Vincent of Lérins, St.

views updated

VINCENT OF LÉRINS, ST.

Fifth-century monk and theologian; d. before 450. Gennadius describes Vincent as Gallic by birth, a priest of wide learning at the monastery of Lérins, author of an Adversus haereticos under the pseudonym of Peregrinus (Pilgrim), whose death occurred in the reign of Theodosius II and Valentinian III between 425 and 450 (De vir.ill. 65). That Vincent served as tutor to Eucherius's son, Salonius, is known from Eucherius of Lyons (Instruct. 1, pref.); while Vincent's own Commonitoria (ch. 1) suggests that he had undertaken military service before coming to Lérins.

Of Vincent's works, the heresiography mentioned by Gennadius is now called the Commonitoria (from a term in ch. 1, 27, 28) and has been frequently edited. The first part (ch. 128) exists in its original form, but the second (ch. 2933) is a compendium of what had been two books. This recapitulation dates from a.d. 434 (c. 29).

The recently discovered Excerpta Vincentii Lirinensis proves to be a florilegium of texts taken from St. augustine with preface and epilogus by Vincent and is plausibly dated 434440 (see Commonit., ch. 16 for the design). It is marked by strong Augustinian sympathies, which call into question the assumption of many scholars that Vincent displays an anti-Augustinianism. That there is a link between the Excerpta and the creed Quicumque vult seems to have been demonstrated by J. Madoz. Hence the possibility that Vincent may be the author of some, at least, of the creedal formulas must be considered, though critical opinion on this creed is not concordant. A no longer extant Objectiones Vincentianae is presupposed by the Pro Augustino responsiones which prosper of aquitaine composed c. 431434. In 1673 the future cardinal Henri Noris suggested that Vincent was the originator of the Objectiones, a view which has also been espoused by H. Koch. On the contrary L. de Tillemont is of the opinion that the author is that Vincent cited by Gennadius (De vir. ill. 81)

The mark of Lérins's true importance lies in his position on tradition and the development of Christian doctrine described in the Commonitoria. Whether this treatise is to be interpreted as a veiled polemic against St. Augustine or as composed quite apart from the SemiPelagian controversy, its theologizing marks an epoch in the understanding of the Catholic faith.

According to Commonit. (ch. 2, 29) it is the double authority of the Scriptures and of the Church's tradition which distinguishes Catholic truth from heretical falsity. Though the canon of the Scriptures is a sufficient norm for truth, the very existence of variant interpretations shows the need for recourse to a standard outside the Scriptures (ch. 2: "secundum ecclesiastici et catholici sensus normam"; also ch. 27). In this case, stress is to be laid upon what has been believed everywhere, always and by all; this is the famed Vincentian canon, marked by the notes of universality, antiquity, and consent (ch. 2: "quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est"; ch. 27, 29). Since Vincent places peculiar doctrinal force upon the judgments of the Roman See (ch. 6, 32, 33) and of ecumenical councils (ch. 23, 28, 29, 30), it is clear that his concept of tradition makes room both for a deposit of truth and for authoritative organs to proclaim the truth. Doctrinal development (profectus religionis ) is legitimate and necessary when it is true unfoldment and not change (ch. 23). It deepens the understanding of the Faith on the part of the entire Church as well as of individuals and is likened to the growth of the human body, to the process whence seed becomes plant, to the polishing of metal (ch. 23). While the Church ever guards the truths committed to her, what was at first simply believed achieves sharper delineation as authoritative decrees define the ancient Faith in new formulas (ch. 23).

Modern theologians, e.g., Cardinal Franzelin, consider the Vincentian canon true in the affirmative but not in the exclusive sense, i.e., whatever is universal, ancient, and the object of Catholic consensus is certainly true, yet precisely because legitimate development has been at work there are truths securely Catholic today which have not ever, everywhere, and by all been explicitly believed in the past. A phrase from Commonitorium (ch. 23) is cited by Vatican Council I, sess. III, cap. 4 (Denzinger, 3020).

Feast: May 24.

Bibliography: vincent of lÉrins, Commonitories, tr. r. e. morris (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation, ed. r. j. deferrari et al. 7; New York 1949) 257332. b. altaner, Patrology, tr. h. graef from 5th German ed. (New York 1960) 540541; Tradition et progrès: Le Commonitorium, tr. p. de labriolle (Paris 1978). j. madoz, Excerpta Vincentii Lirinensis (Madrid 1940); El Concepto de la tradición en s. Vincente de Lérins (Analecta Gregoriana 5; Rome 1933); Gregorianum 21 (Rome 1940) 7594; Recherches de science religieuse 39 (Paris 1951) 461471. h. koch, Vincenz von Lérins und Gennadius (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 31; Berlin 1907) 3958. g. moran, Scripture and Tradition (New York 1963). É. griffe, Bulletin de littérature ecclésiastique 62 (1961) 2631.

[h. g. j. beck]

More From encyclopedia.com