[Roman Martyrology. Authority:—The "Conversio" of S. Afra, which existed in the ninth century, but of no historical value.]
Narcissus, bishop of Gerona, being driven from his see in the persecution of Diocletian, wandered homeless as far as Augsburg, where finding that the Christians were mightily oppressed, and well nigh exterminated, he and his deacon Felix, not knowing whither to take refuge, received the hospitality offered them by a courtesan named Afra.[62] And they not knowing who and what manner of woman she was that invited them into her house, went in nothing doubting. Then Afra marvelled what manner of men these were, who ate little, and spent their time in prayer. And before they departed, she believed and was baptized, with all her house. Now when nine months had elapsed, Narcissus and his deacon, finding the violence of persecution had abated, returned into Spain, and recommenced their work of converting the heathen. The success of Narcissus so exasperated them that they waylaid him and assassinated him. When king Philip of France took Gerona, his soldiers pillaged the shrine of S. Narcissus, whereupon a swarm of hornets issued from it and stung them. Consequently in art he is represented with hornets issuing from his tomb. Relics at Gerona.
S. CYRIL, PATR. OF JERUSALEM.
(A.D. 389.)
[Roman, Greek, and Syriac Kalendars. Authorities:—Sozomen, Theodoret, and his own writings.]
Cyril succeeded Maximus in the patriarchal see of Jerusalem, about the year 350. The story that Maximus was deposed, and Cyril substituted by Acacius, Bishop of Cæsarea, is inconsistent with probabilities, and with the testimony borne by the second general Council to the canonical regularity of his consecration. The other tale, which Jerome credited, that Cyril obtained the see from Acacius on condition of disclaiming the ordination which Maximus had bestowed, is utterly incredible, and probably sprang from the prejudices of a rigid party which mistrusted Cyril.
The paschal season of 351 was marked at Jerusalem by the luminous appearance of a cross, which appeared in the sky over the city. It produced a great impression, and S. Cyril sent an account of it to Constantius.[63]
Cyril, a man of gentle spirit, eminently a peace-maker, was cast in times of great difficulty. The Arian party was in power, through the favour of the emperor; and a large number of prelates were semi-Arians; not disbelieving in the divine nature of Christ as consubstantial with the Father, but doubting the expedience of stating the doctrine in plain words which could not be misunderstood. All who were timorous, not thoroughly illumined with the Holy Spirit, and wanting in that keenness of theological discrimination which makes doctors of the Church, hesitated and temporised. It was inexpedient to take too harsh an attitude towards these weak brethren, and drive them into the arms of the Arians, and this Cyril felt. Firm in his own faith, deprecating the injudicious fire of some Catholics who were resolved at all costs to produce a rupture between those who walked in the clear light of Catholic certainty, and those who fluttered in the twilight, he laboured with words of conciliation to avert such a catastrophe.
At the end of 357, or the beginning of 358, an important change took place at Jerusalem. For two years Cyril had been forced into opposition to the demands of Acacius. He maintained for Jerusalem, as the mother Church, possessing an "Apostolic throne," and marked out for honour in the Nicene Council,[64] an independence of Cæsarea which Acacius would not grant; and he was also obnoxious to Acacius on theological grounds, as holding the orthodox doctrine.
Acacius now summoned a small council of bishops of his own party, which Cyril declined to attend. This was regarded as contumacy; and he was gravely accused of having committed an offence in selling some of the church ornaments to provide food for the famine-stricken poor. Sozomen says that he sold Church treasures and sacred veils. Theodoret mentions a vestment of cloth of gold presented by Constantine to be worn by the bishop when baptizing. Such an accusation does Cyril honour, and ranks him with other illustrious prelates, Ambrose, Augustine, Exuperius, Gregory the Great, Ethelwold of Winchester, who all in like manner sanctioned the principle that the law of love is the highest law of all. It is worth remark that in this case, as in that of S. John Chrysostom, the alliance of a narrow formalism was found, not with orthodoxy, but with heresy.