Smith: MTS (3a)
Martin of Tours – Sulpitius Severus
MTS Thesis, Reading 3a - Dr. Warren Smith, October 24, 2012
Sulpitius Severus by all accounts lived during the same time as that of the subject of his biography, Martin, the Bishop of Tours from 370 until his death in 396. Severus is a first hand witness to some of what he relays in his many writings on the bishop, including not just the biography The Life of Saint Martin, but his Dialogues, Letters, and Sacred History. The two came to know one another only after Martin had gained some notoriety in the countryside of modern France, and Severus mentions his military service almost embarrassingly. In fact, the life of a soldier was one worthy of denigration, as evidenced by his friend Brictio suggesting such a life was "tarnished."[1] If such was the prevailing sentiment in the church, it might explain Severus' reducing what otherwise must have been a twenty or more year difference between his baptism and his declaration to Julian.
However, Severus goes out of his way to sing the praises of Martin, and the glowing light in which the saint is viewed might have prevented his biographer from giving a more critical account. To compensate for what Severus sees as a "disgraceful" concealment of "the excellences of so great a man," he makes it his "endeavor that he should not remain unknown who was a man worthy of imitation."[2] Here one might ask the question of whether there was any sense of trepidation for Severus that, had he not recorded such a life, that it would be lost to time and therefore fail to form a model for the church. In contrast to a number of patristic writers, Severus, and perhaps Martin as well, thinks less of contemplation than he does of imitation.
Severus has a low view of "philosophizing," calling it "vain," and he might fit within contemporary ethics of virtue, in which embodied habits are passed along narratively in order to create moral communities and individuals. It may be unfair to pit philosophy against virtue, but the latter seems clearly to be Severus' interest. His second undoubted Letter, to Aurelius, brings elucidates more on the virtues of Martin in light of the saint's death. In particular, Severus claims that Martin was "joined especially to those who washed their robes in the blood of the lamb," the martyrs, for "by vow and virtues he was alike able and willing to be a martyr."[3] Severus here reveals perhaps more than anywhere else a subtle flavor of works-righteousness that borders on heresy. From earlier discussions, it has become clear that martyrdom is a gift from God, and that saints join their ranks only by divine election. Therefore Martin could not "attain] to the honor of martyrdom without shedding his blood." Severus seems unsatisfied calling Martin a confessor, the name for Christians who persevered persecutions without recanting.
However, it would be important to turn briefly to the tension between the Greek martus discussed in prior sessions and the Latin exemplum that Severus almost certainly uses in its place. Whereas Severus could not rightly use the word "martyr" to describe Martin, he does repeatedly call him an "example." Upon the lips of Martin he places; "I leave you another example,"[4] the Latin root of which is exemplum, from which we derive exemplar. The Latin word also gives us "sample," which evokes a Eucharistic not far removed from that of the martyr, who makes Christ present by their witness to death. While we might behold a witness, we also sample Christ's body by placing the host on our tongue and consuming him. I suspect I will explore this distinction more fully in my final thesis.
Returning to the work itself, were Severus the honest ecclesiastical historian that some claim him to have been, he would have had a keener eye to detailing Martin's faults along with his strengths. His description of Martin's military career is telling in this regard. If, for example, it were true that Martin "act[ed] the part of the soldier, for nearly two years after he received baptism,"[5] and that it was under Julian at Worms that he refused to fight, Severus fails to recall events that occurred during his own lifetime; Julian's battle at Worms occurred in 355 or 356 CE, and if Martin was born in 316 CE and conscripted at 15 in 331, he served a total not of seven years, but of 24 or 25 years. Perhaps his miscalculation (or amnesia) is explained by his desiring to present only the most pure and stoic picture of the bishop. Martin serves almost as a lynchpin for his Sacred History, which ends abruptly upon the bishop's frustration over the Prisillian affair in 385 and death in 397.
However selective Severus' ecclesiastical and Martian histories might be, it is clear that for him, Martin is the embodiment of holiness and Christian virtue. Martin's own interest in concealing his holiness has been transmitted to Severus' own writing, which agonizes between vain embellishments and humble reservation, an agony the saint himself seemed never to struggle with, sure as he was in his reluctance in the very things at which he excelled; first at military service, and then at seemingly menial tasks as first an exorcist, then as priest, bishop, and finally, saint.
Epilogue
Even in writing these reflections, I realize I have forced myself to focus on the author instead of the subject, which is precisely what Severus hopes to avoid. In Severus' defense, he does try to point readers (and listeners, as his Dialogues of/with/for The Gaul suggest a live audience) beyond himself and to Martin. He repeatedly goes against Martin's own desire for secrecy in order to preserve the life of a saint left to us almost exclusively by Severus' efforts. I am unquestionably grateful for his dedication, though he succeeds in ensuring my gratitude is ultimately for the "example" he continuously points toward. Though I am reading Severus in my above critique, he instead asks me to read Martin himself, as we shall.
Questions
If all three of the saints that Martin converses with in Dialogue II, Chapter XIII (p.45) are women (Agnes, Thecla, and Mary), how might their prominence in this story speak to issues of gender, authority, and virtue?
Under what category of virtue does Martin's sincere interest in secrecy and reservation fall, and how does this reflect Christ's own repeated insistence that the apostles and others remain in confidence?
Footnotes
[1] Severus, Sulpitius. Dialogue III, Ch. XV, p. 53
[2] Life, Preface
[3] Life, Ch. 1
[4] Letter II, p.20 (emphasis added)
[5] Letter III, p.23
