Читать книгу The Lives of the Saints, Volume III (of 16): March - Baring-Gould Sabine, Baring-Gould Sabine - Страница 5

S. Theophilus, B. of Cæsarea, in Palestine, circ. A.D. 200.

S. Adrian, M. at Cæsarea, in Palestine, A.D. 308 (see S. Eubulus,March 7th).

S. Phocas, M. at Antioch, in Syria, circ. A.D. 320.

S. Gerasimus, Ab. in Palestine, A.D. 475.

S. Kieran or Piran, of Saigir, B. of Ossory, circ. A.D. 552.

S. Virgilius, Abp. of Arles, 7th cent.

S Drausinus, B. of Soissons, after A.D. 675.

S. Peter de Castelnau, Mk. M. at S. Gilles, in the Narbonnaise,

A.D. 1209.

S. John-Joseph of the Cross, C. at Naples, A.D. 1734.

S. PHOCAS, M

(ABOUT A.D. 320.)

[All the Latin Martyrologies, from the mention in which all that is known of him is derived.]

At Antioch, after many sufferings endured for the name of Christ, Phocas triumphed over the Old Serpent, a victory which is testified, to this day, by a miracle. For whoever is bitten by a serpent, having touched, full of faith, the door of the basilica of the martyr, is immediately cured, the poison at once losing its power; so says the Roman Martyrology.

S. GERASIMUS, AB. IN PALESTINE

(A.D. 475.)

[Roman Martyrology. By the Greeks on March 4th and 20th. Authorities: – Mention in the lives of S. Euthymius and S. Quiriacus, by Cyril the Monk, fl. 548]

S. Gerasimus embraced the monastic life in Lycia; he afterwards passed into Palestine, at a time when Eutychianism prevailed, and he had the misfortune to embrace the errors of that heresy; but S. Euthymius (Jan. 20th) visited him, and restored him to the unity of the faith. He expiated his error by the most rigorous fasting. He became very intimate with S. Euthymius, S. John the Silentiary, S. Sabas, and S. Theoctistus.

A great number of disciples placed themselves under his conduct, and he built a laura near Jordan, consisting of seventy cells, amidst which was a monastery for the lodging of those who were to live in community, and disciplined those who afterwards occupied the hermitages of the laura. The anchorites assembled in the church on the Sabbath and the Sunday to participate in the sacred mysteries, and on these two days they ate common food that had been cooked, and drank a little wine; on other days they ate only bread and dates, and drank water. Fires were never lighted in the cells, and the hermits slept on rush mats.

S. Gerasimus carried his abstinence further than his brethren. Throughout Lent he took no other nourishment than the Divine Eucharist.

One day as the old abbot was walking on the banks of the Jordan, he saw a lion limping, and roaring with pain. The lion, instead of attempting to escape, held up its paw, which was much swollen, and Gerasimus taking it on his lap, examined it, and saw that a sharp splinter had entered the flesh. He withdrew the piece of reed, and bathed the paw. The lion afterwards gratefully followed him to his cell, and never after left him, but was fed by the abbot. There was an ass belonging to the monastery which brought water from the Jordan, for the necessities of the brethren; and Gerasimus sent the ass out to pasture under the guardianship of the lion. One day the lion had gone away from his charge, and an Arabian camel driver passing by, stole the ass. In the evening the lion returned depressed in spirits to the monastery, without the ass. Gerasimus naturally concluded that the lion had eaten the animal, and he cried out, "Sirrah, where is the ass?" The lion stood still, and looked back over his shoulder. "You have eaten him!" said the abbot; "Let us praise God. Well, what the ass did, you shall do now." And thenceforth the lion carried the water for the brethren.

Now one day a certain soldier came to the monastery, and seeing the lion toiling under the water bottles, he pitied the lordly beast, and gave some money to the abbot to buy an ass on the next opportunity, and release the lion from its office of water-carrier. Some days after this, as the lion was near Jordan, there came by the driver who had stolen the ass, with three camels, and the stolen beast itself. The lion set up its mane and roared, and made towards the man, whereupon the driver took to his heels. Then the lion caught the end of the ass's halter, and drew it along with the camels to the door of the monastery. And thus the abbot learned that he was wrong in accusing his dumb friend of having devoured his charge.

For five years the lion was the constant companion of the old abbot, going in and out among the monks; and at the expiration of that time Gerasimus died. Now the lion was out when he departed to his rest; but when the lion returned home, he went about searching for the old man. Then the abbot Sabbatius, a disciple of the dead saint, seeing the uneasiness of the lion, said to him "Jordan, (for by that name the lion was called), our old friend has gone away and left us orphans, and has migrated to the Lord; but here is food, take and eat." But the lion would not and paced to and fro seeking the dead man, and every now and then throwing up his head, and roaring. Then Sabbatius and some of the other brethren came and rubbed his neck, and said, "The old man is departed to the Lord, and has left us." But this did not appease the lion; and the more they caressed him, and spake to him, the more agitated he became, and the louder he roared, "showing with mouth and eyes how great was his distress, because he saw not the old man."

Then the abbot Sabbatius said to him, "Come along with me, as you will not believe me, and I will show you where our old friend is laid." And he led the lion to the place where Gerasimus was buried; and the abbot Sabbatius, standing at the tomb, said, "See here is where he is buried." And then he knelt and wept upon the grave. So when the lion saw this, he went, and stretched himself on the grave, with his head on the sand, and moaned, and remained there, and would not leave the place, but was found there dead, a few days after.

It is almost needless to say that this beautiful incident has given to the abbot Gerasimus his symbol of a lion, in art.

S. KIERAN OR PIRAN, AB. OF SAIGIR

(ABOUT A.D. 552.)

[Irish Hagiologies, and an addition of Usuardus published in 1490. A saint of this name was venerated on this day in the Dumblane Breviary, but it is uncertain if it was the same. The Life of S. Kieran, published by Colgan, and that given by the Bollandists, are of later date, and like so many of the Acts of Celtic Saints, abound in fables.]

According to the Irish legendary lives, Kieran of Saigir was bishop in Ireland before the arrival of S. Patrick. After honouring him with the title of the "first-born of the saints of Ireland," these lives proceed to inform us that his father was Lugneus, a noble of Ossory, and his mother Liadain, of Corcalaighde, (Carberry), in South Munster. S. Kieran was born in Cape Clear Island. Having spent thirty years in Ireland still unbaptized, he heard of the Christian religion as flourishing at Rome, and went thither for the purpose of being instructed. There he was baptized, and remained twenty years, studying the Scriptures and canons, after which he was ordained bishop, and sent to preach in his own country. On his way to Ireland he met S. Patrick in Italy, who was not as yet a bishop, and who told Kieran that he would follow him to Ireland in thirty years from the date of their meeting. This must have happened in 402, and accordingly Kieran, being then fifty years old, was born in 352. When arrived in Ireland he was miraculously directed, as S. Patrick had told him he would, to the place since called Saigir, (Seir-Kieran, in King's County), where he erected a monastery. Having ordained an innumerable multitude of bishops and priests, he died at the age of 300!

Other accounts state that Kieran's meeting with S. Patrick somewhere out of Ireland occurred several years after the latter had commenced his apostolical labours in this country. Jocelin places it at a time when S. Patrick was returning from Britain, whither he had gone to obtain a supply of additional helpers for his mission, and tells us that Kieran was then one of the six Irish priests who were proceeding to foreign countries for religious improvement, and all of whom afterwards became bishops in their own country. In the Tripartite history of S. Patrick the precise place of meeting is not given; but, what is more to the purpose, it is represented as having occurred at least twelve years after S. Patrick had begun his mission in Ireland, and Kieran is stated to have then received directions from the saint concerning the district in which he should erect his monastery.

It appears, however, that he was no disciple of S. Patrick at all, and did not live in his times. His name does not occur in Tirechan's list, nor in any of the Lives of S. Patrick, except in those two just quoted, and his appearance in them is evidently due to the legends in circulation concerning the meeting. Had S. Kieran been a disciple of the apostle, how could he have become a scholar of S. Finnian of Clonard, in the 6th century? For such he is stated to have been, not only in the Life of S. Finnian, and in that of his illustrious namesake of Clonmacnois, but also in the tract which is called his first life, and which enters into more particulars than the other. S. Finnian's school could not have become celebrated before 534. In both Kieran's lives his namesake of Clonmacnois, who died in 549, and the two Brendans, one of whom died in 577, and the other a few years earlier, are spoken of as having had transactions with him.

We may then safely conclude that he belonged to the sixth century, became distinguished towards the middle of it, and died during its latter half. As this was known to be the case, his blundering biographers strove to reconcile their nonsense concerning the antiquity and privileges of Saigir, with the true date of his death, by making him die at the age of about 300 years, although, had they calculated better, about 220 years might have sufficed.

Kieran, we may safely conclude, was made a bishop about the year 538. Having retired to a lonesome spot, since called Saigir, he led at first the life of a hermit, and after some time erected a monastery, around which a city gradually grew up. Next he established a nunnery in the neighbourhood for his mother Liadania, and some pious virgins, her companions, whence the church Killiadhuin got its name. Besides the care of his monastery, Kieran was assiduously employed in preaching the Gospel in Ossory, and he converted a great number of heathen. He is usually considered to have been the first bishop of Ossory, and founder of that see. It is singular that, notwithstanding all that is said in the lives, in praise of Kieran, he is not much spoken of in the accounts of contemporary saints, and that none of the Irish annals or hagiologies give the date of his death. Hence Colgan was inclined to think that he died in Cornwall, and is to be identified with S. Piran, of Peranzabulo. But the first life hints that he died at Saigir. Although the year of his death is unknown, there can be little doubt of his having been alive after the year 550.

If S. Piran of Peranzabulo be the same as S. Kieran of Saigir, his bones have been discovered of late years, when the ancient oratory of Peranzabulo, near Padstowe, in Cornwall, was dug out of the sand. In favour of this identification, Colgan points out that S. Piran was commemorated at Padstow on the 5th March, the same day as S. Kieran in Ireland; and John of Tynemouth asserts that S. Kieran did retire from Ireland into Cornwall where he spent the latter part of his life, and died. The Cornish, moreover, change the K. of Irish names into P.

Some of the legends related of S. Kieran deserve to be recorded. He is said when a little boy to have been bitterly distressed at seeing a hawk carry off a little bird in its talons. Then he cried to God, and the hawk dropped its prey.

One day a king or chief in the neighbourhood carried off one of the nuns of the convent governed by his mother. Kieran pursued him full of wrath, and coming to the castle, bade the chief restore the poor maiden to her cell. "Not unless the cuckoo should rouse me to-morrow morning," answered the chief. Now it was mid-winter. But that night no snow fell round the house where lodged the abbot, and at early dawn a bird perched on the roof under the window of the chief, and began to call "Cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo!" Then the ravisher, in alarm, started from his bed, and restored the nun to her convent.

On an autumn day, Kieran noticed a magnificent bank of blackberries, so large and ripe, that he thought it a sad pity the winter should come and destroy them. Therefore he cast a cloak over the bramble. Now it fell out that the next ensuing April, Ethnea Vacha the wife of king Ængus was ill, and felt a craving for blackberries. She was then, with her husband, the guest of Concraidh, king of Ossory. Concraidh told S. Kieran of the strange wish of the lady, and instantly the saint remembered the hedge of blackberries covered by his cloak, and he went and plucked as many as he could carry, and brought them to the sick queen, and she ate them and revived.

One day S. Kieran of Clonmacnois and the two Brendans visited the monastery. The steward came to the abbot in dismay, and said, "There is nothing to offer these distinguished guests except some scraps of bacon, and water."

"Then serve up the bacon and the water," said the saint. And when they were brought on the table, the bacon tasted to every man better than anything he had ever tasted before, and as for the water, the benediction of the man of God had converted it into wine. But there was at the table a lay-brother, and when he had some bacon put before him, he thrust his platter away angrily, for he was tired of bacon, and had expected something better, when distinguished visitors were present. "Hah!" said the abbot, – 'not by way of condemnation, but of prophecy,' – "The time will come when you, son of Comgall, shall eat ass's flesh in Lent, and soon after you will lose your head."

It is also related that there was a boy came to Saigir called Crichidh of Clonmacnois, and remained for a while under the abbot Kieran. Now it was the custom and rule of S. Kieran, that the blessed Paschal fire should burn all the year. But out of mischief, as we moderns should say, "instigante diabolo," as the mediæval chronicler expresses it, the boy put the fire out. Then S. Kieran said to the brethren, "Look! our fire is extinguished by that confounded boy (a maledicto puero), Crichidh, purposely, for he is always up to mischief (sicut solet semper nocere). And now we shall be without fire till next Easter, unless the Lord sends us some. As for that boy, he will come to a bad end shortly." And so it was, for on the morrow a wolf killed the boy.

Now S. Kieran of Clonmacnois, to whom the boy belonged, hearing of this, came to Saigir, and was courteously received by S. Kieran the Elder. But there was no fire, and the snow fell in large flakes; and it was bitterly cold, so that S. Kieran of Clonmacnois and his companions sat blue with frost, and their teeth chattering. Then S. Kieran of Saigir raised his hands to heaven, and prayed, and there fell a globe of fire into his hands, and he spread the lap of his chasuble (casula), and went with the fireball in it before his guests, and they warmed themselves thereat. And after that, dinner was served. Then said S. Kieran of Clonmacnois, "I will not eat till my boy is restored to me." "Brother," answered S. Kieran of Saigir, "I knew wherefore thou didst come; the boy is now on his way hither." And presently the door opened, and the boy that the wolf had eaten, walked in alive and well.

King Ængus of Munster had seven bards "who were wont to sing before him, harping, the deeds of heroes," but these seven men were murdered and drowned in a bog, and their harps were hung upon a tree by the side of the morass. S. Kieran, at the king's request, restored the seven harpers to life, after their having been steeped in bog-water for a whole month.

Now when he was dying, Kieran besought the Lord to bless all such as should keep his festival. "And," says his historian, "on March 5th, God introduced him into the lot of his inheritance in the vineyard, and planted him in the mountain of his possession, even in the celestial Jerusalem, which is the mother of us all. Wherefore, then, my brothers, let us hold a most solemn feast to the most holy Kieran, and let the voice of praise resound in the tabernacles of the righteous; for the right hand of the Lord made virtue to spring up in this man, which may Jesus Christ for the merits of his servant Kieran cause to grow in us present likewise, that we may be meet, He being our leader, to enter into the courts of our eternal inheritance. Amen."

S. VIRGILIUS, ABP. OF ARLES

(ABOUT A.D. 618.)

[Benedictine and Galican Martyrologies; but at Arles on October 10th, and Greven in his additions to Usuardus. Authority: – A life by an anonymous writer, long posterior, and very credulous. It contains much idle fable.]

S. Virgilius, a native of Aquitania, retired in childhood to the monastery of Lerins, where he distinguished himself by his virtues, and was in time elected abbot. One night, says the historian of his life, who deals somewhat largely in popular legend, as he was walking round the island, as a good pastor keeping guard over his sheep-fold, he saw a strange ship drawn up against the shore, and by the star light he saw the sailors moving on the deck. Then two descended from the vessel, and coming towards him, said, "Reverend father, we know who thou art, and greatly esteem thy incomparable virtue, the fame of which is spread abroad through the round world, and many there are of the faithful in far-off lands who desire to see thy sanctity, and hear the words of wisdom that distil from thy lips. And now we are bound for Jerusalem, come therefore with us and make this journey to the holy sites, and thy name will be praised by all men." But Virgilius mistrusted this address, and he answered, "Ye cannot thus deceive an old soldier of Christ!" and he made the sign of the cross. Then the ship and the crew vanished, and he saw only the stars winking in the waves.

From Lerins he was called, in 588, to take charge of the diocese of Aries, by the unanimous voice of the people.

He is said to have been the consecrator of S. Augustine of Canterbury to his mission in England, by order of S. Gregory the Great, from whom he received the pall. He built several churches in Aries; amongst others, the cathedral, which he dedicated to S. Stephen, and the church of the Saviour and S. Honoratus. Whilst erecting this latter church, the legend says that the people toiled ineffectually to move the pillars to their destined place. At last they sent word to S. Virgil that the truck was fast, and the pillars could neither be taken on nor carried back. Then Virgil hurried to the spot, and saw a little devil, like a negro boy, sitting under the truck, arresting the progress of the wheels. Virgil drove him away, and then the columns were easily moved. By his prayers he is also reported to have killed a monstrous serpent which infested the neighbourhood. He was buried in the church of SS. Saviour and Honoratus, which he had built.

S. DRAUSINUS, B. OF SOISSONS

(A.D. 675.)

[Venerated at Soissons. Mentioned in some of the additions to Usuardus, and later Martyrologies. Authority: – A Life by a native of Soissons shortly after his translation, four years after the death of the saint.]

Drausinus or Drausius was a native of Soissons, and was the son of pious parents of noble rank. He was educated by S. Anseric, bishop of Soissons, on whose death he was called to fill his place. His virtues and charity caused him to be venerated as a saint immediately after his death. S. Thomas-à-Becket had recourse to his intercession when he was in France, before returning to England.

His relics were dispersed at the French Revolution, but his tomb, a very interesting specimen of Gallo-Roman art, is preserved in the Louvre. The Society of Antiquaries at Soissons has made many attempts to recover it for the cathedral at Soissons, but hitherto in vain.

B. PETER OF CASTELNAU, MK. M

(A.D. 1209.)

[Benedictine Martyrology, and Saussaye in his Gallican Martyrology. Authorities: – William of Puis-Laurent, and other contemporary historians of the Albigensian war, and the letters of Innocent III.]

The name of the Albigenses probably arose from the condemnation of these heretics at the council of Albi, under the presidence of Gerard, bishop of that diocese, in the year 1176.

Under the name was included that vast body of heretics which agreed on certain fundamental dogmas, but differed on minor particulars, as they borrowed more or less from Christianity. They inhabited the Duchy of Narbonne, the Marquisate of Toulouse, and the southern portion of the Duchy of Aquitaine, mixed with Catholics in some parts, in other parts comprising the entire population.

Before their condemnation by the Council, they had been known as Cathari, Patareni or Populicians, a corruption of Paulicians; and were a branch of that great Manichæan inroad which entered Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Bohemia, where the name Cathari was corrupted into Ketzer, and which spread from Northern Italy into the southern provinces of France, where Manichæism completely displaced Christianity over a wide area, and gained a head and strength it was unable to acquire elsewhere.

The fundamental principle of the new Manichæans, from which, as from a centre, the different sects radiated, was a Dualism of Good and Evil Principles equally matched, the Evil Principle, the origin of the visible creation; the Good Principle, the author of that which is invisible. This opposition of matter and spirit constituted the basis of their moral systems. These systems were diverse; some, regarding everything natural and carnal as pertaining to the Evil Principle, abstained from meat, cheese, and eggs, from marriage, and from whatever employment attached them to the earth; whilst others, regarding the soul as so distinct from the body as to be incapable of being soiled or affected by the actions of the fleshy envelope, gave themselves up to the grossest licentiousness. Into the theology of these new Manichæans, contact with Christianity had introduced the person of Christ, but in their scheme He occupied no necessary place. He was held to be subject to God, and to have had but a phantom body; He neither suffered, died, nor rose again, except in appearance. But in opposition to this Docetism, John de Lugio taught that Christ had a real body; and some of the Cathari – the late Albigenses – held that the true body was born of Mary and Joseph, and proceeded from the Evil Principle, and that this body died on the Cross, but that the spiritual and good Christ was by no means to be confused with the historical Christ of the Gospels.9

With the doctrines specially professed by the Albigenses it is possible for any one, who chooses, to become thoroughly acquainted, as there is abundant material from which the requisite information can be drawn. Such are the decrees of councils condemning categorically their errors; the bulls of popes and imperial ordinances denouncing them; the letters of Innocent III.; the statutes of Raymond, Count of Toulouse; the controversial treatises written against the heretics, taking each of their doctrines in order, to refute them; and lastly, the valuable transactions of the Inquisition at Toulouse, published by Limborch, containing a great number of cases, the interrogations, and confessions, and sentences; the archives of the Inquisition at Carcassonne, portions of which are published in Vaissette, and the Inquisitorial formulary of questions put to Albigenses as to their faith, in Ricchinus.

The doctrines peculiar to the Albigenses were these: – There were two Creators, the good God, who was the author of the New Testament, and who made the world of good spirits; and the bad God, who was the author of the Old Testament, and Creator of the visible world, and of the evil spirits.10 This latter God they called a liar, because he told the first man: "The day thou eatest of the tree thou shalt surely die," and man did not die the same day that he broke the commandment; they also called him a murderer because he slew Pharaoh and his host, and the inhabitants of the Plain. This bad God was either a fallen angel,11 or the Son of the chief God and Creator, who had two sons, Christ and Satan.12 Others held that the good God had two wives, Colla and Coliba, by whom he begat many sons and daughters.13 Others, that the men made by the good God were good, but that through union with women, whom they derived from the Evil Principle, they fell.14 The creation of men was veiled in the following myth by some of the Albigenses. The devil made men out of clay, and bade God send into them souls. God answered, that men thus constructed would be too strong, "They would dethrone me." Whereupon Satan made man of the foam of the sea; and God said, "That is good, he is a mixture of strength and fragility." And he sent a soul into the man thus made.15 Generally the Albigenses held that there were two Christs; one bad, who was born in Bethlehem of Mary, and who was crucified; and another good, who had a phantom body and was purely spiritual, and who appeared on earth in the body of the Apostle Paul. The good Christ neither ate nor drank, but the bad Christ, the Son of Mary, lived as do other men, and had for concubine, Mary Magdalene.16

The Trinity was naturally rejected by the Albigenses, as incompatible with their Dualism. They also rejected the Old Testament as the work of the Evil Principle; and regarded Moses, the Prophet, and even John the Baptist, as possessed with evil demons.17

With regard to the future, some of the Albigenses taught that the souls of men were the fallen angels condemned to spend seven lives in human bodies. Others denied the existence of the soul altogether.18 With such disbelief in the immortality of the soul, or such notion of its being an angel in a state of purgation, the resurrection of the body, Purgatory and Hell were rejected; and with them, prayer for the dead and invocation of saints – for how pray for a soul which is annihilated, or how invoke an apostate angel?19

The idea of a visible Church, and the necessity of sacraments, could not be entertained with such a creed; and the Albigenses repudiated baptism, communion, and other rites. Marriage they denounced as fornication, and they condemned intercourse between man and woman as sin in the higher ranks of the elect.20 Others, however, said that fornication was no sin.21 But this refers to the lower order of the faithful.

The faithful were divided into two orders: the higher, or "perfect," who wore a black dress, abstained from marriage, the eating of flesh, eggs, and cheese; and the "believers," who gave free scope to their lusts, and whose salvation was due to a certain ceremony being performed over them by one of the "perfect," which was called the "consolation." If one of the perfect ate the least morsel of meat or cheese or egg, he sinned mortally, and all who had been consoled by him fell at the same time out of a state of grace, and it was necessary for them to be re-consoled; and even those who were saved fell out of heaven for the sins of him who had consoled them. The sacrament of consolation was performed by one of the "perfect" laying his hands upon one of the "believers," who repeated a Pater Noster; and such act placed the "believer" in a state of grace from which he could only fall by the fall of his consoler. This ceremony was performed at the point of death.

The ceremony of reception is thus described by Peter of Vaux-Cernaix: —

"When any one went over to the heretics, he who received him said, 'Friend, if you wish to be one of us, it behoves you to renounce the whole faith that is held by the Roman Church.' He must answer, 'I renounce.' 'Then receive the Holy Spirit from the good men,' and then he breathes seven times in his face. Also he says to him, 'You must renounce that cross which the priest made on you in baptism, on your breast, and on your shoulders, and on your head, with oil and chrism.' He must answer, 'I renounce it.' 'Do you believe that water can work your salvation?' He answers, 'I do not believe it.' 'You must renounce that veil which the priest placed on your head when you were baptized.' He must answer, 'I renounce it.' Thus he receives the baptism of the heretics, and denies the baptism of the Church. Then they all place their hands upon him, and kiss him, and clothe him with a black garment, and from that hour he is as one of themselves."

The ceremony of consolation, or heretication, was only performed at the point of death; but if the sick person should show signs of recovery, he or she was required to abstain from food, or to open a vein, so as to prevent convalescence and precipitate death. I may as well give a few instances which came under the notice of the inquisitors of Toulouse, from Limborch: —

"This admission was believed to save the soul of the person admitted, and was called spiritual baptism, the consolation, the reception, and the good end; and it was believed that those sanctified by it were bound from that moment to abstain from touching a person of another sex, and from food, or the soul fell from its state of purification. Thus we read of the trial of a woman whose father had been received amongst the Albigenses, 'that she was forbidden by her father to touch him, because after his reception no woman ought to touch him, and from that time she never did touch him.' (Fol. 49.) And in another woman's trial, 'that it was unlawful for her to touch Peter Sancii, and that she heard that it was reported amongst them that they neither touch a woman, nor suffer themselves to be touched by one.' (Fol. 68.) But inasmuch as it was possible that the person received might return to his former pollutions (says Limborch in his introduction to the Acts of the Inquisition), his reception was delayed to his last sickness, when there was no more hopes of recovery, that so he might not lose the good he had received; for which reason some were not admitted, though one of the Albigenses was present, because it was not believed they would immediately die. Thus it is reported of Peter Sancii (fol. 68) that having called 'to hereticate a certain sick woman, she was not then hereticated, because he did not think it proper, upon account of her not being weak enough.' And afterwards, though the distemper grew more violent, Peter Sancii did not hereticate her, because she recovered. As for those who were received during their illness, they were commanded to make use of the Endura, that is, fasting, and to hasten death by opening a vein and bathing. Thus it is related of a certain woman, that 'she persevered in the abstinence which they call the Endura many days, and hastened her bodily death by losing her blood, frequent bathing, and greedily taking a poisonous draught of the juice of wild cucumbers, mixing it with broken glass, that, by tearing her bowels, she might sooner die.' (Fol. 14-b.) Of another, it is said, 'that she was forbidden by her mother-in-law to give her little daughter, who had been hereticated by Peter Sancii, any milk to drink, by which the child died.' (Fol. 46.) Another confesses, 'that she had not seen her father since his heretication eating or drinking anything but cold water.' (Fol. 49.) But one Hugo, who continued several days in the Endura, did afterwards, by his mother's persuasion, eat and recover. (Fol. 63.) The same year, Peter Sancii invited him 'to enter into the Endura, and so to make a good end; but he would not agree to it till he came to die.' The same Hugo saw 'that Sancii procured and hastened his own death by bleeding, bathing, and cold.' Peter Auterii is said to have received another woman, 'and after her reception to have forbidden any meat being given to the said hereticated sick woman; and that there were two women who attended her, and watched that there should be neither meat nor drink given her the whole night, nor the following day, lest she should lose the good she had received, and contradict the order of Peter Auterii; although the said sick woman begged them to give her some food. But the third day after she did eat and grew well.' (Fol. 65-b.) In the sentence of Peter Raymund and of the Hugos, we read these things concerning the Endura: 'You voluntarily shorten your own corporal life, and inflict death upon yourself; because you put yourself in that abstinence, which the heretics call Endura, in which Endura you have now remained six days without meat or drink, and would not eat, nor will, though often invited to do so.' (Fol. 82-b.) However, all would not subject themselves to so severe a law. For we read of a certain woman 'that she suffered not her sick daughter, though near death, to be received; because then her said daughter must be put in the Endura.' (Fol. 71.) There is also an instance of a woman, who, for fear she should be taken up by the Inquisitors, put herself in the Endura; and sending for a surgeon, ordered him to open one of her veins in a bath, and after the surgeon was gone, she unbound her arm in the bath, that so the blood running out more freely, she might sooner die. After this she bought poison in order to destroy herself. Afterwards she produced a cobbler's awl, which in that barbarous age they called alzena, intending to run it into her side; but the women disputing among themselves, whether the heart was on the right side or the left, she at last drank up the poison, and died the day after. (Fol. 30-b)."22

Now a great deal of abuse has been poured on the Inquisition, and its crimes have been vastly exaggerated. Gieseler speaks of the bloodthirsty Inquisition as a "monster raging with most frightful fury in Southern France," – strong language for so calm an historian. But we ask, was it not necessary that such a system, destructive of life, should be put down? That the fautors of this atrocious self-murdering should be summarily dealt with, when they persuaded mothers to let their children perish on their sick-beds, men to pine themselves to death, and women to swallow broken glass, to tear their bowels, when their health began to amend? We have got the Acts of the Inquisition at Toulouse during sixteen years that it "raged with frightful fury," i. e., between 1307 and 1323. The whole number of cases reported is 932; but it is obvious that the same individual might, and in fact did, often reappear before the Inquisition more than once in the course of sixteen years. Having confessed some connection with heresy, he was sentenced to wear a little cross, or tongue of red cloth, let into the garments, or simply to wear a cross round the neck, or to make a pilgrimage to a certain church, or to use certain prayers; of such sentences 174 are recorded. If the person condemned to do this disobeyed, he was put in prison for a while; there were 218 such cases. If he escaped from prison, or ran away from the country, he was condemned as a fugitive; there were 38 of these. Some of the leaders of the heresy who had caused the death of many persons, and incorrigible heretics who had broken out of prison, were condemned to death; there were 40 fautors of heresy sentenced – twenty-nine Albigenses, seven Waldenses, and four Beghards; thirty-two of these were men, and eight were women. Among the sentences recorded are 113 remissions of penances, 139 discharges from prison, and 90 sentences of heresy pronounced against persons deceased.23

Now when we consider what these Albigensian "perfect" men were, and how dangerous they were to the well-being of society, by their influence over superstitious and ignorant peasants, urging them to self-murder, and thus causing the death of very many persons, we do not think that the Inquisition at Toulouse deserves all the odium that has been cast upon it. Many of those whom it condemned to death would probably have received a sentence of transportation for life in England at the present day; and though the execution of from two to three persons a year is certainly to be deplored, it is not just to denounce the Inquisition as bloodthirsty, when it sentenced to death those who had caused many innocent and ignorant persons to immolate themselves. We do not for a moment pretend to justify the Albigensian war; but we can understand the alarm caused to the Pope and to Christian France by the heathen reaction in Provence, Narbonne, and Toulouse. Nor were the Albigenses free from blame in other particulars. They exhibited their contempt for Christian churches and sacraments in a peculiarly offensive manner, likely to exasperate Catholics to the uttermost. One instance shall suffice, and that is so gross that it must be given in Latin: —

"Erat quidam pessimus hæreticus apud Tolosam, Hugo Faber nomine, qui quondam lapsus est in dementiam, quod juxta altare cujusdam ecclesiæ purgavit ventrem, et in contemptum Dei, cum palla altaris tersit posteriora sua … quæ omnia cum vir venerabilis abbas Cistercii… Comiti retulisset, et eum moneret ut puniret qui tantum faciens perpetrarat, respondit comes quod nullo modo propter hoc puniret in aliquo cives suos."

Peter of Castelnau, of whom we have now to speak, sprang from an illustrious family in the diocese of Montpellier, and was archdeacon of Maguelonne, when he was appointed by the Pope to be one of his legates in the southern provinces infected with heresy. But the desire of a higher perfection led Peter to renounce the honours of the world, and in 1200, to receive the Cistercian habit in the abbey of Fontfroide.

In 1203, he was again obliged to resume his labours as legate, together with Brother Raoul, his colleague, a Cistercian monk like himself. He visited Toulouse, where his efforts to repress heresy met with indifferent success. In 1204, he met the leaders of the Albigenses in conference at Carcassonne.

Hopeless of effecting any good result, Peter of Castelnau implored the Holy Father to relieve him of the burden laid on him, which, he said, was more than he could bear. But the Pope refused to permit him to resign his office, and Peter was obliged to revisit Toulouse in 1205, and exact of the Count of Toulouse an oath that he would suppress by fire and sword the heresy that pervaded his domains. He was ordered on pain of excommunication to become the inquisitor and executioner of his own subjects.

At the same time Peter deposed Raymond, bishop of Toulouse, and thus prepared the way for the election of his friend Foulques, a fierce and bloodthirsty, if zealous soul.24 Then the legate turned to the Rhone, and traversed the provinces of Arles and Vienne. In 1206, he was at Montpellier, deploring with his colleague, Raoul, the sterility of their united efforts. At this time of disappointment, God, who, to use the words of William de Puylaurens, "knows always how to hold in reserve His arrows in the quiver of His Providence," sent them out of Spain two holy and valiant athletes. In July, 1206, the venerable Diego di Azebes, bishop of Osma, accompanied by the sub-prior of his church, tapped at their door with his pilgrim's staff. They opened, and admitted with the bishop that sub-prior, who was S. Dominic.

The legates opened their hearts to the bishop, and told him of their despair. The bishop gently reproved them, and bade them have a good courage, and preach the Word in season and out of season, and be careful to set a holy example. Let them go forth with neither scrip nor purse, like the apostles; and the success which had not attended two legates ambling over the country on their mules, would attend two apostles going barefoot. The advice of the bishop was approved; the legates only asked of him to accompany them with his sub-prior. The bishop consented, and the four set forth one morning out of Montpellier, without shoes on their feet, and no money in their pouch. At once the difficulties melted away, and numerous conversions were made. At Beziers and Carcassonne, they met with great success. The whole town of Caraman, on the Lauraguais, abjured heresy. But their success was not lasting: Peter saw that the only way in which he could hope to extinguish heresy was by a more persuasive weapon than the tongue.

However, he returned into the heat of the battle shortly after, to attend the conference with the heretics, held at Montreal. After this the four apostles separated to preach in different parts. Peter, finding that Raymond, Count of Toulouse, hung back from using the sword to constrain his people to abjure their heresy, excommunicated him, and the Count at once swore, as he had done before, that he would put down the errors of Albigensianism. Peter of Castelnau felt that, to use his own words, "The cause of Jesus Christ will not succeed in these lands, till one of us who preach in His name shall die in defence of the faith; may it please God that I shall be the first to feel the sword of the persecutor."

The Count met the legate at S. Gilles, on the banks of the Rhone, for conference, which led to nothing. On January 15th, 1209, Peter had said Mass, and was preparing to cross the river, when two men ran up, and one of them pierced him through the sides with a lance. Peter fell down, exclaiming, "Lord, pardon him, as I forgive him!" then he said a few words to his fellows, and died, praying fervently. The Count seems to have been guiltless of ordering or approving the murder.

S. JOHN-JOSEPH OF THE CROSS, C

(A.D. 1734.)

[Roman Martyrology. Authority: – His Life by the P. Diodati, published at Naples, in 1794. He was inscribed by Pius VI. among the number of the Beatified on May 15th, 1789; and he was canonized by Gregory XVI. on May 26th, 1839.]

S. John-Joseph of the Cross, who must not be confounded with S. John of the Cross (Nov. 16th), was born in the island of Ischia, on the Feast of the Assumption, in the year 1654, of respectable parents, Joseph Calosirto and Laura Garguito, and was baptized under the name of Charles Cajetan, The family must have been one of singular piety, for five of his brothers entered religion. The subject of our memoir, as a child, exhibited a precocious piety. He chose as his room a small chamber in the most retired portion of the house, where he erected a little altar to Our Lady, on whose great festival he had been born, and towards whom, through life, he manifested a filial devotion. From the earliest age also he manifested a great repugnance from sin. His pure childish soul shivered and shrank from the breath of evil, as a young spring flower from a frozen blast.

The knowledge of evil without bringing guilt to the soul, unless voluntarily received and harboured with delight, leaves on it a mark, so that the soul knowing evil cannot have the freshness of a guiltless and ignorant soul. The little saintly boy, taught of God, seems unconsciously to have felt this, and he manifested none of that curiosity after evil which is one of the tokens of our fallen nature, and which leads the young mind first to the knowledge of evil, and then, it may be, to the perpetration of it.

Feeling a great desire for the religious life, he entered the order of S. Francis, as reformed by S. Peter of Alcantara, in Naples, and assumed the habit at the age of sixteen, taking at the same time the name of John-Joseph of the Cross. This was in 1671. His noviciate lasted three years; and at the age of nineteen, his superior found him sufficiently perfect to be entrusted with the direction of the building of a convent at Piedimonte di Agila, and the organizing of discipline therein.

On arriving at the proper age, he was ordained priest, and soon after retired into a forest, where he built himself a cell, and resided as a hermit. Soon five little hermitages clustered around his cell, and a church was built for the accommodation of the anchorites. But his superiors recalled him to the monastery to undertake the charge of the novices, and somewhat later he was appointed superior of the house at Piedimonte di Agila, which had risen under his care. He suffered about this time from extreme dryness. It was to him as though the face of God were turned away from him, and he felt agonies of fear, thinking that through want of judgment or unbecoming example, he might have retarded the advance, and perhaps lost some, of the souls of the novices who had been entrusted to his care. But one of the brethren who had lately died appeared to him in a vision, and comforted him, assuring him that his novices were all leading an edifying life.

He was afterwards appointed Superior of the convent, an office in which he displayed great judgment, but which withdrew him too much from spiritual meditation and reading to be congenial with his tastes.

At his request he was relieved of the office of Superior, and was again made director of the novices, and fulfilled the duties of this office for four years.

He died on March 5th, 1734, in the convent of S. Lucia, at Naples.