Chapter 58
But should some of the things produced in the craftshops need to be sold, let the one in charge of the transaction not pre sume to do so fraudently. He should ever think of Ananias and Saphira (Acts v), lest he or others who deal dishonestly with the property of the monastery suffer in soul the death which they underwent in the body.1
As regards the prices to be fixed upon such products, let not the evil of avarice creep in, but let one dispose of them a little cheaper than secular artisans can afford to do so, in order that "God may be glorified in all things" (cf. 1 Peter iv, ll).2
GROWTH OF THE MONASTIC COMMUNITY
(Chapters Iviii to Ixvi inch)
FIFTY-EIGHTH CHAPTER
Procedure in admitting new Members When newcomers arrive to take up the monastic way of life, let admittance not be granted them too readily, but let the pro cedure be as the Apostle says: to "try the spirits, if they be of God" (1 John iv, i). If the new arrival, therefore, continues to knock and patiently puts up with the harsh treatment and every other inconvenience during the four or five days there and per sists in his pleas to be admitted, let him be granted entrance and allowed to remain in a cell reserved for guests. vegetable waste, and unusable food left-overs, which we would otherwise have to throw away. The pigs are slaughtered and the meat is sold, but the tender parts are put aside for the sick and the aged. The populace hereabout is numerous."
As far as the work was concerned, the monks were kept occupied in many ways: in the fields and gardens, the smithy and bake-house, or on construction and in the dye-works; others were engaged in weaving large baskets and mats; others, again, were calligraphers. It was a practice there to learn the whole of the Scrip tures by heart" (Vitae Patrum xxxii; cf. also the Holy Rule, chapter xlviii).
' Ananias and Saphira were often held up before the eyes of the monks as terri fying examples of avarice and half-hearted renunciation of the world (cf. Cassian,
Institutes vii. 14 & 25; and Conferences xviii, 7).
2 This version of a passage in St. Peter's First Epistle became in time an enduring maxim of Benedictine monachism. Prayer and labor, in fact, every activity of the monk, must necessarily be a work in praise and glory of God if it is not to be altogether devoid of merit.
Afterwards, however, he should live in the apartment of the novices, where the latter eat, sleep, and hold their spiritual ex ercises. And let a senior monk be appointed to look after him and observe him closely,1 especially one deeply versed in the science of winning souls. And his care shall be to see whether he (the candidate) truly seeks God,2 and is zealous for the Work of God, for obedience, and for humiliations. And let him be told plainly (clearly) all the difficult and harsh things by which one goes to God.
1 The office of master of novices is as old as cenobitism. "St. Pachomius entrust ed certain brethren with the task of winning over new arrivals to the monastic life"
(Second Life xxiv). The Latin version of his biography speaks of his "assistants" in the winning of souls (chap. xxv). A characteristic gravity {Ernst) is associated in our minds with the office of the novice master. It is his heavy task to acquaint his novices with the serious features of life in the cloister and show them what it really means to follow the Cross. Without embellishing it or glossing it over, he must make them acquainted with the harsh and difficult side of monastic life. In deed, according to Abbot Cassian, "he will purposely at times impose upon them such 'obediences' as he knows from his observation of them to be contrary to their natural inclinations" (Institutes iv, 8; cf. also iii-ix; St. Basil, Longer Rules x, 2; and Caesarius, Rule for Nuns 58). In the first place, the master is neither the bonhomie friend nor the father of the novices, but rather their stern and seriousminded instructor. He must not let their affections become fixed upon himself, but selflessly lead them towards the abbot and in the last analysis towards the monastic Church and towards Christ. No words that can be spoken on the deci sive importance of the masters office will ever be wasted, for upon this official de pends the welfare of its youth and the future of the cloister. Only a strong, manly, and humbly selfless personality will be able to fulfill that office after the mind of St. Benedict as expressed in his Rule.
2 In a pithy sentence, inspired no doubt by the devout attitude of the psalms (Ps. lxviii, 33), the Holy Rule speaks here of the deep significance of a monk's life, which is that he must truly "seek God." Seeking God, so far as the monk is con cerned, embraces in its gamut a complete renunciation of the world and of his own will, in addition to a whole-hearted offering of himself and of his life to the Lord. Seeking God, then, means for him something far more than it means for the generality of Christians (cf. Prologue): the Lord seeks, invites, admonishes, rouses up, and knocks at the monk's door, without, however, exerting any com pulsion. The individual who has been invited by the Lord takes up this "search for God" voluntarily by renouncing the world and his personal ambitions, by adopting the life of a religious, by matriculating in the "school of the Lord's service"—enlisting in his army, enrolling in his workshop, and entering into his sheepfold. And the monk's real "search for God" consists not in striving for extraord inary gifts and graces, but in a readiness for the "Work for God," that is, by put ting up patiently with the hardships of monastic life, by being obedient and bear ing humiliations meekly. "Seeking God," then, means for the monk first of all a participation in the Lord's passion and finally in his glory (cf. end of the Pro logue).
If after that, in view of his steadfastness, he promises to per severe in his desire to remain, after two months let this Rule be read through to him. And one should tell him: "Behold the law under which you desire to take up your militant service (literal ly, military service);1 If you can observe it, enter; if you cannot, you are free to depart." If he yet stands fast, let him be led back to the aforesaid apartment of the novices and be tried again in all patience.
Then, after the lapse of six months, let the Rule be read to him again, that he may know for what purpose he has come. If he still persists, after four months let the Rule be read to him once more. And if, after taking counsel with himself, he promises that he will observe all these things and obey all the commands that will be given him, let him be taken into the com munity, knowing that from then on, according to the law of the Rule as it stands, he will no longer be permitted to leave the cloister or withdraw his neck from the yoke of that Rule, which, after so much deliberation, he was free to accept or reject.
At his reception into the community however, let him, in the oratory and before all, make a promise as to his stability, ad herence to a monk's way of life (conversatio morum), and the practice of virtue. (And let him likewise promise) obedience, and this in the sight of God and his Saints, realizing therewith that should he act otherwise, he will one day be condemned by him whom he mocks.
All these promises he shall make in the name of the Saints whose relics are there and before the abbot there present and embody them in a written petition. And this petition he shall write with his own hand, or, if he cannot write, let another write it at his request, but let the novice make his mark upon it1 and place it upon the altar himself.
After he has placed it there, let him forthwith intone this verse: "Uphold me, O Lord, according to thy word, and I shall live: and let me not be confounded in my expectation" (Ps. cxviii, 116)2 The whole community shall repeat the verse after 1 The thought of monastic life as a military, or militant, service is as old as monasticism (cf. Prologue to the Holy Rule).
him three times after the third time adding the doxology:
"Glory be to the Father, etc." The novice shall then prostrate himself at the feet of the individual monks, in order that they may pray for him; and from this day forward let him be regard ed a member of the brotherhood.
Should he possess any property, let him distribute it to the poor beforehand or bequeath it to the monastery, after he has, however, made out a deed of gift, in which he is to retain no thing for his own use; he knows, namely, that from this day on he will not be able to have even his body at his own disposal.1 2 3
After this, in the same oratory, let him be divested of the per sonal things that he has been wearing so far and be clothed in the garments of the monastery. Let the clothes that have been taken off him be set aside to be preserved in the wardrobe, in order that should he ever, at the suggestion of Satan, be per suaded to leave the cloister—which heaven forefend—, he may be divested of his monastic garb (receive back his own) and be dismissed. But the written formula of his profession, which the abbot had taken from the altar, will not be returned to him, but shall be filed away in the monastery.
1 St. Benedict takes it for granted that there will be unlettered individuals in his monastery.
2 The chanting of this verse is the outwardly impressive culmination of a monk's religious profession. In the Beuronese rite of profession, the monk sings this verse immediately after he has read his signed formula aloud while kneeling publicly before the abbot and has then placed it upon the altar table. He chants the first part of the verse with upraised eyes. This is the characteristic attitude of a friend and a child of God, who, conscious of his gracious and merciful election and of his possession of the Holy Spirit, knows that he may now approach God (Christ) with the familiar and endearing term of "Abba Father." The second part of the verse he chants while "kneeling with down cast eyes, bowed head, and hands crossed over his breast." It is the characteristic attitude of the slave or bondservant, who lies prostrate before his master, to whom he belongs completely and indefinitely.
Both attitudes clearly express and bring out the essence of the monk's dedication: the oblation of his entire self to the Lord and his unreserved renunciation of the world. In the first attitude his childlike love comes to the fore; in the second, his reverential awe. "The Lord grant that you may observe all these things, as do those who by their holy lives diffuse the good odor of Christ, not as slaves under the law, but as free men under grace" (St. Augustine, Rule 12). The ceremony just described, a few minor details excepted, is substantially the same in the Amer ican Cassinese Congregation and probably in many other Congregations and branches of the Order. The translator) 3 This sentence in the Rule is parenthetical to the ceremony of profession. The disposal of the candidate's personal income or property very likely took place be-
Excursus I.
The Novitiate.—Of all previous and contemporary Rules, St. Benedict legis lates most clearly and explicitly concerning this period of monastic probation, which we now call the novitiate. We may assume, however, that from the earliest days of monasticism, a period of probation was a customary proce dure, even where there is no mention of it (as, for example, in the rule of St.
Augustine). Pachomius, the founder of the cenobitical life, laid down this ordi nance: "Should anyone come to the portals of the monastery in order to re nounce the world and want to be enrolled as a member of the brotherhood, let him first be announced to the father of the house; he should then be left to stay for a few days outside the walls (most probably in the guest house). He should there be taught the Lord's Prayer and the psalms, or as many of them as he can learn. Afterwards, let him be thoroughly questioned, lest perhaps, he may have committed a felony (and came to escape punishment) or lest he belong to someone (that is, as a slave); let him also be questioned as to whe ther he is ready and able to leave his parents and despise all earthly posses sions. Should it be found that he has the necessary qualifications (that is, to undertake all the monastic routine), let him be taught the other customs and practices that he must keep and to which he must submit himself in the cloistfore the profession proper. The ceremony of profession itself most probably oc curred, as it does today, during the celebration of Mass by the abbot.—According to a very old monastic practice, the novice could freely dispose of all his properties and hereditaments. Abbot Cassian reports that, as a matter of principle and fixed custom, the Egyptian monasteries would accept none of the income or property of the newly inducted candidate, lest the novice be given occasion for pride or arrogance, as if he had conferred a special favor upon the cloister through his be quests, in particular, lest in the event of his leaving either as a novice or as a monk, any improper demands be made upon the cloister. He (Cassian) points to some lamentable experiences of monasteries that had been less far-sighted (Institutes iv,
4). The Coptic patriarch Schenute, and his successor Besa (f 474), demanded of all novices that they draw up a written document, disposing of all their possessions.
These could be left to the monastery or distributed to the poor. A letter of Besa's treats of monks who had left the cloister and afterwards made demands upon it.
"From the day on which these communities were founded, our saintly 'fathers' have solicited no one to come or constrained him by force to become a monk, or even influenced him to do so for the sake of his possessions. We ourselves have never done anything of the kind, for a man should not be compelled to take up a life of virtue. Our 'fathers' have in this matter laid down ordinances for their communities . . . And thus our forebears here have prescribed that anyone who arrives to become a monk with us must first renounce all his earthly goods, make them over to the house of God as well as to the poor, and that he may not (in case he should leave) ever return to seek (that is, to demand) anything either for him self or his relatives, as each one gave his word not to do upon his entrance . . . And thus our 'father' wrote: 'In case I go away, 1 shall wrap (only) a robe about myself, and I may not come back to seek anything.' " This precaution against possible demands of renegade monks soon met with general approval and adoption. (In this country, at least, and probably in every religious house, all postulants and nov ices must sign papers to the effect that they therewith relinquish every claim to wages and salaries for the duration of their stay in the community. The translator)
er. And it shall not matter whether these customs and practices prevail in the brotherhood as a whole (that is, in the entire federation) or in the particular
'house' to which he will be assigned or in the matter of his rank at meals.
Having, then, been instructed and made letter perfect as to all the good practices of monastic life, let him be divested of his secular attire and be clothed in the monastic habit. Afterwards, he shall be put in charge of the porter, so that the latter may at the times of common prayer conduct him into the company of all the brethren. There he shall have his seat in the place that has been set aside for him. The clothes which he previously wore, however, shall be delivered to the brethren who have charge of the wardrobe" (Rule
49). Investiture in the habit of a monk undoubtedly also constituted his pro fession. "One who enters the cloister as an illiterate should first be instructed as to his duties, and after he has given consent, let him be assigned 20 psalms and two epistles of an Apostle or some other part of Holy Scripture (to learn by heart). If he cannot read and write, let him go at the first, third, and sixth hours to an appointed teacher, stand before him, and study with the greatest zeal and in all thankfulness . . . There mu^t be no one in the monastery who cannot read and write." Pachomius also wanted everyone of his monks to be familiar with the New Testament and the Psalter (chap, cxxxix f).
According to Pakhome's prescriptions, the novitiate lasted for only a few days. Profession followed soon after investiture. In any case, the monk would be tried and instructed for some time afterwards. After his profession the young monk was assigned to one of the houses, where he was further tried and instructed. Clothing and profession followed in that order. The young monk was then placed in charge of an older monk for a period of one year. After the year was over, ten of these young monks banded together to form a dean ery (loc. cit., iv, 7). Abbot Schenute of Atripe (f 466) followed Pachomius in this matter rather closely. Abbot Cassian (f 434) settled for about ten days of novitiate (Institutes iv, 3 & 36). Accordingly, the prescriptions of Pachomius,
Schenute, and Cassian were very much alike. Caesarius of Arles (f 542), however, in his "Rule for Nuns," ordained that the candidate was to undergo a year's probation. After that only did the clothing and profession follow
(chap. iv). The novice was then put in the charge of a novice mistress. Like Caesarius, St. Benedict also required a year of probation, and only after the completion of that year did the clothing take place.
Exactly as it is prescribed in the Holy Rule, our monastic constitutions as a rule direct that the applicant spend a few days as a guest of the monastery.
Then he must spend six months as a postulant and live with the novices.* After consulting with the chapter of the house, the abbot may accept the pos tulant for the novitiate, which must last for a whole year and may not be short- (The monastic superior may not shorten this time without a dispensation from the Holy See. The sacred canons do not make the same requirement in the case of candidates for the religious priesthood. In some individual cases, it might be prudent if that prerequisite were followed. The translator)
ened or interrupted. The novice may, of course, leave the monastery at any time during that period, and he may also be dismissed by the abbot, but only for adequate (justa causa) reasons. If the majority vote of the chapter favors his acceptance, the abbot can at the end of that time of probation admit the novice to temporary vows for a period of three years. At the end of these three years, after consultation with his chapter, the abbot can permit him to make his perpetual or solemn profession as the case may be. The abbot may also dismiss him, but again only for good and adequate reasons.f The idea behind these "temporary vows" was no doubt to allow the period of probation to be extended for further observation of the young religious.**
Excursus II.
History of Monastic Profession.—The oldest formula of "profession," or act of embracing the monastic state and assuming its obligations, most probably consisted in this that the ascetic laid aside his civilian garments and put on the poor and shabby clothes of a monk. By adopting a monk's habit, or what was then considered to be a monk's habit, he professed to have adopted the au stere life of that station in society. In the very earliest period, the ascetic mere ly changed his worldly garb for that of a religious on his own initiative or received the "holy habit" from some well known monk or monastic father.
Thus St. Gregory relates that the young ascetic Benedict received "the garb of that holy state" in the cave at Subiaco from the monk Romanus. The cenobite usually received the habit from the hands of the abbot or his representa tive. From the fact that one had adopted the monastic habit and entered the religious state, it was assumed that he had made a "contract with God" or had entered into a "union with God." At first, also, the "profession" was consum mated in silence with the acceptance of the habit; later the habit was taken on and accompanied by an oral promise; finally, this promise was put down in writing. The essence of this contract with God was generally spoken of as a "renunciation." The term was obviously adopted from the wording (German) of the Gospel (cf. Luke ix, 33 ff; xxv; and ix, 23). The monks, therefore, were often called the "renouncers" (Die Entsagenden). The idea of renunciation was brought out in the 2nd sentence of the Rule's prologue: "Whoever thou art that hast renounced the promptings of thy own will, etc."
The earliest evidence we have of a formal monastic profession has come down to us from the cloister of St. Pachomius (f 346). This wise patriarch did not accept indiscriminately anyone who knocked at the gates of the monastery and begged for admittance. He first questioned the candidates as to their qualifications for the monastic life and as to their antecedents. Then he
"placed the monk's garb upon them, but only after he had instructed them in the elements of religious life, indeed, after telling them that they must before f (In this case, again, only for good and adequate reasons, but not on account of any sickness or disability, unless it had been contracted previous to temporary vows and had not been revealed to his superiors. The translator)
** (Perhaps it was also intended to give some candidates, who were slow in making up their minds, more time for reflection. The translator)
all else renounce the world, their families, and themselves to follow the Savior.
This is what it meant to take up the Cross" (First Life xxiv). The candidate was accordingly thoroughly instructed in all the hard requirements of a monk's life: renunciation of the world, of all his estates, and chattels, and of his own ego. This was a concrete following of the Crucified. Only then did the abbot clothe the aspirant in the garb of a monk. It is quite possible, though there is no known evidence to support it, that in the cloister of St. Pachomius an oral declaration or reading of his promises preceded or accompanied the clothing that formed the external solemnity of a monk's profession.
St. Basil (f 379) demanded anoral profession. The candidate had, first of all, to declare publicly and explicitly that he intended to lead a life of virginity, and had to testify to the same. Married postulants had to state their promises (officially) before witnesses (Longer Rules 15 & 12. The tenor of Basil's rite of profession was the same as the one prescribed by Pachomius.
Thus St. Basil: "Above all, renounce the devil and his lusts of the flesh, we who have forsaken our blood relatives, all our civilian friendships, and every one of those customary contacts with the world so inimical to the perfection of our eternal welfare. But it is more imperative that one renounce himself and 'put off the old man and his works.' Perfect renounciation consists in this that a man is indifferent to his life and dies to it, so that he no longer trusts in himself. One must begin by separating himself from all material goods, such as property, empty honors, and his former associations and attachments to use less things . . . Consistently with this, one who fosters an ardent desire to fol low Christ can concern himself with nothing that has any relation to this life, not even love for his parents and relatives if these be in conflict with God's laws, nor the fear of men, nor the ridicule of worldlings. Should we retain any part of our estates or transitory possessions, the spirit (of renunciation) will likewise remain buried in them, and the soul will never arrive at the con templation of God or be moved to yearn after heavenly beauties nor the bless ings promised us in the Gospel . . .
"Renunciation, then, lies in being loosed from the bonds of this temporal existence and being free to devote ourselves to those labors by means of which we can more easily begin our way to God and strive unimpeded for the goods that are more valuable than gold or precious stones. This freedom is really a translation of the human heart to paradise, so that we can truly say: Our con versation* is in heaven' (Phil, iii, 20). Indeed, this is the most excellent of all
* (There has been quite a bit of controversy and discussion in the last few years over this term "conversation" (Latin, conversatio). Most, if not all critical editions of the Rule have adopted the term conversatio rather than conversio, claiming it was the term used by St. Benedict. Its obvious meaning, they say, is: "a way or a manner of life," In this sense it is used frequently in the Scriptures, especially in the psalms, and in the collects of the breviary and the missal, where its use in the sense of conversion or conversation would be an obvious distortion of its mean ing: Conversationem vestram inter gentes habentes bonam: ut ... ex bonis operibus vos considerantes, glorijicent Deum, etc. (1 Pet. ii, 12). The translator).
things, the beginning of that uniformity with Christ, who became poor for our sakes, though he himself was so rich" (Longer Rules 8). In the mind of St.
Basil, this promise of the monks was binding for life, before God, in the eyes of the Church, and in the forum of one's conscience (cf. loc. cit., 14). As little as did Pachomius before him and St. Benedict after him did Basil know of "vows" in the modem sense.
As he shows when he quotes Abbot Joannes, Rufinus (f 410) also took the practice of oral profession for granted. "If one believes," said the abbot,
"that he has renounced the world and the pomps of Satan, it is not enough to have forsaken his estates and chattels and the other things of this world by word of mouth if he has not also abandoned his own faults along with his vain and idle lusts. This is what it means to have renounced the devil and his works . . . The heart that has in truth forsaken the world, that is, the heart that has cast out every fault and closed every means of ingress to Satan, that has bridled its anger, that has curbed its desire for revenge, that spurns deceit, that has forsworn envy, that harbors no detraction, nay, not even one false suspic ion or rash judgment, that looks upon each joy and sorrow of a brother as its own—the heart that does all these things has truly opened its door to the Holy
Spirit. And the Spirit enters into that heart, whereupon joy, jubilation, love, patience, longsuffering, goodness, and, in truth, all the fruits of the Spirit take root and reign there . . .
"There are, however, such as seem to have renounced the world, but are not concerned about purity of heart, do not extirpate sins and vices from their souls, and kep no order in their pursuit of virtue. They seem intent upon mere ly looking up some desert father, in order to hear from him a maxim or two and then go away to expatiate upon the same learnedly and at great length . . .
They aspire to the priesthood, whereas our main task as monks is to get rid of our faults and to acquire the opposite virtues . . . The monk's most excellent occupation is an offering up of the 'pure prayer' to God." The passage just quoted was spoken in the course of a discussion on prayer (Historia Monachorum i). As with St. Basil, so also with Abbot Joannes, the monk's renuncia tion was likened to the renunciation made at one's baptism. His profession was, in fact, a second baptism. Renunciation means undergoing a cruel mar tyrdom, a constant dying to oneself. "To renounce the world," according to Abbot Horsiesi (f c. 380), signifies the same as "to take in hand the standard of the Cross" (Testament xxx).
It can surely be assumed that in the monasteries of St. Augustine the thought of renouncing the world and of taking up the Cross of Christ was put into words during the ceremony of profession. We know as little about St.
Augustine's formula of profession as we do about that of St. Benedict. Nor was he acquainted with "vows" in the modern acceptation of the term. Recep tion as a member of the monastic community found its outward expression when the candidate was invested with the monastic habit?
What Abbot Cassian (f 430) conceived to be the content of monastic pro-
fession he probably left the desert father Pinufius say for him in connection with such a "clothing:" "First of all, "said Pinufius, "you must learn to know what is the essence of renunciation, so that with a proper knowledge of it you may from its significance derive a greater understanding of what you have to do. Renunciation is nothing more than an indication that one has mortified himself and taken up his cross. You may know, then, that on this day you have died to the world, to its pomps, and to its lusts, and that in the words of the Apostle the world has been crucified to you and you to the world (cf. Gal. vi, 14). Consider, therefore, the life of the Cross, under the standard of which you must henceforth do battle; for it is no longer you who live, but he who was crucified for you who lives in you" (Cf. Gal. ii, 20). Following in the way of the Cross means mortification and the conquest of one's sinful desires. There is no longer any going back. Persevere now unto the end. "Cursed be he that does the work of God negligently" (Jer. xlviii, 10).*
The devil will never cease to harass the monk. Along with his discourse at the ceremony of profession, Abbot Pinufius offered "ten signs of humility," which resembled in many respects the twelve degrees of humility mentioned in the seventh chapter of the Rule. At the close of his sermon, the abbot gave his listeners a brief synopsis of the monastic pursuit of virtue. "In short," he said, "receive herewith the ordinance through which you can without too great labor and difficulty scale the heights of perfection. The beginning of our salvation as well as of our wisdom is the fear of the Lord (cf. Ps. cx, 10). Out of this fear springs salutary compunction of heart. From this compunction comes renunciation, which signifies a complete abandonment of all earthly goods and a contempt for them. And this contempt for worldly possessions leads to humility. Out of humility grows mortification of the passions, and in the course of this mortification faults are torn up by the roots. Also from the germ of that virtue (mortification) rises purity of heart. And with purity of heart comes the perfection of Apostolic charity" (Institutes iv, 32-43). The obligation that one assumes with renunciation is such that it binds "before God, before Christ, and before his angels." According to Cassian, profession is consummated with the rite of clothing. Whether a monk made his profession aloud or in silence is not apparent. It is quite possible that at the ceremony of profession the symbolism of the monastic habit was briefly dwelt upon and developed by the abbot (Institutes i, 2-10).
The Formulary of Profession.-—We have now been relatively well briefed as to the content of profession in the minds of the ancient monks. Following of the Cross was one of its fundamental thoughts. We know practically nothing about the manner in which it was made, for we have no complete formulary that reaches back to that olden time. Even the Holy Rule obviously takes for granted that the procedure of becoming a monk was familiar to all. Perhaps tin excerpt from an old Coptic formula of profession, which goes back to the * (As translated from the German, which in turn was translated from the Greek.
The translator)
Egyptian abbot, Schenute of Atripe (f 466), will serve to throw a little light upon how ancient monachism regarded the profession of a monk. We give the excerpt herewith: "1 promise before God in this holy place (that is, in the House of God), as the words which I have spoken with my lips bear witness, that 1 will not defile my body, that 1 will not steal, that I will not swear falsely, that I will not lie, and that I will not secretly do evil. If I do not fulfil what I have promised, I will not enter the kingdom of heaven, although 1 saw (fore saw) that; God, in whose sight I made these promises, would destroy both my body and soul in the fires of hell, for 1 transgressed the promise that I made."
Unfortunately, the formula breaks off at this point. The substance of the rest is given in a still extant summary: "As to the things that reck of defiance, dis obedience, murmuring, quarreling, obstinacy, and the like, the whole com munity knows of them." In these simple, earnest phrases, the candidate gave expression to the obligations of monastic life and the pursuit of virtue.
Abbot Schenute, so far as we know, was the first monastic desert father to prescribe a written formula of profession, as did St. Benedict a number of decades later. In this connection, a disputed Coptic excerpt, which, retrans lated from the German version, reads as follows: "It came to pass, however, that when the brotherhood reaches the number of thirty, he (Abbot Schenute) called them all to a meeting and had them all take a vow in writing that they would constitute a single membership, both as to food and clothing, with no distinction of persons as well as no (other) diversity among them in anything they would do, whether material or spiritual. They also wrote down in the form of an oath that they would regulate all their actions in accordance with the prescriptions and ordinances of the holy man about whom we first spoke, namely, Apa Pgol (that is, Abbot Pgol, Schenute's predecessor), and of his own successor. Then he had them attest the document, took it, and ordered that it be filed away as a strong covenant of union between the brethren for future generations of the community in his cloister. And behold, this written vow stands today in the pages as a memorial of the 'unknowing' " (as they without doubt called themselves). It was not the Greeks, then, nor the Romans but the Copts, first Pachomius and then Schenute, who established the cloist er and regulated its discipline, in that they demanded of the monk not only a written document, or deed, disposing of all his property but also a hand written document of profession, both of which were filed away in the archives of the monastery.
The Holy Rule, as wc have seen, devotes all of chapter Iviii to the matter of the reception and profession of candidates. But there are still some im portant questions left unanswered. How, for example, did profession take place at Montecassino? How was the rite by which the monk renounced the world and bound himself to Christ carried out? What was the formula of pro fession? Did St. Benedict know only of three vows, no more and no fewer?
The Vows.—As was the case with the other monastic fathers and founders whom we have mentioned, St. Benedict was not aeqainted, so wc think, with
the concept of a "vow" as we understand it today. When the Holy Rule pre scribes that the candidate make a promise as to his stability, his pursuit of virtue, and his obedience, this enumeration was most likely only a summary condensation of his profession's content, in other words, a sort of rubric not an actual tallying of the vows that a Benedictine as such had to make. St.
Benedict obviously took it for granted that everyone knew and was fully acquainted with the concrete enactment of the act of profession and was satis fied with merely a brief reference to the content of renunciation and profes sion. That this reference also pointed to something important is equally ob vious. It is likewise quite possible that the novice first made an oral profession that took place during a ceremony in which the abbot asked a series of ques tions which the candidate answered in the affirmative (volo); and the promises thus made, which were (or had previously been) written up in a terse and bind ing summary of the three "vows," were then signed by the novice either there or at a later hour. We are wholly ignorant as to the exact form of the cere mony of profession. The custom of a written document (in place of the merely oral questions and answers) was brought to the West from the East, during a later period of the Empire. A few commeiits on the three "vows" will give us a deeper insight into the content of monastic profession.
Stability.—The Holy Rule binds the monk to perseverance in the monastery of his profession until death. St. Benedict may have stressed this thought more strongly than did other legislators before him. It was certainly not a new con cept. Stability was an essential element in cenobitism. Without it the perman ence of a monastic community was out of the question. Indeed, a certain stability as to place was already discernible in early eremitism. An ever re curring phrase, repeated numberless times (in its history), was "abiding in one's cell," which was tantamount to "being a monk," and points to this topi cal stability. Said the great Antony (f 356): "As the fish belongs in the water, so the monk belongs in his cell."
Fundamentally, of course, and in principle, the hermit was tied to no parti cular locality. And yet the idea, so strongly prevalent in early monachism that the monk was a stranger and pilgrim on earth, entailing a complete abandon ment of home and possessions, was more a spiritual concept in the minds of most hermits and was taken to mean interior abandonment and renunciation.
Nevertheless, there were here and there monks who carried out their idea of "homelessness" in a somewhat radical way externally, wandering restlessly and constantly from one place to another. The roving ascetic teachers of the first Christian centuries may have been in their minds and served as their models, not to adduce the "stranger" Christ of the Gospels (Matt, xxv, 35 &
43). Of course, the missionary's call was absent in the case of these wandering monks. Their roving about was primarily an ascetic practice.
In the monachism of the early Church, there was little distinction between the pilgrim hermit and the stable monk. Both forms had their deep signifi cance and the inbasically justifying arguments. Undoubtedly, however, the
wandering monks were exposed to greater dangers than were the monks whose lives were grounded on stability. There was an ancient maxim, which ran: "As a tree that is often transplanted cannot bear fruit, neither can a monk produce
(spiritual) fruit who does much wandering about." St. Pachomius takes the virtue of stability for granted. He permitted a monk who had left the mon astery to be readmitted (Rules 136 & 175). St. Basil arranged the matter in this way: "Those who have vowed to live together will no longer be allowed to absent themselves without a good reason" (chap, xxxvi, Longer Rules). He gives two reasons for a possible change of place: a corrupt community or a monk's own restless temperament. "One who leaves the cloister for a time at a call from God (that is, on the orders of his superior) does not sever his con nection with his community, but is only doing his duty." Consequently, stabil ity was not interpreted too rigorously, as if a monk were never allowed to leave his cloister again. Rufinus tells of a certain abbot Isidor, who had set up so extensive a monastic district that he could demand a letter-perfect stability of his disciples (Historia Monachorum xvii). But the Council of Chalcedon in the year 451, in its fourth canon, found it necessary to legislate against the growing abuse of an aimless and desultory roaming about of unstable monks
(cf. chap, i, Excursus II). An impressive protest against the evil of monastic instability were the famous stylites, the first of whom was Simeon the Elder
(f 459), whose name was signally honored by Bishop Theodoret of Cyrus (f c. 460) in his Historia Monastica (chap. xxvi).
In the mind of St. Augustine, a monk's topical stability was an obvious prerequisite for a true monastic life. The Gallic Synods, as, for example, that of Angers in the year 453 (canon 8), of Vanne in the year 465 (canon 6), and of Agde in the year 506 (canon 38), sought to curb as an abuse the senseless roaming about on the part of many monks. After that the monk who was met outside his monastery had to identify himself and produce a kind of passport or travel "permit" (cf. Holy Rule, chap. lxi). Even the monk's change of resid ence from his monastery to a hermitage was regulated by Church law, but the hermit remained subject to his abbot. The island cloister of Lerins promoted the idea of stability with an especial fervor. In his "Rule for Nuns," St. Caesarius of Arles (f 542) expressed his thoughts quite clearly on this virtue
(chap. ii). In its first chapter, the Holy Rule does not conceal St. Benedict's deep dislike for the roving religious and specifically demands stability of place for every monk in subsequent chapters (Prologue and chaps, iv, Iviii, lx & lxi).
And yet we must marvel at the consideration St. Benedict displays for un stable monks (chap. xxix). It should be obvious from the Holy Rule that he wants us to keep this topical stability in mind. It is, nevertheless, not to be taken so strictly as if a monk may never leave the monastic precincts for a limited period, even at the direction or with the express permission of his ab bot.
It will always be one of the finest but also one of the most difficult achievements of an abbot so to attach his monks to their monastic home and
to fit them somewhere into its organic set-up that there will never be any need or even any excuse for them ever to seek their salvation outside the cloister.
Obedience.—In the case of an actual hermit, who could regulate his life and his spiritual exercises in accordance with his personal beliefs and inclinations, obedience was secondary to the virtue of humility. But it was not long before it began to take a less subordinate place, especially in the many colonies or groups of hermits (lauras), which grew up around the cell of some prominent and holy father of the desert. Abbot Cassian could adduce a number of heroic examples of obedience that occurred among the Egyptian monks, examples that do not strike us as odd, because they really have their explanation in our
Lord's obedience (Institutes iv. 23-29). Obedience received its decisive signi ficance first in the coenobiunv, for in the coenobium, as we have said, the monk's specific virtue is obedience, a "question of his eternal destiny."
Through his obedience, through the surrender of his right to self-determina tion, he makes himself literally conformable to his humbly obedient Lord (cf.
Phil, ii, 5 ff). Likewise, through his obedience he perfects above all his re nunciation, his choice of the Cross, his unbloody martyrdom, his oblation of self to his divine Master. One of Abbot Poimen's maxims was: "Man's selfwill is the bronze curtain between himself and God." Already in the prologue and later in the fifth and seventh chapters, the Holy Rule stresses the overall importance of obedience.
Conversatio Morum.—Practically all modern readings of the Holy Rule are uniformly consistent in their use of the phrase, conversatio morum;* and we can surely translate it as equivalent to the phrases, "a life of monastic pursuit of virtue," a monastic life of virtue," a "monastic pursuit of virtue," a "mon astic life and pursuit of virtue," or simply (a moral way of life, of course in a monastery). The Holy Rule does not use the other phrase, conversio morum, so often rendered by the words, "conversion of morals," or "conversion of manners." This erroneous interpretation of the phrase goes back to the first commentary on the Rule by Paul Warnefried (f 799), who, instead of the original conversatio morum, read into his version of the text the likesounding phrase, conversio morum, which, of course, could easily be translated by "con version of morals." Two hundred years after the death of St. Benedict, the words conversatio morum were apparently no longer well understood and so were changed into a phrase that had a similar ring, namely, conversio morum.
Up to this very hour, this phrase conversio morum, surely an erroneous form interpolated into the text of the Holy Rule, has been usurping the place of the correct one in our Benedictine rituals and formulas of profession. The Holy
Rule uses the word conversatio nine times in its various chapters: once in the * (On the feast of the Apostle St. James (July 25), as the present translator was checking up on this 58th chapter, he noted that in the collect of the feast the Church prays to the Lord, asking him, by the merits of his Apostle James, that our way of life (conversatio) may be pleasing to him. He has since come upon the word as used in the same sense in many other collects of the liturgy as well as in Holy Scripture.)
prologue, twice in the first as well as in the 63rd and 73rd chapters, and once each in the 21st, 22nd, and 58th chapters.
The meaning of the word conversatio should hardly present any great dif ficulties. It is but one of the many terms taken from the post-classical treasury of Latin words, and can easily be translated by the word "Life" or "way of life" (regardless of whether the life be good or bad). Monachism adopted the term at a very early date and understood it to mean among other things the "monk's life," a monk's way of life," or even "a monk's life of virtue." The Holy Rule undoubtedly used the word in precisely these meanings.
Only the very rare combination of the two words, conversatio morum, cre ates any difficulty here. Up to the present time this combination has been found only twice in the early literature of asceticism: in the 58th chapter of the Rule and in the treatise, "On Virginity" (II, lix), by St. Ambrose (f 397). (Cf. also Studia Anselmiana XLV, vi.) A great deal Of critical acumen and much deep learning were without doubt at work here in arriving at a correct under standing of the phrase. We are dealing also with an expression that was most certainly self-evident and completely familiar to the monks under St. Benedict and therefore needed no further elucidation. It may be that the rather com plicated interpretations given these words so long afterwards suffered ship wreck on the rock of this simple understanding of them. Abbot Cassian did not use the phrase, although he might have given St. Benedict some incentive to do so.
The real difficulty is probably connected with the word mores. The sig nificance and interpretation of this term are to be sought in the monastic and not in the secular usage of the word. A few references should suffice to estab lish the truth of this contention. St. Gregory calls St. Benedict magister virtutum, "a teacher of the virtues" (Dialog. II, ii), and a nun a magistra morum,
"a teacher or mistress of the virtuous life" (Dialog IV, xv). St. Gregory evi dently takes both phrases to mean substantially the same thing. The mores, that is the morals of the monks were surely their virtues, their pursuit of virtue.
The Holy Pontiff refers those who wish to have a deeper insight into the vita and the mores of St. Benedict to his Holy Rule (Dialog. II, xxxvi). Mores here surely also signifies the "pursuit of virtue," and vita wholly approximates the same meaning; for by the word vita St. Gregory does not mean the exterior life, for there is nothing in the Holy Rule concerning that life. Those who want to have a more exact knowledge of St. Benedict's pursuit of virtue (mores) and his life of virtue (vita), should read his Rule; for he could not teach otherwise than he lived.
The translation of the word mores by the term "character" does not meet the requirements. The association of the two words vita and mores is of fre quent occurrence in ecclesiastico-monastic literature. Hagiography, for ex ample, is less concerned with the exterior lives of the saints and with their
"character" than with their strenuous life of virtue, as manifested by the mir acles they worked. St. Caesarius borrowed the following advice in his "Rule
for Nuns" from St. Augustine: "Do not seek to please men," he wrote, "by the style of your garments, but by the life of virtue (moribus) that is in keeping with your calling" (chap. xxii). A letter to an abbess, no doubt erroneously ascribed to Caesarius, reads: Do you not appear more distinguished than the others on account of your habit but rather by reason of your pursuit of virtue
(moribus). Distinguish yourself beyond all the others in those things that will provoke the envy of the devil rather than in the things that may arouse the malice of men; in other words, instead of appearing well dressed on account of your attire, you should appear adorned with a virtuous life (conversatione) and with virtuous conduct (moribus)" (Letter iii).
In monastic literature, the word mores signified a monk's life, that is, his efforts to grow in virtue. This last is the monk's calling and covers the whole range of his duties. The Holy Rule outlines this ambit of the monk's obliga tions in its fourth and seventh chapters. As far as the matter goes, vita, conversatio, and mores are practically coterminous. They can by themselves signi fy with equal force a virtuous or an evil life, good or bad conduct, or an ambi tious course in the right or in the wrong direction. Abbot Cassian, for instance, hints at an evil connotation of the words /conversatio and mores when in his treatise on the three renunciations he says: "The first renunciation is that by which, so far as our bodily comfort is affected by them, we despise the wealth and goods of this world; the second, whereby we scorn all evil pursuits (mores) as well as all evil faults and inclinations of the flesh and the heart; the third, whereby we withdraw our spirits from all present and visible things, fixing our eyes only on the future and yearn for the invisible." Cassian comes back to these three renunciations towards the end of his comments on the Lord's com mand to Abraham: "Go forth out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and out of thy father's house" (Gen. xii, 1). "The first thing he said, however, was:
'Go forth out of thy country,' that is, away from the things of this world and its earthly riches; the second thing, 'From thy kindred,' that is leave thy former
(evil) way of life (conversatio), thy vain endeavors (mores) and the faults (weaknesses) that cling to one from his birth and are kindred to him; and the third, 'Go out of thy father's house,' that is, put out of thy mind all thy mem ories of this world" (Institutes iii, 6).
Instead of the juxtaposition of the two words, "Life and Conduct" (con versatio et mores), the Latins could just as easily say also conversatio morum. a form of the genitive case (genitivus epexegeticus), in this instance explana tory of the other arrangement—one that is not infrequently met with in Latin
(and in the Holy Rule). The Rule makes use of the latter form to describe the content, that is, the obligations consequent upon monastic profession in an altogether general way. We can, as we have said, translate the two words in any one of the following phrases: "A life of virtuous effort in the cloister," a "life of monastic virtue," a "monastic pursuit of virtue," or simply a "monas tic moral life." In this virtuous life in the cloister, obedience and stability are the particularly important features, but they are not the only ones. It is not the
question of a "vow" existing alongside the "vows" of obedience and stability, but rather a question of the sum total of the obligations taken upon oneself at his profession, in a word, and altogether concretely, a question of one's ob servance of the Rule (cf. end of chapter lx)*
The alleged connection of monastic profession and its formula with the Roman military oath (German-Fahneneid, that is, an oath of allegiance to a flag or standard) breaks down before the accidental fact of the "three" vows.
It is not denied herewith that from the very beginning monasticism regarded its members in the light of a militant army of Christ. This thought was already clearly expressed in the first sentences of the prologue. The idea of a king, however, as the top leader of an army is distinctly not a Roman one. Rufinus argues against it, rather as a Roman, when he writes of the Egyptian monks:
"They awaited the coming of Christ as a benevolent Father, or like accoutred soldiers who waited for the arrival of their Emperor in camp" (Historia Monachorum, foreword).
Excursus III.
The Monk's Consecration .*—Along with his profession, which was a most personal act on the part of a monk who embraced the monastic life, there has entered in the course of monastic history also his official consecration or dedi cation as a monk by the Church. The monk's consecration to the monastic life as contrasted with the personal part in it at his profession, is essentially an of ficial act of the Church and witnessed as much by one who is at least a priest.
The Church, through the priest (or abbot), accepts the monk's profession, seals, crown, and perfects it by a consecration, dedication, or, if you will, by a blessing. The outstanding elements in this consecration are the ritual prayers that are said over him at his investiture in the monastic habit. Looked at from a historical point of view, profession as the monk's personal act of self-im molation to the Lord and his acceptance of the monastic habit at the hands of an abbot or monastic patriarch were the original and primary procedure in his becoming a monk, while his dedication or official consecration to the life was distinctly an accessory and secondary one.
Profession is a visible sign of the monk's strong, virile, and yet humble confidence of his own moral strength, which comes to him through the grace of God—Volo, "I will;" promitto, "1 promise." Through his dedication by the Church to the monastic state, he is, so to speak, lifted out of the multitude of the faithful and delivered to the Lord as his own peculiar property. The idea of monastic consecration, like the consecration of the early Virgines by the * (cf. also Dorn John Chapman, St. Benedict in the Sixth Century," Longmans,
Green and Co., 1929, pp. 207-231. The translator) * (The German term for this. Die Monchsweihe, is not an easy one to translate into contemporary English. We cannot very well use the word "ordination," as we usually associate it with the priesthood, so we have to resort to one or another of the words "consecration," "dedication," or "blessing." The German word
Weihe is used indiscriminately in all three senses. We do, however, speak of con secrated virgins; why not of consecrated monks? The translator)
bishop to a life of virginity, dating back to the third century, is worthy of un conditional acceptance.
The difficulty in the matter is really only one of an historical nature. When do we first come upon the idea of monastic consecration? Was St. Benedict al ready acquainted with it? Or did he take it for granted?
The first evidence we have of this official dedication by the Church is to be found in a treatise on the ecclesiastical hierarchy by the so-called Diony sius the Areopagite (also called by some "Pseudo-Dionysius). This Dionysius, who put himself on a par with the Dionysius mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles (xvii, 34), was actually a Writer, to this day still unknown to us, who wrote in Syria around the year 500. As he described it, the consecration or dedication took place in the following manner:
"The priest stood before the altar of God and read the prayers of the con secration (that is, a kind of preface). The candidate to be consecrated or dedi cated stood before the priest as he read the dedication prayer over him. The priest then approached the candidate and asked him first whether he re nounced all the distractions of the world, pot only in his exterior life but also in the interior faculties of his soul. He described to him the perfect life and admonished him that he had to raise himself above the mediocre in virtue.
After the candidate had without hesitation made all the promises, the priest sealed him with the sign of the Cross, in the name of the Most Blessed Trinity, divested him of all his clothing, placed another garb upon him, and then shared with him the all-divine mysteries (that is. Holy Communion)'' The litur gical symbolism of the various parts of the rite was then explained in the fol lowing manner:
"The circumstance that the initiated monk stood erect and was not down on his knees and did not have the divinely inspired Scriptures lying on his head but merely stood by the priest who read the prayers over him, signified that there did not reside in the monastic state the power to induct others (into the Church); but rather that the monk from then on lived in some manner by him self, in a solitary and holy state, a state that was below the priesthood, upon which he had thenceforth to depend for instruction in that divine knowledge which raised him under voluntary obedience to those mysteries of salvation that were in truth his by right of his calling. In his abjuration, not only of the distractions of the exterior life of the world but also the phantasies conjured up by his imagination, there was revealed that perfect philosophy of monachism which was lived up to in a practical way through the knowledge and practice of the precepts that lead to union with God. His sealing with the sign of the cross symbolized the mortification of all the desires of the flesh. The shearing of his hair typified that purity of life which, abhorring all vain ornam entation, did not minimize the spiritual loathsomeness inherent in every artifically created beauty of the body. It did, however, wish to emphasize the truth that life in its inner faculties of the soul is ennobled, not so much by the various devices of worldly beautification as by that interior recollection and
abandonment of earthly things that contributed to making it more Godlike . . .
"The laying aside of his former attire and the putting on of the habit was emblematic of his transition from a good but mediocre state of holiness to a state of perfection. Similarly, as in one's rebirth through God (that is, through baptism), this change of garb signified the elevation of his life, now purged of its sins, to a contemplative and illuminative state. If after this the (officiating) priest and all the faithful there bestowed upon the newly blessed neophyte the kiss of peace, you should see in this the sacred union of the God like, who rejoice lovingly with one another in holy cheer ... At the conclusion of the whole ceremony, the priest summoned the newly professed to the altar for Holy Communion. He thereby gave everyone to understand that if the same newly professed monk otherwise lived up faithfully to the ideals of the monastic state and thereby entered on the way of union to which it led, he would become capable of contemplating the secrets of salvation accessible only to men of his calling. Likewise, he would not only be able to reach a de gree of participation in the Holy Sacraments attainable by the middle class of Christians (that is, the laity), but in addition to that with a sort of supernatural perception derived from the divine graces that had been given him, he would be able to participate in the most divine Sacrament of the Eucharist in a manner and to a degree beyond the ability of the common faithful" (Kirchliche Hierarchie VI, ii-iii).
It may be that the introduction of monastic consecration had its origin in the efforts of the primitive Church to incorporate the monastic state into her organism, not only juridically as we see put into words in the fourth canon of the Council of Chalcedon in 451, but also in her liturgy. At Chalcedon monachism was given a place and rank officially in the Church, below that of the priesthood but above that of the laity.
But it must not be overlooked that the Areopagite above, in his descrip tion of the rite of dedication, had the anchorite principally in mind, since the latter usually lived alone without benefit of rule, independent of any abbot, and out of contact with any community. Indeed, as far as the cenobite was concerned, life under the jurisdiction of an abbot was a necessary condition.
Nevertheless, since the time of Dionysius, an official blessing of the monk was taken for granted in the Orient. It later became more elaborate and compared favorably with the rite of baptism. Investiture in the monastic habit played a prominent part in it. In fact. Oriental monasticism made a rather excessive cult of the monastic habit, in which an expiatory value was supposed to re side (cf. chap, lx, Excursus). Despite the opposition of Theodore of Studiu
(f 826), who refused to see any difference between the "small habit" and the large wide-sleeved (angel-like) habit and pointed to the "uniform monastic habit of the revered desert fathers," this distinction nevertheless found gen eral adoption in the Orient. Aside from the novices, who wore the "junior hab it," or the habit of "beginners," the Oriental monasteries distinguished be tween two classes of monks: those who were still undergraduates, so to speak,