XXII. CHAP.* 1.1
1.2. &c. S. Wilfrids cause again iudged at Rome: to his advantage.
8. &c. His miraculous recovery from a sicknes in France.
1. SAint Wilfrid arriving at Rome the year following,* 1.2 expected awhile his accu∣sers: who being also come, they presēted their state of the present Controversy in Epistles sent by Arch-bishop Brithwald & other Bishops of Brittany to Pope Iohn: and S. Wilfrid declared his cause in a Petition or Memoriall which he humbly offred to the same Pope.
2. The summ of which Petition, extant in William of Malmsbury,* 1.3 is this:
He first shewd how he had been obliged to appeal to the See Apostolick for iustice against the Vsurpers of his Bishoprick, Monasteries and other posses∣sions contrary to the Decrees of the late Holy Popes Agathon and Sergius: Which Decrees he humbly desired the present Pope to confirm: yet withall professing that he was ready to suffer the severity of Ecclesiasticall Canons, in case he could not disprove any accusations layd against him. Moreover he humbly re∣quested that letters in his behalf might be written from the See Apostolick to Ethelred King of the Mercians desiring him to protect in peace all the Monasteries in his Kingdom: and moreover to Alfrid King of the Nor∣thumbers, requiring a restitution of all that belonged to him: Or in case that he might not be suffred to enioy his Bishoprick of York, he besought the Pope to take care that a fit∣ting person might be ordained there. But as for the two Monasterses founded by him at Rippon (Ripis Hagulstaniae) in that Province, he would by no means quitt his right to them. These things being granted, he con∣cluding protested all due obedience to such Decrees of Arch-bishop Brithwald, as were not contrary to to those of the Popes Predecessours.
3. This Petition being read, his Accusers were commanded to shew what they could alledge against it.* 1.4 The principall thing that they insisted on was this, That he was guilty of a capitall crime, having publickly and contumaciously said in a Synod assembled in Brittany, that he would not obey the Decrees of Arch-bishop Brithwald. As touching this accusation, the Holy Bishop standing in the midst of the assembled cleared himself saying, That it was not true that he had answered so in∣definitly but only that he would not obey such De∣crees as were contrary to the Ecclesiasticall Canons: Now nothing is more contrary to them, then that a Bishop should be compelled to depose himself, no crime being layd to his charge.
4. This Answer so simple, easy and al∣lowable