July XVII

St. Alexius, Confessor

From Joseph the Younger, In a poem of the ninth age, divided into Odes, an anonymous writer of his Life in the tenth century, noted by the Bollandists, a homily of St. Adalbert, bishop of Prague, and martyr, of the same age, and from other monuments, free from later interpolations; on all which see Pinius the Bollandist, t. 4, Julij, p. 239, who confutes at large the groundless and inconsistent surmises of Baillet Above all, see Nerinio, abbot of the Hieronymites at Rome, who has fully vindicated the memory of St. Alexius in his Dissertation De Templo et Cœnobio, SS. Bonifacii et Alexii, in 4to. Romæ, 1752. On his Chaldaic Acts, see Jos. Assemam, ad 17 Martli, in Calend. Univ. t. 6, p. 187, 189; and Bibl. Orient. t. 1 p. 401.

in the fifth century

St. Alexius or Alexis is a perfect model of the most generous contempt of the world. He was the only son of a rich senator of Rome, born and educated in that capital, in the fifth century. From the charitable example of his pious parents he learned, from his tender years, that the riches which are given away to the poor, remain with us for ever; and that alms-deeds are a treasure transferred to heaven, with the interest of an immense reward. And whilst yet a child, not content to give all he could, he left nothing unattempted to compass or solicit the relief of all whom he saw in distress. But the manner in which he dealt about his liberal alms was still a greater proof of the noble sentiments of virtue with which his soul was fired; for by this he showed that he thought himself most obliged to those who received his charity, and regarded them as his greatest benefactors. The more he enlarged his views of eternity, and raised his thoughts and desires to the bright scene of immortal bliss, the more did he daily despise all earthly toys; for, when once the soul is thus upon the wing, and soars upwards, how does the glory of this world lessen in her eye! and how does she contemn the empty pageantry of all that worldlings call great!

Fearing lest the fascination, or at least the distraction of temporal honors might at length divide or draw his heart too much from those only noble and great objects, he entertained thoughts of renouncing the advantages of his birth, and retiring from the more dangerous part of the world. Having, in compliance with the will of his parents, married a rich and virtuous lady, he on the very day of the nuptials, making use of the liberty which the laws of God and his Church give a person before the marriage be consummated, of preferring a more perfect state, secretly withdrew, in order to break all the ties which held him in the world. In disguise he travelled into a distant country, embraced extreme poverty, and resided in a hut adjoining to a church dedicated to the Mother of God. Being, after some time there, discovered to be a stranger of distinction, he returned home, and being received as a poor pilgrim, lived some time unknown in his father’s house, bearing the contumely and ill treatment of the servants with invincible patience and silence. A little before he died, he by a letter discovered himself to his parents. He flourished in the reign of the emperor Honorius, Innocent the first being bishop of Rome; and is honored in the calendars of the Latins, Greeks, Syrians, Maronites, and Armenians. His interment was celebrated with the greatest pomp by the whole city of Rome, on the Aventin hill. His body was found there in 1216, in the ancient church of St. Boniface, whilst Honorius III. sat in St. Peter’s chair, and at this day is the most precious treasure of a sumptuous church on the same spot, which bears his name jointly with that of St. Boniface, gives title to a cardinal, and is in the hands of the Hieronymites.

The extraordinary paths in which the Holy Ghost is pleased sometimes to conduct certain privileged souls are rather to be admired than imitated. If it cost them so much to seek humiliations, how diligently ought we to make a good use of those at least which providence sends us! It is only by humbling ourselves on all occasions that we can walk in the path of true humility, and root out of our hearts all secret pride. The poison of this vice infects all states and conditions: it often lurks undiscovered in the foldings of the heart even after a man has got the mastery over all his other passions. Pride always remains even for the most perfect principally to fight against; and unless we watch continually against it, nothing will remain sound or untainted in our lives; this vice will creep even into our best actions, infect the whole circle of our lives, and become a main spring of all the motions of our heart; and what is the height of our misfortune, the deeper its wounds are, the more is the soul stupified by its venom, and the less capable is she of feeling her most grievous disease and spiritual death. St. John Climacus writes,¹ that when a young novice was rebuked for his pride, he said: “Pardon me, father, I am not proud.” To whom the experienced director replied: “And how could you give me a surer proof of your pride than by not seeing it yourself?”

Saints Speratus and his Companions

commonly called the scillitan martyrs

When the emperor Severus returned victorious from having vanquished the kings who had taken part with Nigar against him, he published his cruel edicts against the Christians in the year of Christ 202, the tenth of his reign. But the general laws of the empire against foreign religions, and the former edicts of several emperors against the Christians, were a sufficient warrant to many governors to draw the sword against them before that time; and we find that the persecution was very hot in Africa two years before, under the proconsul Saturninus, in the eighth year of Severus and two hundredth of Christ. The first who suffered at Carthage were twelve persons, commonly called the Scillitan Martyrs, probably because they were of Scillita, a town of the proconsular Africa. They were brought prisoners to Carthage, and on the 16th of July were presented to the proconsul whilst he was seated on his tribunal. The six principal among them were Speratus, Narzalis, and Cittinus; and three women, Donata, Secunda, and Vestina. The proconsul offered them the emperor’s pardon if they would worship the gods of the Romans. Speratus answered in the name of all: “We have never committed any crime, we have injured no one; so far from it, we have always thanked God for the evil treatment we have received; wherefore we declare to you that we worship no other God but the true one, who is the lord and master of all things; we pray for those who persecute us unjustly, according to the law we have received.” The proconsul urged them to swear by the emperor’s genius. Speratus said, “I know not the genius of the emperor of this world, but I serve the God of heaven, whom no mortal man hath ever seen or can see. I never committed any crime punishable by the laws of the state. I pay the public duties for whatever I buy, acknowledging the emperor for my temporal lord: but I adore none but my God, who is the King of kings, and sovereign Lord over all the nations in the world. I have been guilty of no crime, and therefore cannot have incurred punishment. Hereupon the proconsul said, “Let them be carried to prison, and put in the wooden stocks till to-morrow.”

On the day following, the proconsul being seated on his tribunal, ordered them all to be brought before him, and said to the women, “Honor our prince, and offer sacrifice to the gods.” Donata replied, “We give to Cæsar the honor that is due to Cæsar; but we adore and offer sacrifice to God alone.” Vestina said, “I also am a Christian.” Secunda said, “I also believe in my God, and will continue faithful to him. As for your gods we will neither serve nor adore them.” The proconsul then ordered them into custody, and having called up the men, he said to Speratus, “Art thou still resolved to remain a Christian?” Speratus replied, “Yes, I am, be it known to all, I am a Christian.” All that had been apprehended with him cried out, “We also are Christians.” The proconsul said, “Will you not then so much as deliberate upon the matter, or have any favor shown you?” Speratus replied, “Do what you please; we die with joy for the sake of Jesus Christ.” The proconsul asked, “What books are those which you read and have in reverence?” Speratus answered, “The four gospels of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; the epistles of the apostle St. Paul, and the rest of the scriptures, revealed by God.”* The proconsul said, “I give you three days to repent in.” Upon which Speratus made answer, “We will never depart from the faith of our Saviour Jesus Christ, therefore take what course you think fit.” The proconsul seeing their constancy and resolution, pronounced sentence against them in these terms! “Speratus, Narzalis, Cittinus, Veturius, Felix, Acyllinus, Lætantius, Januaria, Generosa, Vestina, Donata, and Secunda, having acknowledged themselves Christians, and having refused to pay due honor and respect to the emperor, I condemn them to be beheaded.” This sentence being read, Speratus, and all those who were with him, said, “We give God thanks for vouchsafing to receive us this day as martyrs in heaven, for confessing his name.” Having said this, they were led to the place of execution, where they all fell on their knees, and once more gave thanks to Jesus Christ. Whilst they continued in prayer, their heads were struck off. The faithful who transcribed their acts out of the public registers, add:^† “The martyrs of Christ finished their conflict in the month of July, and they intercede for us to our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be given honor and glory with the Father and the Holy Ghost through all ages.”

Tertullian,^‡ soon after their martyrdom, addressed his excellent apologetic discourse for the Christian religion to the governors of the provinces, but without success. He testifies¹ that Saturninus, who first drew the sword against the Christians in Africa, soon after lost his eyes. As to the emperor Severus, after carrying on the persecution ten years, whilst he was making war in Britain, being on his march with his army, his eldest son Bassianus, surnamed Antonius Caracalla, who marched after him, stopped his horse, and drew his sword to stab him, but was prevented by others. Severus only reproached him for it, but died soon after at York, of grief for his son treachery, rather than of the gout, on the 4th of February in the year 211, having lived sixty-five years, and reigned seventeen and eight months. His two sons, Antoninus Caracalla and Geta, succeeded him; but the elder caused the latter to be stabbed in his mother’s bosom, who was sprinkled with his blood. See the acts of the Scillitan martyrs, copied from the court registers by three different Christians, who added short notes, published by Baronius, ad an. by Tillemont, t. 3, Ceillier, t. 2, p. 211, Cuper the Bollandist, t. 4, Julij, p. 202, by Ruinart, p. 75, and by Mabillon, t. 3, Analeet. p. 153, and abridged 204.

St. Marcellina, V.

She was the eldest sister to St. Ambrose and Satyrus, and after the death of her father, who was prefect of the Gauls, removed to Rome with her pious mother and brothers. She was discreet beyond her years, and from her cradle sought with her whole heart the only thing for which she was created and sent into the world. Being charged at Rome with the education of her two brothers, she inspired them, by words and example, with an ardent thirst of virtue. She taught them that nobleness of blood cannot enhance merit, nor make men more illustrious unless they despise it; and that learning is an unpardonable crime and folly, if by it a man should desire to know everything that is in heaven and earth but himself; for with the true knowledge of ourselves are all our studies to begin and end, if we desire to render them in any degree advantageous to ourselves. She kindled in their tender breasts a vehement desire, not of the show of virtue, but to become truly virtuous. In her whole conduct all her view was only the glory of God. The better to pursue this great end she resolved to renounce the world; and on Christmas-day, in 352, she put on the religious habit, and received the veil from the hands of pope Liberius, in St. Peter’s church, in presence of an incredible multitude of people. The pope, in a short discourse on that occasion, exhorted her frequently to love only our Lord Jesus Christ, the chaste spouse of her soul, to live in continual abstinence, mortification, silence, and prayer, and always to behave herself in the church with the utmost respect and awe. He mentioned to her the page of Alexander the Great, who, for fear of disturbing the solemnity of a heathenish sacrifice by shaking off his hand a piece of melted wax that was fallen upon it, let it burn him to the bone.

Marcellina in her practice went beyond the most perfect lessons. She fasted every day till evening; and sometimes passed whole days without eating. She never touched any fare but what was of the coarsest kinds, and drank only water. She never laid herself down to rest till quite overcome with sleep. The greatest part both of the day and night she devoted to prayer, pious reading, and tears of divine love and compunction. St. Ambrose advised her in the decline of her life to moderate her austerities, but always to redouble her fervor in tears and holy prayer, especially in reciting often the psalms, the Lord’s prayer, and likewise the creed, which he calls the seal o a Christian, and the guard of our hearts. She continued at Rome after the death of her mother, living not in a nunnery but in a private house with one fervent virgin, the faithful companion of all her holy exercises. St. Ambrose died in 397. She survived him, though it is uncertain how long. Her name is mentioned in the Roman and other Martyrologies on the 17th of July. Se St. Ambrose, l. 3, de Virgin. c. 1, 2, 3, 4, t. 2, p. 1741, and Ep. 20 et 22 ed. Ben. and Cuper the Bollandist, t. 4, Julij, p. 231.

Saint Ennodius, Bishop of Pavia, C.

Magnus Felix Ennodius was descended of an illustrious family, settled in Gaul, and was a kinsman to the greatest lords of his time; as, to Faustus, Boëtius, Avienus, Olybrius, &c. He seems to call Arles the place of his birth;¹ but he passed his first years in Italy, and had his education at Milan under the care of an aunt, after whose death he took to wife a rich and noble lady. Eloquence and poetry were the favorite studies of his youth, and he had the misfortune to be drawn astray into the wide path of the world. But he was struck with remorse, and listening to the voice of divine grace, changed his life and wept bitterly for his past disorders. Out of gratitude to the divine mercy for his call, he entered into orders with the consent of his wife, who at the same time devoted herself to God in a state of perpetual continency. Having a particular confidence in the powerful intercession of St. Victor, the martyr at Milan, he earnestly implored through it the grace to lead a holy life as he informs us.²

Being ordained deacon, yet young, by St. Epiphanius of Pavia, he from that time despised profane studies, to give himself up entirely to those that are sacred. He wrote an apology for pope Symmachus and his council against the schism formed in favor of Laurence. He was pitched upon to make a panegyric upon Theodoric, king of Italy, whom he commends only for his victories and temporal success. He wrote the life of St. Epiphanius of Pavia, who died in 497, and was succeeded by Maximus; likewise that of St. Antony of Lerins, who is mentioned in the Roman Martyrology on the 26th of December, besides several letters and other works, both in prose and verse. He assures us, that under a violent fever, in which he was given over by the physicians, he had recourse to the heavenly physician through the intercession of his patron St. Victor, and that in a moment he found himself restored to perfect health.³ To perpetuate his gratitude for this benefit, he wrote a work which he called Eucharisticon, or Thanksgiving; in which he gives a short account of his life, especially of his conversion from the world, and how, through the intercession of St. Victor, he obtained the grace for his wife that she freely entered into his views in their making, by joint consent, mutual vows of perpetual continency. After the death of Maximus he was advanced to the episcopal see of Pavia about the year 510, not in 490, as Labbe mistakes; for, in his Eucharisticon, he says he was only sixteen years old when Theodoric came into Italy in 489. He governed his church with a zeal and authority worthy a true disciple of St. Epiphanius.

Ennodius was made choice of by pope Hormisdas to endeavor the reunion of the Eastern to the Western Church. The emperor Anastasius fomented the division by favoring the Eutychian heresy, by banishing many orthodox prelates, and by protecting schismatical bishops of Constantinople; and in dissembling (the basest character of a prince) he was a second Herod or Tiberius, whose artifices could not leave them even in things where their interest was not concerned. Upon this errand Ennodius made two journeys to Constantinople, the first in the year 515, with Fortunatus, bishop of Catana, and the second in 517, with Peregrinus, bishop of Misenum. The points upon which he was ordered to insist were, that the faith of the council of Chalcedon and the letters of pope Leo against Nestorius, Eutyches Dioscorus, and their followers, Timothy Elurus and Peter the Fuller, should be received; the anathema, pronounced against Acacius of Constantinople and Peter of Antioch, subscribed; and that the emperor should recall the bishops whom he had banished for adhering to the orthodox faith and communion. The emperor, whose conduct in all he did was equivocal, sent back the legates with a letter, wherein he declared that he condemned Nestorius and Eutyches, and received the council of Chalcedon. Other things he promised to conclude by ambassadors whom he would send to Rome; but his only aim was to gain time, and even whilst Ennodius was at Constantinople he condemned to banishment four bishops of Illyricum for the Catholic cause, namely, Laurence of Lignida, Alcyson of Nicopolis, Gaianus of Naïssum, and Evangelus of Paulitala. He deferred sending his ambassadors till the middle of the next year, and then, instead of bishops as he had promised, sent only two laymen, Theopompus, Comes Domesticorum or captain of his guards, and Severianus, Comes Consistorii or counsellor of state, and their instructions were confined to general protestations of laboring for the peace of the Church. The pope answered that, far from having any need of being entreated on that head, he threw himself at the emperor’s feet to implore his protection for the peace and welfare of God’s Church.

Ennodius’s second legation into the East proved as unsuccessful as the former; for Anastasius rejected the formulary which the pope had drawn up for the union, and endeavored to bribe the legates with money. But finding them proof against all temptations, he caused them to be sent out of his palace through a back door, and put on board a ship with two prefects and several Magisterians,* who had orders not to suffer them to enter into any city. Notwithstanding this, the legates found an opportunity of dispersing their protestations in all cities; but the bishops who received them, from the dread they were under of being accused, sent them all to Constantinople. Upon this, Anastasius being very much exasperated, dismissed about two hundred bishops who were already come to a council which was to have been held at Heraclea to compose the distracted state of the Oriental church. Such was the conclusion of the promise this emperor had given of concurring to restore union between the churches. The people and the senate reproached him with the breach of the oath he had made to that purpose; but he impiously said that there was a law which commanded an emperor to forswear himself and to tell a lie in cases of necessity. This confirmed the people in their general suspicion, that he had imbibed the opinions of the Manichees.

St. Ennodius was obliged to put to sea in an old rotten vessel, and all persons were forbidden to suffer him to land in any port of the eastern empire, whereby he was exposed to manifest danger. Nevertheless, he arrived safe in Italy and returned to Pavia. The glory of suffering for the faith, which his zeal and constancy had procured him, far from serving to make him slothful or remiss in the discharge of his pastoral duties, was on the contrary a spur to him in the more earnest pursuit of virtue, lest by sluggishness he should deprive himself of the advantages which he might seem to have begun to attain. He exerted his zeal in the conversion of souls, his liberality in relieving the poor, and in building and adorning churches, and his piety and devotion in composing sacred poems on the Blessed Virgin, St. Cyprian, St. Stephen, St. Dionysius of Milan, St. Ambrose, St. Euphemia, St. Nazarius, St. Martin, &c., on the mysteries of Pentecost and on the Ascension, on a baptistery adorned with the pictures of several martyrs whose relics were deposited in it. He wrote two new forms of blessing the paschal candle, in which the divine protection on the faithful is implored against winds, storms, and all dangers through the malice of our invisible enemies.* St. Ennodius died on the 1st of August, 521, being only forty-eight years old. He is styled a great and glorious confessor by the popes Nicholas I. and John VIII., and is honored in the Roman Martyrology on the 17th of July. His works were published by two Jesuits, F. Andrew Scot at Tournay in 1610, and by F. James Sirmond, with notes, at Paris, in 1611, and most completely among the works of F. Sirmond, at Paris in 1696, t. 1. See his works, the letters of pope Hormisdas, the Pontifical and F. Sirmond’s collections. Also Solier the Bollandist, t. 4, Julij, p. 271.

St. Leo IV. Pope, C.

He was son of a Roman nobleman, had been educated in the monastery of St. Martin without the walls, and was made by Sergius II. priest of the four crowned martyrs. He was chosen pope after the death of Sergius II. in 847, and governed the Church eight years, three months, and some days. The Saracens from Calabria had lately plundered St. Peter’s church on the Vatican, and were still hovering about Rome. Leo made it his first care to repair the ornamental part of this church, especially the Confession or burying-place of St. Peter with the altar which stood upon it. To prevent a second plundering of that holy place, he, with the approbation and liberal contributions of the emperor Lothaire, enclosed it and the whole Vatican hill with a wall, and built there a new rione or quarter of the city, which from him is called Leonina. He rebuilt or repaired the walls of the city, fortified with fifteen towers. Whilst he was putting Rome in a posture of defence, the Saracens marched towards Porto in order to plunder that town. The Neapolitans sent an army to the assistance of the Romans: the pope met these troops at Ostia, gave them his blessing, and all the soldiers received the holy communion at his hands. After the pope’s departure, a bloody battle ensued, and the Saracens were all slain, taken, or dispersed. The good pope considered the sins of the people as the chief source of public disasters; and being inflamed with a holy zeal, he most vigorously exerted his authority for the reformation of manners and of the discipline of the Church. For this purpose he held at Rome a council of sixty-seven bishops; and among other instances, he deposed and excommunicated Anastasius, cardinal priest of St. Marcellus’s church, because he had neglected to reside in his parish. He received honorably Ethelwolph, king of England, who, in 854, made a pilgrimage to Rome.

Pope Leo directed to all bishops and pastors a Homily on the Pastoral Care, published by Labbe from the Vatican manuscripts, and also extant in the Roman Pontifical. In it all the chief functions of the pastoral charge are regulated, and every duty enforced with no less learning than piety. Among other miracles performed by this holy pope, it is recorded that by the sign of the cross he extinguished a great fire in the city, which threatened the church of the prince of the apostles. He died on the 17th of July, 855, and Bennet III., priest of the church of St. Calixtus, was immediately chosen pope in his room.^† He, with many tears, begged that so formidable a burden might not be laid on his shoulders, but could not prevail. Anastasius, the deposed priest, set up for pope, and procured the protection of the emperor Louis II.; but the steady unanimity of the people in the election of Bennet III., over came this opposition, and he was consecrated on the 1st day of September in the same year, 355, as is related by Anastasius, who was then living, and shortly after (before the year 870) Bibliothecarian of the church of Rome, the most learned man and the most shining ornament of that age, as Dr. Cave allows him to have been. See Solier the Bollandist, t. 4, Jul. p. 302.

St. Turninus, C.

Was a holy Irish priest and monk, who, coming with St. Foilan into the Netherlands, labored with unwearied zeal in bringing souls to the perfect practice of Christian virtue. The territory about Antwerp reaped the chief fruit of his apostolic mission. He died there about the close of the eighth century. His relics were translated into the principality of Liege, and are honorably enshrined in a monastery situated on the Sambre. See Colgan MSS. ad 17 Jul.

¹ Gr. 22, p. 548.

* “Qui sunt libri quos adoratis, Iegentes? Speratus respondit: Quatuor evangelia Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et epistolas S. Pauli apostoli, et omnem divinitus inspiratam scripturam.” Acta apud Ruinart, p. 78, et Baronium. ad an 202.

^† “Consummati sunt Christi martyres mense Julio, et intercedunt pro nobis ad Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, cui honor et gloria cum Patre et Spiritu Sancto in sæcula sæculorum.” Acta apud Baronium, ad an 202.

^‡ Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus is commonly known by the last name. His father was a centurion in the proconsular troops of Africa, and he was born at Carthage about the year 160. He confesses that before his conversion to the Christian faith he, in his merry fits, pointed his keenest satire against it (Apol., c. 18), had been an adulterer (De Resur. c. 59), had taken a cruel pleasure in the bloody entertainments of the amphitheatre (De Spectac. c. 19), attained to a distinguishing eminency in vice (De Pœnit. c. 4, “Ego præstantiam in delictis meam agnosco,” and was an accomplished sinner in all respects, (ib. c. 12. “Peccator omnium notarum cum sim,”) yet having his head marvellously well turned for science, he applied himself from his cradle to the study of every branch of good literature, poetry, philosophy, geometry, physic, and oratory; he dived into the principles of each sect, and both into the fabulous and into the real or historical part of mythology. His comprehensive genius led him through the whole circle of profane sciences; above the rest, as Eusebius tells us, he was profoundly versed in the Roman laws. He had a surprising vivacity and keenness of wit, and an uncommon stock of natural fire which rendered him exceeding hot and impatient, as himself complains (I. de Patient. in imt.) His other passions he restrained after his conversion to Christianity; but this vehemence of temper he seems never to have sufficiently checked. The motives which engaged him to embrace the gospel seem those upon which he most triumphantly insists in his works; as the antiquity of the Mosaic writings, the mighty works and wisdom of the divine lawgiver, the continued chain of prophecy and wonders conducting the attentive inquirer to Christ, the evidence of the miracles of Christ and his apostles, the excellency of the law of the gospel, and its amazing influence upon the lives of men; the power which every Christian then exercised over evil spirits, and the testimony of the very devils themselves whom the infidels worshipped for gods, and who turned preachers of Christ, howling, and confessing themselves devils in the presence of their own votaries, (Apol. c. 19, 20, 23, &c. &c.) also the constancy and patience of the martyrs (l, ad Scapul. c. ult.) &c.

Being by his lively and comprehensive genius excellently formed for controversy, he immediately set himself to write in defence of religion, which was then attacked by the Heathens and Jews on one side, and on the other corrupted by heretics. He successfully employed his pen against all these enemies to truth, and first against the Pagans. The persecution which began to rage gave occasion to his Apologetic, which is not only his masterpiece, but indisputably one of the best among all the works of Christian antiquity. This piece was not addressed to the Roman senate, as Baronius and several others thought, but to the proconsul and other magistrates of Africa, and perhaps to all the governors of provinces and magistrates of the empire, among whom he might also comprise the Roman senators; for the title of Presidents only, agreed to these provincial governors, and he names the proconsuls; (ch. 45) speaks of Rome as at a distance: (c. 9, 21, 24, 35, 45) says they practised at home (at Carthage, the bloody religions rites of the Scythians; (c. 9) and by those words, “in ipso fere vertice civitatis præsidentes,” he seems to mean the Byrsa of Carthage; certainly not Rome, which he always calls Urbs, not civitas.

In the first part of this work he clears Christians from the calumnies of incest and murder thrown upon them, and demonstrates the injustice of punishing them merely for a name, and exposes the absurdity of Trajan’s order commanding them to be punished if impeached, yet not to be sought after. He mentions that Tiberius, and after his miraculous victory, Marcus Aurelius, were favorable to the Christian religion. He then proceeds to confute idolatry; asks, if Bacchus was made a god for planting vines, why did not Lucullus attain to the same honor, because he first brought cherry-trees from Pontus to Rome? Why Aristides the Just, Socrates, Crœsus, Demosthenes, and so many others who had been most eminent, were not admitted to share divine honors with Jupiter, Venus, &c.? He explains the chief articles of our faith, and speaking of the origin and false worship of the demons he inserts the most daring challenge, which Saint Cyprian (ep. ad Demetrianum), Lactantius (De Just. l. 5, c. 21) and other primitive fathers repeat with the same assurance,—“Let a demoniac be brought into court,” says Tertullian, “and the evil spirit that possesses him be commanded by any Christian to declare what he is, he shall confess himself as truly to be a devil as he did falsely before declare himself a god. In like manner let them bring any of those who are thought to be inspired by some god, as Æsculapius, &c. If all these do not declare themselves in court to be devils, not daring to lie to a Christian, do you instantly put that rash Christian to death.”

The apologist mentions the submission of Christians to the emperors, their love of their enemies, and their mutual charity, horror of all vice, and constancy in suffering death and all manner of torments for the sake of virtue. The heathens called them in derision Sarmentitians and Semaxians, because they were fastened to trunks of trees, and stuck about with faggots to be set on fire. But Tertullian answers them: “Thus dressed about with fire, we are in our most illustrious apparel. These are our triumphal robes embroidered with palm-branches in token of victory (such the Roman generals wore in their solemn triumphs), and mounted upon the pile we look upon ourselves as in our triumphal chariot. Who ever looked well into our religion but he came over to it? and who ever came over to it but was ready to suffer for it? We thank you for condemning us, because there is such a blessed discord between the divine and human judgment, that when you condemn us upon earth, God absolveth us in heaven.”

Tertullian wrote about the same time his two books Against the Gentiles, in the first confuting their slanders, in the second attacking their false gods. An accidental disputation of a Christian with a Jewish proselyte engaged him to show the triumph of the faith over that obstinate race, who seemed deaf to all arguments. His book Against the Jews is just, solid, and well supported, a model of theological controversy, which wants but a little clearness of diction to be a very finished piece. Hermogenes, a Stoic philosopher, and a Christian, broached a new heresy in Africa, teaching matter to be eternal. Tertullian shows it to have been created by God with the world, and unravels the sophistry of that heresiarch in his book Against Hermogenes. That Against the Valentinians is rather a satire and raillery, than a serious confutation of the extravagant sentiments of those heretics. His excellent book Of Prescription against Heretics was certainly written before his fall; for in it he lays great stress on his communion with all the apostolic churches, especially that of Rome, and confutes by general principles all heresies that can arise.

His design in this little treatise is to show, that the appeal to scripture is very unjust in heretics, who have no claim or title to the scriptures. These were carefully committed in trust by the apostles to their successors, and he proves, that to whom the scriptures were intrusted, to them also was committed the interpretation of scripture. He promises that heresies are the very pest and destruction of faith, but no just cause of scandal or wonder, any more than fevers which consume the human body; for they were predicted by Christ, and the necessary consequence of criminal passions. He says, as if it had been to anticipate or remove the offence which he afterward gave by his fall; “What if a bishop, a deacon, a widow, a virgin, a teacher, or even a martyr, shall fall from the faith;—Do we judge of the faith by the persons or of persons by their faith? No man is wise who holds not the faith.” (c. 3.) He says: ‘We have no need of a nice inquiry after we have found Christ, or of any curious search after we have learned the gospel. If we believe we desire nothing further than to be believers.” c. 7.) He adds, some heretics inculcate as a good reason for eternal scruple and searching, that it is written: Seek and ye shall find. But he takes notice those words only belonged to those Jews who had not yet found Christ, and cannot mean, that we must for ever seek on. But if we are to seek, it must not be from heretics who are estranged from the truth, who have no power to instruct, no inclination but to destroy, and whose very light is darkness. Christ laid down a rule of faith, about which there can be no cavils, no disputes but what are raised by heretics; and an obstinate opposition to this rule is what constitutes a heretic.

He Inveighs against too curious searches in faith, as the source of heresies. Then coming close to the point, he will not have heretics admitted to dispute about the scriptures, to which they have no claim; and in such a scriptural disputation, the victory is precarious and very liable to uncertainty. All then is to be resolved into what the apostles have taught; which apostolical tradition is the demonstration of the truth, and the confutation of all error and heretical innovation. Our perfect agreement, and general consent and harmony with the apostolic churches which live in the unity of the same faith, is the most convincing proof of the truth, against which no just objection can possibly be formed. (c. 21, 22.) He urges that Marcion, Apelles, Valentinus, and Hermogenes were of too modern a date, and proved by their separation and pretended claim of what was ancient, that the Church was before them; they ought therefore to say, that Christ came down again from heaven and taught again upon earth, before they can commence apostles. “But,” says he, “if any of these heretics have the confidence to put in their claim to apostolic antiquity, let them show us the original of their churches, the order and succession of their bishops, so as to ascend up to an apostle,” &c. He is for having the heretics prove their mission by miracles, like the apostles. (c. 35.) He writes: “To these men the Church might thus fitly address herself: Who are ye? When, and from whence came ye? What do ye in my pastures, who are none of mine? By what authority do you, Marcion, break in upon my enclosures? Whence, O Apelles, is your power to remove my land-marks? This field is mine of right, why then do you at your pleasure sow and feed therein? It is my possession; I held it in times past; I first had it in my hands: my title to it is firm and indisputable and derived from those persons whose it was, and to whom it properly belonged; I am the heir of the apostles; as they provided in their testament, as they committed and delivered to my trust, as they charged and ordered me, so I hold.” (c. 37.) He takes notice that in the Pagan superstitions the devil had imitated many ceremonies both of the Jewish and Christian religion; and that heretics in like manner were bad copies of the true Church. (c. 40.) He appeals to the manners and conversation of the heretics which are vain, earthly, without weight, without discipline, in every respect suitable to the faith they profess. (c. 41. 43.) “I am very much mistaken,’ says he, “if they are governed by any rules, even of their own making, since every one models and adopts the doctrine he has received according to his fancy, as the first founder framed them to his, and to serve his own turn. The progress of every heresy was formed upon the footsteps of its first introducers: and the same liberty that was assumed by Valentinus and Marcion, was generally made use of by their followers. If you search into all sorts ot heresies, you will find that they differ in many things from the first authors of their own sect. They have few of them in any Church; but without mother, without see, without the faith, they wander up and down like exiled men, entirely devoid of house and home.” (c. 42.)

Among his other works, the most useful is the book On Penance, the best polished of all his writings, in the first part, he treats of repentance at baptism; in the second, on that for sins committed after baptism. He teaches here that the Church hath power to remit even fornication, which he denied when a Montanist. He insists much on the laborious exercises of this penance after baptism.

A book On Prayer, explaining in the first part the Lord’s Prayer; in the second, several ceremonies ofter used at prayer. An exhortation to Patience, in which the motives are displayed with great eloquence An exhortation to Martyrdom, than which nothing can be more pathetic.

He wrote a book On Baptism, proving in the first part, its obligation and necessity; in the second, treating on several points of discipline relating to that sacrament.

As to his other works, in his first book to his Wife, written probably before he was priest (see Ceillier, p 375, and 391), he exhorts her not to marry again, if she should survive him; and mentions several in the Church living in perpetual continency. In the second, he allows second marriages lawful, but if the woman be determined to engage a second time in the married state, insists that it is unlawful to marry un infidel. He alleges the impossibility of rising to prayer at night, giving suitable alms, visiting the martyrs, &c. with a pagan husband: “Can you conceal yourself from him,” says he, “when you make the sign of the cross upon your bed or your body?—Will he not know what you receive in secret, before you take any food?” that is, the eucharist, (l. 2. c. 5.) He concludes with an amiable description of a Christian holy marriage: “The Church,” saith he, “approves the contract, the oblation ratifies it, the blessing is the seal of it, and the angels carry it to the heavenly Father who confirms it. Two bear together the same yoke, and are but one flesh, and one mind: they pray together, fast together, mutually exhort each other, go together to the church, and to the table of the Lord. They conceal nothing from each other, visit the sick, collect alms without restraint, assist at the offices of the Church without interruption, sing psalms and hymns together, and encourage each other to praise God.”

In his treatise On the Shows, he represents them as occasions of idolatry, impurity, vanity, and other vices, and mentions a woman who, going to the theatre, returned back possessed with a devil: when the exorcist reproached the evil spirit for daring to attack one of the faithful, it boldly answered: “I found her in my own house.” In his book On Idolatry, he determines many cases of conscience, relating to Idolatry, as that it is not lawful to make idols, &c., but he says, a Christian servant may attend his master to a temple; any friend may assist at an idolater’s marriage, &c. In two books On the Ornaments or Dress of Women, he zealously recommends modesty in attire, and condemns their use of paint. In that On veiling Virgins, he undertakes to prove that young women ought to cover their faces at church, contrary to the custom of his country, where only married women were veiled. In that On the Testimony of the Soul, he proves that there is only one God from the natural testimony of every one’s soul. In his Scorpiace, written against the poison of the Scorpions, that is, Gnostics, especially a branch of those heretics named Cainites, he proves the necessity of martyrdom, which they denied. In his Exhortation to Chastity, he dissuades a certain widow from a second marriage, which he allows to be lawful, though hardly so; and the harshness of his __EXPRESSION__s show that he then leaned toward Montanism.

Tertullian was a priest, and continued in the Church till the middle of his life, that is, to forty or upwards, when he miserably fell. Montanus, an eunuch in Phrygia, set up for a prophet, and was wonderfully agitated by an evil spirit, and pretended to raptures in which he lost his senses, and spoke incoherently, not like St. Quadratus and other true prophets. He was joined by Prisca, or Priscilla, and Maximilla, two women of quality, and rich, but of most debauched lives. These had the like pretended raptures, and many were deceived by them. Montanus, about the year 171, pretended that he had received the Holy Ghost to complete the law of the gospel, and was called by his followers the Paraclete. Affecting a severity of doctrine, to which his manners did not correspond, he condemned second marriages, and flight in persecution, and ordered extraordinary fasts. The Montanists said that, beside the fast of Lent observed by the Catholics, there were other fasts imposed by the Divine Spirit. They kept three Lents in the year, each of two weeks, and upon dry meats, as necessary injunctions of the Spirit by the new revelations made to Montanus, which they preferred to the writings of the apostles; and they said these laws were to be observed for ever. (See Tert. de Jejun. c. 15, also St. Jerom, ep. 54. ad Marcellam, et in Aggæ, c. 1), which is the reason why the Montanists, even in the time of Sozomen, kept their Antepaschal fast confined to two weeks, which the Catholics at that time certainly observed of forty days. For, as bishop Hooper (of Lent, p. 65), remarks, those great fasters would hardly have been left behind, had they not been restrained by the pretended institution of the Spirit, to which they punctually kept; and this circumstance rendered these facts superstitious. Pepuzium, a town in Phrygia, was the metropolis of these heretics, who called it Jerusalem. The bishops of Asia having examined their prophecies and errors, condemned them. It is said, that Montanus and Maximilla going mad, hanged themselves. See Eusebius.

Tertullian’s harsh, severe disposition fell in with this rigidness. His vehement temper was for no medium in any thing; and falling first by pride, he resented some affronts which he imagined he had received from the clergy of Rome, as Saint Jerom testifies: and in this passion deserted the Church, forgetting the maxims by which he had confuted all heresies. Solomon’s fall did not prejudice his former inspired writings. Nor does the misfortune of Tertullian destroy at least the justness of the reasoning in what he had written in defence of the truth, any more than if a man lost his senses, this unlucky accident could annul what he had formerly done for the advancement of learning.

Tertullian is the most ancient of all ecclesiastical writers among the Latins. St. Vincent of Lerins, who is far from shading the blemishes of this great man, says, “He was among the Latins what Origen was among the Greeks—that is, the first man of his age. Every word seems a sentence, and almost every sentence a new victory. Yet with all these advantages, he did not continue in the ancient and universal faith. His error, as the blessed confessor Hilary observes, has taken away that authority from his writings which they would have otherwise deserved.” St. Jerom in his book against Helvidius, when his authority was objected, coolly answered, “That he is not of the Church,” “Ecclesiæ hominem non esse.” Yet he sometimes speaks advantageously of his learning. Lactantius calls his style uncouth, rugged, and dark, but admires his depth of sense; and he who breaks the shell will not repent his pains for the kernel. Balsac ingeniously compares his eloquence to ebony, which is bright and pleasing in its black light. The great master of eloquence, St. Cyprian, found such hidden stores under his dark language, that he is reported never to have passed a day without reading him, and when he called for his book, he used to say, “Give me my master.”

We find this once great man, who expressed in his Apologetic (cap. 39) the most just and fearful apprehension of excommunication, which he there called. The anticipation of the future judgment, afterward proud, arrogant, and at open defiance with the censures of the Church. And this great genius seems even to lose common sense when he writes in favor of his errors and enthusiasm, as when, upon the authority of the dreams of Priscilla and Maximilia, he seriously disputes on the shape and color of a human soul, &c. He lived to a very advanced age, and leaving the Montanists, became the author of a new sect called from him Tertullianists, who had a church at Carthage till St. Austin’s time, when they were all reconciled to the Catholic faith. Tertullian died towards the year 245.

The works which he wrote after his fall are, a book On the Soul, pretending it to have a human figure, &c. Another On the Flesh of Christ, proving that he took upon him human flesh in reality, not in appearance only. One on the Resurrection of the Flesh, proving that great mystery. Five books Against Marcion, who maintained that there were two principles or gods, the one good the other evil; that the latter was worshipped by the Jews, and was author of their law; but that the good god sent Christ to destroy his works. Against this heresiarch, Tertullian proves the unity of God, and the sanctity of the Old Law and Testament. In his book Against Praxeas he proves excellently the Trinity of Persons, and uses the very word Trinity (c. 2), but he impiously condemns Praxeas, because coming from the East to Rome he had informed pope Victor of the errors and hypocrisy of Montanus; on which account he says, he had banished the Paraclete (Montanus) and crucified the Father. “Paracletum fugavit, Patrem crucifixit,” (c. 1.) For Praxeas, puffed up with the title of confessor, broached the heresy of the Patripassians, confounding the three Persons, and pretending that the Father in the Son became man, and was crucified for us. His apology for the Philosophers Cloak, which he continued to wear rather than the Toga, for its conveniency, and as an emblem of a severer life, seems only writ to display his wit. His apology to Scapula, proconsul of Africa in 211, is an exhortation to put a stop to the persecution, alleging that “a Christian is no man’s enemy, much less the emperor’s.” In his book On Monogamy he maintains against the Psychicl (so he calls the Catholics) that second marriages are unlawful, which was one point of his heresy. One of his arguments is, the duty of a widow always to pray for the soul of her deceased husband. (c. 10.)

He write his book on Fasts, to defend the extraordinary fasts commanded by the Montanists; but shows that certain obligatory fasts were observed by the Catholics, as that before Easter, since called Lent, in which they fasted every day till vespers or evening-service: that those of Wednesday and Friday till three o’clock, called stations, were devotional. Some added to these Xerophagia or the use only of dried meats, abstaining from all vinous and juicy fruits; and some confined themselves to bread and water. The Montanists kept three Lents a year, and other fasts always till night, and with the Xerophagia.

Tertullian wrote also his book On Chastity, against the Catholics, because they gave absolution to penitents who had been guilty of adultery or fornication. For the Montanists denied that the Church could pardon sins of impurity, murder, or idolatry. In this book he mentions twice, that on the sacred chalices was painted the image of the good shepherd bringing home the lost sheep on his shoulders. Scoffing at a decree made by the bishop of Rome at that time, he writes, “I am informed that they have made a decree, and even a peremptory one; the chief priest, that is, the bishop of bishops, saith; I remit the sins of adultery and fornication to those who have done penance.” (c. 1.) He calls him apostolic bishop, c. 19 and blessed pope, c. 13, ib. His book On the Crown was written in 235, the first year of Maximinus, to defend the action of a Christian soldier who refused to put on his head a garland, like the rest, when he went to receive a donative. Tertullian says these garlands were reputed sacred to some false god or other He alleges that by tradition a one we practise many things, as the ceremonies used at baptism, yearly ablations (or sacrifices for the lead, and for the festivals of martyrs, standing at prayer on the Lord day, and from Easter to Whitsuntide, and thesign of the cross “which we make,” says he, “upon our foreheads at at every action, and in all our motions at coming in or going out of doers, in dressing or bathing ourselves; when we are at table or in bed; when we sit down or light a lamp, or whatever else we do.” (De Coiona, c. 3 and 4.) His book On Flight, was written about the same time to pretend to prove against the Catholies that it is a crime to fly in time of persecution.

The most correct edition of Tertullian’s works is that of Rigaltius, even that of Pamelius being pointed, and abounding with faults; though Rigaltius’s notes on this and some other fathers want much amondment.

¹ Tert. l. ad Scapul c. 3.

¹ L. 7, Ep. 8.

² Euchar.

³ Ennod. l. 8, Ep 24, ad Faust.

* Magisterianl were officers under the Magister Officiorum, who held one of the first dignities in the imperial court, and had a superintendency over the Palatines, Inferior officers of the court, the schools on academies of the court, and certain governors. See Du Cange, Glossar.

* This ceremony was much more ancient. Alcuin and Amalarius ascribe its institution to pope Zosimus, but others make it of older date. At Rome the archdeacon on Holy Saturday blessed wax mingled with oil, particles of which having a figure of a lamb formed upon them were distributed among the people Hence was derived the custom of Agnus Deis made of wax sometimes mixed with relics of martyrs, which the popes blessed in a solemn manner. See Saint Gregory of Tours, de Vit. Patr. c. 8. The Rom Order, Alcuin, Sirmond, Not. in Ennod., &c.

^† That a pretended woman called Joan interrupted the series of the succession between Leo IV. and Bennet III., Is a most notorious forgery. Lupus Ferrariensis, ep. 103, to Bennet III. Ado in his Chronicle, Rhegino in his Chronicle, the annals of St. Bertin, Hincmar ep. 26, pope Nicholas I. the successor of Bennet III. ep. 46, even the calumniators of the holy see, Photius l. De Process. Spir. Sti. and Metrophanes of Smyrna, l. de Divinitate Spiritus Sancti, who all lived at that very time, expressly testify, that Bennet III. succeeded immediately Leo IV. Whence Blondel, a violent Calvinist, has by an express dissertation demonstrated the falsity of this fable. Marianus Scotus, at Mentz, wrote two hundred years after, in 1083, a chronicle in which mention is first made of this fiction; from whence it was inserted in the chronicle of Martinus Polonus, a Dominican, in 1277, though it is wanting in the true MS. copy kept in the Vatican library, as Leo Allatins assures us, and in other old MS. copies, as Burnet (Nouvelles de la Rep. des Letters, Mars, 1687), Casleu (Catal. Bibl. reg. Londin, p. 102), &c., testify. Lambecius, the most learned keeper of the imperial library at Vienna, in his excellent catalogue of that library, vol. ii. p. 860, has demonstrated this of the oldest and best manuscript copies of this chronicle; also of Marianus Scotus. Her name was foisted into Sigebert’s Chronicle, written in 1112; for it is not found in the original MS. copy at Gemblours, authentically published by Miræus. Platina, and the other late copies of Martinus Polonus and Sigebert, borrow it from the first forger in the copy of Marianus Scotus, probably falsified; certainly of no authority and inconsistent; for there it is said that she sat two years five months, and that she had studied at Athens, where no schools remained long before this time.

As to the porphyry stool shown in a repository belonging to the Lateran church, which is said to have been made use of on account of this fable, it is an idle dream. There were two such stools; one is now shown to travellers. It is certainly of old Roman antiquity, finely polished, and might perhaps be used at the baths or at some superstitious ceremonies. The art of cutting or working in porphyry marble was certainly lost long before the ninth age, and not restored before the time of Cosmos the Great of Medicis this work is still exceeding slow and expensive. On this idle fable see Lambecius, Blondel, Leo Allatius Na. Alexander, Boerhave, &c.

 Butler, A. (1903). The Lives of the Fathers, Martyrs and Other Principal Saints (Vol. 3, pp. 133–143). New York: P. J. Kenedy.