Saint Gregory of Tours

Born in 538 or 539 at Arverni, the modern Clermont-Ferrand; died at Tours, 17

Nov., in 593 or 594. He was descended from a distinguished Gallo-Roman family,

and was closely related to the most illustrious houses of Gaul. He was originally

called Georgius Florentius, but in memory of his maternal great-grandfather,

Gregory, Bishop of Langres, took later on the name of Gregory. At an early age

he lost his father, and went to live with an uncle, Gallus, Bishop of Clermont,

under whom he was educated after the manner of all ecclesiastics in his day. An

unexpected recovery from a serious illness turned his mind towards the service of

the Church. Gallus died in 554, and Gregory's mother went to live with her friends

in Burgundy, leaving her son at Clermont in the care of Avitus, a priest, later

Bishop of Clermont (517-594). Avitus directed his pupil towards the study of the

Scriptures. According to Gregory, rhetoric and profane literature were sadly

neglected in his case, an omission that he ever after earnestly regretted. In his

writings he complains of his ignorance of the laws of grammar, of confounding the

genders, employing the wrong cases, not understanding the correct use of

prepositions, and the syntax of phrases, self-reproaches that need not be taken

too seriously. Gregory knew grammar and literature as well as any man of his

time; it is a mere affectation on his part when he poses as ill-instructed; perhaps

he hoped thereby to win praise for his learning. Euphronius, Bishop of Tours, died

in 573, and was succeeded by Gregory, Sigebert I being then King of Austrasia

and Auvergne (561-576). Charibert's death (567) had made him master of Tours.

The new king was acquainted with Gregory and insisted that in deference to the

wishes of the people of Tours he should become their bishop; thus it came to

pass that Gregory went to Rome for consecration. The poet, Fortunatus,

celebrated the elevation of the new bishop in a poem full of sincere enthusiasm

whatever its defects ("Ad cives Turonicos de Gregorio episcopo"). Gregory

justified this confidence, and his episcopal reign was highly creditable to him and

useful to his flock; the circumstances of the time offered peculiar difficulties, and

the office of bishop was onerous both from a civil and a religious point of view.

I. GREGORY AS BISHOP

He undertook with great zeal the heavy task imposed on him. In the near past

King Clovis had both used and abused his power, but his services to the social

order and the fame of his exploits caused the abuses of his reign to be in great

part forgiven. His successors, however, had fewer merits, and when they sought

to increase their authority by deeds of violence, almost endless civil war was the

result. Might overcame right so often that the very notion of the latter tended to

disappear. Barbarian fierceness and cruelty were everywhere rampant. During the

war between Sigebert and Chilperic, Gregory could not restrain his just

indignation at the sight of the woes of his people. "This", he wrote, "has been

more hurtful to the Church than the persecution of Diocletian". In Gaul, at least,

such may have been the case. The Teutonic tribes newly established in Gaul, or

loosely wandering throughout the whole Roman Empire, were well aware of their

physical prowess, and disinclined to recognize any rights save that of conquest.

Their chiefs claimed whatever they desired, and the army took the rest. Whoever

ventured to oppose them was put out of the way with pitiless rapidity. The

civilization on which they so suddenly entered was for them a source of

annoyance and confusion; coarse material pleasures appealed to them far more

than the higher ideals of Roman life. Drunkenness was prevalent in all classes,

and even the proverbial chastity of the Franks was soon a forgotten glory.

Vengeance threw off all restraint of religion; the powerful and the lowly, clergy

and laity, were a law unto themselves. Queen Clotilda, the model of women, was

popularly thought to have nourished feelings of revenge against the Burgundians

for more that thirty years (see, however, for a rehabilitation, G. Kurth, "Sainte

Clotilde", 8th. ed., Paris, 1905, and article CLOTILDA). Guntram, one of the best

of the Frankish kings, put to death two physicians because they were unable to

restore Queen Austrechilde to health. This being the moral temper of the upper

classes, it is needless to speak of the Gallo-Frankish multitude. It is greatly to

St. Gregory's honour that amid these conditions he fulfilled the office of bishop

with admirable courage and firmness. His writings and his actions exhibit a

tender solicitude for the spiritual and temporal interests of his people, whom he

protected as best he could against the lawlessness of the civil power.

Amid his labours for the general welfare he upheld always what was right and just

with prudence and courage. By his office he was the protector of the weak, and

as such always opposed their oppressors. In him the Merovingian episcopate

appears at its best. The social morality of the sixth century has no braver or

more intelligent exponent that this cultivated gentleman. Gregory explains the

government of the world by the constant intervention of the supernatural: direct

assistance of God, intercession of saints, and recourse to the miracles wrought

at their tombs. He also played a prominent part in increasing the number of

churches, which were then the centres of religious life in Gaul. The cathedral

church at Tours, burnt down under his predecessor, was rebuilt, and the church

of St. Perpetuus restored and decorated. Since the days of Clovis the Church

had held, through her bishops, a preponderating position in the Frankish world. In

the eyes of the people the bishops were the direct representatives of God, and

dispensed His heavenly graces quite as the king bestowed earthly favours. This

was not owing, however, to their moral or religious position, but rather to their

social influence. With the spread of the rude barbarian civilization in Gaul the old

Roman civilization, especially in municipal administration, was unable to cope.

The civil authority was unequal to the former responsibilities it assumed, and was

soon oblivious of its obligations. The public offices, however, which it neglected

corresponded to pressing social needs that must somehow be satisfied. At this

juncture the bishops stepped into the breach and became at once politically

more important under Frankish than they had been under Roman rule. The

Frankish kings gladly recognized in them indispensable auxiliaries. They alone

possessed science and learning, while they rendered signal services on different

missions freely intrusted to them, and which they alone were capable of fulfilling.

On the other hand they were slow to reprove their barbarian masters or to resist

them. Gregory himself says in his reply to Childeric: "If one of us were to leave

the path of justice, it would be for you to set him right; should you, however,

chance to stray, who could correct or resist?". The only duty the bishops seem

to have preached to the Frankish kings was a conscientious fulfilment of the

royal duties for the good of souls. This duty the kings did not deny, though they

often failed to execute it or took refuge in a too liberal conscience.

Tours, which had long possessed the tomb of Saint Martin, was one of the most

difficult sees to rule. The city was continually changing masters. On the death of

Clotaire (561) it fell to Charibert, and when he died it reverted to the kingdom of

Sigebert, King of Austrasia, but not till after a lively conflict. In 573, Chilperic,

King of Neustria, seized it, but was soon constrained to abandon the city. He

seized it again only to lose it once more; at last, on the assassination of

Sigebert in 576, Chilperic became its final master, and held it till he died in 584.

Though Gregory took no direct part in these struggles of princes, he has

described for us the sufferings they caused his people, also his own sorrows. It

is easy to see that he did not love Chilperic; in return the king hated the Bishop

of Tours, who suffered much from the attacks of royal partisans. A certain

Leudot, who had been deprived of his office through Gregory's complaints,

accused the bishop of defamatory statements concerning Queen Fredegunde.

Gregory was cited before the judges, and asserted his innocence under oath. At

the trial his bearing was so full of dignity and uprightness that he astonished his

enemies, and Chilperic himself was so impressed that ever afterwards he was

more conciliatory in his dealings with such an opponent. After the death of

Chilperic, Tours fell into the hands of Guntram, King of Burgundy, whereupon

began for the bishop an era of peace and almost of happiness. He had long

known Guntram and was known and trusted by him. In 587, the Treaty of Andelot

brought about the cession of Tours by Guntram to Childebert II, son of Sigebert.

This king, as well as his mother Brunehaut, honoured Gregory with particular

confidence, called him often to court, and entrusted to him many important

missions. This favour lasted until his death.

II. GREGORY AS A HISTORIAN

From the time of his election to the episcopate Gregory began to write. His

subjects seem to have been chosen, at the beginning of his literary activity, less

for their importance than for the purpose of edification. The miracles of St. Martin

were then his main theme, and he always cherished most the themes of the

hagiographer. Even in his strictly historical writings, biographical details retain a

place often quite disproportionate to their importance. His complete works deal

with many subjects, and are by himself summarized as follows: "Decem libros

historiarum, septem miraculorum, unum de vita patrum scripsi; in psalterii

tractatu librum unum commentatus sum; de cursibus etiam ecclesiasticis unum

librum condidi", i.e. I have written ten books of "historia", seven of "miracles", one

on the lives of the Fathers, a commentary in one book on the psalter, and one

book on ecclesiastical liturgy. The "Liber de miracles b. Andreae apostoli" and

the "Passio ss. martyrum septem dormientium apud Ephesum" are not

mentioned by him, but are undoubtedly from his hand. His hagiographical

writings must naturally be read in keeping with the spirit and tastes of his own

times. An edict of King Guntram, taken from the "Historia Francorum", illustrates

both quite aptly: "We believe that the Lord, who rules all things by His might, will

be appeased by our endeavours to uphold justice and right among all people.

Being our Father and our King, ever ready to succour human weakness by His

grace, God will grant our needs all the more generously when He sees us faithful

in the observance of His precepts and commandments". The mental attitude of

the king differed little, of course, from that of his people. Nearly all were deeply

persuaded that all events were divinely foreseen; but sometimes even to a

superstitious extreme. Thus, despite the contemporary social degradation and

crimes, the people were ever on the alert for supernatural manifestations, or for

what they believed to be such. In this way arose a religious devotion, real and

active, indeed, but also impulsive and not properly controlled by reason.

Providence seemed to intervene so directly in every minute detail that men

blindly thanked God for an enemy's death just as they would for some wonderful

grace that had been granted them. The supernatural world was always quite near

to the men of that age; God and His saints seemed ever to deal intimately and

immediately with the affairs of men. The tombs and relics of the saints became

the centres of their miraculous activity. In the contemporary hagiographical

narratives those who refuse to believe in the miracles are the exception, and are

generally represented as coming to an evil end unless they repent of their

incredulity. Occasionally one notes a reaction against this excessive credulity;

here and there an individual ventures to assert that certain miracles are fictive,

and sometimes impostures. Sensible men endeavour to calm the too ardent

credulity of many. Gregory tells us of an abbot who severely punished a young

monk who believe he had wrought a miracle: "My son", said the abbot,

"endeavour in all humility to grow in the fear of the Lord, instead of meddling with

miracles."

Gregory himself, though he relates a great many miracles, seems occasionally

to have doubted some of them. He knew that unscrupulous men were wont to

abuse the credulity of the faithful, and many agreed with him. Not everyone was

willing to consider a dream as a supernatural manifestation. This distrust,

however, affected only particular cases; as a rule belief in the multiplicity of

miracles was general. The first work of Gregory was an account in four books of

the miracles of St. Martin, the famous thaumaturgus of Gaul. The first book was

written in 575, the second after 581, the third was completed about 587; the

fourth was never completed. After finishing the first two books he began an

account of the miracles of an Auvergne saint then famous, "De passione et

virtutibus sancti Juliani martyris". Julian had died in the neighbourhood of

Clermont-Ferrand and his tomb at Brioude was a well known place of pilgrimage.

In 587, Gregory began his "Liber in gloria martyrum", or "Book of the Glories of

the Martyrs". It deals almost exclusively with the miracles wrought in Gaul by the

martyrs of the Roman persecutions. Quite similar is the "Liber in gloria

confessorum" a vivid picture of contemporary or quasi-contemporary customs

and manners. The "Liber vitae Patrum", the most important and interesting of

Gregory's hagiographical works, gives us much curious information concerning

the upper classes of the period.

Gregory's fame as a historian rests on his "Historia Francorum" in ten books,

intended, as the author assures us in the preface, to hand down to posterity a

knowledge of his own times. Book I contains a summary of the history of the

world from Adam to the conquest of Gaul by the Franks, and thence to the death

of St. Martin (397). Book II treats of Clovis, founder of the Frankish empire. Book

III comes down to the reign of Theodebert (548). Book IV ends with Sigebert

(575), and contains the story of many events within the personal knowledge of

the historian. According to Arndt these four books were written in 575. Books V

and VI treat of events that took place between 575 and 584, and were written in

585. The remaining four books cover the years between 584 and 591, and were

written at intervals that cannot be exactly determined. Gregory relates, indeed,

as stated above, the story of his age, but in the narrative he himself always plays

a prominent part. The art of exposition, of tracing effects to their causes, of

discovering the motives which influenced the characters he described, was

unknown to Gregory. He tells a plain unvarnished tale of what he saw and heard.

Apart from what concerns himself, he always tries to state the truth impartially,

and in places even attempts some sort of criticism. This work is unique in its

kind. Without it the historical origin of the Frankish monarchy would be to no

small extent unknown to us. Did Gregory, however, correctly appreciate the spirit

and tendencies of his age? It is open to question. His mind was always busied

with extraordinary events: crimes, miracles, wars, excesses of every kind; for

him ordinary events were too commonplace for notice. Nevertheless, to grasp

clearly the religious or secular history of a people, it is more important to know

the daily popular life than to learn of the mighty deeds of the reigning house. The

morality of the people is often superior to that of its governing classes. In

Gregory's day, great moral and religious forces, beloved by the people, must

have been leavening the country, counterbalancing the brute force and immorality

of the Frankish kings, and saving the strong new race from wasting away in civil

strife. From Gregory's account, however, one could scarcely conclude that the

people were altogether satisfied with their religion. What Gregory failed to note in

a discriminating way, perhaps because it did not enter into the scope of the

work, a contemporary, the Greek Agathias, has observed and put on record.

GREGORY AS A THEOLOGIAN

The theological ideas of Gregory appear not only in the introductions of his

various works, and especially to his "Historia Francorum", but also incidentally

throughout his writings. His theological education was not very profound; and he

wrote but one work immediately theological in character, his commentary on the

psalms. The book entitled "De cursu stellarum ratio" (on the courses of the stars)

was written for a practical purpose to settle the time, according to the position of

the stars, when the night office should be sung. The "Historia Francorum" makes

known, in its opening pages, Gregory's theological views. The teaching of Nicaea

was his guide; the doctrine of the Church was beyond all discussion. God the

Father could never have been without wisdom, light, life, truth, justice; the Son is

all these; the Father therefore was never without the Son. In Jesus Christ

Gregory saw the Lord of Eternal Glory and the Judge of mankind. He sometimes

speaks of the death and the blood of Christ as the means of redemption, though

it is not clear that he grasped the inner meaning of this doctrine. He saw in

Christ's Death a crime committed by the Jews; in the Resurrection, on the other

hand, it seemed to him he beheld the Redemption of mankind. From the psalms

he had learned that Jesus had saved the world by His blood, but Gregory's idea

of Christ was not that of the Lamb slain for the sins of "the world"; it was rather

that of a great king who had left an inheritance to his people. Generally speaking

his theological writings exhibited the influence of the Frankish idea of royalty. He

does not seem to have been deeply versed in the teaching and the writings of the

Fathers on the Incarnation and Death of Christ. This is evident from the story he

tells of a discussion he had one day in the presence of King Chilperic with a

Jewish merchant. The Jew had questioned the possibility of the fact of the

Incarnation and Death of Jesus, and Gregory, without making a direct reply, went

on to assert that the Incarnation and Death of the Son of God were necessary,

seeing that guilty man was in the power of the Devil and could only be saved by

an incarnate God. The Jew, pretending to be convinced, made answer: "But

where was the necessity for God to suffer in order to redeem man?" Gregory

reminded him that sin was an offence, and that the death of Jesus was the only

means of placating God. The Jew in turn asked why God could not have sent a

prophet or an apostle to win mankind back to the path of salvation, rather than

humble Himself by taking human flesh. Gregory could only reply by lamenting

the incredulity of those who would not believe the prophets, and who put those

who preached penance to death. And so the Jew remained unanswered. This

controversy displays Gregory's lack of dialectical and theological skill.

H. Leclercq

Transcribed by Judy Levandoski

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII

Nihil Obstat, June 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor

Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York

The Catholic Encyclopedia: NewAdvent.org