Pastoral Rule, Dialogues & Letters 54 part 3/4

First, I ask of those peevish and sharp critics whether they sincerely believe the miracles narrated both in the Old and in the New Testament, even though they lack all verisimilitude: Eve's conversation with the serpent, Genesis 3; Lot's wife turned into a pillar of salt, Genesis 19; the she-ass on which Balaam sat disputing most wisely with him after the human manner—nay, beyond the grasp and custom of most men—Numbers 22; that waters burst forth from the molar tooth of an ass's jawbone, so that the thirst of Samson alone might be quenched, Judges 15; the stater found in the mouth of a fish freshly caught with a hook, Matthew 17; that Peter walked upon the waters, Matthew 14;

a legion of demons cast out by Christ from a single man and sent into swine, which in a headlong course threw themselves into the sea and perished, Mark 5; and very many like things. Secondly, it may be allowed to interrogate those who thus blow away the miracles related by Gregory, whether they hold undoubted faith in Christ, asserting even with an oath, John 14:12: «Amen, amen I say to you, he that believeth in me, the works that I do, he also shall do, and greater than these shall he do.» Thirdly, let those critics of so fastidious a nose grant us that a time more suitable for producing those signs and miracles was when the barbarians, utterly estranged from true religion and the knowledge of God, were to be called to the faith.

Indeed, as the Apostle testifies (1 Corinthians 14:22), tongues (and say the same of the other miracles) are for a sign not to believers but to unbelievers, whereas prophecy, on the contrary, is not for unbelievers but for believers. To the Jews, therefore, to whom prophecies were granted as to believers, signs were for the most part denied, since these had been reserved and set aside for the Gentiles who were utterly estranged from the faith. VII. Now, this being obtained, there is no cause whatever for astonishment that, as the fifth century was drawing to its close and almost the whole of the sixth was running its course (the periods which Gregory embraces in his Dialogues), so many and such great miracles were wrought by God.

For at that time almost the whole world lay wretchedly either in the darkness of idolatry or in the dense gloom of unspeakable heresies, so much so that scarcely a single prince then reigned, above all in the West, who worshipped the true God with lawful rite. Italy was either occupied by the Ostrogoths, who had embraced the Arian perfidy, or afterward handed over to the Lombards, who likewise followed the errors of the Arians, or, what is worse, were enslaved to idolatry. Gaul obeyed the Franks, worshippers of idols, or but lately and not perfectly recalled from their worship, or else the Visigoths and other barbarians hostile to the Catholic faith. Spain had yielded to those same Visigoths and to the Suevi, likewise Arians.

The island of Britain, subjected to new guests, namely the Angles, groaned that the worship of idols had been restored in its temples. The Vandals, having gained possession of Africa, had declared a most savage war upon the Catholics, in order to establish the Arian dogma. VIII. Was it, then, alien to God's kindness and providence that so many and such great miracles should then be wrought, by which unbelievers might be enticed to the light of truth? And this indeed came to pass. For within not many years the Lombards abjured the Arian impiety; the Goths embraced the Catholic faith in Spain, with King Reccared as their author and exhorter; the Angles gave their name to Christ; and all, in short, were received into the unity of the Christian and orthodox faith. IX.

As regards the Lombards, who at this period held Italy in great part, the Dialogues of Gregory promoted their conversion in no small measure; for, as Paul the Deacon relates, Queen Theodelinda used these very Dialogues, sent to her by Gregory, to persuade the king and thereupon his peoples and subjects to the Catholic faith. And indeed in this history very many miracles are related (History of the Lombards, book IV, chapter 5), performed while the Lombard army itself looked on, which, had they not been established for certain and confirmed by the deepest conviction of all, the Lombards—whom Gregory depicts as more like bears than men on account of their ferocity—would have mocked; and they would have burned with greater hatred than before against the Catholic faith and the Roman Church.

The contrary, however, Paul the Deacon reports to have happened among the same people (book IV, On the Deeds of the Lombards, chapter 4): namely that King Agilulf, with the rest for the most part following his example, embraced the Catholic faith, restored to the Churches the goods that had been taken from them, and paid due honor to the bishops. X. Besides the remnants of idolatry still surviving here and there in Italy and elsewhere, and the heresies openly rampant, there were then even among those who were called Catholics deadly errors that crept in and were secretly disseminated against the immortality of souls and the resurrection of bodies. That he had once been of two minds concerning the resurrection, Gregory himself humbly confesses, homily 26 on the Gospels.

For many, he says, doubt concerning the resurrection, just as we ourselves once did. See also book II on Ezekiel, homily 8 (formerly 20), and book XIV of the Morals, number 70. Gregory of Tours (book X of the History, chapters 13 and 14) testifies that a certain presbyter of his own Church taught that there would be no resurrection, whom he himself refuted; and that Theodulf, a deacon of the city of Paris, who fancied himself somewhat learned, frequently stirred up disputes on this matter. Let us hear Peter the Deacon conversing with Gregory (book III, chapter 58): «Because I consider that many placed within the bosom of holy Church doubt concerning the life of the soul after the death of the flesh.»

Providing for their salvation, Gregory, after asserting these dogmas of the faith by most invincible arguments, heaps together many miracles and prodigies, by which, as the immortality of the soul, so too the resurrection of the flesh might be more effectively proved to the more unlearned. XI. Of these things which Gregory reports as having been done, some are those at which he himself was present, but others he had received from trustworthy witnesses; namely from most holy bishops entirely free of deceit, from monks of the most upright life or heads of monasteries, from men noble and freeborn. He wrote nothing from the idle rumors of the untrained crowd. Why then is he arraigned as though guilty, when it is clearly established that the laws of history were religiously observed by one writing with such great caution? XII.

Yet I would not on that account wish to assert that no falsehood has crept into the accompanying details and circumstances of the things narrated. On the contrary, I cannot deny that in what is read concerning Saint Paulinus, bishop of Nola, some points conflict with historical truth; namely, that he was carried off into Africa by the Vandals as they were laying waste Campania, whereas the Vandals occupied Africa and ravaged Italy only long after the death of Saint Paulinus. From this passage, however, no insoluble difficulties arise. For it can be said that here «Vandals» is taken for «Goths,» because, as Chifflet observes after Procopius in his «Paulinus Illustrated» (On the Vandal War, chapter 2; Chifflet, p. 187), they had sprung from the same nation;

they used the same laws and the same language, which is called Gothic, and were addicted to the same heresy. That Nola was captured by the Goths around the year of Christ 410, all writers agree. At which time Paulinus, bound by the barbarians so that he might indicate where he kept his hidden wealth, prayed thus to God, as Augustine reports (book I, On the City of God, chapter 10): «Lord, let me not be tortured on account of gold and silver; for where all my goods are, Thou knowest.» And it seems probable that the captives, and among them Paulinus, were carried off together with the Gothic army from Italy into the Gauls, and three years later into Spain, and sold to the Vandals, who invaded Spain from the year 409.

You may read dissertation 7 appended to the works and Life of Saint Paulinus, in the new Edition, namely of the year 1685. This difficulty once resolved, everything in the Dialogues is plain, both as to history and as to chronology. XIII. If any miracles are described that seem hardly consonant with reason, similar ones occur in Ambrose, Augustine—especially in the books On the City of God—Jerome, Sulpicius Severus among the Latin Fathers; to say nothing meanwhile of Gregory of Tours, Fortunatus of Poitiers, Nicetius of Trier; and among the Greeks, in Theodoret in the Religious History, and Gregory of Nyssa in the Life of Gregory of Neocaesarea,

that bishop surnamed Thaumaturgus (the Wonder-worker), and Athanasius himself in the Life of Saint Antony, which our scholars rightly and deservedly ascribe to him in the most recent Edition of the works of the holy Doctor. And so, lest faith be denied to the miracles narrated by Gregory on account of their strangeness, we have taken care to buttress the less credible ones by similar examples fetched from elsewhere, as may be seen in book I, chapters 1, 3, 4, etc.; book III, chapter 5 and following. As regards those whom the pious Doctor testifies to have prophesied future things while placed at the point of death, as in book IV, chapter 26, this can be illustrated from Augustine, book III of On Genesis according to the Letter, chapter 17, where similar things are set forth—consult it. Read also the most learned Petit, book I On the Sibyls, in which passage he praises Tertullian, in the book On the Soul, chapter

55, and makes use of the testimony of Cicero, book I On Divination, who asserts that a certain man from the island of Rhodes foretold the death of others. XIV. For the rest, to those to whom miracles are not so pleasing, it is free to pass these over and to select the outstanding examples of virtues here set forth; which without doubt, as the holy Doctor himself admonishes (book II, final chapter), are to be preferred to all miracles. To dwell on a single one: who would not be astonished at the humility, patience, and charity of the presbyter Sanctulus, as they are delineated in book III, chapter 57? Many dogmas of the faith too are expounded and established in these Dialogues; and it was perhaps this, rather than the long series of miracles, that stirred up the hatred of the heterodox against them.

What he thinks concerning the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, see book II, chapters 24 and 37, and book IV throughout. Concerning the viaticum administered to those near death, read book II, chapter 37, and book IV, chapters 15 and 35. Concerning the most holy sacrifice of the new law to be offered for the living and for the dead, consult book IV, chapter 55 and following. Concerning purgatory he treats in the same book, chapters 39, 55, etc. Predestination is most learnedly explained in book I, chapter 8. The immortality of the soul and the eternity of the punishments to be rendered to the reprobate and of the rewards to the just is most forcibly defended in book IV, chapter 4 and following. Concerning the vision of God he discourses theologically in book II, chapter 35. Concerning the beatitude of the just before the resurrection, chapter 25 of book IV must be read.

That we may sample something of mystical theology, nowhere is it more clearly explained what compunction is, how many its species, what its effects, etc., than in book III, chapter 34. But let us now set a limit to the vindication of the Dialogues, that we may briefly dispatch what remains to be observed concerning them. XV. That the author of the Dialogues is Saint Gregory is established from what has been said above; but since in the Dialogues at least two persons converse, it must be inquired who this is that engages with the most holy Doctor. This Gregory himself teaches us in the preface of the Dialogues: «My most beloved son Peter the Deacon was present, who from the earliest flower of his youth has been familiarly bound to me by ties of friendship, and a companion in the searching out of the sacred word.»

This testimony concerning Peter has persuaded many that he was a monk in the monastery of Saint Andrew, and trained under the discipline of Gregory, who was then abbot. John the Deacon, however, in the Life of Saint Gregory (book II, chapter 11), reckons Peter rather among the clerics than the monks living in the community of the holy Father. That this same person was Peter the Subdeacon, to whom Gregory often and indeed most familiarly writes, nothing forbids one to conjecture. This man in the first year of Gregory's pontificate governed the ecclesiastical patrimony in Sicily, and in the second in Campania. Having discharged these provinces, he could have been promoted to the diaconate, and thereafter have attached himself to the side of the supreme pontiff. Read letters 1 and 2 of book I, and book II, letter 32 (formerly book XII, 30).

You may read his historical eulogy in volume I of the Acts of the Saints of the Order of Saint Benedict, page 497. XVI. This manner of writing, by inventing mutual dialogues, the holy Fathers employed not only for treating polemical matters—as Jerome both against the Luciferians and against the Pelagians, and Theodoret in the three former books of the treatise called Eranistes—but also for recounting the deeds of the saints. For thus Palladius wrote the life of John surnamed Chrysostom, and Sulpicius Severus in three Dialogues traced out the virtues of the Eastern monks and of Saint Martin. XVII. The occasion and reason for writing the Dialogues Gregory himself discloses in the letter to Maximian of Syracuse.

«My brethren,» he says, «who live familiarly with me, urge me by every means to write down briefly some of the miracles of the Fathers which we have heard were done in Italy. For this matter I greatly need the solace of your charity, that you would briefly indicate to me those things which come back into your mind, and which you have happened to learn» (book III, alias book II, indiction 11, letter formerly 50, now 51), etc. That Gregory intended to speak only of the saints who flourished in Italy is evident from book III, chapter 11, where he speaks thus concerning Saint Isaac: «This venerable Isaac, then, was not born of Italy, but I relate those miracles of his which he wrought while dwelling in Italy.» Here he asks to be excused for treating of Isaac, who was not born in Italy.

By the miracles of the Fathers can be understood both the stupendous works of virtue and the signs and prodigies, which, as Saint Gregory teaches—and not without reason (book II, final chapter)—must be ranked below good works. Hence he observed the former no less accurately than the latter. XVIII. The time at which the Dialogues were written seems able to be ascertained from book III, chapter 19, where we read: «Nearly five years before this, when in this city of Rome the Tiber went out of its channel,» etc. This overflow of the Tiber was shortly followed by a plague, which carried off Pope Pelagius. Upon his death Gregory was substituted in his place in the month of September, in the year 590. Reckoning, therefore, five years from that flood, which Gregory of Tours relates to have occurred in the ninth month, that is, in November of the year 589,

we arrive, in reckoning five years (book X of the History, chapter 1), at the year 594 as the time at which the Dialogues were written. But in book IV of the Dialogues, chapter 26, our Gregory counts only three years elapsed from the extreme plague which had devastated Rome: «In that mortality also,» he says, «which three years ago laid waste this city with a most vehement calamity,» etc. These things which seem to conflict with one another we can reconcile by saying that in the former passage it is not Gregory who speaks, but John the Tribune, whose words he reports. Next, that John does not assign a full five years, but nearly five years.

Moreover, that he himself reckons the years from the inundation, but Gregory from the pestilence, which indeed began a little after the inundation, but subsided long afterward, and beyond a full year, as is clearly established from homily 1 on the Gospels: «We suffer pestilences without ceasing,» says Gregory, now made supreme pontiff; for this homily, which is read as having been delivered on the second Sunday of Advent, he could not have pronounced earlier than a full year after the overflow. Finally, John perhaps speaks of years merely begun, Gregory of years completed. We assent, therefore, to those who would have Gregory to have composed the Dialogues in the year 593 or 594. XIX.

That he might apply himself to this work more tranquilly, this man most devoted to the solitary life did indeed seek retirement, as is read in the very preface of the Dialogues; nor yet did he depart from Rome, since in book IV, chapter 26, already cited, designating Rome he says: «In that mortality also which three years ago laid waste this city.» Thus he often speaks, especially in book III, chapters 19 and 35, and book IV, chapter 52, which manifestly proves that he was then at Rome. Nor indeed would it have befitted a most vigilant pastor to desert his flock for long, with so many perils imminent, so many wolves standing round about. Now from an ancient inscription which our Mabillon made public in volume IV of the Analecta, page

497, we are given to understand that Gregory withdrew into the monastery of Saint Andrew to compose the Dialogues. XX. As soon as the Dialogues were brought to light, they were received throughout the Christian world with the greatest congratulation, above all in Italy, and were held in the highest esteem even by the Lombards themselves, especially through the favor of Queen Theodelinda, as we have already said. Certainly how highly our forebears prized them is proved by the well-nigh innumerable Codices penned by hand, in which they are contained either whole or reduced to an epitome. In abridging them Saint Odo, abbot of Cluny, took pains beyond the rest. A compendium of this kind, six hundred years old, we found in the Codex of Ouche, whether it be Odo's or another's escapes us (see volume XVII of the Library of the Fathers of Lyons).

XXI. The excellent opinion conceived of them is also confirmed by the fact that they are read as translated into so many languages. For besides the Greek version, of which we shall shortly treat, there exists an Arabic one preserved in the Colbert library, which was made in the year 779 from the Greek, not from the Latin text itself. Concerning it consult the preface of the new French translation, page 106 and following. In the same place read what is recorded concerning the Saxon version made by order of King Alfred toward the close of the ninth century, or even elaborated by himself, as William Cave asserts in his Literary History; concerning the French version preserved in the library of John, Duke of Berry, who was the third son of King John, and once procured at a great price; and concerning very many others.

In surveying the library of the monastery of Lyre in the diocese of Évreux, we came upon a Codex containing these same Dialogues rendered into French and in verse. There exist also copies described in plain Latin prose in the library of Jumièges. Of all these we exhibit only one version, namely the Greek, in the editing of which we shall state what has been accomplished by us, after certain matters have been prefaced concerning this new Edition of the Latin text itself; for concerning the others which preceded, it will suffice to read the Vindication of the Dialogues by Peter Gussanville, printed above, where he reviews very many, of which he had a supply. Below also, after the manuscript Codices which we have consulted have been reviewed, it will be appended. XXII.

First: we have retained the arguments, that is, the titles of the chapters, because they are read in nearly all the manuscripts, and are rightly believed to have proceeded from Gregory himself. Second: we have attached brief notes beneath the columns, in which we either insert variant readings, or render account of the restorations made by us, or illustrate what Saint Gregory narrates, or meet some difficulties and remove scruples. Of these notes we have borrowed a few from Gussanville and Mabillon, caring little whether we gave our own or another's, provided they were better than our own. But we thought it right to inscribe at the foot the name of those from whom we borrowed them. XXIII.

Fifth: nothing was of higher account to us than to restore the whole work to its pristine soundness and integrity, by the help of manuscript Codices, whose index receive here: — 1. The Codex of Saint-Germain-des-Prés, marked at least 800 years old, numbered on the back 162, which for brevity's sake we call «German.»; — 2. Two other Codices of inferior age preserved in the library of the same monastery, which we shall name «Sangerm.»; — 3. Three Codices of Saint Peter of Chartres, one written in the ninth century, another in the eleventh, and the third in the thirteenth; — 4. Two of Saint Theoderic near Reims, marked 58 and 50, which not rarely disagree with one another; — 5. That of the monastery of Saint Cornelius of Compiègne, marked 30 on the back; — 6. The Codex of the monastery of Longpont, of the Cistercian order;

— 7. A copy of excellent quality of the monastery of Clairvaux, of the same order; — 8. Two of the monastery of Saint Peter of Jumièges, the older of which approaches an age of eight hundred years; — 9. The Codex of the monastery of Préaux, of nearly the same age and antiquity; — 10. Two of the monastery of Saint Ouen in the city of Rouen, no less than six hundred years old; — 11. As many of Bec, at one time useless; — 12. The Codex of the Bigot library at Rouen, at the least [several hundred] years old; — 13. The Codex of the monastery of Lyre. — 14. The series of so many Gallican manuscripts will be closed by the notable Codex of the Royal library, transcribed about the ninth century, but copied from a far more ancient one, as may be conjectured from the title, where Gregory is by no means called «saint»; for it is read thus:

«Here begins the book of Dialogues of Gregory, pope of the city of Rome, concerning divers beautiful miracles.» And afterward: «Of the Dialogues of Gregory, pope of the city of Rome, number 4, concerning the miracles of the Fathers of Italy.» — 15. To all these are added four manuscript copies against which the Dialogues were collated in England, whose various readings Thomas James published. Moreover, we have also employed the more distinguished Editions: the Parisian, of the year 1518, prepared by master Berthold Rembolt and Jean Petit; the Gillot Edition, published at Paris in the year 1705; the Vatican Edition reprinted at Paris in 1605; and finally the Gussanville Edition of the year 1675. XXIV.

Nor indeed do we repent of so great a labor in unrolling so many Codices, since by their aid we have not only ascertained the reasons for the restorations made by Gussanville, which he himself concealed, but have also healed and restored very many places hitherto corrupt in all the printed Editions, which, with a few examples excerpted as they present themselves, we shall now briefly demonstrate. Book I, chapter 9, concerning Saint Boniface, is read in the printed texts: «He held the office of the episcopate, he filled it with morals.» But in the manuscripts, more elegantly, on account of the antithesis: «He held the episcopate by his office, he filled it with his morals.» In the same book, chapter 11, the printed texts have: «Raw loaves are wont to be marked with a sign.» But the manuscripts, by which we believed we should stand: «are wont to be marked with wood.»

Besides, «to be marked with a sign,» what sense has it? what does it sound like? Book II, chapter 1, in the Gussanville Edition: «But Benedict, desiring rather to suffer the evils of the world than to seek praises from men.» The last three words, which by his own hand, with no manuscript Codex shining forth to guide him, he added, we have cut away; and with these rejected the sentence has more savor. A little before, it is corruptly held in the printed texts: «all would recognize from how great a perfection of the grace of conversation Benedict as a boy had begun.» Instead read: «all would recognize from how great a perfection Benedict as a boy had begun the grace of conversation.» Book III, chapter 2, there crept into the printed texts «Justinian the elder as prince,» instead of «Justin the elder,» as is to be read from the manuscripts; nor does historical truth permit us to read otherwise.

In the same book, chapter 37, concerning Sanctulus, the Vulgate texts have: «as he was joyful both in countenance and in mind»; where in the manuscripts stands: «as his countenance and his mind were joyful.» Saint Gregory signifies that Sanctulus was always of glad mind and countenance, whence he adds: «He greeted the toiling Lombards with a glad countenance.» And a little after: «To whom»—namely the Lombards, by whom he had been provoked with injuries—«the man of the Lord responded with a still more joyful countenance.» Book IV, chapter 36, in the printed texts: «A certain Stephen who by another name was called Optio.» In the Gussanville Edition there is added in the margin: «to whom the surname Optio belonged.» But we have restored from the manuscripts: «A certain Stephen who was in the number [ranking] of Optio.» The error began with the first Editors;

perhaps because they were ignorant of what this «number» [rank], what «Optio» signified. The notes to this passage will teach both. In chapter 47 of the same book: «In the same monastery too a certain other was called John, a youth of great character, who passed his age in understanding and gravity.» So barbarously and against the sense the printed books have it. But from the manuscripts light shone forth, where is read «passed through» (transibat), which we preferred. But of these matters, and of the Latin Dialogues, enough. Now concerning the Greek version, published here in conjunction, I would have the reader briefly forewarned. XXV. That the translator of the Dialogues of Saint Gregory is Zacharias is testified by Anastasius the Librarian (in his life of Zacharias), John the Deacon (book IV, chapter 95), and Photius (Codex 252); no one denies it.

But both John the Deacon and Photius err in assigning the time at which this translation appeared; for John teaches that it was done after nearly one hundred and seventy-five years, in the times of the emperor Constantine, namely Copronymus. But Photius, whom the anonymous author follows in the Greek preface prefixed to the version, asserts that one hundred and sixty-five years had elapsed between the Dialogues composed by Gregory and the same rendered into Greek by Zacharias. Now it is established that Saint Zacharias began to occupy the see in the year 741, and ruled the Church not beyond ten years and a few months.

Whence, since from the year 593, before which the Dialogues were not composed, up to the last times of the pontificate of Zacharias, only one hundred and fifty-eight years are numbered, it is necessary that both erred in the chronology. As regards the version itself, it will be plain to the reader that it disagrees from the authentic Latin, both in the titles and arguments of the chapters and in many other things, as we have noted in several places. As to the manner of writing, it teems with barbarous words, which furnished an ample harvest to the most learned Du Cange in compiling his Glossary of the Greco-barbarous tongue. XXVI. That this translation was corrupted in book II, final chapter, is an ancient complaint of John the Deacon and other orthodox writers. For where in Latin it is read:

«Since it is agreed that the Paraclete Spirit ever proceeds from the Father and the Son,» the Greek translator, or rather interpolator, renders: «It is manifest that the Paraclete Spirit proceeds from the Father and remains in the Son.» John the Deacon complains that this was done by the fraud of the Greeks, who by this alone attack the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son. That the author of this corruption was Photius, that most skilled artificer of such depravations, I chiefly suspect from this, that he so greatly commends the work of Zacharias and the Gregorian Dialogues. Namely, from those interpolated passages he was already forging arms and preparing engines for himself or his followers against the procession of the Holy Spirit.