AMBROSE SAY ABOUT IT?
§ 1. Ambrose and Justina.
No considerate person will deny that there is much in the spirit of
the times, and in the actual changes which the British Constitution has
lately undergone, which makes it probable, or not improbable, that a
material alteration will soon take place in the relations of the Church
towards the State, to which it has been hitherto united. I do not say
that it is out of the question that things may return to their former
quiet and pleasant course, as in the good old time of King George III.;
but the very chance that they will not makes it a practical concern for
every churchman to prepare himself for a change, and a practical
question for the clergy, by what instruments the authority of Religion
is to be supported, should the protection and patronage of the
Government be withdrawn. Truth, indeed, will always support itself in
the world by its native vigour; it will never die while heaven and
earth last, but be handed down from saint to saint until the end of all
things. But this was the case before our Lord came, and is still the
case, as we may humbly trust, in heathen countries. My question
concerns the Church, that peculiar institution which Christ set
up as a visible home and memorial of Truth; and which, as being in this
world, must be manifested by means of this world. I know it is common
to make light of this solicitude about the Church, under the notion
that the Gospel may be propagated without it,—or that men are about
the same under every Dispensation, their hearts being in fault, and not
their circumstances,—or for other reasons, better or worse as it may
be; to all which I am accustomed to answer (and I do not see how I can
be in error), that, if Christ had not meant His Church to answer a
purpose, He would not have set it up, and that our business is not to
speculate about possible Dispensations of Religion, but to resign and
devote ourselves to that in which we are actually placed.
Hitherto the English Church has depended on the State, i. e.
on the ruling powers in the country—the king and the aristocracy; and
this is so natural and religious a position of things when viewed in
the abstract, and in its actual working has been productive of such
excellent fruits in the Church, such quietness, such sobriety, such
external propriety of conduct, and such freedom from doctrinal
excesses, that we must ever look back upon the period of ecclesiastical
history so characterized with affectionate thoughts; particularly on
the reigns of our blessed martyr St. Charles, and King George the Good.
But these recollections of the past must not engross our minds, or
hinder us from looking at things as they are, and as they will be soon,
and from inquiring what is intended by Providence to take the place of
the time-honoured instrument, which He has broken (if it be yet
broken), the regal and aristocratical power. I shall offend many men
when I say, we must look to the people; but let them give me a
hearing.
Well can I understand their feelings. Who at first sight does not
dislike the thoughts of gentlemen and clergymen depending for their
maintenance and their reputation on their flocks? of their strength, as
a visible power, lying not in their birth, the patronage of the great,
and the endowment of the Church (as hitherto), but in the homage of a
multitude? I confess I have before now had a great repugnance to the
notion myself; and if I have overcome it, and turned from the
Government to the People, it has been simply because I was forced to do
so. It is not we who desert the Government, but the Government that has
left us; we are forced back upon those below us, because those above us
will not honour us; there is no help for it, I say. But, in truth, the
prospect is not so bad as it seems at first sight. The chief and
obvious objection to the clergy being thrown on the People, lies in the
probable lowering of Christian views, and the adulation of the vulgar,
which would be its consequence; and the state of Dissenters is appealed
to as an evidence of the danger. But let us recollect that we are an
apostolical body; we were not made, nor can be unmade by our flocks;
and if our influence is to depend on them, yet the Sacraments
reside with us. We have that with us, which none but ourselves
possess, the mantle of the Apostles; and this, properly understood and
cherished, will ever keep us from being the creatures of a populace.
And what may become necessary in time to come, is a more religious
state of things also. It will not be denied that, according to the
Scripture view of the Church, though all are admitted into her pale,
and the rich inclusively, yet, the poor are her members with a peculiar
suitableness, and by a special right. Scripture is ever casting slurs
upon wealth, and making much of poverty. “To the poor the Gospel is
preached.” “God hath chosen the poor of this world, rich in faith and
heirs of the kingdom.” “If thou wilt be perfect, sell all that thou
hast, and give to the poor.” To this must be added the undeniable fact
that the Church, when purest and when most powerful, has
depended for its influence on its consideration with the many. Becket's
letters, lately published,[363] have struck me not a little; but of
course I now refer, not to such dark ages as most Englishmen consider
these, but to the primitive Church—the Church of St. Athanasius and
St. Ambrose. With a view of showing the power of the Church at that
time, and on what it was based, not (as Protestants imagine) on
governments, or on human law, or on endowments, but on popular
enthusiasm, on dogma, on hierarchical power, and on a supernatural
Divine Presence, I will now give some account of certain ecclesiastical
proceedings in the city of Milan in the years 385, 386,—Ambrose being
bishop, and Justina and her son, the younger Valentinian, the reigning
powers.
1.
Ambrose was eminently a popular bishop, as every one knows who has
read ever so little of his history. His very promotion to the sacred
office was owing to an unexpected movement of the populace. Auxentius,
his Arian predecessor in the see of Milan, died, A.D. 374, upon which
the bishops of the province wrote to the then Emperor, Valentinian the
First, who was in Gaul, requesting him to name the person who was to
succeed him. This was a prudent step on their part, Arianism having
introduced such matter for discord and faction among the Milanese, that
it was dangerous to submit the election to the people at large, though
the majority of them were orthodox. Valentinian, however, declined to
avail himself of the permission thus given him; the choice was thrown
upon the voices of the people, and the cathedral, which was the place
of assembling, was soon a scene of disgraceful uproar, as the bishops
had anticipated. Ambrose was at that time civil governor of the
province of which Milan was the capital: and, the tumult increasing, he
was obliged to interfere in person, with a view of preventing its
ending in open sedition. He was a man of grave character, and had been
in youth brought up with a sister, who had devoted herself to the
service of God in a single life; but as yet was only a catechumen,
though he was half way between thirty and forty. Arrived at the scene
of tumult, he addressed the assembled crowds, exhorting them to peace
and order. While he was speaking, a child's voice, as is reported, was
heard in the midst of the crowd to say, “Ambrose is bishop;” the
populace took up the cry, and both parties in the Church, Catholic and
Arian, whether influenced by a sudden enthusiasm, or willing to take a
man who was unconnected with party, voted unanimously for the election
of Ambrose.
It is not wonderful that the subject of this sudden decision should
have been unwilling to quit his civil office for a station of such high
responsibility; for many days he fought against the popular voice, and
that by the most extravagant expedients. He absconded, and was not
recovered till the Emperor, confirming the act of the people of Milan,
published an edict against all who should conceal him. Under these
strange circumstances, Ambrose was at length consecrated bishop. His
ordination was canonical only on the supposition that it came under
those rare exceptions, for which the rules of the Church allow, when
they speak of election “by divine grace,” by the immediate suggestion
of God; and if ever a bishop's character and works might be appealed to
as evidence of the divine purpose, surely Ambrose was the subject of
that singular and extraordinary favour. From the time of his call he
devoted his life and abilities to the service of Christ. He bestowed
his personal property on the poor: his lands on the Church; making his
sister tenant for life. Next he gave himself up to the peculiar studies
necessary for the due execution of his high duties, till he gained that
deep insight into Catholic truth, which is evidenced in his writings,
and in no common measure in relation to Arianism, which had been the
dominant creed in Milan for the twenty years preceding his elevation.
Basil of Cæsarea, in Cappadocia, was at this time the main pillar of
Catholic truth in the East, having succeeded Athanasius of Alexandria,
who died about the time that both Basil and Ambrose were advanced to
their respective sees. He, from his see in the far East, addresses the
new bishop in these words in an extant Epistle:—
“Proceed in thy work, thou man of God; and since thou hast not
received the Gospel of Christ of men, neither wast taught it,
but
the Lord himself translated thee from among the world's judges
to
the chair of the Apostles, fight the good fight, set right the
infirmities of the people, wherever the Arian madness has
affected
them; renew the old foot-prints of the Fathers, and by
frequent
correspondence build up thy love towards us, of which thou
hast
already laid the foundation.”—Ep. 197.
I just now mentioned St. Thomas Becket. There is at once a
similarity and a contrast between his history and that of Ambrose. Each
of the two was by education and society what would now be called a
gentleman. Each was in high civil station when he was raised to a great
ecclesiastical position; each was in middle age. Each had led an
upright, virtuous life before his elevation; and each, on being
elevated, changed it for a life of extraordinary penance and saintly
devotion. Each was promoted to his high place by the act, direct or
concurrent, of his sovereign; and each showed to that sovereign in the
most emphatic way that a bishop was the servant, not of man, but of the
Lord of heaven and earth. Each boldly confronted his sovereign in a
great religious quarrel, and staked his life on its issue;—but then
comes the contrast, for Becket's earthly master was as resolute in his
opposition to the Church as Becket was in its behalf, and made him a
martyr; whereas the Imperial Power of Rome quailed and gave way before
the dauntless bearing and the grave and gracious presence of the great
prelate of Milan. Indeed, the whole Pontificate of Ambrose is a history
of successive victories of the Church over the State; but I shall limit
myself to a bare outline of one of them.
2.
Ambrose had presided in his see about eleven years at the time when
the events took place which are here to be related. Valentinian was
dead, as well as his eldest son Gratian. His second son, who bore his
own name, was Emperor of the West, under the tutelage of Justina, his
second wife.
Justina was an Arian, and brought up her son in her own heretical
views. This was about the time when the heresy was finally subdued in
the Eastern Churches; the Ecumenical Council of Constantinople had
lately been held, many Arian bishops had conformed, and laws had been
passed by Theodosius against those who held out. It was natural under
such circumstances that a number of the latter should flock to the
court of Milan for protection and patronage. The Gothic officers of the
palace were Arians also, as might be supposed, after the creed of their
nation. At length they obtained a bishop of their persuasion from the
East; and having now the form of an ecclesiastical body, they used the
influence of Valentinian, or rather of his mother, to extort from
Ambrose one of the churches of Milan for their worship.
The bishop was summoned to the palace before the assembled Court,
and was formally asked to relinquish St. Victor's Church, then called
the Portian Basilica, which was without the walls, for the Arian
worship. His duty was plain; the churches were the property of Christ;
he was the representative of Christ, and was therefore bound not to
cede what was committed to him in trust. This is the account of the
matter given by himself in the course of the dispute:—
“Do not,” he says, “O Emperor, embarrass yourself with the
thought
that you have an Emperor's right over sacred things. Exalt not
yourself, but, as you would enjoy a continuance of power, be
God's
subject. It is written, God's to God, and Cæsar's to Cæsar.
The
palace is the Emperor's, the churches are the bishop's.”—
Ep. 20.
This argument, which is true at all times, was much more convincing
in an age like the primitive, before men had begun to deny that Christ
had left a visible representative of Himself in His Church. If there
was a body to whom the concerns of religion were intrusted, there could
be no doubt it was that over which Ambrose presided. It had been there
planted ever since Milan became Christian, its ministers were descended
from the Apostles, and it was the legitimate trustee of the sacred
property. But in our day men have been taught to doubt whether there
is one Apostolic Church, though it is mentioned in the Creed: nay,
it is grievous to say, clergymen have sometimes forgotten, sometimes
made light of their own privileges. Accordingly, when a question arises
now about the spoliation of the Church, we are obliged to betake
ourselves to the rules of national law; we appeal to precedents,
or we urge the civil consequences of the measure, or we use other
arguments, which, good as they may be, are too refined to be very
popular. Ambrose rested his resistance on grounds which the people
understood at once, and recognized as irrefragable. They felt that he
was only refusing to surrender a trust. They rose in a body, and
thronged the palace gates. A company of soldiers was sent to disperse
them; and a riot was on the point of ensuing, when the ministers of the
Court became alarmed, and despatched Ambrose to appease the tumult,
with the pledge that no further attempt should be made on the
possessions of the Church.
Now some reader will here interrupt the narrative, perhaps, with
something of an indignant burst about connecting the cause of religion
with mobs and outbreaks. To whom I would reply, that the multitude of
men is always rude and intemperate, and needs restraint,—religion does
not make them so. But being so, it is better they should be zealous
about religion, and repressed by religion, as in this case, than flow
and ebb again under the irrational influences of this world. A mob,
indeed, is always wayward and faithless; but it is a good sign when it
is susceptible of the hopes and fears of the world to come. Is it not
probable that, when religion is thus a popular subject, it may
penetrate, soften, or stimulate hearts which otherwise would know
nothing of its power? However, this is not, properly speaking, my
present point, which is to show how a Church may be in “favour with all
the people” without any subserviency to them. To return to our history.
3.
Justina, failing to intimidate, made various underhand attempts to
remove the champion of orthodoxy. She endeavoured to raise the people
against him. Failing in this object, next, by scattering promises of
place and promotion, she set on foot various projects to seize him in
church, and carry him off into banishment. One man went so far as to
take lodgings near the church, and had a carriage in readiness, in
order to avail himself of any opportunity which offered to convey him
away. But none of these attempts succeeded.
This was in the month of March; as Easter drew on, more vigorous
steps were taken by the Court. On April 4th, the Friday before Palm
Sunday, the demand of a church for the Arians was renewed; the pledges
which the government had given, that no further steps should be taken
in the matter, being perhaps evaded by changing the church which was
demanded. Ambrose was now asked for the New or Roman Basilica, which
was within the walls, and larger than the Portian. It was dedicated to
the Apostles, and (I may add, for the sake of the antiquarian,) was
built in the form of a cross. When the bishop refused in the same
language as before, the imperial minister returned to the demand of the
Portian Church; but the people interfering, and being clamorous against
the proposal, he was obliged to retire to the palace to report how
matters stood.
On Palm Sunday, after the lessons and sermon were over in the
Basilica, in which he officiated, Ambrose was engaged in teaching the
creed to the candidates for baptism, who, as was customary, had been
catechized during Lent, and were to be admitted into the Church on the
night before Easter-day. News was brought him that the officers of the
Court had taken possession of the Portian Church, and were arranging
the imperial hangings in token of its being confiscated to the Emperor;
on the other hand, that the people were flocking thither. Ambrose
continued the service of the day; but, when he was in the midst of the
celebration of the Eucharistical rite, a second message came that one
of the Arian priests was in the hands of the populace.
“On this news (he says, writing to his sister,) I could not
keep
from shedding many bitter tears, and, while I made oblation, I
prayed God's protection that no blood might be shed in the
Church's
quarrel: or if so, that it might be mine, and that not for my
people only, but for those heretics.”—Ep. 20.
At the same time he despatched some of his clergy to the spot, who
had influence enough to rescue the unfortunate man from the mob.
Though Ambrose so far seems to have been supported only by a popular
movement, yet the proceedings of the following week showed that he had
also the great mass of respectable citizens on his side. The imprudent
measures of the Court, in punishing those whom it considered its
enemies, disclosed to the world their number and importance. The
tradesmen of the city were fined two hundred pounds of gold, and many
were thrown into prison. All the officers, moreover, and place-men of
the courts of justice, were ordered to keep in-doors during the
continuance of the disorders; and men of higher rank were menaced with
severe consequences, unless the Basilica were surrendered.
Such were the acts by which the Imperial Court solemnized Passion
week. At length a fresh interview was sought with Ambrose, which shall
be described in his own words:—
“I had a meeting with the counts and tribunes, who urged me to
give
up the Basilica without delay, on the ground that the Emperor
was
but acting on his undoubted rights, as possessing sovereign
power
over all things. I made answer, that if he asked me for what
was my
own—for instance, my estate, my money, or the like—I would
make
no opposition: though, to tell the truth, all that was mine
was the
property of the poor; but that he had no sovereignty over
things
sacred. If my patrimony is demanded, seize upon it; my person,
here
I am. Would you take to prison or to death? I go with
pleasure. Far
be it from me to entrench myself within the circle of a
multitude,
or to clasp the altar in supplication for my life; rather I
will be
a sacrifice for the altar's sake.
“In good truth, when I heard that soldiers were sent to take
possession of the Basilica, I was horrified at the prospect of
bloodshed, which might issue in ruin to the whole city. I
prayed
God that I might not survive the destruction, which might
ensue, of
such a place, nay, of Italy itself. I shrank from the odium of
having occasioned slaughter, and would sooner have given my
own
throat to the knife.... I was ordered to calm the people. I
replied, that all I could do was not to inflame them; but God
alone
could appease them. For myself, if I appeared to have
instigated
them, it was the duty of the government to proceed against me,
or
to banish me. Upon this they left me.”
Ambrose spent the rest of Palm Sunday in the same Basilica in which
he had been officiating in the morning: at night he went to his own
house, that the civil power might have the opportunity of arresting
him, if it was thought advisable.
4.
The attempt to gain the Portian seems now to have been dropped; but
on the Wednesday troops were marched before day-break to take
possession of the New Church, which was within the walls. Ambrose, upon
the news of this fresh movement, used the weapons of an apostle. He did
not seek to disturb them in their possession; but, attending service at
his own church, he was content with threatening the soldiers with a
sentence of excommunication. Meanwhile the New Church, where the
soldiers were posted, began to fill with a larger congregation than it
ever contained before the persecution. Ambrose was requested to go
thither, but, desirous of drawing the people away from the scene of
imperial tyranny, lest a riot should ensue, he remained where he was,
and began a comment on the lesson of the day, which was from the book
of Job. First, he commended them for the Christian patience and
resignation with which they had hitherto borne their trial, which
indeed was, on the whole, surprising, if we consider the inflammable
nature of a multitude. “We petition your Majesty,” they said to the
Emperor; “we use no force, we feel no fear, but we petition.” It is
common in the leader of a multitude to profess peaceableness, but very
unusual for the multitude itself to persevere in doing so. Ambrose went
on to observe, that both they and he had in their way been tempted, as
Job was, by the powers of evil. For himself, his peculiar trial had
lain in the reflection that the extraordinary measures of the
government, the movements of the Gothic guards, the fines of the
tradesmen, the various sufferings of the faithful, all arose from, as
it might be called, his obstinacy in not yielding to what seemed an
overwhelming necessity, and giving the Basilica to the Arians. Yet he
felt that to do so would be to peril his soul; so that the request was
but the voice of the tempter, as he spoke in Job's wife, to make him
“say a word against God, and die,” to betray his trust, and incur the
sentence of spiritual death.
Before this time the soldiers who had been sent to the New Church,
from dread of the threat of excommunication, had declared against the
sacrilege, and joined his own congregation; and now the news came that
the royal hangings had been taken down. Soon after, as he was
continuing his address to the people, a fresh message came to him from
the Court to ask him whether he had an intention of domineering over
his sovereign? Ambrose, in answer, showed the pains he had taken to be
obedient to the Emperor's will, and to hinder disturbance: then he
added:—
“Priests have by old right bestowed sovereignty, never assumed
it;
and it is a common saying, that sovereigns have coveted the
priesthood more than priests the sovereignty. Christ hid
Himself,
lest He should be made a king. Yes! we have a dominion of our
own.
The dominion of the priest lies in his helplessness, as it is
said,
'When I am weak, then am I strong.'”
And so ended the dispute for a time. On Good Friday the Court gave
way; the guards were ordered from the Basilica, and the fines were
remitted. I end for the present with the view which Ambrose took of the
prospect before him:—
“Thus the matter rests; I wish I could say, has ended: but the
Emperor's words are of that angry sort which shows that a more
severe contest is in store. He says I domineer, or worse than
domineer. He implied this when his ministers were entreating
him,
on the petition of the soldiers, to attend church. 'Should
Ambrose
bid you,' he made answer, 'doubtless you would give me to him
in
chains.' I leave you to judge what these words promise.
Persons
present were all shocked at hearing them; but there are
parties who
exasperate him.”
FOOTNOTES:
[363] Vid. British Magazine, 1832, etc. And Froude's Remains,
part II, vol. ii.