157.

SECTION V.

THE DISCOVERY OF THE HOLY CROSS.

N the year after the Nicene Council, A.D. 326,

IN

St. Helena, mother of Constantine, and then nearly eighty years of age, went on a pilgrimage, as it was afterwards called, to the Holy Land, and especially to Jerusalem. Her purpose was to visit the scene of the wonderful events recorded in Scripture, and the spots consecrated by the presence of our Lord. Among other objects of her pious search was the Cross upon which He suffered. It was the custom of the Jews to bury the instruments of death with the corpses of the malefactors; and, considering their eagerness to remove the bodies both of Christ and of His two companions before the approaching Feast, there seemed no reason to doubt that, after Joseph had begged His body of Pilate, and placed it in the neighbouring tomb, His Cross, and

* "Accedit consuetudo Judæorum quibus solemne instrumenta suppliciorum juxta cadavera sontium obruere." Gretser de S. Cruc. tom. 1. i. 37, he refers to Baronius and Velser. S. Basnage agrees, Annal. 326. g. [Vid. also Aringhi Rom. Subterr. p. 98, ed. 1659.]

those of the two thieves, as well as their corpses, had hastily been thrown into the ground on the very place of crucifixion. But where that place was, at first sight, was not so easy to determine. The city had been destroyed, and its soil (it is said) ploughed up, in punishment of the very deeds, of which Helena was seeking to recover the memorial. Our Lord had suffered outside the walls; but the population, driven beyond Mounts Sion and Acra, which it had hitherto occupied, had overflowed toward the north, and, without as yet covering Calvary itself,s had obliterated the features of the immediate neighbourhood. And Hadrian, by erecting statues of the Pagan divinities over the sacred spots which were in question,t had driven away worshippers, and at length

" St Cyril says of Calvary, that "it was a garden before, and the tokens and traces thereof remain." Catech. xiv. 5.

66

t St. Jerome mentions Hadrian by name. Eusebius, in the vague way which he adopts on other occasions (as not writing a history but a panegyric, V. Const. i. 11), says, “Ungodly men formerly, or rather the whole race of demons by means of them." V. Const. iii. 26. In like manner he speaks of tyrants of our days who essayed to fight against the God of all, and oppressed His Church," i. 12, meaning Dioclesian; "the Emperor who had first rank,” i. 14, meaning the same; "tyrannical slavery," i. 26, i.e., the sovereignty of Maxentius; vid. also i. 33, etc., 66 news came that some dreadful beast was attacking,” etc. viz. Licinius. i. 49, news came of no small disturbance having possessed the Churches," ii. 61, meaning the Arian controversy; "a man well approved by Constantine for the sobriety of faith," etc., meaning Hosius, ii. 63; ruling city of Bithynia," meaning Nicomedia, iii. 50, etc., etc.

66

"the

effaced all general recollections of their respective localities. But what had destroyed the tradition about them with the many might reasonably be expected to be the means of preserving it with the few; nor did it seem difficult, even without such accidental advantage, to recover, with proper pains, at least the general position of the spot where so great and memorable a deed had been done. The Empress availed herself of the assistance of the most learned both of Christians and of Jews," and she seems to have been animated by a hope, surely not presumptuous, that she was under a guidance greater than human.' At length there is said to have been a general agreement as to the place; it was covered, first with a vast quantity of earth, next with the Pagan edifices; the place of Crucifixion and Burial lay beneath. Helena gave the word, and the soldiers who attended her began to clear away both buildings and soil,

158. Hitherto the main outlines of the history are confirmed by Eusebius, though he speaks of Constantine, his Imperial Patron, instead of St. Helena, and only of the Holy Sepulchre, not of the Holy

" This consideration answers, as far as the present question is concerned, Professor Robinson's remark, that "the Fathers of the Church in Palestine, and their imitators the Monks, were themselves for the most part not natives of the country." Palestine, Vol. i. p. 373.

Calvin, however, considers that St. Helena was urged by "stulta curiositas," or "ineptus religionis zelus." De Reliqu P. 276.

Cross. And though Constantine seems, during the years 326, 327, to have remained in the parts of his Empire between Thessalonica, Sirmium, and Rome, yet under his direction or authority Helena doubtless acted. Eusebius attests the intention of Constantine to build a church over the Holy Sepulchre; its desecrated state; the huge mound and stone-work which covered it; the shrine of Venus which had been raised at the top; and then the demolition of the whole mass of heathenism at the Emperor's command, statues, altars, buildings, mound, and the earth which lay under it. He then continues thus: "And when another level appeared instead of the former, viz., the ground which lay below, then at length the solemn and all-holy memorial of the Saviour's Resurrection appeared beyond all hope; and thus the cave, a holy of holies, imaged the Saviour's revival, and, after being sunk in darkness, came to light again, and to those who came to the sight presented a manifest history of the wonders which had there been done, witnessing by facts more eloquently than by any voice the Resurrection of the Saviour."x Here Eusebius ends his narrative; he proceeds, indeed, to speak of the church which Constantine built upon the spot, but he says nothing of any discovery besides that of the Sepulchre itself. As to the Cross on which our Lord suffered, judging from the course of his narraI V. Const. iii. 28.

tive, we should conclude, not only that it was not found, but that it was not even sought after, nay, according to his literal statements, that St. Helena did not come to Jerusalem, only to Mount Olivet and Bethlehem.>

159. Yet, though he is silent himself, he has preserved Constantine's Letter to Macarius, Bishop of that see, on occasion of the proposed Martyry or Church of the Resurrection. This letter does not contain any express mention of the Cross; and yet, did we read it without knowing the fact of the historian's silence when writing in his own person, we certainly should have the impression that it is of the Cross that Constantine was speaking. He says that "the token of the Saviour's most holy passion" had been “buried under the earth for many years ;" and he speaks of it as a discovery "surpassing all human calculation and all amazement,” and again and again of the miracle which it involved or had effected.2

▾ Dallæus objects that St. Cyril "nihil addit de Helenâ." Rel. Cult. Obj. v. 1. p. 709. Yet we shall see Professor Robinson's reluctant admission presently, note d. As to Eusebius, his object was to praise Constantine. In V. Const. iii. 41, he first speaks as if Constantine founded the Churches at Bethlehem and Mount Olivet, and then corrects himself. [It is remarkable, moreover, that the Bourdeaux Pilgrim, A. D. 333, vid. Wesseling Itinerarium, pp. 589-596, whose silence about the Cross is sometimes brought in corroboration, (vid. Gibbon, Hist. Ch. xxiii., note 63), is also silent about St. Helena's Church on Olivet, which no one doubts about; vid. Euseb. V. Const. iii. 42, 43.]

■ V. Const. iii. 30. Mr. Taylor says, that "the phrases he