The second count[5] against the martyrs was that they had worked no miracles--a serious deficiency in an age when miracles were almost the test of sanctity. Eulogius[6] could only meet the charge by admitting the fact, but adding that miracles were frequent in the early ages, in order to establish Christianity on a firm basis; and that the constancy of the martyrs was in itself a miracle (which was true, but not to the point). Had he been content with this, he had done wisely; but he goes on: "Moreover, miracles are no sign of truth, as even the unbelievers can work them."[7] Now, by trying to show why these martyrs did not perform any miracles, he admits by implication that they were deficient in this particular;[8] and yet in other parts of his work he mentions miracles performed by these very martyrs, as, for instance, by Isaac, and by Flora, and Maria.[9] So that the worthy priest is placed in this dilemma: If miracles are really no sign of truth, why attribute them to the martyrs, when, as is allowed elsewhere, they were unable to work them? if, on the other hand, they did perform these miracles, why not adduce them in evidence against the detractors? [1] Eul., "Mem. Sanct.," i. sec. 19. [2] Isaiah v. 20. [3] Eul., "Mem. Sanct.," i. sec. 24. Taken from some "Acts of the Saints," probably those of SS. Emetherius and Caledonius--a book obviously of no authority. [4] "Ind. Lum.," sec. 10, "In hac Israelitica gente nullus hactenus exstitit praedicator, per quod debitores fidei tenerentur. Isti enim (_i.e._, the martyrs) apostolatus vicem in eosdem et evangelicam praedicationem impleverunt, eosque fidei debitores reddiderunt." [5] Eul., "Mem. Sanct.," i. 13. [6] "Lib. Apol.," sec 7. [7] "Lib. Apol.," sec. 10. [8] Cp. "Mem. Sanct.," i. sec. 13. [9] "Mem. Sanct.," Pref., sec. 4. The third objection is a curious one, that the martyrs were not put to death by idolaters, but by men worshipping God and acknowledging a divine law,[1] and therefore were not true martyrs. Eulogius misses the true answer, which is obvious enough, and scornfully exclaims:--"As if they could be said to believe in God, who persecute His Church, and deem it hateful to believe in a Christ who was very God and very man."[2] Fourthly, the martyrs died a quick and easy death. But, as Eulogius points out,[3] pain and torture give no additional claim to the martyr's crown. Lastly, it was objected that the bodies of these martyrs, as indeed was to be expected, corrupted, and were even, in some cases, devoured by dogs. "What matter," says Eulogius,[4] "since their souls are borne away to celestial mansions." [1] Eul. "Lib. Apol.," sec. 3. [2] _Ibid._, sec. 12. [3] _Ibid._, sec. 5. [4] "Mem. Sanct.," i. sec. 17.