Felicula

ON ST. FELICULA, VIRGIN, IN THE TERRITORY OF AUXERRE IN GAUL,

PROBABLY BEFORE THE TENTH CENTURY.

SYLLOGE.

Felicula, virgin, in the territory of Auxerre in Gaul. (S.)

BY C. B.

What happens from time to time in the Saints to be brought into our Work, that scarcely anything is ascertained concerning them besides the ecclesiastical cult which they enjoy, The Saint, of whom no Acts exist, with ecclesiastical cult, holds place most of all today in St. Felicula. For the Acts of this holy Virgin — who, as is established from the old and present-day Breviaries of the diocese of Auxerre, has enjoyed ecclesiastical cult from time immemorial and enjoys it today in that diocese — do not exist committed to writing; nor do any ancient monuments that I know of teach who or of what kind she was, or in what definite century she flourished. John Le-Beuf, canon and succentor of the cathedral church of Auxerre, known in the republic of letters for the Monuments he published pertaining to the history, both ecclesiastical and civil, of the city of Auxerre, and for another Composition in which he comprised the history of Auxerre captured by the Huguenots or Calvinists and afterwards, these having been driven out, restored to liberty — who himself too found no monuments of St. Felicula other than those which pertain to her cult — supplies various Notices concerning this, both in his praised Composition on Auxerre captured and afterwards restored to liberty, and in various letters which he sent to our Predecessors. All of these, because they comprise most of the things concerning our Saint that seem of more approved credit, I transcribe here, converted from the French tongue into Latin, in the order in which they were given, adding also at the end some Observations, as I shall judge it conducive, by which I may both illustrate those Notices and inform the studious reader of the consequences to be drawn from them and pertaining in any way to the Saint.

[2] In the year 1721, when at Auxerre there was treatment of composing a new Calendar and of restoring in the church of Auxerre the cult of St. Felicula, concerning which and her sacred relics then intermitted for some time, the praised canon and succentor of Auxerre, in a letter given to our Predecessors on the 25th of April, writes thus: There is given St. Felicula, venerated on the 1st of August (namely formerly at Auxerre, from what is to be said), whose memory we have restored, because we think her a native Saint, whose relics partly are or were at Gien, a town of the diocese of Auxerre, partly in the diocese of Bourges at Vailly on the Loire. She is patroness of Gien, but from the thirteenth century she has been confused with a Roman martyr of the same name. Thus he, presently also subjoining things by which he intimates that he doubted, and wished to be informed, whether the Felicula whom he had said was formerly venerated at Auxerre is not the very one who is noted at the 1st day of August in the Usuard of the Lübeck-Cologne edition and of Greven under the name of Facinola. But he seems afterwards to have laid aside this doubt, taught by documents, I know not which. So his praised Composition on Auxerre captured and freed, which he published after the twenty-fifth day of April of the year 1721, makes me judge. For in it, supplying at the same time the second Notice now to be given here, at page 259 and following, on the place in which he teaches that the relics of St. Felicula, religiously preserved at Gien, were impiously scattered by the Calvinists devastating all things sacred and profane there in the year 1567, he observes thus: Those relics (namely of St. Felicula) were (namely at Gien) in the collegiate church of St. Stephen. They were those very ones which Gilo, formerly lord of Gien and the neighbouring places, had carried off from the castle of Saint-Brisson, whither a certain priest had brought them, having discovered them and extracted them from a stone monument which he knew to be near Briare on the Eastern bank of the river Loire. It also appears altogether probable that it was by the liberality of this lord that the chapter of Vailly in the duchy of Berry was once enriched with a notable part of the relics of the same Saint. In the book which they read there after Prime, he is found to have been very beneficent to this collegiate church. The solemnity in which the relics of saint Felicula were received at Gien is celebrated there on the 5th of October; but for three or four centuries this Saint has been confused with the Great Felicula of Rome, whose relics never went out of Italy. The Felicula of the chapters of Gien and Vailly, which are sufficiently near to each other, is more probably she whose memory for at least five hundred years has been marked at the 1st day of August, with the sole title of Virgin, in the Calendars of the diocese of Auxerre. On the same day, in some copies of Usuard, she is found under the name of Fanicula or Facinula, simply Virgin, the place in which she is venerated not being designated.

[3] Notices to our Predecessors From which last words, inasmuch as they are affected by no particle of doubt, it follows that, when he wrote them, the praised canon of Auxerre no longer doubted, as he had done before, whether St. Felicula is the very one who is mentioned at the 1st day of August under the sole name of Facinola in the Usuard of the Lübeck-Cologne edition and of Greven. And that he did not doubt of this matter after the year 1721, in which he gave the first Notice already transcribed here above, sufficiently appears also from another Notice which, in the year 1726, when he had already published the History of Auxerre captured and freed, he suggested in a letter given to our Sollerius, in these words: If you have received our new Calendar (namely printed in the year 1725), you will undoubtedly have found in it at the fifth of October that the death of St. Felicula is reckoned with the 1st day of August. In truth her memory was marked at this day in all our Calendars from time immemorial, that is, going back to about the twelfth century. But a long time ago a thought occurred to me which I have forgotten until now to communicate to you. It is this: Since the first days of the months present more Saints than others, can it have come about that some of these, when the true day of the month on which they died was unknown, were placed on its first day? Hence it may have happened that St. Facinula or Fanicula is recorded at the 1st day of August in certain copies of Usuard; for a manuscript seen by me in the monastery of St. Germain-des-Prés places the Office of this Saint between that which is proposed of St. Bartholomew and another which is proposed of St. Augustine; and I remember that in it she is called Fascinula, the change of one or another little letter not always requiring that we make the Saints in whose names it occurs different.

[4] Further, when in the year 1733 the first volume of August of our Work had come forth, some are given here, and Le-Beuf, canon and succentor of Auxerre, had found nothing in it which could pertain to St. Felicula except these words concerning Facinola occurring among the Passed Over at the first day of that month, Facinola, likewise marked there (in Greven), is equally unknown to me hitherto; and when he gave a letter in the year 1734 to our predecessors, he added to it a little slip conceived in these words: Sollerius at the 1st day of August did not say so much as a little word about St. Felicula, virgin, venerated from time immemorial on this day in the diocese of Auxerre, as its old Breviaries up to those which were in use in the past century attest. Her interrupted cult has been restored in the later Breviary at the 5th day of October. This is believed to be the day of the translation of Felicula, virgin, a native Saint and patroness of the city of Gien, whose relics the Calvinists scattered in the sixteenth century … Her Life is unknown, nor do I find other monuments than those which pertain to the ecclesiastical cult of that holy Virgin. In the old books of Gien a Legend of this Saint is found, in which are attributed to her all the things which have been said at the 13th day of June of the Great Felicula of Rome (namely in our Work) … In the Treasury of the chapter of Vailly, which is sufficiently near to that of Gien and situated in the duchy of Berry, I saw a jaw of St. Felicula, venerated at Auxerre, enclosed in a precious casket.

[5] So ends the aforesaid slip, and it is the last of the Notices given by the canon of Auxerre, already often praised, concerning St. Felicula, or rather concerning her ecclesiastical cult. she was once honoured and is today honoured at Auxerre And indeed, to dispatch now what is to be observed on them, that this is the cult with which the Saint in the diocese

of Auxerre formerly rejoiced at the 1st day of August — very ancient — that writer rightly teaches from its old Breviaries. So I am persuaded even by the sole Breviary of Auxerre existing with us, which is noted as printed at the beginning of the sixteenth century or earlier, and which prescribes at the 1st day of August a commemoration of St. Felicula, virgin. But was the Saint anciently so venerated throughout the whole diocese of Auxerre on that day of August? Since the relics of St. Felicula, as Le-Beuf teaches in the latter of the two Notices given at number 2, were once — namely in the twelfth century, as appears from the words of the Breviary of Auxerre to be transcribed here below — brought on the 5th day of October to Gien, or Giomum, a town of the diocese of Auxerre on the Loire, which is also called Genabum by others, though, as it appears, less correctly, it seems probable that this day of October has for many centuries now been solemn every year at Gien, and chiefly in the collegiate church of St. Stephen of this city, in which those sacred pledges had been deposited, with the ecclesiastical cult of the Saint; and it can therefore be doubted whether it happened that she was honoured at that time in the same church with a commemoration to be made at the 1st day of August in the Office or Canonical Hours — unless perhaps you would have her to have been honoured there with cult twice in the year. However this matter stands, it is at any rate manifest, from the Notices already transcribed here and from the more recent Breviaries and Calendars of the diocese of Auxerre, that the Saint now enjoys ecclesiastical cult both at Gien and at Auxerre at the 5th day of October.

[6] and probably also at Vailly. But now someone will ask whether the Saint does not now enjoy ecclesiastical cult elsewhere too than in the diocese of Auxerre? In the diocese of Bourges, and so outside that of Auxerre, there is a place situated on the Loire which is called in French Lere or Lerai, and in Latin is rendered Valeriacum by Catherinot — whom I followed above too in giving Latinity to this French name — in the Catalogue of the ecclesiastical benefices of the diocese of Bourges, page 5; and since in the collegiate church which the place comprises, and which the praised Catherinot says in the place cited was founded about the year 1100, the jaw of our Saint, enclosed in a precious reliquary, is religiously preserved today, as is established from the Notice given last from John Le-Beuf, it at least appears to be questioned whether the Saint is not also honoured there with ecclesiastical cult; nay rather it seems not unlike the truth that Felicula — of whose relics, moreover, Le-Beuf also teaches, in his Auxerre captured and freed, at the end of the later Notice given at number 2 from this little Work, that some fragments existed in the Priory of La Charité on the Loire — was honoured with this honour in that church already from the twelfth century. For this church would already then have possessed relics of the Saint, if the latter of the two Notices transcribed here at number 2 from Le-Beuf in actual fact also holds its credit, as it appears to hold. So I judge, because according to it Gilo, lord of Gien, who gave the relics of St. Felicula carried off from the castle of Saint-Brisson to the collegiate church of St. Stephen at Gien, likewise gave sacred relics of the Saint to the collegiate church of Vailly; and those with which it was enriched would have been brought to it already from the twelfth century, as the newest Breviary of the diocese of Auxerre — by which it seems we must stand here — discloses in the fourth Lesson of the present Office, in these words pertaining in it to our Saint: That the sacred remains of saint Felicula, virgin, formerly buried beside the Loire in the territory of Auxerre, were also on this day (the fifth of October) six hundred years ago translated to Genabum, or the fort of Giomum, all the monuments of saint Stephen of Genabum testify.

[7] The time at which she died. Thus the more recent Breviary of Auxerre, first printed in the year 1725; from which the six hundred years, before which, as it teaches in the words recited, the relics of the Saint were translated to Giomum, bring us, going backward, to the year 1125, in which therefore, according to the aforesaid Breviary of Auxerre, those sacred pledges were translated to Giomum. From this epoch of this deed, further, it follows that St. Felicula certainly exchanged this mortal life for the immortal not later than the beginning of the twelfth century. But can the year, or at least the century, in which this happened not be defined with certainty? The Calendar prefixed to the present-day Breviary of Auxerre notes that Felicula died before the tenth century: and indeed, since the sacred remains of the Saint were, from what has already been said, translated in the twelfth century, not much advanced, and it could easily have come about that, before this was done, the Saint had already lain buried about two hundred years, it does not appear unlike the truth that she departed from the living before the tenth century; but how much earlier this happened no one, as I think, will define safely enough, ancient monuments being lacking for it; and hence I, solely following the Calendar of Auxerre just cited, thought it sufficient to write above in the margin these words, probably before the tenth century. Let us now turn our discourse to the day on which the Saint is reported to have died. In the Calendar of Auxerre already praised, today, that is, at the 5th day of October, it is expressly noted: She died (namely St. Felicula) on the 1st of Aug.

[8] And indeed, since the Saint, as Le-Beuf teaches in one and another of the Notices transcribed here above, Why nothing was said of her in our Work at the 1st of August. is recorded at the 1st day of August in all the old Calendars of the diocese of Auxerre, she perhaps in fact migrated to the Heavenly ones on this day; but even if the matter stands so, it can by no means be certain that it happened then, if only because Saints are not rarely found inscribed in Calendars and sacred Fasti on other days than those on which they died; nor did Le-Beuf, canon and succentor of Auxerre, already very often praised, hold it as certain, as he discloses not obscurely in the Notice transcribed here at number 3. But, you will say, since the Saint is at any rate inserted in the old Calendars of the diocese of Auxerre at the 1st of August, why was not even a word brought forth concerning her at this day in our Work? Since Felicula, as is clear from what has already been said, does not now enjoy ecclesiastical cult at the 1st of August, as formerly, she certainly was not to be treated among the Saints at this day. Nor do I see either why she should have been commemorated among the Passed Over, since there exist with us no Calendars or sacred Fasti at all in which the Saint's name is inscribed at the 1st of August, and it is not our custom to review among the Passed Over Saints whose names are not recorded in Monuments, that is, in Hagiologies or Calendars which we ourselves can consult; and although Facinola, virgin, was reported among the Passed Over at the said day of August, and thus, at least on her occasion — since Le-Beuf, in the latter of the two Notices given at number 2, makes her the same as Felicula venerated at Auxerre — mention could have been made of our Saint, the Virgin of Auxerre, yet it does not seem that it ought to have been made, for this reason, that, contrary to what Le-Beuf thought, it appears very doubtful whether she is not distinct from Facinola, inasmuch as the latter has joined to her no characteristic at all from which she could be believed to be undoubtedly the same as Felicula.

[9] Distinguished from Saints of the same name. However that may be — to finish now the discourse on our Saint, of whom, because from what has been said she is venerated today, treatment had to be given here — Le-Beuf, if perhaps not rightly making her the same as Facinola, at any rate rightly makes her different, in the Notices transcribed here above, from the Roman Felicula, already given with us at the 13th of June. For our Saint, on the testimony of Le-Beuf in the Notices above, is honoured in absolutely all the Calendars of the diocese of Auxerre with the sole title of Virgin; whence it comes about that she does not seem to have been visited with martyrdom; but the Roman Felicula, inscribed in the sacred Fasti at the 13th day of June, is expressly called martyr in all of these, and did in fact undergo martyrdom. Moreover (see our Work, volume 2 of June, part 2, page 666 and following) the relics of the Roman Felicula, if perhaps — which, however, I do not think — they ever went out of Italy, contrary to what Le-Beuf thinks in the Notices above, do not seem to have been brought into Gaul; so that even from this she ought to seem different from that holy virgin St. Felicula whose principal relics once existed at Gien, and whose jaw, from what has been said, is religiously preserved today at Vailly. There is added also that St. Felicula the martyr was delivered to burial at Rome, as you will find in our Work in the place cited; but Felicula of Auxerre obtained her tomb near Briare, a town of the diocese of Auxerre on the Loire, as Le-Beuf teaches in the latter of the two Notices given at number 2; and although this, like the rest which we have reported above from this writer, does not deserve entire credence in things which pertain to other matters than the cult of our Saint, yet it adds some weight, whatever it be, to the arguments already produced for making a distinction between our Felicula and the Roman Felicula, and it militates also in some way for distinguishing our Virgin of Auxerre from any others of the same name — although meanwhile I do not find it called into doubt whether our Saint is the same as any of these.