ON ST. JOHN, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR, AT COMO IN THE DUCHY OF MILAN,
AT COMO IN THE DUCHY OF MILAN.
IN THE SEVENTH CENTURY.
SYLLOGE.
The Saint's memory and deeds.
John, bishop of Como and confessor, at Como in the duchy of Milan. (S.)
BY J. B.
That St. John, the second of this name, was raised to the fillets of Como when St. Victorinus had been taken from the living, of this Saint and shone before his flock with distinguished sanctity after the example of his Predecessors, is acknowledged by the writers of the more recent age: the other things which are related of him are for the most part in doubt. A continuous series of twenty-two prelates of Como inscribed in the sacred Fasti is exhibited by Benedetto Giovio in book 2 of the History of Novum Comum, by Ferrari in the New Topography to the Roman Calendar, and by Ughelli in tome 5 of the augmented Italia Sacra, among whom John II occurs 18th in order. The first place in it is held by St. Felix; not because before him no prelate governed the church of Como, but because the wickedness of the times and the persecutions stirred up against the Christians by the edicts of the Roman emperors (if we believe Giovio and Tatti) withdrew the names and deeds of the more ancient prelates from the memory of posterity. The second place in it St. Provinus occupies; and the third St. Amantius. That the latter was substituted for St. Felix Baronius writes in the Notes to the Roman Martyrology at the 8th day of April: but if this is so, John, the second of this name, is to be called not the 18th but the 17th bishop of Novum Comum: but the cited Ughelli refutes the most Eminent Cardinal from an ancient hymn of the church of Como.
[2] Ballarini, in the Italian Chronicle of Como, part
2, celebrates St. John with the following encomium. It had been decreed for St. Victorinus, Ballarini, Ughelli, before he departed from life (lest he should do anything against the old custom), to make the election of the future pontiff. On which occasion, by divine nod, he raised to the episcopal grade a noble citizen of Como, sprung from the Chiesa family, called John, the second of this name. He did not yield to his Predecessors in sanctity, since, treading in their holy footsteps, he brought much light to blind sinners, showing them the way to heaven, and, like a skilled shipmaster, sparing neither sweat nor labour, that he might bring the little ship committed to him to the desired port. He died in the year of the Lord 660, on the 5th day of the month of October, in the time of the Pontiff Vitalian I, under the emperor Constantine III, Aritpert, king of the Lombards, reigning in Italy, and was buried in the church of the Holy Apostles, and inscribed among the holy Pontiffs in heaven. Ughelli has almost the same in the series of the bishops of Como. St. John (he says), the second of this name, of the Chiesa family of Como, as some think, was promoted to the throne of Como in the year 644. He sat 16 years, and left life on the 5th day of the month of October, in the year 660, and was buried in the cathedral.
[3] Tatti and the Proper of Novum Comum Luigi Tatti also treats more fully of St. John in the Annals of Como at the year 644 and following, and more strictly in the Sanctuary or Martyrology of Novum Comum, at the sixth day before the Nones of October, writing thus: At Novum Comum, in the church of St. Abundius, the heavenly birthday of St. John, second of this name, bishop and confessor, who in the time of Rothari, king of the Lombards and upholder of the Arian heresy, endured many persecutions: from which at length delivered, he received from the Lord for his labours the crown of eternal life. He cites in the Notes the Offices of the church of Novum Comum, Feliciano Ninguarda in the Description of the churches of the city, where he treats of the basilica of St. Abundius, Roberto Rusca, book 1 of the Antiquities of his family, Filippo Archinto, Lazaro Carafino, bishop of Novum Comum, and others, but whose Works have not come into our hands. You hear the Offices of the church of Novum Comum cited here: rightly, however, did Ferrari write that no Office of St. John was recited in the church of Como; since his Topography had already seen the light from the year 1609, whereas the Offices cited by Tatti came out in public later, namely under Lazaro Carafino, who was translated from the see of Melfi to that of Novum Comum in the year 1626 in the month of January, as Ughelli witnesses.
[4] Nor are the proper Offices of the church of Novum Comum later only than Ferrari's Topography, they mention those of the years 1644 and 1650: but also than the decree of Pope Urban VIII of the year 1634, by which it was provided that no one should dare to inscribe anyone in the Roll of the Saints unless public veneration and cult, and that immemorial, that is, at least a century old, supported it. For those were published at Como in the years 1644 and 1650, as Tatti notes at the year 591 in the Annals of his Native City. Further, Carafino could not have been ignorant of this decree, issued ten years before: whence it is wrong to doubt that the learned man, most loving of antiquity, and most expert in the matters pertaining to his diocese, had the immemorial cult of St. John among his people duly proved and ascertained, either from Benedetto Giovio (however perhaps authors older than he may be lacking), whose Annals preceded the decree of Urban by a whole century and end in the year 1532, and from the constant tradition of the people of Como. And his memory is venerated with a double Office in the same church in which he was laid, of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, but now of St. Abundius. Wherefore, to vindicate for John the title of sanctity, I think there is no need of more.
[5] We said at the beginning that most other things which are related of John are uncertain. of which the various opinions as to the election Let us weigh the testimonies of each of those we have cited. The opinion of Ballarini is, as is clear from his words, that it was the established custom among the prelates of Como that each should choose his own successor; that this custom flourished until Deodatus, at the urging of Liutprand, king of the Lombards (the ancient monuments have Liutprandus, in Muratori in the Annals of Italy at the year 712), was made 23rd bishop of the people of Como, as he relates under St. Flavian II. Ughelli subscribes to Ballarini. But Tatti asserts that St. John was promoted not by Victorinus but by the clergy of Como. Nicola Coleti adds in the Notes to Ughelli that after St. Abundius, fourth bishop of the people of Como, no one was designated to the episcopal duties by his predecessor. I, for my part, believe that the assertion of Ballarini and Ughelli will with difficulty be proved from more ancient monuments. For Benedetto Giovio does indeed relate in most express words, in book 2 of the History of Como, that Saints Felix, Provinus and Amantius, while they were living, designated a successor for themselves: but that this was in use among the bishops who followed he does not intimate by even a word from which it could be hammered out.
[6] That St. John was by native city of Como, and sprung from the noble family of the Chiesa, the native city, the same Ballarini is the authority: I wish nothing to be taken away from the glory of the people of Como, nothing from the splendour of the Chiesa; I fear, however, whether what Ballarini writes in this place can be solidly proved. Benedetto Giovio, reporting the bishops of his native city, does not omit that SS. Eusebius and Eutychius were born at Como, and he would probably not have neglected this in the case of St. John, if he had certainly ascertained that he too was his fellow-countryman. Porcacchi also wove, in book 1 of On the Nobility of Como, a series of the Saints whom Como has given to the world, in which mention is made of Eusebius and Eutychius; of St. John the bishop, none. Hence perhaps it seemed good to Ughelli, when he had said that St. John was born at Como of the Chiesa family, to add presently, as some think. Finally it will be helpful to hear Luigi Tatti in the Annals of his Native City at the year 644 speaking thus: Whence John drew his origin is not known, although the more recent make him a native of Como, and hold in honour the Chiesa family, of which they suppose he was born. This point we leave to others to establish, because we have no mind to expose truth to the uncertainty of chance, since nothing has occurred to be brought forward on that matter besides the authority of a few historians, on whom, as being of slight credit, the proof is incumbent.
[7] the year of the episcopate undertaken, The year of the government of the church of Como undertaken by St. John also has much obscurity. Victorinus, the predecessor of St. John, passed to the heavenly life, as Ballarini witnesses, in the year of the Lord 644, on the 5th day of September, Theodore I administering the supreme Pontificate, and Constantine III the Eastern empire; and he had much intimacy with Gundebert, king of the Lombards, successor of Rothari; which last Ughelli also writes: When therefore he had vigorously gone through the tenth wave of persecutions which he had suffered from the Arians for defending his flock, and Cundipert, a king eminently pious, had succeeded Rothari, Victorinus obtained from him many privileges and immunities in favour of his church. Which things, because they do not cohere, says Tatti in the Martyrology at the 5th of September, it is not sufficiently established in what year Victorinus died, although most of the more recent assert without hesitation that he was taken from this vale of miseries in the year of the Lord 644; how could that happen under the emperor Constantine III, who had ceased both to rule and to live three years before, namely in the year 641. How did he enjoy intimate familiarity with Gundebert, king of the Lombards, and was he honoured by him with many immunities, if Gundebert did not take up the reins of the Italian kingdom until the year 661? And the year in which John entered upon the chair of Como is no less uncertain than that in which Victorinus died.
[8] deeds against the Arians, Let Tatti succeed Ballarini and Ughelli. He writes that St. John in the time of Rothari, king of the Lombards, endured many persecutions. Of Rothari Carlo Sigonio, On the Kingdom of Italy, book 2, writes thus: But Arioald having died without male issue, the Lombards held an assembly for creating a king, and gave to Gundeberga the choice of a husband and king, as before to Theodelinda. She summoned Rothari, of the race of the Harodi, duke of Brescia, and, having taken him as her husband, was the author of the Lombards raising him to the kingdom… This king was imbued with the Arian heresy, which he defended with greater support than anyone else had yet done, but in his other virtues he was most worthy of that place. Under this king two prelates presided over most of the churches of Insubria, the one Catholic, the other Arian, as Paul the deacon of Friuli relates, and therefore also probably at Novum Comum. Whence it is not absurdly deduced that disturbances too were from time to time stirred up against the Catholics by the followers of Arius. This is also urged by St. John, bishop of the people of Bergamo, contemporary and neighbour of our St. John, offered up a little later (about the year 683) to the fury of the Arians, if we believe Sigonio. A particular deed to relate Tatti did not have, confirmed by monuments of certain credit; nor do the others relate one.
[9] In what year of Christ St. John yielded to fate there is not one opinion of the authors. the year of death Of the others that appears more probable which ties his death to the year of the Lord 660, and which Ballarini, Ughelli and Tatti relate. Less approved by Tatti is the assertion of a certain more recent writer (Roberto Rusca, book 1 of On the Nobility of his family), according to which John died in the year 714. For John, the second of this name, he says, was succeeded by John the third, Ottarianus, Benedict, Flavian, Deodatus: and the last of these was occupying the episcopal see in the year of the Lord 721; in testimony of which matter he brings forward a privilege given in that year to Adeodatus, bishop of the church of Como, by Liutprand, king of the Lombards; and he says that it could indeed have happened that in so small an interval of years four prelates of Como took up the fillets and laid them down when taken up: but that it would be scarcely credible if anyone chose to weigh the matter with a calm mind; in which matter I would not wish to oppose Tatti. Moreover, he says (where he treats of John) that the diploma of Liutprand exists in the episcopal archive of Como, although on page 944 he reports only a summary of it.
[10] Tatti advises besides that Roberto, as in assigning the year of death of St. John, the year so also in assigning that of Deodatus went astray: since he wrote that Deodatus ceased to be among the living in the year 781; namely at the time when, the kingdom of the Lombards having been cut down, Charles the Great, king of Francia, possessed Italy: whereas nevertheless (which all confess with one mouth) after Deodatus five bishops of Novum Comum are counted, Lombards by race, and raised to that office by Lombard kings, without doubt when Italy was in their power, not in the time of Charles the Great, when the Lombards had fallen from the kingdom of Italy after Desiderius was captured at Pavia in the year 774. See Sigonio, book 3, On the Kingdom of Italy, and Muratori in the Annals of Italy at this year. If what Paolo Morigia writes in book 1, chapter 4, of On the Nobility of Milan is true, namely that in the year 635 another John, the third of this name, succeeded our John, the latter must be said to have died before the middle of the seventh century; but that about the middle of the same century Victorinus, the predecessor of John the second, was still occupying the chair of Como appears more probable and is more received. See Tatti under Victorinus, and our Acta, tome 2 of September, page 541.
[11] and the day are examined. We have, in no. 7, from Tatti, accused Ballarini of error in writing that Victorinus was snatched from the living in the year 644 under Constantine III: that Constantine was
the son of the emperor Heraclius, taken out of the way in the year 641 (the same in which his father had died), and so three years before the death of Victorinus asserted by Ballarini, by poison administered by Martina Augusta, as was believed, as Baronius witnesses. But since Ballarini also says that John the second died under Constantine III, he seems to be understood to mean not Constantine the son of Heraclius, but his grandson, whom some have called Constans, others Constantius, others finally Constantine. Finally, the heavenly birthday of St. John is not the same for all, some assigning the 2nd of October, others the 5th of the same month. The latter Ballarini, under John the second, and Ferdinando Ughelli in the series of the Bishops of Como, no. 18, affirm, but destitute of all authority, says Tatti, to whom he here opposes the tradition of the church of Como, which has always recalled the memory of its holy Prelate on the second of October, not the fifth; to which, in so great a dearth of more ancient monuments, we judge it safer and more advisable to adhere.