Constantius

ON ST. CONSTANTIUS, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR, AT AQUINO,

IN THE KINGDOM OF NAPLES,

BETWEEN THE YEARS DLX AND DLXXIII.

HISTORICAL COLLECTION.

Of the Saint's cult, the time of his episcopate, and the year of his death.

Constantius, bishop and confessor, at Aquino in the kingdom of Naples. (S.)

Written by J. V.

Aquino, a city … episcopal under the archbishop of Capua, but immune from his jurisdiction, as Baudrand testifies, The Saint is venerated at Aquino as patron: today indeed small, was formerly an ample city and a colony of the Romans. Of it Ferdinando Ughelli in Italia sacra, of the new edition of 1717, tome 1, column 395: The traces still standing, and the very ruins, betray the greatness of Aquino, most certain witnesses of human instability and of envious antiquity. Its tutelary patron is St. Constantius, reckoned by the cited Ughelli fourth in order among the bishops of Aquino; who also asserts that his feast is celebrated on the first day of September, as is held in the Roman Martyrology in these words: At Aquino, of St. Constantius the bishop, illustrious for the gift of prophecy and for many virtues. On which Baronius at letter [o] notes the following: Of him St. Gregory writes in book 2 of the Dialogues, chapter 16, where he shows that he lived in the times of St. Benedict, and again in book 3, chapter 8, he reports that he died in the times of Pope John. But of these things more hereafter. His life was written by Peter the deacon, librarian of Monte Cassino (as the same Peter the deacon testifies in the book on the Illustrious Men of the monastery of Monte Cassino, chapter 45 *), but it is not extant. A certain Constantius without the title of bishop is announced today at Monte Cassino by the abridged Hieronymian martyrologies of Rheinau and Reichenau, tome VII of June; and the Reichenau one indeed adds Felicianus, as does Greven also, but he does not express the place. But whether that Constantius is different from the bishop of Aquino, or the same with him, but ascribed to Cassino perhaps on account of relics translated thither or for some other cause, or who and of what kind he finally was, we cannot divine, much less assert.

[2] The most eminent Prospero Lambertini, now Benedict XIV, Vicar of Christ, and he is celebrated by the more recent martyrologists. in book 2 of his learned Work on the Beatification of the Servants of God and the Canonization of the Blessed, chapter 19, page 155, makes mention of Constantius, bishop of Aquino, reckoning him among the Saints who, being commemorated in the writings of the Fathers and of holy men, have obtained the honors of canonization. But we wonder that the more ancient martyrologists Bede, Ado, Usuard, and others passed over in silence this holy Bishop, whom we find excellently praised by St. Gregory the Great. Whatever be the case, of his cult there can be no doubt from what has already been said. Peter de Natalibus in the Catalogue of the Saints, book 8, chapter 112, and Philippo Ferrari in the Catalogue of the Saints of Italy on this day, page 561, weave the Saint's elogium almost in the words of Pope Gregory; which we shall produce below from the fountain itself. Constantino Ghini in the Nativities of the holy Canons, page 60, announces our Saint on the first of September with the Roman Martyrology: At Aquino, of St. Constantius (elsewhere Constantinus, as he notes in the margin, on what authority we do not know), bishop, illustrious for the gift of prophecy and for many virtues: for when death was pressing upon him, being asked by his own, he foretold that there would be two bishops after him. And he adds from Peter de Natalibus: He flourished in the time of Pope John the first; which is to be examined below. More briefly Castellan in the Universal Martyrology: At Aquino, of St. Constantius, bishop; whom the gift of prophecy and very many virtues rendered famous. Add to these what Orlendi has in the Sacred and Profane World, part 2, volume 3, page 1515: St. Constantius, bishop of Aquino, shone with an extraordinary praise of sanctity.

[3] Concerning his episcopate and other matters the errors How long the Saint held the episcopate, and how many years he lived, is in obscurity; nor can it certainly be determined by us for want of documents. In the series of the bishops of Aquino, John is numbered third by Ughelli, to whom (as he says) John III gave letters in the chapter "ex lit." of the title "de Pigno." If this were true, it would follow that our Saint, who according to Ughelli was the fourth prelate of Aquino, and died under John III, as will be proved below, presided over that church at most twelve years with some months: since John III did not complete thirteen years of the Pontificate. But Ughelli manifestly errs; for the chapter "ex litteris" which he cites is the fifth in book 3 of the Decretals of Gregory IX, title XXI, On pledges, given not by John III, but by Innocent III, who began to sit in the year 1198, that is, more than six centuries later: not to John, but to the bishop of Aquino, whose name is not there expressed. Behold for thee, reader, the heading of the chapter: The same (Innocent III) to the bishop of Aquino, perhaps Gregory II, who, fifteenth in order, as Ughelli himself testifies, succeeded Gregory (I),… in the reign of Innocent III, in the year MCCVI. Nor in all the canon Law is there another canon or chapter "ex lit. de Pigno." to be found besides the one assigned.

[4] of Ughelli are detected. Ughelli goes astray again in writing that St. Constantius under John (namely III), about the year of the Lord DLXVI, was contemporary with St. Benedict: At which time also St. Benedict the Patriarch was flourishing in sanctity. For very many learned men agree that this holy Patriarch by no means reached the times of John III: since indeed he died in the year of Christ 543, on the twenty-first of March, as was proved in Tome III of the same month, page 276, and as Mabillon has in tome 1 of the Annals at the year 543, number 8, where at number 3 he had premised: Meanwhile a twofold blow afflicted beyond measure the minds of the men of Cassino, already sorrowful at the departure of Maurus; namely the death of Benedict their parent, and of his sister Scholastica, who her brother into heaven

preceded by a few days. Nay, according to some he died in the year 536; although this opinion does not seem to us probable on account of Totila's meeting with the holy Father, which happened later, namely in the year 542. And let these things, said in passing concerning the year of St. Benedict's death, suffice, lest I do what has been done already: now let us return to our holy Bishop, to learn more certain things about him so far as is permitted.

[5] St. Gregory the Great, whom Ughelli cites, thus begins chapter 16 of book 2 of the Dialogues: In what year he began to sit, and how long he lived, is uncertain: At the same time also a certain cleric of the church of Aquino was vexed by a demon, who had been sent by the venerable man Constantius, prelate of the same church, through many places of the Martyrs, that he might be healed; but with vain effort. He was therefore led to Benedict, the servant of almighty God: who, pouring out prayers to Jesus Christ the Lord, straightway drove the ancient enemy out of the possessed man. Mabillon, in tome 1 of the Annals, page 60, narrates that this was done in the year 530: whence we can conclude both that our Saint was in the year 530 a contemporary of St. Benedict, and that he was already then ruling the church of Aquino. But how many years before that time he obtained the episcopate, or in what year he was brought forth into the light, we nowhere find. According to Peter de Natalibus, cited at number 2, Constantius was bishop of the city of Aquino, and flourished in the times of Pope John the first; whom Ghini follows and adds: Perhaps in the year DXXV. Since I have nothing from elsewhere by which to weaken or confirm these things, so far I agree with Peter de Natalibus and Ghini: namely that the Saint could have been created bishop about these times, on account of the signal virtues with which he shone forth. Whence he must have been born toward the end of the fifth century, or certainly at the beginning of the sixth. But if they treat (as the order of the words seems to hint) not of the Saint's presbyterate or the beginning of his episcopate, but of his end or death met about that time, I can by no means agree, both on account of what has been said above, and because Gregory in book 3 of the Dialogues, chapter 8, writes: Constantius also, a man of venerable life, was bishop of the city of Aquino, who died RECENTLY in the time of my predecessor Pope John of blessed memory. Where the Benedictine editors note at the word John: Namely John III, who began to sit in the year DLXI (rather 560, as Pagi proves).

[6] Certainly from the martyrdom of St. John I, put to death at Ravenna in the year 526, but it is established that he died under John III, on the twenty-seventh of May, to the pontificate of Gregory the Great, which he entered upon on the third of September in the year 590, sixty-three years flowed by; and John II died likewise on the twenty-seventh of May in 535, that is, fifty-four years before Pope Gregory: and so Gregory, writing the Dialogues in the year 593 or 594, would not have said "recently," but "long since," he died, if the holy Bishop had migrated from this life under John I or II. For who would call a man dead more than sixty-three or even fifty-four years "recently deceased"; or would call, in the obvious sense, his "recent" predecessor one from whom he is distant by the space of so many years, with ten or seven Pontiffs in between? The holy Doctor therefore meant to indicate his nearest predecessor of that name, John III, who died in the year 573; under whose pontificate, and not before, he testifies that our Saint died. Ferrari, cited at number 2, confirms these things by his Annotation: The John under whom St. Constantius lived is the third, who held the Pontificate after Gelasius I * about the year of the Lord DLXI, at which time the Goths had been routed by Narses in the year 552, and again in 554, which was the end of the Gothic war in Italy, as Pagi testifies. Hence it is clear that if our Saint, as Peter de Natalibus and after him Ghini have it, flourished in the times of Pope John the first, and was raised to the episcopal chair; he governed the church of Aquino at the least thirty-four years. Nay indeed, he could have presided over it for more years, even if he had been promoted to the episcopate only under Felix IV, the successor of John I.

[7] although we cannot determine the year. As to what concerns the year of the Saint's death, this we hold as certain from St. Gregory the Great, cited at the end of number 5, that he died in the time of Pope John of blessed memory, namely the third, as we showed at number 6: but in what year of Christ is not established. According to Ughelli he flourished under Pope John about the year of the Lord DLXVI; whether he means that he died in the same year, we do not know: Ferrari expresses no year; Castellan, about the year DLXXII. Let us hear Baronius too, tome VII, at the year 572, where, after narrating the death of John III (which he anticipates by one year, as Pagi shows in the Critica at the same year), he thus has it at number 2: About these times of the same John, Roman Pontiff, yet before the Lombards burst into Italy, Constantius, bishop of Aquino, who had already begun to sit while St. Benedict was still living, died, as St. Gregory testifies. The irruption of the Lombards into Italy the same Baronius, with Pagi agreeing, fixes to the year 568, on the very Kalends of April, from Paul the Deacon, book 2 on the Deeds of the Lombards, chapter 7. We, for lack of a more certain note of time, place the Saint's death under the pontificate of John III, that is, between the years 560 and 573; as we set down above.

[8] The Saint's virtues, and the elogium to be published here. That this excellent Prelate shone with many and signal virtues and merits is beyond controversy; that he was also endowed with the gift of prophecy is plain from Gregory. This one thing we grieve at, that we cannot enumerate and illustrate one by one the illustrious deeds and adornments of so great a Man, since his Life, as Baronius testifies above, is not extant: which, says Ughelli, the voracity of the times devoured. It was written, as the same Ughelli testifies at column 396, about the year MCXXV by Peter the deacon, librarian of Cassino, as he himself affirms in the Opusculum on illustrious men, chapter 47, and in book 4 of the Chronicle of Cassino, chapter 66 (not 48, as Ughelli wrongly has it), addressed to Guarinus, bishop of Aquino, the twelfth in order. I had hoped that I should find at least something concerning that Life, or pertaining to our Saint, either in the Thesaurus of the antiquities and histories of Italy published at Leiden in the year 1723, or among the Writers of Italian Affairs, tome VI of Muratori, printed at Milan in the year 1725, where in columns 59 and 60 a sufficiently long catalogue of the unpublished opuscula of the cited Peter the deacon is woven: but I have sought in vain. Wherefore we desire that the learned Italians, and above all those of Aquino, be earnestly asked that, if anything perchance lies hidden among the moths in some corner of the libraries, they be not unwilling, for the glory of God and the honor of the holy Prelate and their Patron, to bring it forth into the light and communicate it to us. Meanwhile we shall publish the one thing we have found in our museum concerning this Saint, a small Manuscript sent by Ferdinando Ughelli, containing a compendium of his life, such as it is, and the Saint's elogium from book 3 of the Dialogues, chapter 8, of Gregory the Great. That elogium we shall reprint more correctly from the new Paris edition of the Works of the holy Doctor, tome 2, column 293, and shall illustrate it with some annotations. From what author the Manuscript was taken is not added: certainly it is not very ancient. And this title is prefixed to it: The Life or death of St. Constantius, bishop. We shall give it under the name of an elogium.

Annotata

* rather, 47

* read Pelagium I, for Gelasius I had died in the year 496.

ELOGIUM

From the Manuscript of Ughelli, and from St. Gregory the Great.

Constantius, bishop and confessor, at Aquino in the kingdom of Naples. (S.)

BHL Number: 1935, 1934

[The Saint's pastoral care, his perseverance in the divine services, his gift of prophecy:] While the excellent pontiff Constantius was strenuously governing the church of Aquino, and by his words and examples, like a bright lamp set upon a candlestick, was loftily enlightening it, striving with every effort of his strength to fulfill that example to be imitated which is written of Christ, the things which Jesus began to do and to teach: namely that he might exhibit to his hearers in deed that which he might form them by preaching. And because no one exults in the receiving of the prize save he who strives effectually to complete the course, and Truth itself by itself promises eternal salvation not to those who begin but to those who persevere: this holy man strove most constantly, according to the presage of his name, to persevere in the divine services even to the utmost term of his life. Whence also after his death we have known that many virtues were wrought by him: because he merited to have dwelling within him God, the fellow-worker of all virtues, of whom the Apostle most openly testifies, saying: All these things one and the same spirit works, dividing to each as he wills. Who indeed, among the other tokens of his virtues, shone also with the gift of prophecy, as the blessed Pope Gregory, a man in all things most holy, in the third book of the Dialogues (chapter 8), making mention of him, reported, saying:

[2] Constantius also, a man of venerable life, was bishop of the city of Aquino, he foretells two successors after himself, and dies. who died recently in the time of my predecessor Pope John ^a of blessed memory. That he had the spirit of prophecy many testify who could know him familiarly. Among many things, religious and truthful men who were present report ^b this of him: that on the day of his death, when he was most bitterly lamented by the citizens standing about, as a Father so lovable about to depart, they asked him weeping, saying: Whom shall we have after thee, Father ^c? To whom the Father himself, by the spirit of prophecy, answered, saying: After Constantius, a muleteer: after the muleteer, a fuller ^d. O thou, Aquino, this also hast thou ^e. Which words of prophecy being uttered, he breathed forth the last breath of life. When he had died, Andrew his deacon undertook the pastoral care of his church, who once in the stables of the post-roads had kept the running of the horses. And when he too had been withdrawn from this life, Jovinus was summoned to the order of the episcopate ^f, who in the same city had been a fuller. While he was still surviving, all the inhabitants of that city were so laid waste both by the swords of the barbarians ^g and by the monstrousness of pestilence ^h, that after his death neither could any be made bishop, nor could any be found for whom he should be made ⁱ. And so was fulfilled the saying of the Man of God: that after the death of the two who followed him, his church should by no means have a pastor ^k ^l.

ANNOTATIONS.

* for studebat, or studuit

* read ad quod

Notes

a. Consult the Commentary, numbers 5 and 6. The same Pope John III is held among the Prætermissi on the thirteenth of July, tome III, page 471.

b. The Manuscript of Ughelli, "they report."

c. So too Baronius, "Father," with no different sense.

d. So also it is read in the Manuscript: Peter de Natalibus adds: after the fuller, no one. Which being uttered, he breathed forth the breath of life, the intervening words being omitted. Ferrari and Ughelli: after the Fuller, Aquino will have an end. In that sense, namely, in which St. Gregory too must be understood, that after Jovinus it long lacked a bishop. See Ughelli in the succession of the bishops of Aquino.

e. Baronius: O thou, Aquino, these also hast thou.

f. In the Manuscript, Jovinus was taken in. For the rest, of both these prelates, Andrew and Jovinus, I find nowhere anything but the name and office among the bishops of Aquino in Ughelli, column 396.

g. The holy Doctor without doubt means the Lombards, who, having entered Italy in the year 568, as the Commentary has at number 7, with other barbarians, after their king Alboin was slain in the year 574, and likewise after Cleph his successor was killed in the year 576, were under Dukes for ten years, as Sigebert testifies in his Chronicle: they depopulated Italy in the year 578, besieged Naples in 581, and set Authari over themselves as king in 586. See Pagi at the years 571, 573, 577, 578, 581, 585.

h. He designates the inguinal plague, of which see the description in Baronius at the year of Christ 565, number 25. That most grievous pestilence raged for fifty years and more, and began in the East from the year 541 or the following, as Pagi proves at the year 544. The same at the year 577 adduces Marianus Scotus, writing this at the year of Christ 579: The nation of the Lombards, with famine, mortality, and plague accompanying, invaded all Italy, and besieges Rome herself, about to lay her waste. Of the inguinal plague toward the end of the year 589 and the beginning of 590 in Baronius, Gregory of Tours and St. Gregory the Pope also make mention: which plague, says Pagi at number 18, we have shown above to have afflicted in this year (590) not only the City, but other places of Italy also. But in what year that disaster was brought upon the people of Aquino by the swords of the barbarians and the monstrousness of pestilence, is thus far unascertained by me. For the rest, Ferrari in his Annotation says: But Aquino was twice laid waste, first under the Emperor Justinian, secondly under Conrad. After whom it was never rebuilt, although the episcopate perseveres. But he wrongly asserts that the first devastation happened under Justinian: for Justinian I departed from empire and from life on the Ides of November of the year 565, while St. Constantius was perhaps still living, who had foretold that disaster as to come under his second successor only, Jovinus. But Justinian the Younger, or II, took up the empire in the year 685, long after Pope Gregory, who narrates these things as done while he was living, and who died in the year 604. Faultily, therefore, may Ferrari have written the uncle for the nephew, that is, Justinian for Justin the younger, or II, who, since he reigned from the year 565 until 578, could have had Aquino laid waste under him. Moreover Leo of Ostia narrates, in book 1 of the Chronicle of Cassino, chapter 28, that Massar, a general of the Saracens, passed through Aquino in the year 846, and devastated the citadel and the rest round about. As to what concerns Conrad, there was in it Conrad the son of Frederick II, who in the year 1253 in the Terra di Lavoro stormed the cities of Aquino, Sessa, and other places, as Odorico Rinaldi reports from an anonymous manuscript author on the affairs of Manfred, in tome 13 of the Annals at the said year, number 1; but Spondanus in the Continuation of Baronius at the preceding year 1252. Further the episcopate indeed, as Ferrari says, perseveres; but the bishops are wont to reside and to exercise pontifical functions at Pontecorvo, three thousand paces from Aquino to the west, on the boundary of the domain of the Church, by Baudrand's measurement. Some judge, in Orlendi's Sacred and Profane World, part 2, volume 3, page 1516, that Pontecorvo is the ancient Fregellae; from whose ruins, he says, there afterwards emerged Pons Corvus, a noble town of Latium, which at last lately Benedict XIII, Supreme Pontiff, endowed with the right of a city and with an episcopal chair, and united to Aquino in the year MDCCXXV; yet so that the same man be called bishop both of Aquino and of Pontecorvo.

i. Peter de Natalibus, "could." In Baronius the words "nor for whom he should be made" are omitted. The Manuscript of Ughelli faultily has "to be made."

k. Here the Manuscript inserts: the city and citizens being destroyed, through many times. Namely until Angelus, the successor of Jovinus, about the middle of the eleventh century; for he was excommunicated on account of manners certainly not angelic by St. Leo IX, who ascended the chair of St. Peter in the year 1049. See Ughelli, and Baronius at the year 1060, number 5.

l. Namely when the holy Doctor was writing these things. See what was said at letters [d] and [k]. For the rest, in the Manuscript there is a little lower: The rest is wanting. We indeed want more concerning so signal a Prelate, as was said at number 8.