Chapter 36. Continuation of the same subject

We must now consider the objections to the Acts of St. Cecilia, which Tillemont pretends to find in these Acts, considered in themselves. This discussion will not be less instructive than the preceding.

We will begin with the critic's own words : " These Acts are composed of extraordinary miracles, and other matters which have little appearance of truth. The discourses are long. There are, indeed, some beautiful passages, evidently taken from Tertullian ; but he who wrote them should have learned from the same author to treat princes with more respect."*

Hence, sound criticism must reject the Acts of St. Cecilia on account of the extraordinary miracles recorded therein ! Had Tillemont plainly said that the conversion of the Pagan world to Christianity, was effected without miracles, Ave could refer him to the' illustrious Doctor St. Augustin, who would teach him that in that case, so incomprehensible a transformation would be the greatest of miracles. But Tille-

• Memoirs, tome in. page 089.

mont does not deny miracles in general ; he merely distinguishes between those which he calls extraordinary, and those which he deems ordinary. Unfortunnately, he has left us no theoretical rules whereby we may discern one from the other. We have no resource left but to study his manner of appreciating supernatural facts.

Let us first remark that this critic admits all the miracles contained in the genuine Acts of Dom Euinart. He cannot, however, deny that this authentic collection contains many miracles more extraordinary^ to use his own expression, than those related in the Acts of St. Cecilia. The latter are among the most simple recorded in the annals of primitive Christianity. Nothing more than the apparition of St. Paul and several visions of Angels. We learn from Origen, who wrote at that time, and who was certainly not a weak minded man, that such apparitions were very frequent. Tertullian, a contemporary of Origen, attests that the greater part of those who embraced Christianity were converted by visions.*

Tillemont relates and admits all the facts of this nature mentioned in the Acts of Sts. Vincent, Agnes, Theodotus of Ancyra, etc. Most of these apparitions are much more marvellous than those recorded in the Acts of- St. Cecilia. Is it reasonable then to contest the latter ? Beside the apparitions there is no mention in the Acts of any miracle except the prolongation of Cecilia's life after the severe wounds inflicted by the lictor's sword. Were these wounds

• Major pene vis liominum visionibus Deum discunt De anima, cap xlvii.

sufficiently serious to produce death in a short time? We think so. But, however this may be, it should not surprise Tillemont who must remember that the Acts of Dom Euinart, all of which he admits, frequently speak of Martyrs, whose bodies, rendered invulnerable by divine power, resisted all torments ; whose dislocated limbs and gaping wounds were often suddenly and miraculously healed, filling the Pagans with rage and confusion.

The principles of the Port Eoyal School paved the way for those of anti-christian rationalism. To refuse to believe in miracles because they are extraordinary, is senseless logic, since a miracle is only a miracle from the fact of being extraordinary. For this reason, supernatural facts are not proved by internal evidence, but by human testimony. Can we measure the limits of God's Omnipotence ? What answer will Tillemont make to those whose rejection of the Bible, is grounded on the very argument which he addresses against the truth of Cecilia's Acts, viz. : that the miracles mentioned therein, are too extraordinary to be believed ?

Our critic brings forward the lengthy discourses in the Acts of St. Cecilia, as another argument against them. He probably desires to infer that such lengthy discourses could not have been preserved; but this reasoning might carry him too far. To be consistent, he must begin by rejecting the genuine Acts of Saints Pionius, Victor of Marseilles, Philip of Heraclius, Patrick, etc, all of which he admits, and which, nevertheless, contain longer discourses than those of St. Cecilia's Acts.

Even though it be granted for a moment that

352 ^IFE 0F SAINT CECILIA.

these discourses have no historical value, would this concession invalidate the Acts themselves? This would be treating the Acts of the Martyrs with more severity than has ever been shown to any of the historians of antiquity. The latter have embellished their writings with harangues of their own composition ; no one ever questioned their veracity on this account. Is historical pyrrhonism to be our rule, only when examining the history of Christianity ?

The sole discourse of considerable length in the Acts, is the harangue to Tiburtius, when Cecilia explains to him the Christian faith. Tiburtius may have committed this discourse to writing. It would not be the first time that a man has thus preserved words which have deeply impressed his mind and heart. In such occasions, which are not so rare as Tillemont imagines, the memory may sometimes be at fault ; but the writer who has thus noted down his remembrances, knows that his account is a faithful one, because it gives the sense of the discourse and the thoughts which have most forcibly struck him. Besides, this speech had an historical bearing ; the conversion of Tiburtius, which was due to Cecilia, was an event in the history of the Eoman Church, and well merited a page in the annals of Christian Borne. Would it not be more surprising if it had not been handed down to posterity ?

The rest of the Acts contain rather dialogues than discourses. The questions and replies in the interrogatory do not exceed the length of those found in the Acts published by Dom Euinart. Valerian's parable is long ; but improvisations of equal length are fre quently found in the most authentic interrogatories. The Registrars noted down all that the martyrs said ; whilst the notaries of the Church compiled their Acts upon notes made by faithful persons, accustomed to the charge ; in many cases, the official interrogatories were purchased with money. The Christians valued every word uttered by the martyrs before the judges, considering them as inspired by the Holy Ghost, according to the promise of our Saviour in the Gospel : "And you shall be brought before governors, and before kings, for my sake. But when they shall deliver you up, be not thoughtful how or what to speak; for it shall be given you in that hour what to speak. For it is not you that speak, but the spirit of your Father that speaketh in you."*

Tillemont could not avoid seeing the beauty of our Acts, and the acknowledgement of it involuntarily escaped his pen ; but he found an ingenious means of turning this remark against the probity of the historian: " There are some beautiful passages," he says, " but evidently taken from Tertullian," implying that the narrator made use of Tertullian in composing the speeches of his heroes. It is very true that some points of resemblance may be found between the Apology of the eloquent African and the dialogues and responses of the interrogatories ; but what inference can be drawn from this except an additional confirmation of the truth of the Acts ?

At this time, all Rome was speaking of that magnificent Defence of Christianity, which, combining all the arguments of preceding Apologies, had ele-

• Matt, x 18-20.

"vated the Christian cause to the highest degree of moral grandeur. It was only natural, therefore, that the Christians, in their replies to the magistrates of the Empire, should repeat the energetic sentences which had so lately thrilled the Senate. Our heroes were contemporaries of Tertullian, and, consequently, might have spoken like him ; but we find it difficult to believe that the compiler of the Acts, whose careless and unadorned style bears no resemblance to the powerful diction of the Apology, could even have conceived the idea of borrowing from such a masterpiece.

Tillemont considers Cecilia's manner of addressing the prefect, and her invectives against the princes, another improbable circumstance. Her freedom of language scandalized him, and we can readily understand that more than one Catholic in the reign of Louis XIV., thought it a sufficient argument for rejecting Acts in which Christian liberty is so fearlessly proclaimed. This may be accounted for by a confusion of ideas which had become prevalent, respecting the spirit and manners of the early Christians, a confusion which still exists in many minds. A more liberal appreciation of the actions and words of the saints, would have enabled the world to understand, that if it be glorious to suffer death with the meekness of a lamb, led to the slaughter,* it is no less glorious to protest against iniquity, and to de nounce to earthly rulers, the nullity of their rights, and the injustice of their actions, when they use against God and His Church, that power which they

• Isaiah, liii. 7.

could not have received unless it had been given them from above.

Moreover, Cecilia did not in her energetic replies, spit in the face of her judge, as Eulalia did ;* nor did she, like St Andronicus, answer the prefect who reproached him with insulting the Emperors : " Yes, I have cursed and will curse these Emperors who overturn the world in their thirst for blood. May God overthrow them with His mighty arm ; may He crush and annihilate them ; may He visit them with His anger, that they may know of what crimes they are guilty in persecuting the Christians."!

Is it necessary to give other examples? Julian, uncle of the Apostate, and created by him governor of the province of the East, when cruelly tormenting St. Theodoret, a priest of the Church of Antiocb, dared to demand his obedience to the Emperor's edict, by quoting the following text of Scripture : " The hearts of kings are in the hand of God." The martyr replied : " These words are written of a king who knows and serves God, but not of a tyrant who adores and serves idols." "Fool!" exclaimed the governor, " doyou dare to call the emperor a tyrant ?"J

• Martyr ad ista nihil : sed enim Infremit, inque tyranni oculos Sputa jacit. Ruinart. Acta sincera. Martyrium S. 'Eulalice Virginia, p. 499. \ Ego maledixi et inaledico potestates, et sanguibibulos qui saeculum everterunt, quos Deus brachio suo alto evertat, et conterat, et perdat, et det super eos iram ; ut seiant quid agant in servos Dei. Ruinart. Acta SS. Taracki, Prohi ei Andronici^ page 487.

t Julianus dixit : Vol nunc time deOS, et fao qua al> Imperatore sunt jussa, quia soriptum est tibi : Cor. regis in man* Dei, Theodoritus respondit : Cos Regis cognosoentie Deum soriptum

35G LIFE 0F SAIXT CECILIA.

14 If he gives such orders as you say, and if he be the man you represent him," answered Theodoret, " he is not only a tyrant, but the most wretched of men." Christian liberty was no less fearlessly asserted in the peaceful days that succeeded the age of -Persecutions. Saint Hilary of Poitiers, in his sublime invective against Constantius, branded this prince with the name of tyrant, and did not fear to add : " What I say to thee, Constantius, I would have said to Nero. Decius and Maximian* should have heard it from my lips." We find in every century, similar traits of courage. The recital of them would startle the universal effeminacy of the present generation. We need to study diligently, the manners of our ancestors in the faith, who so generously defended that precious deposit, which we find it so difficult to preserve. These public protestations of Christian liberty, far exceed Cecilia's courageous replies to Almachius, which Tillemont considers a proof of the falsity of her Acts. He nevertheless, defends the holy audacity of St. Andronicus, and is only scandalized when he encounters that same audacity in a much milder form in the Acts of St. Cecilia. We will cite his own words : " We find in nearly all the authentic histories of the martyrs, now extant, that they were very respectful to the sovereign powers, and practised est esse in manu Dei, non cor tyranni adorantis idola. Julianus dixit : Stulte, tyrannum vocas Imperatorem. Theodoritus respondit : Si talia jubet, et talis est ut dicis : non solum tyrannus ditendus est, sed miserrimus omnium hominum. Passio sancti 2'heodoriti, page 659.

• Proclamo tibi, Constanti, quod Neroni locuturus fuissem, quod ex me Decius et Maximianus audiront. Adversus Constant tium, lib. i. page 113.

that meekness so frequently recommended by St. Paul. But St. Paul himself fearlessly called his judge a whited wall, and threatened him with the anger of God. St. Stephen, and even our Saviour, speak to the Jews with seeming harshness. The frightful cruelties practised against the Christians were sufficient to excite the just indignation of the martyrs. These Saints hated what God hates, without losing their repose and tranquillity of soul, and they are not to be blamed for expressing their condemnation of what they felt to be wrong. We speak of the fire, as well as of the oil, of charity ; and the more justice is loved, the greater zeal and horror is felt for injustice. It is certain that God acted and suffered too visibly in His saints, to permit us to doubt for a moment that His spirit was with them, according to His promise. Therefore we cannot but respect the apparent harshness of their words, although this harshness should not be unadvisedly imitated, lest impatience, bitterness, or hatred, rather than zeal for God and for justice, should actuate us in following this example of the Saints."*

In thus exposing the entire system of Tillemont in its bearing upon the Acts of St. Cecilia, we think we have enabled the reader to estimate the value of the criticism and the intention of the critic. We are writing in a country where many honest men persist in considering Jansenism as only a system of exaggerated morality. This is not the place to explain to such men to what an extent the dogmas

• Memoires pour servir a l'Histoire Boclesiastique, tom<> v., page 286.

of this sect, condemned by the Church, are opposed to Catholicity. Let them study the history of Catholic truth and the perils to which it has been exposed from a heresy which so artfully insinuates the most odious theories of Calvin. In a question of mere criticism, our duty is simply to remove all doubts concerning the truth of an historical narrative, dear to the Church and to the faithful at all times, for the santification of Christian souls. It does not enter into our plan to expose the reasons which have induced the Jansenists to suppress all the precious, charming, and soul-inspiring traditions offered by the Catholic Church to her children ; we prefer concluding this chapter with the beautiful words of St. Paul to the Philippians : " Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report ; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things." Phil, iv., 8.