TRAJAN.
(Fate of his soul.)

Most learned men of the Romish communion now refute the story which was so much cried up, that the soul of the emperor Trajan was delivered from hell, by the prayers of pope Gregory. Paul and John Diaconus, who wrote the life of St Gregory, give the following account of that affair, which is moreover asserted by St John of Damascus: “St. Gregory, passing Trajan’s square, which that prince caused to be adorned with stately edifices, where the principal actions of his life were represented, stopped particularly to consider a basso relievo, which described the favour he did to a poor widow. This emperor, marching at the head of his army, and being obliged to use great dispatch, a very old and poor widow came to beseech him, with tears in her eyes, to revenge the death of her soil, who had been murdered. Trajan promised her that when he returned from his expedition, he would do her justice. ‘ But sir,’ said the widow, ‘ if you should be killed in the battle, of whom may I expect it afterwards?’ ‘Of my successor,’ answered Trajan. ‘What will it signify to you, great emperor,’ replied the women, ' that any other than yourself render me justice? Is it not

better that you should do this good action yourself, than leave another to do it?' It is said that the emperor, being then moved at the tears of the poor mother, and persuaded by her reasons, alighted from his horse, commanded those that were accused of the murder of the widow’s son to be brought before him, and took an exact cognizance of the whole affair: and though the principal officers of his army urged him very much, yet he would not continue his march till he had determined it. He ordered a considerable sum of money to be paid to the widow, but spared the lives of the criminals. St Gregory, they add, touched with this action of justice and charity, prayed to God, with many tears and groans, to take pity on that emperor. At St Peter’s tomb he shed a great many tears, and remained long in prayer on the same subject. Soon after, he knew he had not prayed in vain, for falling into a sleep, rather ecstatical than natural, God revealed to him that his prayers had been heard; but at the same time commanded him never to pray more for persons that die unbaptised.” John Diaconus, who believed this story to be true, and said, “that it was read in the English churches,” owns however, “that it was not received by the Romans, and that it had appeared to them improbable. It ought, indeed, to be rejected as a fable, that could find credit no where but with the Anglo-Saxons, who were as yet ignorant and uninstructed in the Christian religion: for John Diaconus evidently shows that it derived its original from them. I am surprised that learned men, who have been employed in collecting the acts of the saints, far from rejecting it, have made a note to authorise and support it: I fancy the reason why they judged so favourably of it, was, because they believed that the ancient life of St Gregory, which they published as the performance of an anonymous author, was written by a contemporary historian, as they expressly declare; but that anonymous author is at the same time called Paul Diaconus , and that cotemporary historian is of the IXth century, younger than St Gregory by about 250 years, as I have proved in the the advertisement. Cardinal Baronius has very amply refuted this story in the 8th tome of his Annals, and after him Cardinal Bellarmin, not to mention several learned critics of our own time, who have shown the absurdity and dangerous consequences of it; but as that does not hinder people from making use of it every day, to authorise a very pernicious doctrine, and to teach that the intercession of the holy Virgin saves those that belong to her, and that wear her livery, even though they die in mortal sin; I believe those who love true piety, will be glad to find this falsity refuted by St Gregory himself, and by what he says in his Dialogues. Dionysius de Sammarth. ubi supra, pag.284,285, ¹⁴³

Sammarthanus recites afterwards divers passages of the XLIVth chapter of the IVth book of those Dialogues, and shows thereby that St Gregory did not believe it possible to deliver a damned soul. He refutes likewise some answers that might be made in favour of the contrary opinion. He does not think it worth while to confute in particular another story which is added to the former. It is reported, that this pope felt continual pains in his feet and stomach, as a punishment for the sin he had committed in praying for an emperor that was damned. Father Theophilus Raynauld ranks this among the calumnies which have been published against great men. He quotes Tostatus, who in the LVIIth question on the IVth book of the Kings, affirms that St Gregory then committed a mortal sin. He says that Alphonsus Ciacconius wrote a Treatise, to prove that this story of Trajan's deliverance was true; and adds, that Rutilius Benzonius maintained the same thing in his Speculum Episcoporum, but that Melchior, Canus, and Soto, had

very well conjectured the falsity of that story, and that Baronius, Bellarmin, and Suarez, and several other moderns, had clearly demonstrated it to be a fable. All the subtilties invented to reconcile this pretended deliverance of Trajan with the irreversible ness of God’s decrees against persons who are damned, he looks upon as mere cavilling: and rejects the reflection of John Diaconus, that those pains were inflicted on St Gregory, as an antidote against the pride wherewith he might have been puffed up, after so great an exploit as releasing Trajan’s soul from the pit of hell.—Art. Trajan.