教牧守則·對話錄與書信 第 151 章 第 2/2 段

Certainly nothing did we more guard against than to run through and exhaust all the commonplaces, whether theological or ethical, and so forth—although we have omitted nothing of those things which could contribute to the unravelling of difficult passages and the illustration of the more obscure. Yet where things occur which seem to need a more careful explanation, let the Life of Saint Gregory elaborated by us be consulted, with the torch of the indices applied; and the diligent reader will confess that satisfaction has been given him. XI. Concerning the inscriptions of the letters, only one thing occurs to be observed: Saint Gregory, first of all, humbly enough determined that at the beginning of his letters he should be written 'servant of the servants of God'; so says John the Deacon, in Book II of the Life, chapter

1, and he adds that this document of humility, left by him to all his successors, was by hereditary right preserved in the Roman Church. This testimony of John gives occasion to many questions, which it now seems to the point to resolve. 1. Why does this title, so pleasing to Gregory, appear in so few letters? For if you except three, which are the first in as many books—namely Books VIII, IX, and XII (we follow the old order)—the rest lack this title. 2. In what way can the most holy Pope be praised for having assumed this title of humility, unknown to the other pontiffs, when Saint Damasus the Pope used it in his fourth letter to Stephen and the other bishops of Africa?

Peter Gussanvillaeus too brings forward this letter to this effect (in his notes on Letter 1 of Book VIII). 3. How could John the Deacon be ignorant that Augustine and very many others had fortified their letters with this same inscription? Let Saint Augustine be read, in his letter 217 to Vitalis: 'Augustine, bishop, servant of Christ, and through Him servant of His servants.' Fulgentius too inscribes his fifth letter thus: 'To the good and holy brother and fellow-presbyter Eugippius, Fulgentius, the household-servant of the servants of Christ.' I pass over certain other testimonies brought forward by Gussanvillaeus, either because they were taken from suspect authors, as those excerpted from Eusebius of Emesa;

or because they do not bear on the matter, since they contain examples of bishops far inferior in age to Gregory. To the first objection I reply: all the letters sent by Saint Gregory bore this title, 'servant of the servants of God'; but for brevity's sake it was omitted, both by the antiquarians and by the typographers. It ought nevertheless to have been prefixed at least to the first (and indeed in the manuscripts and in this new Edition it is read), so that from that inscription the form and manner of the rest might be had. To the second objection I reply: the letter praised under the name of Damasus is now held by learned men as doubtful—not to say spurious and forged—and is assigned to Isidore Mercator along with many other adulterated wares.

Besides other reasons brought forth by the learned who have passed sentence on this matter—reasons produced with ripe and refined judgment—it displays a proof of falsity in the note of the time at which it is said to have been written, namely the year 405, as is clear from the consuls inscribed, since Damasus had already died twenty years before. To the third objection I reply: Augustine indeed, and by his example Saint Fulgentius, disciple of the most holy doctor (of the others I keep silent), do not overturn the testimony of the Deacon.

For when he asserted that Saint Gregory, first of all, adorned himself at the beginning of his letters with this title of humility, we must understand 'first of all the Roman pontiffs,' as is sufficiently clear from the sequence of words, where he says that this document of humility was left by hereditary right to all Gregory's successors. By this, as it were by a stratagem, the most wise Father also wished to check and curb the Thrasonic pride of John of Constantinople, who boasted himself 'ecumenical.' His example most of the Roman pontiffs followed, yet not all; for some took up the title of 'praesul,' others of 'papa.' Certain ones, content with their bare name, as Zacharias, sometimes abstained from any mention of their dignity.

Nowadays in his bulls the supreme pontiff always uses this title, 'Servant of the servants of God'; in his briefs, the name 'papa.' Not only other bishops, but even kings and princes have more than once used this same appellation 'Servant,' etc., as the most erudite Cangius observes in his Glossary. All those agreed with Augustine, Book XIX of the City of God, chapter 15: 'To men,' he says, 'in that order of peace by which some are subjected to others, humility profits those who serve, even as pride harms those who dominate.' Before we withdraw from this argument, the Magdeburg Centuriators deserve a thrashing, who, in Century 6, chapter 7, in the section 'On association,' adulterated the testimony of John the Deacon thus: John the Deacon, in Book II of the Life, chapter 1, says:

'Gregory, rejecting the superstitious word of the pontiff, wrote himself, first of all, servant of the servants in his letters.' But where did it ever come into the mind of this writer of the Life of Saint Gregory to call the name 'pontiff' superstitious? A name which he everywhere employs, as may be seen in his preface and in Book I, chapters 1 and 25. Let the heterodox now be ashamed to reproach us with the corruption of ancient writings, when they are clearly convicted of the very crime of which they never cease to accuse us. But of this accusation, by which he tries to defame us, elsewhere. XII. Now must be mentioned the ancient manuscript codices against which we have reviewed and collated Gregory's Register.

The Corbie codex, which is now in the library of Saint-Germain-des-Prés, a codex of venerable antiquity, as are almost all those of that most celebrated monastery. The Rheims codex, namely of the arch-monastery of Saint Remigius, of about equal age. Five manuscripts we received for use from the most richly stocked and splendid Colbert library, by the kindness of the most illustrious and reverend lord Jacques Nicolas Colbert, archbishop of Rouen, primate of Normandy—to whom how much letters and all cultivators of letters owe, no one is ignorant. Of these manuscripts only two are complete. One, older, which we shall call 'the old one,' comprises indeed all the letters, and in the same order as the former, but by no means divided into books.

Two hand-written codices from the royal library were furnished us by the distinguished lord Clément, with the consent of the most illustrious abbé de Louvois, its prefect, who shows himself a patron and Maecenas to all who are students of the fine arts and of letters, especially the sacred. To the praised codices of the truly royal library there were lately added two Tellier codices, the gift of the most illustrious and reverend Charles-Maurice le Tellier, archbishop of Rheims, of which the earlier the most excellent archprelate himself had granted us a copy, out of his supreme kindness and benevolence toward all who toil in the field of letters, and especially in the studies of sacred antiquity.

In these old exemplars, which seemed to us wholly alike, it is often noted on what day, or at least in what month, and in what indiction, the Gregorian letters were dated. One codex of nearly seven hundred years we obtained from the library of the metropolitan church of Saint Gatianus at Tours, from which we also drew many marks of the time at which the letters were written: this we shall designate by the name 'Turon. S. Gat.,' that it may be distinguished from another Tours codex, namely of the greater monastery near Tours, which we have likewise carefully examined. The noble monastery of Saint Albinus at Angers furnished us besides a remarkable codex, in which several letters bear the mark of the time at which they were written;

but far fewer than in the Colbert, Tellier, and above-praised Tours codices. But truly no aid was more present to us than that from the manuscript codices of our own monasteries in Normandy, where this latest Edition was prepared. Seven exemplars in all were supplied us thence, and indeed of the best quality and admirable integrity, but of age—some of seven hundred years, others at least of six hundred—whose names receive here: the Jumièges codex, that is, of the monastery of Saint Peter of Jumièges; the Audoenus, that is, of the royal monastery of Saint Ouen at Rouen; the Michaelinus, namely of the monastery of Saint Michael-in-Peril-of-the-Sea; the Bec codex, of the most renowned monastery of Blessed Mary of Bec-Hellouin;

the Séez codex, or of the monastery of Saint Martin at Séez; the Lyre codex, that is, of Blessed Mary of Lyre, in the diocese of Évreux; and finally the Préaux codex, namely of the monastery of Préaux, in the diocese of Lisieux. But since there is almost always the greatest agreement among those codices, we are wont to designate them by the name 'the Norman ones.' Concerning the Audoenus this is to be observed: on the first leaf, left blank after the volume was bound, there is read, written in a more recent hand, the confession of Berengarius, prefaced thus: 'In the year from the incarnation of the everlasting Beginning 1078, in the month of February, indiction 2, in the sixth year of the pontificate of lord Gregory the seventh, the universal pontiff, etc.,' as is read in the sixth Roman council, in volume X of Labbé's Councils, at the year

1079, with a few words altered. For example, in the manuscript is read 'of the everlasting Beginning' (principii); and in Labbé's Edition, 'of the everlasting Prince' (principis). We do not doubt that this Berengarian confession was written on this leaf as soon as it was issued and published, as was indeed then the custom—to inscribe whatever had recently been composed in any available codex, provided there remained enough blank parchment to take it in. And from these things we conjecture that the Audoenus codex was written at least in the middle of the eleventh century.

Of all the codices enumerated, if account be taken of antiquity, the Corbie codex ought to have been placed first—now in the library of Saint-Germain-des-Prés—sent by Paul the Deacon to Saint Adalard, abbot of Corbie, as is clear from the letter of the same Paul prefixed to the letters of Saint Gregory collected in this book, which our own dom J. Mabillon took care to insert in the Acts of the Saints of the Order of Saint Benedict, volume I, page 397. This codex contains only fifty-four letters (which was the reason we enumerated it last of all), of which thirty-four were corrected and emended by Paul's own hand. But of this collection already above;

and concerning Paul, the little preface prefixed to the Life of Saint Gregory, compendiously written by him, is to be read. All these codices we inspected with our own eyes, and carefully excerpted their various readings. Now we must deal with the Vatican and English codices, which we were not permitted to see. The discrepant readings of four Vatican codices were communicated to us by the distinguished Étienne Baluze, to whom we owe much else; for—to be silent about the rest—he himself pointed out and supplied to us the Colbert codices. He who reviewed and collated the Gregorian letters against the praised codices of the Vatican library (a man certainly of keen judgment, the utmost diligence, and untiring labour) thus gives warning at the beginning of the paper codex:

'On the same day I began to collate the letters of the first book with three Vatican manuscript exemplars, of which one, bound in tawny leather and marked with the number 2534 and the letter A, has not the first letter, nor half of the second. The other, bound in red leather and marked with number 2538 and the letter B, has the beginning (of the letters) with this inscription: Here begin the letters from the Register of blessed Gregory the Pope, in the month of September, indiction nine, that is, in the first year of his ordination. The third is bound in red leather, without a number, which belonged to a certain Carthusian, page 1, and is marked with the letter C. The fourth manuscript exemplar of the letters of Saint Gregory the Great, the lords the keepers gave me on 18 February

1600, marked with the number 190, and by me with the letter D, containing seven hundred and fifteen letters, arranged in no order and with no division of books, but all as sent, whose various readings, differing from the printed text, follow. At the end is read: I finished the corrections of this whole Register on the fifth day of December 1600.' If to the four praised codices others should later have been added, consulted and reviewed by the same learned man, we shall take care to give notice in the proper place. That the various readings of those codices were collected and set forth with great fidelity is fully persuaded to us, both because they almost everywhere agree with ours, and because our own dom Claude Estiennot observed the same readings in the aforesaid codices.

For before this collection of variant readings, made a hundred years ago and more, had become known to us, that most religious and most erudite man, who was then residing at Rome, being asked by us, had most diligently examined the same Vatican codices, and had carefully noted where they differed from the printed texts, as an aid to the new Edition. When we collated what was sent to us, we proved that it agreed entirely with the variant readings excerpted long before. The discrepant readings of six English codices were offered to us by the 'Vindiciae Gregorianae' of Thomas James. This work the heterodox made much of;

but of what quality it is, immortal God, if it be compared with the Vatican collection! For very many variant readings of the greatest moment, and from which corrupt passages might even have been healed, James dissembled. The Editions which we chiefly used, besides the Gussanvillaean, are the Paris edition of 1518, from the press of Master Berthold Rembolt; likewise the Paris edition of 1571, which came forth under the care of the most learned John Gillot, and the Vatican. By 'the more recent ones,' which we sometimes mention, we mean especially this Vatican and the Gussanvillaean. Now must be appended that part of the Gussanvillaean preface which pertains to the letters.

But concerning that preface, and concerning the notes of the same author reprinted in our Edition, we think this must be premised: just as we do not disapprove of them—inasmuch as they were approved by three doctors of the Sorbonne and fortified by a royal privilege—so we by no means dare to vouch for them. 'The letters follow the dialogues. They commonly call it the Register or Regest, that is, the indices and monuments of the deeds done by Saint Gregory. Since indeed it is the custom of the learned to handle as much as possible the letters of the holy Fathers, whence they may draw out the gifts of each author's genius, the images of his character, the sinews of his prudence, the discipline of the Church, the history of the times, the solution of knotty questions, the mutual duties of those with whom they held intercourse.

All this indeed the letters of Saint Gregory give in full measure. Who would not recognize the force and dexterity of his genius expressed in those tablets—his shrewdness, strength of soul, Christian self-abasement, zeal, and the other virtues? How he labours to retain and assert discipline, as though it were sacrilege to dispense with it and to loose men from the canons! He does not parade his power, does not slacken the reins to caprice, so that whatever pleases should be permitted. Only the evident advantage of the Church, or urgent necessity, inclined his unbending mind. He knew on what given occasion that rigour was to be relaxed by fatherly concession—not by trampling down the rules, but by bending and inflecting them a little while, at the discretion of a prudent and clear-sighted charity.

As the highest law is sometimes the highest injustice, so imprudent relaxations overturn discipline, undermine it, and ruin it. Let us illustrate each by a few examples. Against the term 'ecumenical bishop,' understood in its own sense, he never ceases to oppose the canons and usage of the Church. He batters neophyte bishops with the same engines, and shows favour to none; hurling against them the same arguments which Saint Gregory Nazianzen had prefigured in his 'Monody,' as though he had taken them word for word from him. He firmly repelled a bigamist, though queen Brunhild was intreating, and alleged no other cause but the canons....' The rest I omit as too prolix. Gregory, servant of the servants of God, to all the bishops appointed throughout Sicily.

We have clearly perceived it to be very necessary (Gratian, distinction 94, chapter 1) that, just as it was the judgment of our predecessors, so we should commit all things to one and the same person; and that, where we cannot ourselves be present, our authority may be represented through him whom we appoint. Wherefore to Peter, subdeacon of our see, we have committed our office within the province of Sicily, God helping. For we cannot doubt concerning his conduct, to whom, God helping, we are known to have committed the whole patrimony of our Church.

We have likewise perceived that this ought to be done: that once a year your fraternity should assemble universally, with the honour of which he is worthy, as we have commanded him, at the city of Syracuse or of Catania, so that whatever pertains to the benefit of the Churches of that province, or to the relieving of the necessity of the poor and the oppressed, or to the admonition and correction of all whose excesses may happen to be shown, you may dispose with fitting moderation together with the same Peter, subdeacon of our see. From which council let hatreds be far removed, the nurseries of crimes, and let inward envy waste away, and the too-execrable discord of souls. Let concord pleasing to God, and charity, recognize their own as priests.

Therefore conduct all things with such maturity and tranquillity that it may most worthily be called an episcopal council.