"If the love of the heavenly homeland touches you, my friend, read this work, for Jerome shows you the way."
In commemoration of the Feast of St. Catherine of Siena and the traditional Dominican Feast of St. Peter Martyr of Verona on the 29th of April, we are releasing Book I of Jerome Savonarola's Solatium itineris mei, or Solace for My Pilgrimage.
This work was written by the Friar in the summer/fall of 1484 according to Giulo Cattin (See EDIZIONE NAZIONALE DELLE OPERE DI GIROLAMO SAVONAROLA, Solatium itineris mei, a cura di Giulio Cattin, Roma, p. 165) and published in Venice for the first time about 40 years after the death of the Friar. If you read Latin, you can read this original edition here: https://google.com/books/edition/Re_p_f_Hiero_Sauo_Dialogus_cui_titulus_S/2hoQ-Qzy1fcC?hl=en&gbpv=1
To our knowledge, this will be the very first English translation of this work.
For this poster, I recreated the typography from the original edition and paired it with a wonderful 18th-century painting of the Fiesolan hills by Vanvitelli. Prominently featured at the center is the Badia Fiesolana, with the sacred convent of San Domenico di Fiesole tucked just to the right.
San Domenico di Fiesole was the unwavering ally, the unmistakable bulwark, of the convent of San Marco in Florence. Together, these two houses were the first to separate from the Lombard Congregation and join the newly instituted Congregation of San Marco, of which Savonarola was given the office of Provincial. Savonarola often retreated there, and it was from this strategic stronghold that his closest collaborator, Fra Domenico da Pescia—mockingly dubbed il fattoraccio by their enemies—led the friars as Prior during the height of their apostolic campaigns in the city.
A few generations before Savonarola, Blessed Giovanni Dominici, returning to his native Florence after expulsion from Venice, received this plot of land from the Bishop of Fiesole. There he constructed and established the first Observant Dominican convent in Tuscany. Among its earliest sons were a promising boy from Florence, Antonino Pierozzi—later canonized as Archbishop St. Antonino—and a young illuminator named Guido di Pietro, who would come to be known to the world as Blessed Fra Giovanni Angelico.
—A.N.
----------
«Si te tangit amor patriae coelestis, amice,
hic tibi Heronymus (perlege) pandit iter»
"If the love of the heavenly homeland touches you, my friend, read this work, for Jerome shows you the way."
Book I
Spiritus: As I find myself contemplating, far from the presence of God, the return to the Father's house, you, O my Bride, must come with me.
Anima: But I do not know by what path we may walk toward such salvation.
Sp: Our path is Christ.
An: But faith is uncertain.
Sp: For one who wishes to draw near to God, it is necessary to believe.
An: Yet one who believes too easily is light of heart.
Sp: But to believe in God is an act of the utmost gravity.
An: Has God perhaps spoken with you?
Sp: No, but I believe those to whom God has deigned to speak.
An: And how do you know that they have heard God speaking?
Sp: Miracles have proven it to me.
An: But miracles belong to the past; then by what arguments may I believe now?
Sp: Do you doubt, perhaps, that God exists?
An: Even this leaves many in uncertainty, for "No one has ever seen God" (Jn 1:18).
Sp: But such people are certainly devoid of intelligence, according to these words: "The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God’" (Ps 13:1).
An: And by what arguments do you prove that God exists?
Sp: Since nothing can be simultaneously in act and in potentiality with respect to the same reality and perfection, everything that is in motion is moved by another. Yet, one cannot suppose an infinite series of movers, each set in motion by another, for then there would be no first mover, and each of these movers would be moved as an instrument of another, which, however, cannot ultimately be moved unless by the impulse of the first and principal mover. Therefore, since we observe that many bodies are in motion, there must necessarily be a first mover, itself unmoved, by which all mobile bodies are moved. And indeed, everyone agrees that this supreme mover is God.
An: This argument convinces me.
Sp: But there is another, no less effective. You yourself see that under the heavens many things are generated and produced; yet nothing produces itself, nor can we suppose an infinite series of causes. Therefore, we must trace back to a first cause, absolutely first, which everyone believes to be God.
An: But this argument is similar to the first.
Sp: What you say is true. However, another most valid argument is the orderly interdependence of all things. For since all beings pursue what is best and always—or in most cases—produce the same effects, we must admit that they act for an end. Now, since many of them lack knowledge, we must recognize that they are guided by an intelligence, which all affirm to be God.
An: All human intellects are so convinced by this reasoning that, by its force, they are led, as by a natural instinct, to confess that God exists.
Sp: That is exactly so, and for this reason, we too, like all other men, are compelled to affirm it. For by this and other arguments, men of the highest intellect have been convinced of it. And all men, both learned and ignorant, have been led as by a natural instinct to acknowledge that God exists, and though they err in many things, they venerate Him.
An: I approve what you say. Yet I ask you one thing: since it can be demonstrated that God exists, why do we say that believing it is an article of faith? Is faith not concerned with things unseen?
Sp: Because not all are capable of understanding the aforementioned arguments—only a few, and after a long time, and not without an admixture of errors. Therefore, for the ignorant, it is a matter of faith, but not for the wise.
An: Now, however, tell me, I beg you, what is God?
Sp: If carnal men could know who He is, He would not be God. For we are capable of knowing and understanding only sensible things or things knowable through the senses. But God is not a reality subject to the senses, nor is He in any way representable in the imagination, nor can He present Himself to our intellect with any image in His reality. Therefore, it is enough for us to know what God is not.
An: Then tell me, is God a body or not?
Sp: Certainly He is not a body, being the first unmoved mover; for a body cannot move other bodies unless it is itself moved.
An: But is He composite?
Sp: Not at all. A being can act only insofar as it is in act; therefore, the first agent must not only be in act but must consist in act itself, not merely partake of act.
An.: Could He not be the form, or the act, of a body?
Sp.: Absolutely not. For it is more noble to exist in and of oneself than to exist in another.
An.: But if He is a simple reality, how can He be perfect?
Sp.: Precisely because God is pure act. He is not a simple body like one of the elements. Being, in itself, includes every perfection.
An.: Yet He seems to be finite; for what is infinite is imperfect.
Sp.: A quantitative infinite is imperfect—that is, unfinished; but not the formal infinite, such as the being of God, which is God Himself.
An.: But does He perhaps contain all things?
Sp.: He does not contain them as a body would, but because He sustains all things by His own power.
An.: Then is He present in all things?
Sp.: Certainly He is intimately within them. For He gives them being, which He maintains so long as they exist, being the first cause, and He acts without mediation in all beings; thus, He touches the being of all things—that is, what is most intimate within them.
An.: So He is everywhere?
Sp.: Certainly, for He preserves both things and the space they occupy. Yet He is not confined by space, nor preserved by it; rather, He creates space and upholds it.
An.: Then He is not capable of movement.
Sp.: Just so. He is subject neither to local motion nor to any other kind of change; otherwise, He would not be the first mover.
An.: From this, I think I must conclude that He is eternal.
Sp.: Exactly; otherwise, He would be mutable.
An.: But is God one, or are there many gods?
Sp.: Since two self-subsisting acts of being are impossible, and since God is self-subsistent Being itself, it is not possible that there be more than one God. “Multiplicity of rulers is not a good” (Aristotle, Metaphysics XII, ch. 10).
An.: Does God have intelligence?
Sp.: Being supremely distant from both potency and matter, God is supremely intelligent. Indeed, every motion must derive from a mover capable of moving itself; now, the will that moves, because it loves and desires, is not moved by a particular sensible good, but by a universal good—that is, by a first intellectual mover. Therefore, the first mover must possess intellect, or we would be more perfect than God.
An.: Does God then know all things?
Sp.: Absolutely; because in Him, the perfect act, all imperfect beings are mirrored. And He comprehends Himself perfectly. God does not receive knowledge from things, since He is pure act and the first cause of all; nor is there anything outside His essence proportionate to His intellect. Thus, “all things are naked and open to His eyes” (cf. Heb 4:13).
An.: Do you think He loves the things that proceed from Him?
Sp.: If to love means to will and do good, and since He produces and preserves them, surely He loves them.
An.: Do you believe that He is the efficient cause of all things?
Sp.: I believe it, and I know it. For whatever is by participation comes from what is by essence. Now all things derive their being from God; only God is identical with being. Furthermore, universal effects must depend on a universal cause, and being is the most universal effect. Also, in each category of things, there must be a single first principle which is supremely such and the cause of all other beings in that category.
An.: Does God care for all things?
Sp.: Since He knows, produces, and preserves them, He also knows the order of all things to their ends—which they could not attain unless guided by Him. For secondary causes derive their power to act only from the first cause. Therefore, He governs all beings, even the smallest.
An.: But it does not seem honorable to care for the least things.
Sp.: Your claim would be true if in doing so He were distracted from greater things; but for God, to provide for and govern does not bring gain or loss. We have already established that He is utterly immutable.
An.: Then He is most powerful.
Sp.: Indeed, He is most powerful—being pure act, acting with His whole self, and being infinite. Thus, God is omnipotent: He has the power to do all that can be done and all that He wills to do. Nothing can resist Him.
An.: Then He is supremely happy.
Sp.: Yes, because He perfectly understands Himself and delights in that understanding. Being perfect in all things and needing nothing, having the power to do all He wills with nothing able to oppose Him, He is truly and wholly blessed in Himself. He is beatitude itself. Indeed, He is the happiness and perfection of all beings, for the closer an effect is to its cause, the more perfect it is.
An.: Then we have no need to seek any other happiness.
Sp.: If He is our ultimate happiness—and two ultimate ends are impossible—what other beatitude should we seek?
An.: But how do you prove that He is our final happiness?
Sp.: A being’s first perfection is its form; the second is its operation. Our happiness, then, lies in the operation of our highest faculty in relation to its most perfect object. Our highest faculty is the intellect joined to the will, and its most perfect object is God. Therefore, our happiness consists in the enjoyment of God. Moreover, since beatitude fully satisfies desire, and no creature can fulfill our desire—because it is infinite—and since knowledge of effects awakens desire to know the cause, our happiness cannot be attained in this life.
An.: From this, it seems logical to conclude that our soul is immortal.
Sp.: Just so; otherwise, man would have no end. This also follows: since the intellect acts independently of the body in understanding, it must also exist independently. But a form that exists independently is incorruptible. Otherwise, God could be accused of injustice, negligence, or ignorance, since the just suffer in this life while the wicked enjoy themselves and oppress the righteous.
An.: But I beg you—explain this: how will our feeble intellect in the next life be able to see the most high God?
Sp.: Certainly, it cannot rise to such happiness by its own nature and power; for each subject acts according to its mode of being, and no creature is its own being. Thus, by nature it can only know things where essence and existence are distinct. Therefore, this will happen by divine power through consummated grace, called the light of glory, which will elevate our intellect—purified from all stain of sin—to that sublime light. For it is written: “In Thy light shall we see light” Ps35:10).
An.: Persuaded by your words, I begin to long for this vision. But immediately a question arises in me: And if God does not wish to grant it to us, even if we do good? Has He bound Himself to bless in this way those who love Him? And how do you prove it?
Sp.: For now, let what I have said suffice. As evening falls, let us return home and, keeping vigil in prayer, ask our God that tomorrow He may grant us greater graces and those more conducive to salvation. Meanwhile, tonight, meditate on what we have discussed.
An.: Let us also pray that, going from clarity to clarity each day, we may finally reach our eternal homeland.
Sp.: Amen.
"If the love of the heavenly homeland touches you, my friend, read this work, for Jerome shows you the way."
In commemoration of the Feast of St. Catherine of Siena and the traditional Dominican Feast of St. Peter Martyr of Verona on the 29th of April, we are releasing Book I of Jerome Savonarola's Solatium itineris mei, or Solace for My Pilgrimage.
This work was written by the Friar in the summer/fall of 1484 according to Giulo Cattin (See EDIZIONE NAZIONALE DELLE OPERE DI GIROLAMO SAVONAROLA, Solatium itineris mei, a cura di Giulio Cattin, Roma, p. 165) and published in Venice for the first time about 40 years after the death of the Friar. If you read Latin, you can read this original edition here: https://google.com/books/edition/Re_p_f_Hiero_Sauo_Dialogus_cui_titulus_S/2hoQ-Qzy1fcC?hl=en&gbpv=1
To our knowledge, this will be the very first English translation of this work.
For this poster, I recreated the typography from the original edition and paired it with a wonderful 18th-century painting of the Fiesolan hills by Vanvitelli. Prominently featured at the center is the Badia Fiesolana, with the sacred convent of San Domenico di Fiesole tucked just to the right.
San Domenico di Fiesole was the unwavering ally, the unmistakable bulwark, of the convent of San Marco in Florence. Together, these two houses were the first to separate from the Lombard Congregation and join the newly instituted Congregation of San Marco, of which Savonarola was given the office of Provincial. Savonarola often retreated there, and it was from this strategic stronghold that his closest collaborator, Fra Domenico da Pescia—mockingly dubbed il fattoraccio by their enemies—led the friars as Prior during the height of their apostolic campaigns in the city.
A few generations before Savonarola, Blessed Giovanni Dominici, returning to his native Florence after expulsion from Venice, received this plot of land from the Bishop of Fiesole. There he constructed and established the first Observant Dominican convent in Tuscany. Among its earliest sons were a promising boy from Florence, Antonino Pierozzi—later canonized as Archbishop St. Antonino—and a young illuminator named Guido di Pietro, who would come to be known to the world as Blessed Fra Giovanni Angelico.
—A.N.
----------
«Si te tangit amor patriae coelestis, amice,
hic tibi Heronymus (perlege) pandit iter»
"If the love of the heavenly homeland touches you, my friend, read this work, for Jerome shows you the way."
Book I
Spiritus: As I find myself contemplating, far from the presence of God, the return to the Father's house, you, O my Bride, must come with me.
Anima: But I do not know by what path we may walk toward such salvation.
Sp: Our path is Christ.
An: But faith is uncertain.
Sp: For one who wishes to draw near to God, it is necessary to believe.
An: Yet one who believes too easily is light of heart.
Sp: But to believe in God is an act of the utmost gravity.
An: Has God perhaps spoken with you?
Sp: No, but I believe those to whom God has deigned to speak.
An: And how do you know that they have heard God speaking?
Sp: Miracles have proven it to me.
An: But miracles belong to the past; then by what arguments may I believe now?
Sp: Do you doubt, perhaps, that God exists?
An: Even this leaves many in uncertainty, for "No one has ever seen God" (Jn 1:18).
Sp: But such people are certainly devoid of intelligence, according to these words: "The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God’" (Ps 13:1).
An: And by what arguments do you prove that God exists?
Sp: Since nothing can be simultaneously in act and in potentiality with respect to the same reality and perfection, everything that is in motion is moved by another. Yet, one cannot suppose an infinite series of movers, each set in motion by another, for then there would be no first mover, and each of these movers would be moved as an instrument of another, which, however, cannot ultimately be moved unless by the impulse of the first and principal mover. Therefore, since we observe that many bodies are in motion, there must necessarily be a first mover, itself unmoved, by which all mobile bodies are moved. And indeed, everyone agrees that this supreme mover is God.
An: This argument convinces me.
Sp: But there is another, no less effective. You yourself see that under the heavens many things are generated and produced; yet nothing produces itself, nor can we suppose an infinite series of causes. Therefore, we must trace back to a first cause, absolutely first, which everyone believes to be God.
An: But this argument is similar to the first.
Sp: What you say is true. However, another most valid argument is the orderly interdependence of all things. For since all beings pursue what is best and always—or in most cases—produce the same effects, we must admit that they act for an end. Now, since many of them lack knowledge, we must recognize that they are guided by an intelligence, which all affirm to be God.
An: All human intellects are so convinced by this reasoning that, by its force, they are led, as by a natural instinct, to confess that God exists.
Sp: That is exactly so, and for this reason, we too, like all other men, are compelled to affirm it. For by this and other arguments, men of the highest intellect have been convinced of it. And all men, both learned and ignorant, have been led as by a natural instinct to acknowledge that God exists, and though they err in many things, they venerate Him.
An: I approve what you say. Yet I ask you one thing: since it can be demonstrated that God exists, why do we say that believing it is an article of faith? Is faith not concerned with things unseen?
Sp: Because not all are capable of understanding the aforementioned arguments—only a few, and after a long time, and not without an admixture of errors. Therefore, for the ignorant, it is a matter of faith, but not for the wise.
An: Now, however, tell me, I beg you, what is God?
Sp: If carnal men could know who He is, He would not be God. For we are capable of knowing and understanding only sensible things or things knowable through the senses. But God is not a reality subject to the senses, nor is He in any way representable in the imagination, nor can He present Himself to our intellect with any image in His reality. Therefore, it is enough for us to know what God is not.
An: Then tell me, is God a body or not?
Sp: Certainly He is not a body, being the first unmoved mover; for a body cannot move other bodies unless it is itself moved.
An: But is He composite?
Sp: Not at all. A being can act only insofar as it is in act; therefore, the first agent must not only be in act but must consist in act itself, not merely partake of act.
An.: Could He not be the form, or the act, of a body?
Sp.: Absolutely not. For it is more noble to exist in and of oneself than to exist in another.
An.: But if He is a simple reality, how can He be perfect?
Sp.: Precisely because God is pure act. He is not a simple body like one of the elements. Being, in itself, includes every perfection.
An.: Yet He seems to be finite; for what is infinite is imperfect.
Sp.: A quantitative infinite is imperfect—that is, unfinished; but not the formal infinite, such as the being of God, which is God Himself.
An.: But does He perhaps contain all things?
Sp.: He does not contain them as a body would, but because He sustains all things by His own power.
An.: Then is He present in all things?
Sp.: Certainly He is intimately within them. For He gives them being, which He maintains so long as they exist, being the first cause, and He acts without mediation in all beings; thus, He touches the being of all things—that is, what is most intimate within them.
An.: So He is everywhere?
Sp.: Certainly, for He preserves both things and the space they occupy. Yet He is not confined by space, nor preserved by it; rather, He creates space and upholds it.
An.: Then He is not capable of movement.
Sp.: Just so. He is subject neither to local motion nor to any other kind of change; otherwise, He would not be the first mover.
An.: From this, I think I must conclude that He is eternal.
Sp.: Exactly; otherwise, He would be mutable.
An.: But is God one, or are there many gods?
Sp.: Since two self-subsisting acts of being are impossible, and since God is self-subsistent Being itself, it is not possible that there be more than one God. “Multiplicity of rulers is not a good” (Aristotle, Metaphysics XII, ch. 10).
An.: Does God have intelligence?
Sp.: Being supremely distant from both potency and matter, God is supremely intelligent. Indeed, every motion must derive from a mover capable of moving itself; now, the will that moves, because it loves and desires, is not moved by a particular sensible good, but by a universal good—that is, by a first intellectual mover. Therefore, the first mover must possess intellect, or we would be more perfect than God.
An.: Does God then know all things?
Sp.: Absolutely; because in Him, the perfect act, all imperfect beings are mirrored. And He comprehends Himself perfectly. God does not receive knowledge from things, since He is pure act and the first cause of all; nor is there anything outside His essence proportionate to His intellect. Thus, “all things are naked and open to His eyes” (cf. Heb 4:13).
An.: Do you think He loves the things that proceed from Him?
Sp.: If to love means to will and do good, and since He produces and preserves them, surely He loves them.
An.: Do you believe that He is the efficient cause of all things?
Sp.: I believe it, and I know it. For whatever is by participation comes from what is by essence. Now all things derive their being from God; only God is identical with being. Furthermore, universal effects must depend on a universal cause, and being is the most universal effect. Also, in each category of things, there must be a single first principle which is supremely such and the cause of all other beings in that category.
An.: Does God care for all things?
Sp.: Since He knows, produces, and preserves them, He also knows the order of all things to their ends—which they could not attain unless guided by Him. For secondary causes derive their power to act only from the first cause. Therefore, He governs all beings, even the smallest.
An.: But it does not seem honorable to care for the least things.
Sp.: Your claim would be true if in doing so He were distracted from greater things; but for God, to provide for and govern does not bring gain or loss. We have already established that He is utterly immutable.
An.: Then He is most powerful.
Sp.: Indeed, He is most powerful—being pure act, acting with His whole self, and being infinite. Thus, God is omnipotent: He has the power to do all that can be done and all that He wills to do. Nothing can resist Him.
An.: Then He is supremely happy.
Sp.: Yes, because He perfectly understands Himself and delights in that understanding. Being perfect in all things and needing nothing, having the power to do all He wills with nothing able to oppose Him, He is truly and wholly blessed in Himself. He is beatitude itself. Indeed, He is the happiness and perfection of all beings, for the closer an effect is to its cause, the more perfect it is.
An.: Then we have no need to seek any other happiness.
Sp.: If He is our ultimate happiness—and two ultimate ends are impossible—what other beatitude should we seek?
An.: But how do you prove that He is our final happiness?
Sp.: A being’s first perfection is its form; the second is its operation. Our happiness, then, lies in the operation of our highest faculty in relation to its most perfect object. Our highest faculty is the intellect joined to the will, and its most perfect object is God. Therefore, our happiness consists in the enjoyment of God. Moreover, since beatitude fully satisfies desire, and no creature can fulfill our desire—because it is infinite—and since knowledge of effects awakens desire to know the cause, our happiness cannot be attained in this life.
An.: From this, it seems logical to conclude that our soul is immortal.
Sp.: Just so; otherwise, man would have no end. This also follows: since the intellect acts independently of the body in understanding, it must also exist independently. But a form that exists independently is incorruptible. Otherwise, God could be accused of injustice, negligence, or ignorance, since the just suffer in this life while the wicked enjoy themselves and oppress the righteous.
An.: But I beg you—explain this: how will our feeble intellect in the next life be able to see the most high God?
Sp.: Certainly, it cannot rise to such happiness by its own nature and power; for each subject acts according to its mode of being, and no creature is its own being. Thus, by nature it can only know things where essence and existence are distinct. Therefore, this will happen by divine power through consummated grace, called the light of glory, which will elevate our intellect—purified from all stain of sin—to that sublime light. For it is written: “In Thy light shall we see light” Ps35:10).
An.: Persuaded by your words, I begin to long for this vision. But immediately a question arises in me: And if God does not wish to grant it to us, even if we do good? Has He bound Himself to bless in this way those who love Him? And how do you prove it?
Sp.: For now, let what I have said suffice. As evening falls, let us return home and, keeping vigil in prayer, ask our God that tomorrow He may grant us greater graces and those more conducive to salvation. Meanwhile, tonight, meditate on what we have discussed.
An.: Let us also pray that, going from clarity to clarity each day, we may finally reach our eternal homeland.
Sp.: Amen.