Letter CLXIV. To Pope Innocent in the Matter of the Church of Langres

(A.I). 1138.)

1. When I was at Rome there happened to come there the Lord Archbishop of Lyons. With him came also Robert, Dean of the Church of Langres, and Odalric, Canon of the same church, seeking for themselves and the Chapter of Langres permission to elect a fresh Bishop. They had received, indeed, a command from my lord the Pope to abstain by all means from acting till they had the advice of religious men. And when they wished and asked to obtain this permission through me, I altogether refused until I knew for a certainty that they intended to elect a good and fitting person. They replied that they would subordinate their purpose and intention to my opinion, and that they would do nothing but what I advised them. And this they promised me. But as their promise did not give me sufficient confidence, the Archbishop joined his entreaties to theirs, and promised faithfully the same thing. He added, moreover, that if the clergy should attempt to act otherwise he would not confirm or give his sanction to anything that they might do. My lord the Chancellor also gave a similar pledge. Not content with this, I went also before my lord the Pope to have what we had agreed upon confirmed by his sanction and authority. Nevertheless, a conference was held daily between us on the election to beheld, and, out of the many names of which mention was made, two at last were chosen, and it was agreed that we would none of us dissent from the election of either of the two. And so my lord the Pope decreed that our decision should be binding without any change, and both Archbishop and clerks promised faithfully to abide by it. When they had left I made a stay of several days longer in Rome, and when I was able to obtain permission from my lord to return I took my journey to my brethren.¹

2. And as I was crossing the Alps I found that the day was at hand on which the consecration to the See of Langres was to take place, of a person concerning whom I would that 1 had heard better reports and more honourable to him. But 1 am unwilling to repeat what it gave me pain to hear. I was persuaded by not a few religious who had come to salute me to turn aside to Lyons in order, if possible, to prevent the execution of the infamous act that was contemplated. For I, out of regard for my health and the weariness of my body, had determined to go home by a shorter way, especially because I had not given much credence to the rumours that had reached me. For who would have thought that so great a man would have been so lickle as to set aside his own promise so lately given, to say nothing of the command of his lord, and lay his hands without any fear on the head of one whose ill reputation was known? And so I listened to the advice of these religious, and turned my steps towards Lyons, and when I arrived I found that things were just as I had heard. The joyful (or rather unfortunate) festival had been prepared for. The Dean, however, and, unless I am mistaken, the greater part of the Canons of Lyons were in constant and open opposition. The shameful and grievous report had filled the city, too, and was hourly spreading and gaining strength.

3. What was I to do? I called on the Archbishop. With due reverence I reminded him of the agreement that he had entered into, and of the instructions that he had received. He admitted all that I said. But he said that the cause of his going from his promise was the refusal of the Duke's son to accept what we had determined, and he said that to pacify him he had been guilty of this change of purpose, and had done as he did for the sake of peace. He went on to say that whatever he might have done before, he would do as I bade for the future. Then I said, in thanking him, " God forbid that it should be my will; nay, rather God's will be done. And what this will is, will doubtless be known, if the matter is brought before the Council of Bishops and other religious persons who have assembled at your summons, or will soon be here. But if, after invoking the Holy Spirit, the consent of all bids you proceed in the work that you have begun, then proceed in it; but if not, then listen to the Apostle who bids you Lay hands suddenly on no man " (1 Tim. v. 22). My advice seemed to please him. Meanwhile, that man is said to have arrived; but he went to an hostel, not to the palace. He came on Friday night; he left on Saturday morning. It is not for me to say why he was loath to put in an appearance at the Court,, when that was the very object of his long journey. It might have been thought to be a monk's modesty, and a contempt for honour, were it not that what followed showed that it was otherwise. For what were we to conclude when the Archbishop returned from him, and declared before all that he could in noway induce him to acquiesce, but that he rejected wholly what had been done in the matter?

4. In short, the Archbishop soon after bade the election to take place. This is testified by some of the Canons of Langres, who were then present, as well as by a letter which can be produced. When it was brought forward and read before the Chapter of Langres, immediately another was read contrary to the first in every point, asserting that the consecration was postponed, not set aside, appointing a day and place to decide a cause which the first letter declared to have been decided already. You would think that in these letters it was not merely diverse, but adverse persons that were speaking and contradicting each other, if it were not that one and the same image was impressed on •the wax, one and the same name signed at the bottom; and so it was manifestly declared, to the amazement of all that were present, that from one fountain there flowed both sweet and bitter. These contradictory letters are in our hands; whichever you determine to obey, you must be held disobedient. If you obey the first that you open, you will be condemned by the last, or if you elect to follow the latter, the former one will complain. And would that the second letter could as well protect itself against a third as it over turned the first. But lo! we have letter upon letter, so that it is not with us as with the Prophet, Line upon line (Is. xxviii. 10), but rather line against line.

5. In the meantime the man who had shrunk from consecration, and rejected the election, hastened to the King. He obtained formal possession of the Regalia,² but by what title, he must say for himself. Presently letters were sent out, changing the place which had been appointed, and anticipating the day, in order that through the inconvenience of time and place opposers might be deprived of all chance of acting, and a march might be stolen on all who might wish to appeal. But no counsel can stand against that of God, by whose providence it came to pass that neither opposers nor appellants were wanting. An appeal was lodged by Falco, Dean of Lyons; by Ponce, Archdeacon of Langres; by Bonami, priest and Canon of Langres, and also by my brethren, Bruno and Geoffrey, who knew nothing of what these men had intended in their hearts, but who happened to arrive by chance, and no doubt by the will of God, who foresees all things. So little time, indeed, was left, that when I learnt the day scarcely four days were left for our messenger to go with letters to prevent what was more a sacrilege than a sacrament from being performed. He, too, nevertheless, opposed it, and summoned the consecrators and the man they proposed to consecrate to the Apostolic See. He whom I had sent was a Canon of Langres. I say the truth; I lie not. The Truth Himself is my witness that I have said nothing out of personal hatred, but that I have truthfully set down everything out of love of the truth alone.

Footnotes

1. The events referred to here did not take place after the death of Guilencus, or VVilencus, Bishop of Langres, to whom Letters 59 and 60 were sent, but after the death of his successor, William dc Sabran. The death of Guilencus took place August ist, A.U. 1 135, that of William in the year 1138. Then there was a disputed succession. Peter, Archbishop of Lyons, and Hugh of Burgundy, afterwards Duke, gave their support to a certain monk of Cluny; he was opposed by Robert, Dean of Langres, Pontius the Archdeacon, Odalric, and other Canons. Bernard was called in as arbiter, and finally the Cluniac monk was excluded, and Godfrey, Prior of Clairvaux, a relation of Bernard's, was elected. There are three Letters of Peter of Cluny about this controverted election of the Bishop of Langres; one which is ep. 29 of the first book, written to Bernard, in which he endeavours to clear the name of one of his monks, who had been chosen as Bishop of Langres, trom unjust aspersions; the second, which is ep. 28 of the second book, to Pope Innocent, in which he asks that Innocent will refuse to confirm the election of the Abbot of Vezelay to the same See; the last, which is ep. 36 of the same book, to Innocent again, in which he asks that the Church of Langres in future episcopal elections may be allowed its full rights according to the canons. By comparing the first and third it is evident that they refer to the election of which Bernard here speaks. But it is more difficult to say whether the second also refers to it. My own opinion is that it must be understood of another person. For in the first, Peter the Venerable simply speaks of the elected man as " a monk of Cluny and my son," in the second "the Abbot of Vezelay." In the first he says that " he was met by Canons of Langres as he was on his return from Poitou, who told him of the election of his monk; in the latter he says that he had heard a rumour that " ceitain men were clamorously seeking from Innocent that the Abbot of Vezelay might be Bishop of Langres. In the first he does all he can to help forward the confirmation of his monk; in the second he strives to prevent the confirmation of the Abbot of Vezelay. There fore 1 think that the opinion is not to be despised of those who say that Wilencus, Bishop of Langres, was succeeded by William de Sabran, who perhaps was taken from presiding over the Abbey of Vezelay to rule the See of Langres; and that Geoffrey, as will be shown presently, succeeded him. At length, the Cluniac having been excluded, Geoffrey was elected and confirmed A.D. 1138, that is when Bernard had returned into Gaul after the extinction of the schism. But we should observe in this history, as Baronius does (A.D. 1138), that although Peter of Cluny so warmly took the side of his monk, and although he-was worsted by Bernard, yet he refused to change his kindly feelings towards Bernard and his monks (Cf. ep. 229, n. 5). ↩

2. The investiture of the Regalia is the formal delivering by the king to the new bishop of the temporal jurisdiction and lands of the Church after the oath of fidelity has been taken. For the Regalia see also ep. 170, Suger (epp. 19 and 20), and Du Gauge's Glossary. ' A reference may be conjectured to Ps. Ixxv. 7: Neither from the east, nor from the west, nor yet from the south. But the resemblance in the Vulgate is much less strong: Neither from the east, nnr from the ivest, nor from the desert hills. Compare, however, Ps. xlviii. 2, upon the north side lieth the city of the great King; Jer. vi. I, Evil oppeareth out of the north; Ps. cxxvi. 4, Turn again our captivity, O Lord, as the streams in the south; and the comment of Gerhohus on the latter passage. There is not space to go into the subject here, but the north was taken in Mediaeval times to be mystically the quarter whence evil came. In exorcisms, and the Renunciation during the Baptismal Office, if I mistake not, the officiant was directed to turn towards the north; and the north side of churchyards was usually chosen for the burials of criminals and persons under ecclesiastical censures. — [E.] ↩