Pope St. Anacletus and the Roman Martyrology

[FrRJBoyd]

Does anyone know the history of why Pope St. Cletus and Pope St. Anacletus were said to be the same person? In 1961, the Sacred Congregation of Rites stated they were the same person, and deleted the commemoration of Pope St. Anacletus formerly kept on July 13th. From the legends of the Roman Breviary (some not found in the 1962 Breviary were gleaned from Abbot Gueranger’s The Liturgical Year), we have the following time line:

Linus, pope 11 years, 2 months, 23 days: 65-Sept. 23, 76 AD
Cletus, pope 12 years, 7 months, 2 days: 76-April 26, 89 AD
Clement, pope 9 years, 6 months, 6 days, 89-Nov. 23, 98 AD
Anacletus, pope 9 years, 3 months, 3 days, 99-July 13, 108 AD
Evaristus, pope, 9 years, 3 months, 108-Oct. 26, 117
Alexander I, pope 10 years, 5 months, 20 days, 118-Nov. 26, 128 AD

whereas the Catholic Encyclopedia online lists

St. Peter (32-67)
St. Linus (67-76)
St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
St. Clement I (88-97)
St. Evaristus (97-105)
St. Alexander I (105-115)
St. Sixtus I (115-125) – also called Xystus I

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

God bless,
Fr. Boyd

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Father:

The primary reason is that there is no supportable historical data that allows us to view Cletus/Anencletus and Anecletus as two separate individuals. The Oxford Dictionary of Popes says: “The LP [Liber Pontificalis] mistakenly distinguishes two popes, Cletus and Anacletus, but Cletus was merely a shortened form of the full name. He was commemorated, as Cletus, in the ancient canon of the Mass.” Eusebius does not list two separate men in his list of the Bishops of Rome.

So, it appears that the Congregation was simply following the historical precedent of the ancient canon.

Hope this helps.

Deacon Ed

 

[jj2011]

Does anyone know the history of why Pope St. Cletus and Pope St. Anacletus were said to be the same person? In 1961, the Sacred Congregation of Rites stated they were the same person, and deleted the commemoration of Pope St. Anacletus formerly kept on July 13th. From the legends of the Roman Breviary (some not found in the 1962 Breviary were gleaned from Abbot Gueranger’s The Liturgical Year), we have the following time line:

Linus, pope 11 years, 2 months, 23 days: 65-Sept. 23, 76 AD
Cletus, pope 12 years, 7 months, 2 days: 76-April 26, 89 AD
Clement, pope 9 years, 6 months, 6 days, 89-Nov. 23, 98 AD
Anacletus, pope 9 years, 3 months, 3 days, 99-July 13, 108 AD
Evaristus, pope, 9 years, 3 months, 108-Oct. 26, 117
Alexander I, pope 10 years, 5 months, 20 days, 118-Nov. 26, 128 AD

whereas the Catholic Encyclopedia online lists

St. Peter (32-67)
St. Linus (67-76)
St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
St. Clement I (88-97)
St. Evaristus (97-105)
St. Alexander I (105-115)
St. Sixtus I (115-125) – also called Xystus I

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

God bless,
Fr. Boyd

Father,

I think Deacon Ed is correct; plus the Roman Canon agrees with him: Lini, Cleti, Clementis, Xysti…

I have seen ancient sources spell the name differently, for example “Anencletus,” but that doesn’t mean these are different people any more than Sixtus and “Xystus” are distinct individuals.

 

[FrRJBoyd]

Thank you for the (name removed by moderator)ut so far, but, just to be clear, the legends of the two popes that have been celebrated liturgically are quite distinct:

“Anacletus was an Athenian who governed the Church in the time of the Emperor Trajan. He ordained that a Bishop should be consecrated by three Bishops and no less, that clerks should be publicly ordained to Holy Orders by their own Bishop, and that in the Mass, after the Consecration, all should afterwards commúnicate. He adorned the grave of Blessed Peter, and ordered a place for burying the Popes in. He held two ordinations in the month of December, wherein he ordained five Priests, three Deacons, and six Bishops. He sat as Pope nine years, three months, and ten days. He received the crown of his testimony, and was buried on the Vatican Hill.”

Trajan ruled from 98-117.

“Cletus was a Roman, the son of Aemilian, of the Fifth Region of the City, and the street called Noble. He ruled the Church in the time of the Emperors Vespasian and Titus. In accordance with the precept of the Prince of the Apostles he ordained twenty-five priests for the City. He was the first Pope who made use in his letters of the phrase, Health and Apostolic Benediction. When he had ruled the Church for twelve years, seven months, and two days, and brought it into an excellent state of order, in the reign of the Emperor Domitian, and the second persecution since the time of Nero, he was crowned with martyrdom, and buried on the Vatican mount, hard by the body of blessed Peter.”

Domitian ruled from 81 to 96.

I found one web site that said the following:

“Certain authors would confound Saint Cletus and Anacletus and make of them one person. Their father’s names are known, however, as well as their place of birth — the one in Italy, the other in Greece; moreover, Saint Cletus was consecrated bishop by Saint Peter, saint Anacletus was ordained a priest by him.”

I believe it was St. Ireneus who did not list Anacletus as one of the early popes, and Eusebius followed him. It certainly seems easy enough to forget an early pope when another has nearly the same name.

The Roman Canon is really not helpful here, because after Linus, Cletus and Clement, there is a break in the chronology of the popes named. The Sixtus named is actually believed to be Pope St. Sixtus II.

However, even today, it seems that so little is known about the popes of the first few centuries from the science of history that I wonder how we can challenge the ancient legends that have come down to us in the liturgy. I would hope that there was some kind of compelling evidence that would prompt the SRC to make their ruling in 1961, and I really want to know what it was.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Fr. Boyd,

Sadly, the historical accuracy of many of these records is highly debatable. The most reliable source source of information about the early popes comes from Eusebius in his Church history. The Liber Pontificalis is not reliable at all for the early portion of the book as it was assembled much later in history and the author interjected material that was not verifiable.

It is mostly from the LP that we get the information you cited. However, the earliest canon only includes Cletus, not Anacletus. One of the interesting aspects of the research that the Congregation did before revising the papal list was to look at the earliest known variants of the Roman Canon. Since the Church memory is, in part, recorded in her prayers, the omission of Anacletus seems to indicate that he did not exist. The lack of any mention of him in Eusebius further confirms this.

Since his existence is doubtful the Church has chosen to go with the more probably path – and omitted him from the canon.

Deacon Ed