ON ST. LUPUS OF ANGERS, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR,
PROBABLY ABOUT THE YEAR 680.
PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.
Lupus, bishop and confessor, at Angers in Gaul. (S.)
J. V. H.
§ Single. The Saint's cult; the time of his episcopate is inquired into.
The certain cult of St. Lupus: St. Lupus, bishop of Angers, none
of the classical martyrologists commemorates;
but Claude Le Chastelain in his
Universal Martyrology, among the Saints
of Gaul, records the Saint in these words, which we render
into Latin from the French: At Angers, of St. Lupus, bishop of this
city, whose body is honoured there in
the collegiate church of St. Martin. Among the Additions
to Usuard in our Sollerius at this day,
that of Bordeaux has: At Angers, of St. Lupus, bishop;
with which eulogy the editions of Lübeck-Cologne
and of Greven agree, except that they add and Confessor. The Breviary
of Angers, published by order of Charles Miron, bishop,
in the year 1623, venerates St. Lupus at this day with double
rite. So the same festival, though with a lower
rite, is ordered to be celebrated in the old Breviaries
of Dol and of Le Mans and of the monastery of St. Aubin
of Angers. Although, therefore, most Martyrologies
are silent about his name, there is nevertheless no reason why we should call
his legitimate cult into doubt.
[2] the time of his episcopate uncertain; But as certain as the cult of St. Lupus is, so uncertain
are the remaining things pertaining to him: for no trace of Acts
can be found among the writers. Nay,
it is disputed among the learned in what century, after all,
he flourished: for some think that he lived in the seventh century, others in the ninth.
Indeed Claude Le Chastelain also
assigns the tenth century, writing in the margin of his Martyrology
the year 937 as that of his death. But this singular
opinion of Le Chastelain I judge should rather be regarded
as a printer's error; for nothing occurs in the documents
from which such an age could be attributed to St. Lupus.
The whole controversy, then, lies in this, namely which of the two
is the more to be believed: the author of the Treatise on the Return
of Blessed Martin from Burgundy, who is commonly thought
to be St. Odo, abbot of Cluny; or rather
the ancient Catalogues of the bishops of Angers.
For St. Odo, or someone else, in the cited Treatise
says that St. Lupus was present at the said return of St. Martin,
which, as the writer himself has it Marrier, Biblioth. Cluniac., p. 124., coincides with the year
of Christ 887. The ancient Catalogues, on the contrary, establish
St. Lupus as the second successor from St. Magnobodus, who died about
the year 660 Act. SS., vol. VII of October, p. 940, n. 52., and so flourishing about
the end of the seventh century or the beginning of the eighth.
[3] which coincides with the end of the 9th century according to Odo; As regards the Treatise on the Return of St. Martin,
although it was held by John Mabillon, Adrien
Baillet, Claude Fleury and Jacques de Longueval
as a genuine offspring of Odo, the more recent critics
nevertheless take it away from him [Hist. litt. de Fr., vol. VI, p. 250. Fabric. Biblioth. lat., under Odo of Cluny. Journ. de Trévoux, year 1716, June, p. 1145.]: and that indeed
deservedly, inasmuch as they bring forward various and solid
reasons for their opinion. And first they say that this book
does not smell of St. Odo's style: I confess that a reason of this kind
is uncertain as long as it stands alone,
because according to the varying subject of the writing, and the varying
state of mind, the very character of the writing can
sometimes vary. But when this reason is supported by others,
it also justly obtains its own weight.
And in fact the treatise-writer stumbles shamefully in introducing
Fulk asking this writing of Odo;
then because he says Marrier, p. 115 and following.: Moreover, among other things you told me
that you had found in certain old leaflets, written in unpolished
language, how the most sacred body of Blessed Martin
was carried into Burgundy because of the incursions of the Barbarians,
and how thereafter, peace having been restored
to the Church, it was carried back to its own city. When
such things are read, no one will easily persuade himself that St. Odo
was a contemporary, nay, inasmuch as he was of Tours, a spectator
of the return of the body of St. Martin: for, born
in the year 879, he was eight years old when the Relics
of St. Martin were carried back to Tours in the year 887; and having died
in the year 942, there is no reason why, in order to narrate a thing done
in his presence, he should by chance find old leaflets
and scrutinize them diligently.
[4] but the Treatise is taken away from Odo because of contradictions, We have, next, in the Life of St. Odo, which will be given at the
18th day of November, that he was brought up by Fulk, count
or consul of Angers Ibid., p. 18.;
in what way, then, can that also be true which Fulk
says to Odo, that he asks this writing of him not
only by the favour of living together, but also by the sharing of nursing
infancy, for he believes that nothing can be denied
to him whom his mother took as a sharer of her milk?
In turn Odo too calls himself Fulk's foster-brother
Ibid., p. 115.. André Duchesne, in the Notes to the Library
of Cluny Ibid., note 20., strives to wipe away the contradiction,
saying that Odo was brought up by William, the father of Fulk.
But the authority of the Life of Odo stands,
which has it that Fulk brought Odo up,
and so he was not his foster-brother. And John,
the writer of the Life, opens the sources from which he will draw his
narrative, namely witnesses above every
exception. It has pleased me well, he says Ibid., Biblioth., p. 14., to write those things,
namely, which I took from his mouth, as if he were narrating about another,
and committed to my memory;
and next those which Dom Hildebrand, a truthful man indeed
and provost of the monastery of Cluny, and my preceptor
in the regular disciplines, declared to me and
to many others. Since, therefore, the biographer brings forward the most certain
testimonies, there is no reason why we should do violence
to his words, to this end only, that we may vindicate
the truth of a certain Treatise, spurious in many parts.
Indeed this too deservedly offended the Benedictine Writers
of the Literary History of France Hist. de la Fr. litt., vol. VI, d. 250., that
Fulk, the most powerful count of Angers, should write to
Odo the monk Marrier, p. 114.: Let your sublimity then condescend to my
littleness, and grant what I ask,
you who have granted this very thing, that I should dare
to ask.
[5] From what has been said so far it is clear that the often-mentioned Treatise was not composed in that century confused genealogies, in which it could have belonged to St. Odo.
But there are also other heads
which show the writing to be in every way fabulous.
For as often as it touches on the proper names of those who laboured at the return
of the body of St. Martin,
so often does it fall into the gravest errors. As the principal
leader of the work it puts forward Ingelger, count of Angers,
whose genealogy it describes in these words Marrier, p. 120.:
At that time the illustrious man Ingelger, count of the Gâtinais,
nephew of Hugh, duke of Burgundy, lord of Loches
and Amboise, vigorous in arms, was endowed with the highest
power and probity, and was administering the consulship of Angers,
lately bestowed on him by royal gift. But the learned Benedictines
who have written on the history of Burgundy reject this duke Hugh
as fabulous Plancher, Hist. de Bourg., vol. I, p. 230.; for
this Hugh was an abbot of most innocent life, shut up in a monastery from boyhood,
because, being a natural son of Charlemagne, he aroused
fear lest he should one day contend for the kingdom
of Gaul. But Odo, a contemporary and spectator of the things which he was writing,
would not have fallen into so grave an error.
Wherefore J. F. Bodin, in his Inquiries
concerning the district of Anjou, proceeds more cautiously,
and outlines the genealogy of Ingelger thus Bodin, Recherches sur Angers et le Bas-Anjou, vol. I, p. 147.: Torquatus
had a son of very lofty genius named Tertullus,
who, in order to attain a higher degree of dignity,
devoted himself to the service of Charles the Bald and proved vigorous
in arms. Charles gave him as wife Petronilla, daughter
of the duke of Burgundy, with the benefice of the castle of Landon and
some estates in the Gâtinais, by whom he had a son
Ingelger. The author therefore refrains from naming
this duke Hugh, who moreover, like the others in
Gaul, held this region not by hereditary right but by
delegation of the prince.
[6] and in the various sees Nor is this the end of the errors. For in the course
of his narrative he numbers six bishops besides our St. Lupus
Marrier, p. 120, 121 and 124., namely Adalaudus of Tours,
Domnolus of Troyes, Armarius of Auxerre,
Siagrius of Autun, Raimo of Orléans
and Mainold of Le Mans, all of whom,
if you except the one of Tours alone, are lacking in the Catalogues of the bishops
of these sees about that time. And
indeed the see of Troyes was occupied from at least the year 882 to
890 by Bodo, and consequently, say the Writers of Gallia
Christiana Gall. Christ., vol. XII, col. 493., the unknown Domnolus vanishes,
whom they feign to have attended the body of St. Martin
on its return. The pontificate of Auxerre
Herefridus entered on the 8th of September of the year 887, and in it
he persevered for 22 years Ibid., col. 278.; Armarius, therefore, or
the Januarius of the Pseudo-Odo, is to be struck out, who could not even
precede Herefridus, inasmuch as he was, with no one
between, the successor of Wibaud. Of the Church of the Ædui, or
of Autun, no other bishop Siagrius is known
than the full brother of Queen Brunichild,
and so a pontiff of the sixth century: but in the year
887 Adalgarius or Adalgisus had already for twelve years
presided as bishop over the Ædui, and died in 893 Ibid., vol. IV, col. 344..
Raimo, too, bishop of Orléans, is to be struck out,
whose name does not occur among the prelates of this see:
but Walter or Gauterius held this
chair from the year 867 until at least the year 891 Ibid., vol. VIII, col. 1426..
Indeed this very Raimo or Raino, according to the more correct
Catalogues, is set down as bishop of Angers,
inasmuch as he held the pontificate from the year 880 to
the year 907 or 908: he was the brother of Adalaudus or
Adalandus, archbishop of Tours Bodin, Recherch. sur Angers, vol. II, p. 546.. If these things
are accurate, our holy Lupus is excluded from every place.
Finally the Pseudo-Odo shows us Mainold,
bishop of Le Mans, present at the translation
of St. Martin: but since a name of this kind
does not occur in the Catalogues of Le Mans, they change Mainold
into Mainard [Gall. Christ. ant., vol. II, col. 514. Longueval, Hist. de l'Égl. Gallic., vol. VIII, p. 191, Paris edition 1826.]: but not even by this
remedy is the ill healed. For from the Deeds of the bishops
of Le Mans in Mabillon we have it
that Aldric entered on the pontificate in the year of Christ 832 and
held it for 24 years Veter. Analect., p. 297, 300, Paris edition 1723.; and so Robert,
his successor about the year 856, having ruled the Church for
26 years, reached the year of Christ 882
Ibid., p. 300.; whom Lambert succeeded for 6 years;
we have now therefore advanced up to the year 888,
and no place is left for Mainold: nay, between
Lambert and Mainold two bishops must be intercalated,
Guntherius, who for at least 17 years, and Hubert,
who for 27 years, administered the Church of Le Mans
Gall. Christ. Antiq., vol. II, p. 514., and consequently the beginnings of Mainard
or Mainold cannot be set before the 32nd year of the tenth
century. And so this one too is to be eliminated.
[7] of bishops Since, then, the writer commits almost as many errors
as he cites names of bishops, we may
with the best right reject his authority when he alleges
St. Lupus, bishop of Angers, as present at the return
of the body of St. Martin from Burgundy in the ninth century.
But since such grave errors cannot be imputed to a sensible and
contemporary man, such as St. Odo, abbot of Cluny, was,
they must be ascribed to some far more recent forger,
and one ignorant of the things and persons of which
he treated. Nevertheless,
someone will perhaps try to establish the authority of the writing hitherto refuted
from the book of Herbernus,
archbishop of Tours, a contemporary, since he began his
pontificate in the year 896. He, moreover, is said
to have written a book on the Miracles of St. Martin,
which Baluze edited Baluze, Miscellan., vol. II, p. 300. and in which he names as the agents of the Burgundian
translation the bishops Adalaudus of Tours,
St. Lupus of Angers, Mainold of Le Mans
and Raimo of Orléans. But
the Journal
of Trévoux Journ. de Trévoux, year 1716, June, col. 1145., bringing forward various and solid reasons, shows that this book too is falsely attributed
to Herbernus of Tours; which indeed is abundantly shown even from the names
of the bishops alone. In vain,
therefore, does Pagi in his Critique of Baronius at the year 887,
§ VI, strive to sustain by the authority of Herbernus the episcopate
of St. Lupus in the ninth century, and he is refuted even by the correction
which he wishes to be applied in a certain Life
of St. Maurilius of Angers. For there is read [Gall. Christ. Antiq., vol. II, p. 120, and Act. SS., vol. IV of September, p. 65, n. 13.]:
Raino, formerly a disciple of St. Martin and always
a canon, and afterwards, from the beginning of Christianity, the thirty-third
humble bishop of the holy Church of Angers, for the honour of almighty
God, and also of the same St. Maurilius, and for the remission
of the sins of his soul, in the year of the Lord's
Incarnation 905 and in the 25th of his ordination to the episcopate,
ordered this Life to be written and sought out. Archanaldus,
disciple and deacon of St. Martin,
by order of the aforesaid lord Raino wrote and sought it out.
The episcopate of Raino therefore took its beginning from the year 880,
and so no place can be found for any other bishop
sitting at Angers in the year 887.
[8] successions: Wherefore Pagi, to elude the force of the argument,
cuts off a whole decade from the time of Raino's episcopate,
and says that in place of in the 25th of his episcopate one should read in the 15th
of his episcopate, since it is established, he says, that Raino
was a contemporary of Odo, king of Gaul, and survived him.
But this correction is too free, since
the foundation on which it rests is ruinous: for
Raino could both be a contemporary of Odo, king of Gaul, who reigned from the year 886 to 898,
and survive him,
whether he began his episcopate from the year 880 or 890.
Nay, we have two limits, fortified by their documents,
by which the episcopate of St. Lupus is in every way eliminated:
for from the Chronicle of Vendôme or of Angers
we have Labbe, Biblioth., vol. I, p. 285.: 905, the finding, or rather the augmentation,
of the Life of Blessed Maurelius was made by Raino,
bishop, and Archanaldus, writer.
From this year, therefore, the time of Raino's episcopate
is to be computed going backwards. The other limit
is established by a charter of Charles the Fat, given on the 6th day before the Kalends
of November 886, by which Hugh the abbot, a kinsman of the king
Bouquet, vol. IX, p. 352, gave in precarial manner to certain venerable
bishops, Archbishop Adalaldus, and together to Raino,
his brother, a certain vill, Appiariæ
by name, in the district of Orléans in the vicariate of Lodovum,
with all its appurtenances …
D. Bouquet indeed says that this Raino sat at Orléans,
but without any suitable witness: for that he received a vill
situated in the district of Orléans proves nothing,
unless it should prove it also for Adalaldus, which is absurd:
but these were brother bishops, say the Deeds
of the consuls of Angers Ibid., p. 28. Cf. Bodin, Recherch., vol. I, p. 156., nobly born citizens
of the city of Orléans, who joined their niece Delendis
in marriage to Ingelger, handing over to him
with the girl … what came to them in the districts of Orléans and
of Tours by lawful inheritance. From this
more frequent connexion of Raino with the city of Orléans,
therefore Cf. Mabillon, De re diplom., p. 555., I believe has flowed the opinion
that he sat in this city. But we have shown above,
num. 6, that during the whole time which would have to be attributed to Raino,
Walter occupied the chair of Orléans.
Finally, since we meet Raino, bishop of Angers,
to whom Odo grants the vill of Sepmatum in the year 895
for the church of St. Maurice Bouquet, vol. IX, p. 464., for us one
and the same is he who, as bishop at Angers, was present at the return
of St. Martin in the year 887. It is established, consequently, that no
time can be found at which St. Lupus, as
bishop of Angers, could have been present at the translation of St. Martin.
[9] we must therefore stand by the Catalogues of the bishops of Angers. Since, then, from the writings falsely attributed to St. Odo and Herbernus
nothing can be drawn out about the age of St. Lupus,
recourse must be had to the ancient Catalogues of bishops,
which establish that the Saint flourished in the seventh century:
and so much the greater faith is to be given to them, the more nearly
they approach the age of St. Lupus. Now, moreover,
the Maurist Benedictine Housseau arranged the series of the pontiffs
of Angers according to the Catalogues of the royal library
of Paris and others, and treating of our Saint,
he has these things, which I render from French into Latin Bodin, Recherch. sur Angers, vol. II, p. 545.:
St. Lupus. The Sainte-Marthe brothers, because of the authority
of the Pseudo-Odo, move this bishop from his place,
but more weighty than that anonymous writer are the Catalogues of the 9th, 12th and
13th centuries. The Church of Angers recalls the memory
of St. Lupus on the 17th day of October. He holds, indeed,
that St. Lupus succeeded St. Magnobodus after Niulphus:
but to define more nearly the time of our Saint's episcopate,
documents are lacking to us. For at the 16th day
of October we said, more by conjecture than by definition,
that St. Magnobodus died about the year 660,
and that nothing is known of his successor Niulphus Act. SS., vol. VII of October, p. 940, n. 52..
But since between St. Lupus and Sadrius, who
in the year 736 subscribed to the confirmation of the privilege of St. Chrodegang,
bishop of Metz Labbe, vol. VI of the Councils, col. 1700., there are seven intervening
bishops of Angers, I suspect that St. Lupus closed his last day
scarcely after the year of Christ 680,
and for this reason I have, with doubt, written this year at the head of this commentary.
All these things are very meagre,
but we have found nothing anywhere by which we might be able to illustrate the life and
deeds of the Saint. We shall therefore give
the Lessons of the Breviary of Angers of the year 1624, which
explain the cult of the Saint and the various translations of his body.
ELEVATION AND TRANSLATION OF THE BODY OF ST. LUPUS,
From the Breviary of Angers of the year 1624.
Lupus, bishop and confessor, at Angers in Gaul. (S.)
Single chapter.
Lessons I & II.
The body of Blessed Lupus, bishop of Angers,
when it had long lain hidden, unknown, in an obscure place, The body of the Saint found in the year 1012, in the year
of the Incarnation one thousand and twelve, on the eleventh day before
the Kalends of April, was found by Hubert, bishop of the same see
[a], in a stone tomb beside the church
of St. Martin, and for public veneration was laid up
in a reliquary in a raised place above the high altar of his church
[b]. His holiness God declared among those who came after,
even many centuries after his death, by miracles.
For when Philip the First was master of affairs in Gaul
c, and when, the crops having been spoiled for seven years by the inclemency of the sky and the continuance
of rains, the people were labouring grievously under a dearth of grain [d], and
to expiate the public calamity a supplication had been proclaimed to
Saint Nicholas [e], two blind men, going beneath the body
of Saint Lupus, which was being carried by priests among the other
biers of the bodies of the Saints [f],
received their sight: and a woman who was languishing
with a long illness, when she had done the same, was suddenly healed:
and the sky, God having been entreated, was clear for many
days.
Lesson III.
[2] In the year of the Lord one thousand four hundred
and ninety-five also, he is renowned for miracles on the seventeenth day before the Kalends
of November, when the Relics of the Saint's body
were solemnly inspected by Helias, bishop of Veria g,
and at the report of the matter a concourse of people was made from every side,
a cobbler who was grievously afflicted in the leg,
having implored the help of the holy Confessor,
went back sound and well: and a few days afterwards
a certain canon of Saint Martin's, praying before them,
having offered the most holy sacrifice of the Mass, recovered the light
of his eyes, which he had lost [h]. In the year one thousand
four hundred and ninety-nine, the head
of the most blessed Confessor was laid up separately by the same Helias in
a silver case. And when the bone
of the right arm, enclosed in silver, had been carried off by thieves in an unspeakable
sacrilege, at the request of the canons of the same
church, William, bishop of Angers
i, in the year of salvation one thousand six hundred and
twenty, on the very birthday of St. Lupus, with the whole
college standing by, having opened the reliquary, when he had
taken out for himself a fragment of a rib for use in the dedication of churches,
carried around through the church, with great reverence and in the solemn order
of a supplication, the bone of the left arm, inserted in a portable
case:
and having celebrated the office of the Mass with pontifical rite, he granted that it
should thenceforth be exposed for public veneration.
ANNOTATIONS.
a. Hubert,
son of Hubert, count of Vendôme, administered the chair of Angers for thirty-seven
years, from the year of Christ 1010 to 1047, and under his
pontificate various monasteries were built and enlarged at Angers Gall. Christ. Antiq., vol. II, p. 123..
b. An elevation
of this kind was equivalent to episcopal canonization, as Prosper Lambertini,
afterwards Benedict XIV, shows by various examples in his work on the
Canonization of Saints, book I, ch. VI, num. 4 and following. The clod of the body lay long, says the old Gallia Christiana Ibid., p. 121., under the eaves (the projecting part of the roof, by which drippings are kept off the walls)
of the church of Blessed Martin of Angers, until the year 1012, when Hubert was prelate,
who had the body taken out of an unseemly place, and, laid in a silver case,
wished it to be shown to the people to be honoured, as a parchment declares
which the canons found taken out of his tomb.
d. Three
calamities of the grain supply occur among the historians under Philip I, namely
in the year 1090, 1095 and 1100. I would believe, however, that the famine of which the Lessons of Angers
treat began in the year 1090, because Sigebert of Gembloux indicates this year
in such a way that he seems to portend a certain continued calamity. For he
has these things under the year 1090 Bouquet, vol. XIII, p. 260.: The barrenness of the fruits of the earth increases: (it had therefore already begun in the preceding year) and famine little by little creeps in. Under the year 1095 he writes l. c.:
The famine, long conceived, grows most grievously heavier, and the year becomes calamitous,
many labouring with hunger, and the poor harassing the richer by thefts and fires…
In this year many are set on fire by the sacred fire, their limbs blackening like
coals. Sigebert, by the famine long conceived, points to the preceding
calamitous years; wherefore I think the year immediately following, 1096, is
indicated in the Lessons, and that the supplication was instituted at that time,
by which the scourge ceased for a time.
e. The church
of St. Nicholas, formerly in the suburb of Angers, now enclosed within the city itself, at
belonged to a Benedictine abbey: in the year 1794 it was utterly destroyed Bodin, Recherch., vol. I, p. 192.. We know,
moreover, that Urban II, after the council of Clermont, celebrated about the end of the year 1095,
consecrated the church of St. Nicholas of Angers at the beginning of the following year Gall. Christ. Antiq., vol. IV, p. 689.. Perhaps
it was out of veneration towards the Apostolic See that the church of St. Nicholas
was chosen as the goal of the supplication. For the people of Angers held
in great esteem the papal visitation, which they noted as an epoch in their Charters,
as is evident from a charter of Fulk Rechin, count of Angers,
in the Sainte-Marthe brothers Ibid., vol. II, p. 129. Bodin, Recherch., vol. I, p. 227..
In time of calamities the ancients instituted pious
supplications; so in Gregory of Tours,
Hist. Franc., book III, ch. XXIX Bouquet, vol. II, p. 199., we read that the citizens
of Saragossa, besieged by King Childebert, clothed
in haircloth, abstaining from food and drink, went round
the walls of the city singing psalms with the tunic of Blessed Vincent the Martyr.
But that the blind, in order to receive their sight,
went beneath the bier of St. Lupus carried by priests
indicates another mode of veneration. We know
from the Life of St. Romanus, bishop of Rouen,
whose Acts will be given on the 23rd day of October, that a man condemned by capital
sentence was every year released from punishment, on this
condition, that he should bear the bier of St. Romanus (la fierte de S. Romain)
on his shoulders. So also St. Paulinus
of Nola, on St. Felix, Natalicium VI, verse 125 Paulin. Oper., vol. II, p. 76, Paris edition 1685., says
that Christians strove to approach as near as possible to the tomb,
and to touch it with the hand:
The people, poured around in rivalry of devotion,
From every side in a close-packed throng crowns the laid-up limbs;
A religious fight of lovers is piously waged:
Each piously strives to press on another and to stand nearer
To the Relics, and rejoices to touch the body with the hand.
Nor is it enough to have seen once; it delights to linger on,
And to fix their eyes, and, where it is granted, their kisses,
On the exposed limbs.
A trace of the going beneath the sepulchres of the Saints is still
retained by the crypt of Anderlecht, near Brussels;
for there is seen the base of the sarcophagus of St. Guido,
whose Acts our forebears gave at the 12th day of September
Act. SS., vol. IV of September, p. 36., which is so constructed that pilgrims
could creep through the middle of it, 77 centimetres in height and 33 in breadth;
and that this was done very often
is indicated by the stones hollowed out and polished by frequent rubbing
Mém. cour. de l'Acad. de Brux., vol. XVIII, Fréd. Van der Rit, p. 8.. To this rite, however, does not allude what
the cited author relates from the Life Act. SS., vol. IV of September, p. 44, n. 12, namely that men
went through the middle of the sepulchre: for that indicates that the tomb of the holy man
was then held of no value, which,
levelled with the ground of the cemetery, afforded a passage to men and
beasts; wherefore Onulfus, lord of the vill,
ordered two of his peasants to close a hedge around the sepulchre
of the Blessed man.
was celebrated, the Church of Angers was ruled by Jean de Rely, confessor and preacher to Charles
VIII, king of France, who, having accompanied the same king on the
Neapolitan expedition in the year 1494, in which the visitation was made,
and having often been sent to Pope Alexander VI for the handling of affairs, won the highest favour of praise Gall. Christ. antiq., vol. II, p. 145.. Hence
the sacred rite was performed by Helias, bishop of Veria, who probably
filled the place of the absent pontiff in the episcopal functions. Now
Veri, says Steph. Morcelli Afric. Christ., vol. I, p. 351., is a town of the proconsular province …, well enough known in the monuments of the Church, but not so among profane writers. Helias, therefore, was a titular bishop or, as they commonly say, in partibus infidelium.