The Lives of the Fathers, Martyrs, and Principal Saints

A >> Alban Butler >> The Lives of the Fathers, Martyrs, and Principal Saints

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103

A letter to a certain monk called Caesarius, has passed under the name of
St. Chrysostom ever since Leontius and St. John Damascen; and not only
many Protestants, but also F. Hardouin, (Dissert. de ep. ad Caesarium
Monachum) Tillemont, (t. 11, art. 130, p. 340,) and Tournely, (Tr. de
Euchar. t. 1, p. 282, and Tract. de Incarnat. p. 486,) are not unwilling
to look upon it as a genuine work of our holy doctor. But it is
demonstrated by F. Le Quien, (Diss. 3, in St. Joan. Damasc.) Dom
Montfaucon, (in Op. St. Chrys. t. 3, p. 737,) Ceillier, (t. 9, p. 249,)
F. Merlin in his learned dissertations on this epistle, (in Memoires de
Trevoux an. 1737, pp. 252, 516, and 917,) and F. Stilting, the
Bollandist, (t. 4, Sept. Comment. in vitam St. Chrys. Sec.82, p. 656,) that
it has been falsely ascribed to him, and is a patched work of some later
ignorant Greek writer, who has borrowed some things from the first
letter of St. Chrysostom to Olympias, as Stilting shows. Merlin thinks
the author discovers himself to have been a Nestorian heretic. At least
the style is so opposite to that of St. Chrysostom, both in the diction
and in the manner of reasoning, that the reader must find himself quite
in another world, as Montfaucon observes. The author's long acquaintance
with this Caesarius seems not easily reconcilable with the known history
of St. Chrsysostom's life. This piece, moreover, is too direct a
confutation of the Eutychian error to have been written before its
birth: or if it had made its appearance, how could it have escaped all
the antagonists of that heresy? Whoever the author was, he is far from
opposing the mystery of the real presence, or that of
transubstantiation, in the blessed eucharist, for both which he is an
evident voucher in these words, not to mention others: "The nature of
bread and that of our Lord's body are not two bodies, but one body of
the Son," which he introduces to make a comparison with the unity of
Christ's Person in the Incarnation. It is true, indeed, that he says the
nature of bread remains in the sacrament: but it is easy to show that by
the nature of bread he means its external natural qualities or
accidents.

Among former Latin translations of St. Chrysostom's works, only those
made by the learned Jesuit Fronto-le-Duc are accurate. These are
retained by Montfaucon, who has given us a new version of those writings
which Le Duc had not translated. The edition of Montfaucon in twelve
volumes, an. 1718, is of all others the most complete. But it is much to
be wished that he had favored us with a more elegant Latin translation,
which might bear some degree of the beauty of the original. The Greek
edition, made by Sir Henry Saville at Eton, in nine volumes, in 1612, is
more correct and more beautiful than that of the learned Benedictin, and
usually preferred by those who stand in need of no translation.

{274}

As to the French translations, that of the homilies on the epistles to
the Romans, Ephesians, &c., by Nicholas Fontaine, the Port-Royalist, in
1693, was condemned by Harlay, archbishop of Paris; and recalled by the
author, who undesignedly established in it the Nestorian error. The
French translation of the homilies on St. John, was given us by Abbe le
Merre: of those on Genesis and the Acts, with eighty-eight chosen
discourses, by Abbe de Bellegarde, though for some time attributed to de
Marsilly, and by others to Sacy. That of the homilies on St. Matthew,
ascribed by many to de Marsilly, was the work of le Maitre and his
brother Sacy. That of the homilies to the People of Antioch, was given
to by Abbe de Maucroix in 1671. That of the saint's panegyrics on the
martyrs, is the work of F. Durauty de Bourecueil, an Oratorian, and made
its appearance in 1735.

St Chrysostom wrote comments on the whole scripture, as Cassiodorus and
Suidas testify; but of these many, with a great number of sermons, &c.,
are lost. Theophylactus, AEcumenius, and other Greek commentators, are
chiefly abridgers of St. Chrysostom. Even Theodoret is his disciple in
the excellent concise notes he composed on the sacred text. Nor can
preachers or theologians choose a more useful master or more perfect
model in interpreting the scripture; but ought to join with him some
judicious, concise, critical commentator. As in reading the classics,
grammatical niceties have some advantage in settling the genuine text;
yet if multiplied or spun out in notes, are extremely pernicious, by
deadening the student's genius and spirit, and burying them in rubbish,
while they ought to be attentive to what will help them to acquire true
taste, to be employed on the beauties, ease, and gentleness of the
style, and on the greatness, delicacy, and truth of the thoughts or
sentiments, and to be animated by the life, spirit, and fire of an
author; so much more in the study of the sacred writings, a competent
skill in resolving grammatical and historical scruples in the text is of
great use, and sometimes necessary in the church: in which, among the
fathers, Origen and St. Jerom are our models. Yet from the conduct of
divine providence over the church, and the example of the most holy and
most learned among the primitive fathers, it is clear, as the learned
doctor Hare, bishop of Chichester, observes, that assiduous, humble, and
devout meditation on the spirit and divine precepts of the sacred
oracles, is the true method of studying them, both for our own
advantage, and for that of the church. Herein St. Chrysostom's comments
are our most faithful assistant and best model: The divine majesty and
magnificence of those writings is above the reach, and beyond the power,
of all moral wit. None but the Spirit of God could express his glory,
and display either the mysteries of his grace, or the oracles of his
holy law. And none but they whose hearts are disengaged from objects of
sense, and animated with the most pure affections of every sublime
virtue, and whose minds are enlightened by the beams of heavenly truth,
can penetrate the spirit of these divine writings, and open it to us.
Hence was St. Chrysostom qualified to become the interpreter of the word
of God, to discover its hidden mysteries of love and mercy, the perfect
spirit of all virtues which it contains, and the sacred energy or each
word or least circumstance.

The most ingenious Mr. Blackwall, in his excellent Introduction to the
Classics, writes as follows on the style of St. Chrysostom, p. 139: "I
would fain beg room among the classics for three primitive writers of
the church--St. Chrysostom, Minutius Felix, and Lactantius. St.
Chrysostom is easy and pleasant to new beginners; and has written with a
purity and eloquence which have been the admiration of all ages. This
wondrous man in a great measure possesses all the excellences of the
most valuable Greek and Roman classics. He has the invention,
copiousness, and perspicuity of Cicero; and all the elegance and
accuracy of composition which is admired in Isocrates, with much greater
variety and freedom. According as his subject requires, he has the
easiness and sweetness of Xenophon, and the pathetic force and rapid
simplicity of Demosthenes. His judgment is exquisite, his images noble,
his morality sensible and beautiful. No man understands human nature to
greater perfection, nor has a happier power of persuasion. He is always
clear and intelligible upon the loftiest and greatest subjects, and
sublime and noble upon the least." All that has been said of St.
Chrysostom's works is to be understood only of those which are truly
his. The irregular patched compilations from different parts of his
writings, made by modern Greeks, may be compared to scraps of rich
velvet, brocade, and gold cloth, which are clumsily sewed together with
{}thread.

{275}

ST. JULIAN, FIRST BISHOP OF MANS, C.

TOWARDS THE END OF THE THIRD CENTURY.

HE was succeeded by St. Turibius. His head is shown in the cathedral of
Mans, but the most of his relics in the neighboring Benedictin abbey of
nuns called St. Julian's du Pre, famous for miracles; though the
greatest part of these relics was burnt, or scattered in the wind by the
Huguenots, who plundered the shrine of St. Julian, in 1562. He was much
honored in France, and many churches built during the Norman succession
in England, especially about the reign of Henry II., who was baptized in
the church of St. Julian, at Mans, bear his name: one in particular at
Norwich, which the people by mistake imagine to have been dedicated
under the title of the venerable Juliana, a Benedictin nun at Norwich,
who died in the odor of sanctity, but never was publicly invoked as a
saint. St. Julian of Mans had an office in the Sarum breviary. See
Tillem. t. 4, pp. 448, 729. Gal. Christ. Nov. &c.

ST. MARIUS, ABBOT.

DYNAMIUS, patrician of the Gauls who is mentioned by St. Gregory of
Tours, (l. 6, c. 11,) and who was for some time steward of the patrimony
of the Roman church in Gaul, in the time of St. Gregory the Great, as
appears by a letter of that pope to him, (in which he mentions that he
sent him in a reliquary some of the filings of the chains of St. Peter,
and of the gridiron of St. Laurence,) was the author of the lives of St.
Marius and of St. Maximus of Ries. From the fragments of the former in
Bollandus, we learn that he was born at Orleans, became a monk, and
after some time was chosen abbot at La-Val-Benois, in the diocese of
Sisteron, in the reign of Gondebald, king of Burgundy, who died in 509.
St. Marius made a pilgrimage to St. Martin's, at Tours, and another to
the tomb of St. Dionysius, near Paris, where, falling sick, he dreamed
that he was restored to health by an apparition of St. Dionysius, and
awaking, found himself perfectly recovered. St. Marius, according to a
custom received in many monasteries before the rule of St. Bennet, in
imitation of the retreat of our divine Redeemer, made it a rule to live
a recluse in a forest during the forty days of Lent. In one of these
retreats, he foresaw, in a vision, the desolation which barbarians would
soon after spread in Italy, and the destruction of his own monastery,
which he foretold before his death, in 555. The abbey of
La-Val-Benois[1] being demolished, the body of the saint was translated
to Forcalquier, where it is kept with honor in a famous collegiate
church which bears his name, and takes the title of Concathedral with
Sisteron. St. Marius is called in French St. May, or St. Mary, in Spain,
St. Mere, and St. Maire, and in some places, by mistake, St. Marrus. See
fragments of his life compiled by Dynamius, extant in Bollandus, with
ten preliminary observations.

Footnotes:
1. In Latin Vallis Bodonensis. Baillet and many others call it at
present Beuvons, or Beuvoux: but there is no such village. Bevons
indeed is the name of a village in Provence, one league from
Sisteron; but the ruins of the abbey La-Val-Benois are very
remarkable, in a village called St. May, in Dauphine, sixteen
leagues from Sisteron, in which diocese it is. See many mistakes of
martyrologists and geographers concerning this saint and abbey
rectified by Chatelain, p. 424.

{276}

JANUARY XXVIII.

SAINT AGNES, V.M.

A SECOND commemoration of St. Agnes occurs on this day in the ancient
Sacramentaries of pope Gelasius and St. Gregory the Great; as also in
the true Martyrology of Bede. It was perhaps the day of her burial, or
of a translation of her relics, or of some remarkable favor obtained
through her intercession soon after her death.

ST. CYRIL,

PATRIARCH OF ALEXANDRIA.

From Socrates, Marius Mercator, the councils, and his works. See
Tillemont, t. 14, p. 272. Ceillier, t. 13, p. 241.

A.D. 444.

ST. CYRIL was raised by God to defend the faith of the Incarnation of
his Son, "of which mystery he is styled the doctor, as St. Austin is of
that of grace," says Thomassin. He studied under his uncle Theophilus,
and testifies[1] that he made it his rule never to advance any doctrine
which he had not learned from the ancient Fathers. His books against
Julian the Apostate show that he had read the profane writers. He often
says himself that he neglected human eloquence: and it is to be wished
that he had written in a clearer style, and with greater purity of the
Greek tongue. Upon the death of Theophilus, in 412, he was raised by the
people to the patriarchal dignity. He began to exert his authority by
causing the churches of the Novatians in the city to be shut up, and
their sacred vessels and ornaments to be seized; an action censured by
Socrates, a favorer of those heretics; but we do not know the reasons
and authority upon which he proceeded. He next drove the Jews out of the
city, who were very numerous, and enjoyed great privileges there from
the time of Alexander the Great. Seditions, and several acts of violence
committed by them, excited him to this, which grievously offended
Orestes the governor, but was approved by the emperor Theodosius: and
the Jews never returned. St. Cyril sent to conjure the governor by the
holy gospels that he would consent to a reconciliation, and that he
would join in sincere friendship with him: but his offers were rejected.
This unhappy disagreement produced pernicious effects. Hypatia, a pagan
lady, kept a public school of philosophy in the city. Her reputation for
learning was so great, that disciples flocked to her from all parts.
Among these was the great Synesius, who afterwards submitted his works
to her censure. She was consulted by philosophers of the first rank on
the most intricate points of learning, and of the Platonic philosophy in
particular, in which she was remarkably well versed.[2] She was much
respected and consulted by the governor, and often visited him. The mob,
which was nowhere more unruly, or more fond of riots and tumults than in
that populous city, the second in the world for extent, upon a {277}
suspicion that she incensed the governor against their bishop,
seditiously rose, pulled her out of her chariot, cut and mangled her
flesh, and tore her body in pieces in the streets, in 415, to the great
grief and scandal of all good men, especially of the pious bishop.[3][4]
He had imbibed certain prejudices from his uncle against the great St.
Chrysostom: but was prevailed on by St. Isidore of Pelusium, and others,
to insert his name in the Dyptics of his church, in 419: after which,
pope Zozimus sent him letters of communion.[5]

Nestorius, a monk and priest of Antioch, was made bishop of
Constantinople in 428. The retiredness and severity of his life, joined
with a hypocritical exterior of virtue, a superficial learning, and a
fluency of words, gained him some reputation in the world. But being
full of self conceit, he neglected the study of the Fathers, was a man
of weak judgment, extremely vain, violent, and obstinate. This is the
character he bears in the history of those times, and which is given him
by Socrates, and also by Theodoret, whom he had formerly imposed upon by
his hypocrisy. Marius Mercator informs us, that he was no sooner placed
in the episcopal chair, but he began to persecute, with great fury, the
Arians, Macedonians, Manichees, and Quartodecimans, whom he banished out
of his diocese. But though he taught original sin, he is said to have
denied the necessity of grace; on which account he received to his
communion Celestius and Julian, who had been condemned by the popes
Innocent and Zozimus, and banished out of the West by the emperor
Honorius, for Pelagianism. Theodosius obliged them to leave
Constantinople, notwithstanding the protection of the bishop. Nestorius
and his mercenary priests broached also new errors from the pulpit,
teaching two distinct persons in Christ, that of God, and that of man,
only joined by a moral union, by which he said the Godhead dwelt in the
humanity merely as in its temple. Hence he denied the Incarnation, or
that God was made man: and said the Blessed Virgin ought not to be
styled the mother of God, but of the man who was Christ, whose humanity
was only the temple of the divinity, not a nature hypostatically assumed
by the divine Person; though at length convicted by the voice of
antiquity, he allowed her the empty title of mother of God, but
continued to deny the mystery. The people were shocked at these
novelties, and the priests, St. Proclus, Eusebius, afterwards bishop of
Dorylaeum, and others, separated themselves from his communion, after
having attempted in vain to reclaim him by remonstrances. His homilies,
wherever they appeared, gave great offence, and excited everywhere
clamors against the errors and blasphemies they contained. St. Cyril
having read them, sent him a mild expostulation ob the subject, but was
answered with haughtiness and contempt. Pope Celestine, being applied to
by both parties, examined his doctrine in a council at Rome; condemned
it, and pronounced a sentence of excommunication and deposition against
the author, unless within ten days after notification of the sentence,
he publicly condemned and retracted it, appointing St. Cyril as his
vicegerent in this affair, to see that the sentence was put in
execution.[6] Our saint, together with his third and last summons, sent
Nestorius twelve propositions with anathemas, hence called
anathematisms, to be signed by him as a proof of his orthodoxy, but the
heresiarch appeared more {278} obstinate than ever. This occasioned the
calling of the third general council opened at Ephesus, in 431, by two
hundred bishops, with St. Cyril at their head, as pope Celestine's
legate and representative.[7] Nestorius, though in the town, and thrice
cited, refused to appear. His heretical sermons were read, and
depositions received against him, after which his doctrine was
condemned, and the sentence of excommunication and deposition was
pronounced against him and notified to the emperor.

Six days after, John, patriarch of Antioch, arrived at Ephesus with
forty-one oriental bishops; who secretly favoring the person but not the
errors of Nestorius, of which they deemed him innocent, had advanced but
slowly on their journey to the place. Instead of associating with the
council, they assembled by themselves, and presumed to excommunicate St.
Cyril and his adherents. Both sides had recourse to the emperor for
redress, by whose order, soon after, St. Cyril and Nestorius were both
arrested and confined, but our saint the worst treated of the two. Nay,
through his antagonist's greater interest at court, he was upon the
point of being banished, when three legates from pope
Celestine--Arcadius and Projectus, bishops, and Philip, a
priest--arrived at Ephesus, which gave a new turn to affairs in our
saint's favor. The three new legates having considered what had been
done under St. Cyril, the condemnation of Nestorius was confirmed, the
saint's conduct approved, and the sentence pronounced against him
declared null and invalid. Thus, matters being cleared up, he was
enlarged with honor. The Orientals, indeed, continued their schism till
433, when they made their peace with St. Cyril, condemned Nestorius, and
gave a clear and orthodox exposition of their faith. That heresiarch,
being banished from his see, retired to his monastery in Antioch. John,
though formerly his friend, yet finding him very perverse and obstinate
in his heresy, and attempting to pervert others, entreated the emperor
Theodosius to remove him. He was therefore banished to Oasis, in the
deserts of Upper Egypt, on the borders of Libya, in 431, and died
miserably and impenitent in his exile. His sect remains to this day very
numerous in the East.[8] St. Cyril triumphed over this heresiarch by his
meekness, intrepidity, and courage; thanking God for his sufferings, and
professing himself ready to spill his blood with joy for the gospel.[9]
He arrived at Alexandria on the 30th of October, 431, and spent the
remainder of his days in maintaining the faith of the church in its
purity, in promoting peace and union among the faithful, and the zealous
labors of his pastoral charge, till his glorious death in 444, on the
28th of June, that is, the 3d of the Egyptian month Epiphi, as the
Alexandrians, the Copts, and the Ethiopians unanimously affirm, who, by
abridging his name, call him Kerlos, and give him the title of Doctor of
the world. The Greeks keep the 18th of January in his honor; and have a
second commemoration of him again on the 9th of June.[10] The Roman
Martyrology mentions him on this day. Pope Celestine styles him, "The
generous defender of the church and faith, the Catholic doctor, and an
apostolical man."[11]

The extraordinary devotion of this holy doctor towards the holy
sacrament appears from the zeal with which he frequently inculcates the
glorious effects which it produces in the soul of him who worthily
receives it, especially in healing all his spiritual disorders,
strengthening him against temptations,{279} subduing the passions,
giving life, and making us one with Christ by the most sacred union, not
only in spirit, but also with his humanity. Hence this father says that
by the holy communion we are made concorporeal with Christ.[12] The
eminent dignity and privileges of the ever glorious Virgin Mary were
likewise a favorite subject on which he often dwells. In his tenth
homily,[13] after having often repeated her title of Mother of God, he
thus salutes her: "Hail, O Mary, mother of God, rich treasure of the
world,[14] inextinguishable lamp, crown of virginity, sceptre of the
true doctrine, temple which cannot fall, the residence of him whom no
place can contain, Mother and Virgin, by whom He is who cometh Blessed
in the name of the Lord. Hail, Mary, who in your virgin womb contained
Him who is immense and incomprehensible: You through whom the whole
blessed Trinity is glorified and adored, through whom the precious cross
is honored and venerated over the whole world, through whom heaven
exults, the angels and archangels rejoice, the devils are banished, the
tempter is disarmed, the creature that was fallen is restored to heaven,
and comes to the knowledge of the truth, through whom holy baptism is
instituted, through whom is given the oil of exultation, through whom
churches are founded over the whole earth, through whom nations are
brought to penance. And what need of more words? Through whom the only
begotten Son of God has shone the light to those who sat in darkness and
in the shade of death, &c.--What man can celebrate the most praiseworthy
Mary according to her dignity?"

Footnotes:
1. Ep. 56, and 35 apud Lupum.
2. Synesius, ep. 153.
3. Vie d'Hypacie par l'abbe Goujet. Memoires de Litterature, t. 5.
4. It is very unjust in some moderns to charge him as conscious of so
horrible a crime, which shocks human nature. Great persons are never
to be condemned without proofs which amount to conviction. The
silence of Orestes, and the historian Socrates, both his declared
enemies, suffices to acquit him.
5. We have nothing further of the life of this father, until the year
428, when his zeal was first exerted in defence of the faith against
Nestorianism: we shall introduce this period of his labors with some
account of the author of this heresy.
6. Conc. t. 3, p. 343. Liberat. in Breviar. c. 4.
7. St. Leo, Ep. 72, c. 3. Conc. t. 3, p. 656, 980.
8. They have a liturgy under the name of Nestorius, and two others
which they pretend to be still more ancient. See Renaudot, liturg.
orient. t. 2, and Le Brun, liturg. t. 3. The former contains a clear
profession of transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the mass.
9. Ep. ad Theopomp, t. 3. Conc. p. 771.
10. Smith on the present state of the Greek church, p. 13. Thomassin Tr.
des Fetes, l. 1, ch. 7.
11. Conc. t. 3, p. 1077.
12. {Footnote not found in text.} L. 4, contra Nestor, t. 6, parte 1, p.
110. l. 7, de adoratione in spiritu et verit. t. 1, p. 231, c. 10,
in Joan. t. 1, c. 13.
13. T. 5, parte 2, p. 380. Item Conc. t. 3, p. 583.
14. [Greek: Keimelion tes oikomenes]. The rich furniture of the world.

APPENDIX

ON

THE WRITINGS OF ST. CYRIL

OF ALEXANDRIA.

The old Latin translations of the works of this father were extremely
faulty, before the edition of Paris, by John Aubert, in 1638, in six
tomes, folio, bound in seven, which yet might be improved. Baluze and
Lupus have published some letters of this holy doctor, which had escaped
Aubert and Labbe. If elegance, choice of thoughts, and beauty of style
be wanting in his writings, these defects are compensated by the
justness and precision with which he expresses the great truths of
religion, especially in clearing the terms concerning the mystery of the
Incarnation. Hence his controversial works are the most valuable part of
his writings. His books against Nestorius, those against Julian, and
that called The Treasure, are the most finished and important.

His treatise On Adoration in Spirit and Truth, with which he begins his
commentary on the Bible, contains, in seventeen books, an exposition of
several passages of the Pentateuch, or five books of Moses, (though not
in order,) in moral and allegorical interpretations.