The Cross and the Crucifix.

435

crystallisation, in which it becomes fixed, to the manifest detriment of its primitive geniality. It was also led to this by the force of circumstances. Souvenirs, in proportion as they leave the events behind them, take another physiognomy; they become history, that is to say, something fixed and enlarged. This change is visible between the beginning and the end of the third century. The symbolical proceeding becomes an historical one; the facts which furnished emblems become real scenes. Here is a baptism of Jesus, of the third century, almost anecdotal, so realistic is it: the baptized One, half-plunged in the water of the Jordan, John the Baptist holding out his hand to help him out, and a big pigeon flying above. But history, in its turn, is transformed, and becomes dogma. The Christ of the fourth century tends to the supernatural; he reigns, he judges, he takes the nimbus; decorative painting is turning into the hieratic image.

The most notable transformation of the Christian sentiment is indubitably that which is revealed in the history of the Crucifix. It was impossible for Christian faith to ignore the punishment of the cross, this bloody sacrifice which already takes so large a place in several of the apostolic Epistles. But the piety of these early times, as it manifests itself in the Catacombs, did not willingly lay hold on these souvenirs. It was too simple, too serene, and, I dare to say so, too healthy. It preferred the Master teaching and healing, or, later, the Christ reigning and triumphing, to the Victim nailed on the bloody tree. Therefore, it is a very curious fact that the cross, even as a symbol, does not appear in the Catacombs before the fourth century. It may, perhaps, be hidden in the anchor, or in the masts of Jonas's ship, but it does not form a part of Christian imagery. M. de Rossi does not hesitate to recognise this. "The monuments," says he, "which are being every day discovered in larger numbers, in reality constantly teach that the Roman cross at least was very rarely in use before the fourth century, and was only in solemn use during the fifth "-and after all he is only speaking of the recognised and symbolical signs. The crucifix, properly so called, is absolutely foreign to the Catacombs, or, what comes to the same thing, it has only been introduced as an afterthought, in later times, when Popes took their pleasure in decorating the subterraneous burying-grounds, which had become objects

of veneration.

The only representation of Christ on the cross which has been found is a fresco, which, says M. de Rossi, "is certainly not anterior to the seventh century."

M. Roller quotes somewhere an observation which is not out of place here:

"The monuments of Christian art," says M. Grimouard de Saint-Laurent, "are distinguished by a central idea which gives them all a common physiognomy that of deliverance and resurrection, of healing and immortality; it is fundamentally an idea of triumph, beneficent triumph, the peaceful reign of Christ, victory over the world, death, and sin. Baptism, martyrdom, were even triumphs in their estimation. To represent martyrdom, those persecuted ones never chose other symbols than marvellous ones of the Divine protection and the powerlessness of the punishment; the three young Hebrews giving thanks in the furnace; Daniel in the lions' den. The Crucifix is the image of death; the children of the martyrs only wished to see life. During the early ages, the death of the Saviour was recalled by the symbol of the lamb, but they would not represent this innocent victim slain, they must depict it living. The Christians were not satisfied with seeing Christ himself living, they must have him triumphant."

To meet with the Madonna as well as the Crucifix we must have recourse to the Middle Ages. The Catacombs have neither the Holy Family, nor Joseph, nor the Virgin with the nimbus; we find the mother of Jesus with the Child in a very ancient fresco, but without any of the attributes of glory or holiness. The peculiarity of this interesting representation is the simply historical character which distinguishes it. Were it not for the prophetic star which shines above, and to which a second person is pointing with his finger, we might see nothing more than a Christian mother holding her child. In a word, we are in presence, not of a sacred picture but of a Biblical scene-thus almost all the characteristic elements of the faith of the following centuries escape us, in the critical examination of our Roman crypts. They do not know, I mean those of the first three centuries, either the Primacy of Peter, or the Invocation of the Saints, or the Intercession of the dead in favour of the living, or the Eucharist separate from the Agapè or fraternal repast. The priest, or rather the elder (for the Greek word which has been made into priest has as yet no sacerdotal character), may have another profession; one is found to have been a physician, another was married and had been buried along with his wife. The bishop of Rome is only designated by his title of bishop; the name as well as the idea of Pope is absent. This does not, however, prove that the Papacy was not

Devotion to martyrs.—Immortality.

437

in course of formation. It was so virtually from the moment that the Church of Rome was the only Church in the West of apostolic origin, and that it united in itself besides the two eminent distinctions of tracing its foundation to the prince of the Apostles, and of sharing the glory and the destinies of the ancient capital of the world.

There are two points upon which it seems that the Catacombs ought to have been particularly eloquent,-veneration of the martyrs and Christian ideas of immortality. The martyrs before all. There was a time when it was believed that the crypts were peopled by them, when a tool could not be met with without it being looked upon as an instrument of torture, nor an ampulla attached to a tomb without the supposition that it had contained the blood of a martyr. People did not ask how this blood had been taken up, and taken up liquid. There was red dust at the bottom of the vase, and that was enough; most probably the vial had contained perfume or wine. Mabillon had also expressed his surprise, even more than that, his "displeasure, to see that in so great a number of inscriptions a word is never said of violent death pro Christo." There is in the crypt, called that of Pope Eusebius, a very remarkable painting, which may be said to be unique of its kind. It dates from the third century, and represents the judgment of a Christian condemned, to all appearance, for having refused to sacrifice to the Emperor. But no representation of punishments is to be found either in the frescoes or in the sculptures of the first centuries. The symbol of Daniel in the lions' den takes their place. The same feeling which prevented the early Christians from representing the crucifixion of the Master prevented them from reproducing the horrible scenes of the persecutions. Besides this, a certain time must elapse ere respect becomes transformed into devotion. Devotion to the martyrs appears only in the fourth century, and it is true that it takes at once a large place.

It is in the third century, when inscriptions are multiplying and becoming more expansive, that the expression of wishes in favour of the dead appear. It is hoped that the deceased rests "in peace," or "in the fellowship of the saints." His friends wish it for him; nothing more precise. No allusion to Purgatory nor Hell. What is desired for the beloved ones, from whom they have been separated, is the Refrigerium,

refreshment, that is for this is the exact sense of the word -a place at the celestial banquet. As regards prayer for the dead, M. Rossi allows that he cannot yet give full and satisfactory proof that it was practised before the third century, until he has gathered up all the inscriptions relating to it. There is no doubt, however, that, by little and little, the wish became a prayer, and that prayer for the dead produced the demand for their intercession, and the invocation of the saints. At the end of the fourth century this is usual.

I cannot conclude this subject, and the study of M. Roller's book, better than by some of the reflections with which he sums up his researches upon the religious faith of which the Catacombs are the monument. We find in them the spirit of circumspection and moderation, which in an eminent degree distinguishes the whole work:—

"Between the conceptions which the paintings in the Catacombs reveal," writes our author, "those of the three first centuries at all events, and the modern fashion of understanding, and exposing religious or ecclesiastical notions, there is a deeper distinction than a simple difference of doctrines. The Catacombs show that the current of primitive Christian thought followed quite another direction than ours does. According to the age of the underground cemeteries, the attentive observer remarks the shades of the moral state revealed by iconography, according to the periods. The first is so serene that we may call it sometimes joyous: flowers, fruits, children playing, capricious genii, a vine, pastorals and shepherds, country and aquatic scenes, creations in which simplicity predominates, which might hide a mystic thought, but which have nothing of the hideous asceticism of the Middle Ages. The symbolical mysticism of the third, the historical allegories of the fourth centuries, have as yet nothing severe nor austere. As the fifth dawns, we can trace the preludes of the Passion, and the rigours of the Cross, which it holds up as its banner, can be guessed at; but in none of the ages of the Catacombs does Christianity clothe itself in the sombre character that it takes up in the Middle Ages. The reason is, because it came as a comforter and a liberator, not as a master and a despot.

...

"... So many powerful ideas and energetic sentiments supposed at least the elements of a doctrine as firm as it was simple, which, already in the books of doctors, was beginning to clothe itself in formulæ, and which would soon, through the decisions of Councils, find its expression fixed, thus becoming theology. By these transformations it lost somewhat of that wide view of truth, of that strength of love, which was the privilege of those who knew how to live and to sacrifice themselves, if need be, before scientifically reasoning; but before this, by the devotedness which it inspired, this simple faith had astonished the ancient world, as its energetic charity attracted and ended by conquering it."

E. SCHÉRER.

The new Religions of Science.

439

ART. III.-Have we an Ethical Substitute for Christianity?

IN

other words, suppose Christianity were to vanish away, have we any moral force to take its place? Has any principle been discovered, which, fitting into the sphere left by this once mighty religion, could undergird society, support in activity its varied life, and bear it on to higher perfection? Such is the question which is being asked by rot a few thoughtful men at present. Imbued with the positivist spirit, impatient of mystery, and insisting on verification in the rigid scientific sense of every belief, they do not so much disprove Christianity as set it aside, and endeavour to carry on the world's business without its help. Whether they profess to be able to see how this can be done, or whether they dwell yet in "the Golgotha of the No, where peace is not appointed them," it is toward this they tend. And it is beyond question that of recent years hope has been rising. Evolution, with its superb generalisation, has awakened an intense scientific enthusiasm, and not only are men striving down at the boundaries of life to reduce all the phenomena of the world under the single law of mechanical development, but up at the apex they are seeking to bring moral and social life under the action of the same principle, in the faith that it will be equal in time to the full natural development of humanity.

For ourselves, we are glad that rationalism has taken this practical direction. While like Milton's angels we fight in the thin air of abstract conceptions, there is no end to our debate; but when we touch the solid ground of fact, a very complete. and sufficient test of truth and error will speedily be found. This change too alters the relations of the combatants. While we may doubt, or even wholly disbelieve in, the ability of philosophers to conserve and advance by any human system of morals the higher life of man, we yet cannot quarrel with their spirit and aim. So far as the good of the world is concerned they are identical with our own. Our belief in Christianity is not a traditional or superstitious one. It is grounded in experiment and observation as truly as the strongest beliefs of science are. We are convinced that Christianity, in its own