Gaudentius

ON ST. GAUDENTIUS, BISHOP OF BRESCIA IN ITALY,

MORE PROBABLY ABOUT THE YEAR 410.

CRITICAL-HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.

Gaudentius, bishop of Brescia in Italy. (S.)

BY B. B.

§ I. St. Gaudentius, whose name is almost lacking in the sacred calendars; his fatherland, and pilgrimage to the East, during which he was elected bishop of Brescia, in what year is uncertain. Shining with doctrine and holiness, he is sent as legate in the cause of St. Chrysostom, from whom he also receives letters of consolation.

Gaudentius, although he is numbered among the most illustrious and holiest pontiffs of the church of Brescia, St. Gaudentius, whose name is almost lacking in the sacred calendars, yet in almost all the sacred calendars his name is lacking; so much so that Chastelain, whose diligence and accuracy are known, announces these things of him Chastelain, Martyrologe universel, 25 Oct., p. 541.: At Brescia the birthday of St. Gaudentius, bishop, conspicuous for erudition and holiness. And so there; but below in the Supplement Ibid. p. 717.: To the margin of St. Gaudentius, he says, add: Without ancient cult, even in his own church, as appears in Rampert, bishop of Brescia of the 7th (rather 9th) century, who, although he speaks of him, not even once calls him Saint or Blessed, though otherwise he does not neglect to name those Saints who had this cult, as St. Philastrius. This Gaudentius was consecrated by St. Ambrose. How wrongly however Chastelain wrote these things, we shall see where the discussion will be of the cult of St. Gaudentius. This meanwhile remains certain, that his memory is passed over in the ancient martyrologies. Let the Usuard of Sollerius be an example, in which neither in the text nor in the additions does any mention of the holy Bishop occur. But he has been inserted in the Roman on this day in the same words which I have recited above from Chastelain: At Brescia the Birthday of St. Gaudentius, bishop, conspicuous for erudition and holiness. And Baronius notes: He, on the death of St. Philastrius, unwilling and resisting, was put in his place by the work of St. Ambrose, bishop of Milan, as Gaudentius himself testifies in the sermon delivered at his Ordination. Of the pilgrimage undertaken by him to the East he treats in the sermon on the Dedication of the church of the Holy Assembly. These things will become clearer from what is to be said.

[2] an abridged narrative of his deeds. What has come down to us of St. Gaudentius Schönemann renders thus in abridgment Bibliotheca historico-litteraria Patrum latinorum, vol. I, p. 560. Leipzig 1792.: The fatherland of Gaudentius is uncertain. If he was not a Brescian, he certainly lived long at Brescia, already in the times of Philastrius, his nursling and imbued by him with ecclesiastical discipline, at which time he won great favor for himself among the people and clergy. For while he had set out abroad to the East for the sake of religion, Philastrius meanwhile having died, on the demand of the people and by the vote of other bishops, to which great weight accrued from the authority of Ambrose of Milan, he was elected bishop of Brescia. And Gaudentius indeed, on receiving this message, left nothing untried by which to decline that burden. But Ambrose and the other bishops, bound by the oath by which perhaps the citizens of Brescia had obligated themselves that they would accept no other bishop, sent to him such letters with a delegation of citizens that he considered it a matter of conscience to resist longer, especially since communion was denied him by the Eastern bishops themselves unless he promised his return to the people of Brescia. The beginning of his episcopate, as likewise the day of death of his predecessor, is hidden. By no deed in his episcopate did he become more famous than by the legation undertaken for John Chrysostom to the emperor Arcadius in the year 405 (more correctly the year 406), with Aemilius and Cythegius as companions. Which, although it was without result, yet ennobled him with the praise of constancy and magnanimity, and the testimonies of Chrysostom himself provide a most eloquent commendation of the matter. When Gaudentius died is equally uncertain, some referring his death to the year 427, others, among whom Tillemont, with greater probability to the year 410. And these are the sum and approved outlines of the life of St. Gaudentius, for the most part taken from the very writings of the holy Man, which it falls to us to explain part by part and singly.

[3] his fatherland; As regards the fatherland of St. Gaudentius, suitable monuments and testimonies are lacking by which it could be established in what city, in what territory he first saw the light. From where he was, says Gradenigo Brixia sacra seu Pontificum Brixianorum series, p. 51. Brescia, 1755., is uncertain; yet that he had his domicile in this city (Brescia) seems not to be doubted; both because he calls the same "our city." So in the preface to Benevolus: "As of the honored men of our city, so also of the Lord's people, by the Lord's favor, he is the most worthy head." But this reason is little solid: for Gaudentius, already bishop of Brescia, wrote these things to Benevolus; and it is an established custom universally that bishops call that city theirs in which they have their see, whether they were born there or not, whether they had stayed there before, or came there first when they had been enhanced with the pontifical dignity. The other two reasons used by Gradenigo prove better: Then, he adds, because, having enumerated the labors of Philastrius by which he had cultivated the Christian church, he also calls himself: "the least part of his work," which words are read in sermon XXI, on the life and death of Blessed Philastrius Migne, Patrologia, vol. XX, col. 1000.. Then finally, Gradenigo continues, because by long familiarity with him (Gaudentius) the singular gifts were probably known and perceived by the people of Brescia, by which he merited to be so most vehemently sought by them for the episcopate. It remains therefore uncertain where St. Gaudentius was born; but it is very probable that he stayed at Brescia for no short time before his election, and that there he adhered to St. Philastrius, whom he generally calls his father, and was his disciple. Compare Gagliardi in the Prolegomena to the works of St. Gaudentius Ibid., col. 799.. Of the fatherland of Gaudentius, he says, I have nothing certain to affirm. That he stayed at Brescia, before he set out for the East, is ascertained: for he says in the sermon on his Ordination: "So that I could no longer resist without harm to my soul, to whom saving communion was denied also by the Eastern bishops, unless I promised my return to you." Return, further, designates either a fatherland or at least a domicile Compare Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. X, p. 581.. And in very truth what return would it be, unless he had first stayed there?

[4] his pilgrimage to the East, St. Gaudentius himself mentions at length his pilgrimage to the East before his episcopate, in sermon XVI delivered on the day of his Ordination, and in sermon XVII at the Dedication of the Basilica. When, he says Sermon XVII. Migne, in the place above, col. 964 and following., I was proceeding through the cities of Cappadocia to Jerusalem, … in the very greatest city of Cappadocia, which is called Caesarea, where the same Most Blessed (the forty martyrs of Sebaste) have a distinguished martyr-shrine, we found certain handmaids of God, most worthy mothers of a monastery of holy virgins, altogether like Mary and Martha, whom Jesus deservedly loves; sisters by nature, faith and zeal, and the integrity of chastity. To whom by their maternal uncle, the high priest and blessed confessor Basil, had once been handed over the venerable relics of these Martyrs, which they without hesitation and faithfully gave to our desire, approving us as suitable venerators of so great a gift, and at the same time confessing under the Lord's witness that they had always prayed our God that this so precious possession might be passed on to such heirs as should cultivate it with like faith and diligence; who of their zeal and veneration both successors

and increasers might come forward; since they themselves were advanced in years and were daily awaiting their passing from this world. Behold, the faithful prayer was heard, etc. He adds that he had these holy Martyrs as companions of his journey, when he was travelling from Cappadocia to Jerusalem Migne, as above.. From the same pilgrimage, in all likelihood, St. Gaudentius brought back relics of St. John the Baptist, buried at Sebaste in Palestine; of St. Thomas, venerated at Edessa in Mesopotamia; of SS. Andrew and Luke, whose pledges were at Constantinople, while their tombs were in Achaia Compare Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. X, p. 582.. Of all these the discussion will return when we treat of the dedication of the church of Brescia. Tillemont thinks that during this pilgrimage Gaudentius met St. Chrysostom, having formed this opinion from the latter's letter addressed to St. Gaudentius and dated about the year 406: "We draw consolation," are the words of the holy doctor Migne, col. 804., "from the ardour and sincerity of your charity: and having made trial of it here, we have learned that there too (at Brescia) it thrives undiminished, and has in no way been weakened either by length of time or by distance of journey." Tillemont maintains that these words are to be referred to the earlier pilgrimage of St. Gaudentius: for he returned to the East, being by then a bishop, about the springtime of the aforesaid year 406, to bring help to St. Chrysostom, as we shall see later. Gradonicus agrees with Tillemont, deciding thus Brixia sacra, p. 56.: "From which words of the letter everyone sees that Chrysostom, long before that embassy (in the year 406), had had some proof in the East of the charity and sincerity of Gaudentius. Moreover, that any other Gaudentius besides ours spent time in the East in Chrysostom's day is something I have not ascertained from any ecclesiastical records that I have read." So too Justus Fontaninus, archbishop of Ancyra Historia litteraria Aquileiensis, p. 327.: "There in the East he (Gaudentius) was attached to John Chrysostom by a close bond, and on his behalf, after he had been cast out of the episcopate, he was sent to Constantinople as legate of the Roman church. See the sermon XVI of the same Gaudentius, and letter CLXXXIV of Chrysostom." And so indeed those men interpret the quoted passage of Chrysostom. Galeardus seems to have been of another opinion, since he makes no mention of a meeting with the holy Doctor by Gaudentius at that time. To say what I think, the letter of St. Chrysostom can conveniently be understood in its entirety of the later journey to the East, undertaken by Bl. Gaudentius at the command of Innocent I, at the opening of the 5th century, in the cause of the holy Patriarch of Constantinople: both because the letter was written on the occasion of this embassy; and because the words "Having made trial here" are in their obvious sense referred to the innumerable difficulties and labours by which St. Gaudentius was pressed at Constantinople; and because those other words "either by length of time" do not of themselves indicate a span of several years, especially if one looks at the words that follow, with which they cohere, "or by distance of journey," which surely signify nothing other than the return from Greece into Italy. However that may be, if Gaudentius on this pilgrimage (he did not see him on the embassy) met Chrysostom, this must have happened at Antioch: for the latter was made bishop of Constantinople in the year 398; the former, however, bishop of Brescia at least before the 4th of April 397, since on that day and year St. Ambrose died, who was present at the consecration of St. Gaudentius. Moreover, as we shall explain more plainly, this consecration is to be placed either in the year 384 or at the beginning of the year 397 or in one of the years between; whence it is clear that the time of the pilgrimage can be assigned to no certain year; likewise we do not know how long the holy Man stayed in the East, although it appears that he did not traverse Cappadocia and Syria hastily, and accordingly that he was easily absent from Brescia one or two years and perhaps longer. This is certain, that he was called to the mitre while absent.

[5] Elected bishop while absent, Gaudentius was travelling through the East when the death of St. Philastrius of Brescia occurred. The clergy and people being mournful over the passing of their most illustrious bishop, and greatly anxious about the appointment of another, since perhaps no one of the clergy of Brescia was held worthier to be substituted for Philastrius, the absent Gaudentius presented himself before their eyes. Wherefore, having compared their wishes with one another, and with the added suffrage of the neighbouring bishops, and above all of Ambrose, prelate of Milan and metropolitan, they resolved on oath that they would accept no other bishop except Gaudentius Gradonicus, p. 51 and following.. But let us hear the holy Prelate himself, beginning his sermon on his own Consecration with these words Migne, vol. XX, col. 955.: "Conscious of my unskilfulness, and deterred by shame at my age itself, immature for the dignity of the priesthood, I was rightly asking leave of the chief priests to be silent. For I fear first that the power of the heavenly words may be diminished by the speech of my littleness; and then I blush that I am unable to furnish the desired fruit of doctrine to so great an expectation. Wherefore, feeling myself in all things unequal to your desire, I endeavoured with all my strength to decline this burden. But the blessed father Ambrose and the other venerable bishops, bound by the oath with which you rashly obliged yourselves, sent such letters to me with your embassy that I could no longer resist without harm to my soul; for the saving communion would also have been denied me by the eastern bishops unless I promised my return to you. Thus shut in, therefore, by this strait, and subjugated by the authority of the Saints here present, I undertook this office of the high priesthood, neither worthy in merit, nor suitable in age, nor mature in doctrine. Consider, therefore, what I suffer, who, though I know not how to speak, cannot keep silent."

Gaudentius delivered this sermon on the first day of his consecration, and it was accordingly entitled: On his own Ordination … before many bishops, but above all before Ambrose, prelate of the Milanese Gradonicus, in the Proem, p. XXV.. From the passage quoted we learn first that St. Gaudentius was elected at no advanced age, since he himself says that he is of immature age and not suitable in age. On this matter Galeardus notes Migne, as above, col. 955.: "The discipline of those times required that bishops be made only at a mature and already advanced age, which Siricius (Roman pontiff from the year 384 to the year 398, and accordingly contemporary with St. Gaudentius) in his Decretal letter to Himerius, bishop of Tarragona, chapter 9, wished to be five and forty years. There are nevertheless many examples of most eminent men who, having received a dispensation for years, were advanced to the episcopate at an immature age; and this was granted to their virtue, that they should be released from the laws. Thus, on the witness of Eusebius Eccl. Hist., bk. VI, ch. 30., Gregory the Wonderworker and Athenodorus advanced so greatly in the divine oracles that both, while still quite young, were appointed bishops of churches in Pontus. Remigius was elected to the church of Reims when no more than twenty-two years old Flodoard, bk. I, ch. XI.. I pass over others." And so St. Gaudentius appears to have been both elected and consecrated bishop at under forty-five years at the least; but in exactly what year of his age, no one could say, suitable records being lacking.

[6] He is compelled to return to Brescia. Secondly we learn that he ascended the see of Brescia very much resisting and reluctant; and that this was foreseen by the clergy and people; wherefore they obliged themselves by oath that they would accept no other except Gaudentius. Now that this oath was that of the citizens, and not of the bishops, is plain from the context: "But the blessed father Ambrose and the other venerable bishops, bound by the oath with which you rashly obliged yourselves," etc. We observe this in order to note the slip of Baronius, who attributes the oath to the bishops equally with the citizens: "All," he says Annals, at the year 386, n. VII., "the bishops of that province and especially St. Ambrose unite with equal consent in the election upon Gaudentius himself, though absent; they confirm the decree and establish it by oath," unless perhaps Baronius understands that this oath was by no means disapproved by the bishops. Thirdly we learn that the holy Man was compelled to submit his shoulders to the burden. "That burden therefore," so Gradonicus Page 52., "they at once offer him by embassy and letters; but since, while living at Brescia, he had displayed illustrious examples of an extraordinary moderation of mind, the people of Brescia reckoned that he would struggle against it. Wherefore, wishing to forestall every impediment, they gave suppliant petitions to the eastern bishops, that they should deny communion to Gaudentius if he resisted. Nor did the fear they had conceived deceive them: for at first he stoutly refused; then, struck by ecclesiastical threats, he at last obeyed the will of the bishops, and at the opportune time came to Brescia, where, received, as it is fitting to believe, by the outpoured multitude of the rejoicing city of every age and order, he was consecrated by St. Ambrose bishop of this city, while still in the flower of his age."

[7] He is consecrated by St. Ambrose, That the holy bishop of Milan was present is already sufficiently established from the words of St. Gaudentius brought forward in the preceding number. But it shines forth even more clearly from another place in the same sermon: "I beseech," says St. Gaudentius Migne, col. 958., "our common father Ambrose, that after my scant dew of speech he himself may water your hearts with the mysteries of the divine writings. For he will speak by the Holy Spirit, of whom he is full, and rivers of living water shall flow from his belly, and as the successor of the apostle Peter he himself will be the mouth of all the priests standing around. For when the Lord Jesus asked the apostles: 'But whom do you say that I am?' Peter alone answered with the mouth of all believers: 'Thou art Christ, the son of the living God.'" It is certainly likely that St. Ambrose complied with the one inviting him; yet this is found written nowhere. From this invitation and from the fact that St. Ambrose is called father, Gradonicus infers In the proem, p. XXV. that the see of Brescia was at that time suffragan of the church of Milan, not, as afterwards prevailed, of that of Aquileia, and that Ambrose himself enjoyed the metropolitan right: "For indeed," he says, "who can deny that the people of Brescia thought their church to be subject to that of Milan, when he sees them, bereft of a pastor, taking refuge with Ambrose, and not with Valerius, who held the see of Aquileia? There is added also that among the rights of metropolitans, from their very origin down to the 8th century, this was the chief, that the metropolitan held the primacy in the election and consecration of a bishop: 'That bishops be promoted to ecclesiastical power by the judgment of the Metropolitans and of those bishops who are round about;' so it was decreed by canon 12 of the first council of Laodicea, held in the year CCCXX, Sylvester being supreme pontiff. For which reason the first ecumenical Synod, held at Nicaea in the year CCCXXV, had defined in canon 6: 'If anyone has been made bishop without the judgment of the Metropolitan, this man the great Synod defines ought not to be a bishop.' Hence I judge it came about that the Metropolitan was called 'Father' by the others." Then in another place Gradonicus adds Page 52, note (5)., in the proemial dissertation: "We have shown that Gaudentius was consecrated bishop by Ambrose, inasmuch as he was metropolitan. That this was performed as soon as Gaudentius arrived at Brescia may be conjectured from the usage of that time, by which it was not permitted that an episcopate stay long vacant, as the general council of Chalcedon afterwards, celebrated in the year 451, decreed in canon 25, namely that within three months the ordinations

of bishops ought to be celebrated." These views of Gradonicus I for my part would not disapprove.

[8] Uncertain in what year; perhaps in 387. But in what year was this consecration performed? It is an entangled question indeed and, as we have already warned, insoluble. It will help to hear Galeardus: "In what year," he says Migne, col. 798., "Gaudentius took up the episcopate is not sufficiently clear. It seems to have been done about the year 387, an opinion which nearly all the more recent writers approve. Vossius indeed and Labbe, Cave likewise and Natalis Alexander, as also our Cuper in the acts of St. Philastrius at the 18th day of July Acta SS., vol. IX, of July, p. 386., assign the beginning of the episcopate of Gaudentius to this year. The words of Vossius, in book III on the Latin historians, are these: 'Gaudentius, bishop of Brescia, handed down to memory the life of St. Philastrius, whom he had succeeded in the episcopate. Now Philastrius died in the year 387, whence the age of Gaudentius is sufficiently plain.' Assuredly, if the year of the death of Philastrius were established, there would be no question about the beginning of the episcopate of Gaudentius. What we can attain at least by conjecture, however, is this, that Philastrius met his day after the year 384. For Augustine, who came from Rome to Milan in the year 384, writes that he saw Philastrius, bishop of Brescia, at Milan in the company of Ambrose." I subjoin the words of St. Augustine, taken from letter CCXXII, which bears this inscription: "To his most beloved son and fellow-deacon, Augustine the bishop … One Philastrius, bishop of Brescia, whom I myself saw at Milan with St. Ambrose, wrote," etc. Migne, vol. XLII, col. 17 and 18.. Let us return to Galeardus, who continues thus: "And so it may be that some one, and perhaps the last, of these three years (or rather four, namely 384, 385, 386, and 387) was the year of death for Philastrius, since certainly before the death of Ambrose (which is assigned to the year 397, the 4th day of April) Gaudentius had been made bishop of Brescia. And this seems to have happened several years before Ambrose himself departed: for he speaks of him rather often, and at times addresses him as present, in the sermon on his own ordination and in the sermon on Peter and Paul, of which the former was delivered by Gaudentius at Brescia, and the latter at Milan." As regards the sermon on his Ordination, however, nothing may be inferred from it, since that is precisely what comes into question, namely, in what year this ordination took place. That the later sermon, on Peter and Paul, is a genuine work of St. Gaudentius, Galeardus indeed proves Migne, vol. XX, col. 808., but at what time it was spoken he is altogether silent; that it was delivered at Milan is established, in the judgment of the same Galeardus, from the first words of the opening: "The venerable bishop of Christ, our common father, by the affection with which he detained me when I was setting out, has now also compelled me, excusing myself, to address your charity again by the discourse of my sermon." Accordingly we are not much helped by that sermon either; yet from elsewhere there is nothing to lead us to determine that it was uttered in the first year of the ordination of St. Gaudentius; indeed it is easy to judge otherwise. Nor is this to be passed over, that the sermon on Peter and Paul is not cited in Gradonicus, where he reviews the writings of St. Gaudentius Brixia sacra, p. 58.; who accordingly must be thought to have stuck in doubt at least about its genuineness, which however seems to me to be placed in safety by the reasons brought forward by Galeardus. However that may be, it is clear that there is no ground on which we may securely plant our foot when the question concerns the beginning of the episcopate of our holy Prelate. On the whole, certain chronological marks are lacking in the acts of St. Gaudentius, except this one alone, which pertains to the embassy for St. Chrysostom undertaken at the command of Innocent: for this belongs to the year 406, as we shall say elsewhere. Wherefore, although, as I have warned, I do not reckon it improbable that the prelacy of St. Gaudentius began some years before the decease of St. Ambrose, nevertheless its beginning cannot with certainty be placed except after the death of St. Philastrius, whom St. Augustine testifies that he saw at Milan, to which the holy Doctor came in the year 384, and from which he departed in the year 387; and before the death of St. Ambrose, which the learned commonly assign to the 4th of April 397, though our Henschenius in a special treatise [Vol. I of April, p. XXXVIII and following. Compare Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. X, p. 761 and following.] thought it should be moved to the 17th day of the same month of the following year, that is 398. To these extreme years, therefore, and to any of those between them, the consecration of St. Gaudentius may not absurdly be attached.

[9] St. Gaudentius outstanding in virtue From what has been said it shines out plainly how greatly the holy Pontiff excelled in modesty and humility. Gradonicus, treating of the illustrious administration of the holy Man, and of his virtues and excellent doctrine, says P. 52 and 53.: "He at once applies himself solicitously to adorning and advancing his province. First, following in the footsteps of his predecessor, he presses on to instruct the citizens by doctrine and examples, to root out utterly the remains of the pagans and of other depraved men, and to implant the right faith and chaste morals. It cannot be doubted that his labours succeeded happily: for no one could turn his eyes from the most holy examples of the new Bishop; no one could resist the force of his eloquence and the abundance of his arguments. Whence it came about that, even against his will and despite his resistance, his sermons were taken down by notaries (which at that time was the highest praise); and these, afterwards spread abroad among all, won for their author such praise that he was called by the wisest men the glory of the doctors of that age; wherefore they are altogether to be compared with those which were delivered by such prelates as are known to have held nothing more important than the inquiry into those things which are of Jesus Christ."

[10] and in doctrine, Of the doctrine and eloquence of St. Gaudentius Galeardus treats more minutely in this manner Migne, vol. XX, col. 798.: "Now how greatly our Gaudentius flourished in the praise of doctrine and eloquence is splendidly gathered from the fact that his sermons were commonly taken down by notaries while he was speaking to the people. For it was the established custom at that time that, if any of the ecclesiastical expositors excelled in speaking, his discourses were quickly taken down in writing by notaries assigned to the purpose." On notaries and their shorthand signs, see the letter of Lipsius to Leonard Lessius of the Society of Jesus [Century I to the Belgians, ep. 27. Works, vol. II, p. 381 and following. Antwerp, 1637.], where, as was the man's way, you will find many things learnedly collected and acutely and concisely said on the origin of the signs and on the office and industry of the notaries. I set down one passage Ibid., p. 382.: "What was the use of them? Twofold: public and private. Isidore suggests: 'The use of the signs was this, that whatever was said in an assembly or in the courts, the scribes standing by (hearing) should write down, having divided the parts among themselves, how many words each should take down and in what order' … And mostly it was so, and more surely it was so; yet with the art increased, I shall not doubt that even one sufficed. This then was the public use, to take down speeches and sayings and to publish them. So Asconius relates that the oration of Cicero for Milo, the very one he had delivered (for this present one was written afterward), 'was taken down, and was extant in his time' … This then was the public use: but privately it was very great, whether in letters, orations, or other writings to be dictated on the spot," etc. That the sermons of St. Gaudentius were not seldom taken down is established both from the titles more than once prefixed: Here begin the discourses taken down on various chapters Migne, vol. XX, col. 920.; A discourse of the same, taken down on the day of the Dedication of the basilica Ibid., col. 959.; and: Here begins the discourse which the notaries of certain citizens took down on the first day of his ordination Ibid., col. 955.; and from the express complaint of the holy Bishop in the Preface to Benevolus: "But concerning those discourses," he says Ibid., col. 831 and following., "which, with notaries (as I have learned) stealthily assigned, the idle zeal of certain persons has presumed to collect, doubtless broken up and half complete, I have no concern. They are no longer mine, which are known to have been written down by the headlong haste of the notaries: yet I fear lest, under the title of my sermon, the errors of another may envelop certain things hostile to sound faith, and that those who were the authors of an incautious presumption may be made guilty of an everlasting crime." Of notaries, as well open as concealed, St. Gregory of Nazianzus also seems to treat in the Oration to the 150 bishops, usually entitled the Supreme Farewell: "Farewell," he says Migne, Patrologia Graeca, vol. XXXVI, col. 491 and 492., "lovers of my discourses, and you races and concourses, and styli (reed-pens) both evident and hidden," etc. Χαίρετε τῶν ἐμῶν λόγων ἐρασταὶ, καὶ δρόμοι καὶ συνδρομαὶ, καὶ γραφίδες φανεραὶ καὶ λανθάνουσαι. The Maurist editors note: "'Styli,' 'Graphia,' not 'Calami,' as Billius renders it, which at those times were not yet in use (this is not true in every respect); but they wrote on wax tablets by means of a Stylus or Graphium." And Galeardus, who uses the version of Billius: "Here I would note in passing that the passage of Nazianzen was badly taken by Pirckheimer: for where in the Greek one has καὶ γραφίδες φανεραὶ καὶ λανθάνουσαι, 'and reed-pens both evident and hidden,' he interpreted it 'and also slanderers open and hidden;' by which inept version he undermined the whole sentence of Gregory" Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. XIX, col. 832. Note f.. And so much on the doctrine of St. Gaudentius. Of his writings a fuller discussion will return below. One thing, however, we add, namely that the holy Bishop was skilled in the Greek language, as is clearly established from the preface of Rufinus to the version of the Clementine Recognitions: "It is indeed fair," he says Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. I, col. 1205., "to indicate the plan of our interpretation to you (namely Gaudentius, as we shall prove below), who will read these things also in Greek, lest perhaps you should think that in some places the order of the translation was less well observed by us." Which things surely show, in the judgment of Rufinus, that Gaudentius had no common skill in the Greek language.

[11] He is sent as legate in the cause of St. Chrysostom, "Besides these endowments of holiness, doctrine and eloquence (the words are those of Gradonicus P. 53.), there shone in him an exquisite dexterity in handling affairs, which was chiefly the reason why a rough embassy was laid upon him. I set out the matter in a few words. St. John Chrysostom, raised to the see of Constantinople, reckoning it rightly his duty to cleanse the flock committed to him from its stains, began to inveigh against the corrupt morals especially of the clergy and of the leading men, whence he stirred up against himself the hatreds of many (such is the perfidy of depraved men). Among these stood out the emperor's wife Eudoxia, by whose agency he was driven from his see and packed off into exile, the emperor Arcadius passing the sentence. Over this matter most vehement disturbances were raised in the East by good men, which brought the most flourishing church of the East into great peril. When these things were reported to the supreme pontiff Innocent I, the Holy Father resolved to bring help. Wherefore, having assembled the bishops of Italy in the year CCCCV, they came to this counsel, that a most splendid embassy should be sent to the emperor of the East. Which

things as concern this Italian council, perhaps a Roman one, as Mansi writes Vol. I, col. 285 and 286., it is necessary to set forth here a little more minutely: "St. John Chrysostom," says the cited Mansi, "condemned by the sentence of two conventicles, that at the Oak and that of Constantinople, had after his first restoration from exile again gone from his land, nor did any hope of his restoration remain except that some powerful man as mediator of peace should appease the emperor Arcadius. That he might attempt this, Innocent I gathered a council of Italian bishops, so that they might deliberate on the whole matter in common. What bishops assembled we find nowhere handed down to memory." It is certainly easy to judge that St. Gaudentius and the other legates were present. What the Fathers decreed, however, we learn from Palladius, in the Dialogue on the life of St. Chrysostom Works of St. Chrysostom, vol. XIII, p. 12.: "These bishops of Italy, being gathered, pray the emperor (Honorius) to write to his brother and partner in the empire Arcadius, that he should order a synod to be held at Thessalonica, in order that both parties of the East and of the West might the more easily hasten together to one place, and the synod, perfect not in the number of bishops but in the weight of its sentence, might deliver a certain and undoubted judgment. By which things his piety was kindled, and he writes to the bishop of the Roman church to send five bishops, and two presbyters of the Roman church and one deacon, to bear his letter to his brother," of which this was the tenor, to be quoted by us at this place in full:

[12] with a letter of Honorius, emperor of the West, to Arcadius; "For the third time now I write to your clemency, asking that the things done by compact against the bishop John be amended. And, as it seems, it has not yet been accomplished. Wherefore I have written anew by these bishops and presbyters, being much concerned for the peace of the Church, through which our empire too obtains peace, that you may deign to order the bishops of the East to assemble at Thessalonica. For our bishops of the West, having chosen men most steadfast against evil and falsehood, have sent five bishops and two presbyters and one deacon of the great Roman church. These I would have you deign to hold in every honour: so that, if they are persuaded that John has been justly expelled, they may instruct me to withdraw from his communion; or, if they prove that the bishops of the East are deliberately malicious, they may turn you from their communion. For what the judgment of the Westerners concerning bishop John may be, I have subjoined two out of all the letters that have been written to me, of the same judgment with the rest, one of the bishop of Rome, the other of the bishop of Aquileia. Further, this I beg of your clemency before all things, that you order Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, to appear even unwilling, who is said to be above all the author of all the evils, so that the synod of the bishops who shall be present, in no way hindered, may ratify a peace suited to our times." From this letter it is evidently established that altogether five western bishops were sent to the East; whence it seems strange that by Palladius himself only three are named, indeed that only three are indicated as sent. Hence Gradonicus too, in the place cited: "Three altogether most holy men were chosen: Emilius, Cethegus and our Gaudentius." And in the same way Tillemont, where he treats of St. Gaudentius expressly Mémoires, vol. X, p. 587.; but in the life of St. Chrysostom Ibid., vol. XI, p. 313. he adds two others, namely Marianus, perhaps the same as Maurianus who had his see in Apulia and to whom a letter of Innocent I is extant; and another of unknown name. How it came about that these two are passed over I could not easily say, especially Marianus, of whom open mention is made in the course of the remaining narrative in Palladius himself, as will soon be seen.

[13] And he is afflicted by many hardships on the journey and in the East. "When therefore (the words are those of Palladius) holy Emilius, bishop of Benevento, and Cethegus (whose see is unknown) and Gaudentius, together with the presbyters Valentinian and Boniface, had received the letters of the emperor Honorius, of Innocent and of the Italian bishops, of Chromatius of Aquileia and Venerius of Milan and of others, as well as the Commonitorium of the synod of the whole West, they set out by public conveyance for Constantinople with the bishops (oriental) Cyriacus, Demetrius, Palladius and Eulysius. The Commonitorium contained that John ought not to enter upon judgment unless the church and communion had first been restored to him; so that, the cause for refusing the judgment being removed, he might enter the session of his own accord. Having set out therefore for Constantinople, after four months they returned, recounting Babylonish crimes. As we were sailing past Greece to Athens (the writing of Palladius on the life of St. Chrysostom is cast in the manner of a dialogue. He who speaks here either was a companion of the journey or is at least supposed to be See Dom Ceillier: Auteurs ecclésiastiques, vol. X, p. 77 and following.), we were detained by a certain hostile military tribune, who at once attached one centurion to us, not allowing us to approach Thessalonica. For there it had been our purpose to give the letters first to bishop Anysius. Having thrust us, they say, into two boats, he sent us off. Then, as a vehement south wind fell upon us, we crossed the Aegean Sea and the straits for three days without food; about the twelfth hour of the third day we put in before the royal city beside the suburb of Victor. There, held back by the exactors of the ports, we withdrew again; at whose order, however, we do not know; and we were shut up in a Thracian fortress on the sea, called Athyra; the Romans (the legates, and accordingly St. Gaudentius) in one little house, and those who were with Cyriacus in several; and there we were harassed, so that there was not even a servant at hand to wait upon us. When they demanded the letters, we did not give them, saying: How can it be that we, who are legates, should not deliver the letters of the emperor (Honorius) and of the bishops to the emperor (Arcadius) himself? And when we persisted in not giving them, first the notary Patricius came to us, then certain others; last of all there came one Valerian by name, of Cappadocia, commander of a military unit, and, breaking the thumb of bishop Marianus, he carried off the sealed letter of the emperor (Honorius) with the rest. On the next day, therefore, there sent to us, whether the courtiers of the emperor (Arcadius) or Atticus (the Greek has εἰ τε οἱ περι Ἀττικον, that is, those who were with Atticus) we do not know (for he was said to have invaded the throne of the church), men who offered us three thousand coins, begging that, being persuaded, we should communicate with Atticus and keep silent about the judgment of John. Not assenting to these, we persisted in praying, since nothing peaceable was being accomplished, that we might return without danger to our churches, having seen such inhumanity."

Palladius adds that the bishops were warned of these machinations by a vision. After this he continues thus: "The tribune Valerian himself therefore, pressing on, thrust us into a very bad ship, a payment having been given, as the rumour was, to the shipmaster that he should destroy the bishops as they sailed with twenty soldiers of various services; and he at once drove us out of Athyra. When we had sailed a great many stadia and were on the very point of perishing, we put in at Lampsacus; and thence, having changed ship, on the twentieth day we landed at Otranto in Calabria. Nor could they tell us any more in what state the blessed bishop John was, nor where Demetrius, Cyriacus, Eulysius and Palladius (certainly different from the writer of the Dialogue) were, the bishops who had set out as legates with our bishops (namely the western ones). Then, having boarded another ship, after four months had elapsed, they reached Rome, where they reported to Pope Innocent the evils that had befallen them on that journey" Gradonicus, p. 54.. Compare the life of St. Chrysostom prepared by the Maurist editors Works of St. Chrysostom, vol. XIII, p. 173 and following., Tillemont Mémoires, vol. XI, p. 312 and p. 322 and following., Baronius At the year 406, n. XIII., and our Acts Vol. IV of September, p. 646 and following..

[14] St. Chrysostom writes consolatory letters to the Legates Assuredly this embassy did not meet with the desired outcome; yet its own praise is most deservedly attributed to the bishops by Palladius in the life of St. Chrysostom, chapter IV. And several letters of Chrysostom himself are extant, which the learned commonly consider to have been given on this occasion. They are in fact inscribed in Montfaucon: To the bishops who had come from the West. Of these it will suffice to quote one (since they are altogether alike). Letter CLIX in order has it thus Works of St. Chrysostom, vol. III, p. 691 and following.: "No slight consolation for those evils which have invaded these regions do we receive from the greatness of your zeal and diligence. And indeed those things also which were done by you before, and your vigilance and zeal, and such great care and solicitude, abundantly sufficed to bring us great comfort. But what you have now added, in undertaking so long a journey for the good of the church, has refreshed us all in greater measure. And so with a common mind we give you immense thanks for so many labours and sweats and for these illustrious contests, nor do we cease to proclaim you blessed for this outstanding zeal of soul. And for this reason we have besought my lord the most reverend and most religious presbyter (Evethus) to hasten all the way to you. Him therefore being received, as your courtesy demands, I would have you take pains to set an end worthy of the beginnings. For since those who have brought so many tempests and wars on the churches are still labouring under an incurable disease, it is right to think them wretched on this account and to follow them with tears; but to admire and proclaim you, because even as the evils grow heavier you apply an ever greater zeal and greater diligence to driving them off as time goes on." In the margin of this letter and of three others to the same men, as also of another to the Roman presbyters who had come with the bishops, Montfaucon writes: In the year, as is thought, 406.

[15] and other, separate letters Gradonicus adds Page 55.: "But, by no means content with these praises by which he had exalted the three (rather five) bishops to the sky, Chrysostom wished to consign in writing a singular commendation of Gaudentius in a letter given to him in the same year 406, as Montfaucon thinks, but, as it seems to me at least, after the holy Prelate's return into Italy. Now it runs thus, and it is CLXXXIV in order" Works of St. Chrysostom, vol. III, p. 703 and following.: "To Gaudentius, bishop of Brescia, Γαυδεντιῳ ἐπισκοπῳ Βριξης. Nothing of your affairs is hidden from us, but as if present we know well your zeal, vigilance, cares and labours, which you have undertaken on behalf of the truth, and we give you immense thanks. Nor, living in such great solitude, do we draw a middling consolation from the ardour and sincerity of your charity, of which, having made trial here, we have learned that there too it thrives undiminished, and has in no way been weakened either by length of time or by distance of journey. On which account we feel much gratitude to you, and we exhort you to continue in your course and always to show the same zeal. For you are not unaware of how many churches' salvation is now at stake, and how outstanding this work will be. Thinking on these things, therefore, my most reverend and most religious Lord, deign to persevere in the same zeal: for so it will come about that, your slight labours having been exhausted, you may cultivate for yourselves immortal rewards in heaven for these illustrious contests."

[16] To St. Gaudentius. This letter given to our St. Gaudentius,

all the more recent critics by common consent consider. Certainly Montfaucon expressly inscribes it: Γαυδεντιῳ επισκοπῳ Βριξης, To Gaudentius, bishop of Brescia, and notes from several manuscripts the variant readings: Βριξης, Βρυξης Works of Chrysostom, vol. III, p. 703.. Yet for the most part the name of the see is wanting in the manuscripts, and the inscription bears only: To the bishop Gaudentius. Whence Gradonicus Brixia sacra, p. 55.: "Although the title of the see to which this Gaudentius was attached is wanting here, nevertheless no one, as far as I know, has called into doubt that this was our Gaudentius; because there was at that time no other of this name more celebrated than he, nor any better fitted to undertake this embassy, since he must be said to have won for himself, while staying in the East, a great name for piety and religion among the eastern bishops, who could persuade him to come to the episcopate only by casting in the terror of excommunication …" Compare n. 4, where we said that St. Gaudentius perhaps met St. Chrysostom at Antioch on his first journey to the East. Moreover, as Galeardus has it Migne, vol. XIX, col. 800., there were several Gaudentii not far distant from ours in age, equal in the office of the episcopate, and accordingly not to be rashly confused with him. There was namely, in the reign of Constantius, Gaudentius, prelate of Rimini, who, when the synod had been dissolved, rescinded the acts of the council of Rimini, and for this was run through with the sword by the soldiers of the proconsul; there was also Gaudentius, the Donatists' bishop of Thamugadi in Africa, whom Augustine refuted. There was at nearly the same time as ours Gaudentius, bishop of Novara, born at Ivrea, disciple and companion in exile of Eusebius of Vercelli. And in another place the same Galeardus Ibid., col. 804.: "Now although among the ancient writers on ecclesiastical matters, except for Aemilius, whom they call of Benevento, the title of a see is by no means added to the other bishops who headed this embassy; yet no one may rightly call back into doubt that this Gaudentius was of Brescia, when so splendid a testimony of Chrysostom is extant … And so nearly all the more recent writers, who wrote after Baronius and who had the whole matter more clearly in view, bestow the praise of this embassy on Gaudentius of Brescia, among whom are counted Moréri, Cave, Dupin and, above the others, the most skilful Tillemont." Moreover Galeardus inclines to this opinion, that St. Gaudentius was the head of the embassy; which seems to him to be established from the mentioned letter of St. Chrysostom: "But," he says, "more illustrious altogether than the other praises is the testimony of the same Chrysostom concerning our Gaudentius, whom he seems perhaps to indicate as foremost in dignity among the bishops who were discharging that embassy, while he inscribes another letter in his name alone."

§ II. St. Gaudentius builds a basilica, which he wishes to be named the Council of Saints, and at its consecration delivers an illustrious discourse to the people, probably about the year 400. On the death of the holy Man and the years of his episcopate.

He builds and dedicates a new basilica, Among the deeds of St. Gaudentius worthy of memory, no lowest place is held by the dedication of the Basilica of the Council of Saints, which he himself had built in honour of the holy Martyrs, at which the holy Pontiff also delivered a discourse which is still extant, from which we are splendidly instructed what the solemnity was and how it was carried out. The Discourse is inscribed: On the dedication of the Council of Saints Ibid., col. 959.. And it begins: "Our littleness does not avail to return thanks worthy of the divine gifts and heavenly benefits, dearest brethren. For our God has granted that we should have the venerable relics of the saints; then he himself has bestowed it that we should be able to found a basilica in their honour; and he himself has allowed that today, having obtained the presence of the chief priests, we should merit to celebrate the dedication. For the holy bishops and apostolic men have assembled to pay to their most blessed fathers and teachers the homage of due devotion, that we might be enriched with the fullest abundance of spiritual blessings; although the troublesomeness of the Barbarians has taken away from today's date the greatest part of the celebration, in that the other holy bishops, who we believed would be present, have not arrived. Now who they are by whose blessed relics we are made illustrious, I shall begin hence to enumerate. In the first place is John the Baptist, the last indeed but the greatest of the prophets … After him we have the most blessed Andrew, first the disciple of John himself, then of the Saviour … Third is the blessed Thomas, who after the resurrection of Christ alone desired and alone obtained that he should handle the members of Christ with hands inquisitive indeed but surely worthy … Fourth is Luke the evangelist … Of these four we have the blessed relics present, who, preaching the kingdom of God and justice, were slain by the unbelieving and the wicked, and are shown by the powers of their works to live ever unto God. John is related to have been consummated in the city of Sebaste of the province of Palestine, Thomas among the Indians, Andrew and Luke at Patras, a city of Achaia (St. Gaudentius accordingly does not assert that each suffered in that place; and certainly there is no full agreement among the learned on this matter Compare Galeardus. Patrology of Migne, vol. XIX, col. 963, notes a and b.). After these we have Gervasius, Protasius and Nazarius, most blessed martyrs, who a few years ago at the city of Milan deigned to reveal themselves to the holy bishop Ambrose, whose blood we hold, collected in gypsum; requiring nothing further: for we hold the blood which is the witness of the passion. We have also received the holy ashes of Sisinnius, Martyrius and Alexander, whom recently in Anaunia, as they clung more attentively to the cult of the venerable religion, a sacrilegious people slew, and applying flames burned them up, so that they themselves should become a holocaust, who with most just rebuke had forbidden their Christians to furnish victims to demons. Now what shall I speak worthy of the forty Martyrs after these ten, who to our journey," etc. Compare n. 4, where we have set down this passage, from which we learn that St. Gaudentius received these relics from the sacred virgins, kinswomen of St. Basil the Great. "These venerable relics of the forty martyrs we set forth today to believing peoples to be reverenced, although it is known that from that time on the due celebration of our office, dedicated to their illustrious benefits, has never been lacking." There follows a long digression on the holy forty Martyrs. After which the sermon is concluded thus: "We have taken up a portion of the relics, and we trust that we possess nothing less, while we honour and embrace the whole forty in their embers; as that faithful woman in the Gospel , who was saved through the fringe of Christ, held the hem of his garment and drew out the power of divinity: by the touch of the fringe faith drew healing for the believer, and acquired the salvation which it had presumed. And so the very part which we have merited is the fullness; for these forty Martyrs can in no way be divided from one another, whose relics are inseparable and undistinguished. For as that fiery Spirit of God joined their souls in the unity of saving faith ('for the multitude of all believers had one heart and one soul '), so also the fire, burning up their limbs, reduced them into one body of embers. We have therefore both these forty and the aforesaid ten Saints, gathered from different parts of the earth; whence we decree that this basilica itself, dedicated to their merits, ought to be named the COUNCIL OF SAINTS. For it is worthy that, when we are to proceed to the venerable relics of such great martyrs, we should confess that we are proceeding to the COUNCIL OF SAINTS. Being therefore to be aided by the patronage of so many just men, with all faith and every desire let us run suppliant in their footsteps, that by their intercession we may merit to obtain all that we ask, magnifying Christ the Lord, bestower of so great a gift; to whom be all honour, power and glory with the Father and the Holy Spirit, before all things and now and always and unto all ages of ages. Amen."

[18] with a discourse delivered to the people, From this most illustrious monument of the close of the fourth century we learn: first, that a basilica was founded by St. Gaudentius in honour of the Saints whose venerable relics he had; and that they were altogether fifty in number; and that this basilica, dedicated to their merits, was named the Congregation or Council of Saints; which he so called, as Gradonicus writes Page 63, according to the custom of those times, because he had laid up in it the relics of the holy Martyrs. Whence Galeardus Migne, vol. XX, col. 959. rightly reproves Ottavio Rossi, who in the life of SS. Faustinus and Jovita reckoned that the church of the Council of Saints was so called by this name because assemblies of the faithful were held in it: of which appellation assuredly he could by no means have been ignorant of the origin had he read this discourse of Gaudentius. The above-cited Gradonicus also notes, from Carlo Bescapè (a Basilica Petri), Novaria sacra, book II, that it happened at that time in many cities that the principal bishop would found a church other than the cathedral, and there choose or have his burial. This was done by the other Gaudentius, bishop of Novara, who seems to have died about the year 417; that church was for the most part outside the bounds of the city, as at Novara Gradonicus, p. 64.. The basilica founded by St. Gaudentius of Brescia, and in which the holy Man was buried, was afterwards mostly called "de foris." Then we learn from the same sermon or discourse that the dedication of that basilica was indeed solemnly performed, but not with so much splendour as the holy Prelate would have wished and hoped: "Although," he says, "the troublesomeness of the barbarians has taken away from today's date the greatest part of the celebration, in that the other holy bishops, who we believed would be present, have not arrived." Mention of these barbarians will recur in the following number, where we shall inquire into the year of this consecration. Thirdly we learn who are the Martyrs whose relics were laid up, and whence they came; fourthly, finally, we learn that St. Gaudentius, although he had collected only a portion of the holy relics, speaks in such a way that he seems to have obtained the Bodies: "And so," he says, "the very part which we have merited is the fullness," which he also strives to establish by various reasons. Whence Galeardus Migne, as above, col. 970.: "This illustrious passage of Gaudentius is cited by Jean Ferrand, Disquisitio reliquiaria, book I, chapter 4, article 2, from which, and from other testimonies both of Gaudentius himself and of other Fathers, he contends that it came about that in this way some churches assert that they possess the whole body of some martyr, of whom perhaps they had only a tiny portion laid up in altars, memorials or caskets."

[19] [Most probably about the year 400, as it is permitted to conjecture both from some words of St. Gaudentius,] For defining the time of that Consecration, some mark occurs in these words: "We have also received the holy ashes of Sisinnius, Martyrius and Alexander, whom RECENTLY in Anaunia, as they clung more attentively to the cult of the venerable religion, a sacrilegious people slew." Of these treat, at the 29th of May, Bede, Usuard, Ado and others. Likewise the Roman Martyrology: "On the same day the birthday of the holy martyrs Sisinnius, Martyrius and Alexander, who in the time of the emperor Honorius in the parts of Anaunia (as blessed Paulinus writes), the Gentiles persecuting them, obtained the crown of martyrdom." Papebroch illustrated the Acts especially from two letters of St. Vigilius, bishop of Trent, their contemporary; they were also inserted by Ruinart into his work Acta sincera Martyrum, p. 607. Amsterdam, 1713.. Now Baronius notes at the aforesaid day: "In the … acts which Mombritius recites, these are held to have suffered in this month and on this day, Stilicho being consul; that year is counted (according to the fasti of Onofrio) as the four hundredth … In which consulship also St. Vigilius was killed by the same Gentiles,

as Usuard is the authority, on the 26th day of June." But indeed, as Ruinart observes Ibid., p. 608.: "That these martyrs suffered in the year CCCXCVII learned men prove from these words of St. Vigilius: 'The day of the passion was the 4th before the Kalends of June, the 6th feria.' For this date cannot coincide with any other year. Hence they gather that the consular note attached in the published acts of the same Martyrs is an addition, where 'Stilicho being consul,' that is in the year 400, 'those martyrs are said to have suffered. The place of the passion is designated by the other letter of St. Vigilius as Anagnia,'" namely, or Anaunia (commonly Val d'Anagna, or di Nonn), twenty-five stadia distant from the city of Trent, whence by some they are called "Martyrs of Anaunia." So Augustine calls them in letter 139 to Marcellus. And so the consecration of the basilica of the Council of Saints did not take place before the year 397; but it was performed either in the course of this year or in the following years. Galeardus infers from the word "recently," which St. Gaudentius uses, that this discourse was composed by Gaudentius a little after the year 397 … "For Gaudentius says 'whom recently in Anaunia.'" How far that "recently" and "a little after" extends, no one could easily say.

[20] [Then from the incursions of the barbarians, which are recorded to have stood in the way of a more splendid celebration.] Some light comes from another place in the same Discourse, where St. Gaudentius teaches us that fewer bishops than he had hoped were at hand for the solemnity, on account of the troublesomeness of the barbarians. On the authority of Tillemont, no irruption of barbarians into Italy is known before the four hundredth year of Christ Mémoires, vol. X, p. 586.. But Galeardus, on another sermon of the same St. Gaudentius, namely the XIIIth, has it thus Migne, vol. XX, col. 539.: "But which irruption of barbarians he especially designates, whether that of Eugenius and Arbogast, by which, Valentinian having been slain, they invaded Italy about the year 392; or rather another, of Radagaisus and Alaric after the year 400, is uncertain to me." And in fact in some sense those can be called Barbarians whom Eugenius and Arbogast had led over across the Alps in the year 393, according to the chronological arrangement of Tillemont: for he says Histoire des Empereurs, vol. V, p. 93. Notes. Brussels, 1740.: "Eugenius enters into a treaty with the Alemanni and Franks, and afterwards passes into Italy." So under the aforesaid year 393. Nothing certainly prevents St. Gaudentius from having been able to call the followers of Eugenius barbarians; nor would the assertion of Tillemont be thereby weakened, who assigns the first irruption of the barbarians into Italy to the year 400; since he understands those peoples who, under their own leaders or kings, attacked the failing Roman empire and at length brought it to ruin; of whom St. Jerome Epitaph of Nepotian. Letter LX to Heliodorus. Migne, vol. XXII, col. 600.: "My soul shudders to recount the ruins of our times. It is twenty years and more that between Constantinople and the Julian Alps Roman blood is daily poured out. Scythia, Thrace, Macedonia, Dardania, Dacia, Thessalonica, Achaia, the Epiruses, Dalmatia and all the Pannonias, the Goth, the Sarmatian, the Quadian, the Alan, Huns, Vandals, Marcomanni lay waste, drag off, plunder." Yet against our expressly asserting that by the name of Barbarians the Alemanni and Franks are designated by Gaudentius, there stands among other things the fact that these were not at that time properly called Barbarians; and then that in the years 392 and 393 St. Ambrose was still alive, whom Gaudentius would certainly have lamented as absent in express words. And so it is uncertain whether the consecration was performed in the years just mentioned. As regards the Goths, however, who under the leaders Radagaisus and Alaric devastated Italy about the year 400, these indeed come under the proper name of Barbarians, and they burst in when Ambrose was already dead, and accordingly the two difficulties which we noted above, opposing the years 292 and 293, do not hold; but another emerges, namely from the year of the passion of the holy martyrs of Anaunia, which we have said to be the year 397, whence Galeardus judges that the church was consecrated a little after this year, since St. Gaudentius himself asserts that they had recently been given the palm; but if we say that this happened three or four years before the consecration, we shall certainly not have done great violence to the word "recently." The chronicle of St. Prosper favours this, where it says: "Stilicho and Aurelian being Consuls," that is in the year 400, "the Goths entered Italy under the leaders Alaric and Radagaisus." So in the entire chronicle, as it has been published among his works Ibid., vol. LI, col. 589.. In the appendix to the Eusebian-Hieronymian chronicle from the same St. Prosper among the works of St. Jerome, however, the same things are found as above, but with the year 403 assigned Ibid., vol. XXVII, col. 707 and 708.. Wherefore Basnage notes on this latter passage from St. Prosper: "Prosper errs: for Alaric, king of the Goths, and Radagaisus, king of the Huns, entered Italy by turns; and the one had already fled, routed by Stilicho, when Radagaisus attempted the same land with a repeated onslaught. Alaric had come into Italy in the year 400, as Prosper rightly says; and two years later he was destroyed by Stilicho." Compare Tillemont Histoire des Empereurs, vol. V, p. 75. Notes., Pagi At Baronius's year 403, n. VI., from whom Baronius is to be corrected, as also Baynaldus. It is established therefore how at that time the troublesomeness of the barbarians could take away the greatest part of the celebration. Whence the common opinion, and to us the more probable one, is that the consecration of the basilica of the Council of Saints was performed by St. Gaudentius about the year 400.

[21] The death of St. Gaudentius Like the beginning of the episcopate of St. Gaudentius, so also its end is uncertain. "Some," says Galeardus Migne, vol. XX, col. 805., "put it back to the year 410; others, among whom the distinguished Labbe, to the year 427." This much is certain, that the holy Prelate prolonged his day down to the year 406, as is clear from the embassy in the cause of St. Chrysostom. Whether, however, he survived down to the tenth year of the same century is indeed doubted, but the affirmative opinion is judged much more probable, from the fact that Tyrannius Rufinus sent to St. Gaudentius the Recognitions of St. Clement, translated by him into Latin, with a preface added to him; which version appears to have been sent about the year 410, in which Rufinus died, unless perhaps in the following one. Assuredly, if it were clear in what year Rufinus dedicated the Recognitions to St. Gaudentius, we should thence have a clear mark. But it is not so. Whence Schoenemann, a diligent and accurate writer, yet (as is not infrequent among the followers of the reformed religion, as they call it) not sufficiently fair towards St. Jerome where the question comes up of a man's interior sincerity or holiness, leaves undecided the time at which he either turned the Recognitions into Latin or sent them to St. Gaudentius. "He gave himself wholly," he says Bibliotheca historico-litteraria Patrum latinorum, vol. I, p. 580 and following., "to writing books or translating them from the Greek, and he completed the greatest part of his writings within the seven years which he spent at Aquileia. Having left Aquileia in the year 408, he withdrew again to the monastery of Pinetum, and there finished the second book 'on the blessings of the Patriarchs' … intending afterwards to go on to Rome. But when the barbarians fell upon Rome, having joined the fugitive company of Pinianus, he crossed over in the same year into Sicily. There, in the sight of Calabria, laid waste along with the other regions by Alaric, he spent his last strength, for the sake of Pinianus, on some books of Origen, namely the 'homilies on Numbers,' which he inscribed to one Donatus, and on the 'Song of Songs,' and at length gave up his soul in the embraces of his friends in the year 410, and over his bones Jerome barked this (hateful expression): 'The Scorpion is pressed under the soil of Trinacria between Enceladus and Porphyrion.'" Moreover Schoenemann professes that in ordering the affairs of Rufinus he has followed Fontaninus, who in his literary history of Aquileia discoursed excellently and most copiously on the deeds of Rufinus, his writings and their codices, manuscript and printed; and Maria de Rubeis, distinguished for the praise of a more accurate learning, in the Dissertation on Rufinus. "Both," are the words of Schoenemann, "we have compared with one another, not without trouble, and those things which de Rubeis had explained more certainly or more probably we have either adopted at once or have not neglected to note" [Bibliotheca historico-litteraria Patrum Latinorum, vol. I, p. 572. Note. Leipzig, 1792.]. Schoenemann has said nothing of the acts of St. Jerome, illustrated by Stilting at the 30th day of September and published in our work, in volume VIII of September, in the year 1762: nor is it any wonder: for Stilting favours St. Jerome, against whom the author of the library of the Latin Fathers shows himself more bitterly hostile than is just.

[22] He is placed by some, probably, about the year 410, There is, then, no slight series of years, to one or other of which may be attached the version of the Recognitions undertaken by Rufinus, nor can it be determined with certainty whether Gaudentius received it before or after his embassy in the cause of St. Chrysostom; not, however, before the year 402, down to which lasted the very well-known and very bitter contentions between St. Jerome and Rufinus; for in the aforesaid year the former wrote his third book against the latter. Thereafter, as Schoenemann says, "the serenity of the sky being brought back, Rufinus wholly to writing," etc. Whence it appears sufficiently that the Recognitions were dedicated to St. Gaudentius not earlier than in the year 403, nor later than in the year 410, in which Rufinus met his last day. But it will help to hear Rufinus himself. "We," he says in the Prologue Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. I, col. 1205., "whom both the slenderness of our ability renders less ready, and old age now slow and sluggish, have nevertheless at length, though after many delays, rendered the work which Silvia of venerable memory once enjoined, that we should render Clement into our language, and which you (Gaudentius) thereafter demanded by right of inheritance." And so Rufinus, already an old man, asked by Gaudentius, undertook this labour after long delays. Whence, if the request of Gaudentius was made after the contentions with St. Jerome were put to rest in the year 402 (and this seems certain to me), and Rufinus only after long delays put his hand to the work, some years may easily have flowed by between the prayers of Gaudentius and the completion of the work. Indeed Ceillier Autheurs ecclésiastiques, vol. X, p. 518. and Tillemont Mémoires, vol. X, p. 588 and following. judge it to be more probably established from these things that St. Gaudentius survived down to the year 410, because only at that time could Rufinus have submitted the version of the Recognitions to him. I for my part would not dare to assume so much; because no solid reason occurs to me by which we should be compelled to attach the dedication of that version to the last year of Rufinus's life: the more so as Rufinus himself indicates clearly enough that he wrote some other things after these: "but if," he says Fontaninus, p. 295., "the Lord permits me to complete them (he is speaking of the books of the Recognitions), we shall return to those and to your desires, so that, God permitting, we may say something on the books of Numbers and of Deuteronomy." Whence Schoenemann: "He spent his last strength on some books of Origen, namely the 'Homilies on Numbers … and on the Song of Songs' …" Although therefore it is not sufficiently proved that the episcopate of St. Gaudentius is to be extended down to the year 410,

yet I would readily grant it to be established from the Prologue of Rufinus that he survived the embassy for St. Chrysostom by about two or perhaps three years, and accordingly held the mitre of Brescia at least down to the year 408. Whether, however, the holy Man prolonged his day down to the year 427, as seems to have pleased Labbe De script. eccles., vol. I, p. 337. and Ughelli Italia sacra, vol. IV, col. 528., I would strongly doubt. Moreover Labbe relies solely on Ughelli's catalogue: "Gaudentius," he says, "successor of Philastrius in the episcopate of Brescia from the year 387 until the beginnings of the fifth century, and either the year 410, as some have it, or 427, so far indeed as may be understood from the beginnings of his successor Paul, who, as Ferdinando Ughelli teaches in vol. IV of Italia sacra, obtained the episcopal dignity in the year 427." Nor does Ughelli add any reason by which to confirm his chronological arrangement, whence this seems less probable to us, says Gradonicus Brixia sacra, p. 61., with Tillemont; because in the too brief space of twenty-four years there would have been four bishops at Brescia: for we see that Optatianus took part in the council of Milan celebrated in the year CCCCLI. Plainly, after St. Gaudentius and down to Optatianus, Paul, Theophilus, Silvinus and Gaudiosus I sat as bishops of Brescia Compare Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. X, p. 588..

[23] [At which time the version of the Recognitions seems to have been dedicated to St. Gaudentius by Rufinus.] Nor is it to be passed over that some have doubted whether Rufinus, dedicating the Recognitions to a Gaudentius with no indication of a see added, had in view the Bishop of Brescia, or another holy prelate of the same name. But this doubt easily vanishes from an attentive consideration of the text of Rufinus: "To you indeed, Gaudentius (the words are those of Rufinus in the preface Migne. As above.), illustrious glory of our doctors, there is such vigour of ability, or rather such grace of the spirit, that if anything is said by you in the manner of daily speech, if anything is declared in the church, it ought to be kept in books and handed down to posterity for their instruction." Now, as Gradonicus rightly notes Brixia sacra, p. 57., "so great an encomium can be fitted to Gaudentius of Brescia alone; for he it was who, by the agreement of all the writers of ecclesiastical history, was the 'illustrious doctor,' whose sermons, once called Discourses, were taken down by notaries and eagerly read, as we have seen above, and as will be clearer below." There is also another passage by which the same is again established. Rufinus says towards the end of the peroration of the Commentaries of Origen on the Letter to the Romans: "After this indeed the work calls us which was once enjoined by Silvia, but is now, after the death of Silvia, urged upon us more vehemently by the blessed bishop Gaudentius, namely that of Clement, bishop of Rome, companion of the Apostles (this is not so; Fontaninus proves that the author of the Recognitions flourished in the 3rd century Historia literaria Aquileiensis, p. 330 and following.), whose books, that I might give knowledge of them to their successors, are being turned by us into Latin." We have seen above that Rufinus says in the very Prologue of the Clementine work: "The work which Silvia once enjoined, and which you (Gaudentius) thereafter demanded by right of inheritance." Who other in these words than Gaudentius of Brescia could be designated? "Assuredly," says Gradonicus As above, p. 57., "our Gaudentius demanded that translation promised to Silvia by right of inheritance. For the more skilled writers on ecclesiastical matters agree that she, as the (4th) century was already closing, died at Brescia while returning from the East into Italy. In very fact on the 15th day of December the memory of St. Silvia is observed at Brescia, in the church called St. John 'de foris,' and her sacred body is venerated in the same place and at the same altar where St. Gaudentius also wished to be entombed; which shows that this Silvia was joined to our Gaudentius by charity, and perhaps also by blood. I have pursued these things more fully than was otherwise necessary, that it may hence be plain that Heribert Rosweyde in his notes to letter XLVI of St. Paulinus of Nola, and Jacques Cotelier in his notes to the Preface of Rufinus, had no fair reason for suspecting whether this Gaudentius was bishop of Brescia or of Novara; and that Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples, editor of the Clementine Recognitions, by a preposterous decision called the same man, on the witness of Fontaninus, 'Glorious martyr of Christ and bishop of Rimini.' Nor do we linger over the scruples of those to whom the cited preface of Rufinus seemed fictitious: for they were more than sufficiently refuted by Fontaninus, page 327." From these things it is established as very probable to my mind that the version of Rufinus was inscribed to St. Gaudentius of Brescia. It is to be noted, however, that nothing is established concerning the person of the cited Silvia, of whom we shall have to treat in our work at the aforesaid 15th day of December. Let it suffice here to set down what Galeardus briefly relates Migne, vol. XX, col. 806.: "Who this virgin Silvia was is a quite entangled question. At Brescia, in the church of Blessed John the evangelist, once called 'deforis Brixiam,' there is extant the body of the blessed virgin Silvia, whose memory is observed on the 15th day of December. Some of the writers of Brescia, calling her the mother, some the sister of Gregory the Great, have been greatly deceived: for how she can belong to the family of Gregory the Great I do not see. Assuredly, among the illustrious women of his race, besides Silvia his mother, who is known to lie at Rome, and his aunts Tarsilla and Aemiliana, and Gorgonia, greatly degenerate from them, I find no others. Wherefore I think it came about through similarity of name, by a vulgar error, that she whose homeland and race were not sufficiently known was carried across into the city of Rome and into the very family of Gregory the Great. That this Silvia who lies at Brescia is the same as she who is mentioned by Rufinus in the Preface to Gaudentius seems to be indicated both by what Rufinus says, namely that the version enjoined on him by Silvia was asked for by Gaudentius 'by right of inheritance'; and by the place of burial in the same church and altar, common to Silvia and Gaudentius … Cotelier considers that the Silvia mentioned by Rufinus is the same as the Salvia of whom Palladius writes in chapter 143 of the Lausiac history. Tillemont maintains that she may perhaps be Silvia, sister of Rufinus the prefect of the East, who, having returned from the East to the West, died at Brescia. For my part, in such great obscurity of the matter, I would dare to affirm nothing certain."

[24] It is uncertain how long the holy Prelate presided at Brescia. It is uncertain, then, in what year the episcopate of St. Gaudentius began, as was said above at n. 8; and it remains equally in doubt in what year it ended. St. Gaudentius himself, however, teaches us that he held the mitre of Brescia for at least fourteen years: for he says in the Sermon on the life and death of St. Philastrius his predecessor Ibidem, col. 1002.: "For though I have brought to your hearing many proclamations of his merits, renewing the observance of this solemnity now for fourteen years, I perceive that many things which can yet be proclaimed are untouched." From these words, however, it by no means follows that he did not thereafter prolong his life for more years. Since, however, it is probable that the Recognitions of Rufinus were dedicated to St. Gaudentius about the year 408, it is probable also that he received pontifical consecration at least about the year 394. If with Tillemont and others we attach the aforesaid dedication to the last year of Rufinus, namely 410, the episcopate of St. Gaudentius began at least in the year 396. Accordingly it remains uncertain for how long a space of time the holy Man sat at Brescia. The majority, though relying on no certain reason, assign the beginning to the year 387, and they ascribe the end to the year 410; on which positions he would have presided twenty-seven years in all.

* Matth., IX. Luke, VIII.

* Acts IV, 32.

§ III. The writings, cult and relics of St. Gaudentius.

Writings, On the writings of St. Gaudentius, both genuine and lost and spurious, Schoenemann speaks thus in one view, briefly and accurately Biblioth., p. 561.: "As regards the genuine writings of Gaudentius; besides the ten Paschal Sermons with the Preface to Benivolus, four on various chapters of the Gospel and a fifth on the Maccabee martyrs are recognized as true, from the words of Gaudentius himself in the same Preface to Benivolus. Four others, namely on his own Ordination, on the Dedication of the basilica, and likewise to Serminius and to the deacon Paul, of which the latter are Letters rather than Sermons, are proved to be of Gaudentius by similarity both of argument and of style. To these you see moreover added in the edition of Galeardus two, one on Peter and Paul, the other on the life and death of Philastrius his predecessor." Although Schoenemann does not seem to speak so expressly of these two, there is nevertheless no reason why they should not be numbered among the genuine ones. Certainly Paolo Galeardi, canon of Brescia, whose zeal and diligence and accuracy are most highly praised by the aforesaid writer, re-edited all the sermons to the last one, and in the order in which they come above, as genuine, and added notes augmented by second thoughts, in the collection of the old Fathers of the church of Brescia, from the Rizzardi press in the year 1738 Pp. 185–379.. And from this collection the works of St. Gaudentius were recently reprinted in Migne's Patrology Vol. XX, col. 791–1006.. Coming to the lost writings, Schoenemann continues in these words: "That some discourses of Gaudentius have perished we learn from those which survive, as Galeardus noted on Discourse XIV, where he also brings forward a passage from sermon VIII." But it would be better to hear Galeardus himself. In Sermon XIV, or the fourth on various chapters, inscribed on the promise of the coming of the Paraclete, St. Gaudentius says Migne, vol. XX, col. 944.: "He had already taught very many things in the words above concerning the unity of his divinity with the Father, as I expounded in the last discourse." Galeardus notes: "That some discourses of Gaudentius have perished is made plain not only from this passage, but also from the beginning of discourses 11 and 12: for those in which he there indicates that he promised to explain something or lately discoursed are not extant; just as also that which he says in sermon 2, that 'of the girding of the loins' he had frequently 'spoken more widely,' occurs nowhere. Likewise in sermon 13 he recalls these things: 'We have discoursed (as you remember) on the whole text of that reading which describes the Lord at supper in Bethany, explaining the reclining of Lazarus, the reason of the place and time, the ministry of Martha, the attendance of her sister, the power of the ointment and the reason of the hair, with which Mary wiped the feet of Christ anointed with precious myrrh.' All these things likewise are at present wanting to us, as also what he indicates that he explained in discourse 8 in these words: 'With these cohere the things which in their place, as your charity remembers, I discoursed upon minutely, where the Lord, at once joyfully embracing the envoys of the gentiles and foreseeing in a few believers the faith of innumerable peoples, said to the apostles: The hour has come that the Son of man should be glorified.'" Thus far Galeardus. Finally Schoenemann concludes: "Nor are spurious works lacking: the 'Rhythm on Philastrius, the book on the singularity of clerics,' otherwise attributed now to Origen, now to Cyprian or Augustine, but ascribed by the Oxford editor of Cyprian to Gaudentius, whom in his Notes he calls back to the times of Bede. Moreover the 'Commentaries on the Creed' which is commonly called of Athanasius,

Elias Capreolus, in book III of the History of Brescia, makes Gaudentius the author, and Ughelli following Capreolus. Which is both done by a manifest error, and besides no Commentary of the sort exists; unless perhaps, as conveniently occurs to Galeardus, for 'Commentary on the Creed of Athanasius' one should understand the Exposition of Rufinus on the Creed, which, rashly ascribed by many to Jerome and Cyprian, has sometimes also been attributed to Gaudentius." Compare Galeardus Ibid., col. 807 and following. and Gradonicus Brixia sacra, p. 58 and 59..

[26] Of which St. Gaudentius himself makes some mention And let these things be said in general of the writings of the holy Prelate. But the Preface to Benivolus is worthy of special attention, in which St. Gaudentius himself renders some account of his works. Wherefore it is fitting to set down his words at this place. "It had been the common wish," so he begins the preface Migne, vol. XX, col. 827., "that you should have been able to hear in person those things which I explained concerning the divine oracles through the paschal days just past. For your presence is rightly welcome to us always, and especially on feast days, in the assembly of the church of Brescia," etc. There follows a digression in praise of Benivolus. Then the holy Bishop continues thus: "But to return to the plea proposed, your body, as yet still weak from a very great sickness, hindered you from being present at the aforesaid festival; whence you grieved vehemently, reckoning it wholly a defrauding of spiritual goods inflicted on you by the pressure of your sins; and on this account, as a singular remedy for the said loss, you earnestly demanded that I should write down what I remembered to have been expounded by me to the holy brotherhood on each day of that most sacred week. Which I plainly, conscious of my mediocrity, would not dare to trust to letters, had you not compelled me with religious insistence; for it is enough for me if I suffice at least by the living voice to instruct the people committed to me. Knowing, therefore, that a true lover of divine wisdom does not seek the pomp of empty eloquence in the assertion of useless matters, but desires the saving doctrine of fitting explanations from the holy Scriptures, I shall set about writing for you altogether in the same senses and perhaps even in the same words in which I remember having spoken in the church, so that when you read my speech, such as it is, you may easily recognize it. Moreover four shorter discourses, which you have disclosed that I once delivered in your house on various chapters of the Gospel, and a fifth on the Maccabee martyrs, I shall send back to you corrected, since you compel me, so that, if you consider them worthy of any useful memory, you may add them, to be transcribed together, in the last part of this little document. But concerning those discourses which, with notaries (as I have learned) stealthily assigned, the idle zeal of certain persons has presumed to collect, doubtless broken up and half complete, I have no concern. They are no longer mine, which are known to have been written down by the headlong haste of those taking them down: yet I fear lest, under the title of my sermon, the errors of another may envelop certain things hostile to sound faith, and that those who were the authors of an incautious presumption may be made guilty of an everlasting crime. Therefore, since I could not deny to your desire the service requested, I shall first briefly show you that the blows of sicknesses are not always inflicted on our bodies for the heap of our sins." Whence Gradonicus rightly remarks Brixia sacra, p. 58.: "This is the stronger and greater part of the sermons of Gaudentius (namely those ten paschal ones and the five others, with the Preface added), which has reached us by the zeal and industry of Benivolus." Moreover they are called Paschal because they were delivered through the solemnity of the Resurrection; and the first indeed on the night preceding the feast; likewise the second, but this after baptism had been conferred, and with only the neophytes, not the catechumens, present; the third on the feast day itself; the six following on the several days of the Octave; the tenth finally on the Sunday which is usually called in Albis D. Ceillier, Autheurs ecclés., vol. X, p. 519.. Gradonicus adds: "Those writings have rightly been often reprinted, as exhibiting an illustrious image of Christian piety."

[27] In the Preface to Benivolus, a most distinguished man, These things are indeed sufficiently clear, and need no commentary. It will suffice to have added a compendious notice of Benivolus, of whom we see that St. Gaudentius made such familiar and such frequent use. "At Milan," as Gradonicus has it Brixia sacra, p. 60., "he was instructed in the rudiments of the faith by Philastrius, who was fighting against the Arians in that city; but while still a catechumen he obtained an occasion of showing the illustrious disposition of his mind towards the catholic faith. The emperor Valentinian II, at the instigation of his mother Justina, had resolved to bring in a law which should give the Arians the power of assembling and of having churches no less than to the catholics themselves; the penalty of death being proclaimed for those contriving anything against it, as being authors of sedition and guilty of disturbed peace and of treason. It was the part of our Benivolus to draw up that law, as he held under the same emperor the office of Master of the memoria, or president of the bureaus of the memoria, on whom it was incumbent to write the laws. Indeed a man of lofty mind and constant heart shrank from such a crime. Let us hear Rufinus of Aquileia, a writer contemporary with Benivolus Ecclesiastical History, bk. II, ch. XVI. Migne, vol. XXI, col. 524.: 'But he, to whom the faith was sacred and venerable from the cradle, denies that he can utter impious words and speak against God. Then indeed, lest the undertaking of the queen should seem to be frustrated, a loftier honour is promised to him, if he should fulfil what was enjoined. He, who desired to be nobler in faith than in honours, says: Why do you promise me a higher rank as the wage of impiety? Take away this very one which I have: only let the conscience of my faith endure uninjured for me. Saying this, he threw down his belt at the feet of those giving the impious commands.' Returning to Brescia, from which he originated, he was in the highest honour among his fellow citizens," as is seen both from the words of St. Gaudentius quoted above, and from others which we add from the same preface: "For," says the holy Prelate Migne, vol. XX, col. 829 and following., "as of the honoured men of our city, so also of the Lord's people, by the Lord's favour, you are the most worthy head, because you strive with no less diligence to observe the precepts of God than to learn them; contending to match the robust profession of the catholic faith with the merits of an illustrious life, so that sincere faith may have works worthy of the brightness of its purity … Nor is it any wonder if today you so conduct yourself in the fear of the Lord, who, not yet having received the grace of baptism, fought so for the truth of the heavenly faith that the testimony of such great constancy proved you to be imbued with the admirable doctrines of a man in all things apostolic, our father Philastrius. For the queen Jezebel (Justina) of our time, patroness and at once ally of the Arian perfidy, when she was persecuting the most blessed Ambrose, bishop of the church of Milan, thinking that you too, at that time Master of the memoria, had forgotten the saving faith, was compelling you to dictate against the catholic churches; and that you might not do this, you of your own accord despised both the dignity of civil promotion and the ambition of the age and worldly glory for the glory of God, choosing rather to live a private man than to serve as one dead. For he truly dies before God who departs from the truth of the apostolic faith, from whom Christ God, who is life, is cut off, when he is withdrawn from one who denies the homoousion of the eternal Trinity."

[28] But concerning which Dupin has passed no fair enough sentence, Moreover from these, as specimens of the diction and fluency of Gaudentius, one may judge how unfairly Dupin has passed sentence on the works of the holy Bishop. "His style," he says Nouvelle bibliothèque des auteurs ecclésiast., vol. III, p. 86. Paris, 1693., "is simple and uncultivated. It teems with forced allegories and unusual sentences; he frequently alludes to matters too remote. His sermons are bloodless, sterile; little suited to teaching, and in no way to moving; finally they lack force, eloquence, excellences and accurate diligence; by which endowments the discourses of the Greek writers, of whom we have just spoken, excel." Certainly whoever formed his opinion of the works and merit of St. Gaudentius from these words would stray as far as possible from the truth. I for my part would rather count it a fault that the holy Prelate is too solicitous over words, which he for the most part heaps up, loving to join adjectives to his nouns, and those not of whatever sort, but not rarely diligently selected. Let the following passage from the Preface to Benivolus serve as an example Migne, vol. XX, col. 840.: "For some of the prudent of the world, ignorant of heavenly wisdom, wishing to establish as fortuitous all the things which God the creator of all providently carries on with just governance, speak thus: If this world were governed by the providence of God, the blows of tribulations, hardships and sicknesses would never indiscriminately consume the good and the evil, because it would not belong to divine equity to inflict like blows on unlike merits. But the odium of this problem is easily emptied by a familiar example of the truth. For it is known to all that both the edge of steel and the burning of fire are applied either for destruction, when the quality of the crime to be punished demands punishment, or are of profit for cure, when they are medicinally applied for the sake of healing. Thus therefore almighty God tempers the same species of blows according to the qualities of merits: punishing some indeed, but either correcting or cleansing others from their vices, or surely promoting them to ampler glory." And in Sermon IV, addressing the neophytes Ibid., col. 870.: "You therefore, neophytes, who have been invited to the banquet of this blessed and spiritual pasch, see how you keep your souls from every pollution of the foods which gentile superstition has infected." And, some things intervening, again Col. 871.: "Keep, neophytes, the ornament of saving grace: be sober in all things, lest you lose it through drunkenness; come together solicitously to the church; apply yourselves vigilantly with us to prayers, hymns, psalms and spiritual canticles. Let these be the works of your leisure, by which, rendering due service to Christ the Lord, you may be able to obtain from him the reward of eternal life. Let your banquets therefore be sober, your beds chaste; let your mind be modest, your speech calm, your gait gentle. Pray that God may preserve in you the benefits of his grace; and that your faith may advance more and more, by the gift of Christ the Lord, our saviour, to whom is one power and the same divinity with the Father and the Holy Spirit, before all things, and now and always and unto all ages. Amen." Who would not admit that these things are rightly and aptly, indeed also quite elegantly said? Whence also Galeardus against Dupin Ibidem, col. 815.: "Is this that dry and empty manner of speaking, utterly devoid of learning and of all ornament? … Does the oration of Gaudentius indeed lack all ornaments and lights? Or does it not on the contrary overflow with splendour, sap and richness? And all these things lay open even to Dupin, from which he could have perceived both the doctrine of Gaudentius and his eloquence and talent, had he not brought a depraved and hostile mind to reading him." This is certain, that Dupin found few agreeing with him. Tillemont is, so to say, a whole heaven away from him: "The style of Gaudentius," he says Mémoires, vol. X, p. 586., "although it seems simple enough, does not however lack brightness, and it displays a quite gentle and pleasing nature. But as regards the matters themselves,

he excels in doctrine and precepts." Ceillier relates the same in nearly the same words Auteurs ecclésiastiques, vol. X, p. 532.. Schoenemann alone, at least among the writers known to me, has dealt more softly with Dupin: at the words "We have discoursed, as you remember," etc., quoted by us above at n. 24, he has this Bibliotheca Patrum lat., p. 561.: "Which (passage), if any other, serves to declare the man's nature and can clear Dupin of the charge of rashness." And elsewhere Ibid., p. 565.: "On which occasion Galeardus also inveighs heavily against Dupin, who, as it seemed to him, judged too unfairly of Gaudentius."

[29] is approved. To these things that we have discoursed concerning the writings of St. Gaudentius, let it be permitted to add, by way of a crowning touch, the judgment of the often-cited Galeardus, by which he aptly and illustriously commends the sermons of the holy Man: "Moreover," he says Migne, vol. XX, col. 802., "the sermons of Gaudentius breathe piety no less than learning, and how greatly useful they are for fortifying and illustrating the doctrine of the church is easily plain from reading them. For both in sermon 2 the discipline of the Secret is expressly designated; and the mystery of the Eucharist is expounded so aptly, so copiously, so clearly, that I plainly see few of the ancients who have been engaged in this kind of argument more aptly for settling the controversies of our times. Testimonies drawn from this sermon for asserting the truths of the catholic church were used by Jean Étienne Durant in the books on the Rites of the church, printed at Rome in the Vatican press in 1591; by Louis Bail of Abbeville in the Bibliotheca concionatorum, published at Paris by Jean de la Caille in 1666; by Ferrarius on the Rite of the Sacred Discourses of the church; by John cardinal Bona, and by not a few others of ours, to whom it was worth the trouble to unroll the writings of Gaudentius. Illustrious moreover is the testimony of Gaudentius concerning the Relics and Invocation of the Saints, which he splendidly establishes in the sermon on the Dedication of the basilica, in the sermon on Peter and Paul, and in the sermon on the Life and Death of Philastrius his predecessor. William Allen the Englishman, adducing this sermon against the assailants of ecclesiastical history, Dialogue 3, chapter 4, page 319, of the Plantin edition of 1566, reckons our Gaudentius among those Fathers whom the Magdeburgers passed over, and who within the first five hundred years from the birth of Christ wrote of the faith of the primitive church in the matter of the Relics and Invocation of the Saints. In the ninth Discourse he eloquently and zealously defends the incorrupt virginity of the Mother of God; and in the eighth Discourse, although he forbids parents to enjoin perpetual continence on their children, he nevertheless teaches that virginity is better than marriage. In the fifth Discourse towards the end there is a very notable passage 'on the staff,' where he signifies that the staff has been granted to apostolic priests, that is bishops, for the correction of their subjects. From this it seems that support can be furnished to the ancient use of the staff, of which Isidore writes, book II on the ecclesiastical offices, chapter 5. Indeed the ancient monks of Egypt carried a staff, as is plain from Cassian, book I on the Institutes of the cenobia, chapter 9: 'The carrying of which,' he says, 'spiritually warns that they ought never to go about unarmed among so many barking dogs of vices and invisible beasts of spiritual wickednesses.' But it would be long to go through each single thing: wherefore it will have sufficed to have touched upon certain chief heads of the matter, on seeing which the reader may easily judge of the utility and importance of the sermons of Gaudentius." Whoever wants more on this question, let him go to the cited authors, Galeardus in the Preface, Gradonicus, Ceillier, Tillemont, Schoenemann, etc., in the places cited.

[30] Editions of the works of St. Gaudentius. But it has seemed good to add here what the cited Schoenemann has briefly and splendidly reviewed concerning the Editions of the works of St. Gaudentius Bibliotheca PP. latt., p. 562 and following.: "A specimen of the writings of Gaudentius, as Galeardus long ago observed, was first published by Capreolus, in book III of the History of Brescia, namely extracts of the sermon on Philastrius, about the year 1500 or a little later. Then about the year 1554, Luigi Lippomano, bishop of Verona, brought out the entire sermon on Philastrius, the sermon on the dedication of the Basilica, and likewise extracts from the Preface to Benivolus, in the Lives of the Saints, vol. IV, from p. 52–4 of the Venetian edition, where at p. 1 and p. 15 the works of Gaudentius are said not yet to have been printed. They were first collected in the Orthodoxographa of Grynaeus in the year 1569, and in the same order and number afterwards often repeated in the Bibliothecae of the Fathers, yet sprinkled with a great many faults and lacking two sermons (on Peter and Paul, and on the Life and Death of St. Philastrius), which are found added only in the latest edition, and the first that came out separately and could be called accurate, that of Galeardus in the year 1720. The same, afterwards reworked by the editor, was taken into the Quirinian Collection of the Works of the bishops of Brescia. Of each one singly." I omit what pertains to the earlier ones, as being of no such importance, so that I may pass to the editions of the 18th century. "In the year 1720 Jos. Comino printed at Padua (so namely Schoenemann continues), 4, the sermons of St. Gaudentius, bishop of Brescia, which are extant, now for the first time reviewed and corrected according to the faith of manuscript codices. There are added the little works of Rampert and Adelmann, venerable bishops of Brescia. Edited and illustrated with notes by Paolo Galeardi, canon of Brescia. Galeardus undertook the plan of editing Gaudentius at the urging and instigation of the prelate Giovanni Francesco Barbarigo, then recently translated from the episcopate of Verona to that of Brescia, who helped him both with means and with every kind of assistance, and deservedly saw it inscribed to his name. The editor, having obtained illustrious aids from manuscript codices, Vatican, Florentine, of Urbino and of Brescia, gave himself with assiduous study to the correction of the most deeply depraved author, in such a way, however, that wherever anything had been altered he warned the reader of it. In setting down and reviewing the variant readings he was almost too scrupulous: for he says he preferred that his care should seem excessive or fussy to delicate men, than that he should be imperilled among studious and learned readers. He added rather few Annotations, in which those which serve to illustrate expressions consist for the most part of a comparison of nearly like passages occurring in other writers, and some touch ecclesiastical matters; both kinds display an erudition of no great reading. All the more remarkable, however, are the things he discoursed of in the preface, on the life, virtues and praise by which Gaudentius was renowned among his contemporaries and among posterity; on his genuine and spurious writings, and on their character. On which occasion (§ II) he also inveighs heavily against Dupin, who, as it seemed to him, judged too unfairly. Lastly he advises the readers concerning the plan and order of this edition, briefly touching on the earlier ones. To all these are besides added testimonies concerning Gaudentius, as well as an index of passages of the Holy Scriptures." Then Schoenemann mentions in a few words the Life of St. Philastrius by St. Gaudentius published at Hamburg in octavo in the year 1721, and finally adds: "In the year 1738 at Brescia, from the press of Giovanni Maria Rizzardi, in folio, the sermons of St. Gaudentius, bishop of Brescia, which are extant, reviewed and corrected according to the faith of manuscript codices, in the Quirinian collection of the old Fathers of the church of Brescia, from page 185 to 379. Re-edited, with notes augmented by second thoughts added, by Paolo Galeardi, canon of Brescia. What was accomplished by Galeardus on the occasion of this new edition he himself, with a modesty rarely met with among the Italian editors of ecclesiastical writers who followed (which no fair judge of things will find too invidiously said), indicates, saying that new notes have been sprinkled here and there through the text of Gaudentius, and some also of the earlier ones remodelled for the better. But at the very first glance anyone will easily notice how often and how illustriously that has been done. Above all, however, he rejoiced over a codex, not indeed of great antiquity, but of excellent reading and with corrections written in by the hand of Ottavio Pantagato of Brescia, suddenly offered to him, from which he affirms that innumerable things have been restored to him."

[31] The Rhythm on St. Philastrius, once attributed to St. Gaudentius. The same Galeardus appended to the works of St. Gaudentius the Rhythm on St. Philastrius, because it was once attributed by some to the holy Prelate. It is found in our work at the 18th day of July, at which Cuper illustrated the acts of St. Philastrius. Assuredly that Rhythm is older than the 9th century; since Rampert expressly mentions it, while adding however that he was not certain of its author: "But also the Rhythmical piece, which for the sake of authority they say bishop Gaudentius made … That Gaudentius himself composed it, however, I waver," etc. Others have proposed other conjectures; but, says Galeardus Collectio PP. Brixian., p. 375 and following., "I openly profess that everything at this point is obscure and uncertain to me, and that nothing else seems ready to hand except that some pious man, younger than Gaudentius, patched together this Rhythm in praise of Philastrius from the sentences of the sermon of Gaudentius." And hence Cuper Acta SS., vol. IV of July, p. 384.: "Since he himself (Galeardus) admits that everything … is obscure and uncertain; without further reasoning I subjoin that ancient poem (by whomsoever it may at last have been composed), collated with our manuscript."

[32] The cult of St. Gaudentius is vindicated It remains to speak of the cult and relics of St. Gaudentius. We have warned that the name of the holy Bishop is wanting in nearly all the fasti and martyrologies (the Roman excepted). And this is chiefly why Chastelain at the 25th day of October wished this sort of Monitum written in the Margin, which it will help to set down again at this place: "Without ancient cult," he says Martyrologi universel, p. 717., "even in his own church, as appears from Rampert, bishop of Brescia in the 7th century, who, even though he speaks of him, does not once call him Saint or Blessed, whereas otherwise he does not neglect to name as Saints those who had this cult, like St. Philastrius." Here the usual and, so to say, inborn diligence and accuracy of Chastelain fail him. For first Rambert flourished not in the 7th century but rather in the 9th century, seeing that in the eight hundred and thirty-eighth year of the Lord's Incarnation he translated the body of blessed Philastrius, seventh bishop of Brescia, once buried in the church of St. Andrew, to the church of Mary the holy Mother of God, which he himself calls "the winter mother church" Veterum Brixiae epporum opera et opuscula, p. 383. Brescia, 1738.; on which occasion he delivered the sermon which Chastelain mentions. Then it is false that others besides Philastrius are called Saints by Rampert. The sermon on the Translation begins Ibid., p. 387.: "There are thirty bishops of Brescia, whom we remember, who at the altar dedicated to the name of blessed Philastrius and placed over his head celebrated the prayers of the masses, and venerating the day of his passing, and commanding the people of Brescia to abstain from all earthly work, reverently honoured it. These are, third from him and second from Gaudentius, Paul; then Theophilus and Sylvinus and Gaudiosus; Optatianus and Vigilius and Ticianus; Paul, Cyprian, Herculanus, Honorius, Rusticianus and Dominator; likewise Paul, Paterius, Anastasius and Dominicus; Felix and Deusdedit … Amfridus and Peter; bishops of venerable memory. Last of whom in order and in merits, I Rampert, unworthy bishop of the holy church of Brescia," etc. Philastrius alone therefore is called blessed, all the others

are bishops of venerable memory. But if from these words Chastelain rightly infers that St. Gaudentius was without ancient cult even in his own church, the same will by like reasoning have to be decided of the others too, who nevertheless, all of them down to Deusdedit, are numbered among the Saints and are venerated as such. Gradonicus, where he treats of that prelate: "This man (Deusdedit)," he says Brixia Sacra, p. 95., "is the last of the bishops of Brescia to be numbered among the Saints, and he is the twentieth after Philastrius." The greater part of these are already to be read inserted in our work.

[33] against Chastelain. Whence the aforesaid Gradonicus, somewhat angered and not a little indignant, refutes Chastelain: "But," he says Ibid., p. 62., "let this critic not take it ill if we wonder at his excessive confidence; we truly cannot see by what reason it can be inferred from the sermon of Rampert that no honour was attributed to Gaudentius; since Rampert in that place aims only at this, to set before the eyes of his hearers the life of St. Philastrius and the honours shown to him; and he enumerates the other bishops so as in some manner to review the continuous series of bishops. It is no wonder, then, if he calls Philastrius Saint, by which name we openly deny that the others there commemorated are called, as anyone can learn by making trial. The only title of honour with which we read that the bishops are distinguished by Rampert is this: 'of venerable memory,' with which Gaudentius too was distinguished by Rampert, as the passage where those two words lie is even a most splendid proof … It must be concluded therefore that the objection of Chastelain is not of such weight that it can call into doubt the honour which this church of his shows to him 'from time immemorial,' to use the common expression. His feast is kept on the 8th before the Kalends of November." In the same manner Rampert mentions St. Gaudentius in three other places, where he reviews some miracles wrought at the translation of St. Philastrius. He has it thus at number V Veterum Brixian., p. 393.: "For, as is read in the sermon published by the prelate Gaudentius, namely of the life of the most blessed bishop Philastrius," etc. And at number IX Ibid., p. 399.: "What sort of man did Ambrose of most holy memory, bishop of Milan, understand him (Philastrius) to be in the times of the unspeakable storm of the Arians, who had him as his colleague? And of what great merit did the neighbouring bishops reckon him to be, if the fourth bishop of Bergamo … was zealous to remember that Ambrose consecrated him bishop, and Philastrius deacon? Of whose life and sanctity bishop Gaudentius, his successor, had a savour, who for fourteen years, and perhaps more, kept the day of his passing as a holiday, making a sermon to the people about him?" And again at number X Ibidem, p. 399.: "For our predecessor, that is bishop Peter of venerable memory, showed him to be of such great veneration that, panting in his sorrow, he testified that at the time of his presbyterate he had been so increased in fevers that no potion and no ointment could rescue him from the fever, although he himself was skilled in that very art. But when after some time he had come to the tomb of the most blessed Philastrius and had there implored God that health be granted him by the intercession of his merits, he professed that he rose so healthy from the prayer that no chill of an attack touched him any more. And also the rhythmical hymn, which for the sake of authority they say bishop Gaudentius made, he had been accustomed sedulously to sing concerning him. That Gaudentius himself composed it, however, I waver," etc. This then is certain, that nowhere in Rampert is Gaudentius called holy or blessed. I add that three others (besides Philastrius) designated by their names, namely the apostles Peter and John, and likewise Ambrose, are distinguished by Rampert with the title of sanctity. Of the two former one reads Ibid., p. 395.: "Who had asked alms from the most blessed Peter, prince of the apostles, and John, as they were entering the temple for the sake of prayer." Ambrose, as we have seen, Rampert calls a bishop of most holy memory, and a little later repeats his name without a word of honour. May it then legitimately be inferred from this that St. Gaudentius was without ancient cult in his own church? But first the same would have to be decided of the holy bishops of Brescia, altogether twenty in number; then according to the custom of that age, men, and especially bishops, venerable to the people for their deeds and merits, used after death to be entered almost at once on the roll of the saints and to be venerated as such. Nor does it assuredly appear that the cult of St. Gaudentius and of those other holy bishops of Brescia (for such they have certainly been celebrated for centuries) began only after the times of Rampert, and accordingly is no older than the close of the ninth century; which, however, would have to be admitted if the opinion of Chastelain stood. Other things on this matter will come in the following numbers, where the discussion will be of the relics of St. Gaudentius.

[34] Relics, Gradonicus writes Brixia sacra, p. 62.: "The body (of St. Gaudentius) rests in the church of St. John." And Galeardus Migne, vol. XX, col. 807.: "The body of Gaudentius lies at Brescia in the church of St. John the evangelist, once called 'deforis Brixiam,' in the same chapel together with Theophilus, his successor after Paul the bishop in the see of Brescia, and with the virgin Silvia … Their bodies were translated and deposited in that place in the year 1595." Neither of the two, then, speaks of the first burial of the holy Bishop. Gradonicus observes, however, concerning the aforesaid church: "This is the church called 'de foris' in our manuscript, and in the Note on St. Theophilus 'ad Concilia Sanctorum'; and which the canons regular of the Holy Saviour possess today (Gradonicus was writing about the middle of the 18th century); which is not that same one erected by Gaudentius, burned once by fire, but one which was built anew in its place in the year MCLI; whence the ancient title 'of the Council of Saints' has long been obliterated … At what time they ceased from this appellation 'deforis' I for my part do not know; perhaps after the bounds of the city were extended about the year MCCXC and that place was received into the bosom of the city. For that the appellation persisted in the twelfth century is certainly established from a manuscript Privilege, granted by Callixtus II in the year MCXXXIII to this church, in whose archive it is still preserved, (where) these words are read: 'To the Provost and canons in the church of St. John the evangelist, which is called de foris,' etc. Further, at the consecration of this church Gaudentius delivered a sermon, in which he recounts that that church was erected by him, and that the name of the basilica 'of the Council of Saints' was laid on it, which he so called according to the custom of those times, because he had laid up in it the relics of the holy Martyrs, among others those of the holy forty Martyrs of Sebaste." Finally Gradonicus adds: "They themselves (the remains) are venerated at the present time by the people of Brescia in the same church of St. John, in which it was consistent that his body should be committed to burial, because he was not to be separated from those holy Martyrs who, on his journey, when he was going through the cities of Cappadocia to Jerusalem, had deigned to offer themselves as faithful companions, and he himself had founded the same church at his own expense and dedicated it to sacred worship." Compare above, n. 4. Hence it is certainly clear that St. Gaudentius, in the mind of Gradonicus, was given his first burial in the church of the Council of Saints. Nor does it appear that his body was translated as long as this basilica stood; but when it had been consumed by fire, and the church of St. John de foris had been built in its place in the middle of the 12th century, it is easy to infer that the sacred remains of St. Gaudentius were laid up there, in which place certainly they are venerated from then down to our times.

[35] translated Papebroch, at the 27th day of April, in the acts of St. Theophilus, bishop of Brescia, mentions the translation made in the year 1595, and using this opportunity he relates some things pertaining to the aforesaid basilica, which it will suffice for us to have set forth summarily. First of all he quotes from the manuscript Catalogue of bishops of Giovanni Francesco Fiorentini the following Acta SS., vol. III of April, p. 494.: "The very ancient fasti of the holy bishops record that his (St. Theophilus's) bones once lay at the Council of Saints; perhaps the same basilica which St. Gaudentius dedicated, the remains of the holy XL Martyrs being brought in, and named the Council of Saints, though no traces of it at all nor memory of the relics survive." Yet, as we have seen in the preceding number, Gradonicus testifies that those relics are venerated at the present time in the church of St. John. Fiorentini adds: "Yet no one can without rashness suppose that a church of the same name, different from that one, existed here before St. Gaudentius, where the slaughters of so many Martyrs were once perpetrated; especially since Baronius in the Roman martyrology at the 23rd of June, following Molanus, affirms that by the name of a Council of Martyrs is understood that place where the bodies of the holy Martyrs have been buried, which places were also called Cemeteries or Dormitories." But Papebroch replies: "It never entered the mind of either, namely of Baronius and Molanus, to confuse these (Councils of Martyrs) with Cemeteries or Basilicas. What then? We understand not a church or basilica, but a certain place within them dedicated with a peculiar rite, for the bones of several saints, brought out of the vaults of the common cemeteries, to be laid more honourably and venerated more conveniently apart from the crowd of the other Christians buried in the same cemeteries; whether Gaudentius was the first to dedicate such a place at Brescia, and within what church, we cannot divine, being destitute of ancient testimony." To me, however, it seems clear from what was said in § II that the basilica which he named the Council of Saints was founded and consecrated by St. Gaudentius. Nor does Papebroch's reason altogether hold here: for not the bones of several saints brought out of the vaults of the common cemeteries, etc.; but certain relics of named saints (not whole bodies, as we have said), most of them brought from the East, he collected and transferred into a new basilica. Let us also duly note this: at the time at which Papebroch published the acts of St. Theophilus (volume III of April was committed to the press in the year 1675), the Works of St. Gaudentius had not yet come out accurately. Indeed it seems to me that the sermon on the Dedication of the basilica was not read by my learned predecessor. The holy Prelate says: "We have therefore both these forty and the aforesaid ten saints, gathered from different parts of the earth, whence we decree that this basilica itself, dedicated to their merits, ought to be named the Council of Saints. For it is worthy that, when we are to proceed to the venerable relics of such great Martyrs, we should confess that we are proceeding to the council of saints." See n. 17.

[36] "Wherever (so Papebroch continues) that Council of Saints may have been, in the year 1595. now certainly (as the same Fiorentini and the others assert) the sacred body of St. Theophilus is kept in the church of St. John the evangelist … Concerning the bodies resting in this church, there is extant in the book of Provisions of the city such a decree of the 22nd day of April of the year MDXXV: 'In the church of St. John are the bodies of SS. Gaudentius and Theophilus, bishops, and of St. Silvia, virgin: from which let the heads be separated and placed in statues or silver vessels, to be fashioned at the expense of the reverend Fathers and Parishioners, so that they may be carried honourably at fitting times with veneration through the city.' Which decree indeed,

unless there is an error in the number, as Papebroch says, had no effect at that time, but only after LXX years; for so it is read in the same book of Provisions: 'The bodies of SS. Theophilus, Gaudentius and Silvia, which until now had been laid up in separate marble chests, in the chapel on the mountain side of the high altar of the church of St. John, the said chests were removed in order to give light to the said chapel, the bodies having first been taken out. Which bodies then, on Sunday the 9th of July, in this year MDXCV, having been carried with solemn procession round about the parish of St. John, were laid up in the altar recently refashioned in the said chapel, licence having first been obtained by the reverend canons regular of the said church from the most reverend bishop and the deputies of the city. In which procession were present the said canons'" and so on; which, if you wish, see in vol. III of April, in the place cited, where is also found another and fuller history of the same Translation, from which it will suffice to set down at this place what pertains to the statues in which the heads of St. Gaudentius and of the other two saints were enclosed: "With these great honours the bodies of the saints were led through the city, to which through nearly all that day innumerable rosaries were applied. Lastly they were most honourably laid up by the same D. Masino the provost in the altar of this chapel; their skulls were enclosed each in its own statue, overlaid with gold and silver, representing images of the saints from the crown of the head to the breast, and made at the expense of the same D. Floriano Canale (canon regular of Brescia)." And these are the things that could be gathered concerning the Relics of St. Gaudentius; incomplete, indeed, and rather meagre. It would certainly be desirable that there should be certain documents to establish, not indeed the first burial (for this seems to me sufficiently proved), but the perpetual keeping of the sacred body in the same basilica, as long as it stood, as also its translation, after the burning of the Council of Saints, into the new church of St. John, built up from the foundations in the middle of the 12th century.