Nicetas or Niceas
Acta Sanctorum, June 22
Source text: Public Domain. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://actasanctorum.org/june/day-22/nicetas-or-niceas.html
----------------------------------------

ON ST. NICETAS OR NICEAS

BISHOP OF ROMATIANA IN DACIA
AND ANOTHER OF AQUILEIA IN ITALY.

A Collection on the cult, acts, age.

5TH CENTURY.

[Preface]

Nicetas or Niceas, Bishop of the Church of Romatiana (St.)

Nicetas or Niceas, Bishop of Aquileia in Italy (St.)

G. H.

AUTHOR D. P.

In the sacred Geography of Charles of
St. Paul of Fouilloy, page 210, is indicated
the Province of Sardica, in
each Dacia and Upper Moesia;
and after the named Sardica
the metropolis, [An Episcopal See in Dacia.] next is subjoined "Remesiana
to Hierocles." A Manuscript adds "in Dacia."
Diogenianus Bishop of Remesiana was present
at the Council of Chalcedon, where in the first Action, in the Labbe
edition, column 118, among the other Bishops'
names is had, "Of Diogenianus of Remesiana
of Dacia." By the same Charles in an old notice, at the end
of the said Geography, in the Province of Mediterranean Dacia,
among other Episcopal cities is named on page
25 "Remesiana." Situated this was between the said Sardica
and Naissus, which in the Peutinger Table
"Romesiana" is called. But in the Martyrologies "Romatiana,
Rometiana and Romaciana" it is called.
These things seem able to be taken about the arena ascribed to the Saint:
now about the name of him we inquire. We had
here at Antwerp the library of the Queen of Sweden, [The name St. Nicetas or Niceas,]
in which a remarkable codex of the Martyrology of Ado, in the century
of Christ twelfth written, to this 22nd
of June offered these: "On the same day the deposition of Blessed Nicetas,
of the city of Romantiana the Bishop." But in place of
Nicetas, in the printed Ado and in Usuard and
the supposititious Bede is expressed the name Niceas
the single letter being omitted by carelessness perhaps
of the copyists: this however have followed commonly the more recent.
But we judge to be preferred the reading
of the manuscript of Ado, about whom it was treated on the 15th of February in our Preface
to the Life of SS. Faustinus and Jovita
number 14 and 15. Peter de Natalibus, three hundred
and more years ago, in book 5 chapter 140, about this
Saint inserted such a eulogy.

[2] "Niceas, Bishop of the city of Romatiana,
with sanctity and honesty of morals composed, [Eulogy from Peter de Natalibus]
and in doctrine lofty and in eloquence renowned appeared.
Who six, coming to baptism,
with fitting instructions informing, little books
published. Of which the first contains what
they ought to do, who to the grace of baptism to come
desire. The second on the errors of Heathenism.
The third on the faith of the one Majesty. The fourth
against Genealogy. The fifth on the Symbol,
the sixth on the victim of the Paschal Lamb. To
a fallen also Virgin a little book of correction,
with all praises remarkable, [Nicetas in Gennadius] he sent.
But he rested in the Lord on the 10th day before the Kalends of July."
These things Gennadius on the illustrious, namely Writers
Ecclesiastical, chapter 22. Peter de Natalibus
follow Maurolyco, Felici, Galesini,
Canisius, and others. Lucas Holstenius in his Animadversions
to this Roman Martyrology day, indicates,
that that admirable codex of Gennadius,
at St. Andrew of the Valley, "Nicetas," not "Niceas"
writes, as above we have noted in the very ancient
manuscript of Ado of the Queen of Sweden also "Nicetas" to be had;
and through an error of copyists the letter omitted
"Niceas" to be written. [inscribed variously in the most ancient Martyrologies with St. Paulinus,] On the contrary Baronius in the Notes
of the Martyrology to this 22nd of June, indicates somewhere
"Nicetas" for "Niceas" to be read: of the Hieronymian
Martyrology the copies all, and the rest with
them above in St. Paulinus cited old manuscripts,
after him immediately subjoin, "And elsewhere the deposition
of holy memory of Nicetus the Bishop," as the Epternach
and Corbie; the Lucca indeed "of Niceus,"
the Blume and Gellone "of Nica," the Augsburg
finally "of Nicetus the Confessor," with no other word
premised.

[3] This most constant and most ancient conjunction
of each Saint from years more than a thousand thus together
ascribed to the Hieronymian Martyrology, of all
the most ancient, [and by this remarkably praised;] not to mention Ado, Usuard, and the more recent
certain ones, to have been made seems either
because on the same day both, though not in the same year,
they died; or rather because the true of Nicetas's Feast
was unknown, and so unanimous friends it pleased
by a commemoration to unite. Ado, Usuard and others
more expressly "Nicetas in Dacia" write, thinking
without doubt that, which also thought Holstenius, to be
this Nicetas that most renowned guest
of St. Paulinus, [but to the Roman also ascribed on the 7th of January, as another.] whom Baronius on the 7th of January placed
… whom however no Martyrology
published or manuscript in that place acknowledges:
and therefore what there he noted, he hither to be transferred
ought. These things Holstenius. We after our custom, on account of the authority
of the Roman Martyrology, about St. Nicetas
Bishop of the Dacians, on the same 7th of January treated,
and his Acts through three chapters deduced, and
especially from St. Paulinus's writings excerpted illustrated;
and them with this wish we concluded: "Would that the things
by him excellently done to writing had been committed! [He visits Paulinus in the year 398]
An illustrious without doubt of an Apostolic herald
example in them we would have expressed." Pierre
François Chifflet our [colleague], several times by us mentioned,
a double of St. Nicetas's coming into the city
of Nola to St. Paulinus in part 2 chapter II thus assigns,
that the former coming happened in the year 398,
when the Life of St. Martin, by Severus written,
he himself in letter X to Severus, asserts that he had revealed
to the venerable Bishop and most learned Nicetas,
who from Dacia, by the Romans deservedly to-be-admired
had come. But the second of his coming
is noted by Chifflet at the year 402. For
Paulinus in Feast-poem IX thus the present Nicetas addresses. [and 402.]
"You have come at last, in the fourth year restored to me."
But him, whom Gennadius and Peter de Natalibus
above relate, not another to be from Paulinus's
friend with Holstenius we judge: because those little works
by a most learned Pontiff, as by Paulinus he is called,
plainly seem to have been composed. But each of Nicetas's
passage through the city of Nola happened
at the said years' beginning, at the feast day of St. Felix
of Nola, the 14th of January. How long afterward he lived,
not yet have we been able to find.

[4] Cardinal Baronius in the Notes to this 22nd
of June, letter f, confesses that he long and much, what
was that Episcopal city Romatiana
inquiring, labored; [Baronius here made the one related a Bishop of Aquileia,] and at last (unless I am mistaken),
he says, the matter to myself I seem to have attained. I judge that
to be Aquileia; and Niceas or Nicetas
to be of the same city the Bishop, to whom
exists St. Leo the Pope's letter 79. There succeeded
this one St. Chromatius, of whom frequently mentions
St. Jerome, in whose time Niceas himself
was of the same Church a Subdeacon, to
whom exists his letter 42 with this inscription
"of Jerome to Niceas Subdeacon
of Aquileia." But these Nicetases or Niceases, by St.
Leo and by St. Jerome mentioned, seem both between
themselves to be distinguished, and from St. Nicetas Bishop
of Dacia (which hither pertains) plainly diverse to be reckoned,
which most widely deduces Pasquier Quesnel, in his
observations to the letter of St. Leo the hundred
twenty-ninth; and against Baronius denies that
the Aquileian city was called by the Historians
Rome, much less Romatiana. We found
at Rome in the Vallicellan Library of the Fathers of the Congregation
of the Oratory, in a Codex marked with the letter N,
an old Calendar of Aquileia, which we described:
where no anywhere mention is made of St. Nicetas
or Niceas; and to this 22nd of June is celebrated
the memory of Paul, I believe Paulinus the Bishop,
of Arcatius and his companions; and the days 21st and
23rd are vacant, to which it could have been referred; [and therefore now there he is worshipped under a double rite] if by the said
Saints that 22nd had been occupied. Afterward too
we obtained one printed for the year 1674 the Calendar
of the Metropolitan Church of Aquileia,
in which to this 22nd of June is prescribed the Office
of Niceas Patriarch of Aquileia under a rite
double, and the lessons of the second and third Nocturn
are taken from the Common. We obtained at Rome in
the said Vallicellan Library the fourth Lesson
and fifth, to be recited on the feast of St. Niceas Bishop
of Aquileia, which we add, as there
we described from the Collection of Augustin Mann,
by whom were published selected Histories of memorable Things.
And in this manner without prejudice to the Church
Metropolitan of Aquileia all things we leave to a further
examination of learned men. But there are
the said Lessons of this kind.

[5] "Niceas Bishop of Aquileia, in those times
of that Church the helm held,
in which through his highest sanctity the of the Christian
faith foundations at Aquileia the divine clemency
altogether to be destroyed did not permit. [L. IV] For so had grown
of that people the sins, that the wrath of God, [with 2 proper Lessons on the Life,] through
the prayers, fasts, vigils, and tears of the holy
man Niceas longer retarded, more to be averted
by no means could. But while the blessed Bishop
with assiduous preaching the depraved of his
flock morals to amend strives, and from God
the father of mercies to obtain tries for his people
the spirit of true wisdom and understanding;
Attila bursting into Italy, who the scourge
of God was called, the of the Huns King with
an army formidable, admonished by God of the overthrow
of that city, the Saints' Relics, the sacred
Virgins, widows, orphans, and Christ's
poor, to the Grado nearest island,
by the nature of the place against the barbarians' storms quite
fortified, translated: and his flock thus preserved
from the fury of the enemies, with the zeal of exceptional charity
marvelously there nourished. But the city Aquileia
in the same year in which Niceas to the Grado
island had set out, Attila most savagely
devastated.

[6] [From a manuscript] To this moreover the good Pastor with the preserved
flock returning, six years having elapsed, although he was by that
city's and Church's incredible slaughter
struck, those however who survived to be sustained,
both in work and in spirit never was lacking,
and with all his strength took care, through assiduous preachings
and exhortations, that those peoples by so great
a calamity excited, to God at last might return. [L. V.]
Wherefore very many things most holily he decreed,
by which of the Christian discipline the corrupt morals
in great part he restored: in which matter
how much blazed up Niceas's pastoral zeal, we gather
from the letters of holy Leo the Pope, who
to his consultations replied. Thus the glorious
Bishop, amid the assiduous cares of the spiritual
restoration of his Church, not a breadth even
of a nail from the of his past life severe discipline,
and of his body chastisement never departing,
by miracles most renowned, at Aquileia migrated to the Lord
in the year of Christ four hundred fifty-
eighth, on the tenth day before the Kalends of July
on which also day his memory in the Roman Martyrology
is celebrated."

CRITICAL DISSERTATION

Whether it is probable, that Aquileia in the Martyrologies is called the city Romatiana, and that its Bishop was the guest of St. Paulinus?

Nicetas or Niceas, Bishop of the Church of Romatiana (St.)

Nicetas or Niceas, Bishop of Aquileia in Italy (St.)

AUTHOR D. P.

[7] When the Roman Martyrology in the Lessons
to be cited you see, Reader; without doubt
you recognize, [Since no Roman Martyrology] that they are not the very ones older than the Gregorian
that reformation, or at least the 15th century, when
by the care of Bellinus of Padua, published at Venice and
further at Paris the Martyrologies of Usuard, began in
the title to set forth, that they were ordered according to
the custom of the Roman Court: in these moreover in the last
place only is read, "Likewise the deposition of St. Niceas
Bishop of Romaciana." Galesini then, when
for the books by him published and to be published, in which it was said
to be about to be a Martyrology about the of Saints
Lives, in whose name at Milan and in its
diocese either temples or altars are consecrated
(which little work never afterward came forth) he had received
from Gregory XIII a Privilege in the year 1574,
that to no one of them within a decade of reprinting power
there should be; he presumed a grander work to undertake, namely
a most ample and universal Martyrology of the holy
Roman church to the use accommodated, [identifies Aquileia with the city Romatiana]
and to the same Gregory after four years to offer, the prefixed
which I said Privilege as to it pertaining.
It did not please the Romans the manner of such a thing to publish
the Court unconsulted, and much less the work itself,
by its prolixity grievous to be about to be to the Clergy, nor to one only
man's judgment to be committed: but it seemed
that a new Martyrology to be struck off to be entrusted to several
learned men, who, it is plain, of Galesini's labor
in many things used. Yet neither Galesini,
nor they, another city than Romatiana
named, nor from elsewhere than from the doctrine and holy
morals the praise of the Bishop sought: but enough
shows Baronius in the Notes, the first himself
to be who thought that the Aquileian for the Romatianan
could be taken.

[8] This his judgment having followed the people of Aquileia,
as by the Roman See's permission in those Notes
published, I would not indeed argue against, [it is permitted to inquire how rightly that Baronius did.] nor to oppose
the cult, which as to their Bishop Nicetas on this day
they pay him, however solemn. Meanwhile
his sanctity sufficiently persuade the calamity of the times,
under which lived that one; and his zeal in restoring
the ecclesiastical discipline, to be known
from St. Leo the Pope's answers given in the year 458
of Christ, after Aquileia's devastation the 6th, to his
questions about women, who, on the occasion of the captivity
of their husbands, to others married; and about
those, who captives when they were, idol-offerings by hunger
or fear compelling ate; or by fear
or error baptized; or finally once baptized
were, but by heretics. I will not fight against also
that the Subdeacon Niceas of Aquileia
to whom is St. Jerome's Letter 42 they believe to be
the Nicetas, who after St. Chromatius was made afterward
Bishop, and beyond the year 458 his life
prolonged: although it can be that this one long
after lived, nor can with Jerome's Niceas be composed.
Only I ask, that not unjustly bear the people of Aquileia
moreover by me to be discussed, that which already by old age failing
Henschen declined, and with Quesnel to be examined
the foundation, by which relying Baronius Aquileia
and Romatiana or Rometiana the city
or Romessiana, by Hierocles and the Peutinger
old table so distinctly ascribed to Dacia (which
however Baronius without a note of negligence was ignorant of, who
that manuscript and table never saw) for one
and the same city held, the whole Pannonias interposed
probably separated.

[9] But what was Baronius's to such a novelty
to build the foundation? Of the Roman
Colonies the most noble was Aquileia; and, just as
Ausonius in the Poem on the noble cities Arles
names, "Gallic Rome"; [He sets it to be called another Rome,] so Leander
a recent Cosmographer, when he treats of the Aquileian
city, it "the second Rome called"
says. He is Brother Leandro Alberti of Bologna,
of the Order of Preachers, who a Description of all
Italy in Italian wrote, published at Bologna in the year 1550,
which work into Latin rendered William Kyriander,
and at Cologne to be printed gave in the year 1566. The original
text is not at hand; the Latin version thus
has: "That at Aquileia Caesar Augustus the controversies
of Herod and his sons heard, and a judgment
gave, Josephus relates; Tiberius here
with Julia his wife staying, a birth she
premature brought forth; the Emperor too at Aquileia
Vespasian by the Legions saluted we read: [but without a fit witness;]
for which causes so great a city of increase
and of beauty, both in wealth and in buildings, obtained,
that another it was called Rome." I hear: and
to have been able to be said oratorically and poetically I see; but yield
to me, I do not say a Historian, but even a Poet
or Rhetor, ancient or new, who so spoke,
besides that Leander, in a matter so ancient
nothing without a witness about to prove. Aquileia so often the Martyrologies
name: in this one place, would they have called it
by a name not its own? and not even Rome, but Romatiana.
Who so barbarous anywhere, that so he would speak
and write?

[10] Baronius presses, and "To this truth greatly
suffrages," he says, "that St. Chromatius, the predecessor
of St. Niceas about whom we treat, [that a certain Chromatius is called Bishop Roman,] in an excellent
commentary which he wrote on the eight Beatitudes,
in its title inscribed is found 'Chromatius
Bishop Roman.' Wherefore hallucinates
plainly Sixtus of Siena, when he says that Chromatius
to be called is found 'Roman Bishop,'
because Roman by fatherland he was. Hallucinates
that one altogether: for where I ask (I use Baronius's words)
such a nomenclature found Sixtus,
that a citizen Roman, made of some city outside
the city Bishop, would be called 'Roman Bishop'?"
But not much will hallucinate, to whom suspect be
the title of the book, [but it does not prove him to be Bishop of Aquileia.] neither to Jerome, of Chromatius of Aquileia
the intimate, nor to Gennadius the of Ecclesiastical Writers
Catalogue years after him eighty
supplementing. Who knows not such titles often by copyists'
discretion to have been written? and would not see, easily,
but ignorantly, to that Chromatius, truly Roman,
to have been able to be smeared the title of Bishop; with whom
namely that name commonly was found in the Letters,
of this and of Heliodorus to Jerome, and of Jerome
to them, prefixed to the older Martyrology?

Who likewise would not see, that by one letter's change from
"Comanus" could have been made "Romanus"? There is moreover
Comana a city Episcopal double, in Armenia
one, [what if he ought to be written, not Roman, but Comanian Bishop,] in Pontus the other. There is (that within of the Latin tongue
the provinces we may remain) Comania at the Danube,
"Comenia" to Ptolemy, a part of the present Wallachia
or Moldavia, to the King of Hungary's titles to be reckoned
wont; which its without doubt Bishop
had sometime its own, from his nation rather than
from an Episcopal city named, just as Nicetas Paulinus's
friend Bishop of Dacia; and perhaps the same if
not in person and time, certainly in region and dignity
(to be silent about the name) since Comania of old
Dacia a part is.

[11] "Let us grant however," says Quesnel, "that 'Roman'
too was called the Bishop of Aquileia:
that, if it happened, after many years
to have happened I judge: but by what reason
it could happen, I seem to myself quite happily
from Paul the Deacon to elicit." Namely the Lombard
devastation (the 6th century aging)
fleeing the people of Aquileia, [or that 'Roman' is to be understood, as opposed to the Aquileian Lombard sitting at Grado?] in the nearest Grado
island a seat chose. (The same under Attila done
gratuitously is said in the Lessons; but it is known that
from that time's flight the city of Venice its
took beginning) Fleeing, I say, the people of Aquileia
to Grado, its there thereafter Bishop
created; Helias who likewise had fled and Severus,
who after him had been ordained, being dead. Their
successors are explained by Ughelli volume 5 up to … and from the year 589 up
to 1445, when the Patriarchate to Venice
was translated. Thus the one created, for distinction
of him who in old Aquileia was created, (for Grado
it had pleased "new Aquileia" to call)
"Roman" perhaps they may have called, as for
the Romans, or by the Romans created. Paul
the Deacon, on whom relies Quesnel, in book 4 chapter
34, thus writes. "In these days, Severus
the Patriarch being dead at Grado in the year 605, ordained
was in his place John the Abbot Patriarch in old Aquileia,
with the consent of King Agilulf
and Duke Gisulf; at Grado too ordained
was Roman (otherwise 'of the Romans') Candidianus
the Bishop … Candidianus too being dead
at Grado was ordained Patriarch
Epiphanius, who had been Primicerius of the Notaries,
by the Bishops who were under the Romans:
and from that time began to be two Patriarchs." [and that this one is younger than the Chromatius who lived under Attila?]
Let the Reader choose what he will, he will not be compelled
to believe that Aquileia once Rome or Romatiana
was called. That even that whatever-kind-of
Chromatius Baronius makes both either "Roman"
in this sense, or Comanian Bishop, the Author
of the Commentaries on Matthew, as wishes ours
Le Mire in the Supplement of writers from which is had
the Dissertation on Chapter 4 and 5, which to others it pleased
"on the Beatitudes" to name, than Jerome and Gennadius
younger far, on account of their about that work
silence; nothing at all that will make to either,
about which to us is the discourse; nor will it help Nicetas
the Aquileian to whom wrote Leo, that it be believed
under the name of Nicetas Bishop of Romatiana already
once to have had a place in the Martyrologies.

[12] And so, the right to the people of Aquileia being saved, more recently
acquired, of worshipping their Nicetas under Attila
a fugitive, as a Saint, even on this day; [The Romatianan he could have been]
who otherwise by the right of prescription is owed to Nicetas of Romatiana;
let us hold this, not that, to have been inscribed
in the Martyrologies, even the Roman reformed;
and only this let us inquire, whether it is probable, that this
very is he, who St. Paulinus of Nola twice visited,
a man for sanctity and doctrine most praised.
To distinguish them would prefer Quesnel: I of distinction
necessity none see; nay I suspect that Paulinus
himself, in Letter X to Severus, where Nicetas
who from Dacia had come, [Paulinus's guest, Bishop of Dacia.] he calls "by the Romans
deservedly to be venerated," either wrote "by the people of Romatia
or of Romatiana," but in this corrupted by the
copyists, suspecting an error; or by the of the barbarous word
distaste he used a nobler and the same meaning,
nor about any less than about the of the city of Rome citizens
thought Paulinus; although also about these
to think he could, if from Rome came Nicetas, as
gratuitously, as if from Paulinus, assumes Baronius,
but Paulinus nowhere will be found to have said it,
if well the words be weighed. But I said that by the of prescription
right this day is owed to Nicetas of Romatiana:
for I judge that the ancient Martyrologists,
above number 2 toward the end by Henschen related, therefore
only on this day joined to Paulinus Nicetus,
better Nicetas to be called, because his proper
of death or of cult day they knew not. [to whom newly is assigned the 7th of January,] But by this title
more excusable are the of the Roman Martyrology reformers
Gregorian, who nothing thinking about identifying
the of Dacia and the of Romatiana Bishop; to
this 22nd of June about to recur under a more unknown to them title,
to him, under a more known to them appellation, assigned
the 7th day of January, although to no older
Calendars thus before inscribed; with that license namely,
by which holy many Fathers, whose day
was unknown and whose memory seemed of the Martyrology
worthy, to the same they inserted, on a day pleasing to themselves,
nor elsewhere anywhere found.

[13] With a new therefore in January day content that one,
not unwillingly (I believe) this 22nd of June will yield to the other
Saint and to himself of-the-same-name the Aquileian, [under that more known title commonly,] although
by the ancient martyrologists and the new passed over;
of whose doctrine and sanctity would that equally clear
and illustrious extant testimonies! But if to me
God shall have granted the destined of January supplement
to complete, or even a new of it edition, the copies
failing soon indeed to be about to be necessary,
but on account of the times' calamities not
so soon to be hoped for; [as Theophilus called also Bishop of Gothia,] I shall order to January to be transferred,
whatever from the Martyrologies can be gathered,
about the older Nicetas or Niceas, on this day occurring,
as most probably the same. For
that him Paulinus, of Dacia rather, than of Romatiana
the Bishop called; thereby it was done I think,
because the nation of the Dacians, in a Scythian almost manner living,
no certain had a royal seat; and so
their Bishop, although he had a Cathedra in a certain
place placed, namely in the city Romatiana, often
yet nowhere less than there lived, on his Apostolic
office intent. So at the Nicene Council is read
to have been present Theophilus Bishop of Gothia: [though not lacking his own city.]
for so was named Dacia, as long as in it
the Goths dwelt, which they departing again Dacia
was called, until under the Romans it was. But as
of old Dacia, in Ptolemy's age the royal city
Sarmizegethusa was called, so of the more recent and
to the Romans returned Dacia the Metropolis, in Paulinus's
time, [the Metropolis,] perhaps was called Romatia or Romesia
or Romatiana with a termination indeed barbaric,
but the same meaning, as if in Latin we should say
"Roman."
