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. (Book 3)

A Relation of the Contest between Hincmarus and Rothadus Bishop of Soissons.

HIncmarus was engaged in many other Controversies and Quarrels, which were not ended * 1.1 with less trouble than that with Gotteschalcus. The first was the Contest with Rothadus Bishop of Soissons, in which he was forced to contend with the Pope himself, and at last give place to his Judgment. This Rothadus had been Ordained Bishop of Soissons in the Reign of Lewis the Kind. He had an Order to apprehend Ebbo, his Metropolitan, who was fled, and to shut him up in a Monastery, that he might attend the Synod. He was present in 835 at the Sy∣nod held at Thionville, where Ebbo was deposed. So that Rothadus was an ancient Bishop when Hincmarus was made Archbishop of Reims, which was 10 years after the Deposition of Ebbo, which perhaps was the Reason, that he would not give so much respect and subjection to Hincmarus as he expected of him. The beginning of the Business of Gotteschalcus shews, that Rothadus and * 1.2 Hincmarus were not well affected to one another, for Hincmarus would not put that Monk into his Custody, suspecting him to be inclinable to Novelties. There were also some other differences, about which Hincmarus was angry with Rothadus, as his frequent Admonitions and Threatnings of him shewed. At last the Quarrel broke out, when Hincmarus accused him at the Council held at Senlis in 863, that he had unjustly deposed a Priest of his Diocess, and would not obey his Metro∣politan, who commanded him to be restored, and the Person put in his place to be removed; that he had squandered away the Church Revenue, and pawn'd pawn'd a Golden Chalice; that he had sold the Vessels and Ornaments of the Church without the consent of his Metropolitan, the Bishops of Pro∣vence, yea, of the Steward and Clergy of his own Church, and that he had lived in such a way as did not become a Bishop. Rothadus seeing himself likely to be condemned, appealed to the Holy See, and desired that he might have leave to go to Rome. Hincmarus and the Bishops of the Coun∣cil * 1.3 consented to it, upon condition that he should return by such a time. Rothadus returned imme∣diately to his Diocess, and prepared for his Voyage to Rome. But before his departure he wrote to the King, and Hincmarus, and at the same time sent some Heads of Request to a Bishop that was his Friend, to be shewn to the King, in which he prayed the Bishops that had not consented to his Condemnation, to stir in his defence. The Priest that carried this Letter was constrained by the King and Hincmarus to shew it them, although the Bishop to whom it was directed was not present. When Hincmarus had read it, he made use of it directly to hinder his going to Rome, and have him judged in France. He interpreted this as a tacit Renunciation of his Appeal, and that he would be contented to b•• judged in France by the Bishops he had desired the assistance of, and * 1.4

since they were the Judges he had chosen himself, he could not afterward Appeal from them ac∣cording to the Rule Ab electis Judicibus appellere non licet.

Being therefore glad of this opportunity he perswaded the King to appoint those very Bishops for his Judges, whose assistance he begged, and immediately sent a Prohibition to Rothadus to stop his Journey to Rome, and caused him to be Summoned to a Synod by those Bishops. Rothadus refused at first to come, and insisted upon his Appeal to Rome, but it was denied him; so, against his Will, he was brought to the Synod, Deposed, and afterward Deprived, Banished and Imprisoned. Another Bishop was put into his place, but to lighten his Sufferings, Hincmarus gave him a good Abbey, with which he might live commodiously. Hincmarus says, that Rothadus, at first, seemed to acquiesce in this Judgment, but afterwards being sollicited by the Bishops of the Kingdom, and by Lotharius, who quarrelled with him, because he would not wholly join with them in the Mat∣ter of Waldrada, as also by some Bishops of Germany, Lewis's Kingdom, he put himself in the head of them, and went to Rome, to obtain his Restoration. But Rothadus on the contrary maintain'd, that he never acquiesced in that Judgment; that he always protested against it; and demanded, that he might be Judged at Rome, and never had any intention to choose the French Bishops for his Judges; that it was a Trick of Hincmarus's, who made that ill use of the Letter he wrote to a Bi∣shop * 1.5 his Friend. But however that was, Charles the Bald having given Pope Nicolas an Account, that Rothadus, who had Governed the Diocess of Soissons very ill for 30 Years, was Deposed, and desiring him to approve his Deposition, was answered, that he did not approve it in the least; and wrote in particular to Hincmarus, that he should restore Rothadus within 30 days, after he had received his Letter, or suffer him to come to Rome, and come himself, or send his Deputy on his behalf, threatning him, that if he did not do one of them within that time, he will interdict him from the Celebrating the H. Sacrament, and would inflict the same Sentence upon all those who consented to the Condemnation of Rothadus. Hincmarus, and the other Bishops of France, under∣standing that Pope complained of their Judgment, sent the Acts of his Deposition to him, by Odo a Bishop, and wrote to him at large concerning that Matter, but the Acts did only confirm the Pope in his Resolution and Opinion: Wherefore he wrote again to Hincmarus, that he was much troubled to see, that they had Judged that Bishop contrary to the Appeal he had made to the Holy See; that they ought not to have Deposed him without Writing to the Bishop of Rome; and which is much worse, Ordained another Bishop in his place after he had entred his Appeal. For which reason, he refused to confirm those Priviledges which Hincmarus had requested him to do, exhort∣ing him to amend what he had done amiss, and enjoining him a second time to send Rothadus to Rome, threatning him, that if he did not do it, he would pass a definitive Sentence upon him, af∣ter a third Admonition. He gave Charles the Bald also an account of what he had Written to Hinc∣marus, desiring him to take it into serious consideration; and to shew his displeasure, told him plainly, that he must expect no favour from Rome, if he would not maintain the Priviledges and Prerogatives of the H. See. He also wrote a Letter to all the Bishops who were present at the Synod of Senlis, and had consented to the Deposition of Rothadus; in which, after some Allegations out of the Fathers, and the Canons of the Council of Sardica, to confirm the Right of Appeals to the H. See, and condemning the Behaviour of the Bishops of France, in pronouncing Judgment a∣gainst Rothadus, he orders them to recal him from the place of his Exile, and to send him to Rome, and with him two or three Bishops, or their Deputies, that he might re-examine that Affair, assu∣ring them, that if they did not obey his Order within thirty days after they had received his Letter, he would Absolve Rothadus, and treat them as they had used him. Nicolas, at the same time, also gave Rothadus notice of what he had done for him, viz. That he had Written to Hincmarus and exhorted him to come to Rome and answer his Appeal; and after he had received the Acts of his Condemnation, he let him know what he had Answered to the Bishops of France, at the same time advising him, if he knew himself Guilty, to submit to the Sentence passed against him, as he had advised his Adversaries to restore him, if they believed him wrongfully Cendemned. He tells him also, that he was permitted to come to him, being assured by the King and Hincmarus, that he was already let out of the Monastery to which he was confined. He desired the King likewise to furnish him with all things necessary for his Voyage, and tells the Queen Hermentruda, that he could not pass by this Matter, as she had desired him, to gratify her Husband Charles the Bald. It is evident that Hincmarus, who had a mind to keep the Matter as it was, hindred Rothadus from going his Journey, for Nicolas was forced to send him a fourth Letter, wherein he complains of his Carriage, and forbids him Consecrating him Bishop of Soissons who was chosen to be put in Rothadus's place. Hincmarus seeing himself out of favour at Rome about this Affair, and some * 1.6 other Matters, writes a long Letter to Pope Nicolas to justify himself, chiefly about this Matter. In the Letter he assures him, that Rothadus was not condemned with a design to hinder his Appeal to the H. See, that he was Tryed by such Judges as he had made choice of himself, upon which ac∣count it was that he thought it not necessary to send him to Rome, but judged it sufficient to ac∣quaint his Holiness of the Sentence they had passed on him; That he was perswaded that the Ho∣ly See ought not to be troubled with personal differences, between either the Superior or Inferior Clergy, for the Canons of Nice, and the Constitutions of Pope Innocent, and many other, leave them to the Judgment of the Metropolitan, and Bishops of the Province. 'Tis true, when the causes of the Bishops are difficult, and can't be decided by the ordinary Canons in a Council of the Province, then they ought to be carried to the H. See. As also if a Bishop, who hath been Tryed

by a Council of the Province, and hath not Appealed to Judges of his own choosing, thinks himself unjustly Condemned, he may Appeal to the Patriarch to have his Cause re-examined, and the Pope may Write to those that have been his Judges, as it is appointed in the Council of Sardica. That the Archbishops only receive their Pall of the Pope, who therefore ought only to be Judged immediately by him. Coming in the next place to the business of Rothadus, he says, That he had been admonished of his Duty long before, and reproved for his Disorders, but not reforming in the least, he was obliged to accuse him before the Synod of Bishops, that he might grow better upon their Advice; and that instead of hearkening to them, he desired that they would be Judges of the difference between him and his Metropolitan. That these Judges had condemned him, and he acquiesced at first in their Sentence, but afterward being sollicited by the Bishops of the Pro∣vinces of Lotharius, and Lewis of Germany, required his Restoration. That upon the Letters that the Pope had Written he was set at Liberty, and they would send him to Rome, but they did not think it fit to Restore him, because he was unworthy, and his disorders being so publick, they could not do it without Scandal. That if his Holiness would restore him, he would quietly sub∣mit to his Decision, but he took himself obliged to let him know the Crimes of that Bishop, of which, if he were well informed, he could not believe that he would Disanul the Judgment given against him, especially since he chose the Judges himself; and according to the Council of Car∣thage, it is not allowed to Appeal from the Sentence of those Judges a Person hath chosen himself. He insinuates, that according to the Council of Sardica, the Pope ought not to have the first Hear∣ing of the Causes of the Bishops, nor Judge them at Rome, but they ought first to be determined in their own Province; and in case of Appeal, the Pope must send his Commissioners to the places. He adds, That if he that hath been Condemned at the first Tryal be Restored, the latter Exa∣mination ought not to hurt the Persons of the first Judges, nor ought they to be reproved for it, unless it appears that they have Condemned him out of Enmity, Coverousness, or Partiality. In fine, That if the Pope Annuls the Judgment passed upon Rothadus, he would render all the Judg∣ments of the Bishops of France ever after contemptible. As for himself, he would never concern himself to Judge, or Condemn any Man, but, if they would not amend upon Admonition, send them to Rome. And this he shall be obliged to do, to avoid the Menaces of Excommunication which the Pope hath so often repeated to him, altho' it is the Opinion of the Fathers that Excommuni∣cation ought rarely to be used, and that in case of great Necessity. Lastly, He implores him, that his Compassion for Rothadus should not make him over-look the Rules of Discipline, and give an ill Example of Impunity to the Church. These Maxims he confirmed by the Canons of the Coun∣cils, and the Ancient and Genuine Writings of the Popes. Hincmarus also in this Letter assures the Pope, that they had sent their Deputies to Rome in their stead, not to accuse Rothadus, but only to satisfy him, that the Bishops of France intended no manner of disrespect to the H. See in Judging him, and to certify the Pope, that that Bishop was condemned by those Bishops whom he chose for his Judges, But tho' Hincmarus had promised, in the Name of the French Bishops, to send their Deputies to Rome, nevertheless they did not go, and pretended, for an Excuse, that it was told them that the ways were not open, and they should be stopped in their Journey if they went. Wherefore Rothadus went alone, and having waited almost Eight Months for his Accusers, he pre∣sented a Petition to the Pope, in which he complains, That he had been Deposed in contempt of his Appeal to the H. See. He maintains, that he never desisted from his Appeal, nor did choose or demand any other Judges. He accuseth Hincmarus of Compulsion and Deceit. He complains of his ill usage which he had received from him, and prayed the Pope to Try him.

Nicolas, who had entertain'd him civilly, and dealt with him as a Bishop, declared himself whol∣ly for him, and made an Oration in S. Mary's Church upon the Eve of the Nativity 865, in which * 1.7 he pleaded Rothadus's Cause, and maintains, That having Appealed to the H. See, he could not choose any other Judges, nor be Judged at another Tribunal; that he had not done it. And lastly, Since if he had not Appealed, they could not have Deposed him without acquainting the Bishop of Rome with it, because the Canons reserve the Knowledge of such Causes as concern the Bishops to the Holy See; He declares him Innocent, and Disannuls the Judgment given against him, and re∣stores him to his Dignity; And after he had done it, with great noise, upon a Solemn Day, he makes it known to the Clergy and People of Rome in a Letter on purpose. He sent also an Ex∣press to Carolus Calvus, in which he much blames the proceedings of Hincmarus in derogation of the Right which he pretended to belong to the Bishop of Rome, without whose Cognizance they could not Judge a Bishop. He complains of the delays which they had made for above two Years, keep∣ing Rothadus from Rome, and neither sending their Deputies, Witnesses, nor Accusers. He declares Rothadus innocent, and desires the King, Charles the Bald, to see him restored to his Dignity and Estate. At the same time he wrote a Letter to Hincmarus, in which, after he had upbraided him with the same Dealings, he commands him to submit to the Judgment he had given in favour of Rothadus, and to Execute it, or come himself to accuse him, upon condition, nevertheless, that Ro∣thadus should be first restored to his Dignity and Revenues. In conclusion he says, That if he did not do one of them, he Pronounced him, by Virtue of his Apostolick Authority, Deposed from his Priestly Dignity, and separated from the Communion of the Church, without hopes of Restoration. He wrote also a large Letter to all the Bishops, to oblige them to receive Rothadus, and approve the Judgment he had given in his favour; and taking this occasion to greaten his Authority, he claims, as his due, that all Causes of the Bishops should be brought to the H. See. He upholds this

pretence by the false Decretals, which he vouches to be Genuine, Ancient, and very Authentick; and because the Causes of the Bishops are the greatest Causes, whose Cognizance belongs to the Bi∣shop of Rome, according to the Constitutions of the Popes. He proves that Rothadus made no Choice of his Judges, because he Named none in particular, but had only Written to some Bishops that they would undertake his Defence; that he never renounced his Appeal, nor indeed could he, because having once Appealed to a Superior Tribunal, he can't be Judged at an Inferior. Never∣theless, he declares that he will do no Injustice to any Man, and gave them free Liberty to accuse him before the H. See, upon condition they should first restore him, and put him in the same Quality he was before their Sentence passed upon him. He wrote also to the Clergy and People of Soissons, to Congratulate the Restoration of their Bishop, and Exhorts them to receive him joyfully. Lastly, He gave Rothadus a Letter directed to him, in which he restores him to his Dignity and Revenues, forbids all Men to trouble him, Exhorts him to take care of his Bisho∣prick, and execute his Episcopal Functions diligently, (upon condition nevertheless, that if after he is restored, any one shall accuse him before the H. See, he shall be ready to defend himself) and Pronounced a Sentence of Excommunication against them, who, after three Admonitions, would not restore any Goods, that belong to the Church of Soissons, which they had invaded, and against them who communicated with such. This Letter is Dated January, Indict. 13. An. 866. [These Epistles of Pope Nicolas, with many other, are Printed in one Collection at Rome 1542. and in Tom. 8. of the Councils, p. 268, 480, 514, and 563.]

Rothadus furnished with all these Letters returned into France. The Bishops of that Kingdom see∣ing * 1.8 the Pope so earnest in that Affair, would not contend with him, but for Peace sake restored Rothadus, altho' they were perswaded that the Pope did not act according to the Canons, which ap∣point that Bishops should be Judged in the Province, and that their Causes should not be carried to Rome, but he ought to send Commissioners to the places. And this they did so much the more willingly, because the Person who had been put in his place was Dead, as Hincmarus Bishop of Reims observes in the 5th Article against his Nephew Hincmarus Bishop of Laon.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Rothadus B••shop of Soissons.
• * 1.2

  The Dis∣agreement between Rothadus and Hinc∣marus. Hincma∣rus's Accu∣sation of him.
• * 1.3

  Rothadus's Appeal to Rome.
• * 1.4

  Rothadus's Condem∣nation.
• * 1.5

  The Quar∣rel between the Pope and Hincmarus about the business of Rothadus.
• * 1.6

  Hincma∣rus's 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Ro∣thadus.
• * 1.7

  Pope Nico∣las's Letters in favour of Rothadus.
• * 1.8

  The Conclu∣sion of the business of Rothadus.