Stephen

ON ST. STEPHEN, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR,

AT DIE IN GAUL.

In the year 1208.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

Stephen, bishop and confessor at Die in Gaul (St.)

BY J. P.

§ I. The Saint's cult; his memory in the Calendars; his Acts.

[ ] Of Die, or, as others write,

Deia or Dea, a city in the Dauphiné, our Henschen indicated the site in tome 1 of April at the IX day, The people of Die, who, as of old, so now have their own bishop, in the preliminary Commentary to the Acts of St. Marcellus, formerly bishop of Die: where also he subjoined a few things about the bishops and see of the same; and among these the following: Die now has the same bishop as Valence; formerly it had its own. Rightly indeed for the time in which he wrote, and truly. For, as is established from the authors who have treated of the affairs of those dioceses, the said sees were united under Pope Gregory X about the year 1275. The Pontifical letters upon that business you have in Father John Columbi of our Society in the Work which he wrote Columbi of our Society in the Work which he wrote about the deeds of the bishops of Valence and Die, book 1, number 68. But that union does not persevere to this day; for by the testimony of Moreri and others, toward the end of the century last elapsed, Innocent XII revoked it at the prayers of Louis XIV king of the Gauls; and so Die again has its own bishop. Now among the distinguished prelates with whom this see was formerly adorned, conspicuous both by nobility of stock and by sanctity of life, St. Stephen called de Castellione, whom we set forth today, claims for himself no lowest place.

[2] Father John Columbi, just now praised and often to be praised in the course of this work, in book 2 of the cited Work, and the veneration of others toward the Saint began from his very death. number 54, records the singular veneration and cult of the clergy and people of Die toward our Saint in these words: One thing I cannot pass over in silence, which the public scribe set down in his cartulary. The body of that Prelate (St. Stephen) was for many hundreds of years illustrious with such frequent miracles, and had such celebrity with the veneration of peoples and clergy, that one elected bishop was led beforehand to pour out prayers at his tomb, before he took possession of the prelate's seat. In nearly as many words Father Theophilus Raynaud relates it in the Indiculus of the Saints of Lyons. Nay, that this veneration not only of the inhabitants but also of foreign peoples began with the Saint's very death, or not long after, is evidently gathered from a letter directed to Pope Gregory IX in the year 1231, by which the most illustrious John de Bernin, archbishop of Vienne, together with his suffragan bishops, requests the Saint's Canonization. A manuscript transcript of this letter Father Columbi transmitted to our Elders in the year 1665, which, because it very greatly helps to elucidate our Saint's Acts, and embraces most of his miracles wrought after his death, we shall commit to type when the Acts have been set before it. The cult is confirmed also by those things which Saussay subjoins at the foot of the huge eulogy with which he commends the Saint's memory. His body, he says, buried in the Basilica of Die with a funeral of which it was worthy, presently put forth rays of divine power, whence, like a translucent gem, being lifted from the dust and placed in a precious coffer, it continued incorrupt in all honor even to the last century. Of the body, the tomb and the miracles the discourse will recur elsewhere; I go on with those things which further manifest the cult.

[3] Of the martyrologists who have made mention of St. Stephen, both the more recent, Today the martyrologists announce him, and also some coming nearer to his times, the announcement is in agreement on this day, which they establish as the day of his death. Greven, or the Carthusians of Cologne in the Auctarium of Usuard printed in the years 1515 and 1521, announces the holy Prelate with this eulogy. On the same day (the VII of the Ides of September) of Stephen of worthy and holy memory, bishop of Die, of the Carthusian Order, a man of great sanctity and most famous in miracles. Who, taken up from Prior of the House of Portes to the governance of the aforesaid church, besides his other stupendous works, emulated the salvation of souls with great zeal. Whence, when he perceived the people to be of a hard neck, that he might healthfully terrify them, and that they might know what enemies they had served, he caused demons of gigantic hugeness to appear before all (in the first edition it is before all the people gathered together) and to go away again (in the first: who at his nod went away again.) About this prodigy more in the Acts. The Florarium Sanctorum, manuscript among us, agrees, which at the same day has thus: Likewise St. Stephen, bishop of Die, in the year of salvation 1213. Whether that year is rightly established as the Saint's year of death will be discussed in §3. To these are added from the more recent Philippus Ferrarius in his General Catalogue of the Saints; Canisius in the German Martyrology; and Saussay in the said Gallican and its Supplement; yet he has blundered in assigning our Saint's immediate predecessor as bishop, as I shall show at number 22.

[4] Further, as the Saint's cult was not shut within the bounds of the diocese of Die alone, so neither was it shut within any space of time. That it perseveres even to our times, but his feast is kept on 9 September. the Proper of the Saints of the notable Cathedral church of Die teaches, excerpted from the ancient Breviaries of the same church, and published in type at Grenoble in the year LXIX of the preceding century: in the copy which is with us, on page 70 it is thus read: IX September, of St. Stephen bishop of Die. Double. All things as in the common of a Confessor Pontiff. Prayer. Grant, we beseech thee, almighty God, that of thy blessed Confessor and Pontiff Stephen etc. But that his annual memory was transferred to the ninth day of the month, I judge to have come about from this, that, since on the VII day, as again is established from the aforesaid Proper of the Saints, the solemn Veneration of the relics of the Church of the Blessed Mary of Die is held, our Saint too was reckoned to be venerated on this day, inasmuch as his sacred body, incorrupt for so many centuries, had shone forth among those relics. Add that on single days, while the rubrics do not stand in the way, at lauds and vespers after the commemoration of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, a commemoration of him and of the other holy bishops of Die is held in the same place under this prayer: O God, who dost surround and protect us with the glorious confessions of thy holy Pontiffs Saturninus, Petronius, Marcellus, Ulphinus, Exuperius, Ismido and Stephen: grant us both to profit by their imitation, and to rejoice in their intercession. Through our Lord. From these things I reckon the Saint's constant cult abundantly demonstrated. I proceed to other matters.

[5] The writers of his deeds The Acts of St. Stephen have been illustrated, besides not a few others, by Peter Dorland in the Carthusian Chronicle, book 4 from chapter 10 to 14; Arnold Bostius the Carmelite in the Little Work on some chief fathers of the Carthusian family, chapter 7; Peter Sutor, On the Carthusian life, book 2, tract 3, chapter 5; Franciscus Haræus in the Lives of the Saints; and before the rest Laurentius Surius, who sets forth at greater length what the others narrate more contractedly: yet in treating the Saint's chief deeds the aforepraised writers so agree with Surius that you can scarcely doubt that they borrowed their own either from the same source as Surius, or, those who are later than he, from him; add that most of the editors of the aforesaid Works, where there is discourse about our Saint, appeal to this illustrious hagiologist. Leaving the rest therefore aside, except where they differ in some matter, it is worth while to inquire whence Surius drew his own. At the VII day of September he forewarns the reader about the Acts of St. Stephen to be published by him in these words: Whereas a certain man had written that Life in verse, and therefore obscurely, another rendered it in prose, whose name is unknown to me: it is however a history worthy to be read; F. Laur. Surius has polished the style where it seemed good.

[6] The Life first written in verse Surius therefore gave, with the style changed, the Life which the Anonymous author wove together by paraphrase out of the verse. Of both a manuscript transcript is in my keeping; and the first indeed, namely of the verse composed by an author likewise anonymous, our Elders received from the praised Columbi; but the second, namely of the Life rendered in loosened style, in the year 1638 Father John Gamans of the Society of Jesus, most deserving of our studies, sent from Cologne, who, after he had asserted that it was copied from a five-part paper Passionary manuscript in quarto, tome 1, which is of the month of September, of the Library of the Holy Ones of Surius, subjoins these things: That it (the Life) is authentic, though not altogether the earliest, is plain from the prologue. Nay, that it is the same which Surius used, the same Prologue teaches, which he did not judge should be inserted here into his Work; where the author thus prefaces: A certain man wrote in verse in a very brief style the life of blessed Stephen, once dweller of the hermitage of Portes … but because the capacity of readers for the most part does not comprehend such meters clearly, therefore now, with God helping, we shall attempt to unfold the said life in brief and simple speech, in so far as both brief speech may drive away weariness, and simple utterance may admit of easy understanding. Now it remains to indicate what I think about these Acts, and how great authority and credit seems to be attributed to them.

[7] In the Life written in verse I detect no trace either of the author, who certainly was an unskilled poet, written, as the badly twisted little verses sufficiently betray, nor of the place, nor of the time in which it was written; nevertheless I also find nothing from which I might gather that the author, although he now and then inverts the order of things, perhaps compelled by the meter, was far removed from the age of our Saint, or relates anything which could prudently be convicted of falsity. To these is added that it also embraces nearly the same benefits obtained after his death by the merits of St. Stephen which the letter to Gregory IX, alleged at number 2, contains; and that it was dug out together with this from the chests of the archive of the chapter of Die, and handed over to the praised Columbi, as he himself has testified, by the very Reverend Lord De la Baume de Pluvinel, at that time sacristan. Far otherwise do I bear the same judgment about the author of the other manuscript Life, or rather the freer paraphrast of the already-mentioned verse: not that I accuse the man of bad faith, for I dispute about the writing, not about the writer's mind; but because, besides the anachronisms of which in §3, I have noticed some things in it which not a little weaken its authority. For, if he does not yield in time to the versifying biographer, certainly he was more remote from the place in which our Saint lived and flourished, and so did not have so great a knowledge of his deeds; which also he seems to have labored little to acquire from elsewhere: as he himself not obscurely hints in the prologue; But if, he says, some things here shall have been declared less lucidly, let the cause be imputed to the style of the said poem, proceeding more briefly and swiftly; not to that of the interpreter, who was unwilling to add what he did not know. Assuredly, if he had taken care to be taught from elsewhere those things which he did not know, by that help he could have supplied also those things which were more obscure in the said poem, nor would the cause of his obscurity have had to be thrown upon it.

[8] Whence I should believe that he reduced the Saint's deeds into a better order, then set forth by a Paraphrase; that this labors under various indeed, than he had found in the said poem; but that he clothed certain things with such circumstances as he judged had more properly been

in the Saint, as his affection, perhaps for his own Order, dictated. This opinion has been made the more likely to me, since I noticed that not only with words, but with whole and quite long periods taken from the Life of other Saints of the Carthusian family, he adorned his paraphrase in more than one place; which I wonder was not observed by Surius or his followers, since they both published the Lives of those same Saints, and the aforesaid interpreter forestalled candidly enough the reader who might notice it, in the prologue, where he has these things: The Life of the Saints Anthelm of Belley and Hugh of Lincoln, bishops, who before him departed from this light to the glory of the Lord, he is known to have caught at in many things as a form of imitation; and therefore certain writings of the various virtues of those same holy bishops, in which the same St. Stephen imitated them, seem not incongruously inserted into his life consequently set down.* Receive, studious reader, a specimen from the Acts of St. Anthelm, set down by a coeval and intimate author, and reprinted by our Henschen at the XXVI day of June.

[9] from the Acts of other Saints The praised biographer had described the election of St. Anthelm to the bishopric of Belley in chapter 3, number 22, in this manner: The clerics of the said church therefore remaining thus divergent in their votes, certain of them more moderate, though few, to whom neither election was pleasing, being busy to bring the rest back to concord, were zealous to elect that great anchorite Anthelm. His sanctity is commended, his discretion and affability, and his religion is exalted immensely. What need of many words? All assent, all rejoice; even he who was first elected, together with his friends, for he was his kinsman. And so he whom the Lord had chosen for this very thing from eternity is chosen by men at the predetermined time: but because they knew that he could not be plucked from the hermitage without great force, they were zealous to hasten to Pope Alexander for confirmation, while he meanwhile lay hid in the hermitage, and knew not what was being done about him by others. Who (the Pontiff), when he had heard their election, rejoiced immensely, saying that they would be happy in such a pastor, and that this counsel had proceeded from the divine purpose … These things therefore being accomplished, the lord Pope, confirming the said election by Apostolic authority, charged and commanded the aforesaid Anthelm that on no occasion should he fail to undertake the care of the church of Belley, to which he had been elected… When Anthelm knew the matter, and that those who wished to bring him had arrived, withdrawing himself through the hiding-places of the said hermitage, disposing to conceal himself, he sought the protection of flight.

[10] especially of St. Anthelm Compare these with those which the said paraphrast of the verse Life has in chapter 3, numbers 12 and 13; you will easily perceive how aptly he has applied the same to St. Stephen, in order to set forth his promotion to the mitre of the church of Die. But lest you think that this was done in this one place only, consult also number 15 of the cited chapter, where he begins to narrate St. Stephen's rule of living. Set beside it these words again excerpted from the praised Acts of St. Anthelm: For he humbly frequented the divine office not in his own chapel or a secret place, but in the greater church with his canons. Almost every day he offered the saving victim to God, commonly filled with an abundance of tears. All wondered that, against the wont of human felicity, a man advanced from a lowly station to the highest had grown more in humility than in dignity, more in devotion than in domination. You will labor if you attempt to assign a difference worth consideration between the words alleged of the two biographers. But, you say, what wrong in that? Plainly similar deeds the often-named paraphrast could explain even with similar and the same words, however much drawn from another, with truth saved, which in relating the Acts of Saints is to be considered and esteemed before all else. Indeed I am not willing to deny that St. Stephen, since he had set St. Anthelm before himself (I have not cared to examine more studiously the Acts of St. Hugh, bishop of Lincoln) as a form of imitation, both in the institute of the Carthusian life, and in the Priorate of the House of Portes, and lastly in the episcopate — that, I say, he had many excellent deeds in common with him, and clung closely to his footsteps. But indeed neither shall I easily bring myself to believe that, given the diversity of the times in which the things were done, the manner of the same things also and the circumstances of the things were not diverse: and accordingly that presumed likeness of deeds cannot pluck out of me every scruple about that sought-for likeness of words. Let one be an example for many.

[11] Pope Alexander III, when he understood the election of St. Anthelm to the see of Belley, bishop of Belley approved it with the highest gladness of mind, and confirmed it, exhorted Anthelm, who deprecated the burden, with fatherly admonitions, and, when he struggled, compelled him by pontifical authority. Nor is it a wonder: it could not lie hid from Alexander how strenuous and undaunted a champion of the Roman Church Anthelm was. For, as is more fully related in his praised Life, chapter 3, numbers 19 and 20, Anthelm, before he was called to the bishopric, had by his doctrine and prudent piety brought it about that in the time of the schism all the Priors of the Carthusian Order with their subjects adhered to Alexander, the lawful Pastor of the universal Church; the same Anthelm had with unconquered spirit resisted Octavian, the invader of the Apostolic see, and had recalled many from his party. Because of these things he had turned upon himself the huge hatred of the emperor Frederick, who favored the schismatics, and at last had been struck with an idle excommunication by the said antipope. Evident therefore here was the cause why the supreme Pontiff should rejoice immensely at the election of so great a man as Anthelm to the bishopric, especially in times so disturbed. Nothing of that kind wrought by St. Stephen for the Church or its supreme Pastor does his encomiast bring forward, being doubtless about to bring it forward had the matter not been lacking. What of this: that perhaps our Saint was not known even by name to Innocent III, who at that time as Vicar of Christ presided over the whole Church; that at least is not clearly enough gathered either from the verse Life or from its Paraphrase of which we treat: on the contrary in the latter he is said to have lain hid as in the darkness of the hermitage.

[12] Let us however grant this, that some rumor reached the ears of the Pontiff about the virtues of St. Stephen, render it suspect of plagiarism. before he was elected to the bishopric, and about his prudence and dexterity in ruling his Carthusian subjects: it will not yet follow that the same cause of rejoicing so greatly at our Saint's election was Innocent's, which before had been Alexander's for applauding the election of St. Anthelm: nevertheless in plainly the same words, and with only the names changed, the joy of each Pontiff is expressed in both places. Who (the Pontiff), when he had heard their (the men of Die's or of Belley's) election, rejoiced immensely, asserting that they would be happy in such a Pastor (the one in St. Stephen, the others in St. Anthelm) and that this counsel had come forth from God. These things do not suffice, I confess, for those which our paraphrast copied from another to be absolutely rejected as false; but they much conduce to this, that those things which are not verified from elsewhere should deservedly be held suspect. His Paraphrase, which differs very little from the Life which Surius gave, I shall subject to the press, that the studious reader, comparing it with the verse Life which we shall give at the same time, may more conveniently distinguish the true from the suspect.

§ II. The Saint's nobility, native place, entry into the Charterhouse, election to the bishopric.

[ ] Of an illustrious mother and a father lord of Châtillon, That our Saint sprang from an illustrious lineage the writers agree. A man famous by descent, more famous by the gifts of grace, sings the Anonymous praised above in the Verse. But his often-alleged paraphrast and with him others, explaining more distinctly the brightness of his descent, say that the Saint's father was the lord of Châtillon, a man notable for religion and nobility; and although they do not designate the mother's name and stock, they yet assert that she was adorned with like titles as the father. Samuel Guichenon, to whom, by the testimony of Thomas Corneille in tome 1 of the Universal Chronographic and Historical Dictionary, the Châtillon of which we treat fell as his native place, in part 2 of the History of Bresse and Bugey, page 39, describes its site and origin, distinguishes it from other domains of the same name, and assigns to whom in the course of time the lordship of it devolved. The same author in the Continuation of the said part 2, page 117, having set before it a delineation of the family shield, weaves the genealogy of the lords of Châtillon from the year 1070 down to the year 1478. About the year 1152 he establishes our Saint's father as lord of Châtillon, and says that he was called Hugh or Hugoninus: to prove which he cites in the margin James Severt in the chronology of the bishops of Mâcon, who at the year 1151, page 138, produces a charter by which Guigo Incatenatus and his sons transfer the lordship of certain goods to the church of Mâcon: and in it mention is made of Hugh and Stephen De Castellione, and Guichenon maintains that the former was our Saint's father, the latter his uncle. The words of the said charter are these: For keeping the peace they gave these sureties back into the hand of bishop Pontius (of Mâcon) and of Hugh the cantor: Reginald of Bengiacum, the lord Hugh de Canannis, Hugh de Castellione, Stephen de Castellione, Hugh de Misriaco etc.; and this agreement was made … in the year from the Incarnation of the Lord 1152. Columbi in the Work mentioned above dissents from the praised Guichenon, and Nicolas Chorier in tome 2 of the Political State of the Dauphiné, page 167, and they call St. Stephen's father Berard; perhaps because the proof brought by Guichenon seemed to them not firm enough for them to change a name found elsewhere. And indeed, since by Guichenon's own confession many places in those parts come under the name of Châtillon, it does not seem altogether certain that that Hugh of whom the charter speaks was our Saint's father; yet nothing stands in the way of its being true; perhaps too he was distinguished by both names, and thus the authors will be reconciled.

[14] he was born at Lyons, On the occasion of the praised Guichenon there occurs another dispute about the native place or birthplace of St. Stephen: the interpreter of the verse biographer, and after him with Surius many others, affirm that our Saint first beheld the light at Lyons, a most celebrated city of the Gauls. Dorland, praised at number 5, Theophilus Raynaud in the Indiculus of the Saints of Lyons, and almost all the rest who have more distinctly expressed his native place, call him of Lyons. Against this rises up one man, so far as I know, Guichenon, and in part 1, chapter 21 of the said History, enumerating the illustrious men of the provinces of Bresse and Bugey, he contends for Châtillon; whether with arms strong enough, let the learned reader judge: his words, rendered into Latin, I transfer hither: The second (illustrious man of the province of Bresse was) St. Stephen de Castellione, a Carthusian, afterwards Prior of Portes, then bishop of Die, who was the son of Hugh Lord of Châtillon near Dombes, although all who wrote his life have qualified him as of Lyons; but in that they erred: for they took the diocese from which he was, for his birthplace. So he.

[15] A most welcome thing would the praised author have rendered to me, most desirous of attaining the truth,

Guichenon's opinion about the native place less probable. if he had judged it worth the trouble to indicate more clearly in what they erred, and from what monuments he dug out the error of so many writers: so suspect to me are, as I have insinuated in the preceding §, those things which the said paraphrast of the verse Life, and those who follow him, adduce, unless they be drawn from the verse itself, or rest on solid foundations. But neither from the Verse nor from probable reasoning does that error appear. For I do not think that the learned man was so far carried away by love toward Châtillon, his own native place, as to have attempted to claim the Saint for it as a citizen by this or a like argument: St. Stephen was the son of the lord of Châtillon; therefore born at Châtillon; therefore all who said he was of Lyons erred: other consequences indeed I cannot elicit from his words: he was the son of the lord of Châtillon, although … they have qualified him as of Lyons; but in that they erred. How weak these consequences are, and how little apt to beget probable conjectures against the testimonies of so many writers, is manifest to anyone: for how often do illustrious and rich men fix their dwelling in places other than those of which they are lords? how often, if they have fixed it at the place of their lordship, do they pass a great part of the year with their families in other cities, especially such as are not far distant and are famous, as Lyons was? Far be it, I say, that I should think Guichenon wished so to argue: nevertheless, since he brings nothing forward by which to confirm his opinion, as seems fair to be done, especially when we convict all the rest of error, I should not dare to snatch from the people of Lyons a Saint whom by long possession of years, relying on the testimonies of all writers, with Guichenon alone protesting, they have believed their fellow-citizen: but on the contrary, until I be untaught, I shall believe that St. Stephen, son of the lord of Châtillon, was born in the city of Lyons itself.

[16] The Saint's birthday none of the authors whom I have seen determines with certainty; In the 26th year of his age he becomes a Carthusian. although most of them, after the paraphrast of the verse biographer, attach it to the year 1155: yet that it must be anticipated by five or six years appears to me more probable from the arguments to be brought below for the year of his death; wherefore I shall fix it about the year 1150, and from this beginning I shall deduce the rest, which cannot be certainly defined from the writers; namely the time at which he went to the Charterhouse, and afterwards was raised to the episcopal dignity. And so St. Stephen, after his infancy and youth passed in the highest piety and integrity of morals, as may be seen more fully in the Acts and in the often-cited writers, reaching the 26th year of his age (about which all agree) embraced the institute of the Carthusian life in the House of Portes about the year 1176, at which time more probably Guigo, or, as others have it, Hugh, the second of that name and ninth General Prior, administered the monarchy of the whole sacred Order. This I gather from the words of the Nomenclature of the Priors of the Charterhouse, brought forward by Columbi in book 2, On the deeds of the bishops of Die, number 42: they run thus: Under Guigo the second, Prior of the Charterhouse, about the year one thousand one hundred and seventy-sixth flourished Bernard, formerly Prior of Portes, afterwards bishop of Die. But whether this same Bernard, or another of the same name, was Prior of the aforesaid House of Portes in the year in which our Saint entered the Charterhouse, as it is not certainly established from the words just cited, so neither is it from the authors, who determine it as certain. Their opinion I bring forward, that the learned reader may more conveniently judge at what price their reckonings are to be held, when there shall be dispute about the year of our Saint's death.

[17] Dorland and Petreius, in assigning the Prior who admitted the Saint, The praised Dorland, and he who illustrated his Chronicle with notes, Theodore Petreius, will have it that it was the same Bernard who received St. Anthelm and St. Stephen into the Charterhouse, and at whose urging St. Bernard, abbot of Clairvaux, expounded the Canticle of Canticles. Hear Dorland in book 4, chapter 9 of the said Chronicle: He (Bernard) received into the Order St. Anthelm, of whom above, he St. Stephen, of whom below; … this our Bernard, because of the incomparable familiarity which he had with St. Bernard, asked of him that he would deign to write something upon the Canticle of Canticles for his zeal. But in the chapter next following: There came therefore the most pious youth (St. Stephen) burnt with a great fire of devotion, and was received with the highest veneration by St. Bernard, Prior of Portes, of whom I have already made mention above. Petreius agrees in his Elucidation on Dorland's book 4, chapter 9: This, he says, is that man (Bernard) who admitted into the bosom of the Order those two notable prelates of the Christian people: namely Bl. Anthelm of Belley, and Stephen of Die. But these things cannot be admitted without manifest peril of anachronism; for that Bernard who admitted Bl. Anthelm into the Charterhouse, if you believe Guichenon, met his last day in the year 1152, two years after our Saint was born; or, if you think his life must be prolonged, certainly before the year 1163 he abdicated the Priorate, which I show.

[18] commit an anachronism, as is shown from the Acts of St. Anthelm The biographer of St. Anthelm praised above, coeval and intimate, after he had narrated in chapter 2, number 13, how his Saint transferred the laid-down governance of the whole Charterhouse to dom Basil, which Father Henschen asserts to have happened about the year 1151, at number 14 thus continues: There was then (as has been said above) first Prior in the Hermitage of Portes dom D. Bernard, who received the man of God Anthelm into the Order. And a few things being interposed he goes on in this manner: This man, I say, such and so holy, being now worn out with an aged age, wishing to rest from the labor of external things, that he might be free for God more attentively, and at the same time judging it unworthy that he should always domineer, at length preferred to be under than to be over; and so, his burdens and the name of Prior being laid down, he procured that D. Anthelm be substituted for himself. St. Anthelm therefore was substituted for Bernard; and he was taken from Prior of Portes to the bishopric of Belley about the year 1163, as Father Henschen shows in the Annotations to chapter 5, letter b, of the often-mentioned Life of St. Anthelm; and consequently the Bernard of whom we treat had ceased to be Prior some years before, nay more probably had departed from among the living before the year 1176, in which our Saint set his mind toward the Charterhouse. Our paraphrast biographer favors this opinion in chapter 2, where he narrates that St. Stephen was enticed to embrace the Carthusian life in the House of Portes, and was stirred to fight bravely against the demon, by the example of Bernard and Anthelm, who in the said place had stood forth victors over the infernal Goliath. For among the rest, he says, he (Stephen) learned that two most valiant athletes had there been Priors, who, gloriously triumphing over Goliath himself, carried off the crown of perpetual felicity. Of whom the first was the lord Bernard … but the other, of no unequal condition and merit, was St. Anthelm, who was first Prior of the Charterhouse, then of the said House of Portes, and afterwards was made bishop of Belley.

[19] How did he learn that Bernard had been Prior there, and other how Anthelm, who succeeded Bernard; if Bernard were even then the same Prior? Nor should you say that Bernard, when he saw St. Anthelm snatched from his own and promoted to the church of Belley, resumed the government of the said house: for this becomes less likely from the fact that he had before sought chiefly for this reason to be freed from the burden of the Priorate, because, being now worn out with an aged age, he wished to rest from the labor of external things, that he might be free for God more attentively: therefore his age, which had been the cause of his laying down the Priorate, being now increased by the time in which St. Anthelm had ruled the House, with greater reason forbade him to resume the care of it. And indeed that he was much advanced in age, if he lived down to the year 1163, and especially if to 1181, in which by the reckonings of Dorland and Petreius he received St. Stephen as Prior into the Charterhouse, is plain from those things which are found about him in the ancient monuments in Guichenon and Severt. For according to these Bernard, of whom we treat, after he had for some time professed the monastic life in the monastery of Ambronay, with the consent of his abbot Desiderius withdrew into the Hermitage of Portes, and there erected a Charterhouse.

[20] The diploma by which the aforesaid abbot Desiderius grants him the faculty together with some lands to this end, monuments in Guichenon page 222 runs thus: I, Desiderius, abbot of Ambronay, hand over to the knowledge of those present, and commit to the everlasting memory of those to come, by the present writing: that two of our brethren and sons, namely Bernard and Pontius, by our leave and that of the whole chapter, passed over to the Hermitage of Portes, whom very many clerics and laymen followed etc. At the end is subjoined: And the aforesaid Bernard, Prior of Portes, received the aforesaid donation etc. That these things happened about the year 1115 is gathered from the words of the same Bernard, a fragment of whose testament you have in the praised Severt in the Historical Chronology of the archbishops of Lyons at the year 1113, §5, and it thus begins: In that very year therefore of our entry into that hermitage, namely the one thousand one hundred and fifteenth, our dearest and venerable father Gauceramus, archbishop of Lyons, visiting us etc. Behold the first Prior of Portes, who admitted St. Anthelm, held the governance from about the year 1115, and, that the opinion of those authors may be true, he was even then carrying on the Priorate in 1181, in which St. Stephen came to the Charterhouse. These things indeed are possible; but most difficult to believe, considering the reasons which we have brought to the contrary. One thing it is worth while to add over and above, that the learned reader may perceive clearer than light how inconsistently Petreius proceeded, and how imprudently he overturned his own opinion and that of his Dorland.

[21] commit an anachronism. I repeat his words alleged above: For this is that man (Bernard) who admitted into the bosom of the Order those two notable prelates of the Christian people: namely Bl. Anthelm of Belley and Stephen of Die. Then in the same place, in his elucidation on chapter 10 of Dorland about St. Stephen, he thus continues: This most holy Prelate passed to the Lord on the seventh of the Ides of September in the year of salvation one thousand two hundred and thirteenth, of his own age the fifty-eighth, of his conversion the thirty-second, but of his episcopate the sixth. Consult now what the same author has in another Work, which he entitled the Carthusian Library, pages 25 and 26: there, after a huge eulogy in which he extols the virtues of Bernard, Prior of Portes, who received St. Anthelm, and so, from the words just cited, St. Stephen also into his Order, you will read the following: Endowed at last with many virtues and famous after his death for signs of prodigies, he (Bernard) passed to the Lord about the one thousand one hundred and fortieth year of the Virgin's childbearing, on the XVI of the Kalends of January. Do you see, studious reader? Bernard the Prior, by the testimony of Petreius, closed his last day toward the end of the year 1140; and yet the same man, on his own asseveration, received St. Stephen into the Charterhouse about 1181, as will be plain if, beginning from

the year 1213, which is established by Petreius as the Saint's year of death, you subtract the 32 years of his conversion. Who could reconcile these? I should therefore rather believe that our Stephen was admitted into the Charterhouse by that Bernard, Prior of Portes, whom from the words cited at number 16 the praised Columbi places among the bishops of Die about the year 1177 or 1178, and whom Dorland and Petreius confounded with Bernard the first Prior of Portes: but which of them induced St. Bernard of Clairvaux to expound the Canticle of Canticles, it is not the place here to inquire. Further, about the year in which our Saint came out as Prior of the said House of Portes, I have nothing ascertained; wherefore I dispatch in a few words the things that occur to be said about his episcopate.

[22] He is elected bishop more probably about the year 1203. Dorland in the aforesaid Chronicle says that St. Stephen was elected and consecrated Prelate of Die not without a great miracle; Sutor, miraculously raised; Bostius and with him the anonymous author of a brief History of the Carthusian Order in Martène, tome 6, column 176, miraculously brought forth. But of the writers whom I have seen none sets forth what this miracle was, or in what it consisted. Unless perhaps the authors just praised thought it should be ascribed to a miracle that a Man who had lain hid for 26 years in the hermitage, after various disputes of the canons of Die about electing a pastor, was elected bishop by the unanimous vote of all and, led out of the darkness, as the paraphrast biographer speaks, was set upon the candlestick. Saussay in his Martyrology wrongly, as I insinuated at number 3, establishes Robert as our Saint's immediate predecessor in these words: To the bishopric of Die, vacant by the death of the prelate Robert, Stephen was carried off by the repeated command of Innocent III. For that between the said Robert and our Saint this see was occupied by two or three bishops becomes evident from the more accurate Catalogues of the bishops of Die: such as the brothers Sainte-Marthe published in the Gallia Christiana and Columbi in the often-mentioned Work; the latter, having brought forward arguments by which to prove it, designates Peter as Robert's successor, Jarento to Peter, Humbert to Jarento, and at last to him St. Stephen. Indeed I suspect that that error crept into the praised codex of Saussay from the likeness of names; so that either he himself, or some amanuensis, wrote Robert for Humbert. But the Saint's election to the Bishopric, which many bind to the year 1208, seems to me more probably to have been made about 1203; but these things again depend upon the year of his death, of which now: for what virtues he exercised in the monastic life, what examples of piety as Pastor he furnished to his flock, and what prodigies he wrought by divine power, the studious reader will find fully described in the often-mentioned Acts.

that is, cernuntur*

§ III. The year and the day of the Saint's death are discussed.

[ ] Most writers assert that the Saint died in the year 1213 That our Saint, after he had governed the church of Die as bishop for about six years, passed out of this life into heaven in the year 1213 on the VII day of September, very many writers affirm. The Paraphrast of the Verse Life led the column, and, as I think, led the rest into error, whose words are these: On the seventh day of September, on the vigil of the Nativity of the Mother of God, he passed to the Lord in the year one thousand two hundred and thirteenth, of his own age more than the fifty-seventh, but of his episcopate more than the fifth, but less than the sixth. These things, with Surius, Haræus, Sutor, Petreius, Guichenon, praised above, and most others in whom mention is made of the year of death, adopted. All however, if you except one, Guichenon, of whom below, and perhaps Sutor, of whom presently, without testimony, without records by which to confirm the thing which they assert so undoubtingly. Sutor, who, by Petreius's testimony in the Library, flourished in the twentieth year after fifteen hundred, does indeed adduce, to give credit to his sayings, a certain book of the Deeds of our Saint, but more probably he intends from it to prove St. Stephen's virtues, not the year of his death. Receive his words: With so many and so great miracles did he (St. Stephen) shine forth in life and after death, that they turn readers into astonishment. For indeed he raised the dead, cleansed lepers, gave light to the blind, and cured other infirmities more than can be numbered, as is partly had in the book which relates his deeds. And after he had become famous with many signs of virtues, at last in the year of the Lord the thirteenth after the one thousand two hundredth, leaving the earth he sought the stars. Sutor here, I say, refers the reader to the said book of deeds, more probably in order to prove true what he alleges about the Saint's virtues, but not what he afterwards says about the year of his death. But even granting gratis that the praised author intended this last, the assertors of this opinion will draw little thence for themselves; for, since I nowhere find this book of deeds, I strongly suspect that it is none other than the so often mentioned Paraphrase of the Verse Life, and accordingly, until it be brought to light, of no greater authority; and how slight that is in this question, it is easy to judge both from what has been said and from what is to be said.

[24] Against the authors just cited Father John Columbi sets himself in book 2 On the deeds of the bishops of Die. St. Stephen, he says at number 51, is said in Surius to have been made bishop from Prior of Portes, under Jocelin Prior of the Charterhouse, but from the chronological series and to have died after the sixth year of his episcopate in the year 1213, with a notable error. Nor does he assert this simply, but presently sets about proving it by a threefold argument. The first he takes from the chronological series of the prelates of Die, and he contends from genuine records (such he calls those which, as he himself protests in his letter to the reader, he surveyed with his own eyes, turned over with his hands, and, written by a public hand and fortified with the seals of the highest men, drew out from the library of various persons, but especially of the most illustrious Charles James Leberon, bishop of Valence and Die) — he contends, I say, from those tablets, that Humbert II, our Saint's successor, carried on the bishopric of Die in the years 1109, 1110 and 1112: then at number 57 he recounts what the said Humbert did in each of these years, with the day and month noted. These things, because they are rather lengthy, I shall not transfer hither. Let the curious reader, if he please, consult the praised author at the numbers assigned.

[25] of the prelates of Die Yet lest, because perhaps Columbi's book is not at hand, you be wholly frustrated of the knowledge of them, I transcribe plainly the same things, but much more contractedly, yet not less clearly, from the Gallia Christiana of the Brothers Sainte-Marthe, tome 2, page 555 verso, number 38. Humbert II, they say, in the year 1209 (on the V of the Kalends of February, adds Columbi from the Cartulary of the Cistercians of Léoncel) was present at the pacts of the bishop of Valence with his citizens. The same in the year 1210, on 12 March, ended a grave suit of Elias the Hospitaller, preceptor of Ricobellum, with Bertrand Misonius. In the month of June of the same year, by the intervention of the prelate of Viviers he came to agreement with Aimar of Poitiers about Aurel, Bastida, the building of the villa of Paonetum and other toparchies: but in the year 1212, on the IV of the Ides of February, he bestows upon the Prior of St. Marcellus the church of Bl. Bartholomew of Gressa, and the tithes of Bastida Grassi. So the praised brothers: whence also, when in the same place at number 37 they say that our Saint was consecrated bishop in 1208, they must be reckoned to have spoken not from their own but from others' opinion. This they seem sufficiently to insinuate: since they at once subjoin the following: Some write that (St. Stephen) passed to Christ on the VII day of the month of September of the year 1213: but by name Columbi in his Pontificium Diense contradicts, who is to be consulted in the same place — from the assertion of certain records; and immediately after they relate the same things which are contained in the said records, to demonstrate that the see of Die was occupied by Humbert II in the years 1209, 1210 and 1212. For learned men could not but have seen that these two things cannot here stand together: St. Stephen was consecrated bishop only in the year 1208, and his successor Humbert II held the see of Die at the beginning of 1209.

[26] with the arguments brought forward Nor can it be said that St. Stephen, consecrated in 1208, perhaps ceded the bishopric at the beginning of 1209, or, if he did not cede it, that from love of solitude, and that he might be more quietly free for God, he substituted Humbert as his suffragan; and so it could have come about that he entered the bishopric in the year 1208, prolonged his life to 1213, and that Humbert performed in the said years the things which are narrated about him. For besides that these things are gratuitously invented, both fight with what is related about the Saint by Columbi's own adversaries. For if he ceded the bishopric, or substituted another for himself, how does the author in Surius say that he passed from this life in the sixth year of his episcopate? How does Theophilus Raynaud say that he spent six years in the watches of his flock? How Dorland, that he, when he saw that after a short time he was to pass from the world, and was unwilling to leave his church unpacified, composed an implacable war between the people of Die and the neighboring peoples? How, lastly, does the author in Surius again, and with him almost all the rest, say that our Saint, at the impending term of this life, fell into sickness, and that on this account mourning seized the extremes of the joy of the church of Die, and that, when the sons of his church urged him to make a testament, Stephen answered, there is no need, since all things belong to my bride, whom I undertook to govern? These things assuredly and more of this kind indicate plainly enough that he neither ceded the bishopric before his death, nor committed the care of it to another, and thus Columbi's first argument remains unhurt. I go on to the second.

[27] The second argument the just-praised Columbi forms against the author of Surius's opinion out of that same man's own words: and from the author himself of the Life in Surius, for he in Surius, where he brings in our Saint refusing the mitre of Die after the example of Bl. Hugh, once a Carthusian monk and bishop of Lincoln, interjects these things: That blessed Hugh had already departed from life almost two years before; and after a few words he thus continues: But being led (St. Stephen) by those canons with much joy and honor to Vienne, he was there solemnly consecrated by three archbishops in the year of grace one thousand two hundred and eighth. From which Columbi argues nearly in this manner: It is established from Surius himself and from others that Hugh of Lincoln died in the year 1200; on the confession again of the author in Surius, St. Stephen was taken to the bishopric of Die almost two years after Hugh's death: therefore, contrary to himself in this part, he wrongly asserts St. Stephen consecrated six years later, namely in the year 1208; wrongly he affirms him dead after another six years in 1213. This difficulty most of those who have followed Surius's reckonings doubtless felt; but not seeing how they might extricate themselves, they preferred to dissemble these things, and to keep deep silence about Hugh of Lincoln. One I find, Odoricus Raynaldus, who in the Annals of Baronius continued, at the year 1208, number 25, confesses that the author of the Surian Life erred; for after he had related from Surius the words which we cited in the last place, he thus continues: He (the author of the Life in Surius) is however to be corrected, when a little before he affirms that Bl. Hugh bishop of Lincoln

departed from life almost two years before; for his death fell in the two hundredth year above the one thousandth. Nay indeed he is to be corrected; but not because he places the episcopal consecration two years after Hugh's death, but because he prolongs that same consecration down to 1208, and accordingly our Saint's year of death down to 1213.

[28] The third argument at last, and one which wonderfully strengthens the two preceding, as also from the Letter given to the Pontiff in the year 1231, Columbi drew from the Letter which, as we recorded at number 2, the most Illustrious John de Bernin, archprelate of Vienne, and his suffragan bishops sent to Gregory IX in the year 1231: and in it, before they proceed to a quite long enumeration of the miracles which the divine Clemency deigned to work through our Saint, they thus preface: In the year from the Incarnation of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighth, on the eighth of the Ides of September, Stephen, a Carthusian monk, and Prior of Portes of the Carthusian Order, and by Divine grace bishop of Die, passing from this world departed to the Lord. Which words so clearly confirm Columbi's opinion that it would have sufficed to have inserted them alone into this Commentary, the rest being left aside, had not the reason presently to be given impelled me; so clearly, I say, do they confirm Columbi's opinion, that I do not see what can be brought against it by which it might be weakened, and consequently they render it to me much more probable, not to say certain: especially since the authors of the contrary opinion, as I indicated at the beginning of this §, rest upon bare assertion, nor does any one labor to establish the truth of his sayings by reasons or monuments, except one Guichenon, in what manner he has done it I briefly set forth.

[29] and especially the authority of Guichenon is lowered, In part 2 of the History of Bresse and Bugey, page 118, he says that our Saint departed from among the living in 1213, and a little lower, treating of Guigo lord of Châtillon, and, according to him, St. Stephen's own brother, he records a certain instrument in which it is manifestly supposed that the Saint was even then among the living in the year 1212. His words I render into Latin. There is seen, he says, in the archives of the Abbey of Chassagne a donation of certain inheritances made to the Abbot and his religious by Guido Lord of Châtillon in the year 1212, with his brother Stephen de Castellione, bishop of Die, assisting. These things struck me, I confess, at first sight; especially since I perceived them supported by so many authors of the Surian opinion; and I began to doubt somewhat about the truth of Columbi's opinion, which attaches the year of death to 1208: and this was the reason why I discussed more studiously, and disputed at greater length, certain things which could have been indicated in a word or two: namely the name of St. Stephen's parent, his birthplace, whether it was Lyons or Châtillon itself; who was Prior of the House of Portes when the Saint went to the Charterhouse, whether the same Bernard who admitted St. Anthelm, or another: what is to be thought about the Acts of the paraphrast of the verse Life, etc.

[30] For I judged it would not be beside the point to show how little is to be granted to those authors who adorn their own Work with others' shreds, as I observed in our paraphrast at numbers 9, 10 and 11; who in the same matter write things contrary to themselves, as in the same paraphrast at number 27, and in Petreius at number 21; who yield too easily to conjectures, as at numbers 13, 14 and 15 in Guichenon; how little, I say, is to be granted to them, when the opposite opinion is propped by such solid reasons and testimonies as Columbi brings forward. These things being considered, receive in few words what I think about Guichenon's mentioned words. Since the said instrument of donation is neither at hand, nor does he himself testify that he saw it, affirming only that it is preserved or beheld in the praised abbey, which indeed I shall not deny, yet nothing certain can thence be made out against Columbi; and it is permitted to suspect either that a fault crept into the said instrument by the writer's error, or that something was deduced from it by Guichenon through conjecture which is not contained in it certainly enough. How easily could the year 1212 not have been written for 1202, or so read by one seeing it? How easily could Guichenon, when he either saw in the instrument or understood from another that a certain Stephen, even de Castellione, if you will, was present at the said donation, have concluded that this Stephen was the bishop of Die, where nevertheless mention is made perhaps of another of the same name, since, as he himself confesses, many places in those parts come under the name of Châtillon.

[31] Whatever at last may be the truth of the matter, so doubtful are the things which Guichenon has in this matter, [and it is shown that he died in the year 1208, probably on the 6th day of September.] so contradictory on this side and that are the things which other writers have with the author of the Life in Surius, and so clear do those seem which Columbi has, that I do not see what should deter me from embracing his opinion. Therefore our Saint, born about the year 1150, having entered the Charterhouse about 1176, raised to the bishopric about 1203, being in his 58th year, flew to those above in 1208 in the month of September. But on what day of the month? The martyrologists and most of the writers whom we have praised in this Commentary constantly assign the VII day of the month, or the VII of the Ides of September. Yet no light doubt was moved in me by the mentioned letter of the archbishop of Vienne and the other bishops to Gregory IX, which in express words, in the place alleged above, says he passed to heaven on the eighth of the Ides of September. And that this was not a writer's fault, lest anyone should think so, the following seem to confirm, in which the Saint's first miracle after death is narrated: And so on the present day, on which the said St. Stephen had been buried, on which the Nativity of the Mother of God is celebrated, the daughter of a certain man of Die etc. The Saint therefore was buried on the feast day of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, or the VI of the Ides of September, and, as ordinarily happens, at least one day intervened in between between the death and the burial, unless some reason had persuaded that this be hastened, which I do not find. Whence I should easily believe that the Saint really ceased to live on the VI day of September; but since perhaps his sacred body was exposed on the VII to the pious love and veneration of his subjects toward their holy Parent, it could happen that the people of Die themselves noted this day especially as that of his death, which accordingly passed also to the martyrologists and other writers. These are indeed conjectures, but, as I think, not much alien from the truth.

§ IV. Relics; the body long incorrupt given to the fire by heretics; whether the Saint was solemnly canonized.

[ ] Heresy raging, How great veneration our Saint's body was held in from his very death I have touched in a word at number 2, where the cult was treated, and it will further be plain from the miracles. It remains to say how long the people of Die enjoyed this treasure, when and on what occasion they were deprived of it. These things, besides Columbi, very many more recent writers relate who have written about our Saint: but because he narrates most things more distinctly, with testimonies also added here and there, it will be well to transfer hither from him the following: Heresy was creeping (in the year 1557) and by hidden increases was seizing Die, nor was the accustomed honor paid to the remains of Stephen: rather, as Calvinism is wanton and forward, not far from contempt were the hair-shirt, the scapular, the shoes, the girdle, the eremitical staff, memorials of his holy life among the Carthusians, and once led in trackless places far from mortals, which the piety of our ancestors had brought out of the tomb and set forth to be beheld by the people. The unbridled and importunate license touched bishop Monluc deeply: with such prudence and veneration for sacred things as he had, he judged that the holy spoils of the Man were “no longer to be permitted to the eyes of degenerate sons mocking their Father. He orders them to be given back to his body” and again laid up in the tomb.

[33] The bishop orders the Saint's tomb to be opened; This John Monluc presided over the churches of Valence and Die, then united, from the year 1553 to 1579. Variously do various men write about him: for some, and they the more numerous, among whom Severt and the brothers Sainte-Marthe in their Catalogues of the bishops of Valence, praise him for piety, for zeal for the Catholic religion, and for notable dexterity and prudence in transacting affairs; others on the contrary contend that he was infected with the plague of the Calvinian heresy, among whom Theophilus Raynaud in the Indiculus of the Saints of Lyons, where he treats of our Saint, and Odoricus Raynaldus in his Annals at the year 1560, numbers 41 and 48, where that bishop, or pseudo-bishop, as he calls him, is painted in the blackest colors. But since these things conduce little or nothing to our matter, we leave the suit to be settled by them: the champions of both opinions the Brothers Sainte-Marthe recount in order, whom the curious reader will be able to consult. Meanwhile, although the praised authors do not all agree about Monluc's mind and about the end for which he did the things just related from Columbi, yet that the thing itself was so accomplished no one, so far as I know, denies. Columbi goes on in this manner.

[34] and it being opened, the sacred body with the episcopal ornament, It was the eighth day of July: Humbert Faucher, a canon, was carrying out the prelate's commands. With a most crowded people looking on, the sepulchral stone is lifted: the chief men of the city enter the vault: they see the thing of an unwonted portent, and they handle the body, in the midst of lime, whole and full of sap: the pontifical vestment is seen, and all of it is handled, genuine and incorrupt, the alb too, the chasuble, the mitre, the sandals, after nine and forty years above three hundred from Stephen's death. But in the fourth year after, namely of Christ the first and sixtieth after the one thousand five hundredth, the heretics set it upon a pyre built in the middle of the square, and burned it; the impious fury of the Huguenots raged against the sacred body with devouring flames, which so many centuries had not been able to consume. So Columbi; and presently he sets about proving what he has narrated in this fashion: It is worth while to dig out all these things from the public tablets, which were written at the time when the things themselves were being done. First, Spiritus Dermenon, royal notary, thus wrote about the opening of the tomb, which he was seeing. “In the year one thousand five hundred and fifty-seventh, on the third day of the month of July etc. James Vacherius and John de Croux, being commanded, opened the vault of the Lord Stephen, once bishop of Die”.

[35] with the people looking on, This testimony of Dermenon (whom below Columbi also writes Dormido, more probably faultily in one place or the other) — this testimony, I say, seems to conflict with the narration set before it by the praised writer: for what he here ascribes to the eighth day, it was the eighth day of July, the other relates to have happened on the third day, since both treat of the opening of the tomb. They could perhaps be reconciled by saying that the tomb was opened twice: and first indeed secretly, and with fewer persons present, deputed to that by the bishop, or designated by the clergy, and that this was done on the III day; but then on the VIII day publicly; namely after the rumor about that prodigious incorruption of the body had spread abroad through the city and diocese, and had drawn men, both the chief men and others of the people, to behold that miracle with their eyes. If these things cannot be so explained, it must be confessed that some error has here been committed by Columbi; but of light moment, and one which accordingly ought not to detain us

. Let us hear how he goes on to prove his narrative.

[36] Secondly the same notary adds the following about the body of St. Stephen, it is found incorrupt in the midst of lime, which was found in the opened tomb. “The tomb being opened, there met the eyes of all a body clothed with an alb and a chasuble. Beneath this it hung down on either side. Upon the head, to which its own hairs clung, marked out with a priestly crown, a mitre had been placed. One of the arms lay laid upon the other. The hands were covered with gloves. The third or middle finger of the right hand a golden ring adorned, in whose shining bezel a notable gem was set. The feet and legs episcopal buskins protected”. Thirdly, that the feet, legs, hands, arms, breast, head, in short the whole body stood upon its own bones, and was vigorous with its own flesh, you understand from this, that it consisted of its own flesh and its own bones when after four years they burned it, as I shall presently relate. Fourthly, Bl. Stephen's body was found in the midst of lime. For Dormedon the royal scribe adds these things: “Throughout the whole vault, as long and as broad as it was, they had both laid under and set over the body, clothed in pontifical vestments, a very great quantity of lime”. Fifthly at last, the same body, which very much lime had not been able to consume in fully 360 years and more, was set upon a pyre and cremated in the year 1561 in the middle square of the city of Die, as was answered in the year 1573 to the investigator concerning the overthrow of all sacred things, whom the parlement of Grenoble had appointed. For while the rest indeed related the deed, but were silent about the time, one testified under oath in these words: “In the year 1561 they cast an incredible quantity of ecclesiastical papers into a pyre erected in the middle square, together with the body of St. Stephen, which consisted of its own flesh and bones”. So Columbi.

[37] So clearly is the whole matter here set forth that it is not necessary for anything to be added. and together with other relics is burned by the heretics in the year 1561. Nevertheless I again detect some error, or fault of writing, in these words of Columbi: The body, which very much lime had not been able to consume in fully 360 years. For since in his own opinion, which we too have embraced in the preceding §, St. Stephen died in the year 1208, and it is established that his body was burned by the heretics in 1561, between these two years fully 360 years cannot be found, but at most 353. But that it was rather a fault of writing than an error of the author I gather from this, that he himself above at number 43 rightly counts only 349 years from the year 1208 to 1557, in which the tomb was opened, and adds that the body was cremated after 4 years, which added to the preceding make up the just number of 353 years. Further it is more likely that nothing survives today of our Saint's relics: for since the things which had earlier been brought out of the tomb, the hair-shirt, the scapular, and the others enumerated above, were shut up in it again in the year 1557, and the rage of heretics is not wont to spare any sacred thing, nor is it read to have been handed down to memory that anything was withdrawn from the flames or from ruin by the pious industry of Catholics; it is to be feared that Theophilus Raynaud exclaims most truly with others: The holy Man's body with all his remains, O crime horrible even to record! was given to the flames.

[38] That the solemn canonization of the holy Prelate was treated of more than once is beyond doubt. For, by the testimony of Odoricus Raynaldus in the Annals at 1222, in that very year, [Pope Honorius III ordered inquiry to be made into the Saint's life and miracles in the year 1222] only 14 from the Saint's death, it began to be treated of, when Honorius III governed the church as supreme Pontiff. He, being asked by the bishop of Die, (the words are the praised Annalist's) that he would inscribe in the catalogue of the saints Stephen his predecessor, who was flashing with innumerable miracles, and to whose tomb the greatest concourses of men from various regions of the Christian world were being made, orders the bishop of Porto, his legate … to inquire about the Servant of God's life, death, wonderful things put forth before and after death and other circumstances, and to make him more certain. To the apostolic letters is affixed the ninth day of the Kalends of November. So Odoricus, and he praises in the margin the said Pontiff's 27th letter. And indeed that the Pontifical commands were satisfied at least in part by the aforesaid legate, an indication is the letter which, as we said above, nine years later, namely in the year 1231, together with the miracles the archbishop of Vienne and his suffragans sent to Gregory IX, Honorius III's successor. But what, says Columbi in the Appendix to book 4 On the deeds of the bishops of Valence and Die, Pope Gregory answered the bishops of the province of Vienne, I do not find.

[39] the miracles after his death being sent to Rome in the year 1231, Certainly Gregory did not acquiesce in this letter, and he manifestly indicated in the letters presently to be given that by it neither had the mandates of his predecessor Honorius been fully satisfied, nor was it sufficiently established for him about all the things required for anyone to be entered in the canon of the Saints. And indeed Honorius had commanded, as we have seen, that an examination be instituted about the Servant of God's life, death, wonderful things put forth before and after death, and other circumstances. But the letter of the bishops of the province of Vienne contains indeed the miracles wrought after the Saint's death, but not a word about his life, morals, prodigies done before his death, and other circumstances of things. Nor is it permitted to suspect that documents other than the said letter were transmitted to the Pontiff; since the same Gregory IX about two years later, namely in the month of December 1233, as at this year the praised Odoricus Raynaldus records, imposed the parts of examining the matter anew, as if nothing had been done before, upon the archbishop of Embrun, the bishop of Gap, and the abbot of Vallis Crescens of the Cistercian Order. A fragment of the letter by which the Pontiff writes to the said prelates, and which is the 392nd, I transfer hither: Know that we have received from the letters of our brother the archbishop of Vienne and his suffragans, that Stephen, bishop of Die, of memory to be revived, who once living in the world was strong with great merits, is now living in heaven said to flash with so many miracles that his sanctity is proved by open indications, and that it is unworthy not to invoke his suffrages among the other Saints; wherefore they have supplicated us by the same letters that we would inscribe him in the catalogue of the Saints to be venerated. But although for this, that anyone be holy with God in the Church triumphant, perseverance alone suffices according to that saying: Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee the crown of life: which that ankle-length tunic of Joseph evidently figured, yet for this, that he be held holy among men in the Church militant, two things are necessary, virtue of morals and truth of signs, namely merits and miracles, that these and those may bear witness to each other, etc. Given at the Lateran, the XIV of the Kalends of January.

[40] From which it is sufficiently gathered that the Pontiff required both that an examination be instituted and that to the miracles be added the virtues with which the Saint had flashed in life, and that not by a bare relation, Pope Gregory IX willed the matter to be further examined. but one duly fortified with testimonies, as usage bears. Which assuredly was very easy to do, considering the prodigies which are related in the Acts, and the small interval of time from his death: for many doubtless were even then surviving who had lived with the Saint, who had known his rule of living, nay who had experienced in themselves the benefits obtained divinely by his merits; since from the time in which the Saint entered the bishopric to the date of Gregory IX's letters scarcely 32 years had elapsed. That the matter was committed to execution is most likely; but whether with the diligence that was fitting, and whether it obtained the wished-for outcome, remains uncertain to me. The reason is that very few writers, and those indeed disagreeing among themselves, have touched that matter. That the canonization took place Guichenon undoubtingly affirms in part 2 of the History mentioned above, page 118; but here again he brings no testimony; he cites in the margin Surius and Haræus, but in them no mention is made of a canonization. He cites besides Baronius, but since he assigns neither book nor place, I could find nothing about our Saint in that most eminent author; perhaps by Baronius he wished Odoricus, the continuator of the Annals, to be understood; but neither does he anywhere affirm that St. Stephen was in fact entered on the roll of the Saints: whence I believe that the praised authors were appealed to by Guichenon only on account of those things which he asserts in the same place about our Saint's year of death. Let us hear his words, which rendered into Latin run thus: He (St. Stephen) died in his bishopric on VII September in the year 1213; he was canonized; his feast is kept in the Church on XXVI June; whoever have spoken about him have been ignorant of his descent or stock (son extraction). Many things in few words, but all of them at the least uncertain, and destitute of solid foundation.

[41] For first, that death befell our Saint in the year 1208, There are those who assert and not 1213, scarcely admits of doubt, as we showed in the preceding §. Secondly, that his feast is kept in the Church in the month of June none of the martyrologists or writers records except himself: that it is kept on the IX day of September with a double rite in the diocese of Die is established from the Proper of the Saints of that same notable cathedral, as was said at number 4. Thirdly at last, in what sense he would have the Saint's stock to have been unknown to the writers I do not rightly perceive: for Surius, whom he cites, seems clearly enough to designate his stock, where he thus begins the Life: At Lyons, which is a famous and celebrated city of the Gauls, Stephen was born, whose father, lord of Châtillon, was notable for the nobility both of his blood and of his religion. The same thing Haræus expresses in as many words. What then? Will he for this reason say that they were ignorant of his descent, because either they do not indicate the father's name, or, as he himself does (whether rightly enough, I do not inquire), do not genealogically deduce the Saint's origin from grandsires and great-grandsires? But historians often knowingly and willingly omit these things; nor are they on that account presently to be condemned for ignorance. Wherefore, unless the asserted canonization rest upon stronger reasons than the rest already mentioned, Guichenon will increase, not remove, the doubt which I had conceived about it.

[42] The author just praised is followed by Father Peter Fontenay of our Society in tome X of the History of the Gallican Church, page 541. that a canonization followed. Receive his words too rendered into Latin: The archbishop of Vienne, and all the bishops of the province, sent to Rome in the year 1231 a lengthy relation of the miracles which were wrought by his (St. Stephen's) intercession. This they did by way of instruction toward the canonization, which Pope Gregory IX granted them. But neither does he note whence he drew these things: besides, if his words are to be taken in a sense strict on every side, they can by no means be admitted. For it is certain that this Pontiff (if he ever inscribed our Saint in the catalogue of the Saints) was not moved to do it by reason of the said relation embracing the miracles, which the praised writer's words seem to hint; but toward subjecting the matter to a more diligent examination

: as that he did two years later, namely in the year 1233, is plain from number 39. Nay, that St. Stephen was neither then nor ever solemnly canonized by Gregory IX becomes most probable from those things which Columbi relates, and which we are presently about to give from him.

[43] Reasons are brought forward, It must therefore be said that the praised Fontenay was deceived by conjectures likely enough, namely since he knew that the Saint's canonization had been treated of under Gregory IX, since he understood that his feast was celebrated in the diocese of Die, and lastly since he read the same man's canonization asserted so undoubtingly in Guichenon. Unless perhaps you should wish to explain his words thus, that he took the canonization granted by the Pontiff to the said bishops in a wider sense, saying that the Pontiff permitted them that in their own dioceses only they should hold, invoke and venerate Stephen as a Saint; until the Apostolic See, the examination being duly performed, should propose him to be venerated by the universal Church. In this last sense Guichenon too could perhaps be expounded, yet with more difficulty, since he adds that his feast is kept in the Church on XXVI June. Let us now hear what Columbi has to our purpose toward the end of the Appendix to book 4 praised above. He, after he had insinuated that he does not doubt that Gregory IX permitted the bishops of the province of Vienne to implore St. Stephen's suffrages with God, speaks in this manner: That I so think, the public veneration of the Saint makes me, which some centuries ago was in the church of Die, since nevertheless neither Gregory himself nor any other of the Roman Pontiffs is read to have canonized him; and in each century after his death down to the year one thousand five hundred and twentieth it was acted upon by the people of Die, that his canonization should be urged at Rome. In that year John of Lorraine, Cardinal, when, being elected bishop of Valence, he was going to Rome, was asked by the people of Die to treat of his canonization; and Gabriel Gaii, canon of Die, was added to him, to request it of the Pontiff in the name of the whole clergy and city of Die. Whether the Pontiff assented to the Cardinal John, I do not find. John had promised that he would leave nothing untried at Rome.

[44] on account of which it is more probably denied. If therefore credit is to be given to this author, who, as is plain, investigated this matter most diligently, the Saint's solemn canonization was not granted under Gregory IX in the XIII century; nor in any other following down to the XVI begun, when John of Lorraine, Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, made for Rome, nor lastly most probably in a time nearer to us; for although Columbi says that nearly all the papers of the church of Die which were mindful of things once done were given to the fires by the Huguenots, it is not likely that the memory of that thing could so have fallen away from all, that neither should he himself come to knowledge of it, nor should any of the writers, even more recent ones, besides the praised Fontenay and Guichenon, have made mention of it. Wherefore it appears so far probable that the said canonization was never made, that no doubt of the contrary is left to me, though I shall most willingly change my opinion if anyone shall produce more certain things. But what impeded the canonization so often proposed and requested I am wholly ignorant: that the Man's sanctity was exceptional and his merits with God sublime the Acts manifest, and the frequent miracles wrought both before and after his death, to which I proceed. I set first the Life and miracles set down in verse, being about to subjoin the same set forth in loosened style, so that what in the verses is narrated more obscurely or in inverted order may become clearer to the reader: for it would be too grim a business to note the meter of each barbarous verse, and to reduce to the due sense the very many things that are twisted.

THE LIFE

Of Blessed Stephen, in meter,

by an anonymous author.

ON ST. STEPHEN, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR,

AT DIE IN GAUL.

BHL Number: 7899

O wondrous beginnings! The Saint's pious youth and entry into the monastery; O first-fruits of sanctity! For on the sixth weekday already hallowing fasts, An Infant not sucking milk, A young man he entered the rough * hermitage of the House of Portes, he becomes a monk of the Charterhouse for the cause of penance, made a man he despised the world, he touched nothing unclean.

[2] A man famous by descent, more famous by the gifts of grace, the austerity of his life and miracles, he tames the flesh with a hair-shirt, using water at his meal, he turns water into wine, and out of wine he made water. He was found with an angel before the little sign of the cross. To one refusing to confess with hesitating voice and face, to a despairing sick man, he gives the grace of resisting the devil and of confessing, whom he absolves from sin, the demon being fought off, and by most holy prayer gives up his spirit to the Most High. By touching he heals a sick man, by a sign he puts tempests to flight, a soul of a dead woman from the devil, with the people witnessing, he frees by the greatest weeping which he poured out to the Most High.

[3] In such grace of God was he, that he even showed zeal for souls and power over demons. demons to those present, harmful ones, breaking the Lord's sabbaths. And the holy man teaches, Preach to flee markets on the Lord's day as demons; because then the wretched, blind people flees to hear God's canticles and mystical words.

the see of Die being vacant, he is elected bishop; he flees, sought by the clergy; but compelled by a greater one the Servant, with God assenting, consents, though unwilling. By three archbishops and very many bishops that blessed Stephen was consecrated at Vienne.

devout, he teaches the people, by word too and by example often preaching in the temple, he becomes a doctrine unto his subjects, whom he renders given over to God. Peace being given to his people, sick, breathing toward the blessed things, and curing a certain sick woman, he renders up his devout soul, which now enjoys glory in the gladness of the Saints.

read asperam*

MIRACLES AFTER HIS LIFE.

ON ST. STEPHEN, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR,

AT DIE IN GAUL.

BHL Number: 7899

The things said above To the dead he gives life, in blessed Stephen's life happened; and it being finished, these miracles are known. With wondrous miracles and with signs Christ points out Stephen to individuals ^a. Five dead boys ^b, infants, and harmless, the Blessed man raises up. Certain men slain by blows, condemned to the pains of hell, were openly raised again, pardon being obtained through Stephen's merits.

hearing to the deaf, speech to the dumb is rendered through Stephen, from whatsoever languors and various pains health is poured into the sick. Especially in falling sicknesses, in the paralytic, in mofiles ^c and gout of the hand, in ruptures of the intestines, fistulas, flux of blood, gout *, madness, and the rest, demons being cast out ^d. Fevers too being expelled, and prisons opened, ropes too being loosed, each one goes forth free; by these therefore is Stephen visited ^e and prayed to; through Stephen to the dying the grace of health is made, so also to those as good as butchered, their wounds being cured.

[8] This Stephen we beseech, let him be for us more swiftly assiduous with God The author implores the Saint's patronage with God. who against the adverse things of this world, by humble prayer stood forth a triumpher, the Father so pious bestowing it, who with his only Son and his own Spirit redeemed us from destruction, and may he grant us life without end in the height, who both three and one reigns as Lord through the ages. May the Lord be to those present with the rest who read and also to those who hear a pious pitier, and glorious and good Stephen our patron be a pleader for us. Amen.

ANNOTATIONS.

podagra*

A PARAPHRASE OF THE VERSE LIFE

by an anonymous author

From the Ms. Passionary of the Library of the Holy Ones of Surius.

ON ST. STEPHEN, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR,

AT DIE IN GAUL.

BHL Number: 7900, 7901

A. By an Anonymous author.

PROLOGUE.

Being about to render in loosened style a Life published in obscure verse The Life of blessed Stephen, once dweller of the Hermitage of Portes ^b, a certain man wrote in verse in a very brief style: by reason of which, that he might not offend in consonant letters, mute or liquid, proceeding by various straddling, the things preceding seem by no means to agree with those following, or those following with those preceding, in the series of a Life of this kind. On this account certain men, deceived by such an obscure prelude, are rendered more obscure in the said Life out of verse of this kind. Nor do we intend to derogate in anything from that writer's talent; but because the capacity of readers for the most part does not comprehend such meters clearly, therefore now with simple and brief speech, God helping, we shall attempt to unfold the said Life, in so far as both brief speech may drive away weariness, and simple utterance may admit of easy understanding. But we shall take care so far as in us lies not to exclude the truth of so holy a Life, and not, by writing things unknown ^c, to admit falsity. Certain miracles too, which the Saint himself performed in his life, do not admit of a series of time, since the brevity of the Poem does not declare at what time they were accomplished; they will however be set down in series after his attainment of the episcopate, although he is believed to have performed some of them while he was a private person and a solitary.

[2] he divides it into four chapters. But if some things here shall have been declared less lucidly, let the cause be imputed to the style of the said Poem, proceeding more briefly and swiftly; not to that of the interpreter, who was unwilling to add what he did not know. But into IV chapters is this Life divided ^d, that the reader may more easily be able to find what he seeks. For the first chapter touches upon the wrestling-school of that same Saint's secular life, the second the soldierly or eremitical discipline of the House of Portes, the third his promotion to the episcopate with the miracles accomplished in his life, the fourth and last, of the miracles evidently shown after his death. Further, this blessed Stephen is known to have caught at, as a form of imitation in many things, the life of the Saints Anthelm of Belley ^e and Hugh ^f of Lincoln ^g, bishops, who before him departed from this light to the glory of the Lord ^h; and therefore certain writings of the various virtues of those same holy bishops, in which the same St. Stephen imitated them, seem not incongruously inserted into his Life consequently ⁱ set down. Lastly we very much invite the reader's benevolence and attention to what follows, that he may not think little of the poverty of a poor tongue, but rather take up this Life so to his own profit that such profit may be to the writer also a cause of reward.

ANNOTATIONS.

CHAPTER I.

The Saint's native place, his noble parents, his pious boyhood and adolescence, his studies of letters, and his love of the virtues and of perfection.

[ ] [Born at Lyons of illustrious parents, as an infant he abstains from the breasts on Fridays.] At Lyons, which is a noble and famous city of the province ^a of the Gauls, blessed Stephen came forth as a native. Whose father, lord of Châtillon ^b, notable for the Christian religion and for nobility of blood, obtained a consort likewise adorned with titles of this kind. Of these, from a double stock so illustrious, the holy Nursling was begotten. For a good tree is wont to produce a sweeter fruit. That he from his very cradle would be a servant of God was shown by certain signs, which it does not seem absurd to insert into this lesson. For he began to be nailed to the cross of Christ before he could yet speak: for what seems almost incredible, yet the little Infant, who was to be brought up on his nurse's milk, refusing to be cherished by such food every sixth weekday, passed the day without eating. Which his parents and acquaintances hearing and seeing, perceiving that the hand of the Lord was already working in him, were compelled to say that same thing which was said of John the Baptist of God: What, thinkest thou, shall this child be?* But when, drawn away from the breasts, he had begun to grow up into boyhood, he is handed over by his parents to be imbued with sacred Letters.

[4] But the boy, both full of grace and strong in natural talent, As a boy he wonderfully profits in studies and piety. not only in the schools was profiting beyond his age and before his coevals; but also, showing himself in a wonderful manner gracious, docile, humble and lovable to all, he was already as it were naturally beginning the perfection of his future life. For he drank daily the waters of saving wisdom, and from day to day became more prudent than himself. A boy in years, he led an aged age in manners, ignorant of boyish wantonness. For in the discipline of morals and the progress of virtues, with the unction of the Holy Spirit as mistress, he is known to have shone even above all who taught him. But when adolescence broke off boyhood, there began to appear more manifestly what was in him, and that grace in him did not seem void. For the devout and noble Adolescent, seeing that the world was set in wickedness and headlong, considering that saying of the Apostle, that meat is for the belly, and the belly for meats; but God shall destroy both it and them, spurning flesh began to abstain wholly from such food. But all were astonished, and marveled at the virtue, and so much the more as it was less usual among seculars and especially among the noble and rich.

[5] As an adolescent an exemplar of the chief virtues, There might then be seen ^c the thoughts revealed out of the hearts of many, for some, being of sound understanding, marveled at the Adolescent's constancy and abstinence, while very many, who savored the things of the flesh, imputed it to levity on account of his age. But he did nothing without counsel: for he had counsel from the Prophet, who says: It is good for a man, when he has borne the yoke from his adolescence. For what is wont to befall many in the burning border of that age, that, with the wind of new suggestion beating on the mind, they suffer soft shipwrecks of modesty, this he had providently anticipated, and had long since drunk in the love of chastity, so that his breast, stuffed with virtues, was vexed by no base thought. And he added virtues to virtues, and unceasingly built the tower whose foundations he had laid even in the cradle. There grew the trees of the virtues which the grace of God had planted in his heart, and they bore fruit unto eternal life. He fasted more readily and prayed and applied himself as much as he could to works of mercy. But also, while he showed in himself a form of living well, he in no way made a show of himself. He bore gravity of manners in his countenance, he confessed modesty of mind by his gait and habit. Amid these things he burned with the love of contemplation, as one who was always busy to add better things to good, and best things to better. For already as in passing he had had a foretaste that the Lord is sweet, and with all the marrow of his heart he desired to be free for God alone, that he might drain with a full throat of the mind the sweetness he had as it were foretasted.

[6] panting for greater perfection, he determines to embrace the Carthusian Order But when adolescence had now been drawn out into manly youth, after the example of David he desired to enter single combat with Goliath ^d the infernal giant, and, longing to descry a place of combat apt for a conflict of this kind, he first began to try whether, girt with the arms of Saul, namely of secular nobility, he could walk armed, and seeing himself burdened with breastplates of this kind, for he was not accustomed to walk so, he changed both place and arms. For considering himself strong in powers and manly in spirit, for he was now twenty-six years old, after the example of David himself, laying up five stones from the torrent in his wallet, that is, bearing the stigmata of Jesus Christ in heart and body, and holding a pastoral staff, namely discretion, by which he might command the vices and govern himself reasonably, and holding a sling in his hand, namely willing to fulfil the sacred Scripture in work, he hastened to the field of combat. But hearing that the Hermitage of the House of Portes was apt for this combat, for many others also with like arms had stood forth in the said place as victors over Goliath; he made his way thither, to explore whether it were true. And perceiving the place to be more apt in reality than in name, glorying immensely he resumed greater strength. For among the rest he learned that there two most valiant athletes had been Priors, who, gloriously triumphing over Goliath himself, carried off the crown of perpetual felicity. Of whom the first was dom Bernard ^e, at whose instance blessed Bernard of the Cistercian Order expounded the Canticle of Canticles, and who, buried after his death in the said House of Portes, merited to shine again with many signs. But the other, of no unequal condition and merit, was holy Anthelm, who, being first Prior of the Charterhouse, then of the said House of Portes, was afterwards made bishop of Belley, whose sanctity of life many miracles wrought through him both in life and after death declare. Strengthened chiefly by the example of these two, he judged it easy to carry off the victory over the aforesaid adversary.

ANNOTATIONS.

verumtamen* is superfluous

CHAPTER II.

The Saint's passage to the monastic life, his various virtues in it, his election to the Priorate.

[ ] He requests the religious habit, and obtains his wish Disclosing therefore to the Prior and convent of the said Hermitage his intention of the duel, he supplicates with great instance to be joined among them as a prebendary and servant of all, as a monk; who gladly afforded him easy assent, and by whom he was received with great devotion through the kiss of peace after their monastic custom. The Prior and Brethren then exhort him, according to their custom and statutes, that concerning complaints,

if there were any, he should give satisfaction ^a, and should order and dispose his affairs while it is permitted, and appoint a certain day on which he should wish to put on the regular habit, being about to fight there in the field of combat in the agreed duel. But he who had always lived without complaint, to whom was he liable? He assigns therefore a short term, then perhaps for the garments to be made or other necessaries to be prepared. At the time assigned therefore the most valiant Athlete is present, about to fight hand to hand with the infernal Goliath, and at once putting on the regular habit he lived there with the greatest fervor: so that in a short time, instructed in the observances of the Order and in the regular disciplines, he afforded to all a specimen of himself to be imitated. For although he had found there many men of wonderful sanctity and penance, yet in a short time by many works of sanctity he showed himself an example of religion.

[8] His penance and abstinence. But offering his whole self to God as the victim of a holocaust, he was busy to die to the world, that Christ might live in him. He tamed the members of his body with vigils, fastings and scourges; after the manner of the Order with the use of a hair-shirt, and with a drink of water with dry bread. He omitted nothing of any austerity which the common rule or the examples of his elders admitted. For whereas the several brethren were bound by the constitution of the Order to make three abstinences on bread, water and salt in each week, since he himself repaid the abstinences of the Order beyond the others with usury, scarcely for the greater part of the time could anything be found at his table but bread and water. For the bread set on one side, on the other an open book, drawing light in turn to themselves, ministered nourishment to both men; but a dish of water set there afforded both drink and salt. Content with such food, the Servant of God more rarely loaded his table with another dish.

[9] Devotion toward the most holy Eucharist, To the Sacrament of the altar he was so devout and intent, that, wholly bathed in tears, he seemed to be nailed to the cross of Christ itself. For the rest, his whole life on earth was a certain huge miracle. He was zealous in every way to renounce his own will, to avoid idleness (which is the enemy of the soul), to be free day and night for prayer, meditation, contemplation, and the theories of holy psalmodies, to apply himself to the labor of the hands and to bodily exercise at the times appointed by the Order, to let no time pass by in which he did not labor as a good husbandman in the Lord's field. Through things of this kind there was increased day by day his love and fervor toward God, and his repute and sanctity among the brethren, and his name was great within and without, yet not greater than the truth of the thing. All praised Stephen the soldier of Christ, all extolled him, all spoke of him, all wondered at him; and to say nothing of the inner man, whose fortitude, beauty and purity his manners and life sufficiently indicated; because he always bore the outer man in one way so most modestly and most becomingly, that nothing at all appeared in him which could offend the beholders. Who would believe him to converse anywhere but before God and his angels? And that we may give credit to our words, let us touch on one out of many ^b not only for wonder, but also for imitation; for who could enumerate all his holy works?

[10] When on a certain occasion the Athlete of Christ was clinging to prayer or contemplation before the little sign of the Cross, his zeal for prayer, at which an angel visibly assists him. or of the Crucified, suddenly behold an angel of the Lord in human shape, in which he is wont to be seen by holy men, stood beside him, delighted with his works. To this deed testimony was borne by those who saw it, men assuredly very religious and most worthy of credit, whom by divine ordinance, as is believed, it happened by chance to have come thither, that they might bear testimony about the man. For it is likely to be believed that this happened to him many times, but he diligently concealed such a treasure, lest the breeze of human praise could creep upon him. At last, when the Soldier of Christ in such a wrestling-school, a solitary and a cell-dweller for many lustres now, had victoriously vanquished the infernal Goliath, being now propped with well-feathered plumes, he is reckoned most worthy for flight: for through the death or absolution of the pastor of the said Hermitage of Portes he is elected by all, though unwilling and struggling, as Pastor ^c. Who, how strenuously and prudently, how solicitously and regularly and zealously he ruled the house of God, plucking out vices, planting virtues, could not be described with an easy pen.

[11] For by fighting with example and word he seemed not undeservedly to have been made a leader of the Israelite people: Elected Prior, he sedulously promotes his brethren's advancement. for like his own salvation he was zealous in all things for the profit and peace of his own. By his doctrine and mastership examples of perfect religion were given to all in the Hermitage of Portes, whence all carried off documents of sound instruction, and were filled with the affection of pious devotion. Hence suddenly the fragrance of this so holy Pastor flew sweetly not only through the whole country, but also passed beyond the bounds of its territories. And he took care to profit not only his own subjects, but many others; for to arriving guests seeking the salvation of their souls, whom that house frequently had, he ministered the food of life, and many were brought back by his holy admonitions to the way of salvation ^d.

ANNOTATIONS.

CHAPTER III.

The bishopric of Die is conferred on him greatly struggling against it, his zeal for souls and for promoting the Divine glory, various miracles.

[ ] He is elected bishop; While Stephen therefore in the said Hermitage was so healthfully philosophizing with anagogical studies together with those subject to him, He who makes light to shine out of darkness, leading him out of the darkness, was zealous to place him upon the candlestick, that he might give light to all who were in the Church of God. For it happened that the church of Die was deprived of its pastor by the death of its prelate, and that the college of the said church was gathered for the election of a successor. The canons are scattered into various votes, and now this man, now that, each according to the judgment of his own will, each counsels to be elected. There were present some of the said canons more moderate, yet few, who counsel that great anchorite Stephen to be elected. His sanctity is commended, his discretion and affability is praised, and his religion is exalted immensely. Why should we linger with many words? All assent, all rejoice, even those whose heart hung upon electing others. And so he whom the Lord had chosen for this very thing from eternity is chosen by men at the time divinely predetermined.

[13] But because they knew that he could not be plucked from the hermitage without great force, The Pontiff confirms the election. they were zealous to hasten to the supreme Pontiff ^b for confirmation, while he meanwhile lay hid in his hermitage, and was wholly ignorant of what was being done about him by others. Who, when he had heard their election, rejoiced immensely, asserting that they would be happy in such a Pastor, and that this counsel had come forth from God: and at once without delay the said election is confirmed by Apostolic authority, and by the same authority it is charged and commanded to the aforesaid anchorite Stephen that on no occasion should he defer to undertake the governance of the church of Die, to which by the Lord's disposing he had been taken. Then the canons of the said church are present, they show the letters of Apostolic confirmation, they ask him in the person of the whole church of Die that * he would be willing to afford his assent to the election made of him. But the Apostolic letters having been read through, and the canons' words heard, he addresses them in this manner: I wonder that wise men should wish to oppress with so great a load of burden an idiot and uncultivated man, a dweller of the hermitage, and wholly ignorant and inexperienced in secular affairs. Cease altogether, cease, because in this matter you will by no means be able to obtain your intent. When they on the contrary were instant, asking and demanding that he would be willing to console them by his assent, at last he is believed to have addressed them thus in the words of blessed Hugh, bishop of Lincoln and once of the Carthusian Order. (For the said blessed Hugh ^c had gone before, almost two years, from death to life, shining again with many signs of miracles.) Know this, he said, know it undoubtingly, that the goal of your labor is not set in my judgment; you know me to be a monk and set under another's power, and that of the Prior of the Charterhouse

, subject to his nods, and that I am laid under his precept of keeping obedience unto death. Nor does reason admit that, the custody of this house being neglected, I should undertake another church to be governed ^d.

[14] This answer being received, when they perceived that his word could not be changed, Having much struggled, he acquiesces. with other Apostolic letters obtained upon this, they go to the Charterhouse, a mandate having been made to the Prior of the Charterhouse to compel him. Which blessed Stephen having learned, when he saw that he could not escape undergoing such a burden, he took to the protection of flight. But the Apostolic letters being presented to dom Jancelin ^e, Prior of the Charterhouse, at once, as a man of great circumspection and virtue, he was zealous to fulfil the Apostolic mandate. Stephen being diligently sought and found, he is at last compelled by the said Prior with admonitions, prayers and precept to consent to the election. But being led by the aforesaid canons with great joy and honor to the city of Vienne ^f, he was there solemnly consecrated by three archbishops, in the year of grace one thousand two hundred and eighth ^g. But being rendered to his new bride the church of Die, and enthroned with great solemnity and joy in the episcopal see, he in no way omitted the regular observances and gravities of manners, and constancy of virtues, and also the other exercises of his Religion, but rather took care to increase them further. For it is for the giver and the receiver alone to know how much from that very time the Lord prevented him in the blessings of his sweetness, with how great grace of election he filled him, how he made him drunk with the plenty of his house.

[15] Studying earnestly for the salvation of himself and his own Having entered presently upon the governance of his bride, he most devoutly frequented the divine Office not in his own chapel or a secret place, but in the greater church with his canons. Almost every day too, offering the saving victim to God, anointed with exceeding devotion, he was filled with an abundance of tears. All wondered that, against the wont of human felicity, a man suddenly advanced from a humble hermitage to the highest things had grown more in humility than in dignity, more in devotion than in domination. But he himself, thinking or reflecting nothing such about himself, rather for the custody of his heart and the constancy of a better purpose always turned this over in his heart: Stephen, Stephen, for what hast thou come? See and diligently attend what account thou art to render to God for the joining of so noble a bride, if thou shalt not have embraced her with worthy honor and with solicitous diligence. And, as is read of the Lord, that Jesus began to do and to teach, from the first day of his espousal he began to do in himself those things which he was to teach others.

[16] he preaches against violators of the Lord's day, But when by preaching, exhorting, visiting he had begun to act according to his office, and to be zealous for the salvation of the whole people, he found a wretched and blind people by a horrible custom in no way honoring the Lord's day, but rather dedicating it to the devil against the divine prohibition. For fairs or markets, taverns, dances, games, luxury and other harmful spectacles were wont to be celebrated on that day only. Then the Man of God, beginning a sermon to the people, began with honeyed words to show by the plainest reasons the enormity of the sin, and the divine offense and contempt. But the bestial and blind people not only did not receive his sermon, but rather, scorning to hear his words, fled. But the Servant of God, grieving that they were so wanton in morals, so savage in rites, so impious toward faith, so filthy toward life, so stiff-necked toward discipline, judged that he must contend more strongly; and recognizing himself not a hireling but a pastor, he chose to be instant in preaching in season and out of season, if perchance they might come to their senses from the snares of the devil by which they were held captive: but the divine word by no means penetrated their deaf ears.

[17] he bids the demons show themselves visible to the people. But the Man of God, vehemently saddened, imitating an apostolic man, and evidently demonstrating the signs of his apostolate, commanded the demons who were inciting them to the aforesaid crimes, and whose wills they followed, that they should show themselves to them openly without any hurt of theirs. And without delay the demons at once obeyed his precept, whom stiff-necked and hardened men despised. It was a horrible and wonderful thing to see demons of tall and dreadful stature, black, horned, sending forth a stench and a fiery flame, standing at his command and appearing to all, and departing at his order, and able to hurt no one ^h. Which being seen, the blind people began to open their eyes, changing their life and manners for the better. But what wonder if he wrought things so wonderful, being himself so wonderful? nay rather not he, but God in him. Otherwise, Thou art the God, he says, who dost wonders.

[18] But to his Hermitage of Portes, from which he had been taken, Often revisiting the House of Portes, he there lives like a monk. he rather often returned for spiritual recreation, remaining alone in a cell after the manner of the others, and residing there applying himself not moderately to prayer and contemplation. Where he showed not the majesty of a bishop, but the subjection of a humble monk. He had garments and bedding after the manner of the Carthusians, always clothed with a hair-shirt next the skin, and, the Pontifical ring excepted, he differed in nothing at all from their custom ⁱ. Religious places also of his own household he visited rather frequently, where, the brethren being called together, he set forth honeyed words of God for their instruction, and departing from them humbly demanded the suffrages of their prayers. But how merciful and pious he was toward sinners, let it suffice to be declared by this one example, the rest being passed over. A certain one of the sheep committed to him, being sick, with the devil possessing him, showing himself desperate by countenance, voice and other signs, and refusing to confess his sins, was willing to hear the word of God from no one; this being heard, the Man of God, grieving with the wretched man, came to him, exhorts him to confession, and promises God's mercy and indulgence; but, with the devil resisting, his heart could in no way be softened: and seeing that other arms must be used, he turned himself to his accustomed prayer with tears. And behold the sick man, purged of the demon, turning himself to the Man of God, fully confesses his sins, earns absolution, asks for the Sacrament, receives Unction and the Viaticum, and at once breathes out his spirit. O fruitful olive in the house of God! O oil of gladness anointing and shining! who both by the power of prayer expelled the devil, and by the sweetness of a benefit anointed the sick man, for whom, about presently to die, he obtained the faculty of healthfully confessing and communicating.

[19] A certain sick man too, languishing with a long wasting, by touching with his hand he at once restored to entire health. He heals a sick man, stills a tempest, raises a dead woman. When a very great tempest of hail had arisen, so that the country seemed to be in peril, sending forth the sign of the cross against it, he at once put it to flight. A certain woman of his diocese, as it seems, her own merits perhaps requiring it, suffocated by the devil suddenly breathed out her spirit: but having compassion on the wretched woman so deceased, he came to the place where she was; many are present, they narrate the woman's sudden misfortune, all grieve together, and ask a suffrage from him. Then behold, moved by pity he burst into the greatest tears, poured out a prayer for her, asks mercy from God; and after a little she, as if waking from a heavy sleep, rose up, recounts the mercy done upon her by the merits of that Man of God, and returns to her former senses, leaping and exulting and praising God. This being seen by the people, it was filled with astonishment and ecstasy. Nor is he known to have been less merciful toward the living than toward the dead. Who was more pious and kindly toward the poor, the wretched or the afflicted? after blessed Job's example the stranger did not stay without, his door lay open with a liberal hand to the needy ^k: for besides a moderate sustenance for himself and his own he bestowed all things in alms.

ANNOTATIONS.

Since our biographer, as I demonstrated in the Commentary, number 9 and following, borrowed much from the Acts of St. Anthelm, and probably from those of St. Hugh, bishop of Lincoln, in order to set forth St. Stephen's election to the episcopal dignity, and his repugnance toward it, which he had found described in the verse Life in these lines,

He flees, sought by the clergy, But compelled by a Greater one the Servant, with God assenting, consents, though unwilling.

I fear that from a desire of extolling our Saint's humility and obedience he has imprudently detracted much splendor from both these virtues of his. What then? Is he to be esteemed prudently humble and obedient who, having read through the Apostolic letters, by whose authority it is charged and commanded to him that on NO OCCASION should he defer to undertake the governance of the church of Die, to which by the Lord's disposing he had been taken, so answers? Cease altogether, cease, because in this matter you will by no means be able to obtain your intent… Know this undoubtingly, that the goal of your labor is not set in my judgment; you know me to be a monk and set under another's power, subject to the nods of the Prior of the Charterhouse, laid under his precept of keeping obedience unto death. Is he, I say, to be reckoned prudently obedient who, with the supreme Head of the Church so commanding, so answers, appeals to another superior, and awaits his mandate? St. Anthelm struggled, I confess, when he was urged by Apostolic letters to undertake the bishopric of Belley, but weeping, and induced by the counsel of others, he took the road to the Pope, that with great prayers and weepings he might implore mercy; that he appealed to the Prior of the great Charterhouse is not read. St. Hugh indeed did appeal to him, when he was asked for the see of Lincoln, but he had received a mandate only from the king of England and the metropolitan, none from the Supreme Pontiff. I should therefore rather believe that St. Stephen either did not receive such a precept from Innocent III, or, if he did receive it, at least by no means rendered a reply of this kind.

ut*

CHAPTER IV.

His last sickness, pious death, miracles after death.

[ ] Being sick he refuses to make a testament, At the same time in which he passed from this world to the things above, he procured peace for his people with certain adversaries of theirs, who by various assaults of wars were grievously afflicting them. But the term of this westering life being at hand, in which the Lord was disposing to lead him from labor to rest, by the force of sickness he lies down on his bed. You might then have seen the sons of his church running about with religious and many of the common people, to render him service for humanity's sake, and each to carry off the grace of his own profit. All run up about frequent ministry, they diligently seek out medicines and fomentations; but the Servant of God cared not at all about these: for he knew that the time of his passing was at hand. And when the sons of his church were instant that he should make a testament: There is no need, he said, since the whole belongs to my bride, whom I have ruled. But upon those who begged a blessing and counsel from him he bestowed it, and admonished them alike about mutual charity and concord.

[21] he heals a sick woman, and dies holily. But a certain sick woman, who by no help of physicians had been able to earn health, hearing that the Man of God was sick, kept begging his blessing as much as possible for obtaining health. At last she had entrance to him, received his blessing, and departed healed. O sweet-smelling lily budding and flowering for ever before the Lord, and scattering the life-giving odor of sweetness, whose memory is in benediction, who, himself wasting with infirmity, imparts health to others! And then, knowing that he was passing to the Lord, confession being made beforehand, he asked that the Ecclesiastical Sacraments with the saving Viaticum be imparted to him. Those things therefore being diligently completed which were fitting, and which he ordered to be done, amid words of prayers on the seventh day of September, on the vigil of the Nativity of the Mother of God, he passed to the Lord in the year of grace one thousand two hundred and thirteenth ^a, of his own age more than the fifty-seventh, but of his episcopate more than the fifth, but less than the sixth; and he was buried in the church of blessed Mary his bride, as he himself ordered, with our Lord Jesus Christ bestowing it and reigning, to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit be the same praise, honor, virtue and power through all ages of ages. Amen.

[22] At his tomb a blind woman obtains sight, a feverish woman health, But when the servant of God Stephen passed from the darkness of this world to perpetual light, the Lord willed to make his Saint illustrious with many signs of miracles. For on the following day, on which the most holy body had been given to burial, while the Nativity of the blessed Virgin was being solemnly celebrated in the said church, the daughter of a certain man of Die, Lambert by name, of the Burg of St. Martin ^b, who for three months had been deprived of the sight of her eyes, being carried to the tomb of the holy Man, at once received the light of her eyes. On the same day, when the daughter of a certain burgess of the same city, Martin by name, who, burning for long times with great fevers, had lost the soundness and vigor of one side, had been carried by her friends to the Saint's tomb, inasmuch as she could not walk, prayer being poured out there, together with a liberation from the fevers she received also health of her side, and departed on her own feet rejoicing, who a little before had been carried forward with pain by the hands of others ^c.

[23] [a woman infirm in her feet her former vigor, and various persons obtain various benefits.] A certain woman too, who for the space of three years and three months and twelve days could not walk, with devout mind implored the help of the holy Man: who forthwith, health being received, made her way on her own feet to his holy tomb, who before, unless carried by the hands of others, could not move herself. With these and many other miracles, which to explain singly would exceed immensely too far, within the space of three weeks from the burial of the said holy Man, the clemency of the Savior deigned to make him illustrious. But afterwards by his most holy merits the dead were restored to their former life, the possessed were freed, and various persons were freed from various sicknesses of body and soul. But if anyone should judge that the miracles wrought by this most holy Pontiff can all be narrated, he is too much deceived, and it is as necessary that many be passed over in silence as it is impossible that all be comprehended: for merits of this kind therefore it is established that holy Stephen, beloved by God and men, first a Carthusian, then prelate of Die, was received into the fellowship of the angels. Let us rejoice therefore, most beloved Carthusians, because our brother has ascended to his fellow-citizens, discharging an embassy for us set in captivity, conciliating for us the hearts of the Blessed, intimating to them the vows of the wretched. Let us rejoice, I say, and exult, because the heavenly court has from among us one who has a care of us, who may protect us by his merits, whom he has formed by examples and confirmed by miracles. Amen.

ANNOTATIONS.

THE MIRACLES OF ST. STEPHEN,

Or the Letter of John de Bernin, archbishop of Vienne, and of his suffragans, requesting his canonization from Pope Gregory IX.

ON ST. STEPHEN, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR,

AT DIE IN GAUL.

BHL Number: 7902

A. By John de Bernin.

The Pontiff is asked to judge about the canonization To the most holy father and lord Gregory, by God's grace supreme Pontiff, I., humble minister of the church of Vienne, G., procurator ^b of the church of Valence ^a, B. of Die, G. of Grenoble ^c, B. of Viviers ^d, of Geneva ^e, A. of Maurienne ^f, bishops, suffragans of the church of Vienne, with all reverence, to the kisses of his blessed feet. What thanks and what praises we should render to our Lord Jesus Christ, the living and true God, the feebleness of human defect and of our mortality knows not. Who, since he is wonderful in his Servants, ceases not wonderfully and mercifully to work wonderful things. How great indeed and how excellent a prerogative of merits with God and men, and how illustriously he shone, with how many and how great rays of virtues he flashed, our venerable brother in Christ of good memory Stephen, once bishop of Die, both the evidence of the miracles which through him both in his life and after his passing the Lord wrought in his faithful, and at present works, declares.

[2] from miracles A frequent and copious multitude too of divers nations, flocking in troops to the tomb of the said Bishop on account of the troubles of sicknesses and the pressures of divers misfortunes, having rejoiced in the remedies of health, their languors being driven off by the said Man's merits, and other misfortunes also being repelled, publicly attests this same thing far and wide both by words and by the evidence of deeds; but because no one, however great a prerogative of merits he may be strong in, is to be held or venerated as holy by the Church of God unless first his sanctity be approved by the Apostolic See, we transmit to the feet of your Sanctity the tenor of the miracles by which the said Man's sanctity has manifestly become known among the faithful, that, the content of them being inspected, the circumspect providence of your sublimity, most Holy Father, may decree whether the said Bishop ought to be held and venerated as holy by the holy Church of God, and to be reckoned in the catalogue of the Saints.

[3] duly proved. This too we do not wish to lie hid from your Sanctity, that whoever, pressed by any languors, or burdened by the instancy of any misfortunes, have asserted that they obtained soundness and liberation by the said Man's merits; credit was not given by the church of Die until it was first asserted with an oath bodily taken upon the holy Gospels of God, with their companions also joined to them in the oath, if perchance they had any companions,

that they had endured the burdens of sicknesses or of other misfortunes, and that, prayers having been poured out to the Lord in the name of the said bishop Stephen, they had obtained the soundness and helps for which they had supplicated.

[4] The Saint died in the year 1208. In the year from the Incarnation of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighth, on the eighth ^g of the Ides of September, Stephen, a Carthusian monk, and Prior of Portes of the Carthusian Order, and by divine grace Bishop of Die, passing from this world departed to the Lord, whose precious and holy life it is established was declared by the testimony of miracles, which the divine clemency deigned to work through him in honor of the holy and undivided Trinity and of the most glorious Virgin Mary, and of the whole heavenly court. The beginning of which after the passing of his life we set forth, with God assenting ^h.

ANNOTATIONS.

OF THE MIRACLES

PART I.

Life restored to the dead, sight to the blind, gait to the lame, liberty to captives and health to the sick.

Of the blind daughter of a man of Die. And so on the present day, on which the said Stephen had been buried, on which the Nativity of the Mother of God is celebrated, the daughter of a certain man of Die of the Burg of St. Marcellus, Lambert by name, who for three months had been blind, being carried to the tomb of the same Stephen, and staying there, merited by divine compassion to receive the light of her eyes.

[6] Of the feverish daughter healed. But on another day, when the daughter of another citizen of Die, Martin by name, was being carried to the place where the body of the said Stephen lay, who long languishing with a feverish heat had been consumed, and, held by a universal paralysis, had wholly lost the health of her body, that the merits of this Man might be more fully spread abroad to Christ's faithful, the mercy of almighty God restored to the said sick woman entire health together with the use of walking.

[7] Of a squire raised from the dead. Afterwards a certain squire, Bertrand by name, of Gap ^a, who for the sake of making an assault upon the city of Gap had taken the road with his lord's army, when he was persisting in his journeying, on a certain night, struck in the breast by his lord's horse with its hind feet, fell down slain. Which deed, after it had roused the army, at last came to the ears of the lord, who, full of grief and having compassion on the deceased for his misfortune, came to him with a great crowd of soldiers, of whom one recalled to their memory the signs and miracles by which the administration of God willed the merits of the said bishop Stephen not to be hidden. Then, while with huge devotion and suppliant prayer on bended knees they invoked the mercy of that Bishop, the man who had suffered death raised his eyes and said to the soldiers standing round: I give thanks to God and to Bl. Stephen bishop of Die, who has had mercy on me a wretch, and met me in a most beautiful state, snatching my soul from the hands of the demons, while they were dragging it to the eternal punishment, which I saw prepared for my torture, and while I remember it, with all the powers of my mind I fall down and tremble in body.

[8] Of a captive freed. But it came about afterwards that a certain man of Brion ^b, captured at Montclar ^c, was held within a tower under a vat ^d loaded with a great heap of stones: he, cleverly thinking about his own liberation, having made a hollow by digging with his nails, put himself under between the ground and the top of the vat, and, most grievously constricted by both with the great mass of stones, could in no way return inside or go out; then, saddened, fearing the madness of those who held him in captivity, lest he should be found by them in such a state, with the whole affection of his heart and with an abundance of tears he besought the mercy of the said Prelate; by whose intervention he escaped the peril, because he wholly withdrew himself thence freely; and coming to the door of the tower he found it barred with two bolts, which, while he pushed them back, the watchman keeping watch above the tower heard the sound, and cried out with a great voice, rousing the men who remained in that town, that the captive was being freed. But he, passing through the aforesaid door, found two others firmly closed with iron chains, which, freed from their iron knots, he opened most easily, by the going-before protection of the glorious Pontiff: these things therefore being accomplished, with a most swift step he hastened to the tomb of that same Pontiff, and with the people found there rendered manifold praises to his Savior and Liberator.

[9] Of a canon of Valence healed. Among the rest we are unwilling to pass over this most excellent thing, that a certain priest and canon of the church of Valence had lain languishing for a long time, wholly as it were despairing of his health, because through the opening of a rupture of the intestines no small mass came out from him; and also he was laboring too grievously under another sickness, which is commonly called the disease of the Masclæ. Meanwhile, when a certain man of good repute visited him, and they were speaking to each other about the said sicknesses, he made known to the sick man the miracles of the aforesaid Stephen, by which God's goodness, rendering to each according to his works, willed his worthy Prelate to be exalted. But that sick man, hoping that his desire could be led to effect by the prayers of the same Stephen, day and night, namely both waking and sleeping, as we have his own testimonies, supplicated with affectionate prayer and tears the clemency of the same Prelate. And on a certain night the aforesaid Stephen appeared to him, and when he asked him what he wished to be done for him, he asked that health be given him, and, being roused from sleep, he felt himself freed from both the sicknesses named above. And still exceedingly stupefied for joy he revealed to those who were attending on his service the things which had happened to him, who, a light being brought, found the truth of the matter as he himself had said.

[10] But there was a certain woman at the castle of Aouste ^e, Of a blind woman given light. Eschengar by name, whose eye had been wholly consumed by bleariness, and she had been made blind in the other by the same sickness. She indeed, hearing the testimonies of the powers which the Lord was doing through the aforesaid Stephen, had herself led to his tomb by a guide's help, where she received sight in the ailing eye, so that without her guide's benefit she returned to her own house.

[11] Afterwards a certain woman of Vacinum ^f, Ruffa by name, Of a lame woman. who through the * of three years, three months and XV days had lost her gait, when she heard the miracles which the divine pity was working in honor of the same prelate Stephen, with a most devout mind implored the same Man's help, and forthwith, health being restored to her limbs in all things, she visited his tomb on her own feet.

[12] The daughter also of the son of the woman already mentioned, whose crown of the head had been damaged with many openings of a fistula, Of a daughter with a fistula cured. when her father and mother vowed her to the aforesaid Stephen, at once began to be cured of the corruption of the fistula; nor could anything but a scar appear in it within the space of four days.

[13] But a certain woman of the village of Mens ^g, who was most grievously afflicted with the falling sickness, Of a woman cured of the falling sickness, hearing the fame of the miracles of the same Stephen, most devoutly invoked with the whole affection of her mind the clemency of God and the aid of that Pontiff, and felt herself thenceforth freed from that horrible sickness.

[14] Likewise another woman of the castle of Aix ^h, of sixty or more years, Of a lame woman. hearing the said Stephen to be marked with such great miracles, wished to be carried to his tomb, where by the immense goodness of God she recovered the gait which she had lost.

[15] A certain boy too of the same castle, who for two years had not used the benefit of his feet, Of a lame boy. as soon as he was presented by his friends at the tomb of the aforesaid Stephen, his gait was restored to him, with God's mercy working.

[16] And when a certain woman of Die, who was called G., had heard Of a woman with a flux. that the glory of the same Stephen flashed with such great miracles, coming to his tomb she supplicated with prayer as much as she could that he would free her from the menstrual flux with which she had been not a little wearied for four months, four days excepted: and while she persevered in prayer, that the honor of the said Stephen might be enlarged, the power of the divine Godhead deigned so to work, as the said woman published abroad, that there she received the benefit of health.

[17] Likewise another woman of the castle which is called Vorapium ⁱ, Of a woman of Voreppe healed. whose joint of the right arm had been disjoined for five years, while she stayed beneath the tomb of the venerable Bishop, obtained soundness, the frame being joined together.

[18] Of a certain citizen of Die healed. But it happened that a thorn pricked a certain citizen of Die, P. by name, in the knee, whose thigh as well as shin and foot so swelled that he wholly lost the office of walking, nor could he in any way draw his foot to himself. He, wholly despairing of his health by the benefit of medicine, a vow being promised, implored with the highest affection of mind the pity of the same Bishop, and God's compassion, exalting the merits of his Servant, granted him to recover health anew.

[19] Of a woman of Romeyer healed. But afterwards, a few days passing by, a certain woman of the valley of Romeyer ^k, who had been so afflicted with emprosthotonos that she could in no way look to the right, to the left, nor to heaven, came to the tomb of the venerable Stephen, and offered thanksgivings so far as she could, because she recognized that she had received from God, by his intervention, the liberation of her neck.

[20] Of a blind woman of Barri. But another woman of the castle which is called Barri ^l, brought to the tomb of the same Stephen, who had long remained bereft of the light of her eyes, departed giving thanks and rendering thanks to God, who in honor of the said bishop Stephen deigned to provide her with the lost light.

[21] Of a man of Chaissillane healed. But as time went on a certain man of Chaissillane ^m, Juvenis by name, was brought to the church of the holy Mother of God, where the body of the same bishop Stephen rests, although he had been seized with so great a sickness that his own people wholly despaired of his health, and believed him to be breathing his last gasp: when he, set in so great a peril of his life, was invited by his friends to receive for the salvation of his soul the bread which the said Stephen had blessed, having received speech, which he had lost, he asked that that blessed bread be offered to him, asserting to those standing by that in the aforesaid article of death he had, at least with the mind with which he could, promised that he would offer a waxen image to the aforesaid Stephen, and that from that hour he had begun to grow strong, by the interceding merits of the same Stephen.

[22] Of a daughter of Beaumont healed. But it happened that the daughter of a certain man of Beaumont ⁿ came to the tomb of the aforesaid Pontiff, to whom, staying there a little while, the ineffable mercy of God, willing the comeliness and glory of his Prelate to be exalted, granted the benefit of her right arm, in which she had been powerless from her birth.

ANNOTATIONS.

add spatium*.

PART II.

Others recalled to Life, and healed of various sicknesses and infirmities.

Of a deaf woman of Crest. There was indeed a certain woman at the town of Crest ^a, deaf for seven years, led by her friends to the aforesaid tomb, while she there groaning and weeping supplicated the most reverend Bishop, the grace of divine help opened for her the hearing of her ears.

[24] But on a certain day it happened that a certain man of Vercors ^b, Gueso by name, Of a son raised from the dead, his father being deceased, set out with his wife to the service of his father's burial, leaving their son lying at home in his little bed sound and unharmed, and when they returned with very many of their kinsfolk, they found him half-alive, recognizing in him no sign of life; but the mother, most sorrowful, mourning and grieving inconsolably for her son's death, with the highest devotion invoked the mercy of the aforenamed Stephen, uttering words of this kind with a deep groan and a very great shower of tears. Lord blessed Stephen, in whose name I have lately heard so many and so great miracles to be done, I beseech thy holy and glorious benignity, by the glory of the heavenly fatherland which thou hast obtained, that thou wouldst deign to succor me a wretch, so that by thy intercession the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, spreading abroad thy miracles, may render my dead son to life. These things being said, the spirit returned into the body ^c.

[25] But a certain woman of the castle which is called Rimont had on a certain day gone out to walk, and returning found her son suffocated, his little bed being turned over; Of another son raised from the dead. and, some of the neighbors being brought into her house, she showed what had befallen her: remembering the power of the venerable bishop Stephen, although she was troubled and anxious with grief and fear, she implored his help; and by divine disposition the boy who had been suffocated began to weep and thenceforth to be better ^d.

[26] Of a son who fell from a tree. Besides, the son of Pontius Ferrandus of Podium grossum ^e had climbed a certain very lofty tree, who, falling, fell to the ground and for four days and four nights could not speak, took no food, opened not his eyes; whence his friends despaired of his life: his mother, having hope in the mercy of the aforesaid Stephen, whose fame of miracles she had heard, promised a vow for her son, and with contrite heart and an abundance of tears implored it, and forthwith the sufferer opened his eyes and asked for food; to whom by God's power, with his servant Stephen interceding, the grace of full health was at last granted.

[27] Of another of the same place. A certain man too, Gerard Theodictus, made powerless in his hands, having humbly begged the favor of the same Bishop, received the benefit of health.

[28] Of a blind woman, And when the rumor of such great miracles had driven through many provinces, a certain woman of Alessandria, a city of Italy, by the administration of a guide moved from her lodging, setting out on pilgrimage to the tomb of the aforesaid Prelate, who for three years, two months and three weeks had been bereft of the light of her eyes, and also powerless with the hand of her right arm twisted back, which we believe to have befallen her, her own fault requiring it: for when on the night of the vigil of the Assumption of the Mother of God she stole the garments of a certain man who on the morrow was to be newly made a knight, with two companions, she suffered first the punishment mentioned above. But a journey of one day being completed, the most pious and most gentle Lord, as is to be believed, was appeased by the prayers of his Prelate, because to the woman were restored the sharpness of her eyes and the health of her arm.

[29] Of a daughter raised from the dead. But afterwards it came about at the town of Gressa ^f that a certain woman had left her daughter lying safe in her cradle at home, and returning ran to her, that she might take from her laughter and joys, and touching her found her cold, recognizing that her daughter had breathed out her soul on account of the mischief of the twisting of her face wrapped about her neck; wherefore bursting into tears, rending her garments, and tearing her hair, she implored the mercy of God and the intercession of the aforesaid bishop Stephen, and suddenly by God's good pleasure the body of the little girl mentioned above was brought to life.

[30] Of a powerless woman. But there was another woman at the castle of Mont-Vénère ^g, who, since for seven years she had been such that she could govern no part of her body from the breast downward, the aid of that same Prelate being sought again by her, obtained health by devout and suppliant prayer.

[31] Of the Prior of St. John, gouty. Not much interval of time passing by, the Prior of St. John of Royans ^h, called Gontard, who for a year and three months had been constricted by gout, the use of his gait being lost, was brought to the tomb of the reverend Bishop, beside which he was zealous to be placed with the care of attendants: where devoutly keeping watch in prayer and assiduously uttering prayers to the highest Creator and to his Confessor, the divine pity dealt mercifully with him, and restored to him the office of his feet, and conferred the help of health.

[32] But there was a priest in the parts of Trièves ⁱ, an inhabitant of the castle which is called Avignonet, who, having slipped from a very lofty rock, Of a priest who slipped from a rock. with the frame of his sinews and thigh injured, had for a year lost the use of walking. When he had heard that many sick were healed at the tomb of the already-mentioned Bishop, hoping for health to be conferred on him, he hastened to him by the conveyance of a beast, where he passed the night suppliantly in prayer. But the morrow coming, the office of his pilgrimage being performed, when he had prepared to return to his own house and had departed from the city, on a journey of one mile, feeling the constricted sinews of his thigh to be loosened and healed, dismounting by himself alone (he who before could not) from the beast on which he sat, he showed to the companions who were present the things which had befallen him, and with a hurried step, offering such praises as he could to his liberator Stephen, he visited his tomb on foot.

[33] To another man too, called Humbert Sauverius of Crest, Of a powerless man of Crest. brought to the tomb of the reverend Bishop, who had lost the health and governance of his left arm and foot, with God making illustrious the favor of his Bishop, the grace of health was bestowed.

[34] But not many days succeeding meanwhile, there came two men, Of two men taken captive. of whom one was a citizen of Die, and the other an inhabitant in the parts of Trièves, offering to the aforesaid bishop Stephen, as the title of their liberation, the fetters in which they had stood captive; affirming that by his compassion the iron chain was broken by them, which they carried with them, from that town in which they had been captured,

they had gone out at about the middle hour of the day and had thus escaped the cruelty of the tyrants.

[35] Amid these things a certain man of the castle which is called Trescléoux ^k, Of a man of Trescléoux healed. came as a pilgrim to the tomb of the already-mentioned Bishop, who for the space of twenty years could not enjoy walking, except by supporting his limbs with the help of a staff, to whom the Creator of all, revealing his most worthy Prelate, restored at the very hour in which he came his ancient power of walking.

[36] But in a certain town situated in the desert, called Montanegre ^l, Of a little one with the falling sickness. an infant, who could complete the fourth month of his age, was afflicted daily many times with the falling sickness, so pitiably that he moved all to weeping, because, blackened by the torture of the aforesaid sickness, he was compelled to twist his trembling limbs hither and thither, and his mouth flowed with much abundance of foam. But his mother, moved with incomparable grief over her son, with pure heart, with a great rush of tears, begged the compassion of the aforesaid Bishop, and thenceforth received her son unharmed.

[37] But the abundance of the powers of the same Stephen increasing, Of a man suffering from quinsy. a certain man of the Mountains, of the place called Auttans, had his throat and tongue so swollen that the hollow of his mouth could not receive his tongue for the exceeding swelling, for four days, and could scarcely suffice for sending forth the breath of his mouth, nor could the sick man himself receive food or drink. Then his friends standing by with poured-out tears demanded with a great voice the suffrage of the reverend Bishop, at which voice he seemed to assent by such a nod as he could. And a vow being made by the aforesaid persons for the sick man to the same Bishop, at once the sick man was freed by God's mercy from so great a seizure of sickness.

[38] But after these things there was brought to the tomb of the same Bishop Of a Maniac man. a certain man of the city of Vienne, laboring under a Maniac passion ^m, his hands wrapped with iron manacles on account of the excess of his madness. But inestimable providence willed by so great a sign to reveal the sanctity of his worthy Prelate, that it freed that man from madness, who in honor of his liberty offered such praises as he could, and the chain.

[39] Of a man slain by a blow of a stone. Consequently it happened that a certain soldier of Montélimar ⁿ, Bernard by name, set out with several others to make war on a certain building of Neufchâtel. Which when they were assailing with much fighting, a certain one of them, Durand by name, at the coming of a blow of a stone, fell slain in the hindmost part of the head. Him his companions who were present, lifting him up, believing that he had given up the ghost, because the signs of death appeared in all his members, prepared a shroud and a place where the body might be laid. But meanwhile the aforesaid soldier, at whose command he had come thither, ordered that they should look closely whether any sign were found in him, and they weighed none but a little warmth. The report of which misfortune coming to the ears of the dead man's wife, mournful and anxious she hastened thither with a most swift step, and while she invoked with a great voice the aid of the venerable bishop Stephen, the half-alive body being seen, forthwith he himself opened his eyes, and with mind alone placing the hope of his life in the compassion of so great a Prelate, by which he was snatched from death, he hung up at his tomb the shroud prepared beforehand for his funeral.

[40] Of a man oppressed with a swelling of the head. But afterwards a certain man of Trescléoux came to the tomb of the said Bishop, who on account of an exceeding swelling of the head was believed for five days to be laboring at the last. The hope of health being wholly lost, because he by no means took the benefit of food or drink, or of anything else whatever. But his mother, tearful and most sorrowful, begged with affectionate prayers the greatness of the aforesaid Stephen's pity for the health of her offspring, and, the swelling of his head suddenly vanishing, health was granted to the sick man.

[41] Of a blind man. A certain man of Moirans ^o, hearing so many sick healed by the intercession of the aforesaid Stephen, came to his tomb by a guide's help, where God's clemency willed the lost light of his eyes to be restored to him.

[42] Of a girl healed. It came about indeed at the town of Romans [p] that a certain girl, who for seven years had lost her gait, the aid of the aforesaid Prelate being implored by her and by her parents, obtained the benefit of her feet.

[43] Of a dumb woman. Again, while the fame of the venerable Stephen's so many and so great miracles was flourishing in many parts of the world, and a very great crowd of pilgrims was coming to visit his tomb, a woman of the castle which is called Moubluens in the archbishopric of Lyons, who for a year had been dumb, came as a pilgrim, and while she groaned to his pity, divine providence, unwilling that the merits of its Prelate should lie hid under a bushel, but should shine forth upon a candlestick, the sufferer's tongue being loosed, restored its former use.

[44] Of a woman with gout of the hand. There came also a woman from the town of Crémieu [q], who long suffered gout in her hands, so that she could do nothing, hastening to the tomb of the aforenamed Bishop, and there by his merits obtained full health.

ANNOTATIONS.

p In French Romans, in the Dauphiné, where the Isère is furnished with a bridge, 4 leagues from Valence toward the summer sunrise, 10 toward Grenoble, and as many from Vienne to the south. So nearly Baudrand.

q Cremiacum or Crimiacum in the district of Vienne near the Rhone is distant from Lyons about 5 leagues to the east.

PART III.

Other benefits of the same kind obtained.

Of a boy healed. A certain boy of Bagnols ^a, who from his mother's womb had labored for seven years, when his father with much groaning and tears had asked the aid of the aforesaid Bishop, despairing of the remedies of physicians, on the following day was perfectly healed by the highest Physician of physicians.

[46] Of two raised from the dead. There came also two men, one of Loriol ^b, and the other of Buis ^c, on one day bringing their shrouds, who asserted that they had wholly been deprived of life: but when their wives and friends with many showers of tears asked the help of the same Stephen, they received life and health alike. And to these a very great multitude of companions furnished testimony upon these things.

[47] Of the niece of bishop Stephen himself. A certain noble niece of the said bishop Stephen, hearing of the marks of her Uncle's miracles, coming to his tomb poured out many tears and prayers, that the divine pity would show to her, being present, some one of so great miracles. It happened that a certain youth of L'Argentière [d], who for three years had been destitute of the office of nearly all his members, sitting upon an ass came to the door of the church of Die, and there, being let down from the ass by his companions, while the said noblewoman still persevered in prayers, he, trusting, who before could not support himself without his companions' hands, wonderfully hastened to the tomb of the Pontiff without any support, propped by divine help alone, and thence, glad and unharmed, giving thanks to the Lord, returned home on foot.

[48] Of a mad man. A certain man of Buis, seized with grievous madness, bound by his brother, was brought to the tomb of the same Bishop, where, staying for a week to the honor of that same Stephen, by a divine gift he returned home sound and brisk.

[49] Of another madman. Another of the same place, when he had long been held with two joined fetters, the help of the Mother of God and of Stephen himself being invoked, brought the fetters free to the tomb, rendering manifold thanks.

[50] Of a boy raised from the dead. A boy of the town which is called Mirabel, in the diocese of Vaison ^e, fell into a channel, whence he was drawn out stiff, and judged dead by those who saw him; to the honor of the venerable bishop Stephen, whose sanctity and benefit was alike invoked humbly and devoutly, by the divine pity he is brought back sound to his father: whom the father, uttering praises about him, presented at the tomb of his Prelate.

[51] Of a soldier cut down. A certain soldier of Valbonnais ^f, while he was distraining a certain peasant for a withheld tax, and was leading away his ox, that peasant pierced the soldier's belly and back with a lance; nor content with these

he wounded him to death with a knife, whom his wife and friends, judging him dead, the aid of bishop Stephen being invoked, received sound after a little while.

[52] Of a paralytic. A certain man of Sisteron ^g had lost the motion of his whole right side for the space of half a year, and likewise his speech and hearing, being struck with paralysis; when his wife had heard the famous miracles of the said Stephen, and with many tears had promised that her husband would visit his tomb, on that very day he received hearing and speech, and after a few days, being cured by the highest Physician, he visited the Prelate's tomb.

[53] Another of the town which is called Mirabellum, of the diocese of Viviers, Of one not walking on his feet. destitute of the benefit of his shins for six years and a half, pouring out prayers and tears for seven days before the tomb of the aforesaid Pontiff, being made sound by the gift of a divine boon, his shins raised up, which during the said time he had dragged behind him, and his crutches ^h being left behind, returned home.

[54] When a certain shepherd of sheep of the town which is called Monclar ⁱ, Of one taken by robbers. was there guarding his own and others' little sheep, he was taken by robbers, and for a very long time constricted with wooden instruments which are called sepes, in a certain town of the Valence country, and there long macerated, the sepes being loosed by the aforesaid Pontiff's merits, with thanksgiving he presented himself at his tomb with a waxen image, holding also a waxen light in his hands.

[55] A boy of the town which is called Sauzet ^k fell into a channel, Of a boy raised from the dead. and being carried very far by the force of the waters, was found dead among the shrubs, whose parents when with many showers of tears they asked the help of the reverend Bishop, they received that boy after a little sound and unharmed.

[56] When a certain man of Aspres ^l, taken by plunderers, was held at Poyols under a very great vat, Of a captive freed. which the said robbers had heaped with a great pile of stones, the Lord and the said Stephen's help being invoked, rendering glory and praise at his tomb, he asserted that the aforesaid vat had been lifted by Stephen himself.

[57] A certain subdeacon of Tournon ^m had for a year and a half so labored with the paralytic disease, Of a paralytic subdeacon. that on his right side he was wholly destitute of the office of his members, nor could any medicine profit him. But when with prayer and groaning he had asked divine help through the merits of the same bishop Stephen, feeling himself as it were forthwith relieved, not long after he recognized himself cured by the Physician of all.

[58] Two men of Genevray ⁿ, coming to the Pontiff's tomb, Of two taken by robbers. fell into the hands of robbers, who, taking them, led them into a town called Bruchet, and there, being long tortured, they poured out many prayers to the Lord that by the merits of the aforesaid Pontiff, to whom they had directed their journey, he would free them from the cruel hand of their enemies. And the divine pity loosed them from their bonds, and where a way had never of old lain open, through a steep rock afforded them a good and safe way.

[59] A certain man of Montmaur ^o had a wife afflicted with a most grievous infirmity, Of a woman raised from the dead. who, as her husband afterwards swore in the church of Die, breathed out her spirit. But the divine mercy, looking upon the said man's prayers and tears, by the merits of the already-mentioned Stephen restored to her life and health.

[60] Albert, a cleric of Die, had long languished with a most grievous infirmity, Of a cleric of Die healed. and coming to the Pontiff's tomb, with tears largely poured out he offered prayers, that he would either snatch him from this world or free him from the aforenoted infirmity: promising that he would visit the holy land of the Lord, if he would grant him health. But the vigil being performed, weighed down with much sleep, he returned to his couch, and sleeping quietly, in the morning found himself sound and glad.

[61] A certain man of the mandament [p] of Buis had an only son, whose whole shin, with the bone, a fistula almost occupied, and, the help of physicians being implored, the greatest part of the bone being cast out from the shin, they said that the boy could in no way be cured unless the whole fistulous shin were cut through throughout. Which being heard, the father, weeping and wailing, said that he would rather he should die than that the shin should be cut off. Of a son with a fistula. But forthwith, recalling to memory the miracles of the aforesaid Stephen, he cried out to that Bishop with great weeping and sighing for the boy's help, promising that he would offer a shin of wax, and would always furnish six pence of rent. But after a few days, his son being sound and unharmed, the father, attending with many thanksgivings, visited the Pontiff's tomb.

[62] Of a young squire taken captive. A certain young squire of Cobona [q], returning from Chabeuil, while he was passing through the burg of Mont-Vénère, was taken near the gate with five companions by a certain most wicked man who was called Peter de Varo; and being led beyond the Rhone, from morning until the ninth hour he lay hid in a certain cave, but in the evening, three being dismissed, with the other two he returned to the place where he had begun, and when he held them, three being bound, in a wood, the help of bishop Stephen being invoked, the ropes being miraculously loosed, they escaped against their guards' will.

[63] Of a boy raised from the dead. It happened also that in the castle which is called Charpey [r] two stirred up quarrels between themselves, and the younger was struck with a knife by the elder, so that he pierced his neck beside the throat. Nor content with these things, again with the same blade he penetrated the neck and gullet on the other side; but the whole neighborhood holding him for dead, and perceiving no breath in him, his mother, fleeing to the Pontiff's merits, his help being invoked, saw the boy a little after opening his eyes, who thenceforth in a few days was made sound.

[64] Of a girl healed. A certain girl of Vizille [s], who for two years and a half had lost her gait, being carried to the tomb of bishop Stephen, was there by God's good pleasure restored to her ancient step.

[65] Of two shepherds taken captive. But two shepherds of the city of Die, taken by robbers, and led to Balma nigra and held there, although they were bound with strong and difficult fetters, with those robbers present and sleeping, propped by the intervention of bishop Stephen, escaped their captivity with their fetters.

[66] Of a blind man given light. Among the pilgrims came one from Lombardy, who for five years had lacked the light of his eyes, and while he stayed in prayer beneath the tomb of the aforesaid Bishop, and the morning Mass was being celebrated, by the intercession of the same Bishop he gave thanks before all the people that he had received sight.

[67] Of a woman healed. Nor is it to be passed over that, while the said Bishop was sick with no small languor, a certain woman, Bertranda by name, oppressed with a grievous and long-lasting infirmity of the head, came to him with tears, most humbly supplicating that he would deign to touch her head with his hands: and when he touched it, the divine pity, adding to the Pontiff's power, made the woman sound [t].

[68] Of a lay brother of Durbon, sick. But this miracle is not to be kept silent, that when the said Stephen was in the monastery of Durbon [u] of the Carthusian Order, and there a lay brother of the same monastery, a man fearing God and of great religion, was laboring with a grievous infirmity, Stephen, coming to him, said to him: Brother, believe that from this infirmity thou wilt pass to the Lord; whence I ask thee that thou pray the Lord for me, that if I am to incur peril of my soul in that bishopric of Die, and to lose the eternal reward, he would not permit me to remain long in that bishopric; afterwards the lay brother departed; and the said Bishop began to be sick on the same day, and within twelve days closed his last in the Lord.

[69] There are also many other miracles by which the divine clemency has made the said Bishop wonderful among his faithful and does not yet cease to make him wonderful, The conclusion of the Letter. commending in manifold ways the merits of his Servant by the evidence of signs. This too we do not wish to lie hid from your Sanctity, most Holy Father, that Bertrand, bishop of Die, and other canons of the church of Die, have attested to us, in the word of truth and at the peril of their souls, both upon the oath by which those laboring asserted themselves to have obtained divers remedies furnished by the said Bishop's merits, and as to the others which are recounted above, that they hold all the aforesaid things as they have been said above. And we, giving full credit to their sayings and to public report, have strengthened the present charter with the presence of our seals, asking and most humbly requesting of your Sanctity, most Holy Father, that you would take care to apply counsel and saving help to the present business: lest the Lord's precious pearl lie hid in the Church of God as ignoble and unknown, and lest the lamp of so great a light be hidden under a bushel, but rather may direct the Lord's flock into the way of life, and lead it to the everlasting reward of the inheritance. Given at Vienne on the third of the Nones of May, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and sixty-first [w].

✠ John, archbishop of Vienne.

✠ G. of Valence.

✠ B. of Die.

✠ G. of Grenoble.

✠ B. of Viviers.

✠ Of Geneva.

✠ A. of Maurienne.

ANNOTATIONS.

p That is, of the district or territory.

q Cobona I do not find; but Cabeolum, to the inhabitants Chabeüil, is a little town in the district of Valence on the river Veure near Valence.

r That place too is unknown to me.

s A castle in the district of Grenoble on the bank of the river Romanche.

t This miracle is the same, as it appears to me, with that which the paraphrast of the verse Life relates in chapter 4, number 21.

u The House of Durbon is placed by William de L'Isle in the mountains between Die and Gap.

w Father John Columbi, when in the year 1665 he transmitted to us a transcript of this Letter, advised that an error had here been committed by the scribe in reporting the year of the Letter's date. But ten years later, namely in the year 1675, when he published his Work in the light from the Lyons press, in the Appendix to book 4 On the deeds of the bishops of Valence and Die he gave this Letter also, and at the foot of it noted the following: Here for the year 1231 the year 1261 has been written, as may be understood from the names of the supreme Pontiff and of the bishops of Valence, Die, Grenoble and Viviers. For in the year one thousand two hundred and sixty-first there were sitting on the III of the Nones of May, Alexander IV at Rome; Amadeus of Geneva at Die; Philip of Savoy at Valence; Falco at Grenoble; Aimo or Hugh at Viviers. With what truth then are the prelates said to have been then G. of Valence, B. of Die, G. of Grenoble, B. of Viviers, and to have written in that very year 1261 on the III of the Nones of May to Pope Gregory. Therefore, since Gregory IX in the year 1231 and on the III of the Nones of May was sitting at Rome, I., that is, John de Bernin at Vienne, G., that is, William of Savoy at Valence, B., that is, Bertrand at Die, B., that is, Bernard or Bernoin at Viviers, A., that is, Aimar at Maurienne, and the number one thousand two hundred and thirty-first differs from the number 1261 by the penultimate character alone, this seems to have to be said to have been set for that by the writer's error. To these add, that all doubt whatever may be removed, that in the Letter which Pope Gregory gave in the year 1233 to the archbishop of Embrun etc., open mention is made of the Letter of the archbishop of Vienne and his suffragans, which we have already given. Consult the Commentary, §4, number 39.