A. D.

406.

Par. 4.
Birth-place

of Vigilan-
tius.

p. 394.

to the flippant charge of conferring ordination on those only who had pregnant wives or squalling infants. The extravagance of such odious language convicts Jerome of falsehood.

In the fourth paragraph of the Treatise we have an account of the origin and birthplace of Vigilantius, with an incidental sentence which informs us, that he did not confine his endeavours to reform the church to his own locality, but that he visited various parts of Gaul with this object in view. 'He invaded the churches of Gaul,' said Jerome, ' and instead of the standard of the cross he carried

Jerome were silenced, and their written remonstrances suppressed. In an age remarkable for its controversies, when almost every bishop took part in the discussions of the day, not even the names of those who protested against the false miracles of Martin, and of those who supported Vigilantius in his proposed reforms, have been preserved. All we know is, that the following contemporary bishops presided over Gallic dioceses, at no great distance from that in which Vigilantius officiated: Sedonius, at Aix.

Amandus, at Bordeaux.
Jacobus, at Ambrun.
Hilarius, at Narbonne.
Exuperius, at Tholouse.
Simplicius, at Vienne.
Proculus, at Marseilles.
Elpidius, at Lyons.
Crocus, at Nismes.

Diogenianus, at Albi.
Quintinus, at Apt.
Constantius, at Orange.
Paulinus, at Beziers.

Alitheus, at Cahors,
Constantinus, at Die.
Vincentius, at Digne.
Domnianus, at Grenoble.

-See Gallia Christiana.

• Et nunc, cum maxime discordiis episcoporum turbari aut misceri omnia cernerentur, cunctaque per eos odio aut gratia, metu, inconstantia, invidia, factione, libidine, avaritia, arrogantia, somno, desidiâ essent depravata: postremo plures adversum paucos bene consulentes, insanis consiliis et pertinacibus studiis certabant : inter hæc plebs Dei, et optimus quisque probro atque ludibrio habebatur.' Such is the testimony given by Sulpicius Severus: (Sacr. Hist. lib. 2. c. 80) who in the midst of the severest reflections, admits that the majority of Gallic bishops opposed the innovations of a few like himself.

the banner of the devil.' Such is the monk's lan-
guage to express our presbyter's honest attempt
to remove superstitious rites and observances-
'the very master-piece of Satan'-from the church,
and to restore the ensign of the gospel of Christ,
where it had been removed, or hidden beneath
relics, and tapers, and doubtful signs, and symbols
of holiness. It was for this purpose that Vigilantius
went from church to church (a fact which happily
comes out, albeit in the midst of Jerome's vilifi-
cations), conferred with bishops, gave and took
counsel, and made such an impression, not only in
his own neighbourhood, but far and wide, that
Riparius and Desiderius, despairing of any oppo-
sition to him on the part of the Gallic bishops,
implored Jerome to take up the matter, and to put
down the troublesome reformer. The fact, of
calling on a champion in the East to vindicate the
cause of the corrupt church against its impugners
in the West, is of itself a proof that Vigilantius
and his doctrine were in favour from the Pyrenees
to the Alps.

It was at the foot of the Pyrenees, as this paragraph tells us, in the village of Calagorris (so called because it was originally built by a band of insurgents or robbers, whom Pompey forced to leave their native place, Calagorris in Spain), that Vigilantius was born and brought up, and in or near which he was residing, in the character of a parish priest, as we learn from the seventh paragraph of the Treatise * (since you

A. D. 406.

A. D.

406.

Relic wor

ship. p. 395.

dwell at the roots of the Pyrenees), when Jerome assailed him. The name of his native village, Calagorris, has led to the mistake of supposing Vigilantius to be a Spaniard by birth, although Jerome spoke of him distinctly as a home-born enemy of Gaul.* Baronius was confused by it; and De Marca, and after him Pagi, took pains to rectify the error by copious notes on the subject.†

This paragraph contains two or three extracts from the book of Vigilantius, and enables us to determine whether, with such specimens of style and matter before us, we can pronounce with Jerome that the Pyrenean presbyter was either a blasphemer or a fool, unskilled in speaking, devoid of information, and unpolished in elocution.

'What obligation is there either to honour with so much reverence, or to adore that, I know not what to call it, which you carry about with you in a little bor to worship ?

The reader must observe that it was undue honour, the honour of adoration, to which Vigilantius objected, and not the decent respect, due to the remains of the pious.

Why do you kiss in adoration the ashes which are folded up in a linen cloth? Under the pretext of religion, we see a custom introduced into the church, which is almost heathen, viz. the lighting up of a multitude of tapers, while the sun is yet shining, and people are kissing and adoring a small

* Galliæ vernaculum hostem sustinent,' p. 394.
+ See the treatise of De Marca, at the end of this chapter.

quantity of dust, I know not whose,* in a little box
folded up in costly linen.' The word used by Vigi-
lantius was pulvisculum, a small quantity of dust.
(p. 395.) He meant to speak of the doubtful
character of these minute particles. Paulinus tells
us (see supra, 54), that it was the custom to en-
shrine the smallest speck, even a grain or scruple
of sacred dust; and the story of St. Martin (see
supra, p. 146), proving the honoured remains of a
supposed saint to be nothing more than the bones
of a robber, who had been executed for his crimes,
shows that Vigilantius was justified in expressing
his disapprobation of the undue honours paid to
the ashes of they knew not whom. But this
surely was not calling the ashes of the martyrs
'worthless dust,' unclean cinders,' or trampling
upon them,' or
or proposing that they should be
'thrown upon the dunghill,' as Jerome insinuates,
in the course of this treatise. If such, then, was
Jerome's disingenuous use of his adversary's argu-
ment, and the distortion of his words in one place,
are we rash in contending that he misrepresented
him altogether?

'These are the men who think they are doing great honour with their paltry wax-tapers to the blessed martyrs, whom the Lamb in the midst of the throne illumines with all the brightness of his majesty.'

*

Vigilantius might well say this. Jerome was among those, who pretended that the bodies of the four virgin daughters of Philip the Evangelist were still to be seen at Cæsarea.'- Hier. Op. 4. pars ii. p. 673.

A. D. 406.

A. D.

406.

These sentences lose much of their original force by being translated into English; but even so, do they not exhibit a command of diction, which justified the honest criticism of Gennadius, and the favourable opinion of Erasmus?* And do they not convince us that a writer, who so spoke the language of true veneration and faith, in regard to beatified spirits, was not likely to utter a word in disrespect of the blessed martyrs?

Vigilantius evidently had those beautiful passages of Isaiah and the Apocalypse in his recollection, when he spoke of the Lamb being the light of his saints. "The sun shall be no more thy light by day, neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee: but the Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light, and thy God thy glory." Isaiah lx. 19.

"And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon to shine in it; for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.' Rev. xxi. 23.

"And they need no candle, neither light of the sun, for the Lord God giveth them light." Rev. xxvii. 5.

The same thought which Vigilantius expressed so ably in prose, is thus rendered into verse in Heber's Palestine.

Nor sun nor moon they need, nor day nor night,
God is their temple, and the Lamb their light.'

* See supra, p. 357, Homo lingua politus.'-' Attamen quæ citat Hieronymus mediocrem dicendi mundiciem præ se ferunt.'-Erasm.