SOURCE MATERIAL FOR ST. PAUL OF THE CROSS

5. DEPOSITIONS OF WITNESSES DURING THE BEATIFICATION AND CANONISATION OF ST. PAUL OF THE CROSS

Having discussed what may be considered “direct sources” of information, that is, material written by the saint himself, we shall now deal with “indirect sources” of information, that is, with the testimony of people who knew St. Paul of the Cross personally and bore witness to their knowledge of him after his death.  The process for the founder’s beatification and canonization provided the opportunity for giving this testimony.  With the encouragement of Pope Pius VI, these proceedings began in January 1777, just fifteen months after Paul’s death.

Taken into consideration here are the Italian transcriptions of depositions given by 121 witnesses called in six informative processes and three apostolic ones.  This testimony fills twenty-two volumes and over 11,600 pages written on both sides.  All depositions are preserved in the archives of the Passionist Congregation.

Because Paul of the Cross engaged in apostolic activity in several locations in Italy, it was necessary to hold the processes in more than one diocese.  As a result, between the years 1777 and 1780, informative processes were simultaneously held in six different sites: Rome, Corneto-Tarquinia, Gaeta, Alessandria, Vetralla, and Orbetello. Apostolic proceedings (following procedures outlined in canons 2087-97) took place in Rome, Viterbo, and Corneto-Tarquinia between the years 1792 and 1804.

Of all the testimony taken during these nine canonical processes, only a third has been published to date, but further publications are expected.  Without a doubt, these documents represent an almost inexhaustible fount of detail and information on the life of the founder.  At the same time, it is necessary to deal with this testimony in a very objective manner and with critical distance.

Such reservations regarding the claim of historical authenticity of the testimony of witnesses seem fully justified on the following grounds.  Using the date of the testimony as the reference point, facts and related events in most cases occurred many years, sometimes many decades, earlier.  We can conclude, therefore, that the exactness and reliability of the depositions depended solely on the recall of the witnesses.  Moreover, there was a proportionate number of witnesses whose ability to make distinctions and report events in an objectively factual manner was limited.

Also to be taken into account is the fact that the ground rules which governed the informative (as opposed to the apostolic) processes were not designed to maximize reliability in the reporting of historical events.  For example, canon 2050 indicated it was not necessary to have detailed certainty about a person’s virtues, miracles, or martyrdom.  It sufficed that the person had an enduring reputation for such and that it came about spontaneously and in an upright manner.  With the looseness inherent in this type of goal setting, it is understandable that witnesses, with the best intentions in the world and in good faith, could give less-than-accurate information about the occurrence of past events.  Even though an oath was required of the, it was hardly an inherent obstacle to the way in which they, without burdening their consciences, bore testimony to the reputation of the saint as “a servant of God”.

Depositions taken during apostolic processes, in contrast, were to include actual proof of virtues and miracles, even in an isolated case, and proof of martyrdom and its cause. In point of fact, however, the length of time between the fact attested to and its occurrence was so long (more often than not several decades) that it was almost impossible to achieve the immediacy needed to ensure historical reliability of oral testimony.

Despite the presence of variables which tended to reduce confidence in the reliability of some testimony, there were a great number of historically reliable depositions.  This reliability was a function of the qualifications of the witness as a discerner of truth and error and of the closeness of his contact with the founder.  For example, the depositions of Fr. John Mary are regarded as highly reliable.  As Paul’s confessor and spiritual director, he knew the saint very well.  As author of several works describing the origin and growth of the Congregation, Fr. John Mary was also well acquainted with events and their dates and times.

It is apparent from the words and phrases used in many of the depositions that the events and facts were reported in an exaggerated manner.  At least partially, this tendency may be attributed to the spirit of the age.  It is well known that those of the baroque period employed, with great enjoyment, an emphatic and grandiloquent style.  Also, some depositions unmistakably indicate witness’ bias in relating only the marvelous and extraordinary.

 
6.  THE ANNALS OF FR. JOHN MARY CIONI, C.P.

Among the many indirect sources of information on the life and activity of Paul of the Cross, the Annals of Fr. John Mary Cioni, C.P. are especially important because of their high degree of historical reliability. These Annals record the history of the establishment and growth of the Congregation between the years 1720 and 1795 and portray the personality of the founder in a special way.  This all the more so because the author was less interested in detailing the contemporary setting and interrelationships which influenced the founding of the Congregation than in motivating readers, especially Passionists, to an imitation of their founder-saint.

Despite their purported purpose and the author’s moralizing for the edification of his readers, the Annals, taken as a whole possess a high degree of historical reliability in the recording the facts described therein.  This is primarily due to the author’s strong lifelong interest in history.  Besides these Annals, Fr. John Mary composed other historically inspired works such as a history of the establishment of the monasteries, five voluminous biographies, twenty-nine shorter ones, and obituaries on more than seventy members of the Congregation who died during 1745-90.  On the basis of the opinion of some specialists in history, it is reasonable to assume the author of the Annals was thoroughly familiar with historical method.

Two factors which greatly aided Fr. John’s Mary’s work were his phenomenal memory and his familiarity with St. Paul of the Cross.  For the composition of historical works, however, Fr. John Mary relied less on memory, although he possessed an excellent one, than on the prompt recording of events which he had either observed or in which he participated.  He then cited these detailed notes to support his statements in the Annals.  Because Fr. John Mary was Paul’s intimate friend and for ten years his confessor and spiritual director, and because there were numerous opportunities for the type of discussions in which John Mary could obtain an in-depth view of Paul’s personality, the statements John Mary makes regarding deeds or motives of the saint may be preceded by the word authoritative.

After having considered the person of the author, so important for a correct evaluation of the Annals, it is now time to consider more details about the source itself.  Although the handwritten original is anonymous, the author is beyond all doubt Fr. John Mary. Furthermore, it appears that, in his reports on the years 1720-75, the author expresses himself quite laconically, while he treats the years 1775-95 in a less concise and more rambling style.

Taxonomically, the archival data are categorized chronologically.  Small paragraphs are written under each year’s heading.  Each paragraph is numbered, bears a heading, and contains a few sentences.  Facts are recorded, one after another-more or less independently – in the manner of a chronicle.  Hardly any attempt is made to interpret individual events or to evaluate them.

The Annals’ mark of distinction is that they provide a multiplicity of detail on the personality of the founder and the establishment of his Congregation.  Furthermore, the details are firsthand reports of an author who – at least from time to time – lived in the same community with the saint and was himself a participant in the foundation of the Congregation.

In 1967, the Annals were published in their entirety by Fr. Gaetano, who, not content with merely editing the work, wrote several notes which clarified related facts and which, at times, sharpened the focus on the events and added a certain quality of completeness to them.