him; he summons them as evidence of his present visitation, who were witnesses and judges of his blindness. He cries out that, on his touching the hem of the martyrs' garment, which covered the relics, his sight was restored to him. We read in the Gospel, that when the Jews saw the cure of the blind man, they sought the testimony of the parents. Ask others, if you distrust me; ask persons unconnected with him, if you think that his parents would take a side. The obstinacy of these Arians is more hateful than that of the Jews. When the latter doubted, they inquired of the parents; these inquire secretly, deny openly, as giving credit to the fact, but denying the author."—Ep. 22.

We may corroborate the evidence of those two Fathers with that of Paulinus, who was secretary to St. Ambrose, and wrote his life, about A.D. 411.

"About the same time," he says, "the holy martyrs Protasius and Gervasius revealed themselves to God's priest. They lay in the Basilica, where, at present, are the bodies of the martyrs Nabor and Felix; while, however, the holy martyrs Nabor and Felix had crowds. to visit them, as well the names as the graves of the martyrs Protasius and Gervasius were unknown; so that all who wished to come to the rails which protected the graves of the martyrs Nabor and Felix, were used to walk on the graves of the others. But when the bodies of the holy martyrs were raised and placed on litters, thereupon many possessions of the devil were detected. Moreover, a blind man, by name Severus, who up to this day performs religious service in the Basilica called Ambrosian, into which the bodies of the martyrs have been translated, when he had touched the garment of the martyrs, forthwith received sight. Moreover, bodies possessed by unclean spirits were restored, and with all blessedness returned home. And by means of these benefits of the martyrs, while the faith of the Catholic Church made increase, by so much did Arian misbelief decline.”—§ 14.

Now I want to know what reason is there for stumbling at the above narrative, which will not throw uncertainty

upon the very fact that there was such a bishop as Ambrose, or such an empress as Justina, or such an heresy as the Arian, or any Church at all in Milan. Let us consider some of the circumstances under which it comes to us.

I. We have the concordant evidence of three distinct witnesses, of whom at least two were on the spot when the alleged miracles were wrought, one writing at the time, another some years afterwards in a distant country. And the third, writing after an interval of twenty-six years, agrees minutely with the evidence of the two former, not adding to the miraculous narrative, as in the manner of those who lose their delicate care for exactness in their admiration of the things and persons of whom they speak.

2. The miracle was wrought in public, in the case of a person well known, one who continued to live in the place where it was professedly wrought, and who, by devoting himself to the service of the martyrs who were the instruments of his cure, was a continual memorial of the mercy which he professed to have received, and challenged inquiry into it, and refutation if that were possible.

3. Ambrose, one of our informants, publicly appealed, at the time when the occurrence took place, to the general belief, claimed it for the miracle, and that in a sermon which is still extant.

4. He made his statement in the presence of bitter and most powerful enemies, who were much concerned, and very able to expose the fraud if there was one; who did, as might be expected, deny the hand of God in the matter; but who, for all that appears, did nothing but deny what they could not consistently confess, without ceasing to be what they were.

5. A great and practical impression was made upon the popular mind in consequence of the alleged miracles: or, in the words of an historian whose profession it is to disbelieve them, "Their effect on the minds of the people was rapid and irresistible; and the feeble sovereign of Italy found himself unable to contend with the favourite of heaven."1

1 Gibbon's Hist. ch. 27.

6. And so powerfully did all this press upon the court, that, as the last words of this extract intimate, the persecution was given up, and the Catholics left in quiet possession of the churches.

On the whole, then, are we not in the following dilemma :-If the miracle did not take place, then St. Ambrose and St. Augustine, men of name, said they had ascertained a fact which they did not ascertain, and said it in the face of enemies, with an appeal to a whole city, and that continued during a quarter of a century. What instrument of refutation shall we devise against a case like this, neither so violently à priori as to supersede the Apostles' testimony, nor so fastidious of evidence as to imperil Tacitus or Cæsar? On the other hand, if the miracle did take place, a certain measure of authority, more or less, surely must thereby attach to St. Ambrose,-to his doctrine and his life, to his ecclesiastical principles and proceedings, to the Church itself of the fourth century, of which he is one main pillar. The miracle gives a certain sanction to three things at once, to the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity, to the Church's resistance of the civil power, and to the commemoration of saints and martyrs.

Which alternative shall the Protestant accept? shall we retreat, or shall we advance? shall we relapse into scepticism upon all subjects, or sacrifice our deep-rooted prejudices? shall we give up our knowledge of times past altogether, or endure to gain a knowledge which we think we have already,-the knowledge of divine truth?

Chapter íb

The Penitence of Theodosius

"Be wise now, therefore, O ye kings; be learned, ye that are judges of the earth. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice unto Him with reverence. Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and so

ye perish from the right way.'

IT

T is very satisfactory to find that the Christian fortitude of St. Ambrose was not thrown away upon Valentinian. This young prince, who died prematurely, nay, before his baptism, gave signs during several of his last years, of a very altered state of mind towards the Church and her vigorous champion. Such was the fruit of braving the frown of royalty in a good cause. Perhaps St. Ambrose would not have done as much by what men call more prudent conduct; by temporizing and conceding. There is no sort of doubt, that had the scene been laid in England in the nineteenth century, not to speak in very generosity of the sixteenth, courtliness would have been the order of the day. The Basilica would have been surrendered to the heretics; yet I fear without any such change of heart in consequence in prince or prime minister, by a timid policy on the part of the Church, as Valentinian underwent on meeting with resistance. Certainly we have not made great men more religious by letting them have their own way. As for Valentinian, he was cut off under very sad yet interesting circumstances. Being engaged in Gaul in an attempt to reduce the power of Arbogastes, the Frank, who was secretly conspiring against him, he wrote to St. Ambrose to come to him, both to assist him in his negotiations and to baptize him. Before Ambrose could arrive, Arbogastes had murdered the emperor.

But, leaving Valentinian, let us turn to the consideration of a still more striking and salutary instance of episcopal vigour, exerted in the case of a more powerful emperor; I mean the conduct of St. Ambrose towards Theodosius, on occasion of the massacre at Thessalonica. This is the most instructive passage in his history; nay, perhaps in the history of the whole Church; for what sight can be more edifying to the Christian, or more impressive to the world at large, than that of a bishop conscientiously and calmly rebuking a great warrior, and that warrior and sovereign humbly confessing and repenting of his sin?

The circumstances which led to this memorable display of Apostolical severity were as follows:-Theodosius was of a choleric temper, which hurried him on to visit, with the power of an emperor, insults which every one, prince and subject, naturally feels. In the year 390, a tumult took place in Thessalonica on some supposed grievance, such as commonly excites a populace, which ended in the murder of the commander of the imperial forces, who had given the offence, and other officers. The first burst of the emperor's indignation was overcome by the interposition of the clergy, particularly Ambrose; and he promised to pardon the Thessalonians. But his minister considered the outrage too great to be passed over with safety to the empire: a similar tumult had lately been pardoned at Antioch; and, in the present instance, there had been no tyranny or impolitic rigour on the part of the unfortunate general who had been the victim of the insurrection. So far, their judgment was doubtless right; but the sentence, which they succeeded in recommending to their sovereign, was so shocking, as sufficiently to account for the previous intercession of the Church in behalf of the offenders. The purpose of vengeance was kept secret; the Thessalonians were invited to the circus, which was silently surrounded by soldiery; and, when they expected the races to commence, a signal was given, and a promiscuous massacre followed. It continued for three hours; and 7000, without discrimination of age or sex, are said to have been slaughtered. Theodosius had revoked the cruel order