Father Corapi's Biography

[Talbot Introduction]

Though the life of St. Lebuin written by Hucbald of St. Amand is better known and was considered for a long time to be the first, M. J. A Moltzer showed in 1909 that it was based on an older biography, which is here translated. Hucbald was born about A.D. 840 and became monk of Elnone on the Scarpe. He went to Auxerre, where he followed the lectures of Heiric, a disciple of John Scotus Eriugena. Later he passed to St. Bertin, where he was placed in charge of the schools. The successor of Hincmar of Rheims, Fulques (881-­900), invited him to reorgamze the schools in the cathedral city, and after doing so he returned to St. Amand, where he died, 20 June, probably in the year 931. Among a number of other lives of Saints, he wrote a biography of St. Lebuin at the request of Baldric, the restorer of the diocese of Utrecht (918­76), but as he merely pads out the facts without making any original contribution it has seemed better to present the original and earlier text to the reader.

Sources: The Life of St. Lebuin was first published by Surius, vol. vi, pp 277-86, but this was the text written by Hucbald of St. Amand. A translation of this appeared in Serenus Cressy's Church History of Brittany, vol. xxivv, 7. The present text is, however, based on the Vita Lebuini Antiqua, edited by A. Hofmeister, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores (x926-34), vol. xxx, 2, pp. 789-95.

---

THE LIFE OF ST. LEBUIN

[229] THE LAND of England which was converted to the faith of Christ by the intervention of the blessed Pope Gregory has always been most steadfast in its religion. And just as it is prolific in all kinds of animals, so also is it productive of holy men. There one finds laymen devoted to the service of God, virgins of exceptional virtue and monks of outstanding generosity spurning the world for the love of Christ. Very many of these have forsaken their country for the Lord's sake, either to expiate their sins or benefit pagans and Christians by their teaching.

The Lord Himself admonished St. Lebuin to forsake his country and to preach to the Saxons across the sea and told him to instruct the people who dwelt in the lands of the Franks and Saxons near the river Isel. After receiving this command, not once but a second and a third time, he embarked on a ship and came to the priest Gregory, who at that time was in charge of the church at Utrecht, which in olden times was called Wiltenburg. Though Gregory was only a priest, he was fulfilling the duties of a bishop. This man, who was the scion of a noble Frankish family, had been brought up in the service of St. Boniface since he was a boy and first joined him when at God's command he went to preach to the people of Hesse and Thuringia. Boniface had come from England at the time of Charles and became so renowned for his wisdom and holiness in the days of that king's two sons, Carloman and Pippin, that he was able to effect reforms both in religion and belief throughout the whole Frankish kingdoms. Though he set out as a poor pilgrim, such was his eloquence and prudence that he was chosen by the kings and the people to be Bishop of Mainz, and when he went to Rome to be consecrated archbishop by Pope Gregory the third his name was changed from Wynfrith to Boniface because of his good deeds [bona facta]. But after this blessed master was slain by the sword vrith fifty­two companions whilst he [230] was preaching in Frisia, St. Gregory spent the rest of his life ministering to the young Chistian community which St. Willibrord and other disciples of the Lord had baptized in Frisia and in the districts round about.

St. Lebuin, therefore, told St. Gregory what the Lord had comrnanded him and asked to be conducted to the spot in his diocese which the Lord had pointed out and commended to his care. After blessed Gregory had listened to him, congratulated him and welcomed this visitation from the Lord, he directed him to the place he had mentioned and gave him as a companion the servant of God, Marchelmus, who had been one of Willibrord's disciples Then he was received into the house of a widow named Abarhilda and enjoyed her hospitality for some days.

When many had accepted his teaching, the Christians who lived there built an oratory for him near the western bank of the river Isel at a place called Wilp, and not long afterwards they built a church and a dwelling­place on the eastern bank of the same river, where the man of God remained intent on the work of God. From time to time he went into Saxony to see if he could gain souls to God, and he persuaded many to accept the faith of Christ. Among his friends and acquaintances were people of the nobility, one of whom was a rich man named Folcbert who lived in the village of Suderg.

But as it were not possible for him who bore the light of Christ to remain concealed for long, nor for the seed of Christ to grow without persecution, complaints arose among those who did not believe and they began to threaten the man of God because some of their number had abandoned the ancient worship and had turned to new ways. "Why do we not get hold of this fanatic," they said," and give him what he deserves for gadding about the province and jabbering his incantations and sending people out of their minds?" And so they banded together in a mob, burned down his church and drove out the Christians from their midst.

In olden times the Saxons had no king but appointed rulers over each village; and their custom was to hold a general meeting once a year in the centre of Saxony near the river Yser at a place called Marklo. There all the leaders used to gather together and they [231] were joined by twelve noblemen from each village with as many freedmen and serfs. There they confirmed the laws, gave judgment on outstanding cases and by common consent drew up plans for the coming year on which they could act either in peace or war.

Folcbert, whom we have already mentioned, had a son named Helco, who was to set out with the other youths for the meeting. One morning, whilst he was speaking to his son, he said, among other things: " I feel anxious about Wine" - for this is what he used to call Lebuin - "and I am afraid that if he meets with those who hate him they will either kill him or drag him to the meeting place and have him killed there." Whilst he was still speaking, the dogs began barking in the hall and growling at someone coming in. The young man Helco went to the door to see who it was and there he found Lebuin trying to ward off the dogs with his stick. He ran up to him and, driving the dogs away, brought him vwith joy to his father. After they had greeted each other and sat down, Folcbert said to the man of God: "You have just come at the right time, my dear Wine, for I was wanting to see you and have a few words with you. Where do you intend to go now?" The man of God said: "I am going to the meeting of the Saxons." Folcbert said: "You are on friendly terms with many of us, dear Wine, and what you say gives pleasure even to me. But I hear that there are many insolent young fellows who insult and threaten you. Listen to me and be on your guard against them. Do not go to the meeting, but return home to your friend Davo. For once the meeting is over you may go about with less danger and then you can come here in safety and we shall listen to your words with very great pleasure." The man of God replied: " I must not fail to be present at this meeting, for Christ himself has commanded me to make known his words to the Saxons." Folcbert said: " You will not get away." He answered: " I shall escape easily enough, for He who sent me will be my aid."

Since he could not persuade him, he sent him away.

When the day of the meeting came round, all the leaders were present, as were others whose duty it was to attend. Then, when they had gathered together, they first offered up prayers to their gods, as is their custom, asking them to protect their country and [232] to guide them in making decrees both useful to themselves and pleasing to the gods. Then when a circle had been formed they began the discussions.

Suddenly Lebuin appeared in the middle of the circle, clothed in his priestly garments, bearing a aoss in his hands and a copy of the Gospels in the crook of his arm. Raising his voice, he aied: "Listen to me, listen. I am the messenger of Almighty God and to you Saxons I bring his command." Astonished at his words and at his unusual appearance, a hush fell upon the assembly. The man of God then followed up his announcement with these words: " The God of heaven and Ruler of the world and His Son, Jesus Christ, commands me to tell you that if you are willing to be and to do what His senants tell you He will confer benefits upon you such as you have never heard of before." Then he added: "As you have never had a king over you before this time, so no king will prevail against you and subject you to his domination. But if you are unwilling to accept God's commands, a king has been prepared nearby who will invade your lands, spoil and lay them waste and sap away your strength in war; he will lead you into exile, deprive you of your inheritance, slay you with the sword, and hand over your possessions to whom he has a mind: and afterwards you will be slaves both to him and his successors."

At this they could no longer hold their tongue and cried out in a loud voice: "This is the wandering charlatan who goes about the country preaching wild, fantastic nonsense. Catch him and stone him to death." In spite of the efforts of the wiser among them to prevent it, the mob ran to the fence close by, wrenched stakes from it, pared and sharpened them and threw them, trying to transfix him. But suddenly he was no longer there. Then, all of them, both those who had been put to confusion and those who had tried to control them, condemned their action as unjust, and one of them in particular, a speaker named Buto, climbed on to the trunk of a tree and addressed them as follows: "All you who have any sense of justice, listen to what I have to say. When the Normans, Slavs and Frisians or any other people send messengers to us we receive them peacefully and listen with courtesy [233] to what they have to say. But now, when a messenger of God comes to us, look at the insults we pour upon him! The ease with which he escaped from our hands ought to prove to you that he spoke the truth and that the threats he uttered will not be long in happening."

Moved by regret at what they had done, they decided that the messenger of God should go unharmed if he appeared again and that he should be allowed to travel wheresoever he pleased. Then, after this decision had been reached, they continued with the business they had in hand.

St. Lebuin, therefore, went about wherever the Spirit of God led him, persevering in the work of God until he gave back his soul to its Creator. He was buried after his death in the church which had formerly been burned down and rebuilt. But after his death the wicked Saxons laid waste that place and set the church on fire and for three days tried without success to find his body. At the same time Abbot Gregory also died and his diocese was taken over by his nephew Albricus, who loved Liutger [l] with a deep affection. He said to him: " Because you are now my dearest brother, I beg you to carry out my wishes. For the place in which St. Lebuin carried out his work until his death and where he is now buried has been laid waste. I want you to restore that place and to rebuild the church over his body."

[1] The St. Liutger mentioned in this biography was the first Bishop of Munster in Westphalia. Born at Zuilen near Utrecht about 774 (d. 26 March 809), he was sent to the school of Gregory at Utrecht and from there went to York with Alubert, who was consecrated bishop At York Llutger studhed under Alcuin and contracted a friendship with him that lasted throughout hus hfe. It was in 775 that he was despatched to Deventer to restore the chapel destroyed by the Saxons and to find the relics of St. Lebuin, after which he spent some time teaching at the school of Utrecht. In 777 he was ordained at Cologne and put in charge of the Eastern part of Friesland, with Dokkum, the scene of St. Boniface's martyrdom, as his centre. After seven years he was drlven out by the rlsians, instigated by Widukind, leader of the Saxons, and in 785 vlsited Rome, where he was received by Pope Adrian. For the next two years he stayed at Monte Cassino, and there, on the arrival of Charlemagne, was appointed musslonary to the five districts at the mouth of the river Ems. In 793 Charlemagne wlshed to make him Bishop of Trier, but he declined the honour and proposed instead to evangelize the Saxons. He built a monastery m the place, later called Munster, and lived there under the Rule of St. Chrodegang of Metz, whlch a few years before had been imposed in all Frankish territories. Someume between 80z and 803 he was consecrated Bishop of Munster and died on Passion Sunday 809. His body rests at Werden, the Benedictine monastery begun by hlm in 799 and completed in 804.

[234] Therefore the servant of God Liutger, in obedience to the commands of his master, looked for the body of the saint in the place just mentioned but was unable to f nd it. He began to raise a church, however, in the part where he thought it ought to be. When he had laid the foundations and was trying to erect the walls St. Lebuin appeared to him in a dream and said: " Dearest brother Liutger, you have done well in restoring the church of God which the heathens destroyed so long ago: my body, which you were looking for, will be found buried under the south wall which you have built." On the following morning, after saying his prayers, Liutger found the body in the place described to him in the dream, and, gathering together a large band of men, he had the foundations moved to the south part of the building so that the tomb of the saint could be enclosed within the church. It is in this place that God works many miracles through his servant Lebuin even to the present day.

Source:

C. H. Talbot, The Anglo-Saxon Missionaries in Germany, Being the Lives of SS. Willibrord, Boniface, Leoba and Lebuin together with the Hodoepericon of St. Willibald and a selection from the correspondence of St. Boniface, (London and New York: Sheed and Ward, 1954)

The copyright status of this text has been checked carefully. The situation is complicated, but in sum is as follows. The book was published in 1954 by Sheed & Ward, apparently simultaneously, in both London and New York. The American-printed edition simply gave 'New York' as place of publication, the British-printed edition gave 'London and New York'. Copyright was not renewed in 1982 or 1983, as required by US Law. The recent GATT treaty (1995?) restored copyright to foreign publications which had entered US public domain simply because copyright had not be renewed in accordance with US law. This GATT provision does not seem to apply to this text because it was published simultaneously in the US and Britain by a publisher operating in both countries (a situation specifically addressed in the GATT regulations). Thus, while still under copyright protection in much of the world, the text remains in the US public domain.

Some years ago, a collection of such hagiographical texts, including some texts from Talbot, was published:-

Thomas F.X. Noble and Thomas Head, Soldiers of Christ: Saint and Saints' Lives from Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1995).

Soldiers of Christ uses, among others, the Talbot translated texts, but is much improved by additional notes by the two editors, and by new translations of some parts. Readers from outside the US should consult this volume, and readers in the US would find it profitable to do so.

This text is part of the Internet Medieval Source Book. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts related to medieval and Byzantine history.

Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No permission is granted for commercial use.

© Paul Halsall, October 1, 2000
halsall@fordham.edu

1623 St. Josaphat of Polotsk an Eastern Rite bishop martyr to church unity because he died trying to bring part of the Orthodox Church into union with Rome
Vitépsci, in Polónia, pássio sancti Jósaphat, e sancti Basilíi Ordine, Epíscopi Polocénsis et Mártyris; qui a schismáticis, in ódium cathólicæ unitátis et veritátis, crudéliter interféctus est, et a Pio Papa Nono inter sanctos Mártyres adscríptus.  Ejus tamen festívitas recólitur décimo octávo Kaléndas Decémbris.
    At Witebsk in Poland, the martyrdom of St. Josaphat, of the Order of St. Basil, a Polish archbishop and martyr, who was cruelly slain by schismatics through hatred of Catholic unity and truth.  He was canonized by Pope Pius IX, and his feast is observed on the 16th of November.
   In 1054, a formal split called a schism took place between the Eastern Church centered in Constantinople and the Western Church centered in Rome. Trouble between the two had been brewing for centuries because of cultural, political, and theological differences. In 1054 Cardinal Humbert was sent to Constantinople to try and reconcile the latest flare up and wound up excommunicating the patriarch.

The immediate problems included an insistence on the Byzantine rite, married clergy,
disagreement on whether the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father and the Son.
The split only grew worse from there, centering mostly on whether to except the authority of the Pope and Rome.

More than five centuries later, in what is now known as Byelorussia and the Ukraine but what was then part of Poland-Lithuania, an Orthodox metropolitan of Kiev and five Orthodox bishops decided to commit the millions of Christians under their pastoral care to reunion with Rome.
Josaphat Kunsevich who was born in 1580 or 1584 was still a young boy when the Synod of Brest Litovsk took place in 1595-96, but he was witness to the results both positive and negative.

Many of the millions of Christians did not agree with the bishops decision to return to communion with the Catholic Church and both sides tried to resolve this disagreement unfortunately not only with words but with violence. Martyrs died on both sides. Josaphat was a voice of Christian peace in this dissent.

After an apprenticeship to a merchant, Josaphat turned down a partnership in the business and a marriage to enter the monastery of the Holy Trinity at Vilna in 1604. As a teenager he had found encouragement in his vocation from two Jesuits and a rector who understood his heart. And in the monastery he found another soulmate in Joseph Benjamin Rutsky. Rutsky who had joined the Byzantine Rite under orders of Pope Clement VIII after converting from Calvinism shared the young Josaphat's passion to work for reunion with Rome. The two friends spent long hours making plans on how they could bring about that communion and reform monastic life.

The careers of the two friends parted physically when Josaphat was sent to found new houses in Rome and Rutsky was first made abbot at Vilna. Josaphat replaced Rutsky as abbot when Rutsky became metropolitan of Kiev. Josaphat immediately put into practice his early plans of reform. Because his plans tended to reflect his own extremely austere ascetic tendencies, he was not always met with joy. One community threatened to throw him into the river until his general compassion and his convincing words won them over to a few changes.

Josaphat faced even more problems when he became first bishop of Vitebsk and then Polotsk in 1617. The church there was literally and figuratively in ruins with buildings falling apart, clergy marrying two or three times, and monks and clergy everywhere not really interested in pastoral care or model Christian living. Within three years, Josaphat had rebuilt the church by holding synods, publishing a catechism to be used all over, and enforcing rules of conduct for clergy. But his most compelling argument was his own life which he spent preaching, instructing others in the faith, visiting the needy of the towns.

But despite all his work and the respect he had, the Orthodox separatists found fertile ground with they set up their own bishops in the exact same area. Meletius Smotritsky was named his rival archbishop of Polotsk. It must have hurt Josaphat to see the people he had served so faithfully break into riots when the King of Poland declared Josaphat the only legitimate archbishop. His former diocese of Vitebsk turned completely against the reunion and him along with two other cities.

But what probably hurt even more was that the very Catholics he looked to for communion opposed him as well. Catholics who should have been his support didn't like the way he insisted on the use of the Byzantine rite instead of the Roman rite. Out of fear or ignorance, Leo Sapiah, chancellor of Lithuania, chose to believe stories that Josaphat was inciting the people to violence and instead of coming to his aid, condemned him. Actually his only act of force was when the separatists took over the church at Mogilev and he asked the civil power to help him return it to his authority.

In October 1623, Josaphat decided to return to Vitebsk to try to calm the troubles himself. He was completely aware of the danger but said, "If I am counted worthy of martyrdom, then I am not afraid to die."

The separatists saw their chance to get rid of Josaphat and discredit him if they could only stir Josaphat's party to strike the first blow. Then they would have an excuse to strike back. Their threats were so public that Josaphat preached on the gospel verse John 16:2, "Indeed, an hour is coming when those who kill you will think that by doing so they are offering worship to God." He told the people, "You people want to kill me. You wait in ambush for me in the streets, on the bridges, on the highways, in the marketplace, everywhere. Here I am; I came to you as a shepherd. You know I would be happy to give my life for you. I am ready to die for union of the Church under St. Peter and his successor the Pope."

But aside from words, Josaphat insisted that his party not react in anyway that did not show patience and forbearance. When the separatists saw that they were not getting the violent response they had hoped for they decided to wear Josaphat and the others down as they plotted more direct action. A priest named Elias went to the house where everyone was staying and shouted insults and threats to everyone he saw, focusing on calumniating Josaphat and the Church of Rome.

Josaphat knew of the plot against him and spent his day in prayer. In the evening he had a long conversation with a beggar he had invited in off the streets.

When Elias was back the next morning of November 12, the servants were at their wits' ends and begged Josaphat's permission to do something. Before he went off to say his office he told them they could lock Elias away if he caused trouble again. When he returned to the house he found that the servants had done just that and Josaphat let Elias out of the room.

But it was too late. The mistake had been made. Elias had not been hurt in anyway but as soon as the mob saw that Elias had been locked up they rejoiced in the excuse they had been waiting for. Bells were rung and mobs descended on the house. By the time they reached the house, Elias had been released but the mob didn't care; they wanted the blood they had been denied for so long.

Josaphat came out in the courtyard to see the mob beating and trampling his friends and servants. He cried out, "My children what are you doing with my servants? If you have anything against me, here I am, but leave them alone!" With shouts of "Kill the papist" Josaphat was hit with a stick, then an axe, and finally shot through the head. His bloody body was dragged to the river and thrown in, along with the body of a dog who had tried to protect him.

The unsung heroes of this horrible terrorism were the Jewish people of Vitebsk. Some of the Jewish people risked their own lives to rush into the courtyard and rescue Josaphat's friends and servants from the bloodthirsty mobs. Through their courage, lives were saved. These same Jewish people were the only ones to publicly accuse the killers and mourn the death of Josaphat while the Catholics of the city hid in fear of their lives.

As usual violence had the opposite affect from that intended. Regret and horror at how far the violence had gone and the loss of their archbishop swung public opinion over toward the Catholics and unity. Eventually even Archbishop Meletius Smotritsky, Josaphat's rival, was reconciled with Rome. And in 1867 Josaphat became the first saint of the Eastern church to be formally canonized by Rome.

Josaphat of Poland BM (RM) (also known as Joseph Polotsk) Born at Vladimir, Volhynia, Poland, 1584; died at Vitebsk, 1623; canonized 1867; feast day formerly on November 14.

John Kunsevich was born at a time when the attempts of some Christians to bring about a reunion between Rome and the Russian Orthodox Christians were causing deep dissension. Poland had annexed the Ruthenian countries--Byelorussia and the Ukraine-- during the 14th century. In 1595, with the approval of Clement VIII and the Polish government, a synod at Brest-Litovsk, Lithuania, agreed on the unification of the schismatic Greek bishops with the Latin bishops, and on their joint union with Rome.

But the decisions of leaders in isolation from those affected means little. The union failed to take root in the hearts of the 10 million Ruthenians and, instead of union between two churches, a third arose--the Ruthenian Catholic Church that affiliated itself with Rome but kept the oriental rites.

Of these three churches it was the Ruthenian Catholic Church that, being the most recent and therefore also the most revolutionary, aroused the greatest anger on the part of those who, either from principle or calculating interest, were conservatives. The familiar cries arose of indignation, the same cries we hear even today from those who are bound by routine. And, of course, there was the normal squabble for power over appointments.

Only the blood of a martyr can overcome such differences by converting even the hardest of hearts. And so Ruthenia, which was just one example of the eternal problem of minorities, was awaiting its martyr. A rare sort of man was needed, one who was sufficiently dedicated to God not to swear allegiance to anyone else, and sufficiently involved in events to be able to change their course. Such a man was Josaphat, who was baptized John.

At the time of the Union of Brest he was still a boy, having been born at Vladimir in Volhynia in 1580 or 1584, and baptized John. His father, a Catholic, was a burgess of a good family called Kunsevich, who sent John to school in his native town and then apprenticed him to a merchant of Vilna. John was not particularly interested in trade, and employed his spare time in mastering Church Slavonic in order that he might assist more intelligently at divine worship and recite some of the long Byzantine office every day; and he got to know Peter Arcudius, who was then rector of the oriental college at Vilna, and the two Jesuits, Valentine Fabricius and Gregory Gruzevsky, who took an interest in him and gave him every encouragement.

At first his master was not favourably disposed towards John’s religious preoccupations, but he did his work so well that eventually the merchant offered him a partnership and one of his daughters in marriage. Both offers were refused, for John had decided to be a monk and in 1604 he entered the monastery of the Holy Trinity at Vilna. He induced to join him there Joseph Benjamin Rutsky, a learned convert from Calvinism who had been ordered by Pope Clement VIII to join the Byzantine rite against his personal wishes, and together the two young monks concerted schemes for promoting union and reforming Ruthenian monastic observance.

   John Kunsevich, who had now taken the name of Josaphat, was ordained deacon and priest and speedily had a great reputation as a preacher, especially on behalf of reunion with Rome. He led a most austere personal life and added to a careful observance of the austerities of eastern monastic life such extreme voluntary mortifications that he was often remonstrated with by the most ascetic. At his beatification the burgomaster of Vilna testified that, “there was not a better religious in the town than Father Josaphat”. Meanwhile, the abbot of Holy Trinity having developed separatist views, Rutsky was promoted in his place and the monastery was soon full, so Father Josaphat was taken away from his study of the Eastern fathers to help in the foundation of new houses in Poland. In 1614 Rutsky was made metropolitan of Kiev and Josaphat succeeded him as abbot at Vilna. When the new metropolitan went to take possession of his cathedral Josaphat accompanied him and took the opportunity of visiting the great monastery of The Caves at Kiev. The community of two hundred monks was relaxed, and they threatened to throw the Catholic reformer into the river Dnieper. He was not successful in his efforts to bring them to unity, but his personality and exhortations brought about a somewhat changed attitude and a notable increase of good-will.

The archbishop of Polotsk at this time was a very old man and a favourer of the dissidents, and in 1617 Abbot Josaphat was ordained bishop of Vitebsk with right of succession to Polotsk. A few months later the old archbishop died and Josaphat was confronted with an eparchy, which was as large in extent as it was degraded in life. The more religious people were inclined to schism through fear of arbitrary Roman interference with their worship and customs; churches were in ruins and benefices in the hands of laymen; many of the secular clergy had been married two and three times and the monks were decadent. *{*Though according to Eastern Canon law a married man may be ordained to the priesthood, if his wife dies he cannot marry another and if ordained a bachelor he must remain single.}

   Josaphat sent for some of his brethren from Vilna to help him and got to work. He held synods in the central towns, published a catechism and imposed its use, issued rules of conduct for the clergy, and fought the interference of the “squires” in the affairs of the local churches. At the same time setting a personal example of assiduous instructing and preaching, administration of the sacraments and visiting of the poor, the sick, prisoners and the most remote hamlets. By i 6w the eparchy was practically solidly Catholic, order had been restored, and the example of a few good men had brought about a real concern for Christian life. But in that year a dissident hierarchy of bishops was set up in the territory affected by the Union of Brest, side by side with the Catholic one; and one Meletius Smotritsky was sent as archbishop to Polotsk, who began with great vigour to undo the work of the Catholic archbishop. He zealously spread a report that St Josaphat had “turned Latin ”, that all his flock would have to do the same, and that Catholicism was not the traditional Christianity of the Ruthenian people.
  St Josaphat was at Warsaw when this began and on his return he found that, though his episcopal city was firm for him, some other parts of the eparchy had begun to waver; a monk called Silvester had managed to draw nearly all the people of Vitebsk, Mogilev and Orcha to the side of Smotritsky. The nobility and many of the people adhered strongly to the union, but St Josaphat could do little with these three towns; and not only at Yitebsk but even at Vilna, when the proclamation of the King of Poland that Josaphat was the only legitimate archbishop of Polotsk was publicly read in his presence, there were riots and the life of St Josaphat was threatened.

Leo Sapieha, the chancellor of Lithuania and a Catholic, was fearful of the possible political results of the general unrest, and lent too willing an ear to the heated charges of dissidents outside of Poland that Josaphat had caused it by his policy. Accordingly in 1622 Sapieha wrote accusing him of violence in the maintenance of the union, of putting the kingdom in peril from the Zaporozhsky Cossacks by making discord among the people, of forcibly shutting-up non-Catholic churches, and so on. These and similar accusations were made in general  terms, and their unjustifiability was amply demonstrated by contemporary ad hoc testimony from both sides the only actual fact of the sort is the admitted one that Josaphat invoked the aid of the civil power to recover the church at Mogilev from the dissidents. Thus the archbishop had to face misunderstanding, misrepresentation and opposition from Catholics as well.
   There is no doubt that some of the easy reversion to schism was due to the firm discipline and reform of morals that had been inaugurated under Catholic auspices, and St Josaphat did not receive the support he was entitled to from the Latin bishops of Poland because of the uncompromising way in which he maintained the right of the Byzantine clergy and customs to equal treatment with those of Rome. He continued doggedly and fearlessly on his way and, Vitebsk continuing to be a hotbed of trouble, he determined in October 1623 to go there in person again. He could neither be dissuaded nor would he take a military escort. “If I am accounted so worthy as to deserve martyrdom, then I am not afraid to die”, he said. He went accordingly, and for a fortnight preached in the churches and visited the houses of all without distinction. He was continually threatened in the streets, and his opponents tried to pick quarrels with his attendants in order that he might be killed in the ensuing fracas. On the feast of St Demetrius the Martyr he was surrounded by an angry mob, and exclaimed: “You people of Vitebsk want to put me to death. You make ambushes for me everywhere, in the streets, on the bridges, on the highways, in the market place. I am here among you as your shepherd and you ought to know that I should be happy to give my life for you. I am ready to die for the holy union, for the supremacy of St Peter and of his successor the Supreme Pontiff.”

Smotritsky was fomenting this agitation, his object doubtless being no worse than to drive his rival from the diocese. But his followers got out of hand, and a plot was laid to murder St Josaphat on November 12, if he could not be induced to give excuse for violence before then. A priest named Elias was put up to go into the courtyard of the archbishop’s house and to use insulting words to his servants about their master and their religion, and after several complaints St Josaphat gave permission for him to be seized if it happened again. On the morning of the 12th, as the archbishop came to the church for the office of Daybreak, he was met by Elias, who began to abuse him to his face he therefore allowed his deacon to have the man taken and shut up in a room of the house. This was just what his enemies were waiting for: the bells of the town hall were rung and a mob assembled, demanding the release of Elias and the punishment of the archbishop. After office St Josaphat returned to his house unharmed, and let Elias go with a warning, but the people broke in, calling for their victim and striking his attendants. St Josaphat went out to them. “My children”, he asked, “what are you doing with my servants? If you have anything against me, here I am:  but leave them alone”—words remarkably reminiscent of those of another archbishop, St Thomas Becket, on a similar occasion. Amid cries of “Kill the papist!”
he was brained with a halberd and pierced by a bullet. The mangled body was dragged out and contemptuously cast into the river Dvina.
St Josaphat Kunsevich was canonized in 1867, the first saint of the Eastern churches to be formally canonized after process in the Congregation of Sacred Rites. Fifteen years later Pope Leo XIII gave his feast to the whole Western church for this date the Ukrainians and others keep it on November 12, or the ‘Sunday following, according to the Julian calendar. An immediate result of the martyrdom was a revulsion in favour of Catholicity and unity but the controversy continued to be carried on with an unholy bitterness, and the dissidents too had their martyr, Abbot Athanasius of Brest, who was put to death in 1648. On the other hand, Archbishop Meletius Smotritsky himself eventually was reconciled with the Holy See, and the great Ruthenian reunion persisted, with varying fortunes, until after the partition of Poland. The Russian sovereigns forcibly aggregated a majority of the Ruthenian Catholics to the Orthodox Church of Russia. To the afflictions with which a repetition of history has visited the remainder in our own time Pope Pius XII bore sufficient witness, in his encyclical letter "Orientales omnes" issued at the 350th anniversary of the Union of Brest in 1946.

In 1874 Dom Alphonse Guépin published two stout octavo volumes, amounting altogether to more than a thousand pages, under the title Saint Josaphat, archevéque martyr, et l’Église Grecque unie en Pologne. In the preface he speaks of the sources upon which his work is based. He thanks Father J. Martynov in particular for placing at his disposition a copy of the beatification process and a number of other papers transcribed from the Roman archives. He also makes appeal to a vast collection of documents formed by the Basilian hieromonk Paul Szymansky, and to another great manuscript library of similar character, which Bishop Naruszewicz had accumulated, with a view to his own work as a historian. All these had been entrusted to Dom Guépin, and they were put to such good use that most of the Western writers who have since then touched upon the subject have been largely depend­ent upon his researches. Attention should, however, be called to the very useful little books of Father G. Hofmann, nos. 6 and 12 of the series “Orientalia Christiana”. When St Josaphat was put to death the news spread quickly throughout Europe, and the British Museum possesses a copy of a tract, Relacion verdadera de la Muerte y Martirio de… Josafat; it was printed at Seville in 1625. See also 0. Kozanewyc, Leben des hl. Josaphat (1931); and the periodical Roma e l’Orient, vol. x (1920), pp. 27—34. The background of the events narrated above may be read in the Cambridge History of Poland, vol. i (1950), pp. 507 seq. St Josaphat and the Metropolitan Rutsky were the initiators of that movement in Ruthenian monasticism, which eventually became the organized Order of St Basil, and accordingly these monks have been officially known since 1932 as the Basilians of St Josaphat. In 1952 they published at Rome the first volume of Latin text of the beatification documents of St Josaphat.