for uncleanness, by inviting dissolute companions to his house. To avoid the importunities with which he was beset, he sought to effect his escape from Milan; but missing his way, after wandering about all night, he was found not far from the gates of the city. His objections were so strong, that, according to one account, he yielded only to the express command of the emperor, Valentinian I. According to another account, when the difficulties arising from his former reluctance were overcome, it was necessary for him to obtain the imperial consent before he could resign the secular duties of governor, and undertake the spiritual functions of bishop. In this unprecedented manner, Ambrose, the catechumen, in the thirty-fourth year of his age, was called to the high dignity of archbishop of Milan, the capital of the Western Empire, and was duly consecrated to this exalted office on the eighth day after his baptism.
The irregularities of the whole proceeding are transparent; especially as the transaction occurred in a period of the church which our imagination depicts as a scene of perfect order, purity, and peace. The following facts deserve careful consideration:—(1.) The strife between the orthodox and Arian parties was so sharp, that the interference of a magistrate was necessary to preserve the peace. (2.) The ecclesiastical feeling of propriety was so low, as to admit of the election of an unbaptized layman to the episcopal office. (3.) The consent of the emperor was necessary before the individual chosen by the church could assume the episcopal government. (4.) A person was consecrated bishop immediately after baptism.
The distinguishing feature of Ambrose's character was energetic activity: thus, he made over the whole of his property to the church for the relief of the poor; and when his feelings of compassion were strongly excited on behalf of some captives, he hesitated not to employ the treasures, and even the consecrated vessels of the church, for the purpose of redeeming them from slavery. Throughout his life he was a warm advocate of celibacy; and numbers, urged by his representations, came forward to devote themselves to a single life. His attachment to the orthodox creed, shown at the time of his baptism, was afterwards exhibited in his efforts to prevent the appointment of an Arian bishop at Sirmium, who was supported by the zeal and influence of the Empress Justina, the mother of Valentinian II. When Justina demanded one of the churches in Milan for the use of the Arian party, the archbishop distinctly and firmly refused; when violence was offered by a body of guards, who attempted to effect a forcible entrance, Ambrose calmly replied, "You may use your swords and spears against me; such a death I will readily undergo." When Symmachus and the heathen senators of Rome presented a petition, that the altar of victory should be rebuilt, and offered a vindication in behalf of idolatrous worship, Ambrose directed attention to the true source of these victories, and called upon the heathens to declare what captives they had redeemed, what poor they had relieved, to what exiles they had sent alms. The services of Ambrose were highly valued as a political agent, in spite of the resentment which the empress felt at his theological opinions. Thus Ambrose was on two different occasions employed as ambassador to Maximus, who had rebelled against the imperial authority, and was at the head of an army in Gaul. On the first occasion, 385, Ambrose induced him to defer his design of invading Italy; in the second embassy, 387, he was not equally successful; for Maximus entered Milan in triumph, when the archbishop inculcated a virtuous resignation rather than a vigorous resistance.
The career of Maximus was closed by the victories of Theodosius, and his accession to the throne. This powerful prince came into collision with Ambrose on two striking occasions. Some monks at Callinicum, on the frontiers of Persia, were commanded by Theodosius to rebuild, at their own expense, a Jewish synagogue, which had been burnt and destroyed in an outbreak of fanatical excitement. Ambrose exerted his personal and official influence against the execution of this order, and was too successful in defeating the cause of justice and equity. The great event, however, which has gained for Ambrose his eminent place in ecclesiastical history, arises out of the severe and revengeful measures which the emperor adopted against the inhabitants of Thessalonica, the metropolis of the Illyrian provinces. A petty dispute gave rise to riot, sedition, and bloodshed, in which the officers of the garrison were inhumanly murdered, and their bodies treated with base indignity. In a transport of rage, Theodosius ordered a general massacre of the inhabitants, which was carried into effect under circumstances of complicated cruelty and treachery. When Ambrose heard of the atrocious deed, he wrote a letter to the emperor, setting forth the heinous nature of the offence, and the blood-guiltiness to which the paroxysms of passion had given birth. The emperor was sensibly affected by the remonstrances of the archbishop; but, forgetting how he had on the former occasion been debarred from occupying the usual place of honour assigned to royalty, he dared to enter the cathedral for the purpose of performing his devotions. This advance into the sacred precincts of the temple was arrested on the threshold by the archbishop, who insisted on the performance of public penance. When Theodosius pleaded the conduct of David, he received the reply, "You have imitated David in his guilt: imitate him also in his repentance." For eight months Theodosius had no other resource but to submit to this exclusion; and even on the feast of the Nativity, he touchingly lamented that he was not admitted to the sacred courts which were open to the beggar and the slave. At length, on his publicly assuming the humble language and attitude of a suppliant, the interdict was removed; and a salutary precaution was taken against the recurrence of a like massacre, by enacting a condition that thirty days should always elapse between the pronouncing of a capital sentence and the execution of the fatal decree.
The conduct of Ambrose in these struggles with the emperors, gives rise to various conflicting opinions. In a rude and uncivilized age, when the bonds of society were loosed, and the community shaken to its foundations, we contemplate with awe and delight the career of one who, in the short space of fourteen years, asserted his right to rule. We admire the successful transference to ecclesiastical government and discipline of that natural vigour and practical energy which Ambrose had acquired in secular concerns. We look upon these struggles as striking proofs of the spiritual power wielded by Christian teachers; for within the space of eighty years from the persecution of Diocletian, a successor of that unrestrained and lawless despot humbled himself before the unarmed minister of the religion which Diocletian had laboured to destroy.
The decision and impartiality of the archbishop in bringing the emperor of Rome to the bar of public opinion—in rendering him amenable for an act of atrocious tyranny—in affixing the brand of condemnation on a deed of sanguinary revenge, are justly entitled to universal approbation. This tribute to his administrative vigour has been the more cheerfully paid, as it is clear that Ambrose acted, not from the love of power or from sacerdotal ambition, but from a sincere connection that the best interests of mankind, in their temporal welfare and eternal happiness, were involved in establishing the supremacy of the altar over the throne. It should be remembered, too, that the minister of religion had not learned to discriminate as to the extent of his powers, and recognized no distinction between political misconduct and private flagitiousness.
At this time the first blood was judicially shed for opinions deemed to be heretical. The sufferer was Priscillian, a bishop in Spain. Some of those who sympathized with him, and shared his fate, wished to prove before Ambrose their innocence of the charges brought against them, but were unable to obtain a hearing. When, however, the capital sentence was carried into execution, the humane feelings of the archbishop asserted their sway; he denounced the deed of violence, and refused to hold any intercourse with the bishops who had taken part in the sanguinary transaction.
The writings of Ambrose are not remarkable for taste or genius; they have neither the spirit of Tertullian nor the copious elegance of Lactantius; we look in vain for the lively wit of Jerome, or the grave energy of his distinguished disciple, Augustine. His public and popular compositions are far inferior to his theological works. He was led astray by his fondness for the mystic subtleties of Origen. He looked upon Scripture as one vast allegory, and traced out fantastic analogies and recondite significations in every passage. In one of his practical treatises, where he inculcates the habit of intercessory prayer, and insists on the necessity of being ready to forgive, as we would be forgiven, he expounds the passage, "Enter into thy closet," as meaning, not the closet surrounded by walls within which your limbs are inclosed, but the closet within you, within which your thoughts are inclosed, in which your feelings and associations dwell.
His treatises on Faith and on the Holy Spirit were composed for the instruction of the youthful emperor Gratian; but to judge
