2. Abbot of St. Michael's (probably at Beauvais) ; was sent in 870 by Charles the Bald as ambassador to Rome ; appointed in 871 archbishop of Sens, and used as a tool by the pope against the clergy. John VIII appointed him in 876 primate of the French Church and vicar-general of the apostolic see, but a synod of Pontion protested against this, and recognised him only as metropolite. He died in 883, and his successors had to abandon the distinction, which the pope had intended to connect forever with the see. — Gfrorer, Kirehengeschichte, vol. ii ; Gallia Christiana.
Anselrn of Canterbury (commonly called St. Anselm) was born at Aosta, a town of the Alps, in Savoy, A.D. 1033. He was treated harshly by his fa- ther, and travelled early into France, and afterward into Normandy, where he took the monastic habit in 1060, at Bee, where Lanfranc, afterward aixhbishop of Canterbur}*, was prior. Three years after, when Lanfranc was promoted to the abbacy of Caen, Anselm succeeded him as prior of Bee, and became abbot in 1078. Anselm came to England while prior of Bee, and afterward in 1092 by the invitation of Hugh Lu- pus, earl of Chester, who requested his aid in sickness. Soon after his arrival William Rufus also required An- selm's assistance, and finally nominated him (though with great difficulty of acceptance on Anselm's part) to the see of Canterbuiy, which had lain vacant from Lanfranc's death in 1089. Anselm was consecrated j with great solemnity December 4, 1093. In the fol- ; lowing j'ear a stinted offer, as the king thought it, of £500 from the archbishop, in aid of the war which William was carrying on against his brother Rob- ert, was the first cause of the royal displeasure to- ward Anselm, followed by further discontent when An- j selm desired leave to go to Rome to receive the pall ; from Pope Urban II, whom the king refused to ac- knowledge as pope. Anselm proposed a visit to Rome j to consult the pope, but was refused permission. He j went a second time to court to ask for leave, and was again refused, but gave his blessing to the king, and embarked at Dover. The king seized upon the arch- bishopric, and made every act of Anselm's administra- tion void. The archbishop got safe to Rome, and was honorably received by the pope. He lived quietly, at Rome and other places, and finished his treatise Cur Deus Homo at a monastery in Champagne. He assist- ed the pope at the synod or council of Bari, where he prevented Urban from excommunicating the king of England for his various and frequent outrages upon religion. The king, however, finally bribed the court of Rome to desert Anselm, who retired to Lyons, where (with the interval of an attendance at a council at Rome in 1099) he continued to reside till he heard of William Rufus's death, with that of Pope Urban short- ly after. Henry I, immediately upon his accession, invited Anselm to return. The archbishop was re- ceived in England with extraordinary respect both by the king and people, but refusing to be reinvested by the king, and to do the same homage with his prede- cessors, he again fell under the displeasure of the court. In 1103, at the request of the king and barons, Anselm went to Rome to arrange an accommodation; | the kins at the same time, in distrust, dispatching an a'j-ent of his own, who arrived before the archbishop. The pope still continued inexorable, but wrote to the
AXSELM
243
AXSELM
king, promising compliance in other matters if the king would but waive the matter of investiture. An- selm in chagrin again took up his residence at Lyons, while a fresh embassy to Rome from the king was still more unsuccessful than the former. Anselm now re- moved to the court of Adela of Blois, the king's sister, who, during a visit which Henry I made to Norman- dy, contrived an interview between him and Anselm July 22, 1105, when the king restored to him the rev- enues of the archbishopric, but refused to allow him to return to England unless he would comply with the investiture. Anselm remained in France, retiring to the abbey of Bee. At length the pope, adopting a middle course, refused to give up the investitures, but was willing so far to dispense as to give leave to bish- ops and abbots to do homage to the king for their tem- poralities. This was in 1106. The king now invited Anselm to England ; but the messenger finding him sick, the king himself went over into Normandy, and made him a visit at Bee, where all their differences were adjusted. Anselm, being recovered, embarked for England, and, landing at Dover, was received with extraordinary marks of welcome. From this time lit- tle that is remarkable occurred in his life, except a dispute with Thomas, elected archbishop of York in 1108, who, wishing to disengage himself from depend- ency upon the see of Canterbury, refused to make the customary profession of canonical obedience. Before the termination of this dispute Anselm died at Canter- bury, April 21, 1109, in the seventy-sixth year of his age (Penny C'jch predict, s. v.).
The intellect of Anselm was of the highest order ; Neander calls him the Augustine of the twelfth cen- tury. His speculations impressed their character not only upon the theology and philosophy of his own age, but also upon all subsequent ages to the present time. He is generally named as the "father of scholasticism." Though his faith was always sincere and undoubting, his profoundly inquisitive intellect made it necessary for him to philosophize upon the grounds of that faith. Opposing himself to Roscelin, his philosophy was a thorough-going Realism; and in applying his philoso- phy to theology, he sought to demonstrate the being and attributes of God In' the ontolorjical method, of which, in fact, he was substantial!}' the inventor (Pros- loghim, de Dei existentia ; Monologium, de Divinitatis essentia). Remusat (Vie (V Anselm, p. 473) ascribes a Pantheistic tendency to Anselm's uncompromising Realism. Does not the following passage in the Proslogium appear to involve the Pantheistic theory ? Speaking of the divine nature, " It is," he saj's, "the essence of the being, the principle of the existence of all things. . . . Without parts, without differences, without accidents, without changes, it might be said, in a certain sense, to alone exist, for in respect to it the other things which appear to be have no existence. The unchangeable Spirit is all that is, and it is this without limit, simpliciter, inter minahiliter. It is the perfect and absolute existence. The rest is come from nonentity, and thither returns, if not supported by God : it does not exist by itself. In this sense the Creator alone exists; the things created do not" (p. 473, 474). It is plain that these dependent and mere- ly relative existences must be conceived as an emana- tion from the supreme and substantial essence — must, like the qualities of bodies, be in fact identical with the supposed substrata. In bis treatises on free-will and predestination he followed the Augustinian doctrine, and sought acutely, but vainly, to reconcile it with hu- man freedom. He was the first also to treat the doc- trine of redemption [see Satisfaction] in a scientific way. and to seek a rational demonstration of it (in his treatise, Cur Dens Homo). He propounds the question, Why is it necessary that God should have humbled himself so far as to become man and suffer death ? His process of reasoning, in reply to this question, is as follows. Man has by sin deprived God of the glory