Saint Severinus Boethius

Boethius was only ten years old when he lost his father, who had been consul three times. He was sent to Athens to continue his studies. He returned to Rome in the nineteenth year of his age, and some time later he was declared a patrician. Out of consideration for his family, he entered into the state of marriage (492). The woman he married was named Elpis.

Her beauty recommended her even less than her piety and her knowledge. The two hymns in honor of Saint Peter and Saint Paul, *Beate pastor Petre* and *Decora lux*, were composed by Elpis. "If one could establish the reality of this marriage," it is said, "it would result in a strong presumption in favor of the Christianity of Boethius." Now, it is impossible not to admit it.

1° All liturgical collections, all manuscripts in which these hymns are inserted, bear as the author's name, *Elpis, uxor Boetii*, Elpis, wife of Boethius. On the other hand, in the oldest manuscripts of Boethius, these hymns are placed following the works of the Christian philosopher, and are attributed to Elpis his wife;

2° In the epitaph that decorated the tomb of Elpis, she is designated as the wife of Boethius. Now, this epitaph, fragments of which had been discovered in manuscripts at the end of the 16th century, was found complete in 1672, and published in 1715 by Dom Gervaise, provost of Saint-Martin de Tours, author of the most complete history we have of Boethius.

3° That is not all; the very marble that bore this epitaph was uncovered in 1720, five years after the masterful publication of Dom Gervaise, while digging the foundations of the Gesù church in Palermo. The tombstone inscription was identical to the epitaph published by Dom Gervaise based on written monuments.

4° Local tradition had not waited for these revelations to glorify the memory of Elpis. In 1543, the senate of Messina placed the bust of its illustrious compatriot in one of the halls of the city hall. And Jerome of Ragusa established in his *Eloges of the Sicilians*, based on monuments he then had before his eyes, that Elpis was born in Messina, that she was the daughter of the famous Christian senator Festus Niger; that she died in Pavia during a journey made with Boethius her husband, and that finally her sister Faustina, married to the patrician Tertullus, was the mother of Placidus, the beloved disciple of Saint Benedict of Monte Cassino.

5° Death prematurely broke this alliance. The verses that the young wife composed herself for her tomb breathe the most perfect conformity of feelings between husband and wife.

Elpes dicta fui, siculae regionis alumna, Quam procul a patria conjugis egit amor.

Quae sine te mansa dies, nox acta fublis hora; Nec solum caro, sed spiritus unus erat.

Lux mea non clausa est, tali remanente marito, Majorique animo parte superstes uro.

Porticibus sacris jam nunc peregrina quiesco, Judicis aeterni testificata fanum.

Neu qua manus bustum violet, nisi forte jugalis Hac iterum cupiat jungere membra suis;

Ut thalami tumulique comes nec morte revellar, Et socios vita nectat uterque cinis.

I was called Elpis. My childhood passed under the climate of Sicily. The love I bore for my husband made me leave my homeland. Far from him, the day was sad, the night restless, the hour full of tears. Together, we were not only one flesh, but one spirit. My light is not extinguished, since I leave behind such a husband. In him, I will survive in the better part of myself. I rest now under the sacred porticoes that have received the stranger; I have appeared before the throne of the eternal Judge. Let no hand open my tomb, except that of my husband, if it pleases him one day to join his bones to mine. Then I will be the companion of the tomb, as I was that of the nuptial bed: one same ash will unite those who lived one same life.

Widowed from his first beloved wife, Boethius had, in the interest of his family, to contract a new alliance: he married Rusticiana, daughter of the senator Symmachus, the most illustrious of the Roman la dies of Symmaque Roman senator, father-in-law of Boethius, and martyr. her time, a fervent Christian as well. As critics have contested the first marriage of Boethius, one only has to refer them to the works of the philosopher himself who surely knew, himself, if he had been married twice, and who wrote in plain letters that he had had two fathers-in-law as illustrious as the other.

It is important to know what the house of Symmachus was to give us an idea of the environment in which t Symmaque Roman senator, father-in-law of Boethius, and martyr. he supposed pagan philosopher of contemporary criticism had wanted to fix his affections and his life. Rusticiana, the new wife, had two sisters, Galla and Proba, who both have their names inscribed in the catalogue of Saints. Symmachus himself is venerated as a martyr of the Catholic faith. Such was therefore the family to which Boethius allied himself. What would a pagan philosopher have done in such an environment?

If Boethius's alliances were Christian, his friendships and friends were no less so. Let us place in the front rank Cassiodorus, chancellor to Theodoric, the future monk of Calabria, and Ennodius, Bishop of Pavia. Contemporary criticism insinuates that the letters addressed by these two fervent Catholics to Boethius do not suggest the slightest sentiment of Christian faith in their illustrious correspondent. Let us see:

Clovis, conqueror of Gaul, had asked Theodoric the Great, Ki ng of Italy, for a Théodoric le Grand King of the Ostrogoths and ruler of the West during the time of Gelasius. harpist capable of charming the ears of the Franks during the feasts where the glory of warriors was sung. An artist first had to be found. Theodoric entrusted the task of choosing him to the patrician Boethius. Now, here is what one reads in the letter that the king had Cassiodorus, his chancellor, address to him: "... We love to speak of the divine Psalterium truly fallen from heaven, whose chants, repeated throughout the universe, were composed for the salvation of souls. The true prodigy that the world must admire and believe is that the harp of David put the demon to flight and commanded the powers of evil. Three times at the sounds of this harp, King Saul recovered the fullness of his spirit, which was obsessed by the inner enemy. The pagans expressed in their own way that music is a gift from heaven when they placed the lyre among the celestial constellations... But I am straying too far from my subject. Whatever pleasure I may take in discussing doctrine with competent men, I conclude and again recommend to your wisdom the choice of a harpist." If Boethius had been the pagan philosopher, even a tolerant one, that people say he was, would it not have been mocking him to speak to him of the Psalms that are sung throughout the universe, of the harp of David that chases away the devil, of miracles, etc.? Either Cassiodorus did not know what he was writing and wanted to address a written insult to Boethius, or Boethius was a Christian. Now, the proof that Cassiodorus knew what he was doing and what he was writing to a Christian is that he adds "that there is pleasure in speaking of doctrine with the learned." The doctrine he was discussing with him was entirely Christian.

As for Ennodius, Bishop of Pavia, one asks why he never praises Boethius for his religion and does not greet him with the formula: "Fare well in Christ, Vale in Christo?"

Let us first dismiss the objection drawn from the formula Vale in Christo. We have two hundred and ninety-seven epistles of Ennodius, and this formula, far from being familiar to him, is found in only three!!! At that rate, would the Pope to whom Ennodius wrote without using it not have been a Christian!

As for the correspondence itself, its content perfectly proves that Boethius was a Christian, or at the very least, it cannot be invoked to demonstrate that he was a pagan. In his first letter, Ennodius calls Boethius the most accomplished, the most correct of men — emendalissime hominum. It will be agreed that, vis-à-vis a bishop, something would have been missing from the perfections of Boethius if he had not professed a common faith, doctrine, and religion. After having praised his talents, he would have seized the opportunity to teach the pagan philosopher that he lacked the essential science: that of Jesus Christ. — In another letter, Ennodius asks Boethius for the cession of a house that the latter owned in Milan. Boethius grants it out of charity to the bishop. The latter would not have asked for charity from a pagan for a good work, and the pagan would have cared little about coming to the aid of a Catholic bishop. In this same letter, Ennodius calls God to witness his gratitude and uses the Christian formula: Deo omnipotenti gratias, thanks to God Almighty.

Boethius was the model of statesmen; let us examine his political life.

King Theodoric, who made his ordinary residence in Spoleto or Ravenna, having come to Rome in 560, had the occasion to know Boethius particularly well. The speech that Boethius delivered on the occasion of Theodoric's solemn entry into Rome, and the magnificent festivities he organized to celebrate it, all charmed the monarch (560). He made him Master of the Palace and of the Offices, the two court positions that gave the most authority in the state and the most access to the prince.

Boethius formed a system of politics founded on virtue, and he did everything in his power to make Theodoric appreciate it. Not only did he prevent him from persecuting Catholics, but he also encouraged him to love them and take them under his protection. He represented to him that his throne would be strengthened as virtue was encouraged and rewarded; that the glory of a prince consists in procuring the happiness of his subjects; that a king, being truly the father of his people, must apply himself to governing them with kindness and wisdom; that this last point is the most essential of his duties; and that, if he fulfills it faithfully, he will not engage unnecessarily in foreign wars. He succeeded in persuading him to reduce taxes, as the wealth of individuals is the strength of the prince, and to manage his finances with wise economy. Without this economy, he said, the state is despised abroad, weak within, and unhappy on all sides; the people cannot live, the prince lacks resources, the soldier is insolent, and there is nothing but misery and confusion everywhere. He advised him to maintain well-disciplined troops in times of peace, in order to give prominence to the royal majesty and to strike terror into enemy powers. It was in this sense that Theodoric was accustomed to say that one never waged war better than in times of peace.

The wise and virtuous minister of state insisted strongly on the necessity of giving positions only to merit, of strictly observing the laws, and of punishing transgressors with severity. He said on this subject that justice is the foundation of the throne and the security of the people; that it kept those who might be tempted to become thieves, robbers, or adulterers in their duty; that it inspired a salutary fear in those perverse men who oppress the people; that it put a check on the ill will of the enemies of public peace; that it banished, in a word, all the crimes that disturb the rest of society. He exhorted the king of the Goths to protect the sciences and the fine arts, as well as those who cultivated them with success; experience showing that such protection contributes much to encouraging talents, to perfecting human reason, to inspiring the love of social virtues, and to increasing and maintaining the temporal happiness of a state. He further exhorted him to be magnificent in public buildings and in certain festivals which, not being contrary to religion, enhance the splendor of royal majesty in the eyes of the people.

Theodoric conducted himself for some years according to these excellent maxims, and showed himself as he is depicted in his panegyric by Ennodius, Bishop of Pavia. His council was composed of all the most skillful and virtuous men, such as Cassiodorus (who later took the monastic habit in Calabria), a Boethius, a Symmachus, an Ennodius, etc.; and while barbarism debased the Franks, the Visigoths, and the other peoples who shared the spoils of the Roman Empire among themselves, the court of Theodoric was the center of refinement. Letters were cultivated in Italy, and one saw there the shining of some rays of that golden age which made the century of Augustus so memorable. One hardly noticed that one had fallen under the domination of the barbarians. So many advantages meant that Amalasuntha, daughter of the king of the Goths, received a very good education. Happy Italy, if Theodoric had never betrayed himself!

Boethius found relaxation from his study of public affairs in their application. In his leisure moments, he amused himself by making mathematical instruments. Sometimes he composed music, and he sent several pieces of his composition to Clovis, King of the Franks. He also sent to Gundobad, King of the Burgundians, dials for all the different aspects of the sun, with hydraulic devices which, although without wheels, weights, or springs, nevertheless marked the course of the sun, the moon, and the stars by means of a certain quantity of water enclosed in a tin sphere that turned incessantly, driven by its own weight. He had worked on the construction of these machines himself. The Burgundians, not understanding how they could move and thus mark the hours, kept watch night and day to ensure that no one touched them. Convinced of the truth of the fact, and unable to guess the reason, they imagined that some divinity resided in these machines and imparted this movement to them. A correspondence was formed on this occasion between Boethius and the Burgundians; and the fruit of this correspondence was to dispose the latter to receive the maxims of the Gospel.

The foregoing would not suffice to give an idea of the genius of Boethius if we did not add a contemporary testimony that modern science, jealous of the glories of the Church, strives to keep in the shadows. Cassiodorus wrote to Boethius, in the name of King Theodoric his master, precisely regarding this marvelous hydraulic clock that he had invented and whose secret is lost: "Far from the banks of the Tiber, you went to sit in the schools of Athens, and to wear the toga among the crowded ranks of philosophers dressed in the pallium, with the goal of conquering for Rome the sciences of Greece. You have probed the depths of speculative philosophy; you have embraced the various branches of practical science; you have brought back to the descendants of Romulus all that was most extraordinary invented by the sons of Cecrops. Thanks to your translations, Pythagoras the musician and Ptolemy the astronomer have become Italian. The mathematician Nicomachus and the geometer Euclid speak a language understood by the children of Ausonia. The theologian Plato and the logician Aristotle discuss in the idiom of the Quirites. You have returned to the Sicilians their great mechanic Archimedes by making him speak Latin. The sciences and arts that fertile Greece had brought forth through a thousand geniuses are now enjoyed by Rome, and it owes this to you alone. In the light of your genius, the science of so many authors has been reduced to practice: wonders that we would have judged impossible are realized before our eyes. We see water spring from the bowels of the earth to fall back in bubbling cascades! Fire runs through a system of weights; we hear the organ resound under the breath that inflates its pipes and produces voices that are foreign to it. Damp blocks are thrown into the depths of the sea and form constructions there that humidity renders solid. You know the secret of dissolving underwater rocks through your ingenious art. Metals roar, the brazen cranes of Diomedes sound the trumpet in the air, the brazen serpent hisses, artificial birds flutter, and from their metallic throat, which nevertheless has no voice, come the most melodious melodies. But it is little for you that all these small wonders exist. You have succeeded in reproducing the movements of the sky. The sphere of Archimedes regulates its course according to the sun, describes the movement of the zodiac, and demonstrates the various phases of the moon. A small machine is thus charged with the weight of the world; it is the portable sky, the epitome of the universe, the mirror of nature evolving with incomprehensible mobility in the regions of the ether. It is thus that the stars, whose course science teaches us, nevertheless seem immobile to our eyes. Their course appears stable to us, but their velocity, demonstrated by reason, does not appear at all to our gaze. You have realized all these wonders, of which a single one would suffice for the glory of the greatest genius." After these words of Cassiodorus, I do not believe, says a modern historian of the Church, that there is a single scholar today, truly worthy of the name, who does not bow before Boethius. Never perhaps was such a universal genius given to a man. Boethius appears to us here much greater than the few books that remain of him allow us to know. But the greater he was, the more his renown during his lifetime was universal, and the less it is possible to suppose that the Catholic Church was mistaken when, placing this extraordinary genius in the catalog of its martyrs, it said to the face of the world: Boethius was my child; *vir catholicus Boetius*. Less still is it possible to suppose that the three theological opuscules mentioned in all the manuscripts with the author's name Anicius-Manlius-Torquatus-Severinus Boethius were the surreptitious product of an unknown homonym called Boethus. Does one wish to know, moreover, in what terms Cassiodorus, or rather Theodoric, through the pen of his referendary, spoke of Boethius to the King of the Burgundians when he sent him this marvelous hydraulic clock, which did not only mark the hours but depicted all the astronomical movements and indicated the course of the seasons? "Henceforth," he told him, "you will have in your homeland the masterpiece that you once admired in this city of Rome. It is just that your grace should enjoy our own goods, since you are allied to us by blood! Familiarize the peoples of Burgundy with the wonders of art, teach them to esteem the science of these Romans, their elders, who preach to them the abandonment of the cult of the Gentiles." Thus, in the thought of Theodoric and Cassiodorus, the genius of Boethius was to be an instrument of conversion toward the pagan Burgundians.

Boethius was long the oracle of Theodoric and the idol of the Gothic nation. The greatest honors did not seem sufficient to reward his merit and virtues. Three times he was raised to the consulship, and, by a unique distinction, he held this dignity without a colleague in 510.

He had two sons by Rusticiana, his second wife, who, though still young, were designated consuls for the year 522. It was a privilege reserved for the sons of emperors. Boethius confesses that he felt on this occasion all the joy that fragile honors can provide. Indeed, he saw his two sons carried on a triumphal chariot through the whole city, accompanied by the senate and followed by a prodigious crowd; he himself had a place in the circus between the two councils, and there he received the compliments of the king and those of all the people. That day he delivered the panegyric of Theodoric in the senate, after which he was given a crown and proclaimed the prince of eloquence.

But he did not delay in experiencing the inconstancy of human things, and there was reason to believe that he had only climbed so high to make a more terrible fall. His friends, his riches, his honors could not protect him from the blows of fortune. Happy, however, in his fall, since his virtue was the only cause of his sufferings!

Theodoric, seeing himself established on the throne, gave himself over to the inclinations he had for tyranny. As he grew old, he became melancholy, jealous, and full of distrust for all those who approached him. He gave his confidence to Conigastus and Trigilla, both Goths, and as greedy as they were faithful. These unworthy ministers, who sought only to satisfy their rapacity, crushed the people with excessive taxes. During a famine, they had the wheat they bought at a very low price brought into the prince's granaries. They imagined frivolous pretexts to remove from court several persons of merit and probity, among others Albinus and Paulinus. Boethius took it upon himself to carry the sighs and tears of the provinces to the feet of Theodoric; he begged him in the most pressing manner to let that compassion act of which he had given so many proofs. His representations were useless. The seduced prince would hear nothing. Boethius undertook to make one last effort; he exposed to the king, in full senate, the maneuvers of the public leeches. He told him that he was ready to obey him, and he assured him at the same time of the obedience of all the senators. "We respect," he added, "the royal authority, in whatever hands it may be found, and we leave to it the distribution of its favors as free as the rays of the sun. We must, however, ask you for the liberty, which has always been the most precious advantage of this empire, and pray you to allow us to expose our complaints to you, and to represent to you that your confidence is being abused to oppress your subjects against your intention. Things have reached a point where one can no longer be born rich with impunity, and that having property is a title to experience the rapine of those who cause the public misfortune. The stones themselves make the groans of the people resound. Deign to remember those beautiful words that have so often come from your mouth: 'One must shear the flock, and not flay it.' There is no tribute that can be compared to the precious advantage that a prince derives from the love of his subjects... We conjure you to resume that spirit which made you reign as well over hearts as over provinces; to listen to those whose fidelity cannot be suspect to you; to carry your subjects in your heart, and not to trample them underfoot; to remember that the duty of kings is, not to overwhelm the people under the weight of authority, but to make them happy; to think that princes must behave as fathers, and not as imperial masters, and let themselves be governed by the laws. Open your eyes at last to the misery of your provinces, which groan under horrible concessions, and which are obliged to satisfy, by their sweat and their blood, the avarice of a few individuals, who can be compared to a fire that devours, and to an abyss that swallows everything."

Conigastus and Trigilla, who coveted the property of Boethius, endeavored to represent this speech as an act of rebellion. Then came the dispute with the emperor of Constantinople regarding the Arians, which we have spoken of in the life of Saint John, Pope: the intriguers accused Boethius and Symmachus of maintaining secret correspondence with Justin. Nothing was proven, but it was enough to have them declared guilty of high treason and condemned to exile.

But before recounting the end of this great man, let us resolve some other objections regarding the Christianity of Boethius. Here are these objections:

1st. Cassiodorus left a list of the works of the man who was at once philosopher, mathematician, mechanic, poet, and musician. Now, the treatises that would make him a theologian do not appear in this list. Here is the difficulty, and here is the solution: these treatises are titled: On the Unity of the Trinity; — Are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit substantially God, and is this predicate correct? — Substances as substances are good; — Brief profession of faith; — On the person and the two natures. Now, do we know the extent of what we call today the theological treatises of Boethius? The first has nine pages; the second, two; the third, four; the fourth, five; the last, sixteen. The fact is that Boethius's treatises on theological questions were not works *ex professo*, but loose sheets from letters addressed either to his father-in-law Symmachus, or to the deacon John, his friend, who later bec ame pope un diacre Jean Friend of Boethius and recipient of his theological treatises before his pontificate. der the name John I. We can thus explain why Cassiodorus did not catalog them. Cassiodorus does not mention the other epistles of Boethius either: does it follow that Boethius did not write letters? When Cassiodorus drew up his catalog, the letters that were later called theological treatises were not yet in the public domain.

These letters or treatises bear within themselves intrinsic marks of authenticity that do not allow them to be attributed to anyone other than Boethius. Everyone agrees that this philosopher is the first to have imported into the West the dialectical form of Aristotle, the Peripatetic argumentation, the syllogism. If, therefore, Boethius did not write these treatises, they fell from the sky, for in the 6th century, no one else was capable of applying philosophical language to theological discussions against the Arians and the Nestorians. Saint Augustine himself had not thought of it.

That is not all: all the manuscripts that have preserved these opuscules of Boethius bear as the author's name: *Anicius-Manlius-Torquatus-Severinus Boetius*. All bear the subscription to Symmachus, father-in-law of Boethius, or to the deacon John, his friend. Finally, all relate facts that can only apply to Boethius.

Finally, what made the glory of Boethius during his lifetime, what, after his death, earned him the status of an author studied in all schools for ten centuries, is precisely having translated Greek philosophy into Latin, having made the dialectic of the Orientals flexible for the benefit of the Westerners. If someone else, a namesake for example, had had this glory, would he have remained unknown? Or at least would one have made him a son-in-law of Symmachus? This last confusion would have been impossible, since Symmachus had only three daughters: Galla and Proba who died virgins, and Rusticiana who married the Martyr of Pavia, the patrician Boethius, designated throughout all ages as the author of the Theological Treatises.

2nd. Isidore of Seville, who died in 636, that great bishop so deeply versed in all branches of religious science, author of an encyclopedia which, under the modest title of Etymologies, summarizes all the knowledge of the era, Isidore of Seville does not include Boethius in his catalog of Ecclesiastical Writers. The same silence is found in Bede of Toledo. Let us proceed in order: The writings of Isidore of Seville, as everyone agrees, have not all reached us. His catalog of Ecclesiastical Writers, among others, is mutilated. But, of this latter work, there remains an authentic abridgment written by Honorius, bishop of Autun, around the year 1190. Now, in his third book of Ecclesiastical Writers taken from the work, then intact, of Isidore, the bishop of Autun expresses himself thus: « The patrician and consul Boethius wrote a book on the Trinity, another on the Consolation of Philosophy. He translated from Greek into Latin various treatises on arithmetic, music, geometry, astronomy, and explained the rules of dialectic. He was put to death by Theodoric, king of the Goths ». The identity of Boethius is, we believe, caught in the act there.

And, to enclose in two words our answer to the objection drawn from the silence of some contemporaries, we will say that one can only draw negative conclusions from this silence, which remain without force before positive proofs. We have just cited some testimonies. In the first place, it is appropriate to cite the *Liber Pontificalis* which attributes the death of Boethius to the Arian furies of Theodoric: the authority of this document is today scientifically established. Moreover, if one were to reject the authority of the official annals of the Church of Rome, what reason would one have to also reject the registers of particular churches that relate the same facts and assign them the same causes? The catalog of the Popes, of the Church of Verona for example, says very clearly that « Theodoric, irritated, wanted to destroy the Christians of Italy; that he had the two patricians Symmachus and Boethius arrested, had them struck by the sword, and ordered their bodies to be stolen away ». Verona, where this note was written, shared with Ravenna the royal favors of Theodoric: he often stayed there. One could therefore know perfectly well the motive for Theodoric's hatred against men who had once enjoyed his friendship. And then why this order to remove the bodies of the executed? Is this not the procedure of pagan emperors who did not want the remains of those they had declared infamous to be venerated? If the death of Boethius and Symmachus had not been martyrdom, Theodoric would not have ordered their bodies to be hidden.

Paul the Deacon clearly qualifies Symmachus and Boethius as heroes of the Catholic faith. — Procopius, a pagan author, dedicated these significant lines to them in his book *On the Gothic War*: « Symmachus and his son-in-law Boethius », he says, « both of the most illustrious birth, both consular men, held the first rank in the senate of Rome. They professed philosophy, and no one was superior to them in the practice of justice. They devoted their wealth to the service of the poor, native or foreign. Their reputation extended far. It drew upon them the hatred of jealous and envious men, whose calumnies had a deplorable influence on the mind of King Theodoric. This prince admitted the denunciation of sycophants who accused Symmachus and Boethius of plotting a conspiracy. He had them put to death and confiscated their estates ».

In the eyes of Procopius, Symmachus and Boethius are not only united by the bonds of affinity, they study and profess the same philosophy: Now, for a pagan, the religion of Jesus Christ was nothing other than a system of philosophy. But what, under this name, allows one to guess the Christian religion, is the exercise of charity, a virtue unknown to paganism. We will add: If the patrician Symmachus was a Christian, Boethius was one, since Procopius gives the same praise to both and he would not have failed, as a pagan author, to note in favor of paganism the beneficence of Boethius, if the latter had been his co-religionist. Now, nothing is more incontestable than the Christianity of Symmachus. The famous *Vale in Christo* by which Saint Ennodius ends one of the letters he addresses to him is a proof that no one thinks of contesting. On the other hand, Saint Avitus of Vienne says to him in one of his letters: « We hope that you do not love less to see your Church possess the See of Peter than your city, the principality of the world ». Finally, Symmachus, too, is in the catalog of Saints under May 27, and his death certainly had as its motive his attachment to the Catholic faith, his opposition to the Arian furies of Theodoric. Are we not entitled now, after that, to ask the adversaries of Boethius why the alleged pagan so ardently, so constantly sought the friendship of Bishop Ennodius, the alliance of the Catholic Symmachus, of the man whom he himself calls somewhere the Saint, and why twice he united himself with Christians as fervent as Elpis, who dedicated her youth and her muse to singing the Apostles, and Rusticiana, who, having become a widow, gave all her wealth to the poor and reduced herself to beggary?

Is that all? No. The patrician Tertullus, father of Saint Placidus, disciple of Saint Benedict, formed the project of going to visit Monte Cassino. All that is illustrious among the Catholics of Rome wants to accompany him; they are: Boethius, — he is named first, — Symmachus, Vitalian, Gerdian, and Equitius. Let us admit it, this Boethius, a devout pilgrim of Monte Cassino, could not have been a follower of paganism; all men of good faith recognize it.

3rd. We have now arrived at the capital objection, the one drawn from the alleged silence that Boethius keeps regarding his Christian convictions in his famous work *The Consolation of Philosophy*. « Why », ask the critics, « wh Consolation philosophique Literary masterpiece written by Boethius during his exile. y in his prison of Pavia, writing or dictating the pages of his immortal *Consolation of Philosophy*, did he not once pronounce the name of the incarnate Word? He was going to die, and what a death! The tortures reserved for the first martyrs awaited the philosopher, the patrician, the ex-Christian consul of the 6th century, and yet the name of Jesus Christ, his Savior, his God, does not fall from his lips even once! » There are, in this brilliant outburst, two errors, one of fact and one of criticism. First, it is inaccurate to say that Boethius was locked between the four walls of a prison when he wrote the *Consolation of Philosophy*. He says himself « that many people would believe themselves ravished to heaven if they possessed a share, however small, of the remnants of his fortune, and that the very country he called a place of exile was a homeland for those who inhabited it! ... It is therefore probable that Boethius had simply been exiled from Rome and confined to Pavia, but not thrown into chains. He himself did not believe in an imminent execution: the vast subject of composition he had outlined for himself to charm the leisure of his banishment is the proof. Could he, on the other hand, suspect that Theodoric, after thirty years of glory, would come to sacrifice his best friends to a brutal jealousy? So much for the fact. In the eyes of criticism, the book of the *Consolation of Philosophy* remained incomplete, and if the eternal Word which, by all appearances, was to form the crowning of his work, is absent from the part he composed, this silence proves absolutely nothing against the Christianity of Boethius. What he was able, on the contrary, to write of his book, reveals a disciple of Jesus Christ and of uncreated wisdom more than a follower of the philosophy of Plato. Carried away in the study of this masterpiece.

The author pretends to converse there with uncreated wisdom. The dialogue continues through five books in prose interspersed with verses summarizing the feelings that the conversation has given rise to. In the first book, Boethius echoes the bitter complaints that the comparison of their past happiness with their present misfortune wrings from the wretched: he says that in this world one should not count on fortune. He himself tells Wisdom, his interlocutor, the causes of his disgrace. — In the second book, Wisdom consoles him, and tells him that no one has the right to complain of bad fortune, since by accepting the good, one must be ready to accept the bad. — In the third, Wisdom defines happiness: a perfect and permanent state where all goods are united; and demonstrates that none of the ancient philosophers had an adequate notion of happiness. — The fourth establishes that true happiness consists in the practice of virtue: he says a word there about the future punishments reserved for the wicked and distinguishes very clearly — in accordance with Catholic dogma — the purgative punishments from those that are exercised with all penal rigor. It is there that the philosopher establishes the difference that exists between fate and Providence. One can summarize his demonstration with this definition of chance: chance is the known effect of an unknown cause. — The fifth establishes the thesis of human freedom, and reconciles this freedom with the notion of divine foreknowledge. « In God », says Boethius, « everything is present. He foresees things because they happen, but they do not happen because He foresees them ». The school has not provided a better argument against fatality. — There the *Consolation of Philosophy* stops abruptly. To be convinced that this work could not have been finished, it suffices to read the following passage:

« Now that I have placed before your eyes the idea of true happiness », says Wisdom, « now that you know in what it consists, I will have, after having gone through a few more indispensable preliminaries, to show you the path that alone leads to the abode of happiness. I should attach wings to your soul, so that it can soar in the heights. Shaking off like a useless burden sorrow and pain, under my guidance, by my paths, on my chariot (*meis vehiculis*), you will return safe and sound to the homeland. When I show you this homeland that you are looking for at this moment like a forgotten thing, you will exclaim: "Yes, I remember, it is indeed it, it is the homeland of my soul, it is there that I will fix my abode" ».

Boethius himself sensed that time would be lacking for him to subsequently address the great questions of the homeland of souls, of the path that leads there, of the chariots that transport there; for, at the beginning of the fifth book, Wisdom tells Boethius that she is in a hurry to open to him the road that must lead him back to the homeland and that she fears, because of secondary discussions, not being able to finish the career that remains for them to travel... The exposition of Christian dogma was to crown the philosophical work. But it is far from the case that, in the five completed books, Boethius speaks the language of a rationalist philosopher: one guesses the Christian under the philosopher's cloak. « Do you believe », Wisdom says to him, « that nothing can oppose the will of God, the sovereign good? » — « No », replies Boethius. — « There is therefore », continues Wisdom, « a sovereignly good God who, by His Providence, directs and disposes all things with strength and sweetness? » — « Yes », replies the interlocutor; « and I confess that all the reasons you have just provided me with ravish me even less than these last words... » Does one not see the heart of the Christian palpitating there? Let one read again the moved words he devotes to the dogma of prayer, this refuge of the wretched? Criticism has been astonished to find, in an isolated phrase, the opinion of the pre-existence of souls borrowed by Origen from Plato: it suffices to answer that the doctrine of Origen was only definitively condemned twenty-five years after the death of Boethius.

It is probable that the reading of the book *The Consolation of Philosophy* where Boethius pleads his innocence, finished ruining him in the mind of the prince. « My condemnation agreed upon in advance », he says, « makes today the triumph of my accusers. And yet what is my crime? I am imputed a secret correspondence, which never existed. If I had been granted what is not refused to the last of the miserable, if I had been confronted with my calumniators, the truth and my innocence would have burst into broad daylight. — What then! Do they want to claim that I conspired? But this conspiracy is a dream. That I wished for the restoration of Roman liberty? But was such a restoration possible? And would to God that it had been! I would have answered like Canius once did to Caligula: "If I had known of such a design, you would never have seen anything of it" »: — *Si ego scissem, tu ne scisses*! You remember what happened in Verona when a king, greedy for our common ruin, wanted to involve all the senators in the accusation of Albinus. I guaranteed with my head the innocence of the senators, that of Albinus, my own. Is it for this that I was judged without being heard, and exiled five hundred miles from Rome? If I had, as a sacrilegious arsonist, set fire to sacred buildings; if I had, as an abominable assassin, plunged the sword into the hearts of priests; if I had plotted the extermination of all good people, I would have been cited in person, I would have been legally heard, confronted, convicted, punished. But without hearing me, without judging me, I am condemned to proscription, perhaps to death. The accusers accumulate against me the accusations of ambition, of magic, of sacrilege. Sacrilege, I whose motto has always been *sequere Deum* (Deum sequere). Magician, I who never had anything but horror for impure spirits, I whose ideal has always been to become more and more similar to God! Ambitious, I who had banished from my heart every kind of attachment to the things of this world! To prevent even the suspicion of such crimes, it was only necessary to cast one's eyes on the sanctuary of innocence of my house, on the upright honor of the friends who surrounded me, on my father-in-law Symmachus, a Saint, venerable as wisdom itself.

Undoubtedly, this defense by Boethius was triumphant, but it was bound to inflame the anger of the King of Italy. "It was in the month of October 525," says M. d u Roure. Théodoric King of the Ostrogoths and ruler of the West during the time of Gelasius. "Theodoric suddenly sent to Eusebius, governor of Ticinum, the order to extract from Boethius by torture the confession of his alleged crimes, the denunciation of his accomplices, and to put him to death if he refused to speak. Tyrants are only too well obeyed. It pains us to call Theodoric a tyrant, but, from this moment on, he deserves it, and we shall give him no other name. The prison of Calvenzana, ne ar Pa Pavie City in Italy, seat of the saint's bishopric and place where his relics are preserved. via, was chosen as the theater of the execution. The governor went there with the apparatus that follows

SAINT HILDEVERT, BISHOP OF MEAUX, PATRON OF GOURNAY (680).

the executioners. Boethius, exercised by a long practice of virtue, saw this procession arrive with the same composure he had recently used to discourse on his misfortunes. They asked him for confessions; he made none. Then began for him, between the tearing of the flesh and the firmness of the soul, one of those memorable struggles which the historian, through a cowardly and childish delicacy, must not spare the reader from seeing, but which he must, on the contrary, feed him with in a way, because they are a sublime lesson." After a long and bloody flagellation, the body of Boethius was stretched on the wheel. A cord wrapped around his head was tightened by a winch until his eyes were forced from their sockets. This torture, slowly administered, could not extract any revelation from the illustrious patient. When he was detached from the instrument of torture, he was still alive. It is said that he brought his hands to his head as if to force his eyes back into their bloody cavities. The executioner's axe, a few moments later, ended his martyrdom (October 23, 525). Thus died the Christian philosopher, one of the most complete geniuses to have appeared on earth, the patrician, the ex-consul Anicius-Manlius-Torquatus-Severinus Boethius. His relics, initially hidden from the faithful by the express order o f The Pavie City in Italy, seat of the saint's bishopric and place where his relics are preserved. odoric, were, after the tyrant's death, brought to Pavia and deposited in the tomb of Elpis, his first wife, under the portal of a church that Father Papebroch believes to be the one seen near the baptistery known as the Tower of Boethius, which stood until 1584. Luitprand, in 725, transferred the remains of Boethius to the Basilica of Saint Peter in Ciel d'Oro. Finally, Emperor Otto III, in 998, erected in honor of Boethius the current tomb that one still admires in the Church of the Augustinians in Pavia.

We will not stop to demonstrate the absurdity of a final supposition made to prove that the Boethius honored as a Saint in Pavia is not the Christian philosopher who occupies us, but an African bishop of the same name, exiled by the Vandals to Sardinia, and whose relics were brought to Pavia at the same time as those of Saint Augustine by Luitprand, King of the Lombards, in 725. The chroniclers have transmitted to us the exact list of bishops who died in Sardinia whose relics were transported by Luitprand to Pavia: no bishop by the name of Boethus or Boetius appears there. How, moreover, can one suppose that people would have immediately and suddenly agreed to venerate as those of the philosopher Boethius the remains of an African bishop? Boethius had died in Pavia, had been buried in Pavia; it would have been absolutely impossible to attribute his cult to a stranger.

The people of Pavia, faithful to the cult of the martyr Boethius, honor him even in our days, every year, on October 23, with a public solemnity.

We took the liberty of asking His Grace the Bishop of Pavia if any cult was still rendered to Boethius. M. Ariodante Ouette, secretary of the Bishopric of Pavia, was kind enough to answer us with the following lines: "Bishopric of Pavia — Pavia, September 7, 1872. In response to your esteemed letter of August 31 last, I have the honor to inform you that the Diocese of Pavia celebrates, under the double rite, the office and mass of Saint Severinus-Boethius on October 23: the office and mass are from the common of a martyr. The cult of the Saint dates back to the highest antiquity. His skull and his body are for the most part preserved, with the greatest veneration, in this cathedral church." — Thus, while people argue about whether Boethius was a Christian, for centuries an entire diocese has honored him as a Saint and celebrated his feast. This proves how wrong it is not to resort to the sources.

Cf. Du Roure, Hist. de Théodoric (1846); Darras, Hist. de l'Église, and especially D. Gervaise, Hist. de Boèce.