Hincmar ok Laon was nephew of Hincmar, arch- bishop (if Rheinis, who at first patronized him, and had him elected bishop of Laon, about A.D. 856. He soon showed an obstinate and refractory spirit ; set at naught his uncle, who was his metropolitan ; rebelled against his king, and scorned the decrees of sjniods, whose sentence of condemnation he for some time avoided by appealing to Rome; but at length he was summoned, heard, con- demned, and deposed from his sec of Laon. He was also imprisoned and his eyes cruelly put out, A.D. 871. Two years later, at the Council of Troyes, he obtained access to the pope, who reinstated him, assigned him a portion of the episcopal revenues, and permitted liim even to resume his pontifical functions in part. He died about A.D. 880. He wrote many Letters, etc., Mhich are lost ; but a few may be found with his life, defence, etc., in Labbe, Condi, torn, vii, and in Sirmond's editioji of the works of Hincmar of Rheims (q. v.). See Clarke, Suc- cession of Sac7-ed Literature, vol. ii ; Cellot, Vie d'llincmar de Laon ; Biddle, Hist, of the Papacy, ii, 24-27 ; Neander, Chui-ck Llist. in. oGi; Wetzer und Welle, Kircken- Lex. V, 208 ; Illgen, Zeitsch.f. d. Hist. Theol. 1858, p. 227.
Hincmar, archbishop of Rheims, one of the most learned divmes of his age, was born about A.D. 809, of
HIXD
260
HINDUISM
a noble family, related to the counts of Toulouse, and was educated in the Monastery of St. Dcnys, near Paris. After finishing his studies he was summoned to the court of Louis le Debonnaire, to whom he faithfully ad- hered, and who employed him, after his restoration, in settling the ecclesiastical affairs of the empire; after this he retired to his monastery, whence he was again summoned into pubhc Ufe by being chosen archbishop of Kheims, A.D. 845. On the accession of Lothaire, an attempt was made to depose him from his see, without success. He was a zealous supporter of the rights of the Gallican Church. In 8-17 the controversy with Gotts- chalk (Godeschalcus) (q. v.) about predestmation arose, and when the case of Gottschalk came before him, he drove it on with too great heat, and Gotteschalk by his means was condemned and punished with much and unjust severity. One of the most important events in Hincniar's life was his controversy in 81)2 with pope Nicholas I, one of the most learned men of the Roman Catholic Church. Eothadius, bishop of Soissons, and suffragan of Hincmar, deposed a priest of his diocese, who appealed to Hincmar as metropolitan, and was or- dered by him to be restored to office. Eothadius, who resisted this order, was, in consequence, condemned and excommunicated by the archbishop. He appealed to the pope, who at once ordered Hincmar to restore Eo- thadius, or to appear at Eome either in person or by his representative, to vindicate the sentence. He sent a legate to Eome, but refused to restore the deposed bish- op ; whereupon Nicholas annulled the sentence, and re- quired that the cause should have another hearing, and this time in Eome. Hincmar, after some demuiTal, was forced to acquiesce. The cause of Eothadius was re- examined, and he was acquitted and restored to his see. But perhaps more historically interesting is Hincmar's opposition to the temporal power of the medieval papacy. See Papacy. Under the successor of Nicholas, Adrian II, the succession to the sovereignty of Lorraine on the death of king Lothaire was questioned ; the pope favor- ed the pretensions of the emperor Louis in opposition to those of Charles the Bold of France. Adrian addressed a mandate to the subjects of Charles and to the nobles of Lorraine, accompanied by a menace of the censure of the Chiu-ch. To this Hincmar offered a firm and persistent opposition. He was equally firm, ten years later, in resisting the undue extension of the royal pre- rogative in ecclesiastical affairs. Louis III, in opposi- tion to the judgment of the Council of Yienne, wished to bestow upon his favorite, Odoacer, the see of Beauvais but Hincmar boldly remonstrated, and fearlessly de- nounced the attempt as an unjustifiable usurpation, He died A.D. 882. His works consist chiefly of Letters about local ecclesiastical affairs, and his treatise I)e Prce- destinatione Dei et libei-o arhitrio, and small tracts on discipline. A former treatise of his, De Prwdest., is lost. In the controversy with Gottschalk he maintained that "God wills the salvation of all men; that som.e will be saved through the gift of divine grace; that others are lost, owing to their demerit; Christ suffered for all; whoever does not appropriate these sufferings has him- self to blame." All his remains are to be found in the careful edition of his works edited by Sirmond, Opera, duos in tomos dif/esfa, etc. (Paris, 1645, 2 vols. fol.). See Noorden, I/inlcmar, Erzbischof r. Rheims (Bonn, 1863) ; Cave, Hist. Litt. ; Mosheim, Ch. History, cent, ix, pt. ii, ch. ii, n. 52 ; Ilai^cnbach, Hist, of Doctrines, ii, 50 ; Flodo- ard, Kvvhsitv Hunmsis Hist.; Gallin ('//ris/ii,,ia. ix, .39; ///.sV. /;//,'/■. ,/,■ 1,1 France, v, 544 sq. : I IcK-frr. XoNr. Biof;. (ji-ni-rah. xxiv, 7<)G sq. ; Neandcr, HlMnrij nf Jhupnas, ii, 4.''>4 ; Eiddle, History of the Papacy, ii; Milman, Lai. Christianity, iii, 51 et al ; iv, 84; Illgen, Zeitsch.f. d. Hist. Theol. 1859, p. 478 ; Hefele (Rom. Cath.) in Wetzer u. Welte, Kirchen-Lexikon, v, 203.