King Shapoor, or Sapor, of Persia, raised a savage persecution against the Christians in his realm, believing them to be in league with the Roman emperor. Amongst those who suffered were Jonas and Barachisius, because they refused to adore the sun and fire. Melted lead was poured down the nostrils of Jonas, and red-hot plates were placed under his arms, and he was hung up by one foot in his dungeon till he fainted. His hands and feet were cut off, his tongue torn out, and he was pressed to death in a grape-crusher. Barachisius was treated with equal barbarity. Sharp splinters of reed were thrust into his flesh, all over his body, so that he resembled a porcupine, and he was then rolled on the ground to drive the spikes in.

SS. MARK, B. C., AND CYRIL, D. M.

(A.D. 362.)

[By Greeks and Latins on the same day, but the Greeks commemorate especially S. Mark, and the modern Roman Martyrology only S. Cyril. S. Mark, but not S. Cyril, was in that of Galesinius, prepared for the use of the Roman Church, and approved by Gregory XIII., and Clement VIII., but was cut out by Baronius, and S. Cyril inserted in his place. The reason he gave was "Romana Ecclesia non recipit Marcum illum inter Sanctos, quem constat Arianum fuisse." But the continuators of Bollandus have shown that Baronius was without sufficient grounds for concluding that he was an Arian. Authorities:—Theodoret, lib. iii. c. 7; Socrates, lib. ii. c. 30; Theophanes, and the Oration of S. Gregory Nazianzen against Julian.]

Mark, bishop of Arethusa, on Mount Lebanon, was present at the council of Sirmium (A.D. 351), which met to depose Photinus, the bishop of Sirmium, who, in spite of former censures for heresy, had retained his church. This was at a time when the Arian controversy was being carried on with great vehemence, and the word "consubstantial" was insisted upon by the orthodox, and rejected by the Arian party. A third party of semi-Arians, as they were called, existed, which comprised within its ranks men of two different types. On the one hand were the prelates who desired to keep well with an Arian emperor, but who were not disposed to surrender the Catholic faith to obtain favour, and who were wanting in dogmatic precision. On the other hand, there was a body of very pious and thoroughly orthodox bishops, who hesitated about adopting a new word to define our Lord's nature, deprecated the heat displayed by both parties, and hoped, by avoiding this burning word, to prevent many who were passively or ignorantly heterodox, from being forced by the fierceness, wherewith the controversy was carried on, to side permanently with heresy. We have seen S. Cyril in company with these men. Mark of Arethusa was another. At the council he produced a creed, which is given by Socrates, and which it was hoped would be accepted by the semi-Arians and Catholics together. This creed is orthodox92; the only questionable passage in it is in reference to a text in Genesis, and is so involved and obscure that it may be incorrectly given by the historian.93 It is as follows:—"If anyone shall understand the words, (Gen. xix. 24.) 'The Lord rained from the Lord,' not in relation to the Father and the Son, but shall say that God rained from Himself, let Him be anathema: for the Lord the Son rained from the Lord the Father. If anyone, hearing the Lord the Father, and the Lord the Son, shall term both the Father and the Son Lord, and saying the Lord from the Lord, shall assert that there be two Gods, let him be anathema. For we rank not the Son with the Father, but conceive Him to be subordinate to the Father. For He neither came down to Sodom without the Father's will, nor did He rain from Himself, but from the Lord who exercises supreme authority: nor does He sit at the Father's right hand of Himself, but in obedience to the Father."

But this strange passage must not be taken to deny the Lordship of the Son, for the Creed which precedes the anathemas is very explicit on the Eternal Godhead of Christ. "We believe ... in our Lord Jesus Christ, who was begotten of His Father before all ages, God of God, Light of Light, by whom all things visible and invisible, which are in the heavens and upon the earth, were made; Who is the Word, the Wisdom, the true Light, and the Life." Again, "If anyone says that the Son was not with God, begotten of the Father before all ages, and that all things were not made by Him, let him be anathema."

In the reign of Constantius, Mark had drawn down on himself the hatred of the pagan inhabitants of Arethusa, by causing the destruction of a magnificent temple. According to the law published by Julian the Apostate, on his accession to the throne, he was, under these circumstances, bound to make good the value of the temple in money, or else to cause it to be rebuilt. Being in no condition to do the former, and thinking he could not conscientiously do the latter; fearing, at the same time, for his life amidst a ferocious populace, he betook himself to flight. As others, however, were involved in danger on his account, he turned back, and voluntarily offered himself to his enemies. The fanatical multitude now fell upon him; he was dragged through the streets, stripped, and scourged, then dipped in the town sewer, and given over to the schoolboys returning from their lessons, to mangle him with their iron pens. When the old man had almost done breathing, they besmeared him with honey and other liquids, laid him in a basket, in which he was swung up in the air, and left to be preyed upon by bees and wasps. Mark shamed his cruel enemies by the cool indifference which he exhibited under all his sufferings. The governor, himself a pagan, represented to Julian what scandal it must occasion if they allowed themselves to be outdone by the constancy of a weak old man; and the emperor finally commanded him to be set free, for it was not his wish, he said, to give the Christians any martyrs. After, when Libanius, the heathen rhetorician, desired to restrain a governor from indulging in the cruel persecution of a Christian who had been accused of robbing the temples, he warned him thus: "If he is to die in his chains, then look well before you, and consider what will be the result. Take heed lest you bring upon us many more like Mark. This Mark was hung up, scourged, plucked by the beard, and bore all with constancy. He is now honoured as a god, and, wherever he appears, everybody is eager to take him by the hand. As the emperor is aware of this, he has not allowed the man to be executed, much as he is grieved at the destruction of the temple. Let the preservation of Mark be a caution to us."94 Socrates says that the constancy of Mark converted the people of Arethusa, and that they submitted to learn from his lips the doctrines of Christianity.

In the same chapter in which Socrates relates the sufferings of Mark, he tells how other Christians suffered from popular tumults at the revival of paganism under Julian. "At Askelon, and at Gaza, they seized men truly worthy of the priesthood, and women vowed to perpetual virginity, and after having ripped open their stomachs, they threw them to the pigs to be devoured. At Sebaste, a city of the same province, they opened the coffin of John the Baptist, burnt his bones, and flung away his ashes. In Heliopolis, a city near Lebanon, dwelt Cyril, a deacon. Acting on the impulse of ardent zeal, he had there, during the reign of Constantius, destroyed many idols. These impious men not only killed him in revenge for this act, but after having ripped up his stomach, ate his liver. At Dorostolis, a celebrated city of Thrace, Emilius, an undaunted champion of the faith, was thrown into the flames by Capitolinus, governor of the province."

SS. ARMOGASTES AND COMPANIONS, MM.

(ABOUT A.D. 463.)

[Usuardus, Ado, Notker, and Roman Martyrology. Authority:—Victor of Utica. De Persec. Vand. lib. i. (5th cent.)]

Genseric, the Vandal king in North Africa, had in his early youth renounced the Orthodox communion, and had become an Arian. He was exasperated to find that the Africans, who fled before him in the field, presumed to dispute his authority over their faith, and his ferocious mind was incapable of fear or of compassion. His Catholic subjects were oppressed by intolerant laws, and arbitrary punishments. The language of Genseric was furious and formidable; the knowledge of his intentions might justify the most unfavourable interpretations of his actions; and the Arians were reproached with the frequent executions which stained the palace and dominions of the tyrant.

Genseric had ordered, on the advice of the Arian bishops, that no Catholic should be allowed to hold office in his house. Now there was found one, named Armogastes, in the service of his son Theodoric. He was tortured with cords bound round his forehead and legs, compressing the flesh painfully. But he looked up to heaven, made the sign of the Cross, and the cords broke like a spider's web. Stouter cords of hemp were then used, but they proved equally inefficacious. He was next suspended by one foot, with his head downwards. His master, Theodoric, wished to cut off his head, but his hand was arrested by an Arian priest present, named Jucundus, who said, "If thou strikest off his head, the Romans will honour him as a martyr; therefore make him languish to death in other ways." By Romans, he meant the conquered inhabitants of the province. Theodoric then sent Armogastes into the province of Byzacene, to dig the earth. He afterwards recalled him to Carthage, and to disgrace him before all men, made him cow-keeper.

The confessor having had a revelation that his death was at hand, said to a Catholic, named Felix, "I pray thee, bury me under this oak tree, or thou shalt have to give account before God for not doing this." Felix replied, "God forbid that I should do so; I will bury thee, as thou deservest, in some church." Armogastes urged him, and Felix promised to fulfil his wish, so as not to vex him. The saint died a few days after, and Felix began his grave beneath the tree, but the roots incommoded him. He, therefore, got an axe, and cut through them, and found, to his surprise, an ancient marble sarcophagus beneath them; and in this he laid the body of Armogastes.

A certain Archinimus, of the city of Mascula, was also called on to confess Christ about the same time. The king himself endeavoured to persuade him to disbelieve in the eternal Godhead of Christ, and promised him great wealth and favour if he would comply with his wishes. But when he found that the man would not be persuaded, he gave orders that he should be executed, but he sent secret instructions that his life should be spared if he maintained his constancy to the last. The saint showed no disposition to yield, and he was spared.

Satur, procurator of Huneric, often spoke against Arian misbelief. For this he was denounced by an Arian deacon, named Varimad. Huneric threatened, unless he conformed to the established heresy, that he would deprive him of his house, his goods, his slaves, his children, even of his wife, and publicly wed her in his presence to a camel-driver. Satur remained inflexible, and was despoiled of all things. His wife implored delay, and going to her husband, with her garments rent, cast herself at his feet, and implored him not, by his obduracy, to expose her to such a public disgrace, and to such a sin as marriage to another whilst her husband lived. He replied, "You speak like one of the foolish women. (Job xi. 10.) If you loved me, you would not urge me to a second death. He that forsaketh not even his wife, the Lord said, when called upon so to do for His sake, cannot be His disciple." Then Satur was robbed of all, and reduced to beggary; he was even forbidden to go forth from his place. Thus was he despoiled of wealth and family, and liberty. "But," says Victor of Utica, "Of his baptismal robe they could not rob him." These three men are honoured, for their sufferings, as martyrs.

S. EUSTACE, AB. OF LUXEUIL.

(A.D. 625.)

[Roman Martyrology, and that of Ado; not in the genuine one of Bede, nor in that of Usuardus; but in those of Notker and Maurolycus; and in the Gallican and Benedictine Martyrologies; and in the Scottish one of Dempster. His life was written by Jonas, monk of Bobbio, in 664.]

Eustace, born of a noble family in Burgundy, had spent his youth in arms, but he renounced the world and joined S. Columbanus at Luxeuil, and when, through the persecution of that she-wolf, Brunehault, and her grandson, Thierry, king of Burgundy, Columbanus was driven from his monastery, and from the country, Eustace was deemed worthy to succeed him in the government of the abbey. His marvellous sweetness and tender companion to all who suffered, mentally or corporeally, endeared him to his monks; and when they confessed their faults to him, his tears mingled with theirs, and filled their hearts with consolation.

By order of Clothaire II., he travelled into Italy to recall Columbanus, and the two saints had the happiness of once more falling on each other's necks, embracing. Columbanus having refused to return, Eustace went back to the king and explained to him the reasons of the saint for declining his invitation. Eustace, therefore, remained at the head of the great abbey of Luxeuil, which attracted an increasing number of monks. However, the missionary spirit and desire to preach exercised an overwhelming influence over Eustace, as over all the disciples of the great Irish missionary. The bishops, assembled in the Council of Bonneuil-sur-Marne, by Clothaire II., nominated him to preach the faith to unconverted nations. He began with the Varasques, who inhabited the banks of the Doubs, near Baume, some of whom worshipped the wood-spirit, whilst others had fallen victims to heresy. He afterwards travelled beyond the countries which Columbanus had visited, to the extremity of northern Gaul, among the Boii or Bavarians. His mission was not without success; but Luxeuil, which could not remain thus without a head, soon recalled him.

During the ten years of his rule, a worthy successor of Columbanus, he succeeded in securing the energetic support of the Frank nobility, as well as the favour of Clothaire II. Under his active and intelligent administration, the abbey founded by S. Columbanus attained its highest pitch of splendour, and was recognised as the monastic capital of all the countries under Frank government. The other monasteries, into which laxness had but too frequently found its way, yielded, one after another, to the happy influence of Luxeuil, and gradually reformed themselves by its example. This remarkable prosperity was threatened with a sudden interruption by means of the intrigues of a false brother who had stolen into the monastic family of Columbanus. A man named Agrestin, who had been secretary to king Thierry, the persecutor of S. Columbanus, came one day to give himself and his property to Luxeuil. Being admitted among the monks, he soon showed a desire to go, like Eustace, to preach the faith to the pagans. In vain the abbot, who could see no evangelical quality in him, attempted to restrain that false zeal. He was obliged to let him go. Agrestin followed the footsteps of Eustace into Bavaria, but made nothing of it, and passed from thence into Istria and Lombardy, where he embraced the schism of the Three Chapters, and endeavoured to involve therein Attalus, the second abbot of Bobbio. Failing, he returned to Luxeuil, where he tried to corrupt his former brethren. Eustace then remembered what the exiled Columbanus had written to him, in his letter from Nantes, just before his embarkation:—"If there is one among you who holds different sentiments from the others, send him away;" and he commanded Agrestin to leave the community. To avenge himself, the schismatic began to snarl, says the contemporary annalist, hawking here and there injurious imputations against the rule of S. Columbanus. Abellinus, bishop of Geneva, listened to his denunciations, and exerted himself to make the neighbouring prelates share his dislike. King Clothaire, who heard of it, and who was always full of solicitude for Luxeuil, assembled most of the bishops of the kingdom of Burgundy in the council of Macon. To this council Eustace was called, and the accuser invited to state his complaints against the rule. They were directed against certain insignificant peculiarities. "I have discovered," said he, "that Columbanus has established usuages which are not those of the whole Church." And thereupon he accused his former brethren, as with so many heresies, of making the sign of the cross upon their spoons when eating; of asking a blessing in entering or leaving any monastic building; and of multiplying prayers at Mass. He insisted especially against the Irish tonsure, which Columbanus had introduced into France, and which consisted solely in shaving the front of the head, from one ear to the other, without touching the hair of the back part, while the Greeks shaved the entire head, and the Romans only the crown.

Eustace had no difficulty in justifying the customs of Luxeuil, and in discomfiting the violence of his accuser. But as Agrestin always returned to the charge, the abbot said to him: "In presence of these bishops, I, the disciple and successor of him whose institute thou condemnest, cite thee to appear with him, within a year, at the tribunal of God, to plead thy cause against him, and to learn to know the justice of Him whose servant thou hast attempted to calumniate." The solemnity of this appeal had an effect even upon the prelates who leant to the side of Agrestin: they urged him to be reconciled to his former abbot, and the latter, who was gentleness himself, consented to give him the kiss of peace. But this goodness did not benefit Agrestin. Hopeless of succeeding at Luxeuil itself, he sowed revolt and calumny in the other monasteries which had proceeded, like Luxeuil, from the colonising genius of Columbanus, at Remiremont and Faremoutier. But shortly before the expiration of the year, he was slain with a blow of an axe by his servant, whose wife, it was reported—whether truly or not Jonas does not commit himself to decide—he had intended to dishonour. At length, in 625, Eustace was called to his rest, and was succeeded in the government of the abbey by S. Wandelbert (May 7th.)

His relics were preserved in the abbey of Vergaville, in the diocese of Metz, but on its destruction in 1792 they were carried away and concealed by the last abbess, Madame de la Marche, in the house of M. Labrosse, curÉ of Surianville. They were surrendered by him, on the return of security, to Mgr. Ant. Eustache Osmond, bishop of Nancy, and they were placed in two shrines in the Benedictine priory of Flavigny-sur-Moselle, in Meurthe, in 1824.

B. HUGO, MONK OF VAUCELLES.

(A.D. 1236.)

[Gallican Martyrology. Authority:—Thomas Cantipratensis.]

One of the most fervent and exemplary religious of the abbey of Vaucelles in the early part of the 13th century was Hugo de Villa, formerly dean of the church of Cambrai. He was as distinguished for the nobility of his birth, and of his talents, as he was for his virtue. The fear of being called to fill some episcopal throne prompted him to take refuge in the monastery of Vaucelles, where the rule of the first children of S. Bernard was rigorously observed. When the project of the pious dean was known, many persons came to ask him to give them a handsome tame falcon he possessed. Hugo refused, and dissembled his intentions till the moment that he entered religion. He arrived at the gates of the abbey with the bird, and then, cutting the string that held the falcon captive, he gave it liberty, saying, "My dear bird! fly away and enjoy thy liberty in peace, for I am leaving thee for ever."

Thomas de CantinprÉ, his biographer, says, "I have often heard from the mouths of eye-witnesses that during his noviciate, birds would come and perch on his hands, and eat crumbs out of them. The master of the novices, to prove his virtue by opposing this innocent pleasure, reproached him. The good religious then drove away the birds that fluttered around him, saying, with that simplicity which marked all his conduct, 'Away, birds! I am not surprised that you are ordered off: my age and condition requires that you should obey me, and not I you.'"

---