|
|
The Bull Beatus Andreas of
Pope Benedict XIV
Beatifying the Blessed
Martyr Child Andreas of Rinn, Said to Have Been Ritually Murdered by Jews and
Discussing Other Such Child Saints
Preliminary Remark by
Father Gottfried Melzer
Cardinal Stickler in
Rome, presented the original Latin text of the Bull to Professor Maximilian
Baumgartner of Salzburg with the finding that the beatification of the child
martyr Andreas of Rinn had taken place properly. Cardinal Stickler was for a
long time Prefect of the Vatican Library and of the Vatican Archives.
Benedict
XIV was definitely an expert in questions of beatification and canonization.
In the Bull Beatus Andreas, he often refers to the work De
Canonisatione Sanctorum [Concerning the Canonization of Saints] which he
composed. No one can raise the objection in respect to this pious Pope, who
is numbered among the most learned successors of St. Peter, that he did not
perform the beatification of the child Andreas in the proper manner.
Three
points which must be considered
1) The martyr-child Andreas of Rinn is continually called beatus
(blessed) by the Pope in his Bull. This is already the case in the first two
words of the Bull.
2)
Benedict XIV has the public cult, existing since old times, of the
martyr-child Andreas of Rinn, on the 15th of December 1752 by means of
approval of an individual Mass [in his name] and of his own Office. This
corresponds to a so-called “beatificatio aequipollens,” that is, of an
actual [de facto] beatification through the confirmation of the cult.
This beatification has the same effect as a formal beatification, and is
therefore in relation to a [formal beatification], “aequipollent,’ i.e.,
“equally valid.”
3) Benedict XIV
recommends to the faithful the veneration of the Blessed Andreas of Rinn, in
that on the 15th of December 1752 he granted a plenary indulgence to those
who, after receiving the Sacrament on the 12th of July of any year at all,
visit the church in Judenstein at Rinn, where the relics of this Blessed
[child] rest. This indulgence can also be gained on the Sunday following [the
12 of July] according to the usual conditions.
The above-named indulgence is still valid today, since it has never been
taken out of effect by any later Pope. Thus the recommendation of the Church,
of visiting the relics of the Blessed Andreas of Rinn and the Blessed [child]
there in his church, still exists even today.
Preliminary Remarks of the editor of the Latin text of the Bull
It is examined whether it be beneficial to canonize children who have been
killed out of hatred toward Christ. To this end, many things are thoroughly
set out concerning the martyrdom of these children and the public veneration
which has been given them in the Church, and especially concerning the
martyrdom and the veneration of the Blessed Andreas of Rinn, whose initiated
canonization trial has provided the occasion for the letter to be composed.
From the Bull
Beatus Andreas of Benedict XIV
To our beloved son Benedict Veterani, advocate of the Holy Consistory and
Promotor Fidei [promoter of the Faith].
from
Benedict XIV
Beloved
Son, Greeting and Apostolic Blessing!
S.1.
Request of the monastery of Wilten for the granting of an individual Mass [in
his name] and his own Office, to the honor of the Blessed Andreas of Rinn
The Blessed Andreas from the region of the village of Rinn in the Diocese of
Brixen, was butchered in the cruellest fashion before the completion of the
third year of [his] life in the year 1462 by Jews out of hatred toward the
Christian Faith. His public veneration began a few years after his martyrdom,
when his bones were raised in the year 1475, and namely, to a place on the
wall, elevated from the earth, of the church of the aforenamed town, which is
consecrated to God, to the honor of the holy Apostle Andreas. But since the
pious inclination of the people, together with the news of the effects of
miracles has grown all the more here, and in particular, the relics of the child
have been treated with a constant and uninterrupted public reverence with the
knowledge and approval of the bishops of the area, all of this in recent
years has so moved Our venerable Brother, the Bishop of Brixen, (and) Our
beloved son, the Abbot of the monastery of Wilten, that they have petitioned,
for an approval [as subjects] of the Holy See, for an individual Mass [in his
name] and his own Office with corresponding lessons, to be read to the honor
of the Blessed [child] on the day of his martyrdom, the 12th of July, by the
clergy of the world and by those in orders of both sexes in the city and in
the entire Diocese of Brixen.
But on 27 September of the year 1751, We responded to this request, that a
trial concerning the repute of the martyrdom and of the miraculous acts as
well as concerning the veneration, since time immemorial, should first be
carried out by the Bishop of the place, about which We have prayed for a
legally valid confirmation, before [We grant] the permission for his own Mass
and his own Office.
S.2.
Desire of the petitioners for the granting of his own Mass and Office without
protracted and costly proceedings
This letter of response from Us has found no great favor with you. It has
been pointed out to Us, that for the performance of all of that which is
prescribed in it, lengthy time, much work, and high expenses would be
required, since indeed now in Brixen two trials were being conducted under
the auspices of the local Bishop. And We Ourselves , of course, [it was also
pointed out] had dealt with several examples in Our work De Caninisatione,
Book 4, Part 2, chapter 5, from which is clearly emerges that now and then
individual Masses and individual Offices to the honor of a blessed [person]
had been granted only upon the basis of that which important authors had
written about him and what had been published concerning his public
veneration, without any sort of proceedings carried out by the local Bishop
concerning the repute of the virtues, the martyrdom, the miraculous acts, or
production of [a history of] veneration since time immemorial, having had to
procede it. That [would be] on this account, because a trial of this sort
would then absolutely have to be foreseen, if anyone desired to pursue this
matter further, beyond the granting of his own Mass and his own Office, and
to advance to the formal canonization, but not if one, after the permission
for his own Mass and his own Office had been attained, did not have anything
in mind concerning a formal canonization, but wished to be satisfied with
what had been achieved.
We have decided on this, to abandon the path prescribed by Us and to follow
another [path], which We Ourselves have shown and have confirmed with many
examples as above (in Our book) in Chapter 5.
S.3.
Benedict XIV names the authors who have written about the Blessed Andreas of
Rinn
The name of the Blessed Andreas is not unknown to Us, and his martyrdom as
well, because We of course have read what the well-known Bollandists have
written concerning him in Volume 3, under the date 12 July, and because We
also Ourselves have brought him into consideration in Our above-named work De
Canonisatione, Book 3, Chapter 15, Nr. 6. But before We confirmed the
petition brought [to Us], is has been necessary for Us to go through the
handwritten history concerning this blood-witness, which has been composed by
Hyppolyt Guarinoni in German and translated into Latin by Father Norbert, the
Abbot of Wilten, and also to examine the acts of the martyr and the documents
concerning the public veneration and the wealth of knowledge, which have been
collected by much effort and rendered into print in the year 1745 by Father
Hadrian Kembter, as well as the letter of defense concerning the martyrdom of
the Blessed Simon of Trent, which was printed in Trent in the year 1747, and
where, in chapter 5, the martyrdom and the veneration of the Blessed Andreas
is treated in detail. Although this work was published by its scholarly
author without his name because of modesty, it is nonetheless recognizable as
a work of Father Benedict Cavallesio. The well-known Flaminius Cornelius,
member of the Senate of Venice, testifies to this in detail, in his work Die
Verehrung des hl. Martyrer kindes Simon von Trent [The Veneration of
the Holy Martyr Simon of Trent], page 4, where he does not neglect to
give the praise due to the above-named deserving man of the order [i.e.,
religious order].
S.4.
The granted Papal permission for his own Mass and his own Office for the
Blessed [child], as well as a plenary indulgence on the annual day of his
martyrdom
Moreover, We learned that a trial concerning the cult of the same Blessed
Andreas has been carried out previously under the auspices of the local
Bishop, and We thereupon requested a certified copy. And thus at least
extra-judicial proof for the duration of this public veneration has existed
and the relevant records have been delivered to Us. We have now weighed
everything exactly and then, by means of the Congregation of Rites and upon
request of [Our] venerable brother, the Bishop of Brixen, as well as of [Our]
beloved son, the General Superior of the Premonstration order and of the
Abbot of the monastery of Wilten, on 15 December 1752, we have granted a Mass
in his name and an Office in his name with special lessons, for reading by
the world clergy and by members of the orders of both sexes, according to the
rite of a duplex-feast in the city and in the whole bishopric of Brixen. We
have also not neglected to Ourselves exercise care in the examination and
selection of the Mass texts and the corresponding lessons and to review
everything with [Our] beloved son, Ludwig Valenti, formerly Promotor Fidei
and presently Assessor in the Holy Office.
And besides, We have conformed to the requests of the aforenamed Bishop of
Brixen and of the rest of those likewise mentioned, and on 15 January granted
a plenary indulgence to all those who, after Confession and reception of Holy
Communion on the 12th of July of any year, visit the church in Rinn (the
daughter church at Judenstein is meant), in which the relics of the Blessed
Andreas rest.
S.5.
The permission for the cult for the Blessed Andreas occurred in conformity
with the permission for the cult of the Blessed Simon of Trent
In all these criteria, We have held the example before our eyes of Our
predecessor Sixtus V. In the year 1485 (it must be correctly read as 1475)
the Blessed boy Simon of Trent was most horribly murdered before the
completion of his third year of life by Jews, out of hatred toward those who
believe in Christ. This inhuman crime produced so many and such grave
consequences, and the Jews availed themselves of so may and such practiced
artifaces in order to escape [their] deserved punishment and to divert the
righteous anger of the Christian faithful from themselves, that Sixtus IV
could not fail to intervene in this affair himself, in that he forbade that
the public veneration which had been shown to the Blessed Simon continue to
be rendered to him, until it was completely clear that he was butchered by
Jews out of hatred against the believers in Christ. We have reported
concerning the Papal brief of Sixtus IV in Our work De Canonisatione,
Book 1, Chapter 14, Nr. 4.
Then, however, all became clear. Under consultation of the evidence, the act of
murder together with its motivation was proven, and it is also certain that
the murderers were Jews, which emerges from the documents of the proceedings,
which today are still preserved in the secret archives in Engelsburg. As We
have shown in Our work De Canonisatione, Book 3, Chapter 15, Nr. 6,
Pope Sixtus IV by a Papal brief thereupon approved the Mass celebration and
the Office in his [Simon’s] name, to be read on the fixed day in the city and
the entire bishopric of Trent, to the honor of the Blessed Simon, and (the
Pope) moreover granted a plenary indulgence to all those who, having had the
Sacrament of Confession and Communion, visit the church in which his relics
are venerated on his day of the year.
The Papal brief of Sixtus V is contained on page 207 in the above-named
letter of defense concerning the martyrdom of the Blessed Simon, which was
printed in the year 1747 at Trent. The learned author does not neglect in
this to refute everything which Wagenseil and Basnagi have raised as
objections against the martyrdom of the innocent boy. Flaminius Cornelius,
Lord of the Senate of Venice, in his work Die Verehrung des hl. Knaben
Simon von Trent [The Veneration of the Holy boy Simon of Trent],
which was printed in the year 1743 at Venice, does the same with equal power
and scholarship.
Between that, however, which We have granted Ourselves for the veneration of
the Blessed Andreas, and what Our predecessors have decreed concerning the
veneration of the Blessed Simon, is the single distiction, of this, that
namely, at the behest of Pope Gregory XIII, the name of the Blessed Simon has
been accepted into the Roman Martyrology, to which We have referred already
in Our work De Canonisatione Sanctorum, Book 1, Chapter 14, Nr. 4. But
We have not wished to decree this in respect to the Blessed Andreas, in order
not to damage later determinations (what is meant here are those of Urban
VIII, who ruled approximately 50 years after Gregory XIII), which say that in
the Roman Martyrology only the names of those who have been canonized should
be entered, and that the names of those who were enrolled in the number of
the Blessed are to be left out, be it that this enrollment occurred by means
of a solemn beatification, or be it that it occurred by means of an actual (aequipollent)
beatification. For this, see Our work De Canonisatione Sanctorum, Book
4, Chapter 18, Nr. 9, etc.
S.6. The Subsequent Desire of the Wilten Monastery for the
Canonization of Blessed Andreas of Rinn
If
the religious (the members of te choir of the Wilten convent) had been
satisfied, as they had assured [us], with receiving only the Office and the
Mass in [Andreas’] name, and if further, they had not shown an interest in
pursuing the Causa itself up to a formal canonization, We would not
have had to undertake the dictation of this letter, and We would have spared
you the trouble of reading through the same and considering it. But because
they now have in mind the formal canonization and have succeeded in getting
the most influential Catholic princes (what is meant here, are the
substantial members of the House of Hapsburg) to fiercely insist upon it, it
seems to Us necessary, after Our reflecting upon it, to set forth Our
judgement in this letter concerning the recent petition, as is proper for
everything and in accord with regulations.
S.7.
Required investigations with respect to a planned canonization of the Blessed
Child Andreas of Rinn
Naturally, We have no complaint about those who have received from Us
permission for an [individual] Mass [for Andreas] and Office in accordance
with the reasons set forth above, if the same [people], although they
(originally) had stated their intention of not proceeding further, are now
changing their opinion. We gladly take upon Ourselves these new labors in
consideration of the repeated exertions of the religious (of the monastery of
Wilten). We are, moreover, convinced that: As often as these [religious]
desire to hurry to a formal canonization, in accordance with the care which
you are accustomed [in having] from Us, We will not neglect you but rather
expand the commission which is being conducted in status and terminus
[that is, in its authority and duration], as we have stated in Our work De
Canonisatione, Book 2, Chapter 38, Nr. 13, and also strive for proof in
accordance with [canon] law, insofar as it is shown that this case is not
contained in the decretals of Urban VIII, with which, by the way, the postulatores
would like to be in agreement, in that they will refer to Our authentic
indult [a temporary privilege granted to a person by the Roman Catholic
Church] of the Mass and the Office, as we also have remarked in the
previously cited work, Book 2, Chapter 42, Nr. 3.
And We likewise apprise you of the fact that (We) are examining whether, in
the newly begun apostolic trial [The process of canonization within the Roman
Catholic Church has tradtionally included a trial in which proponents and
opponents of canonization make their best arguments and examine all evidence
concerning the life of the candidate; the opponents were represented by a
canon lawyer often refererred to as “the Devil’s advocate”; even in cases in
which the candidate had no serious detractors, every genuine effort was made
to scrupulous challenge the case of the proponents, in the interest of
arriving at the truth], along with the martyrdom of the Blessed Andreas, the
motives of the latter are also proven; further, after [it has been determined
that] there is not sufficient [proof] for a solemn canonization, (We will
examine) both which facts on the one side and which apparent facts on the
other side exist for the granting of the [individual] Mass and the Office, as
We ourselves have set forth in Our work De Canonisatione, Book 1,
Chapter 32, Nr. 6-17, and Chapter 42, Nr. 9.
It is further to be evaluated from the standards of serious criticism,
whether the historians who report about the martyrdom conform to the
necessary conditions of furnishing proof for the solemn canonization in the
Court. (We have) spoken concerning these (above named) conditions in detail
in Our work De Canonisatione, Book 3, Chapter 7, and in the following
chapter, because an all the greater lack of assiduity prevails with the
historians when it is the case of the simple granting of the public rite,
especially of the cult [The word “cult” in this context, and as understood in
canon usage, has nothing to do with it current connotation of an esoteric,
fanatic religious group; rather, it refers to the ‘following’ enjoyed by a particular
saint, beatified person, or candidate for the same, along with the beliefs of
concerning that candidate held by those followers] within a particular
diocese, as when it is a matter of a legitimately prescribed cult, which has
also has been spread throughout the entire Church, which We Ourselves have
stated in (Our work) Book 4, Part 2, Chapter 10, Nr. 26.
And finally, still to be considered moreover, aside from the martyrdom and
its motivation, is the appearance of signs and miracles, which have occurred
after the permission for the public cult, which is likewise to be cited
according to the Papal brief issued by Us for the granting of the office and
of the Mass. But here, two signs or miracles do not suffice, rather four must
be produced in accordance with the requirements. Since there is, in
particular, with respect to the martyrdom of the Blessed Andreas of Rinn, and
in respect to the motivation of the latter, no proof as support, that is to
say eyewitnesses, nevertheless there is to some extent, as a helpful
substitute for this, witnesses who had heard this being told. With respect to
the kind of datum, two signs or miracles are therefore not sufficient, in
agreement with the general determinations (iuxta generale decretum)
[in connection with the general decretal] which We issued on the 23rd of
April 1741 and which have been printed in Our work De Canonisatione in
Book 3, Chapter 3, Nr. 25, which now entirely conform exactly to the
requirement of the Congregation on Rites.
S.13.
Cases of martyrdom of children which have been recorded by the authors
The annals of the Church and other Church memoirs agree with these: Under
(the Emperor) Decius or Valerian there occurred the well-known martyrdom of
St. Cyrill, who was in the first year of his life. His acts were reported by
the Bollandists in Volume 7, for 29 May, and (likewise) in the Acta
Martyrum [Acts of the Martyrs] by Ruinart, (and in particular) in
the Amsterdam edition on page 246.
In the annals of Cardinal Baronius, two child brothers are mentioned in the
year of Christ 311, whose bodies were buried in a church at Nicomedia, which
was because of this called the Martyrium Infantium (Martyrdom of the
Children).
And in the (same) work, page 57, etc., for the year of Christ 522 are
recorded the acts of martyrdom of a certain woman and her son, who had not
yet passed his 5th year of life.
From the Bollandists for the date 24 March, we are told -- aside from what
has been mentioned concerning the blessed boy Simon of Trent -- that in the
Diocese of Cologne, a boy Johannchen [i.e., little Johnny] is
venerated, who was killed by the Hebrews out of hatred against the
(Christian) faith.
Baillet reports for the same 24th of March, that in Paris a certain boy
Richard (Riccardus) is venerated as a martyr.
And likewise, in England another boy with the name William (Villelmus) is
honored. This boy was murdered by the Jews out of hatred against the
(Christian) faith.
In the 18th volume of the work of Father Theophil Raynoud, and in particular
in the work that is entitled De Martyrio per pestem [Concerning
Martyrdom by means of destruction], in Part 2, Chapter 2, Nr. 7, one
reads that in the time of King Ferdinand in Spain a three-year-old boy was
killed by Jews out of hatred against Christ in the district of Guardia near
Toledo, that veneration is shown him and that he is called the innocent child
of Guardia for obvious reasons.
And the same is attested of two other two-year-old twin boys in Sardinia, who
bore the names Cessilius and Camerinus.
And further, in the aforementioned apologetic [this derivative of the word
“apology” is used in the alternate meaning of that word as “an exposition in
support or defense of.”] treatise concerning the martyrdom of the Blessed
Simon of Trent, there is mentioned on page 242, a little three-year-old girl
by the name of Ursula who was murdered in the cruellest manner by Jews out of
hatred of Christ, approximeately in the year 1442 in Lienz, a small but old
town in the County of Tyrol, located in the Pustertal [Puster Valley]
toward Kärnten,. In the year 1609 an older monument at the church of this
place was replaced by a new one. This (newer one) was chiselled after [the
likeness of] the older one and one can read, incribed on the same, the story
of that horrible atrocity.
And on page 264, etc., is mentioned a boy Laurentius, whom the Jews killed in
1485 when he was 5 years of age, out of hatred toward the faith, and this boy
has been regarded and venerated as a martyr since his martyrdom and up to the
present day in Marostica in the region of Vicenza and in areas not far from
there.
S.21.
Martyr-children held to be blessed according to a formal or equipollent
beatification
The last classes are comprised of those children robbed of life due to hatred
toward Jesus Christ, whose cult is practiced on the basis of a formal or
equipollent beatification. This (beatification) can then finally be succeeded
by canonization, as is (otherwise) usual, in the case that nothing stands
against it.
It was further said above, that the Popes have always made their authority
accepted at canonizations, even in cases of a canonization which originates
with a cult introduced in one diocese, which then crosses into another
diocese and finally is extended throughout the whole church.
But now We add that the prescription was introduced and firmly decided by
Alexander III, in accordance with which it is a matter for the Roman Pontiff
to grant or approve a cult at a certain place and in individual dioceses. The
foundations and reasons for this constitution are to be found in Our (work),
Book 1, chapter 10, Nr. 3, etc.; and it might be added that it is not only in
the special manner a matter for the Pope, as it always was, to introduce by
his prescriptions a cult into the whole Church, be it a cult of martyrs, or a
cult of confessors, under which [prescriptions], as has often been said,
canonization is to be understood. It is also (a matter for the Pope) to grant
by means of (his) permission, that in some city or diocese, or in certain
other places, a religious cult is demonstrated to some servant of God which
is entirely clearly such a one [cult] through his martyrdom or through (his)
confession. Therein consists the beatification.
But two blessed children are to be numbered among this latter class, who were
killed out of hatred toward the faith: Simon of Trent, who was tortured in
1475, and Andreas of the village of Rinn, who suffered martyrdom in 1462,
with whose case we are now dealing. For it can be said of both with
certainty, that they have attained a beatification from the Holy See, if not
formally, at least to be sure equipollently, insofar as everything which was
necessary to consider concerning the martyrdom and its cause, and concerning
the news of the signs and miracles, has been produced and thoroughly
discussed (so that it) has arrived at the approval of an Office and Mass for
the particular location.
And if, nevertheless, as we have further said above, at the behest of Pope
Gregory XIII, the name of the Blessed Simon has been added to the Roman
Martyrology, it can however not be inferred that because of this the latter
has been canonized. It is held in particular as an extremely more certain and
to some degree (universally) more accepted principle, that in the Martyrology
the names of those are given and their celebrated acts are proclaimed, (for
the reason) that the faithful (not only) are encouraged to their imitation,
but also encouraged to their veneration, but always under the protection of
the direction of the Church; and indeed in such a way, that the cult to which
the faithful are supposed to be encouraged, insofar as it relates to one
already canonized, be a prescribed and public one; but that it, insofar as it
relates to those who have been beatified, is public, but has been allowed,
according to the indult of the beatification, in a limited manner only to
certain persons and for certain locations. But it should be allowed privately
with respect to other (persons and places), which have not been included by
the indult (of the beatification). We have expressly treated how the
practice, tested and maturely weighed and composed in these words, is
accustomed to being handled by the Holy See, in Our work, De Canonisatione,
Book 4, Part 2, Chapter 19, Nr. 6.
S.22.
A Trial regarding a Causa can be stopped for special reasons
If, nonetheless, the Blessed Simon attained the honor of the Blessed long
before the Blessed Andreas, there is no one who pursued his canonization. And
as concerns the request for a canonization of the Blessed Andreas, which is
now being urged, there is much to take into consideration after the
(attained) beatification. The entire investigation revolves about whether
this wish should be granted. For it is a not unusual situation, that the
course (of a trial) concerning some Causa is stopped for just and
grave reasons and (thus) the path to canonization is blocked, although a
beatification has preceded it, as so many Causae make evident, in
which Office and Mass have been granted after a formal or equipollent
beatification, but where there is no one and furthermore will be no one, who
aims at a solemn canonization.
S.23.
Church blood-witnesses are genuine martyrs, but not in will and works, rather
in works alone
And thus We now, for a small number (of such children martyrs) proceed to the
reasons which are not limited to the Causa of the Blessed Andreas, but
to some extent touch upon all Causae of the children whom the hatred
against the Christian faith has snatched away, and at an age, to be sure,
when they were not able to distinguish between good and evil, although these
(also) are martyrs, but not in Will and Works, but in Works alone, to use the
words of St. Bernhard. It could in particular appear proper to anyone, if one
decided upon one distinct cult of the Blessed for the martyred children under
the conditions given. But he will have doubts whether it be fitting to
proceed further, so that the cult be extended throughout the whole Church
according the manner of prescribed law, which is, of course, the main feature
of canonization, at which [event] what is necessary for a transition from
beatification to a canonization should not be respected in any way.
S.29. The Causa
of the Blessed Andreas of Rinn is to be examined, whether it can be approved
for a canonization trial
Whatever we have said here can also be found in Our work De Canonisatione,
Book 1, Chapter 14, and Book 3, Chapter 15, Nr. 2, etc. It still remains to
(exactly) explore and to examine everything, as to whether it is a matter of
allowing the Causa of the Blessed Andreas to proceed further, or
whether it would be more expeditious that this [Causa] remain at the
same status which it now possesses, which entirely corresponds to (the
status) in which the Causa of the Blessed Simon exists.
And because it is not out of the question that others express similar
desires, they will be (to a certain extent) parts of your effort and of the
wise assessment of the rest, whom We shall apprise of what is to be taken
into consideration when a case of this kind occurs, as indeed it appears
common with respect to a child who has been killed in Holy Week by Jews out
of contempt toward Christ. The murders of the Blessed Simon and Blessed
Andreas in particular are such (cases), but so too are (the murders) of many
which are listed by the authors.
It might perhaps appear to someone that it is proper, whenever there is
admittance to the Causa of children killed in this manner, that these
murders, which are well-known to the people, have been condemned by all and
also punished by the authorities, must be loudly proclaimed in the world).
Moreover, it seems best, whenever there is a case of martyrs “not by Will and
Works, but by Works alone,” that a larger number of signs and miracles than
is otherwise required, be established, in order to obtain a formal
canonization.
We close this, Our letter, by imparting to you Our apostolic blessing,
beloved son.
Given at Rome at Sancta Maria Major, on 22 February 1755, in the 15th year of
Our Pontifficate.
|
Pope
Benedict XIV
|