Difference between revisions of "Pope Marcellinus" - New World Encyclopedia

Saint Marcellinus
Saint Marcellinus
Birth name	Marcellinus
Papacy began	June 30, 296
Papacy ended	April 1, 304 ?
Predecessor	Caius
Successor	Marcellus I
Born	{{{birth_date}}}; ???
Died	April 1 304 ?; Rome, Italy

Revision as of 23:08, 4 July 2008

Pope Saint Marcellinus was the bishop of Rome beginning c. 296 until his death in c. 304 C.E. His reign is particularly controversial, in that he is believed to have committed the sin of apostasy while pope, by sacrificing to pagan idols during the persecution of Emperor Diocletian. The majority of his pontificate, however, was peaceful and prosperous. Some authorities dispute that Marcellinus succumbed to temptation under persecution, while others suggest that he quickly repented and redeemed himself by becoming a martyr.

Biography

Little is known of Macellinus' history before he become pope. According to the "Liber Pontificalis" he was a Roman citizen, the son of a certain Projectus. The Liberian Catalogue of popes gives June 30 as the day of his election, and the years 296-304 as the time of his pontificate.

Marcellinus’ pontificate began at a time when Diocletian was Roman Emperor, but had not yet started to persecute the Christians. He thus left Christianity relatively free and so the church’s membership and influence could grow. Diocletian first moved against Christianity in the year 302. Christian soldiers in the Roman army were force to resign, and later the Church's property was confiscated and Christian books were destroyed. After two fires in Diocletian’s palace were blamed on the Christians, the emperor took harder measures: Christians had either to apostatize, or they were sentenced to death.

The emperor's anti-Christian edicts in Rome were executed by Caesar Maximian, causing the great difficulties in the Roman Church after 303. Marcellinus died in the second year of the persecution. Contemporary sources do not mention him as a martyr. His name does not occur either in the list of martyrs or even in the list of the bishops in the fourth-century Roman Chronograph. Neither is he mentioned in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum".

In mentioning Marcellinus, the church historian Eusebius uses an obscure but perhaps telling expression: he was " overtaken by the persecution." Hist. Eccl., VII, 32). From this it seems that Eusebius believed he did not suffer martyrdom. The question is, did he succumb to it spiritually?

Did Marcellinus apostacize?

Subsequent reports accused Marcellinus of having given up the sacred books after Diocletian's first edict, and also of having offered incense to the gods to protect himself during the later persecution. The Liber Pontificalis, basing itself on the lost Acts of St Marcellinus, relates that during Diocletian’s persecution, Marcellinus was called upon to sacrifice and indeed offered incense to Roman idols. However, it hastens to add that he repented shortly afterwards, confessing his faith in Christ, and suffering martyrdom with several companions. Other documents also speak of his defection. It may be this lapse that explains the silence of the ancient liturgical calendars regarding his episcopacy at Rome.

In the beginning of the fifth century, Petilianus, the Donatist bishop of Constantine, Algeria, affirmed that Marcellinus and his priests had given up the holy books to the pagans during the persecution and offered incense to false gods. Augustine of Hippo, himself a leading anti-Donatist, denied the affair. Documents dealing with confiscation of the church buildings at Rome, brought forward by Augustine during the Donatist controversy in Africa, mention only two Roman deacons as traitors who collaborated with Rome.

At the beginning of the sixth century, an apocryphal document appeared purported to be the acts of the council of Sinuessa (located between Rome and Capua). Supposedly a synod of 300 bishops, the meeting reportedly took place in 303 in order to inquire into the accusation against Marcellinus, that he had sacrificed at Diocletian's order. On the first two days Marcellinus had denied everything, but on the third day he admitted his lapse and repented. However, the synod passed no sentence on him, declaring itself incompetent to pass judgment on the Roman pontiff. When Diocletian learned of the decision, he had the pope and several bishops of this synod executed. However, historians almost unanimously agree that the "acts" of this council are forged.

Catholic tradition holds that "the pope did not comply with the imperial edict by any overt act, such as the surrender of the sacred writings, or even the offering of incense before the statue of a god."^[1]

It is notably that neither Eusebius nor Theodoret mentions Marcellinus' alleged apostasy. On the other hand it is remarkable, that in the Roman Chronograph whose first edition was in 336, the name of this pope alone is missing, while all other popes from Lucius I onwards are forthcoming.

What did happen to Marcellinus? It is possible that he was able to hide himself in a safe place of concealment, as many other bishops did, and simply died of natural causes. But it is also possible that when the edict of outright persecution was issued, he somehow secured his own immunity—for instance through a bribe. In Roman Christian circles this would have been imputed to him as weakness, but not as apostasy; yet his reputation would certainly have suffered from it.

However, it is certain that his tomb was venerated by the Christians of Rome, and that he was later recognized as a martyr. Marcellinus died in 304, but the day of his death is not certain. In the Liber Pontificalis his burial is dated as April 26. This is probably a mistake, but this date is retained in the historical martyrologies of the ninth century and, based on them, in the later martyrologies. If we calculate the date of his death from the duration of his office given in the Liberian Catalogue, he would have died on October 24 or 25, 304. His body was interred in the Catacomb of Priscilla on the Via Salaria, near the crypt where the martyr Crescentius. The Catacomb of Callixtus, the official burial place of the Roman Church, was evidently confiscated in the persecution, while the Catacomb of Priscilla, was still at the disposal of the Christians.

Legacy

According to the Liber Pontificalis, Marcellinus was buried, on April 26, 304, in the cemetery of Priscilla, on the Via Salaria, 25 days after his martyrdom; the Liberian Catalogue gives as the date October 25. The fact of the martyrdom, too, is not established with certainty. After a considerable interregnum he was succeeded by Marcellus, with whom he has sometimes been confused. During his pontificate, Armenia became the first Christian nation in 301.

The tomb of Marcellinus was venerated at a very early date by the Christians of Rome. The precise statements about its position, in the "Liber Pontificalis", indicate this. In one of the seventh century itineraries of the graves of the Roman martyrs, in the "Epitome de locis ss. martyrum", it is expressly mentioned among the sacred graves of the Catacomb of Priscilla (De Rossi, "Roma sotteranea", I, 176). In the excavations at this catacomb the crypt of St. Crescentius, beside which was the burial chamber of Marcellinus, was satisfactorily identified. But no monument was discovered which had reference to this pope. The precise position of the burial chamber is therefore still uncertain. The lost "passio" of Marcellinus written towards the end of the fifth century, which was utilized by the author of the "Liber Pontificalis", shows that he was honoured as a martyr at that time; nevertheless his name appears first in the "Martyrology" of Bede, who drew his account from the "Liber Pontificalis" (Quentin, "Les martyrologes historiques", 103, sq.). This feast is on 26 April. The earlier Breviaries, which follow the account of the "Liber Pontificalis" concerning his lapse and his repentance, were altered in 1883.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain.

External information

Catholic Encyclopedia of 1913

Roman Catholic Popes
Preceded by: Caius	Bishop of Rome Pope June 30, 296– April 1, 304	Succeeded by: Marcellus I

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

Pope Marcellinus ^history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

History of "Pope Marcellinus"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.

↑ Pope St. Marcellinus. www.newadvent.org. Retrieved July 4, 2008.

[1] Pope St. Marcellinus. www.newadvent.org. Retrieved July 4, 2008.

[1]

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 The emperor's anti-Christian edicts in Rome were executed by Caesar [[Maximian]], causing the great difficulties in the Roman Church after 303. Marcellinus died in the second year of the persecution. Contemporary sources do not mention him as a martyr. His name does not occur either in the list of martyrs or even in the list of the bishops in the fourth-century Roman ''Chronograph''. Neither is he mentioned in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum".
-In mentioning Marcellinus, the church historian [[Eusebius]] uses an obscure expression: "the persecution also affected him"  "Hist. Eccl.", VII, 32). From this it seems that Eusebius believed he did not suffer martyrdom, for he normally identifies martyrs as such.
+In mentioning Marcellinus, the church historian [[Eusebius]] uses an obscure but perhaps telling expression: he was " overtaken by the persecution." ''Hist. Eccl.'', VII, 32). From this it seems that Eusebius believed he did not suffer martyrdom. The question is, did he succumb to it spiritually?
 ===Did Marcellinus apostacize?===
-Later reports accused Marcellinus of having given up the sacred books after Diocletian's first edict, and later of having offered incense to the gods to protect himself from the persecution. The ''[[Liber Pontificalis]]'', basing itself on the lost ''Acts of St Marcellinus'', relates that during Diocletian’s persecution, Marcellinus was called upon to sacrifice and indeed offered incense to idols. However, it hastens to add that he repented shortly afterwards, confessed his faith in Christ, and suffered martyrdom with several companions. Other documents also speak of his defection. It may be this lapse that explains the silence of the ancient liturgical calendars regarding his episcopacy at Rome.
+Subsequent reports accused Marcellinus of having given up the sacred books after Diocletian's first edict, and also of having offered incense to the gods to protect himself during the later persecution. The ''[[Liber Pontificalis]]'', basing itself on the lost ''Acts of St Marcellinus'', relates that during Diocletian’s persecution, Marcellinus was called upon to sacrifice and indeed offered incense to Roman idols. However, it hastens to add that he repented shortly afterwards, confessing his faith in Christ, and suffering martyrdom with several companions. Other documents also speak of his defection. It may be this lapse that explains the silence of the ancient liturgical calendars regarding his episcopacy at Rome.
-In the beginning of the fifth century, [[Petilianus]], the [[Donatist]] bishop of [[Constantine, Algeria|Constantine]], affirmed that Marcellinus and his priests had given up the holy books to the pagans during the persecution and offered incense to false gods. [[Augustine of Hippo|St Augustine]], himself a leading anti-Donatist, denied the affair.
+In the beginning of the fifth century, [[Petilianus]], the [[Donatist]] bishop of [[Constantine, Algeria]], affirmed that Marcellinus and his priests had given up the holy books to the pagans during the persecution and offered incense to false gods. [[Augustine of Hippo]], himself a leading anti-Donatist, denied the affair. Documents dealing with confiscation of the church buildings at Rome, brought forward by Augustine during the Donatist controversy in Africa, mention only two Roman deacons as traitors who collaborated with Rome.
+At the beginning of the sixth century, an apocryphal document appeared purported to be the acts of the council of Sinuessa (located between Rome and Capua). Supposedly a synod of 300 bishops, the meeting reportedly took place in 303 in order to inquire into the accusation against Marcellinus, that he had sacrificed at Diocletian's order. On the first two days Marcellinus had denied everything, but on the third day he admitted his lapse and repented. However, the synod passed no sentence on him, declaring itself incompetent to pass judgment on the Roman pontiff. When Diocletian learned of the decision, he had the pope and several bishops of this synod executed. However, historians almost unanimously agree that the "acts" of this council are forged.
-In the Acts of confiscation of the church buildings at Rome, which at the great Carthaginian conference between Catholics and Donatists, were brought forward by the latter, only two Roman deacons, Straton and Cassius, were named as traitors. St. Augustine, in his replies to Petilianus, disputes the truth of the latter's report ("Contra litteras Petiliani", II, 202: "De quibus et nos solum respondemus: aut non probatis et ad neminem pertinet, aut probatis et ad nos non pertinet"; "De unico baptismo contra Petilianum", cap. xvi: "Ipse scelestos et sacrilegos fuisse dicit; ego innocentes fuisse respondeo"). One can only conclude from Petilianus's accusation that such rumours against Marcellinus and Roman priests were circulated in Africa; but that they could not be proved, otherwise St. Augustine would not have been able to assert the innocence of the accused so decidedly, or safely to have referred to the matter at the Carthaginian conference. But even in Rome similar stories were told of Marcellinus in certain circles, so that in two later legendary reports a formal apostasy was attributed to this pope, of course followed by repentance and penance. The biography of Marcellinus in the "Liber Pontificalis", which probably alludes to a lost "passio" of his, relates that he was led to the sacrifice that he might scatter incense, which he did. But after a few days he was seized with remorse, and was condemned to death by Diocletian with three other Christians, and beheaded. It is clear that this report attempts to combine a rumour that the pope had offered incense to the gods, with the fact that, in other circles he was regarded as a martyr and his tomb venerated.
+Catholic tradition holds that "the pope did not comply with the imperial edict by any overt act, such as the surrender of the sacred writings, or even the offering of incense before the statue of a god."<ref>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09637d.htm Pope St. Marcellinus]. ''www.newadvent.org''. Retrieved July 4, 2008.</ref>
-At the beginning of the sixth century, rather later than this "passio Marcellini", a collection of forged documents appeared, which were manufactured in the dispute between Pope Symmachus and Laurentius. Among them are also found apocryphal Acts of an alleged synod of 300 bishops, which took place in 303 at Sinuessa (between Rome and Capua) in order to inquire into the accusation against Marcellinus that he had sacrificed at Diocletian's order. On the first two days Marcellinus had denied everything, but on the third day he admitted his lapse and repented; however the synod passed no sentence on him "quia prima sedes non judicatur a quoquam". When Diocletian learnt of the occurrence, he had the pope and several bishops of this synod executed (Hefele, "Konziliengeschichte", I, 2 Aufl. 143-45). The spuriousness of these acts is almost certain. The forger has made the most of the rumour of Marcellinus's lapse for his own purposes in a different way from the author of the "passio", which crept into the "Liber Pontificalis". These apocryphal fragments cannot by themselves be considered as historical proofs, any more than the rumours in Donatist circles in Africa. It is accepted as certain that the pope did not comply with the imperial edict by any overt act, such as the surrender of the sacred writings, or even the offering of incense before the statue of a god. Such an apostasy of a Roman bishop would without a doubt have been given the greatest prominence by contemporary authors. Eusebius has not made use of the above mentioned idea. And later, Theodoret was still less in a position to state in his "Church History", that Marcellinus had been prominent in the persecution ton ’en tô diogmô diaprépsanta (Hist. Eccl., I, 2). And Augustine also would not have been able to assert so curtly in answer to Petilian, that Marcellinus and the priests accused with him as traitors and "lapsi" were innocent.
+It is notably that neither Eusebius nor Theodoret mentions Marcellinus' alleged apostasy. On the other hand it is remarkable, that in the Roman ''Chronograph'' whose first edition was in 336, the name of this pope alone is missing, while all other popes from Lucius I onwards are forthcoming.
-On the other hand it is remarkable, that in the Roman "Chronograph" whose first edition was in 336, the name of this pope alone is missing, while all other popes from Lucius I onwards are forthcoming. In the manuscript there is indeed under 16 Jan. (XVIII kal. Feb.) the name Marcellinus, but this is clearly a slip of the pen for "Marcellus"; for the feast of this pope is found both in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" and in the old liturgical Roman books under this date, while in the "Liber Pontificalis" and, in connection therewith, in the historical martyrologies of the ninth century, the feast of Marcellinus is transferred to 26 April (Acta SS., June, VII, 185). By certain investigators (Mommsen, de Smedt) the lack of Marcellinus's name was traced to the omission of a copyist, owing to the similarity of the names, and in the "Depositio Episcoporum" they claimed to supplement the "Chronograph": XVII kal. Febr. Marcelli in Priscillæ VI kal. Maii Marcellini in Priscillæ (de Smedt, "Introductio in hist. eccl. critice tractandam", 512-13). But this hypothesis is not accepted. The dates of the death of the popes, as far as Sylvester in the list of successions, are identical with the days of the month on which their feasts are celebrated. Thus Marcellinus must come first after Gaius, whose name is quoted under the date X kal. Maii. Then Marcellinus is lacking not only in the "Chronograph", but also in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum", and in all fifth and sixth century lists of popes. This omission is therefore not accidental, but intentional.
+What did happen to Marcellinus? It is possible that he was able to hide himself in a safe place of concealment, as many other bishops did, and simply died of natural causes. But it is also possible that when the edict of outright persecution was issued, he somehow secured his own immunity--for instance through a bribe. In Roman Christian circles this would have been imputed to him as weakness, but not as apostasy; yet his reputation would certainly have suffered from it.
-In connection with the above mentioned rumours and the narratives of apocryphal fragments, it must indeed be admitted that in certain circles at Rome the conduct of the pope during the Diocletian persecution was not approved. In this persecution we know of only two Roman clerics who were martyred: the priest Marcellinus and the exorcist Petrus. The Roman bishop and the other members of the higher clergy, except the above clerics, were able to elude the persecutors. How this happened we do not know. It is possible that Pope Marcellinus was able to hide himself in a safe place of concealment in due time, as many other bishops did. But it is also possible that at the publication of the edict he secured his own immunity; in Roman circles this would have been imputed to him as weakness, so that his memory suffered thereunder, and he was on that account omitted by the author of the "Depositio Episcoporum" from the "Chronograph", while he found a place in the "Catalogus Liberianus", which was almost contemporary. But his tomb was venerated by the Christians of Rome, and he was afterwards recognized as a martyr, as the "passio" shows. Marcellinus died in 304. The day of his death is not certain; in the "Liber Pontificalis" his burial is wrongly placed at 26 April, and this date is retained in the historical martyrologies of the ninth century, and from them, in the later martyrologies. But if we calculate the date of his death from the duration of his office given in the Liberian Catalogue, he would have died on 24 or 25 Oct., 304. His body was interred in the Catacomb of Priscilla on the Via Salaria, near the crypt where the martyr Crescentius found his resting-place. The Catacomb of Callistus, the official burial place of the Roman Church, where the predecessors of Marcellinus were buried during several decades, was evidently confiscated in the persecution, while the Catacomb of Priscilla, belonging to the Acilii Glabriones, was still at the disposal of the Christians.
+However, it is certain that his tomb was venerated by the Christians of Rome, and that he was later recognized as a martyr. Marcellinus died in 304, but the day of his death is not certain. In the ''Liber Pontificalis'' his burial is dated as April 26. This is probably a mistake, but this date is retained in the historical martyrologies of the ninth century and, based on them, in the later martyrologies. If we calculate the date of his death from the duration of his office given in the ''Liberian Catalogue'', he would have died on October 24 or 25, 304. His body was interred in the Catacomb of Priscilla on the Via Salaria, near the crypt where the martyr Crescentius. The Catacomb of Callixtus, the official burial place of the Roman Church, was evidently confiscated in the persecution, while the Catacomb of Priscilla, was still at the disposal of the Christians.
 ==Legacy==