Roman Chair of Peter, which on XVIII January now is venerated, than to the Antiochene; however much that equally with this in the year 319 would have fallen on Sunday; because the feast of the Roman Chair separately is less ancient than that of the Antiochene; and on that very day, on which perpetually the memory of the Antiochene Chair was celebrated in the Roman Church, formerly also was celebrated the memory of the Roman Chair itself, as Beleth testifies in the Rationale of divine Offices ch. 83: and so anciently nothing did day XVIII January have, why on it should rather be deposited or translated the Bodies of the Apostles, than on any other Sunday.

[204] and why day 22 Feb. is also called of B. Peter of the Feasts? The same Beleth testifies that the feast of the Chair of S. Peter on day VIII Kal. March, was also called the Feast of B. Peter of the Feasts, from this that it was the custom of the old pagans to place at that time feasts at the tombs of their parents, by which ridiculously they believed the souls or shadows of them to be refreshed; when rather by demons or sacrificers at night they were consumed: and that holy men, as the same says, wishing to extinguish that custom, instituted the feast of the Chair of S. Peter, both of that which was at Rome, and which at Antioch; and that on the very day on which those abominable things were being done by the pagans: that by this solemn feast the feast of that depraved custom might be altogether extinguished. whence also from those feasts this feast was called of blessed Peter of the feasts. These then were permitted, Namely on the same day VIII Kal. March in the old Calendar, which Bucherius half, Lambecius entire exhibits, is noted the feast of the Caristia: about which Valerius Maximus so writes: A solemn banquet also the ancestors instituted, and this they called Caristia; in which besides kinsmen and relatives no one was admitted. And here also pertains what in the praised Laterculus of Silvius, on the same day, after the Deposition of S. Peter and Paul, is so added: Cara cognatio, so called, because then, even if there should be hatreds of living parents, at the time of death they are laid aside. Whether therefore from those banquets, or rather from the Feral feasts, which the day before the gentiles were accustomed, celebrating the Feral feasts, for abolishing the superstitions of the gentiles, to place at the sepulchres of their dead, and so to parentate to their manes; and which, as the cited Beleth says, at night the demons consumed: whether, I say, from those banquets, or rather from these feasts, the feast of the Chair, also could seem to have been called of B. Peter of the feasts: yet more credible to me is, that the name clung to that feast; because its first institutors permitted also to Christians on that day certain feasts among themselves and their relatives, as Agapes, in the primitive church very usual, for fostering and augmenting mutual charity among the faithful; and ancient superstition was to be converted into the profit of true Religion.

[205] But Agape was a public banquet of Christians, and was instituted on certain more solemn days, in the beginning in the very temples, and generally after the Eucharist was taken, for fostering, as I have said, mutual charity, and refreshing also the poor. as the Agapes of the primitive church, About these and the first Christians thus writes Chrysostom homil. 27 on the Epistle 1 to the Cor. On set days they made common tables, and the synaxis being performed, after the communion of the Sacraments, all entered a common banquet, the rich indeed bringing food, but the poor, and who had nothing, also being called, and all together feasting. But all things were performed so decently, that not even the wiser of the gentiles had, what they might carp there; Pliny writing so to Trajan in the Epistle, where about the gatherings of Christians: They come together to take food, promiscuous however and innocuous. But Tertullian in the Apologetic ch. 39 treats them more abundantly and more explicitly: Our Supper, he says, shows from its name the reason of itself. For it is called Agapē, which is Dilectio (Love) among the Greeks. With however great expenses it is conducted, it is profit, to make expense in the name of piety. Since indeed we also help the needy by this refreshment … Not before is it reclined, than prayer to God is foretasted. It is eaten, as much as the hungry can take: it is drunk, as much as is useful to the chaste: so they are filled, as those who remember that even through the night God is to be adored by them; so they speak, as those who know, the Lord is hearing. More things pertaining hither can be seen in the cited place.

[206] But in other places too, and from other causes Agapes began to be instituted: for instance in Dedications of temples, also used in dedications of temples; in the Natal Days of Martyrs, in Depositions of Relics. Most beautifully for our matter Gregory the Great treats these things Epist. 71 of book 10, in which through Mellitus the Abbot to his Augustine, intent on the conversion of the English gentiles, he commands some things; which whoever shall have attentively considered, will easily induce his mind to believe, that such things were before permitted by Sylvester at Rome in the dedication and deposition of the Apostles, than were prescribed by Gregory to Augustine to be observed among the English. They will also have there to what they direct their mind, Gregory the Great ordering, in those who in China, and other more cultivated regions, desire usefully to introduce the first laws of Christians among the gentiles. So therefore commands Gregory: Tell, Mellitus, Augustine, what I, long thinking with myself about the cause of the English, have treated, namely that the temples of idols in that nation should by no means be destroyed; but the very idols, which are in them, be destroyed; let holy water be made, in the same temples be sprinkled; let altars be built; let Relics be placed. Because if the same temples are well constructed, it is necessary, that from the cult of demons they should be accommodated to the service of the true God: the sacrifices of the gentiles to be changed that while the nation itself, seeing the same its temples not destroyed; may lay aside error from heart, and knowing and adoring the true God, may resort more familiarly to the places to which it is accustomed.

[207] And (more closely these pertain to our matter) those who are wont to kill many oxen in the sacrifice of demons, must also have some solemnity changed for them on this matter; that on the day of dedication, or natal day of the holy Martyrs, whose Relics are placed there; let them make for themselves tabernacles around the same churches, which have been changed from temples, into banquets of Christians: of branches of trees, and let them celebrate the solemnity with religious banquets. Nor let them now offer animals to the devil (here let the Preachers of the faith again reflect their mind among the gentiles), but for the praise of God in their eating let them kill animals, and to the giver of all things give thanks for their satiety: that while some external joys are reserved for them, they may be able more easily to consent to the interior joys. For to harsh minds to cut away all things at once is impossible, it is not doubtful: because he who strives to ascend the highest place, is raised by steps or paces, as God commanded the Israelites, to the very animals, not by leaps. And it is pleasing to weave the example which Gregory subjoins, showing, God to have ordered the same animals, which were being immolated to demons, also to be offered to himself, with the material of sacrifices not changed, but only the end. He proceeds therefore: So to the Israelitic people in Egypt the Lord himself indeed made himself known; but yet for it the use of sacrifices, which they were accustomed to offer to the devil, he reserved in proper cult; that he commanded them in his sacrifice of God, or what was made to God himself, to immolate animals; insofar as changing; which they were wont to immolate to a demon, to be offered to himself, they should lose one thing of sacrifice, retain the other: that, even if the animals were the same which they were accustomed to offer; yet to God these, and not to idols they were to immolate, now they would not be the sacrifices of the gentiles themselves.

[208] Also Epistle 54 of book 1, the same Gregory, wishing solemnly to dedicate the oratory of blessed Mary, recently built; because the meagerness of the place could not provide the expenses, customarily made for charity, for the poor at such a time in food and drink to be shown; and foods to be paid out to the poor. he so prescribes to Peter the Subdeacon: We wish, that for celebrating the dedication you should give, to be paid out to the poor, 10 solidi in gold, 30 amphorae of wine, 200 modii of grain, 2 jars of oil, 12 wethers, 100 hens. And these things on the occasion of the feast of feasts of S. Peter more than enough: and abundantly teach, that in dedications of churches banquets were prepared, and foods customarily paid out to the poor: so that from there it can also be proved, that on day VIII Kalends Feb. on the feast of the Chair the church of S. Peter was dedicated; because the day and that feast, In the dedication formerly were placed Relics of Feasts of S. Peter was called; and in the very thing feasts then customarily were prepared every year, is presumed.

[209] I return to our dedication and deposition of bodies, which I have so further shown to have been done on the same day from this that we know, that the primaeval Pontiffs were solicitous, that in dedications of churches they should deposit the Relics of those Saints, by whose names the churches were consecrated, if they could be had. So the praised Pope Gregory, Epist. 150 of book 5, sends to Palladius, Bishop of Saintes, Relics of the holy Peter and Paul (for instance brandea, about which above §. 5), and Lawrence and Pancras the Martyrs, to be placed in just as many altars, of those Saints, to whom the churches were dedicated: for their honor indeed

erected, but for lack of proper Relics not yet dedicated. So the same Epist. 58 of book 2, about to dedicate at Rome a church in honor of S. Severinus, asks of Peter the Subdeacon of Campania, that he transmit to him the Relics of the same Saint with due veneration. So Epist. 85 of book 7, Januaria, a religious woman, asks to be granted Relics of the blessed Severinus the Confessor, and Juliana the Martyr; insofar as in their name an oratory, built at her own expense, may be solemnly consecrated: as if without them it cannot. Gregory has other things similar to these elsewhere, and two centuries before him S. Ambrose taught the same, so writing to his sister: When I wished to dedicate the basilica, many as with one mouth began to interpellate, saying; As in the Roman (it is the name of a church at Milan, built and consecrated by S. Ambrose) so this basilica of yours dedicate. I responded; I will, if I shall have found Relics of Martyrs; sufficiently indicating, that without them this was not permitted to him. But to have found, he adds, by some divine instinct, the bodies of the holy Martyrs Gervasius and Protasius; and brought them into the new church, by the builder Ambrosian then called; and with the names of the same holy Martyrs consecrated it, as before the Roman church too, which I have said, he had consecrated in honor of the Apostles, with the deposited Relics of the same in it, which he had brought from Rome.

[210] I must also add, what in the aforesaid Epistle to his sister Ambrose narrates, and that Dedication was wont to be made on Sunday, that the people had acclaimed, that the Deposition of the Martyrs should be deferred to Sunday: but at length it was obtained, that on the following day it should be done. Which certainly indicates, that the use had grown strong then, that solemn Depositions of Martyrs were made on Sundays: and here in the case set forth, except for grave causes, to which even the people should yield, at length it was obtained, that beyond the custom this should be done. Yet I would not wish to be concluded from this, that even the Dedication of the basilica happened outside the Sunday day, as Pagi in the Critique on the year 387 concludes. For reasons could have been, which persuaded that the Deposition of Bodies should be anticipated; not, that the Dedication should be anticipated: and therefore that in fact, as was the custom, on the next Sunday was performed, but that anticipated, one day indeed, according to the opinion of Baronius, referring the Invention and Deposition of the holy Gervasius and Protasius to the year of the common era 387; but two days, according to Pagi in the cited place, and according to us in the Acts of the same Saints on day XIX June; more rightly judging, that the aforesaid happened in the year 386. But that Deposition of the holy Bodies, on whichever of the anticipated days it was made; can be judged to have been a certain preparation for the Dedication. Certainly I prefer to separate among themselves the solemnities of Dedication of the church, and of Deposition of Relics in it, which are mostly simultaneous, than outside Sunday to admit the solemnity of Dedication; as long as a more grave reason of thinking otherwise has not been brought, than is brought by Pagi.

[211] Indeed the opinion, which only by one day anticipates the Deposition of Relics, which took its beginning from the vespers of the Sabbath: and so places it on Saturday, in no way opposes the custom already praised; even if it were also admitted, that then the church too was dedicated, or at least began to be dedicated. For Sunday embraces (as far as pertains to such sacred functions and sacerdotal ordinations) also the preceding night and whatever of time slips after the Vespers of Saturday: about which presently more clearly. Meanwhile that on Sunday it was once customary to confer sacred Orders, we have suggested num. 200, cited for that doctrine the Most Eminent Cardinal Noris; who speaks thus: According to the ancient Canons and the rite of the Latin Church, Bishops only on the Sunday day were consecrated. That rite S. Leo the Great Pope derives from the very Apostles, exhorting Dioscorus of Alexandria, that he also on Sunday should consecrate his Priests; thus piously and laudably would he act in accordance with the Apostolic Institutes. But now that Sunday takes its beginning from the first vespers, the same Leo teaches Epist. XI writing to the aforesaid Dioscorus, and warning him in clear words, that to those, who are to be consecrated, blessing should never be given except on the day of the Lord's resurrection (that is on the Sunday day); to which from the vesper of Saturday is established to be ascribed the beginning. And Epist. to me 10 to the Bishops throughout the Province of Vienne: Not indiscriminately, but on the lawful day let ordination be celebrated. Nor let him know to himself stand the firmness of his status, who on the Saturday day in the evening, which lights to the first of the Sabbath, or on the very Sunday day was not ordained. And so Ambrose depositing the Relics of his Saints on Saturday day, could do that after vespers; and so fulfill the custom received in the Church.

[222] But now since the usage obtained in the most ancient times, that Dedications of churches were made on Sunday, and on such a day the churches of SS. Apostles were dedicated. and at that time were deposited in them also the Relics of Saints, and indeed mostly of those, by whose names the churches were consecrated, if they could be obtained: why should we doubt that in the Dedication of the two chief basilicas of the whole world of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, where their bodies were at hand, and in fact in them deposited about these times it is established to have been done, otherwise than by Sylvester was done, than his successors did, Leo and other Pontiffs, who must be believed in that matter to have had set before themselves the examples of their predecessors; and whose rather than S. Sylvester's, who at the beginning of public liberty of the Roman Church the two primary basilicas with most solemn rite had dedicated, and the bodies of the Princes of the Apostles there had hidden?

§. XX. Whether the Apostles suffered on day XXII February, or not.

[213] You must be forewarned here, Reader, that this Volume up to this page 473, was printed already from the second year of this century, when on account of impending wars and threats to this city, we ordered the presses to be stopped. Meanwhile in the year 1705 P. John Baptist Tolomei consulted me familiarly, by our ancient custom by letters, given at Rome, on the question proposed in the title. The substance of his letters will easily be understood from my response, which I rendered nearly in this manner; and which will suffice to solve the proposed question; besides that on the same we have treated at sufficient length p. 408 from num. 44 Let these therefore be for confirming in some things our opinion, there asserted.

[214] It is true, in the Laterculus of Polemius Silvius, written in the year 449, The Laterculus of Silvius is so noted in Bolland in the general Preface: VIII Kal. Mart. Deposition of SS. Peter and Paul. It is also true, that Bolland promised, that he would publish that Laterculus at some time entire. But neither was it published thereafter, nor any longer (which I much grieve) is it with us. It was lent, before I came to these studies, to P. Alexander Wiltheim, a learned man, then staying at Luxembourg, who not long after departed from life, and our Laterculus was never restored to us, although repeatedly asked back. Which loss ought to make more cautious estimators of ancient writings, that they not allow them to slip from their hands, except perhaps described again.

[215] Moreover the passage above, from the Laterculus of Silvius cited by Pearson, as you say, is very weak, does not prove or plainly none, for proving that the holy Princes of the Apostles on VIII Kal. of March were crowned with the laurel of martyrdom. I have not indeed read Pearson: but I have read Charles le Cointe, whom Pearson seems to have followed, on the same matter so writing vol. 2 of the Annals of France p. 73: In that work or Laterculus of Silvius, by which Christian and ethnic things are contained; VIII Kal. of March is consigned the Deposition of SS. Peter and Paul, with no mention made of the Chair. But on the third Kal. of July, on which the aforesaid Deposition now is celebrated, or on another day, no memory of the same (Deposition) or of the Chair is extant, namely in that Laterculus. Be it so: although however either le Cointe, or Pearson never saw the Laterculus, except so far as it is edited by Bolland in the general Preface before vol. 1 of January. What then? From here gather, says le Cointe, in the times of Silvius the solemn feast of the Chair of B. Peter was not yet: and the Deposition of the Princes of the Apostles was customarily venerated on VIII Kal. of March.

[216] Worst gathering and sequel. Silvius, who only some festivals of the Romans, SS. Peter and Paul on 22 Feb. suffered: both of the gentiles, and of the Christians, annotated in his Laterculus, nowhere mentions the Chair of S. Peter: therefore in the times of Silvius the solemn feast of that Chair was not. Likewise; on III Kal. July, or on another day than VIII Kal. March, no mention is made in the same Laterculus of the Deposition of SS. Peter and Paul, therefore on another day than VIII Kal. of Mart. the Apostles did not suffer martyrdom.

[217] Silvius wrote his Laterculus in the times of S. Leo the Great Pope, because the day of Passion from the feast of the Chair, in the IX year of his pontificate: but Leo both himself celebrated the solemn feast of the Chair of S. Peter, and indicates that it was wont to be celebrated long ago, and from the feast of Martyrdom of S. Peter in express words distinguishes. These things proves his Sermon, given on the very feast of the Chair to the people, from the library of the Most Christian King, among other works of Leo, in the year 1675 printed at Paris; of which this is the beginning: There is at hand, Most Beloved Brethren, the glorious solemnity of the blessed Prince of the Apostles, which we ought with all alacrity of mind, with all devotion of mind to celebrate. For although the day of his martyrdom is rightly held in the whole world most illustrious; this is to be celebrated with no less joy of the whole holy Church. In that indeed, with the hymn-singing choirs of Angels alternating, he was ineffably crowned; in this however, with the faithful troops exulting on every side, with great glory in the pontifical Chair he was raised.

[218] That older than Silvius even the feast of the Chair was celebrated, which before the times of Silvius was solemn, the most ancient apographs of the Hieronymian Martyrology cry out: and not on one day only it was celebrated, equally they cry out. Among these our Ms. so reads: VIII Kal. Mart. The Chair at Antioch. But before it had said: XV Kal Febr. Deposition of the Chair of Peter at Rome. Similarly the Corbey Ms.: VIII Kal. Mart. The Birthday of the Chair of S. Peter, on which he sat at Antioch. And: XV Kal. Febr. Dedication of the Chair of S. Peter the Apostle, on which first at Rome he sat. More can be seen in the most learned Florentini, printed for each aforesaid day.

[219] Almost a hundred years before the Laterculus of Silvius, were written at Rome two Indiculi, is distinguished. one, Deposition of Bishops; the other, Deposition of Martyrs, called: Both not long since I myself transcribed from an old codex of the Caesarian library at Vienna; although I knew, that both from another Ms. of ours had once been printed by P. Bucherius, p. 267 of his Commentary on the Paschal Canon of Victorius. There under Deposition of Martyrs is read, in the month of February VIII Kal. of March, the Birthday of Peter from the Chair, as if a feast already then customarily celebrated on that day. And from here abundantly is established the falsity of the gathering

or sequel of le Cointe and others, thinking with him, that the feast of the Chair in the times of Silvius was not yet wont to be venerated.

[220] Now the other part of the sequel, namely that the Deposition (that is Martyrdom, as he understands it) of the Princes of the Apostles was wont to be venerated on VIII Kal. of March, is equally false, They suffered on day 29 June is shown. From the cited Indiculus of Deposition of Martyrs, and from the apographs of the Hieronymian Martyrology it is certain, that on VIII Kal. of March was celebrated the feast of the Chair of S. Peter before the times of Silvius: and S. Leo on the same day his Sermon mentioned about the same Chair, to the people must be judged to have said. But now the same Leo, who has one Sermon, on the Chair of S. Peter the Apostle (for so it is inscribed in the Ms. Codex), has another, on the Birthday of the Apostles Peter and Paul; and a third, on the Octave of the Apostles Peter and Paul; and these two on diverse festivities from the first he said; which also manifestly he declares with his words brought above, distinguishing the feast of the Chair from the feast of Deposition or Martyrdom. The day which to the Chair of S. Peter the Apostle was solemn already from the fourth century, above is defined the eighth Kal. of March; and another, from most ancient ones XV Kal. of February. Which is owed to the Birthday of the Apostles Peter and Paul, the cited apographs of the Hieronymian Martyrology teach, when ours indeed and the Corbey on III Kal. of July write in the first place, At Rome the Birthday of the Apostles Peter and Paul. Leo seems to have taken from there the title of his Sermon, said on the anniversary of the Martyrdom of the Apostles, because he used the same words. The same reading also have the apographs, Lucca and Blum; but besides they add, of Peter in the Vatican, of Paul however on the Ostian way.

[221] On the same day III Kal. of July establish the Birthday of the Apostles, equally with the Martyrologists of the middle age; as many as wrote Martyrologies anywhere, Bede, Florus, Ado, Rabanus, Notker, Wandelbert, that I may pass over more recent ones. And lest you think, that Birthday in the aforesaid Martyrologies is taken simply for festivity alone, not for martyrdom or death; hear Jerome in Ecclesiastical Writers. He says, that Paul on the same XIV year of Nero, and on the same day on which Peter, at Rome consummated martyrdom. But on what day? On that certainly on which the Birthday of the same Apostles he marks in his Martyrology, namely III Kal. of July: on which day some of the cited Martyrologists more expressly note, in place of Birthday, the Passion, as Rabanus; or Martyrdom, as Wandelbert. Florus still more clearly explains, what there Birthday is, so writing: III Kal. Jul. At Rome the Birthday of the Apostles Peter and Paul; who by the command of Nero the Emperor, Peter by crucifixion, Paul by beheading, were crowned with martyrdom. It must be noted moreover, that the cited Martyrologists all besides this feast of the Birthday of the Apostles on day III Kal. of July, also mentioned the Chair of Peter at Antioch on VIII Kal. of March. Besides both feasts on the said days celebrate the Book of Sacraments of S. Gregory the Great, by Menard; and the old Gothic missal, by Thomasius edited: and also the Responsorial and Antiphonarium, printed at Rome not so long ago, by the care of Joseph Maria Caro.

[222] Let there be added to these, nor yield to any of the aforesaid in authority in this part, from the Catalogue of the Roman Pontiffs, the most ancient Catalogue of the Roman Pontiffs, written about the year of the common era 354, or rather then put together from other older Catalogues; and professedly designating the beginnings and ends of each Pontificate. There about the Prince of the Apostles these things are read: Peter suffered with Paul on day III Kal. of July, with Coss... in the reign of Nero. The same day designate the Idatian Consular Fasti, ending a few years after the Laterculus of Silvius was published: which our Labbeus in his new library of Mss. books published entire. They have thus: With Nero III, and Messala Corvinus Coss. Peter and Paul suffered on day III Kal. of July.

[223] To these, the very greater celebrity of the Birthday of SS. Peter and Paul, and from the greater celebrity of the feast. which with more solemn rite than the rest of their feasts, even in primitive times, was venerated, and in ecclesiastical tablets and Offices on the third Kal. of July was indicated, proves that the Birthday or memory of Martyrdom of the same then was customarily held. So in the Hieronymian Martyrology the Chair of S. Peter, both Antiochene, and Roman; likewise his Chains; and the Translation of S. Paul, neither have a Vigil, nor an Octave: but their Birthday has both. About the Birthday Pope Leo also celebrates the Octave, not likewise about the Chair. Before Leo S. Augustine wrote many Sermons on the Birthday of the same, and one on his Vigil: but none on the Chair. For those which were once attributed to him on the Chair, everywhere now are denied to him, and deservedly, by the Learned.

[224] Add the Codex of Sacraments of the Roman Church, by 900 years (so speaks its editor Joseph Maria Thomasius mentioned above) older. It has nothing about the Chair; but the Birthday it celebrates most amply, setting forth on third Kal. of July four diverse Masses; one, on the Vigil of the Apostles Peter and Paul; the second, On the Birthday of S. Peter properly; the third, On the Birthday of the Apostles Peter and Paul; the fourth, On the Birthday of S. Paul properly: and besides adjoins a fifth on the day before the Nones of July, On the Octave of the Apostles. But not only in the Ecclesiastical Offices was greater in primitive times this solemnity of Birthday or Martyrdom, but also in the people; so singing Prudentius, who in the year of Christ 348 was born, in Hymn XII Peri stephanōn: More than usual they come together to joys. Tell, Friend, what it is. Through all of Rome they run about and triumph. The festal day returns to us of the Apostolic triumph, Noble with the gore of Paul and Peter. Here Prudentius treats of the natal day of the Apostles, on which they shed their blood for God, as is plain. But he says, that then the joy of the people and the resort to the feast, and the triumph were greater than usual at other feasts, and so designates day III Kal. of July.

[225] What therefore at last does the Deposition of SS. Peter and Paul, What by the word Deposition, can be understood. noted in the Laterculus of Silvius on VIII Kal. of March, wish for itself? Let it wish whatever, provided not the day of death or Martyrdom, which it is certain it cannot there signify: and that is enough for us in the present matter. Nor yet on that account would I wish to assent to Quesnel, and with him to accuse the Laterculus there either of supposititious nature or of depravation. For Deposition in that place, equally as Birthday in the above-said Indiculus of Martyrs, can signify the festivity of S. Peter of the Chair, with commemoration of S. Paul, if the Church then (as afterwards, and even now) was accustomed to venerate both Apostles together, in the proper feast of either. Or it will signify, as often elsewhere, some Translation of the Bodies of SS. Peter and Paul, on that day on which the Chair was venerated done: just as on the festal Birthday of the same on III Kal. of July must be admitted (from the cited Deposition of Martyrs) another Translation, of Peter to the Catacombs and of Paul on the Ostian way, with Tuscus and Bassus Coss. For what else there should Deposition signify? And why should the same word signify another thing in the Laterculus, where the day of Martyrdom it cannot signify? Nor indeed ought it seem wonderful to anyone, that two diverse solemnities of the same Saint are celebrated on one festal day. This was very usual formerly; and even three of the same S. Martin on one day IV Nones of July the Church of Tours celebrated (and celebrates today if I am not mistaken), with Ado as witness, namely, the Translation of S. Martin the Bishop, and his Ordination, and the Dedication of his basilica.

[226] It would still have to be treated, as was promised p. 429 in the title of Analects, about the chief Churches of the holy Peter and Paul; those namely, which in the Vatican and on the Ostian way were built by Constantine the Great, and dedicated by S. Pope Sylvester. But because that treatise grew under my hand into greater bulk, than that it seems should be inserted in this place among the Acts of Saints; that, with some others, we will transfer to the end of this Volume, if it can there conveniently be taken.