The history of the Eucharist divided into three parts : the first treating of the form of celebration : the second of the doctrine : the third of worship in the sacrament / written originally in French by monsieur L'Arroque ... done into English by J.W.

CHAP. XIII.

The Eucharist received with the hand.

BUT because it is not sufficient to know the things which were distributed unto Communicants, if we do not at the same time know the manner they were re∣ceived by Believers; I think fit to imploy this Chapter in the inquiry of this Custom and Practice. When Jesus Christ celebrated and instituted his first Sacrament, he said unto his Dis∣ciples, Take; the Greek word used by him in this place imports, to take with the hand, or receive with the hand what is given; accord∣ingly the ancient Christians which succeeded the Age of Jesus Christ and his Apostles did in the very same manner; and it is certain, that all the Communicants generally received with the hand in the Church, the Sacrament of the Eucharist; so Tertulli∣an teacheth us in his Treatise of Idolatry, where shewing, that it is not lawful for a Christian Workman to make Idols, that is to say, Images of false Gods, he expresseth his anger against any amongst the Christians, * 1.1 Who come (saith he) from making Idols, to Church, who lifteth up unto God the Father, the hands which are the makers of Idols; * 1.2 And in fine which stretcheth forth those hands to re∣ceive the Body of the Lord, who gave Bodies unto Devils. And else∣where, We receive the Eucharist from no other hand but from his who doth preside; * 1.3 And in his Book of Prayer, Having (saith he) re∣ceived the Body of the Lord and kept it. Clement of Alexandria, at the end of the Second Century wherein he lived, teacheth us, that there were certain Priests who did not distribute the Sacrament unto Communicants, but permitted each one that approached un∣to the holy Table to take it. * 1.4 Some (saith he) having divided the Eucharist according to the usual manner, suffered each one of the people to take part of it. Cardinal Cajetan, was of opinion, that Jesus Christ did after the same manner, and that the Primitive Church Religiously followed his example; and it is at this time the man∣ner of Communicating amongst the Protestants in Holland: yet this is still receiving the Sacrament with the hand; which was observed in S. Cyprians time, * 1.5 that is to say, in the Third Century, as appears by these words, Let us arm the right hand with the Spiritual Sword, that it may couragiously reject wicked

Sacrifices, being mindful of the Eucharist, and that which receives the Body of the Lord, might afterwards imbrace Christ himself, that hand which is to receive the price of immortal Crowns. So it is that Mr. Rigaut hath in his Notes corrected this passage, by the Manuscript Copies of the Vatican. And again, * 1.6 He that is fallen, threatens those which stand; those which are wounded, them which are not; and the sacrilegious Person is offended at the Priests, because he doth not presently receive the Body of Christ with defiled hands, or that he drinks not the Blood of the Lord with an impure mouth. And in another Treatise, where he teacheth that the works of the flesh are over∣come by means of patience; * 1.7 Let patience (saith he) be strong and well rooted in the heart, that the sanctified Body and Temple of God, defile not it self by Adultery, and that the hand, after having received the Eu∣charist, defile not it self with the Sword and Blood-shedding. Cornelius, Bishop of Rome, contemporary with St. Cyprian, also sheweth plainly that it was so practised in the Church of Rome, when wri∣ting unto Fabius, Bishop of Antioch, he tells him that Novatian the Heretick, made those who came unto him to receive the Com∣munion, to swear that they would be of his party; * 1.8 After he had made the Oblations (saith he) and that he had distributed and given unto every one, part of the Sacrament, he constrained these wretches to swear unto him, instead of the benediction and Prayers, taking with both his hands, the hands of him who received, and letting them not loose, till they had ingaged unto him by Oath. We have again in the same Eusebius, another example of this use and custom about the same time which Cornelius wrote, for we there find, that Denys Bishop of Alexandria writing unto Sixtus Bishop of Rome, speaks unto him of a Brother, that is to say, a Believer, who had lived a great while in the Church after he had entred into its Communion, and forsaken the Hereticks amongst whom he had been Baptized; and amongst many things which he saith, he observes this circum∣stance, That he presented himself at the holy Table; * 1.9 that he had stretched out his hands to receive this holy nourishment; that he had received it, and that he had been a great while partaker of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. It was unto this custom doubtless, that Gregory Na∣zianzen had respect, when he said of Julian the Apostate, * 1.10 He pollutes his hands, to the end there should remain nothing of the unbloody Sacrifice, whereby we communicate of Jesus Christ, of his sufferings, and of his Divinity: The Abbot of Billy, one of the Scholiasticks of Gre∣gory, subscribes thereunto, and observes upon the place, That al∣most all the Antients, after Turtullian, testifie, that antiently, the Eu∣charist was given into the peoples hand. And in the funeral Oration of Gorgonia his Sister, he sufficiently teacheth the same, when he saith, That her hand had hid some of the Antitypes of the Body and Blood of * 1.11

Jesus Christ. St. Basil his intimate friend, deposeth in favour of this same practice about the end of the V. Century; * 1.12 In the Church, (saith he) the Priest gives one part, (that is, of the Sacrament) and he which receiveth it, keeps it with all freedom, and so bears it with his own hand to his mouth. St. Cyril of Jerusalem suffers us not to make any question of it when he speaks of receiving the Body of Jesus Christ in the hollow of the hand, and that he warns the Commu∣nicant, * 1.13 That he take care that he lose none of it, and that not a crum of it, fall or be lost; And St. Ambrose, doth he not say, That the hand is that whereby we receive the heavenly Sacraments? And elsewhere he declares that we receive the Sacraments at the Altar. St. Chrysostom, who dyed the in beginning of the V. Century, gives us several proofs of this antient custom; Consider (saith he,) what you receive with the hand, and be not so inconsiderate as to strike any Body; and after having honoured it with so great a gift, do not dishonour it in imploying it to strike: consider what 'tis you receive with the hand, and keep it free from all covetousness, &c. Think that not only you receive it with the hand, but also that you put it unto the mouth. * 1.14 And in the same Tome, See here, I preach, I conjure, I warn with a loud voice, that he who hath an Enemy, should not approach unto the Holy Table, and that he should not receive the Body of Jesus Christ. * 1.15 And in the third Tome, The Sera∣phin durst not touch it with his hand, but with the Tongs; and you, you receive him with the hand. It is unto this time, must be referred what Sozom••n the Historian hath left us upon Record, of the Woman which being of the Sect of Macedonius, who denyed the Divinity of the holy Ghost, went through complaisance to her Husband, who had quitted this Sect by the powerful Sermons of St Chry∣sostom, * 1.16 unto the Church of the Catholicks, and disposed her self to communicate with them; but he saith, That retaining what she had received, she bowed her self as if she would have prayed, and that at the same instant her maid who was there with her, gave her privately what she had in her hand, and that she had brought along with her; but she had it no sooner between her teeth, but it became a stone. Unto the same purpose may be applyed what St. * 1.17 Ambrose said unto the great Theodosius, after the severe vengeance which he used against the inhabitants of Thessalonica; and St. Isidore of Damiette reproacheth a Priest called Zosimus, that Believers rather chose to abstain from the Communion, than receive it from his impure hands. In a Council at Saragosse in Spain, * 1.18 assembled Anno 380. there is a Canon against those who received the Eucharist, and did not eat it, an Ordi∣nance which is found to be renewed in the fourteenth Canon of the Council of Toledo in the year four hundred, upon which Canon, * 1.19 Garsias Loaysa, a Spaniard, observes, That antiently the Church was wont to give the Eucharist unto Believers in their hand; and he

proves, it by several testimonies, some whereof we have already cited. The prohibition made by a Council of Carthage Anno 419. of gi∣ving the Eucharist unto dead Bodies, doth no less justifie this practice, because the Fathers alledge for a reason, that it is written; * 1.20 Take, eat; and that dead Bodies can neither take nor eat. St. Austin, who was present at this Council, intended not to depart from this use; for writing against the Donatist Petilian, * 1.21 he saith unto him, When you celebrated the Sacraments, unto whom did you give the kiss of Charity? into whose hand did you give the Sacrament, and unto whom at your turn, reached you out the hand to receive it of him that gave it? Hitherto Communicants received the Eucharist with the naked hand, but in this V. Century, there began some difference to be made betwixt Men and Women; so that in some places, the Wo∣men were obliged to receive the Sacrament with the hand indeed, * 1.22 but upon it a clean Linen-cloth. The Men, saith St. Austin, when they desire to communicate, wash their hands, and the Women present clean Cloths, whereon they receive the Body of Christ. A Diocesan Synod of Auxerr, assembled Anno 578. by Aunacharius the Bishop of that See, calls the Linen-cloth used by the Women to receive the Sacrament, The Dominical; That each Woman, saith the 42. Canon, * 1.23 when she communicates, have her Dominical; and if there be any which hath it not, let her not receive until the next Lords day. And in the 36. Canon it made this Decree, A Woman is not permitted to receive the Sacrament with her naked hand. But in a word, it was still re∣ceived with the hand, seeing that a few years after this Synod of Auxerr, Cautin Bishop of Clermont in Auvergne, saith unto Count Eulalius, by the report of Gregory of Tours, in his History, * 1.24 Take the part of the Sacrament, and put it into your mouth. Cardinal Ba∣ronius in his Ecclesiastical Annals, attributes unto Maximus, who lived about the year of our Lord 650. and whom he stiles defender of the Catholick verity, against the Monothelites, the same words but now alledged of St. Austins, or very near them, * 1.25 That all men who desire to communicate, do first wash their hands, to the end that with a clear understanding and purified conscience, they may receive the Sacraments of Christ; That the Women also present clean Cloaths, whereon they receive the Body of Christ with a pure understanding and a clear conscience. Nevertheless the VI. Universal Council assembled Anno 681. made a certain number of Canons ten years after, that is, in the year 691. in one of which it expresly prohibits receiving the Sacrament any other way but with the hand only, and blames all those who imploy any thing else for this use; and because this Canon is none of the worst Monuments of Antiquity, we will make no scruple of inserting it here at large; * 1.26 The Apostle St. Paul doth boldly call man created after the image of God, the Body and

Temple of Christ; he then that is above any sensible Creature, hath obtained a Heavenly Dignity by the saving passion, eating or drinking Jesus Christ, is absolutely disposed and fitted for eternal life, and par∣taketh of Divine grace, being sanctified both in Body and Soul. There∣fore if any desire to participate of the immaculate Body, and will pre∣sent himself at the Communion in the Assembly, let him put his hands in form of a Cross, and so draw near and receive the Communion of Love; as for those, who instead of the hand, make use of Vessels of Gold, or of any other matter, to receive the Divine Gift, and who therein re∣ceive the immaculate Communion, we do by no means admit them, be∣cause they prefer an inanimate thing, and which is inferiour unto them, before the Image of God: if any one therefore be taken giving the blessed Communion unto such as bring such Vessels, let him be Excommu∣nicated, with him that brings them.

We are then come unto the end of the VII. Century, wherein the custom of receiving the Eucharist with the hand continued, without any other alteration, than what hath been men∣tioned, either with the linnen cloths, with which the Women in the V. Century, were obliged, in some places, to receive the Communion; at least, if the Sermon above cited in S. Austin's name, be his, which is not over certain, in which case, we must descend towards the end of the VI. Century, and besides, not pass the limits of the Diocese of Auxerr; or of those little Vessels forbidden by the VI. Oecumenical Council, establishing the ancient use of receiving the Sacrament with the hand only. And I do not see that the Roman Catholicks, * 1.27 or the Protestants, do deny it; for Cardinal Baronius in his Annals, the Frier Combe∣fis in his Augmentation of the Library of the Holy Fathers; Gabriel de Laubespine Bishop of Orleance, * 1.28 a very learned Prelate in the Discipline of the ancient Church, in his Ecclesiastical Ob∣servations; the famous Monsieur Arnold, in his excellent Book of frequent Communicating; * 1.29 and the Abbot of Billy, upon Gre∣gory Nazianzen's first Oration against Julian the Apostate; and Garsias Loaysa, upon the 14. Canon of the first Council of Toledo, in the first Tome of the Councils of the last Edition at Paris; all those I say, and others also concurr herein with the Prote∣stants. It is true, Baronius and Combesis observe, that this custom continued longer in the Eastern Church; which I do not judge ought absolutely to be deny'd: but the better to follow its tra∣ces in the Western Church, it will be requisite further to survey what remains to be seen in the Latin World. The XI. Council of Toledo, Anno 675. in the Eleventh Canon, doth explain the XIV. * 1.30 Canon of the first Council of the same place, Against those

who having received the Eucharist did not 'eat it. And the XVI. Council in the sixth Canon Anno 693. * 1.31 alledging against some Priests who made a little round crust for the Communion, the example of Jesus Christ, sufficiently gives to understand, that they intended that example should inviolably be kept: now it de∣clares two several times, That Jesus Christ having taken a whole Leaf, and broken it in blessing it, gave it by parcels unto each of his Disciples. Yet I will not deny, but that I have observed in the Seventh Century, examples of the Sacrament being put into the mouth of Communicants, but upon occasions that, as I suppose, are not to be insisted upon. In the Appendix of the fifth Tome of de Achery's Collection, is seen the life of S. Magnobode Bishop of Angers, which is supposed to be written by one that lived at that time: and as these sorts of Lives are full of Miracles, which those should have done whose actions are to be written; amongst se∣veral attributed unto S. Magnobode, there is mention first made of a certain blind person, that being drawn by the great reputati∣on of this Bishop, came unto him as he was celebrating Divine Service, desiring him earnestly and with a loud voice, to restore him his sight; this Prelate being touched with his complaints, prayed for his recovery, and having ended the office of the Mass, He put (saith the Author) into his mouth, with the Benediction, * 1.32 the per∣ception of the holy Body. Secondly, there is mention of a young Maid of Quality at Rome, who being for three years space, exceedingly afflicted with a most grievous Feaver, which all men thought incurable; she with tears desired to be carried to the man of God, Magnobode, whose Miracles had already been nois∣ed abroad, which her Parents resolved to do, and carried her to Angers, where they found him at the same Exercise that the blind man above mentioned had done, whom he restored to sight; so that understanding the cause of so great a Journey. * 1.33 He received them courteously, and put into the little Maids mouth the Mystery, or the Sacrament of the Body of the Lord, which he handled with his holy hands. It is evident, if I mistake not, that these two occasions were extra∣ordinary, either if the persons be considered, on whom these two Miraculous Recoveries were made; or if the exercise wherein they found this Prelate be considered: so that there can no conse∣quence be drawn, for the practice of putting the Sacrament in the mouth of Communicants. In the Life of S. Eloy Bishop of Noyon, which is in the same Tome of Dom Luke de Achery's Col∣lection, and who lived also in the Seventh Century; it appears, that this Bishop forbids amongst other things, to sing the Songs of Pagans, and he gives this reason. * 1.34 That it is not just they should

proceed out of the mouth of Christians, wherein is put the Sacrament of Christ. But the Sacrament being there put either by him that celebrates, or him that communicates; and moreover, the custom confirmed by the Decree of an universal Council, in the year 691. requiring Communicants to receive it with the hand, and that they should themselves put it in their mouth, it cannot be reasonably thought, these words of S. Eloy make any thing against the commonly received practice. In fine, at the end of the Se∣venth Century, it was received with the hand in England, which then related unto the Latin State, wherein we travel; for vene∣rable Bede tells us of a certain man called Caedmon, who having passed most of his life as a Secular, and without holy Orders, at last became a Frier at the request of an Abbess. This man falling sick, * 1.35 and finding his death at hand, desired the Sacrament might be brought, And having received it in his hand (saith the Historian) he asked if they were all in Charity with him. Since that time there began to appear in the West, but not suddenly, some alteration in this an∣tient custom, but without abolishing it quite; for in the Book of the Roman Order, written as some imagine, in the Ninth, or the end of the Eighth Century, or as others suppose in the Eleventh, which I conceive to be the most likely, in the Chapter of the Order of Procession, if sometimes the Bishop please to celebrate Mass on Holy daies, there it may be seen, that the Priests and Deacons receive the Communion with the hand, and the sub-Deacons with the mouth: * 1.36 That the Priests and Deacons in kissing the Bishop, receive of him with their hands, the Body of Christ, but the sub-Deacons in kissing the Bishops hand, let them receive from him the Body of Christ in their mouth. And Hugh Maynard, in his Notes upon the Book of Sacraments of Gregory the Great, alledges something of this Nature, touching the Priests and Deacons, relating to the Mass of Illyrica, * 1.37 written, as Maynard conjectures, a little before the beginning of the Eleventh Century, that is, towards the end of the Tenth; he calls it the Mass of Illyria, because it was taken out of the Palatinate Library, * 1.38 and published by Mat∣thias Illyricus, a Protestant Lutheran. Of this Mass, this Benedi∣ctine Frier cites these words, * 1.39 Then the Priests and Deacons receiv∣ing the Body in their hands, it is said unto each of the Communicants, Peace be with you. But it must not be imagined, that this man∣ner of Communicating, was peculiar unto Priests and Deacons, to the utter exclusion of other Communicants, at least in the Ninth Century; for we have been informed by Reginon's Chronicle, that in the year 869. Pope Adrian the Second at Rome it self, gave the Communion unto King Lothair, and

that this Prince received in his hands the Body and Blood of our Lord: * 1.40 which is also to be concluded of all those which attend∣ed him, unto whom the Pope administred the Sacrament. I shall then make no difficulty to believe, that what the Roman Order speaks of sub-Deacons communicating with the mouth, was done by reason of the solemnity of the day, on these oc∣casions, to distinguish betwixt the sub-Deacons, and the Priests and Deacons, who are superiour unto them; besides, that this distinction began not to be made until before the Eleventh Cen∣tury. But in fine, if we enter in the Tenth Century, we shall find it something divided concerning this custom. Ratherius, Bi∣shop of Verona, died in the year 974. in what we have resting of his works, there may be seen the two wayes of receiving the Sacrament, with the hand and with the mouth; in the se∣cond Sermon of Easter, he speaks thus, But O sadness! * 1.41 I have seen some sleight this Council, and would to God it were not such as ought to give example unto others, that they continually lay snares to destroy even him who puts the consecrated Bread in their mouths, say∣ing, The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ profit you unto eternal life. But in the following page, see here what he saith, * 1.42 If they had seriously thought on these things, they would at least have avoided re∣ceiving holy things from the hand of him whom they hated, fearing lest they should so openly have imitated Judas. And in the third Sermon, he alledgeth these words of the seventy seventh, * 1.43 and according to the Hebrews, the seventy eighth Psalm, The meat was still in their mouth, and the anger of God waxed hot against them; And he continues, It is because Sathan who of a long time posses∣sed them by a most wicked and evil intention, entred into them by an evil operation, after the Morsel, as if they had heard say by him that gave them the Morsel, What thou dost, do quickly. * 1.44 And in the same Sermon, When I gave unto them who were such, the sacred Morsel with the hand, which they wished cut off. And in the first Sermon of the Ascension, If before we come to speak of his Judgment, * 1.45 we truly accuse our selves, with what neglect and carelesness do we Consecrate the Bread which we are to distribute or present. Me∣thinks, from all this it may be concluded, that in the Tenth Century, they began in some places to introduce the custom of putting the Sacrament in the mouth of Communicants; yet without blaming the ancient practice which required that it should be received with the hand, notwithstanding what is al∣ledged by Regino, of a Council of Rouan, in Cassander, * 1.46 and the President Duranti in one of his Books of the Ceremonies of the Catholick Church, l. 1. cap. 16. n. 12. In fine, Molanus

Doctor and Divine of Louvain, hath made a kind of Marty∣rology peculiar for the Saints of Flanders, that is, of the Countreys formerly inhabited by the people of Belgia, and up∣on the 6th. of June, speaking of Norbert, Founder of the Or∣der of the Premonstre, he relates this out of Robert du Mont, Continuator of Sigebert's Chronicle of the Year 1124. which is still to be seen: * 1.47 Norbert preaching, the Men and Women being pricked at the heart, brought the Body of our Lord which, for ten Years and upwards, they had hid in Chests and corners; from which things, saith Molanus, Pontac in his Chronology doth conclude, That Christians at that time, did receive the Body of Christ with their hand. And in truth, Pontac, who was one of the most Learn∣ed men of his time, had reason so to judge, being necessarily inferr'd from the words of the Continuator of Sigebert. Those poor people, of whom he speaks, were seduced by a certain Heretick called Tanchelin, or as 'tis in the Edition I have, Tan∣dem, who had perswaded the Inhabitants of Antwerp, which was a very populous City, That the participation of the Bo∣dy of Jesus Christ, was not necessary unto Salvation; therefore they had hid in certain places, the Body of our Lord, until such time as they were disabused by Norbert, unto whom both Men and Women after ten years time, and more, brought what each had hid: but in the main it appears, that in the Twelfth Century, Communicants received the Sacrament in their hand; for otherwise, those we speak of, could not have done what hath been mentioned, and I know not whether unto this purpose may not be referred the fifth Canon of the Council of Tholouse, Assembled in the Year of our Lord 1228. which ordains, * 1.48 That when any sick person hath received from the hand of the Priest the holy Communion, it should be carefully kept until the day of his death, or of his recovery, &c. For to take and receive, is an act of the hand, rather than of the mouth. However it be, we have justified by the Tradition of the Church from Age to Age, that even in the Western Church, Christians re∣ceived the Sacrament with their hand until the Tenth Centu∣ry, excepting, it may be, some particular occasion, which can∣not prejudice the established Law, and generally received cu∣stom; that in the Tenth Century, they began to introduce in some places the custom of receiving with the mouth, without condemning the other practice, which required it to be receiv∣ed with the hand, whereof we have seen examples in the Twelfth Century, and even in the Thirteenth, which justifies, that the manner of receiving the Eucharist with the hand was

ever practised in the West, ever since Christianity had been first established; because that before the Latin Church had a∣bolished this custom, the Albigenses, and Waldenses, had separa∣ted themselves from its Communion, and carefully practised it amongst them, until the time the Protestants separated them∣selves, who continue to practise it at this time. As for the Greeks, James Goar, a Frier of the Order of preaching Friers, observes upon the Euchologie or Ritual of that Nation, * 1.49 That the Priest or Bishop gives the holy Eucharist into the hand, according to the ancient practice. And he represents the gesture wherein the Cler∣gy set their hands to communicate, which is almost the same required by S. Cyrill of Jerusalem, and, 300. years after him, the Council in Trullo; which was common also unto the people, a long time, as well as to the Clergy: but at present, saith the same Goar in the same place, The Laity receive the Bread and Wine together in a Spoon.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Tertul. de Idol. c. 7.
• * 1.2

  Id. de Coron. c. 3.
• * 1.3

  Id. de Orat. c. 14.
• * 1.4

  Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 1. p. 271. Apud. Cas∣sand. in Li∣turg. c. 31.
• * 1.5

  Cyprian. Ep. 56.
• * 1.6

  Id. de laps. p. 175.
• * 1.7

  Id. de bono patient. p. 226.
• * 1.8

  Apud Euseb. hist. l. 6. c. 43. Vales.
• * 1.9

  Ibid. l. 7. c. 3.
• * 1.10

  Greg. Nazian. orat. 1. in Jul. p. 70.
• * 1.11

  Id. orat. 11. p. 187.
• * 1.12

  Basil. Ep. 289. t. 3.
• * 1.13

  Cyril. Hie∣ros. Mystag. 5. Ambros. Hex. l. 6. p. 103. t. 1. id. de el. & jejun. c. 10. Chrysost. ad Pop. Antioch. Hom. 21. t. 1. p. 266.
• * 1.14

  Id. Hom. de simult. p. 285.
• * 1.15

  Id. in Seraph. p. 891.
• * 1.16

  Sozom. hist. l. 8. c. 5.
• * 1.17

  Apud Theo∣doret. Hist. l. 5. c. 17. Isid. Pelus. l. 5. Ep. ult.
• * 1.18

  T. 1. Concil. p. 684. Ib. p. 739.
• * 1.19

  Page. 47.
• * 1.20

  Can. 18. in Cod. Afric.
• * 1.21

  Contra Petil. l. 2. c. 23. t. 7.
• * 1.22

  Serm. 252. de temp. t. 10.
• * 1.23

  T. 1. Concil. Gall. Sir∣mond.
• * 1.24

  Hist. l. 10. c. 8.
• * 1.25

  Apud Baroni∣um Annal. Eccl. ad an. 57. n. 148.
• * 1.26

  Can. 101. T. 5. Concil. p. 349.
• * 1.27

  Ad an. 57. n. 147, 148.
• * 1.28

  T. 2. p. 1014. L. 1. obser. 16.
• * 1.29

  Part. 1. p. 265. P••g. 403. Pag. 747.
• * 1.30

  Concil Tolet. 11. can. 11.
• * 1.31

  Concil. Tolet. 16. c••n. 6.
• * 1.32

  Vita Magnob. c. 9. Append. t. 5. Spicileg. p. 137.
• * 1.33

  Ibid. c. 5. p. 141.
• * 1.34

  T. 7. Spi•••• 217.
• * 1.35

  Bed. Hist. Angl. l. 4. c. 24.
• * 1.36

  Ordo Rom. Bibl. Pat. t. 10. p. 10. ult. edit.
• * 1.37

  Pag. 383.
• * 1.38

  Pag. 380.
• * 1.39

  Pag. 390.
• * 1.40

  Regin. in Chron. ad an. 869.
• * 1.41

  T. 2. Spicileg. p. 314.
• * 1.42

  Ibid. p. 315.
• * 1.43

  Ibid. p. 316.
• * 1.44

  Ibid. p. 317.
• * 1.45

  Ibid. p. 325.
• * 1.46

  Apud. Cas∣sand. in Li∣turg. p. 80.
• * 1.47

  Supplem. Chron. Sigeb. ad an. 1184. Natal. Belg. p. 110.
• * 1.48

  T. 2. Spicil. p. 624.
• * 1.49

  In Euchol. p. 149. n. 170.