1.
In the opposition which Ambrose made to the Arians, as already
related, there is no appearance of his appealing to any law of the
Empire in justification of his refusal to surrender the Basilica to
them. He rested it upon the simple basis of the Divine Law, a
commonsense argument which there was no evading. “The Basilica has been
made over to Christ; the Church is His trustee; I am its ruler. I dare
not alienate the Lord's property. He who does so, does it at his
peril.” Indeed, he elsewhere expressly repudiates the principle of
dependence in this matter on human law. “Law,” he says, “has not
brought the Church together, but the faith of Christ.” However, Justina
determined to have human law on her side. She persuaded her son to make
it a capital offence in any one, either publicly or privately, even by
petition, to interfere with the assemblies of the Arians; a provision
which admitted a fair, and might also bear, and did in fact receive, a
most tyrannical interpretation. Benevolus, the Secretary of State, from
whose office the edict was to proceed, refused to draw it up, and
resigned his place; but of course others less scrupulous were easily
found to succeed him. At length it was promulgated on the 21st of
January of the next year, A.D. 386, and a fresh attempt soon followed
on the part of the Court to get possession of the Portian Basilica,
which was without the walls.
The line of conduct which Ambrose had adopted remained equally clear
and straight, whether before or after the promulgation of this edict.
It was his duty to use all the means which Christ has given the Church
to prevent the profanation of the Basilica. But soon a new question
arose for his determination. An imperial message was brought to him to
retire from the city at once, with any friends who chose to attend him.
It is not certain whether this was intended as an absolute command, or
(as his words rather imply) a recommendation on the part of government
to save themselves the odium, and him the suffering, of public and more
severe proceedings. Even if it were the former, it does not appear that
a Christian bishop, so circumstanced, need obey it; for what was it but
in other words to say, “Depart from the Basilica, and leave it to
us?”—the very order which he had already withstood. The words of
Scripture, which bid Christians, if persecuted in one city, flee to
another, are evidently, from the form of them, a discretionary rule,
grounded on the expediency of each occasion, as it arises. A mere
threat is not a persecution, nor is a command; and though we are bound
to obey our civil rulers, the welfare of the Church has a prior claim
upon our obedience. Other bishops took the same view of the case with
Ambrose; and, accordingly, he determined to stay in Milan till removed
by main force, or cut off by violence.
2.
The reader shall hear his own words in a sermon which he delivered
upon the occasion:—
“I see that you are under a sudden and unusual excitement,” he
said, “and are turning your eyes on me. What can be the reason
of
this? Is it that you saw or heard that an imperial message had
been
brought to me by the tribunes desiring me to depart hence
whither I
would, and to take with me all who would follow me? What! did
you
fear that I would desert the Church, and, for fear of my life,
abandon you? Yet you might have attended to my answer. I said
that
I could not, for an instant, entertain the thought of
deserting the
Church, in that I feared the Lord of all more than the Emperor
of
the day: in truth that, should force hurry me off, it would be
my
body, not my mind, that was got rid of; that, should he act in
the
way of kingly power, I was prepared to suffer after the manner
of a
priest.
“Why, then, are you thus disturbed? I will never leave you of
my
own will; but if compelled, I may not resist. I shall still
have
the power of sorrowing, of weeping, of uttering laments: when
weapons, soldiers, Goths, too, assail me, tears are my
weapons, for
such are the defences of a priest. In any other way I neither
ought
to resist, nor can; but as to retiring and deserting the
Church,
this is not like me; and for this reason, lest I seem to do so
from
dread of some heavier punishment. Ye yourselves know that it
is my
wont to submit to our rulers, but not to make concessions to
them;
to present myself readily to legal punishment, and not to fear
what
is in preparation.
“A proposal was made to me to deliver up at once the Church
plate.
I made answer, that I was ready to give anything that was my
own,
farm or house, gold or silver; but that I could withdraw no
property from God's temple, nor surrender what was put into my
hands, not to surrender, but to keep safely. Besides, that I
had a
care for the Emperor's well-being; since it was as little safe
for
him to receive as for me to surrender: let him bear with the
words
of a free-spoken priest, for his own good, and shrink from
doing
wrong to his Lord.
“You recollect to-day's lesson about holy Naboth and his
vineyard.
The king asked him to make it over to him, as a ground, not
for
vines, but for common pot-herbs. What was his answer? 'God
forbid I
should give to thee the inheritance of my fathers!' The king
was
saddened when another's property was justly denied him; but he
was
beguiled by a woman's counsel. Naboth shed his blood rather
than
give up his vines. Shall he refuse his own vineyard, and we
surrender the Church of Christ?
“What contumacy, then, was there in my answer? I did but say at
the
interview, 'God forbid I should surrender Christ's heritage!'
I
added, 'the heritage of our fathers;' yes, of our Dionysius,
who
died in exile for the faith's sake, of Eustorgius the
Confessor, of
Myrocles, and of all the other faithful bishops back. I
answered
as a priest: let the Emperor act as an Emperor; he shall rob
me of
my life sooner than of my fidelity.
“In what respect was my answer other than respectful? Does the
Emperor wish to tax us? I make no opposition. The Church lands
pay
taxes. Does he require our lands? He has power to claim them;
we
will not prevent him. The contributions of the people will
suffice
for the poor. Let not our enemies take offence at our lands;
they
may away with them, if it please the Emperor; not that I give
them,
but I make no opposition. Do they seek my gold? I can truly
say,
silver and gold I seek not. But they take offence at my
raising
contributions. Nor have I any great fear of the charge. I
confess I
have stipendiaries; they are the poor of Christ's flock; a
treasure
which I am well used in amassing. May this at all times be my
offence, to exact contributions for the poor. And if they
accuse me
of defending myself by means of them, I am far from denying, I
court the charge. The poor are my defenders, but it is
by their
prayers. Blind though they be, lame, feeble, and aged, yet
they
have a strength greater than that of the stoutest warriors. In
a
word, gifts made to them are a claim upon the Lord; as it is
written, 'He who giveth to the poor, lendeth to God;' but a
military guard oftentimes has no title to divine grace.
“They say, too, that the people are misled by the verses of my
hymns. I frankly confess this also. Truly those hymns have in
them
a high strain above all other influence. For can any strain
have
more of influence than the confession of the Holy Trinity,
which is
proclaimed day by day by the voice of the whole people? Each
is
eager to rival his fellows in confessing, as he well knows
how, in
sacred verses, his faith in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Thus
all
are made teachers, who else were scarce equal to being
scholars.
“No one can deny that in what we say we pay to our sovereign
due
honour. What indeed can do him higher honour than to style him
a
son of the Church? In saying this, we are loyal to him without
sinning against God. For the Emperor is within the Church, but
not
over the Church; and a religious sovereign seeks, not rejects,
the
Church's aid. This is our doctrine, modestly avowed, but
insisted
on without wavering. Though they threaten fire, or the sword,
or
transportation, we, Christ's poor servants, have learned not
to
fear. And to the fearless nothing is frightful; as Scripture
says,
'Their blows are like the arrows of a child.'”—Serm.
contr.
Auxent.
3.
Mention is made in this extract of the Psalmody which Ambrose
adopted about this time. The history of its introduction is curiously
connected with the subject before us, and interesting, inasmuch as this
was the beginning of a change in the style of Church music, which
spread over the West, and continues even among ourselves to this day;
it is as follows;—
Soldiers had been sent, as in the former year, to surround his
church, in order to prevent the Catholic service there; but being
themselves Christians, and afraid of excommunication, they went so far
as to allow the people to enter, but would not let them leave the
building. This was not so great an inconvenience to them as might
appear at first sight: for the early Basilicas were not unlike the
heathen temples, or our own collegiate chapels, that is, part of a
range of buildings, which contained the lodgings of the ecclesiastics,
and formed a fortress in themselves, which could easily be fortified
from within or blockaded from without. Accordingly, the people remained
shut up within the sacred precincts for some days, and the bishop with
them. There seems to have been a notion, too, that he was to be seized
for exile, or put to death; and they naturally kept about him to “see
the end,” to suffer with him or for him, according as their tempers and
principles led them. Some went so far as to barricade the doors of the
Basilica;[364] nor could Ambrose prevent this proceeding, unnecessary
as it was, because of the good feelings of the soldiery towards them,
and indeed impracticable in such completeness as might be sufficient
for security.
Some persons may think that Ambrose ought to have used his utmost
influence against it, whereas in his sermon to the people he merely
insists on its uselessness, and urges the propriety of looking simply
to God, and not at all to such expedients, for deliverance. It must be
recollected, however, that he and his people in no sense drew the sword
from its sheath; he confined himself to passive resistance. He had
violated no law; the Church's property was sought by a tyrant: without
using any violence, he took possession of that which he was bound to
defend with his life. He placed himself upon the sacred territory, and
bade them take it and him together, after St. Laurence's pattern, who
submitted to be burned rather than deliver up the goods with which he
had been intrusted for the sake of the poor. However, it was evidently
a very uncomfortable state of things for a Christian bishop, who might
seem to be responsible for all the consequences, yet was without
control over them. A riot might commence any moment, which it would not
be in his power to arrest. Under these circumstances, with admirable
presence of mind, he contrived to keep the people quiet, and to direct
their minds to higher objects than those around them, by Psalmody.
Sacred chanting had been one especial way in which the Catholics of
Antioch had kept alive, in Arian times, the spirit of orthodoxy. And
from the first a peculiar kind of singing—the antiphonal or
responsorial, answering to our cathedral chanting—had been used in
honour of the sacred doctrine which heresy assailed. Ignatius, the
disciple of St. Peter, was reported to have introduced the practice
into the Church of Antioch, in the doxology to the Trinity. Flavian,
afterwards bishop of that see, revived it during the Arian usurpation,
to the great edification and encouragement of the oppressed Catholics.
Chrysostom used it in the vigils at Constantinople, in opposition to
the same heretical party; and similar vigils had been established by
Basil in the monasteries of Cappadocia. The assembled multitude,
confined day and night within the gates of the Basilica, were in the
situation of a monastic body without its discipline, and Ambrose
rightly considered that the novelty and solemnity of the oriental
chants, in praise of the Blessed Trinity, would both interest and sober
them during the dangerous temptation to which they were now exposed.
The expedient had even more successful results than the bishop
anticipated; the soldiers were affected by the music, and took part in
it; and, as we hear nothing more of the blockade, we must suppose that
it thus ended, the government being obliged to overlook what it could
not prevent.
It may be interesting to the reader to see Augustine's notice of
this occurrence, and the effect of the Psalmody upon himself, at the
time of his baptism.
“The pious populace (he says in his Confessions) was keeping
vigils
in the church prepared to die, O Lord, with their bishop, Thy
servant. There was my mother, Thy handmaid, surpassing others
in
anxiety and watching, and making prayers her life.
“I, uninfluenced as yet by the fire of Thy Spirit, was roused
however by the terror and agitation of the city. Then it was
that
hymns and psalms, after the oriental rite, were introduced,
lest
the spirits of the flock should fail under the wearisome
delay.”—Confess. ix. 15.
In the same passage, speaking of his baptism, he says:—
“How many tears I shed during the performance of Thy hymns and
chants, keenly affected by the notes of Thy melodious Church!
My
ears drank up those sounds, and they distilled into my heart
as
sacred truths, and overflowed thence again in pious emotion,
and
gushed forth into tears, and I was happy in them.”—Ibid.
14.
Elsewhere he says:—
“Sometimes, from over-jealousy, I would entirely put from me
and
from the Church the melodies of the sweet chants which we use
in
the Psalter, lest our ears seduce us; and the way of
Athanasius,
Bishop of Alexandria, seems the safer, who, as I have often
heard,
made the reader chant with so slight a change of note, that it
was
more like speaking than singing. And yet when I call to mind
the
tears I shed when I heard the chants of Thy Church in the
infancy
of my recovered faith, and reflect that at this time I am
affected,
not by the mere music, but by the subject, brought out, as it
is,
by clear voices and appropriate tune, then, in turn, I confess
how
useful is the practice.”—Confess. x. 50.
Such was the influence of the Ambrosian chants when first introduced
at Milan by the great bishop whose name they bear; there they are in
use still, in all the majestic austerity which gave them their original
power, and a great part of the Western Church uses that modification of
them which Pope Gregory introduced at Rome in the beginning of the
seventh century.
4.
Ambrose implies, in the sermon from which extracts were given above,
that a persecution, reaching even to the infliction of bodily
sufferings, was at this time exercised upon the bishops of the
Exarchate. Certainly he himself was all along in imminent peril of his
life, or of sudden removal from Milan. However, he made it a point to
frequent the public places and religious meetings as usual; and indeed
it appears that he was as safe there as at home, for he narrowly
escaped assassination from a hired ruffian of the Empress's, who made
his way to his bed-chamber for the purpose. Magical arts were also
practised against him, as a more secret and certain method of ensuring
his destruction.
I ought to have mentioned, before this, the challenge sent to him by
the Arian bishop to dispute publicly with him on the sacred doctrine in
controversy; but was unwilling to interrupt the narrative of the
contest about the Basilica. I will here translate portions of a letter
sent by him, on the occasion, to the Emperor.
“To the most gracious Emperor and most happy Augustus
Valentinian,
Ambrosius Bishop,—
“Dalmatius, tribune and notary, has come to me, at your
Majesty's
desire, as he assures me, to require me to choose umpires, as
Auxentius[365] has done on his part. Not that he informed me
who
they were that had already been named; but merely said that
the
dispute was to take place in the consistory, in your Majesty's
presence, as final arbitrator of it.
“I trust my answer will prove sufficient. No one should call me
contumacious, if I insist on what your father, of blessed
memory,
not only sanctioned by word of mouth, but even by a law:—That
in
cases of faith, or of ecclesiastics, the judges should be
neither
inferior in function nor separate in jurisdiction—thus the
rescript runs; in other words, he would have priests decide
about
priests. And this extended even to the case of allegations of
wrong
conduct.
“When was it you ever heard, most gracious Emperor, that in a
question of faith laymen should be judges of a bishop? What!
have
courtly manners so bent our backs, that we have forgotten the
rights of the priesthood, that I should of myself put into
another's hands what God has bestowed upon me? Once grant that
a
layman may set a bishop right, and see what will follow. The
layman
in consequence discusses, while the bishop listens; and the
bishop
is the pupil of the layman. Yet, whether we turn to Scripture
or to
history, who will venture to deny that in a question of faith,
in a
question, I say, of faith, it has ever been the bishop's
business
to judge the Christian Emperor, not the Emperor's to judge the
bishop?
“When, through God's blessing, you live to be old, then you
will
know what to think of the fidelity of that bishop who places
the
rights of the priesthood at the mercy of laymen. Your father,
who
arrived, through God's blessing, at maturer years, was in the
habit
of saying, 'I have no right to judge between bishops;' but now
your
Majesty says, 'I ought to judge.' He, even though baptized
into
Christ's body, thought himself unequal to the burden of such a
judgment; your Majesty, who still have to earn a title to the
sacrament, claims to judge in a matter of faith, though you
are a
stranger to the sacrament to which that faith belongs.
“But Ambrose is not of such value, that he must degrade the
priesthood for his own well-being. One man's life is not so
precious as the dignity of all those bishops who have advised
me
thus to write; and who suggested that Auxentius might be
choosing
some heathen perhaps or Jew, whose permission to decide about
Christ would be a permission to triumph over Him. What would
pleasure them but blasphemies against Him? What would satisfy
them
but the impious denial of His divinity—agreeing, as they do,
full
well with the Arian, who pronounces Christ to be a creature
with
the ready concurrence of Jews and heathens?
“I would have come to your Majesty's Court, to offer these
remarks
in your presence; but neither my bishops nor my people would
let
me; for they said that, when matters of faith were discussed
in the
Church, this should be in the presence of the people.
“I could have wished your Majesty had not told me to betake
myself
to exile somewhere. I was abroad every day; no one guarded me.
I
was at the mercy of all the world; you should have secured my
departure to a place of your own choosing. Now the priests say
to
me, 'There is little difference between voluntarily leaving
and
betraying the altar of Christ; for when you leave, you betray
it.'
“May it please your Majesty graciously to accept this my
declining
to appear in the Imperial Court. I am not practised in
attending
it, except in your behalf; nor have I the skill to strive for
victory within the palace, as neither knowing, nor caring to
know,
its secrets.”—Ep. 21.
The reader will observe an allusion in the last sentence of this
defence to a service Ambrose had rendered the Emperor and his mother,
upon the murder of Gratian; when, at the request of Justina, he
undertook the difficult embassy to the usurper Maximus, and was the
means of preserving the peace of Italy. This Maximus now interfered to
defend him against the parties whom he had on a former occasion
defended against Maximus; but other and more remarkable occurrences
interposed in his behalf, which shall be mentioned in the next section.
FOOTNOTES:
[364] Vid. 2 [4] Kings vi. 32.
[365] The Arian bishop, who had lately come from the East to Milan,
had taken the name of Auxentius, the heretical predecessor of Ambrose.