ON ST. EDICIUS, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR, AT VIENNE IN GAUL,
Probably about the year 640.
HISTORICAL SYLLOGE.
Edicius, bishop and confessor at Vienne in Gaul. (S.)
BY J. V. H.
§ Sole. His memory in the sacred calendars, the time of his episcopate.
The Church of Vienne, today absorbed by that of Grenoble by virtue of the concordat of 1801, was formerly the metropolis of the Roman province of the same name. St. Edicius, in certain Martyrologies Its controversies with the bishops of Arles about metropolitan right in the fifth century are very well known, which there is no need to expound in this place [Compare Longueval, Histoire de l'Église gallicane, volume II, page 89, Paris edition of 1825.]. Further, among the bishops of the metropolis of Vienne there is recalled on this day St. Edicius, who is also called Edictus, Eodicius, Edistus and Hedicius. The classic Martyrologies are silent about his name, nor does even Ado himself, his successor two centuries later, remember him. But among the Additions to Usuard, in Du Sollier at this day, there is the Lübeck-Cologne edition, which has: At Vienne, of St. Eodicius, bishop. Greven, however: At Vienne, of St. Eodicius, bishop and Confessor. The Paris Martyrology, published in the year 1727 by order of Cardinal de Noailles: At Vienne of the Allobroges, of Saint Eodicius, bishop. Chastelain in the Appendix at the 23rd of October brings forward altogether the same in the vernacular, except that he adds that he was the successor of Saint Sindulf. Finally Ferrarius announces in his Martyrology: At Vienne in Gaul, of St. Edistus, bishop: yet in the Notes placed at the end of the day he says it was drawn from the tables of the bishops of Vienne: he is reported to have been the 33rd bishop of Vienne, to whom Pope Agatho wrote. On him Jean du Bois in the tables of the Bibliotheca Floriacensis. In the table of the Saints whom the Church of Vienne venerates, however, he is not contained.
[2] Is celebrated, Jacques Le Long seems to have copied Ferrarius in his Bibliotheca historica Galliae, in which under no. 10,683 he records Bibliothèque historique de la France, volume I, page 682.: Historical List of the primates and archbishops of Vienne of the Allobroges, collected by Jean du Bois: and he adds that the little work was published in the Bibliotheca Floriacensis, Volume I, p. 109, Lyon 1605, in octavo; but in the Emendations to the first Volume he says that Cluniacensis is to be substituted for Floriacensis Ibid., volume IV, page 327.. But neither holds. Certainly the Bibliotheca Cluniacensis, published by André Du Chesne at Paris in the year 1614, does not touch the Church of Vienne by even a word, much less bring forward a list of its bishops. Similarly the Bibliotheca Floriacensis speaks not a whit of the bishopric of Vienne. I judge the cause of the error, creeping from one to others, to be that in some copies of the Bibliotheca Floriacensis there was bound together with it the little work of the same author Jean du Bois recorded above, whence by a slip of the pen it coalesced into one with the Bibliotheca Floriacensis. Certainly in the Bollandist Museum there was formerly a book so bound: for at the 16th of March, in the historical Commentary on St. Isichius of Vienne, no. 4 Acta Sanctorum, volume II of March, page 448., there is cited Jean du Bois's composition on the Antiquities of Vienne, which, the writer says, exists at the end of the Bibliotheca Floriacensis. The exemplar of the Bibliotheca Floriacensis that I use, however, which also formerly belonged to the Bollandist Museum, lacks the Addition of Jean du Bois concerning the bishops of Vienne. Moreover the cult of St. Edicius, which Ferrarius holds as uncertain, is abundantly shown by the Martyrologies which we have alleged above and by the Breviary of Vienne cited by Le Cointe at the year 631, § X.
[3] Especially by Saussay, And to these indeed must be added the Gallican Martyrology of André du Saussay, who most copiously of all wrote of our Saint, whom he calls Edictus, in these words: At Vienne of the Allobroges, of Saint Edictus, bishop and Confessor, who, worthy of so great a see, governed it with episcopal honour under Pope Agatho. By whom he was honoured with apostolic rescripts, by which he made known the proceedings in the sixth ecumenical synod, at Constantinople, against the Monothelites: and wished other business of great moment of the universal Church, which he should notify to the bishops of Gaul, to be communicated to him through Donatus, presbyter of Vienne, whom the same Pope had made to sit at Rome in the synod in his stead. But Edictus was distinguished not chiefly by these favours of the supreme see; but far more by pastoral vigilance, zeal for the faith and works of justice, full of which he passed away in peace. Jean Le Lièvre has similar things in the History of the antiquity of the city of Vienne Histoire de l'Antiquité de la cité de Vienne, page 163., nor do I doubt that both borrowed these things from Jean du Bois, from whom the said Le Lièvre also cites a letter of Pope Agatho addressed to Edicius, namely: Agatho, bishop, to the holy Edictus, archbishop of Vienne. Your presbyter Donatus gladdened us at Rome concerning your health, in a synod where nearly a hundred bishops sat. To whom we have given, to be delivered to your holiness, the proceedings at Constantinople, as our legates reported them: where you will find that the bishop of Antioch has been condemned for his error. When you have run through these things, most blessed brother, send them on to all the bishops of the Gauls to be read and guarded against and held. Know moreover that Bishop Theophanius has been ordained in his place. Given on the day before the kalends of March, under the most pious Constantine Augustus. Omitting for instance the form of the inscription, which does not agree well with that which commonly occurs in the letters of contemporary Pontiffs, and which suggests some alteration, another doubt ought to be raised about the authenticity of this letter: namely whether St. Edicius lived at a time that reached the age of Pope Agatho. This indeed Ado affirms in his chronicle Migne, Patrologia, volume CXXIII, column 115.. But that his chronology is not rarely blind we shall show below. As regards the letter of Agatho itself, already vitiated by the title of archbishop of Vienne, it will perhaps have to be said that the name of Edicius has crept in by a certain guesswork.
[4] Who nevertheless errs about the Saint's age, Agatho occupied the Roman See from the month of June of the year 678 or 679, as is variously held L'art de vérifier les dates., to the 10th of January (at which day our men have given his Acts Acta Sanctorum, volume I of January, page 624.) of the year 682. Now we have that St. Sindulf, predecessor of Edicius, took part in the year 625 or 630 in the council of Reims held by Sonnatius Labbe, Concilia, volume V, column 1689.; while Landalenus, the third successor from our Saint, subscribed the Council of Chalon, which Philippe Labbe ties to the year 650, and others to the year 644 Ibid., volume VI, column 391.. Further, this is the succession of the bishops of Vienne according to the Catalogues, in which St. Sindulf sat in the year 625, and Landalenus in the year 650: Sindulf, Edicius, Cadeoldus, Landalenus. Landalenus, the subscriber of the Council of Chalon, St. Ado omits in his Chronicle. Whence Charvet, archdeacon of Vienne, suspects that this bishop Landalenus is the same as Cadeoldus: indeed no one will easily persuade himself that Ado did not know, and thus omitted, one of his predecessors, whose age he tries most accurately to mark. The said archdeacon judges that Landalenus crept in among the subscriptions of the synod of Chalon by a corruption of the name of Cadeoldus or even Edaldus. If this be admitted, it will follow that to the pontificate of St. Edicius some years within the limit of 25 years are to be assigned; and thus that his age can in no way be tied to the times of Pope Agatho. And from this it has come about that the archdeacon Charvet, in his History of the Church of Vienne Histoire de l'Église de Vienne, page 132., has attributed to Bishop St. Edicius four years, from the year 636 to 640: which reckoning of the time we should readily admit, unless some barrier were interposed by St. Ado, himself archbishop of Vienne, who assigns the pontificate of St. Edicius to the times of Constantine Pogonatus or III Migne, Patrologia, volume CXXIII, column 115.: and thus places it between the years 668 and 685; seeing that Constantine Pogonatus occupied the throne from the year 668 to 685. Here is the text, so far as concerns the present question Ibid., place cited.: Constantine, son of the preceding Constantine, 17 years… Sindulf, bishop of the Church of Vienne, is held famous… Bishop Sindulf being dead, Hecdicus of the Church of Vienne
took up the episcopate, a man of great religion; and he was famous until the last time of the emperor Justinian (reigning from 685 to 695), in whose time also he died.
[5] By Ado, whose chronology Although Ado, as one of the household, is of the highest authority when he sets out the series and succession of the bishops of Vienne, which moreover agrees with ours given above, Landalenus being struck out; yet he wavers when entangled in chronological knots. I shall bring forward one example, drawn from the chronology of the rule of Justinian II or the Lesser, who succeeded his father Constantine Pogonatus from the year 685 to 695. For Ado places under the time of this Justinian the death of Dagobert I, king of the Franks, in these words Migne, Patrologia, volume CXXIII, column 115.: King Dagobert, sick with a violent fever, died at the villa of Spinogilum in the district of Paris, and was buried in the church of Blessed Denis Compare Fredegar, Migne, Patrologia, volume LXXI, column 656.: and the Franks mourned him many days. He reigned forty-four years. In his place the Franks established his son Clovis as king, whose wife was Balthild, of the race of the Saxons. There is no reason for us to doubt that it is further a question of Dagobert I. The place of death and burial agree, the son Clovis, the second of this name, and his wife St. Bathild. But all the chronological matters are faulty, for in the first place, all agreeing, Dagobert I met his last day in the year 638: and if he died even in the first year of Justinian II, the life of Dagobert will have to be prolonged as far as the year 685; and thus Ado deviates from the right chronology by forty-seven whole years. He then adds that Dagobert reigned forty-four years: we shall show in the Acts of St. Romanus to be given on this very day that Dagobert reigned sixteen years, namely from the year 622, in which his father Clotaire committed the administration of Austrasia to him with the royal title, until his death in the year 638. Indeed the course of Dagobert's life was not so long: for taking 44 years from the common year 638, we come to the year 594, in which Dagobert's father Clotaire was ten years old, as one born in the year 584 Compare Le Cointe at the year 631, § X.. From this we can rightly conclude that the Adonian chronology is by no means to be trusted; and therefore since on the other hand we have Sindulf present at the synod of Reims in the year 625 or 630, and Landalenus subscribing the council of Chalon, at the latest in the year 650, in which middle time the pontificate of St. Edicius is to be placed, the Adonian chronology is not to be highly regarded.
[6] Deceived, is refuted. Further, the σφαλματα of Ado have their origin both in badly computed years of the emperors, and chiefly in the omission of the reign of Heraclius, who reigned altogether thirty years. Whence between the emperors Justinian the First and the Second of the same name there is, on making the calculation, a difference of more or less fifty-four years, if we compare the more correct chronology with that of Ado. Nevertheless Ado's chronology has this usefulness, that it shows that St. Edicius died after Dagobert, who died in the year 638. For under Justinian II he places Dagobert's closing of his life; and then, some other things being interposed, Caldeoldus substituted for St. Edicius Patrologia, volume CXXII, column 115 and following.: King Dagobert, sick with a violent fever, died at the villa of Spinogilum in the district of Paris… Bishop Chaldeoldus ruled the Church of Vienne until the times of King Theodoric, who began his reign in the year 670. Which can be true to the extent that, Landalenus, who subscribed the council of Chalon, as we said above, being struck out, Chaldeoldus held the see of Vienne until Bishop Bobolenus. And surely Ado places no intermediate bishop between the two; and in the year 653, and thus at least three years after the synod of Chalon, we see Chaoaldus, bishop of Vienne, subscribing the privilege which Clovis II granted to the monastery of St. Denis [Félibien, Histoire de l'abbaye de Saint-Denys, page 23. Compare Charvet, Histoire de l'Église de Vienne, page 133.]. Chaoaldus seems to be the same person with Caldeoldus, who is also called Ethoaldus in some places Charvet, page 132.: whence it will have to be said that Landalenus, the subscriber of the synod of Chalon, is the same with Caldeoldus, and thus a man of two names, or that his subscription was corrupted by copyists. Moreover, whichever opinion one embraces: either making Landalenus the same with Caldeoldus or his successor; this always stands unshaken, that between the years 624 and 650 there is a place for St. Edicius in the intermediate time; and therefore that nothing is opposed to placing the time of his death about the year 640. And these are the things we have to say of St. Edicius. His deeds we altogether do not know: among our papers there is one, written by Pierre François Chifflet, containing the Saints of the diocese of Vienne, among whom our St. Edicius also is recorded; but at the same time it is said that perhaps no Life of these has been written. Let us therefore repeat once more the judgment which Ado, himself a Saint of the household and above all exception, passes on the Saint, that St. Edicius was a man of great religion.