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. III.

An Account of the Churches of France.

IN the Tenth Century the Church of Rheims was look'd upon as the chief Church of France, and its Archbishops had the principal share in the Ecclesiastical and Civil Affairs of that King∣dom. The Priviledges which the Popes granted to them, the great Revenues which they possess'd, and which were considerably augmented at that time, the Prerogative which they had of Consecrating Kings, the Post they held in the Assemblies both of Church and State; their Quality, their Reputation, and their Personal Merit, rais'd them to a higher pitch of Power and Dignity than any Prelate could hope for. But forasmuch as all great Dignites are envied and eagerly thirsted after, and the higher the Post is, the more 'tis expos'd to storms and dangers; 'tis not at all to be wonder'd at that there were so many Artifices us'd to come into this Archbishoprick, so many heats to keep in it, and if those that had the possession of it, have been subject to so many Scandals, as the ensuing History will make appear. But because the Ecclesiastical Affairs of the Churches of France, and particularly of that of Rheims, bear so near a Relation to those of the State; and because the Changes of Kings, and the Revolutions of the Government have like∣wise produc'd very many Alterations in the Affairs of the Church: 'Tis necessary to begin with gi∣ving you a Scheme of the State of the French Monarchy, and of the Succession of the Kings who go∣vern'd France during the Tenth Century.

After the Death of Charles the Gross, which happen'd in the Year 888. his Son Charles, sirnam'd the Simple, being still in his Minority, the Neustrians met at Campeign, elected Odo or Eudes, Count of Paris, and Duke of France, to govern the Kingdom, gave him the Quality of King, and caus'd him to be crown'd by Gautier Archbishop of Sens. On the other side, Radulphus the Son of Conrad, made himself Master of the Country between Montjou and the Appenine Mountains; that is, Savoy and Switzerland, and caus'd himself to be crown'd King of Lower Burgundy. Lewis the Son of Bo∣zon, seiz'd on the Country which lies from Lions to the Sea, between the Rhone and the Alpes, and went under the name of King of Arles or Provence, and caus'd that Kingdom to be conferr'd upon him by a Council held at Valence on purpose in the Year 890. Thus France was divided into three Kingdoms: The Kingdom of France, which comprehended Normandy, Aquitain, and the Dutchy of Burdundy; the Kingdom of Arles; and the Kingdom of Lower Burgundy. Eudes was not long in quiet possession of a Kingdom to which he could pretend no Right. Charles the Simple had his Partisans, who sent for him from England, whither his Mother had carry'd him, and caus'd him to be Crown'd at Rheims in the Year 893. He immediately enter'd into possession of a part of the King∣dom, and rais'd a Civil War between the two Parties; which within a while was appeas'd, and wholly ended by the Death of Eudes, which happen'd on the Thirtieth of January 898. By his Death Charles the Simple took possession of the Kingdom of France, not of that of Arles, nor of Lower Burgundy. In the Year 918. he added Lorrain to his Dominions, having conquer'd it from Henry the Falconer, after the Death of Conrad. But the Malecontents among the French Nobles, took an occasion from this War, to cut him out new Work, and elected Robert the Brother of Eudes King, who was Crown'd at Rheims on the Twentieth of June in the Year 922. so that Charles was forc'd to quit Lorrain to come and fight Robert. This last was kill'd in Battle, but his Party elect∣ed in his room his Brother-in-Law Radulphus II. Duke of Burgundy. Charles the Simple struck up on Alliance with Henry the Faulconner, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 whom he remitted Lorrain, upon condition that he should aid him; but he was treacherously taken in the Year 923. by Hebert Count of Vermandois, who kept him Prisonner in Thierry Castle. The Queen his Wife withdrew into England with her Son Lewis. From that time Charles the Simple was always in the Power of Hebert, or Hugh le Blanc Count of Paris, Robert's Son, who kept him Prisoner till his Death, which happen'd in the Year 929. Upon his Death Radulphus was left in quiet possession of the Kingdom to the Year 936. at which time he dy'd without Issue, leaving the Dukedom of Burgundy to his Brother Hugh the Black, and the chief Authority of France to Hugh the White, Count of Paris and Orleans, and Duke of France, his Bro∣ther-in-Law. However, this Man had not the Heart to take the Crown upon him, being afraid of Hebert Count of Vermandois, and Gisalbert Duke of Lorrain; and he thought it more advisable to send for the Son of Charles the Simple out of England, who upon that account was call'd Lewis d'Ou∣tremer. He was receiv'd without any Opposition, and Crown'd at Laon in the Year 936. Lewis during his Reign had great Contests with the Counts Hebert and Hugh, and was sometimes at War, sometimes at Peace with Otho King of Germany. But at last, having accommodated Matters with Hugh, he dy'd peaceably in the Year 954. leaving the Title of King to his Son Lotharius, an Infant of Fourteen or Fifteen years of Age, and the Administration of the Government to Hugh, to whom the young King granted the Dutchy of Burgundy and Aquitain. Hugh dyed in the Year 956. and left four Children, of whom the Eldest, nam'd Hugh-Capet, was declar'd Duke of France in the Year 959. by Lotharius, who gave him likewise Poictou. Lotharius reign'd peaceably Three and Thirty years, having after the Death of Hugh the White, reassum'd the Royal Authority. But this was lost in the hands of his Son Lewis, sirnam'd the Fainthearted; who surviv'd his Father only six∣teen Months under the Tutelage of Hugh-Capet, and was the last King of the Carolignian Line. For after his Death Hugh-Capet was Elected King by the Nobless of Nayon, about the end of May in the Year 987. and afterwards Crown'd at Rheims, without any regard had to Charles Duke of Lor∣rain, Brother to Lotharius, whom they hated, because he had taken an Oath of Allegiance to the King of Germany for his Dutchy of Lorrain. The next year Hugh-Capet caus'd his Son Robert also to be Crown'd. However Duke Charles was not altogether out of hopes of re-investing himself in the States of his Ancestors, and having seis'd on Laon and Rheims, he made War for some time with Hugh; but was taken in the Year 991. in the City of Laon, and carried Prisoner to Senlis, and from thence to Orleans, where he was shut up in a Tower, wherein he dy'd three years after. And thus the Kingdom of France was transferr'd from the Carolignian Line to that of Hugh-Capet, who liv'd till the Year 996. and left his Son Robert in quiet possession of the Kingdom, which this good King govern'd till the Three and thirtieth year of the ensuing Century. And thus much may suf∣fice for what concerns the Political Estate of the Kingdom of France: let us now proceed to the Ec∣clesiastical Affairs, wherein the Archbishops of Rheims had a principal share.

FULCUS Arch-Bishop of Rheims.

FULCUS succeeded Hincmarus in the Arch-bishoprick of Rheims, in the Year 882. He was a Person of Quality, who had been a long time at Court. Immediately he sent to Pope Mari∣nus his Confession of the Faith, according to Custom, and receiv'd the Pall from him. In a Se∣cond Letter he demanded a Confirmation of the Privileges granted by the Popes to his Predecessors, and made Complaints to him of the Estate bequeath'd by his Brother Rampo, for the building of a Monastery, of which Ermenfroy, who had married his Widdow, had taken Possession. Marinus wrote on this last point to to Gerard Arch-bishop of Sens, in whose Diocess this Monastery was; and to John Arch-bishop of Roan, to whose Diocess Ermenfroy did belong, giving him orders to enjoyn him to relinquish the Estate which he had so unjustly possess'd himself of; and if he would not do it, to make use of Canonical Punishments against him. Fulcus wrote likewise to Pope Adrian the Successor of Marinus, to Congratulate his Advancement to the Popedom; and at the same time sent him some Copies of the Privileges granted by the Popes, Leo, Benedict, and Nicholas to the Church of Rheims, to which he desires him to grant a Confirmation. In the same Letter he intreats him to send a Commission to the Arch-bishops of Sens and Roan, to adjust the business of the Mo∣nastery, which Ermenfroy had taken possession of, and writes in favour of Frotarius Arch-bishop of Bruges, who was accus'd by a Monk of his Diocess; assuring the Pope, that he had been Elected by the Bishops of his Province, by the Clergy and Laity of his own Diocess, and Confirm'd by Pope Marinus. He sent another very submissive Letter to Pope Stephen, wherein he thanks him for the Honour he did him in writing to him, and in treating with him as a Friend and Brother; Ti∣tles which he could not pretend to, thinking it an Honour to be his Servant and Subject. He as∣sures him, that if he were not surrounded, and as it were Besieged by the Barbarians, who were not above five Leagues off his City, and who Beleaguer'd Paris; he would have undertaken a Jour∣ney to Rome. He informs him of the part he bore in the Snares which were laid against him, and makes his acknowledgments for the favour shew'd by the Pope to his Son Guy, who was the Arch-Bishop's Kinsman. He promises Obedience to the Pope, and exalts the Dignity of the Church of Rheims, which he pretends had been Founded by Saint Sixtus, who was sent by S. Peter, and was the chief of the whole Kingdom. He adds, that Pope Hormisdas had established the Arch-Bishop of Rheims, his Vicar in Gaul; and desires him to confirm the Privileges granted by his Predecessors. He presses him to order Ermenfroy to be Excommunicated by the Arch-Bishops of Sens and Roan; and intreats him to write to King Charles, to oblige him to restore in full to the Church of Rheims the Revenues which belong'd to it.

The Pope answer'd Fulcus, that he was glad to see he had such good thoughts of the Holy See; he assur'd him, that he look'd upon Guy as his own Child; that he was deeply affected with the De∣solation of France, caus'd by the Barbarians; that he pray'd God to deliver that Kingdom out of all its Trouble: And Lastly, he acquainted him, that he had sent Letters according to his desire, to the Arch-bishops of Sens and Roan.

Fulcus wrote a Second Letter to this Pope, wherein he renews his complaints against Ermenfroy, who would not obey the Injunctions of the Two Arch-Bishops, and intreats the Pope to cause him to be Excommunicated. At the same time he asks his Advice, whether it be lawful to ordain Bishops every Festival day.

The Pope sent him afterwards several Letters.

The first is a Letter of Consolation, for the Miseries he under-went.

The Second is a Recommendatory Letter, in behalf of a Man who was oppress'd by his Children and Relations.

The Third is directed to the Bishops of France against Frotarius, who had seized upon the See of Bruges, after he had been turn'd out of the Bishopricks of Bordeaux and Poitiers. He in∣joyns him under the Penalty of Excommunication, to relinquish Bruges, and return to Bor∣deaux.

The Fourth is in favour of Teutboldus, whom he had ordain'd Bishop of Langres. He therein tells him, that after the Death of Isaac Bishop of that Church, Aurelian Arch-Bishop of Lions had or∣dain'd in his room a Monk call'd Egilon, without being Elected by either Clergy or Laity, who had Elected Teutboldus, and desir'd the Pope that he might be Consecrated; that being willing to main∣tain the Privileges of all Churches, he had sent to Aurelian to ordain Teutboldus, provided it appear'd to him, that he had been unanimously elected by Clergy and Laity: That he had sent a Bishop to be upon the spot, to see that this Order were duly put in Execution; but that Aurelian had put a trick upon him, by sending him before to Langres, with a promise that he would be there soon after him; and that instead of being so good as his word, he suffer'd the Bishop to wait for him to no purpose: That the Clergy and Laity had sent an Act of the Election to Rome, and pray'd that Teut∣boldus might be Consecrated; that he had writ again to Aurelian, requiring him to ordain him; but that instead of obeying his Order, he made it his Business to bring the other into Possession; Lastly, That upon the fresh Instances of the Clergy and Laity of Langres, he had ordained Teu••bol∣dus;

he enjoyns Fulcus to put him into Possession. Fulcus reply'd to him, that he was very willing to put his orders touching Teutboldus into Execution, but that he had been obliged to defer it upon the Instance of King Eudes, who would send his Ambassadors to him, to know his Resolution. He adds, that the Bishops were very glad at his declaring, that he was willing to maintain the Rights and Privileges of Bishops in their full force. He desires to know of him, whether it be lawful for any of his Suffragans to execute the Orders of the King, or of any other without his leave, or to under∣take any thing contrary to his Prohibitions.

The same Pope confirms the Privileges of the Church of Rheims, and prohibits all Persons whatso∣ever from seizing or detaining any of the Revenues which belong to it. He likewise wrote to Ful∣cus about the difference which happen'd between Herman Arch-Bishop of Cologn, and Aldegairus Bi∣shop of Hamburg and Breme. They had both written to the Holy See upon that Subject, and had been cited thither. Aldegairus came to Rome accordingly, but Herman did not appear. However, the Pope being unwilling to determine a matter of that Consequence, without hearing both Parties, he orders Fulcus to call a Synod in his Name at Worms, with the Bishops his Suffragans and Neigh∣bours; and to cite thither Herman and Aldegairus, with the Arch-bishop of Mayence and his Suffra∣gans, to examine strictly the Pretensions of both Parties. He invites him to come to Rome upon that Affair and others, or at least to send thither some able Person, with the Parties concern'd, that so he might be fully inform'd of all things.

The Pope being dead before this Affair was adjusted, Fulcus wrote about it to his Successor For∣mosus, praying that he would continue him in the same Commission. He thank'd him at the same time for the Complements he had sent him by the Abbess Bertha; and asks his advice, what ought to be done against one who had a mind to seize on the Estate which his Brother-in-Law Count Eve∣rard, had bequeath'd to a Monastery, which he had built in Honour of Saint Calixtus, whose Body he had brought from Rome. He withal declares to him, that he was very sorry to hear that there were some Persons, who gave disturbance to the Church of Rome, and he was ready to stand in its defence. In the Conclusion he gives the Pope to understand, that several Bishops of France requir'd the Pall, which they ought by no means to have, since it would cause them to despise their Metropo∣litans; and that he ought to take special care about it, because this abuse might be the Cause of a great deal of trouble in the Church of France.

Pope Formosus return'd him this Answer, that he was oblig'd to him for the Concern he shew'd at the unhappy state of the Church of Rome: That the Eastern Churches were likewise disturb'd by an∣tient Heresies and new Schisms: That the Bishops of Africa had sent their Deputies to Rome, for the adjusting and making up a Schism, which was then on foot between the Bishops of that Country; and that there were several other Deputies at Rome, from divers parts, who requir'd Answers upon several distinct Subjects: That he had resolv'd to hold a Synod the first of March, to which he in∣vited him. He had already invited him to another Synod by a former Letter, whereby he confirm'd the Privileges granted to the Church of Rheims, and prohibited any seizure to be made of the Re∣venues which belong'd to it. By the same Letter he likewise acquainted him of the Coronation of Guy perform'd by him that same Year.

By another Letter of the Year ensuing, he confirm'd the Donations granted to the Church of Rheims, and gave Fulcus to understand, that he had Crown'd Lambert the Son of Guy Emperor. He like∣wise reprimands several Laicks who would not be subject to their Arch-Bishop.

Formosus wrote likewise several Letters in favour of Charles the Simple, against Eudes. He sent for Fulcus to Rome upon that Subject, desiring all Acts of Hostility might cease, till his return. Fulcus excus'd himself from this Journey, and tells the Pope that he ought to write to Arnulphus King of Germany, requiring him to assist Charles, and to threaten Eudes with Excommunication if he continued to ravage France. The Pope wrote to each of them; but it could not hinder Eudes from carrying on his Design: And Arnulphus was so far from favouring Charles, that he entred the Kingdom, laid Siege to the City of Rheims; ravag'd the Country, and particularly rifl'd the Re∣venues which belong'd to the Church. Fulcus made his complaints of this to the Pope. A while after he likewise wrote another Letter to him, wherein he takes Notice, that it was expedient that Lambert should enter into an Alliance with King Charles, and that the Pope should write to Eudes to inform him, that it was highly reasonable, that Charles should enjoy part of his Father's Dominions. At the same time he advises him, about three Persons who lay under perpetual Excommunication, because of the ill usage they shew'd to Teutboldus Bishop of Langres, and to Gautier Arch-Bishop of Sens; viz. whether he might admit them to Penance: and about Heriland Bishop of Teroüane, turn'd out of his Diocess by the Normans; whether he might give him another Bishoprick, and place in his stead a Person who might be more agreeable to the People of the place, and who could speak the Language of the Country. The Pope return'd him this Answer, that he was oblig'd to him for what he wrote with Relation to Lambert; that the three Persons he spoke of, had been con∣demn'd to a perpetual Excommunication, for having put out the Eyes of Teutboldus, and for having cast Gautier into Prison, and that they ought still to lye under that Sen∣tence.

The last Letter which Pope Formosus wrote to Fulcus, related to Berchairus, whom the Laity and Clergy of Chalons had elected their Bishop by the Consent of King Eudes. He complains of the unwillingness of Fulcus to Consecrate him; and that after the Decease of the late Bishop, he had by way of Prevention, caus'd this Bishoprick to be govern'd by Heriland Bishop of Teroüane, who

had been turn'd out of his own Diocess: that afterwards he had ordain'd Mancian, a Man of a pro∣fligate Life; and that Berchairus intending to go to Rome, had been Arrested by Conrad the Creature of Fulcus, and sent into Banishment. For this he cites the Archbishop to Rome, with Mancion, Con∣rad, and several other Bishops.

Fulcus return'd no reply to Formosus, but wrote a Letter of Compliment to Stephen VI. his Succes∣sor. However this did not prevent that Pope from citing him to a Synod, to be holden the latter end of September. He excus'd his going thither, and sent several of his Clergy in his room. He gave the Pope to understand, that he wonder'd at the hard Expressions of his Letter; and the more because he had been always very submissive to the Holy See, and had received nothing from it but Kindnesses and Civilities. He imputes this harshness of the Pope to the false Reports he had receiv'd of him. To justifie himself, he shews how he had been Educated from his Childhood, in all that an Ecclesiastick ought to know: How afterwards he was call'd to Court by King Charles the Son of Lewis, and continued in it till the Reign of Charlemagne; that he had been elected Archbishop of Rheims by the Bishops of the Province, and by the Clergy and Laity of that City; and how indu∣strious he had been in promoting the interest of that Church. Lastly he adds, that if King Eudes would give him leave, he would go to Rome when the way was open, for he was then enclosed by Zuentibold the Son of Arnulphus, who had basely us'd and rifled his Church. In fine, he pray'd the Pope to free him from that Tyranny, and not to oblige him to relinquish his Church, at a time where∣in his presence was so necessary. These are all the Letters of Fulcus to the Popes, and of the Popes to that Archbishop, of which Flodoard gives us an Extract, in the four first Chapters of the fourth Book of his History.

In his fifth Chapter the same Author mentions the Letters of this Archbishop, directed to the Kings and Princes.

The first is to Charles the Gross, the Son of Lewis of Germany, after the Death of Charles the Bald, wherein he pray'd him to protect France against the Normans, who had ravaged the Coun∣try, and laid Siege to the principal Towns thereof.

In a second Letter to the same Emperor, he intreats that he would procure the Pall for him from the Pope, and the Confirmation of the Privileges granted to the Church of Rheims.

The third is directed to Arnulphus King of Germany, wherein he gives him the reason why he had anointed Charles the Simple King. He gives him to understand, that upon the Death of Charles the Bald, the French immediately made their Application to him, to be accepted under his Protecti∣on: but that having received no Protection nor Countenance from him, they were obliged to choose Charles for their King, who was the only Man next him of the Royal Blood, and whose Brothers and Predecessors had been Kings: That the reason why they did not choose him sooner, was, because being too young he was not capable of governing the Kingdom, especially at a time when the Nor∣mans were ready to rifle and pillage the whole Kingdom: and that they had done it at last without consulting Arnulphus in the Case, according to the Custom of France, which always was, when one King was dead, to put up in his place one of the Royal Family, without consulting any Foreign Power. He likewise answer'd that which they accus'd him of, viz. that he had never Crown'd Charles the Simple, but that he might with the more ease bestow the Kingdom on Guy; and makes it appear, that it was only a Calumny invented by his Enemies. And whereas some were pleased to raise a Report, that Charles was not the Son of Lewis the Lisper; he says, that the very sight of him would be a sufficient Evidence to convince them of the contrary; because any one might easily discern in him, the very Air and Features of his Father. Lastly, he intreats Arnulphus to do Justice to this innocent King, and his own Kinsman: To consider that the Kingdom of France had al∣way been an Hereditary Kingdom; and to believe that the French had no other design, than that Charles should be lead by his Counsels, and bound to him in a firm Bond of Amity and Al∣liance.

In the fourth Letter which is likewise directed to Arnulphus, he assures him of the Fidelity where∣with King Charles and himself had observed the Treaties made with that Prince. He informs him, that this King being minded to Attack Eudes, had writ to Guy and the Pope, to engage them on his side.

The fifth was written to King Eudes. He intreats him to grant the Church of Laon liberty to choose a Bishop, in the room of Didon lately Deceas'd.

The sixth was directed to Charles, whom he very sharply reproves for his intention of making a League with the Normans, and of making use of them to reinstate him in his Kingdom. He re∣monstrates to him, that it was a piece of Idolatry, thus to enter into the Alliance and Interest of Pa∣gans: That the Kings his Predecessors were Servants of the true God; and that he had renounced him, by joyning with Infidels; that this was not the way to reascend the Throne of his Ancestors, but rather to loose it, by pulling on his Head the Wrath of an angry God: That those who gave him this advice were his Enemies, and that if he followed it, he knew not how to continue Loyal to him, nor how to prevent himself from drawing off as many as he could from obeying him, but that he must be forced to Excommunicate him, and condemn him with a perpetual Anathema. He adds, that he wrote these things with extreme grief and concern, because it was his desire, that he might be had in honour both with GOD and Man, and that he might regain his Throne by the help of the Lord, and not by the Assistance of the Devil; because the Kingdoms which God bestows are firm and lasting; whereas those which are acquir'd by Injustice and Rapine are uncertain, and of a short standing.

The seventh was directed to the Emperour Lambert, whom he Congratulated upon the Popes De∣claration, that he would look upon him as his own Son. He exhorts him always to bear a due re∣spect and honour to the Holy See, because that was the only way of securing himself an Interest in Heaven, and of obtaining a superiority over all his Enemies. He wish'd him to remember that his Uncle Lambert, who had been an Enemy to the Holy See, Perish'd miserably; and he intreated him to intercede with the Pope for their Kinsman Rampon, who had been Excommunicated.

The eighth was Dedicated to Albrade, or Alfrede, the King of Great Britain, whom he Congra∣tulates for the choice he made of a worthy Person to fill the See of Canterbury; because he heard that in his Country they advanced such a sort of Men, as permitted the Bishops and Priests to have Women among them, and the Laicks to Marry their Kindred, as well as those Virgins who were De∣dicated to God's Service; and to have a Wife and a Concubine at the same time.

The ninth was directed to Richilda, a Queen or Empress, whom he inform'd of the ill Reports which went about of her Conduct, and exhorts her to lead a Life more conformable to Christianity, and to her state of Widowhood, which she had devoted to God.

In the sixth Chapter Elodoard makes mention of the Letters which Fulcus sent to several Bishops.

In the first directed to Frotharius, Archbishop of Bordeaux, he desires that Archbishop to preserve the Revenues of the Church of Rheims, which were in his Diocess, and to Excommunicate such as should seize on them.

The Second is Directed to Rostaing, Archbishop of Arles, on the same Subject.

In the third directed to Herman Archbishop of Cologn, he declares that he had a great desire to hold a Conference with him, and the Bishops of his Province, but that he was prevented by the Incur∣sions of the Normans: And he prays him to do him Justice with relation to some of the Revenues belonging to his Church, of which several Persons had made a Schism; the Cognizance of this Af∣fair having been referr'd to Wilbert his Predecessor, and now laid before him.

The fourth written to the same Person, relates likewise to the Interest of the Church of Rheims, for some Revenues which were Embezell'd from it.

The fifth is directed to Gontier, Archbishop of Sens, about the business of the Abbess Hildergarda. He intreats this Archbishop not to be so False as he had been, to the Assignments made upon this Account, and to do right to that Abbess.

In the sixth he Congratulates Pleonicus a Bishop of England, for his endeavouring to root out those Disorders of which he had made mention in his Letter to Alfrede, and he exhorts him to continue in his Design.

The Seventh was directed to John a Roman Prelate, whom he put in mind of some Ancient To∣kens of Friendship, which he had shewn to him; and intreats him to assure Pope Stephen of his Sub∣mission to him, and begs he would stand his Friend in that Affair.

The Eighth, Ninth and Tenth were directed to Dodilon, Bishop of Cambray. By the two first he calls him to the Synod, which was to meet about determining the business between Hildegarde and Hermingard: and by the last wrote in his own Name, and in the Name of the Bishops his Suffra∣gans, he enjoyns him to compel Count Baldwin to make due Restitutions of the Church Revenues which he had seiz'd on, to send him the Letter which they wrote to him upon the same Subject; and to go and meet with Bishop Hetilon at Arras.

The eleventh was writ to this Hetilon, upon the account of Dodilon's having caus'd the Body of Saint Calixtus to be taken away; which had been bequeathed by Radulphus to the Church of Rheims whither it was brought.

The Twelfth was directed to Didon Bishop of Laon, whom he reproves for having refused the Sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist, at the point of Death, to one Walcher, who was Execu∣ted for High Treason; and for denying him Burial, and forbidding any Prayers to be made for him.

In the Thirteenth he desires Peter a Roman Prelate to obtain the favour of Pope Formosus, that he might put Heriland, turn'd out of his own Diocess of Teroüane, into Possession of the Bishoprick of Chalons putting him in mind of what had been done in the Case of Actardus Bishop of Nants, who had been Translated to Tours.

The Fourteenth was directed to Honoratus Bishop of Beauvais: He complains, that this Bishop was his open and profess'd Enemy; Exhorts him to a Reconciliation, and gives him to understand, that he was accus'd of Rapines: He takes Notice to him of the Excommunication of one nam'd Aldramus, which the Bishop of Beauvais had thunder'd out, and which he said that the Archbishop of Rheims was bound to put in execution: As to this point he tells him, that he was always ready to follow the advice and opinion of other Bishops, but that he knew of no Power which the Church of Beauvais had to command the Church of Rheims; and that this Excommunication was not groun∣ded on a Lawful and Canonical Reason, but only because this Man had left the Interest of Eudes, and embraced that of King Charles. He likewise Summoned him to appear at the Ordination of the Bishops of Senlis and Chalons, and gave him to understand that Pope Stephen had order'd him to send him to Ravenna.

The Fifteenth is a Letter of Compliment to Teuthaldus, Bishop of Langres.

The Sixteenth was directed to Radulphus Successor to Didon Bishop of Laon, whose Promotion to that Dignity he Congratulates, and advertis'd him that he had too rashly Excommunicated one

of his Diocesans, hinting withal that he gave him his advice as a Friend to a Friend, not being wil∣ling to make use of that Authority and Priviledge which the Church of Rheims had from all Antiqui∣ty, of succouring all those who made their Application to it, and thought themselves injur'd by their Bishops.

We might likewise to these Letters joyn that of Mancion Bishop of Chalons, directed to Fulcus, and publish'd by Father Mabillon in the third Tome of his Collections, wherein he asks the Arch-bishop's Advice, how he ought to behave himself with relation to a Priest who was solemnly be∣trothed to a Woman, and would marry her publickly.

In the seventh Chapter Flodoard speaks of several Letters of Fulcus, directed to Abbots, and to Persons of Note.

The first was directed to an Abbot called Stephen, whom he comforts upon his having been de∣priv'd of a Bishoprick to which he had been elected.

In the second he reprov'd Baldwin Count of Flanders, for the many Injuries he offer'd to the Churches of his Country: and among others for having caus'd a Priest to be whip'd; for having turn'd out several Parochial Priests out of their Churches, in order to make room for others of his own choosing; for having unjustly seiz'd upon an Estate which the King had bestow'd on the Church of Noyon; for having seiz'd upon a Monastery, &c. he threaten'd to Excommunicate him, in case he did not forthwith make Restitution, and leave off his Cruelties to the Church.

The third is directed to the Clergy and Laiety of Senlis upon the Election of a Bishop.

The fourth to the Clergy of Laon upon the same Subject.

The fifth to the Monks of Corby, whom he severely reproves for their having cruelly turn'd out their Abbot.

These are all the Letters of Fulcus, which are mention'd in Flodoard; the very Extracts of which shew us, that this Archbishop wrote with a great deal of Strength and Authority; That he was zea∣lous for the welfare of the Church, for the Dignity of Bishops, and particularly for the Rights and Prerogatives of the Church of Rheims. He was assassinated by Win••mare and others of Count Baldwin's Creatures in the Year 900, which Count was incens'd against him for having taken away from him the Abby of S. Wast, and the Castle of Arras.

HERVEUS Archbishop of Rheims.

HIS Successor was one HERVEUS, a young Lord belonging to Court, and Nephew to Count Hughbold. He was ordain'd by the unanimous consent of all the Bishops of the Pro∣vince. Immediately after his Ordination he soon render'd himself capable of governing his Diocess, and gain'd the Esteem and Love of all the World by his Charity to the Poor, by his sweet Temper, by his good Nature, and by the Zeal he expressed for the Welfare of the Church, and for Ecclesia∣stical Discipline. He held several Provincial Councils, wherein he discours'd very usefully of Reli∣gion, and of the Peace both of Church and State, and of the Conversion of the Normans, who a∣bout that time embrac'd the Christian Faith. It was for their sakes that he sent to Guy Archbishop of Roan a Letter containing three and twenty Articles extracted out of the Canons and Letters of the Popes, about the manner of treating those, who after they had been baptiz'd, had apostatiz'd, and afterward's return'd to the Church. In the Year 909. he held a Council at Trosly (a Village near Soissons) at which assisted the Archbishop of Roan, with the Bishops of Laon, Beauvais, Noyon, Cha∣lons, Soissons, Cambray, Meaux, Senlis, Terouane and Amiens; in which, after he had discours'd at large of the Miseries under which France groan'd, which he imputed to the Sins both of the Laity and the Clergy, he gave them very fine and large Instructions, grounded on several Passages of the Fathers and Canons of Councils. 1. Concerning the Honour and Respect due to Churches and to Ecclesiasticks. 2. Concerning the Duty and Allegiance which Bishops and Ecclesiasticks ow'd to their King, and concerning the Duties and Qualifications of a Prince. 3. Concerning the Reformation of those Abuses which were crept into the Monastick Life, and particularly concerning the Abbeys which were possess'd by Laicks. It was ordain'd that Abbots should be Religious Persons, well skill'd in the Regular Discipline; and that the Monks and Religious should live according to their Profession and Rule, praying for the Welfare of Kings, for the Peace of the Kingdom, and for the Tranquility of the Church, without concerning themselves with Secular Affairs, without hunting after the Pomps of this World, and without incroaching on the Rights and Priviledges of Ecclesiasticks: and that they might have no Excuse for stragling, the Abbots were enjoyn'd, or at least those who had the Go∣vernment of Monasteries in their Care, to provide them Necessaries. 4. Against those who either by violence, or by any other method, seiz'd on Church Lands: which he look'd upon as Sacrilege. 5. Against those who either abus'd or persecuted the Clergy. 6. Against those who would not pay Tenths, and the other Revenues belonging to the Church. The Duty of Tithes reached not only to the Fruits of the Earth, and to the Breed of Cattle, but likewise to those things which were the Profits of a Man's Industry and Labour. 7. Concerning the Rapines and Robberies so rise at that

time. He demonstrates the Enormity thereof, and shews the Obligation they lay under of making Restitution, before they could expect Absolution. 8. Against stealing young Women, and against clandestine or unlawful Marriages. 9. Concerning the Prohibitions renew'd so often by the Canons against Priests having Women amongst them. 10. Concerning the Chastity which all Christians were oblig'd to preserve in their Words and Actions. 11. Concerning the Obligation of keeping strictly to the Oaths they took, without being perjur'd. 12. Against quarrelsome Persons who took delight in Law-Suits and vexatious Prosecutions. 13. Against Homicides and Lyars. 14. Against the Abuse which then prevail'd of rifling the Goods of Bishops after their Decease. Upon this he advises that two or three of the neighbouring Bishops, upon the News of the Death of their Bro∣ther, should go and perform the last Offices over him. In the Conclusion, he exhorted the Bishops to refute the Errors of Phetius. Lastly, He sums up in a few words what Christians ought to be∣lieve and practice, and exhorts them faithfully to discharge their Duties.

In the Year 921. Herveus held another Council at the same place, wherein he took off the Ex∣communication issued out against Count Ertebold, who had seiz'd upon some of the Church Reve∣nues.

This Archbishop assisted Charles the Simple in his Expedition against the Hunns, who ravag'd Lor∣rain, and was the only Man who continued Loyal to that Prince, when he was abandon'd by the French Lords. In the Year 920. he brought him back to Rheims, and adjusted Matters betwixt him and his Lords, and re-establish'd him in his Kingdom. But within a short time after the Lords re∣volted again, and being met at Rheims, they elected King Robert, and Herveus was constrain'd to crown him. He did not survive this Coronation but four days, and dy'd in the Year 922. having presided over the Church of Rheims Two and twenty years lacking four days.

Robert caus'd Seulfus to be elected in his room, who was then Archdeacon of that Church. He had been the Disciple of Remy of Auxerra, who had instructed him in the Sciences, both Divine and Prophane. He was ordain'd by Abbo Bishop of Soissons, and by the other Bishops of the Province of Rheims. Eudes the Brother of Herveus, and a Nephew of that Name, were cited before him, being accus'd of Disloyalty to Robert; and they not justifying themselves, were strip'd of all the Reve∣nues of the Church of Rheims in their possession, and cast into Prison: the former in the Custody of Hebert Count of Vermandois; and the latter at Paris. In a Provincial Council held in the Year 923. he impos'd a Pennance on those who had born Arms in the War between Robert and Charles; and in another Council held in the Year 924. at Trosly, he put an end to the Difference which was between Count Isaac and Stephen Bishop of Cambray; the former paying an hundred pounds to the latter, for the wrong he had done to his Church. 'Tis said that Seulfus agreed with Hebert to resign the Arch-bishoprick to the Son of that Count. However the case was, Seulfus did not enjoy this Dignity long, being prison'd in the Year 925. by the order of Hebert as it is supposed.

Presently after his death that Count came to Rheims, and having called thither Abbo Bishop of Soissons, and Bauvo Bishop of Chalons, he caus'd his Son Hugh, who was not then above five years old, to be elected by the Clergy and People of Rheims. Afterwards he procured the Confirmation of this Election by King Radulphus, who committed the Temporalities of this Diocess to Hebert, till his Son came of Age to take upon himself the Government thereof. The Spiritualities were conferr'd by Pope John X. on Abbo Bishop of Soissons, so that Hebert became absolute Master of that Church, and drove out of it all the Clergy whom he suppos'd to be against his Interests, and among others Flodoard, as he himself informs us.

In the Year 927. King Radulphus and Count Hebert fell out upon the account of the Earldom of Laon, which Hebert would have had given to his Son Odo, and which the King desir'd to keep for himself. Hebert willing to rely on a Power which might support his Pretensions, had an Interview with Henry King of Germany, and struck up an Alliance with him. He caus'd a Council to be con∣ven'd the same Year at Trosly, notwithstanding the Prohibition of King Radulphus, which consisted of six Bishops of the Province of Rheims: Afterwards he deliver'd Charles the Simple out of Prison, brought him to S. Quintin, and procur'd an Interview between him and Radulphus Duke of Nor∣mandy: from whence he brought him to Rheims, and writ to Pope John X. for the restablishing of that Prince. This attempt oblig'd Radulphus to quit the City of Laon to Hebert, and to adjust Mat∣ters with him. Radulphus Duke of the Normans would not restore to Hebert his Son. Odo, till he had set Charles at liberty, and promis'd to obey him. At the same time Hebert invited to Rheims Odalric Archbishop of Aix, who had been turn'd out of his Church by the Saracens, that he might there discharge his Episcopal Functions; and to reward him, he gave him the Abby of S. Timotheus, with the Revenue of a Prebend.

France was then as it were parted between the great Lords, and the Regal Authority was ex∣treamly cramp'd. Hugh the White, Count of Paris, and Hebert, were two of the most powerful: Radulphus had the Title of King, and that little of the Regal Authority which remain'd. For Charles was the sport and pastime of all three. As soon as Hebert was reconcil'd to Radulphus, he threw Charles again into Prison; and Radulphus afterwards returning to Rheims, gave him a seeming sort of Liberty, which he did not long enjoy, dying on the Seventh of October in the Year 929. Af∣ter his Death Hugh and Hebert fell out, the Umbrage of which quarrel was, that the Latter had given Entertainment to several Vassals belonging to the former, and among others to Herluin Count of Monstreuil. Radulphus sided with his Brother-in-law Hugh and there was a warm War between them: but Radulphus having taken the City of Rheims in the Year 931. caus'd Artaldus, a Monk

of S. Remy, to be ordain'd Archbishop of the place, who the year after receiv'd the Pall from Pope John XI. This Archbishop held a Council in the Year 934. at Chatteau-Thierry, where he ordain'd Hildegarius Bishop of Beauvais; and in the same year he ordain'd Fulbert Bishop of Cambray. The year after he held another Council at Fismes, wherein he Excommunicated those who had made an unlawful Seisure on the Revenue of the Church. King Radulphus being dead, Hugh the White recall'd out of England Lewis, Charles the Simple's Son, call'd upon that account Lewis d••Outremer, and caus'd him to be crown'd at Laon by Artaldus Archbishop of Rheims, who continued in the peaceable possession of his Archbishoprick for some time, and ordain'd Bishops in all the Churches of his Province, except Chalons and Amiens. But Hebert would not endure that any other but him∣self should be in the possession of so considerable a Post, and thereupon sent several of his Troops to take and rifle the Castles and Villages which belong'd to the Archbishoprick of Rheims. Artaldus for this Excommunicated him. King Lewis to make him amends for the Losses he sustain'd, grant∣ed him the Earldom of Rheims, and the Priviledge of the Mint, and assisted him in taking several Castles which were held out by the Troops of Hebert. Fortune did not long favour Artaldus; for Hugh entring into a new League with Hebert against Lewis d'Outremer, they came with William Duke of Normandy, besieg'd the City of Rheims, became Masters of it at the end of six days, and caus'd Artaldus to appear in the Church of S. Remy, in the presence of several Lords and Bishops; and oblig'd him to make a Resignation of his Archbishoprick, and to content himself with the Ab∣beys of S. Bazol and Avenay, into the former of which he retir'd, after he had govern'd the Church of Rheims for the space of Eight years and seven months. Hugh the Son of Hebert, was replac'd in possession thereof, and was ordain'd Priest by Guy Bishop of Soissons, three Months after his return, and fifteen Years after his first Election. He had spent this Interval of Time at Auxerre, where he had follow'd his Studies under Guy Bishop of that City, who had ordain'd him Deacon; for he had receiv'd his other Orders at Rheims from the Hand of Abbo Bishop of Soissons.

The next Year, namely 941. the two Counts Hebert and Hugh conven'd the Bishops of the Pro∣vince of Rheims at Soissons, and enter'd into a Consultation of ordaining Hugh the Son of Hebert Archbishop of Rheims. The Deputies of the Clergy and Laity of Rheims met there, and demand∣ed that he might be ordain'd, asserting that Artaldus had not been Elected according to the Canon, but intruded by Force; and that he had given up all the Title he could claim to that Archbishop∣rick. Upon this Remonstrance, the Bishops resolv'd upon ordaining Hugh, and immediately set out for Rheims for that purpose. Artaldus was already withdrawn to Lewis d'Outremer: but that Prince having been defeated in the Year 941. near Laon, Artaldus was very lucky in reconciling himself with Hugh the White and Hibert, in re-entring into the Possession of his Abbeys, and in making a League with Hugh Archbishop of Rheims, who soon after receiv'd the Pall that was sent him by Pope Stephen VIII. Notwithstanding this League, Artaldus return'd to Lewis d'Outremer. In the mean time Hebert dying in 943. Lewis was perswaded by Hugh the White to entertain the Sons of this Count, and also to leave Hugh in possession of the Archbishoprick of Rheims, upon condition that they restor'd to Artaldus his Abbeys, give him another Bishoprick, and grant that his Kinsmen should retain the Honours they had obtain'd. This Treaty was not long kept; for Hugh the White and Lewis d'Outremer Warring against each other, the latter laid Siege twice to the City of Rheims, and the second time having chas'd away Hugh Archbishop of Rheims, he enter'd the City, and re-establishes Artaldus, who was replac'd in his See in the Year 946. by the Archbishops of Treves and Mayence. The Church of Amiens becoming Vacant the year after, Hugh ordain'd Tetbold Arch-deacon of Soissons Bishop thereof, which occasion'd a Trial which was brought before an Assembly of Bishops and Lords, held near the River Cher. The Affair was not brought to any Issue at that place, but put off 〈◊〉〈◊〉 November. In the mean time Artaldus was left in possession of the Archbishop∣rick of Rhems, and Hugh permitted to stay at Mouzon.

A Council was call'd and held at Verdun: wherein were Robert Archbishoy of Treves, Artaldus Archbishop of Rheims, Odalric Archbishop of Aix, Adalberon Bishop of Mets, Gozelin Bishop of Tulle, Hildebald Bishop of the Upper Rhine, in the presence of Bruno an Abbot, Brother to King Otho, and of the Abbots Agenold and Odilo. Hugh was cited thither by two Bishops, but would not appear. The Synod adjudg'd the Archbishop•• of Rheims to belong to Artaldus.

Another Council was call'd in January following upon the same Subject, and held in the Church of S. Peter, near to Mouzon. They met at the time appointed, and Hugh made his appearance. But after he had discours'd with Robert Archbishop of Treves, he withdrew, and only caus'd a Letter to be presented by one of his Clergy, which was brought from Rome, and writ in the name of Pope Agapetus, wherein it was order'd that Hugh should be re-establish'd in the Archbishoprick of Rheims. The Bishops having read the Letter, alledg'd that it would not be reasonable to supersede the Execution of the Orders which they had reciv'd from the Holy See, upon the account of a Letter presented by the Enemy of Artaldus, and after they had read the nineteenth Chapter of the Council of Carthage con∣cerning the Accuser and the Accused, they adjudg'd Artaldus to have continued in the Communion of the Church, and in possession of the Archbishoprick of Rheims; and that Hugh, who had been already summon'd before two Synods, without appearing to either, ought to be depriv'd of the Communion and Government of that Church, till such time as he should clear himself in a General Council. This Sentence they notified to Hugh, who for his part declar'd, that he would not submit to it. In the mean time Artaldus having appeal'd to the Authority of the Holy See, Pope Agapetus sent Bishop Marinus his Vicar to King Otho, that he might call a General Synod, to pass a definitive Sentence on this Affair.

It was held at Ingelheim the seventh of June in the Year 948. Marinus the Pope's Legat was the President thereof, and the Archbishop of Cologne, Mayence, Treves, and Hambourgh his Assistants, with six and twenty Bishops of Germany, without reckoning Artaldus Archbishop of Rheims, upon whose account the Assembly met. The Kings Otho and Lewis d'Outremer were likewise present. The latter made his Complaints against the Rebellion of Hugh; and afterwards Artaldus presented his Petition to the Popes Legat and the Synod, wherein he gave a Remonstrance of all his Concerns, which was as follows. That after the death of Herveus, Seulsus who had been put up in his place, declar'd himself against the Kindred of his Predecessor: and that he might gain his point, he enter'd in∣to a Confederacy with Count Hebert, who cast them into Prison, where they were confin'd till the death of King Robert. That Seulfus dying in the third year of his Pontificate, being poyson'd (as several atte∣sted) by Hebert's Creatures, that Count seiz'd on the Church of Rheims, and was in possession thereof for the space of six years by the permission of King Radulphus. But that afterwards that King being mov'd by the Remonstrances of the Bishops, who complain'd that that Church was left so long without a Pastor, after he had made himself Master of Rheims, had caus'd him to be ordain'd by eighteen Bishops. That he had discharg'd the Episcopal Functions for nine years together, ordain'd eight Bishops, and a great ma∣ny Clerks, and crown'd King Lewis and Queen Gerberga. But that Count Hugh being incens'd against him, because he would not joyn in his Revolt against the King, had forc'd him, after he had taken the Ci∣ty of Rheims, to resign his Archbishoprick, had sent him into the Monastery of S. Bazol, and had put in∣to his place Hugh, Count Hebert's Son, who had been ordain'd Deacon at Auxerre. That afterwards he call'd a Synod at Soissons, wherein a Proposal was made to him to permit the Ordination of Hugh. That he immediately oppos'd it, and had declar'd them Excommunicated who should ordain any other Archbishop of Rheims whilst he was living, and him who should accept of such Ordination. That afterwards, to get out of their hands, he had desir'd them, that they would let him go to ask advice of the Queen, and his Friends, what he ought to do, and that they would send some body along with him to know his answer. They sent with him Bishop Deroldus, to whom, in the presence of the Queen, he gave this Answer, That he Excommunicated the Bishops who should dare to ordain another in his place; repeating the Protestation he had formerly made of appealing to the Holy See. That without being concern'd at this Denunciation, some of these Bishops went to Rheims to ordain Hugh. That from that time King Lewis proving un∣successful, he had been oblig'd to wander from place to place like a Vagabond; and that afterwards several of his Friends had brought him by force to the Counts Hugh the White and Hebert, who having him in their power, constrain'd him to resign the Revenues of his Church, and sent him into the Monastery of S. Bazol. That being inform'd that they design'd to make away with him, he fled to Laon. That since that, King Otho came in to the assistance of King Lewis, had turn'd Hugh out of the Archbishoprick of Rheims, and re-establish'd him therein. That Hugh retir'd to the Castle of Mouzon: that in the Con∣ference held upon the River Cher, where he was present with Hugh, his Affair was there debated before the Bishops then present. That Hugh had there produc'd a Letter writ to the Pope in his name, where∣by he desir'd to be discharg'd from his Archbishoprick, which he had maintain'd was counterfeit. That the Favourites of Hugh having alledg'd that an Affair of that Importance could not be determin'd in that Assembly, because it was not a Synod convocated according to form, they had put it off to November, wherein a Synod was to be held; and that in the mean time it was, order'd, that he should have the Go∣vernment of the Church of Rheims, and Hugh was allow'd to stay at Mouzon. That Hugh came in the Season of Vintage with Count Thibold, to carry off all the Wine round about the City of Rheims. That the Synod had been held at Verdun as appointed, to which Hugh was cited, and he would not make his Appearance, nor to another held afterwards near Mouzon, which had pass'd a Sentence absolutely in his favour. But that Hugh having declar'd that he would not submit to this Sentence, and remaining still at Mouzon. he had sent to Rome by the Ambassadors of King Otho a Petition containing his Com∣plaints; that he expected the Issue of all from the Orders of the Holy See, and the Determination of the Council. This Petition of Artaldus having been read in Latin and in the old Teutonick Language, Sigeboldus a Clerk belonging to Hugh enter'd, presented to the Council the Letter which had been brought from Rome, and which had been already produc'd before the Council of Mouzon, and a∣vouch'd that it had been given him by the Legat Marinus then present. It was written in the name of Guy Bishop of Soissons, Hildegaire Bishop of Beauvais, and of all the other Bishops of the Province of Rheims, who desir'd the re-establishment of Hugh, and the Expulsion of Artaldus. When this Let∣ter had been read, the Bishops therein mention'd did declare that it was Counterfeit, and that they had never heard the least mention of any such thing, nor gave their Consent that such a Request should be made in their Names. Upon this their Declaration this Deacon was depos'd as an Im∣postor and Calumniator; and in the same Session Artaldus was confirm'd in the Archbishoprick of Rheims. In the second Session Robert Archbishop of Treves alledg'd, that since they had re-establish'd Artaldus as lawful Archbishop of Rheims, it was requisite to condemn the Intruder. Marinus told them the Council ought to pronounce a Sentence agreeable to the Canon; and after the Decrees of the Pope's touching this Subject were read, the Bishops declar'd Hugh to be Excommunicated and thrown out of the Church, till such time as he should do Pennance for his Fault. In the other Ses∣sions they debated on several Points relating to Church Discipline; and all the Acts of this Council are reduc'd into Ten Canons.

The first contains the Excommunication of Hugh.

The second, the Resettlement of Artaldus, and the Excommunication of those, who were or∣dain'd by Hugh, unless they should appear before the Synod to be held at Treves, September 13. to make Satisfaction, and to receive Pennance for what they had done.

The third inflicts the same Punishment on Count Hugh the White, for having turn'd out Radulphus, Bishop of Laon.

The fourth prohibits the Laity from bestowing Churches on Priests, or from turning them out of them without the Approbation of the Bishop.

The fifth is against those who abuse the Priests, or do them any wrong.

In the sixth, it is order'd that the whole Easter-Week, and the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday after Whitsunday should be kept as Festivals, as well as the Lord's Day.

In the seventh, it is order'd, that in the Grand Litany (which is on S. Mark's day) a Fast shall be kept as in the Rogation-Week before the Ascension.

The eighth imports that the Laicks should have no share of the Offerings which the Faithful of∣fer'd on the Altar.

The ninth, that the Cognizance of all Differences about Tithes should be brought before the Bi∣shops.

The tenth and last Canon is imperfect, and one cannot well comprehend the meaning thereof; There is mention made of Widows dedicated to the Service of God.

After this Council Lewis d Outremer assisted by Conrad Duke of Lorrain, retook Mouzon, Mon∣tague and Laon, and the Bishops being met at Mouzon, Excommunicated Count Thibold, and cited Count Hugh the White to appear before the Synod to be held at Treves. In this Assembly, Guy Bi∣shop of Soissons, who had ordain'd Hugh, came to wait upon King Lewis, and to give him Satis∣faction.

Artaldus when he departed from Laon went to Treves with Guy Bishop of Soissons, Radulphus Bi∣shop of Laon, and Wickfroy of Terrouane, where they met with Marinus the Pope's Legat, and Ro∣bert Archbishop of Treves, who waited for their coming, without whom there would not have been a∣ny other Bishops of Germany and Lorrain. Marinus asked Artaldus and the rest of the Bishops, how Hugh the White had behav'd himself since the last Synod, and whether the Letters which cited him before the Synod had been deliver'd to him. They reply'd, That he still persisted in his Rebellion and Robberies; that one of their Letters had been deliver'd to him, and that the other had been in∣tercepted by his Party. Upon this Reply, It was asked whether any one was come on his behalf; and none appearing, the Assembly was adjourn'd till the morrow. On that day there appear'd no Deputy in behalf of Count Hugh; and tho' the Clergy and Nobless cry'd out, that he ought to be Excommunicated; yet that was put off to the third day. In the mean time they consulted about the Affair of the Bishops who had been cited before the Synod, or who had any hand in the Ordina∣tion of Hugh. The Bishop of Soissons begg'd Pardon and obtain'd it; the Bishop of Terouane was found to have no hand in the Ordination; and the Bishop of Noyon was excus'd by reason of his Sickness. On the third day High the White was Excommunicated till such time as he should come and ask the Legat and the Bishops Pardon for what he had done: and in case he should defer that, he enjoyn'd him to go to Rome for Absolution. There were likewise two Bishops Excommunicated who were ordain'd by Hugh, the one of Amiens, the other of Senlis; and a Clerk who had instituted and inducted the Latter. Hildegairus Bishop of Beauvais was cited before Marinus, or to Rome, for assisting at their Ordination: and lastly, the young Count Hebert, Brother to Hugh, was likewise summon'd to make Satisfaction for the wrong he had done the Bishops. All these things were trans∣acted in the Year 948. and from that time forward Artaldus remain'd in possession of the Arch-bishop of Rheims, which was made sure to him by the Peace concluded between Lewis d'Outremer and Hugh the White in the Year 953. In the same Year this Archbishop held a Council of five Bi∣shops at S. Thierry, wherein he Excommunicated Count Reginald, who had seiz'd upon the Revenues of the Church.

Artaldus dying the last day of August in the Year 967. after he had been Archbishop of Rheims thirty years, several Bishops propos'd the Re-establishing Hugh. The Affair was debated in a Coun∣cil held in a Village of the Diocess of Meaux upon the River Marne, consisting of Thirteen Bishops of the Provinces of Rheims and Sens. The Bishops of Laon and Chalons very strongly oppos'd his Re∣stitution, and the Case was referr'd to the Arbitration of his Holiness. He gave them to understand by Bruno Archbishop of Cologne, that Hugh had been Rejected and Excommunicated by the Coun∣cils of Rome and Pavia, and that there was no thinking of him again. Whereupon they elected a Clerk of the Church of Rheims call'd Odalric, the Son of a Count nam'd Hugh, who was supported by King Lotharius, by the Queen-Mother, and by Bruno. He enjoy'd the Archbishoprick very peaceably for the space of Seven years, and dy'd in the Year 968. His Successor was Adalberon or Alberon, Brother of Count Henry, who govern'd the Church of Rheims for Nineteen years, with a great deal of Prudence and Candor. Under his Episcopacy a Council was held at Rheims in the Year 975. whereof Stephen Deacon of Pope Penedict VII. was President. In this Council Thibold was Excommunicated for having unlawfully seiz'd upon the Church of Amiens. In the Year 972. he held another Council at St. Mary's Mount, wherein he procur'd a Ratification of an Order he had made, of putting Monks into the Monastery of S. Mouzon instead of Canons who were there: Af∣ter the death of this Archbishop, Hugh Capet laid hold on this opportunity of taking into his Inter∣ests Arnulphus, the Bastard Brother of Charles Duke of Lorrain, the last of the Carolignian Race,

Clerk of the Church of Laon, by procuring him to be elected Archbishop of Rheims in the Year 989. who immediately took of him an Oath of Fidelity. But within six Months after his being in possession of the Archbishoprick of Rheims, his Brother Charles was introduc'd into that City, and became Master of it by means of a Priest nam'd Adalger. Which was brought about, as 'tis sup∣pos'd, by the Intelligence he had from the Archbishop, who however was carry'd by his Brother to Laon, and cast into Prison for forms sake. Arnulphus notwithstanding issued out a Sentence of Ex∣communication against those who had made an unlawful Seizure of the Revenues of the Church of Rheims; and the Bishops of the Province met at Senlis, and passed a Decree against Adalger, whereby they Excommunicated him and all others who had any hand in the Usurpation made upon the Churches of Rheims and Laon. This Excommunication was sent to all the Bishops, and Com∣plaints were made to the Holy See, who took part with Arnulphus. But Hugh Capet, who had al∣ways suspected his Treachery, having discover'd that his Suspicion was not groundless, and that he was in the Interests of his Brother, wrote against him to Pope John XV. and caused the Bishops of the Province of Rheims to write to him likewise, who accus'd Arnulphus, and desir'd he might be Condemn'd. After this Hugh becoming Master of the City of Laon, and having Charles in Custody, he took Arnulphus, and brought him to Rheims, where he call'd a Council to proceed against him. It consisted of six Suffragans of the Archbishoprick of Rheims, viz. Guy Bishop of Soissons, Adalberon of Laon, Herveus of Beauvais, Gotesman of Amiens, Ratbode of Mayon, and Eudes of Senlis; besides them were Debert Archbishop of Bourges, Sigwin Archbishop of Sens, Gautier Bishop of Autun, Bru∣no of Langres, Milo of Mascon, Arnulphus Bishop of Orleans, and Hebert of Auxerre, with several Abbots of several Diocesses. Sigwin was President thereof, and Arnulphus of Orleance Prolocutor. In the first Session held the sixteenth of June in the Church of Bazol, Arnulphus Archbishop of Rheims was accus'd for having betray'd his Trust to King Hugh, and being the chief Cause of the taking that City. Sigwin Archbishop of Sens, alledg'd that he would not permit a Process to be made on this Charge, till he was sure that Arnulphus should not be put to Death in case he were Convicted of High Treason; and moreover cited the Thirty first Chapter of the Council of Toledo, which imports that Bishops shall not proceed to the Determination of such Matters, till they had engag'd the Prin∣ces upon Oath to remit the Punishment of the Offenders. Herveus shew'd that it would be of worse consequence if the Prince should take cognizance of the Case, and deprive the Bishops of the right of doing it. Bruno declar'd that he was most concern'd in this Affair; that upon the account of his being a Retainer to the King Lotharius his Uncle, he had engag'd himself for the Fidelity of Arnulphus, that he might be made Archbishop of Rheims, in hopes that he would not let him suffer any prejudice for this Act of Kindness: That Arnulphus was so far from making his due acknowledgments, that he had begun to persecute his Friends, and had put him in danger of his Life: that he had to no pur∣pose warranted that he would not break the Oath of Fidelity which he had taken to King Hugh; that there was sufficient Evidence of his Treachery, because the Authors of that Rebellion were his most intimate Friends, and such as he esteem'd very highly. As to that which was alledg'd, that care ought to be taken that the Offender should not lose his Life; he answer'd, that there was no need to fear any such thing under Princes so merciful as theirs were; but that it was more to be fear'd, whilst they endeavour'd after the Safety of one Man, that the whole Ecclesiastical Order would be expos'd to danger. At last it was concluded, that the Priest who had deliver'd up the Gates of the City to Duke Charles, should be brought in. Whilst they staid for his coming, they read over the Oath of Fidelity which Arnulphus had taken to King Hugh and King Robert. After∣wards the Priest nam'd Adalger appearing, declar'd that it was Arnulphus who gave him the Keys of the City Gates, with orders to deliver them up to Duke Charles. After this Evidence was given, they read the Decree which Arnulphus had made against those who made an unlawful Seizure of the Revenue of the Church of Rheims, which prov'd that himself was Excommunicated, because he was the Author of that Depredation, and went shares with thóse who committed it. To this was joyn'd the Sentence of the Bishops of the Province of Rheims, pass'd at Senlis much about the time wherein they began to suspect Arnulphus of Treason. After the reading of these Papers and the Canons of the Council of Carthage against Persons Excommunicated who partake of the Sacrament, and against Bishops who do any thing contrary to the Oath which they have taken in their Ordination, leave was given to all who were minded to vindicate Arnulphus, to say freely what they could in his behalf. The Clergy of his own Church would neither accuse nor defend him: But John Scholasticus of Au∣xerre, Ranulphus Abbot of Sens, and Abbo Superior of the Monastery of Flewry, undertook to de∣fend him, and produc'd a great many Passages extracted out of the false Decretals of the Ancient Popes, to prove that Arnulphus ought to be re-establisht before they proceeded to judge him; and that they might not judge him till he had been cited several times, and the Holy See made acquaint∣ed with the Business. It was answer'd them that he had sufficient Notice given him; That they ought not to re-establish him till he had receiv'd such a Sentence as declar'd him Absolv'd, since he had been already Condemn'd; That Hildemare Bishop of Beauvais, and Abbo Archbishop of Rheims charg'd with the same Crime as Arnulphus was, had been judg'd by the Synods of the Province; That the Holy See had been already inform'd of this Affair by the Letters of King Hugh, and of the Bishops of the Province of Rheims, which had been carry'd to Rome by Deputies, which the Pope at first had pretty well entertain'd: but that since Count Hebert had presented his Holiness with a fine white Steed and several other things, he deny'd to give them any further Audience. The Deputies which Bishop Bruno had sent to Rome for his Releasment, added, that having requested the Pope to Anathe∣matize

those who were guilty of his Confinement, the Clerks of the Pope had demanded M•…•…y of them for it; and that they not being willing to give them any on that account, the Pope ••••d told them as his final Answer, That the Person for whom he had been Apprehended might release him, if he thought fit: from whence they concluded, that the Holy See did not hinder them from proceed∣ing upon the Spot to the Judgment and Determination of that Affair. But they carried the Point higher yet, and Arnulphus Bishop of Orleans remonstrated, that they might go on in the Trial, with∣out waiting for what Rome should say in the Case. And after he had made Protestation that all due Respect ought to be paid to the Holy See and its Decisions, without offering prejudice to the Ca∣nons of the Councils; he gave them to understand that there are two things of which great care ought to be taken, which were not to permit that the Silence, or the new Laws or Institutions of the Popes, be any prejudice to the Ancient Laws of the Church: Because this would be to overthrow all order, and to make every thing depend on the Will and Pleasure of one single Man. That this did not derogate any▪ thing of the Privileges of the Pontifex Maximus; because if the Bishop of Rome were a Man of Worth for his Learning and his Piety, there was no fear of his Silence, or of his Al∣tering the Constitutions of the Church. That if on the contrary, either out of Ignorance, or Fear, or Passion, he should swerve from Justice, his Silence and his new Decrees were the less to be fear'd; because he who acts contrary to the Laws, cannot prejudice the Laws. From thence he took an oc∣casion to lament the sad. Estate of the Church of Rome, and gave a brief account of the Popes from Octavian to Boniface, and shew'd his abhorrence of their Irregularities. He asked whether Bishops, noted for their Sanctity and Piery, were oblig'd to submit themselves blindly to such Infamous Mon∣sters, who had no Learning, neither Divine nor Prophane. He complain'd that they should advance to the highest Post of the Church the meer Scu•• and Refuse of the Clergy; Pastors who more de∣serv'd the name of Walking Statues, than of Reasonable Men. Upon default of excellent Popes, he was for consulting Metropolitans; and took notice that there were a great many such in Gallia, Belgiea, and in Germany, very well skill'd in Matters of Religion; and that it was more proper to ask their Opinion, if the War which happens between Princes did not hinder it, than to go to seek it in that City, which at present declares in favour of him who gives most, and weighs its Judgments by the Number of Crowns which are presented. He adds, that if any one should alledge with Pope Gela∣•…•…, that the Church of Rome is the Judge of all Churches, and can be judg'd by none, this is a Pro∣position which the African Bishops would not consent to, and which could not be true at this tim, wherein there was scarce one at Rome who had so much as studied Humane Learning, if common Fame were to be credited therein. That Ignorance was more excusable in other Bishops than in the Bishop of Rome, who ought to be Judge of the Faith, of the Life, of the Manners, and of the Discipline of the whole Church. That according to St. Gregory's Opinion, the Bishops, when in fault, are subject to the Correction of the Holy See; but when they are unblameable, Humility in one sence renders them all Equal. Lastly, That when the Bishops of Rome of this time were like to Da•…•…, nothing could be done more than had been done, since the Bishops and the King had writ concerning this very Business to the Holy See, and they had not undertaken to decide it in the Province, till such time as they had no hopes of having it try'd at Rome, which was conformable to the Canons of the Council of Sardica. He quoted several Passages out of St. Gregory, to show that Bishops are ob∣lig'd to punish Offences, and that they may Depose Bishops who are convicted thereof. He added, That tho' one might pass by other Crimes in silence, one could not do so in the Case of High Treason: yet that there have been Instances of Archbishops of Rheims, condemn'd by the Bishops of the Province for this very Crime; namely Gilles Archbishop of Rheims, who prov'd disloyal to Childebert and Eb∣b••, and was depos'd at Thionville: That the Decree of D•…•…, which imports that the Causes of Bishops shall be try'd at Rome, ought to be extended to none but difficult Causes, and not to such wherein the Crime is self-evident: That the African Bishops have contested the very Right of Ap∣pellation, and that the Councils of Nice and Antioch appointed the Synod of the Province to deter∣mine these Matters: That he would very readily grant the Church of R•…•… more than ever the Afri∣can Bishops pretended to allow it: That they consulted it when the Affairs of the State permitted it, and they submitted to its Determinations, unless they were contrary to Equity: But if it remain'd silent, the Ecclesiastical Laws ought to be consulted, and the rather because the Church of Rome at present was destitute of all manner of Supports and Supplys; for since the Fall of the Empire it has lost the Churches of Alexandria and Antioch, as well as those of Africa and Asia, and all Europe be∣gan to fly off from it: That the Church of Constantinople was withdrawn from its Obedience: That the Churches of Spain, which were most remote, did not acknowledge its Determinations; and that Rome had abandon'd it self, since it no longer gave any wholesome Advice to it self, or others. He concludes, that according to the Examples and Canons of former times, they ought to proceed to the Trial of the Archbishop of Rheims.

Upon this the Synod came to a Resolution; the Defendant was called in, who took his place a∣mong the Bishops. The Bishop of Orleans upbraided him with the Favours he had received from the King, which he had return'd with Treachery. The Defendant alledg'd that he had done nothing against the King: that he was always Loyal to him; that he had been taken by force in his City by the Enemy, the King not coming to his Assistance. The Bishop of Orleans oppos'd to him the Te∣stimony of Adalger the Priest, who said he had deliver'd up the Gates of the City by his order. The Defendant reply'd that the thing was false: the Priest maintain'd to his Face that his Evidence was true. Arnu••phus of Rheims complain'd of the ill usage he had met with; the Bishoy of Soissons ask'd him why he did not appear when he was cited by the King and Bishops; and upon the Answer he made, that he could not, being then retain'd in Custody; that Bishop reply'd, that he had offer'd to conduct him, and alledg'd several Circumstances to prove that he had behav'd himself very de∣ceitfully. Afterwards another Witness was produc'd, who told him that he had said to him that he preferr'd Prince Charles to all the World; and if he had any kindness for him, he ought to endeavour to serve him. Whereas several Abbots declared that Arnulphus ought to be permitted to withdraw, and to ask advice what Answer to make, it was granted him; and he withdrew into a corner of the Chamber with the Archbishop of Sens, and the Bishop of Orleans, Langres, and Amient. Whilst they consulted together, they read in the Synod the Canons of the Councils of Toledo against those who prov'd disloyal to their Prince. In the mean time Ar••ulphus acknowled'd and confess'd his Crime before the Bishops who were retir'd aside with him, who call'd others to be present at his Declara∣tion. He made it before them, and thirty Abbots or Clerks, which were call'd to be Witnesses. This Acknowledgment took off the Objection which might arise upon the Account of the Holy See; because Arnulphus having not appeal'd to it, chose his Judges, and acknowledg'd his Fault there was no difficulty remaining; so that they might condemn him without in••roaching upon the Rights of the Holy See. But to be inform'd what Ceremony they should use in his Deposition, several Canons were consulted, and a great many Instances were produc'd, which took up the remaining part of this Session.

The next day the Bishops meeting in the same place, after they had debated several Affairs both Ecclesiastical and Civil, resum'd that of the Archbishop of Rheims: and as they were de∣bating after what manner he ought to be treated, King Hugh, and King Robert entred with the Lords, and then thank'd the Bishops for the Zeal they had express'd for them, and ask'd them how the Case stood. The Bishop of Orleans return'd them this Answer, that there was no need of returning them Thanks for doing what was only their Duty: that they had not acted therein out of any Motive of Love to them, or of Hatred to Arnulphus: they could heartily with that he were a∣ble to clear himself; but that at last, after many Evasions, he had acknowledg'd his Crime, and consented to be degraded from his Priesthood, in the presence of several Abbots, and several Clerks who were Witnesses of that Declaration: that he thought it proper to have him there before him, that the King himself might be both Witness and Judge, and that by this means his Accusers, the Witnesses which had given in Evidence against him, and the Judges might be discharg'd. He was forthwith introduc'd, and the Bishop of Orleans having ask'd him whether he were still of the same Mind, he reply'd, that he was. The Bishop ask'd him, whether he were willing to be deprived of the Sacerdotal Dignity, which he had hitherto abus'd: He reply'd, as you please for that. Count Brochard catching at that word, said, That he did not explain himself enough, and that he ought to acknowledge his Fault publickly, that so he migh•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 afterwards say, that the Bishops had impos'd upon him therein, and that he had not made 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Acknowledgment of that Nature. He reply'd That he had openly confess'd his Fault, and acknowledg'd that he had swerv'd from that Allegiance which he ••••'d to his Prince: that he d•…•… that they would credit what the Bishop of Orleans should say of him, and that he intreated him to make 〈◊〉〈◊〉 fair a Report of his Case 〈◊〉〈◊〉 he could. Thereupon this Bishop said, that Arnulphus of Rheims being naturally modest in speaking, and asham'd to acknowledge in pub∣lick, what he had confess'd 〈◊〉〈◊〉 them in private, it was enough that he should acknowledge in gene∣ral th•••• he had not kept the Oath of Allegiance which he ow'd to his Prince. Count Brochard in∣sisted that ••e ought to declare it publickly; but the Bishop of Orleans silenc'd him by saying, that the Bishops were the only Persons who could extort a Confession of that Nature; and that it was suffi∣cient that the Archbishop of Rheims had made his Confession to them in private, and declar'd him∣self unworthy of the Priesthood because of his Sins, as he had done by a Writing which was read, wherein he declar'd, that he had confess'd himself to Sigwin Archbishop of Sens, and to other Bishops, and had appointed them the Judges of his Offences, that he might receive from them such Pennance as he deserv'd, and be remov'd from the Sacerd••••al Dignity; and consented that another Arch-bishop should be put in his place, without pretending ever to return contrary to this Declaration. Afterwards Adalger the Priest confess'd his Fault. He was ask'd whether he had rather be degra∣ded, o•• ly under a perpetual Excommunication. He preferr'd Degradation, which was perform'd with the usual Ceremony; for he was strip'd of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 his Clerical Habits from his Priesthood to his Sub-deaconship; and each time he was order'd to forbear performing the Offices of the Order, and of the Habit he was strip'd of a after this he was enjoyn'd Pennance, and receiv'd Absolution with leave to Communicate as a Laick. Lastly, They issued forth an Anathema against the other Re∣bels, who did not appear to make Satisfaction and Arnulphus was sent Prisoner to Orleans.

Arnulphus being thus depos'd and depriv'd of the Archbishoprick of Rheims, the Bishops elected in his place one Gerbert or Gilbert. He came of a considerable Family of Auvergne; and applying himself to study, he became a great Proficient in the Sciences and Philosophy. He was brought up in the Mo∣nastery of Aurillac, where he liv'd a Monastick Life; and from thence he went into Spain, where he learn'd the Mathematicks. He was afterwards Schoolmaster of the Church of Rheims, where Prince Robert, Son of Hugh Capet, Leoteric Archbishop of Sens, and Fulbert Bishop of Chartres were his Scholars; and he had afterwards the Honour of being Tutor to Otho III. Immediately after his Election he made a Profession of his Faith, and thereupon was Ordain'd, and Instituted and Inducted into the Archbishoprick of Rheims. In the Year 998. he held a Council, wherein he Ex∣communicated Count Hebert and other Usurpers, who had unlawfully seiz'd upon the Revenues of the Church of Rheims. He wrote at the same time to Fulcus Bishop of Amiens, who had appropri∣ated to his own use several Revenues of his Church.

King Hugh and the Bishops sent the Decrees of this Council to Pope John XV. by the Arch-deacon of Rheims, and pray'd him to approve of their Election of Gerbert. But this Pope being perswaded that Arnulphus could not have been Depos'd without his Authority, very highly resented what the Bishops of France had done. King Hugh wrote him word that they had done nothing in this Affair that might be of any Prejudice to the Holy Sea; and that if he pleas'd to come to Gre∣noble, or into France, he would receive him with all the Tokens imaginable of Submission and Re∣spect; and that if he pleas'd, they should try this Matter over again in his Presence. The Pope sent into France Abbot Leo, with orders to call a Council, and in the mean time forbad the Bishops who had assisted at the Council of Rheims to be there. Gerbert foreseeng the Storm that was coming on him, wrote to an Abbot, and Archbishop Sigwin, and endeavour'd to fortifie the latter, against the fearful apprehensions he had of the Thunderbolts of Rome, by telling him, that the Judgment of the Pope was not Superior to God's Decree: That if he (meaning the Pope) should fall into Error, he might be reprov'd: that he could not exclude Bishops from the Communion of JESUS CHRIST, for being unwilling to consent to a thing which they thought contrary to the Gospel: that they had no Power to debar him of the Communion, neither as a Guilty Person, since he was Innocent, nor as a Rebel, since he had not refus'd to go to any Council: that this Sentence, being unjust, ought not to be look'd upon as proceeding from the Holy See, according to S. Leo's Maxim. That the Rules whereby the Catholick Church ought to be regulated are the Gospel, the Apostles, the Prophets, the Canons made by the Spirit of God, and consecrated by that respect which all the World paid them, and the Decrees of the Holy Apostolical See which were conformable thereto. That those who out of Contempt swerv'd from these Rules, ought to be judg'd and condemn'd by these Rules: but that whoever observes and follows them, ought to enjoy perpetual Peace, without ever being separated from the Communion of the Church. In conclusion he declar'd to Sigwin, that he ought not to su∣spend the performing of his Functions because of the Prohibition of Rome, and that he ought to de∣spise this irregular Judgment, for fear that whilst he endeavour'd to appear Innocent, he should declare himself Guilty.

In the mean time the Pope by his Legat very warmly press'd for the re-establishment of Arnulphus, and after he had appointed Councils to be held for this purpose at Aix-la-Chapelle, and at Rome, to which the Bishops of France would not go, he order'd one to be held at Mouzon the Second of June, in the Year 995. in which assisted Luitolfe Archbishop of Treves, Aimon Bishop of Verdun, and Notger of Liege, with Sigefroy Bishop of Munster. Leo Legat of Pope John XV. presented to them a Letter of that Pope, and after it had been read, Gerbert made an eloquent Speech in his own Defence, wherein after he had shown the Reasonableness of his Conduct, he declar'd that he had not taken the Church of Rheims from its lawful Possessor; but that Arnulphus, who was unworthy thereof, ha∣ving condemn'd himself, he had been elected and ordain'd Canonically in his place. He gave this Speech in writing to the Legat, who handed to him the Pope's Letter. After this the Council broke up, having first appointed to meet at Rheims the first of July, and deputed John a Monk of the Ab∣bot Leo the Pope's Legat, to go to King Hugh. But as Gerbert was going away, Leo order'd two Bishops to remonstrate to him, that he ought to abstain from celebrating Divine Service, till the Con∣vention of the Synod. After he had declar'd that their Denunciation signified nothing, he went him∣self to wait upon Leo, and told him that it was not in the Power of any Bishop, nor of any Patriarch, nor of the Pope himself to exclude any of the Faithful from the Communion of the Church, till such time as he had been either convicted of any Crime, or had acknowledg'd himself to be Criminal, or had refus'd to appear before a Synod, being cited thereto according to the Canon: That neither of these being his Case, he could not tell how to condemn himself. However Luitolf Archbishop of Treves, having calmly, and like a Brother, admonish'd him not to give any occasion of Scandal, he prevail'd upon him so far, that for peace and quietness sake, he would only abstain from celebra∣ting Mass till the first of July next, which was the time appointed for the Synod at Rheims. The Queen Adelaid wrote to Gerbert, ordering him to appear at that Synod; threatning him that if he did not, such Measures should be taken as should be thought most proper. Gerbert understanding that they would Absolve Arnulphus, and re-establish him, and all to gratifie Leo, who had promis'd that the Pope should confirm the late Marriage of King Robert; and being inform'd that his Clergy and Laity had declar'd against him, return'd this Answer to that Princess, That he would not be there; and declar'd that he would patiently attend the Determination of the Synod: That having receiv'd the Government of the Church of Rheims at the hands of the Bishops, he was not willing to

quit it till the Bishops had so order'd it: But that he was not in any manner capable of opposing the Sentence which should be pass'd upon him, or of retaining his Diocess by force: That in attend∣ing the Judgment of the Synod, he suffer'd with grief an Exile, which many believe to be very hap∣py for him.

The Synod appointed at Rheims was held there accordingly; of which we have not any Acts or Decrees. All that we can learn of it is, that they therein resolv'd to re-establish Arnulphus, and to turn out Gerbert. The latter, according to the Resolution he had taken, obey'd, and retir'd to O∣tho III. who soon after gave him the Archbishoprick of Ravenna, from whence he ascended the Pa∣pal Chair in the Year 999. As to Arnulphus (whatever some Authors may say) he was not set at liberty, and re-establish'd till three years after, at the instance of Pope Gregory V. John the Fifteenth's Successor. His re-establishment was likewise afterwards confirm'd by Gerbert himself when he was advanc'd to the Popedom. For that Pope very generously forgetting all that was past, sent him word, That as it was the Duty of the Holy Apostolical See to raise up those who were faln, and to restore to them the Dignity of which they had been depriv'd; so he thought it convenient to suc∣cour him, even him who had been turn'd out of the Archbishoprick of Rheims for some default: Be∣cause since his Deposition had not been ratified by the Pope, it was believ'd that he might be re-establish'd by the Clemency of the Holy See, St. Peter having such a Soveraign Authority as no o∣ther could stand in competition with. That therefore by restoring to him the Pastoral Rod and Ring, he grants him a power of performing all his Archi-Episcopal Functions; to retain the Dig∣nity thereof; to enjoy all the Revenues belonging to the Church of Rheims; and to wear the Pa••••. That he prohibits all manner of Persons from upbraiding him with his Deposition; being willing that the Apostolical Authority should protect him, tho' his Conscience condemn him: That lastly, he confirms and grants to him de novo, the Archbishoprick of Rheims with all that belong'd to it. This is the Language of Gerbert when advanc'd to the Papal Chair; which seems to be in a differen•• strain from what he formerly us'd.

The Writings of Gerbert.

GErbert was without question the most Learned Man of his Time, especially in Prophane Learn∣ing: for he had to his Study of the Languages and Philosophy joyn'd that of the Mathe••aticks, wherein he was a great Proficient. He informs us himself that he had compos'd several Tracts of Rhetorick, Arithmetick, and Geometry. He speaks of a Sphere which he had made, and he com∣pos'd a small Treatise of the manner of its Construction. He invented Clocks, and made one at Magdeburgh, which he regulated according to the Motion of the Polar Star, the which he view'd through a Telescope. They likewise attribute to him a Treatise concerning the Astrolabe, written in Dialogue-wise, between him and Leo the Pope's Legat. This Art made him pass for a Magician, and gave rise to the Fable of his being promoted to the Papal Chair by a Contract which he made with the Devil. He had a great Hand in all the Affairs of the State, and especially in those which related to the Church of Rheims; and was in great repute with the Emperors and the Kings of France. He behav'd himself so well in those difficult times, that he fell into disgrace with none. The Archbishop Adalberon, as well as the Princes and Princesses of his time and several others made use of his Pen to write their Letters. He wrote likewise several Letters in his own name to several Persons about the Affairs of Church and State, or about particular Affairs, or else about some Points of Learning. There is a Collection made of an Hundred and sixty of them, which are publish'd from the Manuscript in the Library of Papyrus Mason, and printed by the Care of his Brother in the Year 1611. at Paris, with the Letters of John of Salusbury, and Stephen of Tournay. They are penn'd in a very pure Stile, and such as is truly Epistolar, with a great deal of Beauty and Spirit, but they do not contain much of Ecclesiastical Affairs. He is likewise the Author of the History of the Acts made by the Council of Rheims against Arnulphus, writ with a great deal of E∣legance and Energy; which shews that he was no less skill'd in Ecclesiastical, than he was in Pro∣fane Learning. His Speech to the Council of Mouzon is a farther proof of both; as well as the Speech which he made, when Pope, for the instructing of Bishops, publish'd by Father Mabillon in the Second Tome of his Analects. In this last Piece he Remonstrates to the Bishops that the higher their Station and Dignity is, the greater Obligations they lye under of answering the height of their Post by their Sanctity and their Merits; and that their Fall is by so much the more deplorable, by how much the more the height is from which they fall: That God requires more of them than of the rest of the Clergy; and that their Faults shall meet with a severer Punishment than those of others. He explains to them the Qualifications which St. Paul requires of Bishops in his first Epistle to Timo∣thy. Afterwards he declares against Simony, which was so common in his time, that Bishops gave Money to Archbishops for their Ordination; Priests, Deacons, and other Clergy-men to Bishops. He exclaims very highly against this abuse, and exhorts the Bishops to whom he directs his Discourse, not to drive such a dishonourable Trade, but to lead an unblameable Life.

FLODOARD Prebendary of Rheims.

FLodoard or Frodoard is not one of the least Ornaments of the Church of Rheims. He was born at Espernay in the year 894. He was Prebendary of the Church of Rheims, and the Scholar of Rhemy of Auxerre, whom Fulcus had invited to Rheims, to be President of the School of his Ca∣nons. In the year 936, he took a Journey to Rome, and in the year 940. he took up a Resolution of going to S. Martin of Tours, because he could not approve of the Promotion of Hugh to the Arch-bishoprick of Rheims. But Count Hebert caus'd him to be apprehended, and took from him the Revenues belonging to the Church of Rheims, which he was in possession of, and the Church of Cormicy which he govern'd. He was for five Months confin'd to that City, till he was brought to Soissons, where he submitted to the Judgment of the Bishops, who confirm'd the Promotion of Hugh. Then he was restor'd to favour; the Revenues which he possess'd were restor'd to him, and the Church of Coroy given him, instead of Cormicy. He assisted at the Council of Verdun, wherein Ar∣taldus was elected Archbishop of Rheims; and liv'd in the World to Odalric's time, into whose hands he resign'd his Benefice, and withdrew into the Solitude of a Monastery, where he dyed in the year 966.

This Author has written an History of the Church of Rheims, divided into four Books. He there∣in gives an Account of the Succession and Lives of the Archbishops, of what they had done or written, and what happened worth the taking notice of under each of them in that Church. The first Book begins with the Apostles, and ends at the death of S. Remy. The Account of the first Bishops is fabulous, and what he says of the following is very uncertain. The Life of S. Remy, the Conversion and Baptism of Clovis take up the greatest and best part of that Book. The second Book contains the Succession and History of the Archbishops of Rheims from S. Remy down to Hincmarus. The third is wholly taken up with the Life of Hincmarus, and with the Abstract of his Writings. The fourth contains the History of Fulcus, and of those who succeeded him down to Odalric. This Hi∣story was publish'd by Father Sirmond, and printed at Paris in the year 1611. and afterwards by Colvenerius who got it to be printed at Doway in the year 1617.

Beside this Piece, Flodoard did likewise compose a Chronicon (for Monsieur Pithon had no grounds to question whether it were his or no.) It began at the year 877. but the first years are lost, and we have only by us the year 919. and those which follow to the 966. where it ends. Bonderius ob∣serves that at Treves there is a Manuscript, which contains several pieces of Poetry of Flodoard; namely, five Books of the Triumphs of the Italian Martyrs and Confessors; three Books of the Tri∣umphs of JESUS CHRIST, and of the Saints of Palestine; and two Books of the Triumphs of JESUS CHRIST at Antioch. But these Pieces have not as yet been publish'd, and no body (as we hear of) has ever seen them since. The Chronicon was publish'd by Monsieur Pithon, and Monsieur Duchesne, in their Collections of the Writers of the History of France.

An ADVERTISEMENT to the following Addition.

As soon as this Volume was printed off, I understood by Father Thierry Ruinard, a Learned Religious Benedictine of the Congregation of S. Maur, that the Treatise of Flodoard concerning the Triumph of the Martyrs, which Bonderius made mention of, was in an ancient Manuscript in the Convent of the unshod Carmelites of that City; and this Father has been pleas'd to communicate the Ab∣stract of that Manuscript to me, which I thought fit to publish.

The ADDITION.

I Have examin'd that Manuscript, the beginning of which is torn; the Work begins at the end of the first Chapter of the third Book. He therein treats of the Martyrs who suffer'd under Valeri∣an's Persecution.

The fourth Book begins with Pope S. Foelix, and treats of the Persecutions of Aurelian, Claudius, Numerian, and Dioclesian. He therein speaks of the Popes according to the times wherein they liv'd.

The Fifth and sixth Books are not there, tho' there seems to be nothing left out.

The seventh treats only of the Persecution under Diocletian.

The eighth has this Title De Persecutione Maximiniani, i. e. Concerning the Persecution under Maxi∣minian.

It begins with the History of S. Marcel, and of all the Martyrs which are in his false Decre∣tals: Afterwards he speaks of the Martyr'd Saints which are worship'd in Italy. The fifteenth Chap∣ter is concerning S. Afra of Augsburgh. The sixteenth is concerning S. Eusebius the Pope.

The ninth Book makes mention of S. Valentine a Martyr at Rome, afterwards of the Martyrs thereabouts; and of the Decretals of S. Sylvester, Gallicanus, S. John, and S. Paul, and of several other Martyrs, who were at Rome in the time of Julian the APOSTATE.

The tenth Book begins at S. Julus the Pope, and ends with Vitalian and A-Deodate. He therein mentions several other Saints; as for instance, in the second Chapter he speaks of Eusebius, whom he calls Praesul, Prelate, who is said to have suffered at Rome under Constance, with Orosus and o∣thers: he speaks of S. Eusebius of Verceil, of Victorine the Rhetorician, and of S. Dennis of Milan; he makes mention of the Translation of the latter, made by S. Basil, who sent his Body to S. Am∣brose. (I have the Letter of S. Basil by me, directed to S. Ambrose, taken out of an ancient Manu∣script, which makes mention of this Translation.) In the third Chapter, where he treats of S. Da∣masus the Pope, he likewise speaks of S. Jerom. In the eighth Chapter he treats of the Schism of Lawrence, of Pascasius the Deacon▪—In the nineteenth of Horsmisdas the Pope, of the Peace in the East, of S. Germain of Capua, of the Restitution of Africa, of S. Remy, of the Conversion of Clovis, of the Crown which he sent to Rome, of the Censular Habits which he receiv'd from the Emperor. In the tenth Chapter he speaks of S. John the Pope, of Symmachus, and of Boëtius, whom Theodoric caus'd to be put to death. In the twelfth Chapter of Cassiodorus, of what Belisairus did a∣gainst the Goths in Italy and Africa. Lastly he treats at large of S. Gregory, and of what happened in his Monastery.

The eleventh Book comprehends the History of the Popes from Agatho down to Christophilus. In the fifth Chapter he speaks at large of Boniface of Germany, whom he stiles Doctor and Martyr. In the sixth Chapter of Charlemagne Prince of France, who turn'd a Religious. In the seventh Chapter of Pope Stephen II. of his Progress into France, of the miraculous Cure he wrought in the Abby of S. Dennis, &c.

The twelfth Book contains the History from Leo IV. to Leo VII. In the first Chapter he speaks of the Palls of Hincmarus, of the Settling the Octave of the Feast of the Assumption of our Lady. In the second Chapter, of John Bishop of Ravenna. In the third Chapter of Hincmarus and of Charles the Bald. In the fourth Chapter of Fulcus Archbishop of Rheims, and of the several Commissions which the Popes granted him. In the fifth Chapter of the Translation of S. Calixtus the Pope to Rheims, which he calls Urbem Nostram, Our City. He treats at large of the Actions of Formosus, whom (he says) Charles▪ King of France desir'd to send him Panem Benedictum, i. e. some Consecrated Bread.

The thirteenth Book is about the Saints which S. Gregory treats of in his Dialogues, and of other Saints of Italy.

The fourteenth Book is about the Guardian Saints, Martyrs, and others of the Cities of Italy. He ends all by S. Colomban and his Disciples.

At the end is an Epitaph of Flodoard himself.

This Manuscript is almost as ancient as Flodoard.

Flodoard's stile is very plain, without any Ornament and without the least Affectation. He makes a great many Extracts, and relates a vast number of Miracles.

AURELIAN Clerk of the Church of Rheims.

TRithemius makes mention of another Clerk of the Church of Rheims call'd Aurelian, who, he says, was very well skill'd in the Knowledge of the Scriptures, and in good Literature; but above all a good Musician. He makes him the Author of a Tract concerning the Rules of Singing and of Notes, which he says was a very remarkable Volume, intituled, The Compleat Musick Master. He adds, that he likewise compos'd several other Pieces, and that he flourish'd in the Reign of Arnulphus about the year 900. We have nothing of this Author left us.

BERNERUS Monk of S. Remy of Rheims.

WE ought likewise to reckon among those who were an Ornament to the Church of Rheims Bernerus Monk of S. Remy of Rheims, who was sent in the year 948. with several Monks to establish a Monastical Discipline in the Monastery of Humbliers in Vermandois. He wrote the Life of S. Hunegonda Abbess of Humblieres, published by Father Mabillon in the second Benedictine Cen∣tury;

and the Account of the Translation of her Body, which is to be met with in the fifth Century. He sent several Monks to S. Quentin to be put in the room of those Clerks of the Church of that place, who did not lead regular Lives. He relates in the Account of the Translation of the Relicks of S. Hunegonda, several Miracles which were wrought till the year 965. which shews that he wrote and liv'd beyond that year. But thus much may su•…•…ce to speak concerning the Church of Rheims. We proceed to the other Churches of France.

GAUTIER Archbishop of Sens.

THE beginning of this Century Gautier was Archbishop of Sens, who was ordain'd in the year 887. and liv'd to the year 923. He made Constitutions, which remain still among us. They are comprehended in fourteen Articles.

The first Prohibits such Abbots and Conventual Priors, who would not appear at the Synod, and were not excus'd; from being admitted into the Church for eight days.

The second prohibits the Religious from receiving any Depositum into their Convents without the permission of the Bishop.

The third orders that they should all eat together in the same Refectory, and all lye together in the same Dormitory.

The fourth imports, that all the separate Apartments of Nunneries shall be pull'd down, except such as were requisite to entertain the Bishop; or proper for the sick; or for any other Cause which the Bishop shall adjudge to be just and necessary.

The fifth, that none of the Religious shall be permitted to go abroad, or to lye out of the Mona∣stery, unless it be but seldom, and upon some lawful occasions.

The sixth, that all the suspicious and unnecessary Doors of these Monasteries shall be shut up.

The seventh prohibits the Ecclesiastical Judges from issuing forth general Excommunications, and from Excommunicating all those who shall Communicate with an Excommunicate Person, unless it be upon some great important occasion, and in such Cases as are enormous.

The eighth injoyns the Canons or Prebendaries to regulate their Offices, and to behave themselves in them with care and exactness.

The ninth enjoyns them to observe the Rules prescrib'd by the General Council.

The tenth and eleventh order, that the Communities of the Monks or Regular Canons be re-establish'd in those Priories where they were us'd to be, if they have but wherewithal to subsist.

The twelfth, that the Abbots and Conventual Priors shall have in their respective Abbeys and Prio∣ries, a sufficient number of Religious, from whom they shall not exact any Pension.

The thirteenth, that the Clerks who lead loose lives shall be shaven by the order of the Bishops, Archdeacons, or other Officers, so that no Mark or Token of their Clerical Tonsure shall be left them.

The fourteenth imports, that when any Country shall be interdicted for the Offence of the Lord or his Bailiffs, that Interdiction shall not be taken off, till such time as satisfaction be made for the Damages which the Parochial Churches shall suffer by reason thereof.

'Tis question'd whether these Constitutions belong'd to this Gautier, or to some other of a more modern date. And indeed they relate more to the Discipline of the succeeding Centuries, than to the Discipline of the Tenth.

Of the other Bishops of FRANCE.

THE other Bishops of France shew'd themselves no less zealous for the keeping up of Discipline and maintaining their Rights, than those we have already mention'd. We have one famous instance of it related by Glaber Monk of Cluny, who liv'd in the following Century. Fulcus Count of Anjou, upon his return from a Journey he made to Jerusalem, being willing to discharge himself of a Vow he had made, caus'd a Monastery to be built in the Territory of Tours, over ••gainst the Castle of Loches, which he dedicated according to the Advice of his Wife to the memory of the Cheru∣bims and Seraphims, and not to the memory of any Martyr. Hugh Archbishop of Tours was intrea∣ted to perform the Dedication of that Monastery; but he refus'd it till such time as Fulcus should re∣store to his Church the Revenues which he had contrary to all justice taken from it. Fulcus stomach'd this refusal, went to Rome, and after he had made several Presents to Pope John, he return'd with Cardinal Peter, who afterwards dedicated the Monastery, having a Commission granted by the Pope

for that purpose. As soon as the Bishops of France •…•…, They k••••w (says Glaber) that it was the effect of 〈…〉〈…〉 which having inclin'd 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈…〉〈…〉 Church, had likewise 〈◊〉〈◊〉 upon the Pope to accept of th••se Presents which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 had 〈◊〉〈◊〉 him of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 which he had un∣lawfully seiz'd upon; and that by this means 〈…〉〈…〉 ris•• to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 fresh 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in the Church of Rome. They all abomin••ted this proc••edings looking upon 〈…〉〈…〉 Action▪ tha•• he who govern'd 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Holy Apostolical See should violate the first Order establish'd by the Apostles and by the Canons, the Custom of the Church, founded on a great many Authorities of Antiquity▪ which forbids Bishops to exercise any Juris•• diction in anothers Diocess, unl••ss the Bishop of that Diocess intreat him, or permit him to do it. For tho' the Pope of Rome be most rever'd upon the account of the Dignity of the Holy Apostolick See, yet he is not permitted in any case whatsoever to violate the Rules prescrib'd by the Canons. And 〈◊〉〈◊〉 each Bishop of the Catholick Church is the H••••band of his own Church, and the Representative of our Lord: So it is not allowable to any man to undertake any thing in •…•…rs Diocess. Glaber adds, that Fulcus notwith∣standing these Remonstrances, having caus'd this Church to be dedicated, had no Bishops present but those of his own Dominions, who assisted at it much against their wills; and that it was no sooner finish'd, but the Fabrick was blown down by a 〈◊〉〈◊〉, which is attributed to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of this proceeding.

In the year 989▪ a Council was held in the Abbey of S. Saviour of Charr••••x, in the Diocess of Poi∣tiers, at which assisted the Archbishop of B••••deaux, and the Bishops of Poitiers, L•…•…ges, Perigueux, Saintes, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉. There was nothing else done there but 〈◊〉〈◊〉 out 〈◊〉〈◊〉 against those who should rob the Churches of their Revenues, de•…•… the Poor of their D•…•…, o•• should by force apprehend or abuse a Clerk, not bearing Arms, before he were try'd by his Bishop.

Ten years after there was another Council held in the City of Poitiers, which 〈…〉〈…〉 called by Wil∣liam Count of Poitiers, and consisted of the Archbishop of Bordeaux, and the Bishops of Poitiers, Li∣m••ges, Ang•…•…, and Saintes. They therein confirm'd the Order made in the Council of Ch••rr••ux against the Usurpators of the Revenue of Churches and of private Persons. And for the putting is in execution▪ it was order'd that all the Grandees and Judges should cause full Restitution to be made to every one, who had any thin•• taken from them▪ and that those who wo••••d not submit to their Determinations, should be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to do it by force. They therein likewise forbid Bishops the exacting any thing for the Administration of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and Confirmation▪ and renew'd the Prohibition made so often against Ecclesiasticks keeping Company with Women.

We shall reckon among the Councils of France the Synod held at Ravenna under Gerbert▪ ••ecause we look upon that Archbishop a•• a 〈◊〉〈◊〉; and because it was ••e 〈◊〉〈◊〉 who •…•…e the following Institution in an Assembly of his Clergy, held the first of May in the year 997.

The first is a Prohibition of a great Abuse which prevail'd in the Church of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, according to which they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to Bishops, at the time of their Consecration, the Body of JESUS CHRIST, and the Holy Chrism to the Arch-Priests of the Diocess. The Eucharist which he speaks of in this place, was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Consecrated Loaf, which was given whole to the Bishop on the Day of his Consecrati∣on, and which he kept by him to Communicate thereof for forty days together, as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 observ'd in the Roman Decretal.

The second imports, that all the Arch-Priests shall pay to the Sub-Deacons of Ravenna, as an ac∣knowledgment of that Church, an yearly Pension of Two pence.

The third renews the Ancient Canons concerning the necessary qualifications of those who are to be admitted into Holy Orders, and prohibits Bishops from Consecrating Churches out of their own Dio∣cess, without leave from the Bishop of the place; and from entertaining or keeping those who be∣long to anothers Diocess▪ till they have Letters Dimissory from their Bishop. He likewise forbids the receiving any thing for the Burial of the Dead, unless their Friends or R•…•…ons ••••ould give any thing voluntarily.

Lastly we shall refer to this place that which happen'd in France and at Rome about the Marriage and Divorce of King Robert and Queen Bertha.

About the end of this Century, that Prince being a Widdower by the Death of Queen Lutgard•• his first Wife, had marry'd Bertha, Sister to Radulphus the Simple, King of Burgundy, who was the Widow of Eudes the first, Count of Chartres. But forasmuch as she was his Kinswoman, and he had formerly stood Godfather to one of her Children, tho' he had taken the Advice of several Bishops of his Kingdom about it, yet the Pope oppos'd this Marriage as being Null, and contracted between Persons, who according to Law could not marry together. Robert did what he could to confirm this Marriage, and spoke about it to Leo Pope Gregory the Fifth's Legat in France, who made him believe that he would obtain of the Pope what he desir'd, provided he would cause Arnulphus to be re-establish'd in the Archbishoprick of Rheims. In the mean time notwithstanding the Judgment which was pass'd i•…•… favour of that Archbishop, Pope Gregory V. held 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Council at Rome in the year 998. in the presen•…•… of the Emperor Otho III. at which assisted Gerbert, at that time Archbishop of Ravenna, and seven and twenty Bishops of Italy. In this Council he declar'd that King Robert ought to part from his Kinswoman Bertha, whom he had marry'd contr••••y to the Laws, and do Pennance for seven years together, according to the Degrees set down by the Canons; and if he would not, he should be Auathematiz'd: That Bertha should submit to the same Penalty; and he Excommunicated Arch•…•…bold Archbishop of T•…•…rs, who had celebrated that Marriage, and the Bishops of France, who had either Assisted or Consented thereto, till such time as they should come and give the Holy-See sa∣tisfaction. This Sentence of the Pope made such an Impression on the minds of Men (if we will be∣lieve

Peter Damien in the case) that all the King's Domesticks, except two or three, abandon'd him, and would no longer have any Conversation with him; and even caus'd the Vessels out of which he had either eat or drunk to be burnt. Let the Case be how it will, King Robert at last giving ear to the Admonitions of Abbo the Abbot, parted with Bertha within two or three years after; and Leo IX. (according as Ives of Chartres relates it) says that they came to Rome with the Bishops, to obtain their Absolution, and to get their Pennance mitigated. The Author of the Life of Abbo does not say that Robert went to Rome; but that he confessed his Fault both publickly and privately: that he asked pardon, and did Pennance for it. That which is most evident is, that the Marriage was of no longer force.

In the same Council, the Pope passed several other Sentences. The first in favour of the Church of Mersburgh, which had been rais'd to a Bishoprick by the holy See, and by the Councils held un∣der Otho, and afterwards destroy'd out of Council by Otho II. He restores to it its Dignity of being an Episcopal See.

The second relates to the Person of the Bishop of Mersburgh, call'd Gislair, who had quitted that Church to be Archbishop of Magdeburgh. It was order'd, that if he had been requir'd by the Clergy and Laity of Magdeburgh to take upon him that Archbishoprick, be should still hold it: That if that had not been done, and he could prove that neither Ambition nor Avarice moved him to take upon him that Archbishoprick, he should return to his first Church without being depos'd. But if he could not deny but that he was induced to it by some one or other of these Motives, he should be de∣priv'd of both Churches. This Gislair did not submit to the Sentence of Gregory, but held both these Churches. Whereupon he was accus'd in a Council at Rome, held under Sylvester II. Successor to Gregory V. who suspended him for some time, and ordered his Nuncio's in Germany to cite him. But that Bishop prevail'd upon them by Bribery to put it off, and afterwards pleaded for his Excuse his being sick of the Palsy. At last he appear'd before a Council held at Aix-la-Chapelle, where he demanded an Appeal to a General Council. Lastly, The Emperor Henry having sent for him to Dronburgh, and remonstrated to him that he ought to return to his Church of Mersburgh, he desired a few days to consider on it, and dy'd in the Interim.

The third relates to the Church of Puy in Velay. Guy Bishop of that City, had elected for his Suc∣cessor his Nephew Stephen, without the Consent of Clergy and Laity: however, after the Death of Guy, the Archbishop of Bourges and the Bishop of Nevers had ordain'd Stephen. The Council de∣clares this Ordination to be null and void; deposes Stephen; excommunicates the Prelates who had ordain'd him, till such time as they should come and give the Holy See satisfaction; grants leave to the Clergy and Laity of Velay to elect a Bishop; desires the Pope might consecrate him whom they should elect; and exhorts King Robert not to support Steven, but to stand by him who should be elec∣ted by the Clergy and Laity. This Sentence was put in Execution; Theodarde was elected by the Clergy and Laity, and ordain'd by Silvester II. Successor to Gregory V. as we learn by the Fragment of a Letter of that Pope, related by Father Dachery in the Advertisement to the Reader before the Ninth Tome of his Spicilegium, wherein he has given us the Acts of that Council more compleat than they are in the Edition of the Councils by Father Labbé. He takes notice in the same place that Gregory V. held a Council at Rome, wherein Gualdalde, who had seiz'd upon the Episcopal see of the Church of Osona or Vich, in the Province of Catalonia, had been depos'd, as appears by a Letter of Gregory V. which Father Dachery tells us is in the hands of Monsieur Baluzius. 'Tis very probable that this was done in the same Council, where Otho III. publish'd an Edict, directed to the Arch-bishops, Abbots, Marquisses, Counts; and to all the Judges of Italy; whereby he declares that all the Deeds of Alienation of the Church Revenues, even tho' leas'd out for 99 years, shall not be of force any longer than the life time of him who shall make them; and that there shall be no such Deeds made but for the Advantage of those Churches who are to be maintain'd out of them. This Edict is dated October 17. in the year 998. and 'tis observ'd that it was publish'd by Gerbert in the Synod which turn'd Arnulphus out of the Archbishoprick of Milan.

In this Century there was no less care taken of settling the Monastical Discipline of France, than of the Ecclesiastical Discipline; and as the Bishops were diligent in reforming the Clergy and Laity; so there were some holy Abbots, who set themselves, and that with a great deal more success, upon reforming the Monastical Order, which was the beginning of that Century in a very lamentable Condition. Most of the Monasteries having been ruin'd by the Normans, were abandon'd, their Re∣venues were in possession of Laicks, and the Abbots were Seculars. If there were any Monks still left in the Monasteries, they were such as observ'd no order; and were so far from living according to their Rule, that they did not so much as know it.

In this Condition was the Monasterial Order, when God rais'd up Berno, Monk of Antun, to be the Restorer of it. He began his Reformation in the Monasteries of Joigny and Baume, and in several others of which he was Abbot. For a Custom was then in Use, that one and the same Abbot held se∣veral Abbeys, or at least several Monasteries which depended upon him. He had for his Compani∣ons and Disciples Odo and Adegrin. In the year 910. William Count of Auvergne and Duke of A∣quitain; having founded the Abbey of Cluny, committed it to the Government of Berno, who put twelve Monks into it, and took likewise care of the Monasteries of Hols, Massay, and Souvigny, who were all under his Conduct, and embrac'd the same way of Living. Berno dying in the year 927. had for his Successor Odo, the Son of Abbo, born at Tours in the year 879. He had been e∣ducated by Fulcus Count of Anjou, and made Canon of S. Martin of Tours at nineteen years of Age.

Some time after, being come to Paris, he became a Disciple of Remy of Auxerre; and afterwards resolved to dedicate himself to God, he embrac'd the Monastical Life in the year 909. in the Mo∣nastery of Baume, under the Conduct of Berno. Odo extended the Reformation of Cluny to a great many other Monasteries, and carried it as far as Rome it self, to which he made three Journeys. The first in the year 936. The second in the year 938. and the last in the year 942. being call'd thither by the Popes to be the Mediator of the Peace between the Princes of Italy. He dy'd at Tours in the year 942. at his return from his last Journey to Rome.

He had for his Successor Ademar, or Aymar; next him was S. Macol, who was employ'd by Hugh Capet in the Reformation of almost all the Monasteries of France. He dy'd in the year 994. leaving for his Successor Odilo, who had been elected three years before his death. This last was Abbot of Cluny for the space of Fifty six years.

ODO Abbot of Cluny.

BErno apply'd himself more to the settling of his Order, than to study: but Odo apply'd himself to both, and compos'd several Pieces at different times, and in all the Conditions of his Life. When he was Canon, he made an Abridgment of the Morals of S. Gregory, and of the Hymns and Anthems in honour of S. Martin. When he was only Monk, he made three Books concerning Priesthood, upon the Prophecy of Jeremy, dedicated to Turpio Bishop of Limoges; They are intituled Collationes sive Colloquia; and others call them by the Title of Occupationes. When he was Abbot, he wrote the Life of S. Geraud or Gerard, Count of Aurillac, in four Books, dedicated to Aimo Abbot of Tulle; and the Life of S. Martial of Limoges; an Account of the Translation of the Body of S. Mar∣tin; a Piece wherein S. Martin is equalliz'd to the Apostles; several Sermons and a Panegerick of S. Benedict. These Tracts are printed in the Library of Cluny, with Hymns upon the Holy Sacra∣ment and S. Magdalene. An ancient Author of his Life takes notice, that being at Rome, he correc∣ted the Life of S. Martin; and speaks of a Book about the Coming of S. Benedict into a Village near Orleans. They likewise attribute to Odo the Life of S. Gregory of Tours, related by Surius. Father Mabillon takes notice that in the Library of the Reform'd Carmelites of Paris, there is a Manuscript which formerly belong'd to the Monastery of S. Julian of Tours, wherein there is a large Treatise in Verse, intituled, Occupationes Odonis Abbatis. He adds that this Piece is divided into four Books; the first concerning the Creation of the World; the second concerning the Formation of Mankind; the third concerning his Fall; and the fourth concerning the Corruption of Nature. 'Tis by a mi∣stake that they attribute to this Odo the Life of S. Maurus, which belongs to Odo Abbot of S. Maurus of Fossez. They likewise falsly attribute to him several Chronicons which Thomas of Lucca compos'd under the Name of Odo, as it has been observ'd by the Author of the History of the Counts of Angers, related in the Tenth Tome of the Spicilegium. Sigibert gives Odo the Title of Musician, and says that he was a very proper Person to Compose and Pronounce Sermons, and to make Hymns upon the Saints.

JOHN Monk of Cluny.

THE Life of Odo was written by one of his Disciples, call'd John, whom he had met in Italy in his Journey in the year 938. and brought along with him to Pavia, where he caus'd him to take upon him the Monastick Life. It is divided into three Books, and printed in the Library of Cluny, and in the fifth Benedictine Century by Father Mabillon, who has likewise given us another Life of Odo, written by Nalgodus, who liv'd about Two hundred years after the death of that Abbot.

ODILO Abbot of Cluny.

ODilo has left us but a few Pieces: which are, the Life of S. Maiol his Predecessor; four Hymns in his Praise; several Letters to S. Fulbert Bishop of Chartres; the Life of S. Adelaide the Empress, Otho the first's Wife; Fourteen Sermons upon the Festivals of Jesus Christ and the Blessed Virgin; a Decree concerning the Prayers for the Dead; and three Letters related by Father Luke Dachery in the second Tome of the Spicilegium, with a Letter of Pope John XIX. who reprov'd him for refusing the Archbishoprick of Lions. He is lookt upon as the first Founder of the Feasts of All-Saints, and of that of the Commemoration of the Dead. He liv'd to the year 1048.

ABBO Abbot of Fleury.

ABBO or Albo, Monk of Fleury or S. Benedict upon the Loire, was born at Orleans, and in∣structed and Educated in the Schools belonging to the Monastery of Fleury, where he studied under Wolfaldus the Abbot; and for several years together had the Government of the Schools of that Monastery. He went afterwards to Paris and Rheims, to study Philosophy and Astronomy; but making no great Progress in them, he return'd to Orleans, where he learnt Musick. From thence he was invited over to England, where he taught publickly for the space of Two years, after which he return'd to the Monastery of Fleury, of which he was made Abbot. This did not hinder him from prosecuting his Studies. He had some Differences to adjust with Arnulphus Bishop of Orleans, which occasion'd him to write an Apology directed to the Kings Hugh and Robert, wherein he exhorts them to turn out Hereticks; among whom he reckons such as believ'd that the Revenues of the Church belong'd to them, and who had made an unlawful Seisure upon them. He would have the same thing done to those Bishops who assert that the Churches and Altars belong to them. He observes that Jesus Christ does not say that the Church is the Church of S. Peter; but that his Church is built upon S. Peter. From whence he concludes that his Successors cannot say that the Churches which they govern, are theirs, much less can they make a gain of them, as he says they then did every day. He likewise in his Apology gives an account of what passed in the Council of S. Dennis about the year 995. where he himself was present, wherein having maintain'd against the Bishops, the Right which the Monks and Laicks had of possessing several Tithes, the People rose up in Arms against the Bishops, who were forc'd to fly for it; and forasmuch as Sigwin Archbishop of Sens, who was at the Head of them had been wounded in the Flight, Abbo was accus'd of being the Author of this Se∣dition. He made his Defence in this Epistle. He wrote a Letter to Bernard Abbot of Beaulieu in the Diocess of Limoges, to disswade him from giving a Sum of Money which the Count of Thoulouse and the Archbishop of Bourges would exact from him, for the making him Bishop of Cahors. That Abbot having resolv'd upon taking a Journey to Jerusalem, was disswaded from it by Abbo, who advis'd him rather to go to Rome, whither he retir'd upon Mount Gargan; and being afterwards intreated to return into the World, to relieve his Relations, he again consulted Abbo about what he ought to do in the Case, who in a very elegant Letter return'd him this Answer, That he ought not to think of quitting his Solitude to involve himself in the Affairs of this World. As to the Question which Bernard propos'd, Whether he ought to keep or leave his Abbey? he return'd him this Answer, That Cir∣cumstances would direct him what to do; and recommends to him the using his utmost Discretion to examine in his own Conscience, which of the two was the most honourable for him, and most beneficial to others: because on one side tis a great Duty to discharge the Functions of an Abbot, when one can conduct Souls to God: but that on the other side, when there is no hopes of being able to do any good, by reason of the Wickedness of those one has to govern, 'tis more convenient to retire, to provide for ones own Salvation. Sometime after Abbo went to Rome to obtain a Confirmation of the Priviledges of his Church. He there met with Pope John XV. upon the Holy See, who was not (says Aimoin the Author of his Life) such an one as he wish'd him, or as he ought to be. Having this Pope in detestation, he return'd after he had offer'd up his Prayers in the Holy Places of God's Worship. Upon his return from this Journey, he wrote a Letter to the Abbot of Fulda, publish'd by Monsieur Baluzius in the first Tome of his Collection of Miscellanies. He was afterwards sent a second time by King Robert to Pope Gregory V. Successor to John, who threatned to lay the Kingdom under an Interdiction upon the Account of Ar∣nulphus Archbishop of Rheims. He met this Pope at Spoleto, was very kindly receiv'd by him, and obtain'd of him a Priviledge for his Abbey, by which the Bishop of Orleans was prohibited entring into that Monastery, unless he were invited thither▪ and the Monks were permitted to celebrate Divine Service in their Monastery always, even tho' the whole Kingdom were laid under an Inter∣diction by the Pope. He adjusted the Business of Arnulphus; and having engag'd his word to the Pope, that that Archbishop should be releas'd out of Prison and re-establish'd, he was intrusted to carry the Pall to him. Upon his return to France, what he had promis'd was accordingly done, and he gave the Pope notice of it. About the end of his Life, he re-establish'd the Monastery of Squires in Gascony, which was call'd the Monastery of the Rule, and in the Country Language la Reoule, where he was kill'd in the year 1004. in an Insurrection which the Monks or Women of that Country rais'd against him. Monsieur Balusius has publish'd a Circular Letter written by the Monks of Fleu∣ry, upon his Death.

Besides the Apology and the Letters of Abbo which we have already mention'd, the Author of his Life makes likewise mention of the following Tracts. Of a Letter in Hexameter Verse, in praise of the Empero•• Otho: The Verses begin and end with the same Letter, and may be read six manner of ways, which make so many different Senses. Of a Treatise directed to Odilo Abbot of Cluny, a∣bout the Harmony of the Gospel: and of another Tract concerning the Cycles of all the Years, from the Birth of Jesus Christ down to his time, which Sigibert says is a Commentary on the Treatise of Vi∣ctorius. They likewise atribute to him the Abstract of the Lives of the Popes, taken out of the Hi∣story of Anastasius the Librarian, printed at Ma•…•…ce in the year 1603. The Life of S. Edmond King of England and Martyr. Father Mabillon has given us an Excellent Collection of Canons com∣pos'd by Abbo, and dedicated to the Kings Hugh and Robert, in the second Tome of his Analects.

Abbo's stile is very pure and elegant, and his Conceptions are accurate: He was very well vers'd in the Rules of Discipline and Morality. His Zeal for the Monastical Order, and the Interest of the Monks, created him a great many Enemies: because, as he says himself, he had always in his Thoughts the protection of the Monks; and had consulted their Interest upon all occasions, and op∣pos'd all who annoy'd them.

AIMOIN Monk of Fleury.

THE Life of Abbo was written by Aimoin Monk of the same Monastery. He was of Aquitaine, the Son of Anentrude, the Kinswoman of Gerald, Lord of Anbeterre. He embrac'd the Mo∣nastick Life in the year 970. under Oilbolde Abbot of S. Benedict upon the Loire; and flourish'd under his Successor Abbo, whose intimate Friend he was. He attended him in his Journey to Gas∣coigne, and after his death return'd to his Monastery, The principal Piece of this Aimoin is his Hi∣story of France dedicated to Abbo. It was printed at Paris by Badius Ascensius in the year 1514. un∣der the Name of Aimonius. Fifty years after Monsieur Pithou or Pithaeus, caus'd it to be re-printed from a Manuscript, under the true Name of Aimoin. It was publish'd in the year 1567. at the Prin∣ting House of Vexel. In the year 1603. James of Breuil, Monk of S. Germain del Prez, caus'd it to be printed, and pretended that it was writ by Aimoin, a Monk of S. Germain. Ten years after Freherus inserted it in the Body of the History of France, which he caus'd to be printed at Hanouer. Lastly, The Messieurs Duchesne inserted it in the Third Tome of their Collections, printed in the year 1641. This History is divided into five Books; But of Aimon's there are only the three first Books, and one and forty Chapters of the Fourth, which ends at the founding of the Monastery of Fleury. The rest is compil'd by a Monk of very late standing.

Aimoin is likewise the Author of two Books of the Miracles of S. Benedict, which are the second and third Books of these four, which are in the Library of Fleury; of the Life of S. Abbo, mention'd before; of a Sermon upon the Festival of S. Benedict; and of several Verses upon the first founding of the Monastery of Fleury, printed in the Third Tome of the Collection of Duchesne; together with another Treatise in Verse concerning the Translation of the Relicks of S. Benedict▪ He is not altogether so elegant as his Master Abbo; But he wrote with great accuracy, and his Narration is plain and pleasant, without having any thing of that flatness of stile which several other Authors of that time had.

The Abbey of Lobes, in the Diocess of Cambray and Principality of Liege, founded in the Seventh Century by S. Ursmar, preserv'd the Monastical Discipline till the Tenth Century, at which time its reputation was farther increas'd by several Abbots, who for their Piety were deservedly advanc'd to the Bishoprick of Liege, and recommended themselves to the World by their Writings.

STEPHEN Abbot of Lobes.

THE first is Stephen, whom Fulcuin calls a Learned Man, and of whom he says, that he observ'd the Rule of the Canons: which made People believe that he was a Secular Abbot. The same Author adds, that he has cast into a more polish'd stile the ancient Life of S. Lambert, which was written in a course dress, and he made a very famous piece of Prose out of it: That he likewise made another small Treatise, compos'd of several fine Thoughts extracted out of Holy Writ; in which he has inserted the Chapters and Collects of each Festival in the year: and that in the Preface he observes that he had been advanc'd to Mets, by dedicating his Treatise to Robert Bishop of that City. Sigibert says likewise, that he made a piece of Prose upon the Trinity, and upon the Invention of S. Stephen the Proto-Martyr. Others say, that they are certain Offices appointed for these Festivals.

The Life of S. Lambert was publish'd in the History of the Bishops of Liege, by Chapeaville. This Stephen was ordain'd Bishop of Liege in the year 903.

After his death the Bishoprick of Liege was contested, as was formerly hinted, between Hilduin and Riquier; but the latter being Abbot of Lobes, carried it from the other. In his time the stu∣dy of the Liberal Arts and Sciences (says Fulcuin) began to flourish in the Abbey of Lobes, and the most famous Professors of them were Scamin, Theoduin, and Ratherius. We have already given a particular Account of the Transactions and Writings of the last of these Persons. Trithemius like∣wise attributes to Hilduin, who was Competitor with Riquier for the Bishoprick of Liege, the Title of Abbot of Lobes, and assures us that he wrote the History of the Abbots of that Monastery, and several Sermons; but 'tis probable that he was mistaken, and that he took Hilduin for Fulcuin.

FULCUIN Abbot of Lobes.

IN the end of this Century Fulcuin or Folcuin was chosen Abbot of Lobes. He left a well penn'd History of that Abbey, from its first founding by Landelin and S. Ursmar to his time, which was publish'd by Father D. Luks Dachery in the Sixth Tome of his Spicilegium. He has likewise com∣pos'd a Treatise of the Miracles of S. Ursmar, referr'd by Henschenius to April 18. and the Life of S. Fulcuin Bishop and is contain'd in the first Part of the Fourth Benedictine Century by Father Ma∣billon. Fulcuin was chosen Abbot in the year 975. and dy'd in 990.

HERIGER Abbot of Lobes.

HE had for his Successor Heriger, the Friend of Notger Bishop of Liege, whose Works are com∣pil'd in the following Catalogue, collected by the Author of the Continuation of Fulcuin's Hi∣story, viz. The History of the Bishops of Liege: The Life of S. Ursmar in Verse: A Letter to Hugh about several Questions, and two other Tracts, which were never publish'd: A Treatise by way of Dialogue between him and Aldebold Clerk of the Church of Liege, and afterward Bishop of Utrecht, concerning the Dissensions of the Church, and the Coming of our Saviour: And another Treatise con∣taining a Collection of several Passages of the Fathers touching the Body and Blood of JESUS CHRIST against Paschasius Rat••ertus. the History of the Bishops of Liege was publish'd by Chapeaville, and his Treatise of our Saviour's Body and Blood is that Anonymous Piece set forth by Father Cellot. The Life of S. Ursmar is in Henschenius referr'd to April 18. and the other Works are only in Manuscript. Some other Pieces are also attributed to him, viz. the Life of S. Berlenda referr'd by Bollandus to Febr. 3. and by Father Mabillon to the third Bedictine Century, and that of S. Candoalde, which is inserted under the Name of Notger by Surius to March 19. This Abbot died in the year 1007.

ALDEBOLD Bishop of Utrecht.

ALdebold Clerk of the Church of Liege, and afterwards chosen Bishop of Utrecht about the year 1009. wrote the History of the Emperor Henry II. which is contain'd in the Lives of the Saints writ by Surius in July 14. and in the Fifth Tome of Canisius's Antiquities. Trithemius likewise makes mention of a Hymn in Commendation of the Cross; of another in praise of the Virgin Mary; and of some other Works of the same Author, as well in Prose as Verse. He died A. D. 1027.

ALBERT Abbot of Gemblours.

ALbert or Olbert Abbot of Gemblours, is likewise one of the Writers who proceeded from the Abbey of Lobes. Sigebert informs us, that he was a Person illustrious for his profound Skill in Human Literature and Ecclesiastical Affairs, as also by reason of his great Zeal for Religion, and that he render'd his Name immortal by writing the Lives of the Fathers, and composing Hymns in Honour of the Saints; but more especially in regard that he was Tutor to Buchard Bishop of Wormes, and incited him to the study of Divinity, and caus'd him to publish his Volume of Canons so useful to the whole World, which was written and dictated by him, and compil'd by the diligence of that Albert. Sigebert does not say that he compos'd those Lives of the Fathers, but only that he wrote them with his Hand; nevertheless Trithemius makes him the Author of them.

ODILO Monk of S. Medard at Soissons.

ODilo Monk of S. Medard at Soissons flourish'd about the year 920, and wrote a Book concerning the Translation of the Relicks of S. Sebastian Martyr, and S. Gregory Pope, to the Monastery of S. Medard, dedicated to Ingram Dean of that Abbey, who was ordain'd Bishop of Laon, A. D. 932. Therefore Odilo's Piece precedes that year. It is referr'd by Bollandus to January 20. and to the fourth Benedictine Century by Father Mabillon, who has likewise given us in the same Volume, the History of the Translation of the Relicks of S. Tiburtius, of S. Marcellinus, and of S. Peter and his Compa∣nions, made in the same Monastery A. C. 828. and written by the same Author.

GERARD Abbot of S. Medard at Soissons.

GErard Abbot, or rather Dean of S. Medard at Soissons, flourish'd in the middle of the Tenth Cen∣tury, having found an ancient Manuscript of the Life of S. Romanus, he cast it into a more polite stile, and made another of it in Verse; which he presented to Hugh Archbishop of Roan, as it appears by the Epistle Dedicatory, publish'd by Father Mabillon in the first Tome of his Analects. Of these Works there is only extant the Ancient Life of Romanus, that he corrected, and which was set forth by Monsieur Rigaud, or Rigultius.

JOHN Abbot of Arnulphus at Metz.

JOhn Monk of Gorze, and afterward Abbot of S. Arnoud or Arnulphus at Metz, flourish'd there in the time of Adalberon, who was Bishop of that City. He wrote the Life of S. Goldefinda Abbess of Metz, and the History of her Translation, with the Life of S. John Abbot of Gorze his Patron, dedicated to Thierry Bishop of Metz. Father Mabillon has inserted these Works in different Tomes of his Benedictine Centuries.

HELPERIC or CHILPERIC Monk of S. Gal.

HElperic or Chilperic Monk of S. Gal, compos'd in the year 980. a Treatise of the Calendar, the Preface to which was publish'd by Father Mabillon, in the first Tome of his Analects, and which is entirely preserv'd in Manuscript in the Library of S. Germain des Prez.

BERTHIER Priest of Verdun.

BErthier Priest of Verdun wrote a Compendious History of the Bishops of that Church, and dedica∣ted it to Dado, who was then Governour of that Country. It was publish'd by Father Dachery in the Twelfth Tome of the Spicilegium. He flourish'd about the year 987.

This Work of Berthier was continu'd by an Anonymous Monk of S. Viton at Verdun down to Thierry the Fourteenth Bishop of that City. Afterward Lawrence Monk of Liege, and at last of the same Monastery of S. Viton at Verdun, made a Supplement and Continuation of that History to the time of Alberon, that is to say, to the middle of the Twelfth Century. These Works are follow'd by an∣other Continuation in the same Tome of Father Dachery's Spicilegium.

ADSO Abbot of Luxeüil.

THere were two Monks in the Tenth Century who bore the Name of Adso: The first of these, the Abbot of Luxeuil, wrote about the year 960. a Treatise of the Miracles of S. Vaudalbert, the third Abbot of Luxueil, which is contain'd in the first Tome of the Benedictine Centuries. The second Abbot of Deuvres in the Diocess of Bourges, is the Author of the Life of S. Bercaire; of that of S. Basole Confessor; of the History of the Translation and Miracles of the latter; of the Life of S. Frodbert Abbot of Celles; of the History of the Translation of his Relicks; and lastly of the Life of S. Mansuet the first Bishop of Toul. All these Works, except the last, are in the second and fourth Benedictine Centuries of Father Mabillon; the last was publish'd by Monsieur Bosquet. This Author flourish'd about the year 980. and died in 992.

LETALDUS Monk of S. Memin.

LEtaldus Monk of the Abbey of Micy or S. Memin in the Diocess of Orleans, flourish'd about the end of the Tenth Century. He wrote the History of the Miracles of S. Maximin or Memin, the first Founder of that Monastery, publish'd by Father Mabillon in the first Tome of his Benedi∣ctine Centuries; and it is probable that he is the same with the Author of the Life of S. Julian Bi∣shop of Mans.

Notes

• The Digni∣ty of the Church of Rheims.
• [Other Historians say he was Son to Lewis the Bald.]
• The state of France af∣ter the Death of Charles the Gross.
• The Reign of Charles the Simple.
• Radulphus.
• Lewis d'Outremer
• Lotharius.
• Lewis the Faint∣hearted. Hugh-Ca∣pet and Robert.
• Fulcus Arch-Bi∣shop of Rheims.
• A Letter of Stephen V. to Fulcus.
• Other Let∣ters of Ste∣phen V. to Fulcus.
• Other Wri∣tings of Stephen in favour of the Church of Rheims.
• The Letters of Fulcus to Formosus.
• The Letter of Formo∣sus to Ful∣cus.
• The Letter of Fulcus to Pope Formosus.
• The Letter of Formo∣sus to Ful∣cus.
• The Letters of Fulcus to Stephen VI.
• The Letters of Fulcus to the Kings and Princes.
• The Letters of Fulcus to the Bishops.
• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Fu•…•… to the A••∣b••ts
• HERVE∣US Arch-bishop of Rheims.
• The Council of Trosly in 909.
• The Council of Trosly in the Year 921.
• Seulsus Archibishop of Rheims.
• Hugh Archbishop of Rheims.
• The Wars between Hebert and Radul∣phus.
• The State of France.
• Artaldus Archbishop of Rheims.
• The Council of Rheims for the De∣posing Artaldus and or∣daining Hugh.
• The Council of Verdun.
• The Council of Mouzon
• The Council of Ingel∣heim in fa∣vour of Attaldus.
• The Council of Mouzon,
• The Council of Treves,
• The death of Artal∣dus.
• Odalric Archbishop of Rheims. Adalberon Archbishop of Rheims.
• Arnulphus Archbishop of Rheims.
• The Council of Rheims against Arnulphus.
• [From all this Learn∣ed and Ju∣dicious Speech of the Bishop of Orleans, it cannot but be observ'd, that even in these dark times, wherein Rome might with ease have imposed on the blind and ignorant World, there were some so wise, and so honest as not to think its Bishop (especially if a wicked and ignorant one) to be the Infallible Judge of all Controversies. Now whether this honest proceeding of the Council of Rheims in judging Arnulphus, even in a time when they professed to pay all due deference to the Holy See; and whether the Practice of the Modern Gallican Churches in this Age, be not a sufficient Evidence to prove how little they (even of the Romish Commu∣nion) believe the Doctrine of the Pope's Infallibility (unless as far as they gain by it) I leave the fair and impartial Rea∣der of both Parties to judge.]
• Gerbert Archbishop of Rheims.
• The Coun∣cil of Mou∣zon.
• The Synod of Rheims against Gerbert. The re∣stablish∣ment of Arnulphus in the Arch-bishoprick of Rheims.
• The Wri∣tings of Gerbert.
• Flodoard Prebendary of Rheims
• Aurelian Clerk of the Church of Rheims.
• Bernerus Monk of S. Remy of Rheims.
• Gautier Archbishop of Sens.
• The Resolu∣tions of the Bishops of France concerning the Dedi∣cation of a Church.
• The Coun∣cil of Char∣roux in the year 989.
• The Coun∣cil of Poi∣tiers in the year 999.
• The Coun∣cil of Ra∣venna in the year 997.
• The marri∣age of King Robert with Ber∣tha.
• The Council of Rome in the year 998. under Gregory V.
• The found∣ing of the Abbey of Cluny.
• Odo Abbot of Cluny.
• John Monk of Cluny.
• Odilo Ab∣bot of Clu∣ny.
• Abbo Ab∣bot of Fleury.
• [How much this Abbot is mistaken in the latter part of his Remark (which says, That our Saviour says his Church was built upon S. Peter) will appear to any who consult our Lord's Words in the Original, Matth. 16. 18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: which words in our Version run thus, And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church. Where we may observe that he does not say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. from whence it must be concluded that he does not mean the Person, but the Faith of S. Peter, the Rock upon which he would build his Church. This Remark seems pertinent, since the Romanists from this Text, and that of S. John, chap. 21. v. 15, 16, &c. pretend to prove the Infallibility and Universality of the Pope.]
• The Coun∣cil of S. Dennis 995.
• Aimoin Monk of Fleury.
• Stephen Abbot of Lobes.
• Fulcuin Abbot of Lobes.
• Heriger Abbot of Lobes.
• [After having left his Employ∣ments in the Court of the Emperor Henry II. whom he serv'd in quality of a Privy Counsellor and General of his Armies, he became a Monk of Lobes.]
• Aldebold Bishop of Utrecht.
• Albert Abbot of Gemblours.
• Odilo Monk of S. Medard at Soissons
• Gerard Abbot of S. Medard at Soissons
• John Ab∣bot of S. Ar∣nulphus at Metz.
• Helperic or Chilpe∣ric Monk of S. Gal.
• Berthier Priest of Verdun.
• A nameless Monk.
• Adso Ab∣bot of Luxueil. Adso Ab∣bot of Deu∣vres.
• Letaldus Monk of S. Memin.