A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

CHAP. XII. (Book 12)

The Constitutions of some Bishops, and Collections of Canons, concerning the Discipline of the Church.

BEsides the Constitutions made by the Bishops Assembled in Councils for the Resormati∣on of Church-Discipline, several Bishops were at the pains to make particular Con∣stitutions for their own Diocesses, and Treatises for the Instruction of their Clergy. They also, at the same time, made several Collections of Canons about Penance, and other Ecclesiastical Matters. The chief Tracts, which relate to the Matters, and the Authors of this Age, which composed them, are these that follow.

Hatto, or Hetto, chosen in 796 Abbot of the Monastery of Augia Dives, of which he was a * 1.1 Monk, and afterwards Bishop of Basil in 801; was sent, by Charles the Great, in the year 811, to the Greek Emperour, to make a Peace, and settle the Bounds of both Empires. He Wrote a Rolation of his Voyage, but it is lost. He Composed a Book of Constitutions for the Instruction of the Priests of his Diocess, put out by Father Dacherius, in Tom. 6. of his Spicilegium, and in∣serted in the last Collection of the Councils.

This Book contains 25 Articles. 1. That Priests shall understand well the Doctrine of the Faith. 2. That they shall Teach the People the Creed, and Lord's Prayer in Latin, and their Mo∣ther-Tongue. 3. That they shall Teach them to say the Responses after the Priest in Divine-Ser∣vice. 4. That the Priests shall understand the Nature of the Sacraments, of Baptism, Confirma∣tion, and the Lord's Supper; and that by the Mysterious use of a Visible Creature, the Salvation of the Soul is further'd. 5. That they shall have Books necessary for their Office, viz. A Book for Celebration of Sacraments, a Book of the Lessons, Anthems, Administration of Baptism, a Ca∣lendar, and Homilies for all the year. 6. That they shall recite S. Athanasius's Creed at the Prime. 7. That they shall have notice of the Solemn time for Baptism, as H. Saturday, and the Sa∣turday before Whitsuntide, although in cases of necessity, Baptism may be administred at all times. He observes, that they used Three Dippings, and had in their Fonts a Vessel, which they used onely to Baptize in. 8. That they should know all the days in the year, which they are to keep Holy, viz. All the Sundays in the year, from Morning to Night; our Lord's Nativity, St. Stephen's, St. John's, St. Innocent's, Circumcision, Epiphany, Purification, Easter, Ascension, H. Saturday, Whitsuntide, St. John Baptist, the XII Apostles, and chiefly St. Peter and St. Paul. The Assumption of the Virgin Mary, the Dedication of St. Michael's Church, and all other Chur∣ches; the Feast of every Saint, in Honour of whom any Church is Founded. That they ought to observe the Fasts appointed by the Prince; but as to the Festivals of S. Remedius, S. Mau∣rice, and S. Martin, the People ought not to be forced to keep them, nor hindred, if their Devo∣tion lead them to it. 9. That Clergy-men ought not to have Women, that are Related to them▪ with them. 10. Nor go to Taverns. 11. Nor frequent Courts of Judicature, nor be Bail, nor go a Hunting. 12. That they should know, that none ought to be Ordained for Money, and if any Man be, he ought to be deposed, as well as he that Ordained him. 13. That no body ought to receive, nor employ a Clergy-man of another Diocess, without the consent of his Bi∣shop. 14. That they ought not to celebrate Mass in private Houses, or Unconsecrated Churches, unless in respect to the Sick. 15. That Tithes ought to be paid, the third part of which belongs to the Bishop, according to the Council of Toledo; that, as for himself, he was contented with a Fourth part, according to the Constitutions of the Roman Bishops, and the use of the Church of Rome. 16. That Women ought not to come near the Altar, nor doe any Offices about it. That when they are to wash the Vessels, and Church, the Clerks shall take them from the Altar, and deliver them to the Women at the Rails of the Altar, whither they shall bring them again; and the Priests shall also receive there the Offerings of the Women, to carry them to the Altar. 17. That Priests shall Preach both by their Word and Example, That Men ought not to be U∣surers. 18. That no Clergy-man, Ordained, or to be Ordained, shall go out of his own Diocess, either to Rome, or to Court, or to obtain Absolution, without the allowance of his Bishop; and that they shall admonish them, that will go to Rome out of Devotion, that they ought not to go, till they have confessed their sins in their Diocess, because they ought to be bound, or loosed by their own Bishop, and not by a Stranger. 19. That nothing shall be Sung, or Read in the Church, which is not taken out of Scripture, or the Writings of the Orthodox Fathers. That they shall not honour any unknown Angels, but onely S. Michael, S. Gabriel, and S. Raphael. That Priests shall all have one way of Administring Penance, and shall impose it according to the nature of Mens Faults. 20. That they shall put the Offerings of the Faithful to a Good Use. 21. That they shall not suffer a Contract of Marriage between Relations to the Fifth degree; but nevertheless those that are Married in the Fourth degree shall not be parted, but put to Penance so long as they continue together. That it is not lawful to Marry the Relations of a First Husband, or First Wife; also a God-son, or God-daughter at Baptism, or Confirmation: That they who have committed Fornication with a Relation in the First degree, may not co•…•…nue together, that

they shall be put to penance, and parted; but they may Marry others. That Slaves may not Mar∣ry, without the consent of their Master; and if they doe, the Marriage is null. 22. That Priests shall Teach their People to doe Works of Mercy▪ Instruct them in Vertue, and win them from Vice, but chiefly from Perjury. 23. That they shall Officiate in the Churches they are appointed, and shall not fail to say the Canonical hours both by day and night. 25. That they shall admo∣nish God-fathers and God-mothers, that they are obliged to make their God-sons and God-daugh∣ters, when they are at Age of Discretion, to be sensible of the Promise they have made for them. These Constitutions shew, how prudent and wise a Man this good Bishop Hatto was. Being very Aged, he laid down the Government both of his Diocess and Monastery, which he had always held with it, in 823, and lived a private Monk the rest of his Life. He died in 836. He also Wrote a Relation of the Visions of St. Wettinus, or Guettinus, a Monk of the same Abbey, which are also mention'd by Strabo. [This Tract is printed among the Visions of Hildegardes, and other Religious Men, at Paris, 1513. and by F. Mabillon, Saec. Benedict. 4. p. 1.]

This is a proper place to Treat of the Writings of Agobardus, which, for the most part, concern * 1.2 the Discipline of the Church. The Life of this Author is very obscure; some think him a French∣man, though they have no clear proof of it. He was Coadju∣tor, a 1.3 or rather a Suffragan of Leidradus, Arch-bishop of Lyons; who being desirous to retreat into the Monastery of Soissons, in the beginning of the Empire of Lewis the Godly, Argobardus was put in his place by the consent of the Emperour, and b 1.4 a whole Synod of France, which approved of the Choice, that Leidradus had made of him for his Successor. But this Ordination was afterward found fault with, because 'tis against the Canons for a Bishop to choose his Successor; a Rule, which it is very dangerous to break. Neverthe∣less Agobard enjoyed his See peaceably, till he was put out by Lewis the Godly for taking part with his Son Lotharius, and having been one of the Principal Authors of his Deposition, at an Assembly of Bishops held at Compeigne, in 833. for Lewis the Godly punishing the Injustice, and Violence, which had been done to him by Lotharius, and the Bishops of his party, had a Process drawn up against them at a Council of Thionville held in 835. Ebbo, who was Arch-bishop of Rheims, was forced to confess his fault, and submit himself to his Deposition. Agobardus, who fled into Italy, with the other Bishops of his party, was cited to the Council three times; and, not appearing, was Deposed. The Examination of their cause was began the next year, at an Assem∣bly held near Lyons, but was left undetermined, by reason of the absence of the Bishops, to whom alone it belonged to depose their Brethren. Lastly, The Children of Lewis the Godly having made peace with him; they obtained, that Agobardus should be Restored; and he was present at a Sy∣nod held at Paris, by the Order of Lewis the Godly. He likewise obtained the favour of that Em∣perour, with whom he Died at Xaintonge in 840, on the 15th day of June.

This Bishop had no less share in the Affairs of the Church of his time, than in those of the Empire, and hath shown, by his Writings and Government, that he was not more Learned and Skilful in Divinity, than expert in Politick Affairs. The Catalogue, and Extract of his Works follow.

His Treatise against Felix Orgelitanus is dedicated to Lewis the Godly. In it he explains the Tract of Felix, which he Composed by way of Question and Answer, and published, against what Agobardus had asserted in the City of Lyons, where he was then in banishment, after the Re∣cantation he had made of his Error at the Council of Aix la Chapelle. Agobard observes, that Fe∣lix had suppressed several Expressions, which he had used before, and had added new Errors. He acknowledged, that that Bishop lived a very Holy Life; but says, that we must judge of a Man's Faith, not by the Holiness of his Life, but of his Manners by his Faith. Non est vitâ hominis me∣tienda fides, sed ex fide probanda est vita. He excuses the plainness of his Style, and prays them, who will take the pains to read his Writings, to content themselves with the consideration of the passages of the Fathers which he hath cited, and to compare Felix's Opinion with them. After he hath spoken in general of the Error of Nestorius and Eutychius, he says, that he hath heard that Felix in his Life-time, did Teach, That Jesus Christ, as Man, was ignorant of many things; as of the place where Lazarus was Buried; because he asked his Sisters, where they had laid him; the Day of Judgment; the Discourse which the Disciples, that went to Emmaus, had together; the Love St. Peter had for him. That Agobard, knowing that he Taught these things, found them out, reproved him for them, explained those places to him, and sent him several passages of the Fa∣thers, contrary to those Errors; that having read them, he promised to amend them; that things remaining thus, he did not think it his Duty to publish the Errors asserted by him, because it did not concern him to doe it. But, after his Death, some of the Faithful told him, That he had asserted, That it was not certain that the Son of God Suffer'd, or was fixed to the Cross, but that ought to be affirmed of the Manhood onely, which he had assumed; an Error, which arises from the ignorance of the Substantial Union of the Word with the Flesh, although he seemed to admit but one Person onely in the Person of Jesus Christ. He shews, that Nestorius spake after the same manner. He consults that Assertion of Felix, That in the Nativity of the True Son of God, of the Substance of his Father, his Nature preceded his Will; so that he is necessarily the Son of God: but in his Humane Nativity, it was from his Will, and not from Necessity. That he was the Son of God—Agobardus affirms, that this Expression makes Jesus Christ to be believed

not to be the true and natural Son of God. He also blames Felix for teaching, that though the Virgin Mary be the Mother of God, yet she is otherwise the Mother of the Man, than of God. He says, that this Expression is not only new, and not heard of before, but impious. That the Virgin can't be one way the Mother of the God-head, and another of the Manhood in Jesus Christ, since she was the Mother of a God-man at the same time, and the Divinity and Humanity make but one Person in Jesus Christ. He also opposes that opinion of Felix, that Jesus Christ was dif∣ferent ways the Son of God according to his different Natures; That according to his Divinity, he was a Son by Nature, in Truth and Substance, whereas according to his Humanity, he was a Son only by Grace, Election, Will, Predestination and Assumption. From this Principle, he draws this Consequence, That since Jesus Christ is a Natural Son in one Sense, and an Adoptive in another, we must acknowledge two Sons and two Persons. 'Tis true, that Felix disowns this Consequence, but Agobard affirms it to follow directly from his Doctrine, and says, that Ne∣storius used that very Expression. He confutes this principle, and the Consequences Felix draws from it by several passages of the Fathers. And Lastly, answers to those that Felix had alledged to prove the Adoption of Jesus Christ; shewing that the Fathers never said, that Jesus Christ was an Adoptive Son, but that the Humane Nature was adopted by the Divine, i. e. the Divine Nature was united with the Humane, so that the Person made up of both Natures, was the true and na∣tural Son of God, and not meerly by Adoption and Grace.

The Book of Agobard concerning the Insolence of the Jews, is a petition addressed to Lewis the Godly, in which he Complains, that the Commissioners which he had sent to Lyons, took part with the Jews against the Church, and had sealed Letters and Ordinances bearing his Name, which were favourable to them. They had carryed the Business so far, that they spoke openly in fa∣vour of the Jews, and so threatned some Bishops. Agobard, who was absent when this happen∣ed, being gone to the Monastery of Nantonē to accommodate a difference that had happened a∣mong the Monks, wrote about it to the Commissioners, but they had no regard to his Letters; whereupon he addressed himself to the Emperour, and represented it to him, that the Jews did persecute Him and his Fellow-Bishops, because he preached to the Christians, that they should not sell any Slaves to the Jews, nor suffer the Jews to sell Christians into Spain, nor keep Christians for their Houshold Servants, not to suffer Christian Women to keep the Jewish Sabbath, nor the Jews to labour or trade on the Lord's Day, not to eat in Lent with them, not to eat any Flesh they have killed, nor drink any Wine that they sell. Lastly, not to converse familiarly with them, nor trade with them, because they daily Blaspheme the Name of Christ. Then he describes the insolence of the Jews, because they found themselves upheld by the Authority of the Commissioners. He beseeches him to hear the humble entreaty of Himself and Brethren, and rectifie this disorder.

To this Petition he joyns a Letter written in his Name, and in the name of Bernard, Arch-bi∣shop of Vienna, and another Bishop called Eaof or Taof, in which they produce the Authorities of the Fathers and Scripture, to justifie the Severity they treated the Jews withall. They relate the example of S. Hilary, who would not salute them; of S. Ambrose, who writes, that he would ra∣ther suffer Death, than rebuild a Synagogue of the Jews, which the Christians had burnt. They add to these two Fathers, S. Cyprian and S. Athanasius, who wrote against the Jews: Then they alledge the Canons of the Councils of Spain and Agda, which forbid Christians to eat with the Jews, and the Constitutions of the first Council of Masco, which declares, that according to the Edict of Childebert, it is not permitted to the Jews to be Judges, or Receivers of the publick Re∣venues, nor to appear in publick in the H. Week, and renew the prohibition given the Christians not to eat with them. This is Confirmed by the Canons of the First and Third Councils of Or∣leans, and the Council of Laodicea, which forbids Christians to converse with them. They forget not the Action of St. John, who fled from the Bath, in which he saw Cerinthus the Heretick en∣tered, who was an Heretick of the Sect of the Jews. They accuse the Jews of their time to be worse than Cerinthus, because they believed God Corporeal, and had gross and false Notions of the Divinity, allowed an infinite number of Letters, and believed the Law to be written several Years before the World, were perswaded that there are several Worlds and Earths, introduced ma∣ny Fables about the old Testament, and uttered Blasphemy against Jesus Christ, published the false acts of Pilate, used the Christians as Idolaters, because they hated the Saints, and did infamous Actions in their Synagogues, from whence they conclude, that if they ought to separate themselves from Hereticks, they ought with more Reason to have no commerce with the Jews, which they maintain by several passages of H. Scripture.

'Tis very probable, that Agobard went to Court about this Business. He applyed himself to Three Persons, who were in great Favour at Court, viz. Adelardus Abbot of Corbey, Vala the Son of Bernard, Brother of Pepin, and a Relation to the Emperour, and Helesacharius Abbot of S. Maximus at Treves, having complained before them of those that defended the Jews, they brought him into the King's presence to relate it, but he received no Satisfaction, and was or∣dered to with-draw. Being returned, he consulted those Three Persons by a Letter, what he should do with those Jewish Slaves, who desired to become Christians and be Baptized. He shews by several Reasons that he could not refuse to do it; and that the Jews might have no ground of Complaint, he says that he offer'd to pay them for those Slaves, what was ordered by the an∣cient Laws. But since the Jews would not receive that Price, because they were perswaded that the Court Officers were their Friends, he prays them to whom he wrote to direct him what to do upon that occasion, about which he was much perplexed, fearing on the one Side Damnation,

if he denyed Baptism to the Jews, or their Slaves who desired it; and on the other Side, being fearful of offending the great Men, if he granted it to them.

In Agobard's Letter to Nebridius Arch-bishop of Narbonne, he shews how dangerous it is to hold a familiar converse with the Jews, and tells him, that he hath admonished his People of it all along his Visitation of his Diocess, and boldly opposed the attempts of the Emperour's Commissioners.

Agobard presented another Petition to Lewis the Godly, in which he prays him to abolish the Law of Gundobadus, which ordered, that private Contentions and Differences should be decided by a single Combat, or some other proofs, rather than by the Deposition of Witnesses. He shews that that Law which was made by an Arrian Prince, is contrary to the Spirit of the Gospel; to that Charity, that Christians ought to have one for another, and to the peace both of Church and State. He observes, that it came neither from the Law nor Gospel; That the Christian Religi∣on was not established by such sort of Combats; but on the Contrary, by the Death of him that preached it; That the most Wicked and Guilty have often overcome the more Just and In∣nocent. He adds, that Avitus Bishop of Vienna, who had some Conferences about Religion with Gundobadus, and converted his Son Sigismond, disallowed this Custom. He complains of the little Regard had to the Canons of the Church of France. Lastly; he says, he could wish that all the Kings Subjects had but one Law, but because he believed that impossible, he desired he would abolish at least, that Custom, which was so unjust and so prejudicial to the State.

In the Treatise of the Privileges and Rights of the Priest-hood, dedicated to Bernard Bishop of Vienna. Agobard Treats of the Excellency of the Priest-hood. He says, that all Christians being Members of Jesus Christ, who is our Chief Priest, are Kings and Priests of the Lord. That in the beginning of the World, the First Born were Priests, and Sacrificers. There he produces se∣veral Examples taken out of the Holy Scripture, and many Authorities to shew that God hath of∣ten heard wicked Priests, and had no regard to the Sacrifices of good ones, because he looks chie∣fly upon the Dispositions of the Heart of those for whom they offer Sacrifices, and that otherwise 'tis not the Merit of the Priest, nor his Person that God respects, but his Ministery and Priest-hood. For this Reason it is, that wicked Priests may administer Sacraments, which the most H. Lay-men cannot do. And upon this account, Men ought to hear and believe what the Priest teacheth, if he do not corrupt the Doctrine of Jesus Christ, for if he teach any thing that Christ hath not Commanded, he that hears him, saith Agobard, is a Leper, that follows another Leper, a Blind Man, lead by another Blind Man, and consequently both of them ought to be driven out of the Camp, and shall both fall into the Ditch. This gives him occasion to cite several Texts of Scripture, to exhort the Priests of the New Testament to behave themselves worthy of their Mi∣nistery, and to complain of the Irregularities of his time. He observes that the Great Lords of his time, kept Domestick Priests in their Houses not to obey them, but to employ them as they plea∣sed, as well in Temporal as Spiritual Services; insomuch says he, that some Priests wait at Ta∣ble, provide Meat and Drink, look after Dogs and Horses, and take care of their Farms in the Country. And because they can't find any good Clergy-men, who will so dishonour their Calling, they take such as come next, without regarding whether they are ignorant and worthless, and guilty of many Crimes. They only desire to have some Priests with them, that they may leave the Churches and publick Offices to them. And when they have a mind to have them ordained, they come and say in an imperious way, I have a little Clergy-Man whom I have brought up, who is the Son of one of my Waiting-Men or Tenants, I desire you to make him a Priest, and when they have got him ordained, they think that they have no need of the Curates, and never come to the Service of a Parish-Church, nor Exhortions made there. He crys out against this abuse, and bewails the badness of his time, in which the Bishops were not allowed to reprove their irregula∣rities, as by their Office they are obliged. Lastly, he exhorts the Laity to have respect to the Sacraments, which are administred by the Priests. For says he, the Holy Sacraments, Baptism, and the Consecration of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, and the rest, which give Life and Salvation to the Faithful, are so Great and Holy, that they cannot become more Excellent, by reason of the Holiness of good Ministers, nor worse by the impiety of wicked ones, because they operate not by the Virtue of Men, but by the Majesty of the Holy Spirit, when the Priest hath made his Invocation; whereupon he cites several passages of S. Austin, Gelasius and Pope Anastasius, and advises the Bishops to be careful, that they be not partakers of other Mens Sins, by ordaining such Persons Priests, as are vicious, ignorant, and unable to discharge their Ministery well. He says, that the Learning of Ministers is more to be regarded than their Manners, be∣cause though a Priest ought to be blameless in both, yet 'tis less dangerous, to have a Priest that teaches well and lives ill, than to have the ignorant though they live well. Lastly, he distin∣guishes Ministers into four sorts, 1. Such as are to be loved, who live well and teach well. 2. Tolerable, such as teach well but live ill, or who live well, but have not learning enough to in∣struct others. 3. The Contemptible, who live ill and are ignorant. 4. Such as are accur∣sed, who live either well or ill, and teach Heresies. In the Conclusion, he prays God to pour his Graces upon the Priests of his Church, that they may carry themselves so, as becomes their Ministery.

Nothing is more judicious, than the next Treatise of Agobard's, which he wrote to undeceive the People, and remove the Opinions they had, that Sorcerers could raise Tempests, cause Thun∣der, and bring Hail by their Inchantments. He proves by several Texts of Scripture, that it is great Folly, and a kind of Sacrilege to attribute to Men, that which belongs to God. He laughs at the fancy of some, who supposed that there was a Region in the Air, whither they conveyed

the Corn and Fruit, which the Hail beat down. He shews by several Texts of Scripture, that God only is the cause of Thunder and Hail, that he punishes Men by these Plagues; That all that is done in the Air, is the effect of his Power, whether done by Himself or Angels, or Men; That he alone is the Mover and Creator of the Universe; That if wicked Men had power to af∣flict and destroy other Men, all their Enemies would be so dealt with; That he understood not how Men had power to disturb the Air, or Heaven, whose Nature they are ignorant of; That most of the Histories written upon this Subject being examined, will be found false, although there be some People so ignorant as to expose themselves to Death to maintain them, as it hap∣pen'd a little before, when they accused Grimoaldus Duke of Beneventum, of having scattered a Powder through the whole Countrey, which made all the Oxen die. As if, says he, he could make a Powder, which should kill Oxen only, and not other Beasts, or could make such quan∣tities of it, and have Sowers enough to scatter it through the whole Countrey.

Fredegisus Abbot of S. Martins at Tours, having found fault with some passages in one of Ago∣bard's Books, he thought himself obliged to defend himself and answer that Abbot's Objections. The first Expression of Agobard's which he reproved was, That the humble Man who hath mean Thoughts of himself, is subject to errour. Fredegisus says, That Jesus Christ was humble, and yet 'tis certain, he was not subject to errour. Agobard answers, That his Maxim ought not to be understood of Jesus Christ, who abased and humbled himself voluntarily without ceasing to be Omnipotent and Sinless; but he confirms it in respect of all other Men, who are subject to Errour and Sin.

Secondly, Fredegisus accuses him of weakning the Authority of Scripture, and of the Interpre∣tation of it, because he had observed, that they did not always observe the rules of Grammar. Agobard answers, that that ought not to make those things doubted of, which are related in Holy Scripture, that the Interpreters have used so to do, either to accommodate themselves to the capa∣city of the Simple, or to express the Sense of the Original the better. That it is not allowable to doubt of the authority of those Authors, of whom the Holy Spirit hath made use to write the Canonical Books, or believe that they ought to have written otherwise than they have. That next to the Original, the authority of the Translation of the Seventy ought to be acknowledged, and the fidelity of S. Jerom's Latin Version upon the Hebrew Text, and that the Latin Versions made by Orthodox Christians out of the Seventy, are not to be contemned, but there are several Translations which are justly to be corrected and reproved, as those of those famous Hereticks, and Bastard Jews, Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus, as also certain Latin Interpreters reproved by St. Jerom. And Lastly, as to Commentators, Men ought to follow the Rule of St. Austin, who gives all Liberty to judge of them, and reject what is not orthodox and true in their Wri∣tings. Afterward examining particularly the question about the Holy Books, he says, 'tis absurd to believe, that the Holy Ghost did inspire the Prophets and Apostles, with the Words and Terms which they used; and to prove this, he alledgeth the Example of Moses, who says, that he was of a slow Speech. He produces the Testimonies of S. Jerom, who acknowledgeth, that there is a difference in the Style in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles, some of whom wrote more Loftily and Eloquently, others with less Elegancy and Loftiness, and sometimes there is the same difference in different Writings. This difference may not be attributed to the Holy Spirit, but to Men, and consequently 'tis they, not the Spirit, which are the Authors of the Words and Expres∣sions which they use, although he inspires them with the Sense and Doctrine they ought to write.

In his Answer to the Third Objection, he opposeth the Opinion of his Adversary, who main∣tain'd, that the Souls of Men were Created, separated from the Bodies; he affirms, that we ought to believe, that they are created in and with the Body, although the Philosophers delivered the con∣trary, and Austin doubts of it.

In the next place he answers a question put to him by his Adversary, Whether Truth be any thing but God. He answers, That Truth is not always taken for God himself, although 'tis not to be doubted, but that God is Truth. The Fourth Question concerns the Righteous Men of the old Law. Agobard maintains that they may be called Christians, although they were not called so, because they believed in Jesus Christ, and belonged to him, being anointed with the invisible Ointment of his Grace, as well as those who were good Men among the Gentiles.

The Jews who were in credit at Court, because they had Money, obtained an Edict from the Emperour, which contained many things in their Favour, and among the rest, that none of their Slaves should be baptized, but with their Masters Consent. This Edict being very prejudicial to Religion, and contrary to Christian Piety. Agobard addressed a Writing to Hilduin the King's great Chaplain, and to the Abbot Vala, who was at Court, in which he shews the injustice and impiety of that Prohibition, being evidently contrary to the Design of the Gospel, and the inten∣tion of Jesus Christ, who will have all Men to be saved, and hath commanded his Apostles to preach the Gospel to all Creatures, and baptize all that believe, whether Bond or Free. He desires them to whom he writes, to endeavour all they can to get this Edict recall'd, which he hoped might be done more easily, because he offered to pay the Jews the Ransom of those Slaves, ac∣cording to the appointment of the Canons made in that Case.

In the Letter written by Agobard in his own Name, and Hildegisus and Florus's, who were Clergy-men of Lyons, to Bartholomew Bishop of Narbonne, he speaks of a certain Distemper, which took Men suddenly, and threw them down like the Falling-Sickness. Some also felt a sudden Burning, which left an incurable Wound. This ordinarily happen'd in the Churches, and the a∣stonish'd

People to guard themselves from it, gave considerable Gifts to the Churches to secure them. Agobard disallows this practice, and searching into the Cause of this Plague, he says, 'twas nothing else but the will of God, who punisheth Men by the Ministery of an Angel. Af∣ter which, he relates several Examples of the like Chastisements out of Scripture, in which God hath exercised his Justice by Angels and other Creatures. He affirms, that these sort of inflictions are not from the power of the Devil, although he owns that God sometimes suffers the Devil to disquiet and torment Men. Returning then to the Question of Bartholomew, viz. what we ought to think of the practice of those, who coming into the Churches, where they were seized with this Distemper, bring presents to them. He says, that fear causes these people to do what they ought not, and hinders them from doing what they ought; for it were better, says he, to give Alms to the Poor, or Strangers, to address themselves to the Priest to receive Unction, according to the Command of the Gospel and of the Apostle, to fast and pray, and do works of Charity. It is true, adds he, that if the Offerings given to the Church be employed as they ought, they are an Action of Charity, but because at present, they are used only to satisfie the Covetousness and Ava∣rice of Men, and not to honour God, or relieve the Poor, it is a shame to give them to such co∣vetous Wretches to be kept, or ill imployed by them.

The Injustice and Violence which was practised among the people of Lyons, and could not be restrained, obliged Agobard to write to Ma••fredus, a powerful Man in the Emperour's Court. He begs of him to use his Interest with his Prince, to hinder those Disorders, and cause justice to be done. This Compliment is short, but urgent. The Letter to the Clergy of Lyons concerning the manner, how the Bishops and Pastors ought to govern, is an excellent instruction for them. He says, that those who are entrusted with the Government of the Church, the Spouse of Christ, who is Peace, Truth, Justice, and the Author of all Good, ought to love that his Spouse singu∣larly as himself, and apply himself entirely to the spiritual good of his only Spouse. That those who neglect to do their Duty, and place all their Pleasure and Affections upon Riches, Fi∣nery, Hunting, and Debauchery, are the destroyers of God's Work, and the Assistants of Anti-christ; That though they seem to be Bishops in the Eyes of Men, they are not so in the Eyes of God, no more than Hypocrites, who affect to appear outwardly Holy, but whose Heart is full of Impurity, who seek not the Edification and Instruction of the Faithful, but their own Interest and Glory, such are those, who seek to get into the sacred Ministery, only to obtain Honour and Riches, or to live finely. He adds, that all those, that make it their main Business to gain them∣selves the Love and Respect of those that are under their Charge, and not to make Jesus Christ be loved and honoured by them, who is the only Spouse of the Church, are Adulterers and unworthy of the sacred Ministery, because they design rather to feed themselves than their Flock. Never∣theless he advises, that the Sheep should endure wicked Pastors, through Prudence, when they can't reform them.

His Book concerning the Dispensing of Ecclesiastical Revenues, was not written against the ill usage, which Clergy-men might make of them, but against the Laity, who took them away and kept them unjustly. Lewis the Godly, having called an Assembly of Clergy-men and Lords at Attigny, in 822. for the Reformation of Church and State, Agobard advises Adelardus Abbot of Corbey, and another Abbot called Helissicarius, that they ought to rectifie the Disorder, that was in the Church about the Ecclesiastical Revenues, which the Laity had appropriated to themselves, that they might speak to the Emperour of it. He zealously represents to them, that the Churches having been enriched by the Gifts of the Emperours, Princes and Bishops, had made an abundance of Laws and Canons for the preservation of the Revenues, and to hinder Lay-men from encroach∣ing upon them; That the necessity which they alledged, was not a sufficient Reason to over-look those Laws, nor to authorize the Usurpations they had made of them. The year following, this matter was more fully debated in an Assembly held at Compeigne, where the Clergy again repre∣sented that the Laity were not to be suffered in the quiet Possession of the Revenues of the Church, which they had usurped. The Lords would not agree to the Restitution of them. The Empe∣rour thought to accommodate the matter between the Bishops and Nobles, by causing a part to be restored only, but the Nobles not contented with it, declared at Length, that they would not hear of any accommodation, and complained grievously against Agobard, as a Man whoh••d raised a question, which was fit to trouble both Church and State. In this Book he defends himself by bringing Authorities out of the Old and New Testament, to shew, that it is a great Crime to meddle with the Goods Consecrated to the Temple, Altars, maintenance of Ministers, and relief of the Poor. To them he joyns the Authority of the Canons, and chiefly those of the French Church. He observes, that some would not receive them, because the Popes and Emperours Deputies were not present at the Councils that made them, but 'tis his Judgment, that where-ever Orthodex Bishops are met in the name of Jesus Christ for the good of the Church, the Deci∣sions they make ought to be respected and followed, which says he, is established upon the Au∣thority of the Popes, who have ordained that every two Years, two Councils shall be held in e∣very Province, and have commended great Councils. Lastly, Agobard not only condemns the ••ay-men, who make use of the Revenues of the Church to maintain Doggs and Horses, and great Retinues of Servants, or to satisfie their Pleasures and Passions, or spend them in Sports and superfluous Gallantry, but he involves in the same Condemnation the Bishops, Abbots and Clergy-men, who put those Revenues to any other use, t•…•…n is allowed by the Laws of the Church and Doctrine of the Fathers.

Agobard's Treatise against the Judgment of God (i. e. the proofs made of Mens Innocency, ei∣ther by single Combat, or by holding a red-hot-Iron, or by standing immoveable by a Cross, or by any other proof of like Nature) contains several Maxims taken out of the Holy Scripture, and chiefly out of the New Testament; by which he proves, that this usage is contrary to the Go∣spel, Christian Charity, Right Reason, and the Principles of our Religion.

In his Discourse of the Faith, Agobard runs through the chief Articles of our Belief, as the Tri∣nity, Incarnation, Redemption; the Union of Jesus Christ with his Church; the Necessity of the Grace of Jesus Christ; to doe Good, and Resist Temptations; Patience in Adversity; Obligation to Prayer, &c. and sets down on every point Texts of Scripture, or Fathers: 'Tis rather a Sermon, than a Doctrinal Treatise.

The Letter of Lamentation about the Division of Europe, Dedicated to Lewis the Godly, was Written by Agobard in 833. when that Emperour made War against his Children. Agobard, who wished for peace, although he was of Lotharius's party, sent this Letter to him. He first of all represents to him, that it is the duty of a faithful Subject, and chiefly of a Prelate, to admonish his Prince, when he sees him ready to engage in a bad Cause, where his Soul is endanger'd. He calls God to witness, that this was the onely cause of his Writing to Lewis the Godly. Last∣ly, After he hath lamented the Calamities and Disorders which the War had caused, he tells him, That he did some time since part his Countrey between his Children, and made Lotharius a Part∣ner in the Empire: That it was done with all the Solemnity possible, and with the consent of the Nobles and Bishops; That to consult the Will of God about it, he had commanded a Fast, continual Prayers, and Alms for three days; That the thing being finished, he sent the Act to Rome, to have it confirmed by the Pope. Lastly, That he obliged them all to Swear, that they approved the Election of Lotharius, and Division of the Empire. That, at first, all Letters and Edicts bore the Name of the Two Emperours in the front of them; but afterward he put out the Name of Lotharius without any Reason, and attempted to dispossess him of it. He beseeches Lewis the Godly not to persist in that design. He lets him know, that the Oath he had taken obli∣ged him to be of Lotharius's party; and he endeavours to terrifie that Prince, who was of a fearful spirit, by threatning the Judgments of God, and hatred of Men upon him.

About the same time he sent a Treatise to Lotharius, Entituled, A Comparison between the Ec∣clesiastical and Civil Government; in Answer to an Order, which the Emperour had given to the Nobles, as well of the Clergy as Laity, to be ready to fight for him; the one with the Sword, and the other with the Tongue. Agobard tells him, That he ought in War to put his trust in God's help, more than his own Forces; and that in all Disputes we should seek for Truth, rather than Eloquence. Since he was one of those that Lotharius had Commanded, not daring to come himself, he Admonished him by Writing, of the Respect he ought to give the Holy See; and, to perswade him to it, he Cites a Passage of Pope Pelagius, against some Bishops, who would not re∣cite the Pope's Name at Mass: And another passage out of St. Leo, about the Primacy of Pe∣ter. Agobard touched upon this string, because Lotharius carried Pope Gregory the IVth along with him, to Authorize his own party, and make his Father's odious. He knew what the other Bishops of France said, That if he came to Excommunicate them, he should return Excommu∣nicated himself. Si Excommunicaturus verniret, Excommunicatus abiret Agobardus. That if Gre∣gory came, with an ill design, to foment the War, he deserved to be sent away with Disgrace: but he maintains, that if he came to procure the Peace and Quiet of the Empire, they ought to obey him, and not resist him. Now, he affirms, that this is the end of his Voyage, since he came to set∣tle what was done by the will of Lewis, and consent of all the Members of the Empire; and confirmed by the Authority of the Holy See. He adds, That he had received Letters from him, commanding, that Prayers and Fasting be made for the Restoration of the Peace, and Agreement of the Empire, and in the Emperour's Family. Lastly, Agobard exhorts Lewis the Godly to be of that Mind.

This Writing is followed by a Letter, or rather a Fragment of a Letter of Gregory the Fourth to the Bishops of France, who would not receive him. It serves for an Answer to a Letter which they Wrote to him. In the beginning of it he finds fault, that they had called him Father, and Pope, in the Superscription of their Letter. He requires them to give him the Name of Father, as if the Bishops were not his Brethren, and had not that Title given upon many occasions; yea, in those very Letters he sent to them. The Second thing that Gregory finds fault with in the French Bishops Letter, is, That they declare their Joy for his Arrival; being perswaded, that it would be profitable for their Prince and his Subjects; and that they would have paid their Respects to him, had they not been prevented by an Express Order from the Emperour. He complains, That they preferred the Order of their Prince, before their Respect due to him; and maintains, that the Matter of Fact was not true, for they had notice of his Arrival, before they had any such Command from the Emperour. He adds, That they ought to know, that the Spiritual Govern∣ment of Souls is more excellent, than the Temporal Government of Princes, as S. Gregory Na∣zianzen boldly told the same Emperour: That they ought to imitate the Liberty of Gregory the Great, who told the Emperour, That he was one of his Sheep, and that he ought to hear and believe him in things that belong to the Faith. That, in stead of those foolish flatteries which 〈2 pages missing〉〈2 pages missing〉

The Works of 〈…〉〈…〉 the one an Epitaph upon Charles the Great; 〈…〉〈…〉 Reliques 〈…〉〈…〉 Cyprian, S. Spera∣tus▪ and •…•….

Agohard Writes▪ •…•…, but something flat, and without Ornament: 〈…〉〈…〉 Citations, long passages of Scripture and Fathers, 〈…〉〈…〉 Argues very rationally about the Mat∣ters he Treats of, and Writes 〈…〉〈…〉 in the Doctrin of the Fathers, and Disci∣pline of the Church.

His Works are published by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Massonus, and Printed at Paris in 1605, in Octavo, out of a MS. which he found by chance in a •…•…ers-Shop at Lyons, which he designed to use as Wast-paper; and which his Brother, after his Death, put into the King's Library. But though Massonus was a very Learned Man, yet he left many Faults in his Edition, which have been since Corrected by M. Baluzius, in his Edition of Agobard's Works, Printed by Maguet at Paris, 1666, in Two 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Octavo. Revised by the same MS. with great exactness, who hath added a Treatise of Agobard's to it, against the Book of Offices, made by Amalarius, taken out of a MS. which was communicated to him by F. Chiffletius. [This Edition is put into the last Edition of the Biblioth. Patrum, Tom. 14. p. 2••4.]

Amolo, Amulo, or Amulus, a Deacon of the Church of Lyons, under Agobard, succeeded him in 841. He was in great Reputation and Favour with Charles the Ba•…•…. He was President in a * 1.5 Council held at Lyons, 845.

We have already spoken of this Letter to Gotteschalcus about the Question of Predestination and Grace: But we must here give an Extract of another Letter Written to Theobaldus, or Theobaldus, Bishop of Langres; who consulted him about some Abuses committed in the Church of S. Benig∣nus at Dijon, as to the Relicks shewed then: Two Monks had brought some Bones of a pre∣tended Martyr, which they said came from Rome, and some other place of Italy; but that which was most pleasant, was, that these impudent Monks were not ashamed to say, That they had forgotten the Name of the Saint; As if, says Amulo, it were credible, that they could be ig∣norant of the Name of a Saint, famous in the place from whence they had him; or could forget his Name in the way, whom they looked upon as their Patron, and whom they ought continu∣ally to Pray to. The Bishop of Langres used much prudence upon this occasion; and imitating S. Martin in a like Case, determined, That they ought not to receive those Relicks, which were not well-Attested; but yet they might not use them with contempt. Then he thought it ••it to oblige those who had brought them, to procure Authentick Proofs from the place where they had them. Indeed, one of them went away with a pretence to get some proofs, but never re∣turned; and the other died a little time after at Dijon. Nevertheless they laid up these pretended Relicks in the Church, by the Body of the Holy Martyr, and affirmed they did many Miracles: No Sick persons were cured by them; but, on the contrary, some Women fell upon the ground, beat themselves▪ if they were Plagued by them. This brought many to that place. Amulo observes, that there were many persons who were seized with the same Distemper, and, upon that account, were obliged to stay in the Church, or to return again as soon as they were gone out of it: That this Distemper happened in other places, particularly in the Vil∣lage of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, in the Dioces of Autun, where the Bodies of the Holy Martyrs, Andochius, Thyrsus, and Felix lay.

Amolo hereupon advises the Bishop of Langres to remove these Bones out of the Church, and Bury them in some decent place at a distance from it, in the presence of some few persons; for, say•…•…, They are the Bones of some Saint, we ought not to deprive them of all Respect; but yet we ought not to give an occasion to the People to fall into an Error and Super∣stition. Nor may we fear, adds he▪ least our scrupulousness be the cause of Scandal; since God hath commanded us to be sincere, and prudent in things which concern his Service. Whereupon he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Example of S. Martin, and the Decree of Pope Gelasius. He says, That 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Miraculous C••••es done in the Church of S. Benignus, they ought to be attributed to God, and the Merits of his Saints, without approving other Signs, done in the Church▪ or •…•…where. That it is likely, that the fallings and beatings of Men and Women▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the wickedness of those miserable Beggars, who pretended themselves to be so afflicted, onely to get Money. That he never heard any such Mira∣cles spoken of, as to make Sound-Men Sick; part Daughters from their Parents, and Wo∣men from their Husbands▪ by obliging them to continue in the Church, and hindring their return to their Houses. That these things are the effect, either of Humane Malice, or Dia∣bolical Illusions. Upon this occasion he relates two Examples of things of like nature, which happen'd under his Predecessor Agobard, of which he found out the Cheat. He advises the Bishop of Langres to banish that Superstition out of his Diocess, to perswade the people from it; and exhorts them earnestly not to assemble so unprofitably in that place, but every one to remain in his Parish, and frequent the Service of that Church, where he received his Bap∣tism,

as well as the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, where he useth to hear Solemn Masses, from whose Priest they receive Penance, are assisted in their Sickness, and are Buried after their Death; to whom they pav their Tithes, and bring their Offerings, to which they go to hear Sa∣ving Instructions. That in these Churches it is, they must meet to pay their Vows and Pray∣ers to God, to beg the Prayers of the Saints, to give Alms to the poor Widows and Orphans, That this is the Lawful and Regular Discipline of the Church, and the ancient practice of the Faithful. That if it happens that Christians fall into any Weakness, or Sickness, they ought to follow the Command of St. James, to call the Priests to Pray over them, and anoint them with Oil in the Name of the Lord. He doubts not but if this were put in practice, all these pre∣tended Miracles would cease: And he likewise advises him, that if any of these Wretches prove obstinate, to have them Scourged, till they shall confess the Truth. He adds, That since these Distempers happened, through the Illusion of the Devil, they would do better to implore the help of the Lord of their Churches, than to remain in a distant Church; and that one Saint will not contradict the Honour given to another, because they are all united in the same Love. If they will go to visit the Churches of the Martyrs, they ought to doe it at those times, which are appointed for it by the Church, viz. In the Rogations, Lent, and Festivals of the Martyrs. Nevertheless he doth not condemn those, who doe it at other times out of Devotion, provided they doe it without Ostentation and Tumult; but he finds fault with them for neglecting to doe it upon the Solemn Days set apart by the Church; and tells them, they doe it at other times to no purpose, through Vanity and Ostentation. Lastly, Since there are some people really possessed, they ought to be used by the Priests of the place, or Neighbour∣ing Chapels of the Martyrs, in private, with gentleness, and not expose them to the throng and tumult of the People. These are the principal Arguments of Amulo in this Letter, which prove, that this Bishop had much sincerity, knowledge, prudence, zeal and eloquence. He is also the Genuine Author of a Treatise against the Jews, published by F. Chiffletius, under the Name of Ra∣banus [at Dijon, 1656.] for Trimethius [De Script. Eccles.] attributes it to Amulo, and it is found under his Name in a MS. in the Library of M. Colbert. [Baluzius published the rest at the end of Agobard's Works.]

Adelardus, the Son of Count Bernard, Brother of Pepin, Grandson of Charles Martellus, Great * 1.6 Master of the French, and Abbot of Corbey, was sent to Rome to Pope Leo, about the: Question concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost. Having joyned with Bernard King of Italy, in the Conspiracy against Lewis the Godly, he was forced to fly into Aquitain, to the Monastery of S. Philibert, but he was re-called in 822, and restored to his Monastery. He made some Statutes for the Church of Corbey, published by Father Dacherius, Tom. 4. of his Spicilegium. He died in 826. His Life is Written by Paschasius Rathbertus, Abbot of Corbey.

Ansegisus, Abbot of S. Wandrillus, is the Author of the Collection of the Constitutions of * 1.7 Charles the Great, and Lewis the Godly, of which we have already spoken. He died in 834.

Halitgarius Succeeded Hildegaldus in the Bishoprick of Cambray, in 816. He was sent with * 1.8 Ebbo▪ of Rheims to Preach the Gospel in Denmark; and, by Lewis the Godly, Ambassador to Michael Balbus, the Emperour of Greece, Anno 828. Being returned from that Embassy, he died in 830, June 25. He Composed a Work, Entituled, Of Vices, and their Remedies: Of Vertues, and the Order and Judgments of Penance. 'Tis a long Penitential, divided into Six Books, which is found in Tom. V. of the Collection of Canisius, and in the Biblioth. Partrum [Tom. XIV.] This Work is also attributed to Rabanus.

Isaac, Surnamed the Good, a Scholar of Hilduin, and Deacon of Pardulus, Bishop of Laon, * 1.9 who was preferred to the Bishoprick of Langres, and present at the Council of Savonieres in 859, and the following Councils; made a Collection of Ecclesiastical Laws, taken out of the Canons of the Councils, held by Boniface Arch-bishop of Mentz, and confirmed by Pope Za∣••hary; and out of the Constitutions of the French Kings; chiefly out of the Three Books, which the Deacon Benedict hath added to the Collection of Ansegisus. This Collection is published by Father Sirmondus, in the Ninth Tome of the Councils of France; and by M. Ba∣•…•…us, Tome I. of Capitularies. F. Dacherius hath published a Small Tract about the Canon of the Mass, which bears Isaac's Name. But M. Baluzius tells us, That 'tis not Isaac Bishop of Langres's, but another Isaac's, who was Abbot of Stella, whose Name it bears in some MSS. and under whose Name it hath been published in Tom. VI. of the Biblioth. Cistertiorum.

Herard, made Arch-bishop of Tours in 855, made a Collection of Ecclesiastical Laws in 856, * 1.10 taken out of the Capitularies, which he propounded to a Synod of Priests, held in May the same year. This Collection is in Tom. VIII. of the Councils of the Last Edition, and at the end of Tom. I. of M. Baluzius's Capitularies. This Arch-bishop died in 871.

Wauterius, or Gauterius, Bishop of Orleans, about the year 870, made also a like Collection * 1.11 of Canons for his Diocess; which is Printed Tom. VIII. of the Councils.

Wulfadus having been Ordained, as we have s••id, by Elbo, and molested by Hinemarus, * 1.12 was, made Arc•…•…p of Bourges, in 866. He ••ath l••st a Pastoral Le•…•…, directed to the Priests of his D•…•… which Father M••••illon hath put out in Tom. IV. Analect. This Bi∣shop died in 876.

Riculphus, who was Bishop of Soissons, about the end of the Ninth Age, sent, in 889, a Pastoral Letter to the Curates of his Diocess, ••ontaining 28 very useful Constitutions for or∣dering * 1.13 their Discipline and M•…•…ers. He exho••••s them to labour after the Sa••ctay of their Peo∣ple, by their good Example and Knowledge: He advises them to be constans in Divine Ser∣vice, and exhort their Parishioners to be there as of••••n as they can; but ••o be sure not in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 absent on Festivals and Sundays. He requires the•• to say by heart the Psalms, Canon of t•••• Mass, Creed, Qui••••tnque, S••c. That they should be skilled also in Singing, and the Calen∣dar; That they should have Rituals to Administer Baptism, a Missal, a Book of the Lessons, a Book of the Gospel, a Martyr-book, a Book of Anthems, a Psalter, and a Copy of S. Gre∣gory's Forty Homilies. He also prescribes what O••••aments they ought to have, and Orders them to take care of them, to keep them near, as well as the Holy Places. He orders them to instruct the Catechumens in Lent, that they may be Baptized, and receive the Eucha∣rist at Easter. He commands them to have a care of the Publick Penitents, and not to receive them to Absolution, till they have performed the time of their Penance; and if it happens that they are forced to it by necessity, or any other Reason, he desires them to have particular care of them. He Orders them to Administer to the Sick the Holy Unction, after Confession, and Absolution, but before Communion. He allows them to give Absolution to the Sick, that have lost their Speech, if there be any that can witness that they desired it. He puts them in m•…•… of the Division of the Churches Revenues into four parts, and requires an account of that, which is to be employed for the Service of the Church. He exhorts them to have two or three Clergy-men to celebrate Masses, i. e. Divine-Service with him; and forbids them to ce••••∣brate it alone. He advises them to be Charitable and Hospitable. He forbids them going to Inns, suffer Wine to be sold in the Church, to dwell with any Women, or be familiar with them; to be Farmers, or Men of business. He forbids Usury, and orders them to keep the Sunday Holy. He requires them to take nothing for the Burial of the Dead, but allows them to take any Free-gifts. He orders the Deans to call Assemblies of the Curates every Month, on the First day of it, but forbids Feasting at them; and enjoyns them to have Con∣ferences about what concerns their Ministery, and the occasions of their Parishes. He orders them to reconcile those that are Enemies, or Excommunicate them if they refuse. He enjoyns them to give Notice of the Fasts, he hath appointed, to the People. This Letter is published by Condesius, with Hincmarus's Works [at Paris, 1615.] and is Printed in Tome IX. of the Councils.

Elias, Bishop of Jerusalem, Wrote in 887, a Letter to Charles the Grosse, the Clergy, and Lords of the Kingdom of France, to desire of him some Relief for the Churches of * 1.14 his Countrey; He tells him, That the Prince under whose Government they were, being become a Christian, had allowed them to re-build, and repair their Churches, which were either quite ruin'd, or ready to fall: That to doe it, they were forc'd to Mortgage, their Lands and Revenues, so that they had nothing to purchase Oil, Ornaments, and Holy Vessels for Divine-Service: Then he exhorts this Prince, and the French, to exercise t•…•… Charity upon this occasion, and to bestow something upon the Two Monks which he wo•…•… send to gather their Alms. This Letter is in Latin in Tome II. of Dacherius's Spicilegium. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is well Written, but very short.

Luitbe••tus, Arch-bishop of Mentz, hath Written a Letter to King Lewis; In which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 tells that Prince, That seeing the Danger their Churches were exposed to, he was oblig•…•… * 1.15 to speak, because the Primacy and Dignity of St. Peter is assaulted and Dishonoured by t•…•… who ought to be the Leaders of the People of God, who prefer Humane things before 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vine; insomuch, that he is afraid, that the Evil, which is in the Head••, will spread 〈◊〉〈◊〉 self into all the Members, unless a Remedy be timely provided. He tells the King, t•…•… there is present danger, because those that ought to watch for the Salvation of others, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 stroy themselves, and dig a Pit of destruction for those that follow them. He exhorts 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to conser with those, that know the Law of God, that he may remove these Scandals, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Peace in the Church. He adds, That it is so much the Easier, because all the Body 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Church is not corrupted as yet; That there are some Members weakened by the wound 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the head, but may be cured with suitable Medicines; That it seems necessary and profit•• ble, that King Charles call a Council soon; that the Bishops of his Kingdom, which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not infected with the Disease, might joyn, with the: Bishops of Germany and Him, to re•…•… the Peace and Agreement of the Catholick Church, as soon as he return•• from the Voy•…•… he was about to take. This Letter seems to relate to the Troubles, which happened after 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Death of Lotharius, about the Kingdom of Lorain, which Pope Adrian claimed for the Empe∣rour Lewis; threatning Excommunication to Charles, and to the rest who were in possession of it.

Of all Authors of this Age, there is none that hath taken more pains about the Canons than Regino. He was chosen Abbot of Prom, about 892; after Farabertus had voluntarily resign∣ed it, but he enjoyed it not long, being deprived of it in 899, by the Arts of his Enemies, who put Richarius, the Brother of the Counts Gerhardus and Montfredus, into his place. He endured this injustice, with a great deal of Patience, and lived a private Monk, in the Ab∣bey of Prom. In this time he composed his Collection of Canons, and Ecclesiastical Constitu∣tions at the desire of Rathboldus, Arch-bishop of Treves. He finished it in 906. He also com∣posed a Chronicon, which ends in 968, dedicated to Adelbertus Bishop of Metz. We do not exactly know to what Age he lived.

His Collection of Canons is entituled, A Treatise of Ecclesiastical Discipline and of the Christian Religion, collected by the order of Rathboldus, Arch-bishop of Treves, by Regino, heretofore Abbot of P•…•…, and taken out of the Fathers, Councils and Popes. It is divided into two Books. In the first he sets down the Canons, which concern Ecclesiastical Persons; and in the Second, those that concern the Laity. These two Books begin each of them, with a form of such things, as Bishops, or Ministers ought to be informed in, when they make their Visits. That which is at the begin∣ning of the first, concerns the Clergy; and that which is at the beginning of the second, con∣cerns the Laity. Then he confirms the Articles of the first by the Canons and Ecclesiastical Con∣••titutions. He quotes the Canons of the Councils, and particularly those of France, the Consti∣tut••ons of the Kings, the genuine Decretals of the Popes, and sometimes the false; some pas∣sages of the Fathers and Ecclesiastical Authors. This Collection is very large, and exact. Bur∣chardus, Iv•• Carnatensis, and the other Collectors of Canons that follow him, have made use of it, and often copy it out. It hath been published from a M S. of Flaccus Illyricus, and printed at Helmstad, 1659; and since M. Baluzius hath taken care to print it at Paris, by Muguet, 1671, ha∣ving received it by a very ancient M S. in the Library of the Fathers of the Oratory at Paris. He hath set down in the Margin, the places from which the Canons and passages of that Collection are taken, and where the Articles of Burchardus's Collection are found.

Regino's Chronicon is divided into two Books. It was printed at Frankfort in 1583. Trimethius assures us, that this Author wrote several Sermons, some Letters, and other Works, which never came to his Hands. He much commends his Ingenuity, Learning and Piety; and says, that he is the best of the German Writers of his Time.

Lastly, we have another Author of this Age, who treats of a very curious Subject of Disci∣pline, and that is Auxilius, who maintains the Validity of the Ordinations made by Pope Formosus. He was a 1.16 ordained by this Pope, and 'twas his Interest to defend it. He hath made two small Treatises upon that Subject, in which he shews a great deal of Learning for the Age he lived in.

The First is a Collection of Ecclesiastical Constitutions and passages of Fathers, to prove that a Bishop deprived of his Bishoprick may be dig∣nifyed in another Church, when it is for the good and advantage of the Church, and with the Pope's Permission. This Collection was designed to prove the Translation of Formosus, from the Bishoprick of Ostia to the Roman See, Lawful. Then he adds some other Testimonies to shew that though the ordination of Formosus was not lawful, yet the Ordinati∣ons made by him were valid. Upon the first Head, he brings a Pas∣sage out of the false Decretal of Anterus, the Example and Authority of St. Gregory Nazianzen, the Examples of some Translations alledged by Socrates, and what is observed in the Greek Book, about the Translation of S. German of Cyzicum to Constantinople. Then he shews, That the Canons of the Council of Nice, do not forbid all Transla∣tions, but those only, that are made through ambition, and to disturb the Church. He approves the Law, which Hosius propounded in the Council of Sardica, which forbids those Translations which are made for Avarice, Ambition, or Dominion; but he disapproves what is ad∣ded, that those who pass from one See to another, shall be reduced to Lay-Communion. He affirms this Law, comes near the Rigour of the Novatians, Condemned by S. Austin, That it was not approved by the Holy See; and that Hosius was of no great Au∣thority, having fallen into Heresie. He ought to have observed, that all the Bishops of the Council, approved the opinion of Hosiu••.

Auxilius then passeth to the Second Head; which concerns the Validity of the Ordinations made by Photius, and alledgeth the Testimonies of S. Innocent, S. Austin, S. Leo, S. Gregory, and S. Anastasius, to shew that the Ordinations made by unlawful Bishops are valid, and ought not to be repeated. He confirms this Doctrine by a Canon of the Council of Nice, which accepted the Ordinations made by the Novatians. He says, that since the Ordinations of Pope Liberius, who was an Heretick, and Vigilius who was an Usurper, guilty of Simony and Murther, were

well approved, there is much greater reason to allow of those made by Formosus. He proves, that it will cast the Church of Italy into strange Confusion, and the Faithful into inexpressible Trouble. He observes, that if there was any default in the Translation of Formosus, it did not belong to him, who accepted it, but to the Clergy and Nobles of Rome, who chose him, and ac∣knowledged him for their Bishop. Lastly, he proves, that they who swear, that their Ordination is void, are guilty of Sacrilege, and they are not obliged thereby to obey the Commands of their Superiours, nor of the Pope, who exacts it, because they ought not to execute those Com∣mands of Superiours, which are contrary to Justice, and the Law of God; That their Excommu∣nication ought not be feared or observed, but when it is just; That we ought to distinguish be∣tween the Papal See, and the Persons who preside in it; That we ought to respect the Sees, but not follow those that preside in them, if they depart from the Faith or Religion, although, they are obliged to obey them in those things, they order well, although they would not do it. In Conclusion, He advises,

That this Collection of Testimonies may perhaps seem needless to several Persons, because there are few People, that will judge of this▪ Affair with Equity, and that he did not hope to carry his Cause in the judgment of those, who are both Judges, Advocates and Witnesses, but that according to the Opinion of S. Jerom, he wrote both for himself, and for them which were of his Judgment, that they might be courageous, seeing they do not ground their belief upon their own Sence, but the Holy Fathers, and that they observe, that which is written; That if a Multitude rise up against you, you should not fear, and that they should hold fast what they have received, least you lose your Crown. That continuing in the sacred Vocation you have received, they may wait for the impartial Examination of a general Council, under the protection of which they may put themselves with these W•…•… Lift up thy Self, O Lord, judge thine own Cause.

The Second Treatise of Auxilius, saith Sigibert in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers, is written in form of a Dialogue, by way of Question and Answer. It was composed at the desire of Leo, Bishop of Nola, who had been ordained by Formosus, who being urged to acknowledge, that the Priest-hood which he had received from Pope Formosus, is null; first consulted the French Bishops, and the Bishop of Beneventum about it, who answered him, that he ought not to do it, and then sent his Request to Auxilius, to answer the Objections made against the Ordinations of Form••s••••. At the beginning of this Treatise is propounded a general Question, which serves as a Preface to it, viz. whether those who have been ordained against their own Consent, but afterwards yield to their Ordination, ought to be re-ordained. To which he answers, that as we do not re-baptize Infants, nor such as have been baptized by force; no more ought we to re-ordain them who have been involuntarily ordained. This Preface is accompanied with a Letter of Auxili••••'s to Leo Bishop of Nola, in which he tells him, That he made this Treatise to satisfie him, and had set down the Objections under the name of the Objecter, and answers under the name of the Defender. That he ought not to expect in his Writings Syllogisms in form, no Logical Subde∣ties, being the Scholar of a Fisher, i. e. S. Peter. That 'tis true, though he is in his Bark, he is in a Tempest, but he prayed the Lord of all to command the Winds and Sea, and make a Calm.

The first Objection made by the Objecter, is about the Translation of Formosus. He says, having left his Wife, i. e. Bishoprick, he hath taken away the H. See from them, who ought to be ordained in it; so that he is a Reprobate and Hypocrite. The Defender says, That he did not trouble himself with what Formosus was, but he maintained that the Ordinations of For∣mosus made by him were valid and Lawful. The Objecter insists and says, That Formosus not being Pope, all the Ordinations made by him are null. All that Chapter contains this Difficulty. The Defender maintains, that his Ordinations may be valid, since S. Leo acknowledgeth the Ordina∣tions of false Bishops to be so; That Anastasius allowed Acacius's, and no Man ever doubted of Libe∣rius and Vigilius's. The Objecter replies, That the Council of Nice declared their Ordinations void; and that Pope Innocent asserts, That an Hypocrite and Reprobate can't conferr Ordination, because he hath none. The Defender Replies, that this ought to be understood of some, and not all Here∣ticks, since he approved of those that Bonosus ordained. The Objecter insists upon his Principle, and demands how it can be, that the Ordinations of a Reprobate can be valid, since the Mem∣bers can't exist without the Head; and to urge it the farther, he asks to whom Formosus's Crime ought to be imputed; if his Ordinations are of Force, the Defender says, it belongs to the Cler∣gy and people of Rome, and not to a Clergy-man, who being a Stranger, came far with a good intention to receive Ordination from him, whom he saw settled on the H. See. Then he proves by the Testimonies of Anastasius and S. Austin, that a Reprobate and an Hypocrite may administer Sacraments effectually, and consequently Ordinations. The Objecter urges the Ex∣ample of Constantine the Antipope, whose Ordinations were declared null, and the Persons or∣dained by him Re-ordained. The Defender condemns this Action, and opposes the Authority of S. Leo, Anastasius, &c. Then he proves by some passages of the Popes and Fathers, that Re-ordinations are no less faulty, than Re-baptizations. The Objecter says, That if it were so, a great number of Men are Condemnable, because the number of them that believe Formosus's Or∣dinātions null, is very Great. This inconvenience doth not at all touch the Defender. He says, God regards not great or small Numbers, but Justice; That his Flock is small; That he never

hath, nor will pardon a multitude of Sinners, though never so great, which he clears by the Exa••ple of the Deluge; People of the Jews, and the small number of those that remained Faith∣fu•• under the Persecution of Antiochus; adding to these Examples of the Old Testament, that in S. Ath•…•…asius's Time almost all the World embrac'd Arianism, and there was but a very ••••all •…•…ber of Persons that continued in the Catholick Faith, and did obtain the Crown. The •…•…nder having asserted, that those who are ordained a Second time ought to be excluded for ever 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Sacred Ministery. The Objecter propounds two difficulties against the Propositi∣ons T••e first, That they are not deprived of Christianity, who have been re-baptized. The Second is, That Clergy-men who have fallen into Idolatry, may do their Duty, and perform their Functions, and therefore 'tis probable, that the same thing may be allowed to those who are re-ordained. The Defender answers to the First, that a Minister's Function is not like the Title of a Christian, that this is necessary, but that the other is not. To the Second he says, that they have been deposed without all hopes of Restauration, who have voluntarily renounced the Faith, and no Mercy hath been shewed, but only to those who have done it through the vio∣lence of Torments. The Obedience due to the Pope, and the Oath which he required, to ac∣knowledge that the Ordinations of Formosus are null, create new Difficulties. The Defender strongly maintains, that Superiours ought not to be obeyed, when that which they command is forbidden, and that the Oaths taken in such Cases oblige not. He takes himself not to be obliged to go to the Synod, which the Pope had appointed, and treats the Bishops, that were at it, as Wolves. He adds, that it is sometimes convenient to discover the faults of Superiours, especially when they are prejudicial to the Church, and they can't be remedied any other way; and in fine, insists upon the Fact that 'tis a Fault, which is published, and aggravated by those that defend it. He proceeds yet farther; he says, that we ought not to fear or regard the Excommunication that is unjustly pronounced. He repeats what he had said in his first Treatise about the Distinction of Sees, and them that sit in them. He comes next to the Examination of the affair of Formo∣sus; and says, as he was deposed, so also he was absolved by the Pope; That the Oath which they made him take never to come to Rome, or to return to his Bishoprick, was a Cruelty and an unheard of Violence; That he did it only by Constraint. He brings several Examples of Bi∣shops condemned and deposed, who have been restored again. He adds, that Formosus having been restored by the Pope; his first Deposition could not be alledged as an Obstacle to his pro∣motion to the Pope-dom; That only God knows, whether it was through Ambition that he was rai∣sed to the H. See, and so it belongs only to him to judge of it. That all the City of Rome, and Neighbouring Provinces did bear Witness of his Piety, except some who had the boldness to blast his Reputation. He endeavours to justifie his Translation by the Example of several others, of whom he makes a long list. He answers as he had done in the other Treatise to the Law pro∣pounded in the Council of Sardica, approving the first, and condemning the second part. The Council of Africa was objected, which forbids him who doth the Office of a Clergy-man in one Church, to pass to another. He replies, that it is only forbidden by that Canon, to receive the Clergy of another Bishop. He explains the Canons, which forbid Translations, of such as are through a kind of Ambitious Avarice or Dominion, and proves that they do not comprehend those which are made for the necessity, and profit of the Church. He adds, that it belongs to the People of Rome to answer for the Necessity and Advantage there was in Translating of Formo∣sus to the See. It was objected, that although Formosus might be excused as to those Points, yet the Blow he had received by suffering himself to be re-ordained, was not to be covered. This Objection much puzzled Auxilius, and to answer it, he supposeth that the Priests and Bishops are not essentially distinct, and endeavours to prove it by the famous passage of St. Jerom, from whence he Concludes; That as a Priest is Consecrated to make a Bishop, without any intention of Consecrating him a Priest anew, but only adding the Episcopal Title in like Manner. Formo∣sus by his Second Ordination, did not lose the Title of Bishop he had before, but only received the addition of the Apostolick Dignity. This Sophistical Answer of Auxilius, did not excuse For∣mosus, if the Matter of Fact were true; but he maintains immediately, that it was very false, and that he was informed by those, that were present at the Instalment of Formosus, that he did not receive a new Ordination, but was conducted to the H. Apostolick See, by singing of Prayers, and was installed with a Speech proper for that occasion. He adds, that none but his Enemies, and others, that had a present Quarrel with him; said, that he was ordained a Se∣cond Time, whose Testimony was not worthy of Credit. That to pass a true Judgment of this Matter, a general Council ought to be called, which might easily remove the Scandal, and set∣tle Peace in the Church; That the Synod held at Ravenna had confirmed the Ordination of Formo∣sus, for which indeed the Bishops were accused of Bribery, but very unjustly. He aggravates the Cruelty exercised by Pope Stephen against Formosus, whose Corpse he took up and brought it to a Council, where having stripp'd him of his pontifical Habits, he caused a Lay-Garb to be put on him, and having cut off two Fingers of his Right-Hand, he caused him to be Buried in the Church-Yard for Strangers, from whence he was aftèr thrown into the Tiber. Auxilius says, that they that exercised this piece of inhumanity upon him, acted like Savage Beasts; That this their Action was contrary to Heathen Morality, which obliges us to spare the Dead; That although the Translation of Formosus had been contrary to the Laws of the Church, it ought to have been tolerated with a Christian Compassion, and not aggravated with an unheard of Cru∣elty. That all that could have been done, had been to have called a Council to forbid the Peo 〈2 pages missing〉〈2 pages missing〉

whatever else is necessary to Celebrate Divine Service. He acquaints him, that he had gotten Schools of Singers, who are so very excellent in their Art, and are able to Instruct others. That he has Readers, who not only Read Publickly, but are fit to Expound and Interpret. That he has caused a great many Ecclesiastical Authors to be Transcribed; Rebuilt and Beautified a great many Mona∣steries, and other Religious Houses; and likewise erected a Cloyster for the Canons and Prebenda∣ries, and many other things both of Use and Profit. The Second Letter of Leidradus is Consolatory to his Sister upon the Death of her Son and Brother. The Works of Leidradus are in a plain and natural stile, but have nevertheless a great deal of good Sense and very Christian Thoughts. These two last Letters are in the Bibliotheca Patrum, [Tom. 10. p. 232.] Papyrius Massonus and M. Balusius have joyned them to the Works of Agobardus, to whom Leidradus resigned his See to retire into the Monastery of St. Martin at Soissons. There are other Anonymous Answers given to the Questions proposed by Charles the Great in his Letter. All these Authors give an Account of the Ceremonies of Baptism, and put a Mystical Sense upon them, for the Instruction and Edification of Priests and Be∣lievers.

Lewis, Sirnamed the Kind or Godly, was not less Curious than his Father, in endeavouring to un∣derstand the Ceremonies of the Church. Amalarius, a Deacon of Mets, to whom is also given the * 1.17 Title of Abbot in Ancient Manuscripts, and whom some have called Suffragan, Dedicated to him Four Books of the Ecclesiastical Office, in his Preface of which he gives him great Commendations, concluding it with many wishes for his long and happy Life. In these Books he relates the Ceremo∣nies and Customs of the Church, according to the Roman Establishment, and gives Mystical Reasons for them, which are in no wise to be thought the true Reasons for the Institution of these Ceremonies, but Humane Inventions, and for the most part groundless Suppositions, and which I do not think my self obliged to give any Account of; therefore shall only take notice of a few Points of Disci∣pline in them, which are the most considerable. The First Book is about the Service of the Church from Septuagesima to Pentecost: Where he teaches us, that from Septuagesima to Easter, neither Halle∣lujah, nor Gloria in Excelsis were sung in Churches; that Lent began the Wednesday after Quinqua∣gesima. That on Holy-Thursday they Consecrated Oyls for the Sick, for the Catechumens, and those that were Confirmed. That these three Oyls had three different Consecrations. That they mingled Balm with that used for Confirmation. That on Good-Friday they worshipped the Cross, and after they had brought out the Body of Christ (reserved the day before) they mixt it with unconsecrated Wine, which they thought sufficiently consecrated by this Mixture, and so gave it immediately to the People. But he takes notice at the same time, that in the Church of Rome the Priests only Commu∣nicated. That the Service of Saturday was for Saturday Night till Sunday, and that they blest the Wax Candle. He speaks of some of the Ceremonies of Baptism made use of at that time, and principally of the Unction, which was pour'd by the Priests on the top of the Novice's Head. He seems to disapprove of the Fast upon Rogation, which he says, was Instituted by St. Mamertus, and was never in use with the Eastern Churches. In the Second Book he Treats of the Twelve Lessons of Divine Service, of the Fast of the Four Ember Weeks, of the several Orders and * 1.18 Habits of Priests, of which he gives very Mystical significations. The Priest's Vest signifies the right manage∣ment of the Voice, his Albe the subduing of the Passions; his Shooes, upright Walking; his Cote, Good Works; his Stole, the Yoke of Jesus Christ; the Surplise, Readiness to Serve his Neighbour; his Handkerchief, Good Thoughts, and the Pallium, Preaching. The Third Book Treats of the Method observed in Celebrating Mass. Of the Habits, of the Office of the Singers, of the manner of the Bishop's going to the Alter; of the Place where he sits, of the Presenting of the Chalice by the Acolythus to the Subdeacon, who receives it. Of the mixing of the Sacramental Bread with the Con∣secrated Wine; and lastly of the Kiss of Peace. He Discourses at the same time of the Prayers which are said, viz. † 1.19 Of the Introitus, the Kyrie Eleison, the Gloria, the Collects, the Tractus, the Responses, the Hallelujah, the Offertory, the Secret Prayers, the Preface, the Canon, the Lord's Prayer, the Agnus Dei, and the Blessings, which are given at the end of the Mass. He also adds some Reflections upon the Mas∣ses and Service used on All-Saints-Day, the Advent, Christmas-Day, and the Puri∣fication; upon the Hour of Celebrating Mass, and the differences between the Masses for the Dead. We may thereby Learn, that the Practice in his Time of Celebrating Mass was not different from what it is at present. But the Mystical Reflections he makes upon these Cere∣monies and Prayers are so far-fetched and incongruous, that there is no great use to be made of them. He has one particular Observation to himself about the Body of Jesus Christ, which he divides into three states or conditions. 1st. Of Jesus Christ risen again, represented by that part of the Eucharist which is put into the Chalice. 2. Of Jesus Christ upon Earth, represented by that which is consumed by the Priest. And, 3. The Body of Jesus Christ in the Tomb, represented by that part which remains on the Altar. The last Book is upon the other parts of the Divine Service; ‖ 1.20 As the Prayers for the First, Third, Sixth, None hours, Vespers, Complectorum, and Night-Office, as well for Sundays and Holy-days, as other Principal Feasts of the Year. F. Mabillon, in the Second Tome of his Analects, has Printed a Supplement to this Fourth Book at∣tributed to Amalarius. But it appears by Agobard's Book, writ against this Work, that the last Chapter of the 4th book, was the same with the last and 47th in the Vulgar Editions: Also 'tis certain, that this Supplement is rather added by the Monk Ademarus, than the Work of Amalarius. Moreover 'tis plain, this Addition has no Connexion or Conformity with the other parts of that Treatise.

The same Author has Writ another Book, called * 1.21 The Order of the Book of Anthems, where he gives a Reason for the Order he has observed in the Book of Anthems, which he made for the Churches of France, in so disposing the Anthems, Responses and Psalms. Ademarus informs us, That Amalarius was also Author of a Treatise, named A Rule for the Canons and Canonesses, Publish∣ed in the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle, which consists of nothing else but a Collection of Precepts and Canons, gathered from the Fathers and Councils, relating to the Lives of Clergy-men and Monks. The Deacon Florus makes mention of two other Books of Amalarius, made before the former, and adds a third, called An Introduction or Preface to his Works; but this we have altogether lost.

Mon. Balusius amongst the pieces which are at the end of the second Volume of his Capitulary, hath Published some Eclogues of choice Reflexions, upon some places of the Roman Order, con∣cerning the Ceremonies of the Mass, which go under the name of Amalarius: But althô this Work be very full of Reflections, much like those of Amalarius, yet it is very dubious whether they be his or no; for besides that it is not likely he would Treat a second time of the same thing, only after a diffe∣rent manner, of which he had spoken before in the third Book of his Divine Offices. It appears to me, that this Author's Style and Manner of Writing is something different from that of Amalarius.

There are five Letters of this Authors, in the seventh Tome of Dacherius's Spicilegium, [Tom. 6.] The first is directed to Terence, Arch-Bishop of Sens, concerning the manner of Writing the Name of Jesus Christ, together with Terence's Answer. The second is on the same subject, Writ to Jonas Bishop of Orleans, with that Bishop's Answer. The third is to Rancarius Bishop of Noyon, about the meaning of these Words in the Gospel; This is the Cup of my Blood, of the new and eternal Testament.

The fourth is to the Monk Hetton, who was Abbot of Fulda, after Rabanus, about the Word Sera∣phim, whether it be of the Masculine or Neuter Gender; And the fifth is to Gontard, where he treats of this Question, viz. Whether a Person may be allowed to spit just after receiving the Holy Eucharist. It seems by this last Letter, that he believed that there was no harm in spitting some time after, when one cannot easily forbear longer: And if it should happen that without their knowledge or will, they should let drop some of the Eucharist, they need not much trouble themselves about it: Also, That he doubted whether Christs Body once Received did Incorporate with ours, and accom∣pany it to Death; or whether it evaporated through the Por••s, or was exhaled into Air, or conver∣ted into Blood, or went into the Drought; so that this has given occasion to some, to accuse him of the Error of the Starconanists, as Heribald and Rabanus were. The Books of Amalarius were very ill receiv'd in France, and chiefly by the Church of Lions, which would by no means endure them. Agobardus Bishop of this See, wrote three Treatises against his Offices and Book. Florus a Deacon of the same Church, attackt him very vigorously, and accused him in the Councils of Cressi and Thionville: First about his Opinion of the Body of Christ, under three Forms, represented by three pieces of the Sa∣cramental Bread: Secondly about his Moral and Mystical significations of the Ceremonies of the Church, which he lookt upon as false Opinions and Imaginations without Grounds. Thirdly, because he insisted only upon the Roman Order, and Expounded it word for word, altho he knew that this Book was unknown to the Arch-Deacon of Rome, of whom he had many Traditions.

Amalarius thus having attacked the Customs of the Church of Lions, Agobard, who was their Arch-Bishop, Desended them in his Correction of the Anthem Book, to which his Treatise of the manner of singing Psalms in the Church of Lions, serves for a Preface. He observes that the particu∣lar Customs of some Churches ought not to be reflected on. He approves of that of the Church of Lions, in not Singing new and fantastical Psalms, in not making use of Poetry in Divine Services, and by keeping exactly to the Scriptures. This was what Amalarius Quarrel'd with, but Agobard vigo∣rously defended it, and proved it highly reasonable and conformable to the sense of the Church.

This Correction of the Anthem Book is Dedicated to all Believers, but principally to the Singing-men of the Church of Lions: He there gives reasons for the Corrections he has made, and shows that he has only retrencht all that was not taken from the Holy Scriptures, he gives particular reasons for leaving out some Anthems, and proves that they were contrary to the Truth, and did not at all agree with Mysteries. He afterwards Quotes several Places in the Fathers, to show that it is necessary to endeavour to reform the Service, and to retrench those Errors and Abuses which are ••lid into it, either by Malice, Ignorance or Simplicity. He complains that there are some Clergy-men, that spend their Lives more in learning to Sing, than in Studying the Holy Scriptures, and other matters that relate to their Ministry: He says that the Ancients to avoid this disorder, chose rather to repeat the Psalm often, than to charge the minds of those that sung with a great many superfluous pieces. And lastly he concludes, That as the Church has a Mass-Book whose Doctrine is very pure, and a Collection of Lessons taken wholly out of the Holy Scriptures, so it ought also to have an Anthem-Book Purged from all Errors and Humane Inventions, and composed out of nothing but the Bible.

This Treatise is followed by another against some passages of Amalarius's Book, concerning the Divine Service: He reproves what Amalarius maintains; That on the twenty fifth of April might be used Litanies or Rogations, without Fasts and Abstinence; he laught at what Amalarius had asser∣ted, that upon that day they prayed Publickly for Eggs, Bread and Fish. He finds fault with Ama∣larius's Explanation of the passage of St. Paul. He reproves divers expressions and Notions of this Author; as when he says, that the Holy Ghost did drive all Carnal Desires out of the Apostles Hearts: That Man, and by consequence Jesus Christ, was Created out of the four Elements; That Jesus Christ dyed for the just and unjust; That there are two Sacrifices, the one General for all Men, and the other particular only for the Saints: That the first is the death of Jesus Christ, and the second the

Prayers of the just, which are united to the Sacrifices of the Angels: This Treatise of Agobard seems imperfect.

Rabanus or Herbanus, sirnamed Maurus and Magnentius, has made himself very famous by his * 1.22 Works, which he has Written concerning the Ceremonies and Discipline of the Church. He was born at Mayence, in the year 788. He was put very young into the Monastery of Fulda, where he was brought up; from thence he was sent to Tours, where he Study'd some time under the famous Alcain: He returned afterwards into Germany to his Monastery, where he was entrusted with the Government of the younger Monks, and was afterwards ordain'd Priest in the year 814. and at last chosen Abbot of Fulda in 822. After having managed this charge twenty years, he voluntarily quit∣ted it to satisfie his Monks, who accused him, that he applied himself too much to Study, and neg∣lected the affairs of the Monastery. He retired to the Mount of St. Peter, and was at last chosen Arch-Bishop of Mayence, in the year 847. He held a Council the same year for the Refor∣mation of Disc••pline, be Condemned Gotescalcus a Monk of Corbey in another Council, and sent him to Hincmarus Arch-Bishop of Rheims; he dyed in the year 856.

He excell'd all in the common Learning of those times, such as expounding the Principles of Arts, as the Rules of Grammar and Rhetorick; in a readiness of Collecting from the Fathers of the Church, common places upon the Holy Scriptures. In Inventing Allegories upon the Histories of the Bible; in the Exposition of the Mystical Reasons of the Ceremonies; in a knack of turning Prose into Verse, and in the manner of reducing his common places into Precepts and Instructions. All the Works of R••banus, are of this kind.

I shall not speak of the Grammar that is attributed to him, and which is nothing else but an Ex∣tract of Priscian, because these kind of Works do not relate to our Subject; and that those that have writ his Life, and the Catalogue of his Books, have not mentioned it.

His Treatise, De Universo▪ or of the signification and propriety of Words, composed for Haymon Bishop of Halb••rstat, and sent to Lewis the Godly, is nothing but a Collection of common Places, about a great number of things. It is divided into twenty two Books, of which there are but the five first, which have any relation to Ecclesiastical Affairs, the others being all about the Sciences and pro∣fane Arts. The fir•••• Book is concerning the three Persons in the Godhead; in the first Chapter he ex∣plains the several names of God, and gives the sence of such Expressions in the Scripture, as attri∣butes the Members and Actions of Man to him. In the second he considers the different Names which are given to the Son of God, in the Old and New Testament. In the third he explains what relates to the Holy Ghost, which he affirms to proceed from the Father and the Son. In the fourth he treats of the Mystery of the Trinity, and in the last of the Names of Angels, and of their dif∣ferent Orders. In the second and third Book he searches into the Significations of the Names of the Patriarchs and Prophets, and other remarkable Persons in the Old Law. The fourth concerns the Church only; he there Explains the Names and Parables in the New Testament, he takes Notice of the Signification and Etimology of the Words which are made use of in the Affairs of the Church, such as Clerk, Bishop, Martyr, &c. Also he distinguishes the different sorts of Monks: he speaks of Heresies, and concludes with an Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church, which is taken, or ra∣ther Copy'd out of the Treatise of Gennadius, upon Ecclesiastical Opinions. In the fifth he Discour∣ses of the Books of the Holy Scriptures; he makes a Catalogue of them, and adds moreover to those the Church has received as Canonical, some that have not been allowed by the Canon of the Jews. He sets down those that he believes to have been the Authors of the Old and New Testa∣ment, and makes an Abbridgment of their Works. He speaks also of the Restoration of the Holy Books by Esdras, of the Libraries of the Version of the Septuagint, and of other Versions of the Holy Scriptures; ••e extreamly commends that of St. Jerom, and prefers it before all others, as being the most literal and clear. Verboram tenacior & perspicuitate Sententiae Clarior. He Treats also in the same Book of other Ecclesiastical Writings of Canons, or of Concordances of the Evangelists, of Defini••ions of General Councils, and of Ecclesiastical Offices. He comes at last to the Sacra∣ments, and other means of Sanctifying us. He says, That Sacraments are things which ought to be received Holily; That Baptism, Chrism, the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, are called Sacra∣ments, because the Divine Grace works in them by the Visible Signs; that they have their Effect, whether they be Administred by good or bad Men; that Baptism remits Sins; that there are seve∣ral sorts of Baptisms, as that of the Holy Ghost, and that of Martyrdome, &c. That there are in the Church other means of purifying our selves from our Sins, and principally Confession, Penance and Tears; that Chrism or Unction Sanctifies us, and that the Priest lays his hands upon us to endue us with the Holy Ghost; That as to the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, God has chosen Bread and Wine to shew us that his Body and his Blood is for our common Nourishment; That the Sacraments g••ve Life to some and Death to others, because all receive them, tho few have the virtue and benefit of them. He speaks lastly of Exorcisms, the Creed, the Lords Prayer, Lent, publick Penance, and Littanies or Processions.

Rabanus's Work in Praise of the Holy Cross, is of a very particular kind; it must needs have cost him a great deal of pains and study, tho it be but of little use. The body of the Work is composed 〈◊〉〈◊〉 letters divided from one another, and range over against one another in lines. In reading from the right hand to the left, every line contains an Hexameter Verse. These Letters thus rang'd in lines, make a sort of a draught or platform, on which there are Figures or Simbols of the Cross Painted; the letters enclosed in these Figures make also Verses, which have some relation to the Figure. There are 28 Figures in 28 Tables, the Verses are Copy'd entire; afterwards at the

end of every Table, and the Mystery explained in Prose. The first Table contains the Image of Christ, extending his Arms in the form of a Cross. The 47 Verses read long-ways, from the right Hand to the left, show the several Names that have been given to Christ, in the Old and New Te∣stament. The Letters compriz'd in the draught of the Figure Compose other Verses; as for Exam∣ple, Those that meet i•• the Crown about his Head, read round, make exactly this Verse, Rex Regum Dominus Dominantium. In the other Tables he represents many different things upon the Cross, as the Angels, the Virtues, the Elements, Ciphers, Mystical Numbers, Gifts of the Holy Ghost, the Be∣atitudes, Books of Moses, Names of Adam, Allelujah, Amen, &c. In the last he represents a Cross, at the foot of which is Painted a Monk Worshipping it, and in it these Words, Rabanum memet cle∣mens rogo, Christe tuere, O Pie, Judicio. This first Book is explained by a second, which contains 28 Chapters in Prose. Rabanus undertook this Work at thirty years of Age, and presented it a great while afterwards to Gregory the Fourth, to whom it was recommended as a wonderful piece of Art by Alcuinus, who had been Rabanus's Master.

These are the Contents of the first Tome of Rabanus's Works; the second consists of four Books of Commentaries upon Genesis, four upon Exodus, seven upon Leviticus, with an Abridgment of them, by Strabo his Scholar, four upon Numbers, and as many upon Deuteronomy. All these Com∣mentaries are Dedicated to Freculphus Bishop of Lysieux, at whose desire he undertook them. Ra∣banus in his Epistle entreats him to Examine them; and tells him, That he ought not to expect any thing extraordinary from one that was more fit to Work for his Living, than to write Books for the use of the Learned, and besides whose charge of Abbot allowed him but little Leisure. The third Tome contains two Books of Commentaries upon Judges, Dedicated to Humbertus Bishop of Wirtz∣bourg. One on the History of Ruth, four on the four Books of Kings, Dedicated to Hilduin, four others upon the two Books of Chronicles, Dedicated to Lewis Emperour of Germany. One Commen∣tary upon the History of Judith, and another upon Hester. These two are Dedicated to the Empress Judith. A Comment upon the Canticles, which is Composed into Morning Hymns, for every day of the Week, Dedicated to Lewis King of Germany. Three Books of Commentaries on the Proverbs of Solomon, as many on the Book of Wisdom, and two upon Ecclesiastes. These two last are Dedi∣cated to Otgarus Arch-Bishop of Mayence. The fourth Tome consists of nineteen Books of Commen∣taries upon the Prophesie of Jeremiah and his Lamentations, twenty upon Ezekiel, Dedicated to the Emperour Lotharius. And two more on the two Books of Maccabees; the first is to Lewis King of Germany, and the other to Geroldus Arch-Deacon of that Kings Chappel. The fifth Tome contains eight Books of Commentaries upon the Gospel of St. Matthew, Directed to Aistulphus Arch-Bishop of Mayence: and lastly, thirty Books of Commentaries upon the Epistles of St. Paul, written at the request of Lupus of Ferrara, and Dedicated to the Bishop Samuel. Many Homilies upon the Sundays, Feasts and Holydays of the year, and also upon divers points of Morality, Dedicated to Aistulphus and Lotharius. A Treatise of Allegories upon all the Scripture, where, after having explained the dif∣ference between Tropology, Analogy, and Allegory; he ranks in Alphabetical Order, many words of the Holy Scriptures, to all which he gives an Allegorical or Mystical Sense.

Those Authors that have mentioned Rabanus's Works, add to these several other Commentaries, upon Joshua, Esdras, Tobit, Job, the Psalms, Isaiah, Daniel, the Minor Prophets, the Gospels of St. Mark. St. Luke, and St. John, the Acts of the Apostles, and Canonical Epistles, and some others which have never yet been Printed. All these Commentaries consists of nothing else but Collecti∣ons out of other Mens Works, which be Copy'd from them without any exact choice or distinction.

The Sixth Tome of Rabanus's Works contains many Books; the first and most considerable of all these, is his Treatise of Instruction of Clerks, divided into three Books. He Compos'd it for the Monks of Fulda, who propounded to him divers questions about their Duty, and Dedicated it in the year 819. to Aistulphus Arch-Bishop of Mayence. The first Book treats of the several Ecclesiasti∣cal Degrees and Habits of Clergy-men; also of the four Sacraments of the Church, as Baptism, Chrism, the Body and Blood of Christ, and the Service of the Mass according to the Roman Or∣der. The second is upon the Liturgy it self, the Canonical Hours, Fasts, Confessions, Penance, Holy-days, the rule of Faith, and about Heresies; the last is of Ecclesiastical Knowledge and Studies.

In the first, after having observed that the Church is an Assembly of Believers, he divides it into three sorts of Members; first Lay-men, secondly Monks, and thirdly Clerks: He observes, That the Clergy are admitted into it by Shaving the Crown, which is a Ceremony that demonstrates, that they ought then to part with all Vice and Disorderly Living. It seems they did not then content themselves to cut off a little Hair, but Shav'd all the top of their Heads, leaving only a circle round about, which Rabanus believes to have been a mark of the Royalty of the Christian Priest-hood. He reckons up eight Ecclesiastical Orders; the Porter, the Querister, the Reader, the Exor∣cist, the Acolythus; the Sub-deacon, the Deacon, the Priest, and Bishop. He says, That this last must be Ordained, not by one Bishop only, but by all those of his Province; least so great Power being trusted to a single Person, he should undertake any thing prejudicial to the Faith. He adds, That in Consecrating him he has a Staff put into his Hand to admonish, that he is not only to Guide but Correct the People committed to his charge, and a Ring to denote either the Honour of the Priesthood, or the Secrets he is to keep. He counts three sorts of Bishops; first Patriarchs, secondly Arch-Bishops or Metropolitans, and thirdly single Bishops. He adds moreover Suffragans, which he compares to Christs Disciples, who could do nothing without their Masters Orders. These sorts of Bishops were Establish'd for the sake of the Poor in the Country, that they might not be depriv'd

of Confirmation, which these Suffragans had power to confer upon them, tho they were Ordained by one Bishop onely, as the Priests are. He tells us, that these last were also called Bishops, and that they had the power almost equal to theirs, for they could Consecrate the Eucharist confer Bap∣tism, and Preach. But nevertheless they had not the chief Dignity of Priesthood, Pontificatus Api∣cem, since they could not anoint the Forehead with Chrism, and bestow the Holy Ghost, which two only belong to the Bishops, as it appears by the Acts of the Apostles; neither can they confer Holy Orders, which is also reserved to the Bishops. The Deacons are Ministers of Sacred Things, they have right to Baptise, they are necessary in the service of the Altar, for the Priest cannot take the Chalice from thence, but must receive it from the Hands of the Deacon. The Sub-deacons are un∣der them; these take the Offerings of the People, and carry them to the Deacons who place them upon the Altar; they are oblig'd to live unmarried: These are not Ordain'd by Imposition of Hands, but only by receiving the Cover and Chalice from the Hands of the Bishop; and the Chri∣stal Bottle and Napkin from the Arch-Deacon. He says nothing particular of the lesser and infe∣riour Orders. I shall pass by the Remarks he makes upon the likeness of our Ministers with those of the Old Testament, and the Mystical significations he gives to the Bishops Habits. To come to what he teaches concerning the Sacraments, He says, That Baptism, Chrism, and the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ are called Sacraments; because that under the Vail of Corporal things, the Divine Power produces Salvation and Grace, after a secret manner by the power of the Holy Ghost, which works this Effect, insomuch that they are equally Efficatious, whether they be Administred by the Good or the Bad. That Baptism is the first, because it must be received before Confirmation, and before the Receiving the Body and Blood of our Lord. That in this Sacrament Men are dipt in Water, to denote, that as Water outwardly purifies the Body, so Grace inwardly does the Soul, into which the Holy Ghost descends. He relates afterwards the Order of Administration, and the Ceremonies of Baptism; and from thence passing to Confirmation, he Remarks, that the Bishop dispenses the Holy Ghost by Imposition of his Hands; and that he Anoints the Believer a second time with the same Chrism the Priest had done before, with this difference only, that his Anointing is on the Forehead, whereas the Priest's was on the Crown of the Head. He attributes to this last Unction the Sanctification and Grace of the Holy Ghost. At last speaking of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, which he considers as two different Sacraments. He asks the Question, Why Jesus Christ has comprehended the Mystery of his Body and Blood under things which we eat and drink? And why of all the sorts of Food we eat, he has made choice of Bread and Wine? To which he Answers, That Jesus Christ has given us his Body and Blood in the form of Nourishment, because effectively his Flesh is such and his Blood Drink. That he hath made use of the Fruits of Earth, because he was upon Earth, and that he has chosen Bread and Wine to accomplish the Sacrifice of Melchisidech, and to show that as Bread and Wine consists of many Particles, which together make but one Substance, so we are all United into the same Church by the same Charity, being all made Members of the same Body by this Sacrament. He adds, That this Sacrament serves for Nourish∣ment to our Flesh, and converts itself into our Substance, and that by vertue of this Sacrament we are changed into Jesus Christ. That we participate of his Spirit and Grace; and in a word, that we become his very Members. That the Bread which is made use of is without Leaven, to denote, that those which approach it ought to be exempt from all Impurities. That Water is mixt with the Wine, because we read in the Gospel, That Blood and Water came out of the Side of our Saviour. And that as it is good for them that are not separated from it by their Sins, often to approach this Sacrament, so it is very dangerous for such as have committed such Crimes as debar them from it, to receive it before they have Repented. After having treated of the Sacraments, he speaks of the Celebration of Mass, which he believes to have been so called, because of the dismissing of the Ca∣techumens with these words, Ita Missa est. He says, That the Mass is a Sacrifice which the Priest offers to God, instituted by Jesus Christ, practised by the Apostles, and used by all the Church. He acknowledges that at first they did not Sing as they do at present; but he believes they read the Go∣spel and the Epistles of the Apostles; he ends this Book with a short Exposition of the Ceremonies and Prayers of the Mass.

In the second Book after, he hath spoken of the Hours for Divine Service, and the different sorts of Prayer. He treats of the Confession, the Litanies or publick Prayers, and the divers kinds of Fasts. He distinguishes three sorts of Lent; the first, that which precedes Easter; the second, the Fast observed after Pentecost; and the third, that which begins in November and ends at Christmas-day. He notes, that the custom of his time was to Fast Friday and Saturday. He does not forget to speak of the Fasts of the four Ember-weeks. He approves of other Fasts ordered by the Bishop on any particular occasion, or practis'd thrô Devotion by Christians. In speaking of abstaining from Wine and Flesh, he observes, that Birds are allowed to those who are forbid to eat of any four-foot∣ed Creature, because that 'tis thought, they were formed out of Water as well as Fish.

He distinguishes two different sorts of Alms, and ranks amongst this Number the good Works we do for our Salvation, which are as Alms we bestow upon our selves. He defines Penance a Punish∣ment. by which a Man corrects himself for what he has done amiss. He says, that Penitents let their Hair and Beards grow, wear Sack-cloth, throw themselves on their Faces on the Ground, and besprinkle their Bodies with Ashes. That Repentance is a second remedy for our Sins, after Baptism. That to effect a true Repentance, it does not suffice only to bewail ones Sins past, but we must never commit them again. That this is the satisfaction, followed by Reconciliation. That Penance and Reconciliation ought to be publick, for publick Transgressions; but as to those whose Sins are

concealed, and who have confest them secretly to a Priest or a Bishop, they may do Private Penance, such as the Priest or Bishop will order; and afterwards be reconciled when they have performed their Penance. That the ordinary time for Reconciliation is Holy-Thursday, but Absolution may be granted at other times to those that are in danger of their Lives. He afterwards Treats copiously of the Solemn Celebration of Feasts and Sundays. He speaks by the by of the Oblation of the Sacri∣fice of the Mass for the Dead, of the Dedicating of Churches, the Prayers of Divine Service, the Songs, the Psalms, Hymns, Anthems, Responses, and Lessons. He makes a Catalogue of Cano∣nical Books, which comprehends all that are at present acknowledged for such. He tells you those that he believes to have been Authors of the greatest part of them. He speaks of Ecclesiastical Be∣nedictions, viz. That of Oyl, and that of Salt and Water; which he says, are made use of to com∣fort the Sick against the Illusions of the Devil, to heal the Flock, and to drive away Distempers. At last, having spoken of the Apostles Creed, and given an Abridgment of the Doctrines agreeable to the Faith, he sets down a very imperfect Catalogue of Heresies, in which he forgets some, and reckons others which are altogether unknown; as the Canonians and Metangismonites.

The last Book is concerning the Learning of Clergy-Men. He says, they are not allowed to be ignorant of any thing they should teach others, and which is necessary to render them capable of In∣structing them. That they ought to understand very well the Holy Scriptures, not only the Histori∣cal part, but be able to Expound the Figures and Mystical Sense of it. That it is good for them to have a Tincture of other Arts and Sciences. That they be Civil and Regular in their Manners, and Affable and Courteous in their Speech. That they be of an Acute Judgment, and know how to apply proper Remedies to the different Diseases of the Soul. He afterwards makes use of the words of St. Gregory the Great, to Reprove those who undertake to teach others, and Cure Souls, without being very well instructed in their Duty themselves: I mean such as enter into the Ministry meerly through the Prospect of Interest or Ambition, and those that dishonour God by an Irregular Life, whose Deportment does not answer their Doctrine. He says, That the Grounds and Perfection of Wisdom is the Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, which is an Emanation of the Eternal Wis∣dom of God, and a Participation of his Truth. That all the Wisdom and Truth that Men have, and all that is to be found Profitable in Profane Writers, is to be attributed to the Divine Wisdom, which gave it a beginning. That the Scripture has its Obscurities, which are good to exercise Mens wits: But there are scarce any Truths contained in one place, which are not explained in another, Nihil autem de illis obscuritatibus eruitur quod non plenissimè dictum alibi reperiatur. This is taken from St. Austin's Treatise of Christian Doctrine, as well as the rest of this Book; which is nothing but an Extract from this Father, excepting what he says upon the Seven Liberal Arts, upon which he quotes a passage taken out of the Pastoral of St. Gregory.

The Book of Orders, Holy Sacraments, and Priests Habits, which followeth this, is almost no∣thing else but a Copy of the first of the three foregoing Books: It is very near the same with the three Books of Ecclesiastical Discipline; for the two first are nothing but an Abridgment of those of the Instruction of Clerks, to which he has added some passages out of St. Austin. In the last, which is about the Christian Warfare, he Treats of Vertues and Vices.

* 1.23 The two Books dedicated to the Abbot Bonosus, of which the first is about the Vision of God, and the second upon Penance, are made up of passages out of the Fathers upon these Subjects.

The three Books of Questions about the Rules of Penance, do not belong to Rabanus. The first and second are Halitgarius's, Bishop of Cambray, and the third an unknown Author's.

The three Books of Vertues and Vices belong to the same Halitgarius, who has also made a Peni∣tential at the Request of Ebbo, Arch-Bishop of Rheims, divided into Five Books, and published un∣der his Name by Canisius. These are not much different from the Five Books, which here bear the Name of Rabanus.

But the Penetential dedicated to Otgarus, Arch-Bishop of Mayence, is certainly the Work of Raba∣nus, which he composed towards the Year 841, before he was Bishop of Mayence. [This Tract is Printed alone at Venice, 1584. Quarto.]

The Name of a Penitential has also been given to the Letter which he wrote to Heribaldus, Bishop of Auxerre, published by Stewart in his Addition to the Antiquities of Canisius [at Ingolstadt, 1616.] and by M. Balusius, at the end of Regino, [at Paris, 1671.] But this is a Canonical Letter, in An∣swer to some Questions propounded by that Bishop. It is divided into Articles, and quoted by Regino and the Collectors of Canons. He there gathers together many Canons concerning the Penances of Homicides, Adulterers, Forsworn People, Sorcerers; and about the Punishments of those that com∣mit any great Crimes after they are admitted into Holy Orders, and about other Circumstances of Penance and Absolution. But towards the end he Treats about two Questions much debated in his Time. The First about the Eucharist, whether it goes into the Draught? A Question that has been spoken of before. And the Second about Ebbo, Old Arch-Bishop of Rheims, who after his Deposition, retired to Hildesheim in Saxony, where he exercised his Episcopal Functions. He says, that he knows not whether he was justly or unjustly Deposed; but nevertheless that it did not hinder him from doing the Duty of that Office: For he has heard that he was afterwards re-established by the Holy See. He adds, That he had lately written thereupon to Hinemarus, after he understood that he had removed from the Priesthood and Clerkship, all those who had been ordained by Ebbo after his being deposed. This Letter of Rabanus was written about the Year 853. a long time after the Peneten∣tial, of which we have spoken before.

Rabanus's Letter to Humbert, about the Degrees of Consanguinity, within which 'tis forbidden to Contract Marriage, is also a Work of the same Nature. In it after he hath related the Opinions of Theodorus, Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, and Isidorus, he says, 'tis his Judgment, that a Man may Marry after the fifth Degree of Consanguinity. And that if there be any Marriages found within that Degree, without their knowledge they were so near of Kin, they might be suffered to continue married, only enjoyning them Penance, and exhorting them to live in Abstinence from the Marriage-Bed.

Humbertus not being satisfied with this short Answer, sent him some new Questions about this Sub∣ject; and also askt him what he thought of Fortune-tellers Divinations? Rabanus Answers him in a longer Letter, in which he shews, that he was in the right to make use of the Chapter in Leviticus to Regulate the Degrees of Consanguinity, within which it is forbidden to Marry: Because that this Law related to Manners, and that the Precepts of this kind have not been abolisht by Jesus Christ. He afterwards relates a passage of St. Austin, which explains the passage of Leviticus. Another passage in the Answer of St. Gregory to Austin the Monk; and a great many Canons concerning the Degrees of Consanguinity, in which it is forbidden to Contract Marriage. In the Second Part, after having spoken of the Artifices of Magicians or Sorcerers, he concludes, That we ought to take care how we apply our selves to them for the Cure of any Distemper, or to find things that are stollen or lost.

In his Book, Of the Soul, he treats briefly, contrary to his ordinary Custom, about such Questi∣ons that respect the Original and Nature of our Souls. He says also, that it is a disputable Point, whe∣ther God created it to be infused into our Bodies, or whether it be produced from the Souls of our Fathers and Mothers. He maintains, that it is altogether Spiritual, and has no particular Figure, although its principal seat be in the Head. He says, it is not less in Infants than more aged Persons; and that it is of the same Nature in all Men, though the inequality of Organs hinders it from act∣ing every where alike. He Treats afterwards of the Principal Vertues of the Soul, of the Form of the Body, and of the Senses.

The Treatise of the Rise, Life, and Manners of Anti-Christ, contains a Description of his Life and Actions, framed out of what is said of him in the Holy Scriptures: That he should be of the Race of the Jews, and of the Tribe of Dan: That he should be born according to the order of Na∣ture, of a Father and Mother: That at the very Minute of his Conception the Devil should enter into his Body, and always dwell there: That he should be born in Babylon: That he should extend his Dominion to a great distance. That he should do Signs and Prodigies. That he should stir up a great Persecution against all Christians. That when he should come, the Roman Empire would be entirely ruined, and Judgment would be at hand. That he should call himself Christ, and draw all the Jews after him. That he should also sit in the Temple of God, that is to say, the Church. That he should have Elias and Enoch for his fore-runners: That they should be killed after three Years and a half's Preaching. That the great Persecution of Anti-Christ should commence from their Death, and that it should continue three Years and an half; but that although the Anger of God should be enflamed against him, and that he should be slain by Jesus Christ, or the Angel Mi∣chael armed with his Power. That 'tis thought this shall be on the Mount of Olives. That the Judg∣ment shall not follow his Death immediately, but that God should grant some time to those that have been seduced, to Repent, and acknowledge their Transgressions.

At the end of these Works we find Rabanus's Verses, in which he confesses, that his Writings are only Collections and Composures out of others Writings.

The Martyrology attributed to Rabanus, is very short, and seems to be a Genuine Piece: It has already been published by Canisius, [Antiq. Lect. Tom. VI.] We owe to the Jesuit Brouverus the Collection of Rabanus's Poetry, where there is Sence and Wit, although it is every where full of Bar∣barous Terms, and have neither Elegance nor Politeness.

The Commentary upon the Rules of St. Benedict, attributed to Rabanus, belongs to the Abbot Smaragdus, as we have noted before.

The List of some Latin words rendred into High Dutch Terms, and the Figures of the Letters or Characters of the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and Tutonick Tongues, are taken from the Second Tome of the History of Germany, composed by Goldastius, which are such Ancient Pieces, that they may very well be attributed to Rabanus. These are the whole Contents of the Six Tomes of this Author, Printed at Antwerp in the Year 1626. bound in Three Volumes in Folio. [And by the Care of Geor∣gius Colvenerius, at Colen, 1627. Fol. Vol. 3.]

There have been since published some other Works of Rabanus. For without reckoning the three Letters of Predestination and Grace, written against Gotescalcus, and published by Sirmondus [at Paris, 1647. Octavo.] of which we have spoken. M. Balusius has given us in the last Edition of the Works of M. de Marca, two Treatises, which without doubt do belong to Rabanus, and which are most elaborate, useful, and best Written than any of his other Works. The first is Dedicated to Drogo Bishop of Mets, which is concerning Suffragans. Opinions were then divided in the Gallican Church, about the Dignity and Power of Suffragans; some affirmed they were real Bishops by their Ordina∣tion, and that they might ordain Priests and Deacons, Confirm, Consecrate Altars, and do all the Office of a Bishop: But others denied this, and affirmed that their Ordinations and Confirmations were null and void. Charles the Great consulted Pope Leo the Third upon this Question, who An∣swered. That he was certain that Suffragans had not this Power, and that all they had done belong∣ing to Bishops, was ipso facto void, and that they ought to be deprived of any such Power. The Council of Ratisbon followed the Popes Advice, and ordered them to remain in the rank of Priests.

This Decision did not hinder, but that there were yet Suffragans in many Diocesses, and that the Bishops did still allow them Privileges which belonged only to them. There has always been many Churches, and chiefly in Italy and Spain, where Suffragans have been esteemed no more than Ordi∣nary Priests, where they Re-ordained such as were made Priests or Deacons by them, Confirmed anew those they had been Confirmed by, and Consecrated anew such Churches as they had Consecrated. Rabanus having understood this, undertook to defend the Suffragans. He says, that their Order had its Original from the times of the Apostles; and that they had such Assistants who could Ordain and do the same Offices with them. He believes that St. Linus and St. Cletus were Suffragans to St. Peter and St. Paul in the Church of Rome. He accuses those Bishops that underva∣lue Suffragans, and who look upon them no more than Ordinary Priests, of overthrowing the Order by their Ambition. He endeavours to prove by the Canons of the Councils of Ancyra and Antioch, that Suffragans might Ordain thro the permission of their Bishops, and that they have received the Episcopal Consecration and Ordination. He asserts, that if Suffragans had not this Right, they would be of no use to the Bishops as they now are: And upon what was objected against him, that it is said in the Acts, that the Apostles themselves had been sent into Samaria, to bestow the Holy Ghost on those that were newly Baptiz'd; He answered, that the Apostles were sent thither, because there was then no Suffragan at Samaria but only the Deacon Philip, who had Baptiz'd them. The rest of the Treatise contains some Admonitions to the Bishops about Humility.

The other Treatise of Rabanus, Publisht by M. Balusius, is concerning the respect Children owe to their Parents, and Subjects to their Prince: It was writ upon the occasion of the Conspiracy of Lewis the Godlie's Children against their Father. Rabanus there quotes several places in the Scrip∣ture, which prove, that every one ought to obey his Prince and his Parents. He confirms these Truths by Examples, and shows in particular, that it was never permitted to a Subject, to take Arms against his Sovereign upon what account soever. He mightily condemns those children who would deprive their Parents of their Estates. He speaks against unjust and rash Judgments, openly blaming that which the Bishops pronounc't against Lewis the Godly. He shows plainly that Clergy-men ought not to meddle with Secular or Temporal Affairs. He maintains, that none can Condemn or put to publick Penance, a Sinner that accuses himself, unless he be otherwise Convicted. He adds, that those that are sorry for their Sins and are converted, deserve forgivness. At last addressing himself to the Emperour, he exhorts him to despise the false Judgments given against him; and advertises him, that he may nevertheless with good Works * 1.24 merit Heaven. He Counsels him, not to be surprized at the attempts of his Enemies, but to be encourag'd by the truth of the Gospel, and to believe in his Judge and his King, who has given him a Crown on Earth, and promised him one in Heaven. He tells him, that if the Conspiracy of his Enemies have done him any wrong he should trouble himself but little about it, but be thankful to his Defender and Saviour Jesus Christ, who afflicts nd chastizes all those that he loves. He exhorts him in fine, not to seek after any Re∣venge, but heartily to forgive all such as have offended him. This Treatise is Elegant and well Written.

M. Balusius, has also Published in the first Tome of his Miscellaneous Works, his Trea∣tise about the account of Time, directed to Macarius. Rabanus writ this when he was a private Monk, in the year 820. This Book is written by way of Questions and Answers. It treats of all that relates to the Kalendar; as Days, Months, Years, Epacts, Cycles and Easter. These Matters, tho they be very obscure, are here treated of with a great deal of Exactness and Method.

The same M. Balusius hath put out in another of his Works, (viz. his Collection of some ancient Acts, which he has put at the end of his Capitularies) a Letter of Rabanus's to Regenbaldus, Suffragan of Mayence, about some Questions, that Regenbaldus had propounded to him, about several cases. The first is concerning a Person who having beaten his Wife, had caused her to bring forth a dead Child. He answers, he ought to be dealt with as a Man-slayer. The second is about a Person, who having been bit by a Dog, applyed immediately some of his Liver to the Wound, as most likely to heal it. He excuses him that did this through Ignorance; but he says, he ought to be for∣warn'd of committing the like again. The third is concerning such as are guilty of the Sin of Bestiality. He condemns them to suffer the Punishments specified in the ancient Canons. The fourth is, Whe∣ther it be lawful to eat the Calves brought forth by Cows polluted with the Abominations of Men? He Answers, that that is not forbid to his knowledge. The fifth is concerning the Penance of those that have voluntarily, involuntarily, or otherwise killed their Parents and other Relations. He refers these to what has been said about Homicides. In the Conclusion he tells this Suffragan, that he may moderate Canonical Punishments with Prudence and Discretion.

There is at the end of the eight Volume of Councils, in the last Edition, another Letter of Ra∣banus's to the same Reginbold or Reginbald, about other questions of like nature with the former. The first is concerning those that carry away and sell Christians to Pagans. He Answers, that they ought to be subjected to the Penance for Homicides. The second is about Infants, who are stifled by lying with their Fathers and Mothers. He says, that although these Children came by their Death, contrary to the knowledge of them that were the cause of it; nevertheless they ought not to be exempt from doing some Penance; and if they knew it, they ought to have been punisht as Homicides. The third is about the degrees of Consanguinity, within which it is forbid to Marry. He sends him upon this question, the letter which he writ to Humbert. The fourth is concerning the

Sins of Fornication or Adultery amongst Relations; Rabanus hereupon quotes divers Canons. The fifth is, whether it be lawful to Pray for a dead Slave, who had run away from his Master. Raba∣nus says, that we ought not to refuse to Pray for him, if he had committed no other Crime; but withal, that we ought to admonish other Slaves not to commit the like. The sixth is concerning a Man, who pleading to be a Priest, althó he was none, had Administred the Sacrament of Baptism. Rabanus says, it ought not to be reiterated, if it was Conferred in the Name of the Holy Trinity. The last is about those that eat Flesh in Lent, and who swear by Relicks. Rabanus answers, that they do very ill, and that they ought to be made to do Penance for their Crime.

Walafridus Strabo, (so called as some think, because he was Squint-Ey'd) a Monk of Fulda, a Scholar of Rabanus; afterwards Dean of St. Gallus, and Abbot of Richenou; followed and imitated * 1.25 his Master, not only i•• Composing a Glosse upon the whole Bible, Collected principally out of his Commentaries: but also in making a Treatise about the Beginning and Progress of Divine Wor∣ship, Dedicated to Reginbert, in which he explains particularly what relates to the Ceremonies of the Church. This Work has been Printed in the Collections of Writers concerning Divine Offices, [by Cochlaeus at Mentz, 1549. and Hittorpius at Paris, 1610.] and also in the Bibliotheca Patrum, [Tom XV.] The principal Points which he handles in this Book are these:

He says about the Original of Altars and Temples, that Noah, Abraham and Isaac, erected them in Honour of God. That Moses was the first that Built a Tabernacle for the People to Wor∣ship God in. That Solomon afterwards Built a Temple, which was preserved a great while by the Jews. That Pagans, and Authors of false Religions, have imitated in this the Worship of the True, in Honouring Devils and False Gods with the like Ceremonies. That when Christians, who are the true Worshippers of God in Spirit and Truth, began to set up Places for their Worship, they always sought out pure places, distant from the noise and hubbub of the World; where they might quietly offer God their Prayers, Celebrate the Holy Mysteries, and Comfort one another. That they have sometimes made use of their houses for that purpose, but the number of them encreasing, they were for∣ced to build Churches. That oftentimes to avoid Persecution, they have met together in Caves, Ca∣verns, Church-yards, and other private places; but at length, Religion being fully establisht, they Built new Churches, and turn'd the Temples of their False Gods, into those of the True. That they then did not much mind in what Scituation their Churches were built, although the common custom has been since, to turn towards the East to Pray. That at first they had no Signal to call them to the Assemblies. That some were led thither by their Devotion, others had notice of the Day and Hour at their last Meeting, and others by reading it upon certain Tables, set up in their Assemblies for that purpose. That they afterwards made use of an Horn and Trumpet, and at last of Bells, the larger of which are called Campanae, and the lesser Nolae; so named from the Town of Nola, where they were first used. Having explained the names of Church, Temple, Basilick, and their parts, together with the Barbarous name of the Osticon, he goes on to Discourse of Images, the Ab∣stracts of which, I shall for some reasons forbear to set down here.

He proves afterwards, that Altars ought to be Consecrated, and so passes from the material parts of Churches, to what is to be done in them. He says, that Praises ought there to be Sung to God, the Gospel Preacht, and Baptism Administred. That a great deal of Care ought to be taken, to keep them from Profane uses. That Prayers there ought to be short and pure, and accompany'd with Tears; and that they ought to proceed from Hearts worthy to be the Habitation of God, who loves the Offe•…•… of Virtues, better then any Corporeal Gifts. That nevertheless God accepted the Oblations of •…•…archs, and the Sacrifices of the Jews, till such time as Christ, which they represented, w••s 〈◊〉〈◊〉 That he by his coming, has caused all Sacrifices to cease, and has establish∣ed new Mysteri•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 given the Sacrament of his Body and Blood to his Disciples; and com∣manded them at 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••ame time to Celebrate it in Commemoration of his Passion. That he has chosen for this Mystery, the Species of Bread and Wine, to signify the Union betwixt the Head and its Members; and that Water is mixt with the Wine, to shew, that the People ought not to be se∣parated from Jesus Christ. That these Mysteries are called Sacraments, because of the Secret Vir∣tue, by which they work our Sanctification. That it is for this reason, that such as cease to be Mem∣bers of Jesus Christ, by committing Capital Crimes, are excluded from these Sacraments, for fear that if they should approach them, they should be made worse, or be Corporally punisht: And to the end, that the terrour of this Separation might engage them to Repentance; he takes notice, that heretofore other things than Bread and Wine were offered upon the Altar; and that is some places at Easter, they Sacrific'd a Lamb, which was laid upon the Altar, or the side of it, and which they afterwards eat; but he altogether disapproves of this Practice. He afterwards shews there was great reason, that the Eucharist should be received in Lent.

As to what relates to frequent Communion, he observes, that some have thought it enough to Communicate once a year, and that others Communicated every Sunday, and many upon all Holy-days; that afterwards they added some solemn days for Fasting. He approves of their Practice, that Communicate and Say Mass every day, provided they be free from great Sins. He adds also, that there were some Priests that would not Celebrate Mass above once a day, and that there were others, who believed themselves obliged to say it three or four times; for according to the Church of Rome, there are sometimes two or three Masses appointed for one day, as for Christmas-day, and some Feasts of Saints. He gives every Priest the liberty of using them as they think fit, provided they don't condemn each others Practice. As to the Prayers of the Mass, he says, that no body knows by whom they were established, as they now are; and that the Apostles Celebrated it, after a plainer

and most unaffected manner: Quod nunc Agimus multiplici Orationum, Lectionum, Cantilenarum, & Consecrationum Officio, totum hoc Apostoli, & post ipsos proximi (ut creditur) Orationibus & Comme∣moratione Passionis Dominicae, sicut ipse praecepit, Agebant simplicitér. That the Ancients say, that they did, as we do now on Holy [or Good] Friday; and that after they had repeated the Lord's Prayer, and made Commemoration of Christ's Passion, they received the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. That afterwards the Offices of the Church were enlarged, as well as the Ceremonies. That the Romans added to what they received from St. Peter, what else they thought fit. That their usage was admired by so many People, because they were a famous Nation, and were taught by St. Peter himself, the Head of the Apostles; and because there never was a Church in the World so free from Heresies. That St. Ambrose compos'd a Form of Prayer for his Church, and for the Churches of Liguria. He fixes upon the Roman Order, and explains the parts of it, taking notice of the Popes, to whom some attribute the Institution of them. He wishes, that they would Com∣municate at every Mass; and observes, that the time of Communion is before the Prayer, which is said at the end of the Mass, in which they commonly Pray for those that have Communicated. And although he acknowledges, that Priests may Offer and Communicate alone; nevertheless he says, Illam esse legitimam Missam cui intersunt Sacerdos, Respondens, Offerens & Communicans. As to the hour of the Mass, he observes it is different, according as the Solemnities of the day will permit; that sometime it is before Noon, sometimes towards three a Clock in the After-noon, some∣times in the Evening, and sometimes at Night, but never before nine a Clock in the Morning. He speaks afterwards of Holy Vessels and Priests Habits. He makes several remarks upon the Hours of Divine Service, of which these are some of the most considerable. That the Irish kneeled down often; that the Distribution of the Psalms into many parts of the Service, was not begun before the time of Theodosius. That about the same time they began to sing Hymns in the Church of Milan, and to Celebrate Vigils. That St. Ignatius goes for the Institutor of Anthems. That the name of Hymns may be given to all Psalms of Praise, altho they be not in Verse. That there are a great many Churches, where they are never Sung in Verse. That St. Ambrose was not the Author of them all. That the Gloria Patri is differently exprest. That the Spaniards Sing it thus; Gloria & Honor Patri, & Filio, & Spiritui sancto in saecula saeculorum, Amen. And the Grecians, Gloria Patri, & Fi∣lio, & Spiritui sancto, & nunc & semper, & in saecula saeculorum, Amen. That the Latins add, Sicut erat in Principio. That 'tis thought to be the Council of Nice that Instituted this Hymn, That many put it at the end of those Hymns which they divide into a great many parts, as those which follow the Service of St. Benedict. That the Romans use it not so often in their Psalms, as they do in their Re∣sponses: That all the Offices begin with, Deus in Adjutorium, except that for the dead, and that for the Holy Week, [or Week before Easter]. That the Romans still Sing the Psalms, according to the Edition of the Septuagint, but the French and some of the Germans, according to the Correction of St. Jerome; that Stephen the III. coming into France, introduced the Roman way of Singing there.

Strabo, after having finisht what related to the Divine Service and its several parts, treats of the Administration of Baptism. He says, That the Ceremonies of Baptism have been encreased by little and little, that the Unction of Chrism was added to it, which no body doubts but 'twas taken from the Old Law. That from the very first, Confirmation was Administred by Imposition of Hands, which was then always Conferr'd by the Bishops, and so is still. That the solemn times of Admi∣nistring Baptism, are Easter and Whitsuntide, that some have added Christmas-day and the Epiphany. That in case of necessity Persons may be Baptized at any time. That they may be Baptized by Dip∣ping or Sprinkling, Plunging the Infant in the Water once or thrice. That at the beginning of the Church, Baptizing of Adult Persons was more frequent; because that those which were Converted, were capable of being instructed in the Principles of Religion, and in answering for themselves. That as for Infants, they had Godfathers and Godmothers to answer in their Names, who are obli∣ged to put them in mind, when they come to have the use of their Reason, of the Promise, that they have made for them.

He passes afterwards to Tithe's, and shews that they ought to be given to the Clergy, who must divide them into four parts, whereof one is for the Bishop, another for the Clerk, a third for the Poor, and the last reserved for the Buildings of the Church. He does not forget to speak of the Litanies or Processions, used in the days of Rogations, establish'd by Mamertus; but he observes, that some keep them between Easter end Whitsuntide, according to the Council of Orleans; but the Spaniards defer them till after Whitsuntide, and others to December. He adds, that the name of Litany does not only signifie, that Prayer by which the Saints are Invoked, but also every sort of Prayer, by which we ask any favour of God. He speaks afterwards of the Sprinkling of the Holy Water, of the Consecrating of Wax-Candles, and ends with an enumeration of the several Orders of Clergy, which he compares to Civil Employments. These are the several Orders of the Clergy. The Supreme Bishop who enjoys the See of Rome, and holds the place of St. Peter, being rais'd to the Dignity of Head of the Church. The Patriarchs of other Churches, who are equal in Dignity to the See of Rome, which are of Antioch in Asia, and Alexandria in Africa; besides these three Pa∣triarchs, there are many others which are Inferiour to them [as the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Ephesus]. The Arch-Bishops are above the Metropolitans, to whom succeed in order the Metropo∣litans, Bishops, Abbots, Great Chaplains, Little Chaplains, Suffragans, Priests that are possessed of Churches where they Administer Baptism, and Priests who have the Government of private Chap∣pels,

Arch-Priests that have the charge over Canons, Arch-Deacons who have care of the Bishop's Family. Then Deacons, Sub-Deacons, Exorcists, Porters, Acolythus's, Readers, and Singing-men. This is an exact Abridgment of this Work of Walafridus Strabo, which treats of Matters very rati∣onally. He seems to have read a great deal. He often quotes the false Decretals of the Popes, and sometimes Cites Apocryphal Histories. There is another small Treatise of this Author's, upon the Destruction of Jerusalem, and a great deal of Poetry, Publisht by Canisius [Antiq. Lec. Tom. 6.] The Lives and Miracles of St. Gallus and Othmarus, Publisht by Surius [Oct. 16. & Nov. 16.] The Life of Blainaus Abbot of Ifi, and the Visions of St. Wittinus in Saec. Benedict. IV. of Father Ma∣billon. Walafridus dyed in the year 849.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Hatto.
• * 1.2

  Agobard.
• a 1.3

  Or rather a Suffragan.] We ought to Read Chorepiscopus in Ado, as it is in the Chronicon of Hugo Flavinia••ensis, and not Co-episcopus; because if he had been Co-episcopus, or Coadjutor, there had been no need of Ordaining him a-new, when Lei∣dradus retired. And 'tis certain there were at this time Suffragans in France.
• b 1.4

  A Whole Synod.] What Synod it was is not known. M. Baluzius believes it was that of Mentz, in 813. but this Sy∣nod was under Charles the Great; and Lei∣dradus did not retire, and so Agobard could not be Ordained, till the Reign of Lewis the Godly.
• * 1.5

  Amulo.
• * 1.6

  Adelardus.
• * 1.7

  Ansegisus.
• * 1.8

  Halitgarius,
• * 1.9

  Isaac.
• * 1.10

  Herard.
• * 1.11

  Wauterius.
• * 1.12

  Wulfadus.
• * 1.13

  Riculphus.
• * 1.14

  Elias.
• * 1.15

  Luitbertus,
• a 1.16

  Ordained by this Pope.] He says it plainly at the end of his first Treatise, in which having spo∣ken of the Validity of the Ordina∣tions of this Pope; he adds, That he continued in the order which he had received by Consecration, waiting for the equitable Judg∣ment of a General Council. In the Thirty First Chapter of his Second Treatise. His Adversary objects, that he was a Stranger; and at first he don't deny it, but a∣bout the end he puts in a Doubt; saying, 'twas a fiction of his Ad∣versaries. He says also in the same place, ••hat he was ordained a Priest by Formosus. In the Chap∣ter of the Second Book, he says also, that he was ordained by Formosus, and was come to Rome from his own Countrey.
• * 1.17

  Amalarius.
• * 1.18

  Of the Habits of Priests, see Durand. Ration. l. 3.
• † 1.19

  Concerning these parts of the Mass (533.) if any desire to be exactly informed, let him consult Durand. Ration. lib. 4.
• ‖ 1.20

  These hours of Prayer, and the Reasons of their Institution, are at large explained by Du∣rand. in his Rationale Divin. Off. l. 5. c. 3—10.
• * 1.21

  De ordine Antiphona∣rii. Liber.
• * 1.22

  Rabanus.
• * 1.23

  Dr. Cave adds a third, De Puritate Cordis: Or, the Purity of the Heart.
• * 1.24

  Merit Pardon—Heaven] Under the word me∣rit, which is often met with in the Fathers, The Church of Rome, which gene∣rally con∣ches her new and false Do∣ctrines, under old Names, would have us understand a Merit ex condigno, whereby we deserve Heaven as a just reward of our Works; whereas they mean a Merit of impetration, as a conditional qualification for happiness.
• * 1.25

  Walafridus Strabo.