Barypsabas

ON ST. BARYPSABAS, HERMIT AND MARTYR,

IN THE EAST.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

Barypsabas, hermit and Mart., in the East (St.)

BY J. S.

§ I. The memory of the Saint in the Calendars of the Greeks: the ancient Greek Acts, of whose credit there is doubt.

[ ] The memory of St. Barypsabas announced among the Greeks, Most of the Greek martyrologists announce to us today St. Barypsabas, otherwise Baripsabas, hermit and martyr, unknown to almost all the Latins. The Menology which the most eminent Sirletus turned into Latin comprises in a brief elogium nearly all that is known of that Saint, having it thus: On the same day, the birthday of the holy martyr Baripsabas. He, having received from a certain pious and religious hermit the precious Blood of Christ which flowed from the side of the Lord God Jesus Christ our Saviour, healed very many by that same Blood. And so he is killed by treachery at night by the unbelievers, but that treasure remained preserved with a certain disciple of his. The printed Menæa have exactly the same in Greek, but they add two verses, in which the death of the Saint is explained in this way:

Βαρυψαβᾶς δι᾽ αἷμα θεῖον Δεσπότου Εἰκεῖον * αἷμα, συντριβεὶς ξύλοις, χέει.

Barypsabas, for the divine Blood of the Lord, Pours out his own blood, crushed with staves.

By what kind of death the Saint was killed, the others do not declare. But if he was in truth killed with staves or cudgels, as is here said, it is easily understood that his disciple

was able to flee away in the darkness with the precious treasure while they were assailing him.

[2] his elogium from the Basilian Menology, In the Basilian Menology it is set out in what manner the sacred Blood of Christ the Lord was preserved and at last handed over to Barypsabas; but at the end some things are added which are in a fashion contrary to what went before. Wherefore I transfer the whole elogium hither: At the time when the Jews out of envy fastened our Lord Jesus Christ to the cross, a certain James, standing by the cross, when he had seen a soldier pierce the Lord's side with a lance, and Blood and water come forth from it, ran up and caught the precious Blood in a gourd, and hid it with himself, and toward the last time of his life left it to two hermits. And so, being handed on from hand to hand thereafter, after many ages it came into the power of a certain pious monk named Baripsabbas, who by it wrought many healings. And before he departed, taking the holy Blood together with the gourd, he went about that whole city and region, working frequent miracles. This being observed, certain men who in no way feared God came into this hope: that if, having killed Baripsabbas, they should themselves get possession of the gourd with the precious Blood, they would make great gain from it. Therefore, attacking him by night, they kill him. And the gourd indeed they took; but they found none of the things they hoped for. And he, being thus slaughtered, gave up the ghost.

[3] What is here said, that those murderers took the gourd but found none of the things they hoped for, which, however, seems to need correction. is not only contrary to the Calendars already given, but also to the manuscript Synaxarium which our predecessors received from Sirmond, although that Synaxarium elsewhere agrees accurately with this Menology in the story of the sacred Blood received by Barypsabas. And so I transcribe the end of that elogium from the said Synaxarium: Ἰδόντες δέ τινες τὸν Θεὸν μὴ φοβούμενοι, καὶ νομίσαντες ὅτι, ἐὰν αὐτὸν φωνεύσωσι καὶ λάβωσι τὸ τὰς ἰάσεις ἐπιτελοῦν, κερδήσουσι διὰ τούτου χρήματα πολλὰ, νυκτὸς ἐπελθόντες ἀπέκτειναν αὐτὸν. Ἀλλ᾽ οὐχὶ καὶ τοῦ σκοποῦ ἐπέτυχον· θείᾳ γὰρ ἐπινεύσει ὁ θήσαυρος οὗτος προπαρεδόθη τῷ μαθητῆ αὐτοῦ φυλαττόμενος, καὶ μετὰ καιροὺς τῇ μεγαλοπόλει ταύτῃ ἀπεδόθη. In Latin these words run thus: But certain men, not fearing God, and thinking that if they killed him and took that by which the healings were wrought, they would through it obtain much money, came upon him by night and slew him. But neither so did they obtain what they desired: for by divine providence that treasure had been handed over beforehand to his disciple to be kept; and in course of time it was given over to this great city (Constantinople).

[4] The things which are related in the Calendars just cited are set out in a longer discourse in the Greek Acts Greek Acts much older than Metaphrastes; which I have to hand. Leo Allatius, On the writings of the Simeons, p. 123, gives the beginning of those Acts, and places them in his catalogue of those which, because of a difference of style or the age of the writer, cannot be by Metaphrastes. Both reasons concur in these: since the style is lower than the style of Metaphrastes, and since these Acts are beyond doubt older than Metaphrastes, as is easily proved even from the codex alone from which our copy comes. For our Papebroch noted this concerning the antiquity of the codex: From the Vatican codex 1589, whose first quire, in a character far differing from the rest, Leo Allatius, keeper of the Vatican library, judged to have been written a thousand years ago; of which this is a specimen. He then gives the beginning of the title, which I have compared with the Greek letters of the seventh century which Montfaucon gave in his Greek Palæography, book 3, chap. 4, and I saw the several letters of the title agreeing excellently with them, and most of them even with the letters of the sixth century given in Montfaucon. Then Papebroch adds: And that all the rest is of the same time, though written in minuscules, is indicated by the titles of the several Lives, plainly by the same hand, form, etc., and likewise by certain Lives in the middle. All these things suggest that that codex is probably of the seventh century, as Allatius believed; and consequently that this Life is much older than Metaphrastes.

[5] Yet even so it can with difficulty be determined how much credit is due to this Life, but written inelegantly and less accurately. since it is not accurately written, and especially since it has those things concerning the Blood and water gathered as they flowed from the side of Christ the Lord hanging on the cross, which we do not read in any ancient writer. There is added also another reason for doubt, because some deny that the Blood of the Lord remained on earth after His glorious resurrection, and cite for that opinion the authority of St. Thomas Aquinas. Of this last reason for doubt I shall treat presently at somewhat greater length. But as regards the several circumstances of the deeds, it is certain that some things are related in these Acts in a manner little likely and not very credible; and that some things are even amplified beyond likelihood, as I shall observe in the Annotations. For this cause I long doubted whether I should insert these Acts in our Work, or rather omit them as useless. Nevertheless, because Allatius has already made mention of them, and our predecessors cited them at the XV of March in St. Longinus, I judged that they should be given, and that it should be examined whether at least the chief thing which is maintained in the Acts — namely concerning the Blood of Christ gathered up — appears probable.

* read Οἰκεῖον

§ II. Some writers deny that anything of the most holy Blood of Christ remained on earth: but they do not seem to establish this by theological or historical arguments.

[ ] [The most recent writers, who hold that nothing of Christ's Blood was left on earth;] Some writers, and especially some theologians, think that nothing of the Blood of Christ the Lord remained on earth. Others, on the contrary, are of opinion that those would say nothing discordant or absurd who should allow that Christ the Lord left some particles of His most precious Blood on earth for the consolation of the faithful. Among the most recent who have disputed on that matter may be reckoned the most illustrious Angelo Rocca, prefect of the Apostolic sacristy and bishop of Tagaste, who published a Commentary on the Blood resumed by Christ the Lord in the resurrection. This Commentary is extant among the Works of the said writer reprinted at Rome in the year 1745, tom. 1, p. 140 and following. The same question was treated in our century by Honoré de Sainte-Marie, Discalced Carmelite, in the French Work which he entitled Observations on the rules and use of criticism, tom. 3, or book 5, dissertation 5, art. 1. These two writers strive to prove nearly the same thing, but by very different arguments: for the first uses theological arguments, to establish that all the Blood which Christ shed in the passion was resumed by Him in the resurrection, and consequently that all the Blood which is venerated in various churches for the Blood of Christ has its origin either from the image of Berytus or from some other prodigious effusion of blood. The second believes that he too has in some fashion shown this last point, because the traditions of those churches which claim for themselves the Blood of Christ the Lord rest upon very slight foundations.

[7] they disagree about the Blood left upon the instruments of the passion: Yet the said writers disagree in this, that the second asserts that it cannot rightly be denied that some little Blood was left on earth by Christ the Lord, since certain instruments of the Lord's Passion are had stained with Blood. To prove this he cites St. Jerome, who in the Epitaph of Paula writes thus: There was shown to her the column supporting the portico of the church, stained with the Blood of the Lord, to which He is said to have been bound and scourged. He cites also another ancient writer who affirms that drops of Blood are to be seen on the column; and he observes the same concerning the Crown of thorns and the other instruments of the passion, as may be seen there. Rocca, on the contrary, speaks of these things thus: But the blood, or the bloody colour itself, with which the instruments of the passion are seen to be stained and are preserved in various places — namely fragments of the cross, the nails, the thorns, the iron of the lance, and something of the garments, and other things of that kind — is the bloody colour of that Blood which flowed from the body of Christ fastened to the cross. But St. Jerome did not use this subtle distinction, who was not afraid to say that the column was stained with the Blood of the Lord, because St. Jerome did not believe, I suppose, that anything would be lacking to the integrity of the glorious body if some drops of Blood had been left on earth. Wherefore I would rather say with St. Jerome that Blood was left on the column, than with Rocca that only a bloody colour appears on the instruments of the Lord's passion. The said Rocca saw that all his arguments fall to the ground if even a single drop of vital Blood must be reckoned to have been left by Christ on earth; and thence, in place of blood, he admitted only a bloody colour.

[8] So strictly did Rocca wish to explain the words of St. Thomas, part 3, quest. 54, art. 3, [Against the Blood of Christ left on earth the authority of St. Thomas is brought forward,] where the holy doctor speaks thus: Whatever pertains to the nature of the human body was wholly in the body of Christ rising again. Now it is manifest that flesh and bones and blood and other such things pertain to the nature of the human body. And therefore all these were in the body of Christ rising again, and that entirely, without any diminution: otherwise the resurrection would not have been perfect, if whatever had fallen away through death had not been restored. He answers similarly to the third objection, that is, to the very point we are treating of, concerning the Blood preserved in various churches, and adds: But that blood which in certain churches is preserved as a relic did not flow from the side of Christ, but is said to have flowed miraculously from a certain image of Christ that was struck. The words of St. Thomas any theologian will readily admit, if only it be believed that all that Blood was resumed without diminution which was necessary that the body of Christ should be perfect and entire. Hence many do not think that the words of St. Thomas are to be expounded so strictly that it must be denied that anything of the divine Blood remained on earth.

[9] If we weigh the reasoning of St. Thomas, we shall not find, [whose words are not to be explained so strictly, since St. Jerome stands in the way.] I think, that there is need of so strict an explanation as Rocca wished. That the resurrection might be perfect, whatever had fallen away through death had to be restored, according to the mind of St. Thomas. But that reasoning does not seem to require that we should say that all the Blood was resumed by Christ which He had shed in the garden, in the scourging, and when He was crowned with thorns. Besides, the resurrection of Christ was perfect, even though He willed to retain the sacred stigmata in His glorious body. Why then should we doubt of the perfection of the resurrection, even if we believe that the Lord willed to leave something of His Blood on earth? Many things could be brought forward even from St. Thomas himself, where he treats of the resurrection of the dead; but let it suffice to have said that St. Jerome did not doubt of the perfect resurrection of Christ when he said that the column was stained with the blood of the Lord. If, then, any wish the words of St. Thomas to be understood so rigidly that they cannot be reconciled with the words of St. Jerome, let them not take it ill that the opinion of St. Jerome pleases me better, as it likewise pleases

our Most Holy Lord Benedict XIV, who in the Work lately reprinted on the beatification and canonization of the Servants of God, book 4, part 2, chap. 10, disputes on this question on both sides, and in the Work on the Feasts of Our Lord Jesus Christ, likewise lately reprinted in Latin, p. 162, num. 374, clearly declares his opinion.

[10] What St. Thomas adds, that the Blood which is preserved as a relic in various churches is from a certain image that was struck, The blood at Constantinople, is said only to meet an objection: for the holy doctor did not inquire whence the several churches received that Blood which they venerate as the very Blood of Christ the Lord. For this reason St. Thomas, Quodlibet 5, quest. 3, art. 5, adds another answer to this one, saying: Or else otherwise from the body of Christ. St. Thomas, therefore, did not know whence that Blood came, but only holds that it could have had its origin from an image that was struck. Further, what St. Thomas said in answer to the objection, Honoré de Sainte-Marie, cited above, attempts to prove historically. He observes, first, that a certain image of Christ was pierced with a knife by a Jew, and sent forth Blood. Lambeck, in his Commentaries on the Imperial Library, book 1, p. 132, testifies that the Greek narrative of that miracle is preserved in the imperial library, and that this is its title: Θαῦμα γενόμενον ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει ἐν εἰκόνι τοῦ κυρίου ημῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. A miracle wrought at Constantinople in an image of our Lord Jesus Christ. Lambeck says the thing happened under Justinian the Great, that is, in the sixth century.

[11] and afterwards at Berytus, flowed from an image of Christ that was struck: He observes, secondly, that at Berytus in Syria an image of Christ was crucified by the Jews, and from it there flowed abundant blood, as the Roman Martyrology has it at the IX of November in these words: At Berytus in Syria, the commemoration of the image of the Saviour, which, being crucified by the Jews, sent forth so abundant a blood that the Eastern and Western churches received of it plentifully. He places the event, on the authority of Sigebert, under the reign of Constantine and Irene — not his wife, as he has it, but his mother; as Pagi also does at the year 780, num. 13. But the said Lambeck, who assigns the whole Greek relation of the event to the Imperial library, writes thus of the time of that miracle at p. 124: This miracle happened in the year of the Christian era 765, under the emperor Constantine V, surnamed Copronymus, Caballinus, Iconomachus, Iconoclast, when the question of the veneration of sacred images was being agitated to the utmost. But since that difference of time does not bear on our purpose, I leave it undecided and pass on to other matters.

[12] [what Gregory of Tours reports of that event seems to have happened at Constantinople.] Honoré observes, thirdly, that a like miracle is related by St. Gregory of Tours, book On the Glory of the martyrs, chap. 22, and he says it is older than the two preceding ones, and happened in the time of Gregory of Tours himself, that is, in the sixth century, in which he flourished and died. But when Gregory's relation is compared with what Lambeck has concerning the image of Constantinople, I can scarcely doubt that St. Gregory of Tours is treating of that very image of Constantinople which was struck and carried off by a Jew, and at last found by the Christians sprinkled with blood: for the time agrees excellently, and the other circumstances of the event accord rightly. This only I observe, lest the event be doubled — though otherwise it matters little to our purpose whether the event be one or twofold.

[13] Someone believes that this blood is preserved as the Blood of Christ, Further, the said writer adds that this seems to be the origin of that Blood which is preserved as the true Blood of Christ at Mantua, at Bruges, and in various churches of France, Italy and England; and that this too is the opinion of St. Thomas Aquinas. He adds also this reason: Before these miracles happened, it had never been heard that the Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ was had upon earth, and the most ancient of all the traditions on this matter are later than those miracles. And at last he concludes that the Blood which is preserved in various churches as the true Blood of Christ flowed forth from some image, because there are no suitable monuments by which it is shown to be from the most sacred body of Christ the Lord. Concerning the Blood preserved at Mantua, however, he remains more uncertain; for he does not so cleave to the opinion of St. Thomas as to hold that absolutely nothing of Blood was left by Christ on earth.

[14] Du Cange, in Christian Constantinople, book 4, p. 131, recites some Greek verses of John, metropolitan of Euchaïta, who flourished in the eleventh century. [and concerning it Du Cange explains verses which seem to have been written of the true Blood of Christ:] These were composed εἰς τὸ Δεσποτικὸν αἷμα, on the Blood of the Lord. But Du Cange thinks they ought to be referred to the blood shed from an image of Christ. I transfer the verses themselves hither:

Ἐν οὐρανοῖς μὲν προσκυνητὰς τοὺς ἀγγέλους Ἔδει τὸ λύτρον της ἐμῆς ψυχῆς ἔχειν. Ἀλλ᾽ ἦν ἄμεινον τὸν δι᾽ ὂν παρεσχέθη, Τοῦτον τὸ δῶρον προσκυνεῖν ἐν γῇ κάτω. Ὅμως δὲ τοῦτο προσκυνοῦσι καὶ νόες, Ἐνταῦθα σεπτῶς νῦν τεθησαυρισμένον. Πρέπει γὰρ αὐτοὺς αἷμα τιμᾷν Δεσπότου, Εἰς ἓν δι᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῖς βροτοῖς συνημμένους.

From the Latin rendering the reader ignorant of the Greek tongue will be able to gather whether these things can in any way be understood of the blood of any image whatever. So far as can be done, I shall render word for word:

In heaven indeed it befitted the angels, its adorers, to have the Ransom of my soul. But it was better that he for whom it was given should himself adore the gift here below on earth. Yet the angelic minds also adore it, here now laid up with veneration as a treasure. For it behooves them to honour the Blood of the Lord, who through it have been made one with mortals.

The Ransom, or price of the redemption, of our soul is beyond doubt the true Blood of Christ our Lord shed for us; and the rest also seems to suggest the same so clearly that I cannot explain those verses of any other miraculous Blood whatever.

[15] Further, I doubt the less of that writer's mind, since other writers too speak in proportion as other Greek and Latin Writers more clearly agree that something of the Lord's Blood was preserved on earth. Euthymius the monk, Zigabenus, who flourished at the beginning of the twelfth century, has it thus in the Panoply against heresies, part 2, tit. 24: But that it was not a shadow of Christ, but Christ Himself who was crucified in the flesh, can be understood from the Blood which flowed from His most holy body and is kept by Christian men, and which is established to be Christ's from the cures of diseases and from many miracles. So has it the Latin version of Pietro Francesco Zini in the Venetian edition, fol. 61. The Greek text with another version may be seen in tom. 2 of the Library of the Greek Fathers, p. 296. In the same place, at p. 150, Germanus, archbishop of Constantinople, speaks thus: The cup (or chalice in the Mass) is in place of that vessel which received the Blood sent forth from the immaculate side that was pierced, and the precious Blood that flowed from the hands and feet. I would not, however, contend here that the Work On the contemplation of ecclesiastical matters, from which the words are drawn, is certainly by St. Germanus of Constantinople, who flourished in the eighth century, although it has been published under his name. But at least the passage adduced shows that the opinion concerning the Blood of Christ that was caught up does not rest on the testimony of Nicephorus alone; since that Germanus, whether he be St. Germanus or another who flourished in the thirteenth century, is much older than Nicephorus.

[16] of the Blood of Christ preserved on earth. Nay, Metaphrastes, four centuries older than Nicephorus, in the Discourse on the Life and Assumption of St. Mary, in Surius at the XV of August, relates nearly the same as Nicephorus in these words: And these things too are said by tongues which make much of truth: that when these new and wondrous things had been perceived by the eyes of the Mother of God, and when after the death of her Son, just as if He lived, water and Blood gushed from His side, she reverently and carefully caught it up. Older also than Nicephorus is the Relation concerning the Blood of Christ preserved and carried into England, which happened in the year 1247. The tradition of the people of Bruges is likewise older: for they received the sacred Blood in the year 1148, and are now celebrating with the utmost solemnity the six hundredth year of that reception. To these are added the Martyrologies of the Greeks, of which the Basilian Menology certainly belongs to the tenth century. And the Invention of the Blood of Mantua happened about the year 804; and older than that very invention is the relation which I shall presently subjoin. From these things I conclude that a tradition of some kind concerning some part of the Blood of Christ preserved on earth has flourished for many centuries, and therefore is not to be lightly rejected as though it lacked all foundation.

[17] [That all the blood which is held for the Blood of Christ is from an image cannot be proved;] But the said Honoré attempts to establish by two reasons that the true origin of the Blood which is preserved as the Blood of Christ is from the image of Berytus or of Constantinople. The first is, because it cannot be sufficiently proved to be the Blood of Christ; the second, because the miracles are established by which the images of Christ poured out Blood. I answer that by these reasons the blood which is preserved in several places can in some fashion be rendered doubtful, since the tradition may in truth have been corrupted; but that by those reasons what Honoré labours to establish is by no means established. Let us take for an example the blood preserved at Bruges, which he altogether denies to have flowed from the wounds of Christ. He will say that blood shed from images is established; I shall reply that Blood shed by Christ the Lord is even more certainly established. He will say that it cannot be proved by legitimate authority that the blood of Bruges is that which flowed from the wounds of Christ. I shall reply that it can be much less proved to be the blood of some image, since the people of Bruges did not receive it as such, nor has anyone ever called it such. Truly the reasoning of Honoré is astonishing, if without any documents he would lay down anything certain about the treasure of the people of Bruges. But the manner in which the people of Bruges received that treasure is not so improbable as to deserve no credit.

[18] [for concerning the blood which is preserved at Bruges, and which was sent into England,] Let us hear John of Ypres, who, in the Chronicle of St. Bertin, chap. 43, relating the gifts which Baldwin, king of Jerusalem, gave to his son-in-law Thierry, count of Flanders, as he was departing from Palestine, speaks thus: Among other precious jewels there was given to that count Thierry by the aforesaid king, with the consent of the prelates and princes, a great part of the Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the count carried into Flanders by the hands of our aforesaid lord abbot Leo, and placed at Bruges in the church of St. Basil, in the year of the Lord 1148. This is a part of that precious Blood which was gathered and preserved when Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus laid our Lord Jesus Christ, taken down bloody from the cross, upon

a clean vessel and washed it, etc. John of Ypres adds many things about the sacred Blood received at Bruges and venerated there. Then he carefully observes that the Blood is indeed honoured in several places; But, he says, it is a thing coming forth miraculously, and not flowed from the body of Christ. And this I say without prejudice to that part which on this occasion remained at Jerusalem, etc. I observe here, first, that the blood which had flowed from images was not unknown when the people of Bruges received theirs. Secondly, that some part of that Blood which before the middle of the twelfth century was held at Jerusalem for the true Blood of Christ then remained there; and consequently that there seems no room for doubt that it is that very part of the Lord's Blood which in the year 1247 was sent from Palestine to Henry III, king of England, as Matthew Paris relates at the same year: for the English at that time also spoke of the preserved Blood sent to them in the same way in which the people of Bruges say theirs was preserved, namely at the washing of the most holy body by Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, as may be seen in the Additamenta in Paris, p. 105, or also in our own work at the XVII of March, in Joseph of Arimathea.

[19] Further, that manner in which the most sacred Blood of Christ is said to have been obtained nothing is said which does not appear probable: is so natural and likely that it can satisfy prudent men, and the bishop of Lincoln by that reasoning removed the doubt of certain Englishmen. But, says the said Honoré, that whole relation of the Blood preserved at the taking down and washing of the body is drawn from the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus, and so deserves no credit. I answer that such an objection is worthy of little attention, since nothing is brought forward from that Gospel about which anyone could rightly doubt. What then? Will it be denied that the body of Christ was taken down from the cross by Joseph? But the sacred Scriptures have that. Shall we doubt whether the most precious Blood which clung to the nails, and which perhaps flowed from the wounds while they were being drawn out, was reverently wiped away and caught up and carefully preserved? But that doubt would lack all reason. Wherefore it is not necessary that we should turn our minds too curiously to the washing of the body, to the wiping of the Blood which clung to the cross, to the gathering of that which had flowed down about the cross onto the ground — although there seems no room for doubt that all that Blood was most carefully gathered: for we cannot doubt that a notable quantity of the Blood of Christ was reverently gathered and most carefully preserved; nor do we need an apocryphal gospel to hold that for undoubted.

[20] [nor does the mere silence of the earlier centuries suffice to deny the truth of that Blood] Nevertheless I am not ignorant of what can here be objected. For our adversaries will say that all that Blood was resumed by Christ in the resurrection: and so they will return to the theological argument, to which I have already answered. The only thing, therefore, which can rightly be objected against the Blood of Bruges and that which was carried into England, is the silence of the earlier centuries, in which we read nothing written of a preserved Blood of Christ. But I answer that many instruments of the Passion are today held for genuine, even though nothing is read written of them among the ancients as preserved. Concerning the Blood which is preserved at Mantua, Leo III is said to have judged favourably after a serious examination. That of Bruges the prelates and princes in Palestine and in Flanders held for genuine in the twelfth century; nor could they have been ignorant that a miraculous blood which had flowed from the image of Berytus was preserved in certain places. Wherefore, since it can be established neither by theological nor by historical arguments that all the Blood was so resumed by Christ that nothing remained on earth, let those enjoy their possession who for many centuries now have so venerated the Blood of Christ the Lord that it cannot be shown that this was begun rashly.

GREEK ACTS

by an anonymous author

From the Vatican codex 1589, which Allatius believed to be of the 7th century. Translated by J. S.

Barypsabas, hermit and Mart., in the East (St.)

By an Anonymous author.

Πᾶσα

δόσις

ἀγαθὴ

καὶ

πὰν

δόρημα

τέλειον

ἄνωθέν

ἐστι,

καταβαῖνον

ἀπὸ

τοῦ

πατρὸς

τῶν

φωτῶν,

παῤ

ᾧ

οὔκ

ἐστιν

παραλλαγὴ

ἢ

τροπῆς

ἀποσκίασμα.

Ὅθεν

ἀδελφοί

μου

ἀγαπῆτοὶ,

διήγησιν

ὑμῖν

βούλομαι

σαφηνῖσαι

ἀκριβεστάτην

περὶ

τῆς

οἰκονομίας

τοῦ

Κυρίου

ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ

Χριστοῦ,

ἵνα

μετὰ

πάσης

ἀσφαλείας

καὶ

καθαρᾶς

καρδίας

προσέρχωμεν

οἱ

ἀκούσωμεν

τῆς

φωνῆς

τῶν

μυστηρίων,

ὧν

ὁ

Κύριος

ἔδωκεν

τοῖς

αὐτὸν

ἀπεκδεχομένοις

μετὰ

χαρᾶς

τὸν

στέφανον

τῆς

ἐπαγγελίας.

[2] Κατὰ

τὸν

καιρὸν,

ὃν

ἔπαθε

ὁ

Κύριος

ἡμῶν

Ἰηστοῦς

Χριστὸς

ἐπὶ

Ποντίου

Πιλάτου

τοῦ

ἡγεμόνος

καὶ

ἀρχιερέων

Ἄννᾳ

καὶ

Καιάφᾳ,

οἵ

κατέκριναν

τὸν

Κύριον

θανάτῳ·

τότε

ὁ

Πιλάτος

παρέδω

Κύριον

τὸν

Ἰησοῦν

ἵνα

σταυρωθῇ.

Λαβόντες

δὲ

οἱ

στρατιῶται

τὸν

Ἰησοῦν

ἐσταύρωσαν

αὐτὸν

ἐν

τόπῳ

ἐπιλεγομένῳ

Γωλγοθᾶ,

ὅ

ἐστιν

Κρανίου

τόπος.

Ἰωσὴφ

δὲ

ἀνὴρ

δίκαιος

καὶ

θεοσεβὴς

προσελθὼν

τῷ

Πιλάτῳ

ᾐ

τήσατο

τὸ

σῶμα

τοῦ

Ἰησοῦ,

καὶ

ὁ

Πιλάτος

ἐκέλευσε

δοθῆναι

αὐτῷ

τὸ

σῶμα.

Καὶ

τότε

οἱ

στρατιῶται

ἐλθόντες

ἐπὶ

τοῦ

σταύρου

ἴδον

τὸν

Ἰησοῦν

ὅτι

ἐφῆκεν

τὸ

πνεῦμα,

καὶ

λαβὼν

εἷς

τῶν

στρατιωτῶν

λόγχην

ἔνυξε

τὴν

πλευρὰν

τοῦ

Ἰησοῦ,

καὶ

εὐθέως

ἐξῆλθεν

αἷμα

καὶ

ὕδωρ.

Ἰδὼν

ἄνθρωπός

τις

ἄξιος

τοῦ

Θεοῦ

ὀνόματι

Ἰἀκωβος

τὸ

γεγονὸς,

ἔχων

ἐν

τῇ

χειρὶ

αὐτοῦ

κολόκυνθαν,

εὐθέως

θεὶς

ἐδέξατο

αὐτὸ

μετὰ

χαρᾶς

μεγάλης,

καὶ

ἐπίστευσεν

εἰς

τὸν

Χριστὸν

καὶ

ἀπέκριβεν

ἑαυτὸν

διὰ

τὸν

φόβον

τῶν

Ιουδαίων.

Πιστὸς

γὰρ

ὤν

ὁ

ἄνθρωπος

κατεφρόνησεν

τοῦ

φόβου

αὐτῶν

ἵνα

γένηται

ἀφορμὴ

ζωῆς

πᾶσι

τοῖς

ἀνθρώποις

τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν

εἰς

τὸν

Χριστὸν

τὸν

θησαυρὸν

τῆς

ζωῆς·

οἷς

γὰρ

ἔβλυσεν

ἐκ

τῆς

πλευρᾶς

τοῦ

Κυρίου.

[3] …

πάν

τὸ

αἷμα

καὶ

τὸ

ὕδωρ

δεξάμενος

ἐν

τῇ

κολοκύνθῃ,

ἔλαβεν

ἔλαιον

καθαρὸν

ἐπάνω,

ἵνα

μηδεὶς

δοκῆται

ὅτι

ἔχει

ἐν

τῇ

κολοκύνθῃ

ἄλλο

τί

ποτε,

μὴ

μόνον

ἔλαιον

καθαρὸν.

Οὕτως

δὲ

ἄνθρωπος

ὁ

πιστὸς

ἐφύλαττε

τὴν

εὐλογίαν,

ἣν

ἐδέξατο

παρὰ

τῆς

πλευρᾶς

τοῦ

Ἰησοῦ,

ἐπὶ

πολλὰ

ἔτη

μετὰ

πολλῆς

ἀσφαλείας,

καὶ

πολλαὶ

ἰάσεις

ἐγένοντο

διὰ

τοῦ

ἐλαίου

ἐκείνου.

Ἔτυχε

δὲ

μετὰ

τὴν

τελευτὴν

τοῦ

πιστοῦ

Ἰακώβου

ἐλθεῖν

δυὸ

ἀσκητὰς·

καὶ

οὗτοι

ἄνθρωποι

ἐν

σχήματι

ἐρημητῶν

ἐπορέυοντο·

καὶ

αὐτὸς

οὗτος

ὁ

θησαυρὸς

τῆς

ζωῆς

ἦχθεν

εἰς

αὐτοὺς,

μὴ

ἰδότων

αὐτῶν

ὅτι

ἐκ

τῆς

πήγης

τοῦ

Ἀθανάτου

ἐστίν.

Πορευομένων

δὲ

αὐτῶν

ἐν

τῇ

ὁδῷ,

ἐφάνη

αὐτοῖς

ἄγγελος

Κυρίου,

καὶ

εἶπεν

αὐτοῖς·

εἰρήνη

ὑμῖν

μαθηταῖ

τοῦ

Κυρίου·

νῦν

εὐαγγελλίζομαι

ὑμῖν

ἵνα

ἐν

ἀσφαλείᾳ

καὶ

φόβῳ

μεγάλῳ

φιλάττητε

τὸν

θησαυρὸν,

ὃν

βαστάζετε,

ὅτι

τὸ

αἷμα

τοῦ

Κυρίου

ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ

Χριστοῦ,

τὸ

ἐξελθὸν

ἐκ

τῆς

πλευρᾶς

αὐτοῦ,

ὃ

βαστάζεται

ἐν

τῇ

κολοκύνθῃ·

ἀλλὰ

μετὰ

ἀσφαλείας

καὶ

ἀγνώτητος

σώματος

καὶ

πνεύματος

ἔχετε

αὐτὸ·

ὡς

εἰδότες

ποῖον

θησαυρὸν

ἔχετε,

ὅτι

ἐξ

αὐτοῦ

δίδοται

ἴασις

πᾶσιν

ἀνθρώποις,

καὶ

μὴ

κολύετε

τὴν

δωρεὰν

τοῦ

Χριστοῦ.

Καὶ

μετὰ

τὸ

λαλῆσαι

τὸν

Ἄγγελον

τοῦς

λόγους

τούτους

ἀπῆλθεν

ἀπ᾽

αὐτῶν·

οἵ

δὲ

αὐτοὶ

ἀσκηταὶ

ἐπορεύοντο

εὐλογοῦντες

τὸν

Θεὸν

ἐπι

τῇ

δωρεᾷ

τῇ

δοθείσῃ

αὐτοῖς

ἐν

τῇ

ἐρήμῳ.

[4] Καὶ

ἐξῆλθεν

ἡ

φήμη

ἐν

ὅλῳ

τῷ

κόσμῳ,

καὶ

συνήρχοντο

ἀπὸ

πάσης

τῆς

οἰκουμένης,

καὶ

οἷος

ἀνήρχετο

ἐν

πίστει,

ἐλάμβανεν

ἴασιν

οἵᾳ

δήποτε

ἦν

κατεχόμενος

ἀσθενείᾳ,

καὶ

ἤρχετο

εἰς

τὸν

οἶκον

αὐτοῦ

εὐλογοῦν

τὸν

Θεὸν.

Καὶ

μετὰ

χρόνον

πολὺν

συνέβη

τελευτῆσαι

ἔνα

τῶν

ἀσκητῶν

μετ᾽

εἰρήνης·

καὶ

κατὰ

συγκυρίαν

τοῦ

θεοῦ,

τοῦτο

οἰκονομίσαντος,

μοναχός

τις

ταπεινὸς

ἐπορεύετο

κατὰ

τὸν

τόπον

ἐκεῖνον

εἰς

ἐπίσκεψιν

τῶν

πατρῶν

τούτων.

Εἰδὼν

ὁ

μακάριος

ἐπυνθάνετο

τὸ

ὄνομα

τοῦ

Πατρὸς·

ἔφη

δὲ

αὐτῷ,

ὅτι

Βαριψαβὰς

καλοῦμαι.

Καὶ

διατρίψαντος

αὐτοῦ,

ὁ

δίκαιος

οὐχ

ὁμολόγησεν

τῷ

ἁγίῳ

Βαριψαβᾷ,

τὸ

ποῦ

ἔκειτο

τὸ

ἔλαιον.

Καὶ

μετὰ

πολὺν

χρόνον

ἔτυχεν

τελευτῆσαι

τὸν

δίκαιον

ἐκεῖνον.

καὶ

πρὸ

τῆς

αὐτοῦ

τελευτῆς

ἐκάλεσε

τὸν

ἅγιον

Βαριψαβὰν,

καὶ

εἶπεν

αὐτῷ·

Κύριε

πάτερ,

ὡς

νομίζω,

ἔφθασεν

ἡ

ὧρα

τοῦ

μετελθεῖν

με

ἐκ

τοῦ

κόσμου

τούτου·

ἄλλα

παρακαλῶ

σε

ἀκοῦσόν

μου.

Καὶ

ἃ

λέγω

σοι,

φύλαξον,

ἵνα

γένῃ

ἐλεημοσύνη

πᾶσιν

ἀνθρώποις,

καὶ

τὸ

ὄνομά

σου

κυρηχθήσεται

ἐν

ὅλῳ

τῷ

κόσμῳ

διὰ

τὴν

παραθήκην,

ἣν

παρέχω

σοι.

Μὴ

οὖν

καταφρονήσῃς,

ἄλλ᾽

ἐν

ὁσιότητι

καὶ

καταρότητι

πνεύματος

καὶ

σαρκὸς

γένου

ἐν

πάσαις

ταῖς

ἡμέραις

τῆς

ζωῆς

σου.

[5] Καὶ

ἔλαβεν

τὴν

ἁγίαν

κολόκυνθαν,

καὶ

ἔδωκε

τῷ

ἁγίῳ

Βαριψαβᾷ,

λέγων

αὐτῷ,

ὅτι

τοῦτο

ἔχων

τὸν

Κύριον

ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦν

Χριστὸν

βαστάζεις·

ἐπειδὴ

τὸ

αἷμα

καὶ

τὸ

ὕδωρ

τὸ

ἐξελθὸν

ἐκ

τῆς

πλευρᾶς

τοῦ

Κυρίου

ἐπὶ

τοῦ

τιμίου

σταύρου

ἐν

τῷ

Γολγοθᾶ,

ὅ

ἐστι

Κρανίου

τόπος,

ὅπου

αὐτὸν

ἐσταύρωσαν

οἱ

Ἰουδαῖοι

αὐτό

ἐστιν,

ὃ

ἔχει

ἡ

ἁγία

κολόκυνθα.

Οὕτως

οὖν

ποίει

πᾶσι

τοῖς

πιστεύουσι

καὶ

προσερχομένοις

εἰς

ἴασιν

βαλεῖν

ἔλαιον

καταρὸν,

καὶ

μίγε

ἐκ

τοῦ

ἐλαίου

τούτου

καθαροῦ,

καὶ

δίδου

πᾶσι

τοῖς

ἐπιδεομένοις

εἰς

ἴασιν

ἐν

πάντι

καιρῷ

καὶ

τόπῳ.

Βλέπε,

κύριε

πάτερ,

μὴ

ἀμελησῃς

περὶ

ὧν

ἐνετειλάμην

σοι,

ἵνα

μὴ

ἀπολέσῃς

τὸν

κάματόν

σου,

ὃν

ἔκαμες

ἐν

πάσαις

ταῖς

ἡμέραις

σου.

Ὅ

δὲ

ἅγιος

Βαριψαβὰς

ἐποίησε

καθὼς

ἐνετείλατο

αὐτῷ

ὁ

δίκαιος

ἐκεῖνος·

καὶ

μετ᾽

ὀλίγον

χρόνον

(ἐνέβαλεν

ὃ

θεὸς

εἰς

τὴν

καρδίαν

αὐτοῦ)

καταναστὰς

ἔλαβεν

τὴν

εὐλογίαν

τῆς

ζωῆς

τὴν

δοθείσην

αὐτῷ

ὑπὸ

τοῦ

δικαίου,

καὶ

ὅπου

δ᾽

ἀν

ἐπορεύετο

δύναμιν

ἰαμάτων

ἐποίει

ὁ

Κύριος

ἡμῶν

Ιησους

Χριστὸς

διὰ

τῶν

χειρῶν

αὐτοῦ,

καὶ

ἀπὸ

τοτε

ἕως

τοῦ

νῦν

δυνάμεις

μεγάλαι

γένονται

διὰ

τοῦ

ἐλαίου

τούτου.

Ἡμεῖς

δὲ,

ἄδελφοι,

πιστοὶ

ὄντες

οὕτως

πιστεύομεν,

ὅτι

οἶος

ἀν

πότε

προσέλθῃ

τῷ

ἐλαίῳ

τούτῳ,

τῷ

Κυρίῳ

ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ

Χριστῷ

προσέρχεται,

καὶ

διὰ

τὴν

πίστιν

τὴν

εἰς

αὐτὸν

λήψεται

ἴασιν

καὶ

θεραπείαν

πάντων

τῶν

μελῶν

αὐτοῦ.

[6] Ὁ

δὲ

ἅγιος

Βαριψαβὰς

κατὰ

ἀποκάλυψιν

τοῦ

Κυρίου

καὶ

θεοῦ

ἔλαβεν

τὴν

δοθείσην

ἁγίαν

παραθήκην

τὸν

θησαυρὸν

τῆς

ζωῆς,

καὶ

ἐπορεύθη

Καταῤῥὰν

ἐν

χωρίῳ

ἐπιλεγομένῳ

Σουχρεῶν,

καὶ

ᾤκησεν

ἐκεῖ

πάσας

τὰς

ἡμέρας

τῆς

ζωῆς

αὐτοῦ,

καὶ

ἀπὸ

τότε

ἑὼς

τοῦ

νῦν

ἰάσεις

καὶ

θεραπείαι

γένονται

ἐν

πάντι

νοσήματι

τοῖς

ἐν

πίστει

προσερχομένοις

τῷ

Κυρίῳ

ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ

Χριστῷ

καὶ

ἐν

τῷ

ὀνόματι

τοῦ

ἁγίου

καὶ

ἐνδόξου

Βαριψαβᾶ·

καὶ

ὅτε

ἔδοξεν

αὐτὸν

ὁ

Κύριος

μεταθέσθαι

ἐκ

τοῦ

σώματος

ἐν

πολλῇ

ἦν

ἀσκήσει

καὶ

σωφροσύνῃ·

καὶ

ἐκεῖσε

οἰκήσας

τις

ὁλίγας

ἡμέρας

μετὰ

τοῦ

δικαίου

ἠκολούθει.

ἐξελθεῖν

ὁ

ἀββὰς

Βαριψαβὰς

καὶ

ἀπελθεῖν

εἰς

τὸν

ἴδιον

τόπον

καὶ

παρεκάλεσεν

αὐτὸν

ὁ

δίκαιος

αὐτὸς

λέγων·

Κύριε

πάτερ

ἔαν

ἐστὶ

θεοῦ

εὐδοκία

παρακαλῶ

σε

ἳνα

τὴν

οἴκησιν

ποιησώμεθα

μετ᾽

ἀλλήλων.

Ὁ

δὲ

ἀββὰς

Βαριψαβὰς

θεου

εὐδοκήσαντος

ἠνἔσθετο

τοῦ

συμμεῖναι

μετὰ

τοῦ

δικαίου

καὶ

ἔμειναν

ὁμοθύμαδον

χρόνον

πολύν.

Καὶ

ἔβλεπεν

δυνάμεις

πολλὰς

καὶ

ἰάσεις

γενομένας

διὰ

τοῦ

ἐλαίου

τοῦ

ὄντος

ἐν

τῇ

κολοκύνθῃ·

κατέλειπεν

αὐτὸς

τον

θήσαυρον

τῆς

ζωῆς

ἡμῶν

τὸν

δοθέντα

αὐτῳ

ἐν

τῇ

κολοκύνθῃ

τῷ

μαθητῇ

αὐτοῦ.

Πάντες

δὲ

προθύμως

προσέλθωμεν

τοῖς

λιψάνοι

αὐτοῦ,

καὶ

δόξαν

ἀναπέμψωμεν

τῷ

Πατρὶ

καὶ

τῷ

Υῷ

καὶ

τῷ

ἁγὶῳ

Πνεύματι,

νῦν

καὶ

ἀεὶ

καὶ

εἰς

τοὺς

ἀιῶνας

τῶν

αἰώνων.

Αμὴν.

The author commends his own trustworthiness in the telling. Every best gift and every perfect boon is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change nor shadow of alteration. Whence, beloved brethren, I desire to make manifest to you by a most accurate ^a narration the dispensation of our Lord Jesus Christ, that with all security and with a clean heart we may draw near, we who have heard the word of the mysteries, of which the Lord gave to those who receive Him with joy the crown of the promise.

[2] At that time when our Lord Jesus Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate the governor, and the high priests Annas and Caiaphas, [a certain man is said to have caught up the Blood and water flowing from the side of Christ:] who condemned the Lord to death, Pilate delivered our Lord Jesus to be crucified. And the soldiers, having received Jesus, crucified Him in the place called Golgotha, which is THE PLACE OF THE SKULL. And Joseph, a just and religious man, approaching Pilate, asked for the body of Jesus, and Pilate ordered the body to be given to him. Then the soldiers, coming to the cross, saw that Jesus was dead; and one of the soldiers, taking a lance, opened the side of Jesus, and at once there flowed forth Blood and water. When a certain man worthy of God, named James ^b, who had a gourd in his hand, saw this done, he presently set it beneath and with great joy caught up the Blood and water; and believing in Christ, he hid himself for fear of the Jews. For since he was a faithful man, he despised that fear, that it might become an occasion of life to all men believing in Christ, who is the treasure of life: for it was for them that it flowed from the Lord's side.

[3] and when he died, that treasure is said to have been carried to two others, Further ^c, when he had received all the blood and water into the gourd, he put pure oil above it, lest anyone should judge that there was anything else in the gourd besides pure oil alone. Thus indeed the faithful man kept for many years, with great security, the gift which he had received from the side of Jesus, and by that oil many healings were wrought. And it came to pass, after the death of the faithful James, that two religious men came, who went about in the habit of hermits; and this very treasure of life came to them ^d, they being ignorant that it was from the fountain of the Immortal One. And as they were going along the way, an angel of the Lord appeared to them and said to them: Peace be to you, disciples of the Lord. Now I announce to you that you should guard safely and with great fear the treasure which you carry, because it is the Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which came forth from His side, which is borne in the gourd. But hold it with security and with purity of body and of soul, as knowing what manner of treasure you have, because from it healing is given to all men: do not hinder the gift of Christ. The angel, having spoken these words, departed from them. And these religious men went on their way praising God for the gift given them in the wilderness.

[4] and to have shone with many miracles: it is then given to St. Baripsabas, Thereafter the report went out into the whole world, and men came together from the whole earth ^e, and whoever drew near with faith obtained health, by whatever infirmity he had been seized, and returned home praising God. After a long time one of those hermits rested in peace; and by chance, God so disposing it, a certain humble Monk was passing through that place to visit those fathers. Seeing him, that blessed man asked what was the Father's name. And he replied: I am called Baripsabas. But while he was staying in that place, that just man did not show St. Baripsabas where the oil was. But when much time had passed, that just man died; and before his death he called St. Baripsabas and said to him: Lord father, as I judge, the hour has come when I shall depart from this world. But I ask you, hear me; and what I say to you, observe, that you may show mercy to all men. Your name will be proclaimed in the whole world on account of the deposit which I hand over to you. Do not, then, despise it; but see that you be holy and pure in soul and body all the days of your life.

[5] who works many miracles by it, And he took the holy gourd and gave it to St. Baripsabas ^f, saying to him: He who has this bears our Lord Jesus Christ, since the Blood and water which flowed from the Lord's side on the precious cross at Golgotha, that is, in the place of Calvary, where the Jews crucified Him, is that very thing which the holy gourd contains. Thus, then, to all who believe and draw near to be healed, bid them bring clean oil, and mingle with it from this pure oil, and give to all who ask, for healing, in every time and place. See, lord father, that you neglect nothing of what I have charged you, lest you lose the labour which you have borne all your days. And St. Baripsabas did as that just man charged him; and after a little time (God Himself suggesting that counsel to him) he arose and took the gift of life bestowed on him by the just man; and wherever he went, there our Lord Jesus Christ wrought the power of healings by his hands. From that time ^g until the present, notable powers are wrought by that oil. And we, brethren, being faithful, believe thus: that whoever at any time draws near to that oil, draws near to our Lord Jesus Christ, and through faith in Him obtains a remedy and the healing of all his members.

[6] And St. Baripsabas, according to a revelation of the Lord and God, took the holy deposit given to him, and leaves the same treasure to his disciple. the treasure of life, and went to Catarra ^h, to the place called Σουχρεῶν, and dwelt there all the days of his life; and from that time until the present all diseases are healed there of those who draw near with faith to our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the name of the holy and glorious Baripsabas. And when the Lord seemed about to translate him from the body, he was in much exercise and temperance; and when someone had dwelt there a few days with the Just man, he followed him. Abbot Baripsabas wished ⁱ to go away and return to his own place. But that just man asked him, saying: Lord father, if it be God's good pleasure, I beg you that we may dwell together. And abbot Baripsabas, God willing it, bore to remain together with the just man; and they remained of one mind for a long time. And he saw many powers and healings wrought by the oil which was in the gourd. He (Baripsabas ^k) left this treasure of our life, given to him in the gourd, to his disciple. And let us all eagerly draw near to his relics, and give glory to God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and always and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

ANNOTATIONS.