Epistle
LII.
To Natalis, Bishop
1463
.
Gregory to Natalis, Bishop of Salona.
As though forgetting the tenour of former letters, I had
determined to say nothing to your Blessedness but what should savour of
sweetness: but, now that in your epistle you have recurred in the
way of argumentation to preceding letters, I am once more compelled to
say perhaps some things that I had rather not have said.
For in defence of feasts your Fraternity mentions the
feast of Abraham, in which by the testimony of Holy Scripture he is
said to have entertained three angels (
Gen. xviii
.). In view of this example,
neither will we blame your Blessedness for feasting, if we come to know
that you entertain angels. Again you say that Isaac gave a
blessing to his son when satiated (
Gen. xxvii. 27
). Now as to both these
things in the Old Testament—since they were so done in the way of
history as still to have a meaning in the way of allegory—would
that we could so read through the accounts of the things done as to
perceive and take thought for the things to be done. For indeed
the one, in saluting one only of the three angels, declared the Persons
of the Trinity to be of one Substance; the other blessed his son when
satiated, because one who is filled with divine banquets has his senses
extended into the power of prophecy. But the words of Holy Writ
are divine banquets. If, then, you read diligently—if,
drawing example from what is outward, you penetrate what is
inward—you will be satiated, as it were, from hunting in the
field, and fill the stomach of the soul, so as to be able to announce
things to come to your son placed before you, to wit to the people you
have taken in charge. But one who prophesies anything of
God
is already in the dark as to this world;
for it is assuredly right and fit that he whose senses are bright
inwardly through intelligence should see less through concupiscence
here below.
Take, therefore, these things to yourselves; and,
if you know yourselves to be such as I have said, you need not at all
doubt of our esteem. I also find your Blessedness rejoicing if
you bear the name of “a gluttonous man” along with the
world’s Creator. As to this I briefly comment thus; that,
if you are called so falsely, you do truly bear this name along with
the world’s Creator; but, if it is true of you, who can doubt
that it was false of Him? A like name does not avail to acquit
you, if the cause for it is unlike. For even the thief who was
condemned to die endured the cross with Him; but a like crucifixion did
not acquit him whom his own guilt bound. But now I beseech
God
with all the prayers I can offer that not
the name only, but the cause for it, may join your most holy Fraternity
to our Creator.
Further, your Holiness in your letters rightly praises
feasts which are made with the intention of bestowing charity.
But yet you should know that they then truly proceed from charity, when
at them the lives of the absent are not backbitten, no one is censured
in derision, and no idle tales about secular affairs, but the words of
sacred reading, are heard; when the body is not pampered more than is
needful, but only its weakness refreshed, that it may be kept in health
for the practice of virtue. If, then, you thus conduct yourselves
in your feasts, I own that you are masters of abstinence.
As to your alleging to me the testimony of the
apostle Paul, where he says,
Let not him that eateth not judge him
that eateth
(
Rom.
xiv. 3
), I think that
this was altogether out of place, seeing both that I am not one that
eateth not, and also that Paul did not here mean to say that the
members of Christ, who are mutually bound to each other in His body,
that is to say in his Church, with the bond of charity, should have no
care whatever for each other. If, indeed, I had nothing to do
with thee, nor thou with me, I should rightly be compelled to hold my
peace, lest I should blame one whom I could not mend. This
precept, then, was given only with reference to persons who go about to
judge those who have not been committed to their care. But now
that we, by the ordering of
God
, are one, we
should be much in fault were we to pass over in silence what calls for
our correction. Lo, thy Fraternity has taken it amiss to have
been blamed by me about feasts, while I, who surpass thee in my
position, though not in my life, am ready to be found fault with by
all, and by all to be amended. And him only do I esteem to be a
friend to me, through whose tongue I wipe off the stains of my soul
before the appearance of the strict judge.
But as to what you say, most sweet brother, about your
being unable to read because of the pressure of tribulations upon you,
I think this avails little for your excuse, since Paul
says,
Whatsoever things are written
are written for our instruction, that we through patience and comfort
of the Scriptures might have hope
(
Rom. xv. 4
). If, then, holy Scripture
has been prepared for our comfort, we ought by so much the more to read
it as we find ourselves the more wearied under the burden of
tribulations. But if we are to rely only on that sentence which
you quote in your letter, wherein the
Lord
says,
When they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall
speak, for it shall be given you in that hour what ye shall speak; for
it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in
you
(
Matth. x.
19
), I say that Holy
Scriptures have been given us in vain, if, being filled with the
Spirit, we have no need of external words. But, dearest brother,
trusting in
God
without doubt, when we are
straightened in a time of persecution, is one thing; what we ought to
do when the Church is at peace is another. For it is our duty,
through this same Spirit, to learn by reading now what we may be able
to shew forth also in suffering, should cause arise.
Now, I rejoice exceedingly that you declare in
your letter that you are giving attention to exhortation. For
thus I know that you are wisely fulfilling the duties of your position,
if you take pains to draw others also to your Maker. But your
saying in the same sentence that you are not like me saddens me at
once, after I had begun to rejoice, since I think that it is in
derision that you give me praises which in truth I do not recognize as
due. However, I give thanks to Almighty
God
that through you heretics are being recalled to holy
Church. But it is needful for you to have a care that those also
who are contained in the bosom of holy Church live so that they be not
her adversaries through their evil lives. For, if they give
themselves not to heavenly desires, but to earthly lusts and pleasures,
sons of strangers are being nourished in her bosom.
Now as to your declaring that you cannot possibly be
ignorant of the degrees of ecclesiastical rank, I too fully know them
with regard to you; and I am therefore much distressed that, if you
knew the order of things, you have failed, to your greater blame, in
knowing it with regard to me. For, after letters had been
addressed to your Blessedness by my predecessor and myself in the cause
of the archdeacon Honoratus, then, the sentence of both of us being set
at nought, the said Honoratus was deprived of the rank belonging to
him. Which thing if any one of the four patriarchs had done, such
great contumacy could by no means have been allowed to pass without the
most grievous offence. Nevertheless, now that your Fraternity has
returned to your proper position, I do not bear in mind the wrong done
either to myself or to my predecessor.
But as to your saying that what has been handed down and
guarded by my predecessors ought to be observed in our times also, far
be it from me to infringe in any church the statutes of our ancestors
with regard to my fellow priests, since I do myself an injury if I
disturb the rights of my brethren. But when your accredited
messengers arrive, I shall know the rights of the case between you and
the aforesaid archdeacon Honoratus; and my own personal examination of
it will shew you that, if you have the support of justice on your side,
you will sustain no injury from me; as indeed you never have
done. But in case justice supports the plea of the
often-before-named Honoratus, I will shew by my acquittal of him that
in judgment I have no knowledge even of persons whom I knew.
Concerning the article of excommunication which,
if I may say so, was of necessity added to our letters (though even the
second and the third time with a condition interposed), your
Blessedness complains unreasonably, since the apostle Paul says,
Having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience
(
2 Cor. x.
6
). But let these
things pass: let us return to what concerns us now. For, if
the lord Natalis acts as he should do, I cannot but be friends with
him, knowing how much I am a debtor to his affection.
1463
See I. 19,
note 5, with
reff
.