C O L L E C T I B N DE L ' G C O L E P R A N C A I S E D E R O M E 340

PROCES* DE CANONISATION AU MOYEN AGE

ASPECTS JURIDIQUES ET RELIGIEUX

MEDIEVAL CANONIZATION PRBCESSES

LEGAL AND RELIGIOUS ASPECTS

sous la direction de GAbor K~ANICZAY

EXTRAZT

MICHAEL RICHTER

PROCEDURAL ASPECTS OF THE CANONIZATION OF LORCAN UA TUATHAIL

Lorcin Ua Tuathail (Latin Laurentius, anglicized Laurence 1 Lawrence O'Toole), was archbishop of Dublin 1162-1180 and papal legate from 1179 to his death. He died 14 November 1180 in Eu, Normandy. Lorcin was canonized by Pope Honorius 111 on 5 December 1225.

The last biographical treainient of Lorcan dates from 1930.' In 1926, a year after the seventh centenav of his canonization, important original documents pertaining to thc canonization werc published in Ireland.' There is no comprehensive account of his canonization to date.' Twentv years ago the four existing Latin Lives of Laurentius were edited for the first time in a doctoral dissertation at Universtiy College Dub1in.l

Lorcan was a prominent official of the Irish Church and thus in Irish politics during the critical time of the first phase of the English intervention in Ireland which began in 1169. This period of Irish history has always received attention from various angles, but even in the most recent accounts, for no apparent reason, Lorcan has not been presented in any great depth. His role as mediator between natives and foreigners proved t obe problematical. He died in Eu on his way to Rome. The Augustinian canons of St Maiy did not know much of Lorcan then, but apparently his reputation attracted inany

' J . F. O'Dohcriv, Laiii-entiiis iioi? Dubliiz iiizd (10s irische Nbr;i,ni?i?ei?tiriii. Miinchcn, 1933. This account cnds with L's deatl? and lias nothing oii ihc canonization.

M. V. Ronan, St. Laureiztirrs, airl?bisl?oj> of Dl.ibiiiz. Ol-igi~zal iesiii71oi?ies for caizoizisnlioi?, in Tlic Ii-isli Ecclcsiasiical Rccord, Fijih Scries (1) 27, 1926, p. 347- 364; (11) 28, 1926, p. 247-256; (111) P. 467-480.

Lorcan is i-efel-red to only i11,passing in A. Vauchcz, L« .saii?iciiei? Occideiii arix rlerr7iei~ siicies dit Moyeii Age d ' ap i s les plocis de c(iiioi?isniioi-i er ies dociinzcirrs hagiogrnjii2iqi<c.s, Rnme, 1981, 1988?.

' M. F. Rochc. Tlzc Laiii? L i t o of Si. Lau~erice of D~lbiiiz, edited, wiili a critical introduction, unpiiblishcd disscrtation 2 vols., Dublin, 1981. Thc Acin Saizcio~.rii.ii of tlie Bollandists onlv I-each as far as 12 Novcmbcr and il?crcrorc ihc bulk of ihc niaicrial on Lorcan is not widely available.

54 MICHAEL RICHTER

Irish visitors to Eu at an earlv Stage. The move towards canonization was initiated from Eu where he was virtually a stranger.

The main focus of the present investigation is on the procedure of canonization at that time. It is not possihle to give precise dates for the emergence of the procedure of canonization that was to beconie the norm after 1200. In the course of the twelfth century, as one aspect of the emergence oi the papacy as a judicial institution in a centralized Roman Church, the act of canonization passed from the responsibility of the local bishop to that of the p ~ p e . ~ This process was not yet completed when the canonization of Lorcan Ua Tuathail was moved, and thus the sources pei-taining to this process are valuable beyond the specific case of the Irish cleric.

Lorcan Ua Tuathail was not the first saint from Ireland to be canonized according to the procedures which emerged in the course of the twelfth century. In this he was preceded in 11816 by Virgil of Salzburg who had died in 784, and in 1190; by Malachy of Armagh who had died in 1148. However, Lorcan was the earliest Irish saint to whose canonization the new formalities could be applied. When he was canonized in 1225 there would have been still people in Ireland who had experienced him personally.

The present study is facilitated substantially hy the modern edition of the canonization documents concerning Gilbert of Sempringham, canonized in 1202.~ The procedural aspects of that canonization can he brought to bear on the material relating to Lorcan. Nevertheless it should he kept in mind that each canonization has its own specific Features which deserve consideration.

In the documentation leading to the canonization of Gilbert, Pope Innocent 111 laid down the essential preconditions For any canonization, a saintly life and the working of miracles :

ad Izoc ia;ize;z z r i ipse saiiciirs apzrd i~oiizines hobeoiur iii ecclesia iiziiiiai?te diio suni izecessai-ia, vir,ius ;;ZOP-IL;?I ei virrizs sip~zor~ozz, ineiiia videlicer er iilii,acul~, z ~ i izec er illa sibi iizvicetiz cotzteslenruii Non e;?i;iz airi itieriia sitze nziI'aci~iis a f ~ i itii~acirla siiie iizer-iiis pielze szlfficiui?t ad veiizibeizd~~in iizier izoniiizes resii;?zoi~iuin saizcriiaii ...'

'C. Kuitnei-, La ri.sove papale du droir de cnizoizisriiioiz. in Re~~zie i~isioriqzie i/e di.oii f?ai?pnis el d l ~ ß ~ g ~ ~ , @ sirie, 17, 1938, p. 172-228.

" K . Anion, Virgilr Naciilebe;? - Heiiigspiecizuiig citzd Kuli, H . Dopscli and R. Juffingci- (eds.), Viigil von SalzLu>-g - Missioizar irnd Geleizrio., Salzbu1-g, 1984, n. 384.399. -~ - ' JL 13314 PL 204, 1466.

IR . Foreville and G. Kcir- (eds.), Thc Book ofS1. Gilbe~i, Oxford, 1987. " Tlw Book of Si. Gilbert, cii., p. 246. Snnocent 111 had foi-mulated tlie same

idea alrcady in his 61-st year as pope I-elating to the canonization o f Homobonus o f Ci-cmona : ailzro inii?eii, i;i>-iz~r videlicef >noruiiz ct vii?t<s sigizoi.lriw, opera scilicei

TH£ cAKONIZATIOK OF LORCAK UA TUATHAII. 55

These requirements were obligatory already before Innocent's pontificate..

The claim that the pope alone was responsible for the canonization was formulated explicitly as early as the year 1200 by Innocent I11 : cu17z hoc stlblinze iudiciunz ad eunz tantui?z pertineat qui est beati Petri successor et i,icalius Jesu Clzristi. Yet it will be seen that in practice the pope did not act on his own even in the later decades.

L o r c h was of noble descent, originating from the southeast of Ireland, from Leinster. He lived through particularly turbulent times in Irish politics which saw the arrival of English and Anglo-Welsh fighters who were to establish themsel\~es in parts OE Ireland on a permanent basis." Moreover, Lorcan found himself in the midst of these changes in more than one respect. On the one hand, he was a brother-in-law of King Dermot Mac Murrough of Leinster who was instrumental in bringing the English and Anglo-Welch into Ireland. On the other hand, at that time he was archbishop of Dublin and thus the spiritual lord of that part of the island first and most strongly affected by the English intervention," yet there is no novel and thorough investigation of Lorcan Ua Tuathail in the political sphcre at this critical period."

Lorcan had been abbot of the monastery of Glendalough Co. WicMow, where he introduced Augustinian canons from ca. 1154. In

pietaiis ii7 viia ei 17ziracuio1111iz .sig~za post iiz01-ieil2, I ~ I quis rep~tieiur .sa>~ci~.s iiz ~niiiiaizii ecciesia, i.equii.lrizrc<i.. » Duc Register Ii?izoie~zi' III., 1. Poiziifikntsjnhi, 0. Hage~iedel- and A. Haidacher (cds.), Graz-Köln, 1964, no. 528 (530), p. 762.

Kuttnel-, La r6seive papale, cit., p. 208. 11 is inteiesting that in the material rclating to Loi-can the enclusivc papal privilege to canonize is nientioned in conneciion will1 Cclestine 111 in 1190 : «ncgotium ... quod Dominus Jesus pcl- gratiam suam vobis (i.e Celestine 111) i-cservavit effectui mancipandum,n Ronan 11, 248 no. ii.

"The niosr detailed account by u conternporai: is Giraldus Cambrcnsis, Expirgizaiio Hibenzica. Tize Conqiresi of Ii-elar?d, A. B. Scott and F. X. Mal-tin (eds.), Dublin, 1978. For the latcst scholarly treatment sec A. Cosgrovc, (cd.), A Neiv Hisioi? of Irclriizd vol. 2, 1169-1531, Onfol-d, 1988. Irnportant is also M - T. Flanagan, Iiish Sociri?, A~i?gio-Noi7,ial? Sei1ler.s. A>igei:iii Ki~gshil). I~?iemciioi? in Iieland in ihe lare Tir>el,filz Ce>?ii~>);, Oxford, 1989.

' 2 For the tei-m 'inteiveniion' rather than the moi-c cornrnon tei-ms 'invasion' o r 'conquest' sec M. Richter-, Mediei:al Irrland - ihe Eizdiii.ii?g Tradiiioii, Dublin and New York, 1988, p. 129 i. (Gei-man version : Irlniid i~iz Miiielo1rei.- K~iliur iiizd Geschicitir, Strittgali, 1983, revised cd. Munich, 1996).

"The leading stridics are J. A. Watt, Tlte CIz~trch und ihe Tiiio Naiions ii? Medievai Ireiai~d, Carnbridgc, 1970, and A. Gxvynii, Tize lrish Ci~~ircIz ii7 ihe IP" riild 12''; ceiziuries, G. O'Bi-ien (ed.), Dubliii, 1992.

56 MICHAEL RICHTER

the last phase of ihe i-efornl of the Irish Church Glendalough was made iiito a bishopric. In 1162 Lorcan U-as elecied archbishop of Dublin and in this position also spiritual overlord of Giendalough. In Ca. 1163 his nephexv Thomas was made abbot of Glendalough which sho\vs that that monastery remained close to the heart oF the archbishop. At the time of his elevation to the archbishopric, Dublin \vas under Hiberno-Norse iule. In 1170 the citv was conquered by an alliance of the king of Leinsier and the Anglo-Norman invaders. In the following year King Henry 11 of England caine to Ireland to establish his ovei-lordship there and inet also Loi-can. H e n - was ihen under suspicion of having instigated tlie rnurder of Thornas Becket of Canterbury on 29 December 1170. L o r c h was again with Heniy 11 in Windsor in 1175 as witness of a ternporary political settlement of Anglo-Irish r e l a t i ~ n s . ' ~

In Januaxy 1179, before setting out for Rome to atiend the Third Lateran Council, Lorcan, togeiher wiih other niembers of the Irish hierarchy, had io swear io ihe English king that they would do nothing in Rome that might diminish the king's rights in Ireland. In the Course of the Third Lateran Council Lorcan was appointed papal legaie for Ireland. No doubt at his request, Pope Alexander 111 issued two bulls, one in favour of the archbishop of Dublin, the other in favour of the bishop of Glendalough."

Back in England Lorcan experienced the wrath of Henry I1 conceining these papal documents. He returned to Ireland and continued his spiritual leadership of reform.'"n the autumn of 1180 he set out once again for Rorne; he fell ill en route in Normandy and died 14 November after a sojourn of a few days as a guest of the Augustinian canons of St Mary's Abbey of Eu. He was succeeded as archbishop in Dublin by the Englishman John Curnin (1181-1212).

Fron1 an early stage, L o r c h was renowned for his saintly life, considering the salvation of the flock in his charge as his suprerne duty, whatever their origin. This did not only make him friends, but the reputation of his sanctity would have become quickly known at

" M-T. Flanagaii, Iiish Sociery, cit., p. 260-64. Shc prints the tcxt o f ihc trcaty of Windsor, witnesscd by Loi-can, on p. 3121.

" A . Gxvynn, Saiiir Lurrreizce O'Tooie as legale iiz Irelni?d (1179-/180), in Aiialecin Bollai?dini?a 68. 1950, p. 223.240. esp. p. 226 1. Unlortunately the bibliographical I-cfci-cnccs given for thesc documents are incorrect, a s are thosc in O'Dohertv, I*iiir-ei?rius cit., p. 94, notcs 41,42.

' T o r this importani pci-iod sec G y n n , Sniiit Inueizce O'Toole as izgate in Ireirti?d (1179-1/80), csp. 22811.

THE CAOSIZATIO\j OF LORCAN GA TLIATIIAIL 57

Eu through visitors from Ireland. When Lorcan died in Eu, he must have had with hin1 an entourage from Ireland who could provide sonie initial informatioii conceriiing their leader. These people in turn would have bi-ought home the news of Lorcan's burial in Eu. In 1186, as the first stage of the local recognition of his sanctity, the hody of L o r c h was elevaied to a nelv site in response to the increase of Chi-istians wishing to benefit froni Lorcin's power as a saint. The Augustinian canons of Eu would have learned a t an early stage that Lorcan had promoted the Augustinians in his own arclidiocese, in Glendalough as well as iii Dublin. This must have endeared Lorcan to them. Numerous xiisitors came to Eu from Ireland and miracles were worked. This would have been ihe initial step towards the canonization of Lawrence.

There is indirect although apparentlv reliable evidence that a first move towards canonization of Lorcan canie from Ireland. This attempt has to be placed W-ithin the first decade of Lorcan's death and during the pontificate of Clernent 111. It is not possible to say whether this move was coordinated with the canons of Eu. In any case, in Eu tliere was available, in the first decade of the thirteenth century, a Life and an account of miracles of Lorcin W-hose author n:as known as Malaclzias Laoi?elzsis episcopus : Mz~lfis aliis i?zivaculis er signis eittsdem iiiri sanciiias ~efidlsit, s ic~ii liber ostetzdii qilei?z de ipso boizae ;?zei?zoriae Malachias Laone;?sis episcopus co~zscripsit.'~ This work is not extant any more. The author has heen identified as Maol Iosa 0 Cerbhaill, bishop of Clogher 1178-87, from the archdiocese of Arniagh.'Vhis would be significant for political reasons. The inetropolitan responsible for such a step would have been the archbishop of Dublin, John Cumin. It is doubtful whether this Englishman was interested in promoting the sanctity of his Irish predecessor although it will emeige later that he was prepared, in a way, to cooperate in the preparatory work.

If the identity of the author of that first work on Loi-cin is correct, then the inove was initiated prior to the canonization of Malachy of Armagh. It is not known whether the lrish clergy were aware that this canonization was pending since it had been inoved From Clairvaux where Malachy had died. The bull announcing the canonization does not mention that Malachy was Irish.I9 It is not known how and when the Life of Lorcan by Malachy reached Eu but this perhaps did not happen a t a n early stage.

" Ronan, Si. Lnidii>iiiris cii., 11, ii, p. 249. ii Ronaii, SI. lniirriiiiiis cit., p. 249 note 1 . This Maiach? docs not Ei3ui.c in

Watt, Tlre Ciztii-ch cil., noi. i i i Cosgrove, A Nciii Hisiory' cit., 1988. "'IJL 16.514, PL 204, coll. 14661. On Malacliv of Ai-magh sec Watt, Tile Cl7riiz.h

cit., P. 19-28 and passim.

58 MICMAEL RICHTER

An essential precondition for canonization by Rome was an account of the life of the prospective saint. The canons of Eu were singularly poorly informed about Lorcan. They therefore wrote to Dublin to obtain such an account. There is still available such a Life, now in a copy in MS 938 of the Bibliotheque de l'Ars6nal in Paris which ends before Lorch's death (about this there would have been no direct knowledge in the archdiocese of Dublin). This Arsenal Life20 is anonymous, hut there is evev reason to believe that it was written by an Irish author, especially by the way Irish personal names and place names are given. The Arsenal Life witnesses thus the functioning cooperation in Ireland between the English archbishop of Dublin and Irish members of the hierarchy.

It is not known whether the canons of Eu knew that on 6 July 1190 Pope Clement I11 had canonized the Irishman Mala~hy .~ ' Within months the first known formal request was brought to Rome for the canonization of Lorch . The negative outcome of this move, from Pope Celestine 111 in a letter to the canons of Eu dated 20 May 1191, refers to the submission then of an account of Lorcan's life as well as accounts of miracles in letters written by ecclesiastical officials as well as by lay people. It ean be eoncluded that the Person in charge of this first approach in Rome was the provincial head, the archbishop of Rouen.

De vita et inivaculis .... i~zulta fuisseizt proposita er litteris pre2atortu?z ecclesie aiqtle seculariunz personarzrin el presertinz asse~tione veizerabilis fratvis nostvi Rotonzageizsis arckiepiscopi i z ~ n t i a t a . ~ ~ n a letter to Pope Innocent 111 Walter of Coutances, archbishop of Rouen, in fact refers to his visit to Cele~tine. '~ The Pope claimed that he had no time to examine the case at that stage but did not specify any procedural objections.

In this respect it is instructive to Iook at two canonizations completed by Pope Celestine. Bernward bishop of Hildesheim was canonized on 8 January 1193. The evidence for this act had been brought together by the cooperation of the pope's representative, Centius, cardinal presbyter of St Laurence in Lucina, the head of the regional province, Conrad, archbishop of Mainz, Dietrich, abbot of St Michael's of Hildesheim, as well as laymen and clerics from the archdi~cese .~" Five years later, concerning the canonization of

?OKochc, dissertation cit., uol 1, p. 64-81, vol. 11, p. 2-18 (Lest). ? ' J L 16514, PL 204, 1466. M. P. Sheehy (cd.), Ponliricia Hibcrnicu. A4ediei>nl

papal chancery dociiineizis c»ircer.izii?g I>-elrii?d 640-1261, 1, Diihlin. 1962, no. 23, p. 681.

?? Sheeliy, Po>?iificiu Hibemicu cir., no. 24, p. 73. ?'Konan, SI. Laui.o?iius cit., 11, p. 248. ?'.TL 16943, PL 206, col. 970.

Gerard of the monastery of Sauve-nmjeur from the archdiocese of Bordeaux on 27 April 1198, no papal representative is mentioned. Instead, the documentation conceming Gerard's sanctity was carried to Rome by two monks of the monastery. It consisied of a Life and supporting letters from the archbishop of Bordeaux as well as suffragans, bui also letters from abbots and lay nobles." This second case is formally a close parallel to the first move h-om Eu concerning Lorcan. It shows that an involvement in a central position of a papal representative was not then obligatory. Nor was a complete dossier required at that stage. Single separate documents were apparently acceptable.

The canons of Eu persisted in their efforts, most likely under Celestine I11 and ceriainlv under his successor Innocent 111. In 1206 or 1207 Hugh, abbot of Eu, writing to Innocent 111, mentions several approaches in that matter in the past : noiz solunz eizinz senzel et secuizdo sed tertio i a m et qi4arto petiiiinzz~s que et izunc p e t i m ~ s . ' ~ In this case they mention a document containing a Life and a few miracles, written by the abbot and sealed with the seal of the chapter. In addition the documentation included letters from the archbishops of Rouen and Dublin, as well as letters from other religious : .. Miserulzt et cui?z litteris izostiis litteras suas doi?ziizz,~s nosteu Rothonzageizsis a rch i ep i s cop i .~~ et donzinus Dubliiziae archiepiscopus aliaeque persoizae religiosae, de lzis que audieuaizt et viderant testii?zoniuin perhibeiztes . . . .2i There is a testimony from John Cumin, archbishop of Dublin. He writes that he had witnessed how at the tomb of Lorcan a man had been healed who had been deaf and dumb for many y e a r ~ . ~ ~ This would suggest that John Cumin himself had visited the site where L o r c h was buried. Apart from that he merely referred to the statements made by people who had known Lorcan personally. The letter from Eugenius, archbishop of Armagh, relies for the evidence of the sanctity of Lorcan on the Life a copy of which appears to have remained in Ireland.

There was further supporting evidence of two men who had known Lorcan personally, Ailbe, bishop of Ferns (the area from which Lorcan originated) and M. (Murchad 0 h-Aedha), bishop of Cork. These two men expressed their familiarity with Lorcan in identical terms : qui i~zaizdncavii7zus et bibinws cuni illo, ... et discipuli eius fiiii?zu~.'~ This suzgests that the two statements from members of the Irish hierarchy had been coordinated. Ailbe, not the

?'JL 17327 PL 206, col. 121lf. ?6Ronan, Sr. Lai<~eizrius cil., 11, p. 248. ?'Ronan, Si. Laurriirius cil., 11, p. 248. '"onan, St. Lau~izfius cii., I , p. 349. ''lRonan, SI. La~<i-eizrius cil., p. 1, 350f.

i?iagiiaruiizque toriirs peiie pi'>viizcie, iaiii anre qi.riiiqiriei ad curiaiii Roiizaizaiii cuiii vitn saizcfi er iiliiactrlis d e p o r ~ n r i s . ~

It would appear that this eai-lier material had been preserved at the Curia. It would indicate that the Curia expected requests for canonization to he maintained after thev had been unsuccessfullv pleaded. In this case the lack of success may not have been due to the merits o r otheiwise of the case but rather to a failure to satisfy the by then established procedures. The last stage in the canonization of Lorcan in fact turned around procedural points.

One gets the impression that this material by itself was impressive enough. There was just one procedural defect : the iizquisitio iii par t i b~ i s in Ireland had not been done in response to a request issued by the apostolic see. The man who was put in charge of the issue was Nicholas bishop of Tusculum. This document was issued by Pope Honorius together with a comparable document addressed to the archbishop, dean and treasurer of Rouen 5 November 1224. Abbot Guy once more returned to Normandy.

The Vi ta Pr ima reports that Pope Honorius 111 had approached the archbishop of Dublin but had not received a reply. It adds Further that the inquisition to date had not been done according to the formalities of the Roman church.33 This now had to be done.

In a letter of 5 November 1224 to the archbishop, the dean and the treasuerer of Rouen Pope Honorius I11 formally appointed the Norman metropolitan as his representative in the case :

quia tai?zeii apostolica sedes iii ialibiis cuin i?zulta i?~atir~ifate procedere coizsi~ei>it, discretioizi vesrrae peu apostolica scripta iizaiidamus, quatiizus iiiqiriratis super dicti viii vita ei i?ziract~lis dilige~ztissime iiei-irareiiz i ~ i eiri?z izobis per 1iirei.a~ vestras ffdeliier i>ztii?zetis, fit ea coiizl~ei.ta plene pio suppl ica~i t i t~ i~ i desidei-io seccirius aizizuere i>aleai?zus."

The Vi ta Prii.rza repoits that the Pope had also involved the bishop of Tusculum. There was then set up a further iizqui.~iiio ii7 pavtibus in which the witnesses gave evidence under oath. A further local inquisition was set up in Ireland under a canon by the name of Ascellinus.

Facta est igitui. iiiquisitio iiz partibus i7osti.i~ ex ppraecepro si~i?iizzi ~.'oiztificis Honoi.ii per i>eizeinbilei?i Rotlzoii~ageizsei7z archiepiscopuiiz

3zIl~id. , p. 138. "lbid. : «Sed yuoninii, p>ercyuisita I.e.scl.ipiio D~<bliiiei?sis aizhie1iiscopi n

doiizii20 pupa imi? e>naimi:emr, iiec seci,<iirluiiz Roiliai?ac ecclesiae fiinwnii? et o>dinei?z fiieizt 1>erriuciaii<, fiicieiidae P-ryula~iiei- ii?quisiti»,~is sub auie i~~ico stiniiiii ~joiziiffcis diciiis nbbas pro iiiagno gmiiae >i?u>lcre liticras reporravir.

Ronan, Si. Lairi-e,?iiits cii., 111, p. 4682.

Tlzeobalduiiz er coizquisito~-es suos, per depositioizeiiz restiunz iuratorzriii sic~tt docttit er i?iaizdavit per saras litte,ns NicIzolar<s episcopus Tusciilaizr~s.

Id ips~~rin izilziloi~zii~u~ er iiz Hibeli7ia ireruiiz actitaruizz es! per praedictuiii Hei71.ici~izz ai.chiepiscopi~~?z Dublii?eizsei7z, I R ~ S S O ad hoc sacerdote Ascellino coi7caizonico izosrro."

In 1225 two last rounds oFBzqt4isitioizes ii? partibus were brought about, one in Normandy, the other in Ireland. Since the results were available for presentation to the Curia within a year of Honorius III's initiation, there is reason to believe that previously collected material was used. In 11-eland, the archbishop of Dublin d e l e ~ t e d the task to two people since he himself was busy with other matter, Roger, prior of Holy Trinity, Dublin and Ralph of Bristol, bishop of Kildare.36

In October 1225 Abbot Guy reached the papal Court at Rieti. After some delay, the material testifying to the sanctity of Lorcin, vita et inii-acula, was read out in the consistory in the presence of all cardinals, and the Pope showed himself duly impressed. However, even here procedural deficits still remained. For this reason the reading was done once more the following day :

praefixa est igifur dies sequens iiz qua colzgregaris cardinalib~rs oizznibus, lecra sunt oii7nia iiiqriisirioizunz rescripta tanz de i~riracirlis sancti viri qua171 de vita, er diligeizti exaniine discussa sunr et probata. Ipse quoque donzii7~1s papa cunz onzizia aperte et distincte faceret lectitari, gratzila~zti aizinzo aureitz libeniissinze ad oi~ziiia inclii7abat; et iiz legeizdo pelze parre diei tertia coinnzoraturn est; omizesqwe cardiizales uoto irizaizii?zi coizco~-dabaizt iizento hunc saiicruiiz saizctoruiir catalogo proriiius adscribendenz. Tunc etiaiiz propter absentiaiiz capellanomiii donzini pape et episcoponli?~ extraneoruiiz qui ianz a curia raedio affecti discesserant, id ipsum iiz crasrinuiiz reservatunz est. .. .. Cuius diei parre deducta iii legeizdo ireruiiz vita er izzii-acrllis beati vin, consenseruizt onz~zes cardiiznles, episcopi er q i ~ i coizve17emizt oiizizes viri auiei?tico, nzeriro hunc Dei faiizi~Lri7z talztis testiiizoiziis appmbatzri7z sanctorir~?~ esse nuiizero coizscribendum. ....

Co~izpleto randeiiz sen~zone resti17zoi7ia de beato viro relegi in coizspect14 a~~i~ te i z r iu~?z iiizperavit, 12e forte aliquis dubietaris adlzuc scncp~rlo ~?zoveretur.. .

testil?zoi?ia aditzirantibus, qzrippe C I L I ? ~ iizter caetem praeclara iizii,act.ila septem airdissei7r itieriris ipsisitrs i~zortuos suscitatos, sicut iiz lizrei?s doiiziiii pape Hoizorii plei?iz~s coiztii?er~i1-~~

Then it was decided with the approval of all cardinals and

'' Vita P?ii?za p. 138. Sheehv. Poiztificin Hibernica. cit.. I . D . 260-262. . . . . Vira ~;&rn, 142-145.

THE CANONiZATiON OF LORCAN UA TIlATFfAiL 63

bishops and the rest of the audience'qhat Lorcan's name deseru-ed to be added to the list of saints. Lorcan's sanctity would appear to have been shown especially bv his raising people from the dead. Seven instances of this had been brought forward in evidence.

Bull of canonization : lizeffabilis provideiztia'"

venei,abilis fvater i~osrer ... arcliiepiscop~is er diiecti filii capi t i~ l i in~ Rotizo~izagensis uiza ciiin .... abbate ac coni>eiztia ecciesie stipradicte nzuitisque aiiis airhiepiscopis et episcopis abbaribus er reiigiosis viris eiias vei~eral~ilis viie insigizia er comscai~ria i~ziracula suis nobis 1iiie1l.s iiztinzaiztes hzuzziliter su]~plicai~eruizr ....

in Izi,ii~isnzodi izegotio secuizdiai7z coizsuetudiizeiz7 apostolice sedis C L ~ I T Z digiza i~zari~ritate procedere prefaro ai-clziepiscopo et . . . decano ei . . . ihesaurario Rorhoi~zageizsibus dedin~us i i ~ nzaiz~i 111 super dicti viri vita er nziraculis iizqtrire~,eizt diligenrissiilie iieritatenz ....

Ipsi auienz i+zaizdafuizl n o ~ t r u n ~ CUIIZ diligeenria exequeizres quia de prefaii v i n coizver.satioize ac vira per Izoinines de panibus illi.7 ceriificari izequibaiir eo quod perparies illas rrai~situnz faciei~s i n ecclesia plrdicra con,eprus infirnzirare decub~ii t .... scripseret venei-abili frairi izost?,o ... arckiepiscopo Dubliizeizsi c i f veriiaiei7z super hac iizquisitanz eis per suas Iitreras intin7arer quia ciira nzare Hibemiciain ill~rsiris regi.~ Aizglorrdin negofiis occiipaiias 17012 valeizs id iizquirere per se ipsunz, veizerabili fratri izostro ... Darensi episcopo suffraganeo s ~ i o ac ... y i o r i sancte Trinitatis Dubliizeizsis conznzisit in lzuiusi?zodi negotio vices suas ac denzunz eorurn litteras sanctirarenz vite er corzversarioizis sepedicti viri pleizius coiztineiztes SILO er ipsoru171 sigillis nzi~nitas destiizavit eisdeilz quas iaiza cziin depositionibus tesfiunz super i?zirac~ilis receptoriinz nobis sub sigillis propriis tiiiizsi~ziseruizi ..... idenz Sanctus inznzo Donzii71as o b ipsius i~zerita gloriosa septein nzor iuo~ quorui~z uizus rridiaai7us erat i~zii-ifice susciravir ....

The complete dossier of the canonization of Lorcan is contained in Paris, Bibliotheque Sainte-Genevikve, MS 1833, dating from the seventeenth century.

As far as procedural aspects are concemed, the requirement of iiita e t nziracula was there from the earliest Stage of the attempts to have Lorcan Ua Tuathail canonized in the first decade of his death. Even when the canonization was completed, more than two decades after the formulation that the canonization was the privilege of the pope, it would appear that the consent of the consistory was still regarded as desirable. The other element clearly decisive under

'"CE abovc, notes 23-24. 3'1Shechy, Pontificia Hibenzica cit., p. 260-262, hom the Registei- o l Popc

Honoi-ius 111.

64 ,MICRAEL RICHTER

Honorius I11 in this case was the formal appointment of inq~~isiiioizes by the bishop of Rome. It goes without saying that such appointment was only possible after the pope had learned about the potential s anc t i i of a candidate.

The documentation is not complete; there appear to have been more moves for the canonization than are attested. At that early Stage two features are recognizable that remained parts of the procedure down to the canonization itself :

1. the official representative of the proceedings in Rome is the metropolitan, in this case the archbishop of Rouen.

2. The evidence for the sanctity of the candidate consists of accounts of i~iia et i?ziracula. The latter are provided by separate accounts of clerics and lay people.

It can be gathered that the first approach of the pope had been preceded by exchages between Eu, Rouen and Dublin which resulted in the provision of at least a life account of Lo rch , perhaps also of miracles from Ireland. There is no indication in the - admittedly rather brief - documentation that there were then any procedural shortcomings in evidence. The subsequent attempts show that the material submitted was of the same genre, vita et i?zimcula. It is not clear, however, whether the miracles were subsequently continuously brought up to date.

The approach in 1224 shows that again the documentation submitted before the pope were individual letters from clerics and lay people requesting the canonization. But there also emerges something not in evidence before. By this time one formality was absolutely necessary : a papal mandate to compile vita and ii7iracula of the candidate. This time the formality could be satisfied within twelve months, which shows that the material required was more or less readily available. However, we learn that once more it was felt necessaly to contact from Rouen the archbishop of Dublin who routinely delegated the task to others under his authority.

Finally, \ve learn something about the ceremony of canonization itself. It consisted of a reading of viia et i.izi,iicula publiclv in the presence of mainly church dignitaries whoever were present. Subsequently those who were present were consulted whether they agreed that the evidence submitted was sufficient to accept the candidate. Formally, it was a joint decision of all present. It should be emphasized, however, that this procedure is documented in the Vita Priiwa but not in the official bull that proclaims the conlpletion of the procedure. Therefore it must remain Open whether this aspect was a necessary and integr-al part of the canonization itself.

The following hvpotheses may be suggested

The outline of the canonization procedure with its foi-mal I-equirements was known in the ecclesiastical circles koni the beginning of our docurnentaiion. It seems to have been modified in the coui-se of the 33 years covered by our documentation.

1. The need for a subinission of vita et n z i ~ a c ~ ~ l a was evident from the first stage, i.e the last decade of the twelfth ccntury.

2. The obligatoi-y involvenient of the metropolitan is not evident from this first stage, but this may be due to the uery brief informaiion we have about this first stage.

3. Even a n unsuccessful preliminary request mav have resulted in the retention of written docurnentation in Rome, accessible at a later stage.

4. There is no indication froni our documents that bef01-e Honorius 111 an official papal niandate to collect material concerning a canonization had been required. Was this possibly introduced by Honorius?

Michael RICHTER