CHAP. I. The Occaſion of this Eſſay.

THE Duke of Schomberg, whom I had the Honour to ſerve as Chaplain, arrived at Turin the 18th of July, 1691. He found the State of Affairs there in a bad Poſture, and the People in a great Conſternation. The French had lately Fortified Carmagnole. Coni was Beſieg'd and given over for loſt. Monſieur la Hoguette had forced the Paſſages of the Valley of Aoſte, which gave him entrance into the Country of Verceil and the Frontiers of the Milaneſe. Our Army inſtead of making ſome motion to diſturb the Enemy, Incamped upon the Deſcent of Mountcallier, being Spectators of the waſte and burning of the Plains below. Turin dreaded every hour being inveſted. There was an univerſal fear; and the retreat of the Princeſſes to Verceil added yet more to the terrour of the Inhabitants. The Favourers of France gave out publickly that his Royal Highneſs would unavoidably be ſtripp'd, this Campaigne, of all his Territories, and that he had no way left, but to ſubmit to the King's mercy.

Certain it is, that without that firmneſs and greatneſs of Soul which his Royal Highneſs ſhewed on this occaſion, all had then been loſt; and though the beginning of his Reign ſeems to prognoſticate a ſeries of Heroick Actions, yet this part of his Hiſtory will be none of the leſs Illuſtrious. Emmanuel Philibert, oppreſſed during the Wars between Charles the V. and Francis the I. ſunk at laſt under the weight of his Misfortunes. He had the weakneſs to take upon him the Name of St. Mark's Son; and that he might be aſſiſted by the Venetians, he Sacrificed to that Republick the prcedency he had in all the Courts of Europe. The Affairs of his now Royal Highneſs were almoſt as deſperate: Nevertheleſs a manly and undaunted Air did always appear on the Face, and in the meen of this young Hero. Neither the Propoſals of France, joined with Italian craft, the bad Condition of his Troops, the exhauſting of his Treaſury, nor the Enemies Army Incamping in the Plain of Millefleurs, a League diſtant from Turin, could ever raiſe in him the leaſt degenerate Thought. And it may be ſaid that his Conſtancy and ſteddineſs bore up againſt his ill Fortune, and that himſelf put a ſtop to the deſperate Condition of his Affairs.

The Duke of Schomberg came to him in this dangerous juncture; and did by his Example and Counſels confirm his Royal Highneſſes's Reſolutions. Two or three days after his Arrival, waiting on the Prince on Horſe back to obſerve the French Army, which had then paſs'd the River Pô, and was incamped between Carmagnolle and Mountcallier; Duke Schomberg ſpeaking High-German to one of the Guards of that Nation, his Royal Highneſs declared his deſire to Learn that Language, adding that he had attempted it two or three times, but was always diſcouraged by the difficulty he found in it; which gave occaſion to Duke Schomberg to offer his aſſiſtance, and to be his Maſter. The Prince reply'd that others might Inſtruct him in the German Tongue, but that it was the Art of War that he deſired to Learn of him. A viſible change was ſoon perceived in the State of Affairs. Our Infantry which was poſted on the riſing Ground of Mountcallier, came down to the Foot of the Hill. Our Horſe ſtretched on the Plain where the Enemies were Incamped, and cauſed the Siege of Coni to be raiſed, and forced Catinat to retire, which freed the City of Turin from their Allarm.

The Wiſdom and Valour of his Royal Highneſs were juſtly praiſed. And publick Prayers were made to bleſs God for having averted the Storm, and removed in a great meaſure the ſad apprehenſions they had lain under. And thus far all things went right. But to ſpeak freely, I could not ſee without grief, a part of that Incenſe, the Smoak whereof ought wholly to have aſcended to the Glory of the Lord of Hoſts, burnt to the Honour of the Thebean Souldiers. I was preſent at my return from the Compaign, at a Sermon Preached by a Jeſuite in the Church of the Old Colledge, on the Holy-day kept in Honour of the Thebean Souldiers, Solutor, Adventor and Octavius, to whoſe Memory this Church is Dedicated; and to whom the City of Turin pays veneration as to their Patrons: O People of Turin (ſaid the Preacher above a hundred times) O people of Turin, bleſs your deliverers! Bleſs theſe Sacred Martyrs who watch for your ſafety, and whoſe Merits and Prayers have preſerved your City, your Families, and Eſtates. I ſaw afterwards all the Religious Orders, and the Confraternities or Brotherhoods come to the Feet of the Altars, where the Reliques of theſe Souldiers are depoſited, to receive, what the Romiſh-Church calls, the Bleſſing.

This occaſioned the firſt deſire I had to examine the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, as ſoon as I could have both time and Books neceſſary for that purpoſe. And that which further moved me to do it, was my being afterwards an Eye-witneſs of the Church-Service which the Magiſtrates of the Town ordered to be performed on the 20th of Jan. 1693. for the diſcharge of a Vow they had made in Honour of the Thebean Souldiers, which, by reaſon of ſome difficulties, they had not been able ſooner to perform.

The Reliques of the Thebean Souldiers were ſet in the Church of the Jeſuits, upon a Throne covered with a Golden Brocado, illuminated with an infinite number of White-wax-tapers. The Archbiſhop accompany'd with the whole Chapter, came and Officiated in his Pontifical Habit. The Court was preſent at this Solemn Service, and adored the Urn in which theſe Sacred Corpſes were (for ſo they are Styl'd by the Jeſuit, who Printed a Relation of the Ceremony) Indi ſopravenne la Corte, e s'eſpoſe alla publica Ferrero. p. 205. Adorazione l' Urna de' Sacri Corpi All the Orders, the Monks and Fryers, all the Confraternities, the White, Blue, Black, Red, and Gray Penitents, came in Proceſſion to adore the Sacred Shrine, which contains the Fate and Hopes of their City. Towards the Evening it was carried about from the Church on Mens ſhoulders under a rich Canopy of State, ſupported by four Perſons of the firſt Quality. The Canopy was attended by twelve Knights of St. Mauritius and of St. Lazarus, appointed by their Order for that performance. The moſt part of the Nobility and Gentry of the Town followed with lighted Wax-Torches, and almoſt all the People, of what Rank and Condition ſoever, flocked thither to Worſhip the pretended Reliques of their Protectors.

I withdrew my ſelf, not a little concern'd to ſee the Devotion of all ſorts of People, applied to the Honour of the Saints, when it ſhould have been wholly directed to the Glory of God, the only Author of their Deliverance, and preſent ſafety. And my grief was heightned, by a Senſe of gratitude to a People that had ſhewed ſo much good Nature to me a Stranger, and a Proteſtant Miniſter; which Character, though odious to all the reſt of Italy, yet was in nothing prejudicial to me during two Years that I Preached there. Though I confeſs the Kindneſſes I received were owing moſt to the great eſteem they had for the Duke of Schomberg, and eſpecially to the great regard they have there for the Engliſh Nation, whoſe Valour and Power are as rightly underſtood there at this time, as in the reſt of Europe. But I cannot, without, ingratitude forbear here giving to the Inhabitants of Turin their due, which is, that they are extreamly Courteous and Civil to Strangers, and partake of the Politeneſs of the Court of Savoy, which hath been for a long time lookt upon as one of the moſt Poliſhed and Civilized, and where Converſation is juſtly tempered, between the Liberties of Paris, and the Reſtraint of Florencc.

Since then it is neither out of unthankfulneſs, nor for want of reſpect for the City of Turin, but out of meer Love to Truth, and as a Duty incumbent on my Function, that I do Attack their Patrons in this Work of mine, no body I hope will take any offence at my deſign. Morever, as this whole buſineſs depends on Proofs; if they are frivolous, the Thebean Souldiers will ſtill peaceably enjoy the Glory of their Martyrdom; but if they prove good, it will be ſome Service to have undeceived the World in this matter. Now I deſire this Juſtice may be done me, that my Thoughts may not be miſinterpreted, nor a conſtruction put upon them, which I do not deſign. For I know ſome Proteſtants do make uſe of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion to back ſome other queſtions, which are not at all to my preſent Deſign, nor proper for one in my circumſtances to meddle with. Thoſe who are acquainted with my Temper will believe me in this point. And I have always applyed to my ſelf this wiſe ſaying, Exul tace.

CHAP. II. That both the Court and City of Turin have been Ancient Worſhippers of the Thebean Souldiers.

GReat Honour and Reverence have been paid for a long time at Turin to the Thebean Souldiers. And the general Opinion is, that they have ſignaliz'd themſelves there by a great number of Miracles. Hyacinto Ferrero, a Jeſuit, relates, that by their means, Conſtantine the Great got that memorable Victory which opened him the way both to Rome and to the Empire. He ſaith, that when he conſiders that the Battel was Fought in the Neighbourhood of Turin, he cannot but believe that the Flying Squadron which was then ſeen in the Air, and cry'd to Conſtantine, Carolo Hyacinto Ferrero vita de' primi Protettori, &c. pag. 72. n'andiamo a ſoccorſo di Coſtantino, were thoſe Thebean Souldiers ſlain by Maximian, who were Arm'd by Heav'n on this occaſion; to cauſe the true Chriſtian Religion to Triumph, which that Tyrant had endeavoured to deſtroy. If after the riſe of Conſtantine to the Empire, Paganiſm began to fall, and if the Progreſs of the Goſpel in Turin went ſo ſucceſsfully on, and with ſo much rapidity, that in a ſhort time ſeveral Churches, Ferrero pag. 76. Tuttoſi deve al Sangue a' Miracoli, alle preghie re de' noſtri Benigniſſimi Protettori.and a Biſhop with a numerous Clergy, were ſeen there: All this, adds the ſame Author, was owing to the Blood, Miracles, and Prayers of the Thebean Souldiers. He relates afterwards two or three Adventures, in which the Thebean Souldiers have viſibly ſhewed their watchful care over Turin, and how intent they were to procure Bleſſings from Heaven upon this City. He ſaith, that the Romiſh Religion was in extream danger at Turin at the time when the Famous Claudius Ferrero pag 76. Biſhop of that See endeavoured to aboliſh the Adoration of the Croſs, and of the Sacred Images, and the Worſhipping of Martyrs: And likewiſe ſeveral Years after, when L'Ediguieres entred into Piedmont with an Army of Calviniſts, but that the Thebean Souldiers, by the Merits of their Martyrdom, and the Efficacy of their Prayers, removed the danger, and preſerved that Religion there. But here is ſomething yet more wonderful. The ſame Jeſuite relates, that a General of the Emperour Charles the V. beſieged Turin in the Year 1537. and had taken it infallibly by the ſecret Intelligences he had there, had he cauſed his Souldiers to Scale it at any other place Ferrero. pag. 131. Difeſero in un pericol • eſtremo il Principe e la Città dall' Arme et dall' Ereſia de' Calviniſti.than that which is call'd now the Baſtion of St. George. But that, unluckily for him, the Reliques of the Thebean Souldiers reſted then near the ſame Baſtion; and that when his Men went to get up, they were frighted by the Sparkling Arms and threatning looks of theſe Holy Martyrs, who miraculouſly appeared for the defence of the City.

And perhaps Cardinal de la Rovere ſpoke of this Miracle in a Sermon which he Preached before Emmanuel Philibert, in a certain Solemnity in Honour of the Thebean Souldiers. Theſe are the Saints, Great Prince, ſaid he, who have preſerved Il Card. de Rovere Queſti ſono quei ſanti liquali, Serenſſimo Principe vi hanno reſtituita intie • a queſta fideliſſima Citta veſtra, &c.to you your Loyal City of Turin, and have averted from it the deſolations of War. Theſe are the Saints, O City of Turin! who are the Towers and Bulwarks which have been and ſhall be thy Defence, to the end that thou mayſt remain ſtill a peaceable and a Triumphant Place to thy Prince. Grant us, O ye glorious Saints, that we may always cry out with joy and Devotion, Jacta eſt Pax in virtute veſtra & abundantia in Turribus veſtris.

Charles Emmanuel the Firſt, could not poſſibly have given a greater Teſtimony of his Devotion to thoſe Saints, than by freely giving up to the Valeſians the Town of St. Mauricius, and other places which they had Uſurped from him during the Wars between his Grandfather and Francis the Firſt; upon Condition, that the Valeſians ſhould give him leave to Convey to Turin the Corps of St. Mauricius, Chief of the Thebean Legion, one of whoſe Arms he had already gotten out of Bohemia, whither it was Tranſported in the Year of 1250. by King Ottocarus the Fifth. And 'twas perhaps about that time that St. Mauricius Cromerus de Reb. Pol. l. 3. his Lance, ſpoken of by Chromer, was brought to Cracovia, where it lyes yet expoſed to publick Veneration. I queſtion very much, whether France would now give up Pignerol to the Houſe of Savoy, though that Houſe ſhould proffer in Exchange il Santo ſudario, or the Holy Shroud, notwithſtanding the great Zeal it ptetends to have for the Romiſh Religion, and though this Holy Shroud is look't upon as the moſt Precious Relique of that Religion. But Charles Emmanuel, in the Devotion he had for the Thebean Souldiers, did nothing but tread in the ſteps of Emmanuel Philibert his Father. When the Reliques of theſe Saints were conveyed from the Church of the Bleſſed Virgin into that of the Jeſuites, where they do reſt to this Day, Emmanuel Philibert honoured the Ceremony with his preſence, and was at a great expence towards the Magnificence of it. And this wiſe Prince, knowing well that Saints without Power are ordinarily neglected, and that the giving of Indulgences is a means for them to gain a good Reputation, obtained a conſiderable ſhare of them from Gregory the Thirteenth, for all thoſe who by Offerings and Prayers ſhould ſhew their Devotion to the Thebean Souldiers. His Bull was obtained in the Year 1574. And the Bull Greg. 13. ob eximiam devotionem quam erga eoſdem ſanctos dilectus Filius Emmanuel Phil. Dux ſabaudiae, & univerſus Civitatis Taurinenſis Populus gerunt, &c.Pope expreſſes in it, that he grants theſe Indulgences upon conſideration of the ſingular Devotion, which both the Duke of Savoy and the People of Turin do pay to the Thebean Souldiers.

Charles Emmanuel had ſo great a Zeal for the glory of the Thebean Souldiers, that he imparted to Spain ſome of their Reliques, to the intent they might partake of their Merits and Interceſſion. He charged Charles Broglia, Archbiſhop of Turin, with his Orders concerning it, as appears by the Copy of the Certificate, which, according to the Cuſtom of the Roman Church, was put up with the Reliques, and was Signed in the Month of September 1603. This Archbiſhop ſaith in the ſame Certificate, that he himſelf hath taken a Rib of St. Mauricius's Body, one of St. Secundus's great Toes, three Bones of the Fingers of Solutor, Adventor, and Octavius, and a Leg-bone of one of St. Gerion's Companions. Charles Emmanuel cauſed theſe Reliques to be put in a Silver-gilt Shrine, all ſet with precious Stones, and diſpatch'd Leonardo Roncaſſio his firſt Secretary of State, to preſent it to Margaret of Auſtria Queen of Spain.

All theſe things plainly ſhew the great reſpect and Devotion, that both the Court and City of Turin have long paid to the Martyrs of the Thebean Legion.

CHAP. III. That it is worth ones Labour to examine the Paſſion of the Thebean Souldiers, though it paſſes for current amongſt all ſorts of Chriſtian Societies.

WE ſhall now endeavour to prove, that there were never any ſuch Perſons as theſe Thebean Souldiers, and that the Relation of their Martyrdom, ſaid to have been writ by Eucherius, Biſhop of Lions, is altogether falſe and Counterfeit.

Avia Pieridum peragro loca, nullius ante Trita Solo.

This matter is quite new, and was never handled, for ought I know, by any Author before. Though after ſo many Books written, there is, one would think, hardly any thing in Eccleſiaſtical Antiquity that hath eſcaped the ſtrict Examination of judicious Criticks; ſome Learned Men indeed have ſuſpected the Paſſion of the Thebean Legion to have been a Fiction, but none of them had the Courage to oppoſe an Opinion which they ſaw ſo Univerſally eſtabliſhed.

If general Approbation might be admitted as a Proof, there would be ſcarce any Opinion more Probable than that of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, if we conſider the great number of grave and Learned Authors who have all aſſerted it as an undoubted matter of Fact. Rome, Geneva, the Lutherans, the Church of England, and generally all Chriſtian Societies have given Credit to the Hiſtory of this Legion; and that, no doubt, upon account of the Honour which they imagined the Martyrdom of it did to the Chriſtian Religion, by the wonderfulneſs of the Action, the greatneſs of Soul, and the Glorious Characters of the Perſons that ſuffered.

John Lewis Fabritius relates the Example of the Thebean Legion, in his Learned Diſſertation concerning the juſt Limits of humane obedience, in order to eſtabliſh this ſo important a Maxim in Morality; That we ought always to ſide with God, whenever there is more certainty and evidence in the Prohibitions of God, than in the Ordinances of Princes. Archbiſhop Uſher, a Man of ſo vaſt a knowledge in Eccleſiaſtical Antiquity, fell into the ſame common opinion: And the Martyrdom of the Thebean Souldiers, making for him in his Book of Regal Power, he lays as great a ſtreſs upon it, as if it were a thing of unqueſtionable certainty. The famous Grotius ſpeaks twice of it in his Learned Book, Crot. lib 1. c. 2. & Cap. 11. 11, 12. de jure Pacis & Belli, and makes uſe of it, as that which of all things he leaſt doubted the Truth of. And though ſince the death of theſe two great Men, the exactneſs of Criticiſm upon the Works of the Fathers hath been much improved, yet the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion is ſtill Edward Fuller, the Deſ. of Chriſtian. Sect. 3. c. 16. pag. 187. cryed up amongſt thoſe other popular Errours the World is fallen in Love with. Edward Fuller, Biſhop of Gloceſter, hath made it one of the Ornaments of a very fine Treatiſe, compoſed by him upon the great Deſign of Chriſtianity, which is the Sanctification of Men. And Doctor Dr. Cave, Primitive Chriſt. part 3. c. 4. pag. 331. Cave, one of the Prebends of Windſor, brings in, with great great Pomp, the Hiſtory of this Legion in that Work of his, in which he gives us a very fine Repreſentation both of the Religion and Manners of the Primitive Chriſtians.

There is ſcarcely, I confeſs, any Divine who hath out-done him in the Study of Church Hiſtory, as may appear by the great Volume he hath given us upon the Writings of the Fathers. Now how great a reſpect ſoever we have for the extraordinary merit of theſe Learned Authors, we ought to reject their Errours, be they never ſo Ancient. There is no preſcription againſt Truth; and a long prepoſſeſſion gives no right at all to Errour. I have ſeen, ſaith one of our Old Writers, the Birth of many Miracles in my time, and though they no ſooner ſaw the Light, but they were ſtifled, we do however foreſee the courſe they would have taken, had they happened to have lived to their full Age. For the main buſineſs is to find out out the end of the thread, then you may wind as much as you pleaſe; and there is a greater diſtance from nothing to the leaſt thing that may be, than there is from that leaſt to the greateſt that can be imagined. A private Errour firſt cauſeth a publick one; and then that publick Errour occaſions other private ones. Thus the whole work goes on, patch'd up and faſhioned by a ſucceſſion of ſeveral hands; ſo that the remoteſt witneſs knows more of the matter than the neareſt, and the laſt inform'd is better perſwaded of it than the firſt. This was exactly the way the Paſſion of the Thebean Souldiers firſt crept into the World, and then inſenſibly got credit in the Church. And they have been for theſe Eight or Nine Hundred Years in a quiet Poſſeſſion of the glory of their Martyrdom, and do enjoy it peacably to this day, under the ſhadow and Authority of the greateſt Names, and the moſt renowned Doctors of all Chriſtian Communions. Now that we may diſtinguiſh the Romance from the Hiſtory, we muſt remove all the Miſts which the Legendaries and Martyrology-makers have ſpread over it. For the ſupport of ſo much of it as is purely Romantick; there are alledged Manuſcripts and Old Writings; and we muſt ſhew that thoſe who do pretend the greateſt skill in Antiquities, are lyable to miſtakes.

CHAP. IV. That the moſt skilful Men are ſometimes miſtaken in the Judgments they make upon the Works of the Ancients.

IT will Evidently appear from what ſhall be ſaid hereafter, that Baronius, Peter Francis Chifflet, Archbiſhop Uſher, and Grotius, have been miſtaken in their Judgments concerning the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, and the Relation Fathered upon Eucherius.

For Criticks are not always in the right. Though they have contributed much to the reviving of Learning, yet it does not thence follow, that even the moſt skilful Men in that Science are infallible. It hath very often happened that they have taken falſe Copies for Originals, and ſet upon Modern Writings the worth and value due to thoſe of Antiquity.

Thoſe who have any skill in Medals, know that the moſt underſtanding Men themſelves are apt ſometimes to be miſtaken. If one Examines Vaillant Praeſt. Imp. Numiſm. pag. 12. 14, 16. 13. the firſt Edition of the Praeſtantiora Imperatorum Numiſmata of Mr. Vaillant, Printed at Paris in the Year 1682, there one will find the Medals of Germanicus, of Nero Druſus his Father, of the Emperour Claudius, of Julia Wife to Severus, and of Gordianus Affricanus the Son, the Price and Rarity whereof this Medaliſt does mightily Extol. But if you caſt your Eye upon the Second Edition of 1692. there you will find the ſame Medals very much debaſed. Mr. Vaill. pag. 49. Vaillant, acknowleging the three firſt to be ſuſpicious, and the two laſt abſolutely falſe. He praiſeth likewiſe in the ſame Work, one of Trajan's Pag. 71.Medals with a Pillar and an Owl on the top of it. And in his Remarks upon Scelecta Numiſmata Seguini, Publiſhed at Paris in the Year 1684. he confeſſeth ingenuouſly that the ſame was Counterfeit.

'Tis no leſs uſual to be deceived in matter of Statues and Baſſo-Relievos, then in Medals. We have a great many Examples of this kind; but it will ſuffice to give here only one ſingle inſtance: Vazari tells us, that Michael Angelo, to convince ſome Vertuoſos and Antiquaries, who valued nothing but what was Ancient, of the raſhneſs of their Judgment in ſuch caſes, made a Cupid and buried it under the ruines of an Old Building, having firſt broken off one of its Arms which he kept at home. All the Lovers of the Art came immediately to look upon it, and no Body did ſo much as queſtion the Antiquity of the piece, till Michael Angelo ſhewed them the Arm which he had kept by him, to convince them of their Errour, and to ſhew them how eaſily they might be impoſed upon, in a matter wherein they pretended to ſo much skill.

But miſtakes of this kind, have been yet more frequently made by thoſe who have imployed their-Criticks upon thoſe Heathen Authors, which have been left to us either by the Grecian or Latin Antiquity. Every Body knows the witty trick Muret put upon Scaliger; how he compoſed ſome Verſes, and told him he had found them in an Old Manuſcript: And how Scaliger, who boaſted that he was very well • cqu • inted with the genius and Style of every Age both in Proſe and Verſe, found immediately an Ancient Author for thoſe Verſes of Muret's making: And being afterwards informed they were of his compoſing, he revenged himſelf of him by a Diſtich upon his Cheat. Theſe feigned and Counterfeit Works were not unknown to Ancient Greece, ſince the Learned of thoſe times made it their Study to find them out. Dionyſius Longinus made a Treatiſe upon the ſame Subject; and we ſhould be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .informed now of a great many Fabulous Relations inſerted into Hiſtories, had not the ill Fate of Learning deprived us of the Works of that excellent Critick.

But ſeeing that Men have naturally a reſpect for things which belong to Religion, one would think that they ſhould not ſuffer themſelves to be miſ-led by thoſe who have made it their buſineſs to impoſe upon the World; by inventing Fables, and Publiſhing ſuppoſititious Eccleſiaſtical Writings and Tranſactions. Nevertheleſs, by what Misfortune I know not; theſe frauds have been more frequent in the Church, than any where elſe, and it is impoſſible to Summ up the miſtakes, they have occaſioned amongſt the Learned in all Chriſtian Societies. So many ſpurious Writings, and ſuppoſititious Facts were made and Publiſhed even in the three firſt Ages of Chriſtianity, that Amphilochius, Biſhop of Iconium, ſo much eſteemed by St. Baſil, one of the moſt worthy Fathers of the Church, compoſed a whole Book of them, which is cited in the Acts Council. 7. act. 5. Tom. 3. pag. 552.of the Seventh Council. There was ſcarcely any thing to be ſeen, (to make uſe of Fontanel's Words in his Hiſtory of Oracles,) but falſe Goſpels, falſe Epiſtles of the Apoſtles, falſe Hiſtories of their Lives, &c. The chief Men of the Church have been ſometimes deceived, &c. They did not always narrowly examine what ſeemed to favour Religion. The heat and fervour they felt, when they fought for ſo good a cauſe, did not always ſuffer them to chuſe the beſt Weapons.

And the Diſtemper was ſo far from leſſening in the following Ages, that it ſtill more increaſed and t • e boldneſs in inventing Fables, and Forging falſe Lives of Martyrs and Saints, went ſo far, and became ſo common, that the Church thought it neceſſary to put a ſtop to it, by the Authority of its Canons. For in the Council of Conſtantinople, held in the Year 692, under Juſtinian the Younger, the Church condemned, in the 63d▪ Canon, the falſe Paſſions, and Fabulous Lives of Saints and Martyrs.

A great number of Learned Men have endeavoured in theſe latter times, to find out theſe ſuppoſititious Writings, and to aſcribe to every Author the Works belonging properly to him. And they would undoubtedly have been more ſucceſful in it, had they not been miſ led, as well as the People, by Intereſt or Partiality. For oftentimes both their Minds and Pens are ſway'd by prejudice and Paſſion: As if a Work were good or bad, Ancient or Modern, as it chanced to be look'd upon by Proteſtant or Popiſh Eyes; falſe and ſuppoſititious, if contrary to their Opinions, but Ancient, and of the true ſtamp, if it proved fovourable to them.

But though they ſhould be allowed to have been free from Prejudice and Paſſion, yet it is no ſtrange thing to ſee Men differ in their Judgments. This follows neceſſarily the different applications, and Natural inclinations of their minds. Some view things only on one ſide, and ſome on another. The greateſt part fix themſelves, before they have well examined all the Reaſons that are, and may be produced on both ſides. And ſometimes it happens that Men concern themſelves for ſome Works, as they do for ſome Perſons, without knowing why they are more for thoſe than for the others. Hence it is that the Writers of the ſame Church do not always Ann. Baron. Tom. 1. An. 51. Bellarm. de lib. arb. lib. 5. c. 25. agree in their Opinions. Cardinal Baronius ſpeaks of the Recognitions attributed to St. Clement, as of a ſink full of filthineſs and lies: Whereas Bellarmine maintains that they are St. Clement's own, or of ſome other Author as Ancient and as Learned as he. The ſame difference in Opinions is obſerved amongſt the Proteſtants concerning St. Ignatius's Letters, though theſe Letters are generally, and with good reaſon look'd upon as one of the faireſt Monuments of the Apoſtolick Age. And Mr. Dupin, in his Bibliotheca nova, ſets aſide in a hundred places the Judgment and Authority of his Friends Poſſevinus, Sixtus of Siena, Rainaldus, Bellarmine, Labbe, and other Writers of his Religion, who have Criticis'd upon the Works of the Fathers.

This ſhews that the moſt Learned may ſometimes be miſtaken in their Judgments upon the Works of the Ancients. Nor is this much to be wondered at, ſince the intricacy and confuſedneſs wherewith ſome Tranſactions are related, and the diſtance of the time wherein they happened, make it a very hard matter for us now to diſcern Truth from Falſhood. Criticks borrow moſt part of their Light from the Quality of the Manuſcripts; and ſometimes theſe Manuſcripts, the Antiquity whereof ſounds ſo high with ſome Men, are but Modern Writings. And particularly we ſhall conſider in another place, wh a Judgment one ought to paſs upon a Relation of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, which Peter Francis Chifflet took out of an Ancient Manuſcript of St. Claudius's Monaſtery. But 'tis now time to come to our Proofs.

CHAP. V. That St. Eucherius, Biſhop of Lions, • s not the Author who wrote that Paſſion of the Thebean Souldiers, which both Surius, and Baronius have followed.

THE firſt proof we bring againſt the Relation of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, is, That it is clear and plain that St. Eucherius, Biſhop of Lions, is not the Author of it, and that his Name hath been ſet to it by ſome Cheat, to gain more Credit thereto, from the eſteem which the Church always had for the extraordinary Virtues and Merits of this great Prelate. To be convinced of this, 'twill ſuffice to mention only one paſſage, wherein 'tis ſaid of Sigiſmond King of Burgundy, D • u noctu que hymn • rum, Pſalmorumque decantatio non deſini • , quod jubente praeclaro Sancto que Martyre Beato Sigiſmu • do Rege inſtitutum, uſqu • bo • ie co • ſervatum eſt. That they never ceaſe Night nor Day to ſing Pſalms and Hymns in the Monaſtery of Agaunum: And that this Holy Praclice, firſt appointed there by the bleſſed King and Martyr St. Sigiſmond, is obſerved there to this very day. It viſibly appears from this place, that when this Relation was made, King Sigiſmond was dead. It follows moreover from thence, that it muſt have been compos'd ſeveral Years after the Death of this Prince; ſince that Author, after he hath ſpoken of the Rule which King Sigiſmond cauſed to be eſtabliſhed there, adds, that this Rule was ſtrictly obſerved there, uſque • odie, to this very day. So that were it true, that St. Eucherius was the Author of this Work, he muſt of neceſſity, not only have been contemporary to King Sigiſmond, but more than that he muſt have out-lived him many Years. But now it happens to be quit • contrary, for St. Eucherius was dead, when Sigiſmond was yet on the Throne.

Moſt Hiſtorians do reckon the Death of this King of Burgundy, to have happen'd about the Year 520, and place that of St. Eucherius in Dupin Nov. Bibl. Tom. 4. pag▪ 175. the Year 441. 'Tis true, that Mr. Dupin refers it to the Year 454. upon the Authority of Proſper's Chronicle. Some on the contrary carry it as far back as the Year 421. Amongſt whom are Gennadius and Ado. But there is much reaſon to ſuſpect in both theſe Authors, the diſingenuity of ſome Tranſcriber, ſince it could not be unknown to Gennadius and Ado, that St. Eucherius was preſent at the Council of Orange, where his Name is found amongſt the Subſcribers; and that it is agreed on by every Body, that this Council was held about the Year of our Lord 441. Some indeed, to ſave this Anachroniſm, pretend that there have been two Eucherius's, like the Jews, who to mend their deſperate Cauſe, have invented two Meſſia's, to reconcile in both the fulfilling of the Oracles, which they cannot apply to one alone.

But, in ſhort 'tis not poſſible that St. Eucherius, Biſhop of Lions, ſhould be the Author of the Paſſion of the Thebean Legion▪ unleſs we allow him to have had the gift of Prophecy, and make him ſpeak Prophetically of thoſe Rules which were to be ſettled in the Monaſtery of Agaunum, ſeveral Ages after his Death. Should ſome Perſon now put out any Writings, under the Name of Monſieur de Marca, or of Cardinal Duperron, and mention therein the eſtabliſhment and Foundation of St. Cyr. To ſhew that theſe Writings ought not to be aſcribed to theſe two great Men, it would ſuffice to make it appear, that they were dead ſeveral Years before Lewis the 14th made this Foundation. Nevertheleſs, this ſo plain a demonſtration of Forgery, hath not hindered Surius, in his Relation of the Surius Tom. 5▪ 22. S • p▪ Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion on the 22. of September, from confidently aſſerting, that St. Eucherius was the Author of the Acts of their Paſſion. 'Tis very ſtrange that Baronius ſhould Martyr. Rom 10. Kal • n • . Oct. pag. 3 • 5. make the ſame blunder, both in his Annals and in his Notes on the Roman Martyrology. And indeed this would ſeem yet more ſtrange, were it not plain, that this Learned Cardinal undertook in his Annals▪ not ſo much to give us the Hiſtory of the Church, as to defend the prejudices and ambitious pretenſions of the Church of Rome Therefore when its an advantage to him, to overlook ſome ſuppoſititious and Counterfeit Writing, he pretends he ſees neither contradiction nor Anchroniſm in it; he is no longer that able Critick, whoſe pierceing knowledge nothing can eſcape, and who clears and extricates the moſt obſcure and knotty things of Antiquity: Bellarm. in Catal. Script. Eccl. in Euch.In a word, he is no more Baronius.

Cardinal Bellarmine, whoſe Zeal for the glory of the Roman Church did not yield to that of Baronius, hath taken another way to ſave the • ruth of the Paſſion of the Thebean Legion, that it might not be objected to his Church, that it worſhipped ſome for Saints, who never had ſo much as a being in the World. For ſince Men would at the very firſt ſight be ſtartled, to ſee ſo long an interval of time between St. Eucherius and St. Sigiſmond, he hath endeavoured to cut it much ſhorter, and to render it ſo little, as that it might paſs wholly unobſerved, or however be but very little minded. He tells us, that this Biſhop of Lions lived till the Year 499. and he grounds his conjecture upon a place in the Life of St. Ceſarius, Biſhop of Arles, compos'd by Cyprian the Prieſt; where it is ſaid, that theſe two Biſhops, being in company together, reſtored a Woman to her former health, who was afflicted with a very ſore Diſtemper. If there were any certainty in this Conjecture of Cardinal Bellarmine, Eucherius would have been almoſt contemporary with King Sigiſmond. For Meſſanius a Prieſt, and Stephen a Deacon, two other Diſciples of St. Ceſarius, in the Book they have added to the Life of this Holy Prelate, ſay that he dyed forty Years after he had been made a Biſhop, and ſince every body knows that he ſucceeded Ennoius, about the Year 504. his Death ſhould be placed in the Year 544 or 545. For it is certain that he was preſent at the Council of Arles in 524 and at the ſecond Council of Orange in 529▪ And to prove that he was alive in 528. we have a Letter that Pope Vigil wrote to him under the Conſulſhip of John and Voluſian.

But though we ſhould grant Cardinal Bellarmine's Conjecture not to be groundleſs, yet he would be but little the better for it. 'Tis not enough to prolong St. Eucherius's Life to the Year 499. 'Tis to no purpoſe, likewiſe to prove that St. Eucherius might have ſeen St. Ceſarius Biſhop of Arles. King Sigiſmond dyed about the Year 520. and they muſt make it appear that St. Eucherius out-lived him a great many Years, to make good the uſque hodie of the place we have before quoted. Now it is ſo far from being true, that St. Eucherius did out-live St. Sigiſmond, that on the contrary, there is no likely-hood that he liv'd till the Year 499. according to Cardinal Bellarmine's Conjecture. It appears by the Subſcriptions of the firſt Council of Orange, that he was Biſhop of Lions in 4 • 1; and conſequently he muſt have been then at leaſt thirty, or forty Years Old; for at that time it was not uſual to raiſe any perſon under that age to the Dignity of a Biſhop; Biſhopricks being not yet beſtowed as rewards upon Families, and the Holineſs of Canons holding yet out againſt the Vanity of the Clergy, and the Uſurpations of Kings. Now ſince we are certain of this, can we think it probable that St. Eucherius ſhould live to ſee St. Ceſarius Biſhop of Arles, who was not raiſed to that Dignity, till after the Death of Ennoius, about the Year 504 Indeed, I think a Man muſt needs be very bold in his Conjectures, who can allow St Eucherius to have lived above a Hundred Years, if he have no other Warrant for it, but that place of the Life of St. Ceſarius: Thoſe who ſhall carefully examine this Life of St. Ceſarius, will agree, that it ought not to be rely'd upon too much. 'Tis true, it is polite and judicious enough for that Age, and ſeems not unworthy of him who had been one of the Diſciples of St. Ceſarius, and who for his great Piety and Merits was raiſed to the Dignity of a Biſhop, as appears by his Name found in the Subſcriptions of the ſecond Council of Orange▪ But what if ſome Impoſtour here diſguiſed himſelf under the Name of a Famous Diſciple of St. Ceſarius? At leaſt this pretended Diſciple ſeems not to be much inform'd of his Maſters Affairs. He ſaith in one place, that St. Ceſarius ſent ſome Grave and Learned Men to a Council Aſſembled at Valence to Condemn the Opinions of Pelagius. Which having given me occaſion to examine the Acts of the Councils held at Valence, I • ind nothing in them concerning the Hereſie of Pelagius, wherein St. Ceſarius could have any hand. So that being miſtaken in a matter of Fact of this Importance, he might as well have been over-ſeen in joyning Eucherius and Ceſarius in the Cure of that Diſeaſed Woman.

Cave Hiſt. Li • . Script. Eccleſ. p. 333. in C • ſario. It appears that the Learned Doctor Cave relyed a little too much upon this Life of St. Ceſarius. He ſaith in his Hiſtory of Eccleſiaſtical Writers, that this Holy Biſhop, underſtanding that he was ſuſpected of Pelagianiſm, cauſed a Council to be Aſſembled at Valence, to clear himſelf of this accuſation; and being hindred by reaſon of the illneſs of his Health from going to it, he maintained there publickly by his Legates, that Man in the ſtate of Sin, cannot work out his Salvation without a preventing Grace. But if, inſtead of following this Cyprian, Diſciple of St. Ceſarius, and who was afterwards Biſhop of Thoulon, Doctor Cave had given himſelf the trouble to look over the Councils of Valence, he would have obſerved that in the firſt, which was held in the Year 734. their whole buſineſs was about Bigamy; that in the Second, which met in 599. (ſome place it in the Year 684, and ſome in 589.) they were wholly taken up with the great Donatives which Guntran King of Burgundy had beſtowed upon the Church: And that the Third, in which Pelagius, Hinmark, and John Scot were Condemned, and the Acts whereof are cited by Forbeſius in his Inſtructions, was not called till the Year 855. as appears by the Acts of it being preſented to the Emperour Lothary, and to Charles the Bald. Now St. Ceſarius was unborn at the time of the Firſt Council, ſince Doctor Cave brings him into the World, only in the Year 469. And he was Dead when the Second met, according to the ſame Doctor, who places his Death in the Year 542. And 'tis, I think needleſs to add that he was not concern'd in the Third, which was held in 855. and in which the Pelagian Opinions were Condemned. This ſhort digreſſion, which we have thought neceſſary, to remove St. Ceſarius from St. Eucherius's times, will not ſeem, I hope, unſeaſonable. It appears then that Bellarmine, for all his Conjecture, cannot bring St. Eucherius near enough to St Sigiſmond King of Burgundy. The diſtance is too great to admit of any means of reconciling the Diſpute. We ſhall obſerve by the way, that Uſuard and Aimonius have commited the like miſtake: But becauſe it is but a matter of three or four Years difference, they may perhaps find Friends to help them out. Theſe two Writers ſay, that Clovis was delivered from a dangerous Sickneſs, by the Vows and Prayers of St. Severine, Abbot of Agaunum. And it is certain that Clovis was Dead three or four Years before Sigiſmond had founded that Monaſtery. Gregory of Tours ſaith, that he cauſed the ſame to be Built, and richly Endowed it, after the Death of his Father Gombaldus. But Marius Biſhop of Avanches marks preciſely the Year in his Chronicle, and ſaith that Sigiſmond founded the Agaunian Monaſtery, under the Conſulſhip of Florentius and Anthemius, viz. Four Years after the Death of Clovis. This Remark is owing to Monſieur de Valois, in his Notice of the Gauls; Hadr. Vale • i • s Notit. Gall in Heaunum.where he ſaith, that he cannot underſtand how Severine could have been Abbot of that Monaſtery in Clovis's time. Nevertheleſs the Miraculous recovery of a great King, being of great Credit to the Prayers and Suffrages of Monaſteries, Uſuard and Aimonius, who were both Monks, cauſed Prayers to be made for Clovis in Agaunum, even before King Sigiſmond had it in his thoughts to build a Monaſtery there. 'Tis true, that Bollandus would fain perſwade us, that this Prince did only repair and beautifie it. But this he aſſerts without any ground, ſince both the Ancient and Modern Writers who ſpeak of the firſt Foundation of the Agaunian Monaſtery, do all generally agree that 'twas St. Sigiſmond King of Burgundy, who cauſed it to be Built to the Honour of the Thebean Legion, which ſuffered Martyrdom in that place.

CHAP. VI. That the Acts of the Council of Agaunum, concerning the Thebean Legion, are as falſe as the Acts of their Paſſion▪

BUT whether King Sigiſmond only beautified the Monaſtery of Agaunum, or whether he laid the firſt Foundations thereof, 'tis all one to us. 'Tis enough that we can prove that the Paſſion, which we aſſert to be falſe, is poſteriour to all this. And that it is ſo cannot be deny'd, ſince mention is made there of the Baſilick, which was Dedicated at Agaunum to the Memory of the Thebean Souldiers. If you are not pleaſed to rely upon the Hiſtory of their Paſſion as it is related in Surius and Baronius, and wherein notice is taken of the Rules made by St. Sigiſmond in the Agaunian Monaſtery; we ſhall willingly pitch upon, and refer our ſelves to the latter Acts that are mended, ſince in theſe as well as in the others, mention is made of a Miracle that happen'd when the Church of Agaunum was a building to the Honour of the Thebean Legion. For if King Sigiſmond did only repair and Adorn that Church, the time of theſe Works muſt neceſſarily be plac'd in the Year 500. and conſequently St Eucherius could not have made mention of them, ſeeing all do agree that he dyed about the Year 440.

We may ſtrengthen this Argument with another taken from the Acts of a Council, ſuppoſed to have been aſſembled by order of King Sigiſmond at Agaunum, and in which Sixty Biſhops put it into his Head to gather the Bones of the Thebean Souldiers, and to Dedicate a Baſilick, or ſtately Church to them. Though this Council is viſibly falſe and ſuppoſititious, yet it will be of good help to diſcover the falſity of the Paſſion of the Souldiers of Agaunum, Fathered upon St. Eucherius. The Acts of this pretended Council are ſet down in the Fourth Tome of the Councils by Labbe and Coſſart. Tom. 4. Council Labbe and Coſſart. pag. 1557. Theſe two Learned Jeſuites were very ſenſible of the Forgery of theſe Acts, but it would have been too much againſt the grain to have confeſſed it▪ They were therefore content to ſay, they wondered they did not ſee amongſt the Subſcriptions the Name of Avitus Archbiſhop of Vienna, who both by reaſon of his Eminent Qualities, and for the Dignity of his See, ought of courſe to have been preſent at that Council. The Oratory-Prieſts being fairer dealers than the Jeſuites, Le Cointe, one of them, freely declares in his Le Cointe Ann. Eccleſ. an. ch. 536. num. 224. pag. 534. Annals, that the Acts of this Council were altogether falſe. However, as falſe as they are, they have brought great incomes to the Monaſtery of Agaunum. They make St. Sigiſmond to give to it a great number of Villages, and very conſiderable Lands in the Dioceſes of Vienna, Lions, Grenoble, and of the Cities of A •• te, Avanches, Lauſanne, and Beſanſon, &c. The Cheat indeed was worth the making. But we muſt confeſs that the makers thereof were not very skilful in their contrivance of it. The truth is, that in thoſe times People were ſo credulous, that they gave Credit to the groſſeſt tales. They were contriv'd and conceiv'd under the ſhadow of Monkiſh Holineſs, and were brought forth into the World without contradiction, or any Body to oppoſe them. The Monk who Forged this Council, makes both King Sigiſmond and the Biſhops to ſay very ridiculous things. The Country Peaſants of Valeſia would now ſpeak better Senſe. Le Cointe obſerveth, that the Acts of this Council are Dated in the beginning of the laſt of April, and towards the end of the Ides of May: That it is ſaid at firſt, that the Council was held at Agaunum, and again, that it was Aſſembled near that place. Which ſhews the poor Monk hardly knew what he did. He adds that Sixty Biſhops met together at Agaunum, and in Sigiſmond's time there were not above Seven and Twenty Biſhops in all, throughout the whole Kingdom of Burgundy. He ſaith, that Theodorus, Biſhop of Sion in Valeſia, asked what ſhould be done with the Bodies of the Thebean Souldiers that laid yet unburied upon the Ground. And in St. Sigiſmond's time, there was no Biſhops-See at Sion. The Biſhops-See was transferred thither, not till many Years after, it having always been before at a place which is called Martignac, or Martigni, which is the Ancient Octodurum. So that this Theodorus being contemporary with King Sigiſmond, ought to have been call'd Octodurenſis Epiſcopus, and not Sedunenſis, as the Council-Forger hath done.

Tom. 4. Concil Labbe. Coſſ. pag. 1557. But the thing we ought chiefly to obſerve, is, that both Labbe and Coſſart, place this Council in the Year 516. The Acts do expreſly mention, that when it was held, the Buildings which King Sigiſmond ordered to be made at Agaunum, were finiſhed, and wanted only to be Dedicated, and appointed to their uſe. This Prince ſaith, in the beginning of De jam dicto Monaſterio quod vocatur Agaunum, quod nunc Domino adjuvante infra Reg • um noſtrum Burgu • dionum conſtruximus.his Deed of Gift, that he makes Hinnemond▪ Abbot of the Monaſtery of Agaunum, which, by the help of God, he hath Built in his Kingdom of Burgundy. And a little before he ſays, that all the Biſhops do repreſent to him, that the Reliques of Mauricius; Exuperius, Candidus, and Victor, ought to be depoſited in the New Church, which he hath cauſed Infra ambitum Baſilicae quam clementia Regis ad hoc opus ornare juſſit.to be Built. The Biſhops of this pretended Council, are there chiefly taken up with regulating the ſinging of Pſalms, the Offices, Obſervances, and whatever was to be Practiſed in that Monaſtery. Now the buſineſs is to know, whether the Paſſion of the Thebean Legion, which we aſſert to be falſe, is anteriour to that Council, or happen'd after its ſitting. If they ſay it is anteriour, we ask, how could the Author of it ſpeak of a Monaſtery which was not yet Built, and of Rules not yet eſtabliſh'd? If it be anſwered, that this Paſſion was Written after the ſitting of the Council, which according to Labbe and Coſſart met in the Year 516. it follows, that St. Eucherius is not the Author of this Paſſion, ſince he died in the Year 440.

If the Acts of this Council be compared with the Paſſion, one cannot but ſuſpect that the Impoſtour, who compoſed it, had before his Eyes the Acts of this Council. 'Tis ſaid in theſe Acts, that the Biſhops conſulted with King Sigiſmond, what Diſcipline was to be ſet up in the Monaſtery of Agaunum, and that the Rules which ſhould be preſcrib'd to the Monks, might be ſo framed as to laſt for ever. And the Author of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Souldiers, as it is related both by Baronius and Surius, ſaith, that they never ceaſe, Day nor Night, to ſing Pſalms and Hymns in the Agaunian Monaſtery; this practice having been eſtabliſhed by the Bleſſed King and Martyr St. Sigiſmond, and being ſtill in force there to this very day.

But that the Acts of this Council, are forged, Father Le Cointe hath given infallible proofs. And whereas Labbe and Coſſart place this Council in the Year 516. we ſhould not fear being much miſtaken, if we charged the Forgery upon ſome Impoſtor of the Seventh or Eighth Century. For theſe and the like Writings are the Titles and Foundations both of the Worſhip, vaſt Power, and Immenſe Revenues of the Church of Rome. 'Tis true, we are told that the Manuſcripts of theſe things are kept in the Vatican Library, or in that of Florence; and that they have all the Characters of an uncontroulable Antiquity. But Marſham, a man very well skilled

Marſh. in Propyl. ad Mon▪ • ug.

Cantè intuendae ſunt hujuſ • nodi Chartae, quae fidem ha • ent e • minorem quo majorem prae ſe ferunt Antiquitatem.

in diſtinguiſhing between Old and Modern Manuſcripts adviſeth us to truſt to them ſo much the leſs, by how much the Older they are ſaid to be▪ And he is favoured in his Opinion by Papebrook a Jeſuite, who Papebrookin Propylnum. 125. Cha • tas ſinceras & genuinas vix reperi • i.obſerves, that you'l ſcarcely find any Acts or Manuſcripts true and ſincere from the Reign of Dagobert the Firſt, upwards; that is beyond the Year of our Lord 640. Which is much about the time, in which the Fables which we are now Examining were invented

'Tis ſtrange indeed, that Father Mabillon, one of the moſt Eminent Men in Europe in that kind of Learning, ſhould Condemn the Opinion both of Marſham and Papebrook. He thinks that theſe two Learned Men were miſtaken, and to prove it▪ he reports ſome Acts of the 6th or 7th Age; but this is nothing to the purpoſe; for Marſham and Papebrook did never deny but there were true Acts ancienter than▪ the Reign of Dagobert the Firſt; but they only affirmed, that theſe Writings are very ſcarce, and can hardly be found; ſo that Father Mabillon, to have an occaſion to contradict theſe two great Men, makes them ſay abſolutely, what they only meant with a reſtriction. And beſides▪ 'tis one thing to go about to prove from the Words of ſome Authors, that there have been Kings before Dagobert the Firſt, who made Gifts in Writing to ſeveral Churches, and another to prove that theſe Writings do yet continue, and have been handed down to us, and that they have not been worn out by time, loſt or deſtroyed by the Accidents and Revolutions which have happened in the courſe of ſo many Ages, nor falſify'd and corrupted by the covetouſneſs, ignorance, and infidelity of Men. The firſt of theſe two things, which is not in queſtion, Father Mabillon takes upon him to prove, but ſaith not one word of the ſecond which he ought to have proved. But here is the buſineſs. Papebrook is plain and downright, becauſe he, being a Jeſuite, is of an Order of a very new Date, and which therefore needs not go up and ſearch very high for Titles: Whereas Father Mabillon is a Benedictine Monk, of the Congregation of St. Maur. And St. Benet's Order hath a great concern to maintain the Antiquity of their rich Foundations. Papebrook confeſſes ingenuouſly, that moſt of the Acts in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries have been falſify'd by Monks, becauſe this reproach could not fall on the Jeſuites, who were not then in the World. But by reaſon there were at that time almoſt no other Monks in the Weſt but the Benedictines, 'tis worth the while to ſee, with what Zeal Father Mabillon ſtickles in their defence. But while he endeavours to make their Cauſe too good, he betrays his own.

He proves that the falſification of Acts, ought not to be laid only at the Church▪mens Doors; that every Body had then a hand in the corrupting of them; that Cheats and Impoſtours were as common at that time amongſt the Laity, as in the Church; and that both the watchfulneſs and Authority of the Emperours were taken up in preventing and chaſtiſing theſe knaviſh tricks. This is juſt what Marſham and Papebrook do both mean and ſay. We have thought fit to make this Obſervation. For having a very great Veneration for true Antiquity, we ſhould be unwilling to have any Body allarm'd at our impugning the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, which hath obtained the Belief of ſo many Ages in the Church.

CHAP. VII. That the Paſſion of the Agaunian Martyrs, Publiſhed by Francis Chifflet in his Edition of Paulinus, is as falſe as that which Surius and Baronius have followed.

THE Relation of the Paſſion of the Thebean Souldiers, which both Surius and Baronius have followed, is a piece ſo notoriouſly ſuppoſititious, that it is now quite laid aſide even in the Roman Church. This does evidently appear, in the Judgment which Anthony Pagi makes of it in 〈…〉 5790. ch. 297. Diocl. 14. Maxini. 12. p. 124. his Criticks upon Baronius. The Acts of the Martyrs of Agaunum, ſaith he, which Baronius hath taken out of Surius, and which he thought were written by St. Eucherius, Biſhop of Lions, are falſe and ſuppoſititious. There 'tis ſaid, that this Martyrdom happened under the Pontificate of Marcelline, when Maximian went into Gaul, to put a ſtop to the Bagaudian Rebellion; and it is certain that it was in the beginning of Diocle • ian s Reign, that Maximian made this Expedition during the Pontificate of • ajus Therefore the Doctors who had the direction of the Impreſſion of Bibliotheca Patrum, which was Printed by the Aniſſons at Lions in the Year 1677 were wiſer than to give out amongſt the Works of St. Eucherius the Paſſion of the Thebean Souldiers, as it was Bibl. Patrum apud Aniſſ. Lug▪ dunt, an. 1677. Tom. 6. pag. 866. reported both by Surius and Baronius. We give (ſay they) the Acts of the Martyrs of Agaunum written by St. Eucherius Biſhop of Lions and extracted out of a very Ancient Manuſcript; thoſe that are put out by Surius having been ſpoiled and corrupted by ſome Anonymous Writer of the laſt Ages. Peter Francis Chifflet is the Man who Printed theſe new Acts of the Agaunian Martyrs in his Paulinus Illuſtratus, and which, he ſaith, he Copied out of a very Ancient Manuſcript Theod. Ruin. Act. prim. Martyr. pag. 285. of St. Claude's Monaſtery. As for Theodorus Ruinart, he hath followed Chifflet s Copy, in that • ollection of the Acts of Martyrs which he cauſed to be Printed at Paris in the Year 1689. There he confeſſes, that the former Acts Publiſhed by Surius were Counterfeit, and thoſe likewiſe that were Printed by Mombritius, then he adds, that in the very time it was given over by the Learned, to find out the true Acts of the Agaunian Martyrs, Chifflet had happily diſcovered them in an Ancient Manuſcript. • t ſeems then that the Thebean Souldiers caſe is not yet quite deſperate, there being another door for the true Acts of their Martyrdom to come in at. The Jeſuites are very Crafty Men, I muſt confeſs. They find immediately a way to remove every difficulty. The World was ready to forſake the Thebean Souldiers and their Paſſion, when juſt in the nick of time, Father Chifflet, hath found a Manuſcript in the Monaſtery of Mount Jura, which gives a faithful account of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, and is free from thoſe falſities which are ſo palpable both in Surius and Baronius. Not a word there of Marcelline's Pontificate, of King Sigiſmond, nor of the Revolt of Aelius and Amandus, Authors of the Bagaudian Inſurrection in Gaul. You have all in it but this. Both the Paſſions are in every thing alike. Only two or three Events are wanting in that of Chifflet, which might ſerve as a ſure Epoche, whereby to diſcover exactly the time wherein it hapned. A perſon more miſtruſtful than I, might eaſily believe, that it is not without ſome good reaſon, that theſe places are not to be found in Chifflet's Manuſcript. There would be leſs cauſe to ſuſpect it, had other circumſtances been left out of ſmaller conſequence, and ſuch as do not ſerve to mark out exactly the time and age of the Piece.

But 'tis in vain for Father Chifflet to boaſt the antiquity of his Manuſcript. We have not forgot the Advice which Marſham and Papebrook have given us, not to truſt too much to Manuſcripts, which have on them the moſt ancient dreſs. Were we admitted to compare Chifflet's Manuſcript with that of Surius, we ſhould ſoon ſee whether of them has got the beſt looks of Truth and Antiquity. The Acts of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Souldiers were Printed at Ingolſtadt, under the Jeſuites inſpection, in the Year 1617. by the care of Stewartius, who was ſure he had Examined the beſt Manuſcripts he could find Peter Natalis and William Baldeſan, who in Italy, writ the Hiſtory they have left us of the Thebean Legion, were not wanting to conſult the Manuſcripts, extant in the beſt Libraries of that Country. Though Father le Cointe does diſown the Acts of Surius, nevertheleſs he acknowledgeth 'em to be conform to the greateſt number of the Manuſcripts that are kept in the Archives of the Church. Notwithſtanding, Father Chifflet will needs have his Manuſcript to be the only one that is true and ſincere, and thoſe of all the other Writers to be ſpurious and corrupted. I would fain know who told him, that his own was not mended by ſome Monk, who underſtood Hiſtory ſo well, as to perceive the Anachroniſms and contradictions in the Acts of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion. This is not without Example, and we might mention ſeveral; for the Monks formerly did what they pleaſed with the Writings of their Predeceſſors. Fauſtus compoſed the Life of St. Severine, Abbot of Agaunum, of whom mention hath been already made. An Anonymous Author, ſome Ages after, added to it ſome things, cut off others, and dreſſed it up after his own Fancy; as Father le Cointe complains in his Annals. He tells us Le Cointe, An. 609. further, that another Fauſtus having Written the Life of St. Maurus, it was not lik'd by Odo, an Abbot in the Dioceſe of Angers, in the Year 863. and that he changed it in ſuch manner, that it were to be wiſhed he had never meddled with it at all. And now can Father Chifflet warrant that no ſuch hand hath ever made bold with his Manuſcript? The Acts of the Agaunian Souldiers, having no ſuch thing in them as Gifts to Monks and Monaſteries; 'twas no hard matter to find them corrected in ſome Old Manuſcripts But I queſtion much whether any ſuch Manuſcript can be produced, as will ſerve to rectifie the Acts of the Council of Agaunum, wherein ſo many conſiderable Revenues are beſtowed on the Monks of that place. Let any Body read Mr. Dodwel's Diſſertation upon the ſmall number of Martyrs, and he will ſee there what ſtreſs one ought to lay upon the Acts and the Manuſcripts from whence they were taken. 'Tis true, that Theod. Ruin. Praef. in Act. Martyr. alii reſecuerunt noilnulla, quae ſibi in illis Actis diſplicebant. Theodore Ruinart, in the Edition he hath lately put out at Paris, of the Acts of ſome Martyrs, prefixes a long Preface, wherein he oppoſes Mr. Dodwels Opinion concerning the ſmall number of Martyrs; but at the ſame time, he confeſſes, that they who gathered their Acts have often added to, or cut off from them what they liſted.

Ex iis etiam Actis plera que perierunt quibus alia poſtmodùm ſubſtituta fuere, ſed quae ad iſtorum Auctoritatem non pert ingunt nedùm ad priorum ſinceritatem. One may ſee in the ſame Preface, that the Acts of moſt of the Martyrs having periſhed, either by the ravage and burnings made by the Barbarians, or by the Orders of Heathen Magiſtrates; others were ſubſtituted in their place, but ſuch as have not the Authority of the former, and much leſs can they pretend to the ſame ſincerity and exactneſs. Theſe Acts have been, by the Monks of the laſt Ages, ſo disfigur'd and ſtuffed with ſo many Fables, that the honeſter and more ingenuous of the Church of Rome have been aſhamed of it, and have publickly expreſſed

Lud. Vives de Trad. Diſc. lib. 5.

Melchior Canus, Loc. 11. c. 6.

Dolenter hoc dico multò Severius a Laertio Vitas Philoſoph • rum ſcriptas, quam a Chriſtianis Vitas Sanctorum; long • que incorruptius & integrius Suetonius, &c.

their Sorrow for it. Lewis Vives, and Melchior Canus, have grievouſly complained that Diogenes Laertius has Written the Lives of the Pagan Philoſophers with more integrity and Wiſdom, than the Chriſtians have done thoſe of their Martyrs▪ Confeſſors, and Virgins. When it was firſt given out that Lippomanus, Biſhop of Verona, was upon correcting the Acts and Old Legends of Saints, all good Men of the Romiſh Church were very glad at the News, hoping that he would have purged them from all the groſs lies which Metaphraſtes, Comeſtor, and Jacobus de Voragine had left behind them. But Lippomanus, and Surius made all things worſe, inſtead of mending them. For before this, the Acts and Lives of Saints were look'd upon as pious Romances, and a production of the ill-regulated zeal of the Legend-Writers. But then they were eſteemed quite another thing, after they had been Reviſed by Surius, Lippomanus, and Junius Mombritius, who contented themſelves with taking away only the moſt palpable and obvious falſities, retaining thoſe which they thought were not ſo offenſive, and then proteſting that they had gone up to the head, and had conſulted the beſt Manuſcripts Roſweidus, Bollandus, Godfrey Henſchenius, and Papebrochius, who are come after, thinking to do ſome Service to the Learned, by gathering all whether good or bad▪ have not given us a truer account of the Acts of Martyrs and Saints, but only have incumbred Mens Studies with their huge and bulky Volumes.

'Tis not that we believe, that the Doctors of the Romiſh Communion are willing to countenance lyes and Forgeries. We do them more juſtice than ſo They would undoubtedly have all this ſilly ſtuff taken out of their Church Service, Breviaries, and Martyrologies, but they know not how it can be done. They fear to give ſome advantage to the Proteſtants, and to furniſh them with Weapons againſt the infallibility of their Church. And the Learned amongſt them are afraid to bring upon themſelves the hatred and perſecution of Monks and Fryers, who make a Trade of theſe Impoſtures amongſt ſilly Women, and the more ignorant ſort of People. 'Tis known all over France, what troubles they brought upon the Biſhop of St. Pons, one of the moſt worthy Prelates of that Kingdom, for taking out of the Calendar of his Dioceſe ſeveral Saints, whoſe Saintſhip might be called in queſtion, and whoſe Suffrages he did not ſo much eſteem. This is the reaſon why moſt of thoſe who are ſufficiently convinced of theſe abuſes, are contented to bewail them in ſecret, not having the Courage to undertake the redreſſing of them. There are ſome others, who, thinking it unſufferable that their Religious Worſhip ſhould ſeem to have no other ground than the falſe Legends of Saints and Martyrs, have indeed taken away from the Story what was moſt fictitious, but yet have kept ſtill the Eſſential part of it. Father Chifflet was perhaps one of theſe, and therefore he found juſt in time a Manuſcript of the Paſſion of the Agaunian Martyrs, more accurate, and truer than the Manuſcripts of Surius and Baronius. Finally, we might add; that Manuſcripts, as well as other Books, are ſubject to the rigour of the Index Expurgatorius. And how ſhould they ſtick at maiming them when they fear they will give any advantage to the Proteſtants, ſince they make no ſcruple ſometimes of ſuppreſſing them wholly. We are not willing to ſet down here the Story of the Edition of Anaſtaſe, Publiſhed by the Jeſuits of Mayence in 1602. in which they cut off what we read in the Manuſcript of Heydelberg about Pope John, and of the trick they put us upon Marquardus Freherus, who had diſcovered it to them. Fabrotus, in his new Edition of that Author, Printed at Paris in the Year 1649. hath been ſo ſincere as to own the expunging that paſſage; but at the ſame time, was not ſo ingenuous as to reſtore it. Every Body knows the Story of St. Chryſoſtom's Letter to Ceſarius the Monk, and of Theodoret's Commentary upon the difference that aroſe between St. Paul and St. Peter, the which as not favouring Tranſubſtantiation, and the Authority and Infallibility of the Pope, they have endeavoured to ſtifle and to ſuppreſs. Alix Expoſtul▪ de St. J. Chryſ. pag. 9. Mr. Alix having diſcovered this Myſtery of iniquity, acquainted the Publick with it, in his excellent Letter to Mr. Hambden. But after all, Peter Francis Chifflet is not the firſt Writer, who to extricate himſelf out of a difficulty, or to purchaſe the glory of ſome curious diſcovery, hath taken an occaſion to find a Manuſcript. 'Tis not of late Years that there have been Annius's of Viterbo and Varilla's, eſpecially amongſt the pretenders to Antiquity, and Compilers of Anecdota, or Secret Hiſtories.

But though theſe Remarks may not perhaps ſeem unſeaſonable, yet we have no need of them for clearing the matter of Fact now in queſtion. Father Chifflet's Manuſcript hath not brought us to ſuch ſtraits, as to reduce us to meer gueſſes and conjectures. For admitting his Manuſcript to be both as Ancient and Correct as he pleaſes; the Thebean Souldiers would not be a jot the better for it. We ſhall, in the concluſion, examine their cauſe without any regard to the Manuſcripts and Acts of their Paſſion, and ſhall deduce, from the very circumſtances of their Martyrdom, ſuch Arguments as will demonſtrate the falſity of it. And we muſt own our obligation to Father Chifflet, that we ſhall now Fight no longer in the Dark, without either ſeeing or knowing our Adverſary. We know now whom we are to deal with, and who 'tis we are to encounter. Before this, while we attack'd the Acts which Surius and Baronius have left us, and were proving that St. Eucherius, Biſhop of Lions, could not be the Author of them, it might have been anſwered we took pains to no purpoſe; that we ought to have known that there have been two St. Eucherius's, and that the Acts of the Agaunian Paſſion were of the latters compoſing, who Theoph. Raynal. in Ind. Sanct. Lugd. p. 227. was preſent at the Council of Orange in the Year 529. This very thing Theophilus Raynaldus hath endeavoured to prove in his Catalogue of the Saints of Lions. So that after all our endeavours, we might chance to be in the ſame plunge with the Sofia's in Plautus, concerning the two Amphytrions, and with the Parliament of Toulouſe in the caſe of the two Martins Guerra. But now we muſt return our thanks to Father Chifflet, for having help'd us out of theſe doubts and uncertainties. He agrees with Baronius, that there was but one St. Eucherius; and his Reaſons are ſo weighty and ſtrong, that it ſeems ſtrange, that the Learned Dr. Cave, who muſt needs have ſeen Cave Ann. ch, 434. p. 335. quamplurimi Eucherio Juniori aſcribunt, & rectè quidem.them in the Paulinus Illuſtratus of that Author, ſhould yet be of the Opinion of Theophilus Raynaldus, about the two Sts. Eucherius's, and ſhould attribute to the Junior the Acts of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Souldiers. We ſhall now go on with our proofs againſt the Agaunian Martyrs, and ſhall draw them from that Ancient and accurate Manuſcript, upon the Credit of which Father Chifflet hath reformed thoſe Acts, which both Surius and Baronius have followed.

CHAP. VIII. That the Style of the true St. Eucherius is different from that of the Paſſion of the Agaunian Souldiers, Publiſhed by Chifflet.

IF we compare Chifflet's Copy with that of Surius, we ſhall obſerve in it the ſame Style, the ſame Expreſſions, Thoughts, and Opinions; ſo that one would conclude it to be the very ſame Piece; that place only excepted, where mention is made of King Sigiſmond, who in that Copy is not contemporary with the true St. Eucherius by many Years. But one cannot find in theſe Acts of Chifflet, the Style, Genius, and Air of St. Eucherius. Eraſmus, Eraſm. Bibl. Patr. Tom. 6. p. 886. Nihil video profectum a noſtrae Religionis hominibus, qui Eloquentiae quoque gloria floruerunt, quod cum hujus phraſi ſit conferendum.who had not the Reputation of being too Liberal of his praiſes, thinks he can never Extol too much the true St. Eucherius's Letter to Valerian, de Contemptu mundi. He ſaith, that the Chriſtian Religion never had any Writers, no not amongſt the greateſt Profeſſors of Eloquence, who could Andreas Schottus in Epiſtola aurea ad Valerianum.match him in his Style and way of Writing. Andreas Schottus calls his Letter, in his Preface to St. Eucherius ▪s Works, a Golden Letter. But theſe ſo high Praiſes, and given too by Men of ſo refined a knowledge, are in no wiſe ſuitable to the Author of the Paſſion of our Martyrs. And it is certain, that if Eucherius, Biſhop of Lions, compoſed that Letter to Valerian, he never could be the Author of the Hiſtory of the Agaunian Souldiers.

'Tis true, an Author cannot always be the ſame in all his Works. The moſt happy Genius, does not like a fertil ſoil always bear alike, nor yield ſo plentifully at one time at it does another. The Treaſures of Invention and Eloqence do not lye open at all hours even to the greateſt Wits. There are ſome lucky Moments for compoſition that are not at our command; beſides, the difference of Age cauſeth ſome difference in the productions of the brain, as may be obſerved in the Iliads, and Odyſſes, of Homer; ſome Subjects being delightful, we are fond of them, and fall greedily to work; whereas others, becauſe dry and inſipid, do naturally cauſe in us ſome neglect. Nay ſometimes a Subject does even require a Man to deſcend from his uſual greatneſs, and to lay aſide all the pomps and loftineſs of Style. In a word, there are few Writers, how able ſoever, that can bear up with a conſtant and continued evenneſs. Therefore the Learned Voſſius was in the right to condemn Maſſius, for denying Xenophon to be the Author of the Expedition of Cyrus, becauſe the Critick, forſooth, did not obſerve in it all the ſtrokes of that unimitable Eloquence, which is the Character of that excellent Writer. For although, for the Reaſons we have hinted at, an Author may ſometimes deviate from his Character, yet notwithſtanding there will ſtill be diſcovered in his Style a tincture, as it were of himſelf, and a particular Air that is proper to no other but him. Fannius pronounced publickly in Rome an Oration, and there being ſome who envied the applauſe he had got, they gave out, that he was obliged for it to his Friends, who had help'd him in the making it. But Cicero in Bruto. unus enim ſonus eſt totius Orationis, & idem Stylus. Tully, on the contrary, maintained that it could not be ſo, becauſe in the diſcourſe of Fannius, both the Style, the turn, and Harmony all over the ſame.

According to this ſuppoſition, we ought not to Father upon the true St. Eucherius, the Paſſion of the Agaunian Martyrs. For inſtance, let us but compare it with that excellent Epiſtle of his, upon the contempt of the World, and Worldly Philoſophy. Wherein his way both of Thought and Expreſſion; and indeed every thing is quite different from the former. One would take this Letter to be the product of Auguſtus's Age, when the Latin Tongue was in its greateſt purity, whereas the Style of the Paſſion of the Martyrs of Agaunum, taſtes like that of the Empire in its declenſion, and of the Age of Caſſiodorus. Mr. Du Pin, a Doctor of Paris, ſo much to be commended both for his diligence and ſincerity, hath without doubt, perus'd the Acts which Father Chifflet hath taken out of his Old Manuſcript. And ſee how he ſpeaks of 'em in his Bibliotheca Du Pin Nova Bibl. 〈◊〉 tom. pag. 175. Nova. The Hiſtory, ſaith he, of the Paſſion of St. Mauritius, and of the other Thebean Souldiers, is not the Style of our St. Eucherius.

But perhaps we have been too favourable to this Relation of the Martyrs of Agaunum, in attributing it to the Age of Caſſiodorus. For in the At Baſil in. 15 •• . At Rome in 1564.Old Editions of St. Eucherius, Printed at Rome, and at Baſil, they have inſerted amongſt the Works of this Father, ſome Commentaries on Geneſis, and upon the Book of Kings, which ſeem to have been made not in Caſſiodorus's time, but even ſince Gregory the Great, that is above an Hundred Years after, as appears by the Books of Morals of this Pope, being cited in theſe Commentaries. This Remark hath been made long ago, by Poſſevinus, and Sixtus Senenſis. And there is much more reſemblance between the Style and Character▪ of theſe Commentaries, and the Style and Character of the Paſſion of the Agaunian Martyrs, than there is between the Letter of the contempt of the World, and the Relation of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion.

This Conjecture is ſtrengthened by the Epiſtle Dedicatory, prefixed to theſe Commentaries on Geneſis. It will be of ſome uſe to ſet it here. Eucherius, to the Holy and moſt Bleſſed Biſhop Salvlus. I have ſent to your Beatitude, the Hiſtory which I have written of the Paſſion of our Martyrs. I feared leaſt the Memorable Events of their glorious Martyrdom, ſhould have been buried in Oblivion, both by long tract of time, and the negligence of Men. I have endeavoured to know the truth from thoſe who are able to inform me of it, who have aſſured me, that they had the thing from Iſaac, Biſhop of Geneva, much after the ſame manner as I have related it. And I believe theſe things came to the knowledge of Iſaac, by the means of the moſt Bleſſed Biſhop Theodorus▪ who lived in the former Ages. Viro anterioris temporis. And now whereas others from divers places, and even from the remoteſt Provinces, offer Gold, Silver, and ſeveral other things to the Honour of our Saints, we preſent them with our writings, if ſo be you vouchſafe to approve of them; and I beg for their ſakes the remiſſion of all my ſins, and for the future, the continual aſſiſtance of my perpetual Patrons. Remember us likewiſe in your Prayers, when you come before God, and do attend the Services of the Saints.

There are ſeveral things very obſervable in this Letter. Firſt, that he who wrote it ſaith, that he is the Author of the Paſſion of the Agaunian Souldiers. Secondly, that the Monaſtery of Agaunum was Built a long time before, and was in great repute in the World, ſince Offerings were ſent thither from all parts. Thirdly, that this Theodorus, who is called there a Man of the former Ages, is in all probability the ſame Theodorus Biſhop of Sion, whereof we have ſpoken on the occaſion of the Council of Agaunum; which ſhews this Letter was written at leaſt in the Seventh Century, ſince that otherwiſe, this Theodorus could not be called Vir anterioris Temporis. Fourthly, that it mentions one Iſaac, Biſhop of Geneva, who is not to be found in the Catalogue, which Leti, and Mr. Spon, have made of the Biſhops of that place▪ and which they have taken out of an Ancient Bible of that City. Fifthly, that whereas in the Bibliotheca Patrum, Printed at Lions, this Letter is placed immediately after the Paſſion of the Martyrs of Agaunum, the Editors who have taken care to advertiſe the Readers, that the Paſſion written by Surius, was not altogether Authentick, do not give the leaſt caution about this Letter, which is viſibly later by ſome Ages than St. Eucherius. Sixthly, that this Letter Baron. an. ch. 297. pag. 734. is inſerted at full length by Baronius in his Annals, as an irrefragable proof that St. Eucherius is the Author of the Acts of the Agaunian Martyrs, ſeeing it is brought there to ſerve as a Preface to it. Seventhly, that after you have read this Letter, when you come to the Acts of the Thebean Martyrs, you cannot perceive any difference. You find there much the ſame Matters, Style, and way of Expreſſion in both of them. Eighthly, that this Letter, in all the Editions of the St. Eucherius's Works, is prefixed as a Dedication to the Commentaries on Geneſis, which have been compoſed by the Monks two Hundred Years after St. Eucherius, as appears by ſome places of the Morals of Gregory the Great being inſerted in them. Ninthly, that the Author of the Commentaries upon Geneſis, and the Book of Kings, is very probably the Author of this Letter. And that he who wrote the Letter, compoſed likewiſe the Paſſion of the Agaunian Martyrs. Which leads us to this Obſervation, that perhaps we ſeek abroad for what we may find at home. I mean, that perhaps, the Acts of the Thebean Legion may be the growth of this Land, and the Work of ſome Engliſh Writer. See how the pretended St. Eucherius ſpeaks in his Commentary upon In 30. Comm. in Lib. Reg. c • p 22. the Book of Kings. The Bleſſed Pope Gregory, Armed with an Evangelical Eloquence▪ governed then in our days the Romiſh Church, when the moſt Reverend Fathers, Auſtin and Paulinus, and their Companions, came into England, and Preached the word of God to a People, who had been Bibl Pat • . tom. 6. p. 823. non Gallus ho • o ſed Britannus. Infidels for ſo many Ages. Theſe words have given occaſion to the Learned Jeſuite, Andreas Schottus to think that the Author of theſe Commentaries, I mean the pretended St. Eucherius, was not a French but an Engliſhman.

I do not know but one might ſtrengthen yet this Conjecture, by an Expreſſion which we have obſerved in the Acts of the Agaunian Martyrs, 'Tis ſaid there, that Mauricius, who commanded the Thebean Legion, exhorted the Senators of the Souldiers to ſuffer Martyrdom, Senatores militum. For though this Office is not altogether unknown, and ſtrange in the Roman Militia,

Hieron. Epi • t. ad Pammach. Deinde Senator, Ducenarius, Biarchus, Cirmicitor, Eques, deinde Tyre.

Gloſſar. du Cang. tom. 3. p. 796.

and that St. Jerom ſpeaks of it in his Letter to Pammachius, nevertheleſs you will hardly find it in thoſe Authors, who write about military employments. Whereas this Expreſſion was common then amongſt the Engliſh, who uſed to give it to thoſe perſons who held the firſt rank, not ſo much in conſideration of their Age, as for their Wiſdom and merit. One may ſee in Mr. du Cange, the Examples he alledges of it, taken from the Laws both of King Edward the Confeſſor, and of Kenulphus King of the Mercians.

CHAP. IX. That in Father Chifflet's Copy, as well as in that of Surius, the Commander of a Legion, is called by a Name not then in uſe, and that there is a fault in the number of the Legionary Souldiers.

BUT it matters not much, to know whether the Author of the Paſſion of the Thebean Souldiers, was Engliſh of French. Theſe two Warlike Nations will ſcarcely fall out with one another, for the Honour of having given him to the World. We muſt paſs now to other Remarks. 'Tis not only the difference in the Style, which ſhews that the Acts of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion are not of the true St. Eucherius, but there are yet other manifeſt proofs of it. It appears from the Inſtructions which St. Eucherius gave to his Son Salonius, that this Father knew the uſe and propriety of Hebrew; but if he was the Author of the aforeſaid Paſſion, he muſt needs have been very ignorant even of Latin terms, though his Letter upon the contempt of the World, ſhews that he was a great Maſter of it. In the Edition of Surius, and of Chifflet, St. Mauricius, who Commanded the Thebean Legion, is called Primicerius Legionis. Can one imagine, that the true St. Eucherius did not know that the Commander of a Legion, was called Praefectus Legionis? Let any Body examine carefully all the Old Tombs and Monuments, which can give us any light into the Names and Titles of Military Offices, from Auguſtus's time, to that of Juſtinian; let any Body read the Notitia Imperii, with Pancirole's Notes; let any Body turn over the Codes of Theodoſius, and of Juſtinian, in which there are ſo many Laws concerning the Civil, as well as the Military Offices of the Empire; let any Body look over all the Inſcriptions of thoſe times which are commonly ſo full of Titles, and you will no where find that the Commander of a Legion was ever called Primicerius Legionis. The Reaſon of the Name

Lazius Comin. Rp R • m. lib. 3. c. 17. pag. • 58.

Primicie • u primi erant & anteſignani omnium. Digni • atum quod in tabula cerata prime notarentur.

is, that whereas formerly they made uſe of a Paper prepared with Wax, therefore they called Primicerii thoſe of their reſpective Orders who were ſet down firſt in the Publick Regiſters. Hence it is that ſo many of that Name are to be found amongſt the divers Orders of Dignities and Magiſtrates of Suid • s 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hera • lii. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .the Empire. There was the Primicerius of the Imperial Chamber, of the Wardrobe, of the Liberalities, of Notaries, of the Court of Accounts, of the Golden Mace, of the Singing-School, of the Servants, of the Judges, of the Readers, and of many others, whoſe Names are ſeen in the Notitia, or State of the Empire. This term was alſo received into the Church in the following Ages. The dignity of Primicerius is very conſiderable in the Clergy of Venice. Baluſius nov. Coll. Concil. pag. 480. And in the Collection of the Councils by Mr. Baluze, this Name is given to one Peter a Prieſt of Alexandria. The Church writers have ſometimes made uſe of it Metaphorically, St. Auguſt. Serm. 2.calling St. Stephen Primicer of Martyrs, and St. Peter Bodicus delonſis. Arch. in Hiſt. Hieroſ.the Primicer of the Apoſtles, and at laſt this term hath been appropriated to theſe Prieſts who carry Wax Tapers before Princes and Prelates. But as for the Military Officers, I confeſs I cannot well underſtand what rank and command the Primicerii had there. Lipſius, and Salmaſius, don't give us much light thereupon in their Goltzius Theſ. rei antiquariae pag. 149. Books of the Roman-Militia. 'Tis true, that Goltzius, in his Catalogue of Military Dignities, makes mention of Primicerius Caſtrenſis. But all the Learned do agree, that what Goltzius does relate, ought not always to be rely'd upon, for he writ this, as well as the reſt of his Books, upon other Peoples word, and without having ſeen himſelf the Medals and Inſcriptions which he goes upon. If Goltzius hath been miſtaken, we have found out methinks the cauſe of his Errour. In the Notice or State of the Empire, in the Chapter of the Civil and Military Dignities in the Weſt, we ſee one Primicerius Sacri Cubiculi, Primicerius Notariorum, Caſtrenſis, Sacri Palatii, &c. And perhaps he thought that before Caſtrenſis ought to be underſtood Primicerius▪ which might give occaſion to the Dignity of Primicerius Caſtrenſis, ſet down in his Catalogue. But had he minded another Chapter, wherein an account is given of the Offices which were ſub diſpoſitione viri ſpectabilis Caſtrenſis, he would have obſerved that this Dignity, Caſtrenſis, related chiefly to the Sacred-Houſe which was the Emperour's Palace.

Veget. lib. 2. cap. 21. Sicut Primicerius in Officio Praefectorum praetorio que ad honeſtum quaeſtuoſum que Militiae pervenit gradum. 'Tis true indeed, that Vegetius ſpeaks of one Primicerius, who after he had been a Prefect, and in the Praetorſhip, was raiſed to an Honourable and gainful Military Dignity. His Commentators are ſilent upon this place, which yet ſeems difficult enough. But Mr. de Valois does not leave us quite in the dark about this matter, in his Notes upon Ammian Marcelline. For

Ammian. Marcel. lib. 18. c. 3.

Inter quos Valentinus ex Primicerio Protectorum Tribunus.

this Hiſtorian having ſpoken of one Valentinus, who was made a Tribune after he had been Primicerius of that Body which was called Protectores, Mr. de Valois

Valeſius pag. 190.

Caeterùm ex Primicerio Protectorum ad Tribunatum prevenire mos erat.

obſerveth that from Primicer of Protectors it was uſual to be made a Tribune.

And 'tis true, that Ammianus Marcellinus ſpeaks in his thirteenth Book of one Gratian, who after he had been made Primicer of the Protectors, and Tribune, was made ſuperintendant to the Military Affairs in Africa. Which place does explain that other in a Collection of the Acts of Conſtantine, In Excerptis de Geſtis Conſtantini. Conſtantius D. Claudii opt. Principis Nepos ex fratre, Protector primum, exin Tribunus, poſtea Praeſes Dalmatiarum fuit.where 'tis ſaid, that Conſtantius, Nephew to Claudius the Emperour, after he had been firſt a Protector, then a Tribune, was at leaſt created Preſident of Dalmatia. But we don't find in all this, that in St. Eucherius time the Commander of a Legion, was called Primicerius Legionis. For it is only in the laſt Ages, that it was given to all thoſe who had Matth. Paris an. 1240. Sciſcitabantur in Exercitu quis foret Primicerius.any Command. Mathew Paris in the Year 1240. ſpeaks of an Army where it was demanded, who was the Primicerius of it, that is, who commanded it. So that as the term Commander in Engliſh is very general, and may be applyed to thoſe, who either do command a Company, or a Regiment, or are Governours of Towns and Provinces; ſo likewiſe in the laſt Ages, in the which 'tis likely the Paſſion of the Thebean Souldiers hath been Forged, the quality of a Primicer had a very large ſignification; I am tempted to ſay, ſpecially amongſt the Engliſh, and from thence to make another conjecture, viz. That the Author of the Acts of Agaunum was an Engliſhman. We did juſt now cite Mathew Paris, who was a great Ornament to this Nation in the twelfth Century. There Monaſticon Angl. Tom. 1. pag. 838. is an Act in the Hiſtory of the Engliſh Monaſteries, in the which the Kings, Edmond, and Edgar, qualifie themſelves Kings and Primicers of all England, Primicerii totius Albionis. Therefore this Primicerian Quality being

Gulielm. Tyrius lib. 4. cap. 8.

Pracedebant autem ejus Exercitum quaſi Legion • m Primicerii, vexilla bajulantes • iri Nobiles & inclyti.

ſo general at that time, 'tis no wonder that William of Tyre, who lived about Fifty Years before Matthew Paris, does mention ſome Legionary Primicers. Honourable Men, ſaith he, bearing Enſigns, went before the Army, as if they had been the Primicers of Legions. If it can be inferred from theſe words, that the Legionary Primicers were the Signiferi, or Enſign-bearers of thoſe times, one ought to confeſs that in William of Tyre his time, things were very much altered, and that nothing can be concluded from this expreſſion that may authorize that in the Relation of the Agaunian Martyrs, unleſs one would confeſs that they ſuffered Martyrdom about the time of William of Tyre, to wit, many Ages after the true St. Eucherius. But let us examine what Surius Copy, and that of Father Chifflet tells us of the number of the Thebean Souldiers. That of Surius ſaith, that in the Emperour Maximian's Army, there was a Legion of Souldiers called Thebeans, and that a Legion was made up of Six Thouſand, Six Hundred, and Sixty ſix Souldiers, according to the cuſtom of the Ancient Romans. In Father Chifflet's Manuſcript, the number of Sixty and ſix, and what is ſaid of the cuſtom of the Ancient Romans is cut off, being ſaid only there, that a Legion was then made up of Six Thouſand and Six Hundred Men.

If by the cuſtom of the Ancient Romans, ſpoken of both in Surius and Baronius's Copy, was meant the Military Diſcipline anciently eſtabliſhed by Romulus, 'tis certain that in his time the Legions were compoſed only of three Thouſand Foot, and ſome Horſe. And let one look over all the times in which that Common-wealth flouriſhed, from the expulſion of Kings to Julius Caeſar, one ſhall obſerve many changes in the number of the Souldiers which compoſed the Legions, and that it was ſometimes leſſer, and ſometimes greater, according to the Exigencies▪ and Revolutions of the Empire: But it will be a hard matter to prove, that there hath been a time, in which the Legions had preciſely the number of Souldiers ſpecify'd in thoſe two Copies.

Tit. Livius lib. 13. Livy, ſaith indeed, that it was a priviledge of the Legions, which were in Macedonia, to be compoſed of Six Thouſand Foot, and Three Hundred Horſe, the others Ex veteri Inſtituto, according to the Ancient cuſtom, being formed only of Five Thouſand Foot, and two Hundred Horſe. This great Author in all probability was better informed in the Roman Cuſtoms, than the Author of the Paſſion of the Thebean Souldiers. For the Legions having been raiſed to Five Thouſand Men in the Roman Wars againſt Polyb. lib. 6. Carthage. Polybius obſerves that to his time, they ſtill retained the ſame number of Five Thouſand Foot, and Three Hundred Horſe. It cannot be deny'd, but the number of the Legionary Souldiers increaſed under the Emperours, ſince at the time of the Emperour Tacitus, the Legions were of Six Thouſand, One Hundred, and Twenty Foot, and of Seven Hundred, and Sixteen Horſe, which is a Remark of Modeſtus, in the Treatiſe he addreſſes to him of the Terms uſed in the Military Art. Vegetius, who Dedicated his Book to the Emperour Valentinian, tells us likewiſe, that in his time the Legions were of the ſame number. So that it would be an obligation to the Publick, to prove, by good Authors, that at the time of Diocleſian, and Maximian, in which it is ſuppoſed that the Thebean Legion ſuffered Martyrdom, the Legions were of 6666, or 6600 Men, as 'tis ſaid in the Copies both of Surius, and Chifflet.

CHAP. X. That in the Editions both of Surius and Chifflet, a Miracle is related which hath all the appearance of a feigned Story.

IN the Acts of the Agaunian Martyrs, there is a Miracle ſet down that deſerves our conſideration. This Miracle hapned on the occaſion of a man, who in Surius's Original was a Gold-ſmith by Trade, and in that of Chifflet Aurifex. Faber.a Black-ſmith or a Carpenter. 'Tis ſaid in theſe Acts that all the Chriſtians of Agaunum being Aſſembled at Church upon a Sunday, this Man, who was a Pagan, ſtayed alone in the new Church which was then a Building to the Honour of the Thebean Souldiers. Whereupon the Saints appearing to him in a bright and glorious Apparel, dragg'd him from the place where he was, ſtretched him as it were upon a rack, and having banged him ſoundly, reproached him with his abſenting himſelf from the Church on the Lords-day, and that he being a Pagan, had been ſo bold as to work upon a Church which was Erecting to them. It is incredible that a grave Author, as St. Eucherius was, ſhould have made the Bleſſed Martyrs to ſpeak ſuch Nonſenſe. For it is an eaſie thing to infer from their diſcourſe, that the Pagans themſelves were obliged, even as Pagans, to obſerve the keeping of the Lords-day, and this is a Tenet which one can't by any means admit. For if the Fourth Commandment had obliged the Heathens, as well as the Jews, as the other Commandments of the Decalogue did, 'twould be a certain proof that the Duty enjoyned by the fourth Precept concerning the Sabbath-day, is a Duty Eſſentially Moral, of a Natural and inviolable Rectitude; and it would be a very intricate difficulty to juſtifie the Apoſtolick Church about the tranſlation of the Sabbath to the Day of the Reſurrection of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt. When we diſpute againſt the Sabbatarians, one of the ſtrong Reaſons we bring againſt them, is, that the diſtinctive Character of the Laws Eſſentially Moral, is their extenſion and univerſality, that is, that they bind all ſorts of Perſons at all times, in all places, and under both Covenants. So that we conclude, that the obſervance of the Seventh Day is not a Moral Duty, ſince the fourth Commandment did not oblige the Gentiles; and I do not know, if the ſame thing may not be ſaid of our Sunday, which hath ſuceeded to the Rights of the Sabbath▪

'Tis true, that after Nature hath taught Men the exiſtence of a God, it may teach them further the reaſonableneſs of Conſecrating a ſetled time to his Service: But it can lead them no further, and will leave the choice of that time to their Liberty. Let it be the Fourth, the Sixth, or the Seventh Day, 'tis all one in the main. And to render the Pagans guilty in not keeping the Sabbath, either according to the Jewiſh, or Chriſtian Inſtitution, the Sabbath ought to be See Lock of Hum. Underſt.one of thoſe Duties that are as well known to us, as the firſt Principles inbred in our very Nature, at our coming into the World, and ingraved by the Hand of God in the Hearts of all Men. The Agaunian Saints were much in the wrong to uſe a Pagan ſo ſcurvily, under pretence of his not obſerving the Sunday. They ought firſt to have inſtructed him, to have ſet before him the excellency and Holineſs of the Chriſtian Religion, and ſhewed him how juſt and reaſonable it is to Conſecrate the Sunday, to the glory of Jeſus Chriſt, the Mediator and High-Prieſt of this new Law: And after this, had he been ſtubborn and Rebellious to their Charitable inſtructions and admonitions, then in Gods Name let him fall under the Cenſure. But to knock him down out of hand, this is a way of Converſion only known and practiſed in our Days in France, and which cannot be attributed to Saints, without a great offence to their Charity. It was an ordinary thing indeed, at that time, to ſee the Pagans drag the Chriſtians by force to their profane Sacrifices, but not one Example of thoſe times can be produced of any Chriſtians, in places where they had the power to do to it, tormenting the Pagans, and compelling them to come and joyn with them in their Worſhip. Nay, it ſeems that in thoſe former times, they made ſome ſcruple of admitting Infidels into the places where their Holy Myſteries were Celebrated. For otherwiſe, to what purpoſe ſhould the fourth Council of Con. Carth. 4. can. 84. Carthage have Ordered the Biſhops to ſuffer the Pagans, the Jews, and other Hereticks to enter their Churches, and hear the Word of God? 'Tis true, that it is added in that Canon, that they ſhall not be ſuffered to ſtay but to the Maſs for the Catechumens, ſo that after the Sermon and Prayer for the Catechumens, the Infidels were obliged to withdraw, before the Celebration of the Holy Sacraments.

Another circumſtance againſt the credibility of it, is, that, the Agaunian Saints do reproach this Pagan, for his boldneſs in working upon the Church which was a Building for them. Is it poſſible than an Author, ſo wiſe and knowing, as Sr. Eucherius was, ſhould have put in the Mouth of his Saints ſuch unbecoming reproaches! Saints are not certainly ſo nice as this comes to, I am ſure God himſelf is not. For when Solomon was Building him a Temple, it does not appear that he found fault with him for ſending for Wood and Stones from Heatheniſh Countries. And according to St. Auſtin, he would not have taken it ill, though all the Aug. Ep. 154. ad Publ.Timber of his Temple had been cut down in the Groves Conſecrated to Idols, ex lucis alienorum Deorum. When we reflect on the the prodigious number of Workmen, who were employed in the Building of the Temple, we cannot but conclude, that many of the Infidel Neighbour Nations were alſo employed in it, and ſo much the rather, becauſe the Jews apply'd themſelves more to Husbandry, than to other Mechanick Arts. It was by God's Order, that Joſue Ch▪ 6. 24▪ the Gold and Silver of the Idolatrous Jericho were put into the Sacred Treaſury. Thoſe Tables and Precious Veſſels, and the other rich Preſents which Ptolomy Philadelphus, and Queen Helena, ſent to the Temple at Jeruſalem, were no doubt of the Gentiles making, nevertheleſs,

Lightfoot. De • cript. Temp.

Hier. ſect. 4. pag. 649.

they were accepted of by the High-Prieſts, and Conſecrated to the Service of the God of Iſrael. In what School then did the Thebean Souldiers Learn that piece of Morality, that it was not allowable in a Pagan to help in the Building of Chriſtian Churches? Certainly the Romiſh Church muſt think that Saints have now-a-days much abated of the ſeverity of their Morals, and are grown much more humane and tractable, ſince in the Cathedral in Rome, a Brazen St. Peter is ſeen which, formerly was a Statue of Jupiter, and in whoſe Hands the Keys were put, inſtead of the Thunder-Bolt and fiery Arrows that they held before; and ſince the Pantheon, which was the Temple Dedicated to all the Heathen Gods, is now a Church Conſecrated to the Bleſſed Mother of our Lord.

CHAP. XI. In which the thoughts and diſpoſitions for Martyrdom, which are attributed to thoſe Saints in the Acts of Agaunum, are Examined.

VVE muſt not forget, that the Hiſtorian of the Thebean Souldiers repreſents them all poſſeſſed with a burning Zeal for Martyrdom. He ſaith, that they were all inflamed with a Noble deſire to die for Jeſus Chriſt, and that the Miniſters of the Emperour being arrived to put his barbarous Orders in Execution, the Thebean Souldiers made not the leaſt reſiſtance or endeavour to eſcape, but • endered their Necks of their own accord to the Executioners. This was not ſet down without ſome deſign; the Author had a mind to anſwer before▪hand, a difficulty which might be objected by the Readers. He fore▪ſaw that it would not well go down with ſome conſidering Men, that a whole Legion well Armed, had ſuffered their Throats to be cut without making the leaſt oppoſition, and that theſe brave Souldiers who fought like Lions in ſo many Battels, ſhould have permitted themſelves to be led as Lambs to the Slaughter. But now he thinks he hath removed the difficulty, by ſaying that they were poſſeſſed with a fiery heat, and a kind of fury for the glory of Martyrdom; as appears eſpecially, in that Victor, whoſe Death is related towards the end of the Acts of the Martyrs of Agaunum, who ſought for Death, and brought it upon himſelf by his own indiſcretion. For being invited by ſome Pagan Souldiers to come and make merry with them, with the ſpoils of the Thebean Souldiers, he returned their kindneſs with a Thouſand Imprecations and Curſes, and declared, without neceſſity, that he himſelf was a Chriſtian. But theſe things are not perhaps ſo certain, as to leave no manner of ſuſpicion behind them. 'Tis true, that we find in Euſebius, Sulpitius Severus, and Lactantius, many fine things ſaid upon the Noble Ardour of Chriſtians (in the primitive Ages) for Martyrdom. It cannot be denyed neither, but in the Church Hiſtory there are particular Examples of ſome who had more zeal than knowledge, and who in the time of Perſecution, when they might have made their eſcape, or hidden themſelves, choſe rather to run into the hands of their unmerciful Judges and Tormenters.

But here the caſe is otherwiſe, for we are not ſpeaking of ſome ſimple ignorant People, whom a blind zeal might carry too far in the firſt heats of Chriſtianity, but of a whole Legion, which they ſuppoſe had been well inſtructed by a Biſhop of Jeruſalem, and confirmed in the Faith by Pope Marcelline. Amongſt theſe were a great number of Officers, who no doubt had a competent ſhare of Learning, and were ſufficiently inſtructed in Chriſtian Morality, as not being Chriſtians by their Birth and Education, but by choice. In the Archives of the Metropolitan Church of Turin is kept a Manuſcript-life of St. Second, one of the Thebean Souldiers, wherein it is ſaid that he was of one of the beſt Families of the Province of Thebaide, brought up in all the beſt accompliſhments, and by his extraordinary Merit, raiſed to a conſiderable Office in the Imperial Palace. Now if notwithſtanding all theſe fine qualifications, this St. Secundus was left out in the Acts of Agaunum, we may well think that Mauricius, Candidus, Exuper, Urſus, and Victor, who are mentioned there, ought to have been Men of tranſcendent Parts and Ability. Nevertheleſs, the Acts of their Paſſion do attribute to them, ſuch Thoughts as are quite contrary to the Principles and Morals of Chriſtianity. If the Author of theſe Acts was of opinion, that they ſhould have offended God by endeavouring to flye from the Orders and Cruelty of the Emperour, we need no other premiſes to conclude, that the true St. Eucherius is not the Author of this Relation. This Holy Biſhop well knew that Chriſt did ſuffer his Diſciples, when they were perſecuted in one place to flee to another. He knew undoubtedly very well, that true Religion ſtrengthned the Saints againſt dangers, but that it forbad 'em to ſtay for them, or to go meet them. A man that is throughly convinced of the truth of Gods promiſes, and hath experienced the Comforts of 'em, will certainly without any change, or being in the leaſt daunted, look upon a fiery Furnace▪ but yet he will not run himſelf head-long into it. As we ought not to be afraid of Death, ſo neither are we to grow weary and prodigal of Life. Ignatius and Albina may ſerve as Patterns to Chriſtians of both Sexes, but not Cato and Lucretia. The Crown Cypr. de 〈◊〉 Nam cum 〈◊〉 de 〈…〉 • c. of Martyrdom comes from the hand of God; we ought to wait for it without anticipating the time, (ſaid St. Cyprian the great Panegyriſt of Martyrdom) the Thebean Souldiers had an excellent Model in St. Paul to frame themſelves upon; who being choſen by God to • reach the Goſpel to the Gentiles, feared neither Tribulation, nor Anguiſh, nor Perſecution, nor Hunger, nor Nakedneſs, nor Peril, nor Sword; he challenged Life and Death, Angels, Principalities, Powers, things preſent, and things to come, the heighth, the depth, and all the Creatures together, to ſhake his unmoveable ſteadineſs and fidelity. But withal he never faced the dangers, whenever it was in his Power to decline them, and made no ſcruple to turn aſide when he foreſaw ſome great miſchief in the way. An inſtance of which was his going out of Damaſcus, as you ſee in the 9. Ch. of the Acts.

This was alſo a known Practice in the time in which 'tis ſuppoſed that the Thebean Legion ſuffered Martyrdom. Let one but look over the Collection of Penitential Canons by Peter of Alexandria, who was in great eſteem about the time of the Perſecutions of Diocleſian. This Biſhop does there Cenſure thoſe obſtinate Martyrs, who having opportunity to make their eſcape, ſought notwithſtanding for Death. Chriſt, ſaith, he, withdrew himſelf to ſhun the malice of the Jews who laid in wait for him; and though he knew that the time appointed in the Counſel of his Father was not far off, he went not in ſearch after his Croſs, but waited for it from the fury of the Jews in a ſolitary place, whither he did retire. And when he foretold his Apoſtles of all the Perſecutions they were to ſuffer for his Names ſake, he told them that they ſhould be delivered to the Councils and Synagogues. Whereupon this Biſhop obſerves that Chriſt ſaid, they ſhall deliver you, and not, Ye ſhall deliver your ſelves. Tillemont Hiſt. des Emp. 2. p. 3. • om. pag. 864. For this reaſon Mr. de Tillemont, in his Hiſtory of the Emperours, makes this wiſe obſervation, ſpeaking of the Acts of St. Maximus, That theſe Acts do appear very well deſerving the eſteem which Baronius had for them, though they do expreſs that this Saint delivered himſelf to Death, which is more uſually ſeen in ſpurious,

Council Elib. can. 60.

Auguſt. in Breviar. colla • . Di. 3. c. 13.

than in true Acts. In ſhort, one may ſee what were the Morals of the Ancient Church about this thing, from a Canon of the Council of Eliberis, and from a ſpecial place in St. Auſtin; and the ſame Morals may be ſeen practiſed in the Lives of St. Cyprian and Athanaſius, who fled from Perſecution whenever God gave them opportunity to do it.

All the buſineſs is then to examine whether the Thebean Souldiers, being informed of the Emperour's reſolution, might have prevented it by their flight; and for the clearing of this point, we need only read the Acts of their Martyrdom. The Army of Maximian having paſſed the defiles of Valeſia, the Thebean Legion which was in the Rear, underſtood at Agaunum, that this Army was deſigned to cut off the Chriſtians in Gaul. They ſtopped at this News, and refuſed to March any further. Firſt every Body will agree that they might have diſbanded and betook themſelves to flight; for in ſuch caſes as this, Military Laws ought to yield to that of ſelf-preſervation, and then deſertion is not, it ſeems, a greater infraction of Military Diſcipline, than to refuſe to March at the Orders of the General. 'Tis further ſaid in the Acts, that Maximian being informed of the refuſal of the Thebean Souldiers, commanded them to be Decimated, hoping by the Death of ſome to terrifie the others into their duty. The Legion with an undaunted Courage ſuffered the Decimation, and the Miniſters who Executed the Emperours Orders, made their report to him, that the Rebellious Legion was nothing frighted by this Exemplary puniſhment, but perſiſted in their obſtinate reſolution not to March. During all this while, the Army is not ſeen to come back in Order to obſerve the Motions of this Legion; neither was it obſerved, that the Emperour did command any Troops to watch them, for preventing the ill effects of their mutinous diſpoſition. 'Tis very natural to think that if the whole Legion was not able to ſave all their Lives, part of them at leaſt might have got away, and yet 'tis ſaid in the Acts, that not ſo much as one of them did eſcape the Emperours Cruelty. Whatever care is now taken to hinder the Deſertions in an Army, all the diligence and watchfulneſs of the Officers cannot hinder a great many Souldiers to run away from their Colours every Campaign; and what is yet worth our obſervation is, that the Situation of Agaunum afforded great facility to the Thebean Souldiers to flee away for their ſafety. I have paſſed my ſelf that way, when I went with the Corps of Duke Schomberg from Turin to Lauzane, where he had ordered me to Bury him. And having then ſome Thoughts of this Diſſertation, I ſtaid a good while to conſider the • venues and Situation of Agaunum. It is ſeated at the bottom, and further end of a very narrow Valley, and there is no acceſs to it but by continual Defiles, having on both ſides Woods and high Mountains. So that, had the Thebean Souldiers taken advantage from the place, the whole Army of the Emperour had not been able to have hindred the greateſt part of them from making their eſcape. From this we may conclude, that the Author of their Acts hath not much obſerved the rules of Probability in the Romance he hath left us, ſince he ſaith, that all the Thebean Souldiers were Maſſacred, not one of them caring to make his eſcape, but all with one accord chearfully holding up their Necks, and wiſhing for nothing ſo much as the glory of Martyrdom.

CHAP. XII. That there is no likelyhood that a Legion ſhould be ſent for from the Eaſt to ſuppreſs a Tumult of the Gauls.

WE have hitherto conſidered the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, with Relation both to the Acts wherein it is contain'd, and to the Author to whom theſe Acts are attributed. 'Tis time now to come to the Fact it ſelf, and to treat it without any regard either to the Acts or their Author. Father le

Le Cointe Ann.

Franc. tom. 3. An. Ch. 636.

Cointe thought in his Annals to ſalve both the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, and the Relation of their Paſſion, by betaking himſelf to the Acts and to the Copy of Father Chifflet. We do not deny, ſaith he, that the Acts of the Martyrs of Agaunum, were written by St. Eucherius, Biſhop of Lions; but we ſay that thoſe publiſhed by Surius, and which are found in the Manuſcripts of moſt Churches, are ſpurious, and falſly attributed to St. Eucherius. We acknowledge none to be true beſides thoſe publiſhed by Francis Chifflet in his Paulinus Illuſtratus, and the which he hath Extracted out of a very Ancient Manuſcript of St. Claud's Monaſtery. And we believe St. Eucherius to be the true Father of that Work. But whether St. Eucherius be the Author of that work, or whether he be not▪ whether the Acts be falſified in the Copy of Surius, and whether they be true in Father Chifflet's Manuſcript, this is now no more the matter in queſtion. We have hitherto in a manner Attack'd only the Out-works, but we come now cloſe to the Fact, and will ſhew in it palpable Characters of falſity.

Acta Martyr. Agaun. Hi in auxiliu • Maximiano ab Orientis partibus acciti. The firſt of which is this ſuppoſition, namely, that the Emperour Maximian, cauſed a Legion to be put Death, which he had ſent for from the Eaſt to go with him into Gaul. We don't deny but there were in the Eaſt ſome Legions call'd Thebeans. In the Book we have already cited of the Dignities of the Empire, mention is made of four Thebean Legions.

Sub diſpoſitione Viri illuſtris Magiſtri militum per Orientem Legiones Comitatenſes 9.

Secunda Flavia Conſtantia Thebaeorum, ſecunda Felix Valentis Thebaeorum.

And in another Chapter.

Sub diſpoſitione Viri illuſtris Magiſtri militum per Thracias Legiones Comitatenſes.

Prima Maximiana Thebaeorum

Tertia Diocletiana Thebaeorum.

* Laziu • Rcip. Rom. lib. 3. comitabantur Auguſtum in procinctum abcuntem. We will not deny neither, but that the Exigencies of the Empire, calling Maximian into Gaul, the Emperour might have been attended by ſome of thoſe Legions. They are all four numbred amogſt thoſe Legions which the Romans called Comitatenſes.

But our buſineſs is to Examine which was that Thebean Legion, whereof it is ſpoken in the Acts of the Agaunians Martyrs The Copies both of Surius and Chifflet, do agree that Maximian cauſed this Legion to come from the Eaſt. So that according to the pretended St. Eucherius, it cannot be either Prima Maximiana Thebaeorum, or Tertia Diocleſiana Thebaeorum, theſe two Legions remaining in Thracia, appointed to Guard thoſe Frontiers of the Empire. This Legion, then muſt have been one of thoſe which were under the Command of the General of the Foot in the Eaſt. But it is not very likely, that the Emperour ſhould have ſent for a Legion, ſo far to perſecute the Chriſtians in Gaul, or to quell a Sedition raiſed there. The Legions on the Rhine, on the Danube, in Moeſia, and in Illyria, were much nearer at hand. No Example can be ſhewed in Hiſtory, that to make War againſt the Gauls, Garriſons were drawn out of the Frontier places of Egypt, or Meſopotamia. Should it be replyed, that the Romans were at peace with the Perſians and that all things were quiet upon the Confines of Africa and Aſia, that the danger was preſſing in Gaul, that Rome did tremble at the firſt news of a Mutiny in thoſe parts, and at the bare naming of Tumultus Gallicus, and therefore, that it ought not to appear ſo ſtrange that Legions were called from the utmoſt parts of the Eaſt. And ſhould it be added in confirmation of this Conjecture, Sex • . Aurel. Victor. Eutr • p. lib. 9. that the danger ought to have been very great, ſince the Hiſtorians do obſerve that this was one of the reaſons which induced Diocleſian to divide the Empire with Maximian, to the end that being inveſted in the Imperial Dignity, and having a greater Authority, he might ſooner make an end of this buſineſs: All theſe replies make for us, by leſſening the probability of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion. For the War which Maximian was to undertake being of ſo great importance, it is not likely he would wilfully have deprived himſelf of a Legion, which he had ſent for from the extremities of the Empire. But ſuppoſe Maximian had been as Zealous as ever Emperour was, for the Service of his Gods, and as implacable an Enemy and perſecutor of Jeſus Chriſt and his Diſciples, yet after all, we ought not, without good reaſons, to make a mad Man of him, and ſo bad a Politician, as to imagine he would have commanded one of his beſt Legions to be Maſſacred in the very face▪ as I may ſay, of the Enemy, and at the beginning of a War, the ſucceſs whereof ought to have commended to the World the choice which Diocleſian had made of him: And by ſo much the rather, for what Aurel. Victor. quanquam ſemiagreſtem, Militiae tamen at que ingenio b • • um. Aurelius Victor ſaith of him, viz. That though he was but half a Courtier, yet he was a brave and skilful Warriour. Beſides this, if with Father Labbe, we refer the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion to the Year 286. 'tis like that at that time the State of Affairs did not permit that the Frontiers of Egypt, and of the Eaſtern Provinces, ſhould be unguarded; ſince it was not long after, that Achilleus took the Purple upon him, and that the Quingentians, or Inhabitants of the Five Towns, joyned their Forces againſt the Empire. And if this Martyrdom be placed in the Year 297. with Cardinal Baronius, I queſtion very much whether the War was not then raging upon the Frontiers of Perſia, and whether the Emperour Galerius had by that time repaired the Loſs of that unfortunate day, in which all his Army was defeated, and he himſelf had much ado to eſcape.

But now I come to ſomething more poſitive. The very Names which in the Book of the Dignities of the Empire, are given to thoſe Thebean Legions which were in the Eaſt, may ſuffice to ſhew that the Martyrdom here mentioned, cannot be applied to any of them. For one of theſe Legions is called Secunda Flavia Conſtantia Thebaeorum. Where we are to take Notice, that the Romans gave different Names to their Legions for diſtinction ſake, as Princes do now to their Regiments. Theſe Names are ſometimes taken from the Order or time of their Creation, as the Firſt, Second, Third, and Fourth Legion. And ſometimes they were given upon the Account of ſome remarkable Action, whereby they had ſignalized themſelves, accordingly one was called the Victorious, another the Conquering, the Iron Legion, &c. Now and then they took their Names from the Countries and Frontiers that were committed to their charge, as the Germanick, and the Pannonick Legions, appointed to Guard the Empire in Hungary and Germany. Some of them had alſo their Names from the Countries where they had been raiſed, as the Nervian, and Iſaurian Legions. Mezeray, in his Hiſtory of France, before Clovis's time, gives this very ſame reaſon for the Name of the Thebean Mezeray Hiſt. before Clovis, &c. pag. 218. Legion Maximian, ſaith he, having alſo taken upon himſelf the defence of Gaul, departed from Nicomedia, and took with him ſome Legions, and amongſt them that of the Thebeans, ſo called from its having been raiſed in Thebais of Egypt. But moſt commonly the Legions bore the Names of the Emperours who had raiſed them; ſuch were the Ulpian, Trajan, Claudian, Diocleſian, and Maximian Legions. And it is moſt likely the two Thebean Legions, which were in the Eaſt, were of this laſt Order. For one of them was called Flavia Conſtantia Thebaeorum, from the Name of the Emperour, Conſtantius. Pancirollus obſerves judiciouſly, that this ought to be underſtood of Canſtantius, Son to the Emperour Conſtantine, and not of Conſtantius his Father: only the Reaſon he gives for it is falſe. He ſuppoſes then, that Conſtantine the Great was the Firſt Emperour who added to his Titles, that of Flavius; and that moſt of his Succeſſors after him took the ſame likewiſe, as a mark of the eſteem they had for his Virtues, and of their deſire to bear ſome reſemblance with him. Mr. du Cange, in his Byzantine Families, ſpeaks of ſome Medals of Conſtantius, Father to Conſtantine, with the Name Flavius, upon them. And Mr. Baluze, in his Notes on Lactantius's Book of the Deaths of the Perſecutors, produces an Inſcription which he had from Mr. Vaillant, where this Emperour is inſcribed FLAVIUS VALERIUS CONSTANTINUS, ſo that we ſhould rather think that at the time when Maximian was raiſed to the Empire▪ and when he undertook his Expedition into Gaul, Conſtantius, Father to Conſtantine, had not ſufficient Authority to raiſe Legions in the Eaſt, and to give them his own Name. And ſince the other Legion was called Secunda Felix Valentis Thebaeorum, from the Emperour Valens his Name, it follows that neither the one nor the other could poſſibly ſuffer Martyrdom by the Order of Maximian, who was taken into a Partner-ſhip of the Government ſeveral Years before Conſtantius and Valens came to the Throne.

Guido Pa • cirol. Notit. Imper. cap. 48. fol. 34. Pancirollus ſeems to have been ſenſible of this difficulty, but finding no way to evade it, he falls with all his knowledge into pitiful contradictions. Inſtead of one Thebean Legion, which is ſuppos'd to have ſuffered Martyrdom, he relates the Paſſions of two Thebean Legions. He ſaith that the Legio Secunda Flavia Conſtantia Thebaeorum was raiſed by Conſtantius, and put in the room of the Second Thebean, who were Chriſtians, and had been Maſſacred at Treves, by Rictiovarus, a Prefect of the Emperour Maximian; And as for the Legio Secunda Felix Valentis Thebaeorum, Pancirollus will have it, that the Emperour Valens raiſed it to make up the loſs of the Legion which periſhed at Agaunum, on this ſide of the Alpes, for refuſing to take the Military Oaths with the Pagan Ceremonies. That which led him into this Errour, was his having read in other Legends, that Maximian having paſſed the Alpes, made a Detachement of ſome Cohorts of the Thebean Legion, with ſome other Troops, to reinforce the Army wherewith he deſigned to oppoſe Carauſius. Thus this famous Antiquary of theſe few Cohorts, hath made an entire Legion. Which is ſo far from being true, that in the following Chapters the ſame Thebean Souldiers, who are now ſuppoſed to have been ſent againſt Carauſius, will furniſh us with new proofs againſt the Martyrdom of the whole Thebean Legion.

CHAP. XIII. That if the Hiſtory of this Legion were true, there would not be ſo much uncertainty of the time wherein it happened.

ANother Character of falſhood, in the Hiſtory of the Thebean Legion, which deſerves our obſervation, is the uncertainty and contrariety of the Writers of the Church of Rome, concerning the time in which they ſuppoſe the Thebean Legion ſuffered. The Martyrdom of a whole Legion is ſo Memorable an Event, that if it were true, it would certainly have been written and deſcribed in all its circumſtances in the Annals of the Church. And though the Eccleſaſtical writers had been ſo negligent as to be ſilent therein, yet, Aurelius Victor, Eutropius, Jordanes, or ſome other Author, would undoubtedly have made amends for this Omiſſion Titus Livius, failed not to relate the Tragical end of that Legion, whereof all the Souldiers were Condemned to Death for Mutining and poſſeſſing themſelves of Rhegium, during the War of the Romans with Pyrrhus. And yet ſome would have it, that Six Thouſand, Six Hundred, Sixty and ſix Officers and Souldiers, were Maſſacred by the Emperour's Order, upon their refuſal to ſwear by his falſe Gods, and to joyn with the other Troops that were Heathens, in ſhedding of Chriſtians Blood; though not one word is to be found either in Profane or Eccleſiaſtical Writers, whereby to diſcover the exact time of an Event, which ſo many circumſtances render ſo extraordinary and wonderful. Neither do the ableſt writers of the Romiſh Church agree upon the Year, the Pope, or the Conſul, under whom it happened. Cardinal Baronius puts their Martyrdom under the Pontificate of Marcelline, in which Errour he was followed by two Learned Fathers of the Oratory, Namely

Le Cointe An • . Ch. 638.

• o • i • us part. 2. cap. 3. de rebus a Conſt. geſtis.

le Cointe, and Morin. Anthonius Pagi refers this Martyrdom to the firſt Years of Emperour. The Jeſuite Labbe Chr. Hiſt. part 1. an. ch. 2 • 6. pag. 216. Labbe forſakes here the Opinion of his Baronius, and 'tis he perhaps, whom Anthonius Pagi followed. His words are theſe. 'Tis ſaid that about the Year 286 Sebaſtianus Tiburtinus, Tranquillus, Marcellinus, Zeus, Mauricius, and ſeveral others with the Thebean Legion ſuffered Death for the Faith of Jeſus Chriſt at Agaunum, at the entrance of the Pennine Alpes This agrees very well with the Pontificate of Cajus, and the beginning of the Empire of Diocleſian. And whereas Cardinal Baronius refers the Martyrdom of the Thebean Souldiers to the Year 297. it happened according to Father Labbe's computation in the Year 286, viz. immediately after that Carinus was killed, and that Diocleſian had taken Maximian into the Government▪ Which if true, what Ducheſne Hiſt. of the Popes pag 45. will become of Mr. Ducheſne's Argument in his Hiſtory of Popes, who to prove that Pope Marcelline did not Sacrifice to Idols in the time of Perſecution, as is moſt commonly believed, ſaith, that this Pope adminſtred the Sacrament of Confirmation to the Thebean Legion, when they paſſed by Rome, and earneſtly exhorted them to Piety and to perſeverance in Religion? Here Labbe and Pagi, put the Martyrdom of this Legion ſeveral Years before the Pontificate of Marcelline In the mean while we may take notice of the extraordinary fair dealing of this Jeſuite, who does not give us the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, as a thing whereof he himſelf is very well aſſured, and of which he hath found any Authentick Records and Proofs, but only with an, It is ſaid, or given out; and this no doubt he does, as being unwilling to vouch for a Relation which he found to be ſomewhat fabulous.

Now if it be reply'd, that it is not fairly done to deny a matter of Fact, meerly becauſe its Epoche is uncertain; it may be anſwered, that there is a great deal of difference between one Tranſaction and another; that there are in Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory, ſeveral Relations of matters of Fact, concerning which this Argument would prove of no great force. But the Martyrdom of a whole Legion is a thing ſo extraordinary, ſo ſingular, and ſo remarkable in it ſelf, that the uncertainty of the time in which they ſay it happen'd, makes it very ſuſpitious. And for the ſame Reaſon ſeveral Perſon doubt of the Diſpute of St. Peter with Simon Magus, and of the ſurprizing Death of this wicked Man, whom the Devils let fall to the ground, after they had born him up for ſome conſiderable time in the Air. 'Tis true that Euſebius, Sulpitius Severus, and St. Auſtin, take Notice of this Memorable Event. But thoſe who believe it to be falſe, do reply that one ought not always to truſt to the Relations of the Ancient Eccleſiaſtical Authors, becauſe the Zeal they had for Religion, made 'em not always very Nice in the choice of Proofs and Examples; and ſometimes they had a mind to oppoſe one Miracle to another, ſeeing that the whole Pagan Religion was Built upon the Belief of Miracles, and the Apparitions of their falſe Gods. They add farther, that had this Event happened, as it is reported, it would have occaſioned ſo much Noiſe in Rome, and through the whole Empire, that ſome Footſteps thereof would have been preſerved in the Writings of Pagan Authors. And that after all, though it was believed by Euſebius, Sulpitius Severus, and St. Auſtin, this does not make it leſs dubious, ſince thoſe three Writers do not agree about the time wherein it happn'd. Euſebius puts it under the Empire of Claudius, St. Auſtin, and ſeveral others, under that of Nero, about the Year of our Lord 67. and Sulpitius Severus refers it to the time when St. Paul came to Rome, towards the Year 57. And this is the very argument we urge againſt the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion.

CHAP. XIV. That the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion cannot be referred either to a General, or to a Local and particular Perſecution.

ANother Character of falſhood, yet more palpable, and in the very Fact, is this, that if the Thebean Legion ſuffered Death for being Chriſtians, this muſt have happened in the time of the General Perſecution, or of a Local and particular one. Now if we examine exactly all the afflictions and calamities that befel the Church uuder the Reign of Diocleſian, we find neither time nor room where to place the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion. For place it if you pleaſe with Cardinal Baronius in the Year 297. or put it in the Year 286. with Labbe and Pagi, what ſide ſoever you take, you ſhall never make it fall in with the General Perſecution, which happened in the Year 303. according to the Opinions of the Learned

Henr. Noris Epochae ſyron. Diſſ. 3. p. 143.

Valeſius in Notis ad cap. 2. lib. 8.

Baluſius in Notis Lactantii Riccioli Chr. Ref. lib. 4. cap. 10.

Petitus 3. Eccl. Chron. 5▪ Henry Noris, Mr. de Valois, and Mr. Baluze. Riccioli a Jeſuite, in his reformed Chronology finds, fault with Baronius and Petau, for placing the beginning of it in the Year 302. and Remarks that Onuphrius hath been more exact in his Computation, who makes the General Perſecution to begin in the Month of March, and in the Year 303. Samuel Petit hath thought fit to put it off to the Year 304. in his Summary Collections of Chronology, where he ſaith, that the difference about the Celebration of Eaſter, cauſed this Perſecution to begin ſooner in one Country than in another; and that the Emperour▪ Diocleſian (the better to ſurprize the Chriſtians, and to make the Effects of his rage both the more certain and dreadful) commanded they ſhould be Maſſacred on Eaſter-day.

But though the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, could be made to agree in point of time with the General Perſecution, yet this would not remove all difficulties, ſince 'tis poſſible this Perſecution might not reach ſo far as the Country where it is ſuppoſed that the Thebean Souldiers ſuffered. However, notwithſtanding the Diverſity of Opinions about the circumſtances of their Martyrdom, all the Writers who have handled this Matter, do agree, that the Country of Valeſia, and the Neighbourhood of Agaunum had their Soil Honoured with the effuſion of their Blood. Now the buſineſs is, to know whether that Canton was not of Gaul, and Aurel. Victor quae irans Alpes Galliae ſunt Conſtantio ſunt co •• m • ſſae.in the Diviſion of Conſtantius. Aurelius Victor does clearly decide the Queſtion, ſaying, that in the partition of the Empire, Conſtantius had for his ſhare all the Gallick Provinces beyond the Alpes; and one need only caſt his Eye upon the Map, and he will find that Agaunum is beyond the Alpes in reſpect to Rome. In the Book which we have already cited of Dignities of the Empire, Notice is taken of the Seventeen Provinces of Gaul, and amongſt them the Alpes called Grajae and Penninae are comprehended. Now it is certain, that the Ancient Agaunum was Brietus parall. Veter Ge • gr. & Novae pag. 374. ſituated in theſe Alpes, which were Inhabited by a People called Veragri. And therefore, Briet the Jeſuite, a Man ſo very well ſeen in Ancient and Modern Geography, puts in the Fifth Vienneſe Octodurum, which is now the chief City of Valeſia. This Fifth Vienneſe included moſt part of the Alpes called Grecian, and Pennine, and belonged to Gaul, by the Diviſion which the Romans made of the Provinces of the Empire. Ant. Pagi Crit. Hiſt. Chr. p. 218. Morever, Father Pagi proves that theſe Grecian Alpes were none of the Five Provinces, which compoſed the Ancient Province of Narbonne, and that they were in Gaul at the time when the Province of Narbonne was ſeparated and joined to Italy.

Seeing then that the Country of Valeſia, where Agaunum ſtood belonged to the Gauls at that time, and was then under the Government of Conſtantius, this will ſuffice to ſhew that the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, cannot be placed in the time of the General Perſecution Mr.

Boſquet Hiſt. Eccl. lib. 4 c. 11.

Dodwel Diſſ. Cypr. 11.

Boſquet, Biſhop of Montpellier, and Mr Dodwel in his Diſſertations upon St Cyprian, have made it out, that Conſtantius Chlorus was the only Prince of all thoſe that had then a ſhare in the Empire, who never Perſecuted the Chriſtians. And of this great moderation of his, the Donatiſts were not wanting to take Notice, in their Humble Addreſs to Conſtantine, hoping thereby to incline him to mildneſs, and a Toleration of their Sect. Likewiſe Euſebius, in the Life of the Emperour Conſtantine, relates one of his Edicts, in which he gives this Commendation to his Father, that of all his Colleagues in the Empire, he only left the Chriſtians in Peace and unmoleſted. 'Tis true indeed, that yielding to the neceſſity of the times, he comply d ſo far with the two other Emperours, as to permit the Chriſtian

Ver • m autem Dei Templu •• quod eſt in h • miri ••• i • colume ſerv • v •• .

Lactant de Mort. p • rſec. lib. 15.

Temples in his Diviſion to be demoliſhed; But Lactantius obſerves, that he took care that no harm ſhould be done to their Perſons.

For this Reaſon, the defenders of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, will be forced to have recourſe to ſome Local and particular Perſecution, which muſt have been raiſed againſt the Church ſome Years before the time of the General One. But then they ought to mark out to us, out of ſome good Authors both the places and times of theſe Local and particular Perſecutions. For we are a little too hard of Belief for the Legend-writers; nor can we ſwallow the Relations of things ſaid to have been done in the Second and Third Centurys when there is nothing produced in confirmation thereof but Lives and Paſſions compoſed by Monks, who lived ſome Eight or Nine Hundred Years after. And yet it would be no eaſie matter to find any one of that Order, who refers the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion to a particular Perſecution, which only raged in ſome ſingle Countrey. They Matth. Weſtm. pag. 67. have all-ſpoken of it, after the ſame manner as Matthew of Weſtminſter hath done, who places this Martyrdom in the Year 303. and ſaith, that it was at that time that the Thebean Legion, made up of Six Thouſand, Six Hundred, Sixty and ſix S uld • ers, ſuffered Death couragiouſly for the Faith of Chriſt. According to the • hronology of this Benectine Monk, the Thebean Legion ſuffered in the time of the General Perſecution; and he joins this Event with the Martyrdom of St. Alban and other Engliſh Saints; though it is not true neither, that Conſtantius permitted theſe violences to be done in England; and beſides, Gildas, and Polydor Vergil, place their Martyrdom in the Year 305. In the mean while it is worth our Obſervation, that the Manuſcript ſo much commended by Father Chifflet, is different from that which Matthew of Weſtminſter made uſe of, for it is ſaid in that as well as in the Copies which Surius and Baronius followed, that the Legion was compoſed of Six Thouſand, Six Hundred, Sixty ſix Souldiers. We don't pretend however, to deny that there have been ſome Local Perſecutions before that Fatal interview of Diocleſian and Valerius, at Nicomedia, where theſe two Emperours reſolved the General Perſecution. For we do agree with the Learned Theodorus Ruinart, Theod. Ruinart, in Praef. contra Dodwelum.that ſometimes the Governours, the Judges, and the Pagan Prieſts in their turns, raiſed ſome Perſecutions, here and there, in ſome or place or other of the Empire. But we ſay, that it cannot be referred to any of the Local Perſecutions, which are found in Church Hiſtory. If it could be applied to any particular one, it muſt be to that which was raiſed at Rome (and in which Baronius relates that St Sebaſtian ſuffered Martyrdom) rather than to any other. But of this the Cardinal obſerves, that Baronius an. Ch. 286. it extended not much further than Rome, and conſequently not ſo far as the Alpes, and to Agaunum. In ſhort, before the time of the General Perſecution, we find ſome Chriſtians Condemned to Death in ſome parts of the Empire; but before the unhappy Congreſs at Nicomedia, 'ts not poſſible to ſhew any-where, during the whole Reign of Diocleſian, any ſuch Maſſacre as that of a whole Legion.

CHAP. XV. That the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion cannot be reconciled with the Hiſtory, and Years of the Emperour Maximian.

THE Character of Forgery which we have diſpatched in the Precedent Chapter, will appear yet more Evident, by conſidering further, that 'tis ſuppoſed that the Thebean Legion ſuffered Death by Order of Maximian; whereas there is no room for this Martyrdom, either in the Life or Years of this Emperour. The Copies of Surius and Chifflet, and all the Legend-Writers who have followed them, agree in this, that this Emperour cauſed the Thebean Souldiers to be put to Death in an Expedition which he made into Gaul. Accordingly then a place muſt be found for their Martyrdom in ſome of Maximian's Voyages, on the other ſide of the Alpes. Lactantius, in his Hiſtory of the Deaths of the Perſecutors, makes mention of three of them. The Firſt, was occaſioned by the Marriage of his Daughter Fauſta with Conſtantine, to whom he gave the Title of Auguſtus, he having had only that of Caeſar before. He was forc'd to undertake the Second to ſhun the fury of his Souldiers, who were extreamly incenſed againſt him, for deſigning to deprive his Son Maxentius of the Empire, by whom he had been reſtored to the Purple, which he had freely Abdicated before. And he came the third time into Gaul, at his return from his Journey into Hungary, whither he went, but unſucceſsfully, to Sollicite Diocleſian to reſume the Government; and it was then that Conſtantine, perceiving the ill Deſign he had formed to deſtory him, thought it neceſſary to prevent him, and cauſed him to be ſtrangled. But the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, does not anſwer to any of theſe Expeditions, ſince they are all poſterior to the Year 306. and all Hiſtorians agree, that the General Perſecution at that time began to abate in the Weſt. Beſides, it is certain that Maximian in none of theſe Progreſſes paſſed the Alpes with an Army, and that his Fortune and the poſture of his Affairs at that time, did not put him into a condition to deprive himſelf of a whole Legion.

Where ſhall we then find a fourth Expedition of Maximian into Gaul, in which this Emperour might be ſuppoſed to have Murthered the whole Thebean Legion? There is none left but that which is mentioned by Eutropius, and Aurelius Victor. Theſe two Hiſtorians agree that ſome Troops of Banditi or Rapperees, who were called Bagauds, having raiſed a Tumult in Gaul, and put themſelves under the Conduct of Amandus and Aelianus, Diocleſian made Maximian his Partner in the Government, and ſent him in all haſte with an Army to puniſh thoſe Rebels. But the time of this Expedition is not agreed upon. Petau de D • ctr. Temp. lib. xi. cap. 31. Father Petau relates at large the different Opinions of the Learned concerning it, in his Book of the Doctrine of times. He thinks that Maximian's Reign began in the Year of our Lord 285. Diocleſian being then Emperour, and veſted the ſecond time with the Tribunitian Power; and he confutes Baronius who was led into a miſtake by a paſſage of Baluſ. in Notis ad Lactant. Mamertine. Mr. Baluze affirms, that Diocleſian having been raiſed to the Empire on the 20 of November in the Year 284. took Maximian into the Government on the Firſt of April, in the Year 285. and ſets it down as a point univerſally agreed in Hiſtory, that the I wentieth Year of Maximian ought to anſwer his Eighth Conſulſhip. From whence he concludes, that Diocleſian Reigned Twenty Years, Five Months, and twelve Days; and Maximian, Twenty Years, and a full Month. So that if this Calculation be juſt, the beginning of Maximian's Reign ought to be reckoned from the Firſt of April, in the Year 285. Father Pagi an. 284. num; 3. p. 112. Pagi followeth the Author of the Alexandrian Chronicle, and having placed Pagi Diſſert. by • . cap. 2. num. 8. the beginning of Diocleſian's Reign on the 17th of September in the Year 284 he adds that Maximian was Created▪ Caeſar on the 20 of Novemb. the ſame Year.

Eutropius, and Aurelius Victor, are different in their Expreſſion concerning the Character which Diocleſian gave to Maximian, when he ſent him into Gaul againſt the Bagands. Eutropius ſaith, Herculeum Caeſarem miſit, and Aurelius Victor ſaith, Imperatore • jubet. Which difference occaſioneth another Diſpute amongſt the Criticks, viz. Whether Maximian was made firſt Caeſar, and then Auguſtus, according to the uſual Cuſtom; or whether both the Dignities were conferred on him at one and the ſame time. Anthony Pagi, and Henry Noris, differ onely in the time, in which they ſuppoſe Maximian was raiſed to the Dignity of Auguſtus; and they are of Opinion that before this he was made Caeſar. But though both of them are great Maſters, and ſeem able to pronounce upon this Matter, yet Mr. Baluze, in his Notes on Lactantius, is for the contrary, and alledges ſeveral Laws from whence he gathers, that Maximian was firſt Created Auguſtus. Againſt which Opinion of his, a Medal of Francis Angeloin's inſcribed NOBILIS CAESAR, and on the Reverſe PRINCIPI IVVENTVTIS, was thought to make very much. But this difficulty the famous Mr. Cuper, in his Notes on Lactantius hath removed. Where he obſerves, that this Medal ought to be referred to Galerius Maximianus, by reaſon that ſeveral of his are found with the ſame Inſcriptions, which are not upon any of the Medals of Herculeus Maximianus, Collected by Counte Mezabarba.

But the Subject we have before us does not require that we ſhould trouble our ſelves about theſe Chronological queſtions. We are in ſearch of the time when Maximian took another Journey into Gaul, not mentioned by Lactantius. Now the difficulty is not to find out that time, ſeeing it is circumſtanced both in Eutropius, and Aurelius Victor, by two Memorable Events; one of which is his Exaltation to the Empire, and the other the Bagaudian Revolt under their Leaders Amandus and Aelianus. Both which do ſhew, that he undertook the Gallican Expedition in the Year of our Lord▪ 285. to Wit, at the beginning of his Reign, and above Eighteen Years before he took his other Journies ſpoken of by Loctantius. But our buſineſs is to examine, whether we can fix the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion to that time. And the Diſpute is at an end, if we give Credit to thoſe Acts of the Agaunian Martyrs, which both Surius and Baronius have followed. For there mention is made of the Bagauds, of Amandus and Aelianus, of Maximian s Aſſumption to the Empire, and of his Expedition into Gaul with the Thebean Legion. All which does agree well enough with the time we have aſſigned for the ſame Expedition. And it is ſtrange, that Cardinal Baronius, who hath followed the Acts of Surius, and ought conſequently to have joined the time of the Bagaudian Revolt, with that of the Death of the Thebean Souldiers, hath, notwithſtanding this, placed their Martyrdom in the Year 297, viz. Twelve Years after Diocleſian had taken Maximian into the Government, and ſent him into Gaul to ſuppreſs the Rebellion of Amandus and Aelianus. And ſince theſe two Events fell out ſo well to the purpoſe, one would wonder Father Chifflet ſhould be ſo tranſported, upon his finding a Manuſcript in which there is not a word ſpoken of the Begauds, no • of Amandus nor Aelianus, if it were not that King Sigiſmond unluckily appeared there alſo amongſt the reſt. For as theſe two concuring Events very much favoured the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, ſo what is there related of St. Sigiſmond made it evident, that St. Eucherius could not be the Author of the Acts of that Martyrdom, ſince he Dyed ſeveral Years before this Prince came into the World. Bollandus thought he might ſave the Credit of this piece, prove it to be the work of this Holy Biſhop of Lions, and remove the Anachroniſm, by ſaying, that there was formerly a Monaſtery at Agaunum, and that King Sigiſmond only repaired and beautified it. But becauſe it is but a poor ſhift, deſtroyed both by the Acts of Surius, and the Accounts which all the Hiſtorjans give of that Martyrdom, Father Chifflet was overjoyed upon his finding a Manuſcript, wherein not the leaſt mention is made of King Sigiſmond, or of the Bagaudian Inſurrection. We have already declared how good an Opinion we have of Father Chifflet's integrity, which we don't pretend to retract. Nevertheleſs, if he be not the Man who hath helped this place out of the Acts of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, no Body ought to find fault with us, if we ſuſpect that ſome others might have conjured it away. Whatſoever may be the Antiquity of Father Chifflet's Manuſcrpit, ſure Theod▪ Ruin. Praf. in Act. Man. alii r • ſe • uerunt non nulla qua in illis Act is diſplicebant.it is that Impopoſtors are yet much ancienter than it. Now I hope Father Ruinart will not except againſt us, for making ſome advantage of the Advice he himſelf gives in his Anſwer to Mr. Dodwel, viz. That the Collectors of the Acts of Murtyrs have frequently added too, and lop't off ſuch things as they did not like.

But let us come now to the Matter it ſelf, and examine whether the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, can be made to fall in with Maximian's fourth Expedition into Gaul, mentioned by Eutropius, and Aurelius Victor. The Emperour Diocleſian, fearing leſt the Gallican Revolt ſhould be of dangerour conſequence, aſſumes him into the Government, to the end, that by his aſſiſtance he might with more eaſe to himſelf undergo the weight of it; He raiſes an Army with all ſpeed to ſuppreſs this threatning Inſurrection in its Birth; then it is ſuppoſed that he ſent for the Thebean Legion from the Eaſt, to ſerve in the Expedition. And yet they needs will have it, that having paſſed the Mountains with them, and in a manner facing the Enemy, ſuch a Frenzy of ſuperſtition on a ſudden ſeized him, as made him weaken his Army by the Martyrdom of this whole Legion. We took Notice before, that the Author of this Romance was not very cautious in obſerving the Rules of probability, But becauſe ſome things may be true, though they do not ſeem very probable, we ſhall therefore add ſomething of more weight than meer Conjeures, for the proof of our Aſſertion.

Firſt then, let a Man be never ſo little verſed in Roman Hiſtory, he will find no ground there to believe, that Maximian, being but lately admitted to a ſhare in the Empire, ſhould by his own ſingle authority cut off a whole Legion. For though Diocleſian had made him Auguſtus,

Eutrop lib. 10. Diviſuſ que inter eos Romanus Orbis.

Oros. lib. primi Imp. Rom. in du • s partes determinaverant.

yet were they Maſters in Common, and joint ſharers of the Provinces, Arms, and Legions of the Empire. Galeſius and Conſtantius were the Firſt that ſhared the Empire. This the City of Rome took very ill, looking upon it as a diminution of its Power and glory. But this ſharing of the Empire ending in the Victories which Conſtantine got over all his Competitors, Rome became again the Miſtreſs of the Univerſe. Whereupon the Poet Porphyrius, in a Poem which he compoſed in the 15th Year of this Prince, has theſe words.

—lacera cruentis Imperii pars feſſa Poli, diverſa gemehat S • eptra, & Auſoniae moerebat perdita jura.

During the Diviſion of the Empire, each Emperour acted as he pleaſed in his own Diſtrict, and was under no obligation to Communicate his Affairs and Conduct to the other Emperours; whereas when the Empire was poſſeſſed jointly by two or three Emperours, they Conſulted one another in all Affairs of Importance, becauſe each had an equal right to the whole, Aequo Jure, as Eutropius ſaith, ſpeaking Eutrop. lib. 7. of Marcus Aurelius, and of Lucius Verus. Whence we may judge, if it be poſſible in reaſon to ſuppoſe, that Maximian would of his own head have Commanded a whole Legion to be put to Death, and without ſo much as Conſulting Diocleſian, have allarm'd all the Chriſtians throughout the Empire by ſo violent a Perſecution. 'Tis true indeed, if the loſs of a whole Legion, cut off by the Command of a Cholerick and Enraged Prince, were to be look'd upon as a trifling matter, and of no conſquence to the State, there would have been no great need for Maximian upon this occaſion, to have ask'd the Advice of his Colleague; but I queſtion much, whether any conſidering Perſon will think it ſo.

Secondly, Let us reflect upon what the Hiſtorians tell us of the Reign of Diocleſian and Maximian till the time they begun to perſecute the Chriſtians, and we ſhall find that they repreſent thoſe times to us, as times of Eaſe and Plenty, and they ſpeak of their Government as managed with Clemency and Moderation.

Mamert. in gene • hli • ſu • finein.

Ʋt vero lucem • en • ibus extu • iſtis, exi • de ſoluta res 〈◊〉 j • g •• er mar • nt.

Euſ • b. lib. 8. cap. 12. and 13.

Matermin tells Maximian, that no ſooner had the Light of his Government ſhined upon the Empire, but it overſpread all places with peace and ſecurity. Euſebius, in the 12th and 13th Chapter of the 8th Book of his Church-Hiſtory, cannot forbear making frequent mention of the Happineſs, which both the Church and Empire enjoyed before Diocleſian and Maximian had reſolved to Exterminate the Chriſtians. Who can expreſs (ſaith he) the Proſperity and Plenty which the Empire enjoyed, ſo long as thoſe who Governed were well and kindly affected towards us. He had ſaid before, we want Words to expreſs the great value and eſteem which the Doctrine of our Bleſſed Saviour met with amongſt the Greeks and Barbarians, and the perfect Liberty and Tranquility which the Profeſſours of it enjoyed before the Perſecution which was raiſed againſt the Church in our Days. The particular affection the Emperours ſhewed towards thoſe of our Religion, and the Honour they did them, in conferring upon them the Government of Provinces, without obliging them to Sacrifice to their Idols. And a little after he adds. Who can recount the great numbers of thoſe who came over every Day to make profeſſion of our Faith; how many Churches were Erected in every City, and in what Crowds came People to pay their Homage to God; inſomuch, that the Ancient Buildings proving too narrow to receive them, it was neceſſary to have others built more large and capacious. Neither could the Envy of Devils, or Malice of Men, put a ſtop to this Progreſs of Chriſtianity, ſo long as the People of God were not unworthy of his Almighty Protection and Favour. But when the exceſſive Liberty we enjoyed, had ſlackned the ſtrictneſs of our Diſcipline; ſo that we begun to make War amongſt our ſelves with abuſive and bitter Words; and Biſhops Incenſed againſt Biſhops, raiſed diſſentions and diſorders; in a Word, when Malice and Couzenage were come to their height, then Divine Juſtice lift up his Hand to puniſh us, Firſt gently, as it uſeth to do, and permitted thoſe amongſt the Faithful, who made profeſſion of Arms, to be Perſecuted firſt. Now, who can believe that the Thebean Legion was Maſſacred at the time here deſcribed by Mamertine and Euſebius? Can any one Style that a Reign of Peace, Meekneſs, and Felicity, in which above Six Thouſand Six Hundred Perſons were at one time inhumanly Murthered? 'Tis ſuppoſed that Maximian Commanded them to be put to Death, upon their refuſal to Sacrifice to Idols, and yet Euſebius told us juſt now, that both Diocleſian and Maximian conferred the Government of Provinces on Chriſtians, without any obligation to Offer Sacrifice. It was then the Cuſtom amongſt the Romans, that the Proconſuls, the Govenours, and other Magiſtrates ſhould Sacrifice to the Gods, to the ſafety and Genius of the Emperours, and ſhould be preſent at all the publick Sacrifices Offered to them; which is the Reaſon, that the firſt Chriſtians ſhunned thoſe Employments as very dangerous baits, and occaſions of Sin. But their Exemplary integrity being without doubt a motive to the Emperours, to deſire they might be employed in places of publick Truſt, Euſebius obſerves, that they acquitted them from the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .obligation of doing Sacrifice, (as Mr. de Valois Reads that paſſage out of the Manuſcripts of the Medicean, and the Mazarine Libraries) 'Tis true, that Euſebius ſaith, that the Faithful who made profeſſion of Arms were Perſecuted firſt. But this cannot be apply'd to the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion. For it is ſuppoſed that this Legion was Barbarouſly Maſſacred; and Euſebius ſpeaks of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .a Perſecution, whereby God did only Gently and Modarately chaſtiſe the Church. But certainly the Martyrdom of a whole Legion cannot be called a light and gentle Chaſtiſement.

But Thirdly, theſe laſt Words of Euſebius ſhew clearly, that it is not poſſible to make the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, f • ll in with Maximian's Expedition into Gaul againſt the Begauds. Euſebius having ſaid expreſly, that the faithful who made profeſſion of Arms were Perſecuted firſt, we need only find out the time when that Perſecution againſt the Souldiers begun. For if it was in the Year 285. we may ſuppoſe, indeed, that the Thebean Legion was then Condemned to Death, ſince it was about that time that Maximian was taken into the Government, and cauſed the Legions to March into Gaul, to ſuppreſs the Rebelion of Amandus and Aelianus, as Eutropius, and Aurelius Victor relate. But what will they ſay, if the Perſecution of the Souldiers did not begin till above Twelve An • h. Pagi ad an. Ch. 298. Years after that time. Father Pagi places it in the Year 298. and Mr. Dodwel in 301. whoſe Reaſons may be ſeen in his Diſſertations upon St. Cyprian. But without entring upon theſe Diſputes of Chronology it will be ſufficient to prove that the Perſecution of the Souldiers happened ſeveral Years after Maximian's Expedition Lactant. de Mort. Perſe • . cap. 10. into Gaul. Now the Account which Lactantius hath given, both of the time and occaſion of the Perſecution of the Thebean Souldiers, leaves no place to doubt of it. He ſaith, that Diocleſian being anxious about the Succeſs of the War againſt the Perſians, which he had left to the Conduct of Galerius, Conſulted the Aruſpices concerning the Event thereof, and adds, that the Inſpector having told him, that the preſence of the Chriſtians hindred him from making any Diſcovery in the Entrals of the Victims▪ the Emperour thereupon Commanded that the Souldiers ſhould Sacrifice to the Idols, and upon refuſal ſhould be drawn out of their reſpective Ranks, and Disbanded. Mr. Baluze, on this place of Lactantius, ſaith, that Euſebius hath very well obſerved, that the Perſecution begun with the Souldiers; and that really none but thoſe who ſerved in the Army were at firſt Perſecuted. We ought eſpecially to obſerve

Lactant. de Morte Perſecut. cap. 10.

E •• am milites cogi ad n • fanda Sacrificia prae • ipit, ut qui non paruiſſent mili • ia ſolverentur. Hactenus furor ejus & ir a proceſſi • .

that Lactantius ſaith expreſly, that the Emperours Anger and Fury againſt the Souldiers proceeded no further at that time than to Caſhier them. Which Act of his, Euſebius calls a puniſhment; for amongſt the Romans to be Caſhiered and turned out of the Army, was accounted a great ſhame and diſgrace, as Hirtius tells us, ſpeaking Hirtius lib. 5. • e Bello Africano.of the African Wars. However, Euſebius is in the right, to call this Ignominy a light and gentle Puniſhment, in compariſon of the other Evils which the Chriſtians ſuffered ſome Years after. Therefore

Sulpitius Sever. lib. 2. pag. 387.

Sed id inter Perſecu • i • nes um computatu • . Ade • res 〈◊〉 nego ••• f • it quam ut ad Eccleſiarum v • lnera perveniret.

Sulpitius Severus, after having ſaid that Licinius contending for the Empire with Conſtantine, Commanded the Chriſtian Souldiers either to Sacrifice to the Idols, or to lay down their Arms, adds, but we don t reckon this amongſt the Perſecutions, as being too inconſiderable a thing to deſerve a place amongſt the Wounds which the Church received. Had the Thebean Legion ſuffered Martyrdom at that time, they would certainly have been reckoned among the Souldiers who ſuffered Perſecution; and becauſe ſo great and remarkable an Event as this could not have eſcaped the knowledge both of Euſebius and Laciantius, 'tis not likely the latter would have ſaid, that the Emperours did only at firſt Caſhier the Souldiers, and the former would not have called this Perſecution a light and gentle Puniſhment. And ſince 'tis agreed on all hands, that thoſe who made profeſſion of Arms were Perſecuted firſt, 'tis manifeſt that the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion cannot be referred to the Expedition which Maximian made into Gaul, to ſuppreſs the Revolt of Amandus and Aelianus. For Maximian undertook this Expedition ſome Months after his Admiſſion to the Government, about the Year 285. and the Perſecution of the Souldiers, according to Lactantius, did not begin till a long time after. The ſame Author ſaith, that the Perſian Wars did then take up all the thoughts of the Court; whence it follows, that this Expedition did not happen till after he had ſettled his Affairs in Egypt, and ſeverely puniſhed thoſe who had followed the party of Achillaeus, and at the time when he was putting himſelf into a Condition to be revenged upon Narſes King of Perſia, who taking advantage of the Revolt of Egypt▪ made irruptions into Armenia and Meſopotamia. Which hapned ſeveral Years after Maximian's Advancement to the Empire, and his Bagaudian Expedition.

CHAP. XVI. That it is not true, that the Bagauds were Christians, and that the Thebean Legion ſuffered death for refuſing to perſecute them.

IT will not be amiſs to take notice here of an Objection, which may perhaps be made a gainſt us, Viz. That it is true that the Perſecution mentioned in the precedent Chapter did not begin till near the year 298, or 301; But that Maximian was oblig'd to cut off the Theb. Legion upon another account, which was, that thoſe People who had revolted, and went under the nickname of Bagauds, being Chriſtians, the Emperour was afraid leaſt the Theb. Souldiers who Mezeray Hiſt. do France avant Clovis liv. 2. pag. 219. were of the ſame Religion, ſhould joyn with the Rebels, and therefore he thought it the beſt courſe he could take to get himſelf thus rid of them, and that This was the chief, and indeed, the true cauſe of their Martyrdom. Here we are to conſider what Mezeray ſaith in his ſecond Book of the Origin of the French concerning this matter. Theſe are his words. After Carinus at his departure from Gaule had drawn thence all his Legions to go and encounter Diocleſian; the Provinces, being freed from the Troops that kept them in awe attempted likewiſe to ſhake off the heavy Yoke of ſettled Taxes, and the arbitrary extorſions of their Governours: Which lying heavieſt upon the Countrey people, they took up arms firſt & Aelianus and Amandus, two Officers in the Roman Army, were ſo unwiſe as to put themſelves at the head of them. Such ſlaves as were hardly uſed by their Maſters, joyned with them; ſome came into this Party of their own accord, and others were ſurpriſed into it, ſeveral were ſollioited, but moſt of them ſcorned the invitation. This Riſing was call'd Bagaud, and the followers of it Bagauds or Bagaudians. Which word (as ſome ſay) ſignifies Revolt, and perhaps a Revolt of ſuch as lived in Gaud in the old Gallick language, in low Britiſh goúer, & in High dutch wald ſignifie Wood.the Woods, according to the Etymology of the word from the Ancient Celtick Language. For it is likely that thoſe People having no other Fortreſſes and Places to retire to but Woods, they there intrenched themſelves after the manner of the Germans and Ancient Gauls. There were many Woods without doubt in ſeveral places of that Countrey, but the chiefeſt and biggeſt of them was two Leagues from Paris on the River Marne, in a place where now ſtands the Abbey of St. Maur, called des Foſſez, or of the Ditches, becauſe they had digged up a very ſpacious Trench to incamp there. Most of them were Chriſtians. And who knows, but that after ſo many horrid Perſecutions which they had ſuffered, their patience did turn at laſt into a juſt fury in arming them both againſt the Torments, and their Tormentors. Maximian taking a review of his Troops near the Town of Aoſte on this ſide of the Alpês, the Theb. Legion refuſed to take the Oaths with the Ceremonies uſed amongſt the Pagans, and being encouraged by the Speeches of their Tribune Mauritius, choſe rather to undergo two or three Decimations, and at last to be all cut to pieces, then to deſite themſelves by thoſe abominable Rites. The whole Legion was not there, ſome Cohorts having been detached, who, as we ſhall ſee hereafter in another place, ſignaliz'd themſelves by a like Victory. So many brave Men who deſpiſed Death would have ſold their lives to the Romans at a very dear rate, if it had not been more glorious to die for the Faith, which they profeſſed, than to fight for it. I ſay further that they would have ſtrengthened very much the Bagaudian Party, had their Religion permitted them to diſſemble till they had joined them. However Maximian having defeated ſome of theſe Bagauds and received others into his favour, and by this means having divided them, he beſieged their great Intrenchment both by Land and by Water, with ſo great Vigour and Reſolution, that at laſt he took it. All thoſe who were found in it were put to the Sword without exception; and their ſtrong works were ſo entirely ruin'd and demoliſh'd, that nothing of them but ſome few Ditches remained We are to believe, ſaith the Author of the Life of St. Baboulene, that theſe Men being Christians, and deſpiſing their lives for the ſake of their Religion, paſſ'd through Martyrdom to the Kingdom of Heaven; and though we have not their Acts in writing, nevertheleſs their Memory and Names ſhall never be blotted out of the Book of Life. Theſe are the new Weapons wherewith M. de Mezeray furniſhes the Aſſerters of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion. Now all theſe difficulties we are very deſirous to remove, the better to clear this piece of Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory. Firſt then it is ſuppos'd in the Objection, that moſt part of the Bagauds Army were Chriſtians, and that the Emperour Maximian cauſed the Theb. Legion to be cut off, for fear ſo many brave Men ſhould joyn with and ſtrengthen the Rebels. Then it is ſaid, that this Objection is taken out of an Ancient Anonymous Writer, who hath given us the Life of St. Baboulene, and who ought therefore to be credited, by reaſon that theſe Tranſactions happened in an Age nearer to his, than to our times. Our Anſwer to this will not a little contribute, I hope, to diſcover the Falſhood of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion.

And Firſt in this Account of Mezeray, ſupported by the Authority of that Anonymous Writer, we find the Chriſtians divided in their Practice upon a very conſiderable point of Morality. For ſome of them leaving the Plow take up Arms againſt their Sovereign, and others on the contrary being up in Arms lay them down, and patiently ſubmit to the Execution of the barbarous Orders of their Prince. Now to what ſhall we aſcribe this difference in their Judgment and practices? Was it that the Morality on the other ſide of the Alps differ'd from that of the Gauls? Or muſt we attribute the cauſe of this difference to the diverſity of their Climates, Educations, Tempers and Manners? But we ſhould ſpend too much time ſhould we go about to untye this knot, therefore the ſhorteſt way is to 〈◊〉 it, and to 〈◊〉 poſitively, that both 〈…〉 of 〈…〉 that is 〈1 line〉 Chriſtianity would rather looſe than get by it. The Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion is aſſerted, becauſe it is thought very honourable to Chriſtianity; but then to ſupport the Aſſertion, and Inſurrection of the firſt Chriſtians in Gaule is brought in, and a rebellious Conſpiracy to ſhake off the Yoak of their Maſters. So that if thoſe who ſet up for the defence of an Obedience ſo intirely paſſive, have, in the Example of the Theb. Souldiers a Legion of Martyrs to boaſt of: Thoſe, who on the contrary believe, that there are ſome Caſes and Times, in which Patience ought to give place to other Vertues, ſhall find in the Bagauds a whole Army of Chriſtians, in Rebellion againſt the Empire, to oppoſe to that Legion: And ſhall the Example of one ſingle Legion, be of more Weight and Conſideration, then that of a whole Army?

Sulpitius Severus, lib. 2. pag. 283. Secondly, Sulpitius Severus, ſpeaking of the perſecution which ac tum primum inter Gallias Martyria viſa, ſeriùs trans Alpés Religione ſuſcepta. Marcus Aurelius rais'd, againſt the Chriſtians, ſaith, That that was the firſt time that Martyrs were known to have ſuffered in Gaule, Chriſtianity having been received ſomewhat late beyond the Alpes. From which words we may very reaſonably infer, That it is not likely that when Diocleſian admitted Maximian to a Partnerſhip in the Government, the Chriſtians were ſo numerous as to form an Army. But if to deſtroy this conſequence, and the Authority of Sulpitius Severus, it be reply'd, that there is no likelyhood that the Goſpel was preached ſo late in France, a Country ſo near adjoining to Italy, ſince in the time of Marcus Aurelius, the Apoſtles and their Diſciples had publiſhed it in the moſt diſtant parts of the World; we will oppoſe nothing to this Anſwer, that may any way detract from the Antiquity of the French Churches. For beſides, that this would carry us too far beyond our purpoſe, the Perſecution, which their unworthy Poſterity have raiſed againſt us, ſhall never leſſen that high and juſt reſpect and veneration, we have always had for the firſt Churches of the Gauls. But ſuppoſe it were True, that St. Luke, St. Philip, St. Paul, Creſcent, and ſome other Diſciples of Chriſt did Preach the Goſpel in Gaule, and let it be ſuppos'd likewiſe, That it is not without ground that Vienna, Lions, Aix, Narbonne, Sens, Paris, Reims, Limoges, and Toulouſe, do boaſt of having received the Chriſtian Religion from the Apoſtles, and Apoſtolical Men, yet all this would not ſuffice, unleſs we ſhould alſo further ſuppoſe, that theſe firſt Preachers left there both Succeſſors and very great numbers of Converts. Nay, indeed it ought to be made out, That their Preaching proved very effectual, and made conſiderable progreſs every where. But if none but well approved Acts muſt be truſted, this matter will prove of greater difficulty than may at firſt be imagined. The Aſſembly of the French Clergy having ordered all the Biſhops to ſend Memoirs to the Meſſicurs of St. Marthe, concerning the Foundations and Antiquity of the Churches of their Dioceſes; theſe learned Men made to theſe Memoirs ſeveral Additions and Diſcoveries of their own, and at laſt cauſed thoſe large Volumes of theirs, of Chriſtian France, to be Printed: 'Tis true we find in them, that the Chriſtian Religion was Preached in Gaule very early by the Apoſtles and their Diſciples; and we believe, That in that reſpect, the Titles of the Gallican Churches are as good as thoſe of many other Churches that flatter themſelves with the like belief of their having been honoured with the Preſence, and the Preaching of ſome or other of the Apoſtles, who came there in Perſon. But if you ſtrictly and impartially conſider the Works of Meſſicurs de St. Marthe, after the Apoſtolick Age, you fall into a kind of Wilderneſs, a large waſte of almoſt 250 years, fill'd up with nothing but fabulous Legends and uncertain Traditions, except the Relations of ſome few Martyrs, as thoſe of Lions, who ſhine as Stars, in ſo profound and long a Darkneſs, all the reſt being made up of nothing but groundleſs Suppoſitions, or Acts that may eaſily be proved to be ſpurious. I have by me the Original Copy of the Memoirs, which Artus de Lion Biſhop of Gap ſent to Mrs. de St. Marthe, written by himſelf, and ſigned with his own hand. Where he proves, that St. Demetrius, Diſciple of the Apoſtles, was Biſhop of Gap; and gives two Reaſons for it; the Firſt is, That before the Proteſtants had pull'd down the Epiſcopal Palace in the year 1577, there were ſeen upon the Walls of the great Hall, the Images of the Biſhops of Gap, and that St. Demetrius was at the head of them with theſe Words, Saint Demetrius the Firſt Biſhop of the Church of Gap, and Diſciple of the Apoſtles: And that by the Grace of God they had yet an Eye Witneſs of it in their Chapter, namely Mr. Paul of Bauvais, who when he wrote theſe things, was in the hundredth year of his Age. The other Authority he produces is taken out of a Berviary, which Bertrand of Champeaux Biſhop of Gap, cauſed to be Printed in the year 1499, where St. Demetrius is placed in the Calender on the 26th of October, with the Character of Biſhop and Martyr, and the Word totum Duplex, which according to the uſe of the Church of Gap ſignifies the ſame as (according to the uſe of the Council of Trent) Duplex primae Claſſis, which is proper to the Feſtivals of Patrons and Titulars of Churches. After theſe ſo ſpecial and convincing proofs, who would venture now to deny that St. Demetrius, Diſciple of the Apoſtles, did plant the Faith in the Dioceſs of Gap? That Breviary of Gap, Printed in the Year 1499. is a curious Piece indeed. We read there in the. 8th Leſſon of St. Demetrius's Office, ſpeaking of the Etymology of that Saint's Name, that Demetrius ex eo dictus, quia de Medio, id eſt, de Mundo triumphavit: And in the fourth Leſſon, that the City of Gap, having been taken by the Sarazens, Count William beat them out of it, and gave the half thereof for the Redemption of his Soul, to God and to the Bleſſed Virgin Mary, in the Year of our Lord 86, on the Kalends of January, in the fifth Indiction. Though it is well known to every body that the uſe of the Indictions did not begin till three Hundred Years after Chriſt, and that the Sarazens did not make Inruptions into Gaule till ſeveral years after. Should we come to Examine narrowly the traditional Origins of moſt Gallican Churches, we ſhould not, I think, find much more ſolidity in any of them. And eſpecially we may obſerve that after the Firſt Age, there happened to that kind of Traditions ſuch an Eclipſe, or Diſcontinuation, that they do'nt appear again till after the time of the General Perſecution. And yet notwithſtanding, if we believe Mezeray and take his Anonimous Writer's bare word for it, the Chriſtians made a figure great enough at that time in Gaule, to raiſe whole Armies againſt the Emperours.

However, there is no need of ſtraining very much for to preſerve to the Churches of France their Antiquity, and to Sulpitius Serverus the Authority he deſerves in a matter of this nature. For though the Apoſtles and their Diſciples had preached the Chriſtian Religion in Gaule very early, yet this bleſſed Seed, as well as that in the Parable, was ſoon after choak'd by thorns, and ſprung not up again till a long time after, ſo that it was very late before it came to any conſiderable Maturity there. Gregory of Tours gives us this way of ſaving both the Authority of Sulpitius Severus, and the Antiquity of the Gallick Church, who ſaith, that about the Year 250, under the Reign of Decius, the City of Toulouſe had Saturnine for its Biſhop, and that he came from Rome with ſix others to preach the Goſpel in Gaule, Viz. Gatian at Tours, Trophimus at Arles, Paul at Narbonne, Dionyſius at Paris, Aſtremonicus at lermont, and Martial at Limoges Theſe are then the new Evangeliſts ſent in the time of Decius, to re-kindle the Light of the Goſpel in Gaule, which had been ſo long extinguiſhed there. From whence it may be gathered that the Chriſtian Religion had not then made any great progreſs amongſt the Gauls, ſince in the Year of our Lord two hundred and fifty there was need to preach Pagl. 214. Galliarum nomine antiquam Narbonenſem Provinci • m minimè comprebendit.it a freſh there, and even at Narbonne and Arles, Citys rather belonging to Italy then to Gaule, and which Sulpitius meant not to ſpeak of, if we may believe Father Pagi. How is it poſſible then to imagin that four Years after the Reign of Decius, the Chriſtians ſhould be ſo multiply'd in Gaule, as to be in a condition to make up vaſt Armys, and thoſe ſo formidable as to ſtrike a terrour into Rome it ſelf, and to perplex its Emperours. This they would fain perſwade us, by Aſſerting peremptorily, that the Bagauds were Chriſtians, and that Maximian deſtroy'd the Theb. Legion for no other reaſon, but becauſe he was afraid They ſhould joyn with them.

But Thirdly, They are at a very great loſs for Arguments to prove the Martyrdom of their Theb. Legion, when they are forced to this ſhift of ſuppoſing thoſe Bagauds to have been Chriſtians. For they caſt no ſmall blemiſh upon the Ancient Gallican Church, who fix ſuch a Character upon her Sons▪ & beſides they are very much unacquainted with the Morals of the Chriſtians of thoſe Primitive Ages, who think they were capable of ſuch injuſtice and violences, as the Bagauds ſtand charg'd with in Hiſtory. Therefore Mezeray receiving the Bagauds into the Church, thought fit to clear them from theſe odious Aſperſions and to juſtify their proceedings. Who knows, ſaith he, but that having ſuffer'd ſo Mez. Hiſt. of France before Clovis lib. 2. pag. 219. many horrible Perſecutions, their Patience turn'd at laſt into a juſt Fury, in arming themſelves both againſt the Torments and the Tormentors. Bucherius endeavours likewiſe to excuſe them ſaying, That the Bagauds were moved to a Rebellion Aegidius Bucherius Belg. Rom. num. 6. pag. 220. which was in a manner juſt, by reaſon of the Crueltys and Tyranical Impoſitions of their Governours.

Bagaudas ad Rebellionem tum ferè juſtam Praepoſitorum ſuorum acerbitatibus & tyrannicis incitates. Salvianus did the ſame before them, whom perhaps they have both followed.

Savl. lib. 5. He ſaith, That the Bagauds oppreſſed by their unjuſt Judges, loſt all De provinciâ inceperunt eſſe Barbari quia non permittebantur eſſe Romani.reſpect for the Majeſty of the Empire, becauſe they had been Stript of the Rights and Priviledges of Roman Liberty.

In ſhort, the Emperor Auguſtus, the better to procure himſelf the good Affection of the Gauls, had granted to ſome of them the Roman, to others the Latine, and to others again the Italic Laws and Liberties. Whence Salvian took occaſion to ſay: We call the Bagauds Rebels and Profligate Villains, when 'tis we that have hurried them into theſe Outrages. For how came they to be Bagauds, but by our own injuſtice, by our proſcriptions of their Perſons, and violent Ʋſurpations of their Estates; and this is the effect of their being condemned to death and hang'd for the Robberies of their Judges, That they are now become like Barbarians, becauſe they were not ſuffered before to live like Romans.

That Prieſt of Marſeilles, who wrote about the year of Our Lord 495, adds ſeveral other things, whereby the Crimes and Violences which were imputed to the Bagauds are laid to the Charge of the Governours of the Gauls, of their Judges and of the Collectors of the Taxes. But he never ſpeaks the leaſt Word, from whence we may conclude, that the Bagauds were Chriſtians, but on the contrary, his way of ſpeaking on their behalf ſhews plaingly enough, that they did not profeſs the Chriſtian Religion, we need only compare his Apology with thoſe of Athenagoras, of▪ St. Auſtin, of Tertullian, and eſpecially of Arnobius, who lived at the time of the Bagaudian Revolt. Theſe Fathers ſpeak of nothing ſo much as of the Piety, Meekneſs, Charity and Innocence of thoſe happy Ages of the Church. Whereas Salvian Apologizes for the Bagauds by excuſing their Crimes of Injuſtice, Violence and Rebellion. Were that true which Mezeray ſaith of them, perhaps Eutropius and Aurelius Victor, would have told us ſomething concerning their Religion. Proſper might alſo have taken ſome notice of it, ſince he makes mention Eumenius in Paneg. de ſchol Juſt.of them in his Chronology; ſo likewiſe Eumenius in his Panegyrick, wherein he informs us, that the Bagauds having beſieged Autun, that City implored the Emperour's Aſſiſtance. But it is moſt incredible that Marmertine would have been ſilent in this Matter in the Panegyrick, which he made at Treves in praiſe of the Emperour Maximian. Mr. Cuper ſaith, that he made it in the Cuper Notae in La. p. 145. H. Noris Diſſ. de Num. Dio. Mammer. in Paneg. pag. 91. year 288. The Learned Henry Norris puts it a year later, in his curious Diſſertations upon the Medal of Diocleſian and Maximian. Howſoever it be, Mamertine made this publick Speech but few years after the defeat of the Bagauds; wherein he endeavours to quicken his diſcourſe by drolling upon their Army; and Cum Militares habitus ignari Agricolae app • tiverunt. Cum Arator Peditem, cum Paſtor Equitem, cum hoſtem barbarum ſuorum Cultorum Ruſticus Vastator inſtitutus est.makes a meer jeſt of it: That a Crew of ignorant Ruſticks ſhould pretend to the Exerciſe of Arms, and Military Diſcipline; that the Plowman ſhould change his Goad for a Pike; the Shepherd leave his Flock to turn Trouper; and that the Husband man ſhould plunder and waste his own Eſtate, and deſtroy the Fruits of his own Labour with as little concern as the moſt Barbarous Enemy would have done.

From which ſharp and pungent Expreſſions, One may give a ſhrewd Gueſs at what he would have added, had the Bagauds profeſſed the Chriſtian Religion. Preſident Fauchet is One of the French Writers, who hath made the greateſt diſcoveries in the Gallick Antiquities. But it does not appear, that he was of Opinion, that the Bagauds Fauchet lib. 1. Antiq. Gall.were Chriſtians; for he ſaith of them. The Gauls being overburdened with publick Subſidies and Taxes roſe up in Arms in the year of our Lord 290 or thereabouts, under the conduct of Amandus and Aelianus, and took the Name of Bagauds, which ſome ſay, ſignifies in the old Gallick Language, Forced Rebels or Traitors, and ſome are of Opinion, that they were all Peaſants, and will have it, That the VVord Bagaud ſignifies Tribute; the heavy Taxes being in ſome parts of France not many years ago, called Bagoges. Theſe troubles were appeaſed by Maximian, Scalig. in Chro. pag. 222. Diocleſians Partner in the Empire. Joſeph Scaliger, ſaith, That Bagaud is not a French VVord, but the Name of a Faction or People, and that ever ſince the time of Diocleſian, the Highway-men and Robbers were call'd Bagauds. Which agrees with what Aur. Vict. Excitamanu Agreſtium & Latronum▪ quos Bagaudas Incolae Vocant. Aurelius Victor ſaith, That Amandus and Aelianus gathered together great numbers of Peaſants and Robbers. And that which ſhews it to be the Name of a Faction or Party according to Joſeph Scaliger's Obſervation, is, that Idacius in his Chronology ſpeaks of the Bagauds, who mutined in Spain in the Province of Tarragonia, under the Kings Rechila and Theodoricus. 'Tis alſo very likely, that they wandred from one Countrey to another as the Hordes of the Tartars do. This Conjecture is ſeconded by what Proſper tells us of a Phyſician nam'd Eudoxius, who took ſhelter in the Bagaud, which then had changed In Bagauda id temporis mora delatur. Station. And becauſe perhaps they lived in Tents, their Name might well be derived from thence; ſince Amerbachius remarks that formerly the Tents were call'd Baugas. Menage in his Origines of the French Tongue ſaith, That Ciron fetched the term Bagaud from the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which ſignifies in Suidas to live a Vagabond, or rambling Life, and that Mr. Bochart derived it from the Hebrew Bagad, which ſignifies, ſaith he, to revolt, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 though it is properly uſed for Perfidious. He relates beſides one of the Memoirs, which Mr. Dupuy communicated to him upon the Names which divers Nations and People have given to the Gangs of Robbers, or Highway-men, where the Bagauds ſeem to Anſwer to the Ʋſcoks of Dalmatia, the Coſaks of Poland, the Heydukes of Hungary, the Arabs of Africa, and the Pyrenean Mikelets. So that it makes doubtleſs very much to the honour of the Ancient Gallican Church to maintain, that thoſe Bagauds profeſſed the Chriſtian Religion. Thus we ſee what poor ſhifts they are forc'd to make uſe of in defending the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion, when they find themſelves oblig'd to aſſert that the beſt and moſt Ancient Chriſtians were Banditi, Rebels, and Rapperies. And beſides let the ſay what they will, they ſhall never perſwade us that in the Church of the Third Century, there were ſufficient numbers of theſe goodly Chriſtians to make up an Army. So that upon the whole it ſeems much better to reject as we do, the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion as a groundleſs Romance, then to caſt ſuch a ſcandal upon the primitive and golden Ages of the Church? But had Mazeray and the other Writers read with attention the fifth Book of Salvian, in which he deplores the ſad misfortune and miſeries of Gaule, they would never have imagin'd, that the Bagauds had been Chriſtians. The Chriſtians being there very numerous in his time and involved in publick calamities, Salvian repreſents them as Perſons of a Spirit and Principles quite different from thoſe which Mezeray attributes to the Bagauds. VVhat place is there (ſaith he) where the Magiſtrates and Governours of Towns do not devour the entrails of the Widows and Orphans, nay and even of the Saints too, with whom they deal in like manner, becauſe either the love they have for their Religion hinders them from making any reſiſtance, or their innocence and humility does not leave them the power to do it.

This was the true Spirit of the Ancient Galican Church, and we ought rather to follow Salvian, who lived nearer to thoſe firſt times of Chriſtianity, then Mazeray and the Legend-Writers, who ſay that the Chriſtians in Gaule roſe up in Arms, and that Maximian cauſed the Theb. Legion to be put to the ſword, for fear they ſhould joyn with and ſtrengthen that Party. Nevertheleſs it is Univerſally believed as a certain Truth, not only at Turin, but throughout all Italy. All the Modern Writers ſpeak of it after the ſame manner; and all the Preachers on the Feſtival of the Theb. Soulders do from their Pulpits deliver it ſo to the People. After the very ſame manner Emmanuel Teſauro, famous for ſeveral of his other Works, and eſpecially his Hiſtory of the Kings of Lombardy, relates the matter in the account he gives of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion in his Hiſtory of the City of Turin Printed in • olio; where he ſaith that at the Place where St. Mauritius's Em. Teſ. •• iſi. de Torino lib. 2. pag. 112. Ch • ogni 〈◊◊〉 a ••• ove et giur • ſſe la guerra • on • ro a' Chriſtiani.Town now ſtands, there was an Altar upon which the Emperour Maximian commanded all the Souldiers of his Army to ſacrifice to Jupiter, and ſwear hostilety against the Chriſtians. But Mezeray, Teſauro, and all the others have been led into this miſtake by the Acts of the Martyrs of Agaunum. For thoſe Acts in Surius's Copy and in that of Chiſſlet do attribute the cauſe of their Death to their refuſal to go and perſecute the Chriſtians in Gaule. Paſſio Mart. Ag. C •• a hi •• ut c • teri militum ad per • r thendam Chriſtianorum multitudinem deſtin trentur, &c.There it is ſaid, that they, together with the reſt of the Army, were Commanded to perſecute the Chriſtians, and that they alone refuſed to Execute that Bloody Order. And a little after it follows, that the Emperour having commanded the whole Theb. Legion to be decimated, ſent new Orders, to force all thoſe who were left to promiſe that they would perſecute the Christians. But this chiefly appears in the Speech the Theb. Souldiers are made to ſpeak to Maximian, wherein the Author of theſe Acts hath diſplayed all his Wit and Rhetorick. We offer you, ſay they, the beſt Service our hands can perform, againſt all your enemies whatſoever; but we look upon it as the blackeſt of crimes, to imbrue them in innocent blood. Theſe hands know how to fight against VVicked men and Rebels to the Empire, but they have never yet learned to deſtroy good Men and loyal Subjects &c.—You command us to go and ſeck for the Chriſtians, that they may be brought to puniſhment, but there is no need for you to make theſe enquiries any further, for here we our ſelves are Chriſtians, and do confeſs God the Father the Author of a • things, Jeſus Chriſt his Son, and the Holy Ghoſt. This one particular related in all the Acts of the Agaunian Martyrs, to wit, that Maximian's Army was ordered to perſecute the Chriſtians, and to puniſh their Rebellion, ſhews evidently the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion to be but a counterfeit Story. Such a ſtudied and pathetick Speech as this, which they are made to deliver to the Emperour, is another proof of the Forgery of their Acts. Theſe little School Declamations would have been very unbecoming the mouths of dying Chriſtians and Martyrs, whoſe minds were wholely taken up with the thoughts of another Life. Whenſoever ſuch Speeches as theſe are found in the Acts of Martyrs we may well conclude, that either thoſe Acts are counterfeit, or that thoſe Speeches were added to them by ſome Chriſtians of the following Ages. The true Acts of Martyrs, are thoſe that have been taken out of the publick Regiſters, Church-Offices, and Proconſular Acts. Now after the Stentence of Death pronounced againſt the Chriſtians, it was not uſual amongſt the Romans to inſert or add to them Mezer. Etat de la Religion dans les Gaules liv. 4. pag. 486.any thing more in the publick Regiſters. The Opinion of Mezeray upon this matter is ſo juſt and ſo rational, That it is well worth reciting. In all the Authentick Acts of Martyrs (ſaith he) you will find an ardent Charity for God and their Brethren, a modeſty and humility ſo much the greater by how much they were more conſtant and worthy of Glory, an entire confidence in the Grace of God, an extream diffidence of their own Weakneſs, much Meekneſs and Compaſſion for thoſe who were fallen, great Wiſdom and Strength, and above all, continual Prayers to God: All which godly diſpoſitions render thoſe other Acts, which make Martyrs utter long Speeches and elaborate Diſcourſes, Invectives and Threatnings, juſtly ſuſpected.

Fourthly, ſince Mezeray was induced to believe, that the greateſt part of Maximian's Army were Chriſtians, only upon the Authority of the Authors of St. Baboulene's Life, it will not be amiſs to examine what can be built upon this Writer's Authority; And i • we caſt but half an eye upon this Work of his, we ſhall plainly diſcern that the whole from the beginning to the end of it is made up of nothing but fabulous Legends and Fictions. The Manucript is kept at Paris in the Library of St. Germain Des-Prez, and James Dubrcuil, a Monk of that Abbey, made an abrigdment of it, and publiſhed it in the Year 1614. Mr. Du Cheſne inſerted it ſome Years after in his Hiſtory of France; Father Le-Cointe takes notice of it alſo Le-Conte An Fr. tom. 3. p. 73. Anonymum Fabulatorem qui geſta Regum Francorum ſcripſit.in his Annals, and rejecteth it as altogether unworthy of credit; for he obſerveth, that this Writer exactly follows in every thing that Anonymous Impoſtor, who wrote the Acts of the Kings of France; of which he gives theſe following particulars. Firſt, That he makes Erchenald Major of the Palace in the firſt Year of Clovis, whereas Fredegair calls him, who was then in that Office Aeganes. Secondly, that he confounds Aubert, Biſhop of Paris under King Clovis, with Agilbert, who was Biſhop of that •• e under Clotary. Son to Clovis. Thirdly, that of two Baboulenes, one of whom was Abbas Bob • enſis, and the other Abbas Foſatenſis, he makes but one. Fourthly, That he reckons but 85. Years from the Death of Clovis the firſt to the Death of Clovis the ſecond; Fifthly, That he makes Clovis the ſecond to ſucceed his Father Dagobert in the Year of our Lord 643, in the firſt Indiction. And ſeveral other faults he finds in the ſame Author all contrary to the known truth of Hiſtory. But a moſt notable one is his Saying, that the Abbey of St. Maur des Foſſez is ſituate in the place where formerly the Camp of the Bagauds was, and that they incamped there becauſe there was then ſtanding an old Caſtle, built by Julius Caeſar, incloſed with Walls, and ſecured on all ſides with large Ditches. The truth is, that that Abbey of St. Maur is call'd by ſeveral Writers of the Later Ages Castrum Bagaudarum. Mr. Menage in his Origines upon the Word Bagauds ſaith, that in a Charter of the Abbey of St. Maur, granted in the Year 868. St. Maur des Foſſez is call'd Caſtrum Bagaudarum, and adds becauſe Anciently it was a Fort of the Bagauds. But who told that Anonymus Author, that Julius Caeſar had built there a noble Caſtle, Nobiliter Conſtructum. He is the only Writer who ſpeaks of that Caſtle, there is not the leaſt mention of it in the Commentaries of Julius Caeſar, though all his Actions in Gaule are therein Writen with the greateſt exactneſs. Moreover, this Oroſ. lib. 9 cap. 25.Impoſtor makes Oroſius to ſay things, which he never thought of. For Oroſius ſaith, that Amandus and Aelianus having got a conſiderable number of Peaſants together, raiſed great diſturbances in Gaule, which Oblig'd Diocleſian to create Maximianus Herculeus, Caeſar, and to ſend him thither, who being a Man of conſiderable experience in War, eaſily diſperſed that Army of Peaſants which was altogether without Order and Diſcipline. But this Anonymous Scribler makes Oroſius to ſay, That Amandus and Aelianus were Chriſtians, and that they revolted only, becauſe they thought that their Religion did not allow them to obey Pagan Princes. It is a ſtrange impudence this, firſt to invent Fables, and then for the confirmation of them, to quote a Famous Hiſtorian. If we take this Authors quotation out of him for truth, Oroſius attributes very Noble and Evangelical Morals to the Chriſtians of the Third Century, in making them ſhake off the Authority of their lawful ſuperiours, only becauſe they were not Tirlemont 2. p. • om. 3. pag. 868.of their own Religion. Monſieur de Tirlemont makes a Remark very ſu • iable to the purpoſe. It is upon the Acts of St. Maximus, related by Baronius in the year 254. There ariſes, ſaith he, yet greater difficulties from what Optimus ſaith, That the Edict of Decius, commanded all Chriſtians to forſake their Superſtition, and to acknowledge their lawful Prince, on whom all things depended, and to Worſhip his Gods. Againſt which Mr. Tirlemont with great reaſon does except thus. What does all this mean? Should then the Chriſtians have made any difficulty to acknowledg Decius for their Emperour? By no means. But the truth is, that though they were the moſt Submiſſive and Trueſt Subjects to their Princes, Nevertheleſs, becauſe they did not prefer them to God himſelf, they were deemed to fall from the duty of their Allegiance. In fine, this Anonymous Writer of Mezeray's relates the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion very differently, both from the counterſeit St. Eucherius, Surius, and Father Chifflet. For he ſaith, that Maximian having ordered, that all the Souldiers of his Army ſhould ſwear upon the Altars of his Gods, Sacrifice to them, and oblige themſelves by an Oath, that they would perſecute the Chriſtians where-ever they ſhould meet with any of them: Mauritius anſwered for the whole Theb. Legion under his Command. We know, O Emperour, how to fight againſt Rebels and Wicked Perſons; but we know not how to make War upon Good Men, and our own Fellow Subjects: Though we are all well Arm'd, yet we do'nt make any reſistance, as being more willing to have our own blood ſhed, than to ſhed that of others. So without any more ado they ſtretched out their necks to the Executioners, and were raiſed by their Torments to the glory of Paradiſe. And thus this Anonymous Author leads us immediatly to the end of his Romance, whereas the ſuppoſed St. Eucherius, after Maximian hath given his barbarous Orders, makes the Theb. Legion to withdraw; ſuppoſes, that it refuſes to march; ſaith, that it was only decimated at firſt; makes the Emperour to reiterate his Orders, relates their Speech to this Prince; and ſo entertaining his Reader with a great number of intervening particulars, he at laſt brings him to the Cataſtrophe of his Tragedy. Whence it follows, that the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion is not originally found but in falſe and ſuppoſititious Writings, and was only related at firſt by Impoſtours. One invented and publiſh'd the Story of this Martyrdom, Another vouch'd for the Truth of that Narrative, by another of his own: And upon the credit of theſe two Relators, hundreds of others believed it, and at laſt it became a common Opinion in the World. For a Tale never miſſes to be credited, when it begins to grow ancient; and we ſee every day, that when any Relation hath paſſed for current for fifty or threeſcore years, it is then almoſt too late to Contradict, or call it in Queſtion.

CHAP. XVII. That it is not True, That ſome Cohorts of the Theb. Legion were detached out of Maximian's Army to March againſt Carauſius.

TOWARDS the end of the counterfeit Agaunian Acts there is a paſſage which affords us another proof, that this Story of the Theb. Legion is a Forgery. Ex eadem Legione fuiſſe dicuntur etiam illi Martyres, Urſus & Victor quos ſoloduro paſſos fama confirma • , &c.It was, ſaith the Author, a common report, That Ʋrſus and Victor, two Souldiers of that Legion, ſuffered death for Chriſt at Soleurre.

If we ask the Legend Writers, how it came to paſs, that theſe two Theb. Souldiers left their Legion, and were martyred ſo far off in Suiſſerland, they anſwer, that Maximian upon his March into Gaule, to compoſe the Bagaudian troubles, was inform'd that Carauſius had revolted, and ſeized on both the Port of Bologne and the Navy which the Romans kept there. Which news oblig'd him to make a great detachment of his Army, and to ſend it in haſte down the Rhine againſt this Rebel. They add, that there were amongſt this detachment ſome Cohorts of the Theb Legion, all the Souldiers whereof were maſſacred upon the roads, upon the news of what had happened at Agaunum to the body of the Legion; ſo that Ʋrſus and Victor were put to death at Soleurre: Three Hundred and Eighteen were thrown into a Well at Colen, and the reſt in ſeveral places ſuffered Martyrdom. If you ask them further, who told them all theſe Tranſactions and Particulars, they cite you one Helinaud a Monk of the Ciſtertian Order, and Author of the Acts of Florentius, Caſſius, Victor, Gerion and ſeveral other Souldiers of the Theb. Legion. Theſe Acts are found Sur. rom. 5. 10. Octo. Bar. rom. 2. an. ch. 297. num. 18.in Surius on the 10th of October, where he puts the death of theſe pretended Saints; and it is ſtrange, that Cardinal Baronius ſhould not ſcruple to follow theſe Acts, and to make uſe of them, when they are full of ſuch viſible and Palpable Untruths; unleſs he did it for the reaſon we have formerly given, viz. That in examining the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion ſo many Apocryphal Authors and ſuppoſititious Writings do occur by the way, that it is very troubleſom to get rid of them. Which thing however, far from being favourable to that Martyrdom, ought the rather to render it more ſu • picious, ſeeing that nothing can be produced in its defence but ſpurious and counterfeited Acts. But let us hear what Helinaud himſelf ſaith, he tells us; That the Emperour Maximian marching againſt the Bagauds had notice given him, that Carauſius was forming ſome enterpriſe againſt the Empire; That this Carauſius was a Man of quality, and made by the Romans Governour of a Province near the Ocean and upon thoſe Confines of Gaule and Saxony, which the Franks, driven a ſecond time out of their own Countrey, were come to inhabit. That the Emperour upon this News gave Orders that part of his Army ſhould go down the Rhine; amongſt which were ſome Cohorts of Chriſtian Souldiers commanded by Gerion, Victor, Caſſius and Florentius. Then he relates the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion, upon their refuſing to adore an Idol, that Maximian ſet up at a place called afterwards St. Maurice, and to which he Order'd all his Army to do Sacrifice. Then he ſaith, that the Emperours Life-Guards followed the Detachment ſent against Carauſius, and that having underſtood, that Caſſius and Florentius with ſeven others were of the Theb. Legion, they cut off their heads near Verona on the Rhine; That Gerion marching before with three hundred and eighteen Theb. Souldiers, the Imperial Ministers came up to them before they had heard any thing of this maſſacre of their Fellow Soldiers; That all of them received with conſtancy the Crown of Martyrdom in a Field near Colen, and that the Executioners having cut their Bodies to pieces threw them into a deep Well. Then headds, That the other Cohort com mnded by Victor was marching in great haſte to their Rendevouz, and was come to the Town of the Gauls, call'd by the Inhabitants Troy, or Xanthus, in rememberance of the Old Troja, from whence their Anceſtors came. But that while they were encamping in the pleaſant Meadows, near that place, the Commiſſioners of the Emperor arrived, who having maſſacred Victor, that Illuſtrious Soldier of Jeſus Chriſt, with three hundred and thirty other Theb. Souldiers, ſunk their dead Bodies into marſhy Grounds and Ditches.

Mezeray has alſo ſuffer'd himſelf to be impoſed upon by this account of Helinaud, as well as by that other of the Anonymous Author of St. Baboulene's Life. Since therefore he has collected the materials of his Hiſtory of France, before the times of Clovis, out of ſuch uncertain and adulterate writings, this may ſerve as a caution to his Readers not to believe every thing he ſaith. Mezeray Hiſt. of France before Clovis Lib. 2. pag. 228.This Helinaud, ſaith he, wrote about the year 1212, but he muſt have taken this Narrative from other Authors more ancient than himſelf. But for thoſe which he makes uſe of, we know nothing of them, I wiſh they had told us where that new Troy was, which was then inhabited by the Gauls. Some are of Opinion that he meant by it, the Trajan Colony, and that through Ignorance and Affectation they imagined it to have been a Trojan Colony. But if there ever really was a City in that Countrey call'd Troy, we muſt believe, that it was built by the Gauls, and that they were ever afterwards perſuaded of their Trojan Original; being either flattered into that Opinion by the Romans, the better to tame them by a pretended affinity; or elſe attributing to themſelves that Honor, as not willing to yeild in point of Antiquity to thoſe to whom they were not inferior in Valour. But the following Remarks will ſuffice to ſhew what little certainty there is both in the Text of Helinaud Helin. and in Mezeray's Commentary.

Carauſius quidam Nobilis Eu. Carauſius qui viliſſims natus, Oroſ. Carauſius quidem genere infimus. Firſt, This Ciſtercian Monk makes Carauſius to have been a Man of quality, whereas Eutropius, who in all likelyhood was better informed than Helinaud, about the birth of Carauſius, ſaith expreſly, that he was a Man ſprung from the very dregs of the People. Which account of him is confirmed by Oroſius, who calls him alſo a Man of the meaneſt extraction.

Secondly, Helinaud ſaith, That Caſſius and Florentius, with ſeven other Theb. Souldiers ſuffered at Verona on the River Rhine. This Surius alſo relates upon the Credit of thoſe Acts; and Baronius hath inſerted them in his Annals. 'Tis Baron. Martyr. Rom. pag. 402. ad 10. Oct. Sed Verona perperam legitur loco Bonae. true, that this Cardinal being afterwards ſenſible of this groſs blunder, hath corrected it in his Notes on the Roman Martyrology, where he ſaith, that inſtead of Verona, we ought to read Bon, which is a Town of Germany ſituate on the Rhine near Colen. But does he eſtabliſh this his correction by the authority of any more authentick Manuſcript? Does he ſay, that he hath taken it out of a more exact Copy? Not at all. He only ſaith, that it is his Conjecture, Baron. ubi horum ſanctorum Corpora requieſcere accepimus.becauſe he hath been told that it is at Bon, where the Reliques of theſe two Theb. Souldiers are kept. So that if he had been told, that their Reliques were at Baſil, Worms, or Spire, he would in all likelyhood have made no difficulty in ſetting down any of theſe inſtead of Verona. And for the ſame reaſon another may conjecture, that it was at Verona in Italy, becauſe in that Town of the Milaneſe, they think they have the Reliques of Caſſius, as Garnier a Canon relates it in his Hiſtory of St. Alexander.

Eutro. Cum apud Bononiam pertractum Belgicae & Armoricae pacandum mare accepiſſet, quod Franci & Saxones infestabant. Thirdly, Eutropius ſaith, that Carauſius was by the Romans commiſſionated at Bologne, to free thoſe Seas from the Piracies of the Franks and Saxons.

Helin.

Procurator conſtitutus erat Provinciae quae eſt juxta Oceanum, ubi Franci jam ſecundo a ſedibus expulſi juxta Gallorum & Saxonum conſinia conſederunt.

And Helinaud makes Carauſius Procurator for the Romans, in a Province bordering upon the Franks, contrary to the Geography of thoſe times, which places the Franks in Germany and very far from the Belgick Frontiers.

Beſides, if Eutropius repreſents the Belgicks, infeſted by the Franks, he obſerves at the ſame time, that they were Pirates who kept the Seas, and conſequently whoſe places of abode might have been at a great diſtance. ut if any body will undertake to defend Helinaud's Relation, he will do us a kindneſs to mark us out the Province, where, he ſaith, that the Franks, when driven a ſecond time out of their own Country, came to ſettle near the Confines of the Gauls and Saxons, and whereby it is ſuppoſed, that the Gauls and Saxons were Neighbours. This particular we ſhall examine no further, but leave it to the conſideration of thoſe that are better verſed in ancient Geography.

But Fourthly, what does Helinaud mean by that Town of the Franks, to which the Inhabitants gave the Name of Troy, or Xanthus, in remembrance of the Ancient Troy, from whence their Anceſtors came? Unleſs one ſhould imagin it to have been the ſame with Troy in Champaine, as ſome ignorant Writers have done; who were led into that miſtake by that French Name: For anciently that Town was not call'd Troja, but Trecae, as appears by Ammianus Marcellinus. But Mezeray is not to be excuſed, when he pretends to find any tolerable Senſe in this Diſcourſe of Helinaud; eſpecially, when he himſelf diſcover'd ſo great a blunder in it; and which made him in his Tranſlation of this place of Helinaud, at large, to leave out the Word Xanthus, which is the Name of the River, that ran near the Walls of Troy, and which the Franks, as Helinaud ſaith, gave to their Town in remembrance of the Ancient Troy. Mezeray, who in his Hiſtory of France before Glovis, does affect to appear well verſed in the old Gallick Geography, would have been hard put to it to have produced any good Geographer or exact Hiſtorian, that makes any mention of that Troy, built by the Franks, after they were driven the ſecond time out of their own Country. This is exactly the Fable, that was revived by the Abbot Trithemius, and is by all the Learned rejected as a Dream, though he would fain have perſwaded the World, that he collected it out of the two Famous Authors Vaſtaldus and Hunibaldus, whom he makes to ſay, That after the deſtruction of Troy, ſome Trojans, under the conduct of Francion, fixed their abode near the Palus Moeotis, from whence being expelled by the neighbouring Nations, they retired into Hungary, where they built the Town, Sicambria, which they forſook afterwards to make an Irruption into Germany, where they conquered the Country of the old Sicambrians, which they poſſeſſed till the year 420, when following the Example of the Vandals, Viſigoths and Burgundians they ſpread firſt into Gaule, and came to ſettle into Gueldria; but that after having got ſeveral Victories and driven the Burgundians and Viſigoths from their Conqueſts, they made themſelves Maſters of the greateſt part of Gaule. All which agrees with the Romance which the Cistercian Monk hath given us, Baron. tom. 2. an. 297. n. 18.and wherewith he hath alſo ſet off another Romance, to wit, the Celebris Temporum ſuorum Scriptor, qui eadem omnia ex Antiquioribus Monumentis accepta brevi Sermone contexuit.Martyrdom of Gerion and ſome other Theb Soldiers. Now ſhall we after all this depend upon Cardinal Baronius, who cites Helinaud with ſuch high Commendations, calling him a Famous Writer, who took every thing he wrote out of very Ancient Monuments, and drew them up into a Compendious Hiſtory?

Fifthly, We have formerly obſerved, that it is very ordinary for Impoſtours to thwart and contradict one another; and we muſt here again make the ſame Remark, becauſe in the Agaunian Tragedy, we ſee none but Liars and Cheats appear upon the Stage. The counterfeit St. Eucherius ſaith not one Word there of thoſe Cohorts of the Theb. Legion, detached from Maximians Army, and ſent down the Rhine to joyn the Body which was aſſembling againſt Carauſius. But according to his Acts, the whole Theb. Legion was at Agaunum, and ſuffered there. For he ſaith, that Maximian by one ſentence condemned Ʋn â Sententiâ interfici omnes decrevit, &c.all the Theb. Souldiers, and the more effectually to put his ſentence in execution, he cauſed them to be ſurrounded by ſeveral Bodies of his other Sic interfecta est illa plane Angelica Legio.Souldiers, and thus, ſaith he, that truly Angelical Legion was ſlain. But if we believe Helinaud, the whole Legion was not at Agaunum; for a great Detachment had been made out of it againſt Carauſius, and Gerion was Martyr'd near Colen with three hundred and eighteen Souldiers, while Victor had in another place the ſame deſtiny, with the three hundred & thirty, who accompany'd him. Add to theſe, the nine who ſuffered Martyrdom near Bonne, and you ſhall find, that after Helinaud's, own reckoning ſix hundred fifty nine ſuffered in other places then at Agaunum, where the ſuppoſititious St. Eucherius affrms the whole Legion to have been barbarouſly ſlain.

But Sixthly, becauſe theſe two Cities, Colen, and Bonne, deſirous to maintain the reputation of their Martyrs, and the worſhip which is paid to them, may replay, that St. Eucherius in his Relation hath followed the ordinary uſe of giving the name of the whole to the moſt conſiderable part of it, and therefore that what he ſaith does not deſtroy the account given by Helinaud, Viz. That Maximian, upon his march into Gaule to ſuppreſs the Bagaudian Inſurection, underſtood, that Carauſius had revolted and threatned the Confines of the Empire; which was the reaſon why he divided his Army and ſent part of it with all ſpeed againſt this Rebel: We object, that this Anſwer, and the account of Helinaud ſuppoſe, that the Revolts of the Bagauds and of Carauſius happened both at one and the ſame time, which ſuppoſitions cannot be proved. For Eutropius and Oroſius, who without doubt were better informed than Helinaud concerning theſe two Events, do exactly diſtinguiſh them; both of them ſaying, that Carauſius did not begin to move till after the Bagaudian Inſurrection was over

Eutrop. lib. 3.

Poſt haec tempora etiam Carauſius qui Viliſſimè natus, Purpuram ſumpſit & Britannias occupavit.

And Eutropius having ſpoken of Amandus and Aelianus, and of the diſorders cauſed by the Bagauds, adds, that after that time, Carauſius a Man of a very low and vile Extraction, &c. took the Purple and poſſeſſed himſelf of Britain.

Oroſius, loco citato, qui facile agreſtium hominum imperit • m & confuſam manum militari virtu • e compeſcuit.

Deinde Carauſius quidam genere inſimus, &c.

Oroſius places theſe two Events in the ſame order as Eutropius, ſaying, that Maximian defeated the Bagauds, and eaſily diſperſed their ill diſciplined Army, and that after this Expedition Carauſius begun to ſtir.

An. Pagi an. 286. pag. 116. Therefore Father Pagi having put the Bagaudian Inſurrection in Henri Noris. Diſſ. 1. de Num. ſmpp. Dio. & Max.the year of our Lord 285, refers the Revolt of Carauſius to the following year; which the Famous Henry Noris places yet a whole year later, viz. in 287, and though theſe two learned Men do not agree about the time that Maximianus Herculeus was made Auguſtus, nevertheleſs they both ſay that the Troubles in Gaule were ended, before Carauſius formed any Enterpriſe againſt the Empire. This Aurelius Victor is peremptory in; and no Man that reads him can doubt of it.

Bagaudian For after he hath ſpoken of the War, he adds, That in the ſame

Aurelius Victor.

Quo bello Carauſius Menapiae Civis, fact is promptioribus enituit eoque eum ſimul quiae gubernandi (quo officio adoleſcentiam m • rcede exercueraet) gnarus habebatur parandae Claſſi, & prpulſandis Germanis maria infeſtantibus praefecere.

War Carauſius a Citizen of Menapia, diſtinguiſh'd himſelf with ſo much Gallantry and Valour, that the Eſteem and great Reputation he acquired, and the Opinion they had conceived of his being a good Officer, as having bore Arms from his Youth, were Motives to the Romans to make choice of him to fit out their Navy, and to clear the Seat of the German Pyrats then ſwarming in thoſe Parts. From which Words of Aurelius Victor, it will appear, that Carauſius made War with Maximian againſt the Bagauds, and ſo ſignaliz'd himſelf by his illuſtrious Actions, as moved the Romans to entruſt him with their Naval Forces; and that it was not till afterward, that being informed they ſuſpected him, and had reſolved his Ruin, he declar'd openly againſt the Empire, put on the Purple, and invaded Britain. So that it is certain, that the Bagaudian Revolt was not at the ſame time with that of Carauſius. Now ſince this Carauſius was perſonally in conjunction with the Imperial Troops, employed in the War againſt the Bagauds, it makes it evident, that the Monk Helinaud was groſsly miſtaken, in going about to perſwade us, that Maximian in his march againſt the Bagauds, detached ſome Cohorts of the Thebean Legion againſt Carauſius, who at that time threatned to invade the Fron • iers of the Empire.

CHAP. XVIII. That no Writer for two Hundred Years after Maximian hath made any mention of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion.

Martyr. Rom. Baron. dec. Kal. Oct. pag. 375. CArdinal Baronius in his Notes on the Roman Martyrology, obſerves that the Greek Church hath amongſt its Martyrs, one Mauritius and his Companions, who at the time of Diocleſian and Maximian's Perſecution, ſuffered Death at Apamea, a City of Syria. He further ſaith, that he was the ſame Mauritius who was chief of the Thebean Legion; that the Martyrs of Apamea were the Agaunian Martyrs, and that formerly he himſelf was of that Opinion, condemning Metaphraſtes for having confounded the Eaſtern with the Weſtern Martyrs. And adds, Theodoret. de Evang. verſ. lib. 8. that he was perſwaded to the contrary by reading a Place of Theodoretus, Biſhop of Cyr, where he ſpeaks of the moſt eminent Martyrs that were come to his Knowledge. It would here be ſuperfluous either to examine this Paſſage of Theodoret, or the Reaſons which induced Baronius to change his Opinion. It is enough that by this Learned Cardinal's own Confeſſion, we know that there was a time when he thought that Mauritius and his Companions were martyred at Apamea; which is as much as to ſay, that he look'd upon Eucherius's Relation to be Fabulous; and that the Latin Writers deſigning to do Service to the Weſtern Churches, had remov'd the Scene of this Tragedy from Syria into the Alps. We cannot pretend to know certainly the motives which Baronius had then to call in queſtion the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion. Nevertheleſs, there is ſome reaſon to believe, that one of thoſe which made the ſtrongeſt impreſſion upon him, was the univerſal ſilence of the Eccleſiaſtical Writers for above Two Hundred Years after the time in which it is ſuppos'd that this Legion was cut to pieces at Agaunum. For indeed the Martyrdom of a whole Legion is ſo conſiderable an Event, that had ſuch a thing ever been, it muſt needs have been taken notice of, in above a Hundred Places of Church Hiſtory. And can any pertinent Reaſon of this general Silence be aſſigned? Thoſe who believe that a Woman poſſeſſed the Roman See, between the time of Leo the IV, and Bennet the III, have ſomething to anſwer to thoſe, who, as an Argument againſt it, preſs the Churches ſilence for above Two Hundred Years, viz. to the time of Marianus Scotus, who was one of the firſt who ſpoke of Pope Joan. To which they reply, that thoſe were very ignorant and barbarous Ages, wherein Writers were very ſcarce; and that though ſome few of them may be found, yet the matters they handled had no relation to the ſucceſſion of Popes: That perhaps thoſe who treated of it were by the care and induſtry of the Church of Rome wholly ſuppreſſed, or elſe have periſhed by the ſame miſfortune, that hath raviſhed from us ſo many other Works; That Hincmarus, Photius and the Defenders of the cauſe of the Emperours, againſt the Uſurpations of the Popes Hildebrand and Nicholas, have always ſpared the Chair of St. Peter and the ſucceſſours of the Apoſtles. What other reaſons they give for this ſilence, may be ſeen in that excellent Treatiſe concerning Pope Joan, lately publiſh'd by Mr. Spanheim. But now there is no ſubſtantial reaſon, can be given for the ſilence of the Eccleſiaſtical Writers concerning the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion, till about the time of Gregory of Tours, viz. almoſt three hundred Years after Maximian's Expedition into Gaule. For had there been any ground for the belief of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion, two ſort of Writers would have undoubtedly ſpoken of it. Viz. Either thoſe Preachers who have made Homilies, or Sermons upon the Martyrs, or elſe the Compilers of Chronologies, and Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtorys. We have ſtill a great number remaining of the Sermons of thoſe Fathers, who lived two hundred years after Maximian's Empire, and which are either upon all Martyrs in general, or ſome Martyrs in particular. 'Tis true indeed we have loſt Methodius's Diſcourſe upon the Martyrs, except only a fragment of it tranſmitted to us by Theodoret, the Panegyrick of Martyrs, by Theodoret. Dial. 1. p. 37. Hieron. de Script. Ec. c. 33. Genand. de Script. Eccleſ. cap. 1. Caſſiod. Lect. Div. cap. 32. Gennad. cap. 37. Phileas an Egyptian Biſhop, mentioned by St. Jerom, in his Book of Church-writers, the Treatiſe of the Perſecution of Chriſtians, by James ſurnamed the Wiſe, whereof Gennadius ſpeaks with great Commendation, a Letter of St. Jerom upon the ſufferings of Martyrs addreſſed to Chromatius and Heliodorus, as we are told by Caſſiodorus, a Treatiſe of Vigilius in praiſe of Martyrs, and a Letter of the Acts of Martyrs amongſt the Barbarians cited by Gennadius. And though theſe and ſeveral like writings are now loſt, yet if the Authors of them had ſpoke of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion, doubtleſs ſome footſteps of it would be ſeen in the remaining Writers of thoſe times, who had occaſion to make uſe of their Works. Methodius wrote about the year 290, Phileas Biſhop of Thinus in Egypt was beheaded in the year 311, under the Perſecution of Maximian, and had they ſpoken of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion, Lactantius who flouriſh'd at the beginning of the fourth Century, muſt in all probability have known ſomething of it. But beſides Lactantius, being an Italian born, and call'd into Gaule by Conſtantine for the Education of his Son Criſpu • , it is very unlikely that he ſhould have been wholly unacquainted with ſo remarkable an Event, as that of the Agaunian Martyrdom, which might have happened but thirty years before: And had he known any thing thereof, it would have fall'n in ſo pat to his Treatiſe of the death of the Perſecutors, That it cannot be imagin'd he would have left it out, ſpecially when he was deſcribing the Cruelties of the Emperor Maximian, and the dreadful Puniſhments which God inflicted upon him. Whoſoever therefore ſhall weigh with an unprejudiced Mind this ſilence of Lactantius, will doubtleſs be perſwaded, that the Martydom of the Thebean Legion is nothing but a Fiction.

Though the Sufferings of Confeſſors in general do afford a rich Field of Eloquence to Preachers, yet it muſt be granted, that there is no Martyrdom more capable of receiving Ornament from the Pulpit, and of elevating the genius and thoughts of a Chriſtian Orator, than the Martyrdom of this Legion. How comes it then to paſs, that of ſo many Fathers, who have writ Homilies in the praiſe of Martyrs, none of them have ever made uſe of ſo pathetick and powerful an Example as this would have been. Ephrem, a Monk of Syria, wrote Encomiums on all the Martyrs of Chriſt, about the Year 360. Gregory of Nazianzen hath handled the ſame Subject much about the ſame time. We have the Sermons of St. Chryſoſtom, upon Martyrs in general. Aſterius Biſhop of Amaſia in Pontus, who lived at the beginning of the Fifth Age, hath made likewiſe a Panegyrick on all Martyrs, but none of theſe Fathers, nor any other who treated of the ſame Matter, have made the leaſt mention of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion.

If any had mentioned it, it muſt have been Maximus, Biſhop of Turin, who died under the Reign of Honorius, and Theodoſius, Junior: For he wrote in the Country, where it is ſuppoſed that this Martyrdom happened, and the Memory of it would therefore have been freſh in his Days; but in all his Works there is not one Word relating to it. We read, amongſt his Writings that are yet extant, a Sermon, De Sanctis Martyribus, which Gennadius hath taken notice of, and call'd, Generalem omnium Sanctorum Homiliam. But in this Sermon, there is not the leaſt ſtroak in reference to the Thebean Legion. 'Tis true, that amongſt his Works, there is another Sermon with this Title, In Natali Sanctorum Taurinorum Octavii, Aventitii & Solutoris. Theſe are the ſame Saints, whoſe Names are ſeen in Capital Letters, on the Frontiſpiece of the Jeſuites Church at Turin. In which Church; there is a Chappel where the Reliques of theſe Saints are kept in an Urn, which Madam Chreſtiene of France cauſed to be made on purpoſe, with this Inſcription ingraved on it, Auguſtae Taurinorum Patronis Chriſtiana à Francia. Theſe Saints have done many Miracles, if we may believe the Vows and Offerings hung up in their Chappel; but we may obſerve, that this Sermon which we ſpeak of, is to be found amongſt thoſe of St. Ambroſe, of the impreſſion of Baſil, in the Year 1555, with this Note in the Margent, A Sermon of St. Maximus. The Benedictines of Paris in their new Edition of St. Ambroſe, do likewiſe reſtore it to that Biſhop of Turin, and ſay, that St. Maximus had been ſo converſant in the Works of St. Ambroſe, that he ſometimes uttered long Paſſages out of them in his own Sermons; the doing whereof, occaſioned great Confuſion in the Homilies of theſe Two Fathers; and they likewiſe judge St. Maximus to have been the Author of the Book of Sacraments attributed to St. Ambroſe. However, Gennadius does not mention that Sermon in his Catalogue of Maximus's Works. And Father Mabillon Muſ. Ital. Tom. 1. p. 2. Gennadio duce reſtitui poſſunt. Mabillon publiſhing ſome new Pieces of this Father, in his Muſaeum Italicum, ſays, that we ought to conſult Gennadius, to diſtinguiſh the genuine Works of this Father, from thoſe which are ſpurious. I ſhould be very ſorry, that this Sermon ſhould be diſowned to belong to Maximus, for it is ſo principal a ſupport to the Cauſe we defend, that if there was any ground for what we are told of the Thebean Legion, this is the very work where we ſhould find it. But if we look for it in the Body of that Sermon, we ſhall looſe our labour. I have read it ſeveral times over, but never could find one word in it relating in the leaſt to the Martyrdom in queſtion. Should any pretend to make his beſt of the Inſcription, In Natali Sanctorum Taurinorum Octavii, Aventitii & Solutoris; this Title does not import theſe Three Saints to have been Thebean Souldiers: For thoſe People whom the ancient Geographers called Taurini, were extended far into the Cottian Alps, and into Liguria; ſo that we ought not therefore to conclude that Octavius, Aventitius and Solutor, were Three Saints particular to the City of Turin, becauſe they are called Sancti Taurinorum. In St. Ambroſe's Works, printed at Baſil in the Year 1555, there is Sanctorum Tauricorum. In the Geographical Manuſcript of Selden, there is likewiſe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; and who can tell but St. Maximus might mean ſome Saints whoſe Zeal and conſtancy had been remarkable amongſt thoſe People called Tauriſci, who are placed by ſome Geographers in the Fifth Rhetia. If we had that Manuſcript of St. Maximus, mentioned by the Benedictine Monks, in their new Edition of St. Ambroſe, we might perhaps make ſome other Remarks on the Title of that Sermon: But without examining whether the Titles of St. Maximus's Sermons be ancient, and writ by himſelf, here is a Proof, that Octavius, Aventitius, and Solutor, were not Thebean Souldiers, and ſuch a Proof that nothing can be replied againſt it. The Counterfeit St. Eucherius, does not mention any of thoſe in his Relation; but ſaith, that in his time none of them were known by Name, except them following, viz. Mauritius, Exuperius, Candidus, Victor, and another Victor who ſuffered Death at Soleur, with Ʋrſus; adding that the Names of the others were unknown to him, but were written in the Book of Life. As we believe the Author of the Acts of the Thebean Souldiers more modern than St. Maximus, this ſufficeth to convince us, that the Three Saints whoſe Piety this Biſhop of Turin did formerly celebrate, were not Thebean Souldiers. But to prevent all cavilling about the time in which St. Eucherius might have written, we ſhall produce other Writers, who lived ſome Ages after St. Maximus. Ado, died about the Year of our Lord, 875. This Ado who was Arch-biſhop of Vienna, hath collected all the Names of the Thebean Souldiers that were Ado Martyr. 7. Kal. 7. bris. heard of in his Time, thirteen whereof he reckons in his Martyrology, to wit, Mauritius, Exuperius, Candidus, Moloſſus, Victor, Innocentius, Vetalis Gerion, Victor, Orſus, Alexander, Secundus and Antoninus. Amongſt which we find not either Octavius, Aventitius, or Solutor. Now Vienna being but fifty Leagues diſtant from Turin, had theſe Saints, whoſe Memory was celebrated in Piedmont, been generally thought to have been Theb. Souldiers, there is no Likelihood, that Ado would have left them out of his Catalogue. This reaſon is yet more confirmed by Ʋſuard's ſilence upon it, who was a Monk of St. Germains, and contemporary with Ado He formed the deſign of making a Martyrology both more exact and copious than any that had appear'd before: For he thought, that St. Jerom and Beda had handled this matter too careleſly; and it is even reported, That the Emperor Charles the Bald, to whom he dedicated his Book, had ſet him at work. And therefore it is more likely, that he did every thing anſwerable to the Zeal of his Age for Martyrs and Reliques. Which notwithſtanding, his diligence and all the care he took, could effect no more than the Diſcovery which he made of two other Theb. Souldiers, namely Caſſius and Florentius, who are alſo recorded by Helinand, But further, had it paſſed for current, at that time, that the three Saints in St. Maximus's Sermon were Theb. Souldiers, 'tis very improbable, that they could have eſcaped the diligent Search of Ʋſuard. If after this, any one ſhould alledge to us the Lives of Saints, as the Legends of Octavius, Aventitius and Soluter, we have no other Anſwer for them, but that there are none ſo blind, as they that will not ſee. But ſince it hath ſo fallen out, that Maximus his Sermon hath given us an occaſion to ſpeak of St. Ambroſe, we ought not to paſs by, without ſome Reflection, the Silence of this Father in this particular, viz. concerning the Theb. Legion and their Martyrdom, though in an hundred places of his Works, he ſpeaks of Saints and famous Martyrs in general. The time he lived was not long after that, wherein it is ſuppoſed, that the Theb. Legion was cut off. He was Biſhop at Milan, not very far diſtant from Agaunum, where this Martyrdom is ſaid to have happened, and he had converſed ſometimes with Theodorus Biſhop of Octodurum or Martigni, where Agaunum is ſituated Both theſe Biſhops were preſent at the Council of Aquileia, aſſembled to give a deciſion in the cauſe of Palladius and Secundianus, Arrian Biſhops in Illyria. They met again at Milan, where Theodorus ſigned the Letter, which St. Ambroſe and the other Biſhops wrote to Pope Siricius, concerning the condemnation of Jovinian, who had uttered blaſphemous Expreſſions againſt the Virginity of the Bleſſed Mother of God. And though the falſe St. Eucherius, in the Letter already related, does write to the Biſhop Salvius, That Theodorus, whom he calls vir anterioris Temporis had informed Iſaac Biſhop of Geneva of all the circumſtances of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion, it does not appear, that he ever ſpoke of it to St. Ambroſe, ſeeing there is not the leaſt notice tak'n of it in all the Works of this Father.

But let us come now to another ſort of Writers, and ask the Fathers, who have compoſed Chronologies or Church-Hiſtories. Theſe perhaps will tell us ſomething of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion; for this is not ſo inconſiderable a Tranſaction as can be ſuppos'd to have been overlook'd, or loſt amongſt the Croud of thoſe great Events, which they had to relate. It is a memorable matter of Fact, worthy of their Pens, and to be recommended to Poſterity; for it is the Martyrdom of a whole Legion, and the moſt Famous Hiſtorians of the Church, either liv'd at the time of this ſuppos'd Martyrdom, or wrote about a hundred Years after; I mean Euſebius, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, Evagrius, Jerom, Oroſius, Sulpitius Severus: If this Martyrdom were true, it is impoſſible, that they ſhould have been ignorant of it, and had they known it, 'tis not to be imagin'd, they would all have conſpired together to leave us in the dark about it.

To begin with Euſebius, of whom thoſe who favour him leaſt, as Joſeph Scaliger, do Mr. le Prefident Couſin dans ſon advertiſſementa. le Hiſtoire de Euſebe. yet agree, that with great care he hath ſearch'd into the Original Pieces concerning the Foundation of the First Sees, the ſucceſſion of their Biſhops, the Perſecutions moved by enraged Pagans against the Primitive Chriſtian Religion, the many Conflicts of the Bleſſed Martyrs, for its Defenſe and the Victories which their Faith and conſtancy have obtained over Infidelity and Errour. St. Jerom, or whoſoever is the Author of the Letter to Chromatius and Heliodorus, agrees with the Remarks of Preſident Couſin upon the care and diligence of Euſebius in collecting the Acts of the Martyrs. It is ſaid in that Letter, that the Emperour Conſtantine at his arrival at Ceſarea permitted Euſebius to ask him whatever he had moſt a mind to, and that Euſebius deſired him to command, that they ſhould ſend him from all the Courts and Tribunals of Judicature throughout the Empire, all the Proceſſes, Tryals and Sentences concerning Martyrs, that ſo he might be particularly inform'd of their right Names, Qualities and Numbers, and alſo of the different kinds of their Torments and Death, and of the Provinces, Towns, and Days of their Excecutions, and laſtly with what Patience and Courage they had ſuffered their Torments. Therefore Antipater Biſhop of Boſtra in Arabia, thinking to obſcure the Glory and Reputation of Euſebius, ſaid in his confutation of Origen's Apology. I allow Euſebius to be excellently vers'd in Hiſtory, and that there is nothing in the Monuments of Antiquity which he is unacquainted with; but the Emperours Authority favouring his deſign, it was an eaſy thing for him to gather up whatever Writings were ſcattered all over the World. So that Euſebius having ſo many ways of being imformed of the Truth, of the Agaunian Martyrdom, no body can deny but he is a well qualify'd Witneſs, to be call'd and heard upon this Matter of Fact. And ſo much the rather, becauſe he not only was alive at the time of this Martyrdom, but of age to know what was then tranſacted. In the firſt Book of Conſtantine's Life he ſaith, that in his youth he firſt ſaw this Prince in Paleſtina, in the Retinue of the Emperour Diocleſian; And in the Third Book of his Church Hiſtory, ſpeaking of Dionyſius of Alexandria, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .he ſaith, that it was in his time that he was raiſed to the Honour of the Epiſcopal Chair; ſeeing therefore that it is agreed on all hands, that Dionyſius of Alexandria dyed in the twelfth Year of the Empire of Gallienus's Reign; Euſebius his Birth muſt neceſſarily precede the Death of this Prince. The Learned Doctor Cave conjectures, that he was born about the Year 270. As to the time of Gallienus's Death we are under great uncertainties. Cardinal Baronius placeing it in the Year 269, upon the Teſtimony of Euſebius, who will have him to have Reigned but fifteen years, but Antonio Pagi is of a different opinion and thinks he lived ſome few Years longer and this upon the Authority of a Medal of Gallienus; ſpoken of by Mezabarba, with this Inſcription P. M. TR. PO. XVI. CON. VII. So that it appears to be a difficult thing to aſſign preciſely the time of Euſebius his birth. But it is not our buſineſs here to caſt the Horoſcope of this Father, or to make an exact Calculation of the time of his Nativity, it is ſufficient to our purpoſe that the circumſtances here ſpecify'd will make it appear that Euſebius was at leaſt fifteen or ſixteen Years old, when Maximian went into Gaule, in the Year 285, the very time wherein the Theb. Legion was ſuppos'd to have been Maſſacred. We are then much in the right to produce Euſebius, in this cauſe as a Witneſs very fit to inform us about the Truth of Falſehood of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion. But in all his Works there is not one Word ſpok'n either of this Legion, or of this Martyrdom. However he had often a fair opportunity to ſpeak of it, ſeeing that his whole Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory is chiefly filled up with long accounts of the Perſecutions and Conflicts of Martyrs. His Eighth Book is nothing but an ample Narrative, both of Diocleſian and Maximians Cruelties, and of all the great Examples of Zeal and Conſtancy, which the Chriſtians of all Orders and Conditions ſoever gave in thoſe times. If any ancient Writer had occaſion to ſpeak of the Theb. Legion, without doubt it was Euſebius, but ſince he hath ſaid nothing of it, his ſilence is an Hiſtorical Demonſtration, that it is only a meer Fable. To this we might add, that the ſame ſilence is obſerved by Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret and Evagrius, who have now and then pick'd up ſome Facts that are wanting in Euſebius; That St. Jerom who hath followed Euſebius in his Chronology, and carefully collected thoſe things that have eſcaped his knowledge, ſaith nothing of the Theb. Legion; That Sulpitius Severus, whoſe Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory goes beyond the Aera of Martyrs, and who is ſo much noted for his great credulity, and fondneſs of opinion about Saints and Miracles, had not heard of it at the beginning of the fifth Age; That we find it not in Paulus Oroſius, who ſpeaks of the Bagauds, of Amandus and Aelianus, of Maximian's Expedition into Gaule, and greedily ſwallows any thing that does but ſerve his turn, whether Dupin. Nov. Bibl. • om. 3. well grounded or no (as Monſieur Dupin obſerves) Voſſ. de Hist. Lat. lib. 2. cap. 14. and ſometimes even debaſeth the Dignity of Hiſtory ſo much as to inſert into it meer popular Reports (according to Voſſius's Judgment.) However the Fable of the Theb. Legion, being not yet brought into the World in the Reign of the Emperours Arcadius and Honorius, wherein he lived, we do not ſee, he hath adorned the Seven Books of his Hiſtory with the recital of it. It remains then only for us to examin, whether according Joannis Launoij Diſſ. de Auth. Arg. neg. p. 190. to the Principles of the Doctors of the Romiſh Church, we may not infer a good Concluſion from this Negative Argument. John Launoy a Doctor of Paris in his Diſſertation upon the Authority of Negative Arguments, lays down this Rule, that we may reaſonably conclude the untruth of a Fact from it's not being atteſted either by contemporary Writers, or by any Author within two hundred Years after. He confeſſes, That this Space of two hundred Years is indeed too long; but that he feared, if he had chalked out a ſhorter, he ſhould thereby have drawn upon himſelf the reproaches and calumnies of moſt People, who are not willing, that too ſtrict a Search ſhould be made after Truth. But what if Mr. de Launoy had been ſo very complaiſant to the Monks, and the Admirers of Fables and Legends, as to throw 'em in t'other fifty Years, yet this would not in the leaſt have weakened the ſtrength of our Argument, ſince that 'tis almoſt Three hundred Years after Maximian's Expedition into Gaule, that not one Writer hath ſpoken of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion. 'Tis true, that upon the Superſtitious Party of the Popiſh Church's being alarm'd by Mr. de Launoy's Book, becauſe they ſaw, that the Method in it was like to pull down a great number of their Saints, and would bring into contempt their Miracles and Reliques, John Baptiſt Thiers, a Divine of Paris, endeavour'd to re aſſure them by a Diſſertation in anſwer to that of Mr de Launoy, which indeed he did not think worth his while to anſwer, or to ſhew the vanity of his Arguments and Evaſions. Now this is the Tenet of John Joann. Bap. Thiers Exercit. 〈◊〉 53. part. 6. Baptiſt of Thiers: We grant that a negative Argument ought to be of ſome force in Hiſtorical Accounts, when in matter of very ancient Facts, the Argument is taken from the general ſilence of Grave, Learned and Diligent Writers, who were not lightly wrought upon, but prudent in their Judgment and Choice, and who have ſucceeded one another during many Ages. Where notwithſtanding that all his Words be exactly meaſured and fitted to his deſign, viz. to render negative Arguments of no uſe, by putting them under impoſſible conditions, &c. yet nevertheleſs we deſire no other conceſſions, than what he himſelf grants: For the Fact here in queſtion is very Ancient, and no body can deny but the Writers here ſpoken of, are ſome of the moſt Grave, Learned and Diligent that ever appeared in the Church; and that for a continued ſucceſſion of two or three Ages, and yet not one of them but is wholly ſilent upon the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion. Now after this long ſilence, on the one ſide, let us ſee who thoſe were who firſt open'd their Mouths on the other, and who ſhould theſe be but two Authors who lived towards the end of the ſixth Century; Greg. Turon. lib. 10. Hiſt. Franc. cap. 3. & Glor. Miracul. cap. 76. Venant. Fortun. lib. 2. carm. 15. namely Gregory of Tours and Venantius Honorius Fortunatus; the latter of which was a Poet, and conſequently more likely to make uſe of their old Privilege in the Verſe, Pictoribus at que Poetis, He hath Tranſlated into Verſe an Abridgment of St. George's Legend, which Baronius confeſſes to have been originally writ by the Arrians. Seeing then that this Poet was ſo groſly miſtaken in attributing the Character of a Saint to one who was an Arrian and a wicked Man, may we not think but his credulity might have been likewiſe impoſed upon concerning another matter of Fact, of an older date than this was? Dupin Nov. Bibl. Tom. 5. p. 90. And as for Gregory of Tours, Mr. Dupin obſerves, that he was very credulous and eaſy in the matter of Miracles, and made no ſcruple of recounting uncertain and fabulous Hiſtories. Which agrees with what Abbot Hilduinus wrote concerning him to the Emperor Lewis: We ought to Pardon the Simplicity of this Pious Man, for having written ſeveral things contrary to the Truth of Hiſtory, not indeed out of any crafty deſign of impoſing upon the World, but meerly through his credulity. And ſeeing, that Fortunatus took a journey to Tours, where he hoped to have been cured of his ſore eyes, by the interceſſion of St. Martin, and that he had a great eſteem and affection for Gregory, it is very likely, that he received all that he knew concerning the Theb. Legion from this good Biſhop. Now to let you ſee the very Foundation on which Gregories own belief of this matter was eſtabliſh'd, I ſhall only tranſcribe the Place where he ſpeaks of it in the Tenth Book of his Hiſtory of France. I found, ſaith he, a little Cheſt in St. Martin's Treaſury in which our Fathers had depoſited the Reliques of the Agaunian Martyrs, as I was informed by ſome very aged Prieſts. The very Seal which their Piety had put to it, was by old Age and Rottenneſs quite worn away; and it happened, that during the ſolemn Office that was celebrated to their Honour in the Eve of their Feſtival, it came into my thoughts to take a Torch, and view them more carefully. Now while I was a ſearching with great attention, one of the Porters told me, Here is a Stone with a Cover upon it, what may be in it, I cannot tell, neither did my Predeceſſors, to whoſe Cuſtody theſe things were committed, know any more of it than my ſelf; if you pleaſe, I will bring it hither, that we may ſee what it contains; and when he had brought it, I opened it, and found a little Silver Trunk, wherein were not only ſome Reliques of the Martyrs of the Bleſſed Legion, but alſo of ſeveral Holy Martyrs and Confeſſors. We found likewiſe in the ſame Trunk, ſeveral other hallowed Stones, with ſome Reliques of the Apoſtles and other Martyrs. From which Words, we may judge not only of the Character of this Gregory of Tours, but alſo of the genius of his Age. However, both he and Venantius were without doubt great Men, conſidering the time they lived in; nor do we ſuſpect either of them of Fraud or Impoſture, but only ſay, that they were too credulous, and the Chriſtians were then ſtrangely affected and hankering after Reliques and Miracles. Do but read the 30th Epiſtle of the Third Book of Gregory, the 28th Chapter of St. Austin, de Opere Monachorum, the 62d Canon of the Council of Lions, and the 7th Act of the Second Council of Nicea, and you may ſee what a ſcandalous Trade was then droven with the Limbs and Bones of Martyrs, which were broke in Peices, and tranſported from Town to Town, and from one Province into another, under pretence of Devotion. St. Auſtin even then lamenting, ſaid, That the Bodies of ſeveral Perſons were had in veneration upon the Earth, whoſe Souls were tormented in Hell-fire. And it was not without reaſon that he thus complain'd, for do but read St. Martin's Life, in Sulpitius Severus, who ſaith there, That the People of Tours ran in great Grouds to a Place where they thought ſome Martyrs had been buried. That the common Tradition was, that the Altar there had been erected by the ancient Biſhops of Tours. But that St. Martin having not been able to learn any thing for certain from the eldeſt Prieſts of his Clergy, concerning the Names of thoſe Martyrs, and the time of their Death, was in great perplexity and doubt about this matter, fearing on the one ſide to cauſe ſome prejudice to Religion, if he ſhould forbear his uſual coming to that Place, and on the other to increaſe Superſtition, if he had authorized it by his preſence. But one day being gone thither with ſome of his Brethren, and having pray'd to God to diſcover to him who it was who was there buried; he ſaw on his Left-hand a frightful and deformed Spectre, which he commanded to tell what it was. Whereunto the Shade anſwered, I am a Robber condemned formerly for Crimes to an ignominious Death. The Error of the People makes me here to be honoured, but I have no part with the Martyrs, they being in Glory, and I in Torments. After which, St. Martin cauſed the Altar to be thrown down, and freed the People of Tours from that groſs Superſtition. This Example alone may ſuffice to ſhew, that in matter of Reliques, Impoſtures are no new Device. Moreover, it ſerves to diſcover the falſe Zeal of the Chriſtians, of the Sixth Age, and the ignorance and baſe connivance of the Biſhops and Prieſts, in not repreſſing the indiſcretion of it. Sulpitius Severus hath told us juſt now, that it was the common Opinion that the Altar upon the Grave of that Robber had been erected by the ancient Biſhops of Tours. Now after this, is it ſo much to be wondred at, for the Good-Man Gregory, who a Hundred Years after was made Biſhop of Tours, to be deceived himſelf by ſome uncertain Tradition, or that he ſhould give ſo much Credit to an Inſcription upon the little Truck, in which were ſuppoſed to be ſhut up the Reliques of the Agaunian Martyrs? Now from St. Martin's time, the evil was ſo far from diminiſhing, that it increaſed more and more. Religion and Piety did then it ſeems chiefly conſiſt in ſearching the Graves, looking for the Bodies of Saints, erecting Altars, and contriving all ſorts of ways to honour them. The Sixth Age having brought into the Church, St. Bennet and his Rule, his Children departed very ſoon from the Inſtitution of their Holy Founder, applying themſelves wholly to get plentiful Poſſeſſions, and large Revenues. The Martyrs, their Reliques and Miracles, were the propereſt means in the World for that purpoſe, and God knows how they improv'd the knack they had already got of making uſe of them; for it is certain, that they owe moſt of their vaſt Incomes and Eſtates to meer Dreams and Chimaeras like that of the Agaunian Martyrs. Then the Old Saints grew out of date, and new ones came in Faſhion, being reputed to exceed the others in multiplicity of Miracles. Therefore they found the way to dig every Day a new one out of the Ground, as if the Prieſts of thoſe times had made uſe of a Divining Rod, to find out Bodies of Saints. No wonder therefore if ſome Martyrs of the Second and Third Age, unknown to Euſebius, Oroſius, and Sulpitius Severus, were diſcovered ſince by ſome Monks of the Eighth and Ninth Century.

It is very probable, if I may give my Opinion, that the Acts of the Agaunian Martyrs were forged towards the end of the Sixth Age, or at the beginning of the Seventh, the Author of them ſaith, That the Names of the Thebean Souldiers are written in Heaven, and that only theſe following were come to his knowledge, viz. Mauritius, Exuper, Candidus, Orſus, and the Two Victors. But it ſeems not long after, ſome others began to peep out; Ado, Archbiſhop of Vienna, who wrote towards the middle of the Ninth Century, adds to theſe Maloſius, Victor, Innocent, Vitalis, Gerion, Alexander, Secundus and Antoninus. Ʋſuard a Benedictine Monk of St. Germans, had the good luck to find out Two more, namely Caſſius and Florentius. In the Archives of Treves is kept the Hiſtory of St. Thirſus, wherein is mentioned another Thebean Souldier, call'd Bonifacius. In Burgundy ſome Churches are conſecrated to Viator, and St. Amour, who, by the Authors who have written their Lives, are ſaid to have been Agaunian Martyrs. So that we ſee already Fourteen or Fifteen of them, who were not come to the knowledge of the pretended St. Eucherius. But further Diſcoveries have been made yet, for one Day telleth another. St. Paul exhorted the Pſal. 19. Col. 3. Chriſtians, to ſeek the things that are above, but the Monks of the Tenth Century, preſſed them to nothing ſo much, as to look into the things that are below, and to ſearch into the Graves. And though Chriſt had ſaid, ſpeaking of himſelf, that where the Body was, there the Eagles ſhould gather alſo; yet the Chriſtians did now, no longer with Joſeph of Arimathea, frequent the Sepulchre of our Lord. The Death of Chriſt was to them an old Story, and grown out of date, and new Objects were then required to excite the Zeal and Devotions of Christians. Hence it was, that from time to time, ſome Thebean Souldier or other, was digged out of the Ground, and propoſed to their Veneration. The Citizens of Pignerol make their boaſt of having there in the Abbey of our Lady, the Corps of St. Tiberius. In the Dioceſs of Saluces, are ſhewed the Tombs of Conſtantius and Theophredus or Jafredus, and a new Inſcription clapt thereon, cauſeth them to be worſhipped as Souldiers of the Thebean Legion. Some Years ago paſſing by Foſſano, I had the curioſity to go and view the Place, where according to the Tradition of that Town, Alverius and Sebaſtianus, Thebean Souldiers, are ſaid to be Buried. Garnier in his Hiſtory of St. Alexander, ſaith, that the Bodies of Caſſius, Severinus, Licinius and Secundus, lye depoſited at Crantzius Sax. 7. 16. Como in the Milaneſe. Crantzius tells us, that at Brunſwick, they believe, that they have ſome Martyrs of Agaunum. The City of Colen vaunteth to have a great number of them. But above all, the Town of Turin brags of having been enrich'd with their Spoils. In the Abbey of St. Solutor are kept ſome Reliques with this Title, Reliquiae Sancti Benigni Thebenſis. They ſhew in the ſame Abbey, a Manuſcript, wherein are recorded the Lives of Solutor, Adventor and Octavius, ſet off with all thoſe incidents and flouriſhes, which generally adorn the common Legends. The Jeſuites of Turin have made a ſudden diſcovery all at once, of Ciro, John, Cacuſat, Chryſogon, Cyriacus, Felix, Fortunatus and Achilles, as they inform us in the Hiſtory which they have publiſhed of the Holy Martyrs, Abondius and Abondantius. When you have paſſed the Bridge of Turin, and taken your way towards the Mountain that leads to Chiers, you find on the ſide of the River Pô, a little Chappel, where there is an Inſcription which I had amongſt my Papers, but by miſchance it hath been almoſt blotted out; however here is the remainder of it. D. O. M. Beatae Virgini Mariae Thebaeorum Martyrum . . . . Ex vetuſtate labentem Aediculam, ampliorem . . . . Divinoque Miniſterio eptiorem Comes Gregorius Johaninus . . . . . a Solo excitavit . . . . an 1654. I remember that the Names of two Theb. Souldiers are to be ſeen there. And it is certain, that if in travelling through Italy, One would be at the trouble to take information of the Saints of every particular Place, and to read both the printed and manuſcript Lives of Saints that are kept in the Archives of the Cathedral Churches, there would great numbers of Theb. Souldiers ſtart up from behind the buſhes, who had no other being but what they received from the Monks of the laſt Ages, in order to ſerve their turns and promote the Trade they made of the poor People's ſuperſtition. However it be, as the caſe ſtands, I have in this Diſſertation ſtruck of from the Romiſh Church 6666 Saints, as the learned Father Sirmond with one daſh of his Pen had taken lately from them eleven thouſand. For having met with theſe Words in an Old Martyrology, S S Vrſula & Ʋnde ci milla V. M. i. e. Ʋndecimilla, Virgin and Martyr, he ſhew'd the ſhameful blunder of thoſe who imagin'd that Ʋnde ci milla with the V and M had been an abbreviation to expreſs eleven thouſand Virgins. Mr. de Launoy had both the honeſty and courage to publiſh what he thought of St. Bruno, and ſeveral other Saints; and might he have enjoy'd the protection, either of the Court or Clergy, he would have been a great inſtrument of Reformation in the Roman Worſhip. I was told, That this Mr. de Launoy, being once at dinner with the Curate of a Country Pariſh, in the Dioceſs of Mans, on the Feſtival of the Chief Saint of that Village, deſired the Curate to tell him the Name of that Saint. You muſt excuſe me for that, anſwered the Curate, for ſhould you once go about to pull down my Saint, as you have done ſo many others, I ſhould be undone, and my Boors would Valeſiana pag. 48,find themſelves without a Patron. Mr. de Valois ſaith, that the Life of St. Catharine, Virgin and Martyr is but a Fabulous Legend, from the beginning to the end; and likewiſe, that of St. Euſtachius Patron of the biggeſt Pariſh in Paris; and as for what is related of St. Lazarus, of St. Martha, of Mary Magdalen, and of the St. Baume he added, credant qui volent, as for me I ſhall never believe a Word of it, and I hold their arrival into France to be one of the moſt Fabulous things in the World. Menagij animad. in Diog. La. pag. 493. Mr. Menage, in his Book of Learned Women, having enumerated amongſt them St. Catharine, takes Notice, That Baronius ſuſpected it to be but a Fable. And it is material to obſerve by Baron. Ann. ad an. 317. Sect. 23. Cumdoleamus ab Euſebio praetermiſſa &c.the by, that Baronius's ſuſpition was grounded upon the ſilence of Euſebius which we have alſo alledged againſt the Agaunian Martyrs. Moreover, Mr. Menage tells us, that Francis de Harlay, Arch-Biſhop of Paris, having choſen ſome of the moſt underſtanding Men of his Clergy in 1680, to reviſe and reform the Breviary for the uſe of the Church of Paris, theſe Doctors thought fit to expunge the Life of St. Catharine, looking upon the Acts of her Martyrdom, as a meer Fiction. The Biſhops of St. Pons, in the year 1684, took from the Calendar of his Dioceſs about ſixty Holy-days, amongſt which were St. Amarante, the Immaculate Conception of the Bleſſed Virgin Mary, the Chair of St. Peter, St. Ignatius Loyola, &c. He is a Prelate, who has very much diſtinguiſhed himſelf both by his Learning and Piety, but who had the misfortune to incur the hatred of the Jeſuits as being a Diſciple of the famous Biſhop of Alet; and alſo to diſpleaſe the Court for refuſing to perſecute the Proteſtants of his Dioceſs, and not following Cardinal Bonzi, and the Biſhops of his Cabal, in Voting in the States of Lauguedoc the Subſidies that were demanded by the French King. Therefore the Jeſuites looking for an occaſion to bring him into Trouble, the Abbot of Aulergues, his Archdeacon, devoted himſelf to ſerve their Revenge. So that if an Archdeacon is call'd in the Canons of the Church Oculus Epiſcopi, it may be well ſaid, that here the Light of the Body became darkneſs. This Abbot appealed from his Biſhop againſt the Reformation of his Calendar to the Parliament of Toulouſe. The Jeſuites who cared but little for the other Saints, but reſented very much the diſgrace put upon their St. Ignatius, procured an Order from the Court to that Parliament, that they ſhould favour the Abbot's Cauſe without further delay. I was then at Toulouſe, where I was oblig'd to ſtay during the Months of July, Auguſt and September, at which time the Cauſe was Pleaded. I was preſent at the hearing, and the Kings Attorney broke into a furious paſſion againſt the Biſhop of St. Pons, and taking occaſion from the Feaſt of the Immaculate Conception, to ſpeak of the Honours due to the Bleſſed Virgin, he carry'd them as far as Bonaventure, Bernardine and Craſſe • . But at laſt the Archdeacon's Appeal was declared frivolous and faulty. The Biſhop of St. Pons, was maintained in the power which the Councils of the Gallican Church gave to their Biſhops of making a Calendar, and regulating the Church Service of their Dioceſs. And this Sentence was the effect of the Virtue and Honeſty of the firſt Preſident, who without contradiction was a Great Magiſtrate and worthy of a better Age.

I have related theſe Facts upon this Account only, that they of the Romiſh Religion, who may read this Work of mine, may ſee, that I had reaſon to queſtion the Truth of the Acts of ſome of their Saints, ſince ſome of the greateſt Men of their Communion have done the ſame, and do agree that many falſe ones are found amongſt them. And if ſome Preachers ſhould not like our Endeavours in expoſing the Falſhood of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion; becauſe hereby they find themſelves at a loſs for want of ſo many fine Paſſages, elevated thoughts, and an Example ſo moving, and ready at hand, whenever they had a mind to exhort their Hearers to patience and perſeverance in the Faith, we need only to recommend them the reading their Euſebius, wherein they ſhall find great numbers of true Martyrs, whoſe Examples are much more inſtructive, and fit to move the affections, then the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion, is pretended to be. It is neither Arthur of Britain, nor the Roland of Arioſto, nor the Renaldo of Taſſo, which thoſe who are intruſted with the firſt Education and Inſtruction of young Princes do propoſe to them for a Pattern of Imitation, but thoſe Heroes, who had a real being in the world, ſuch as Scipio, Hanibal and Augustus. In like manner Church Hiſtory being full of the glorious Conflicts and great Examples

Saints de Contrebande.

It alludes to prohibited Wares unlawfully and ſurreptitiouſly imported without paying Cuſtom, which are call'd in French Marchandiſes de Contrebande.

of the Piety of true Martyrs, Chriſtian Princes would betray the Holineſs of their Miniſtry, did they propoſe to their People falſe Martyrs and Counterband Saints as Mr. de Valois us'd to call them.

CHAP. XIX. That the Fabulous Relations of the pretended Agaunian Martyrs, and other fictitious Saints, are ſufficient to destroy all the Reaſons brought by the Roman Church to justify the VVorſhip they pay to Saints.

THE firſt ſhift of the Romiſh Church in this matter, is, to diſtinguiſh Worſhip into Abſolute and Relative, Mediate and Immediate. They ſay, that God alone ought to be the Object of abſolute and immediate Worſhip, but that the Relative and Mediate Worſhip, may be paid to Saints and Angels, ſince it paſſeth only through them, and terminates in God. That this is but a mere Evaſion, our Writers have ſhewed a thouſand times. And more than that, they have proved, that upon Examination of the Matter of Fact, it is not true neither, that the Romiſh Church renders to the deceaſed Saints, only mediate and relative Honours. For this diſtinction hath place only in their Schools, being no way diſcernible in their Practice. They make no diſtinction as to Place, ſince they worſhip both God and the Saints in the ſame Churches; nor in reſpect of time, for as God hath his, ſo the Saints have likewiſe their Holy-days; nor yet in the Church-Service, ſince the Saints are mentioned four or five times in the Service of the Maſs, which they offer moſt immediately to God; nay, not ſo much as in the bodily Poſtures of the Worſhippers, ſince they fall down on their Knees, and make the ſame bodily Proſtrations before God and his Saints. Neither can it be diſtinguiſh'd in the quality of their Petitions, ſince they who pray to Saints, ask pardon of them for their Sins, and the Grace of the Holy Ghoſt; No more is it in the multitude of their Prayers; for they will ſay ten Ave Maria's to one Pater noſter. So that the Saints do, if I may ſo ſay, reap all the Worſhip of the Roman Religion, and God, who ſhould gather the whole, hath only the Tithe of it. This diſtinction therefore hath place no where but in Diſputes, no real difference being perceivable between the Honours paid to God, and the Saints. Our Writers have likewiſe diſcuſſed the Queſtion, de Jure, viz. whether it be lawful to beſtow upon the Creatures a Worſhip which terminates in God. Their Writings are full of good Reaſons ſhewing that religious Worſhip is the Glory of God's Excellency, and that not ſo much as the leaſt portion of this Glory can be beſtow'd upon the Saints, without provoking the anger of that Jealous God. 'Tis true, that in coming near to God to know him, we may make uſe of the Creatures as ſteps to the knowledge of Him: But when we approach God in the duty of Worſhip, all our Thoughts, Attention and Affections ought wholly to be fix'd upon him alone. We ought then to baniſh the thoughts of all created beings out of our Minds, and ſo to Bleſs, Pray to and Worſhip him, as if there were none but He and We in the World. But when all is done, what uſe ſoever they may make in their Diſputes of the diſtinction of Worſhip into Abſolute and Relative, 'tis certain the Doctors of the Roman Church can make none of it, when we charge them with calling upon ſuch Saints, as never had any being in the World, ſuch for inſtance, as St. Longinus, St. Chriſtopher, St. Catharine, the eleven thouſand Virgins, and the Souldiers of the Thebean Legion. They cannot▪ ſurely have the face to ſay, That the Worſhip paid to theſe pretended Saints, hath any relation to God, or terminates in him. And therefore they ought to confeſs, that their Church hath erred, and is yet in errour.

Secondly, The Romiſh Doctors, to juſtifie the Worſhip they pay to the Saints, ſay, that all their Prayers to them do amount to no more, according to the intention of their Church, than barely to deſire them that they would pleaſe to pray to God for them. To which it hath been replyed and abundantly proved, that the Uſe and Form of the Terms, do determine the quality of Prayers, and not the Intention of the Church; that if the Matter, or the Form of Prayers be faulty, it is not the Intention of the Church that can rectify them; and that the Common People mind only the literal ſignification of Prayers, and never think while they are pronouncing them, of giving a Catholick ſenſe to Idolatrous Expreſſions. Why then do they put ſo many ignorant People in danger of making unlawful Prayers? Why do they give Proteſtants ſo great an occaſion of Scandal? Why do they not take out of their Prayer-Books and Breviaries all thoſe Forms of Prayer in which they ask the Saints to have mercy on them, to cleanſe them from their Sins by their Merits, to illuminate their hearts, and to excite in them a true Repentance? If this Principle of the Roman Church had any good foundation, I don't ſee why ſhe might not as well have put an Arrian Creed into her Liturgy, with a warning to her Children to follow her Intentions, and give an Orthodox ſenſe to that Heretical-Creed. It would prove a hard matter to reduce to an Orate pro nobis that Prayer uſed at the Conſecration of their Altars; Sanctify O Lord this Stone to thine Honour, to the Honour of the Virgin Mary, and to the Honour of all Saints. You ſee here the Saints and the Bleſſed Virgin joyn'd equally with God. Monſ. de le Habeſpine Biſhop of Orleans hath laboured Albaſp. p. 250. fol imppar.in vain to juſtify this Prayer. And from hence we muſt neceſſarily conclude, that the Romiſh Church pays to the Saints a Religious. Worſhip of the ſame nature with that which ſhe gives to God; For otherwiſe Bellarmine does not argue well when Bellarm. lib. 1. de Chr. cap. 13. he proves from the Form of Baptiſm, that the Holy Ghoſt, being joined therein with the Father and the Son, ought therefore to be eſteemed, God, as well as the Father and the Son. Go and Baptiſe all Nations in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghoſt. But what can the Romiſh Church reply, when it is objected that ſhe prays to Saints who never had any being, as St. Chriſtopher, St. Catharine, the eleven thouſand Virgins, and the Souldiers of the Theb. Legion? Let theſe Prayers be reduced as much as they pleaſe to the general Spirit of the Church, yet ſhe cannot juſtify them, and therefore ſhe muſt confeſs that ſhe hath erred, and is yet in error.

Thirdly, They of the Church of Rome, to excuſe the Worſhip they pay to the Saints, ſay, That they pray to them in the ſame manner as we pray our living Brethren to intercede for us. But had they not thus explain'd their meaning by the Biſhop of Meaux's Pen, we would hardly believe that they were in good earneſt. What! Is there then no difference between the Prayers which the Sick Proteſtants deſire to be made for them in their Churches, that God would comfort and relieve them in their ſeveral neceſſities, and thoſe which the Papiſts direct to their Saints? When the Proteſtants deſire theſe Offices of Charity of their Brethren, do they ask them after the ſame manner, and in the ſame order as the Romiſh Church implores the Interceſſion and Aſſiſtance of her Saints? Do they conſecrate Holydays and Altars to them? Build them Churches? Make Vows and Pilgrimages to their Honour? Do they light Wax-candles before their Images? Approach them with Cenſers? Preſent them with Offering? And make Proceſſions and Confraternities in honour of their Memories? Quite contrary. Our Brethren are there preſent with us, where they ſee our neceſſities with their own Eyes, and we deſire them to joyn with us in Prayer. We don't look upon them as if they were of a ſuperior Order to us, but as Fellow Labourers, ſubject to the ſame weakneſſes and infirmities as we are, and thereby ingaged to compaſſionate our ſufferings. Our practice is authorized by the Example of the Faithful of all Ages, and by St. James cb. 5. v. 16.the expreſs command of the Apoſtle St. James, who exhorteth us to Pray one for another. But the Romiſh practice is very far from having a Title to any of theſe advantages. Under the Old Teſtament no Prayers were ever made to the deceaſed Saints, though the Faithful prayed one for another, as we do. Notwithſtanding they had at that time Saints whoſe Holineſs could not be call'd in queſtion, ſince God himſelf had, if I may ſo ſpeak, canonized Elias and Enoch. All theſe Anſwers are ſolid and good. But how can they apply this? Or what other Anſwer can they make, when we charge them with praying to ſuch Saints as never were in the World, ſuch as St. Chriſtopher, St. Catharine, the eleven thouſand Virgins, and the Souldiers of the Theb. Legion, ſeeing theſe Saints were only meer fictions and the invention of Legend-Writers? They cannot ſure anſwer that they Pray to theſe after the ſame Manner, as we do to our living Brethren; and therefore they ought to confeſs that they have erred, and do remain ſtill in error.

The Fourth Evaſion of the Romiſh Church is to have recourſe to the equivocal Senſe of the Terms Worſhip and Adoration. They ſay, that there is a Supream Worſhip and Adoration of Latria, and that God alone deſerves this Worſhip and Adoration; but that there is an inferiour Worſhip and a Service of Dulia, which we ought to pay to Angels and Saints. But this Diſtinction is not in, nor is it grounded upon, Scripture. For St. Paul makes uſe of the Term Dulia, when he ſpeaks of the Supream Worſhip, telling the Theſſalonians, 1. Theſs. 1. verſ. 9. That they turn'd to God from Idols to ſerve the Living and True God. And the Septuagint have uſed it in the ſame Senſe, 1. Sam. c. 7. v. 3. and Pſ. 11. v. 11. and on the contrary, they have expreſſed by that of Latria, the Services which Men do one to another in that Threatning, which God makes to his People, That they ſhould ſervetheir Enemies, Deut. 29. verſ. 48. which God would ſend againſt them in hunger and in thirſt and in nakedneſs. But beſides, this Diſtinction is very inſignificant; for let the Terms be never ſo Equivocal, yet the things expreſſed by them are not ſo. For Churches, Feſtivals, Altars, Vows, Offerings, Lights, and Proceſſions are not Equivocal things, but determined to the higheſt ſort of Religious Worſhip. To prove this, let an Indian or a Chineſe go into a Popiſh Church, tell him, That this Temple is conſecrated to Francis of Aſſiſe; that this is his Holy-day, and that they are going to make a Proceſſion to his Honour; That the Image which he ſeeth adorned with ſo many flowers, and illuminated with ſo many Torches is his Repreſentation. And let him ſee afterwards all the People proſtrating themſelves before it, in order to the Addreſſing their Prayers to it: And then ask him, what this People is a doing? He will anſwer, that they adore St. Francis, or his Image, the ſimple Notions of Nature leading him to that Anſwer, becauſe all the Actions of this People are determined to Religion, which being taken altogether are the formal and diſtinct Signs of the Supreme Worſhip. And therefore it is in vain for them to endeavour to palliate the Matter by a pretended equivocal uſe of Words. Had the Romiſh Doctors been pleaſed to expreſs themſelves more clearly, there would have been no wrangling about the Terms. We acknowledg, that the Acts of Religion are not all of the ſame Weight and Importance. The firſt are thoſe that are call'd Elicite and Immediate, which are referred only to God. The ſecond are grounded upon the reference or relation which certain Things and Perſons have to Religion. In this Rank we place the reverence due to Paſtors, to Churches, Holy Veſſels, to the Elements of the Sacraments, to Saints, to Angels, to the bleſſed Mother of God; That is, That there are ſome Degrees of reſpect due to each of theſe, in proportion to the Rank which they hold in Religion, and to the Account which God makes of them. The laſt Sorts of Religious Acts are thoſe that are commanded by Religion it ſelf, as for Example, the Submiſſion and Honour we owe to Parents and Magiſtrates. But if theſe Controverſies were fairly manag'd, all the Diſpute would be about the firſt Sort of theſe Acts of Religion, which are call'd in the Language of the Schools, Elicite and Immediate, and ſuch as God reſerves peculiarly to himſelf, with excluſion of the nobleſt and moſt exalted Rank of Created Beings, ſuch, for inſtance, as Invocation, Pſal. 50. v. 15 Truſt and Affiance Jer. 17. v. 17. Vows, Iſa. 19. v. 21. Worſhip, Sacrifice and Adoration, Exod. 20. v. 50. Act. 10. v. 26. Apocal. 19. verſ. 10. Theſe are the Acts of Religion which we accuſe the Roman Church of giving to the Saints. Thoſe amongſt them who pretended to devotion, make Vows to the Saints upon every occaſion, though St. Thomas hath ſaid, that a Vow is an Act of Latria. But however this be, the Equivocal Senſe of the term Adoration, can do them no ſervice, where they are accuſed of paying a Religious Worſhip to Suppoſititious Saints, ſuch as St. Chriſtopher, St. Longine, St. Catharine, the eleven thouſand Virgins, and the Souldiers of the Theb. Legion. They cannot pretend that they pay theſe Saints only a Worſhip of Dulia, & Honours much inferior to the Supream. They ought therefore to confeſs that they have erred, and do ſtill perſiſt in their error.

Fifthly, the Roman Church ſpeaking by the Mouth of the Biſhop of Meaux, ſaith, that ſhe inſtructeth her Children to make a great deal of difference between the affections that accompany the Prayers they make to Saints, and the Zeal, Piety, and profound Humility they ought to be poſſeſſed with, when they direct their Devotions immediately to God himſelf. But to this have not we juſt reaſon to reply, that God alone knows the Affections of the Heart, and that we cannot judge of them but by Mens Words and Actions? We don't pretend to uſurp the Prerogative of God, and ſhould be very unwilling to paſs a raſh Judgment upon Men. Moſes hath taught us, that ſecret things belong to the Lord our God; and Chriſt hath told us, that we ſhall know Men by their Fruits; that is, by their Words and Actions. This way of paſſing Judgment upon Mens Hearts, is ſo common a notion, and ſo univerſal a Principle, that all Men in the World do follow it in the judgments they make of others. So that it is very unjuſtly done by thoſe Acts of the French Clergy of 1685, A • • i. 6. of the French Clergy, who accuſe us of calumny in finding fault with their Church for its paying to Saints a prohibited Worſhip, ſince our Accuſation is founded upon their Words and Actions. For let them ſay what they pleaſe, that they do not form the ſame Idea of the Saints, as they do of an Infinite and Supream Being, and that their Prayers to God are accompanied with Affections far more lively, ardent and humble, than thoſe they addreſs to the Saints: This is known to none but God, and diſcernable only by his all-ſeeing Eye. And all that we ſee and hear of their Performance towards the Saints, as Prayers, Temples, Feſtivals, Illuminations, Burning of Incenſe, Proceſſions, Proſtrations; all theſe things, I ſay, are the proper and formal Characters of the Supream Worſhip, which God hath in a peculiar manner reſerved to himſelf. Are we then in the wrong, to conclude that they carry the honours they render to the Saints too far? The Janſeniſts in that Book of theirs, intituled the imaginary Hereſie, charged the Jeſuites with making the Pope a God by their Tenet, that the Pope is infallible, becauſe Infallibility is a property belonging only to God. But we have yet more reaſon to reproach the Roman Church for dealing with Saints as if they were Gods, not only upon account of the external Worſhip ſhe pays to them, but alſo becauſe of the good things ſhe asks of them, which ſuppoſe that they know the Hearts of Men, are preſent every where, and have an unlimited power; all which, are Properties belonging only to the Supream being. But after all, ſuppoſe it ſhould be true, that the Romiſh Church puts a great difference between the Thoughts that accompany the Prayers to God, and thoſe addreſſed to the Saints, we leave every wiſe Man to conſider, whether this diſtinction in the Thoughts, does not raiſe in the Mind troubleſome Scruples, and hinder its due application and adherence to God. Theſe Theological Principles leave one always unquiet and uneaſie, for fear of going beyond, or ſtopping ſhort of the Mark. Thus far in their Opinion the Worſhip is lawful and right, but to go ever ſo little further, is Idolatry. When thoſe who repeat after the Prieſt the Confeſſion of Sins at the beginning of the Maſs, hear him ſay, I confeſs to God Almighty, they muſt mind to do an Act of Latria, but when he adds, and to the Bleſſed Virgin, they muſt take care to deſcend lower to Hyperdulia, and when he goes on ſaying, to the Angels, and to the Saints, to the Holy Apoſtles, Peter and Paul, &c. it would be a Crime, ſhould they offer to them any of the Two former kinds of Worſhip; and therefore they muſt paſs to that of Dulia. If an Image be preſented to them, they are to offer but a relative honour to it; but let it be a little piece of the true Croſs, they may go as far as the indirect Latria. And becauſe theſe different Worſhips are often mix'd in the ſame Service and Litanies, we leave it again to Wiſe Men to conſider, whether all thoſe who are preſent at theſe Church-Services, have in that inſtant of time all theſe diſtinctions preſent in their Minds; whether they be all capable of theſe nice and refined ſubtilties of the Schools; and whether all this be proper to raiſe the heart, and to inflame true piety. At leaſt, our Religion hath this advantage above theirs, that God alone being propoſed to us as the Object of our Worſhip and Prayers, we need not buſie our Minds about any of theſe Diſtinctions; no ſcruple ariſes to diſturb our Zeal, we embrace the Divine Object with all our Heart, and with all our Soul, free from fears and danger of running beyond the Mark. But after all, this difference of Thoughts in their Prayers, will do them no Service, as to the worſhip which they render to Saints that never exiſted, ſuch as St. Chriſtopher, St. Catharine, the Eleven Thouſand Virgins, and the Souldiers of the Thebean Legion. Theſe being mere Chimeras and groundleſs fancies, which deſerve not any the leaſt reſpect; they who pay any ſort of Religious Worſhip to them, ought to confeſs, that they have been, and are, yet in Error.

The Sixth Subterfuge of the Roman Church is, that they make great difference between Chriſt's Mediation, and that of the Saints. For, ſay they, Chriſt is a Mediator of Redemption, and the Saints are only Mediators of Interceſſion. But in anſwer to this, all the Functions of the Mediator of Redemption, may be reduced to theſe Three principal ones. Firſt, Chriſt hath taught Men the true and only way that leadeth to Heaven, having brought Life and Immortality to 2 Tim. 1. 10. light, through the Goſpel. Secondly, Chriſt by his Death, hath reconciled God to Men, and the Merits of his Croſs, are the ſource of their Peace and Righteouſneſs, God having made him to be ſin 2 Cor. c. 5. v. 21. for us, who knew no ſin, that we ſhould be the Righteouſneſs of God in him. In the Third Place, Chriſt is the Diſpenſer of all thoſe good things which are the effects and conſequences of that eternal and new Covenant which he hath brought into the World, and ſealed with his own Blood upon the Croſs, all power being give • him, both in Heaven Heb. 7. 25. and Earth, that he might ſave to the uttermoſt all that come to God by him. Now we think we have great reaſon to accuſe the Roman Church, of attributing to the Saints theſe Functions of the High Prieſt of the New Covenant. For as if the Goſpel were not a ſufficient Rule to direct us the way to Heaven, the Romiſh Church teaches, that her Dominicks, Francis's, Loyola's, &c. have received from Heaven, Rules more certain and powerful to raiſe thoſe who follow them to a higher Perfection, than thoſe of the Goſpel it ſelf. And for the proof hereof, they produce the Heavenly Viſions, Divine Apparitions, and other Miracles wherewith they pretend God hath honoured the calling of theſe Founders of Orders. Moreover, the Romiſh Church holds, that by Chriſt's Death, only our Mortal Sins, and the eternal puniſhment due to them were expiated; ſo that Men muſt have recourſe to other ways of Expiation, both for their Venial Sins, and the temporal Puniſhments due to their Mortal ones. Therefore was Purgatory invented; and to that purpoſe are likewiſe applied the Faſts, the diſciplining Whips, the Obits or Offices for the Dead, the pious Foundations, the Maſſes, and the Canonical Penances injoyned by the Confeſſors at the Tribunal of Penitence (as they call it.) But the moſt powerful Machine, is the Treaſury of Indulgences, that Treaſury which hath drawn ſo much Money into the Pope's Exchequer, and which, they ſay, is ſilled up with the Overplus of the Satisfactions and Merits of Saints; which ſuperabundance is by Indulgences applied either for the expiation of Venial Sins, or for a compenſation for the temporal Penalties due to Mortal Sins. This is the ground of that Prayer which the Prieſt ſaith in the Maſs, when he asks of God the forgiveneſs of Sins, by the Merits of thoſe Saints whoſe Reliques are at reſt under the Altar. Finally, the Roman Church makes her Addreſſes to the Saints, as to the Diſpenſers of Heavenly Graces; and we might obſerve a Hundred Places in their Prayer-Books, Rituals, Breviaries, and other Books of their Religion, where it plainly appears, that they ask of them the forgiveneſs of Sins, the Grace of Perſeverance, and good Diſpoſitions for Dying well. But here perhaps it may be objected, that the Church of Rome makes a great difference in its Practice, between Chriſt's Mediation, and that of the Saints; which is ſo far from being true, that one of her moſt famous Writers, ſadly complains, that it is evident, that moſt of the People put Alexand. Al. quaeſt. 93. num. 1. Artic. 4. more truſt in the Interceſſion of the Saints, than in Chriſt's Interceſſion; and that they have recourſe with more zeal to their Protection, than to the Patronage of that great Redeemer. And after all, this diſtinction of Mediator of Redemption, and Mediator of Interceſſion, is very injurious to Chriſt, and to the fulneſs of his Prieſthood. The Apoſtle willing to condemn the partialities of the Corinthians, ſome ſaying they were of Paul, and others of Cephas, asked them with indignation, 1 Cor. 1. 13. Have Paul, Apollos or Cephas, been Crucified for you? And may not we then with more reaſon, ask the Doctors of the Romiſh Church, have Francis, Dominick, or Ignatius Loyola, been Crucified for you? For Chriſt's Prieſthood comprehends two parts, namely Sacrifice and Interceſſion, one upon the Earth, and the other in Heaven, one on the Croſs, and the other beyond the Vail in the true and incorruptible Sanctuary, that's to ſay, that his Interceſſion is nothing but a continuation of his Prieſthood; and that the reaſon why he is our Advocate, is, becauſe he was crucifi'd for us. But in what order of Mediators can the Romiſh Church put St. Chriſtopher, St. Longine, St. Catharine, the eleven thouſand Virgins, and the Thebean Souldiers, ſince it is plain, that at the beſt they are nothing but meer figments? They will not ſure offer to own them Mediators of Interceſſion, and therefore they muſt confeſs that they have err • d, and are ſtill in error.

The Seventh device of the Church of Rome to excuſe the Worſhip they render to Saints, i • , That they would fain perſwade us, That the Council of Trent hath not determined this Worſhip to be neceſſary, but only ſimply declared, that it was a good and profitable practice. To which it will ſuffice to oppoſe this Argument. That Practice muſt needs be held neceſſary to Salvation for the not obſerving of which People are declared to be damned: Now it is evident, that the Church of Rome damns all thoſe who believe that Saints ought not to be prayed to, from whence it ought to be inferr'd, that the Worſhip of Saints, is, according to the Principles of the Roman Church a practice neceſſary to Salvation. The proof for the Minor of this Argument is found in the 25th Seſſion of the Council of Trent, where is a Canon that Anathematizeth all thoſe who deny the lawfulneſs of calling upon Saints conformably to the uſe and practice of the Roman Church: Unleſs they would ſay, that the Council of Trent did pronounce theſe Anathemas, notwithſtanding, they were of Opinion that the worſhiping of Saints is not a practice neceſſary to Salvation. But while they go about to ſet off the Wiſdom of the Fathers aſſembled in that Council, they are not aware, that they accuſe them both of Levity, and want of Charity in damning Men, for things that may be either done or let alone without prejudice to Salvation. The Doctors of the Church are hardly put to it to know what things the Council of Trent hath judged Ceremonial, and what Dogmatical and Eſſential to Religion. That which gives occaſion to theſe Diſputes is, That in ſome States that ſubmitted to the Pope's Authority, the Deciſions of the Council of Trent, have been recieved as to the Dogmatical part of Religion, though they will not acknowledge them as to Rites and Eccleſiaſtical Diſcipline. I ſhall obſerve by the by, that the Illuſtrious Peter de Ma • ca, frequently lays i • down as a certain Truth, That France approved of and received the Council of Trent in the year 79 of the laſt Age. However, we find in the Hiſtory of the Cardinal Duke of Joyeuſe, compos'd by Haberi, a Bareſter at the Parliament of Paris, a Brief of Pope Paul the V. ſent to the Cardinal of Joyeuſe Biſhop of Oſtia, above five and fourty Years after the time when M • unſ. de Marca ſaith, That France received the Council of Trent, wherein this Pope complains very bitterly of the refuſal, which they ſtill made in France to approve this Council, and to ſubmit to its Deciſions. Whatſoever it is, moſt of the Doctors of the Romiſh Church do agree, that to know the difference which the Council of Trent hath put between things dogmatical, pertaining to Religion, and things meerly ritual and belonging to Diſcipline, the moſt certain Rule to judge by, is the Anathemas that are faſten'd on them. And therefore, ſince that Council hath Anathematiz'd all thoſe who do not approve the Worſhip of Saints, it follows, that the Fathers of that Council did look upon this Worſhip as a thing of great moment and neceſſity in Religion, and not as one of thoſe Practices and Ceremonies, which though they be allowed to be very good and profitable, yet may be left out or changed at the will and pleaſure of the Pope and Church. But let them ſay what they pleaſe, certain it is that the Romiſh Church does not only believe, that it is neceſſary to Salvation to call upon Saints, but is moreover bound to believe ſo. And their Doctors pretend, that this piece of ſervice to Saints is commanded in the Scripture, wreſting I know not how many Texts to make them apparently comply with their fancy, and utter what they would be at. Now if we believe, that God hath commanded a Worſhip, there is no doubt but we ought alſo to believe that we cannot omit the peformance thereof, without puting our Salvation to ſtake. But what can they ſay for thoſe Services that are eſtabliſhed in ſo many places to the honour of ſuch Saints, as owe all their being to the forgeries of a parcel of Monks, and the credulity of a deluded People? Whereas inſtead of declaring theſe Practices to be neceſſary, the Church of Rome ought to acknowlege that they fall ſhort of being even good and profitable. And therefore that Church muſt confeſs that it hath erred, and is yet involved in error.

The Eight Shift is that of ſome Doctors of the Romiſh Church, who do deplore the exceſs that the Worſhiping of Saints is grown to, and proteſt altogether, that if in ſome places ſome Saints that never were are Worſhiped, they are but local practices tolerated, though not approved by the Church. This is the Rock on which do ſplit every day the Learning, Piety, Knowledge and Conſcience of many Eccleſiaſticks in the Church of Rome, who being deſirous of Salvation and having made a conſiderable ſtudy in Religion, yet comparing the miſchief of that falſe Worſhip, with the conſequences of a Separation, think it much ſafer for their Souls to live in a corrupted Church, and to groan under its Errors, than to make a breach of Charity by ſeparating from its Communion. In which they are like thoſe cowardly and unworthy Citizens, who while a generous Deliverer hazards his Fortune and his Life, to preſerve to them both their Laws and Country, are content with folded Arms to wiſh him good ſucceſs and proſperity; and if he chances to fail in the attempt, will alſo bewail and pity him. Of which ſort of People a The Duke of Rohan▪ great Man uſed to ſay, that they were the moſt uſeleſs of all Friends, for that having the Vertue of wiſhing us well, and ſhedding ſome tears for us, they had not yet courage enough to afford us their Aſſiſtance. For indeed all theſe good Wiſhes and Lamentations are no remedy to the misfortunes of a Church or Country. Works they are and honeſt endeavours which God requires at our hands, and not timorous Wiſhes and unprofitable Vows. If ſome of the Romiſh Party do ſigh at the ſight of a Worſhip, which they think diſhonourable to their Church, why do they not likewiſe joyn with thoſe who apply themſelves to reform it? I believe there are but few very amongſt them who have not heard of the wholſom Advices of the Bleſſed Virgin Mary to her Indiſcreet Votaries, and of the Paſtoral The Biſhop of Tournay. Letter which a Biſhop of France adjoyn'd thereto, recommending them to the peruſal and practice of all the good Chriſtians of his Dioceſs. This was juſt the time, and a fair occaſion for thoſe Doctors, who bewail ſo much in private the Abuſes of their Church, to appear and to ſpeak, had not ſome unworthy conſiderations ſtop'd them in the way, and made them Speechleſs. The Prelates, the Univerſities, Rome it ſelf condemned thoſe wholeſom Advices, no body having Piety and Courage enough to defend them, while Error and Falſhood found a World of Zealous Protectors. Craſſet a Jeſuite ſtood in the defence of all the Exceſſes of the Bonaventures and Bernardines: And the Sorbonne by giving their Approbation to his Works, condemned likewiſe both the wholeſom Advices, and the paſtoral Letter of the Biſhop of Tournay. How can they ſay then, that moſt of thoſe things, which we find fault with in the Church of Rome, are but local Practices, or Exceſſes only tolerated, and not approved by the Church? Thoſe very things which we diſallow, are of ſuch a nature, that a bare toleration of them, hath the force of an Approbation. For they are not Dogmatical Errours, nor empty Speculations, but Errours in the Practice, and Falſe▪worſhip, in the publick Service of Religion: Which, whenever a Chriſtian Society does tolerate, it gives thereby a ſufficient ground to believe, that it approves them likewiſe. Yet had not all our juſt Complaints upon this matter, power enough to induce the Commiſſioners of the Index Expurgatorius, to expunge the ſcandalous Exceſſes of their Bonaventure, Bernardine of Siena, and Gabriel Biel. The Congregation of the Holy Office, and that de Ritibus, are very well informed of the Honours paid in divers Places to the Souldiers of the Thebean Legion. But let the Proteſtants prove as clear as the Day, the Forgery of their Martyrdom, theſe imaginary Beings, conſecrated by a blind Superſtition, are permitted notwithſtanding ſtill to retain all the Deferences of Honour and Worſhip formerly paid to them.

A Ninth evaſion of the Romiſh Party is, that we cannot, they ſay, condemn their worſhipping of Saints, without involving both the Fathers, the Church of the firſt Ages, and the moſt ancient Chriſtians in the ſame Condemnation. But this Accuſation which they enter againſt us with ſo much confidence, is wholly groundleſs The truth is, that in the times of St. Baſil, St. Chryſoſtom and Gregory Nazianzen in the Eaſt, of St. Ambroſe, St. Jerom, St. Auſtin and St. Paulinus in the Weſt, ſome Practices may be obſerved which have been in the After-Ages the Origine of the falſe Worſhip paid to the Saints. The People beginning then to eſteem a little too much of their Reliques, they flock'd from all parts to their Sepulchers, and with an extraordinary zeal, they celebrated the memorial of them; the Preachers in the mean time, by Rhetorical Figures, directing their Speech to them in ſuch manner, as if they had been actually alive. But however the Veneration they had then for them, came nothing near to the Worſhip which the Romiſh Church pays to them now adays. Gregory the Firſt, who died in the Seventh Century, began in his time to innovate in the publick Worſhip of the Church, by inſerting in the Litanies, the Name of the Bleſſed Virgin Mary, thoſe of the Saints having not been introduced till a long time after. And we defy the Doctors of the Church of Rome to ſhew us, that the Worſhip which they render to Saints, is mentioned in any of the Eccleſiaſtical Writers, who Perez de Trad. part. 3. conſ. 7. pag. 197. lived before the Year of our Lord 350. Martin Perez Hiala, Biſhop of Cadiz, confeſſes, that they cannot juſtify by ancient authority, the Invocation and Interceſſion of Saints, before the time of Cornelius, who lived towards the end of the Third Century. And this good Prelate would have deſcended Blondel in Epiſt. Pontif. pag. 308. yet a Hundred Years lower, had he ſeen the Reaſons which Blondel alledges, to prove that that which is cited of Cornelius is meerly ſpurious. Had the Invocation of Saints been in uſe in the times of St. Athanaſius, and St. Hilary, we muſt Athan. Epiſt, ad Adelph. 2. contr. Arr. Hilar. de Trinit. lib. 8. & 12. confeſs that the Arrians had but very little wit, when it being objected, as it was by theſe Fathers to them, that they were down-right Idolaters, in praying as they did to Chriſt, whom they thought to be but a Creature; they did not reply that this Accuſation ought to rebound on their Adverſaries alſo, ſince notwithſtanding they did not believe their Saints to be Gods, yet they made Prayers and Supplications to them But how is it poſſible to believe, that in thoſe firſt Ages of Chriſtianity, the Chriſtians made their Addreſſes to the deceaſed Saints, ſeeing they were of Opinion, that the Souls of the Faithful did not enjoy the Beatifick Viſion before the general Reſurrection of the Dead. If we ask Cardinal Bellarmine why the Saints were not invoked under Bellarm. de Bea • . Sanct. lib. 1. c. 19. the Old Teſtament, he anſwers, Becauſe the Souls of the Juſt were then in Limbo, and did not yet behold the Face of God. For which very Reaſon, we may likewiſe conclude, that the Chriſtians of the firſt Ages did not pray to Saints, ſince they believed that their Souls were not to be admitted into the preſence of God till the General Reſurrection. Which Opinion of theirs, hath forced Cardinal Richlieu to make this Confeſſion, Richlieu Tract. Conv • r. lib. 3. c. 4. That ſeveral Fathers in the Firſt Ages, held for certain, that the Souls of the Faithful deceaſed in the Grace of God (thoſe of Martyrs only excepted) ſhould not enjoy the Beatifick Viſion, till after the Reſurrection of the Dead; and therefore 'its no wonder, that they ſpoke in thoſe times, of the Veneration and Invocation of Saints, with more caution and warineſs, than it hath been done ſince it hath been commonly believed, that the Souls of the Faithful who have departed this Life in the fear of God, did not wait till the Reſurrection for the enjoyment of the Beatifick Viſion. In the Church of the firſt Ages, they obſerved another Practice inconſiſtent with that Worſhip, which the preſent Church of Rome renders to the Saints. For now a days, the Living Pray to the Dead, whereas, formerly the Living pray'd for them. Cardinal Richelieu (as you have ſeen in the place above quoted) hath excepted the Martyrs from the general Rule; but in this caſe there was no exception made of any; for according to the Liturgy aſcrib'd to St. Mark, the Chriſtians us'd to ſay. Remember O Lord Our Ancestors the Bibl. Patr Gr. Lat. 2. Pag. 17. Patriarcks, the Prophets, the Martyrs, and all the Spirits who are perfect in the Faith of Jeſus Chriſt, and grant that their Souls may reſt in the Sanctuary of thy Saints.

This practice of praying for all the Saints, was yet in uſe in Hinkmar's time. And in the Rubrick upon the Decretals at the Title of the Celebration of Maſſes, ch. 6. ſect. Oratio quae dicitur, &c. we find this curious Remark in the Gloſs on the Margent. It was formerly Dicebatur olim annue nobis Domine ut animae famuli tui Leonis haec proſit Oratio. Ho • ie aurem dicitur ut Interc • ſſione Beati Leonis hac nobis proſit Oratio.ſaid, Grant O Lord that this Prayer may be profitable to the Soul of thy Servant Leo: But now it is ſaid, Grant that this Prayer may be profitable to us by the Interceſſion of thy Servant Leo.

So little diſtinction was made in thoſe times between the Martyrs and the Saints of the firſt Order, That they uſed to pray even for the Bleſſed Mother of God. For in the Liturgy attributed to St. Chryſoſtom, we find theſe Words: Let us pray to the Lord, for all thoſe who Bibl. pp. • . 9. rom. 2. p. 62.have heretofore adminiſtred and fulfilled the Duties of Prieſthood, for the eternal remiſſion of their Sins, and for the memory of all thoſe who are deceaſed, in hope of the Reſurrection. Forgive them O Merciful Lord. And we offer alſo this reaſonable Service unto thee for our Anceſtors who reſt in the Faith, the Fathers, the Patriar • s, the Prophets, the Apoſtles, the Martyrs, and eſpecially for the moſt Bleſſed and Immaculate Mary. After this do ye think it well done of the Romaniſts to accuſe us of condemning the Primitive Church, and all the Ancient Fathers, becauſe we condemn the Worſhip which they pay in our days to the Saints? Certain it is that in this we don't condemn Origen, who wrote thus againſt Celſus Origen. contra Celſ. Tir • ▪ 8. & 5.We ought not to pray to Creatures, who have as much need to make Prayers and Supplications for themſelves, and do therefore rather by their calling upon him, admoniſh us to make our addreſſes to God only, and not to debaſe our ſelves before them by dividing between God and them the honour of Prayer, God forbid that we ſhould follow Celſus's advice, who would have us to pray to Angels. We ought to pray to none but God, who is the Paramount Lord of a • l things. We do not condemn St. Auſtin, who ſaith, Auguſt. contra Epiſ. 1. Parm. lib. 2. cap. 8.That were St. Paul and the other Apoſtles our Mediators, we ſhould have many of them, but then this Apoſtle had not been in the right who ſaith, that there is but one God and one Mediator between God and Man who is Jeſus Christ. And he declares in Aug. de Civi • . Dei. lib. 22. c. 19. another place: That in offering the Sacrifice, mention was made of the Martyrs, as of Men of God, who by the Confeſſion of his Name, had triumphed over the World, but that they were not invocated. We don't condemn Ignatius, a Diſciple of the Apoſtles, who recommended this to the Chriſtians, to have none before their Eyes when they pray but Chriſt Jeſus and his Father. We do not condemn Iren. lib. 2. cap. 57. St. Irenaeus, that Holy Biſhop of Lions, who had framed himſelf both upon the Leſſons and Examples of Polycarp, and who ſaith, That the Church does not mix in her Service either the Invocation of Angels, or any other criminal Curioſity, but does direct her Prayers meerly, purely and openly to God, the maker of all things, by calling upon the Name of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt. We do not condemn Tertul. Apol. cap. 17. & 30.Tertullian, who giving an Account of the Faith and Hope of the Chriſtians, before the Roman Emperors, ſaith. That they do Invocate none but the true God and do pray for the proſperity of the Emperor, but that they ask it of him whom they know alone to be able to grant it. Nor do we condemn Lactantius who declares, That thoſe who pray to deceaſed Saints, do Sin both againſt Reaſon and Piety, revolt againſt God, break all ſorts of Laws, and in Worſhiping dead Men, do commit an unpardonable Theo • o 〈◊〉 in Celſ. 2. 18. & • . 7.Fault. But if the Romiſh Church, does ſide with thoſe Ancient Hereticks, who, as Theodore • informs us, held, That whoſoever will have a free Acceſs to God, ought firſt to endeavour to ſecure to himſelf the Favour of Angels; and if we find fault with that Church for doing the ſame, we leave it to our Readers to examin, whether we do condemn alſo that Ancient Doctor, who anſwered theſe Hereticks, That it is but a pitiful ſubterfuge to ſay, that we make our addreſſes to the Creatures, only upon the account of making by their means our Approaches to God, as they are us'd to do, who deſire to be introduced to the King, by making firſt their Application to his Officers. True it is, that to be admitted to the audience of a King, and to be promoted by him, it is neceſſary firſt to ſpeak to and court thoſe who do attend him, becauſe a King being but a Man cannot of himſelf know whom to truſt with the adminiſtration of his Affairs, but as he receives information from thoſe that are about him. But that we may approach God, who is Omniſcient, there is no need of imploring the Patronage of Men. It is enough, if we have a ſincere and upright heart, and a religious mind; for God will anſwer in any place of the Ʋniverſe whoſoever ſpeaks to him in that holy diſpoſition. How unjuſtly then are we condemned by the Romaniſts, for holding Opinions contrary to thoſe of the Ancient Church concerning the Saints, ſince in conformity to that Church of the firſt Ages, we do not addreſs our Prayers to any but God through Jeſus Chriſt. We do, as ſhe did, honour the Saints, and reverence their memory, we propoſe their Examples to our Imitation, we applaud their Triumph, and do Crown them with praiſe. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Imitation, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Praiſe, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Love, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Commemoration, were all the duties which the Piety of the Primitive Chriſtians pay'd to the Saints. And if we do reſtrain our ſelves within the ſame bounds, we have for us the moſt Authentick Acts of Antiquity as the 34. and 57. Epiſtles of St. Cyprian, wherein this bleſſed Martyr ſpeaks of the Commemoration which the Church made of Martyrs; and the 3. ch. of the Book Corona militis by Tertullian, in which are mentioned the Oblations which in thoſe times were offered for the dead, eſpecially for Relations and Friends: But chiefly we have on our ſide the Declaration of the Ancient Church of Smyrna concerning Euſeb. lib. 4. cap. 25. St. Polycarp's Body, related by Euſebius, and in the Acts of this Bleſſed Martyr Printed by Ʋſſerius, and which are quoted by Mr. de Valois in his Notes. It is a very memorable Fact, and which happened about the year of Our Lord 167, and is as follows: The Jews being unwilling that the Chriſtians ſhould have the comfort of burying their Polycarp, repreſented to the Pagan Magiſtrates, that if the Chriſtians were permitted to keep the Body of that Holy Martyr, they would ſoon forſake their Maſter to ſerve his Diſciple, not knowing, ſaid the whole Church of Smyrna, That it is impoſſible we ſhould leave Chriſt who hath ſuffered for the Redemption of all thoſe who are ſaved through the whole World, and that we ſhould pay a religious Worſhip, or addreſs our Prayers to any other but him. For as to Chriſt, we adore him as being the Son of God, whereas we love the Martyrs as the Diſciples and Imitators of the Lord. And certainly this is nothing but what is very juſt, conſidering the Zeal and fervent Love they had for their own King and Maſter. God grant that we may ſo imitate their Piety, that we may be partakers of their Glory. Which diſcourſe of the Church of Smyrna, as it is our Apology, ſo it is a condemnation of the Worſhip which the Romiſh Church renders now a days to Saints. And if the Ancient Church ſpeaks thus of true Martyrs, we may eaſily judge how it would have behaved it ſelf towards falſe and ſuppoſititious ones, ſuch as are the Souldiers of the Theb. Legion.

Tenthly, Father Malbranche is without contradiction, one of the greateſt Wits of our Age, did he not too much affect to be an Original. His Syſtem concerning the Worſhip of Saints, and the way he takes to defend the Practice of his Church is as follows. Firſt, he lays down for a Malbranche Moral. c. 9. pag. 156.Foundation, that all our good things come from God, and that he is the only cauſe and diſpenſer of them. Secondly, He ſaith, That when we receive from him any thing that is good, Chriſt is the occaſional Cauſe thereof, God by an Eternal Law having decreed not to communicate any Good to Mankind, but at Chriſt's Deſire and Requeſt. Which Tenet of his is ſet forth more largely both in his Chriſtian Meditations, and his Treatiſe of Nature and Grace. Thirdly, He declares, That it is not in the Power of the Saints to impart any of theſe Goods unto us, and that we ought not ſo much as to ſay, That they are the occaſional Cauſes of them, it being a Privilege, that belongs to none but Chriſt, as he is the Mediator of the New Covenant, and the High Prieſt of Things Eternal. It is at the Deſire of Chriſt, and not at thoſe of the Saints, that God by an Eternal Law hath bound himſelf to communicate his Graces. Fourthly, Nevertheleſs he adds, that the Saints do excite and incline the Deſires of Chriſt toward us, in which chiefly he makes the force of their Interceſſion to conſiſt. Fifthly, and laſtly, He believes, that they have the Power to heal Sickneſſes, and to bleſs with fertility our Fields, becauſe the Order of the Univerſe ſeems to require, that inferior things be made Subject to the Power of the Superior Beings. I know not how Father Malbranche, with all the Sagacity and Sharpneſs of his Wit, can reconcile theſe Principles of his both with the Doctrine and Practice of his Church. For having Eſtabliſhed in the Firſt, That God is the only Diſpenſer of all good things, hence it follows, that the asking the Saints for Graces, which come only from the hand of God, is down-right Idolatry. And when he ſaith, ſecondly, That God does not diſpenſe his Graces but at the Deſire of Chriſt, who is eſtabliſhed by him the Mediatour of the New Covenant, and the High-Prieſt of Things Eternal, and that he alone can make Interceſſion for us to his Father in determining and contracting by his deſires the general Laws of God's Mercy to ſome particular Sinners, whom he hath more kindneſs for, we may eaſily conclude, that the imploring the Mediation of Saints, and asking them to pray directly and immediately to God for us, is a high Injury offered to the Prieſthood of Jeſus Chriſt. Now as to his third Tenet, viz. That the Saints have not the Power to convey to us thoſe Graces which we want, and that we ought not ſo much asto look upon them as the occaſional Cauſes of them, if this opinion of his be true, what will become of ſo many Litanies and Prayers ſet down in the Popiſh Breviaries, and in their Prayer and Maſs-Books, in which they ask the Saints to cleanſe them from all their Sins, to preſerve them

Miſſal p. 353. and 359.

Brev. p. 826. die 18. Jan. die 15.

Octob. pag 1095, &c.

from the Sickneſſes of the Spirit, to inflame their hearts with the Fire of Charity, to deliver them from Hell-fire, to open the Gates of Heaven to them, and to make them ſit on Thorns with the glorious Company of the Bleſſed above, &c. Laſtly, if according to Malbranche's fourth and fifth Principles all the good Services, which the Saints are able to do, are only to move and excite Chriſt's deſires towards us, and to give us eaſe in our Afflictions, or afford us a good Crop, he Aſſerts theſe laſt Tenets in ſo dubious a manner and ſo faintly (though upon any other matter, he uſes to be very Vigorous and Poſitive) that it is an eaſy thing to diſcern that he himſelf is not very well convinced of it. 'Tis, ſaith he, The Opinion of the Church that the Saints do know all our wants. We may pray to the Saints, that they be pleaſed to ſtir up the deſires and the Charity of Jeſus Chriſt. One Saint perhaps is more in Favour, and hath more Acceſs to Chriſt upon his own Holy-day than at another time, or than another Saint. It may be alſo that they have the power of healing our Sickneſſes, or of procuring us a plentiful Year. We ſee by theſe ſhy and uncertain expreſſions, how hard he is put to it to reconcile his Opinions with the Doctrine and Practice of his Church. For indeed there is a palpable incompatibility of his Principles, with that Religious Worſhip which the Romiſh Church pays to the Saints. And we need only to examin the Principles, which he had already laid before, viz. That the Church by praying to the Father through the Son, does acknowledge the Son to be equal and of one ſubſtance with the Father: For if he were not ſo, ſaith he, we could not call upon him. And likewiſe he had already ſaid, that the Father hath tyed his Bleſſings and Treaſures to Chriſt's Deſires, and that this is the Reaſon why we ought to adore the Father, and to call upon Chriſt. But what he after adds deſerves eſpecially our conſideration, namely, that theſe Deſires of Chriſt are the deſires of his human Will, that his Fleſh is the Principle of theſe Deſires, which make all the riches of the Church and the Sanctification of the Elect: And that this is the reaſon why Religion teaches us to Addreſs ſometimes our Prayers to the Father, becauſe if we never did invocate any but Chriſt, by reaſon of thoſe Priviledges which God hath by an eternal Decree adapted to his Deſire, to thoſe human deſires, he ſaith, which do proceed from the Child of the Bleſſed Mary, we ſhould be in danger of adhering to Chriſt as he is a Man, and of truſting in his Fleſh with the ſame kind of Love and Truſt, which we owe only to the Infinite and Soveraign Being. We may eaſily perceive that this way of reaſoning is quite contrary to the Doctrine of the Roman Church, and to that Worſhip it renders to Saints. The Eſteem indeed, which I have for Great Men is ſuch, that I cannot forbear having alſo a kind of reſpect even for their odd fancies, and by-ways of Writing, which made me take notice by the by of Father Malbranch • his Syſtem concerning the worſhipping of Saints, though I know in the bottom of it there is no more reality than in a ſhadow or dream. But after all, ſhould we ſuppoſe his Opinion to be not altogether groundleſs, who would venture to ſay, that ſuppoſititious Saints, ſuch as we have proved thoſe of the Theb. Legion to be, can move and excite Chriſts deſires? Therefore the Roman Church ought to confeſs, that ſhe hath erred in permitting and approving the Worſhip which is paid to them.