Saint Prudentius of Troyes

His rare merit led to his elevation, in 840 or 845, t o the episcopal see of Tr oyes. He was one of the most learned prelates of the Church of France, and he was consulted from all sides as an oracle. We learn from his sermon on Saint Maura, virgin, that he preached often, that he attended with assiduity to all the functions of the episcopate, and that he also administered the sacraments of Penance, the Eucharist, and Extreme Unction.

It was around the same time th at Gottsc halk, who had made his profession in the abbey of Orbais, in the diocese of Soissons, began to dogmatize on predestination. This wandering monk taught that God had predestined the reprobate to sin and to hell, so that it was not in their power to avoid either. Notingus, bishop of Brescia or Verona, made his errors known to Rabanus Maurus, archbishop of Mainz, who then enjoyed a great reputation for virtue and learning. The latter, after having examined Gottschalk in a council held at Mainz in 848,

condemned his blasphemies, and sent him to the famous Hincmar, archbishop of Reims. Hincmar, with Wenilo of Sen s and several other bishops, examined the doctrine of the monk of Orbais again, in a synod that was held in 849 at Quierzy-sur-Oise, in the diocese o f Soissons. Got tschalk, having refused to submit, was condemned, degraded from the priesthood, and imprisoned in the abbey of Hautvillers, in the diocese of Reims. Saint Prudence, who was consulted, believed that he should not be deprived of lay communion; but Hincmar, seeing that he still persisted in his obstinacy, excommunicated him some time later.

Some people suspected Hincmar of having fallen into the error of the semi-Pelagians regarding the necessity of grace; and Ratramnus of Corbie wrote against him. Saint Prudence took up his pen to clarify a point that the intensity of the disputes had muddled. He firmly established the Catholic doctrine, by showing: 1° that man is free and that Jesus Christ died for the salvation of all men; 2° that one can do nothing without grace and that Jesus Christ offered his death in a special way for the salvation of the elect.

Unfortunately, the spirit of dispute maintained prejudices. Neither side understood the other, even though they professed the same faith. Lupus, abbot of Ferrières in Gâtinais, Amolon, archbishop of Lyon, and Sain t Remigius , his successor, wrote against Rabanus and Hincmar, despite the horror they felt for the blasphemies of the predestinarians. Amolon himself and his Church, who seem to have excused Gottschalk in the beginning because they did not know him well, always rejected the errors that were condemned in him. One must indeed admit the predestination of the elect as an article of faith, but one must at the same time reject as a monstrous heresy any grace that would destroy free will. As for Saint Remigius of Lyon and Saint Prudence, they never took up the defense of Gottschalk.

In 853, Hincmar and several other bishops published, in a second synod held at Quierzy, four articles in which they established that man is free and that Jesus Christ died for the salvation of all men. Saint Prudence subscribed to these four articles, as we learn from Hincmar and the annalist of Saint Bertin. The Church of Lyon was alarmed by the doctrine contained therein, believing it incompatible with the necessity of grace. This is what caused the Council of Valence in 853, presided over by Saint Remigius of Lyon, to publish six canons in which it set forth in the most precise manner the doctrine of the necessity of grace and the predestination of the elect. Saint Prudence obtained from Pope Nicholas I, in 859, the c onfirmation of these canons; he did even more, for in his fear that the articles of Quierzy, which he had himself approved, might be abused in favor of Pelagianism, he wrote to refute the misinterpretation that could have been given to them and to solidly establish the belief of the Church regarding the grace of Jesus Christ. This precaution was all the more necessary as some, on the occasion of these disputes, were renewing the errors condemned in Pelagius.

Around the same time, John Scotus, call ed Eriugena, a famous sophist, published a work on predestination against Gottschalk. In it, he openly taught semi-Pelagianism and several other errors. Woulton, Archbishop of Sens, having extracted nineteen articles from it, sent them to Saint Prudence, who solidly refuted Scotus's work.

The zeal that the holy Bishop of Troyes had always shown for the maintenance of discipline and for the abolition of abuses earned him singular veneration. This was what led to his appointment, jointly with Lup us of Ferrières, to work on the reform of all the monasteries of France. He discharged this important commission with as much vigor as wisdom. He died on the authenticity. He supported what he said with the conduct that Saint Martin had maintained in similar cases and on the decree of Pope Gelasius. As for the alleged miracles of some women who fell into convulsions and who suffered in the presence of these relics, he said that they should be rejected and despised. True miracles, he adds, often restore health to the sick, but they never take it away, nor the use of reason, etc. Bibl. Patr., t. xiv, p. 329; Op. Agobardi., t. II, append., p. 135. See Migne Patrolog., t. cxvi.

April 6, 861. His name is found in the martyrologies of France. From the year 1100 to the year 1652, Saint Prudence had an office of nine lessons in the liturgical books of the diocese of Troyes: from 1652 to 1867 the lessons were reduced to three. His feast is still celebrated today on April 6.

In 1648, the body of Saint Prudence was still among the many other relics possessed by the cathedral of Troyes.

He is represented, at the cathedral of Troyes, in a stained glass window of the sanctuary gallery (second tribune, fourth ogive); he is on a worked red background, holding a golden crozier and a book.

See Dom Cellier, vol. XII; Hist. littér. de la France, vol. IV; the Vies de saint Prudence de Troyes et de sainte Moore, Troyes, 1735; Nicolas Antonio, Bibl. Hispanica vatus, l. VI. cap. 1, no. 259 ad 279. This last work was published in Rome, in 1696, under the care of Cardinal d'Aguirre.