Three Treatises From Bec on the Nature of Monastic Life 9781442689428

Citation preview

THREE TREATISES FROM BEC ON THE NATURE OF MONASTIC LIFE Medieval Academy Books, No. 109

This page intentionally left blank

Three Treatises from Bec on the Nature of Monastic Life

Edited with introduction and notes by Giles Constable Translated by Bernard S. Smith

Published for The Medieval Academy of America by University of Toronto Press

© The Medieval Academy of America 2008 University of Toronto Press Incorporated Toronto Buffalo London www.utppublishing.com Printed in Canada ISBN 978-0-8020-9260-1

Printed on acid-free paper

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Three treatises from Bec on the nature of monastic life / edited with introduction and notes by Giles Constable; translated by Bernard S. Smith. (Medieval Academy of America; no. 109) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8020-9260-1 (bound) 1. Monastic and religious life – France – Normandy – History – Middle Ages, 600–1500. 2. Normandy (France) – Church history. 3. Church and state – France – History – To 1500. I. Constable, Giles II. Smith, Bernard S. III. Series: Medieval Academy books; no. 109 BX2613.T57 2008

271'.10442

C2007-900722-8

University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial assistance to its publishing program of the Canada Council for the Arts and the Ontario Arts Council. University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial support for its publishing activities of the Government of Canada through the Book Publishing Industry Development Program (BPIDP).

CONTENTS

Preface vii Abbreviations

ix

Introduction

3

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum The Professions of Monks 29 De professionibus abbatum The Professions of Abbots 107 De libertate Beccensis monasterii On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec 135 Index of Citations General Index

171 175

This page intentionally left blank

P R E FAC E

The editors have worked together on this volume, but the edition of the Latin texts, and the introduction and notes are primarily the work of Giles Constable and the translation of Bernard S. Smith. The three treatises presented in this volume were originally planned as additions to a revised reprint, issued in 2003, of their Oxford Medieval Texts edition of the Libellus de diversis ordinibus et professionibus qui sunt in aecclesia (Oxford, 1972), thus forming a small collection of works concerning the nature of religious life in the first half of the twelfth century. The length of the Bec treatises, however, and their somewhat different character from the Libellus, led to the decision to publish them separately. The form of the text and notes follows in many respects that of the Oxford Medieval Texts. For help in preparing the transcription and identifying sources the editors are indebted to Loren Weber of Los Angeles and to R.B.C. Huygens of Leiden. Marie-Thérèse Gousset of the Bibliothèque nationale helped with the dating of the manuscript and Alison Beach of the College of William and Mary especially with the analysis of the script. Theodore Evergates of Westminster College gave valuable assistance with the passages relating to homage. Help with the canonical texts (which formed the basis of a separate article, cited p. 11 n. 30) was given by Theo Kölzer of Bonn, Peter Landau of Munich, the late Hubert Mordek of Freiburg-im-Breisgau, Robert Somerville of Columbia University, New York, Jörg Oberste of Regensburg, and above all by Paul Meyvaert of Cambridge, Mass., who prepared an article (cited p. 5 n. 12 below) on the citations from Gregory the Great. These two articles, plus two others (cited pp. 18 n. 54 and 147 n. 23) on abbatial professions in Normandy and England and on Anselm’s move from Bec to Canterbury, have helped to keep the length of the introduction and notes within bounds.

This page intentionally left blank

A B B R EV I A T I O N S

Abbates

De professionibus abbatum

BHL

Bibliotheca hagiographica latina. Subsidia hagiographica, 6. Brussels, 1898–1901

CC

Corpus Christianorum: Series latina. Turnhout, 1953–

CC:CM

Corpus Christianorum: Continuatio mediaevalis. Turnhout, 1966–

CCM

Corpus consuetudinum monasticarum. Siegburg, 1963–

CSEL

Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum

GC

Gallia Christiana. Paris, 1715–1865

Gratian, Decretum

Decretum magistri Gratiani. Edited by Emil Friedberg. Corpus iuris canonici, 1. Leipzig, 1879

Gregory, Dialogi

Gregorii Magni Dialogi libri IV. Edited by Umberto Moricca. Fonti per la storia d’Italia, 57. Rome, 1924

Libertas

De libertate monasterii Beccensis

Mansi

Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio. Edited by Giovanni Domenico Mansi. Florence and Venice, 1759–98

x

Abbreviations

Martène, De ritibus

Edmond Martène. De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus. Rouen, 1700–2; Antwerp, 1736–8; Venice, 1763–4; Bassano, 1783. Cited here in the Antwerp edition

Monachi

De professionibus monachorum

MGH

Monumenta Germaniae historica

PL

Patrologia latina. Edited by J.P. Migne. Paris, 1841–64

T H R E E T R E AT I S E S F RO M B E C O N T H E NAT U R E O F M O NA S T I C L I F E

This page intentionally left blank

INTRODUCTION

1 THE MANUSCRIPT The only known manuscript of the three treatises published in this volume is Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Latin 2342, which is one of the few surviving manuscripts from the library of Bec.1 The De professionibus monachorum is on folios 146v–159r; the De professionibus abbatum on folios 159r–162v, where it breaks off, incomplete, at the bottom of the page; and the De libertate monasterii Beccensis on folios 185v–190v, followed by a brief epitaph of abbot Boso (folio 190v).2 The manuscript apparently includes the works of a single

1 There is a full description in the Bibliothèque nationale: Catalogue général des manuscrits latins, vol. 2 (Nos. 1439–2692), ed. Philippe Lauer (Paris, 1940), 418–19. See also Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. 12, new ed. (Paris, 1869), 335–44; André Wilmart, ‘Les ouvrages d’un moine de Bec. Un débat sur la profession monastique au XIIe siècle,’ Revue bénédictine, 44 (1932), 21–46; and Geneviève Nortier-Marchand, Les bibliothèques médiévales des abbayes bénédictines de Normandie (Caen, 1966; Paris, 1967), 74 n. 69, 82. See also Bettina Wagner, Die ‘Epistola presbiteri Johannis’: lateinisch und deutsch. Überlieferung, Textgeschichte, Rezeption und Übertragungen im Mittelalter, Münchener Texte und Untersuchungen zur deutschen Literatur des Mittelalters, 115 (Tübingen, 2000), 90, dating it to the first half of the twelfth century. The numbering of the folios is later and includes some errors and omissions. The texts of the three treatises do not correspond to the signatures. Fol. 22r–v is blank, and fol. 113bis is an added half-leaf. There are handsome inhabited initials on fols. 3r, 29r, 96v, 146v, and 163r and an offset from a colored initial on fol. 22v. 2 These treatises have been published before, but in scattered and relatively inaccessible works. Monachi was published by Edmond Martène, De ritibus (Rouen), 2:65–92, (Antwerp), 2:469– 96, (Venice), 2:166–77, and (Bassano), 2:168–77 (see Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ [cited n. 1], 30 n. 4 and Aimé-Georges Martimort, La documentation liturgique de Dom Edmond Martène, Studi e testi, 279 [Vatican City, 1978], 369, no. 730); and there is a partial edition in Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages,’ 34–8. Monachi is not the same as the unedited De professione monachorum, ‘of

4

Three Treatises from Bec

author, except for the addition at the end of an incomplete copy of the socalled customary miracle of Our Lady of the Blachernae at Constantinople (folios 190v–191r), of which the earliest manuscripts date from the eleventh century,3 and a copy of a well-known letter from Prester John to the emperor Manuel Comnenus (folios 191r–193r).4 The manuscript begins (folios 1v–2r) with a catalogue of fifteen works ‘which he who wrote this book composed by his own labor.’5 Eight of these are not found in this manuscript: a treatise ‘for the sake of the blessed Nicholas’ on Matthew 25.14; a work ‘on the miracles and virtues of the same most glorious confessor Nicholas’;6 two treatises ‘on the pleas (iniussiones) of abbots’ and ‘on the churches and tithes of monks’; ‘an extensive work against the words of a certain person, in which he placed a hundred and fifty authorities gathered from various doctors against the teachings of that person’; a work in five parts ‘on the sacraments and mysteries of the Old and New Testaments’; ‘a very extensive work from various sentences and authorities’ consisting of 899 sentences divided into seven parts and an additional 290 ‘which are not divided into chapters’; and an account of

3 4

5 6

uncertain authorship’ (perhaps Roger of Caen), mentioned by Richard Sharpe, A Handlist of the Latin Writers of Great Britain and Ireland before 1540, Publications of the Journal of Medieval Latin, 1 (Turnhout, 1997), 60. Abbates was published by Jean Leclercq, ‘Un traité sur la “Profession des abbés” au XIIe siècle,’ Analecta monastica, vol. 6, Studia Anselmiana, 50 (Rome, 1962), 177–91. Libertas was published by Jean Mabillon, Annales ordinis s. Benedicti (Paris, 1703–39), vol. 5 (1713), 635–40, and (Lucca, 1730–45), vol. 5 (1740), 601–5; and in Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, new ed. (Paris, 1869–80), 14:270–7. There is an English translation of Libertas in Sally N. Vaughn, The Abbey of Bec and the Anglo-Norman State, 1034–1136 (Woodbridge, Suffolk, and Totowa, NJ, 1981). Venance Grumel, ‘Le “miracle habituel” de Notre-Dame des Blachernes à Constantinople,’ Echos d’Orient, 34 (1931), 129–46, with the eleventh-century text on 134–5. Printed from this manuscript in Achille Jubinal, Oeuvres complètes de Rutebeuf (Paris, 1839), 1:442–54. See Friedrich Zarncke, Der Priester Johannes, in Abhandlungen der philologischhistorischen Classe der Königl. Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, vol. 7, no. 8 and vol. 8, no. 1 (Leipzig, 1876–9), 884–5 (58–9 of offprint), who says that this manuscript ‘zeigt manche Auslassungen, Aenderungen und Schreiberversehen’; and Wagner, ‘Epistola presbiteri Johannis’ (cited n. 1), 161, 164 n. 28, 167–71, who classifies B.N. Lat. 2342 as one of sixtyseven MSS of redaction B of the letter and one of two representatives of redaction *B, of which the other copy is from Windberg. Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ (cited n. 1), 22: ‘Haec sunt quae ille qui hunc librum scripsit proprio labore composuit,’ followed (22–6) by the list. There is an incomplete edition of the Miracula s. Nicholai, printed from other manuscripts, in the Catalogus codicum hagiographicorum latinorum … qui asservantur in bibliotheca nationali Parisiensi (Paris and Brussels, 1889–93), 2:405–32; BHL 6208. See Margaret Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec (Oxford, 1978), 199–200.

Introduction

5

the translations and miracles of St Honorina.7 These works, except those on St Nicholas and St Honorina, are all lost. The texts of the seven other works listed in the catalogue are found in this manuscript: three biblical commentaries (in two, six, and seven parts respectively) on Luke 10.38, 1.26, and 2.1; the treatises, edited here, on the professions of monks and abbots; a collection of eighty-six chapters from the Moralia of Gregory the Great; and the treatise, also edited here, on the liberty of the monastery of Bec. Two further works in the manuscript not mentioned in the catalogue but presumably by the same author are a commentary on the Pentateuch in six parts and the epitaph of abbot Boso, whose death in 1136 establishes a terminus post quem for the completion of the manuscript. The manuscript has been variously dated between the late eleventh century and the second half of the twelfth.8 The decorated initials have attracted the attention of paleographers and art historians, who have tended to date the manuscript somewhat earlier than other scholars. Charles Dodwell dates it ‘to the end of the eleventh or to the early twelfth century’;9 François Avril dates it ‘XIe–XIIe’; and Margaret Gibson writes that ‘the earliest initials can be very little later than 1100.’10 Avrom Saltman, however, says that the manuscript is in ‘a mid-twelfth century hand’;11 Paul Meyvaert that the author ‘seems to have lived there [at Bec] during the first half of the twelfth century’; and Jean Leclercq ‘towards the middle of the twelfth century.’12 Finally, André Wilmart, who was the first scholar to study the manuscript in detail, dates it to

7 See the incomplete edition of Miracula s. Honorinae in Analecta Bollandiana, 9 (1890), 135–46; BHL 3983. Sections of it are printed, from MS, Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Latin 13774, in J. Depoin, Les comtes de Beaumont-sur-Oise et le prieuré de Sainte-Honorine de Pontoise (Pontoise, 1915), 54–6, 60–1, 66–7, 69–70, 72–3, 75–6, nos. 6, 11, 21, 24, 27, and 32; see introduction, 39, 42–3. Depoin dates the work ca. 1137 from the reference to prior Robert as novus and attributed it to him (70). 8 In the B.N. Catalogue général (cited n. 1) it is dated simply ‘XIIe s.’ 9 C.R. Dodwell, The Canterbury School of Illumination, 1066–1200 (Cambridge, 1954), 12–13. In the catalogue of an exhibition held at the Bibliothèque nationale, Les manuscrits à peintures en France du VIIe au XIIe siècle (Paris, 1954), 76, no. 203, it is dated ‘début du XIIe siècle.’ 10 Avril in the catalogue of the exhibition Manuscrits normands XI–XIIème siècles (Rouen, 1975), 58–9, no. 56; and Gibson, ‘History at Bec in the Twelfth Century,’ in The Writing of History in the Middle Ages: Essays Presented to Richard William Southern, ed. R.H.C. Davis and J.M. Wallace-Hadrill (Oxford, 1981), 171 n. 4, citing Avril in the exhibition catalogue Trésors des abbayes normandes (Rouen and Caen, 1979), no. 169. 11 Saltman, Theobald, Archbishop of Canterbury, University of London Historical Studies, 2 (London, 1956), 4 n. 3. 12 Meyvaert, ‘Uncovering a Lost Work of Gregory the Great: Fragments of an Early Commentary on Job,’ Traditio, 50 (1995), 55; and Leclercq, ‘Traité’ (cited n. 2), 177.

6

Three Treatises from Bec

the second half of the twelfth century.13 He believes, owing to the variation in handwriting and the many errors and corrections, that the manuscript is not an autograph but an uncorrected copy made either under the direction of the author or from an authorized model.14 A detailed analysis of the script made by Alison Beach (in an oral communication), however, shows that with the possible exception of the insertions on folios 185r–v and 189r it was written by a single scribe, probably over a period of time, which accounts for the variations. The decorated initials and numerous (though inconsistent) rubrications indicate that the texts are not preliminary versions. The changes, errors, and lacunae suggest that the manuscript is a working draft rather than a careless copy.15 The best solution to these problems seems to be Gibson’s proposal that the manuscript is the author’s autograph ‘to which he went on adding material over a period of some forty years,’ that is, from the 1090s until the late 1130s.16 He also continued to revise the texts. The entire manuscript can therefore best be described not as a draft but as a working copy. A further point with regard to the dating, which has not been discussed by previous scholars, is the inclusion (in apparently the same script as the other texts) of the letter from Prester John, to whom the earliest reference in the west is in the Chronica of Otto of Freising under the year 1145,17 and whose

13 Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ (cited n. 1), 21. 14 Ibid., 22 n. 2, 23. 15 A study of the corrections and changes in these and the other texts in the manuscript might throw light on the working habits of the author. Five of the changes in the texts edited here (four whole words and one single letter) are preceded by ‘uel’ and may be alternative readings rather than corrections or changes: see Leonard Boyle, ‘ “Epistulae venerunt parum dulces.” La place de la codicologie dans l’édition des textes latins médiévaux’ (1992), in his Integral Palaeography (Turnhout, 2001), 76–7. 16 Gibson, ‘History’ (cited n. 10), 171. In Lanfranc (cited n. 6), 202, Gibson describes B.N. Lat. 2342 as ‘the personal manuscript of the author of the Miracula S. Nicholai …, who continued to add to his work, and have it embellished by successive artists, over the period c. 1090–c. 1140.’ This would fit with the fact that Libertas and the epitaph of Boso appear last in the manuscript, but does not explain why the commentary on the Pentateuch is not listed in the catalogue. 17 Otto of Freising, Chronica, 7.33, 2nd ed., ed. Adolf Hofmeister (Hanover and Leipzig, 1912), 365–7. See Lynn Thorndike, A History of Magic and Experimental Science during the First Thirteen Centuries of Our Era (New York, 1929), 2:238–43; Vzevolod Slessarev, Prester John, The Letter and the Legend (Minneapolis, 1959), 26–8; Edward Ullendorff and Charles Beckingham, Hebrew Letters of Prester John (Oxford, 1982), 1, who go on to say, however (2), that ‘the story in some form was already known’ before 1145; and the articles in Prester John, the Mongols and the Ten Lost Tribes, ed. Charles Beckingham and Bernard Hamilton (Aldershot and Brookfield, Vt, 1996), where the letter is dated between 1143 and 1180 by Beckingham (273), who calls it a ‘preposterous document.’

Introduction

7

letter, which was said to have arrived in 1165, was mentioned by pope Alexander III in 1177.18 The text of the letter in B.N. Lat. 2342 is of the second (interpolated) version, according to Jubinal and Zarncke, or version B, according to Wagner, and includes many omissions, changes, and mistakes,19 which suggest that it is a late copy, or, possibly, a preliminary version. Its inclusion here, together with the account of the Blachernae miracle, shows that the writer had an interest in the east and raises the possibility that he was the author of the letter, in which case B was a preliminary version.20 Its presence in this manuscript, unless it was added later, in a similar hand, indicates either that it is earlier than is commonly believed or that work on the manuscript continued considerably later. 2 THE TEXT The number of additions and corrections – some inserted into the text, others written in the margins or over erasures – pose special problems for the editor and translator of the texts.21 The insertion of ‘debet esse ut’ into a citation from Gregory the Great makes nonsense of the grammar. At least one sentence lacks a verb. The examination of the abbot on folio 161r was squeezed, presumably subsequently, into too small a space, and the long passage on folio 186r–v (written in a smaller hand on a somewhat shorter leaf, with more lines than the other folios) is a later insertion for which the author made no provision in his original text. Mabillon in his edition of Libertas silently inserted ‘Anselmus’ after ‘Quam abbatiam gubernauit’ in order to make sense of the text when it resumed after the insertion. All three previous editors of the treatises made a number of corrections, mostly silent, of which a few (but not all) are followed here and others noted in the apparatus. Though many of the alterations are written in ink of a different color, either lighter or darker, than that normally used, they appear to be in the

18 Slessarev, Prester John (cited n. 17), 33; Ullendorf and Beckingham, Hebrew Letters (cited n. 17), 2–3; and Wagner, ‘Epistola presbiteri Johannis’ (cited n. 1). 19 Zarncke, Priester Johannes (cited n. 4), 885 (59 of offprint). 20 Slessarev, Prester John (cited n. 17), 41–56, argues that the letter was written by a westerner, perhaps from northern Europe, writing either in the east or with some knowledge of the east. The oldest translation is into Anglo-Norman verse, probably in the late twelfth century. 21 Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ (cited n. 1), 22 nn. 2 and 4 (cf. 32 n. 1), comments somewhat acidly on the number of errors, inconsistencies, and ambiguities. They are especially striking in Libertas.

8

Three Treatises from Bec

same hand, and it is impossible to say when they were made. Many small abbreviation marks are also in a dark ink. Erasures and gaps in the text are sometimes filled by a line. Variants are written above some words, occasionally preceded by uel. The letter h has been added superscript at the beginning and occasionally in the middle of many words originally written without an h. In some passages the additional h was added or omitted, out of either design or oversight, and the reader is presented with readings like hornamenta for ornamenta, uic for huic, ac for hac, ominium for hominium, abeat for habeat, and peribent for perhibent. Spelling and word separation are inconsistent. Many small words are joined to larger words, both before and after. Elisions are uncertain, leading to spellings like adclamabat and ambundantior, and whole syllables as well as individual letters are omitted, as in subciatur, stabilite, iniquitem, and sociate. Some words, syllables, and letters are added above the words in which they belong; they are printed here in parentheses; omissions are supplied in pointed brackets. Some letters are used interchangeably, such as s and x, and m and n, as in unquam/umquam. The same word is often spelled in different ways, even when the different forms are close together (autoritas/auctoritas, monacus/monachus, Rotomagus/Rothomagus) and with single or double letters (abas/abbas, apellantur/appellantur, baculum/bacculum, dificiles/difficiles, imitatio/immitatio, oculus/occulus). Ecclesia, a very common word, is spelled both with and without a diphthong. It is tempting to attribute this variation, as did Wilmart, to scribal ignorance or carelessness, but many of these variations are clearly attributable to the author, who by reworking the texts, perhaps over a period of time, introduced inconsistencies as well as corrections. In view of these variations, it is hard to expand abbreviations consistently, and although the text in this edition is more consistent than in the manuscript, a few inconsistencies have been retained in order to give the character of the text, such as aecclesia and ecclesia and ambundantiore and abundantiore (2 Cor. 2.7), which are within a few words of each other. A small c with a line above it can stand for com(n) or cum(n); e cedilla for ae or oe (haec sometimes has a cedilla under the c); i with a line above for im or in; and t with a line above for -ant, -itur, or -unt. In this edition a , c , i , and u , have been expanded with an m, even in words that are occasionally spelled out with an n, like unquam and quanuis. Nanque, however, is often spelled out with an n and has been left that way. Among the more consistent abbreviations are ·e· for est, h for haec (hec), h· for hoc, ·i· for id est, and q for quae. Ds and dm are expanded deus and deum and dns as dominus, though the author also used domnus and donnus. Special problems are posed by m with a suprascript o, which stands both for ‘modo’ and for various forms of monachus and monacus, as it is sometimes spelled (especially when abbreviated monac). The capital R in the monastic scrutinies may

Introduction

9

stand for Responsio (used here), Respondet, or Respondeatur.22 Et is represented by both the ampersand and the tironian note resembling the numeral seven. Additions in the manuscript are marked by a sign like a wishbone on its side at the beginning and end of the insertion. With regard to the forms of letters, both large and small capitals and large cursive capitals are used, especially at the beginning of proper names. The small initial forms of r and s, and occasionally q, appear at the beginning of words, and more rarely in the middle, again especially in proper names. The capital V and lower-case u are used consistently, though the capital U is found occasionally. The first letters of sentences starting at the beginning of a line are often put in the margin, and frequently rubricated.23 The highlighting of letters is usually in red, but green (from folio 155r) and blue (from folio 156r) are also used. Proper names are sometimes picked out in silver, which has since turned black. The large initial P at the beginning of Monachi (folio 146v, see frontispiece) is about 15 centimeters high and 7.5 centimeters wide and is in green, with a blue background (with stars), red vegetation, and a red frame. The figures at the top are red and those at the bottom purple, and the animals, in reverse, are purple at the top and red at the bottom. The care devoted to these decorations is among the best evidence that the manuscript is not a preliminary draft but a copy on which the author continued to work. There are no consistent indications of divisions in the text. The only guide is the size and color of the capital letters, but the extent of capitalization varies greatly. Some folios (such as 147v, 148r, and 162r) have no capitals at all, whereas others (such as 153v) have as many as fifty. The capitals in the margins, as indicated above, are of no help because they mark only the beginnings of sentences. There are about twelve large capitals (between 6 and 8 centimeters in height) in the text of Monachi (not including the canon law texts at the end); three in Abbates; and none in Libertas. These capitals, where they occur, form the basis of the divisions of the texts in the present edition. The punctuation is likewise based on that in the manuscript, which has the medial . (printed in this edition as a period at the end of a sentence, as a colon before a quotation, and as a comma in the middle of a sentence); the question mark; and é. , â. , and ; (very rarely, as on folio 188v, lines 2, 6). These are all printed here as a comma. Some additional paragraphs and punctuation have been introduced, in addition to quotation marks. In spite of these emendations the punctuation here substantially reflects that of the manuscript.

22 Ibid., 36 n. 1, 37 n. 1. The expansions here do not always agree with those of the previous editors. 23 The omission of the initial P before ‘romitto’ on fol. 157r, line 17, shows that the capitals were inserted and rubricated after the text was written.

10

Three Treatises from Bec

3 THE AUTHOR Nothing certain is known about the anonymous author of the works in B.N. Lat. 2342, except that he was a monk of Bec and a prolific writer. The treatise Libertas was written probably soon after the death of abbot Boso in 1136.24 It has been suggested that the author’s name was Nicholas, because he wrote a homily in honor of St Nicholas and an account of his miracles, and that he spent some time at the priory of Conflans-Sainte-Honorine, because he wrote a treatise on the translation of St Honorina to Conflans and on her miracles, but these are both conjectures.25 Even more conjectural is Palémon Glorieux’s proposal that Alan of Lille wrote the treatises while he was a monk at Bec.26 Unless further information comes to light, perhaps in the author’s unpublished works, he must remain in obscurity. His writings show that he read widely and had access to a considerable collection of books, presumably at Bec.27 He was particularly attached to Augustine and Gregory the Great and apparently knew a lost letter or treatise by Gregory and an early version of the Moralia.28 He did not cite many

24 The lack of any reference to the election and blessing of Boso’s successor Theobald, which involved many of the issues discussed in Libertas, indicates that it was written shortly after Boso’s death: see Adolphe Porée, Histoire de l’abbaye du Bec (Evreux, 1901), 1:152 n. 2; Saltman, Theobald (cited n. 11), 4, who suggests that it was written ‘perhaps by order of Theobald’ in connection with the conflict over his election in 1137; and Vaughn, Abbey (cited n. 2), 58–9, 64. 25 Histoire littéraire (cited n. 1), 12:335; Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ (cited n. 1), 28–9; Gibson, Lanfranc (cited n. 6), 199; Gibson, ‘History’ (cited n. 10), 171–5, where she refers to the writer as ‘the Conflans author.’ 26 Glorieux, ‘Alain de Lille, le moine et l’abbaye du Bec,’ Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale, 39 (1972), 51–62. Cf. Gibson, Lanfranc (cited n. 6), 199 n. 2, saying that there is ‘no substance’ in this identification. 27 On the library at Bec see the medieval catalogues printed in Félix Ravaisson, Rapports au ministre de l’instruction publique sur les bibliothèques des départements de l’Ouest (Paris, 1841), 376–95 (PL, 150:769D–82C), which includes the books given to Bec by bishop Philip of Bayeux in the middle of the twelfth century; and Gustav Becker, Catalogi bibliothecarum antiqui (Bonn, 1885), 199–202 (books given by Philip of Bayeux), 257–66 (the principal library). See also Theodor Gottlieb, Über mittelalterliche Bibliotheken (Leipzig, 1890), 93, 392; Zachary Brooke, The English Church and the Papacy (Cambridge, 1931; repr. 1989), 57–8 (esp. on canon law); Saltman, Theobald (cited n. 11), 7; and Nortier-Marchand, Bibliothèques (cited n. 1), 34–60, who comments (63) on the growth of the library in the twelfth century. 28 Meyvaert, ‘Uncovering’ (cited n. 12), 55–74. On the popularity of Gregory’s works, especially in florilegia and canonical collections, see R. Wasselynck, ‘Présence de saint Grégoire le Grand dans les recueils canoniques (Xe–XIIe siècles),’ Mélanges de science religieuse, 22 (1965), 205–19; Giorgio Picasso, ‘ “Quam sit necessarium monasteriorum quieti prospicere” (Reg. Epist. 8.17). Sulla fortuna di una canone gregoriana,’ in Cristianità ed

Introduction

11

classical authors – there is only one reference to Virgil in the treatises – but among the Latin fathers he cited Jerome, Ambrose, Leo, Fulgentius, and Isidore, and among more recent writers Guitmond of Aversa, from whom there are a number of quotations, especially on folios 60–5, and Anselm, whom he may have known personally. The letters by Anselm cited in Libertas include at least two that are otherwise unknown and several others of which the identifications are uncertain, showing that the Bec author had access to sources which are now lost. In other works he cited Origen, Cyril, Eusebius of Emesa, and Chrysostom among the Greek fathers, and Cyprian, Hilary, Gelasius, Cassiodorus, Paschasius Radbertus, and Lanfranc among Latin writers.29 He had a considerable knowledge of canon law and made use in Monachi and Abbates of several canons that are found in no known legal collection.30 He also had an interest in, and possibly some knowledge of, Greek, as the references to the Greek fathers and the inclusion in B.N. Lat. 2342 of two works relating to the east suggest. In his work on the miracles of St Nicholas he referred to a fever that the Greek doctors called ‘oxea.’31 His writings range widely over the fields of exegesis, theology, hagiography, and monastic affairs. His only known historical work is Libertas, which covers

Europa. Miscellanea di studi in onore de Luigi Prosdocimi, ed. Cesare Alzati (Rome, Freiburg, and Vienna, 1994–2000), 2:95–105, with further references on 96 n. 6. Peter the Venerable, in the Contra Petrobrusianos, 256 (CC:CM, 10:151), said that he did not need to cite individual passages of Gregory’s Life, Homilies, and Dialogues because ‘They are recited, and heard, and read, and understood daily and almost without interruption by innumerable and even unlearned and simple brothers.’ 29 Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ (cited n. 1), 22 n. 4. Manuscripts of the works of most of these authors were in the library at Bec: see the catalogues cited in n. 28 and Max Manitius, Handschriften antiker Autoren in mittelalterlichen Bibliothekskatalogen, ed. Karl Manitius, Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen, Beiheft 67 (Leipzig, 1935). Assuming that the works of Lanfranc and Guitmond (who studied under Lanfranc), though not listed, were available at Bec, the principal absences are Cyril, Eusebius, and Paschasius. This suggests that the author had access to other libraries. 30 See Giles Constable, ‘The Canonical Citations in Two Twelfth-Century Treatises from Bec,’ in Grundlagen des Rechts. Festschrift für Peter Landau zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Richard Helmholz, Paul Mikat, Jörg Müller, and Michael Stolleis (Paderborn and Munich, 2000), 271–6. The author’s source was not the so-called collection of Lanfranc, which came from Bec and of which there is a copy in MS Cambridge, Trinity College, 405 (B.16.44): see Brooke, English Church (cited n. 27), 57–83, saying that this collection was found only in Normandy before Lanfranc brought it to England, and 231–5 on the manuscripts. 31 Miracula s. Nicholai, no. 14, in Cat. cod. Paris. (cited n. 6), 2:413. Heinrich von Staden informs me that ‘oxea’ meant ‘acuta’ or ‘celeris’ in Latin, that is, a non-chronic fever. Connections with south Italy and the east are also suggested by the references to the stories of pilgrims and crusaders in Miracula s. Nicholai and Miracula s. Honorinae (see n. 34 below).

12

Three Treatises from Bec

the first hundred years of the history of Bec, but his treatises on the miracles of St Honorina and St Nicholas also shed some light on his method of historical composition.32 The Miracula s. Nicholai begins with a brief history of Bec, the success of which he attributed to zeal for the work of God, the fervor of religion, and the study of love.33 This is followed by thirty-five chapters, mostly devoted to individual miracles, of which four are dated respectively to 1103, 1111, 1125, and 1129. He wrote in one, dated 1125, that he had himself experienced the power and assistance of St Nicholas, and he referred in others to his sources, which included several monks of Bec and former pilgrims and crusaders. A monk named Roger, for instance, told him a story about William of Breteuil, who also figures in Libertas. Alebold of Jerusalem was a cleric of Bari who entered Bec and was abbot of Bury St Edmunds from 1114 until 1119, and the interesting story of the shipwreck of some returning crusaders was attributed to the son of Fulco of Aunou, named Richard, who witnessed the events and later became a monk at Bec.34 These contacts with the outside world expanded the author’s horizon, and in Libertas he showed a considerable knowledge of events outside the walls of his monastery. He also made use in the Miracula s. Nicholai of the Lives of Herluin (which was written between ca. 1109 and 1118) and of Lanfranc, with which he was clearly familiar, and there is a striking resemblance between some parts of Libertas and the Life of Boso by Milo Crispin.35

32 Gibson, ‘History’ (cited n. 10), 171–5. 33 Miracula s. Nicholai, no. 2, in Cat. cod. Paris. (cited n. 6), 2:406. 34 Miracula s. Nicholai, nos. 24, 25, 26, 32, in Cat. cod. Paris. (cited n. 6), 2:419, 421, 422, 428. No. 26 was a miracle at Bari at the time the gens christiana started ‘the Jerusalem journey.’ On Alebold, see David Knowles, C.N.L. Brooke, and Vera London, The Heads of Religious Houses: England and Wales, 940–1216 (Cambridge, 1972), 32. On Richard son of Fulco of Aunou, see Jonathan Riley-Smith, The First Crusaders, 1095–1131 (Cambridge, 1997), 148, 220. See also Miracula s. Nicholai, no. 31, 427, for another returning crusader; and see Miracula s. Honorinae, no. 19, in Analecta Bollandiana (cited n. 7), 141, and Depoin, Comtes de Beaumont (cited n. 7), 69–70, no. 24, for a story from a pilgrim or crusader ‘tendens Jerusalem.’ 35 Milo Crispin, Vita Bosonis, in Lanfranc, Opera omnia, ed. Luc d’Achéry (Paris, 1642), app., 47–50. It was written between the death of Boso in 1136 and the death of Milo in about 1150. Gibson, ‘History’ (cited n. 10), 174–5, attributes the author’s use of the Lives of Herluin and Lanfranc to his contacts with the priories of Bec along the Seine and to river trade. Some of it appears to be based on personal knowledge and on first-hand reports by eye-witnesses.

Introduction

13

Vita Bosonis e contra ille asserebat hoc se non posse facere, propter magnam sui corporis debilitatem, et alia quaedam grauia quasi peccata opponebat. (P. 48)

Libertas Ille ad hec respondit: ‘Hoc facere nullo modo possum, quia nimium infirmus sum corpore ut omnes scitis, et tantum onus super me ponere non presumo.’ (P. 158)

Tunc compulsus est aperire quod latebat, et accipiens archiepiscopum cum episcopo seorsum, dixit papam sibi interdixisse ne unquam laicae personae hominium faceret. (P. 48)

Tunc archiepiscopus duxit eum extra capitulum in secretiori loco, et iussit ut diceret. Tunc ille: ‘Olim cum apud domnum apostolicum Vrbanum conuersarer, promisi ei quasi ex fide quod numquam alicui laico homini hominium facerem.’ (P. 158)

Reuersus in capitulum archiepiscopus cum episcopo dixit, quandam causam illum obtendere propter quam, Deo iuuante, non necesse esset electionem hanc cassari. (P. 48)

Deinde reuersi sunt in capitulo. Tunc dixit archiepiscopus conuentui: ‘Audiui causam domini prioris pro qua se excusat obedire uestris uoluntatibus, sed ut mihi uidetur non est talis pro qua debeat hoc facere.’ (P. 158)

‘Nec mihi faciet hominium, nec uobis professionem’; ad haec ille: ‘Domine,’ ait, ‘facite quod uestrum est, de hoc quod ad me pertinet, bene inter nos conueniet.’ (Pp. 48–9)

‘Domine archiepiscope, scitote pro certo quia iste abbas nec mihi faciet hominium, nec uobis professionem.’ Et archiepiscopus econtra: ‘Domine quod uobis beneplacitum est de re uestra facite ut dominus, de re uero quae ad me proprie pertinet inter me et ipsum bene conueniet.’ (P. 160)

Tunc archiepiscopus adstans sacris altaribus, interrogabat illum iuxta morem, et ille ad interrogata respondebat ut solet, donec ad illud uentum est, ut diceret: ‘Vis obediens esse huic ecclesiae, et mihi, et legitimis successoribus,’ at ille ‘Volo.’ (P. 49)

Tunc archiepiscopus ad abbatem: ‘Quamuis non sit necesse mi domine ut te interrogem sicuti mos est alios interrogare et discutere, tamen ne consuetudo aecclesiae relinquatur, breuiter quero si uis subiectus et obediens huic sanctae Rotomagensi aecclesiae et eis qui ei presunt.’ Abbas respondit: ‘Volo.’ (P. 164)

14

Three Treatises from Bec

The resemblances between these two accounts show that the authors were describing the same events (on the basis of their own observation or of eyewitness accounts) but not that either one was copying the other.36 This is confirmed by the differences. In the Vita, for instance, the archbishop left the chapter to question Boso ‘with the bishop [of Lisieux],’ who is not mentioned in Libertas; and in the Vita the archbishop questioned Boso at the altar ‘according to custom’ and Boso replied ‘as is customary,’ whereas in Libertas the archbishop said that it was not necessary to question Boso ‘as is the custom’ except on the central point of obedience. Boso’s unwillingness to say profiteor led in the Vita, but not in the Libertas, to an uproar that was settled only by the intervention of the cardinal-legate. These passages illustrate the extensive use made in Libertas of direct speech. Many of the principal characters are quoted verbatim at one point or another, both in formal and informal circumstances. Robert Curthose swore per mirabilia dei five times and king William per mortem Christi. These lend a certain vividness and verisimilitude to the account. The similarity between the words spoken by the archbishop to the duke in the Life of Boso and in Libertas suggests that they may derive from those he actually spoke, but in many cases it was probably a rhetorical technique of the author.37 The opinions of scholars regarding the reliability and ability of the anonymous Bec author therefore vary. The authors of the Histoire littéraire rank him relatively highly. While acknowledging that he had neither the method nor the style of Anselm, they say that his works show ‘a spirit nourished in the reading of the Fathers and exercised in the art of reasoning.’ They describe him as a solid writer who was ‘attached to the essential truths,’ as a theologian who did ‘not depart from the principles established by tradition,’ and as a wise and subtle dialectitian who gave ‘very plausible solutions to difficulties in which commonplace theologians are lost.’ They conclude that he was ‘one of the most

36 See Eduard Norden, Die antike Kunstprosa vom VI. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissance, 5th ed. (Darmstadt, 1958), 86–7 (plus Nachträge, 8); Peter Schon, Studien zum Stil der frühen französischen Prosa, Analecta Romanica, 8 (Frankfurt-am-Main, 1960), 185– 203; and several of the articles in Oral History of the Middle Ages: The Spoken Word in Context, ed. Gerhard Jaritz and Michael Richter, Medium Aevum Quotidianum, Sonderband 12 (Krems and Budapest, 2001). 37 Vaughn, Abbey (cited n. 2), 59, says of this passage in Libertas that ‘Clearly an eyewitness account, it must surely be independent of Milo Crispin’s version.’ Gibson, in Lanfranc (cited n. 6), 199, and ‘History’ (cited n. 10), 173, however, concludes that ‘The author [of Libertas] agrees in so many details with the Vitae Abbatum that he can be assumed to have known Milo Crispin’s work: he had only to recast it as a polemic.’

Introduction

15

skillful theologians and most judicious writers of his century.’38 Wilmart, on the other hand, expresses a decidedly unfavorable opinion and calls him an ‘author of the third rank.’ He has no regret at the loss of works known only by their titles, and more than once expresses surprise that scholars of the calibre of Mabillon and Martène had published his works in extenso. He himself prints only excerpts from Monachi in his article on the anonymous author of Bec. He gives the author credit, however, for his assiduity and for ‘a certain breadth of views which is explained by the long monastic tradition from which he benefited.’ And he concludes, somewhat grudgingly, that ‘His culture and ambitions do honor to the school of Bec, and even to the twelfth century.’39 4 THE CONTEXT The abbey of Bec was approximately a hundred years old at the time the treatise On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec was written. It was founded about 1039 by Herluin, who served as first abbot until his death in 1078.40 The first church was consecrated by the archbishop of Rouen in 1041, and Bec rapidly became one of the best-known and most influential monasteries in northern France. Lanfranc taught there before he became abbot of St Stephen’s at Caen and, in 1070, archbishop of Canterbury. The second abbot, Anselm (1079–93), also became archbishop of Canterbury. He was succeeded by William (1093– 1124) and Boso (1124–36), Anselm’s interlocutor in the Cur Deus homo, both of whom figure prominently in Libertas, and finally by Theobald, who was abbot from 1136 to 1138 and archbishop of Canterbury from 1138 until 1161. These first five abbots were all chosen from among Bec’s own members, a procedure unlike that in most Norman monasteries, where the choice of abbots

38 Histoire littéraire (cited n. 1), 12:337, 344. 39 Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ (cited n. 1), 27–8. See also Meyvaert, ‘Uncovering’ (cited n. 12), 55. Gibson, ‘History’ (cited n. 10), 171, takes a middle position, calling the author ‘a man of far wider interests and better education’ than Milo Crispin. The lost works on the pleas of abbots and on the churches and tithes of monks would complement in many respects the three treatises edited here. 40 Herluin established a small community in 1034 at Bonneville, where the bishop of Lisieux dedicated a chapel in 1035. The community moved in 1039 to Bec, which is called Le Bec Hellouin in French, after its founder Hellouinus. See Gilbert Crispin, Vita Herluini, ed. Anna Abulafia and Gillian Evans, The Works of Gilbert Crispin, Auctores Britannici Medii Aevi, 8 (London, 1986), 185 n. 1 (with further references to the sources), 190 n. 2; and Ordericus Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica, 3, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis, Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford, 1969–80), 2:12. Among modern works see Porée, Bec (cited n. 24), 1:35–45; and Vaughn, Abbey (cited n. 2).

16

Three Treatises from Bec

was subject to a measure of control from external authorities.41 Some scholars have associated Bec with Cluny,42 but this is true only in the sense that it played a role in the monastic world of Normandy, Flanders, and England comparable with that of Cluny in some other parts of Europe.43 Anselm as a young man admired the strictness of the order of Cluny,44 and the monastic constitutions of Lanfranc, issued after he became archbishop, were influenced by the customs of Cluny,45 but there is no evidence of Cluniac influence on monastic life at Bec. The editor of the surviving customs of Bec, which were drawn up considerably later, said that Bec in its early years was uninfluenced by any contemporary monastic practice and that the customary was ‘an organic compilation of customs [that were] lived before they were codified’ rather than a systematic collection from identifiable sources.46 Bec was celebrated for its high standard of religious life and for its intellectual activity.47 The record of professions show that the numbers of monks rose rapidly in the 1070s, leveled off until the 1120s, and then rose again, reaching

41 Consuetudines Beccenses, ed. Marie-Pascal Dickson, in CCM, 4:xxxiv–xxxvi, xli; and MariePascal Dickson, ‘Monachisme et liberté. La liberté de l’Eglise du Bec,’ La vie spirituelle, 128 (1974), 136–45. David Douglas, William the Conqueror (London, 1964), 117, says that ‘Le Bec … was in many ways unique.’ 42 Max Heimbucher, Die Orden und Kongregationen der katholischen Kirche, 3rd ed. (Paderborn, 1933–4), 1:203, called Bec ‘ein “Cluny in kleinen” ’ for Flanders and England; Philibert Schmitz, Histoire de l’ordre de Saint-Benoît (Maredsous, 1948–56), vol. 1 (2nd ed.), 167; Kassius Hallinger, Gorze-Kluny. Studien zu den monastischen Lebensformen und Gegensätzen im Hochmittelalter, Studia Anselmiana, 22–5 (Rome, 1950–1), 1:474–5 esp. n. 7; Norman Cantor, Church, Kingship, and Lay Investiture in England, 1089–1135, Princeton Studies in History, 10 (Princeton, 1958), 110: ‘During Anselm’s abbacy and even earlier, Bec had been loosely affiliated with Cluny’; Decreta Lanfranci, ed. David Knowles, in CCM, 3:xvii–xviii: ‘The Bec use is of the family of Cluny.’ 43 David Bates, Normandy before 1066 (London and New York, 1982), 223, stresses the nonand anti-Cluniac elements in Norman monasticism. See Heinrich Sproemberg, Beiträge zur französisch-flandrischen Geschichte, vol. 1: Alvisus, Abt von Anchin (1111–1131), Historische Studien, 202 (Berlin, 1931), 50–1, on the influence of Bec. 44 Eadmer, Vita Anselmi, 5, ed. R.W. Southern, The Life of St Anselm … by Eadmer, Nelson’s Medieval Texts (London and Edinburgh, 1962), 9. Later, after he became archbishop, he knew abbot Hugh and visited Cluny. 45 Decreta Lanfranci, ed. Knowles (cited n. 42), xviii–xix. Cf. Consuetudines Beccenses, ed Dickson (cited n. 41), xxxi. 46 Ibid., xxxvi–xxxvii (cf. xli), again stressing the independence of Bec and its liberty in the choice of customs. 47 David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England: A History of Its Development from the Times of St Dunstan to the Fourth Lateran Council, 940–1216, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1963), 92; and David Douglas, William the Conqueror (cited n. 41), 116–18, 126–7.

Introduction

17

a high point in the late 1130s.48 By the second half of the eleventh century it had a good library and a famous school. When Anselm was hesitating over whether and where he should become a monk, he at first rejected Bec because the reputation of Lanfranc would overshadow his own.49 Lanfranc was known especially for his works on theology, exegesis, and grammar, but Bec also had a number of writers on monastic and spiritual matters and on history, including the lives of its abbots and monks.50 Among these, in addition to Anselm, whose fame would outshine even that of Lanfranc, were Gilbert Crispin, Boso, and the anonymous author of the treatises published in this volume.51 Bec’s exceptional degree of institutional independence dated from its origins.52 It had been founded on Herluin’s inherited land (‘de patrimonio proprio,’ according to the author of Libertas), and subsequent grants were ‘from the charity of the barons of that land,’ that is, without any feudal obligation.53 Although Bec received no known privileges of exemption during the first century of its history, the monks jealously guarded its customary freedom from

48 The numbers then declined to about the level of 1080–1120 but rose again in the 1150s. See the chronological list of professions in Porée, Bec (cited n. 24), 1:629–45; and the analysis in Gibson, Lanfranc (cited n. 6), 201. 49 Eadmer, Vita Anselmi, 5, ed. Southern (cited n. 44), 9. On Anselm at Bec and his prayers, meditations, and early treatises, see R.W. Southern, Saint Anselm and His Biographer (Cambridge, 1963), 27–76. 50 Jean Leclercq, ‘Une doctrine de la vie monastique dans l’école du Bec,’ in Spicilegium Beccense, vol. 1 (Paris, 1959), 477–88, repr. as ‘Dans l’entourage de Lanfranc et de saint Anselme,’ in Témoins de la spiritualité occidentale, vol. 2 (Paris, 1965), 218–35; Leclercq, ‘Lettres familières d’un moine du Bec,’ Analecta monastica, vol. 2, Studia Anselmiana, 31 (Rome, 1953), 141–73; and Gibson, ‘History’ (cited n. 10), 167–86. See also Sally N. Vaughn, ‘Lanfranc, Anselm, and the School of Bec: In Search of the Students of Bec,’ in The Culture of Christendom, ed. M.A. Meyer (London, 1993), 155–82. 51 On Gilbert Crispin, see Leclercq, ‘Entourage,’ in Témoins (cited n. 50), 221–3; and the introduction to his Works, ed. Abulafia and Evans (cited n. 40). On Boso, see Porée, Bec (cited n. 24), 1:280–98; and Southern, Anselm (cited n. 49), 83, 86–7, 202; on Gilbert’s early relation to Anselm and conversion to monastic life, see Eadmer, Vita Anselmi, 34, ed. Southern (cited n. 44), 60–1; and on his spiritual writings, Henri Rochais, ‘Textes anciens sur la discipline monastique,’ Revue Mabillon, 43 (1953), 43–7; and Leclercq, ‘Entourage,’ in Témoins, 223–4. 52 See n. 40 above. 53 See p. 21 below. Cf. Gilbert Crispin, Vita Herluini, 44, ed. Abulafia and Evans (cited n. 40), 193 (‘locum sui iuris’); Ordericus Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica, 3, ed. Chibnall (cited n. 40), 2:12 (‘in patrimonio suo’); Robert of Torigny, De immutatione ordinis monachorum, 14 (PL, 202:1315B); and Robert of Torigny, Chronique de Robert de Torigni, abbé de Mont-Saint-Michel, ed. Léopold Delisle, Société de l’histoire de Normandie (Rouen, 1872–3), 2:195 (‘in proprio solo’).

18

Three Treatises from Bec

external control, including the right of the abbot to make no profession to the archbishop and no homage to the duke or king.54 When the office of the abbot was vacant, according to the later customs, the ‘lord of the land’ was asked to grant free election, and his representatives, and those of the archbishop, were informed of the outcome after the election.55 In 1091/3 archbishop William Bona Anima of Rouen gave Bec a privilege, which was confirmed by archbishop Hugh in 1141, granting the monastery and its parish freedom ‘from all episcopal exactions’ except for those pertaining exclusively to the office of the bishop.56 In effect, Bec exercised in its own name the jurisdiction of an archdeacon over its own parish. No other monastery in Normandy had a privilege of this type before the middle of the twelfth century. The purpose of the author of these treatises was to assert and justify these privileges, especially with regard to profession. His works can be seen as late examples of the Libelli de lite imperatorum et pontificum, which dealt with the conflict between church and state in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Libertas in particular has been described as tendentious, polemical, inaccurate, and politically motivated,57 but the author was well informed and honest according

54 See Giles Constable, ‘Abbatial Profession in Normandy and England in the Eleventh and Twelfth Century, with particular attention to Bec,’ in ‘Ins Wasser geworfen und Ozeane durchquert.’ Festschrift für Knut Wolfgang Nörr, ed. Mario Ascheri et al. (Cologne, Weimar, and Vienna, 2003), 105–20, where the distinction between a written and an oral submission (see below) is also discussed. 55 Consuetudines Beccenses, 531–2, ed. Dickson (cited n. 41), 219–22. Subsequently the lord was asked to perform ‘quod facere tenetur,’ presumably to grant the pastoral staff symbolizing temporal authority. 56 Lanfranc, Opera (cited n. 35), 332; GC, vol. 11, instr., 17. See Porée, Histoire de Bec (cited n. 24), 1:319–22; Charles H. Haskins, Norman Institutions, Harvard Historical Studies, 24 (Cambridge, Mass., 1925), 68; and Jean-François Lemarignier, Etude sur les privilèges d’exemption et de juridiction ecclésiastique des abbayes normandes depuis les origines jusqu’en 1140, Archives de la France monastique, 44 (Paris, 1937), 172–4, 202, calling it ‘le seul exemple d’octroi de franchise dont on soit sûr’ before 1140. The powers of bishops, according to Abbates, included ordination, confirmation, dedication of churches and altars, consecration of sacred vessels, giving chrism, permission to build churches and cells and to own tithes and churches, and visitations. 57 See among others Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ (cited n. 1), 26 n. 2 (calling it inaccurate); Saltman, Theobald (cited n. 11), 4 (cf. n. 24); Vaughn, Abbey (cited n. 2), 64 (‘a blueprint for political action to achieve political ends’); Gibson, ‘History’ (cited n. 10), 173 (polemic); and Emily Zack Tabuteau, Transfers of Property in Eleventh-Century Norman Law (Chapel Hill and London, 1988), 294–5 n. 4, cf. 278 n. 48, 327 n. 10 (tendentious).

Introduction

19

to his lights. He may be called a conservative reformer. He deplored many of the developments in the church of his time and wrote in his commentary on Luke 1.26 (‘the angel Gabriel was sent’) that the state of the Christian religion has been so reduced to nothing that not only are zealous men not found in the perfect religion [i.e., monasticism] in our time but also those who are completely indolent and totally ignorant of divine law but who are exceedingly hated are sought out by diligent inquiry and are promoted to the pastoral summit or to holy orders, which is against all church law and all the statutes of the fathers.58

He lived at a time when many bishops reacted against monastic freedom from episcopal control and sought to establish their authority over the monasteries in their dioceses, and he was passionately opposed to any explicit form of abbatial subordination, such as a written profession or oath of obedience, which might oblige a monastery to perform secular services. He recognized the superiority of bishops in spiritual matters, however, and had no objection to an oral expression of obedience and submission to a bishop, nor to an episcopal blessing of an abbot and grant to him of the cure of the bodies and souls of monks. The author fully accepted the role of the duke, and later king, in the appointment of the abbot and, more generally, in protecting the monastery.59 He recorded with apparent approval the statement of the king, recorded in Libertas, that he was the abbot in external affairs, and he raised no objection to the ruler’s grant to the abbot of the pastoral staff, which in Normandy and Anjou, unlike other parts of Europe, was thought to represent the abbot’s

58 B.N. Lat. 2342, fol. 74r: ‘Adeo enim status christiane religionis ad nichilum redactus est, ut non solum uiri strenui nostro tempore in perfecta religione non eligantur, uerum etiam diligenti scrutinio inertissimi legis quoque diuinae omnino nichil expertes, sed plurimum exosores requirantur, et ad apicem pastoralem uel a[d] sacros ordines promoueantur, quod est contra omnem aecclesiasticum ius et contra omnia statuta patrum.’ Exosores is a rare word deriving from exosus (hating). 59 On the role of the dukes of Normandy (and later the kings of England) in protecting the churches in their domains, see R.N. Sauvage, L’abbaye de St-Martin de Troarn au diocèse de Bayeux des origines au seizième siècle, Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de Normandie, 34 (Caen, 1911), 61–2; and Bates, Normandy (cited n. 43), 207: ‘The ducal protection … would appear to have had the character of a general oversight rather than that of direct control.’

20

Three Treatises from Bec

external, secular authority as contrasted with his internal, spiritual authority.60 Fulbert of Chartres distinguished between exteriora and interiora in a letter written in 1027 to the archbishop of Rouen, and Ordericus Vitalis specified more than once ‘that the abbot received the exterior cure by the pastoral staff’ from the duke and ‘the spiritual care,’ or cure of the monks’ souls, from the bishop.61 In this respect the anonymous author of Bec was closer to the socalled Norman Anonymous, who also accepted the authority of secular rulers over the church, than he was to the views of reformers elsewhere.62 Abbot Boso stood between the two positions, since he had sworn to pope Urban II never to perform homage to a layman, but he accepted the pastoral staff of Bec from the king.63 There are some interesting references to homage in each of the treatises. In Monachi the author distinguishes between homage made to lay lords and that to ecclesiastics, who make grants from church property of which they are the custodians, not the owners. Even lay lords should not refer to those who do them homage as ‘their men,’ because the person doing homage may be of higher rank than the recipient. Homage done to ecclesiastical lords is ‘like the homage that kings and princes require their men to receive from other men for their possessions.’ This homage is thus unlike that given to a lay lord for a grant from his own property, since someone holding a grant from the king is

60 On the distinction between the exterior dominium (potestas) and interior cura animarum, see Olivier Guillot, Le comte d’Anjou et son entourage au XIe siècle (Paris, 1972), 1:183–92, who describes this arrangement, by which the secular ruler kept the political power but gave up the right to invest with the spiritualia, as the pre-Gregorian reform which emerged in Anjou and Normandy in the 1050s. On the rejection of external investiture elsewhere in Europe, see Hermann Jakobs, Die Hirsauer. Ihre Ausbreitung und Rechtsstellung im Zeitalter des Investiturstreits, Kölner historische Abhandlungen, 4 (Cologne and Graz, 1961), 18–19, 79–103. 61 Fulbert of Chartres, Ep. 126, ed. Frederick Behrends, in The Letters and Poems of Fulbert of Chartres, Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford, 1976), 226–8; and Ordericus Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica, 3 (St Evroul in 1059 and 1066) and 8.18, ed. Chibnall (cited n. 40), 2:74, 144–6, 4:254. 62 There is a large literature on the Norman Anonymous (also known as the Anonymous of York and of Rouen) starting with Heinrich Böhmer, Kirche und Staat in England und in der Normandie im XI. und XII. Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 1899): see Charles Gross, A Bibliography of English History to 1485, ed. Edgar B. Graves (Oxford, 1975), 847, no. 6427, for editions of the texts and secondary literature (to 1975). 63 On the Boso ‘episode,’ see (in addition to Libertas) Milo Crispin, Vita Bosonis, in Lanfranc, Opera (cited n. 35), app., 48 (and p. 14 above); and among secondary works, Böhmer, Kirche (cited n. 62), 272–3; Saltman, Theobald (cited n. 11), 5; introduction to Ordericus Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica, ed. Chibnall (cited n. 40), 1:73; and Gibson, ‘History’ (cited n. 10), 173–4.

Introduction

21

the custodian, not the owner, of the king’s property, just as a churchman is the custodian of the property of the church and the poor.64 Both are intermediaries, as it were, in the same way that abbots are intermediaries and witnesses to the promises made by monks. The words ‘in the presence of lord abbot N.’ do not mean that the profession is made to the abbot, because ‘there is only One to Whom the subscription is made and One Who blesses.’ In Abbates the author criticized worldly prelates who to satisfy their ambition were not ashamed to swear fealty and do homage, which ‘is more impious to perform and a great sacrilege to demand and receive.’ Abbots who do homage, even through intermediaries, and not in person, ‘that is, hand in hand,’ are simoniacs and heretics. The subject of homage came up repeatedly in Libertas, beginning with the statement that the first abbot, Herluin, ‘made homage to no man for the possessions of his church because he possessed almost everything from his own patrimony (de patrimonio proprio) and the remainder from the charity of the barons of the land,’ that is, in free alms.65 Although the author did not use the term allod, here or elsewhere, or any other term for land held without feudal obligations, he clearly assumed the existence of possessions for which no homage was given and no service was owed to a lord.66 When William I gave Bec to Anselm ‘by the grant of the pastoral staff,’ he demanded no homage, and Henry I supported Boso in his refusal to perform homage, saying to the archbishop of Rouen ‘that this abbot will neither do homage to me nor profession to you.’ He repeated this when the archbishop said that he and Boso should arrange between themselves concerning the archbishop’s affairs, though the king as lord should do as he wished concerning his own property. Meanwhile the bishops of Evreux and Lisieux protested that ‘We who are bishops do homage to our lord, and this monk says that he cannot in any way do what

64 The author drew a distinction here between directly and indirectly held fiefs and, correspondingly, between homage done for a lord’s own property and homage done for property held from the king or by an ecclesiastic. He also made the point that homage might be done by a greater to a lesser man. On the relation of secular and ecclesiastical ceremonies of investiture, see Jacques Le Goff, ‘Les gestes symboliques dans la vie sociale. Les gestes de la vassalité,’ in Simboli e simbologia nell’alto medioevo, Settimane de studio del Centro italiano di studi sull’Alto Medioevo, 23 (Spoleto, 1976), 2:741–2, 763–8. 65 See, in addition to the references in n. 53, Donald Matthew, The Norman Conquest (New York, 1966), 255: ‘It appears that hereditary possession gave complete rights to the owner; over temporary cessions by the duke, the latter retained “sovereign” rights.’ 66 Haskins, Institutions (cited n. 56), 6, argues that by 1066 most land in Normandy was held from a lord, but according to Tabuteau, Transfers (cited n. 57), 102–3, 122–6, homage and fealty were rarely mentioned in the eleventh century.

22

Three Treatises from Bec

everyone else does.’ The king nonetheless ‘granted the abbey to the prior by a certain grant with no mention of homage.’ The view of homage found in these treatises differs from that found in many standard works on medieval society and involves a more nuanced concept of the relations between individuals.67 The same is true of the relationship between monks and abbots and between abbots and bishops.68 For the anonymous Bec author the essence of being a monk (and presumably also a nun, though he does not mention female religious) was the voluntary and irrevocable gift of the self to God and the total renunciation of self-will, which was replaced by the will of God, represented by the superior, to whom the monk promised obedience. Religious obedience, unlike secular fidelity and obedience, expressed the monk’s renunciation of will rather than the superior’s power or authority. The three basic elements in becoming a monk were the monastic habit, which the author suggests at one point was in itself enough to make a monk,69 the scrutiny or examination, in which the monk formally expressed his desire to be a monk,70 and the

67 These and other passages in the treatises throw some light on the relations between the magnates and the king, who used both anger and good humor as political weapons. Robert Curthose swore ‘by the marvels of God’ when he was both angry (cum ira) and jocular (iocundo), and William exclaimed ‘by the death of Christ’ when speaking to the archbishop. See Tabuteau, Transfers (cited n. 57), 122 n. 126; and Anger’s Past: The Social Uses of an Emotion in the Middle Ages, ed. Barbara Rosenwein (Ithaca and London, 1998), especially the articles by Gerd Althoff, ‘Ira Regis: Prolegomena to a History of Royal Anger’ (59–74), and Stephen White, ‘The Politics of Anger’ (127–52), who stresses that displays of anger were part of the ‘discourse of disputing, feuding, and political competition’ (142) and ‘both highly conventionalized and socially generated’ (150). 68 In addition to the works on profession cited in Giles Constable, Medieval Monasticism: A Select Bibliography, Toronto Medieval Bibliographies (Toronto, 1976), 127, see Raphael Molitor, ‘Von der Mönchsweihe in der lateinischen Kirche,’ Theologie und Glaube, 16 (1924), 584–612 (604–5 on Monachi); Colomban Bock, La promesse d’obéissance ou la ‘professio regularis’ (Westmalle, 1955), who stresses the growing elements, already before the twelfth century, of personal allegiance in the promise of obedience (25) and the parallels with secular homage and the oath and kiss (39–42); Richard Yeo, The Structure and Content of Monastic Profession, Studia Anselmiana, 83 (Rome, 1982); Giles Constable, ‘The Ceremonies and Symbolism of Entering Religious Life and Taking the Monastic Habit, from the Fourth to the Twelfth Century’ (1987), repr. in his Culture and Spirituality in Medieval Europe, Variorum CS 541 (Aldershot and Brookfield, Vt, 1996), esp. 783–808; Bertil Nilsson, ‘Gratian: On Entry into the Monastery,’ in In Quest of the Kingdom: Ten Papers on Medieval Monastic Spirituality, ed. Alf Härdelin, Bibliotheca theologiae practicae, 48 (Stockholm, 1991), 135–55; and Hubertus Lutterbach, Monachus factus est. Die Mönchwerdung im frühen Mittelalter, Beiträge zur Geschichte des alten Mönchtums und des Benediktinerordens, 44 (Münster, 1995), 10–16, with further bibliography. 69 See below pp. 23–4 on solo habitu. 70 See below pp. 26–8 on the scrutinium.

Introduction

23

promises to God and the community required in the rule of Benedict.71 These were then confirmed and made irrevocable by a blessing or consecration and by a signed subscription, mentioned in the rule, but neither of these, according to the author, were essential to make a monk.72 There was an awareness at this time of historical change and of development in the character of monastic profession, and several writers from the school of Bec stressed what was by then an old-fashioned view, that profession alone, without a blessing or written subscription, or even just wearing the monastic habit, made a monk and was inviolable. Lanfranc wrote to the bishop of Durham in 1071/80 that ‘the canons and decrees of the holy fathers do not allow those who publicly wear the clothing of religion for several days later to return to secular life for any reason,’ and to the bishop of Rochester in 1077/89 that ‘Nuns who have made a profession that they will keep the rule or who although they have not yet been professed have nevertheless been offered at the altar are to be advised, exhorted, and obliged to keep the rule in their ways and lives.’73 Ivo of Chartres, who (according to Robert of Torigny) studied under Lanfranc at Bec, wrote to abbot Geoffrey of Vendôme in 1094 that a monk is made by contempt for the world and love of God and that profession and benediction do not make a monk but bind and preserve monastic stability. He went on to say that profession and benediction or consecration came ‘later, when the congregations of monks multiplied.’74

71 Regula Benedicti, 58, specified that a new monk should promise ‘in the oratory before all’ the monks and ‘before God and his saints’ concerning his stability, conversatio morum, and obedience. 72 Cf. Molitor, ‘Mönschsweihe’ (cited n. 68), who distinguishes several types of profession: with a prayer but no blessing (as in the rule of Benedict); with a simple blessing, which did not change the monk’s juridical status; with a confirmatory blessing (as, presumably, for the anonymous Bec author); and with a blessing that changed the monk’s juridical status. See Yeo, Structure (cited n. 68), 261–5, from which this summary of Molitor’s argument derives. The Bec author did not discuss the specific ceremonies for making a monk, on which see Constable, ‘Ceremonies’ (cited n. 68); Yeo, Structure, esp. 75–85; and Marie-Gérard Dubois, ‘Monastic Initiation: A History of the Rites,’ Liturgy O.C.S.O., 30, no. 3 (1996), 59–76. 73 Lanfranc, Ep. 53., ed. Helen Clover and Margaret Gibson, The Letters of Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford, 1979), 166; cf. Ep. 45, 142. See also d’Achéry’s learned note in Lanfranc, Opera (cited n. 35), 363–8. 74 Ivo of Chartres, Ep. 41, in Yves de Chartres, Correspondance, ed. and trans. Jean Leclercq, Les classiques de l’histoire de France au Moyen Age, 22 (Paris, 1949), 164–6; see also Ep. 73 (PL, 162:94A), where Ivo wrote to the abbot of Marmoutier that abbatial blessing was a prayer, not a consecration, and that many early monks received no blessing. See Constable, ‘Ceremonies’ (cited n. 68), 802–3.

24

Three Treatises from Bec

These views were echoed in a letter written by Anselm, not long after he left Bec for Canterbury in 1093, to Gunnilda, the daughter of king Harold, who wanted to give up monastic life. Wearing the monastic habit was in itself, he wrote, ‘a manifest and undeniable profession,’ even though she had not read a profession or been consecrated by a bishop. ‘For many thousands of people of both sexes professed by their habit alone (solo habitu) that they were of this way of life and attained its height and crown before the profession and consecration of the monastic way of life that are now customary (nunc usitata) were made.’ Anyone who gave up the habit, even if it was ‘taken without this profession and consecration,’ was an apostate.75 These letters suggest that the view of the nature and necessity of monastic profession and benediction was changing in the late eleventh century. Anselm’s disciple Boso, later abbot of Bec, said that spontaneous self-donation without profession was less meritorious, because less permanent, than the profession by which a monk gave himself and his property to God and lived ‘under the rule and obedience of an abbot.’76 The author of the treatises published here was probably of the same generation as Boso and shared his view that the blessing and confirmation, while not essential to making a monk, confirmed and made permanent the commitment created by assuming the monastic habit, expressing the desire to become a monk, and making a promise to God and the monastery. In his Miracula s. Nicholai he said that when Lanfranc entered Bec he was accepted immediately as a monk and ‘after not many days strengthened his stability there by a monastic profession’;77 and in Monachi he said that ‘the monastic order is to a certain extent rightly placed above other orders, because the others seek saints but do not make them … the monastic order seeks one who is not a saint and makes [him] a saint, like baptism.’ Other monastic writers at this time, including Gilbert Crispin and Ralph of Canterbury, compared the life of a monk to baptism, which cleansed the new monk of sin and was by its nature indelible

75 Anselm, Ep. 168, in S. Anselmi … opera omnia, ed. F.S. Schmitt (Edinburgh, 1946–61), 4:45. See Southern, Anselm (cited n. 49); Eleanor Searle, ‘Women and the Legitimization of Succession at the Norman Conquest,’ Anglo-Norman Studies, 2 (1981), 159–70; and Sally N. Vaughn, Saint Anselm and the Handmaidens of God: A Study of Anselm’s Correspondence with Women (Turnhout, 2000), 184–202. 76 Rochais, ‘Textes’ (cited n. 51), 43; cf. Leclercq, ‘Entourage,’ in Témoins (cited n. 50), 223–4. The identity of Boso is probable but not certain. 77 Miracula s. Nicholai, no. 10, in Cat. cod. Paris. (cited n. 6), 2:411.

Introduction

25

and irreversible.78 One of the reasons that an abbot should not be required to make a profession, the Bec author said, was that he had already made one when he became a monk and need not make another. Every order had its own blessing and its own examination or scrutiny, however, and the author described the questions in both the treatises on professions. Monks were asked four questions by the abbot: Do you wish to be a monk? Do you wish to preserve and be subject to this church? Do you wish to change your behavior from bad to good? Do you wish to be obedient to the abbot and to those who are set over you in accordance with the institutions of the rule? Monks who were dying or unable to speak (in which case the replies could be given by relations or friends) were given an abbreviated examination, omitting the question about a change in behavior. Abbots, since they were already monks, were asked a different set of questions by the bishop: Are your mind and word free from any taint of simony? … Do you wish to observe your way of life and the rule of St Benedict and to instruct those subject to you to do likewise in accordance with the rule? … Do you wish to exercise faithfully custody over the goods of the church gathered there and to distribute them faithfully for the uses of the church and the monks and the poor? … Do you wish to be subject and obedient to this holy church and to me and my successors according to the institutes of the canon?

These questions were written in the manuscript of Abbates, folio 161r, in a smaller script on five lines (plus five short lines in the margin) in a space normally taken by four lines, which was apparently left blank and filled in later. Wilmart conjectures that in the first redaction the first three questions were written on four lines and that the fourth question was omitted (and was not

78 Gilbert Crispin, De monachatu, 1–2, in Works, ed. Abulafia and Evans (cited n. 40), 89–90; and Jean Leclercq, ‘La vêture “ad succurrendum” d’après le moine Raoul,’ in Analecta monastica, vol. 3, Studia Anselmiana, 37 (Rome, 1955), 162 (cf. 160). See Leclercq, ‘Profession monastique, baptême et pénitence d’après Odon de Cantorbéry,’ in Analecta monastica, vol. 2, Studia Anselmiana, 31 (Rome, 1953), 136–9 (cf. 126–7); and Leclercq, ‘Entourage,’ in Témoins (cited n. 50), 222, 229–30, 233–4. On entry to monasticism as a second baptism, see Jean Longère, ‘La prédication sur saint Benoît du Xe au XIIIe siècle,’ in Sous la règle de saint Benoît. Structures monastiques et sociétés en France du Moyen Âge à l’époque moderne, École pratique des Hautes Etudes: IVe Section, Sciences historiques et philologiques, V: Hautes études médiévales et modernes, 47 (Geneva and Paris, 1982), 438, 442, 458–9; Constable, ‘Ceremonies’ (cited n. 68), 779–80, 799 and n. 89 (with references on the early church); and Christophe Vuillaume, ‘La profession monastique, un second baptême,’ Collectanea Cisterciensia, 53 (1991), 275–92 (mostly modern).

26

Three Treatises from Bec

asked) because it was contrary to ‘the liberty of the church of Bec.’79 More probably the author (or scribe) did not have the questions to hand when he was writing and left a space that later proved too small for the text. He had no objection to a verbal, as opposed to a written, promise of obedience. When in Libertas Boso was asked whether he wished to be subject and obedient to the church of Rouen and its superior, he replied ‘I wish.’80 The question concerning obedience was indeed the only question that appeared in the examinations both of a monk and of an abbot and embodied the author’s clear acceptance that a monk is subject to his abbot and an abbot to his bishop. The verbal promise obviated the need for a written profession or subscription, which the author considered equivalent to secular homage and subordination involving an obligation of service. The practice of examining candidates for various ranks and orders in the church was ancient and widespread.81 In the early church baptism was always preceded by a series of questions, and the early councils in Africa and Gaul required all candidates for ecclesiastical office to be examined and tested.82 The questions were called scrutinies, according to John the Deacon, writing about 500, because ‘we examine (perscrutamur) the hearts [of the electi] about the faith.’83 As time went on the scrutiny took on the character of an

79 Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ (cited n. 1), 39 n. 3. Cf. Leclercq, ‘Traité’ (cited n. 2), 179 n. 13. 80 In the version of this episode in Milo Crispin, Vita Bosonis, in Lanfranc, Opera (cited n. 35), app. 49, Boso first replied ‘I wish’ and later, under pressure to say ‘I profess,’ said ‘I wish, and I wish from my heart.’ See pp. 13–14 above. 81 On the scrutinium, see Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ (cited n. 1), 38–41, where he calls it ‘un rituel insolite,’ and 42–5, where he changes his mind and concludes that the practice at Bec was an extension of the policy followed with respect to priests and bishops. See Pierre de Puniet, Le pontifical romain (Paris and Louvain, 1930–1), 2:72 (citing Monachi); Leclercq, ‘Traité’ (cited n. 2), 178–9 and n. 13, with other examples; Constable, ‘Ceremonies’ (cited n. 68), 790– 1; and (on its early history) Constable, ‘The Anonymous Early Medieval Homily in MS Copenhagen GKS 143,’ in Ritual, Text and Law: Studies in Medieval Canon Law and Liturgy Presented to Roger E. Reynolds, ed. Kathleen G. Cushing and Richard F. Gyug (Aldershot and Burlington, Vt, 2004), 165. For a different use of scrutinium by the author, see n. 58 above. 82 Breviarum Hipponense (397), 20, in Concilia Africae A.345–A.525 (CC, 149:39); cf. Carthage (523/46 and 525), 232 (CC, 149:264, 306); Statuta ecclesiae antiquae (c. 475), 1 and 23, in Concilia Galliae A.314–A.506 (CC, 148:164–5, 171); and Martin of Braga, Cap. 24, in Martini episcopi Bracarensis opera omnia, ed. Claude Barlow, Papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome, 12 (New Haven, Conn., 1950), 131 (=Decretales PseudoIsidorianae et capitula Angilramni, ed. Paul Hinschius [Leipzig, 1863], 430). 83 Cited in Peter Cramer, Baptism and Change in the Early Middle Ages, c. 200–c. 1150, Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought, 4th series, 20 (Cambridge, 1993), 142–3.

Introduction

27

examination, but the old idea of the scrutiny as instruction was still found in the Ordo scrutinii in the Fulda Sacramentary of c. 975 and the Ordo ad faciendum monachum in the tenth-century Mainz Pontifical, where the novice was asked ‘whether he renounces by his own will, the world, and all things that are of the world and – what is more – also [his own] wishes and whether he is willing to bear all injury and opprobrium for the love of our Lord Jesus Christ.’84 The examination of monks and canons before they were professed was a common practice in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, though comparatively few records of the questions have survived.85 A Monte Cassino ordinary from the time of abbot Odorisius has three questions, concerning leaving the world, conversatio morum, and obedience.86 At Marbach in the early twelfth century the abbot interrogated a novice before the entire community in the chapter and ‘again brought up, as before, matters concerning the authority of the regular discipline.’87 And Hildegard of Bingen wrote in the Scivias that ‘No one should approach the religion of these people [i.e., monastic life] suddenly and as if awaking from a dream, unless he is examined by a thorough examination into the bond of his spirit whether he can persist in this undertaking.’88 Hildegard may have had in mind an inner self-examination, but superiors were clearly expected to make sure that candidates for profession fully understood the nature of the monastic undertaking. The chapter ‘On the examination [scrutinio] of novices before their reception for approval’ in the customary of

84 On the Fulda Sacramentary, see ibid., 195–6; on the Mainz Pontifical, see Michel Andrieu, Les Ordines Romani du haut moyen âge, vol. 1: Les manuscrits, Spicilegium sacrum Lovaniense: Études et documents, 11 (Leuven, 1931), 183; and Melchior Hittorp, De diversis catholicae ecclesiae ritibus et mysteriis (Cologne, 1568), 138, cited by Wilmart, ‘Ouvrages’ (cited n. 1), 43, with other MSS of this text. On the scrutinium in Carolingian baptismal rites, see Dominique Iogna-Prat, Ordonner et exclure. Cluny et la société chrétienne face à l’hérésie, au judaïsme et à l’islam 1000–1150 (Paris, 1998), 154. 85 Martène, De ritibus, 2.2, 5.2–4 (Antwerp), 2:451–96, 4:625–59. Marmoutier and the archbishop of Tours reached an exceptional agreement in 1118/24 that the abbot would be blessed ‘absque scrutinio, absque scripto, absque professione’: Cartulaire de l’archevêché de Tours (Liber bonarum gentium), ed. Louis de Grandmaison, Mémoires de la Société archéologique de Touraine, 37–8 (Tours, 1892–4), 1:94, no. 43. 86 Martène, De ritibus, 5.4.4 (Antwerp), 4:640. 87 Josef Siegwart, Die Consuetudines des Augustiner-Chorherrenstiftes Marbach im Elsass, Spicilegium Friburgense, 10 (Fribourg, 1965), 163–4, no. 128. Siegwart dates these customs 1122/4 (30–1). 88 Hildegard of Bingen, Scivias, 5.22 (CC:CM, 43:194).

28

Three Treatises from Bec

Melk, which is related to that of Subiaco, includes a long list of matters about which the novice ‘should be continuously examined before he is vested.’89 The scrutinium described in the Bec treatises was therefore not unusual, though it includes details not found in other sources, especially the desire to be obedient, either to the abbot, on the part of a monk, or to the cathedral church and bishop, on the part of an abbot. It reflects at the same time the author’s belief in the personal nature of profession and his resistance to any sort of formal obligation that might distract the monk from his service to God.

NOTE TO THE READER

Additions found in the manuscript (probably inserted by the author) are printed in parentheses (see p. 8). Omissions are supplied in pointed brackets. The orthographical inconsistencies correspond to those in the manuscript. In both the Latin texts and the translations quotations from other sources are printed in italic type. The shorter pages of the Latin text match the longer English translation on the opposite page and do not indicate breaks in the original text.

89 Breviarium … Mellicensis, 3.11 (CCM, 11, pt 2:145–6).

TRACTATUS D E P R O F E S S I O N I BU S MONACHORUM T H E P RO F E S S I O N S OF MONKS

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

Principium monastici ordinis ab apostolis et ceteris credentibus qui de Iudeis primi crediderunt initium sumpsit. Cum enim beatissimus Lucas euangelista uerissimus et luculentissimus per(or)ator diuinorum operum in libro suo qui inscribitur de actibus apostolorum domini ascensionem descripsis(s)et, deinde reformationem duodeni numeri apostolorum per Mathiam qui per Iudam perierat, dehinc spiritus paraclyti aduentum super discipulos in igneis linguis, ad quorum uoces (cum) multitudo Iudeorum qui de diuersis mundi partibus illuc confluxerat miraretur et aliqui illorum eos estimassent plenos esse bacco, Petrus obtrectationem illorum repletus spiritu sancto prophetico testimonio compescuit, deinde doctrina sua ita eos imbuit, ut statim .iiia. milia ex illis crederent in Christum, sic narrando subiunxita: Qui ergo receperunt sermonem eius baptizati sunt, et appositae sunt in illa die animae circiter tria milia. Erant autem perseuerantes in doctrina apostolorum et communicatione fractionis panis et orationibus. Fiebat autem omni animae timor. Multa quoque prodigia et signa per apostolos fiebant in Ierusalem, et metus erat magnus in uniuersis. Omnes etiam qui credebant erant pariter, et habebant omnia communia. Possessionesb et substantias uendebant, et diuidebant illa omnibus prout cuique opus erat. Cotidie quoque perdurantes unanimiter in templo et frangentes circa domos panem, sumebant cibum cum exultatione et simplicitate cordis collaudantes deum, et habentes gratiam ad omnem plebem. Dominus autem augebat qui salui fierent cotidie in idipsum.1 Hoc expleto, narrat idem euangelista miraculum de claudo qui ante portas templi iacebat, quem Petrus et Iohannes

a narrando subiunxit super ras. b possessiones super ras.

The Professions of Monks

The beginning of the monastic order takes its rise from the apostles and other believers who first received their faith from the Jews. For when the most blessed Luke the evangelist, the most accurate and brilliant chronicler of the Lord’s works, had depicted the ascension of the Lord in his book that is entitled the Acts of the Apostles, and then the reestablishment of the number of apostles to twelve, with Matthew replacing Judas who had died, and after that the descent of the Paraclete in tongues of fire onto the apostles, at whose voices the multitude of the Jews, who had streamed there from different parts of the world, were amazed, with some judging them to be full of new wine, Peter, filled with the holy spirit, confounded their mockery with the testimony of the prophets, and then so imbued them with his teaching that suddenly three thousand of them believed in Christ, as he adds in his narrative: They therefore that received his word were baptized and there were added in that day about three thousand souls. And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles and in the communication of the breaking of bread and in prayers. And fear came upon every soul. Many wonders also and signs were done by the apostles in Jerusalem: and there was great fear in all. And all they that believed were together and had all things in common. Their possessions and goods they sold and divided them to all according as everyone had need. And continuing daily with one accord in the temple and breaking bread from house to house, they took their meat with gladness and simplicity of heart: praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord increased daily together such as should be saved.1 After this account the evangelist narrates the miracle of the cripple who lay at the gate of the temple, whom Peter and John

1 Acts 2.41–6.

32

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

solo uerbo sanauerunt in nomine Christi.2 Ad quod miraculum omnes circumquaque acurreruntc, stupentes et admirantes tale factum mirabile. Ad quorum admiration(em)d iterum Petrus stans in medio red(di)dit rationem, ostendens non hoc per se et Ioannem operatos fuisse, sed per illum quem illi crucifixerant, et qui a mortuis resurrexit et ad caelos ascendit. Ad hanc iterum concionatio(nem) Petri, ex audientibus crediderunt .v. milia, ita inquiens euangelista: Multi autem de (h)is qui audierunt uerbum crediderunt, et factus est numerus uirorum quinque milia.3 Et post aliquanta subsequentia: Multitudinis autem credentium erat cor unum et anima una. Nec quisquam eorum quae possidebat aliquid suum esse dicebat, sed erant illis omnia communia. Et uirtute magna reddebant apostoli testimonium resurrectionis Ihesu Christi domini nostri, et gratia magna erat in omnibus illis. Neque enim quisquam egens erat inter illos. Quotquot enim possessores agrorum aut domorum erant, uendentes afferebant precia eorum quae uendebant et ponebant ante pedes apostolorum. Diuidebantur autem singulis prout cuique opus erat.4 Post mortem uero Stephani facta persecutione in aecclesia a Iudeis ita ut Iacobus frater Ioannis ab Herode decollaretur, dispersi sunt credentes per regiones Iudeae et Samarie, et inde coeperunt habitare credentes separatim per abdita loca, non tamen longe ab hominibus et a conuersatione publica. Cumque in hunc modum multitudo monachorum propagaretur per regiones Tebaidis et Egypti deserta essetque innumerabilis eorum multitudo, quidam patrum coeperunt construe(re) monasteria et illic adunare choros monachorum et uiuere in commune ad exemplum apostolorum, et illorum qui primi crediderunt. Tamen illi(s) qui recipiebantur non facilis erat ingressus, sed ante per aliquot dies multis iniuriis et diuersis laboribus probabantur secundum apostoli preceptum: Probate spiritus si ex deo sunt.5 Nullus enim tam facile recipiebatur tunc, quam nunc. Quod in illo probatissimo monacho qui Paulus Simplex dictus est, et in Ioanne alio monacho, et in Mutii abbatis necnon Pynuphi conuersione perspicue uidere quis poterit qui uitas patrum atque instituta illorum legere uoluerit. Primum namque ut diximus antequam etiam ipsum introitum illi pateret, pro foribus per plurimos dies excubabat,

c que a super ras. d quorum admirationem super ras.

The Professions of Monks

33

healed in Christ’s name with a simple word.2 At this miracle everyone around them ran to them in wonder and amazement at such a marvelous event. To their astonishment Peter, again standing in their midst, gave an explanation, demonstrating that this had not been done by himself and John, but by Him Whom they had crucified, and Who had risen from the dead and ascended into heaven. Because of this second address of Peter’s five thousand of the listeners believed, as the evangelist reports: But many of them who had heard the word believed and the number of the men was made five thousand.3 And after a while: And the multitude of believers had but one heart and one soul. Neither did anyone say that aught of the things which he possessed was his own, but all things were common unto them. And with great power did the apostles give testimony of the resurrection of Jesus Christ our Lord: and great grace was in them all. For neither was there any one needy among them. For as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the price of the things they had sold and laid it down before the feet of the apostles. And distribution was made to everyone, according as he had need.4 After the death of Stephen the church was persecuted by the Jews so that James the brother of John was beheaded by Herod, the believers were scattered throughout Judaea and Samaria, and from then on began to live separately in secret places, though not far from men and from the public way of life. And since a great many monks spread in this way throughout the regions of the Thebaid and the Egyptian desert and their multitudes were innumerable, certain of the fathers began to build monasteries there and bring together groups of monks to live in common, following the example of the apostles and of those who had been the first believers. However, entry for those who were received was not easy, but for some days beforehand they were tested with many different and exacting labors, following the Apostle’s injunction: But try the spirits if they be of God.5 At that time no one used to be received as easily as they are now. Anyone who wishes to read of the lives of the fathers and their customs can see this clearly in that most tested monk called Paul the Simple, and John, another monk, and in the conversion of the abbot Mutius, and Paphnutius. For as we have said before, entry was not made available to anyone until he had slept outside the gates for several days,

2 3 4 5

Cf. Acts 3.2. Acts 4.4. Acts 4.32–5. 1 John 4.1.

34

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

indicium perseuerantiae ac desiderii sui pariterque humilitatis ac patientiae demonstrans. Tunc deinde ex industria ab omnibus refutabatur atque despiciebatur, tanquam qui non religionis sed necessitatis obtentu monasterium obtaret intrare. Deinde ut superius diximus multis iniuriis et exprobationibus affectus, experimentum dabat constantiae suae, et qualis futurus essete in temptationibus oprobriorum tolerantia declarabat. Sed cum in eum uiderent perseuerantem uoluntatem fixumque animum ad omnia sufferenda, recipiebant eum intus, et iterum longo tempore probabant eum. Tunc demum requirebant ab eo ut ore proprio diceret, si monachus esse uellet, et si omnibus rebus omnibusque desideriis ex toto renuntiaret. Cumque hec omnia ore proprio coram omnibus se omnimodis obseruaturum profiteretur, concedebant ei ut in nomine domini esset unus ex illis, non tamen de stabilitate id est ut in illo loco tota uita sua perseueraret aliquam promissionem faciebat uel exigebatur ab aliquo. Nam cum alicui agere placebat uitam solitariam, uel se honorari a ceteris pro aliquo magno opere uidebat, quod nimium antiqui sancti fugiebant quod nunc econtra illi qui nomen sanctitatis super ceteros habere uidentur quam maxime appetunt et requirunt licentissime et absque ulla contradictione uel timore et dampno animae suae ibat quo uolebat, tantummodo obseruans propositum et habitum religionis. Sed cum ille ardor de quo dominus dixit: ignem ueni mittere in terram quem uolo ut ardeat,6 qui ignis quam maxime in ordine monachico temporibus apostolorum et eorum successorum ardere uisus est tepescere cepisset, et seuissima iniquitas et inexplebilis uoraxque cupiditas exardescere cepisset per monachos, ita ut uere illud dominicum uerbum impleri uideretur: quoniam habundabit iniquitas, refrigescet caritas multorum,7 sicut diuersa genera hereticorum sic diuersa genera monachorum esse ceperunt. Quorum genera .vi. inueniuntur, tria bona et tria mala. Primum et obtimum bonorum (est) cenobitarumf id est in commune habitantiumg ad instar illorum qui temporibus apostolorum in Ierusolimis fuerunt, qui ita in commune habitabant ut nullus dicere auderet aliquid proprium, sed erant illis omnia communia, et anima et cor unum in domino,8 horum exemplo et institutione monasteria sumpserunt principium. Secundum genus est heremitarum, qui procul ab hominibus recedentes deserta loca et uastas solitudines habitare perhibentur, ad imitationem scilicet Heliae et Ioannis

e esset in marg. f add. in marg.: Aliter Ieronymus: cenobium quod illi Sauhes gentili lingua uocant, nos in commune uiuentes d (Jerome, Ep. 22.34 [CSEL, 54:196]). g uel uiuentium super lin.

The Professions of Monks

35

demonstrating equally his perseverance and desire for humility and patience. Then he was rejected and despised on purpose by everyone, as one who hoped to enter the monastery on the grounds of necessity, not of religion. Henceforth, as we have said, though afflicted by many torments and reproaches, he gave proof of his constancy, and demonstrated by his willingness to suffer the trials his taunters inflicted on him the kind of man he would be in the future. But when they saw in him a persevering will and determined mind in the face of all he might have to bear, they let him in and tested him again for a long time. Then at last they demanded from him that he should state with his own lips whether he wished to be a monk, and whether he would totally renounce everything and all he desired. When he declared with his own lips in everyone’s presence that he would be compliant, obey in every way, they acknowledged in the name of the Lord that he was one of them; but he did not give any promise of stability, that is, that he would pass his whole life resolutely in that place, nor was this demanded of anyone. For when it pleased a man to lead the solitary life, or he saw himself honored by others for any great work – a situation that the saints of old firmly avoided and which these days is, on the contrary, desired and sought out by those who seem to have a name for sanctity above all others – he went where he liked quite freely, without any opposition or fear or damnation of his soul, simply observing the way of life and habit of his religion. But when that ardor of which the Lord says: I am come to cast fire on the earth, which I wish should be kindled,6 this fire which seemed to burn most greatly in the order of monks at the time of the apostles and their successors, began to grow tepid, and the most cruel iniquity and insatiable hunger and cupidity began to flare up among the monks, so that indeed that word of the Lord seemed to be fulfilled: because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold,7 then did various kinds of heretics begin to exist, as did various kinds of monks. Of which kinds six are to be found, three good and three bad. The first and best of the good is the coenobites, that is those living communally like those who were in Jerusalem at the time of the apostles, who so lived in common that no one dared say aught was his own, but all things were common unto them, and they were but one in heart and soul in the Lord,8 from whose example and institutions monasteries took their beginning. The second kind is the hermits, who, departing far from men, insist on living in deserted places and vast wildernesses, that is imitating Elias and John

6 Luke 12.49. 7 Matt. 24.12. 8 Acts 4.32.

36

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

Baptiste, qui heremi recessus penetrauerunt. I(i) penitus ab omnium conspectu remoti, diuino tantum colloquio perfruuntur, cui puris mentibus in(h)eserunt, et propter cuius amorem non solum mundum sed etiam hominum consortia reliquerunt. Tercium genus exstitit et est anachoritarum qui includunt semetipsos in cellulis procul ab (h)ominum conspectu remoti, nulli penitus a(d) se prebentes ingressum, sed sola dei contemplatione uiuentes, quos usitato more uocamus reclusos, huius religionis auctor et institutor fuit magnus Antonius.9 Nunc alia tria uideamus. Primum malorum est qui sub specie anachoritarum uiuunt. Quorum genus elapsum est, et si est, non agnoscitur. Secundum genus est quod antiquitus circiliones dicebantur, eo quod non (ad) aliud intendebant nisi diuersas prouintias et diuersas circuire et usquequaque uagare. (H)os beatus Benedictus gyrouagos uocat uera ethymologia nam girant et circumeunt diuersa loca et diuersas prouintias. Tercium itidem genus est malorum qui sarabaite dicuntur et alio nomine celliciones uel potius renuitaei uocantur, eo quod bini aut terni in cellulis manent nullam regulam conseruantes nec alicui aecclesiae uel abbati se summittere uolentes, sed ipsi sibimet sunt magistri et pro lege eis est sola uoluntas, ita ut quidquid puta(n)t bonum esse, hoc dicant j sanctum, et quod noluerint, hoc omnino putant non licere.10 Heck tria genera falsorum monachorum maxime circylionum qui maxime et precipue ordineml sanctum conmaculaueruntm (et) commaculant de cenobiis processerunt et prodeunt. Tunc tamen maxime, quia nullum retinaculum alicuius stabilitae professionis eos artabat. (H)ac enim causa, ita (tunc) demonum atrocitas contra sanctum ordinem inualuit et ardor monastici ordinis intepuit, ut uix in sac(ra)tissimis locis et magnis cenobiis paucissimi repperirentur electi uiri et qui de toto corde ad deum conuerterentur. Hec diuersitas monachorum usque ad tempora beati Benedicti qui precipuus institutor atque reformator sancti ordinis piusque ordinator cenobialis institutionis in occiduis partibus fuit, permansit. Qui beatissimus pater primum habitum sancte religionis a quodam monacho nomine Romano sumpsit.11 Quo accepto, statim heremiticam simul et anachoriticam uitam arripuit in quodam artissimo specu, ubi deguit per tres continuos annos omnino incognitus hominibus nisi soli Romano monacho qui ei modicam annonam certo tempore prebebat.12 Sed post cognitus

h sic emend. in Martène, De ritibus. i add in marg.: Ieronymus uel remnuoth (cf. Jerome, Ep. 22.34 [CSEL, 54:196]) j dicunt ante corr. k Hec in marg. l (h)ordinem MS. m conmaculauerunt in marg.

The Professions of Monks

37

the Baptist, who made their way into the depths of the desert. Far remote from everyone’s sight, they enjoyed only their converse with God, clinging to it with pure mind, and because of this love they renounced not only the world but the company of men. The third kind comprises anchorites, who enclose themselves in little cells far distant from the sight of men, suffering absolutely no one to enter, living only for the contemplation of God; and these we usually name recluses; their originator and founder was the great Anthony.9 Now let us look at the other three. The first of the bad ones are those who live under the guise of anchorites. Their kind has disappeared, and if they have not, then they are not known. The second kind is those who were called in antiquity ‘circiliones,’ because they had no purpose except to circulate and wander everywhere through different provinces and different regions. These the blessed Benedict calls ‘gyrovagi,’ by true etymology, for they go round in circles and wander about different places and different provinces. The third kind is similarly those evil men who are called ‘sarabaites’ and by the other name of ‘celliciones’ or rather ‘remnuothi,’ because they stay in their small cells two or three at a time, keeping no rule nor wishing to submit to any church or abbot, but who are themselves their own masters, and for whom the law is only their will, so that whatever they think good they call holy, and what they do not want, they consider completely impermissible.10 These three kinds of false monks, especially the circyliones who have most greatly defiled the holy order and still defile it, leave their monasteries and appear in public. This happened particularly at that time, because there was no constraint imposed by any vow of stability to restrict them. It was for this reason that then the abomination of demons grew so much more powerful against the holy order, and the ardor of the monastic order cooled, so that in the most sacred places and great monasteries scarcely the smallest number of chosen men could be found who were converted to God with their whole heart. This diversity of monks prevailed up to the time of the blessed Benedict, who was the distinguished founder and reformer of the holy order and pious organizer of the monastic institution in the west. This most blessed father first took the habit of holy religion from a certain monk called Romanus,11 and having taken it, immediately embraced the eremitical and anchorite life in a certain narrow cave, where he passed three uninterrupted years entirely unknown to men, except the monk Romanus alone, who every so often supplied him with a little grain.12 But after he became known

9 10 11 12

Cf. Isidore, Etymologiae, 7.13.2–4. Benedict, Regula, 1.9. Gregory, Dialogi, 2.1f (ed. Moricca, 76–8). Ibid., 76.

38

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

hominibus, plurimi sub eius discipulatu coadunati sunt fratres. Qui ut uidit multos sub suo magisterio ad seruicium dei currere, constituit .xii. monasteria, et per singula bissenos monachos cum patre proprio constituit.13 Quibus regulam statuit quam propria manu scriptam confirmauit, plenam tocius disciplinae simulque discretionis. Quam regulam beatus Gregorius papa multum collaudat in libro dialogorum suorum, ubi uitam predicti patris Benedicti ex ordine scribit.14 Et merito a tanto doctore et summo pastore sanctae aecclesiae et laudata et auctoritate confirmata est. Primum, quia tam puram scripturam atque mundissimam uix aliquis repperiet. Quamuis enim de multis et diuersis rebus loquatur sicut res et materia expostulat, tamen ita pure loquitur ut nec mentio alicuius turpitudinis uel etiam leuitatis in ea repperiatur. Qui eam legit, auertere potest quanta mundicia qualis pudicicia in eo et in suis subiectis exstiterit, cum nec mentio secundum apostoli preceptum inter eos fuerit de aliqua re turpi.15 Si enim inter subiectos aliquid tale repperisset, non tacuisset sed districte emendasset. Et iterum si aliquid in corde illius uersaretur, non omnino ita silentio comprimere posset quia scriptum est: Ex abundantia c o l.16 Deinde coniunctionem et concordiam inter pietatem et disciplinam, inter misericordiam et magnam districtionem quis non admiretur in eius regula? Ita enim moderatur et temperat sua instituta, ut non sit etas uel discretio quae non possit esse sub eius disciplina. Ibi enim simul inuenitur et lacteus potus quo tenera fidelium nutriatur infantia, et solidus cibus quo robusta perfectorum iuuentus spiritualia sanctae uirtutis accipiat incrementa.17 Ibi infirmorum solatia, illic sanorum laboriosa operatio. Illic pusillanimorum remedia, illic zelantium in opere dei magna et continua exercitatio. Fortes et debiles, sani et infirmi, litterati et non litterati, nobiles et innobiles, pueri, iuuenes senesque sub ea possunt uiuere, atque animas suas saluare. Quicquid enim dicit, quicquid precipit et ordinat, aut ad subuentionem infirmorum ut pia mater preordinat, aut ad correptionem superborum et inobedientum et indisciplinatorum ut uerus pater exibet et docet disciplinam. Tanta nanque est in ea prudentia atque mensura, ut nec pietas discipline, nec disciplina pietati locum tollat. In qua inter cetera ille de quo legitur quod uirtutum omnium iustorum plenus18 exstiterit

The Professions of Monks

39

to men, several became united as brothers under his direction. And when he saw many who were under his rule hasten to the service of God, he founded twelve monasteries and for each he established twelve monks with their own father.13 For them he set out a rule and confirmed it in his own writing, full of the entire discipline and prudent judgment together. The blessed pope Gregory praised this rule greatly in his book of dialogues, where he described in order the life of the aforesaid father Benedict.14 And it was deservedly both praised and authoritatively confirmed by such a teacher and the highest pastor of holy church, first, because such pure and extremely elegant writing was hard to find. For although many different matters are discussed, as the subject and theme demand, nevertheless the expression is so pure that no mention of anyone’s baseness or even folly can be found. Whoever reads it can observe what elegance, what purity, can be found in him and its subjects, in that it made no mention, following the precept of the Apostle, of anything base.15 For if he had found anything of the kind in the material, he would not have passed over it in silence but would have meticulously amended it. And again if anything occupied his heart, he could not completely suppress it in silence, because it is written: For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.16 And then who does not admire in his rule the conjunction and concord between piety and discipline, between mercy and great rigor? Its provisions are so moderate and temperate that there is no age or type of character unable to live under its discipline. For there together are found both milk to drink through which the tender infant is nourished, and solid food whereby the firm spiritual qualities of holy virtue of youth take their increase.17 Here the relief of the sick, here the industrious activity of the healthy. Here solace for the weak, there the great and constant practice of the zealous in the work of God. Strong and weak, healthy and ill, literate and illiterate, noble and commoner, children, the young and the old, all can live under it and save their souls. Whatever it says, whatever it orders and prescribes, either it anticipates wants for the relief of the sick like an affectionate mother, or it sets forth and teaches discipline for the correction of the proud, disobedient, and undisciplined like a true father. For there is so much prudence and moderation in it that piety does not yield to discipline, nor discipline to piety. There, among other things, he of whom one reads that he was full of all just qualities18 lays

13 14 15 16 17 18

Ibid., 84. Ibid., 2.36 (ed. Moricca, 131–2). Col. 3.8. Luke 6.45. Fulgentius of Ruspe, Sermones, 1.1 (CC, 91A:889). Gregory, Diologi, 2.8 (ed. Moricca, 93).

40

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

ordinat secundum instituta Tabennisiotarum quomodo quis ueniens ad conuersionem debeat recipi, addens quod in illan erat institutum scilicet ut nullus prius recipiatur in congregatione quam coram deo et sanctis eius abbatis quoque simulque congregationis presentia ante promiserit se permansurum in illo cenobio quamdiu uixerit,19 addens etiam id quod in cunctis regulis institutum fuerat, ut simul morum conuersionem et obedientiam promittat. Hec tria iubet ut scribendo promittat id est stabilitatem, morum conuersionem (et) obedientiam. Due ut diximus promissiones id est morum conuersio et obedientiao semper ab omnibus requirebantur et exigebantur antequam reciperentur. Illa uero que est de stabilitate non ab omnibus sed a quibusdam. Multi quippe ante beatum Benedictum fuerunt patres qui regulas conscripserunt qui nichil de hoc scripserunt et etiam beatus Basilius. Tamen ex illis tres repperiuntur qui hoc idem quod beatus Benedictus iubet de stabilitate statuerunt id est Ysidorus, Aurelius, Fructuosus, scilicet ut nullus ante reciperetur nisi se prius ibi scriptis sua professione spoponderit p permansurum.20 Sed quomodo tunc componebatur eadem professio, nescimus. Nam nunc diuerse componitur per diuersa cenobia. Nam sicut diuersi usus tenentur per diuersas aecclesias in omni re aecclesiastica, ita et in hoc. Tamen quantumcumque sint uel prolixiores uel breues semper in omnibus hec tria repperiuntur id est stabilitas, morum conuersio, obedientia, et hec omnia secundum regulam sancti Benedicti. Hoc uero quod postea in monachatus confirmatione additum est id est benedictio sancti ordinis, in nulla regula inuenitur institutum. Sed qui hoc instituit, ualde necessariam rem atque dignam tanto ordini preuidit. Si enim ordini monachico defuisset benedictio et consecratio, uilipenderetur idem sacer ordo uidelicet quam maxime, quia nullus sacer ordo est in sancta aecclesia qui non habeat propriam benedictionem. De hac benedictione et de hac professione multi diuerse sentiunt. Quidam enim dicunt nullum esse uel posse esse monachum absque professione. Nam in professione non solum res seculi sed etiam seipsum a seipso denegat qui professionem facit, quod est proprie esse monachum, quod nemo potest contradicere. Ex altera parte sunt qui dicunt quod illa consecratio quam monachus accipit licet desit professio ita eum ligat et facit perfectum monachum, ut nullo modo deinceps ad seculum redire fas ei sit nec habitum ullo modo mutare, nec ullo modo saluum posseq, si uoluntate et

n non add. o conuersionem et obedientiam ante corr. p uel sponderet supra lin. q esse supra inter saluum et posse.

The Professions of Monks

41

down, following the institutions of the Tabennisiotes, the way in which anyone coming there for conversion ought to be received, adding that in it was prescribed that no one should be received into the congregation before he promised, as though in the presence of God and his saints, in the presence of the abbot together with the congregation, to spend his whole life in that monastery.19 Further – and this was prescribed in every rule – that he should at the same time promise a reformation in morals and obedience. These three he ordered to be promised in writing – stability, reformation of morals, and obedience. Two promises, as we have said, that is, of a reformation of morals and obedience, were always sought from everyone and demanded before men were accepted. That of stability was not demanded of everyone, but only of some. There were certainly many fathers before blessed Benedict, including blessed Basil, who composed rules which said nothing of this. However, from among them three are found who made the same rule about stability as Benedict – Isidore, Aurelius, and Fructuosus: that is, that no one was to be received before and unless he bound himself to remain there in his written profession.20 But what the wording of that profession was I do not know. For now different ones are composed in different monasteries. For as in all ecclesiastical matters different usages are maintained in different churches, and so it is in this respect. But however great they may be, wordy or brief, these three things are always to be found in all of them: stability, a reformation of morals, and obedience, and all these according to St Benedict’s Rule. It is true that there was added afterwards the blessing of the holy order in confirmation of the monk’s status, and this is not to be found laid down in any rule. But whoever laid this down had foresight in a matter extremely necessary and suitable for the order. For if the blessing and consecration were lacking in the monastic order, that same sacred order would be held in extreme contempt, because there is no sacred order in holy church which does not have its own blessing. There are many diverse opinions held about this blessing and this profession. Some say no one is or can be a monk without the profession. For whoever makes the profession does not only renounce secular affairs, but even renounces himself by himself, and this is the peculiar characteristic of a monk and no one can deny it. However there are those who say that the consecration that a monk receives, without a profession, so binds him, making the perfect monk, that thereafter it is in no way lawful for him to return to the world or change his habit, nor can he be saved in any way if he has asked

19 Benedict, Regula, 58.17–18. 20 Isidore, Regula monachorum, 4.2 (PL, 83:872A).

42

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

proprio ore illud petierit uel aliquo nutu concesserit. Et hoc nemo potest auersari. Sunt uero alii qui et hoc diuerse sentiunt. Nam alii dicunt: Sola professio sufficit monachor absque benedictione. Alii: Sola benedictio sufficit monachos absque professione. De hac re quantum dominus donauerit pro posse nostro dicemus. Si cui placuerit, dei dono at(tri)buat. Si cui aliter, non contra contendemus, sed aurem libenter apponemus, ut si melius senserit discere possimus. Scimus enim scriptum: Unusquisque in suo sensu abundat.21 Tria sunt quae homo potest deo dare: sua, et seipsum ex parte, et insuper seipsum totum. Primum datum requirit deus ab omni homine. Sine hac datione, saluus esse aliquis non potest. Que est ista datio? Elemosina, misericordia. Dicit ueritas: Date elemosinam et ecce omnia munda sunt uobis.22 Et Salomon: Feneratur domino, qui miseretur pauperi, et uici(ssi)tudinem suam reddet ei.23 Et Aecclesiastes: Ignem ardentem extinguit aqua et elemosina resistit peccatis.24 Et Tobias filio suo Tobi: Elemosina ab omni peccato et at morte liberat, et non pateturu animam ire in tenebras. Fiducia magna est coram summo deov elemosina omnibus facientibus eam.25 Et angelus Rapha(h)el ad eosdem: Bona est oratio cum ieiunio, et elemosina, magis quam thesauros auri condere. Quoniam elemosina a morte liberat, et ipsa est quae purgat peccata, et facit inuenire uitam eternam.26 Multaque similia in diuinis scripturis sepe inueniuntur. De misericordia uero, dicit ueritas: Misericordiam malo quam sacrificium.27 Et in Ecclesiastew: Libera eum qui iniuriam patitur de manu superbi, et non accide feras in anima tua.28 Item: In iudicando esto (pupillis) misericors pater, et pro uiro matri illorum, et eris tu uelut filius altissimi obediens, et miserebitur tui magis quam mater,29 et multa (h)is similia. In (h)is exemplis et in multis aliis datur intelligi

o

o

r m MS; modo in Martène, De ritibus. s m MS; modo in Martène, De ritibus. t ad MS. u patitur ante corr. v deo summo ante corr. w Ecclesiastico in Martène, De ritibus.

The Professions of Monks

43

voluntarily, and with his own mouth should seek to do so, or conceded this by some sign. And no one can deny this. There are of course others who judge this differently too. For some say: The profession alone is enough for a monk, without a blessing. Others: The blessing alone is enough for a monk, without the profession. The Lord willing, we speak concerning this as best we can. If it pleases anyone, let him count it as a gift of God. Should it seem different to someone else, we shall not contend against it, but shall willingly incline our ear, so that we shall be able to learn if he deems it better. For we know it is written: Let every man abound in his own sense.21 There are three things a man can give to God: his goods, part of himself, and over and above these, himself totally. The first God requires from all men. Without that gift no one can be saved. What is that gift? Alms, mercy. The Truth says: Give alms: and behold all things are clean unto you.22 And Solomon: He that hath mercy on the poor lendeth to the Lord: and He will repay him.23 And Ecclesiasticus: Water quencheth a flaming fire and alms resisteth sins.24 And Tobias to his son Tobias: For alms deliver from all sin and death, and will not suffer the soul to go into darkness. Alms shall be a great confidence before the most high God, to all them that give.25 And the angel Raphael to both: Prayer is good with fasting and alms: more than to lay up treasures of gold: for alms delivereth from death: and the same is that which purgeth away sins, and maketh to find life everlasting.26 And many similar sayings are often to be found in holy scripture. Indeed concerning mercy, the Truth says: I will have mercy and not sacrifice.27 And in Ecclesiasticus: Deliver him that suffereth wrong out of the hand of the proud, and be not faint-hearted in thy soul.28 And in the same place: In judging be a merciful father to the fatherless, and as a husband to their mother. And thou shalt be as the obedient son of the most High, and He will have mercy on thee more than a mother,29 and there are many more like these. In these examples and in many others we are given to understand

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Rom. 14.5. Luke 11.41. Prov. 19.17. Wisd. 3.33. Tob. 4.11–12. Tob. 12.8–9. Matt. 9.13. Wisd. 4.9. Wisd. 4.10–11.

44

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

dare de suo pauperibus et misericordiam impendere is qui opus habent ualde acceptum esse deo, si tamen puro animo id fit. Secunda datio est cum quis ea que licite potest uti relinquit, et ab (h)is pro dei amore se omnino abstinet, sicut est legale coniugium. carnium et uini perceptio, mollia indumenta, auri et argenti cupido, terrene possessiones atque seculares (h)onores, parentum omnium affectiones, et cetera talia quae licite potest homo uti absque dampno animae suae, si ita usus eis fuerit sicut religio christiana preordinat. Qui ista dat deo multum proficit. quia illud domini iussum adimplet: Si uis perfectus esse uade uende omnia quae (h)abes et da pauperibus, et (h)abebis thesaurum in caelo.30 Sed propter istam dationem adhuc non est monachus, quia adhuc omnino ita est suus, ut si uoluerit illa que dimisit (libere) possit repetere et resumere, sicut sunt illi qui se sponte exilio tradunt, uel liberi (h)eremite quos communis locutio uocat burdones. Istos liberos ideo uoco, quia de se omnino adhuc sunt liberi. Faciunt enim quod uolunt, nec habent aliquod retinaculum ad seculum ex toto redeundi si uoluerint, et facere quicquid illis libuerit, nisi (sibi preponant) solum dei timorem, si id non uouerint ante obseruandum. Qui uero ita proficit ut cum abiectione rerum terrenarum illud subsequentis domini preceptum adimplere uelit id est et sequitur me,31 monachus est. Sed quomodo aliquis hoc adimplet? Cum quis monachilem (h)abitum quod est proprium signum seculum et ea quae seculi sunt reliquisse propria uoluntate accipit, et inde sicut sacer ordo requirit benedicitur, hic talis sine dubio monachus est. Quomodo? Quia ipsa benedictio ita eum alligat deo et sancto ordini, ut deinceps ad seculum sine sua perditione redire nullatenus possit. Proprie enim de talibus dicit ueritas: Nemo ponens manum suam ad aratrum et respiciens retro, aptus est regno dei.32 Quisquis namque accepto sancto ordine cum statuta benedictione, si post ad seculum redierit et ipsum habitum abiecerit, sine dubio apostata est. Apostata namque retro incedens interpretatur.33

The Professions of Monks

45

that to give of our goods to the poor and bestow mercy on those in need is extremely acceptable to God, provided it is done from a pure heart. The second gift comes when a man relinquishes those things he may use legitimately, and abstains completely from them for the love of God, for example, legal marriage, the consumption of meat and wine, soft clothing, the desire for silver and gold, earthly possessions and secular offices, the affections of all our kinsmen, and other such things that a man can legitimately use without damning his soul, if he has used them as the Christian religion ordains. Who offers such things to God profits greatly, because it fulfills God’s command: If thou wilt be perfect, go sell what thou hast and give to the poor and thou shalt have treasure in heaven.30 But a man is not yet a monk because of this gift, because up to this point it is entirely his, so that if he wishes he can freely ask to have back again what he has given up, and resume possession of it, like those who go into exile of their own free will, or free hermits, who in popular language are called ‘mules.’ I call them free because they are entirely free to this extent. For they do what they want, nor do they have any ties to the world, being completely able to return to it if they wish, and do whatever pleases them, provided they put before themselves only the fear of God, if they have not vowed to comply with it beforehand. Whoever truly advances, so that by rejecting earthly things he wishes to fulfill that precept about following the Lord, that is, and followeth Me,31 is a monk. But how can anyone do this? When someone of his own free will dons the monastic habit which is the proper sign identifying him as one who has renounced the world, and those things which are worldly, and then is blessed as the holy order requires, such a one is without doubt a monk. Why? Because the blessing itself so binds him to God and the holy order that afterwards he cannot return to the world in any way without damning himself. The Truth says concerning such men: No one placing his hand to the plough and looking back is fit for the kingdom of God.32 For if someone has accepted the holy order with the statutory blessing, and then returns afterwards to the world and throws off his habit, he is without doubt an apostate. Apostacy is defined as proceeding backwards.33

30 31 32 33

Matt. 19.21. Matt. 10.38. Luke 9.62. Cf. Glossae codicis Vaticani 3321, in Corpus glossariorum latinorum, ed. G. Loewe (repr. Amsterdam, 1965), 4:19.

46

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

Secundum domini dictum qui manum suam in aratro miserit si post retro respexerit apostata sine dubio conuincitur esse nec ullatenus regno dei aptus. De hac re beatus Gregorius in .ix. omelia super Ezechielem ita dicit: Sicut apostata est qui fide recedit a deo, ita qui ad peruersum opus post professam religionem recedit ab omnipotenti deo apostata absque dubitatione ulla deputatur, etiam si fidem tenere uideatur.34 Si igitur doctor eximius de omni criminali peccato hoc dixit, quanto magis de illo in quo post negationem fidei christiane plus aperte apparet apostasia? Nullum enim peccatum maius mihi uidetur preter abnegationem fidei christiane, quam cum monachus ordinem suum relinquit, et se denegat ore et actione esse monachum. Qui taliter agit, non fur est hominis sed dei. Et quid deo furatur? Aurum uel argentum uel aliquam terrenam suppellectilem? Non, sed illam rem pro qua deus dignatus est fieri homo, et pro qua sanguinem suum fu(n)di permisit id est animam et corpus hominis. At cum aliquis ita desertus a deo aliquam terrenam rem furto secum aufert, non pro magno debet uideri alicui sensato homini. Haec dicens, contra memetipsum (loquor). Sed quid? Cum ueritatem loquimur quamuis auersum sit cordi nostro, non debemus tacere. Cum enim quis seipsum id est animam et corpus suum deo et sanctis eius cui se donauerat (furto) aufert, quid mirum si aliquam rem minorem secum furatur? Si enim detestabile sacrilegium est furari sacrum de sacro, quanto magis furari animam a(d) similitudinem dei factam a sociate sanctorum immo a paradyso? Hinc beatus Gregorius in epistola ad Venantium ex monacho patricium dicit inter cetera: Pensa quid facturus est deus de peruerso opere, si quosdam in iudicio suo reprobat de occioso sermone. Scis qua morte Ananias multatus est qui pecunias quas deo uouerat partim obtulit, partim subtraxit. Si igitur morte dignus fuit qui nummos abstulit,35 pensa qua pena dignus sit qui seipsum per suae professionis obliuionem deo subtrahit. Septempliciter igitur peccat qui se deo ita aufert. Primum tripliciter in cogitatione, de(h)inc quad(r)upliciter in operatione. Primum cum cogitat et deliberat facere illam rem pro qua postea fugit. Secundo cum propter hoc deliberat fugere, ut liberius et opportunius hoc quodx cupit facere possit adimplere. Tercio, cum res aecclesiae etiam excogitat exportare uel quod peius etiam furari. Quarto, cum hoc quod cogitat, opere adimplet,

x quod in marg.

The Professions of Monks

47

According to the Lord’s saying, whoever has put his hand to the plough and afterwards looks back is doubtless guilty of apostacy and is not fit for the kingdom of God. The blessed Gregory says of this in his ninth homily on Ezechiel: Just like the man who turns away from his faith in God, so is he who turns to a misguided way of life after he has made a religious profession, turning away from the omnipotent God, and is reckoned to be without any doubt an apostate, even if he appears to keep his faith.34 If therefore the eminent doctor says this of every criminal sin, how much more does it apply to him in whom his apostacy appears more openly after his denial of the Christian faith? For no sin, save the denial of the Christian faith, seems greater to me than when a monk leaves his order and denies by his words and actions that he is a monk. Whoever behaves in this way is not a thief from men but from God. And what is stolen from God? Gold or silver or other products of the earth? No, but that for which God deigned to become man, and for which He allowed his blood to be shed, that is, man’s body and soul. And when anyone thus deserted by God in this way carries off with him any earthly thing by theft, he should not appear to anyone to be a great, a thinking man. Saying this, I speak against myself. But why? When we speak the truth, although it is against our inclination, we should not be silent. For when anyone takes away like a thief what he had given to God and his saints, that is, himself, his body and soul, who can be surprised if some lesser thing is also stolen with him? For if it is a detestable sacrilege to steal the holy from the holy, how much greater is it to steal a soul, made in the image of God, from the company of the saints, indeed from paradise? Here the blessed Gregory in his letter to the noble Venantius, who became a patrician after being a monk, says among other things: Think what God will do about your perverse deed if he in his judgment blames some for their idle words. You know that Ananias was punished with death because he offered only part of the money he had vowed to God and withheld the rest. If therefore he deserved death because he took money,35 think what punishment he deserved who withheld himself from God by forgetting his profession. Seven times therefore he sins who takes himself away from God. Three times at first in thought and then four times in deed. First, when he deliberates and plans to do that thing for which later he flees. Second, when because of it he plans flight so that he can carry out more freely and easily what he desires to do. Third, when he contrives to carry away church property or even worse steal it. Fourth, when he actually does what he has planned,

34 Gregory, In Ezechielem, 1.9 (CC, 142:126). 35 Gregory, Registrum, 1.33 (MGH, Epistolae, 1.46; CC, 140:40).

48

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

primum de se dehinc de rebus aecclesiae. Sexto, cum habitum professionis abicit. Septimo, cum uerbo et opere ex toto renuntiat se esse monachum. Dehinc quanta mala subsequantur quis dinumeret? Ut igitur breuiter cuncta comprehendam, non enim aliquid singulare uolo dicere uel exprimere ne aliquis putet me alicui notam uelle inge(re)re, nullus secularis nec etiam aliquis scu(r)roy in omni re turpi tam effrenate et inpudenter se precipitat quam monachus qui habitum sancte professionis proicit et se monachum ex to(to) abnegat esse. Dei enim iudicio ita in po(te)state diaboli perducitur, ut nec ad momentum ut ita dicam ulli diabolice operationi seu temptationi possit contraire, sed sepissime quod peius in talibus illud diuinum dictum compleri conspicimus: Impius cum uenerit in profundum malorum contempnit z.36 Non enim illam terribilem comminationem curant que dicit: Qui templum dei uiolauerit, disperdet illum deus.37 Quis hoc dixit? Apostolus, immo Christus per apostolum. Ipse enim dicit: An experimentum queritis eius, qui in me loquitur Christus?38 De quo templo hoc dixit, de materiali an spirituali? De illo scilicet, de quo supra dixerat. Et quid? Vos estis inquiens templum dei uiui,39 et spiritus (sanctus) habitat in uobis.40 Ac deinde subiunxit, quod supra posuimus: Si quis uero templum dei u, d i deus. Quisquis igitur ab hac apostasia uult esse liber, caueat omnimodis elationem et superbiam, quia pro nulla re ut sancti patres testantur tam cito deus sinit hominem labi in hac apostasia, quam pro superbia. Vix uero aliquis repperitur, qui hanc apostasiamaa faciat, nisi pro aliquo carnali delicto. Sic enim de hac re dicit beatus Gregorius in .xxxoiio. libro moralium: Liquido omnibus patet, quia postquam semel superbia hominis spiritum ceperit, mox se ad corruptionem carnis extendit.41 Et in libro omeliarum suarum idem doctor: In luxurie uoragine neminem diabolus usque ad consensum mergit, nisi eum qui prius in occulis dei superbiendo cadit.42 Quod ipse primus homo ostendit, qui postquam superbiendo peccauit, mox genitalia membra erubuit. Nam quia deum superbiendo contempsit, mox a subdita carne prelium sumpsit.

y hic ras. ca. 10 litt. z add. in marg.: Nec mirum, nam ut beatus Ieronimus dicit omne flagitum si terminus pudoris excesserit, crimina auget criminibus, et semper ad deteriora procedit (Jerome, In Amos, 1.2 [PL, 25:1006B]). aa apostosiam MS.

The Professions of Monks

49

first for himself and then for church property. Sixth, when he throws away the habit of his profession. Seventh, when he totally denies in word and deed that he is a monk. Who could list how many ills result from this? So that I may briefly treat all of them together – for I do not wish to mention or discuss any of them singly, lest it should be supposed I want to draw attention to anyone – no man of the world, not even the most foul-mouthed buffoon, makes an exhibition of himself with such impudence and lack of restraint as the monk who has abandoned the habit of his holy order and utterly denied he is a monk. The judgment of God is brought so thoroughly into the Devil’s power that for the moment, as it were, it cannot resist any diabolic operation or temptation, but most often we see fulfilled in such men what is worse – that divine saying: The wicked man, when he is come into the depth, evils contemneth.36 For they pay no attention to that terrible threat which says: But if any man violate the temple of God, him shall God destroy.37 Who said this? The Apostle, or rather Christ through the Apostle. For he himself said: Do you seek a proof in Christ that speaketh in me?38 Of what temple does he speak, the material or the spiritual? The one he had spoken of above. And what did he say? You are, he said, the temple of the living God39 and the spirit of God dwelleth in you.40 And then he added, what we have written above: But if any man violate the temple of God, him shall God destroy. And so whoever wishes to be free of this apostacy should beware of all kinds of boastfulness and pride, because there is nothing, as the holy fathers testify, through which God so quickly allows a man to lapse into this apostacy as through pride. There is scarcely anyone to be found who commits this apostacy except through some carnal offence. Blessed Gregory speaks of this in book 32 of his Moralia: It is plainly evident to all, after pride has seized the spirit of a man it soon spreads to the corruption of the flesh.41 And in the book of his homilies the same doctor says: The Devil thrusts no one into the abyss of wantonness to the point of consent unless he has first fallen in the eyes of God through pride.42 This the first man himself shows, who after he had sinned through pride, soon felt ashamed of his genitals. For because he despised God through pride, he soon took up arms against the subdued flesh.

36 37 38 39 40 41 42

Prov. 18.3. 1 Cor. 3.17. 2 Cor. 13.3. 2 Cor. 6.16. 1 Cor. 3.16. Gregory, Moralia, 32.14.21 (CC, 143B:1645); see Introduction, p. 10. Gregory, Moralia, 3.31.60 (CC, 140:153).

50

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

Vnde propheta: Respondebit inquit arrogantia Israel in faciebb eius43 id est per meritum latentis superbiae in apertam luxuriam eadem permittit. Qui ut ostenderet quod libido ex merito superbie proruperit, ait: Spiritus fornicationis in medio eorum.44 Si enim pie sub deo premitur, caro super spiritum illicite non eleuatur. Quisquis ergo superna appetit, si postea a uoluptate prosternitur, non tunc se uictum iudicet cum aperte superatur. Nam ante dei oculos in culpe uoraginem cecidit, cum sese ultra quam deberet efferens latenter intumuit.45 Hi uero qui pro alia aliqua causa hoc faciunt, funem a naui ex toto non abrumpunt id est sanctum habitum quod est maximum et precipuum retinaculum sancti ordinis non abiciunt, sed est eis quasi magnum retinaculum contra insidias diaboli. Si quis uero hec legens propter hoc irasci uoluerit, de se dictum fatebitur, cum forte ille qui scripsit, de alio hoc senserit. Ex altera parte hi qui cenobiis presunt magno studio et summa diligentia de salute istorum deberent esse solliciti. Non enim solummodo periculosa res est ista (h)is qui delinqunt in hoc, sed quam maxime et precipue (h)is qui eis presunt, si aliquo modo causa ruine istorum existunt, uel si eis qui in tali dampnatione sunt non omnimodis et omni arte qua possunt (prodesse) talibus non subueniunt ut salui sint. Meminisse semper deberent cui pastori immo cui domino reddituri sunt rationem.46 Si enim de ocioso uerbo reddituri sunt rationem,47 et de minimis operibus suis, quanto magis de salute animarum sibi commissarum, pro quarum salute tantum precium donatum est? Sed quid dicam? Plenus sum sermonibus, et coartat me spiritus uteri mei.48 Eloquar an sileam?49 Sed melius est ad modum tacere quam eloqui plura. Non hoc dico propter timorem, quia nil habet timeri, qui nil habet perdere, sed propter temporis oportunitatem. Scriptum est enim: Tempus loquendi, et tempus tacendi.50 Nunc ad cepta redeamus. Diximus supra, quod sola assumptio sacri habitus cum

bb faciem MS.

The Professions of Monks

51

Wherefore the prophet says: And the pride of Israel shall answer in his face,43 that is, it permits open wantonness, through the fault of hidden pride. Who in order to show that lust has burst forth through the fault of pride, says: The spirit of fornication is in the midst of them.44 For if it is subdued piously under God, the flesh is not raised illicitly above the spirit. Whoever therefore desires heavenly things, if afterwards he is prostrated by sensuality, let him then judge himself beaten when he is openly overcome. In the eyes of God he has fallen into the abyss of guilt when, exalting himself more than he should, he has become secretly puffed up.45 Truly they who do this for any other cause do not tear the rope away from the ship, that is, do not cast off the holy habit which is like the great main hawser of the holy order, but it is for them like a great hawser against the snares of the Devil. But if anyone reading this wants to be angry, he will be assuming that it has been said about him, when perhaps the writer will have been thinking of someone else. On the other hand, those in charge of monasteries should be concerned with great zeal and the highest diligence about the salvation of their people. For not only is it a dangerous matter for those who are at fault in this, but mainly and particularly for those who are their superiors, if in any way they are the cause of their ruin, or if they do not help in every way and with every skill they have those who are in such damnation, so that they are saved. They should always remember to which pastor, nay to which master, account is to be given.46 For if an account is be to given of idle words,47 and of one’s slightest deeds, how much more of the salvation of the souls of those committed to him, for whose salvation such a price has been given? But what shall I say? For I am full of matter to speak of, and the spirit of my bowels straiteneth me.48 Should I speak or should I be silent?49 But it is better to be moderately silent than to speak much. I do not say this from fear, because he has nothing to fear who has nothing to lose, but from the appropriateness of the time. For it is written: There is a time to speak and a time to keep silence.50 Now let us return to what we have undertaken. We said above that the simple donning of the holy habit with the

43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

Os. 5.5. Os. 5.4. Gregory, Moralia, 26.17.28–9 (CC, 143B:1286–7). Benedict, Regula, 3.11, 63.3. Matt. 12.36. Job 32.18. Virgil, Aeneid, 3.39. Eccles. 3.7.

52

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

benedictione, faciat monachum. Quod euidentius debemus ostendere, ne aliquis maliuolus subridendo dente canino me submordeat. Monachilis benedictio (h)abet proprium scrutinium, sicut ceteri sacri ordines. Quicquid igitur promittitur in professione si recte a(d)uertitur, et in monachili scrutinio hoc idem promittitur. Non enim absque scrutinio debet aliquis benedici. Aliter, res non recte agitur. Omnis nanque sacer ordo, habet proprium scrutinium, et propriam consecrationem. Non enim debet consecrari quis in aliquo sacro ordine, nisi ante inquisitus et examinatus fuerit sicut sacer ordo quem recipere debet expetit. Septem gradus aecclesiastici ordinis singuli habent propria scrutinia, sicut baptismus, et inpositi(o) manuum episcopi, licet istud pretermiserint pene omnes episcopi. Dicunt enim sufficere cuique baptizato scrutinium baptismi. Nam quod promittitur in scrutinio baptismatis, hoc et in scrutinio confirmacionis quamuis breuiter. Habet et scrutinium suum episcopalis consecratio, nec non etiam et abbatis consecratio. Et si omnes aecclesiastici gradus habent propria scrutinia et proprias consecrationes, ille ordo qui quodam modo uidetur superexcellere ceteros gradus quam maxime exposcit proprium scrutinium et propriam benedictionem. Hoc quod diximus monachicum ordinem quodammodo superexcellere ceteros gradus aecclesiae ita intelli(gi) debet secundum euangelicam perfectionem non gradu et ordine. Confitemur enim et ueraciter affirmamus ordinem sacerdotii maiorem esse monachico ordine officii dignitate. Nam quis neget magne esse dignitatis magneque sanctitatis sacerdotale officium? Presbiter enim uicem Christi tenet et portat. Et quis super Christum se audeat ponere? Tamen secundum euangelicam perfectionem monachus presbitero maior est. Presbiter enim omnia que sunt seculi potest uti et possidere libere excepto coniugio, quod monachus non potest. Non enim licitum est monacho possidere aliquid propri(um) si uere monachus est. Inquirat et diligenti studio perscrutet totum euangelium quisque et inueniet ni fallor nullum hominem posse sic adimplere pleniter omnia p(r)ecepta euangelica quomodo monachus. Et ut de multis pauca proferantur, quis unquam potuit adimplere illud domini iussum nolite solliciti esse de crastino51 nisi monachus uiuens in commune? Et quis est qui et illud possit pleniter adimplere si uis perfectus esse uade uende omnia que habes et da pauperibus, et ueni sequere me52 nisi monachus? Et secundum

The Professions of Monks

53

blessing makes the monk. We should demonstrate this more clearly lest someone smiling with ill will should snap at me like a dog. The blessing of monks has its own examination, like the other holy orders. Whatever therefore is promised in the profession, if properly carried out, is also promised similarly in the examination of monks. For no one should be blessed without the examination. Otherwise the matter is not executed properly. For truly every holy order has its own examination, and its own consecration. For no one should be consecrated in any holy order unless he has been interrogated and examined beforehand, as the holy order which he is to receive requires. Each of the seven degrees of the ecclesiastical orders has its own examination, such as baptism, and the laying on of hands by a bishop, even though nearly all the bishops have omitted it. For they say the examination for baptism is sufficient for the baptized. For what is promised in the examination of baptism is also promised in the examination of confirmation, no matter how cursorily. The consecration of bishops also has its own examination, and the consecration of abbots too. And if all the ecclesiastical degrees have their own examinations and their own consecrations, that order which in some way seems to excel the other degrees greatly demands its own examination and its own blessing. When we say the monastic order excels in certain ways the other degrees of the church, it should be understood according to evangelical perfection, not by its degree or order. For we confess and truly affirm that the order of the priesthood is greater than the monastic order in the dignity of its office. For who will deny the greatness of the dignity and sanctity of the priestly office? The priest holds and carries out the office of Christ. And who will dare place himself above Christ? In respect, however, of evangelical perfection the monk is greater than the priest. For, with the exception of marriage, the priest can freely make use of and possess everything secular, which the monk cannot. For it is not lawful for a monk, if he is truly a monk, to possess anything of his own. Let everyone search and scrutinize the entire gospel with the most diligent care and he will find, unless I am mistaken, that no man can fulfill so completely all the evangelical precepts in the way a monk can. And to offer a few from many examples, who could ever fulfill that prescription of the Lord: be not therefore solicitous for the morrow,51 if not a monk living in common? And who is it who could also fully carry out: If thou wilt be perfect go sell what thou hast and give to the poor and come follow Me,52 if not a monk? And according to

51 Matt. 6.34. 52 Matt. 19.21.

54

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

Matheum: Qui amat patrem aut matrem super me, non est me dignus. Et qui amat filium aut filiam super me, non est me dignus. Et qui non accipit crucem et s me, non est me dignus.53 Et secundum Lucam: Si quis uenit ad me et non odit patrem suum aut matrem suam et filios et fratres et sorores adhuc autem et animam suam, non potest meus esse discipulus. Et qui non baiulat crucem suam et uenit post me, non p meus esse discipulus. Et item: Omnis qui non renuntiat omnibus quae possidet, non p meus esse discipulus.54 Hec omnia quis unquam tam perfecte et ex toto potest adimplere quam monachus? Sciendum inter hec quod dignitas officii non dat locum maioris meriti, sed uite perfectio, quod in uno possumus a(d)uertere. Integra uirginitas superiorem locum obtinet inter alias uirtutes post fidem et martirium. Et tamen quamuis ita sit, sullimior(is) tamen meriti est apud deum humilis continens, quam superba uirgo. Sic monachus quamuis officio et dignitate inferior sit sacerdote, tamen quantum ad meritum maior est quia ut scriptum est qui plus laborat plus mercedis accipit,55 ita qui plus dat deo plus recipiet. Qui uero plus recipit, plus diligitur. Et qui plus diligitur, maiorem locum meretur et obtinet. Et qui maiorem locum obtinet, quis est qui possit recte dicere minoris, esse meriti apud deum, quamuis obtutibus hominum uideatur uilis sicut ordo ipse expostulat? Aliud uideamus. Monachicus ordo recte ex parte preponitur ceteris ordinibus, quia ceteri requirunt sanctos, sed non faciunt. Monachicus uero requirit peccatorem et facit sanctum, ita ut ad ceteros gradus possit per istum ascendere. Multi namque eliguntur ad sacerdotium immo ad presulatum, qui si monachi non fuissent nullo modo ad ista officia aecclesia illos admitteret. Quia ut diximus ceteri ordines requirunt sanctos sed (non) faciunt, monachicus uero requirit non sanctum et facit sanctum, sicut baptismus. Item aliud uideamus. Nullus ordo est uel in clericali ordine seu in laicali qui non possit dimitti quoquomodo absque peccato. Monachicus uero semel assumptus, nullo modo nulla ratione potest dimitti absque dampnatione anime. Hinc est quod ii qui de hoc ordine ad presulatum assumuntur, nullo modo monachicum habitum debent uel audent dimittere. Et si aliquando alia desuper induunt indumenta, tamen subtus semper gestiunt habitum monachilem. Nam si ex toto illa abicerent, apostasie deputaretur.

The Professions of Monks

55

Matthew: He that loveth father and mother more than Me, is not worthy. And he that loveth son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he that taketh up not his cross and followeth Me is not worthy of Me.53 And according to Luke: If any man come to Me and hate not his father and mother and children and brethren and sisters and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not carry his cross and come after Me cannot be my disciple. And similarly: Every one of you that doth not renounce all that he posseseth cannot be my disciple.54 Who but a monk can ever fulfill all these so perfectly and completely? It must be known among these that perfection of life rather than dignity of office gives a place of greater merit, which we can point to in one instance. Intact virginity has the superior place among other virtues, after faith and martyrdom. And however this may be, with God a humble continent person is of higher merit than a proud virgin. Thus a monk, though he may be of inferior office and dignity to a priest, is nevertheless greater in merit because, as is written, whoever does more work shall receive the greater reward,55 that whoever gives more to God shall receive more. Whoever indeed receives more is loved more. And whoever is loved more merits the greater place and obtains it. And whoever obtains the greater place, who is there who could rightly say he is of lesser merit with God, though in the eyes of men he might appear base, as the order itself demands? Let us look elsewhere. The monastic order is to a certain extent rightly placed before other orders since the others seek holy men but do not make them. But the monastic order seeks a sinner and makes a saint, so that he can ascend by it to the other grades. For many are chosen for the priesthood, indeed for the prelacy, whom the church would certainly not admit to such offices if they had not been monks. Because, as we have said, the other orders seek saints, but do not make them; but the monastic order seeks one who is not holy and makes him holy, as baptism does. Again let us look elsewhere. There is no order either in the clergy or in the laity which cannot be abandoned in some way without sin. The monastic order once entered cannot be left in any way for any reason without damnation of the soul. Hence those who are promoted from this order to the prelacy certainly ought not and dare not abandon the monastic habit. And if at some time or other they dress outwardly in other clothing, nevertheless they always wear the monastic habit underneath. For if they cast it off entirely, it is regarded as apostacy. In this

53 Matt. 10.37–8. 54 Luke 14.26, 27, 33. 55 1 Cor. 3.8.

56

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

In hoc quisque perpendere potest quante sanctitatis sit ordo monachicus in operatione, cum ipse habitus quanuis uilissimus tante dignitatis sit ut nec summae personae aecclesiastice eum relinquerecc ualeant. Ex altera parte perpendendum est quanta dampnatione est dignus, qui tantum et tam sanctum ordinem (h)abitu et actu abicere non dubitat. Monachilis uero (h)abitus secundum sancti Benedicti regula, cuculla est et dicitur.56 Est enim signum innocentiae. Simplex nanque est uestimentum, quod uix ad cubitorum ima pertingit. Nudas de reliquo circumfertur manus in modum colobiorum, ut amputatos (h)abere eos actus, et opera mundi (h)uius suggerat abscisio manicarum. Capitium uero quod in eodem continetur uestimento, mortificationem ab amore et seculi actibus signat, iuxta apostoli dictum: Mortui estis et uita uestra abscondita est cum Christo in deo.57 Quo habitu, nullus recte potest uel debet uti nisi monachus, et sine hoc monacho quoquam nullo modo licitum est incedere. Sine enim hoc, quisquam non agnoscitur esse huius religionis. Cilicinum uero uestimentum quod subtus ad carnem gestat monachus, communi locutione uocatur staminia, et signat proprie carnis mortificationem. Tonsuram uero clericalem quam gestat monachus ab apostolis et primis discipulis feruntdd traditam qui primi monachi fuerunt, et primi in nouo testamento per clericaleee officium aecclesiasticos gradus administrauerunt. Licet enim in institutis patrum hoc non inueniatur statutum, tamen qui uitam beati Mauri discipuli patris Benedicti perlegit, inuenit quod ii qui sub norma illius uiuebant tonsuram clericalem (h)abebant, siue fuissent clerici siue laici.58 Qui igitur ita proficit uoluntate, specie et actione, de illis profecto est quibus dicit dominus: Omnis qui reliquerit domum aut fratres aut sorores aut patrem aut matrem aut uxorem aut filios aut agros propter nomen meum centuplum accipiet et uitam aeternam possidebit.59 Quibus dixit hoc ueritas? Apostolis uidelicet, qui uerissimi et perfectissimi monachi fuerunt, quia non solum que possidebant reliquerunt, sed etiam uoluntatem habendi a se penitus abiecerunt, nec aliquid nisi Christum deinceps assequi obtauerunt. Qui igitur apostolorum uestigia in quantum possunt ita imitari satagunt, nullus contraire recte potest quin (h)i sint monachi. Non enim omnes una semita ad Christum perueniunt. Sic nanque diuerse mansiones sunt parate bene operantibus,

cc lacuna 3 litt. in relin…quere. dd fertur ante corr. ee clericalem ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

57

everyone can consider carefully how much sanctity the monastic order displays in its activities, when the habit itself, though very base, has so much dignity that the highest persons in the church have no power to abandon it. On the other hand, consider carefully how severely a man should be condemned who does not hesitate to reject in his dress and deeds such and so holy an order. The true monastic habit, according to St Benedict’s Rule, is and is said to be the cowl.56 For it is a sign of innocence. The garment is indeed really simple, barely extending at most to the elbows, and furthermore it goes round the bare hands like a short-sleeved tunic, as though cut down for work; and the cutting of the sleeves suggests the activities of this world. The hood which is part of this same piece of clothing signifies mortification from love and worldly activity, according to the saying of the Apostle: For you are dead: and your life is hid with Christ in God.57 No one except a monk can or should rightly use this habit, and it is not lawful for a monk to go about without it. For without it no one can be recognized as being a member of this religion. The hair-shirt is the garment which a monk wears underneath, next to his skin, and in common speech it is called linen-wool and signifies the mortification of one’s own flesh. The clerical tonsure of the monk is taken over from the apostles and the first disciples, who were the first monks, and who in the New Testament first administered the church’s degrees through the clerical office. For though statutes concerning this are not to be found in the ordinances of the fathers, nonetheless whoever reads through the life of the blessed Maurus, the disciple of father Benedict, finds that those who lived under his rules had the clerical tonsure, whether they were clerics or laymen.58 Whoever therefore so advances in will, thought, and deed, the Lord was undoubtedly referring to them when He said: And everyone that hath left house or brethren or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands for my name’s sake shall receive an hundredfold and shall possess life everlasting.59 To whom did Truth say this? The apostles, of course, who were the most true and perfect monks, because not only did they give up what they had, but they also completely rejected the will to possess, and henceforward hoped to acquire nothing but Christ. No one can rightly deny therefore that whoever is conscientious in following in the footsteps of the apostles as much as he can is a monk. For not all come to Christ by the same path. Just as different mansions are prepared for those doing well,

56 57 58 59

Benedict, Regula, 55. Col. 3.3. Cf. Vita s. Mauri, 48, 51 (Acta sanctorum, 3rd ed. [Paris, 1867–94], 20 Jan., 2:330). Matt. 19.29.

58

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

sic diuerse uie eundi ad Christumff.60 Si quis igitur uitam apostolorum ut iam diximus imitari studet uoluntate, specie et actione, quis neget eum esse monachum, quamuis adhuc aliquid perfectionis desit? Quod credendum est in apostolis et apostolicis uiris fuisse. Quam perfectionem tercia donatio perficit et adimplet, de qua quantum dominus donauerit breuiter dicere cupimus. Tercia donatio est cum quis suam uoluntatem ex toto deser(i)t et denegat sibi, et uice dei alicui mortali homini (se) ita subdit, sicut dicit psalmographus: Vt iumentum factus sum apud te.61 Hic talis secundum domini iussum crucem suam baiulatgg.62 Crux dicitur a cruciatu. Cum igitur quis ita se ipsum offert abnegans semetipsum id est omnem sui ipsius potestatem, immo propriam uoluntatem Christo eiusque uicariis tribuens, crucifixus recte dicitur. Cruci enim quis a(f)fixus, potestatem sui non habet, nec secundum suam uoluntatem se mouere potest. Sic et monachus. Sed oportet ut ille qui sic baiulat crucem Christi perficiat hoc quod ueritas adiunxit. Et quid ueritas adiunxit? Non ueni uoluntatem meam facere, sed eius qui misit me.63 Et quid est sequi Christum nisi imitari illum?64 Et quis est qui eum imitatur? Qui facit quod dixit et opere adimpleuit. Et quid dixit? Non ueni uoluntatem meam facere, sed eius qui misit me. Et quomodo hoc adimpleuit? Apostolum audi: Factus est obediens usque ad mortem, mortem autem crucis.65 Et ipse in passione ad patrem: Pater, si possibile est t c i a me. Sed non quod e u sed quod tu.66 Et apostolus Petrus aperte ostendit qui(d) sit sequi Christum cum dixit: Christus passus est pro nobishh uobis relinquens exemplum ut sequamini u e.67 Quomodo? Peccatum non fecit, nec inuentus est dolus in ore eius. Qui cum malediceretur, non maledicebat,68 et reliqua. Qui igitur hanc sui ipsius donationem ita deo offert ut inde cartam signatam faciat eamque coram testibus deo super ipsius altare legat et offerat,

ff ad Christum eundi ante corr. gg baiululat ante corr. hh uobis MS.

The Professions of Monks

59

so there are different ways of coming to Christ.60 If therefore anyone strives to imitate the life of the apostles, as we have said, in will, thought, and deed, who will deny that he is a monk, even though as yet there is something of perfection lacking? We must believe this was the case with the apostles and apostolic men. The third gift completed and fulfilled this perfection, and we desire briefly to speak about how much the Lord will give. The third gift comes when someone totally forsakes his own will and denies himself, subjecting himself to some mortal man in place of God in such a way that, as the Psalmist says: I am become as a beast before thee.61 Such a man takes up his cross according to the Lord’s command.62 Cross refers to crucifixion. When therefore someone so offers himself, denying himself, that is all his own powers, indeed his own will, for Christ, submitting to his vicars, he is rightly said to be crucified. For fixed to a cross, he does not have his own power, nor can he move in accordance with his own will. Such is the monk. But it is proper that he who takes up Christ’s cross in this way should accomplish what Truth has added. And what has Truth added? I have not come to do my will, but his Who sent me,63 and what is it to follow Christ if not to imitate Him.64 And who is it who imitates Him? Whoever does what He has said and has carried out his work. And what did He say? I have not come to do my will, but his Who sent me. And how did He carry it out? Hear the Apostle: Becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross.65 And in his passion He Himself said to his Father: My Father if it be possible let this chalice pass from Me. But not what I will but what Thou wilt.66 And the apostle Peter clearly showed what it is to follow Christ when he said: Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example that you should follow his steps.67 How? Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth. Who, when He was reviled, He did not revile,68 and the rest. Whenever therefore a man so offers to God this gift of his very own, that he then draws up his declaration and signs it, and reads it out and presents it to God on his altar before

60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68

Cf. John 14.2. Ps. 72.23. Luke 14.27. John 5.30, 6.38. Augustine, De sancta virginitate, 27 (CSEL, 41:264). Phil. 2.8. Matt. 26.39. 1 Peter 2.21. 1 Peter 2.22–3.

60

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

quid plus possit offerri deo et quid firmius non uideo. Plus quippe nemo potest dare, quam sua omnia et se ipsum totum. Cum aliquis homo alicui alii homini dat aliquam rem et eandem rem sub testimonio hominum illi tradit, non debet nec potest ille qui rem dederatii iterum repetere. Si uero fecerit, ille cui data est ut rem propriam uindicare et defendere debet et potest. Si autem de ipsa datione ei cui dedit donum fecerit scriptum et subscriptione firmauerit, ad hoc tantummodo ualet subscriptio ut firmiter maneat quod dedit, non quod ipsa datio per hoc augeatur. Sic et in monachili ordine. Cum enim monachus in scrutinio se dat deo, et ipsam donationem id est se ipsum in benedictione et in perceptione sancti (h)abitus tradit deo, quicquid amplius facit non est nisi confirmatio eiusdem dationis. Subscriptio enim professionis ideo monachis constituta est, ut stabiles suo sint in loco, et de stabilitate conseruanda signum faciant, ut si forte de mutabilitate presumpserint illud eis opponatur. (H)ac ratione iubet institutor sanctae regulae ut ipsa subscriptio in monasterio conseruetur,69 ut si forte discedere uoluerit (eis) uel fecerit, pactum quod cum deo iniit ei anteponatur, ut sciat quem irridet illum dampnaturum nisi resipuerit. Seu etiam ut ille qui ei uice dei preest si uoluerit coercere eum possit et quasi rem propriam non que illius sit retinere sibique immo deo cui rem propriam uult auferre summitti districtis coercicionibus. Nanque hec subscriptio non efficit monachum sed potius uincit, quoniam sine tali subscriptione monachus esse potest. Sed tali uinculo, tali conexione, patres decreuere homines colligare, quoniam non ignorabant eos mutabiles. Talis subscriptio non officit monachico ordini immo proficit nimium, nec malum aliquod inde potest oboriri. Quod igitur non nocet immo iuuat, nequaquam pretermittendum est. Tamen non est dampnabile si aliquando pretermittatur quia non est ex canonica auctoritate tradita sed ex traditione hominum, quanuis multum necessaria ordini monachico. Nam ex quo feruor monachilis ordinis cepit tepescere, nulla res sic restrinxit ipsum ordinem quam hoc uinculum professionis. At si aliquis confirmare uoluerit non posse ullo modo esse monachum nisi qui professionem fecerit, huic econtra pacificis uerbis dicemus. Quid igitur? Monachi non fuerunt sancti patres qui ante sanctum Benedictum fuerunt, et professionem non fecerunt? Monachi non sunt qui ipsam regulam (modo) non obseruant

ii dederat rem ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

61

witnesses – I cannot see what more he could offer to God and what more decisively. For no one can give more than all his goods and his entire self. When a man gives something to another man, and he hands over the same thing to him before witnesses, the man who gave it ought not and cannot ask for it back. If he does so, he to whom it has been given can and should claim and defend it as his own property. If however he to whom the gift was given draws up a document concerning this very gift and confirms it with his signature, the signature ensures only that what was given unquestionably stays there, and does not in itself increase the gift. This also applies in the monastic order. For when a monk gives himself to God in his examination, and hands over to God the same gift, that is himself, in the blessing and the reception of the holy habit, whatever he does in addition is nothing but a confirmation of this same gift. For the signature of the profession was so established, that monks remain stable in their place and make a sign for the preservation of stability, so that if perchance they should presume to change, it can be brought against them. For this reason the institutor of the holy rule ordered that this signature is preserved in the monastery,69 so that if he should by chance wish to leave (them) or does so, the covenant he has entered into with God is placed before him, so that he may know that He Whom he mocks will condemn him unless he comes to his senses. Or even, so that he who is in charge of him in God’s stead can if he wishes coerce him, and, as though the property were not his own to keep but God’s from whom he wishes to carry it off, subject him to summary punishments. For this signature does not make the monk but rather supplements him, since he can be a monk without such a signature. But the fathers decided to bind men together with such a bond, such a tie, since they were not ignorant of their inconstancy. Such a signing does not weaken the monastic order, but indeed advances it greatly, nor can any ill arise from it. Therefore it does no harm but rather helps, and should certainly not be omitted. However it is not to be condemned because it is sometimes omitted, since it has not been handed down by canonical authority but by men’s custom, though very necessary for the monastic order. For since the fervor of the monastic order began to cool nothing has so buttressed this order as much as this bond of profession. But if anyone should wish to confirm that it is not possible in any way to be a monk unless he makes a profession, we shall counter him with peaceful words. What then? Were not the holy fathers who lived before St Benedict and who made no profession monks? Are not those monks who do not observe

69 Benedict, Regula, 58.29.

62

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

sed adhuc antiqua statuta retinent sicut sunt Greci et Egyptii et Armenii, et multi alii et etiam in latinitate plurimi? Vere profitendum est quod ueri et perfecti monachi fuerunt et sunt. Et ut ad nos ueniamus quid de pueris dicent, qui uoto parentum offeruntur et infra annos sancto habitu induuntur et benedicuntur et monachi apellantur et sub tanta custodia atque disciplina nutriuntur ut illicitum sit eis facere aliquid et (si) fecerint non impune pretermittitur? Isti tales quia prescriptam professionem usque ad annos intelligibiles non faciunt et ab eis non requiritur, nam ita ordo et ratio expostulat, monachi non sunt? O quam perdita uita, si uitam monachilem in omnibus et per omnia custodiunt, et monachi non sunt propter hoc solummodo, quia nondum subscripserunt? Monachi non sunt qui periculo mortis requirunt et accipiunt toto desiderio monachilem (h)abitum? Nimium deluduntur, cum ad istam religionem quasi ad portum uel ad munitum asilum contra infestationem immundorum spirituum (ad) acies refugiunt, et in hoc portu atque munitissimo et firmissimo asilo sperant saluari, si hoc non est uerum propter hocjj quia non subscribunt? Sedkk absit hoc a mentibus fidelium. Tanta enim in hoc sacro ordine creditur et speratur inesse sanctitas et purificatio, ut qui solummodo (h)abitum monachilem fideli mente assumpserit, si penituerit et confessus fuerit peccata sua absque ulla dubietate monachus esse certissime credatur. Si est qui deneget monachum non posse esse nisi qui subscripserit, uideat et perspiciat qui hoc dicit quam magnum honorem aufert huic sacro ordini, et quam magnam spem ueniae tollit peccatoribus. Nanque precipuum et maximum adiutorium et refugium aufert omnibus ordinibus. Nam ad istu(d)ll adiutorium atque refugium currunt non solum pauperes, mediocresmm et non litterati, sed etiam duces, tyranni et nimium litterati. Quin immo summae aecclesiasticae persone non solum in morte ad hunc portum salutis currunt, sed etiam in uita ad eum peruolant et quasi singulari lorica se muniunt, credentes et sperantes qu(od) qui illam fideli mente induerint, mortali uulnere eos nequaquam occidere uel uulnerare inimicus nul(lus) poterit. Qui dicit non posse esse monachum nisi qui subscripserit, tale est aut si dicat non potest esse quis christianus nisi qui crisma in capite et inter scapulasnn perunctus fuerit, uel albis indutus uel candelam in manu non tenuerit. O quam multi in caelesti gloria sunt martyres coronati, et quam multi uerissimi christiani saluati qui nunquam in baptismo ista perceperunt? Hec enim omnia, non sunt (nisi) quedam ornamenta sacri baptismatis. Nam absque is omnibus, potest esse quis fidelis christianus.

jj propter hoc in marg. kk Sed in marg. ll istum ante corr. mm mediocri ante corr. nn scapulas in marg.

The Professions of Monks

63

the same rule now, but up till now retain the ancient statutes, as do the Greeks and Egyptians and Armenians, and many others, and even many in the Latin world? It must be acknowledged that they were and are true and perfect monks. And to speak of ourselves, what will they say about the boys who are offered, by a vow of their parents, and are clothed in the holy habit before they are of age, and are blessed and called monks and are reared under such guardianship and discipline, that it would be unlawful for them to do anything and if they did so it would not be passed over without punishment? Are they the kind who are not monks, because they do not make the prescribed profession, and it is not required of them, until they reach the years of understanding, since the order and reason demand it? O what a wasted life, if they observe the monastic life in every way and every respect and are not monks merely because they have not yet subscribed? Are they not monks who, when at risk of dying, seek and accept the monastic habit with deep longing? Are they not extremely deluded if they take refuge in the religious life, as if it were a haven or defended asylum, against an attack of unclean spirits, and in this haven or highly fortified and mighty asylum, hope to be saved, if none of it is true, because they have not subscribed? But heaven preserve the minds of the faithful from this. People believe and hope that so much sanctity and purification belong to this holy order, that whoever simply puts on the monastic habit with a faithful mind, if he does penance and confesses his sins, may surely be thought without doubt to be a monk. If there is anyone who denies flatly that unless he has subscribed no one may be a monk, let him who says this see and ponder how great an honor he is taking away from this holy order and how great a hope of forgiveness he is taking from sinners. For he is depriving all the orders of a special and mighty help and refuge. For to this help and refuge run not only the poor, the middling men, and the illiterate but also dukes, despots, and the highly literate. Why do the highest ecclesiastical personages not only run in death to this haven of salvation, but also fly to it in life and arm themselves as if with a unique breast-plate, believing and hoping that no enemy will in any way be able to kill or injure with a fatal wound those who put it on with a faithful mind. Whoever says it is not possible to be a monk unless he subscribes is the kind who says no one can be a Christian unless he has been anointed on the head with chrism and between the shoulder-blades, or has been clothed in white, or has held a candle in his hand. O how many crowned martyrs there are in the glory of heaven and how many of the truest Christians have been saved who never experienced these things in baptism? For all of them are nothing but the ornaments of holy baptism. And without any of them a man may be a faithful Christian.

64

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

Nam cum dominus discipulos suos misisset per uniuersum mundum, non dixit: ite baptizate, inunguite, inalbate, candelas in manibus ponite, sed tantum: ite docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti, docentes eos seruare omnia quecunque mandaui uohis.70 Non ista dicimus quasi pro magno non (h)abeamus quod apostoli et apostolici uiri statuerunt. Absit hoc ab animo christiano. Non enim solummodo laudamus sed etiam ueneramuroo et amplectimus quod sancti statuerunt in sacramentis aecclesiae. Quicquid enim in aecclesia (pene) agitur, aut sacramentum est au figura alicuius sacramenti. Sed ideo ista proposu(i)mus, quia sunt multi qui sibimet uidentur scioli et ideo multo aliter sentiunt de pluribus rebus quam oporteret. Non enim ut (ad) rem redeam in subscriptione est perfectio, sed in adimpletionepp subscriptionis. Nam siue subscribat siue non subscribat, si inplere studuerit quod ordo monachicus expostulatqq, monachus pro certo erit. Et que (est) impletiorr professionis? Ipse dominus qui est uera perfectio nobis ostendit paucis uerbis, cum dixit: Qui uult post me uenire, abneget semetipsum et tollat crucem suam et sequatur me.71 Quid breuius, quid perfectius? Paucissima uerba sunt sed ponderosa et grauissima ad adimplendum, de quibus iam superius plura diximus, et ad(h)uc pauca dicere uolumus, quia in (h)is est summa monasticae religionis. Quid nanque est grauius, quam abneg(a)re semetipsum? Et quid est abnegare semetipsum, nisi suam propriam uoluntatem omnino deserere et sibimet ex toto denegare? Semetipsum sibimet abnegat, qui suam uoluntatem omnino deserit et supponit deo immo homini propter deum. Cum factus est primus homo, a deo factus est beatus et in corpore et in anima. Summa uero beatitudo illius post dei uisionem fuit, ut esset quicquid uellet sine ulla contradictione. Nil autem erat contra eius uoluntatem, quia nichil uolebat contra dei uoluntatem. At cum peccauit et contra dei uoluntatem fecit, perdidit illam beatitudinem partim in anima ex toto uero in corpore ex quo peccauerat. Voluntas uero ita ei remansit libera, ut nisi ipse sibi eam tollat, nullus ei auferre possit. Omnia igitur potest uelle sed adimplere non potest, quia corpus quod corrumpitur a(g)grauat animam, et deprimit sensum multa cogitantem.72 Et hec est magna miseria de qua apostolus

oo ueneramus ante corr. pp adimplectione ante corr. qq quod … expostulat in marg. rr implectio ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

65

For when the Lord sent his disciples throughout the world he did not say: Go and baptize, anoint, dress in albs, put candles in men’s hands, but only: Go teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.70 We do not say these things as though we considered what the apostles and their successors laid down unimportant. Heaven preserve all Christian souls from such a thought. For we not only praise but even venerate and embrace what the saints have established in the sacraments of the church. For almost everything that is done in the church is either a sacrament or the image of some sacrament. But we have presented these things in this way, because there are many who consider themselves knowledgeable, and so have opinions about many subjects, which diverge greatly from what is seemly. For to return to the subject, perfection is not in the signature but in the fulfilling of the signature. For whether he subscribes or does not, if he strives to fulfill what the monastic order demands he will certainly be a monk. And what is the fulfillment of the profession? The Lord himself Who is true perfection showed us in a few words, when He said: If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me.71 What could be shorter, what more perfect? They are the briefest of words, but weighty and most serious in the fulfillment, and we have said much about them above and still wish to say a few things more because in them is the essence of the monastic life. For what is more serious than to deny oneself? And what is denying oneself unless it is to forsake one’s own will entirely and renounce oneself completely? He who utterly forsakes his own will and submits to God, nay to man for God’s sake, denies his own self. When the first man was made he was made by God blessed both in body and soul. The height of his true blessedness after the sight of God was that he was whatever he wanted to be without any contradiction. Nothing was against his will because he wanted nothing against the will of God. But when he had sinned and acted against God’s will he lost that blessedness partly in his soul and totally in his body, the cause of his sin. His will remained free, however, so that unless he himself took it away no one could take it from him. Therefore he could will everything but could not carry it out because the corruptible body is a load upon the soul and presseth down the mind that museth on many things.72 And this is the great wretchedness of which the Apostle

70 Matt. 28.19–20. 71 Matt. 16.24. 72 Wisd. 9.15.

66

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

alio loco dicit: Velle adiacet mihi, perficere autem non inuenio.73 Et propter hoc exclamat: miser ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius?74 Id est quis me ad illam beatitudinem in qua conditus fuiss reformabit? Statimque ipse ostendit quis: Gratia dei per Iesum Christum dominum nostrum75 id est Christus per suam mortem, non merito meo sed gratuito suo dono. Et hoc est quod dominus dicit, ut si quis uult post eum uenire id est ad illam beatitudinem que ipse est, abneget semetipsum id est quod suum est proprium, scilicet propriam uoluntatem. Et quomodo quis abnegat semetipsum id est suam propriam uoluntatem? Cum ita se subdit alicui mortali homini propter deum, ut nil suo arbitrio ultra uelit facere. Hec est enim perfectio quam requirit monachica professio ut nullam omnino rem faciat propria uoluntate sed alterius iudicio id est non stet, non sedeat, non ambulet, non manducet, non uigilet, non dormiat, nisi alterius arbitrio et ordinatione. De istis communibus rebus cur hoc dicimus, cum nec etiam aliquod bonum ipsa perfectio requirat ut ille qui ita se dat deo faciat nisi uoluntate et permissu illius cui uice dei se summisit quod mirum uidetur et contrarium rationi aliquibus, sed non est. Multi nanque sunt qui non facile discernere preualent sua opera teste Salomone qui dixit: Sunt uie que uidentur hominibus recte, quarum finis usque ad profundum inferni demergittt.76 Et ideo quia sunt multi qui inter dexteram et sinistram pleniter nesciunt discernere nec regiam uiam tenere sed per uiam latam et tortuosam incedunt, ita ut quodcumque eos desideriorum duxerit pes, mox assensu secuntur, non recordantes quia mors secus introitum delectationis posita est. Sed ii qui(bus) ad uitam aeternam ambulandi amor incumbit, istam latam uiam deserunt et angustam arripiunt id est non suo arbitrio uiuere cupiunt, uel desideriis et uoluptatibus suis obedire uolunt, sed semetipsos subdunt alieno iudicio et imperio, dominum imitari cupientes qui dixit: Non ueni uoluntatem facere, sed eius qui misit me.77 Ii igitur de anime salute solliciti sunt. Quia siue bene siue male pastor iubeat, et exerceat, illum tangit in discussionis iudicio rationem reddere,78 qui imperat, non qui imperata perficit,

ss me del. MS. tt demergitur ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

67

speaks in another place: For to will is present with me: but to accomplish that which is good I find not,73 and because of this he cries out: Unhappy man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death?74 That is, who will remake me in that blessedness in which I was made? And immediately he tells us ‘who’: The grace of God by Jesus Christ our Lord,75 that is Christ by his death, not through my merit, but his gratuitous gift. And this is what the Lord says, if anyone wishes to come after Him, that is to the blessedness which He is, let him deny himself, that is, what is his own, his own will. And how does a man deny himself, that is, his own will? When he so subordinates himself to any mortal man for God’s sake, in such a way that he does not wish to do anything further by his own decision. This is the perfection that the monastic profession requires, that he should do nothing of his own volition but by another’s judgment, that is, he should not stand, or sit, or walk, or eat, or wake, or sleep but by another’s judgment and command. Why do we say this about our common affairs, when this very perfection does not even expect any good, so that he who thus gives himself to God acts only by the will and permission of him to whom he has submitted himself in God’s place? This seems surprising and against reason to some, but it is not. For there are many who are not capable of discriminating among their actions; witness Solomon, who said: There are ways which seem just to a man, and the ends thereof lead to death.76 And because of this there are many who do not know how to distinguish fully between left and right, nor how to keep to the royal road, but take the broad and winding road, so that to whatever of their desires their feet may lead them, they soon follow approvingly, not remembering that death has been stationed close by the entry to pleasure. But those whom love impels to reach eternal life forsake that broad road and make for the narrow one, that is, they do not long to live by their own judgment or wish to follow their own desires and pleasures, but subject themselves to another’s judgment and authority, desiring to imitate the Lord, Who said: I have not come to do my own will, but the will of Him that sent Me.77 They then are concerned for the salvation of their souls. Because a pastor gives orders well or badly and directs his charges, it behooves him who gives the orders, not him who fulfills them, to offer a reason in the judgment of discussion,78

73 74 75 76 77 78

Rom. 7.18. Rom. 7.24. Rom. 7.25. Prov. 14.12, 16.25; Isa. 7.11; Luke 10.15. John 5.30, 6.38. Benedict, Regula, 2.32, 37, 38, etc.

68

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

tantum non sit peccatum. De illis enim de quibus certum est quod qui fecerit iudicium non euadet, nullo modo obedire oportet. Ceterum uero, per omnia obedire oportet. Et si aliquando fallitur ueniale erit. Defendit enim subditum a timore iudicii, quod examinauerit iudicantis censura. Nam cui alieni ponderis imponitur moles, totum portat quod suscipit. Maius nanque periculum iudicantis est quam eius qui iudicatur. Scriptum est enim: Iudicium durum, super is qui present.79 Quicumque ergo semper interrogat et quod iussum fuerit serua(t)uu, nonquam errabit. Et si errauerit alterius iudicio, fides credentis et labor obedientiae non errabunt neque mercede carebunt. Ex altera parte cum quis subditus per se uult aliquid facere boni et non examinatione magistri, in hoc ipso coram deo arguitur culpe quod iudicare presumpsit qui alieno iudicio cuncta agere disposuerat, nam etiam si rectum fuerit prauum illi deputabitur, sicut institutor sanctae regulae in sententia de quadragesime obseruatione aperte demonstrat. Sed hec uia arta et angusta80 est pluribus et maxime qui propria desideria adimplere uolunt, et non quod uolunt perficere possunt, sed alieno iudicio iugum domini tra(h)entes quo (ire) dele(c)tationibus suis uoluerint denegatur, et quod animus illorum obtaret ab (h)is omnimodis subtraturvv. Sed non debet desperare qui in tali carcere se posuit propter deum. Scriptum est enim: Voluntas (h)abet penam, et necessitas parit coronam.81 Dicet aliquis: Mercedem non exspecto de inuito operae bono. R: Mercedem exspectare potes, tantum non consentias peccato. Tria sunt in homine: ratio, uoluntas et appetitus. Dum seruit uoluntas rationi, quanuis appetitus doleat, uiuit homo spiritualiterww. At cum appetitus superat rationemxx, et hoc con(tra) se animaliter uiuit. Nulla igitur desperatio inesse debet (h)is qui non uoluntate peccant, quia fidelis est qui repromisit. Et quid repromisit? Quicunque perdiderit animam suam propter me, inueniet eam.82 Ille quippe animam suam id est uitam suam perdere uidetur, qui quasi pro nichilo uiuit, et uidetur quasi non esse, hoc stultis uidetur, sed desipiunt cum hoc putant. Neque enim ut beatus Augustinus dicit utiliter in tempore uiuit,

uu seruauerit ante corr. vv subtrauntur ante corr. ww hic ras. ca. 4 litt. xx rationi ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

69

provided it is not a sinful one. For concerning those about which it is certain that whoever does it will not escape judgment, it is not fitting in any way to obey. Otherwise indeed one must be obedient in everything. And if sometimes he is mistaken he will be forgiven. He defends those under him from the fear of the judiciary, which will examine with the censure of a judge. For whoever has had imposed on him the weight of another’s burden must carry all he takes up. The danger to the judge is greater than to the accused, for it is written: A hard judgment shall be on them that bear rule.79 Whoever therefore always calls someone to account and upholds the sentence will never err. And if he does, the judgment of another, the faith of the believer, and the work of obedience will not err, nor shall they be without their reward. On the other hand, when a subordinate wishes to do good on his own, and not because of his master’s scrutiny, he will incur guilt before God for this in itself, because he who has arranged to do all things by another’s judgment has presumed to judge, and even if he is right he will be considered in the wrong, as the institutor of the holy Rule clearly shows in his remarks on the observation of Lent. For this way strait and narrow80 is for many, and especially those who wish to fulfill their own desires, and cannot achieve what they want, but bear the Lord’s yoke by another’s judgment and are refused permission to go where they wish in pursuit of their desires, so that what their spirit wanted is taken from them completely. But whoever has placed himself in such bondage for God’s sake should not despair, for it is written: The will has its punishment, and necessity confers a crown.81 Someone may say: I do not look for a reward for good work done reluctantly. I reply: You can look for a reward, so long as you do not consent to sin. There are three capacities in men: reason, will, and appetite. When the will serves reason, even though the appetite suffers, a man lives spiritually. But when the appetite overcomes reason, even against himself, he lives like an animal. So there should be no despair in those who sin unwillingly, for he is faithful who binds himself. And what binds him? Whoever shall lose his life for my sake shall find it.82 Certainly he seems to lose his soul, that is his life, who lives as if for nothing, and he appears not to be this to the foolish, but they are foolish who believe this. For the blessed Augustine says: he does not live

79 80 81 82

Wisd. 6.6. Matt. 7.14; cf. Benedict, Regula, 5.11. Benedict, Regula, 7.33 (Uoluptas pro Uoluntas). Matt. 16.25.

70

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

nisi ad comparandum meritum quo in eternitate uiuatur.83 Qui ita perdit animam suam, in uitam eternam inueniet eam, cum id ei a domino dabitur, quod oculus non uidit, nec auris audiuit, nec in cor hominis ascendit.84 Pro hoc non debet desperare aliquis si cum tedio et quasi per uim agit bonum quia scriptum est: Regnum celorum uim patitur et uiolenti diripiunt illud.85 Deus enim prenoscens infirmitates hominum propiciator est humanae fragilitati. Non enim ultra quam ferre potest sinit quenquam temptari,86 nec reputat dampnabile quicquid appetitus carnis in homine commouet, tantum ratio per consensum operationis non superetur atque subciaturyy. De hoc enim ita dicit apostolus Paulus: Nichil dampnationis est is qui in Christo sunt qui non secundum carnem ambulant.87 Nunc opitulante domino de scrutinio aliquid dicamus. Sunt enim multi qui non solum illud pretermittunt propter subscriptionem, sed etiam nesciunt quid sit et quomodo agi debeat. Siue enim subscribatur ut iam superius diximus siue non subscribatur semper ante benedictionem scrutinium est peragendum. Nam sine scrutinio aliquis sacer ordo in aecclesia non recte peragitur. Cum benedici petierit qui benedicendus est, coram omnibus ab illo qui preest predicentur ei omnia dura et aspera quod monachilis ordo et disciplina in se continet id est asperitatem ordinis, difficultatem obedientiae et insuper abrenuntiationem proprie uoluntatis, secundum institutionem sanctae regule. Et cum hec ostensa ei fuerint, dicatur ei: Ecce lex, sub qua militare uis. Si potes obseruare, ingredere. Si uero non potes, liber discede. At ille si promiserit se omnia custodire, singillatim hec .iiiior. interrogentur ab illo. Vis esse monachus? R: Volo. Vis esse perseuerans et subiectus huic aecclesiae? R: Volo. Vis mutare mores tuos de malo ad bonum? R: Volo. Vis esse obediens abbati et prepositis tuis secundum instituta regule? R: Volo. Et ille qui preest: dominus uerus pastor adiungat te suis ouibus, et omnes sancti suorum consortio. Et r omnes: amen.88 Hoc est scrutinium.

yy ras. ca. 3 litt. in sub … ciatur

The Professions of Monks

71

usefully in time unless in acquiring the merit by which he shall live in eternity.83 Whoever so loses his soul, will find it in eternal life, when it shall be given to him by God, that eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man.84 No one should despair over this if he does good through weariness and, as it were, by violence, because it is written: The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence and the violent bear it away.85 For God, foreknowing men’s weaknesses, propitiates human frailty and He does not permit anyone to be tempted beyond what he can bear,86 nor does He consider damnable whatever the carnal appetite arouses in a man so long as reason is not, by consenting to the deed, overcome and subordinated. Of this the apostle Paul says: There is now no condemnation in them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh.87 Now with God’s help we shall say something of the examination. There are many who not only omit this because of the subscription, but even are ignorant of what it is and how it should be done. Either the subscription is carried out as we have said above, or it is not always done before the blessing (and) examination are carried out. For without an examination any holy order in the church is not correctly carried out. When he who is to be blessed asks to be blessed, he is warned by the superior in everyone’s presence of all the hard and bitter elements the monastic order and discipline contain, that is, the harshness of the order, the difficulty of obedience, and above all the renunciation of one’s own will, according to the institution of the holy Rule. And when they have been explained to him, it will be said to him: Behold the law under which you wish to do your service. If you can observe it, enter. If you cannot, depart freely. But if he promises to observe them all, these four questions are to be put to him separately: Do you wish to be a monk? Let him reply: I do. Do you wish to be persevering and subject to this church? Let him reply: I do. Do you wish to change your morals from bad to good? Let him reply: I do. Do you wish to be obedient to the abbot and those set over you according to the institutions of the Rule. Let him reply: I do. And the superior says: May the Lord the true Shepherd join you to his sheep and all the saints to their fellowship. And let all reply: Amen.88 That is the examination.

83 84 85 86 87 88

Augustine, Epistolae, 130.7 (CSEL, 44:55) (uiuitur pro uiuit). 1 Cor. 2.9. Matt. 11.12. Cf. 1 Cor. 10.13. Rom. 8.1. Benedict, Regula, 11.10.

72

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

Deinde ad missam post euangelium sicut moris est benedicatur et communicetur, et sit in silentio tribus diebus. Si uero in infirmitate positus sanctum (h)abitum pecierit, si uxoratus est coram testibus dimittant se inuicem. Nullus quippe neque sanus neque infirmus ante debet accipere tonsuram et habitum monachilem quam si uxoratus est utrorumque consensu ab inuicem separentur. De hoc (h)abemus multas auctoritates, quas supersedimus hic ponere propter prolixitatem et tedium legentium. Hoc peracto, si tunc eum benedici uolueri(n)t timore mortis, dicat qui eum benedicturuszz est: Vis esse monachus? R s(i) potest loqui et si non potest, parentes et amici eius pro eo: Volo. Vis perseuerare in hoc sacro ordine quod petis? R: Volo. Vis esse obediens huic aecclesiae et abbati et prepositis illius? R: Volo et cupio. At ille: Et nos in nomine domini sacrum habitum quemaaa petis (h)ac pactione tibi damus. Tunc primum faciat eum clericum sicut ordo expostulat, ut sit quod sonat. Clericos hinc appellatos dicuntbbb, quia Mathias sorte electus est, quem primum per apostolos legimus ordinatum. Cleros enim grece, sors uel (h)aereditas dicitur latine. Propterea ergo dicti clerici, quia de sorte domini, uel quia (eum) partem (h)abent. Generaliter autem clerici nuncupantur omnes qui in aecclesia Christi deseruiunt, quorum .vii. sunt gradus.89 Quo peracto, benedicat eum ita incipiens: Suscipe me domine s e t et u, et non c m a mea,90 et cetera que secuntur, si exitus mortis non coegerit ut aliquid de institutis orationibus dimittaturccc. Si ad sanitatem redierit, que acta dictaue fuerunt non repetantur. Que uero acta non sunt, perficiantur. Hic idem modusddd, seruetur in pueris. Istis breuiter demonstratiseee, modo si placet inspicere studeamus quid sit quod promittit (monachus) et in scrutinio et in professione. Et quid promittit? Stabilitatem, morum conuersionem et obedientiam. Quomodo promittit? Ego frater N. promitto stabilitatem meam et conuersionem morum meorum, et obedientiam secundum regulam sancti Benedicti coram deo et sanctis eius in hoc monasterio quod est constructum in honorem sancti N. in presentia donni N. abbatis.91 Cum aliquis hoc audit et singula (hec) diligenter inspicit ac deinde cui (et ubi) et

zz benedicendus ante corr. aaa quod ante corr. bbb dicuntur ante corr. ccc dimittantur MS. ddd Hunc eundem modum ante corr. eee Ista breuiter demonstrata ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

73

Then during the Mass after the gospel, as is the custom, let him be blessed and take communion, and remain silent for three days. If however he is sick, let him ask for the holy habit; if he is married, let them both divorce each other in the presence of witnesses. If married, no one, either healthy or sick, may accept the tonsure and the monastic habit before he has separated from the other by mutual consent. For this we have many authorities, which we shall pass over here because of their prolixity and the irksomeness of having to read through them. That done, if they wish to bless him because they fear death is near, let him who is to perform the blessing say: Do you wish to be a monk? Let him reply if he can speak, and if he cannot, let his relations and friends say for him: I do. Do you wish to persist in this sacred order that you seek? Let him reply: I do. Do you wish to be obedient to this church and the abbot and those set above you? Let him reply: I wish and desire to. And he says: In the name of the Lord we give you by this compact the holy habit you seek. Not until then may he be made a cleric as the order requires, so that he may be as he says he is. They say they are called clerics, because Matthew, who we read was first ordained by the apostles, was chosen by lot. For cleros means ‘lot’ in Greek, and is called ‘portion’ in Latin. For this reason therefore they are called ‘clerics’ because chosen by the Lord’s lot, or because they have this portion. Generally however all those who serve in Christ’s church are called clerics and they are divided into seven grades.89 Which done, let him bless him, beginning thus: Uphold me Lord according to thy word, and I shall live, and let me not be confounded in my expectation,90 and the rest which follows, if the onset of death has not made it necessary to omit certain of the established prayers. If he returns to health, whatever has been done or said should not be repeated. Whatever has not been done should be completed. The same should be observed in the case of boys. Now that these matters have been dealt with briefly, let us consider, if it seems appropriate, what it is that the monk promises, both in the examination and the profession. And what does he promise? Stability, a conversion of morals, and obedience. How does he promise them? I brother N. promise stability and a conversion of my morals, and obedience according to the Rule of St Benedict before God and his saints in this monastery, built in honor of St N. in the presence of lord N. the abbot.91 When anyone hears this, and examines it carefully in detail, and then considers to whom and where and

89 Isidore, Etymologiae, 7.12.1. 90 Ps. 118.116. 91 Benedict, Regula, 58.17–18.

74

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

sub quorum testimonio, contremi(s)cit et obstupescit et dicit intra se: Durus est hic sermo,92 dura et difficilis hec promissio. Et quis adimplere eam fideliter potest? Arta et angusta uia (est) quae ducit ad uitam.93 Respondemus: Non negamus, difficilem rem quantum ad humanum respectum promittit qui ista promittit. Vere arta et angusta est uia quae ducit ad uitam.94 Sed tamen sicut dominus dicit de diuitibus quod impossibile uidetur hominibus, deo est facile.95 Ipse enim est potens in omnibus, et per omnia, et quos uult facit potentes in omnibus quae precipit. Videa(mus) nunc singula.

romitto stabilitatem meam. Cum hoc dicit, promittit nullofff modo se iturum quoquam, absque licentia sui maioris, nec locum mutaturum pro qualibet causa propria uoluntate, sed usque ad finem ibi permansurum. Magnam promissionem, et multis difficilem. Qui hoc promittit, in magno carcere propter deum se ponit. Sed sunt multi, et uere multi qui cum hoc promittunt, nesciunt quod promittunt. Nam si scirent, non promitterent. Nam carcer est hec promissio multis non omnibus. Nam quibus deus facit asperas uias (esse) planas,96 sicut dat camelo transire per foramen acus97 id est diuitemggg seculi ad gaudia (peruenire) perpetua, sic et istis. Multi quippe uocati, sed pauci electi.98 Multi quidem fuerunt sancti magni nominis sicut legimus et multos nouimus qui magnam opinionem inter alios homines habebant sanctitatis, qui hanc uirtutem stabilitatis quanuis promisi(s)sent, minime obseruare potuerunt. Semper enim de loco in locum pergunt, nec uspiam sunt stabiles. Et quod plus mirandum, hoc ipsum quod faciunt, absque ulla offensa se facere existimant. Videant quid faciunt, non est meum illos iudicare. Veniet et cotidie uenit qui de occultis iudicat et iudicabit, ad illos ueniamus quibus deus facit carcerem paradysum uoluptatis. Qui hanc promissionem uult adimplere, oportet ut omnino animum apponat ut locum in quo stabilitatem promisit diligat, et quasi maternum gremium amplectatur, et cum propheta ore et

fff Cum … nullo in marg. ggg hic ras. ca. 15 litt.

The Professions of Monks

75

under whose testimony, he begins to tremble and is struck dumb, and says to himself: This saying is hard;92 hard and difficult is this promise. And who can fulfill it faithfully? Strait and narrow is the way that leadeth to life.93 We reply: We do not deny that whoever makes those promises, promises a difficult matter with respect to human regard. Truly strait and narrow is the way that leadeth to life.94 However as the Lord says of the rich, what seems impossible to men is easy for God.95 For He is powerful in all things and through all things, and those things He wishes he makes powerful in all that He orders. Let us look at them in turn. I promise stability. When he says this he promises that he will not go anywhere without the permission of his superior, nor will he change his abode for any cause whatever of his own volition, but will stay there till the end. A big promise and difficult for many people. Who promises this confines himself in a great prison for God’s sake. But there are many, indeed many, who promise this without realising what they are promising. And if they knew they would not promise. This promise is a prison for many, though not all. For those for whom God makes the rough ways plain,96 just as He makes the camel pass through the eye of a needle,97 that is, the rich man of the world pass to perpetual joy, so does He work for these. For many are called but few are chosen.98 Indeed, as we read, many were saints of great renown, and we know of many who had a great reputation for sanctity among other men but who, though they had promised this virtue of stability, were able to practise it but little. They always kept moving from one place to another and never stayed anywhere. And, what is more surprising, they considered what they did was without any culpability. Let them see what they do: it is not for me to judge them. He who judges and will judge what is hidden will come and does come every day. But let us come to those for whom God turns a prison into a paradise of pleasure. Whoever wishes to fulfill that promise should properly apply his mind entirely so that he loves the place where he promised stability and embraces it like a loving mother, and always says in the words of the prophet with his lips and his

92 93 94 95 96 97 98

John 6.61. Matt. 7.14. Matt. 7.14. Cf. Matt. 19.26. Isa. 40.4; Luke 3.5. Matt. 19.24. Matt. 22.14, 20.16.

76

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

corde semper dicat: Hec requies mea in seculum seculi, hic (h)abitabo quoniam elegi eam.99 Deinde opus est illi ut omnino ocium fugiat. Nam homo ociosus, uno loco nullo modo consistere potest et ociositas, inimica est animae.100 Qui enim ociosus est, tedio afficitur. Et qui in tedio est, nullo modo diu locum proprium diligere potest. Et locus non dilectus, quam cicius deseritur. Igitur qui locum proprium non diligit et ab ocio non se precauet, nullo modo hanc pactionem obseruare diu preualet. Hanc stabilitatem intelligere quishhh potest etiam fidelitatem. Sunt enim multi qui stabiles sunt propriis locis corporaliter multis ex causis, sed non sunt fideles suis aecclesiis. Nam aut fraud(at)ores sunt de rebus aecclesiae, aut quod peius fures et sacrilegi. Quid igitur? Fraudator proprie aecclesiae non est fur? Immo sacrilegus dupliciter (quia) et res pauperum aufert et ecclesiam expoliat de re propria. Sunt qui ab (h)is iniquitatibus apertis se custodiunt, sed tamen nil conquirere uolunt suis propriis locis cum possent, sed quod peius palliatis occasionibus quicquid possunt exportant. Et sunt alii qui et hanc nequiciam non faciunt, sed nichil facere per se uolunt uel in aliqua re proficere suis aecclesiis cum nimis prodesse illis possent immo sibi. (H)i omnes quales estimandi sunt? Vere instabiles, quia infideles. Nam si corpore ibi permanent quod uix efficitur, mente tamen et uoluntate per mundum uagantur. Sunt enim multi intus qui sunt foris, et multi forisiii qui intus remanent. Quomodo? Ponamus aliquem qui uix paucis diebus demoret in aecclesia propria, et tamen ubicumque uadit ubicumque est semper cor et animus illius ad profectum suae aecclesiae semper intendit et in(h)eret. Semper de loco in locum pergit et more prudentis apicule et ingeniose semper ubi(cum)que est utilitatem et profectum propriae aecclesiae querit et operatur. Iste talis si a peccatis se custodit et precauet ne per illumjjj aecclesia sua diffametur de aliqua re turpi immo sacer ordo, iste talis stabilitatem propriamkkk bene custodit. Si autem hoc idem fecerit permissu sui pastoris, quid de illo dicendum est nisi quia et stabilis est et obediens? Sequitur: Et conuersionem morum meorum. Arta et angusta uia.101 Hic promittit qui hoc promittit mutationem uitae preterite, ut si fuit superbus deinceps sitlll humilis, si leuis moribus, deinceps maturus, si lubricus, deinceps firmus in bono, si iracundus et inpatiens, deinceps mitis et paciens, si uinolentus et gluto, deinceps sobrius et continens, si cupidus et

hhh -ligere quis in marg. iii foras ante corr. jjj in aliqua re add. et del. MS. kkk ras. ca. 3 litt. lll erit ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

77

heart: this is my rest for ever and ever: here will I dwell for I have chosen it.99 Thereafter it is needful that he flee idleness entirely. For the idle man cannot remain in one place at all, and idleness is the enemy of the soul.100 Whoever is bored cannot love the place where he is for long. And how quickly is an unloved place abandoned. Therefore, whoever does not love his own place and takes no precautions against boredom will certainly not last long in observing this compact. He who can understand this stability can also understand fidelity. For there are many who are physically stable in their own places for several reasons, but are not faithful to their churches. They either cheat the church of its property, or, worse, steal and desecrate it. What does this mean? Is cheating the church of its property not theft? Indeed the desecrator steals twice, because he both takes away what belongs to the poor and plunders the church’s property. There are those who refrain from blatant iniquities and who at any rate do not wish to acquire for their own places even when they could, but, worse, they carry away whatever they can whenever they can do so unnoticed. And there are others who do not commit even this wickedness, but have no desire to do anything themselves, or even profit their churches in any way, when they could do them a great deal of good, and themselves too. How are all of these people to be judged? Unstable truly, because unfaithful. For if they stay bodily where it does little good, in mind and will they wander about the earth. There are many inside who are outside, and many outside who remain inside. How? Let us suppose there is someone who stays scarcely a few days in his own church, and nevertheless, wherever he goes and wherever he is, always directs his heart and mind to the welfare of his church and cleaves to it. He is always going from one place to another and like the prudent and skillful bee always seeks and works for the advantage and welfare of his own church wherever he is. Such a man, if he preserves himself from sin and takes care lest his church, or indeed the holy order, should be defamed through him by any base act, such a man maintains his own stability well. If however he does this with the permission of his pastor, what can one say of him but that he is both stable and obedient? Next comes: And the conversion of my morals. A strait and narrow way.101 Here he promises a change of his past life, such as if he has been proud, he will be humble, if capricious in morals, he will be steadfast, if lewd, he will be strong in the good, if irascible and impatient, he will be meek and patient, if a drunkard and a glutton, he will be sober and controlled, if greedy and

99 Ps. 131.14. 100 Benedict, Regula, 48.1. 101 Matt. 7.14.

78

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

auarus, deinceps largus et amator paupertatis, si deliciosus et scurulus, deinceps uilis et maturus. Sic in ceteris. Sed ad hec quid dicemus? Multi ista promittunt, sed pauci adimplent. Sed beati qui promissa custodieri(n)t. Sed quod peius, multi quod promittunt non solummmm obseruare nolunt, sed etiam ipsam promissionem mutant quantum in ipsis est. Quomodo? Audiat et intelligat qui uult. Sunt multi qui in seculari (h)abitu bene et recte uiuunt. Sed nullus tam bene uiuit, qui melius uiuere non possit, nec ullus ita sanctus qui sanctior esse non possit. Et ideo cum aliquis bonae uitae efficitur monachus, ideo facit quia monachicam uitam sanctiorem estimat ceteris ordinibus sanctitate et perfectione. (Et) qui hoc putat, non errat. Cum uero ad hanc professionem quis peruenit, conuersionem morum suorum promittit de id scilicet quod nondum est, non de id quod est. Si enim fuit castus coniugatus, promittit dehinc perpetuam continentiam. Si deditus elemosinis ex proprio suo, dehinc promittit omnia relinquere non solum que possederat sed etiam se ipsum. Si fuit sobrius et uigilans atque studiosus adnnn audiendum opus dei per spacia temporum, deinceps continuatim et absque intermissione. Si dilexit amicos, deinceps (diligat) et inimicos. Qui igitur illam bonitatem quam habebat in seculo relinquit et peior fit quam erat in seculo, nonne iste mutat uitam suam de bono in malum? Quod exemplis multis possemus ostendere. Sed de multis pauca dicamus que uisu et auditu experti sumus. Multi dum in seculari (h)abitu sunt ita in opere dei sunt studiosi ut nullo modo dies pretereat quo missam non audiant et sepissime duas uel tres. Qui ut sunt tonsorati et manicati atque ut mos est consecrati ita se inertiae conferunt, ut non dicam unus dies sed etiam plu(ri)mi pretereant (eis) absque missa. Isti quid faciuntooo? Nonne hoc quod diximus? Nouimus et alios qui cum in seculo essent os suum a iuramento et maliloquioppp omnimodis custodiebant qui ut burlatam uestem sunt induti econtrario ita iuratores incipiunt esse quasiqqq ipse ordo (h)oc requirat. Et quid de loquacitate et scurilitaterrr dicam, cum melius possint estimari (quidam) confabulatores quam monachi? Sunt alii qui cum in seculo sunt ita se humiliter agunt uerbo habitu et aspectu ut (his) qui illos aspiciunt ad memoriam reducatur ille euangelicus publicanus qui ad celum occulos erigere non audebat sed percutiebat pectus suum dicens: domine propicius esto mihi peccatori.102 Iste talis cum est tonsoratus et preparatus

mmm non solum in marg. nnn aut ante corr. ooo Iste quid facit ante corr. ppp se add. et del. MS. qqq quasi in marg. rrr scrurilitate ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

79

avaricious he will be open-handed and a lover of poverty, if luxurious and abusive, he will be austere and sound. And so on for other qualities. But what can we say to this? Many promise these things, but few fulfill them. But blessed are they who keep their promises. But what is worse, many people not only do not wish to observe what they have promised, but even change the promise itself as far as they can. How? Let him who will listen and understand. There are many who live well and decently in their secular clothes. But no one lives so well that he could not live better, nor is anyone so holy that he could not be holier. And so when anyone of good life is made a monk, it is because he considers the monastic life to be holier than the other orders in sanctity and perfection. And whoever believes that does not err. When anyone attains to this profession he promises a conversion of his morals concerning that which does not yet exist, not concerning that which does. For if he has been a chaste husband he promises perpetual continence henceforth. If devoted to giving alms from his property he promises to relinquish everything, not only of what he possesses, but even himself, henceforth. If he was sober and vigilant and zealous in hearing the office at certain periods, he will hear it continuously and without interruption henceforth. If he has loved his friends, now he will also love his enemies henceforth. Does not he who abandons that good which he had in the world and becomes worse off than he was in the world change his life from good to bad? We could show this by many examples. But we shall speak a little of many which we have experienced with our own eyes and ears. Many while they wear secular clothes are so zealous in God’s work that no day goes by in which they do not hear Mass, and often two or three times. But as soon as they are tonsured and robed and, as the custom is, consecrated, they so abandon themselves to laziness, that not one day but even many days go by without their hearing Mass. What are they doing? Is this not what we were talking about? We know others too who, when they were in the world kept their lips entirely free from oaths and slanders, but who, as soon as they were clothed in the tunic, began on the contrary to be such swearers as if the order itself demanded it. And what shall I say about their garrulity and scurrility, when they could be better characterized as gossips than monks? There are others who when they are in the world behave with such humility in word, dress, and attitude that people looking at them are reminded of that publican in the gospel, who dared not lift up his eyes toward heaven, but struck his breast saying: be merciful to me a sinner.102 Such a man, when tonsured and prepared

102 Luke 18.13.

80

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

quasi ouis ad uictimam, fit non solum aries qui cornibus impetit sed etiam (ut) indomitus taurus qui crassa ceruice incedit, uel ut equus indomabilis qui ungula terram fodit.103 Et qui ante se peccatorem reum et omni uilitate dignum se adclamabat nec dignum aliqua apellatione, post modicum ita se eleuat non solum mente sed etiam operatione ut dedignetursss colloqui et coram assistere nobilibus et honestis uiris et eis pro aliqua causa uix re(d)dere rationem, estque in eo maior su(per)bia cum sit infimo genere quam est in uiris secularibus tyrannica potestate. Sunt et alii qui in seculo nil habuerunt quod computari possit. (H)ii postquam monachi (sunt) nominatittt de beneficiis et oblationibus fidelium se extollunt et diuites fiunt et per hoc in tantam superbiam se eleuant mente et actione, ut mirabile sit non solum dicere sed etiam cogitare. Nam qui ante monachatum uix paruum tugurium (h)abeba(n)t, et uix unum solidum conquirere potera(n)t, postea de elemosinis diuitum fidelium fiunt possessores magnarum possessionum, et adunatores magnarum opum. Qui cum se adunasse multitudinem pecunie auri scilicet et argenti uident, fiunt inde curiales et legatarii regum et principum adquiruntque gratiam principum fauoralibus obsequiis in tantum ut per hoc ad ecclesiasticos (h)onores perueniant. Sunt uero alii qui ad hoc pertendere non possunt, sed tamen quantumcumque possunt luxu et uoracitatibus atque crapula totam uitam suam in hoc expendunt. Sed quid in (h)is diu inmoror? Multi in monasteriis inueniuntur qui extra sunt pannosi et intus portant superbiam tyrannorum. Vultus (h)abent pallidos, et animos plenos inuidiae. Caput specie tenus circulatum, cor spelunca latronum, et omni spurcicia contaminatum. Facies incompta et inculta, caro luxuriosa, demissum supercilium, corpus petulcum, uerba blesa, mens inpudica. Quid igitur de istis omnibus dicam? Nonne omnes (h)i quos commemorauimus mutant uitam suam immo commutuant de bono ad malum, de sanctitate ad iniquitem, de paupertate ad diuicias, de humilitate ad superbiam, immo de amore dei ad amorem seculi? Is omissis, ad terciam promissionem ueniendum est. Sequitur: Et obedientiam secundum regulam sancti Benedicti. De (h)ac .iiia. promissione quae grauior et difficilior est ceteris duabus ad adimplendum, nam in ea pendet omnis perfectio monasticae institutionis iam multa locuti sumus in .iiia. datione nec opus est ut in hoc inmoremuruuu quae iam diximus. Qui pleniter scire cupit que sit obedientia monachi

sss -etur in marg. ttt ita add. et del. MS. uuu inmoremus ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

81

like a sheep for the sacrifice, becomes not only a ram which attacks with his horns, but even like a wild bull which advances with his thick neck, or an unbreakable horse which digs the earth with his hooves.103 And whoever previously used to proclaim himself a guilty sinner and worthy of all contempt and not worth any honor, so elevates himself after a while, not only in his fancy but even in his actions, that he disdains conversation and even standing up in the presence of noble and honest men, and will hardly render them account for any reason, and there is greater pride in him as one of the lowest kind than there is in worldly men with the power of tyrants. And there are others who in the world have nothing that could be counted. After they have been named monks these men praise themselves for the benefices and payments of the faithful, and become rich, and because of this elevate themselves in their minds and deeds into such great pride that it is astonishing not only to say it but think it. The men who before they became monks hardly owned a tiny hovel, and could barely scrape together a solidus, afterwards became owners of great possessions from the alms of the wealthy faithful, and hoarders of great riches. When they see they have amassed a great amount of money in gold and silver, they become because of it courtiers and legates of kings and princes, and gain the favor of princes through sycophancy, so much that they attain to ecclesiastical honors thereby. Of course there are some who cannot get this far, but nevertheless, as much as they can, spend their whole lives in extravagance and gluttony and drunkenness. But why should I dwell on these matters so long? Many can be found in monasteries who are in rags outside, and inside exhibit the pride of tyrants. They have pale faces and envious souls. The head tonsured, to outward view; the heart a den of thieves and contaminated with every kind of filth. Their appearance unkempt and neglected, flabby flesh, louring brow, wanton body, drivelling words, unchaste mind. What shall I say of them all? Do not all of them I speak of change, indeed utterly transform, their lives from good to evil, from sanctity to iniquity, from poverty to riches, from humility to pride, indeed from the love of God to the love of the world? Disregarding them, we must turn to the third promise. Next: And obedience according to the Rule of St Benedict. We have already spoken much in our remarks on the third gift about this third promise, which is more serious and more difficult to fulfill than the other two, for on it depends all the perfection of the monastic institution, and there is no need to dwell on what we have already said. Who would like to know fully what monastic

103 Cf. Isa. 53.7; Ps. 143.14; Eccles. 30.8.

82

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

et quomodo adimplere ei oporteat, legat regulam supradicti patris Benedicti, et ibi in multis locis inueniet maximeque in sententia que sic incipit: Primus humilitatis gradus est obedientia sine mora,104 et illam que est in fine regulae que sic incipit: Si cui fratri aliqua forte grauia aut impossibilia iniunguntur,105 plenissime inuenietvvv monachicam obedientiam. Quam perfectionem nullus pleniter adimplere potest, nisi (hi) qui in monasteriis conuersantur. Ii(s) uero qui hec adimplere studueri(n)t erit perfecta remuneratio sicut et perfecta datio. Nullus est enim teste beato Augustino melior in omni religione quam monachus bene propositum suum seruans, nec ullus peior quam ii qui hoc propositum commaculant et obseruare neglegunt.106 Sic nanque dicit in quadam epistola ad Yponienses: Simpliciter fateor caritati uestrae coram domino deo nostro qui testis est super animam (meam), ex quo deo seruire cepi, quomodo difficile sum expertus meliores quam qui in monasteriis profecerunt, ita non sum expertus peiores quam qui in monasteriis ceciderunt, ita ut hinc arbit(r)er in apocalipsi scriptum: Qui sanctus est sanctificetur adhuc, et qui in sordibus est sordescat ad(h)uc.107 In id uero quod sequitur: coram deo et sanctis eius, nulla controuersia est que recte opponi possit, quia certum est quod et (a) deo promittuntur ista, et coram deo teste psalmista qui dixit: ante te omne desiderium meum.108 Et idem propheta satis in .c.xxxviii. psalmo de dei cognitione loquitur, ostendens nullam rem omnino posse abscondi ab eius presentia.109 Est hoc uerbum quod dicitur coram deo similewww prophete dicto: (ecce) dominus mandabitxxx et percutiet domum magnam ruinis et domum paruam scissionibus.110 Quodque sequitur in hoc monasterio quod est constructum in honorem sancti N. ad promissionem stabilitatis proprie pertinere uidetur, licet ad alias duas aptari possit. De id uero quod in fine dicitur: In presentia donni N. abbatis, multi errant maximeque abbates estimantes per hoc scriptum illos quos benedicunt suos esse professos, quod falsum omni(n)o est et uecordie dicere atque estimare. Non enim est aliudyyy in hoc, nisi testis. Nam hoc quod dicitur in presentia

vvv inueniet plenissime ante corr. www illius add. et del. MS. xxx mandabit dominus ante corr. yyy alius ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

83

obedience is and how one should observe it, let him read the Rule of the above-mentioned father Benedict, and he will find it there in many places, particularly in the sentence which begins: The first degree of humility is obedience without delay,104 and that coming at the end of the Rule which begins: If it should happen that a brother is ordered to do something difficult or impossible,105 he will discover monastic obedience. No one can attain this perfection completely unless he is of one mind with the others in the monastery. For those who try to fulfill it there will be a perfect reward just as there is a perfect gift. By the testimony of the blessed Augustine there is no one better in the whole monastic community than the monk who keeps to his intended way of life, none worse than those who pollute this way of life and neglect its observance.106 He says this in a letter to the men of Hippo: I acknowledge simply to your charities in the presence of the Lord God, Who is witness of my soul, that from the time I began to serve God how difficult it has been to find better people than those who have succeeded in monasteries; similarly I have not found worse people than those who have failed in monasteries just as I think is written in the Apocalypse: He that is holy let him be sanctified still, and he that is filthy let him be filthy still.107 In what follows in the presence of God and his saints, there is no argument which could rightly be opposed to it, because it is certain that those things were promised by God, and in God’s presence by the testimony of the psalmist who said: all my desire is before Thee.108 And the same prophet speaks sufficiently in Psalm 138 of the knowledge of God, showing that nothing can be hidden from his presence.109 It is this word which is called a simile for in the presence of God which the prophet speaks: (behold) the Lord hath commanded and He will strike the greater house with breaches and the lesser with clefts.110 And what follows: in this monastery built in honor of St N. seems to pertain especially to the promise of stability and may possibly be applied to the other two promises. Indeed many go wrong, and particularly abbots, with reference to what is said at the end: in the presence of lord N. the abbot, thinking these words mean that those whom they bless have professed to them, which is utterly false both to say senselessly and to think. For he is nothing in this procedure but a witness. The words: in the presence of

104 105 106 107 108 109 110

Benedict, Regula, 5.1. Benedict, Regula, 68.1. Cf. Augustine, In Psalmos, 83.4 (CC, 39:1149). Augustine, Epistola 78 (CSEL, 34:344–5); Qui sanctus … adhuc: Apoc. 22.11. Ps. 37.10. Cf. Ps. 138.1–5. Amos 6.12.

84

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

donni N. abbatis non est nisi confirmatio dationis, sicut in scriptis terrenarum donationum in fine dicitur et subscribitur teste isto, teste illo. Sicut enim nullus presbiter potest dicere: hic (est) meus baptizatus uel meus christianus, nam unus est qui baptizat de quo ad Io(h)annem dicitur, hic est qui baptizat111 et sicut nullus episcopus potest dicere: hic est meus ordinatus uel meus consecratus nam unus est qui ordinat et consecrat, sic nullus abbas potest et debet dicere: hic est meus professus uel meus monachus, nam unus est cui subscribitur, et unus qui benedicit. Hoc nanque uerbum quod dicitur: hic est meus monachus uel meus professus mendatium est et procedit ex fonte nimie superbie, sicut et illud quod dicunt de ominiozzz laicorum: hic est meus homo cum forsitan ille qui ominium facit sit comes uel alicuius magne dignitatis et ille qui recipit infimo et uilissimo genere. Cum hoc aliquis dicit intra se deberet dicere: Qui sum ego et quis iste? De qua re facit mihi iste ominium, de patrimonio meo et de re propria, an de re aliena? Certe non de re propria sed de re(bus) aecclesiae, et de re(bus) pauperum. Nam quis ego? Nonne dispensator et custos, non dominus et possessor? Et ne longius pro(tra)amus ista, ominium quod aecclesiasticae persone accipiunt a laicis de rebus et pro rebus ecclesiarum ita intelligendum et accipiendum est, ut illud ominium quod reges et principes faciunt accipere suis hominibus de rebus suis ab aliis hominibusaaaa.112 Cum igitur ista scriberentur, et aliqui ea libenter legerent, ceperunt inde aliqui proponere questiones. Si professio inquiunt monachi nil ad abatem respicit nisi quod testis est subscriptionis quam deo et aecclesiae suae monachus uouit, quid est quod abbates tam libere dant suis subiectis licentiam discedendi de suis cenobiis cum aliqua controuersia inter eos exoritur quasi sibi et non deo et aecclesiae illi fecerint professionem? Responsio: Quamuis nodosa sit questio ad dissoluendum, tamen quantum dominus donauerit sua gratia breuiter differemus. Propositio est de magistris utrum eis liceat subiectos liberos facere atque absoluere a professione quam deo et aecclesiae suae fecerunt an non. Nunc uideamus primum breuiter textum professionis, utrum que in ea dicuntur respiciant ad abates an non. Ego inquit nouiter conuersus promitto stabilitatem meam et conuersionem morum meorum et obedientiam secundum regulam sancti Benedicti coram deo et sanctis eius in hoc monasterio quod est constructum in honorem sancti N. in presentiabbbb huius abbatis. Tria promittit: primum

zzz Dominio ut videtur ante corr. aaaa ab aliis hominibus de rebus suis ante corr. bbbb prehentia MS.

The Professions of Monks

85

lord N, the abbot are nothing but the confirmation of the gift, as is found at the conclusion of charters making grants of land, and subscribed to in witness to this or that. For just as no priest can say ‘this is my baptized or my Christian’ since there is only One who baptizes, of Whom is said to John He it is that baptizeth,111 and just as no bishop can say ‘he is my ordained priest or my consecrated priest’ for there is only One who ordains and consecrates, so no abbot can say or should say ‘he is my professed or my monk,’ for there is only One to whom subscription is made and One who blesses. For the words which say ‘he is my monk’ or ‘my professed’ are a lie and proceed from a source of excessive pride, as is what they say about the homage paid by laymen, ‘this is my man,’ when perhaps he who pays homage is a count or some great dignitary and he who receives it is of the lowest and most worthless kind. When people say this among themselves, they should say: Who am I, and who is this? In what respect is he paying me homage, for my patrimony and personal property, or someone else’s? Certainly not my personal property, but for church property and the property of the poor. For who am I? Am I not a steward and guardian, not a lord and possessor? And – not to prolong this too much – the homage which ecclesiastical persons accept from laymen for property and church property is so to be understood and assented to as being like that homage which kings and princes make their men accept for their property or the property of others.112 Therefore when they are written and others freely read them, the others begin then to ask questions. If the monks say the profession has nothing to do with the abbot, unless he is a witness to the subscription which the monk has vowed to God and the church, what is it that abbots so freely give to those subject to them, a licence to leave their community, when any dispute rises among them, as if they had made their profession to them and not to God and the church? Reply: Though this question is a knotty one to resolve, nonetheless we shall briefly define how much a lord shall give at his pleasure. The proposition concerns the heads of houses and whether they may free their subjects and absolve them from the profession they have made to God and the church, or not. Now let us first look briefly at the wording of the profession to see whether what is said concerns abbots or not. The new brother says: I promise stability and the conversion of my morals and obedience in accordance with the Rule of St Benedict, before God and his saints in this monastery, built in honor of St N. in the presence of this abbot. He promises three things: first,

111 John 1.33. 112 That is, the subinfeudated property of the kings and princes. See Introduction, pp. 21–2.

86

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

stabilitatem, deinde morum conuersionem, .iiio. obedientiam. Cui? Huic monasterio uel in hoc monasterio utrumque nanque tantundem ualet. Coram quibus testibus? Deo et sanctis eius. Non dicit: huic abbati promitto hoc sed uic monasterio. Quasi dicat: mutentur moriantur abbates, huic monasterio obedientiam et stabilitatem promitto me usque in finem seruaturum. Si enim abbati qui pr(es)ens adest tantum ad testimonium uel ad benedicendum id promitteret, reuera dum moreretur fieret profecto liber a professione, sicque necesse esset ut singulis abbatibus qui eo uiuente subcederent eadem promitteret, fierentque tot professiones quot abbates (h)aberet, quod stolidissimum est non solum facere sed et dicere. Quapropter firmiter est tenendum quod id quod (pro)mittit non abbati promittit sed deo et aecclesiae cui se subdit, ita etiam ut si casu aecclesia deforet ab abbate, non liceret ei pro hoc promissum uiolari. Quod uero in fine dicitur in presentia huius abbatis, non est aliud nisi quod testis est ut diximus huius subscriptionis et si ab ea deuiauerit qui subscripsit, licite eum constri(n)get obseruare que promisit ut minister Christi et uicarius aecclesiae cui ille subscripsit. Id uero quod in quibusdam cenobiis cum abbatis testimonio etiam tocius congregationis ponitur ita, in presentia istius abbatis et tocius huius congregationis, propter han(c) controuersiam de qua agimus ut credo institutum est, ne quis abbatum crederet sibi facere professionem cum se audit nominari in ipsa professione, quod cautissima prouisione statutum est. Nunc ad proposita ueniamus. Unusquisque cum ad religionem monachicam attingere cupit, quia arta et angusta uia est quae ducit ad uitam113 et pauci sunt qui per eam sciant pergere recto tramite secundum quod Ieremias propheta dicit: Scio domine quia non est hominis uia eius, nec uiri est ut ambulet et dirigat gressus suos,114 et supra: stultus factus est omnis homo a scientia sua,115 cum ad hunc ordinem ut diximus quisque uenit, subdit se uni homini uice illius qui dixit: Ego sum pastor bonus,116 et ego sum hostium et uia et ueritas et uita117 et sub disciplina illius ponit animam, et corpus suum promittens ei obedientiam et omnem subiectionem ut ille sit ei pater et

The Professions of Monks

87

stability; and then a conversion of morals; and third, obedience. To whom? To this monastery or in this monastery, for either is equally valid. Before which witnesses? God and his saints. It does not say ‘I promise to this abbot,’ but ‘to this monastery,’ as if he were saying ‘Abbots may change or die. To this monastery I promise to maintain obedience and stability to the end.’ For if he were to promise to the abbot there present only for his testimony or for his blessing, he would be completely freed from his profession when he died, and it would be necessary for him to promise the same to the individual abbots who succeeded him while he was still alive, and there would be as many professions as there were abbots, which would be utterly stupid not only to do but to say. For this reason it must be firmly borne in mind that what he promises he does not promise to the abbot, but to God and the church to which he is subject, so that even if it happened that a church lacked an abbot, he would not for this reason be allowed to break his promise. What is meant after all by in the presence of this abbot is nothing other than that he is a witness to this subscription, as we have said, and if he deviates from what he has subscribed to, it is permissible to force him to keep his promise, as a servant of Christ and vicar of the church to which he has subscribed. In some monasteries it is done with the witness of the abbot and of the whole congregation thus – in the presence of this abbot and the whole of his congregation. This has been the source, I believe, of the controversy with which we are concerned, lest an abbot should think that the monk is making a profession to him when he hears himself named in this profession, which has been established by a very cautious provision. Now let us come to the proposition. Every single man desiring to attain to the monastic way of life, for narrow and strait is the way that leadeth to life,113 and they are few who know how to go straight along the path, as is said in the prophet Jeremiah’s words: I know O Lord that the way of man is not his: neither is it in a man to walk and to direct his steps,114 and earlier: Every man is become a fool for knowledge115 – when anyone comes to this order, as we have said, he submits to one man in the place of Him Who said: I am the good Shepherd116 and I am the Way and the Truth and the Life,117 and places his body and soul under his discipline, promising him obedience and complete subjection, so that he should be a father and

113 114 115 116 117

Matt. 7.14. Jer. 10.23. Jer. 10.14. John 10.11, 14. John 14.6.

88

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

pastor uice illius qui dixit ego sum pastor bonus, et ipse illi sit ut filius. Abbas uero ac pactione illum recipit et curam animae et corporis illius super se omnino ponit. Quam pactionem non est licitum abrumpere quamdiu absque dampno animarum utriusque simul esse possunt. Si uero aliqua controuersia inter eos exorta fuerit aliquo tempore et non potuerint id quod promiserant custodire absque dampno uel detrimento alicuius illorum uel certe amborum melius est ut unus saluetur quam uterque in preruptum dampnationis cadat. Nam de magistris dicit ipsa ueritas discipulis: Si oculus tuus scandaliz(at) te, abscide eum et proice abs te, et si manus tua uel pes tuus scandalizat te, abscide eum et proice abs te,118 et reliqua. De discipulis uero doctor gentium dicit magistris: Auferte malum ex uobis,119 et: Infidelis si discedit discedat.120 Beatus Benedictus cum hoc exemplum poneret adiunxit quare, ne una inquiens ouis morbida totum gregem contaminet121 id est si talis est ut non solum sibi sed et aliis noceat, melius est ut ipse solus dampnetur quam alii propter eum. De illa uero professione quam monachus deo et aecclesiae suae uouit et subscripsit nulla ratione debet aut potest eum absoluere abbas, quia omnino non est suum hoc facere. Sicut enim ullus presbiter non potest aliquem christianum absoluere a uinculo christianitatis, sic nec abbas aliquem monachum a subscriptione quam deo et aecclesiae suae fecit. Tamen hoc tantum uidetur nobis illum posse concedi ut ab illa subiectione quam ei ille promisit in scrutinio ante professionem potest eum absoluere quoquomodo antequam peius faciat et aliis noceat. De duobus enim malis leuior assumendus est, ut maius euitetur. Dubia res est ualde, sed usu quasi in auctoritate uersa. Sed hanc autoritatem et hunc usum uerterunt domini abbates in dampnationem sibi suisque subiectis. Cum enim aliquem ex subiectis odio habent, uertunt discipline auctoritatem in dominationem et tyrannidem suaque odia atque iras palliant uelamine discipline ad medium deducentes dictum apostoli qui dixit: Auferte malum ex uobis.122 Verum est quia apostolus hoc dixit, hoc iussit. Sed numquid probare possunt quod iusserit hoc odio? Nullo modo. Certum nanque est ex is que secuntur

The Professions of Monks

89

pastor to him in place of Him who said: I am the good Shepherd, and he should be like a son. The abbot in accordance with the compact admits him and places the cure of his soul and his body completely above himself. It is not lawful to break this compact for as long as both can be together without damnation of their souls. If any dispute between them should arise at any time and they cannot keep their promise without damnation or injury to either of them, or to both, it is certainly better that one should be saved than that both should fall into the catastrophe of damnation. For on the heads of houses the Truth Himself said to his disciples: And if thy right eye scandalize thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee, and if thy hand or foot scandalize thee, cut it off and cast it out,118 and so on. On discipline the teacher of the gentiles says to the heads of houses: Put away the evil one from among yourselves,119 and: But if the unbeliever depart, let him depart.120 The blessed Benedict, when he cited that injunction, added the reason, saying, lest one infected sheep contaminate the whole flock.121 That is, if he is the kind who will harm not only himself but others too, it is better that he alone should be condemned than others because of him. On the profession which the monk has made to God and his church and subscribed, there should be no reason, nor can there be, for the abbot to absolve him, because it is not his place to do so. For just as no priest can absolve any Christian from the claims of Christianity, neither can an abbot absolve any monk from the subscription he has made to God and his church. However it seems to us that he can only grant absolution from the promise he made to him in the examination before the profession of subjection, before he does worse in any way and harms others. Of the two evils the lesser is preferable, so as to avoid the greater. It is a highly doubtful matter, but it is a custom which has turned into a sanction. But lords abbot have turned this sanction and this custom to the damnation of themselves and those subject to them. For when they feel hatred for one of their subjects, they turn the sanction of discipline into despotism and tyranny, and cloak their hatred and anger with the veil of discipline, misapplying to the community the saying of the Apostle: Put away the evil one from among yourselves.122 It is true because the Apostle said so and ordered it. But can they really prove that he ordered this hatred? Of course not. It is certain from those who follow it that they do not order from

118 119 120 121 122

Matt. 5.29–30. 1 Cor. 5.12. 1 Cor. 7.15. Benedict, Regula, 28.8. 1 Cor. 5.12.

90

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

quia non ex ira uel aliqua mala motione hoc precepit sed ex fonte caritatis et zelo discipline. Vis audire quomodo? Dicit in secunda epistola ad eosdem quibus hoc preceptum dederat in prima id est ad Chorintios: Sufficit illi qui eiusmodi est obiurgatio hec quae fit a pluribus, ita ut econtra magis donetis et consolemini ne forte abundantiore tristicia absorbeatur qui eiusmodi est.123 Statimque adiungens apertius manifestat quo corde illa superius dixerat: Propter quod obsecro uos ut confirmetis in illo caritatem.124 (Quare?) Ne forte ambundantiore tristicia absorbeatur.125 Non dixit, non iussit perpetualiter excludite illum a uestro consortio, ita ut nec paenitens reuerti possit, sed dixit: confirmetur in illo caritas, ne forte abundantiore tristicia absorbeatur, dominum suum per omnia immitari studens, qui dixit per prophetam: Viuo ego dicit dominus deus, nolo mortem peccatoris, sed magis ut conu(er)tatur et uiuat.126 Ipse pius dominus dixit in euangelio: Omnis qui uenit ad me non eciam foras.127 Contra hoc, domini abbates non solum non recipiunt extra uenientes, sed etiam proiciunt immo expellunt intus stare uolentes. Saluator cui cuncta sunt que subsistunt, ipse in passione dixit ad patrem: Quos dedisti mihi non perdidi ex eis quemquam128 et domini abbates non solum non admittunt quod traditum est illis ad custodiendum uerum etiam et expellunt. Pius pastor dixit: Venit filius hominis querere et saluum facere quod perierat,129 et domini abbates secundum quod propheta dicit quod crassum est occidunt, (et) quod infirmum non consolidant, et quod egrotum non sanant, et quod fractum non alligant, et quod abiectum non reducunt, et quod perit non querunt, sed cum austeritate imperant eis et cum potentiacccc.130 Pastores uolunt uideri et appellari, sed illum immitari nolunt cuius locum honoris tenent qui dixit: Ego sum pastor bonus. Qui subdens, ostendit quomodo sit bonus pastor: Cognosco eas per dilectionem, non per potentiam et tyrannidem, et ille me cognoscunt ille scilicet subaudis que sunt meae cognoscunt me per amorem et preceptorum obedientiam, non

cccc et quod perit … potentia in marg.

The Professions of Monks

91

anger or any bad motive, but from a spring of charity and zeal for discipline. Do you wish to hear how? He says in his second letter to those to whom he had given this precept in the first, that is, the Corinthians: To him who is such a one, this rebuke is sufficient, which is given by many. So that on the contrary, you should rather forgive him and comfort him lest such a one be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.123 He reveals more openly what his heart had said earlier, immediately adding: Wherefore I beseech you that you would confirm your charity towards him.124 Why? Lest such a one be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.125 He did not say and did not order: ‘Exclude him for ever from your company, so that he cannot return penitent,’ but he said: confirm your charity towards him lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow, zealous to imitate his Lord in every way, Who said through the prophet: As I live saith the Lord God, I desire not the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live.126 The same righteous Lord said in the gospel: and him that cometh to Me I will not cast out.127 On the contrary, lords abbot not only do not admit those coming from outside but even reject, nay expel, those wishing to stay inside. The Saviour to Whom everything that exists belongs, said during his passion to the Father: Of them whom thou hast given me, I have not lost any one,128 and the lords abbot not only do not receive what has been entrusted to them for safekeeping but even cast it out. The righteous shepherd said: For the Son of man is come to seek that which was lost,129 and the lord abbot: You killed that which was fat, the weak you have strengthened, and that which was sick you have not healed, that which was broken you have not bound up, and that which was driven away you have not brought again, neither have you sought that which was lost, but you ruled over them with rigor and with a high hand.130 They want to be regarded as and to be called pastors, but do not wish to imitate Him, Whose place of honor they hold, Who said: I am the good Shepherd. He submitting Himself showed them how to be a good shepherd: I know them by love, not by power and tyranny, and they know Me. ‘They’ is to be understood as they who know Me through love and the rule of obedience, not

123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

2 Cor. 2.6–7. 2 Cor. 2.8. 2 Cor. 2.7. Ezech. 33.11. John 6.37. John 18.9. Luke 19.10. Ezech. 34.3–4.

92

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

per timorem et odium.131 Et quali quantaque dilectione eos cognoscendo diligat, protinus manifestat cum subdit: pono animam meam pro ouibus meis.132 O uos quibus nomen pastoris delectat ad uosmetipsos reducite mentes uestras et inspicite si estis tales qualis ille fuit cuius nomen et uicem portatis. Sed uos nomen et honorem summi pastoris tenere uultis, sed opus eiusdem pastoris nec ad modicum implere studetis, sed quod peius quod ille mirabiliter creauit et mirabilius reformauit non aliunde quam precioso suo sanguine, uosdddd domini abbates contendit(is) propellere et demergere in id unde (eos) Christi sanguis redemit. Deinde proponitur: Et monachus illam professionem quam deo et aecclesiae suae fecit, aliqua causa potest mutare? R: Videtur aliquibus quod possit mutari tribus ex causis. Aut cum ille qui preest aliqua macula symonie agnoscitur esse maculatus, non enim iustum aut rectum iudicatur cum excommunicato habere consortium, uel si aecclesia in qua professus est ita exstat exordinata ut nullo modo possit in ea monastice uiuere, tercio si is qui preest uel cohabitantes pro iusticia mouerint ei persecutionem. Is .iiibus. causis peribent seniores posse monachum mutari professionem concessu tamen sui episcopi. Michi uero uidetur melius et securius ut et professionem suam monachuseeee seruet, et ad tempus secundum domini iussum det locum ire atque discordie.133 Post hec queritur: Cum abbas ille cui se subdidit primum monachus et coram quo subscripsit mortuus fuerit, illi abbati qui mortuo subcedet debet esse similiter subiectus sicut priori an non? R: Plane quantum ad rectitudinem et ad perfectionem. Nam cum quis promittit obedientiam non parietibus que sunt insensibiles creature illud promittit sed prelatis qui uicem Christi in eadem aecclesia tenent (et) qui secundum deum ibi constituti sunt. Sed quia is diebus tanta peruersitas tam magna superbia in monachis et maxime in abbatibus inuenitur quanta in nullo ordine, ideo in hac re diuersi diuersa sentiunt, de quibus dua ponenda sunt. Aiunt quidam: Nullus homo potest animam meam sub potestate sua habere nisi ei dedero, ac ratione. Deus cum condidit hominem dedit ei liberum arbitrium id est liberam uoluntatem siue ad bonum seu ad malum.

o

dddd os(o) (?) MS. eeee m MS; modo in Martène, De ritibus.

The Professions of Monks

93

through fear and hatred.131 And, knowing them, how much He loves and with what kind of love! He shows this straightway when He adds: I give my life for my sheep.132 O you who delight in the name of shepherd, direct your minds to yourselves and look closely to see if you are like Him Whose name and place you bear. But you wish to have the name and honor of the highest Pastor, but do not try to do the work of the same Pastor in the slightest, but – worse – what He miraculously created and most miraculously amended with nothing other than his precious blood you lords strive to drive away and bury in that from which Christ’s blood redeemed us. Next it is asked: Can the monk change the profession he has made to God and the church for any reason? The answer: It seems it is possible to change it for three reasons. Either when the superior recognizes that he is defiled with the stain of simony, for it is considered not right or just to consort with an excommunicate; or if the church in which he was professed is deemed to be degraded so that it is impossible for monks to live there. Third, if his superior or his fellows incite persecution of him instead of doing justice. For these three reasons the senior brothers may enable a monk to change his profession, with the consent however of his bishop. It seems to me better and safer that the monk should both preserve his profession and in accordance with his lord’s order avoid anger133 and discord in good time. After this it is asked: When the abbot dies, to whom he first submitted as a monk and in whose presence he subscribed, should he be similarly subject to the abbot who succeeds the deceased, or not? Answer: certainly so far as it concerns the abbot’s jurisdiction and his own perfection. For when someone promises obedience, he does not promise it to walls which are insensible artifacts, but to the prelates who hold Christ’s place in the same church and who have been established there according to God. But because such perversity and such great pride are found in monks, and especially abbots nowadays, as in no order, so in this matter different people have different opinions, of which two need be considered. Some say: No man can have my soul in his power unless I give it to him, and rightly so, since when God created man He gave him free will, that is freedom to choose good or evil. But when man sinned and God almost took away his most noble gifts, He held back from him the same free will He had given in paradise, so that man’s will should always be free, enabling him to turn freely to what he wanted, whether good or evil, even though it was not as perfect as before. 131 John 10.14. 132 John 10.15. 133 Rom. 12.19.

94

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

Cum uero peccauit homo et sua preclarissima dona ei deus pene abstulisset, eundem tamen liberum arbitrium quod in paradiso dederat ei reseruauit, ut semper uoluntas hominis in homine libera foretffff ut ad quod uellet se libere conuerteret siue ad bonum seu ad malum, licet non sic perfecte sicut prius. Nam antequam peccasset, libere uolebat quicquid uolebat. Ideo libere, quia statim quod uolebat erat, et recte, quia nil contra dei uoluntatem uolebat. At cum contra dei uoluntatem uoluit, bonum etiam quod inde uoluit quasi cum quadam difficultate uoluit. Vnde solent homines dicere: Id uolo, sed cum difficultate. Hunc liberum arbitrium hominis, nemo alius homo debet aut potest habere ullo modo ulla ratione nisi qui sponte eam tradiderit alicui alio homini propter (deum). Hanc donationem nullus homo alius probatur posse facere nisi solummodo monachus qui se ita totum dat deo ut renuntiet se a semetipso, ut ultra non sit suus non solum in operatione uerum etiam in uoluntate. Igitur cum discedit is cui uoluntatem suam uice dei tradiderat, liber fit a donatione quam homini fecit et nisi alteri iterum idem concesserit uel ut certius dicam tradiderit scilicet curam animae suae et sub illo summiserit uoluntatem suam, quamuis abbas uocetur qui substitutus est et in ea que de foris sunt uideatur habere potestatem in animam illius nulla ratione habet potestatem et est a cura animae illius omnino liber et ille ab illius subiectione, si uult. Quod plane rectum et rationabile iudicatur. Ecclesiastica nanque dominatio non eundem modum habet quam tyrannica seculi dominatio. Tyrannica nempe dominatio cum adquirit terras et diuersas prouincias atque etiam regna, uult ut omnes inhabitantes in eas uelint nolint sint ei subiecti, et quicumque contradixerit, gladio feriatur. Econtra ecclesiastica censura tyrannidem non requirit, lites odit, scandala precauet, fastum et arrogantiam exsecrat, illum immitari semper cupiens qui dixit: pacem meam do uobis, pacem meam relinquo uobis.134 Et qui uult inter uos maior esse, fiat omnium seruus.135 Contra hec domini abbates uolunt habere per dominationem et tyrannidem, quod ecclesia Christi timet et precauet habere per rectitudinem, semper timens illam sententiam, cui plus committitur, plus ab eogggg exigitur.136 Que enim furia que amentia est illum uelle abere quasi seruum empticium qui nil mihi debet plusquam ego illi. Sumus enim pares et in natura et in Christi gratia. Alii sic ista exponunt. Canonicalis regula est ut unusquisque grex christianus per orbem diffusus secundum suos gradus et ordines abeat proprium pastorem. Qui regulariter debet eligi antequam preponatur. Si episcopus est, cleri et populi electione perficiatur. Si abbas, communi omnium fratrum electione prorsus exclusa omnis fauoralis gratia

ffff foret in marg. gggg ab eo] habeo MS.

The Professions of Monks

95

Before he sinned he willed freely whatever he wished, for whatever he willed was there instantly, and rightly so, because he willed nothing against God’s will. But when he willed against God’s will, thereafter he willed even the good with some difficulty. Hence men are used to saying: I want that, but with difficulty. No other man could have this free will at all for any reason unless someone gave it to some other man for God’s sake. No other man is proved to be able to make this gift, except the monk alone, who so totally gives himself to God that he renounces himself for himself, so that afterwards he is not his own, not only in deeds but indeed also in will. Therefore when the man to whom he had made over his will in God’s place leaves, he is freed from the gift he has made to the man, and unless he again concedes the same to another, or, so that I speak clearly, delivers it, that is the cure of his own soul, and submits his will to him, even though he who has been substituted is called abbot and in external matters seems to have power, he has by no reasoning power over his soul, and is completely free from the cure of the soul of the man, and that man, if he so wishes, is free from subjection to him. This is clearly judged to be right and reasonable. For ecclesiastical lordship does not have the same methods as tyrannical secular lordship. To be sure tyrannical lordship, when it acquires lands and different provinces and even kingdoms, wants all the inhabitants to be subject to it, whether they wish it or not, and anyone objecting to this is put to the sword. But an ecclesiastical judgment does not need tyranny, hates lawsuits, avoids scandal, execrates haughtiness and arrogance, desiring always to imitate Him: My peace I give unto you: my peace I leave with you.134 And whosoever wishes among you to be greater, shall be made the servant of all.135 Against this the lords abbot wish to have through lordship and tyranny what Christ’s church fears and avoids having as of right, always fearing that sentence, from him to whom more is committed more is expected.136 For this frenzy which is folly wants to have him as it were as a slave to be bought, owing me no more than I owe him. Others explain this similarly. The canonical rule is that every single Christian congregation spread throughout the world should have its own pastor in accordance with its degrees and orders. It has already been explained that he should be chosen lawfully. If he is a bishop, the election should be carried out by the clergy and people. If he is an abbot, by the common election of all the brothers, with all partiality and favoritism

134 John 14.27. 135 Mark 10.43–4. 136 Benedict, Regula, 2.30.

96

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

et omne munus siue a man(u), seu a lingua, seu ab obsequio. Breuiter ista perstrinximus, nam nimis prolixum est omnes regulas et omnes auctoritates patrum de ista re in unum colligere. Tamen ne omnia omnino preterisse uideamus, pauca de multis ponenda sunt. Celestinus papa: Nullus inuitis detur episcopus, cleri et plebis et ordinis consensus requiratur, et tunc alter de altera eligatur ecclesia, si de ciuitatis ipsius clero cui est episcopus ordinandus nullus dignus quod euenire non credimus poterit repperiri.137 Ex concilio Aurelianensi: Nullus ordinandus est episcopus, nisi conuocatis clericis et parochianis et in unum consentientibus.138 Gregorius Mariniano: Defuncto abbate non aliunde ibi abbas ordinetur, nisi in propria aecclesia non fuerit idoneus.139 Item Gregorius Petro subdiacono: Monachus qui in lapsum corporis inciderit abbas non ordineturhhhh, ordinatus autem cognitus deponatur.140 Ex concilio Affricano: Illud statuendum est, ut quando ad eligendum episcopum conuenimus, si qua contradictio oborta fuerit, non presumant ad purgandum eum tres tantum episcopi, sed postulentur ad hunc numerum si haberi possunt duo, et discutiantur primo personae contradicentium. Postremo etiam illa quae obiciuntur pertractentur, et cum purgatus fuerit sub conspectu publico, tunc demum ordinetur.141 Ex concilio Aurelianensi: Ut episcopi iudicio metropolitanorum et episcoporum qui circuncirca sunt proueantur ad aecclesiasticam potestatem, hi uidelicet qui plurimo tempore probantur, tam uerbo fidei, quam rectae conuersationis exemplo.142 Si quis episcopus aut abbas uel presbiter per pecuniam obtinuerit aliquam aecclesiasticam dignitatem, deiciatur ipse et ordinator eius, et a communione sancta modis omnibus arceatur.143 Gregorius: Si quem ad episcopatus gradum prouehi deo auctore contigerit, puris hominum mentibus nuda electionis conscientia sincero omnium iudicio proferatur.144 Nemo gradum sacerdotii pretii uenalitate mercetur. Ita castus et humilis nostris temporibus eligatur episcopus,

hhhh non ordinetur abbas ante corr.

The Professions of Monks

97

and all gifts, whether by hand, by tongue, or by services excluded entirely. We have dealt with this cursorily since it would be too wearisome to assemble all the rules and patristic authorities in one conspectus. However, so that we should not appear to have passed over them all completely, a few from the large number can be cited. Pope Celestinus: No one unwilling should be made a bishop, a consensus of the clergy and people and the orders is required, and if no one worthy is to be found from the clergy of the city of which he is to be ordained bishop which we do not believe will occur then someone from outside their number is elected to the church.137 From the Council of Orléans: No bishop is to be ordained unless a convocation of clerics and parishioners is in complete agreement.138 Gregory to Marinianus: On the death of an abbot, an abbot from elsewhere may not be ordained unless he would not be suitable in his own church.139 Similarly Gregory to Peter, the subdeacon: A monk whose health is failing may not be ordained abbot, and if he has been knowingly ordained he is to be deposed.140 From the Council of Africa: It is to be established that when we convene for the election of a bishop, should any dissension arise, let not even as many as three bishops presume to exonerate him, but let it be asked of him whether two could be asked to argue the matter with the first person who has dissented. Finally, even those dissenting should be treated with consideration, and when he has been vindicated in public, then and only then should he be ordained.141 From the Council of Orléans: So that bishops should be appointed to ecclesiastical power by the judgment of the metropolitans and bishops all around them they are to be examined several times, as much with respect to the words of the faith as to their example of a correct manner of life.142 If any bishop or abbot or priest shall obtain any ecclesiastical dignity by money, let him and his ordainer be expelled and kept from holy communion by every means.143 Gregory: If it should transpire that anyone is promoted to episcopal rank with divine approval, it should be made known by men of pure mind with a simple knowledge of elections and with the sincere judgment of all.144 No one may purchase a priestly rank by bribery. In these days a bishop so chaste and humble

137 Ivo, Decretum, 5.61 (PL, 161:347C). 138 Ibid., 5.66 (PL, 161:349A–B). 139 Gregory, Registrum, 8.17 (MGH, Epistolae, 2.19; CC, 140A:536–7); Ivo, Decretum, 7.11 (PL, 61:547D). 140 Gregory, Registrum, 3.23 (MGH, Epistolae, 1.181; CC, 140:169). 141 Ivo, Decretum, 5.60 (PL, 161:347B). 142 Ibid., 5.63 (PL, 161:348C). 143 Ibid., 5.78 (PL, 161:351D–352A). 144 Cf. Gregory, Registrum, 5.10 (MGH, Epistolae, 1.291; CC, 140:276).

98

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

ut locorum quocunque peruenerit, omnia uitae suae proprie integritate purificet, et non pretio sed precibus ordinetur episcopus. Tantum ab ambitu debet esse sepositus, ut queratur cogendus, rogatus recedat, inuitatus effugiat, sola illi suffragetur necessitas excusantis. Profecto enim indignus est sacerdotio, nisi fuerit ordinatus inuitus.145 Item Gregorius: Antiquam patrum regulam sequens, nichil unquam de ordinationibus accipiendum esse constituo, neque ex datione pallii neque ex traditione cartarum. Sicut enim non decet pontificem manum quam imponit uendere, ita minister et notarius non debet in ordinatione eius uocem uel calamum uenundare. Pro ordinatione ergo uel usu pallii seu cartis atque pastellis eum qui ordinandus est omnino aliquid dare prohibeo.146 Item ipse: Sunt nonnulli qui nummorum quidem premia ex ordinatione non accipiunt, et tamen sacros ordines pro humana gratia largiuntur. Hi nimirum quod gratis accipiunt, gratis non tribuunt,147 quia nummum fauoris de impenso officio sanctitatis expetunt. Vnde cum uirum iustum describeret Isaias, ait: Qui excutit manus suas ab omni munere,148 quia aliud est munus ab obsequio, aliud a manu, aliud munus a lingua. Munus ab obsequio, subiectio indebite impensa. Munus a manu, pecunia. Munus a lingua, fauor.149 Gregorius episcopis Pyri: Admoneo atque contestor, ut omnino sitis solliciti et nichil sibi commodi datio, nichil gratia, nichil quarumlibet supplicatio personarum in sacris ordinibus uindicet.150 Item ipse: Non est pura nec grata ante deum ordinatio, ubi subest fauor uel aliqua gratia hominum.151 Zosimus papa in decretis suis: Ecclesiasticis disciplinis non pleniter imbutus, et laicus ad episcopatum non accedat.152 Et Celestinus in suis: Laicus aut criminibus irrecitus ad sacros ordines non accedat.153 Item ipse:

The Professions of Monks

99

should be elected that whatever place he arrives at he will purify it by the integrity of his entire life, and a bishop should be ordained not for money but with prayers. He should be so remote from covetousness that he is sought out by force, should retire when asked, should flee when invited, and he should be voted for only by the urging of necessity. The priesthood is really unworthy unless it is ordained against its will.145 Gregory: Following the ancient rule of the fathers, nothing concerning the acceptance of ordination is ever to be established, either from the giving of the pallium, or the transfer of charters. For just as it does not befit an archbishop to sell the hands he lays on, so an official notary should not offer his voice or pen for sale. Therefore I utterly forbid him who is to be ordained to give anything for an ordination or use of the pallium or charters and pasturage.146 Again from the same: There are those who do not accept gifts of money for ordinations, and who nevertheless grant holy orders prodigally for human favors. They are too accepting of what costs nothing, but do not give what costs nothing,147 because they demand money for the favor of the expenses of their office’s sanctity. Hence when Isaiah describes the just man, he says: (he) shaketh his hands from all bribes,148 because a charge for acquiescence is one thing, and for something written down is another, and for spoken words another. A charge for acquiescence is a fraudulent substitute for an improper expense. A charge for something written is a sum of money. A charge for spoken words is a favor.149 Gregory to the bishops of Epirus: I admonish and call to witness, that ye be extremely careful that no gift of advantage to you, nothing gratuitous, no entreaty by whatever persons shall enable them to enter holy orders.150 Another from the same: An ordination is not pure or pleasing to God where favor or any gift from men is involved.151 Pope Zosimus says in his decretals: If he is not completely imbued with the church’s discipline, a layman may not enter upon the episcopacy.152 And Celestinus in his decretals: A layman or anyone involved in crimes may not enter holy orders.153 And the same:

145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153

Cf. ibid., 5.24 (MGH, Epistolae, 1.305; CC, 140:291). Ivo, Decretum, 5.109 (PL, 161:361C–D). Matt. 10.8. Isa. 33.15. Ivo, Decretum, 5.86 (PL, 161:353D). Gregory, Registrum, 6.7 (MGH, Epistolae, 1.387; CC, 140:376). Cf. ibid., 9.218 (219) (MGH, Epistolae, 2.206; CC, 140A:784). Ivo, Decretum, 5.102 (PL, 161:358C). Gratian, Decretum, D.61.7 (ed. Friedberg, col. 230).

100

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

Inuitis non detur episcopus.154 Sciendum uero est quod quicquid iussum est de episcopis, similiter intelligendum est de abbatibus. Diximus uero supra quod communi consilio et permissu clericorum atque laicorum sit ordinandus et abbas communi omnium fratrum electione, quod certissimum est ita debere existere. Sed quia difficile est ut in tot electionibus quisque grex semper in unum consentiat, non enim omnes uno sensu, una etate, uno sexu, una uoluntate sunt, decreuerunt sancti patres ut in unaquaque electione pastoris grex proprius requiratur et in unum congregetur, et eorum uoluntatem post actas orationes in commune audiatur. Si omnes simul consenserint in idoneam personam, deo gratias. Si non, quod maiores natu et sanctiores sanctitate, et prudentiores sapientia cum timore et amore dei elegerint preponatur, nec propter rixas et dissentiones indoctorum atque insipientium differatur. Similiter in electione abbatis faciendum est. Sed sciendum quod maior consideratio omnimodis debet et oportet haberi in abbatia quam in episcopaliiiii regiminejjjj quia duplicem onus suscipit. Nam et omnia que in episcopo debet esse, debet et in abbate et multo plus ni fallor. Et ut multa preteream, episcopus non habet curam nec aliquam sollicitudinem nisi de animabus sibi commissis. Nam singuli quique christiani siue sint clerici siue laici licite possident sua. Abbates uero non solum animarum uerum et corporum recipiunt curam. Vtique illos recipiunt ad gubernandum qui nil in hoc seculo debent habere proprium. Qui si habent dampnabile est illis. Et beatus Benedictus institutor sanctae regulae dicit quia ad abbatem respicit quicquid a discipulis delinquitur.155 Et ideo sicut de animabus illorum sunt reddituri deo rationem, sic procul dubio de corporibus.156 Quarto interrogatur: In abbatis electione illos qui contradicunt abbas nouiter ordinatus debet illos pro hoc foras expellere an non? R: Nullo modo. Non enim ulla auctoritas uel regula istud precipit. Interrogatio: Quomodo igitur erit? R: Si pacifice et ordinate uoluerint habitare in aecclesia, quamdiu hoc fecerint, nullo modo pro illa contradictione debent expelli uel aliquam molestiam sustinere. Sed si in aecclesia pacifice habitare uoluerint tractet eos abbas prudenter et omnem amorem et obsequium eis exibeat

iiii in episcopali in marg. jjjj uel susceptione super lin.

The Professions of Monks

101

A bishopric should not be given to those unwilling.154 It should be known that whatever is ordered concerning bishops is to be understood similarly of abbots. Indeed we said above that he is to be ordained with the consent of the community and the permission of the clergy and laity, and an abbot by an election of all the brothers of the community, which must be held without fail. But because it is difficult to ensure that with so many elections every group will always be unanimous, for everyone is not of the same opinion, age, sex or will, the holy fathers decreed that in every individual election of a pastor his congregation is necessary and should meet together and their wishes should be heard after the speeches have been given. If everyone agrees on a suitable person, thanks be to God. If not, it is preferable that those of greater years, holier sanctity, and more prudent wisdom should perform the election in the fear and love of God, nor should it be delayed by the brawls and disputes of the illiterate and foolish. The election of an abbot is to be carried out similarly. But it should be known that by all means greater consideration should be given to the rule of an abbey than the rule of a bishopric, because he takes up a double burden. For everything that ought to be in a bishop ought also to be in an abbot, and much more, unless I am mistaken. And – to omit much – a bishop does not have any care or anxiety except for the souls entrusted to him. For every single Christian, whether a cleric or a layman, may lawfully own property. Abbots do not accept only the cure of souls and bodies. In particular they receive under their guidance those who are not allowed to have their own property in this world. Those who have are to be condemned. And the blessed Benedict, the institutor of the holy Rule, says that the abbot should be mindful of whatever mistakes his disciples make.155 And just as an account must be rendered to God for their souls, so must it be for their bodies.156 Fourth, it is asked: In the election of an abbot, should those who contradict a newly elected abbot be cast out, or not? Reply: not at all. For no authority or regulation prescribes this. Question: What should be done then? Reply: If they wish to live in the monastery, as long as they do so in a peaceful and orderly manner, they should certainly not be expelled for this contradiction or suffer any annoyance. But if they wish to live in the church peacefully, the abbot shall deal with them prudently, and show them every love and indulgence,

154 Ivo, Decretum, 5.61 (PL, 161:347C). 155 Benedict, Regula, 36.10. 156 Ibid., 2.34, 37–8, etc.

102

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

etiam plusquam aliis, domini sui cui est uicarius implens consilium qui dixit: Si exurierit i t, ciba illum. Si sitit, p d illi. Hoc enim faciens, c i c super c eius.157 At si uolueri(n)t pacifice uiuere sed scandala et contentiones et exordinationes mouerint in aecclesia et uiderit abbas per illos turbari aecclesiam sibi commendatam, admoneat eos per se et per seniores aecclesiae ut quiete et ordinate uiuant. Si non emendauerint, in noticiam episcopi sui deferat. Qui et ipse admoneat eos ut se emendent. Si non fecerint, tunc iam clarescentibus culpis et coram episcopo examinatis per consilium episcopi debet eos coniurare. Si noluerint sed pertinaciter contra eius interdictum remanere temptauerintkkkk, debet et potest eos expellere, si tamen talis est malitia eorum ut aecclesiae noceat.158 Hinc Gregorius Eusebio archiepiscopo: Prouidi sollicitudo pastoris debet esse ut ouem languidam quae curationem non recipit, ne alias languoris sui labe contaminet, a sanarum consortio non differat eicere, sciens ceterarum se sanitatem non aliter nisi huius posse eiectione seruarellll.159 Igitur quam ponderosa sit gubernatio monastici ordinis et quam grauis et difficilis monachica subiectio satis ut opinor in hoc tractatu ostendimus, sicut qui longa probatione et exercitatione didicimus. Qui ordo quamuis sit eminens et supereminensmmmm ceteris religiosis ordinibus qua propior est deo, ideo propior quia religiosior, ideo religiosior quia perfectior et quantum perfectior tantum et dificilior ad tenendum et obseruandum quia arta et a est uia q d a u.160 Ideo utrobique difficilis, quia ex una parte quicumque credit scripturis pro certo intelligit certa ratione quam insipiens immo amens est qui super se ponit curam animarum de quibus singulis est redditurus rationem tam districo iudi(ci) cum de sua anima tantum erit impeditus ut uix ab illa terribili examinatione possit quis per se euadere. Ex altera parte quanta sit uecordia tradere animam et corpus suum immo uoluntatem suam quam omnino (h)abet liberam alicui homini mortali propter deum, nisi talem ante cognouerit illum esse qui sciat

kkkk remanere temptauerint in marg. llll Hinc Gregorius … seruare in marg. mmmm et supereminens del. MS.

The Professions of Monks

103

even more than he does to the others, fulfilling the counsel of the Lord, whose vicar he is, Who said: But if thy enemy be hungry, give him to eat. For, doing this, thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head.157 And if they wish to live peacefully, but nevertheless scandals and disputes and irregularities disturb the church, and the abbot sees the church troubled by those entrusted to him, he should admonish them himself and have the senior members of the church admonish them too, so that they live quiet and orderly lives. If they do not mend their ways, he should bring them to the notice of the bishop, who should admonish them himself to mend their ways. If they do not, then, examining them in the presence of the bishop, he should indict them for the obvious faults, jointly with a council of bishops. If they do not wish to change their ways but obstinately try to continue to oppose his injunction, he should and may expel them, if in spite of everything their malice is such that it harms the church.158 On this subject, Gregory to archbishop Eusebius: The care of the prudent pastor should be such that the sickly sheep does not receive care, and that, knowing that the health of the others can be preserved in no other way but by its exclusion, he should not delay in casting it out from the company of the healthy, lest it contaminate the others with the weakness of its sickness.159 And so I think we have shown sufficiently in this treatise how grave a matter the direction of the monastic order is and how serious and difficult monastic subjection is, as we have learned during a long novitiate and long practice. This order, though it is distinguished, and more than distinguished among the other religious orders the closer it is to God because it is more religious, is more religious because more perfect, and more perfect because it is more difficult to maintain and observe, for strait and narrow is the way that leadeth to life.160 So it is difficult in two ways because, on the one hand, whoever believes scripture understands for certain and for good reason how foolish, indeed mad, is he who imposes on himself the cure of souls, for which he will render a detailed account to so stern a judge, when he will be so bowed down concerning his own soul that he will scarcely be able to escape from that terrible examination. On the other hand, how senseless it is to deliver up one’s body and soul, and will also, which is totally free, to some mortal man for God’s sake, unless he has known beforehand that he is such a man who knows,

157 158 159 160

Rom. 12.20. Benedict, Regula, 62.11. Gregory, Registrum, 9.196 (MGH, Epistolae, 2.185; CC, 140A:754). Matt. 7.14.

104

Tractatus de professionibus monachorum

et possit illum ducere recto tramite ad illum pro cuius amore subdidit se illius potestati. Nam sicutnnnn stultum se probat ille qui in aliam patriam uult pergere onustus auro et gemmis et timet malos occursus latronum si se homini committit quem ante bene non nouit uirum esse fidelem atque prudentem in re huiusmodi ita stultus est et multo plus qui curam anime et corpori sui committit homini quem ante non nouerit diuturna probatione.

nnnn alicui homini … Nam sicut super ras.

The Professions of Monks

105

and can lead him on the right path to Him for Whose love he has subjected himself to his power. For just as the fool tests himself when he wishes to go into another country laden with gold and jewels, and fears to fall among wicked thieves, if he entrusts himself to a man whom he has not known before to be trustworthy and prudent in matters of this kind, so is he foolish and more than foolish who entrusts the cure of his soul and body to a man he has not known before during a long period of testing.

This page intentionally left blank

D E P RO F E S S I O N I BU S A B BAT U M T H E P RO F E S S I O N S OF ABBOTS

De professionibus abbatum

Omnia quae in catholica fiunt aecclesia, quamuis ad eundem finem tendant, tamen sicuti diuerso fiunt modo, sic et unum nequaquam habet effectum. Verbi gratia: Sine aqua non possumus baptizare, neque sine sanctae trinitatis inuocatione. Ecce cum solempniter baptizamus, crisma et oleum et sal et sputum et albas et cereum adicimus, et multas festiuas orationes aliquando ceteris agendis inserimus, quae sunt quaedam ornamentaa quoddam decus, quaedam ortamenta sicuti quidam uenustatis colores, quosb apponimus super depictas imagines, (h)abent tamen singulas suas significationes, quae nos admonent. Tamen non possumus diffiteri quod sine istis plerunque faciunt homines christianitatem. In omnibus tamen agendis aecclesiae de hominibus dumtaxat loquor, quaedam requirimus, quae a primitiua aecclesia hucusque obtinuit usus, quae iusticia parturiuit, quae patrum auctoritas confirmauit. Et illa quidem professiones possunt uocari, quae nullatenus oportet aboleri. Nam baptizandi et sua dant nomina, seque uelle baptizari profitentur. Id ipsum in confirmationibus, id in singulis actitatur ordinibus. Episcopi obedientiam promittunt suis archiepiscopis, et abbates episcopis et monachi abbatibus. De obedientia monachi iam ut dominus dedit satis ut opinor in superiori tractatu locuti sumus. Nunc ad episcopos et ad abbates ueniamus. In episcoporum consecrationibus scrutinium agitur sicut in ceteris ordinibus. Quod et faciendum est u(t) ad quod promouentur cognoscant, et palam confiteant que interrogati fuerint. Necessarium siquidem est ut hi qui populis presunt, corde credant, et ore quod crediderint coram omnibus testentur,

a hornamenta MS.

b quas MS.

The Professions of Abbots

All things that are done within the catholic church, though they tend to the same end, vary in their natures, and consequently do not produce only one effect. For example, we cannot baptize without water, nor without invoking the Trinity. In fact at a solemn baptism we also use chrism and oil and salt and spittle and the alb and candle, and at different times we introduce many festive prayers taken from the offices for other occasions, which are a kind of attractive embellishment, a further incentive to piety like the beautiful colors we apply to figures we have painted. Even so they have their own intrinsic meanings which instruct us. However, we cannot deny that most men lead a Christian life without those things. We require, at least in all the church ceremonies involving the men I am speaking of, a certain number of procedures which have been in force from the time of the early church till now, which justice has given rise to, and which the authority of the fathers has confirmed. And they can indeed be called ‘professions’ which should certainly not be abolished. For those to be baptized both give their names and declare their wish to be baptized. The same applies to those being confirmed and for the performance of single ordinations. Bishops promise obedience to their archbishops and abbots to their bishops and monks to their abbots. In my opinion I have, with the Lord’s help, spoken enough about the obedience of monks in my discussion above. Now let us proceed to bishops and abbots. As in other orders, an examination is necessary for the consecration of bishops. This must be done so that they learn what their promotion involves, and to make public those matters they have been interrogated on. After all, it is essential that those who are set above the people should believe in their hearts and bear witness with their lips in the presence of everyone to what they

110

De professionibus abbatum

iuxtac apostolum: corde c ad i ore a c f ad s.1 Quod autem legunt et subscribunt nec multum est laudandum nec multum uituperandum quoniam scrutinio peracto sine subscriptione pleniter possent esse episcopi, nec aliquid propter hoc minueretur dignitas archiepiscopalis. Non enim ad sacramentum mysterii pontificalis pertinet subscriptio, nec ex ueteri testamento traditio est ubi primum institutum est ordo pontificis. In scrutinio siquidem totum peragitur, quicquid ad officium episcopale pertinere uidetur excepta consecratione. Sed metropolitanorum auctoritas suos ad hoc perduxit suffraganeos, ut de subiectione eos promittere et subter signare persuaserint. Illi uero quia episcopi esse desiderant ex consuetudine se palliant, et in archiepiscoporum exactiones sine discretione peruolant. Ad seculare siquidem supercilium pertinere uidetur, et ad exactionem quod subscribunt. Cum hec dicimus, metropolitanis obedientiam non contradicimus, sed quod (id) ipsum continet scrutinium attestamur. Hoc de professionibus breuiter dictum sit. Quod uero sacramenta ab episcopis exigiturd, nullo modo est adprobandum, quia non est canonicum. Nullo enim modo a Christi dei sacerdotibus uel sub obedientie uelamine uel qualibet alia causa extorqueri debet sacramentum. Si enim legimus quod Abra(h)am super femur seruum suum iurare fecerit,2 si legimus: Iurauit d et non p eum,3 si iuxta Paulum omnis controuersiae finis iuramentum est ad probationem,4 et in actibus apostolorum aliqui dextras dederunt societatis,5 non tamen hec et talia exempla ad iurandum nos impellunt, quoniam in illis mysterium sonat. At cum nos in nostris agendis iuramus, semper aut exactio seu ambitio seu purgatio siue quilibet seculare latitat. Liuidatur igitur aecclesiae sinceritas, ubi superinducitur indebita iurandi nouitas. Spiritus quoque sanctus per Moysen terribiliter obtestatur, non iurabis in nomine domini ne forte periurese.6 Et dominus in euangelio:

c iusta MS.

d pro exiguntur.

e uel peieres super lin.

The Professions of Abbots

111

believe, in accordance with the Apostle: with the heart we believe unto justice, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.1 But what they read and subscribe to is to be neither overpraised nor overcensured, for if they complete the examination they can be fully bishops without having subscribed: nor should the archbishop’s dignity be impugned in the slightest because of this. For the subscription has nothing to do with the sacrament of episcopal ordination, nor is the tradition from the Old Testament, where the episcopal order was first instituted. Indeed in the examination everything is dealt with that seems relevant to the episcopal office, except the consecration. But the authority of the metropolitans has so intimidated their suffragans that they have persuaded them to promise submission and to agree to it in writing. Since of course they wish to be bishops, they accept the pallium in the customary manner, and comply with the archbishops’ demands without demur. This seems to be prompted by worldly pride and from the demand for services they have subscribed to. In saying this we are not questioning obedience to the metropolitan, but are confirming what the examination itself comprises. This is what may be said briefly about the professions. Whatever oaths are in fact required from bishops are certainly not to be approved, because they are not canonical. For in no way, either under the cloak of obedience or on any other pretext, should an oath be extorted from the priests of Christ our Lord. If we read that Abraham made his servant swear on his thigh,2 if we read: The Lord hath sworn and He will not repent,3 if according to Paul an oath for confirmation is the end of all their controversy,4 and in the Acts of the Apostles some of them gave their right hands of fellowship,5 these and similar examples do not impel us to swear, simply because a ceremony seems to be latent in them. Moreover, whenever we swear an oath in our ceremonies there is implicit either a demand or a requirement or penitence or something secular. And so the simple purity of the church is jeopardized whenever a needless novelty in swearing oaths is interpolated. Even the Holy Spirit is called on in dread as witness by Moses: thou shalt not swear in the name of the Lord lest you perish.6 And the Lord says in the Gospel:

1 2 3 4 5 6

Rom. 10.10. Cf. Gen. 24.9. Ps. 109.4; Heb. 7.21. Heb. 6.16. Gal. 2.9. Benedict, Regula, 4.27.

112

De professionibus abbatum

Non iurabis inquit neque per caelum, neque per terram, sit autem sermo uester est est non non. Quicquid preter hoc est, a malo est.7 Cornelius quoque papa et martyr in decretis suis de hoc sic precipit: Sacramentum a summis pontificibus uel reliquis sacerdotibus exigi nisi pro fide recta minime cognouimus, nec sponte eos iurasse repperimus.8 Summopere sanctus I(ac)obus apostolus prohibens sacramentum, loquitur dicens: Ante omnes fratres mei nolite iurare, neque per celum neque per terram, neque aliud quodcunque iuramentum. Sit autem sermo uester, est uel non.9 Quod igitur fiunt sacramenta, propter hominum incredulitatem ad confutandam eorum irreuerentiam. Que autem huiusmodi sunt, quantum ad pontifices irregularia sunt. Satis ut opinor et etiam ultra satis locutus sum de professionibus et sacramentis episcoporum. Statueram quippe de hac re nichil loqui, quia labor uacuus est de hoc disputare quod libenter faciunt, et ita in consuetudinem uenit ut difficile sit illud auferre. Nunc ad abbates ueniamus, pro quibus immo contra quos ista tractare incepimusf. Vsus itaque ita indubitanter obtinuit et preualuit inter episcopos et abbates, quatinus abbates legerint et subscripserint, quod non est rectum atque necessarium, hac ratione: Dum facti sunt monachi, legerunt et subscripserunt. Qui dum facti sunt abbates quandiu pure id est sincera uoluntate facere uoluerunt absque aliqua exactione, sine peccato sine periculo illud exequi potuerunt. At postquam ad hoc uentum est ut hac causa episcopi monasteria grauare ceperunt, et exig(er)e abbatibus et monachis quae eis non licet exigere nec istis facere, abbates subscribere distulerunt. Quod beatus papa Gregorius nequaquam ignorabat, cum quieti monachorum prouidens super huiuscemodi rem priuilegium suum corroborans diffiniuit sic loquens cuidam abbati. Gregorius Luminoso abbati: Castorio fratri et coepiscopo nostra preceptione transmissa ei successoribusque eius a monasterio tuo cunctam lesionis abstulimus funditus potestatem, ut nec ultra in uestro uersetur grauamine, nec monasterii res describat, nec publica illic missarum processio.10 Item ipse Castorio episcopo Arimini: Precipimus fraternitati tuae, ne in monasterio

f ista tractare incepimus immo contra quos ante corr.

The Professions of Abbots

113

Thou shalt not swear either by heaven or by the earth but let your speech be Yea, Yea: No, No. Whatever is over and above these is of evil.7 Cornelius, pope and martyr, also warns us in his decretals about this: We have not known at all that an oath has been demanded from the highest prelates or other priests unless for the true faith, nor have we ascertained that they have sworn voluntarily.8 The most holy James the apostle, prohibiting oaths, said: But above all things my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, by the earth, nor by any other oath. But let your speech be Yea, or No.9 Hence the sacraments exist because of men’s lack of faith, to restrain their irreverence. Those of this kind are irregular as far as bishops are concerned. I have spoken enough, and in my opinion more than enough, about the professions and oaths of bishops. Indeed I had decided to say nothing on this topic because arguing over it, as is done so readily, is to labor in vain, and it has become so customary that it is difficult to put an end to it. Now let us come to abbots, for whom, or rather against whom, we began this discussion. There is no doubt whatever that the usage obtained and prevailed among bishops and abbots, inasmuch as abbots did read and subscribe; but it is not proper or necessary, and for this reason: when they were made monks they read aloud and subscribed; when they were made abbots, so long as they wished to do so with a pure heart and a sincere will, without a demand for services being made of them, it could be required of them without sin or danger. But after it had reached the point at which bishops began to oppress monasteries for this purpose and to demand from abbots and monks what bishops were not permitted to demand and they not permitted to concede, the abbots deferred signing. Blessed pope Gregory was certainly not unaware of this when, making this kind of provision for the strengthening of his privilege for the peace of the monks, he defined it in speaking to a certain abbot, Gregory to Luminosus, as follows: Having sent our injunction to Castorius, our brother and co-bishop, and his successors, we take absolutely all power to harm your monastery from him so that he will occupy himself with no further damage to you, nor will he direct the affairs of the monastery, nor arrange for a public procession of masses there.10 Further, to the same Castorius, bishop of Rimini: We order your fraternity not to lay hands in any way on the monastery of

7 Matt. 5.34–7. 8 Ivo, Decretum, 5.308 (PL, 161:418D), 12.77 (PL, 161:799D); Gratian, C 2.5.1 (ed. Friedberg, col. 455). 9 James 5.12. 10 Gregory, Registrum, 5.47 (MGH, Epistolae, 1.346–7; CC, 140:341).

114

De professionibus abbatum

sanctorum Andree et T(h)ome constitutum Arimino aliquo modo manum mittas, nec in describendis prouidendisque adquisitis adquirendi(s)ue monasterio (rebus) manum mittas, uel ulla occasione te permisceas. Missas publicas illic uel per te uel per alium episcopum fieri omnino proibemus, ne in seruorum dei recessibus popularibus occasionibus prebeatur ulla conuentibus.11 Item ipseg: Nullo modo patior ut monasteria per clericorum ambitum destruantur.12 At contra pontifices maxima ambitione id exigere abbatibus ceperunt, nec manus imponere illis statuerunt, donec illi subscriberent. Postquam igitur ad hoc uentum est, iam ibi patenter et exactio et ambitio uidetur. Quantum ad episcopos exactio, quantum ad electos ambitio. Non (et) enim iam propter aliud iam legunt et subscribunt, nisi ut cicius consecrentur. Amittere quippe uerentur quod eis ab electoribus suis semel concessum est, si non cito consecrati fuerint. Quod pro nichilo faciunt. Nam nec episcopus nec ipsi monachi qui eum elegerunt super se esse nec persona quelibet alium quempiam possunt ipsi nolente substituere, quem fratrum consensus confirmauit et uniuit sibi. Quod enim semel solenniter unitum est, de cetero dirimi non potest. Electio quippe abbatem facit, consecratio confirmat. Nam absque hac consecratione, possunt esse abbates. Nam de benedictione abbatis nil beatus Benedictus instituit, sicut nec de monachi benedictione. Sed hanc ipsam rationem que contat in monachi benedictione, potest et in abbatis. Patitur igitur in hoc sanctae aecclesiae puritas maculam et inducitur ei per hoc perperam, qui beatam contaminant sinceritatem, propter suam ambitionem. Audenter igitur profiteri possumus, quia non est casta puraue consecratio, ubi est rerum illicitarum commixtio, poterat illud prius sine peccato peragi ex utriusque consensu, si non ab episcopo exigeretur, et ab electo ambiretur. Sed postquam interuenit ex una parte exactio, et ex alia ambitio, statim subrepit nequam contagio. Sed si domini sacerdotes rationabiliterh auertere uellent sicut deceret seruos dei et ministros sanctae aecclesiae de subscriptione abbatum non contenderent. Non enim ullo modo abbates eis esse possunt inobedientes de re de qua monachus obedire debeat prelato suo. Quoniam quando monachi facti sunt obedientiam uouerunt, nec cumi abbates fiunt

g hic lacuna ca. 16 litt.

h rationanabiliter MS.

i co MS.

The Professions of Abbots

115

St Andrew and St Thomas, established at Rimini, nor to interfere by administering or granting out the existing and future possessions of the monastery, nor to intrude there on any occasion. We utterly prohibit public masses to be celebrated there either by you or another bishop, lest on public occasions in monasteries anything should be intruded into the secluded places of the servants of God.11 Similarly to the same: I shall suffer in no way that monasteries be destroyed through the intrigues of clerics.12 But in spite of this the bishops began to make demands on the abbots with the greatest importunity and resolved not to consecrate them until they had subscribed. And so afterwards it came about that now both exactions and covetousness appeared quite openly. The more exactions were made by the bishops, the more covetousness was evident in the bishops-elect. For now they did not elect or subscribe for any other reason than to be more quickly consecrated. For indeed they feared to lose what had been once conceded to them by the electors if they were not consecrated quickly. But they did this in vain. For neither the bishop, nor the very monks who had elected him to be over them, nor anyone else could substitute any other person they liked against the will of him whom a consensus of the brothers had confirmed and united with themselves. For what once has been solemnly united cannot be separated afterwards. The election makes the abbot; the consecration affirms it. But there can be abbots without this consecration. For Benedict did not institute anything concerning the benediction of an abbot, just as he did not concerning the benediction of a monk. But the same consideration which applies to the benediction of a monk can also apply to an abbot. In this the purity of the holy church suffers a stain and is led astray by him who contaminates her blessed integrity through his covetousness. And so we can confidently declare, because a consecration is neither chaste nor pure where there is an admixture of illicit elements, it could be carried out previously without sin through the agreement of both, if it was not insisted on by the bishop and solicited by the bishop-elect. But after a demand has intervened from one party and covetousness from the other, an evil contagion creeps in at once. But if the priests of the Lord wish in a proper fashion to keep the servants of God and ministers of the church from harm, as is fitting, let them not quarrel over the subscription of abbots. For in no way can abbots disobey them in a matter in which a monk must obey his superior. Because when men are made monks they vow obedience, and when they are made abbots they are not

11 Ibid., 5.49 (MGH, Epistolae, 1.349; CC, 140:343). 12 Ibid., 5.1 (MGH, Epistolae, 1.282; CC, 140:266); Ivo, Decretum, 3.18 (PL, 141:203B).

116

De professionibus abbatum

a iugo regule ullo modo sunt liberi sed magis subiecti. Nam si sunt prelati ceteris, tamen quam maxime eos oportet obseruare precepta regule.13 Nam ideo sunt prelati, ut et ipsi custodiant et alios custodire faciant. Nam si est aliquis qui se dicat non esse monachum quia nomen portat abbatis aut ex magna superbia hoc profert aut ex nimia stulticia et uecordia. Nam quis potest esse abbas nisi monachus? At si monachus non est, nec abbas. Videat qui hoc dicit, ne et monachus non sit nec abbas. Potest quis esse monachus, qui abbas non erit. Abbas uero non potest esse nisi monachus fuerit. Abbas quippe ebraice, latine pater dicitur, monachus uero grece, solitarius dicitur latine.14 De quo solitario dicit Ieremia: Sedebit s et t, quia l se s< uper> se.15 Qui scit leuare se super se, hic potest esse pater aliis et docere ceteros. Qui autem se nescit leuare super se, id est nescit domare et refrenare carnalia illicita in se, hic quomodo alios paterna seueritate simul et amore corrigebit? Qui dicunt non se esse monachos quia sunt abbates ideo hoc dicunt sicut per eorum ora didici non quia se negent monachos (h)abitu, sed quia putant se esse liberos a potestate regule scilicet ab illa re in quo credunt et uerum est pendere totum monachatum id est a subiectione regulae et obedientia maiorum. Sed hoc omnino falsum est. Nam precepta regulae pre ceteris si uerus abbas uult et cupit esse oportet eum obseruare, et esse quam maxime subiectus non solummodo suo episcopo sed etiam omnibus suis subiectis. Quomodo? Debet enim tot habere animos in se quot habet in suo regimine filios, ut sciat se secundum uniuscuiusque qualitatem uel intelligentiam conformare et aptare, ut grex sibi commissus non patiatur in aliqua re aliquod detrimentum, sed magis ac magis in aumentatione boni gregis gaudeat,16 sicut de is de quibus omnibus deo est redditurus rationem.17 Et ideo qui preest ceteris cum dignitate sit primus, sciat se omnibus subiectum esse, quantum ad mores et ad obsequium, si uult immitari illum cuius locum (tenet) et nomen portat. Qui uult

The Professions of Abbots

117

freed from the yoke of the Rule in any way, but are made more subject to it. For if they are superiors over the rest, how much more does it beseem them to observe the precepts of the Rule.13 For prelates are such that they both watch over themselves and have others watched over. Now if there is anyone who says he is not a monk because he bears the name of abbot, he says so either from great pride or from excessive stupidity and madness. For who can be an abbot if not a monk? And if he is not a monk, he is not an abbot. Let him who says this see whether he is neither a monk nor an abbot. Someone can be a monk who will not become an abbot. But he cannot be an abbot unless he has been a monk. The Hebrew ‘abbas’ of course means ‘father’ in Latin. ‘Monk’ is in fact Greek and means ‘solitary’ in Latin.14 Concerning this ‘solitary’ Jeremiah says: He shall sit solitary and hold his peace because he has taken it up upon himself.15 Whoever knows how to raise himself above himself can be a father to others and teach the rest. But whoever does not know how to raise himself above himself, who does not know how to tame and curb illicit worldly pleasures in himself, how then will he correct others, combining paternal strictness and love? Whoever says he is not a monk because he is an abbot says this as if he were dedicated through his mouth, not because he denies he is a monk by his habit, but because he believes he is free from the authority of the Rule, that is from that in which he believes, and on which truly the whole body of monks depends, that is on subjection to the Rule and obedience to the senior brothers. But this is quite false. For if he wishes and desires to be a true abbot, it behooves him to observe the precepts of the Rule before all else, and to be subject as much as possible not only to his bishop but even to all those subject to him. How? He should have as many souls in himself as he has sons in his charge, so that he might know how to shape and adapt himself to each one’s qualities and intelligence, so that the flock committed to him should not suffer any kind of harm, but more and more rejoice in the growth of the good flock,16 as concerning them from all of whom account is to be rendered to God.17 And so whoever is in charge of others, even it he is the first in dignity, let him know he is subject to all, as much in morals as in obedience, if he wishes to imitate Him Whose place he holds and Whose name he bears. Whoever wishes to be

13 14 15 16 17

Benedict, Regula, 65.17. Isidore, Etymologiae, 7.12.1 and 13.1. Lam. 3.28. Benedict, Regula, 2.32. Ibid., 63.3; cf. 2.34.

118

De professionibus abbatum

inter uos p esse, sit o s. Sicut f ho non u m sed mi et dare a s r pro m.18 Debet igitur a domini sacerdotes pro tam parua re deesse turbulentiae neuus et infrunitus animus. Nam uelint nolint abbates ut decet et rectum19 est episcopis subiecti sunt, nulloque modo abj eorum subiectione possunt ex toto colla excutere si monachi sunt et promissam obedientiam uolunt obseruare. Nam quae res est aecclesiastica quam monachi possint facere uel habere absque dono et concessu episcoporum, de is rebus dico quae ad episcopos pertinent. Ipsi ordinant eosdem abbates, et monachos, qui illis subiecti sunt, et illorum clericos. Ipsi confirmant non solum laicos sed etiam ipsos monachos. Illi illorum dedicant aecclesias, et eorum altaria, et consecrant illorum sacra. Ipsi dant crisma monachorum ecclesiis, et oleum ad ungendos infirmos. Absque illorum permissu non possunt edificare aliquam ecclesiam uel construere nouam cellam. Absque illorum licentia non possunt possidere aliquam ecclesiam uel decimas adquirere seu habere. Omnimodis de ecclesiasticis rebus pene subiecti sunt episcopis, de quibus alique auctoritates ponende sunt, preceptum est, in .iiiito. concilio Toletano: Nuntiatum est presenti concilio quomodo episcopali imperio seruili operi mancipantur monachi et iura monasteriorum contra statuta canonum illicita presumptione usurpentur, ita ut pene ex cenobio fiat seculare domicilium atque illustris portio Christi ad ignominiam seruitutemque perueniat. Quapropter iubemus et statuimus uos qui aecclesiae presunt, ut ultra talia non presumant. Sed hoc tantum sibi in monasteriis uendicent sacerdotes, quod precipiunt canones et nil amplius id est monachos ad sanctam conuers(at)ionem premonere, abbates constituant secundum uoluntatem monachorum, et si deuiauerit corrigat secundum canonum instituta.20 Et in concilio Aurelianensi: Abbates pro humilitate religionis in potestate episcoporum consistant, ita ut si extra regulam fecerint, ab episcopo corrigantur.21

j ab add. MS (rep.).

The Professions of Abbots

119

first among you, let him be servant to all. Even as the Son of man is not come to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his life a redemption for many.18 For so small a matter there should be absent therefore from the priests of the Lord any blemish of factiousness or foolishness of spirit. For whether they want to be or not, abbots are subject to bishops, as is right and proper,19 and in no way can they free their necks fully from their subjection if they are monks and wish to maintain their promised obedience. For whatever ecclesiastical matters the monks can be involved in or properties they can own without episcopal grant or concession, these I say are the concern of bishops. They ordain the same abbots and monks who are subject to them, and their clerics. They confirm not only laymen but even the monks themselves. They dedicate their churches and their altars and consecrate their sacraments. They give chrism to the churches of the monks and oil for anointing the sick. Without their bishop’s permission they may not build any church or construct a new cell. Without their licence they cannot possess any church or acquire or own any tithes. They are subject to the bishops in almost every kind of ecclesiastical matter, and concerning them other authorities must be cited. This is set forth in the fourth Council of Toledo: It is made known to the present council how monks are being freed from servile works by episcopal order, and that they have usurped illicitly, against the statutes of the canons, the rights of monasteries, so that practically secular dwellings are being made out of monasteries and a part of the illustrious benefice of Christ is reduced to ignominy and servitude. Because of this we order and establish that you who exercise authority in the church do not take such matters upon yourselves. But priests should claim for themselves in the monasteries only that which the canons direct and nothing more, that is, to admonish monks to a holy manner of life, to establish abbots according to the monks’ will, and correct them if they go astray, according to the established canons.20 And in the Council of Orléans: For the humility of the religious life abbots are in the power of the bishops, so that if they step beyond the Rule, they are corrected by the bishop.21

18 Matt. 20.27; cf. Mark 10.44. 19 Cf. Ps. 32.1. 20 Council of Toledo iv (633), 51 (Mansi, 10:631) (from ‘hoc tantum’ in Gratian, Decretum, C 18.2.1 [ed. Friedberg, col. 829]). 21 Ivo, Decretum, 7.85 (PL, 161:565A–B); Gratian, Decretum, C 18.2.16 (ed. Friedberg, col. 833).

120

De professionibus abbatum

Sed hic queri solent quidam cur episcopi non habent potestatem super monachos, cum habeant super abbates. R: Quia monachus de omnibus est omnino sub suo abbate. Abbas uero sub suo episcopo. Non licet episcopo aliquem monachum sub abbate excommunicare aut cedere, aut ordinare aut degredari, aut ab eok confessionem accipere sine permissu sui abbatis, aut ei aliquid iniungere quia si hec omnia episcopis liceret, magnas discordias atque lites inter episcopos et abbates sepiss(im)e orirentur. Non licet etiam episcopo in aliquam aecclesiam cenobialeml ponere sedem uel statum sibi, uel aliquod officium agere absque permissu abbatis et congregationis, uel aliquid repetere in ea quasi ex debitom nullam omnino rem22 uel aliquid in ea (com)poneren uel ordinare intus uel foris sicut beatus Gregorius uetat ut supra prescripsimus. De ceteris autem rebus quae ad episcopium pertinent debent ei esse subiecti et ab eo petere humiliter, et cum ad eos uenit causa uisitationis et ortationis debent eum recipere humiliter et caritatiueo, atque omnimodis honorare sicut dominum et Christi uicarium. Que ergo contentio est pro una subscriptione? Cum hoc uolunt per uim (h)aberep quod ambitiose appetunt, perdunt quod (h)aberep possent et recte eis debetur id est amorem et humile seruicium fiuntque causa scandali intra sancta aecclesia timerique deberent domini sui comminationem quam minatur dicens: Qui scandalzauerit unum de p i e ei u s m a in c eius, et d in p m23 et post paululum: Ve illi per quem s uenit.24 Est et aliud quod intercludit rationabiliter subscriptiones abbatum. Sunt quedam cenobia tam libera per priuilegia romana uel per precepta regalia ab ac consuetudine subscriptionis, ut nullus episcopus uel metropolitanus audeat contra eos de ac re contendere. Decet igitur ut una aecclesia sit libera et alia ancilla,25 cum constet uniuersam aecclesiam per orbe diffusam, unam esse et totam liberam per Christi gratiam? Quid eam uultis ex parte ancillare? Aut tota sit libera, aut si non uultis, contendite si potestis sicut et facitis ut tota sit ancilla, quod non poteritis siq p(e)nnis uolare posseisr. Absit igitur a sancta aecclesia quae una et

k abbeo corr. ab eo MS. l cenobiali MS. m dibito MS. n (com) preonere MS. o caritatiuere MS. p (h)aberere MS. q hic ras. ca. 4 litt. r posse is (t grat.).

The Professions of Abbots

121

But some ask why the bishops do not have the power over monks that they have over abbots. I reply: Because in all things the monk is entirely under his abbot. The abbot is under his bishop. It is not permitted to a bishop to excommunicate any monk under an abbot or defer to him, or to ordain or degrade him, or to hear his confession without permission from his abbot, or to give him orders, because if all these were allowed to a bishop, great discords and lawsuits between bishops and abbots would frequently arise. A bishop is not even allowed to establish his seat or himself in any monastic church, or to perform any office without the permission of the abbot and his congregation, or to demand anything from it, as of right, to settle anything at all,22 or decide anything inside or outside, as the blessed Gregory forbids, as we have cited above. Concerning other matters pertaining to the episcopate, they must be subject to him and make their requests humbly to him, and when he comes to them for the sake of visitation and prayer, they ought to receive him humbly and charitably, and honor him in every way as their master and as a vicar of Christ. Why then is there contention about subscription alone? When they want to obtain by force what they strive after with covetousness, they lose what they could have, and what is rightly owed them – love and humble service – and cause scandals within holy church, and the fear they owe their Lord, who said in threat: But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea.23 And a little later: Woe to them because of scandals.24 And there is something else which quite reasonably precludes the subscription of abbots There are certain monasteries that, because of privileges from Rome or royal decrees, are so free from this custom of subscription that no bishop or metropolitan dare argue against them about the matter. Is it therefore proper that one church be free and another a bondwoman,25 when it is agreed that the universal church is spread throughout the world and is one and wholly free by Christ’s grace? For what reason do you wish it to be in part a bondwoman? Either it should be entirely free, or if you do not wish this, try if you can to act as though it were entirely a bondwoman, which you would not be able to do if you had wings to fly with. Heaven forbid therefore that the holy church that is one and

22 23 24 25

Benedict, Regula, 33.3. Matt. 18.6. Matt. 18.7. Gal. 4.22.

122

De professionibus abbatum

eadem est absit inquam a nobis, qui libertatis uigore qua libertate Christus nos liberauit26 compacti sumus, aliam aecclesiam liberam, aliam seruam faciamus. Absit ut sponsa Christi quam sanguine suo liberauit et dotauit in ancillatum redigatur, et istam gaudere, illam lugere compellatur. Quapropter domini sacerdotes qui locum tenetis summi sacerdotis et ueri sponsi sanctae aecclesiae cuius signum sponsionis portatis in digitis, auferte scandalum a sancta aecclesia propter tantillam causam, quia ut iam diximus et testamur uelint nolint non possunt uobis inobedientes esse quos ipsi creabitis et constituetis abbates. Tantundem enim ualet super abbatem scrutinium, quantum ipsa subscriptio quam queritis ab eis. Nam superscriptio non est nisi confirmatio. Si uultis scire modum et formam scrutinii breuiter ponemus. Interrogatio: Est mens et operatio tua munda ab omni surreptione symonie? R: Est plane. At ille: Deo gratias. Vis ergo tuum propositum et sancti Benedicti regulam obseruare, tibique subiectos ut idipsum faciant regulariter instruere? R: Volo. Vis rebus aecclesiae inibi coadunatis fideliter custodiam adibere, easque in usus aecclesiae et fratrum atque pauperum fideliter distribuere? R: Volo et opto. Vis (h)uics aecclesiae sanctae et mihi meisque successoribus subiectus et obediens esse secundum canonum instituta? R: Volo. Et ille: Ista et omnia alia bona det tibi deus implere. Qui assunt r: amen. Hoc est modu scrutiniit. Quod scrutinium non debetis pretermittere, nec illi ullo modo refutare, uel refugere. Nam cum eos interrogaueritis sicut debetis et rectum est in omni aecclesiastica consecratione quae supra posuimus si hoc renuerint confiteri uel concedere sed in aliquo contradixerint, deinceps nolite eos consecrare quia nullomodo debetis. Contradicunt enim aperte statutis ecclesiasticis, et omnino modum suae professionis uidentur excedere. Quod si suae regulae uolunt et promittunt obtemperare quae eos de humilitate, de obedientia, de ceteris morum ornamentis edocet, et si aecclesiis uestris et uobis ut bona membra cupiunt incorporari, quid amplius queritis? Ne uero longius protraatur hec nostra oratio, simpliciter profitemur et attestamuru non oportere ullo modo monachos professionem duplicare,

s huius MS. t -que successoribus … scrutinii in marg.

u attestamus ante corr.

The Professions of Abbots

123

the same, I say, heaven forbid that we who are united by the force of freedom, by which freedom wherewith Christ has made us free,26 should make one church free and another a servant. Heaven forbid that the bride of Christ whom He freed with his blood and endowed should be reduced to servitude and be compelled to rejoice over the one and mourn over the other. For which reason do you bishops’ priests who hold a place at the highest point of the priesthood and of the true bride of holy church, whose mark of marriage you wear on your finger, remove the scandal caused by so small a matter from holy church, because, as we have just now said and testified, whether they want to or not they cannot be disobedient to you, who will elect and constitute them abbots. For the subscription you ask of them is as strong as the examination of an abbot. For the superscription is nothing if not a confirmation. If you wish to know the style and form of the examination we shall set it out briefly. Cross-examination: Q. Are your thoughts and deeds free of all suggestion of simony? R. They are certainly. Q. Thanks be to God. Do you wish to observe your way of life and the Rule of St Benedict, and instruct those subject to you to act in accordance with the Rule? R. I do. Q. Do you wish to conduct yourself faithfully as a custodian of the goods of the church there, and faithfully distribute them for the use of the church and your brothers and the poor? R. I wish and hope to. Q. Do you wish to be subject to this holy church and me and my successors and to be obedient according to the established canons? R. I do. Q. May God grant it to you to fulfill these and all other good acts. Let those present respond: Amen. This is the method of examination. You may not omit this examination, nor in any way rebut or avoid it. For when you have interrogated them as you should, it is right in all ecclesiastical consecrations, which we have outlined above, that if they refuse to confess or concede but contradict in any way, then do not consecrate them, because you must emphatically not do so. Such men patently contradict church statutes and can be seen to depart from their profession entirely. And if they wish and undertake to conform to their Rule, which instructs them concerning humility, obedience, and other signs of good morals, and if they desire to be incorporated into you and your churches as good members, what more do you ask? Our discourse will not be protracted any longer. We simply declare and attest that it is not proper for monks to repeat their profession

26 Gal. 4.31.

124

De professionibus abbatum

quando assciscuntur in monasteriorum regimine. Et ut firmum sit quod dicimus et audacter attestamurv, auctoritatem Vrbani pape ad medium proferatur.27 Vetus consuetudo erat aecclesiae Maioris Monasterii facere professionem Turonice matri aecclesiae. Quae consuetudo durauit usque ad tempus donni Bernardi abbatis.28 Postquam uero iste defunctus est, sagacitas Maioris Monasterii elegit sibi ad regimen sui unum ex suis qui ante exstiterat episcopus Suessionis ciuitatis nomine Helgotus.29 Quod ideo fecerunt, ut non benediceretur. Non enim est consuetudo ut minor benedictio subponatur maiori. Et si non benedicitur, subscriptio non exigitur ab eo. Et si exigitur, rationabiliter denegatur. Quod ita factum est. Nam quia episcopus fuerat consecratus, nec benedici potuit nec subscribere debuit. Isto autem ad paruum tempus defuncto, elegerunt alium de suis nomine Wilielmum genus ducisw Britonum.30 Qui ut factus est abbas, timens ne illa congregatio peniteret illum super se posuisse quia de alienigena gente erat et per hoc abere alium studerent sicut et fecissent si se non prouidisset neque enim est aliquis qui degustato honore uelit eum relinquere, de consecratione sua et per se et per mediatores suos cum Turonico pontifice agere sermonem cepit. Sed propter subiectionis exactionem, a monachis clerici dissidebant. Propter hanc causam in aecclesia beati Mauricii que mater est aecclesia ciuitatis Turonice conuenire non potuerunt. Consilio igitur inito31 in beati Iuliani cenobium conuenerunt, ubi clericis absentibus abbas Maioris Monasterii liberius intronizaretur. Ventum est ad hoc. Reuestitis omnibus introitum misse inchoauerunt cum magno gaudio. Lecto euangelio, de scrutinio tractari cepe(runt). Tractandox, uentum est ad nodum professionis, et confestim enituit decipula exactionis. Non potuerunt decipi sagaces monachi Maioris Monasterii, sed statim suum abbatem auocauerunt a responsionibus illicitis.

v attestamus ante corr.

w ducens MS.

x Trantando MS.

The Professions of Abbots

125

when they are associated in the full regime of monasteries. And so that what we say and boldly attest should be firmly established, we bring to your notice the authority of pope Urban.27 It was an old custom of the church of Marmoutier to make a profession to the mother church at Tours. This custom lasted until the time of lord abbot Bernard.28 After his death the wisdom of Marmoutier elected as its ruler one of its own, named Hilgot, who had previously been the bishop of the city of Soissons.29 They arranged it this way in order that he should not be blessed. For it is not customary that a lesser benediction should be superimposed on a greater. And if he was not blessed the subscription was not demanded of him. And if it were demanded it might reasonably be refused, which is what happened. For since he had been consecrated bishop, he could not be blessed, and so did not have to subscribe. After a short time, however, he died and they elected another from their number, named William, of the family of the dukes of the Bretons.30 When he was made abbot, fearing lest the congregation should regret having appointed him over them because he was from a foreign country and for this reason would try to have another, as they would have done if he had not foreseen it (for there is no one who having tasted the honor wishes to give it up), he started to consult the archbishop of Tours, on his own and through intermediaries, concerning his consecration. But because of the demand for subjection the clerics disagreed with the monks. Because of this they could not convene in the church of the blessed Maurice, the mother church of the city of Tours. When the council therefore was begun,31 they met in the monastery of the blessed Julian where, the clerics being absent, the abbot of Marmoutier was more freely enthroned. It so happened that when everyone was robed they began the introit of the Mass with great joy. After the gospel was read they began to carry out the examination. As this proceeded, they arrived at the crux, the profession of obedience, and at once the trap set by the demand for service became clear. The wise monks of Marmoutier could not be deceived, but immediately warned their abbot not to give the illegal responses.

27 Here and below, Urban for Paschal. On the dispute between Tours and Marmoutiers, see Constable, ‘Abbatial Profession’ (cited p. 18 n. 54), 107–8; and Introduction, p. 23 n. 74. 28 Bernard of Saint-Venant, abbot from 1084 to 1100 (J. Rabory, Histoire de Marmoutier et de ses prieurés [Paris, 1910], 1:150–73). 29 Hilgot of Neaufles, bishop of Soissons in 1084, abbot from 1100 to 1104 (Rabory, Marmoutier, 1:177–81). 30 William of Combourg, abbot from 1104 to 1124 (Rabory, Marmoutier, 1:182–200). 31 Gregory, Dialogi, 2.3 (ed. Moricca, 81–2).

126

De professionibus abbatum

Festinabat enim benedi(ci), propter supradictam causam. Sicque cum magna dissensione quique a(d) propria redierunt, abbas absque benedictione, archiepiscopus absque requisita professione. Tunc monachi quam cicius potuerunt cum suo abbate usque Romam peruolarunt, et ibi consecrationem abbati suo ab ipso papa Vrbano receperunt, et in priuilegium acceperunt ab ipso papa, ut nullus deinceps abbas Maioris Monasterii quoquomodo subscriberet.32 Erat tunc quando hoc priuilegium aecclesia Maioris Monasterii accepit a Romana sede presens quidam abbas de cenobio Burguliensi nomine Baldricus qui postea fuit archiepiscopus Dolensis in Britannia uiry litteratus atque facundus simulque religiosus et pro hoc nimium carus eidem uenerabili papa Vrbano.33 Hic quamuis esset monachus et abbas monachorum, tamen quia ipse cum ceteris conprouincialibus abbatibus semper absque ulla contradictione subscripserat, cepit quasi contradicere huic priuilegio non tamen palam, opponens supradictam rationem, non esse scilicet rectum ut una aecclesia existeret libera, alia ancilla. Cuius uerbis respondit papa dicens: Monachus postquam in monachatus sui tyrocinio professionem semel fecit, iterum profiteri non habet, quia obedire omnibus hominibus et episcopis precipue monachi proprium est. Quod edictum ille abbas generale subintulit fore. Et papa ad hec alta uoce: Generale inquam sit. Qui presentes aderant, r: Fiat, fiat. Sed non est mirum o domini abbates si in hoc et in multis aliis rebus a dominis sacerdotibus et eorum clericis sustinetis tantas molestias. Vix enim admodum inuenitur aliquis in ordine uestro qui pure et secundum deum ingrediatur in prelatione, sed omnes aut per fenestras aut per latera uel quod turpius per desubtus limen introeunt in ouile domini, et nemo per ostium. Qui autem non intrat per ostium secundum domini dictum fur est et latro.34 Fur uero non uenit nisi ut perdat et mactet.35 Si uero est aliquis quamuis perraro qui intret per ostium, ut se uidet in honore stabilitum et confirmatum statim relinquit ouinam pellem qua se ante induerat et

y hic ras. ca. 7 litt. MS.

The Professions of Abbots

127

For this reason he hurried on towards the blessing. And thus amid great dissension each returned to his own place, the abbot without his blessing and the archbishop without his required profession of obedience. Then the monks with their abbot hastened as fast as they could to Rome and there received the consecration of their abbot from pope Urban himself, and accepted from the same pope the privilege that no subsequent abbot of Marmoutier would have to subscribe in any way.32 There was present at that time, when the church of Marmoutier accepted this privilege from the Roman see, a certain abbot from the monastery of Bourgeuil, named Baldric, who subsequently became archbishop of Dol in Brittany, a learned and eloquent man and a religious one too, and because of this extremely dear to the venerable pope Urban.33 Although he was a monk and the abbot of monks, and because together with other abbots of his province he had always subscribed without any contradiction, he began as it were to dispute this privilege, not however openly, but putting forward the above-mentioned reason, that is, that it was not right that one church should exist free and another servile. To which words the pope replied: After he has made his profession once in his novitiate a monk does not have to swear again, because it is proper for a monk to obey every man and especially bishops. This pronouncement, the abbot added, would be of general application. And the pope replied in a loud voice: I say this is to be generally applied. Those who were present replied: So be it, so be it. But it is not surprising, my lords abbot, if in this and in many other matters you should suffer such annoyances from bishops and their clerics. For hardly anyone is found at all in your order who enters into his prelacy purely and in accordance with God’s will, but they all enter into the Lord’s sheepfold through either the windows or the roof or side doors, or more basely under the threshold, and no one comes through the door. He that entereth not by the door, according to the Lord’s saying, is a thief and a robber.34 The thief cometh not indeed but for to kill and destroy.35 If indeed there is anyone who does enter through the door, even though it happens very seldom, so that he sees himself established and confirmed in his office, he at once puts off the sheep’s clothing in which he has dressed himself beforehand, and puts

32 This privilege is lost but is referred to in the privilege of Calixtus in 1119: see Ulysse Robert, Bullaire du pape Calixte II, 1119–1124 (Paris, 1891) 1.94–5, no 66. 33 Baldric, abbot of Bourgeuil (1079) and archbishop of Dol (1107–30). On his role in this dispute, see Constable, ‘Abbatial Profession’ (cited p. 18 n. 54), 107–8. 34 John 10.1. 35 John 10.10.

128

De professionibus abbatum

lupinum indumentum assumit opere et actione.36 Quis nanque uestrum talem se ostendit qualem beatus Benedictus et ceteri sancti patres iubent esse abbatem. Si quis uult audire qualis debeat esse qui preest, breuiter audire potest. Qui preest monasterio debet esse uite sanctae institutione duratus, non conuersione nouellus, sed qui diuturnum tempus in monasterio sub abbate desudans inter multos est comprobatus, quique etiam per exercitium uitam laboriosam tolerauit, cui per etatem et per cinceritatem uite parere subiecti non dedignentur, qui ab(s)que crimine notabili fuerit, qui circa omnes seruet iusticiam, contra nullum liuore odii inardescat, sed omnes ex corde amplectat, nullum despiciat, illorum leticiam suam et illorum tristiciam atque tribulationem suam deputet, qui semper sit paratus ad infirmitates subiectorum portandas secundum dicta apostoli,37 qui sit discretus, castus et si fieri potest flore uirginitatis ornatus, carus omnibus, humilis, mansuetus et doctus, qui non sit zelotipus et nimis suspiciosus,38 qui diuinis experimentatus sit documentis, qui in abstinentia ceteros precellat, in doctrina refulgeat, uini nimiam perceptionem respuat, cunctis in commune ut pater pius et prouidus prouideat, quem nec ira subita immoderate deiciat, nec superbia extollat, nec meror aut pusillanimitas frangat, qui et in patientia discretionem, et cum ira exibeat lenitatem, qui se subiectis ut ministrum non ut prelatum se ostendat, qui habeat et in correptione modum et in familiaritate temperamentum, qui plus timeatur ab omnibus amore quam odio,39 cui debet esse tanta sermonis et uite consonantia ut id quod docet uerbis confirmet operibus sedulis. Ecce audistis paucis uerbis qualem oporteat esse abbatem. Sed quis inueniet ex is talem? Nemo ut spero. Nomen et honorem omnes querunt, sed opus nominis pene omnes neglegunt, et quod est peius contra nomen operantur. Pastores dici uolunt, nec tamen esse contendunt. Officii uitant laborem, appetunt dignitatem. Immundorum spirituum feras a grege domini dilacerando non pelliciunt, sed quod remanserit ipsi consumunt, et quod est peius sanas dilacerant, et uulnerant immo occidunt. Quod infirmum est non consolidant, sed magis debilitant. Quod egrotum est non sanant sed magis frangunt.

The Professions of Abbots

129

on wolf’s clothing in his work and deeds.36 For (if one) of your people shows himself to be such a man as the blessed St Benedict and the other holy fathers, they order him to be an abbot. If anyone in charge wishes to hear how he ought to act, he can hear briefly. Whoever is in charge of a monastery should have been strengthened by the institutions of the holy life, not newly converted to it, but a man who has shown his worth among many, sweating under an abbot for a long time, and who has also endured a laborious life of physical exertion, who has not because of his age and purity of life disdained a life of obedient subjection, who has been without notorious crime, who serves justice with everyone, has not burned with hateful envy against anyone, but embraces everyone from the heart, despises no one, reckons their joy his own and their sadness and tribulation his own, who is always ready to bear the weaknesses of those subject to him, according to the sayings of the Apostle,37 who is discreet, chaste and, if possible, graced with the flower of virginity, is dear to all, humble, gentle, and learned, who is not jealous and oversuspicious,38 who has experience of divine letters, who excels the rest in abstinence, who shines in doctrine, who shuns an excess of wine, who cares for everyone in common like a father, pious and prudent, whom neither sudden anger depresses too much, nor pride exalts, neither grief nor timidity enervates, who shows patience in discrimination and gentleness in anger, who shows himself to those under him as a servant not as a prelate, who has both measure in chastising and balance in friendship, who is feared by all more in love than hate,39 in whom there should be so much harmony between his words and his life that what he teaches in words is confirmed in diligent works. There, you have heard in a few words how one should be an abbot. But who will find among them such a man? No one I expect. Everyone seeks a title and honor, but almost everyone avoids working for the title, and, what is worse, works against the title. They want to be called pastors, but they do not try to be pastors. They avoid the labor of the office, but crave the dignity. They do not entice away the wild beasts of unclean spirits from the Lord’s flock, tearing them to pieces, but they consume what remains themselves, and what is worse tear the healthy ones to pieces, wounding, nay killing them. They do not strengthen the weak, but weaken them further. They do not heal the sick, but enfeeble them more.

36 37 38 39

Cf. Matt. 7.15. Gal. 6.2. Benedict, Regula, 64.16. Cf. ibid., 72.9.

130

De professionibus abbatum

Quod fractum est non alligant, sed magis magisque quassant. Quod abiectum est non reducunt, sed magis pelliciunt. Quod perierat non querunt, sed inuenta proiciunt. Sed non est mirum si se ita agunt erga subditos, cum non propter animarum salutem eos suscipiunt ad regendos, sed ut inde habeant honores et magnas possessiones quas nobiles uiri et diuites huius mundi40 pro redemptione animarum suarum deo et suis pauperibus tradiderunt, quas isti perquirunt atque omni ingenio agunt ut eas habeant et possideant ut raptores et inuasores de rebus non alienis sedz dei atque sancte aecclesiae cum nil ipsi habuerint in seculo nec aliquid deo obtulerint de suo et deberent exspectare ut res suas sicut proprias Christus ordinaret et committeret cui uellet. Econtra nullus istorum exspectat uoluntatem dei atque eius ordinationem, sed inferunt se in ecclesiasticis honoribusaa nichil inde querentes nisi ut terrenum honorem quem ambiunt possideant, unde libitus suos possint adimplere. Est et aliud quod multis uidetur quasi mirabile, quia facilius ad hoc pertinguntbb qui minus ualent non solum in sapientia et religione sed etiam in seculi nobilitate, quam nobiles et sapientes et religiosi. Qui hoc cogitant debe(re)nt attendere quia non est hoc nouum ut peiores et uiliores melius in hoc seculo nequam41 (h)abent aliquando, quam meliores et ualentiores, et quoquomodo id fiat, absque dei ordinatione non fit, deberent autem mirari, si semper hoc fieret, et nullus bonus assumeretur. Sed cum modo istos modo illos assumuntur ad honores, nonnisi in operatione dinoscuntur qui sint a bono et qui a malo. At isti pardi de quibus ait Ieremias, si mutare potest Ethyopscc pellem suam aut pardus uarietates suas,42 cum se intelligunt per bonam uitam ad id peruenire non posse, nam in eis non est nec apparet, ad hoc omne studium suum apponunt, ut terrenis potestatibus possint in aliquo obsequi et per hoc placere. Promittunt enim eis omnia non solum que abent et que (h)abere poterunt, sed etiam se ipsos ad omnia que uirtus et sensus eorum attingere poterit. At terrene potestates cum eos tales intelligunt nil afore illos contra se sed illos et omnia illorum adesse sua, si eos in id quod cupiunt statuerint, fauent et consentiunt illorum ambitionibus tribuuntque honores si sunt tales qui dare possint, et si non sunt

z de rebus add. et del. MS. aa honoribus ecclesiasticis ante corr. bb uel a (= atingunt) super pertingunt. cc Ethyopb MS.

The Professions of Abbots

131

They do not bind up what is broken, but shatter it more and more. What is abandoned they do not restore, but entice away. What is lost they do not seek, but they cast off what they have found. But it is not surprising if they behave thus to their inferiors when they do not undertake to guide them for the salvation of their souls, but to have offices and those great possessions that noblemen and the rich of this world40 have delivered to God and his poor, for the redemption of their souls, things which they covet and strain after with all their abilities to have and possess, like robbers and usurpers of property not belonging to others, but to God and holy church, when they themselves will have nothing on earth nor will offer anything of their own to God, and ought to hope that their things should be like the possessions Christ orders and commits to whom He wishes. On the contrary none of them await the will of God and his ordinances, but snatch at ecclesiastical promotion, seeking nothing from it but secular honor, which they intrigue to get hold of so as to fulfill their desires. There is also something else which seems to many like a miracle, because those of less worth, not only in wisdom and religion but even in worldly nobility, attain it far more easily than the noble and wise and religious. Those who think about it should pay attention, for there is nothing new about the more wicked and more contemptible sometimes prospering in this wicked world41 more than the better and more virtuous, and however it happens, it does not happen without God’s ordinance; and they ought to be surprised if it happened all the time, and a good man never prospered. But since sometimes this man and at other times that man is promoted to high office, the good man cannot be distinguished from the bad except in what he does. However they are the leopards of whom Jeremiah says: If the Ethiopian can change his skin or the leopard his spots,42 when they realise they are unable to attain it by means of a good life – for it is not in them nor is it apparent to others – they apply all their efforts to accommodating themselves somehow to the powers of this world and thereby give satisfaction. For they promise them not only everything they have and everything they could have, but also pledge themselves to everything their ability and intelligence will be able to attain. But the powers of this world, when they realise they are the kind of men who will do nothing against them, but that they and everything they have will support their interests if they assist them in what they desire, they will then favor them and conspire to further their ambitions, and grant them honors, if they are the kind they can give, and, if they are not,

40 1 Tim. 6.17. 41 Gal. 1.4. 42 Jer. 13.23.

132

De professionibus abbatum

fiunt aduocati et intercessores fauoralibus precibus pro eis apud aures principum. Cum uero ad id quod ambiunt perueniunt, quicquid a donatore requiritur libenti animo conceditur, ita ut etiam fidelitatem iurare se(u) hominium facere non eos facere pudeat quod impiissimum est facere et magnum sacrilegium requirere et accipere. Abbates quippe qui id presumunt sub dei odio esse certissimum est. Nam absque ulla aesitatione symoniaci sunt. Et quamuis se pallient non esse quod sunt quia ad presens id est manum ad manu non dant quod promittunt, tamen ante deum cui nuda et aperta sunt omnia43 et ante homines qui dei amorem habent sunt heretici. Hinc canones: Cauendum est summopere, ac per uirtutem Christi sanguinis interdicendum episcopis et regibus et omnibus sublimioribus potestatibus atque cuntis factoribus et doctoribus quorumcunque atque censoribus seu ordinatoribus in gradu aecclesiastico ut nemo per symoni(ac)am heresim regiminis locum obtineat, quacunque factione, calliditate, promissione, seu commoditate, aut datione per se uel per emissam personam.44 Toletano concilio .xio.: Nullus premium accipiat pro ordine, pro baptismate, pro communione, uel pro ulla aecclesiastica re, nec ante nec post,45 et plura similia in eisdem Toletanis conciliisdd. Et Gregorius papa Virgilio Arelatensi episcopo: Nullus ex datione ecclesiasticorum ordinum querere presumat temporale commodum.46 Item ipse Ioanni episcopo Chorintiorum: Neque per commodum neque per gratiam aut quorundam supplicatione pallium uel sacri ordines dentur.47 Item ipse Etherio, Virgilio, Desiderio episcopis Galliae: Qui inuitatus et quesitus refugit, est altaribus admouendus. Qui se ingerit, est repellendus,48 et multa is similia in eodem libro. Si uero ratio queritur cur monachus et maxime abbas non debeat fidelitatem facere, audiat. Monachicus ordo officium est penitentis49 sicut dicit beatus Ieronimus. Scimus autem quod auctoritas iubet quod penitens quandiu est in penitentia nullum iuramentum faciat nec ab aliquo recipiatur. Quod si fecerit, < … >

dd conciliis Toletanis ante corr.

The Professions of Abbots

133

they become advocates and intercessors with favorable requests on their behalf in the ears of princes. When they attain what they are striving for, whatever is required by the donor is conceded with a free heart so that even swearing fidelity or performing homage causes them no shame, and this is most impious to perform and a great sacrilege to demand and accept. In fact it is most certain that abbots who presume to do so suffer under God’s hatred. For, without any hesitation, they are simoniacs. And although they purport not to be what they are, because they do not give what they promise in person, nevertheless before God to Whom things are naked and open43 and before men who have the love of God, they are heretics. Here are the relevant canons: It is greatly to be guarded against and, by the virtue of Christ’s blood, to be forbidden by bishops and kings and all the higher powers and all assistants and teachers of whatever kind and magistrates or controllers of ecclesiastical rank, that no one should obtain a position of authority through simoniacal heresy by whatever connections, craft, promises, benefits, or gifts, either by himself or an emissary.44 The eleventh Council of Toledo: No one should accept a gift for ordination, for baptism, for communion, or for any ecclesiastical sacrament, neither beforehand nor afterwards.45 And there are several similar prohibitions in the same Councils of Toledo. And in a letter of pope Gregory to Virgilius, bishop of Arles: No one should presume to seek by the gift of church orders secular remuneration.46 Likewise to John, bishop of the Corinthians: Neither by benefits nor favors nor anyone’s supplication should the pallium or holy orders be given.47 Similarly to Etherius, Virgilius, and Desiderius, bishops in Gaul: He who shuns entreaties and requests should be advanced to the altars. Whoever intrudes himself is to be repelled,48 and there are many clauses similar to these in the same book. If someone asks the reason why a monk and particularly an abbot should not swear fealty, let him hear. The duty of the monks’ order is penitential, as blessed Jerome says.49 And we know that authority orders that the penitent as long as he is in penitence may make no oath nor may he have one administered by anyone else. If he were to do this …

43 44 45 46 47 48 49

Heb. 4.13. Ivo, Decretum, 5.75 (PL, 161:351B); Gratian, Decretum, C 1.7.3 (ed. Friedberg, col. 427). Ivo, Decretum, 5.126 (PL, 161:366A); Gratian, Decretum, C 1.1.101 (ed. Friedberg, col. 398). Cf. Gregory, Registrum, 5.58 (MGH, Epistolae, 1.369; CC, 140:355). Ibid., 5.62 (MGH, Epistolae, 1.377; CC, 140:366). Ibid., 9.218 (219) (MGH, Epistolae, 2.206; CC, 140A:784). Jerome, Contra Vigilantium, 15 (PL, 23:367A).

This page intentionally left blank

D E L I B E RTAT E B E C C E N S I S M O NA S T E R I I ON THE LIBERTY OF THE MONASTERY OF BEC

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

Opere precium puto mandare litteris his qui sunt et qui futuri sunt post nos quo ordine et qua libertate Beccensis aecclesia constet ab initio. Neque enim uidetur absque culpa esse si per negligentiam scribendi ea que acta sunt preteritis temporibus aliqua perturbatio euenerit Beccensi aecclesiae, quoquo modo, aliquo tempore. Plurimum enim ualere solet noticia preteritorum. Igitur fundatio Beccensis aecclesiae constat initium habuisse a quodam militari conuerso nomine Herluino.1 Hic in proprio patrimonioa istud Beccense cenobium construxit, dei uoluntate et adiutorio, suoque labore et studio. De hoc non est necesse ut plura loquamur, quia et uita et actus illius optime perscripta tenentur.2 Tamen quantum ad rem quam in manibus habemus pertinet, breuiter dicemus. Hic cum iam quadraginta annos excessisset etatis, et omnino seculum deseruisset, a nobili quodam episcopo Normanniae qui ducibus terrae illius propinquus extabat nomine Herberto3 sacrum habitum monachi accepit, et non post multum tempus sacerdos et abbas est constitutus his qui ei adherebant, quamuis pauci admodum essent. Si queritur quare eum ordinauerit cum de illius parochia non esset, ideo hoc factum est,

a patrimonia ante corr.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

I believe it is worthwhile to set out in writing for those here and for those who will come after us the status and liberty with which the church of Bec was established from its foundation. For we should not be considered blameless if, through our negligence in writing down what had been done in earlier days, some kind of disturbance should befall the church of Bec in some way at some time. Knowledge of past events is usually of the highest value. It is well known therefore that the foundation of the church of Bec had its beginnings from a certain knightly convert, named Herluin.1 He built this monastery of Bec on land inherited from his father, by God’s will and aid and his own zeal and labor. It is not necessary to speak further about this, because his life and deeds have both been well described in writing.2 However we shall relate briefly what we have in our possession as far as it is relevant. When he was already over forty years of age and had entirely renounced the world, he received the holy habit of a monk from a certain noble bishop of Normandy, named Herbert,3 who was related to the dukes of that land, and who not long after he was appointed priest and abbot for those who had attached themselves to him, even though they were very few in number. If anyone should ask why Herbert should have ordained him when he was not of his parish, it happened

For a discussion of the sources and full publication details, see the Bibliographical Note on 168–9. 1 Herluin (c. 995–1078), abbot and founder of Bec. 2 Gilbert Crispin, Vita Herluini, in PL, 150:695–712; ed. J. Armitage Robinson, Gilbert Crispin, Abbot of Westminster (Cambridge, 1911), 87–110; and ed. Anna S. Abulafia and Gillian R. Evans, The Works of Gilbert Crispin, Abbot of Westminster, Auctores britannici medii aevi, 8 (London, 1986), 185–212; BHL 3836. 3 Herbert, bishop of Lisieux (c. 1026–49).

138

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

quia tunc aecclesia Rothomagensis absque pastore erat, et idem episcopus utpote propinquus ducis Roberti4 quaeque uolebat sine ulla contradictione faciebat. Hic uenerabilis abbas Herluinus nulli unquam hominium fecit de rebus aecclesiae suae, quia de patrimonio proprio pene omnia possidebat, et cetera de elemosinis baronum terrae illius. Professionem alicui episcopo numquam fecit, quia mos non erat ut aliquis abbas professionem faceret alicui episcopo. Hic uir nobilis genere et moribus postquam decessit, monachi illius qui iam ceperant adolescere in bonitate et religione prudentiam pastoris amissi retinentes cautis consiliis in omnibus seb prouidentes, deo se primum commendauerunt, orationibus et ieiuniis obnixe pietatem illius postulantes, ut dignum pastorem eis proponere dignaretur. Quorum orationes deus non distulit adimplere. Nam peractis orationibus et ieiuniis communi consensu elegerunt sibi in abbatem eiusdem aecclesiae priorem nomine Anselmum,5 qui iam tenuerat prioratum pene .xv. annis. Hoc fecerunt absque ulla inditione et ulla permissione alicuius aecclesiasticae personae. Electione peracta, innotuerunt hoc scilicet suam electionem principi Willelmo,6 quam ipse non refutauit, sed concessionem atque donationem distulit usque dum ueniret Brionnio quo in proximo erat uenturus. Qui cum illuc uenisset, misit tres ex optimatibus suis ad ecclesiam, scilicet Rogerium comitem,7 et Willelmum de Britolio,8 et Rogerium de Bellomonte,9 ut scirent et renuntiarent (si) communiter in electionem sui prioris concordarent. Qui pergentes et quae imperata fuerant peragentes, reuersi sunt ad dominum suum laeti et hilares. Dux autem ut cognouit per eosc communem uoluntatem conuentus et humilem illorum petitionem, gauisus est ualde, atque isdem baronibus iussit ut ei deducerent uirum cum aliquantisd fratribus. Qui uenientes ad cenobium iussa principis patefecerunt,

b pro sibi (?).

c is MS. hos in Mabillon, Annales (cited p. 3 n. 2). d aliquantibus MS.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

139

because at that time the church of Rouen was without a pastor, and the same bishop, being related to duke Robert,4 could do what he wanted without any opposition. This venerable abbot Herluin never did homage to anyone for the possessions of his church, because he owned almost all from his father’s lands, and held the rest in free alms from the barons of the area. He never made a profession to any bishop, because it was not the custom for any abbot to make a profession to any bishop. After this man, noble in blood and morals, died, his monks who had now begun to mature in goodness and religious discipline, though they had lost the prudent guidance of their pastor, took care to maintain his careful judgment in all matters. First they commended themselves to God, and by prayer and fasting resolutely requested Him to deign to designate a worthy pastor for them. God did not delay in fulfilling their prayers, for when their prayers and fasts were over they elected as abbot, by common consent, Anselm,5 prior of the same church, who by then had held the priorate for almost fifteen years. This they did without any declaration or permission from any ecclesiastical authority. Once the election had been completed, they informed William,6 their prince, and he did not disallow it himself, but deferred his permission and the donation until his arrival at Brionne, where he was due shortly. On arriving there he sent three of his magnates to the church, that is, earl Roger7 and William of Breteuil8 and Roger of Beaumont,9 to find out and report to him whether they were all in agreement on the election of the prior. They proceeded immediately to do as they had been ordered, and returned to their lord happy and in good spirits. The duke was greatly pleased because he had learned from them the general will of the community and their humble petition, and he ordered the same barons to bring the man to him along with some of the brothers. Coming to the monastery they revealed the duke’s order,

4 Robert I, duke of Normandy (1027–35), pilgrim to the Holy Land in 1034. 5 Anselm (c. 1033–1109), prior (1063–78) and abbot (1079–93) of Bec, archbishop of Canterbury (1093–1109). 6 William the Conqueror, king of England (1066–87). 7 Roger of Montgomery, earl of Shrewsbury (d. 1094). 8 William of Breteuil (d. 1103 at Bec). See Miracula s. Nicholai, 24, in Catalogus codicum hagiographicorum latinorum … qui asservantur in bibliotheca nationali Parisiensi (Paris and Brussels, 1889–93), 2:419; and Gesta, 8.15, ed. Van Houts, 2:226–30, 227 n. 7, 230 n. 3, and s.n. in index (2:338). 9 Roger of Beaumont (d. 1094/7), father of Robert of Beaumont (see n. 13) and uncle of William of Beaumont, abbot of Bec (see n. 25): see Porée, Histoire de Bec, 1:153 n. 1; Gesta, 7.4, ed. Van Houts, 2:96–8, 97 n. 7.

140

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

ille uero electus hoc audiens nimium reluctari cepit, sicut supra fecerat in electione (prioratus) ut in uita illius pleniter describitur.10 Tandem humilibus precibus monachorum uictus, iuit ad curiam cum aliquantis fratribus. Princeps uero Willelmus cum honore et gaudio suscepit eum, abbaciamque ei tradidit donatione baculi pastoralis sicut mos erat regionis, nec ab eo requisiuit ullum hominium. Deinde iussit cuidam episcopo qui presens aderat ut eum Beccum reduceret, et in statione abbatis cum honore poneret. Sed Anselmus nullo modo consensit ut bacculum portaret, nec aliquid agere uoluit nisi quantum in prioratu faciebat. Quapropter monachi accelerauerunt negotium ut benediceretur. Sed quia ecclesia Rothomagensis tunc extabat absque pastore, iussu principis Gislebertus Ebroicensis episcopus11 peregit hoc opus in ipsa Beccensi aecclesia absque ulla mentione professionis .viii. kalendas marcias.12 Huius uenerabilise patris Anselmi temporibus, Robertus comes Mellenti13 sua astutia obtinuit apud ducem Normannie Robertum,14 castrum Brionnense in dominio suo,15 quod actenus fuerat dominium ducibus Normanniae. Qui compos uoti sui, uoluit Beccense cenobium sub suo dominio possidere, eo quod idem cenobium in fisco Brionnensis castri constat edificatum. Tunc primum ut astutus homo priuatim aurem patris Anselmi per nuntios expetiit, rogans et quasi supplex exorans ut hoc concederet, promittens multas a(u)mentationes

e Huius uenerabilis ... re habuit (p. 146 line 6) add. (see Introduction p. 7).

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

141

but on hearing he had been elected he began to show extreme reluctance, just as he had on his election as prior, as is fully described in his biography.10 At length, overcome by the humble prayers of the monks, he went to the court with a few brothers. The prince William received him with respect and pleasure and granted him the abbey by donating the pastoral crosier, as was the custom of the region, and he did not demand any homage of him. Then he ordered a certain bishop who was present to accompany him back to Bec and install him ceremonially in the office of the abbot. But Anselm flatly refused to carry the crosier, nor did he wish to do anything he had not been accustomed to do as prior. Because of this the monks hurried through the business so that he might be blessed. But because the church of Rouen was then without a pastor, on the order of the prince this ceremony was carried out by Gilbert, bishop of Evreux,11 on the twenty-second of February,12 in the church of Bec itself, with no mention of profession. In the time of the venerable father Anselm, Robert, count of Meulan,13 obtained by cunning from Robert, duke of Normandy,14 the castle of Brionne in his own demesne,15 which up to that time had been in the domain of the dukes of Normandy. Having been granted his wish, Robert wanted to have the monastery of Bec under his control, because this monastery had clearly been built within the estate of the castle of Brionne. Then cunningly he first sought to gain the ear of father Anselm in private through messengers, making a request like a petitioner and entreating him to grant it, promising many increases

10 Eadmer, Vita Anselmi, ed. R.W. Southern (London, 1962), though the description there of Anselm’s election as prior (1.12, p. 12) is not very full. See also Vita Willelmi, ed d’Achéry, 42. 11 Gilbert, bishop of Evreux (1071–1112), accompanied Robert Curthose (see n. 14) on the First Crusade. 12 At this point there is a symbol indicating the addition (to ‘de hac re habuit’) on the supplementary fol. 186. 13 Robert I of Beaumont, count of Meulan and earl of Leicester (1046–1118), father of Waleran of Meulan (see n. 43): see Gesta, 7.4. ed. Van Houts, 2:96–8, 98 n. 1, and s.n. in index (2:330–1). On his conflict with Bec, see Porée, Histoire de Bec, 1:194–8; Bates, Normandy, 222; Vaughn, Anselm, esp. 106–48; and Tabuteau, Transfers, 294–5. 14 Robert Curthose (c. 1054–1134), son of William the Conqueror and duke of Normandy (1087–95). 15 On the castle of Brionne, here and below, see Ordericus Vitalis, Historia, 8 and 12, ed. Chibnall, 4:208–10, 6:354; Vita Bosonis, ed. d’Achéry, 48; and Gesta, 15 and 22, ed. Marx, 288, 296. See Donald Matthew, The Norman Conquest (New York, 1966), 255; and Tabuteau, Transfers, 327 n. 10. According to the Miracula s. Nicholai, 17, in Cat. cod. Paris. (cited n. 8), 2:414, it was taken from Bec by force.

142

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

aecclesiae de suis rebus, maximeque in eodem castro. Quibus pater Anselmus respondit: ‘Hoc non est meum concedere. Abbatia ista non est mea, sed domini principis Normanniae. Quod illi placuerit erit.’ Illi econtra: ‘Concessum principis facile assequi sperat dominus noster, sed uoluntatem uestram inde uult scire, et assensum uestrum inde habere.’ Et abbas: ‘Ego per me de hac re nichil possum facere. Dico autem uobis, quod difficilem rem ut estimo elaborat dominus comes.’ Et legati: ‘Quomodo?’ Abbas statim edisserit (causas). Quibus finitis, sine ulla controuersia reuersi sunt legati ad dominum suum. Comes audiens responsum Anselmi, obstupuit ad prudentiam uiri. Cumque hec ad noticiam monachorum uenissent, ueluti destructionem totius aecclesiae audissent exhorruerunt, et mature consilium inierunt quidnam (contra) agerent. Et facillime reperto, ducem Robertum festinanter adierunt, eique causam intimauerunt pro qua uenerant. Cumque dux hoc audisset, ira commotus magna uoce dixit: ‘Per mirabilia dei quid est hoc?16 Quae insania est quam audio? Vult comes Mellenti michi auferre abbatiam meam? Illam utiquef quam super omnes diligo, uult iste traditor mihi subtrahere? Per mirabilia dei de dono quod ei feci non diu gaudebit.’ Tunc forte superuenerunt Willelmus Crispinus17 et Willelmus de Britolio et Rogerius de Benefacta.18 Qui cum causam scissent magna indignatione commoti, magnis uocibus et terribilibus iuramentis protestati sunt quicquid sui parentes aecclesiae Becci dederant se auferre, si comes Mellenti cenobium Beccense in suo dominio quoquomodo haberet, simulque ducem uehementer increpauere quod clauem suae prouinciae homini infideli tradidisset. Quid plura? Monachi petita licentia redierunt ducis et principum promissionibus firmati. Post paucos dies comes Mellenti nesciens quid monachi fecissent, cum paucis uenit Beccum, uolens per semet ipsum animum patris Anselmi temptare de re supradicta. Cuius aduentum monachi agnoscentes

f lacuna ca. 19 litt.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

143

for the church from his possessions, particularly in the same fortified area. Father Anselm replied to them: ‘This is not mine to grant. This abbey is not mine but the lord prince of Normandy’s. Whatever pleases him shall be.’ They answered: ‘Our lord hopes to obtain the grant from the prince easily, but he wishes to know your wishes concerning it and to have your agreement.’ And the abbot said: ‘I myself can do nothing about this matter on my own. So I say to you I believe the lord count is taking great pains about a very difficult matter.’ And the messengers replied: ‘How do you mean?’ The abbot immediately explained the reasons in detail. After this the messengers returned to their lord without further argument. The count, hearing Anselm’s response, was amazed at his judiciousness. And when it came to the notice of the monks, they were horrified, as though they had heard of the destruction of the entire church, and they promptly discussed a counterattack. And having easily thought of one, they presented themselves hurriedly to duke Robert and explained to him why they had come. And when the duke heard this, he said angrily in a loud voice: ‘By God’s miracles, what is this?16 What madness is this I am hearing? Does the count of Meulan wish to carry off my monastery? Does this traitor wish to rob me by stealth of what I love especially above all else? By God’s miracles, he will not rejoice for long over the gift I have made him.’ Then it so happened that William Crispin17 and William of Breteuil and Roger of Bienfaite18 suddenly arrived. When they had learned what had occurred, they were moved by great indignation, and in loud voices and with most terrible oaths they protested that they would take back whatever their parents had given the church of Bec, if the count of Meulan should have the monastery of Bec in his possession in any way. At the same time they vehemently upbraided the duke for having handed over the key of his province to an unfaithful man. What more is there to say? Having sought permission, the monks returned, fortified by the promises of the duke and the princes. After a few days the count of Meulan, not knowing what the monks had done, came to Bec with a few men, wishing to put Anselm’s sentiments about the matter to the test on his own. When the monks learned of his arrival,

16 The duke’s expression here and below echoes Job 37.14. 17 William Crispin II, nephew of Amalric of Montfort (see n. 44) and brother of Gilbert Crispin (c. 1045–1117), abbot of Westminster. See William Crispin, De nobili genere, ed. d’Achéry, 53; Porée, Histoire de Bec, 1:195 n. 2; and on the Crispin family the introduction to Works of Gilbert Crispin, ed. Abulafia and Evans (cited n. 2), xxi–xxv. 18 Roger of Bienfaite, also known as Roger fitz Richard, witnessed royal charters frequently between 1101 and 1131. His father, Richard fitz Gilbert, was known as of Bienfaite and of Clare.

144

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

cum uehementi furore quasi ad destructionem loci uenisset presto ei affuerunt, scilicet Farmannus celararius, Eustachius, Albertus, Robertus.19 Quem tamen moderata uoce interrogauerunt qua causa uenisset. Comes econtra affectuosis uerbis ut mos erat ei cepit loqui. Monachi magna indignatione ad hec permoti, uehementer contra eum argutis uersuciis uilipendentes personam eius in hac parte, respondere ceperunt. Cumque utrique pro hac causa uehementer inter se contenderent, pater Anselmus superuenit, opponensque se medium inter utrosque compescuit. Deinde sedens dixit comiti inter cetera: ‘Domine comes hanc rem quam elaboratis habere nullo modo assequi ualebitis, quia nec dominus noster uult nec principes quorum beneficio uiuimus, et insuper domini et filii nostri nullo modo hoc concedere uolunt. Non enim est hereditas uestra hoc castrum, sed donum domini principis, qui quando uolu(er)it ut rem propriam repetet. Sed de hac re quidg opus est ut inter nos contendamus? Requirite uoluntatem domini nostri et uestri, et inde quod iudicabit et quod iusserit fiet.’ Ad hec Eustachius erigens se et manum dexteram eleuans contra aecclesiam, dixit: ‘Per istam aecclesiam cuius monachi sumus, si tu pater Anselme et dominus noster princeps .R. in hoc assensum preberetis, quod non spero, ante omnes de aecclesia exiremus quam hoc concederemus.’ Et conuersus ad comitem, cum nimia constantia dixit illi: ‘Domine Roberte, per istam aecclesiam iuro tibi quia quamdiu ego et ceteri monachi qui modo in hac aecclesia sumus superstites fuerimus, nullo modo nulloque ingenio libertas Beccensis aecclesiae per uos ancillabitur.’ Cumque et multa Eustachius et alii monachi presente patre autem contra comitem dixissent, comes cum nimia ira discessit. Cuius iram pro nichilo monachi duxerunt, ad hoc omnino studentes, ut libertatem suae aecclesiae liberam conseruare possent. Post paucos dies comes perrexit ad curiam. Quod cognoscentes monachi, et leuitatem ducis nimium pertimescentes, de suis elegerunt quos ad curiam festinanter direxerunt, et aduentum comitis duci predixerunt, multisque precibus exorauerunt ne in suis promissis erga Beccensem aecclesiam uerbo aliquo mutaretur. Quibus inuicem sermocinantibus, adest comes. Quem dux ut uidit, cacinnando dixit ei: ‘Domine Roberte quid est? Quomodo est inter uos et monachos Beccenses?’ Comes cernens monachos adesse presentes, demisso uultu respondit: ‘Bene. Quicquid enim iusseritis, benigne concessuri sunt.’ Et dux econtra: ‘Omnino mentiris.’ Et eleuans uocem cum ira, iterum dixit: ‘Per mirabilia dei o falsissime speras quod ita sim hebes, ut uelim tibi dare abbatiam meam?’ Et illapsus

g qui MS.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

145

they faced up to him in a wild frenzy as if he had come to destroy the place, that is, Farmannus the cellarer, Eustace, Albert, and Robert.19 Nevertheless they questioned him with restrained voices as to why he had come. But the count, as was his custom, began to speak to them in kindly words. The monks, excited to great indignation by this, answered him vehemently, contemptuous of the glibness and cunning he was displaying in the matter. And while both sides were arguing violently among themselves, father Anselm intervened and placing himself between them subdued them all. Finally he sat down and among other things said to the count: ‘Lord count, you will certainly not be strong enough to achieve the end you are trying so hard for, because neither our lord nor the princes from whose bounty we live want it, and moreover our lords and our sons have no desire whatever to grant it. For this castle is not your inheritance, but the gift of the lord prince, who can take it back as his own property whenever he wishes. But what need is there for us to wrangle over the matter? Enquire after the will of our lord and yours, and then what he decides and orders will be done.’ At this Eustace rose and raising his right hand towards the church said: ‘By that church, whose monks we are, if you father Anselm and our lord prince Robert were to offer your assent to this, and I hope you do not, we should all leave the church before allowing it.’ And turning to the count, with great resolution he said to him: ‘O lord Robert, I swear to you by that church, that as long as I and the other monks in it are alive, the liberty of the church of Bec shall be not be subordinated to you by any means or contrivance.’ And when Eustace and the other monks had said many things against the count in the presence of the father, the count left in a great rage. The monks counted his anger as nothing, concerned only with their ability to preserve the liberty of their church. After a few days the count went straight to the court. The monks knew of this and, becoming extremely anxious about the unpredictability of the duke, they chose some of their number and sent them quickly to the court to inform the duke that the count was coming, begging him with many entreaties not to change one word of his promises concerning the church of Bec. In the middle of this exchange the count arrived. When the duke saw him he said, laughing: ‘Lord Robert, what is this? How is it between you and the monks of Bec?’ The count, seeing the monks there, replied with downcast face: ‘It is well. Whatever you command will willingly be granted.’ And the duke countered: ‘You are an utter liar.’ And raising his voice in anger, he said again: ‘By God’s miracles, you hope, O traitor, that I am so stupid as to want to give you my abbey?’ And at a loss for

19 See the list of monks of Bec in Porée, Histoire de Bec, 1:628–9 (and 196).

146

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

in uerbis, ut mos erat ei quando irascebatur, quamuis raro, nimium exprobrauit comitem propter hanc rem. Comes, uidens suum studium in hac re fore uacuum, omnino resiliuit ab spe sua, et non post multos dies dux repetiit castrum suum,20 et de manu comitis abstulit, Rogerioque de Benefacta tradidit, qui hereditario iure illud requirebat, et inde Beccensis aecclesia pacem de hac re habuit. Quam abbatiamh strenue gubernauit per .xv. annos, postea propter multa negotia aecclesiae suae perrexit in Angliam permissu monachorum. In qua dum demoraretur, retentus est in archiepiscopatu Cantuariensis aecclesiae. Quod audientes fratres qui domi remanserant, grauiter tulerunt quod sine illorum permissu ista fecisset, immo quia eos deseruisset. Quae controuersia ex utraque parte multum diuque durauit. Tandem pace reddita, consilio illius immo iussioni illius uolentesi parere sicuti illi qui eos nutrierat et educauerat in omni religione, non enim ullum alium agnouimus nostris diebus qui tam ardenter dilexerit monachicam religionem, et tam bene et honeste atque prudenter sciuerit eam aliis edocere. Ille igitur sciens uoluntatem eorum, mandat eis per litteras ut abbatem eligant loco suo,21 simulque remittens eis bacculum suum pastoralem. Ad ista fit iterum magna perturbatio. Iterum mittunt, petunt, et multis praecibus exorant ut misereatur, nec eos ex toto relinquat, sed nomen et potestatem abbatis super se retineat, et per prepositos et alios perspicuos ministros, sub sua iussione et potestate domus tota intus et foris22 gubernetur. Ille uero econtra nimium reluctans nullo modo adquiescens praecibus eorum, mandat eis iterum ut abbatem eligant,23 reddens rationem ad illorum postulata, quod longum est hic inserere. Hoc diu multumque durauit. Ad extremum fratres uidentes suas preces omnino nil ualere ad id quod petebant, in illius electione posuerunt electionem suam, semper timentes de se ut uiri prudentes, ne si per se facerent electionem et non bene proueniret, ab omnibus merito culparentur.

h Anselmus add. in Mabillon, Annales (cited p. 3 n. 2).

i pro uolebant (?).

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

147

words, as happened when he was angry, though not often, he strongly rebuked the count about this matter. The count, seeing his efforts would be fruitless, abandoned his hope, and after a few days the duke reclaimed his castle,20 took it from the hand of the count, and granted it to Roger of Bienfaite, who demanded it by hereditary right. Thenceforth the church of Bec was undisturbed in this matter. (Anselm) governed this abbey actively for fifteen years. Later because of frequent church business he proceeded to England, with the permission of the monks. While he stayed there he was retained as archbishop of the church of Canterbury. When the brothers who had stayed in the monastery heard of this they were deeply offended because he had done this without their permission, and indeed they asserted that he had deserted them. Being maintained by both sides, this controversy lasted a very long time. Finally peace was restored, for they wished to follow his advice or rather his orders, as one who had nourished and educated them in the entire monastic life. For we have known no other in our time who will have loved the monastic life more ardently, and will have known so well how to instruct others honestly and prudently. Knowing their wishes he ordered them by letter to elect an abbot in his place,21 at the same time sending back to them his pastoral crosier. At this great disorder broke out again. Once more they sent to him and requested and entreated him with many prayers to have mercy on them and not abandon them completely but keep the name and power of abbot over them, and to have the house ruled completely, within and without,22 by monastic superiors and other clearsighted ministers under his authority and power. He indeed for his part was extremely resistant to this and, ignoring their entreaties, ordered them again to elect an abbot,23 and brought forward arguments against their requests, which would be too long to include here. This lasted a long time too. At last the brothers, seeing their prayers were quite without power to achieve what they wanted, arranged for him to organize his own election, always fearing, being prudent men, that if they should carry out the election on their own and it turned out badly, they would justifiably be blamed by everyone.

20 On Brionne, see n. 15. 21 Anselm, Ep. 148, in Sancti Anselmi … opera omnia, ed. F.S. Schmitt, 6 vols (Edinburgh, 1946–61), 4:3–6. 22 Ezech. 2.9. 23 Perhaps Anselm, Ep. 151, ed. Schmitt, 4:12–13. See (here and below) Giles Constable, ‘Anselm’s Move from Bec to Canterbury,’ in Auctoritas. Mélanges offerts à Olivier Guillot, ed. Giles Constable and Michel Rouche (Paris, 2006), 489–96.

148

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

Quapropter in eius iudicio et potestate posueruntj electionem suam, parati ad id quod uellet per omnia obaedire. Quod ut Anselmus audiuit, gauisus est ualde, et pro illorum bonitate et humilitate multum deum collaudans, direxit eis litteras plenas monasticae doctrinae,24 deinde iussit humili preceptione ut unum ex suis eligerent abbatem, scilicet Willelmum de Bellomonte,25 illique iussit per obedientiam ne in hac re ullo modo contradiceret. Quod (ut) iusserat factum est. Misit et alias litteras suo priori Baldrico26 priuatim, precipiens ei ut nichil de hac (re) priuatim ageret, nec ulla conciliabula priuatim monachis sineret habere inter se, sed in capitulo omnes communiter congregati litteras quas congregationi miserat coram omnibus recitari faceret. Deinde sicut in sua electione fuerat factum omnes singillatim per ordinem interrogaret quid quisque de hac re diceret. Si omnes communiter hanc electionem concederent, bene, si non, citius illi remandaret. Quod ut iusserat pleniter adimpletum est. Nanque omnes communiter consilio et iussioni illius consenserunt, quamuis multi ex illis multo aliter uoluissent, sed uoluntates suas uoluntati patris Anselmi supposuerunt, per omnia ei uolentes obedire sicut illi quem super omnem hominem dilexerant. Post haec ille qui legationem attulerat protulit alias litteras ex parte archiepiscopi transmissas duci Roberto pro causis Beccensis aecclesiae.27 Tunc fratres gauisi post aliquot dies curiam adierunt, scilicet abbas Rogerius monachus Beccensis aecclesiae,28 et Baldricus prior, et alii quamplures, simul et electus abbas. Interim quamdiu fuit Becco, locum proprium non mutauit. Venientes autem ad curiam, leto uultu recepit eos dux. Illi uero humiliter pro quo uenerant edixerunt. Deinde ille qui litteras attulerat tradidit eas Baldrico priori, et prior obtulit eas duci.

j 6 litt. eras.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

149

For this reason they placed the election under his jurisdiction and control, quite ready to do anything he wished. When Anselm heard this he was very glad, praising God greatly for their goodness and humility. He sent them letters full of monastic learning,24 and then instructed them gently to elect one of their number as abbot, namely William of Beaumont,25 and he ordered him by the obedience he owed not to offer any kind of opposition to the proposal. His orders were carried out. He also sent another, private, letter to his prior Baldric,26 warning him not to do anything secretive about the proposal, nor to permit the monks to hold any private meetings among themselves: they were to do everything assembled together in chapter, and have the letters he had sent to the congregation read out to them. Then, as had happened in his own election, everyone was to be asked individually one after the other to discover what each had to say about the matter. If everyone together agreed to this election, well and good: if not, he should quickly report back to Anselm. His orders were carried out to the full, for everyone agreed with his advice and instructions. Although many of them wanted something quite different, they subordinated their wishes to father Anselm’s, ready to obey him in everything, since they had loved him above all men. After this, the man who had brought the message produced another letter sent on behalf of the archbishop to duke Robert, in support of the church of Bec.27 Then after a few days the brothers gladly came to the court, that is abbot Roger, a monk of the church of Bec,28 Baldric the prior and several others, together with the abbot-elect. Meanwhile, for as long as he was at Bec, William did not change his own position. When they came to the court the duke received them with a joyful expression. They announced humbly the reason they had come. Then he who had brought the letter handed it to Baldric the prior and the prior presented it to the duke.

24 Anselm, Epp. 156–7, ed Schmitt, 4:17–24. 25 William of Beaumont, monk and abbot (1093–1124) of Bec, also known as William of Montfort: see Gesta, 8:6, ed. Van Houts, 2:210 and n. 2. According to his Vita, ed. d’Achéry, 41, he came from Montfort-sur-Risle, His father was named Thurstan; his mother, Albareda, was a niece of Roger of Beaumont (see n. 9). He was therefore a first cousin (once removed) of Robert of Beaumont (Meulan). See, however, Crouch, Twins, 16, 23. 26 Baldric, prior of Bec from at least 1078 until 1115. Anselm’s letter to him is lost, but see his Epp. 156–7, ed. Schmitt, 4:17–24, to Baldric and other monks of Bec, and Ep. 164, ibid., 4:37, to Baldric, referring to a letter sent secrete from Baldric to Anselm. 27 Perhaps Anselm, Ep. 163, ed. Schmitt, 4:36. 28 Roger, abbot of Lessay (d. 1106), was a former monk at Bec: see Anselm, Ep. 158, ed. Schmitt, 4:25–6; and Porée, Histoire de Bec, 1:103, 144–5, 242, and the list of monks on 1:630, where he appears as tenth in order of seniority.

150

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

Ille statim iussit cancellario suo nomine Ernulfo29 legere eas coram omnibus. Cunque perlectae fuissent, iocundo affamine dux dixit: ‘Per mirabilia dei opportet facere quod domnus meus Anselmus iubet, fiat.’ Tunc statim tradidit abbatiam illi qui electus fuerat, donatione bacculi pastoralis.30 Deinde iussit cancellario ut cum monachis pergeret ad archiepiscopum Rothomagensem,31 et illi ex sua parte diceret, ut quod ad eum de hac re pertinebat perficeret. Quod archiepiscopus libenter perfecit, tradens ei curam animarum. Deinde iussit abbati Rogero ut uice sua in statu abbatis eum poneret. Quod abbas Rog adimpleuitk ad matutinas no(c)te festiuitatis aecclesiae.32 Venerant enim tarde. Sed cum ad primam abbas Willelmus uenisset in chorum, noluit intrare in statum suum, sed in illum qui iuxta erat, nec ad missam in cathedra sedere, nec baculum portare, nec proprium sigillum habere usque ad benedictionem. Quam benedictionem nec ipse abbas unquam requisiuit, nec monachi per multum tempus, et hoc fecerunt per consilium. Cum uero illis placuisset requisierunt archiepiscopum Anselmum quid de hoc illi placeret. Ille adiudicauit fieri, mandans per litteras archiepiscopo Rot(h)omagensi Willelmo,33 ut dei amore et suo illum honorifice benediceret. Quod ille libenter annuit, dans diem in quo benediceretur. Ventum est ad locum. Cunque dies illuxisset, uenerunt ad ecclesiam. Tunc quidam ex clericis priuatim innotuerunt abbati quod archiepiscopus uellet omnino ab eo requirere professionem. Quod ille ut audiuit nimium perturbatus est. Qui cum uellet redire ad hospitium, prior dixit ei: ‘Domine, ad uos nichil pertinet de hac re, sed nobis1, sufferte et expectate, quid nos faciemus.’ Statim ipse et aliqui qui cum illo erant perrexerunt ad ducem Robertum, et audacter introierunt ubi erat. Quos dux ut conspexit, iucundo affamine dixit: ‘Quid est? Habetis necesse?’ Illi statim dixerunt causam. Et dux statim respondit: ‘Per mirabilia dei nullo modo uolo, ut abbas Becci faciat professionem.’ Mox

k ca. 12 litt. eras. l nobis super ras.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

151

The duke immediately told his chancellor, Arnulf by name,29 to read it out to everyone. When it had been read through, the duke addressed them affably saying: ‘By God’s miracles, we must do what my lord Anselm orders. Let it be done!’ Straightaway he granted the abbey to him who had been elected by presenting him with the pastoral crosier.30 Then the duke ordered the chancellor to proceed with the monks to the archbishop of Rouen31 and tell him on his behalf to carry out whatever was his responsibility in this matter. The archbishop did so willingly, granting him the cure of souls. Then he ordered abbot Roger acting for him to install William in the position of abbot. Abbot Roger did this at matins on the night of the feast of the church,32 for they had come late. But at prime when abbot William came into the choir, he did not wish to enter into his place but the one next to it, nor to sit in the abbot’s chair for Mass, nor carry the crosier, nor have his own seal, until he had been blessed. Neither the abbot himself nor the monks had ever required this benediction and they performed it after some deliberation. When they had decided, they asked archbishop Anselm what he would like in this matter. He judged it should be done, asking archbishop William of Rouen33 in a letter to bless William ceremonially for God’s love and for love of himself. He assented to this, appointing a day when he would be blessed. They came to the place, and at daybreak arrived at the church. Then some of the clerics advised the abbot privately that the archbishop would certainly want to ask him for a profession. When he heard this he was extremely troubled. Since he wished to return to his lodging, the prior said to him: ‘Lord, this business has nothing to do with you but with us. Take courage and wait to see what we do.’ Immediately the prior and a few who were with him proceeded to duke Robert and boldly went in to where he was. When the duke caught sight of them he addressed them affably, saying: ‘What is the matter? Do you need something?’ They immediately told him the reason. And the duke straightaway replied, ‘By God’s miracles I certainly do not want the abbot of Bec to make a profession.’ Soon after,

29 Arnulf (Ernulf) of Chocques, chaplain and chancellor of Robert Curthose, with whom he went on the First Crusade; patriarch of Jerusalem from 1112 until his death in 1118: see David, Curthose, 217–20; and Hans Eberhard Mayer, Bistümer, Klöster und Stifte im Königreich Jerusalem, Schriften der Monumenta Germaniae historica, 26 (Stuttgart, 1977), passim. 30 Cf. Vita Willelmi, ed. d’Achéry, 43: ‘dedit ei abbatiam more antecessorum suorum.’ 31 William Bona Anima, archbishop of Rouen (1079–1110). He was a former monk of Bec and student of Lanfranc. 32 Vita Willelmi, ed. d’Achéry, 43, dated this event 23 October 1093 and the blessing 10 August 1094. 33 This letter from Anselm to William is lost.

152

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

Ernulfo cancellario et Willelmo de Britolio et Willelmo filio Ricardi34 qui ibi presentes tunc erant precepit ut ad archiepiscopum prefestinanter pergerent, et ex sua parte dicerent ut Willelmum Beccensium abbatem cum honore benediceret, ita libere ut absque mentione professionis fieret,35 et hoc faceret, si omnino amorem suum retinere uellet. Illi uero statim perrexerunt quo iussi fuerant. Sed cum uenissent ad ecclesiam, ut callidi homines expectauerunt foras usque dum archiepiscopus altari assisteret. Erat solennitas passionis sancti Laurentii.36 Prior Baldricus fecit ad missam reuestiri abbatem de uestimentis Rotomagensis aecclesiae. Sic enim est consuetudo. Ante euangelium dum decantaretur sequentia uenerunt qui missi fuerant a duce ante archiepiscopum ubi sedebat, et dixerunt ei preceptum sui domini. Ille ut hoc audiuit, turbatus est non modice, uidens se interceptum. Sed ut sapiens uir et bene religiosus ad se reuersus postposita ira, exsequutus est mandatum sui domini, coram astantibus illis qui a duce missi fuerant. Benedictione finita absque ulla controuersia, reuersi sunt missi ad dominum suum, et monachi ad ospitium suum. In crastino rediit abbas ad archiepiscopum, et locutus est cum eo diutius priuatim, et tunc sic iuncti sunt amore inuicem ut deinceps aliqua discordia nullo modo extiterit inter eos. Cumque uellet discedere, iussit archiepiscopus uenerabili Willelmo abbati Cormeliensi qui et ipse monachus erat Beccensis,37 et cum priore Becci illuc uenerat, nam supradictus abbas Rog ante paucos dies in domino obierat, ut cum abbate Willelmo Becco rediret, et sua uice eum in proprio statu poneret. In crastino die uenit abbas ad suam ecclesiam, et tunc primum receptus est cum processione. Venit autem nudis pedibus. Sic enim debet fieri. Finita oratione, incepit abbas Cormeliensis, Te deum laudamus, et tunc posuit eum in proprio statu, deinde osculatus est eum, et omnis conuentus post eum, ut erant reuestiti. Deinde duxit eum in cameram, et

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

153

he ordered Arnulf the chancellor and William of Breteuil and William fitz Richard,34 who were there at the time, to make their way to the archbishop with all speed, and tell him from the duke that he was to bless William the abbot of Bec with the proper rites, and that this should be done so freely that there should be no mention of a profession,35 and that he should do this if he truly wanted to keep his love. They left at once for the place where they had been ordered to go. But when they arrived at the church, they prudently waited outside until the archbishop stood by the altar. It was the feast of the passion of St Lawrence.36 Prior Baldric had the abbot vested for Mass in the vestments of the church of Rouen, for this is the custom. Before the gospel, while the sequence was being sung, those who had been sent by the duke came to where the archbishop was sitting and told him what their lord had ordered. When he heard this he saw his prerogative had been overruled and was not a little disturbed. But like a wise and a truly pious man, he regained his composure and, setting his anger aside, he carried out the orders of his lord in the presence of those standing there who had been sent by the duke. When the benediction had been pronounced without any dispute the messengers returned to their lord and the monks to their lodging. Next day the abbot returned to the archbishop and spoke privately with him for a long time, and then, so joined in mutual love were they, that henceforth no kind of discord arose between them. And when William wished to leave, the archbishop ordered the venerable William, abbot of Cormeilles, who was himself also a monk of Bec37 and who had come there with the prior of Bec – for the above-mentioned abbot Roger had died in the Lord a few days earlier – to return with William to Bec, and acting for the archbishop install him in his proper office. The next day the abbot came to his church and was received with a procession for the first time. He came with bare feet, for this is the way it should be done. When prayers were over the abbot of Cormeilles began the Te Deum laudamus, then installed him in his proper office, and then kissed him, and after this, when they were robed again, the whole community did likewise. Then he led him into a chamber and 34 He is identified in Vita Willelmi, ed. d’Achéry, 43, as William of Bardouville (see Porée, Histoire de Bec, 1:245). A ‘Willelmus filius Richardi’ witnessed two documents in 1123? and 1125?: see Regesta, 2:185, no. 1391; and Round, Calendar, 536. 35 In Vita Willelmi, ed. d’Achéry, 43–4, the duke ordered the archbishop to bless the abbot ‘nichilque de eo exigeret’ and the archbishop did so ‘sine professione.’ 36 See n. 32 above. 37 William, abbot of Cormeilles (d. 1109), had been a student of Lanfranc at Bec: see William Crispin, De nobili genere, ed. d’Achéry, 55; Porée, Histoire de Bec, 1:55; Consuetudines Beccenses, ed. Marie-Pascal Dickson, in CCM, vol. 4 (Siegburg, 1967), xxix–xxx; and Gibson, Lanfranc, 198–9.

154

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

fecit ei a cubiculario proprio pedes lauari, et ipsa die manducauit cum fratribus in refectorio, et tabulae fuerunt coopertae. Haec omnia ideo breuiter annotauimus, ut cum necesse fuerit sciant qui post nos futuri sunt quomodo agi debeat. Hic uenerabilis abbas postquam abatiam suam .xxx. annism et eo amplius strenue gubernauit, humanis rebus exemptus est. Post cuius decessumn,38 omnis conuentus monachorum Becci uno animo elegerunt priorem suum nomine Bosonem,39 quia bonus homo erat et amabilis, et maxime quia fuerat ex disciplina uenerabilis Anselmi, et mores illius in aliquibus quammaxime immittabatur, credentes et sperantes pium pastorem illum fore. Nec frustrati sunt a spe sua. Quam electionem ipse pro nichilo ducens, illorum deprecationem surda aure transibat,40 tantummodo studens nimia sollicitudine ne aliqua neglegentia intus uel foris41 eueniret sub sua custodia. Ipse agebat quod ad ministerium suum pertinebat ut infirmus homo,42 monachi uero quod ad eos pertinebato. Ea nanque tempestate regio ista nimium extitit perturbata. Nanque Walerannus comes Mellenti43 et Amalricus comes Ebroicensis44 et Willelmus Crispinus et Hugo de Monteforti45 et alii quamplures contra regem Henricum46 arma mouerunt uolentes eum propellere a patrio solo,47 sed deo donante illorum conatus omnino adnichilati sunt et in capite illorum qui hoc conati sunt reuersum est. Pro his causis non modico (grauamine) grauata est Beccensis aecclesia.

m annos ante corr. n dieesum MS. o quod ad eos pertinebat … fecerant ut (8 primae lineae de fol. 188v) super ras.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

155

had his feet washed by his own chamberlain, and on the same day William, abbot of Cormeilles, ate with the brothers in the refectory and the tables were covered. We have noted all this thus briefly so that those who come after us shall know, when it is necessary, how such matters should be ordered. When this venerable abbot had ruled his abbey vigorously for over thirty years, he was freed from human cares, and after his death38 the whole community of the monks of Bec unanimously elected their prior, Boso by name,39 since he was a good and loveable man, and particularly since he had been trained by the venerable Anselm and imitated his practices so far as he could in every way. They believed and hoped he would become a pious pastor. Nor were they disappointed in their hopes. Arrogating nothing to himself from that election, he passed over their entreaties with deaf ears,40 being only extremely concerned that no negligence should be incurred within or without41 under his stewardship. Though a weak man,42 he did what his ministry required of him and the monks did likewise. At that time the region was in great disorder, for Waleran, count of Meulan,43 and Almaric, count of Evreux,44 and William Crispin, and Hugh of Montfort,45 and many others took up arms against king Henry,46 wishing to drive him from his paternal soil,47 but with God’s help their efforts were brought utterly to nought, rebounding upon the heads of those who had made them. For these reasons the church of Bec was weighed down with no little burden.

38 16 April 1124: see Chronique, ed. Porée, 6. According to the Vita Willelmi, ed. d’Achéry, 45, he refused to nominate a successor. 39 Boso, prior and abbot (1124–36) of Bec. According to the Vita Willelmi, ed. d’Achéry, 47, he was the disputant in Anselm’s Cur deus homo. He was probably the author of the letter on profession published by Henri Rochais, ‘Textes anciens sur la discipline monastique,’ Revue Mabillon, 43 (1953), 43–7. 40 On the expression ‘surda aure,’ see A. Otto, Die Sprichwörter und sprichwörtlichen Redensarten der Römer (Leipzig, 1890), 47–8, no. 212. 41 Ezech. 2.9. 42 Wisd. 9.5. 43 Waleran II, count of Meulan (d. 1166), son of Robert of Meulan (see n. 13), was a notorious figure, and there are many references to him in contemporary sources, especially books 12 and 13 of Ordericus Vitalis, Historia, and Gesta, 7:21, ed. Van Houts, 2:234–6 and s.n. in index (2:337). 44 Amalric (Amaury) of Montfort was granted the county of Evreux by Henry I (but see Gesta, 8:18, 32, ed. Van Houts, 2:234 and n. 21, 256 and n. 4). See n. 17 above. On the various families named ‘of Montfort,’ see Cokayne, Peerage, 7:708–17; and Douglas, Domesday, 65–70. 45 Hugh of Montfort was given the honor of Montfort by Henry I: see Haskins, Norman Institutions, 296; and Regesta, 2:143, no. 1186. 46 Henry I, king of England (1100–1135). 47 On this rebellion in 1124, see Ordericus Vitalis, Historia, 12, ed. Chibnall, 6:332–6.

156

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

At tamen monachi ut uiri cauti et prudentes de pastore eligendo non omiserunt, nec diu protrasserunt, sed electionem quam in priori suo fecerant ut (est)p potuerunt et ratio dedit, innotuerunt regi Henrico, et humili supplicatione petierunt ut uoluntati eorum daret consensum.48 Ille hoc audiens ut ferus homo omnino renuit. Erat enim ei infensusq, idem Boso, propter quasdam causas que inter ipsum Henricum et Anselmum quondam extiterant, unde iste multum adhuc causabatur. Monachi uero redeuntes ad ecclesiam innotuerunt quod inuenerant conuentui. Tunc omnes communiterr ut uiri edocti in sapientia et bonitate ad summum refugium quod est deus se conuerterunt, orationibus et ieiuniis assiduiss deum deprecantes, ut ille qui habet corda regum in manu sua frangeret cor illius principis ad illorum uoluntatem. Post paucos dies redierunt ad regem, postulantes supplici postulatione, ut consentiret ad illorum electionem. Ille uero nullo modo uoluit, sed precepit ut alium eligerent. Illi nimium tristes effecti, ceperunt inter se multa dicere. Inter hec exortae sunt causae per quas inpeditum est id quod quidam uolebant. Cumque essent in magna turbatione quidam bono corde uigens, dixit eis ut orationibus assidue instarent, credens quod ad modicum deus eos exaudiret. Iterum ipse qui hoc consilium dederat, et cum eo alius frater perrexerunt ad regem, et inuenerunt eum laetum et hylarem. Tunc humili uoce exorare eum ceperunt, ut uoluntati eorum bono animo assentiret. Tunc ille: ‘Spero quod bene erit. Ite modo, et deum exorare studete ut uobis consulatt, et mihi det salubre consilium super hac re.’ Post paucos dies uenit rex obsidere Briognense castrum, quod contra eum rebellabat.49 Ibi uenit ad eum archiepiscopus Rothomagensis nomine Gaufridus.50 Rex inter cetera quae locutus est ad eum postulationem monachorum Becci ei innotuit, et dixit se uelle adimplereu uoluntatem illorum. Cuius uoluntatem multum collaudans archiepiscopus, misit eum rex ad predictum cenobium, et cum eo Iohannem episcopum Luxouiensem,51 et Rogerium filium Ricardi,52 uolens certissime scire per eos si totus conuentus communiter in eius electione consentiret, aut si essent aliqui qui in hoc discordarent.

p priori suo fecerant ut (est) add. in marg. q infessus MS. r conuentui … communiter add. in marg. s assidue ante corr. t cosulat MS. u adimple/plere MS.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

157

However the monks, cautious and prudent men, did not neglect the election of their pastor, nor did they protract it for long. But they notified king Henry that they had elected their prior, as they were reasonably entitled to do, and with humble supplication made petition that he should consent to their wishes.48 On hearing this Henry, because he was a violent man, refused flatly. For Boso was hostile to him because of certain differences which had arisen between the same Henry and Anselm at one time, and for this reason Henry still felt resentment. When the monks returned to the church they told the community what they had discovered. Then, being thoroughly instructed in wisdom and goodness, they turned together to the highest refuge which is God, ardently beseeching Him with prayers and constant fasting that He who has the hearts of kings in his hand should crush the heart of this prince to their will. After a few days they returned to the king, entreating him with supplications to agree with their election; but he would not agree and told them to elect another. Saddened by this, they began to talk among themselves on many topics, and during this conversation the reasons for the denial of what some of them wanted emerged. And while they were in great distress one of them, stout in goodness of heart, said they should constantly renew their prayers, believing that God would pay some heed to them. He who had given this advice and another brother went once more to the king and found him cheerful and happy. Then in a humble voice they began to urge him to assent to their wishes with a good will. He said: ‘I hope it will turn out well. Go now and take care to pray to God to look after you and to give me wholesome counsel on this matter.’ After a few days the king came to besiege the castle of Brionne which was rebelling against him.49 The archbishop of Rouen, named Geoffrey,50 came to him there. Among other matters he touched on, the king informed him of the request from the monks of Bec, and said he wanted to carry out their wishes. The archbishop praised this desire highly, and the king sent him to the aforementioned monastery, in the company of John, bishop of Lisieux,51 and Roger fitz Richard,52 wishing to know through them without fail whether the entire community concurred in the election, or if there were any dissenters.

48 On this election and Boso’s unwillingness to swear homage to the king, see Vita Bosonis, ed. d’Achéry, 48–9, which in places verbally resembles (as in the king’s words) the account given here. 49 On Brionne, see the references in n. 15. 50 Geoffrey, archbishop of Rouen (1111–28). 51 John, bishop of Lisieux (1107–41). 52 See n. 18 above.

158

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

Et si omnes in una uoluntate inueniret, ex sua parte concederet quod petebant. Vt iusserat ita factum est. Cumque hi qui missi fuerant audirent illorum unanimem uoluntatem, archiepiscopus dixit: ‘Dominus noster rex benigne concedit quod bona uoluntate concorditer petitis.’ Conuentus gratanter et cum humili inclinatione gratias reddidit. Tunc archiepiscopus conuersus ad priorem dixit: ‘Dominus noster concedit huic conuentui quod toto desiderio diu petierunt, et ego tibi precipio ea potestate quam super hanc aecclesiam habeo ut curam animarum illorum et corporum suscipias.’ Ille ad hec respondit: ‘Hoc facere nullo modo possum, quia nimium infirmusv sum corpore ut omnes scitis, et tantum onus super me ponere non presumo.’ Audientes haec fratres humiliter prostrauerunt se in terram, petentes ne eos desereret. Videntes hoc qui missi fuerant admirati sunt ualde super humilitatem illorum, et ceperunt eum nimium obiurgare quod uoluntati illorum non adquiesceret. Ille econtra opponebat inbecillitatem suam. Tandem cum uidisset immutabilem fore uoluntatem illorum cunctorum, dixit: ‘Dico uobis quamuis coactus quia est alia causa pro qua non possum obtemperare uestris uoluntatibus.’ Archiepiscopus interrogat que sit causa. Ille coram omnibus noluitw innotescere. Tunc archiepiscopus duxit eum extra capitulum in secretiori loco, et iussit ut diceret. Tunc ille: ‘Olim cum apud domnum apostolicum Vrbanum53 conuersarer, promisi ei quasi ex fide quod numquam alicui laico hominix hominium facerem. Et si dominus noster rex hoc a me uoluerit ut (ei) faciam, quod nullatenus possum facere, timeo ne per hoc aliqua commotio oriatur in hac aecclesia, quod nullatenus uolo ut fiat.’54 Ad ista archiepiscopus ut sapiens uir multa respondit. Deinde reuersi sunt in capitulo. Tunc dixit archiepiscopus conuentui: ‘Audiui causam domini prioris pro qua se excusat obedire uestris uoluntatibus, sed ut mihi uidetur non est talis pro qua debeat hoc facere. Nunc autem reuertar ad dominum meum et hii qui mecum sunt, et dicemus ei quaeque uidimus et audiuimus, uos autem nolite cessare ab orationibus, quia ipse saluator sic dixit: Petite et accipietis, querite et inuenietis, pulsate et aperietur uobis. Omnis enim qui petit accipit, et qui querit inuenit, et pulsanti aperietur.55 Deinde exiit de capitulo et ad regem profectus est. Cumque iter ageret, aperuit episcopo Luxouiensi quare prior Boso nollet obaedire. Audiens hoc episcopus,

v 13 litteras eras. w uoluit MS.

x hominium MS.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

159

If he should find them all in agreement, he would for his part grant what they were asking for. His orders were carried out. And when those who had been sent heard that they were unanimous, the archbishop said: ‘Our lord king kindly grants what you have asked for harmoniously and with good will.’ The community gave thanks willingly and with humble gratitude. Then the archbishop, turning to the prior, said: ‘Our lord grants this community what they have long sought with all their heart, and I order you by the power which I have over this church to undertake the cure of their souls and bodies.’ He replied: ‘I cannot do this at all, because I am physically too weak as you all know, and I cannot presume to take so great a burden upon me.’ Hearing this, the brothers humbly prostrated themselves on the ground, asking him not to abandon them. Seeing this, those who had been sent were extremely amazed at their humility, and began to rebuke him severely for not acquiescing in their wishes. He for his part pleaded his weakness. Finally when he saw that their combined will could not be changed, he said: ‘I say to you, though under duress, that there is another reason why I cannot comply with your wishes.’ The archbishop asked for the reason, but the prior did not wish to make this known in everyone’s presence. Then the archbishop led him out of the chapter house to a more secluded place and told him to speak. Then he said: ‘Once when I was in the company of the lord pope Urban,53 I promised him, almost as if on oath, that I should never do homage to any layman. And if the lord our king wishes me to do what I certainly cannot do, I fear some turmoil will arise in this church because of it, and I certainly have no desire for that.’54 To this the archbishop wisely answered many things. Afterwards they returned to the chapter house. Then the archbishop said to the community: ‘I have heard the lord prior’s reason for excusing himself from obeying your wishes, but it seems to me it is not for such reasons that he ought to do this. Now, however, I and those who are with me will return to my lord, and we shall tell him what we have seen and heard. You however should not cease to pray, because the Savior Himself said: ‘Ask and ye shall receive: seek and you shall find: knock and it shall be opened to you. For everyone that asketh, receiveth, and he that seeketh findeth and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.’55 Afterwards he left the chapter house and journeyed to the king. And while on the journey he revealed to the bishop of Lisieux why prior Boso was unwilling to obey. On hearing this the bishop

53 Urban II, pope from 1088 to 1099. 54 According to Vaughn, Abbey, 163 n. 30, Boso ‘probably accompanied Anselm to Rome in 1099.’ He may have taken the oath at that time. 55 Matt. 7.7; Luke 11.9.

160

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

indignatus est nimium, et cepit inuehi uerbis super monachos. Quid multa? Venerunt ad regem, et archiepiscopus queque uiderat et audierat manifestauit. Ad cuius uerba rex nimium admiratus est, ex una parte uidelicet humilitatem et religiositatem fratrum, ex altera parte constantiam uiri. Cum hoc audissent episcopus Ebroicensis56 et episcopus Luxouiensis, ceperunt nimium murmurare coram rege, et dicere: ‘Nos qui episcopi sumus facimus hominium domino nostro, et iste monachus dicit se nullo modo facere quod omnes alii faciunt?’ Per hec uerba et multo amariora cum uellent animum regis ad iracundiam concitari, rex pacato animo et uultu sereno dixit: ‘Causa haec ad me pertinet, quod mihi placuerit erit.’ Haec dicens surrexit, et alias se contulit. Ipsa die redditum est ei castellum cum pace, et ipse diluculo mane surrexit, et contulit se apud sanctam Wiburgam,57 propter recreationem. Interim monachi positi sub dubia re et scientes certo relatu quod episcopus Luxouiensis et episcopus Ebroicensis uellent eis nocere, nimium timidi ad consuetum refugium concurrerunt, assiduis precibus deum exorantes uty illorum uoluntatem quae ex se erat ut putabant perficere dignaretur. Quorum preces adque uota deus non distulit adimplere sicut in multis iam fecerat et facit sua clementia. Nam post aliquot dies dum rex ad ciuitatem pergeret obuiam ei uenerunt Gaufridus eiusdem ciuitatis archiepiscopus et Ioannes episcopus Luxouiensis, et ceperunt simul equitare unus a dextris, et alter a sinistris. Cumque inter se confabularentur, ceperunt uerbum habere archiepiscopus uidelicet et episcopus de priore Becci qui dicebat se nulliz homini laico facturum hominium pro ulla re, uolentes regem ad hoc deducere ut mutaret suam sententiam. Verba quorum rex non diu ferens, sed conuersus ad archiepiscopum dixit ei: ‘Domine archiepiscope, scitote pro certo quia iste abbas nec mihi faciet hominium, nec uobis professionem.’ Et archiepiscopus econtra: ‘Domine quod uobis beneplacitum est de re uestra facite ut dominus, de re uero quae ad me proprie pertinet inter me et ipsum bene conueniet.’ Rex uero econtra: ‘Dixi uobis et adhuc dico, per mortem Christi, quia abbas Becci nec mihi faciet hominium nec uobis professionem.’ Ad haec conticuerunt ambo episcopi, et de re alia ceperunt loqui.

y super (?) MS. z nullo MS.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

161

was highly indignant and began to inveigh against the monks. What more is there to say? They came to the king and the archbishop explained what he had seen and heard. The king wondered greatly at his words, on the one hand at the humility and strength of religion of the brothers, and on the other at the steadfastness of the man. When the bishop of Evreux56 and the bishop of Lisieux heard this, they began to complain to the king and said: ‘We who are bishops do homage to our lord, and this monk says that in no circumstances will he do what everyone else does.’ Although they wanted through these words and some even more bitter to excite the king to anger, the king said with tranquil mind and serene expression: ‘This matter concerns me, and what pleases me shall be done.’ Saying this he rose and betook himself elsewhere. On the same day his castle was returned to him peacefully, and he arose at dawn and betook himself to St Wiburg for recreation.57 Meanwhile the monks were placed in a dubious position, and knowing through a reliable report that the bishop of Lisieux and the bishop of Evreux wished to do them harm, they ran hastily in great fear to their accustomed refuge, beseeching God with constant prayer that He would deign to fulfill their will, which, they believed, came from Him. God did not delay in fulfilling their prayers and desires, as He had done many times and still does by his clemency. For after several days, while the king was travelling to the city, Geoffrey, archbishop of the same city, and John, bishop of Lisieux, came to meet him, and they rode on together, one on his right and the other on his left. And while they talked together the archbishop and the bishop began to speak of the prior of Bec, who said he would not do homage to a layman for any reason, with the desire of bringing the king round to the point where he would change his mind. The king refused to tolerate their words for long, and turning to the archbishop said to him: ‘My lord archbishop, know for certain that this abbot will neither do homage to me, nor make a profession to you.’ And the archbishop replied: ‘Lord, in what pleases you concerning your affairs, act as lord, but whatever matters pertain properly to me, will be decided on suitably between him and me.’ The king answered: ‘I have told you and I tell you now, by Christ’s death, that the abbot of Bec will not do homage to me, nor make a profession to you.’ At this both bishops held their tongues and began to speak of other matters.

56 Odo (Audinus), bishop of Evreux (1113–39). 57 On St Vaubourg, which is four miles from Rouen, see Porée, Histoire de Bec, 1:287.

162

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

Post aliquot igitur dies, misit rex priorem sanctae Mariae de Prato Becco,58 mandans priori ut ad eum ueniret, et secum adduceret ex personis aecclesiae, mandans etiam conuentui salutem, et ut pro eo orarent, et ne ullo modo tristes extarent de re tamdiu protelata, quia modo paratus erat in omnibus adimplere uoluntatem illorum. Prior uero iter hoc prius recusauit, sed post precibus fratrum uictus perrexit. Qui ueniens Prato ibi remansit. In crastinum autem uenit rex ibi, et locutus est priuatim cum priore. Quid multa? Discesseruntaa ab inuicem pacifici. Deinde iussit monachis ut ibi remanerent usque dum ipse mitteret pro eis, quia admodum impeditus erat multis negotiis. Qui ita fecerunt. Post tercium diem mandauit priorem et monachos ut ad eum priuatim uenirent. Et ita fecerunt, continentes se in una secretiori camera. Vt hoc rex cognouit, dimisit a se omnes. Archiepiscopum uero et quemdam episcopum de Anglia et duos ex obtimatibus suis secum retinens,59 et uocans priorem et monachos ante se honorifice sedere fecit, deinde breuiter collaudans eos de illorum perseuerantia et de illorum bonitate quam in eos sperabat, tradidit abbatiam priori per quandam donationem sine mentione hominii. Hoc uidens archiepiscopus et ceteri qui ibi erant, admirati sunt ualde bonitatem regis erga ecclesiam Beccensem. Deinde requisitus rex a monachis quis poneret abbatem in proprio statu, uocauit episcopum Sagiensem,60 et iussit ut cum abbate et monachis iret Beccum, et eum honorifice poneret in proprio statu. Audiens hoc archiepiscopus, dixit regi: ‘Quia uideo bonam uoluntatem uestram erga ecclesiam Beccensem, ego ipse pergam et mittam eum in proprio statu.’ Audiens haec rex et collaudans hoc factum, iussit ut ita ageret. Ad pentecosten qui prope erat uenit archiepiscopus Beccum, et in ipso die festiuitatis reuestitis omnibus ut dies requirit ad terciam, ipse archiepiscopus ut erat reuestitus posuit abbatem in suo statu dum ebdomadarius incepit ymnum, Veni creator spiritus. Ad quam horam ibi fuit, et non amplius usque ad benedictionem.

aa dicesserunt MS.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

163

After a few days the king sent the prior of Notre-Dame du Pré to Bec,58 ordering the prior to come to him, and to bring with him some of the members of the church, and sending also his greeting to the monks in order both that they should pray for him and that they should not be sad concerning the matter which had been protracted for so long, because he was now ready to fulfill their wishes in all respects. At first the prior again refused this, but overcome by the brothers’ prayers he made haste and reaching Notre-Dame he remained there. Next day however the king arrived and spoke privately with the prior. What more is there to say? They left one another peacefully. Next he ordered the monks to remain there until he himself should send for them, because at present he was held up by a great deal of business. And they did so. After the third day he told the prior and the monks to come to him privately. They did so, assembling in a more secluded chamber. When the king learned of this he dismissed everyone, keeping the archbishop, a certain bishop from England, and two of his magnates with him,59 and, calling the prior and the monks, he respectfully had them sit before him. Then briefly praising them for their perseverance and goodness which he expected from them, he granted the abbey to the prior in a kind of ceremony of presentation without mentioning homage. Seeing this, the archbishop and the others present were greatly amazed at the goodness of the king towards the church of Bec. Then the king, asked by the monks who would install the abbot in his proper seat, called the bishop of Séez,60 and ordered him to go to Bec with the abbot and monks and install him honorably in his proper seat. Hearing this the archbishop said to the king: ‘Because I can see your good will towards the church of Bec, I myself shall proceed and install him in his proper seat.’ Hearing this and praising the deed, the king commended him and ordered him to do so. At Whitsun, which was near at hand, the archbishop came to Bec and on the very day of the feast everyone was vested as the day requires. At terce the archbishop himself, after he was vested, installed the abbot in his office as the hebdomadary began the Veni creator spiritus. He was there at that moment, but then removed himself until the benediction.

58 Notre-Dame du Pré (also known as Émendreville and Saint-Sever) was a priory of Bec located in Rouen: see the charter of 1096/7 in Haskins, Norman Institutions, 293. The name of the prior in the 1120s is unknown. 59 The meeting took place in April 1124, when bishop Hervey of Ely may have been with the king (Regesta, 2:141, nos. 1420–1), but the precise identities of the English bishop and the two optimi are not known. 60 John, bishop of Séez (1124–43).

164

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

Archiepiscopus ipsobb die fecit sermonem ad populum, et missam celebrauit. In crastinum summo mane antequam proficisceretur, iussit ut in sequenti sabbato ueniret Rotomago, quia in sequenti die dominica uellet eum benedicere. Factum est ut iusserat. Sed antequam ad ecclesiam pergerent, perrexerunt ad regem. Quos cum uidisset, laeto affamine uocauit eos et dixit: ‘Habetis necesse?’ Illi dixerunt causam pro qua uenerant. Rex cognoscens causam, uocauit Robertum de sigillo61 et alium clericum et misit eos ad archiepiscopum mandans et precipiens per amorem quem erga eum habebat ut abbatem Becci honorifice susciperet et abbatem consecraret, sine ulla mentione professionis. Et adiunxit: ‘Ita faciat, si uult retinere meum erga se amorem.’ Archiepiscopus ut mandatum regis percepit, sicut sapiens uir nil contradixit, sed per omnia adimpleuit. Ventum est ad missam. Archiepiscopus abbatem honorifice fecit reuestiri ornamentis Rotomagensis aecclesiae, et ante se fecit sedere usque ad euangelium. Ventum est ad benedictionem. Tunc archiepiscopus ad abbatem: ‘Quamuis non sit necesse mi domine ut te interrogem sicuti mos est alios interrogare et discutere, tamen ne consuetudo aecclesiae relinquatur, breuiter quero si uis subiectus et obediens huic sanctae Rotomagensi aecclesiae et eis qui ei presunt. Abbas respondit: ‘Volo.’ Et archiepiscopus: ‘Deo gratias.’62 Deinde incepit Veni creator spiritus, hoc ordine fuit benedictus. Post missam inuitauit eum archiepiscopus ad prandium suum. Circa uesperam uero redierunt ad regem gratias agentes pro omnibus bonis suiscc quae per eum contigerant in hoc negotio. Quas grates rex libenter accepit, collaudans nimium illorum prudentiam et religiositatem. Deinde admonuit eos ut laicus homo, ut ordinem suum districte seruare studerent, et ne hospitalitatem quae nomen magnum eis adquisierat relinquerent, dicens inter cetera abbati uerbum dignum memoriae:

bb ipsa MS.

cc suis expunc. MS. om in Mabillon, Annales (cited p. 3 n. 2).

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

165

On the same day the archbishop himself gave the sermon to the people and celebrated Mass. Early next morning, before he departed, he ordered him to come to Rouen on the following Saturday, because he wished to bless him on the following Sunday. His order was obeyed. But before they reached the church they went to the king, who when he saw them called to them with cheerful greeting and said: ‘Do you have what you need?’ They told him why they had come. As soon as he learned the reason the king called Robert de Sigillo61 and another cleric and sent them to the archbishop, ordering and directing him by the love he had for him to receive the abbot of Bec with due honor and consecrate him abbot without any mention of profession, and he added: ‘Let it be done in this way if he wishes to keep my love for him.’ The archbishop received the order of the king, and wisely contradicted nothing but carried it out in full. When they celebrated Mass the archbishop had the abbot ceremonially vested with the accoutrements of the church of Rouen and made him sit before him until the gospel. When they reached the benediction the archbishop then said to the abbot: ‘Though it is not necessary, my lord, for me to interrogate you in accordance with the custom and to interrogate others and carry out an investigation, nevertheless lest a custom of the church fall into neglect, I shall ask briefly if you will be subject and obedient to this holy church of Rouen and to those set above it.’ The abbot replied: ‘I will.’ And the archbishop said: ‘Thanks be to God.’62 Then the Veni creator spiritus began and by this order he was blessed. After Mass the archbishop invited him to take a meal with him. Towards evening they returned to the king, giving thanks for all the instances of his goodness which had benefited them during this affair. The king gladly accepted these thanks, praising greatly their prudence and religious zeal. Then as a layman he advised them to take care to preserve strictly their order and not to relinquish the hospitality for which they had acquired a great reputation, saying to the abbot among other things a word worth remembering:

61 Robert de Sigillo was keeper of the king’s seal from about 1121 to 1135 and bishop of London from 1141 to 1159: see especially Green, Government, 270–1. 62 Cf. the account of these events in Vita Bosonis, ed. d’Achéry, 49, saying that the king gave him the abbey ‘solo verbo’ and that the archbishop questioned him ‘iuxta morem.’ Boso replied ‘ut solet’ until it came to the question concerning obedience to the church of Rouen, to which he replied ‘Volo.’ When some of the clerics urged him to say ‘profiteor,’ he again replied ‘Volo,’ and, when urged again, ‘Volo, et ex corde Volo.’ The cardinal-legate John of Crema, who was present, then asked what more they could want, and the archbishop blessed Boso. On the legation of John of Crema to France and England in 1124–5, see Theodor Schieffer, Die päpstlichen Legaten in Frankreich vom Vertrage von Meersen (870) bis zum Schisma von 1130, Historische Studien, 263 (Berlin, 1935), 225–6.

166

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

‘Tu esto abbas intus in ordine tuo, et ego ero abbas in rebus exterioribus. Nam in quantum potero deinceps ero proficuus uestrae aecclesiae, tantum ut de uobis bona audiam, sicut hactenus audiui.’ Quibus dictis, dimisit eum cum gaudio. In crastino uenit abbas Beccum, et receptus est cum magno gaudio, ut dignitas Beccensis aecclesiae exigit, ut supra iam diximus. Rex autem deinceps nimium eum dilexit, intelligens in eum puram bonitatem quamplurimum etiam sapientem. Quapropter super omnes personas regni sui eum honorauit. Abbas econtra dulciter eum dilexit, et assiduis orationibus eum commendabat deo et sue aecclesiae. Quam ecclesiam pie et sancte gubernauit per .xiii. annos et .xxii. dies. Fuit enim sapiens homo magnique consilii, prudens et prouidus in omni actione sua, optime litteratus, benignus et munificus, caritate plenus, animo et corpore castissimus, pacientissimus, mente, uerbo et actu tranquillissimus, habens semper cor suum sub moderamine discretionis, super multos alios homines nostri temporis, monachos suos regens paterna disciplina, et eos diligens et fouens materno affectu. Quapropter quod de Ioseph legitur, de isto dici ueraciter potest, quia deus erat cum illo, et ideo in cunctis prospere agebat.63 Transiit autem e mundo media nocte festiuitatis sancti Iohannis baptistae,64 post multas subferentias et passiones sui corporis. Anima cuius sit cum anima domini et magistri sui Anselmi, ubi uiuit immortaliter, uidet deum perhenniter, letatur insatiabiliter, perfruitur ipsa perpetua beatitudine inmarcescibiliter. Amen.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

167

‘You must be the abbot for the internal affairs of your order, and I shall be the abbot for external affairs. For as far as I am able, I shall from now on be a benefactor to your church, as long as I hear as much good of you, as I have heard up till now.’ When he had said this he cheerfully dismissed him. Next day the abbot went to Bec and was received with great joy as the dignity of the church of Bec demanded, as I have already mentioned. From that time on the king loved him greatly, perceiving in him pure goodness and as much wisdom. For this reason he honored him above all other persons in his kingdom. For his part the abbot loved him dearly and would commend him to God and his church with constant prayers. He ruled this church in piety and sanctity for thirteen years and twenty-two days. For he was a wise man and of great powers of judgment, prudent and farsighted in all his actions, highly learned, benign and generous, filled with charity, most chaste in mind and body, most patient, most tranquil in thought, word, and deed, having his heart always controlled by a discretion greater than that of many other men of our time, ruling his monks with paternal discipline, loving them and fostering them with maternal tenderness. For this reason that which we read of Joseph can be said truly of him, because God was with him, he was a prosperous man in all things.63 He passed from the world in the middle of the night of the festival of John the Baptist,64 after much suffering and pain of the body. May his soul be with the soul of his lord and master, Anselm, where he lives immortally, sees God eternally, rejoices unquenchably, and enjoys to the full the eternal bliss that never fades. Amen.

63 Gen. 39.2. 64 24 June 1136.

168

De libertate Beccensis monasterii

B I B L I O G R A P H I C A L N OT E The prosopography of Normandy in the eleventh and twelfth centuries presents many difficulties. The identifications of the people in the notes to Libertas are drawn from various sources and secondary works. The two most important narrative sources (both for the texts and the notes) are Ordericus Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford, 1969–80) and William of Jumièges (with interpolations by Robert of Torigni), Gesta Normannorum ducum, ed. Jean Marx, Société de l’histoire de Normandie (Rouen and Paris, 1914), and ed. Elisabeth van Houts, Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford, 1992) (= Gesta). Milo Crispin’s lives of abbots William and Boso of Bec were published by Luc d’Achéry in Lanfranc, Opera omnia (Paris, 1648), app., 41–6 (Vita Willelmi) and 47–51 (Vita Bosonis). William Crispin, De nobili genere Crispinorum, was also published by d’Achéry, ibid., 52–6. The chronicles of Bec edited in Chronique de Bec et chronique de François Carré by Adolphe Porée, Société de l’histoire de Normandie (Rouen, 1883), are of use primarily for chronological details. Many of the relevant documents are listed in the Regesta regum Anglo-Normanorum 1066–1154, ed. W.H.C. Davis, H.A. Cronne, and R.H.C. Davis (Oxford, 1913–69); J. Horace Round, Calendar of Documents Preserved in France Illustrative of the History of Great Britain and Ireland, vol. 1: A.D. 918–1206 (London, 1899); and Regesta regum Anglo-Normannorum: The Acta of William I (1066–1087), ed. David Bates (Oxford, 1998). Also of value, especially for the introduction and notes, is The Domesday Monachorum of Christ Church, Canterbury, ed. David Douglas (London, 1944). Among secondary works, the following are particularly used: Bates, David. Normandy before 1066. London and New York, 1982. Bouet, Pierre, and François Neveux. Les évêques normands du xie siècle. Colloque de Cerisy-la-Salle, 30 septembre–3 octobre 1993. Caen, 1995. Cokayne, George Edward. Complete Peerage of England, Scotland, Great Britain, and United Kingdom. 2nd edition. London, 1910–59. Crouch, David. The Beaumont Twins. Cambridge, 1986. David, Charles W. Robert Curthose, Duke of Normandy. Harvard Historical Studies, 25. Cambridge, Mass., 1920. Gibson, Margaret. Lanfranc of Bec. Oxford, 1978. Green, Judith. The Government of England under Henry I. Cambridge, 1986. Haskins, Charles H. Norman Institutions. Harvard Historical Studies, 24. Cambridge, Mass., 1925. Porée, Adolphe. Histoire de l’abbaye du Bec. Evreux, 1901. Tabuteau, Emily Zack. Transfers of Property in Eleventh-Century Norman Law. Chapel Hill and London, 1988.

On the Liberty of the Monastery of Bec

169

Vaughn, Sally N. The Abbey of Bec and the Anglo-Norman State, 1034–1136. Woodbridge, Suffolk and Totowa, NJ, 1981. – Anselm of Bec and Robert of Meulan. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London, 1987. Genealogical chart of the Meulan and Beaumont families on 370. – Saint Anselm and the Handmaidens of God: A Study of Anselm’s Correspondence with Women. Turnhout, 2002. V. Gazeau, Les abbés bénédictins de la Normandie ducale (911–1204), and David Spear, The Personnel of the Norman Cathedrals, 911–1204, appeared too late for use in this work.

This page intentionally left blank

I N D E X O F C I TAT I O N S

BIBLICAL CITATIONS Genesis 24.9 39.2 Tobias 4.11–12 12.8–9 Job 32.18 37.14 Psalms 32.1 37.10 72.23 109.4 118.16 131.14 138.1–5 143.14 Proverbs 14.12 16.25 18.3 19.17 Ecclesiastes 3.7 30.8

111 167 43 43 51 143 119 83 59 111 73 77 83 81 67 67 49 43 51 81

Wisdom 3.33 4.9, 10–11 6.6 9.5 9.15 Isaiah 7.11 33.15 40.4 53.7 Jeremiah 10.14 10.23 13.23 Lamentations 3.28 Ezechiel 2.9 33.11 34.3–4 Hosea 5.4, 5 Amos 6.12

43 43 69 155 65 67 99 75 81 87 87 131 117 147, 155 91 91 51 83

172 Matthew 5.29–30 5.34–7 6.34 7.7 7.14 7.15 9.13 10.8 10.37–8 10.38 11.12 12.36 16.24 16.25 18.6 19.21 19.24 19.26 19.29 20.16 20.27 22.14 24.12 26.39 28.19–20 Mark 10.43–4 10.44 Luke 3.5 6.45 9.62 10.15 11.9 11.41 12.49 14.26, 27, 33 18.13 19.10

Index of Citations

89 113 53 159 69, 75, 77, 87, 103 129 43 99 55 45 71 51 65 69 121 45, 53 75 75 57 75 119 75 35 59 65 95 119 75 39 45 67 159 43 35 55 79 91

John 1.33 5.30 6.37 6.38 6.61 10.1 10.10 10.11, 14 10.14, 15 14.2 14.6 14.27 18.9 Acts 2.41–6 3.2 4.4 4.32–5 Romans 7.18, 24, 25 8.1 10.10 12.19 12.20 14.5 1 Corinthians 2.9 3.8 3.16 3.17 5.12 7.15 10.13 2 Corinthians 2.6–7, 8 6.16 13.3

85 59, 67 91 59, 67 75 127 127 87 93 59 87 95 91 31 33 33 33, 35 67 71 111 93 103 43 71 55 49 49 89 89 71 91 49 49

Index of Citations Galatians 1.4 2.9 4.22 4.31 6.2 Philippians 2.8 Colossians 3.3 3.8 1 Timothy 6.17

131 111 121 123 129 59 57 39

Hebrews 4.13 6.16 7.21 James 5.12 1 Peter 2.21, 22–3 1 John 4.1 Apocalypse 22.11

173

133 111 111 113 59 33 83

131

CLASSICAL AND PATRISTIC CITATIONS Augustine Epistola 78 83 130.7 71 De sancta virginitate 27 59 In Psalmos 83.4 83 Benedict, Regula 1.9 37 2.30 95 2.32 67, 117 2.34 101, 117 2.37–8 67, 101 3.3, 11 51 4.27 111 5.1 83 5.11 69 7.33 69 11.10 71 28.8 89 33.3 121 36.10 101

48.1 77 55 57 58.17–18 41, 73 58.29 61 62.11 103 63.3 51, 117 64.16 129 65.17 117 68.1 83 72.9 129 Fulgentius of Ruspe, Sermones 1.1 39 Gratian, Decretum C 1.1.101 133 C 1.7.3 133 C 2.5.1 113 C 18.2.1 119 C 18.2.16 119 D 61.7 99 Gregory the Great Dialogi 2.lf 37–9 2.3 125

174 2.8 2.36 In Ezechielem 1.9 Moralia 3.31.60 26.17.28–9 32.14.21 Registrum 1.33 3.23 5.10 5.11 5.24 5.47 5.49 5.58 5.62 6.7 8.17 9.196 9.218 Isidore of Seville Etymologiae 7.1.5

Index of Citations 39 39 47 49 51 49 47 97 97 115 99 113 115 133 133 99 97 103 99, 133

117

7.12.1 73 7.13.3–4 37 Regula 4.2 41 Ivo of Chartres, Decretum 3.18 115 5.60 97 5.61 97, 101 5.63 97 5.66 97 5.75 133 5.78 97 5.86 99 5.102 99 5.109 99 5.126 133 5.308 113 7.11 97 7.85 119 Jerome, Contra Vigilantium 15 133 Virgil, Aeneid 3.39 51 Vita s. Mauri 48, 51 57

GENERAL INDEX

Abbot: election of, 93–103, 115; meaning of word, 117 Abraham, patriarch, 111 ad succurrendum, 25n, 63, 73 advocates, 133 Alan of Lille, 10 Albert, monk of Bec, 145 Alebold of Jerusalem, 12 Alexander III, pope, 7 Amalric of Montfort, 143n, 155 Ambrose, St, 11 Ananias, 47 anchorites, 37 Anjou, 19, 20n Anselm, abbot of Bec, archbishop of Canterbury, 11, 15, 16, 17, 21, 24, 139–51, 155, 157, 159n, 167 Anthony of Egypt, St, 37 apostles, as perfect monks, 57–9 Arles, bishop of. See Virgil Armenian monks, 63 Arnulf (Ernulf) of Chocques, chancellor of Robert Curthose, patriarch of Jerusalem, 151, 153 Augustine, St, 10 Aurelius, monastic legislator, 41

Baldric, abbot of Bourgeuil, archbishop of Dol, 127 Baldric, prior of Bec, 149, 153 baptism, 25n, 26, 53, 63, 109 Bari, 12 Basil, St, 41 Bayeux, bishop of. See Philip Bec, 12, 15–18, 137–67; abbots of (see Anselm; Boso; Herluin; Theobald; William of Beaumont); customs of, 16; library at, 3, 10, 11n Benedict, St, 37, 39, 41, 61, 83, 115, 129 Bernard of St Venant, abbot of Marmoutier, 125 bishops, election of, 95–101, 109–11 blessing, 23, 29, 41, 43, 45, 53, 61, 71, 73, 75, 115, 125, 151, 153, 165; of abbots, 53; of bishops, 53, 109–11 Bonneville, 15n Boso, abbot of Bec, 3, 5, 6n, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 20, 21, 24, 26, 155, 157–67; Life, 12, 13 Brionne, 139, 141, 147, 157, 161 Calixtus II, pope, 127n Canterbury, archbishop of. See Anselm; Lanfranc; Theobald

176

General Index

Cassiodorus, 11 Castorius, bishop of Rimini, 113 Celestine I, pope, 97, 99 celliciones, 37 charters, 85, 99 Chartres, bishop of. See Fulbert; Ivo chrism, 63, 109, 119 Chrysostom, St John, 11 churches: dedications of, 119; proprietary, 119, 143 circiliones, 37 cleric, meaning of term, 73 Cluny, 16 Conflans, 10 consecration. See blessing Constantinople, Our Lady of the Blachernae, 4, 7 conversatio morum, 27, 41, 73, 77, 87 Corinth, bishop of. See John Cormeilles, abbot of. See William Cornelius, pope, 113 cowl (cuculla), 57 crosier. See pastoral staff Curthose, Robert. See Robert Curthose Cyprian, St, 11 Cyril, St, 11 Desiderius, bishop of Vienne, 133 Dol, archbishop of. See Baldric Durham, bishop of, 23 Egyptian monks, 63 Elias, early hermit, 35 Ely, bishop of. See Hervey Etherius, bishop of Lyons, 133 Eusebius of Emesa, 11 Eustace, monk of Bec, 145 Evreux, bishop of. See Gilbert; Odo Farmannus, cellarer of Bec, 145

fealty, fidelity, 133 Fructuosus, monastic legislator, 41 Fulbert, bishop of Chartres, 20 Fulco of Aunou, 12 Fulda Sacramentary, 27 Fulgentius of Ruspe, St, 11 Gelasius I, pope, 11 Geoffrey, archbishop of Rouen, 21, 157– 65 Geoffrey of Vendôme, 23 Gilbert, bishop of Evreux, 21, 141 Gilbert Crispin, abbot of Westminster, 17, 24, 143n Greek monks, 63 Gregory the Great, pope, 7, 10, 11n, 47, 97–9, 113, 121, 133; Dialogues, 39; Homilies on Ezechiel, 47; Moralia, 5, 49 Guitmond of Aversa, 11 Gunnilda, daughter of king Harold, 24 gyrovagi, 37 habit, monastic, 21, 24, 35, 37, 45, 49, 51, 55–7, 61, 63, 73, 75, 117, 137. See also cowl; hair-shirt; hood hair-shirt (cilicinum), 57 Henry I, duke of Normandy, king of England, 21, 155n, 157–67 Herbert, bishop of Lisieux, 137 heresy, heretics, 21, 35, 133 Herluin, founder and first abbot of Bec, 12, 15, 17, 21, 137, 139 hermits, 35–7, 45 Herod, king, 33 Hervey, bishop of Ely, 163 Hilary of Poitiers, St, 11 Hildegard of Bingen, 27 Hilgot, bishop of Soissons, abbot of Marmoutier, 125

General Index homage, 20–1, 22, 85, 133, 139, 141, 161, 163 Honorina, St, 5, 12 hood (caputium), 57 Hugh, archbishop of Rouen, 18 Hugh of Montfort, 155 humility, 35, 55, 77, 79, 123, 149, 159, 161 Isidore of Seville, St, 11, 41 Ivo, bishop of Chartres, 23 James, apostle, 33, 113 Jerome, St, 11, 133 Jerusalem, 12n, 31, 35, 151n John, apostle, 31, 33 John, bishop of Corinth, 133 John, bishop of Lisieux, 15n, 21, 157, 159–61 John, bishop of Séez, 163 John, early monk, 33 John the Baptist, 35–7 John of Crema, cardinal-legate, 14, 165n John the Deacon, 26 Judas, 31 Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 23, 24, 153n Leo the Great, pope, 11 Lisieux, bishop of. See Herbert; John lordship, ecclesiastical and secular, 93–5 Luke, apostle, 31 Luminosus, abbot of St Thomas, Rimini, 113 Lyons, archbishop of. See Etherius Mainz Pontifical, 27 Marbach, 27 Marinianus, bishop of Ravenna, 97

177

Marmoutier, 23, 27n, 125–7; abbot of (see Bernard; Hilgot; William) maternal imagery, 39, 43, 75, 125, 167 Matthew, apostle, 31, 73 Maurus, disciple of Benedict, 57 Melk, customary of, 27–8 metaphors for monastic life: arms, 63; asylum, 63; bee, 77; fire, 35, 37, 61; military, 71; nautical, 51, 53; paradise, 75 ; port, 63; prison, 75; road, 67–9, 75, 77, 87, 103 Milo Crispin, 12, 14, 15n monastic privileges, 121 monks: blessing of, 115; meaning of term, 117; varieties of, 35, 61–3 Monte Cassino, 27; abbot of (see Odorisius) Moses, lawgiver, 111 Mutius, abbot, 33, Nicholas, St, 4, 11, 12 Norman Anonymous, 20 Normandy, 19, 20n, 21; dukes of (see Henry; Robert I; Robert Curthose; William I) Notre-Dame du Pré, 163 oath, 111–13, 133, 159 obedience, 19, 21, 25, 27, 41, 69, 71, 73, 81, 83, 87, 93, 109, 115, 119, 123, 125–7, 149, 165 oblati, 63 Odo, bishop of Evreux, 161 Odorisius, abbot of Monte Cassino, 27 oil, holy, 109, 119 Ordericus Vitalis, 20 Origen, 11 Orléans, council of, 97, 119 otium, 77 Otto of Freising, 6

178

General Index

pallium, 99, 111, 133 Paphnutius, early monk, 33 Paschal II, pope, 125n Paschasius Radbertus, 11 pastoral staff (bacculum, crosier), 18, 20, 21, 141, 147, 151 paternal imagery, 39, 43, 87–9, 117, 129, 155, 167 Paul the Simple, early monk, 33 Peter, apostle, 31, 33, 59 Peter, sub-deacon of Campania, 97 Peter the Venerable, abbot of Cluny, 11n Philip, bishop of Bayeux, 10n Prester John, 4, 6 pride, 39, 43, 49–51, 81, 85, 93, 111, 117, 129 priests, appointment of, 95–9 profession (subscription), 19, 21, 23, 24, 26, 41, 47, 53, 61, 65, 67, 71, 83, 85, 87, 89, 93, 111, 113, 115, 121, 123, 125, 139, 151, 161 Ralph of Canterbury, 24 Ravenna, bishop of. See Marinianus remnuothi, renuitae, 37 Richard of Aunou, monk of Bec, 12 Richard fitz Gilbert (of Bienfaite, Clare), 143n Rimini, St Andrew and St Thomas, 115; bishop of (see Castorius) Robert, monk of Bec, 145 Robert, prior of Conflans-SainteHonorine, 5n Robert of Beaumont, count of Meulan, 139n, 141–7, 149n, 155n Robert Curthose, duke of Normandy, 14, 141–51 Robert I, duke of Normandy, 139 Robert of Sigillo, bishop of London, 165 Robert of Torigny, 23

Rochester, bishop of, 23 Roger, abbot of Lessay, 149, 151, 153 Roger of Beaumont, 139, 149n Roger of Bienfaite, 143, 147, 157 Roger of Breteuil, 139 Roger of Montgomery, 139 Romanus, early monk, 37 Rome, 127, 159n Rouen, 26, 139, 141, 151, 153, 165; archbishop of, 15, 20 (see also Geoffrey; Hugh; William Bona Anima) sacraments, consecration of, 119 St Vaubourg, near Rouen, 161 sarabaites, 37 scrutiny (examination), 22, 25–7, 53, 61, 67, 73, 89, 97, 109, 111, 123, 125, 165 seal, abbatial, 151 Séez, bishop of. See John seniores, 93, 101, 103, 117 simony, 21, 25, 93–9, 123, 133 Soissons, bishop of. See Hilgot Solomon, 67 stability, 35, 41, 61, 73, 75, 77, 83, 87 Stephen, protomartyr, 33 Subiaco, 28 subscription (superscription), 23, 59, 65, 85, 87, 93, 123, 125, 127. See also profession Tabennisiotes, 41 Thebaid, 33 Theobald, abbot of Bec, archbishop of Canterbury, 10n, 15 tithes, 119 Toledo: Fourth Council, 119; Eleventh Council, 133 tonsure, 57, 73, 79 Tours, archbishop of, 27n, 125; St Julian, 125; St Maurice, 125

General Index Urban II, pope, 20, 125, 127, 159 Vienne, bishop of. See Desiderius Virgil, 11 Virgil, bishop of Arles, 133 virginity, 55, 129 Waleran of Meulan, 141n, 155 William, abbot of Cormeilles, 153–5 William, abbot of Marmoutier, 125 William of Beaumont, abbot of Bec, 15, 139n, 149–55

179

William Bona Anima, archbishop of Rouen, 18, 151 William of Breteuil, 12, 139, 143, 153 William Crispin (II), 143, 155 William I, duke of Normandy, king of England, 14, 21, 139, 141 William fitz Richard (? of Bardouville), 153 Zosimus, pope, 99