S. Gregory I, letters 21416
TO Felix, Bishop O Messana.
To our most reverend brother, the Bishop Felix. Gregory, servant of the servants of God18
Our Head, which is Christ, to this end has willed us to be His members, that through His large charity and faithfulness He might make us one body in Himself, to whom it befits us so to cling that, since without Him we can do nothing, through Him we may be enabled to be what we are called. From the citadel of the Head let nothing divide us, lest, if we refuse to be His members, we be deserted of Him, and wither as branches cast off from the vine. That we may be counted worthy, then, to be the habitation of our Redeemer, let us abide with the whole desire of our heart in His love. For he says, He that loveth me will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will make our abode with him (Joh. 14,23). Now thy Love, most dear brother, has demanded of us that we should reply to shy enquiries with the authority of the Apostolic See. And, though we make haste to do this, not at length but succinctly (because of certain pressing cares that have come upon us, through the hindrance of our sins), yet we commit what follows to Shy attention for wider enquiry, and investigation of other institutes of holy fathers. For a mind worn and weighed down with burdens and pressing cares cannot effect so much good, or speak of these things so freely, as can one that is joyful and free from depression. We have not therefore given the preference to such cares as wishing to deny to shy Holiness this and such other information. as we might find to be needful, but in order that what is here found deficient may be more fully enquired into.
For, following the examples of thy predecessors, thou hast thought it fight to consult the Apostolic See, in which thou hast been brought up and educated, on three points; that is on marriages of consanguinity, on vexation of bishops by subordinates, and on doubt with respect to the consecration of churches. Know then that what I wrote to Augustine, bishop of the nation of the Angli (who was, as thou rememberest, thy pupil), about marriages of consanguinity was written specially to him and to the nation of the Angli which had recently come to the faith, lest from alarm at anything too austere they should recede from their good beginning; but it was not written generally to others. Of this the whole Roman city is my witness. Nor did I thus order in those writings with the intention that, after they had been settled in the faith with a firm root, they should not be separated, if found to be below the proper degree of consanguinity, or should be united, if below the proper line of affinity, that is as far as the seventh generation. But for those who are still neophytes it is very often right in the first place to teach them, and by word and example to instruct them, to avoid unlawful things, and then afterwards, reasonably and faithfully, to shut out things that they may have done in matters of this kind. For according to the Apostle who says, I have fed you with milk, not with meat (1Co 3,2), we have allowed these indulgences for them only, and not (as has been said above) for future times, lest the good which had been planted so far with a weak root should be rooted up, but that what had been begun should rather be made firm, and guarded till it reach perfection. Certainly, if in these things we have done anything otherwise than as we ought to have done, know that it has been done, not of wantonness, but in commiseration. Wherefore, too, I invoke God as my witness, who knows the thoughts of all men, and to whom all things are naked and open. For,if I were to destroy what those who came before me established, I should be justly convicted of being not a builder but an over-thrower, as testifies the voice of the Truth, who says, Every kingdom divided against itself shall not stand (Lc 11,17); and every science and law divided against itself shall be destroyed. And so it is needful for us all with one accord to hold to the appointments of our holy Fathers, doing nothing in contention, but, unanimous in every aim of good devotion, to obey, the Lord helping us, the divine and apostolical constitutions.
O how good is charity, which through love exhibits absent things in an image to one’s self as though they were present, unites things divided, sets in order things confused, associates things unequal, consummates things imperfect! How rightly the excellent preacher calls it the bond of perfectness, since the other virtues indeed produce perfectness, but yet charity so binds them that they cannot now be unloosed from the mind of hint that loves. This being duly considered, in what has been already spoken of I indulged charitably; nor did I give a command, but advice; nor did I deliver a rule to be held to by any who should come after, but shewed of two dangers which might be more easily avoided. If, then, in secular affairs every one should have his own right and his proper rank preserved to him, how much more in ecclesiastical arrangements ought no confusion to be induced, lest discord should find place there whence the blessings of peace ought to proceed. And this will be thus secured, if nothing is yielded to power, but all to equity. On this account our heart rejoices greatly with your greatness, because we find you so earnest in your doings as to have a care for us, and at pains to enquire about such things by questioning us, to the end that such things may acquire for you not only glory with men, but also rewards of recompense with the Almighty Lord.
But with regard to vexation of bishops, about which you wish to consult us, we know that the life of prelates ought to be perturbed by no excesses, since it is very unfit that those who are called thrones of God should be disturbed by any motion from kings or subjects. For, if David who was the most righteous of kings presumed not to lay his hand on Saul who was evidently already rejected God, how much more should heed be taken that none lay the hand of detraction or vituperation or indiscreetness or dishonour on the Lord’s Anointed, or on the preachers of holy Church, since vexation or detraction of them touches Christ, in whose stead they fill the office of legates in the Church! Hence all the faithful should be exceedingly cautious not either secretly or publicly, by detractions or vituperations rend their bishop, that is, the Lord’s Anointed, considering that example of Mary [i.e). Miriam], who for speaking against Moses the servant of God because of the Ethiopian woman was punished with the uncleanness of leprosy (Nb 13).; and that of the Psalmist, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm (Ps 104,15)19 . And in the divine law we read, Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people (Ex 22,28). Hence great care should be taken by subordinates, whether clerical or lay, that they dare not to blame rashly the lives of their bishops or superiors, if perchance they see them do anything blameable, lest from their position of reproving evil they be sunk into greater depths through the impulse of elation. They are to be admonished also that, when they consider the faults of their superiors, they grow not too bold against them. But let them so consider with themselves the things that are bad that, constrained by divine fear, they refuse not to carry the yoke of reverence, seeing that the things done by bishops and superiors are not to be smitten with the sword of the mouth, even when they may seem to be such as may be properly blamed; since we are aware that it has been laid down by our predecessors and by many other holy bishops that sheep should not readily blame their shepherds, or presume to criminate or accuse them, because, when we sin against our superiors, we go against His ordinance Who gave them to us. Hence Moses, when he had learnt that the people complained against himself and Aaron, said, For what are we? against us is your murmuring but against God (Ex 16,8). Wherefore subordinates of either order are to be admonished that, when they observe the deeds of their masters, they return to their own heart, and presume not in upbraidings of them, since The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord (Mt 10,24).
Concerning doubt as to the dedications of churches, about which among other things you have wished to consult us, you ought duly to hold to this which we have received as handed down to us from those who have gone before us; namely, that, as often as doubt is entertained as to the baptism or confirmation of any persons, as well as the consecration of churches, and there is no certain account to be given, either from writings or witnesses, as to whether persons have been baptized or confirmed, or whether churches have been consecrated, that such persons should be baptized and confirmed, and that such churches should be canonically dedicated, lest such doubt should become ruin to the faithful; inasmuch as what does not appear by certain proofs to have been duly done is not in such case done a second time. This, divine grace supporting us, we desire so to hold; and we enjoin it on you, as you have requested, to hold and teach; and we wish not wantonly to break through, but faithfully to observe, what has been determined by holy Fathers before us. Wherefore we implore the mercy of our Redeemer to assist you with His grace, and give unto you to carry into effect what He has granted you to will, since in this matter the good gifts of retribution by so much the more accrue to us as the zeal of labour is increased. But we decree that every one of those who have been faithfully taught, and already stand ineradicably planted with a firm root, shall observe his descent even to the seventh generation. And as long as they know themselves to be related to each other by affinity, let them not presume to approach the association of this union; nor is it lawful, or shall be lawfully for any Christian to marry a woman of his own kindred whom he has lived with as a wife, or whom he has stained by any unlawful pollution; since such intercourse is incestuous and abominable to God and to all good men. But we read that it has long been determined by holy Fathers that incestuous persons are not to be reckoned under any title of wedlock. And so we desire not to be blamed by you or any other of the faithful in this matter, seeing that in our indulgence herein to the nation of the Angli we have acted, not as laying down a rule, but as taking thought lest they should leave imperfect the good which they had began, &c.20
1 See I. 62, note 9.
2 Sacerdotes, here as elsewhere meaning bishops.
3 “Convertit in monasterio.” Conversio, as usually, means here monastic profession.
4 As to this Pomponiana (al. Pompeiana), cf. I.48; XI. 25.
5 Bishop of Catana in Sicily. Cf. IV. 36.
6 Castrum Cassiopi, which appears to have been a fortress in the isle of Corcyra, to which refugees from the mainland of Epirus had resorted in time of war. Euria was one of the sees in Epirus Vetus under the jurisdiction of which these refugees had been ; and it seems that the bishop of Euria had been complained of by Alcyson, bishop of Corcyra, for asserting jurisdiction over them in their new abode. See also E.p.VIII. which follows, and Ep. XIII.
7 Parochiam, in the then usual sense of what in now called a diocese.
8 See XIII. 38, note 1.
9 Cf. preceeding epistle.
10 i.e. the child had been baptized a catholic. It would seem from Gregory’s way of speaking, and the absence of allusion to the conversion of the father, that king Agiluiph had not yet announced his Arianisrn. Paul Diaconus alleges that he did so eventually through the influence of Theodelinda.
11 The child who had been baptized (al.Adaloaldus, or Adoaldus). He succeeded his father as king of the Lombards, a.d. 616, being still a boy, reigning under his mother’s guardianship. According to Paul Diaconus, Gregory’s hopes were for a short time fulfilled :—“Under them Churches were restored. and many endowments were bestowed on venerable places;”—but before long he became insane, and after ten years (a.d. 626) was deposed, Arioald being appointed to succeed him (Hist. Longob.iv. 43).
12 On the subject of the “Three Chapters,” as appears from what follows. It is evident that the able and conscientious queen Theodelinda never found herself able to accept the ruling of the See of Rome on this question (cf IV. 2, note 3); and she seems now to have employed the abbot Secundis to draw up a statement of the arguments on her side, inviting Gregory to reply to them. He did not, however, on this account cease to address her cordially as a good catholic. He seems to have condoned in her what he so strongly condemned in others as involving them in schism. On the schism arising from the matter of the “Three Chapters,” see I. 16, note 3; and Prolegom., p. x.
13 Some precious stone, probably of a white colour.
14 See XIV. 7.
15 Messina in Sicily. This Felix cannot be identified wth Felix, bishop of the same See, to whom previous letters (viz, I.66, together with two others, I.40, and II. 5, which have not been translated) had been addressed. For he had been succeeded in the see by Donus, probably in the 14th Indiction, i.e). a.d. 595–6, (see (VI. 9), when Gregory’s reply to Augustine’s interrogatories, which is the main subject of the epistle before us, had not yet been sent. Augustine does not appear to have even arrived in Britain till a.d. 597. But there seems to be no reason against the supposition that a second Felix had succeeded Donus at Messina before the death of Gregory, the last mention of Donus being in the superscription of Ep. XVIII. in Book XIII., assigned to the 16th Indiction, i.e). a.d. 602–3.
16 See also below—“the apostles in the first place who were prelates of the Apostolic See.” It would seem from these expressions that the Sicilian bishops went on the tradition of St. Paul and St. Peter having been joint founders of the Roman Church and throughout the epistle, though the supremacy of the See of Rome is acknowledged, it is not spoken of as derived especially from St. Peter.
17 See XI., 64 (Responsio ad Interrog. vi)..
18 The genuineness of this epistle is, to say the least, open to grave suspicion. Jaiffé (Regesta Pont. Lit. Spur). rejects it as spurious. Its style in some parts reminds us of Gregory, and it contains passages identical with what he had written elsewhere: but its prolixity, bad composition. and repetitions are unworthy of his pen. It reads like an unskilful imitation of his style. Nor is it difficult to understand why such a letter may have been forged. If, as supposed in our note to Ep. XVI., a letter from Sicily had been addressed to Gregory not long before his death with reference to his answers to Angustine’s questions, to which letter he had been unable to reply, it was not unlikely that such a letter as the one before us would afterwards be composed in his name. For anxiety might naturally be felt to vindicate from inconsistency the teaching of the Roman See on the subject of marriages of consanguinity. Such a letter, too, if forged, would be likely to attempt an imitation of Gregory’s style, and to bring in (as this does) extracts from his previous writings. It may be observed that the plea set forth of the directions to Augustine having been meant only as temporary concessions is not borne out by the actual language of those directions. See XI. 64.
19 (Ps 105,15.
20 The rest of this long prolix epsitle, not being of any peculiar interest, has not been translated).
[i]Roberts, Alexander and Donaldson, James, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series: Volume XII, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc). 1997.
S. Gregory I, letters 21416