Theodora, who lived twenty-one years, seven months, twenty-three days. In peace. Whilst following an exalted life, a chaste Venus, she pursued her way to the stars. Now she rejoices in the court of Christ. She resisted the world, ever following heavenly things. A devout observer of the law, and mistress of honour, she applied an illustrious mind to holy things while here in this world. Hence she reigns (amid) the choice odours of paradise, where the herbage is forever green beside the streams of heaven,[700] and awaits God, in order that she may rise to the upper air. She laid her body in this tomb, forsaking mortal things, and Evacrius, her husband, built the monument, superintending the work.
The first inscription at all favourable to Romish doctrine is the following barbarous example, (A. D. 380:)
HIC QVIESCIT ANCILLA DEI OVEDE
SVA OMNIA PEPENDIT DOMVM ISTA
QVVM AMICI DEFLENT SOLACIVM Q. REQVIRVNT
PRO HVNC VNVM ORA SVBOLEM QVEM SVPERIS
TITEM REQVESTI ETERNA REQVIEM FELICITAS CAVSA MANEBIS.
Read: Hic quiescit ancilla Dei quæ de suis omnibus pependit domum istam, quam amicæ deflent solaciumque requirunt. Pro hac una ora subole quam superstitem reliquisti. Eterna requie felicitatis causa manebis.
Here rests a handmaid of God[701] who, of all her riches, possesses but this one house: whom her friends bewail, and seek for consolation. O pray for this thine only child whom thou hast left behind. Thou wilt remain in the eternal repose of happiness.
The yearning cry of an orphaned heart for the prayers of a departed mother is, however, a slight foundation for the Romish practice of the invocation of the saints.
Previous to this date we have found not the slightest indication of Romish doctrine; and if those doctrines have been transmitted, as their advocates assert, from the very earliest ages, it is incredible that they should have left no trace in the dated inscriptions for nearly four centuries. After this time, it is true, we find occasional epitaphs which, rigidly interpreted according to the canons of theological criticism, contain sentiments unwarranted by Scripture; but these may be the result of carelessness of expression, or of the corruptions of doctrine which had already taken place in the church.
If then those inscriptions which apparently favour Romish dogmas, of which we know the date, are all of a late period, we may assume that those of a similar character which are undated are of the same relative age, and therefore valueless as evidence of the antiquity of such dogmas. Dr. Northcote admits the fact, but objects to this conclusion as founded upon negative evidence;
yet he himself adopts the same line of argument concerning the absence of military rank among the primitive Christians. But we are not left to negative evidence. We have the amplest testimony of a positive character, which we shall proceed to examine, showing that even in the fifth and sixth century the vast proportion of the inscriptions are of a highly evangelical character, and are entirely antagonistic to the most cherished doctrines of the Church of Rome.