2. The second difficulty is as follows: Many of the graves marked by the phial of blood are also marked by the presence of that special form of the monogram of Christ which belongs to the period of Constantine; they cannot, therefore, be the graves of martyrs.
What has been already said in reply to the first difficulty applies equally to the second. But is it certain that the use of the monogram in question does not go farther back than the time of Constantine? There is good reason to believe that it is by no means certain. In many portions of the catacombs which, undoubtedly, were excavated before the fourth century, tablets have been found most distinctly marked with this form of monogram. Besides, the same form is sometimes found close by other forms which are beyond doubt of most remote antiquity, and this, too, in corridors which, for the most part, appear to have been excavated before the time of Constantine. Examples of this collocation are to be seen in the cemetery of Cyriaca, in that of Maximus, or Saint Felicitas, in the Via Salaria Nuova, in the cemetery of Saint Hypolytus, in the cemetery of Saint Agnes. It is the well-considered opinion of almost all antiquarians, that the use of the monogram alluded to in the difficulty was by no means infrequent at the close of the third and the commencement of the fourth century—that is to say, at the period of the persecution of Dioclesian.
3. The third difficulty denies the supposition that the slight red coating found on the side of the phials, has been deposited there from blood. Some have been bold enough to say that it is due to the Eucharistic species of wine which the vessels once contained, and which gradually dried up; others say that it has been caused by the decomposition of the glass, or that water trickling through the reddish earth has left behind it a coloured sediment upon the vessel's sides. But it results from careful chemical analysis, frequently repeated, that the red coating is due to the presence of the colouring matter of the blood, and not to any of the causes above recited. The opinion which ascribes it to the Eucharistic species is, above all others, singularly destitute of proof from history or monuments.
Since the publication of the Decree we have given above, an important discovery has been made in the Basilica Ambrosiana of Milan, which goes far to justify the accuracy of the decision of the Sacred Congregation. In the year 386 Saint Ambrose discovered at Milan the relics of the two illustrious Milanese martyrs, Saints Gervasius and Protasius. He caused them to be translated to the Basilica, and buried them beneath the altar, on the right or Gospel side. "This spot", said he, in his discourse on the occasion, "I had destined for myself, for it is meet that the bishop should repose where he was wont to offer the Divine Sacrifice. But to these sacred victims I give up the right portion". Saint Ambrose died in 397, and was buried on the left or Epistle side of the same altar, beneath which he had placed the bodies of the holy martyrs.
In the ninth century Anglebert II., Bishop of Milan, placed in one and the same urn the remains of the three saints, and built over them a new altar, which was so richly ornamented with gold and precious stones that it has ever since been styled the Pallio d'Oro. This altar has remained intact down to our days. On the evening of the 15th January, 1864, the authorities of the Basilica, in course of excavations directed by the provost and a special commission, made search for the primitive sepulchre in which Saint Ambrose had laid the two martyrs. They found it formed of slabs of rare marbles, and within it a little earth mixed with small fragments of bones, together with a fragment of an ampolla or glass phial. Of this ampolla, the illustrious Cavalier De Rossi, in his Bulletino di Archeologia Cristiana (anno ii., No. 3, p. 21), thus writes: "It now remains for me to speak of a fact lately established by chemical science—a fact of the greatest importance, and worthy of the attentive consideration of all students of Christian archæology. In Biraghi's first account (of the discoveries in the Basilica Ambrosiana) we read that the bottom of a glass ampolla was found in the sepulchre to the right, that is, in the sepulchre of the martyrs Gervasius and Protasius. The same gentleman has since written to me to say that a chemical analysis of the deposit found in the fragment of phial has resulted in the discovery of the presence of blood. Now, this is certainly the most notable instance we have of a phial containing blood being placed at the sepulchre of martyrs known as such to history, and what especially distinguishes this ampolla beyond every other are the solemn words of the great Doctor Saint Ambrose, which have especial reference to it. He had discovered the tomb of Saints Gervasius and Protasius, and describing his discovery in a letter to his sister Marcellina, he says that within the urn he found 'plurimum sanguinis'. In the same epistle he adds: 'Sanguine tumulus madet, apparent cruoris triumphales notae, inviolatae reliquiae loco suo et ordine repertae avulsum humeris caput' (Ep. xxii. ad Marcellin.). It was of the blood of the same martyrs that Gaudentius, of Brescia, uttered the well-known words: 'Tenemus sanguinem gypso collectum, qui testis est passionis' (Serm. in ded. SS. XL. Mart.). But neither Ambrose nor any one else had informed us that besides the blood copiously sprinkled in the sepulchre, and in which the chalk or cement was soaked, there was also some collected in a glass ampolla. The late discovery certifies to this fact, and shows that phials filled or stained with blood were placed in the sepulchres of martyrs, and that these phials were alluded to in the celebrated words of Ambrose and his contemporaries, who speak of blood found in tombs, and bearing witness to martyrdom. This important fact comes most opportunely to strengthen the principle followed by the Church; and lately confirmed by a new decree of the Congregation of Rites, namely, that the bloodstained ampolla was placed in the sepulchres of martyrs to the end that it might bear witness to their glorious death for the faith of Christ".
[UNIVERSITY EDUCATION IN IRELAND.]
There are two Universities recognized by law in this country. One of these, the University of Dublin, or Trinity College, although it has shown of late years a more liberal spirit towards Catholics than formerly, must always remain essentially Protestant in character, until the way is open for Catholics to be appointed on its governing body—a change, of which there does not appear to be the slightest probability.
As a matter of fact, its governing body, consisting of the provost and senior fellows, are all members of the Church as by law established, and, with two exceptions, are Protestant clergymen. The other fellows, and the scholars on the foundation, are likewise Protestants; and this in a city where, of a population of 254,000, only 58,000 are Protestants (of all denominations), and in a country in which only 11.8 per cent. of the inhabitants are members of the Established Church.
It is true that within the last few years some scholarships of small value have been opened for Catholics and Dissenters. Masters of Arts, even such of them as are not Protestants, have votes in the election of members to represent the University in Parliament; but these scholarships are not on the foundation, the holders of them do not belong to the corporation, and no Catholic has any share in the government of the University, nor (with one trifling exception) in its teaching. Trinity College was founded for the purpose (as stated in its original charter) of destroying Catholicity and promoting the ascendancy of the Established Church in Ireland. It has religiously endeavoured to discharge that trust; and, although some of its members have been and are men of liberal and enlarged views, still it continues to the present day the work given it to do by its foundress, Queen Elizabeth. At this moment there is a Protestant bishop in Ireland who was a Catholic till he entered Trinity College; the same can be said of the archdeacon of another diocese, and his two brothers; the female members of the families of these dignitaries still remain good Catholics; and on the list of the fellows, professors, and scholars of the University itself, are the names of several who were baptized in the Catholic faith, and declared themselves Protestants when wishing to become members of the University of Dublin! What wonder, then, that Catholics should be unwilling to leave the chief education of the country in the hands of the Protestant University of Dublin, more especially since it has been observed that a very large proportion of the Catholics who have studied there, cease during their University course to be communicants in the Church to which they still belong by name? What wonder that Catholics should consider it a hardship to be forced, if they wish to get University education near home, to seek it in an institution from whose dignities and management they are excluded, in which an antagonistic creed is always put forward ostentatiously in a position of superiority, while the faith of their fathers, if it be not contemned and scoffed at, is systematically treated with silent indifference, or with supercilious patronage? What wonder that Catholics being declared by Act of Parliament "freemen" in every way equal to their Protestant fellow-countrymen, should be unwilling to continue begging as a favour at the gates of such an institution for the academical honours and distinction to which they are entitled as a right? It is absurd that in the metropolis of a free country, containing inhabitants of various religions, a handful of clergymen of one denomination should pretend to a monopoly of University education; should hold in their hands the keys of knowledge, doling it out as they please, and obliging even those whose faith they denounce as idolatry and superstition, to send their sons to their schools. Would such a system be allowed in any other country? Would a few Catholic priests be allowed, even for one hour, to monopolize the University education of Protestant England?