Primary source documents

chapter 11: The history of the other church: Revivalism, reform, and alternative Christian faith expression in the medieval time

The founding of the Monastery of Clairvaux by St Bernard

Source: Frederic Austin Ogg (ed.), A Source Book of Medieval History. Documents Illustrative of European Life and Institutions from the German Invasions to the Renaissance, New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: American Book Company 1908, 256-8.

Bernard of Clairvaux may be regarded as the most important Western European of the 12th century. He was first and foremost a monastic reformer who established an important daughter monastery within the reform order of the Cistercians. Although the Cistercians’ reform movement had been founded already in 1098, it was with the monastery of Clairvaux and the personality of Bernard that the movement gained strength. Bernard was, second, an important mystic theologian. Third, he was an influential politician who played a key role in the second crusade.

The text below is taken from a large biography of the great reformer by several monastics of the 12th century. The part below was written by Arnold, the abbot of the monastery of Bonneval near Chartres in central France, around 1153.

   Twelve monks and their abbot, representing our Lord and His apostles, were assembled in the church. Stephen placed a cross in Bernard's hands, who solemnly, at the head of his small band, walked forth from Citeaux […] Bernard struck away to the northward. For a distance of nearly ninety miles he kept this course, passing up by the source of the Seine, by Chatillon, of school-day memories, until he arrived at La Ferte, about equally distant between Troyes and Chaumont, in the diocese of Langres, and situated on the river Aube. About four miles beyond La Ferte was a deep valley opening to the east. Thick umbrageous forests gave it a character of gloom and wildness; but a gushing stream of limpid water which ran through it was sufficient to redeem every disadvantage.

   In June, 1115, Bernard took up his abode in the "Valley of Wormwood,” as it was called, and began to look for means of shelter and sustenance against the approaching winter. The rude fabric which he and his monks raised with their own hands was long preserved by the pious veneration of the Cistercians. It consisted of a building covered by a single roof, under which chapel, dormitory, and refectory were all included. Neither stone nor wood hid the bare earth, which served for a floor. Windows scarcely wider than a man's head admitted a feeble light. In this room the monks took their frugal meals of herbs and water. Immediately above the refectory was the sleeping apartment. It was reached by a ladder, and was, in truth, a sort of loft. Here were the monks' beds, which were peculiar. They were made in the form of boxes, or bins, of wooden planks, long and wide enough for a man to lie down in. A small space, hewn out with an axe, allowed room for the sleeper to get in or out. The inside was strewn with chaff, or dried leaves, which, with the woodwork, seem to have been the only covering permitted. […]

   The monks had thus got a house over their heads; but they had very little else. They had left Citeaux in June. Their journey had probably occupied them a fortnight; their clearing, preparations, and building, perhaps two months; and thus they were near September when this portion of their labor was accomplished. Autumn and winter were approaching, and they had no store laid by. Their food during the summer had been a compound of leaves intermixed with coarse grain. Beechnuts and roots were to be their main support during the winter. And now to the privations of insufficient food was added the wearing out of their shoes and clothes. Their necessities grew with the severity of the season, until at last even salt failed them; and presently Bernard heard murmurs. He argued and exhorted; he spoke to them of the fear and love of God, and strove to rouse their drooping spirits by dwelling on the hopes of eternal life and Divine recompense. Their sufferings made them deaf and indifferent to their abbot's words. They would not remain in this valley of bitterness; they would return to Citeaux. Bernard, seeing they had lost their trust in God, reproved them no more; but himself sought in earnest prayer for release from their difficulties. Presently a voice from heaven said, "Arise, Bernard, thy prayer is granted thee." Upon which the monks said, "What didst thou ask of the Lord?" "Wait, and ye shall see, ye of little faith," was the reply; and presently came a stranger who gave the abbot ten livres.

Joachim of Fiore, The Book of Concordance, Book 2, Part 1, Chapters 8 and 9

Source: Apocalyptic Spirituality. Treatises and Letters of Lactantius, Adso of Montier-en-der, Joachim of Fiore, The Franciscan Spirituals, Savonarola. Translation by B. McGinn, New York: Paulist Press, 1979, 127-131.

Joachim of Fiore (1145-1202) was the inventor of the most influential prophetic system in the medieval era. He interpreted history as going through three successive ages, each linked to one Person of the Trinity – an age of the Father or the Law, an age of the Son or the Gospel, and an age of the Spirit, which would be one of love and joy. According to his view of history, each period would be preceded by a time of incubation. The incubation for the first period had lasted from Adam to Abraham, and the incubation for the second had lasted from Elijah to Christ. The third incubation, he said, had begun with Benedict of Nursia and was approaching its end by the time of Joachim. He taught that each Age lasted forty-two generations, with each generation around 30 years. Such calculations led Joachim to expect the Age of the Son to turn to the Age of the Spirit at some point in the 13th century. Many expected the year 1260 to be the turning point of history, and medieval apocalyptic expectations intensified towards this time.

The following partly rather esoteric and difficult text is an extract from Joachim’s Book of Concordance.

CHAPTER 8

   According to the pattern we are about to discuss, the tempus of the first Testament began with Adam and continued even to Christ, bearing fruit from Jacob. The tempus of the New Testament began with Josiah, King of Judah, and will last until the consummation of the world, bearing fruit from Christ.

   For we know that the carnal Jewish people imitated the first parent in sinful corruption. Just as he is the first of all men, so too is he recorded first in the order of fathers. The Roman people, who are Gentile, began from a certain Moechus, as Augustine teaches in his book The City of God. He generated Romulus and Remus through adultery in the days of Josiah. Afterward both peoples of the Lord were shown mercy, the former from the days of Jacob, the latter from the time when Christ came into the world. Fathers were elected from the former people by means of the law and circumcision; from the latter people sons were chosen by means of the sacrament of baptism. The likeness of the Father is found in the former, the likeness of the Son in the latter. For this reason the former have been called fathers in a special way, the latter not fathers but sons.

   Lest the likeness of the gifts of the Holy Spirit be missing – the Spirit who proceeds from the Father and the Son – the kingdom that has been called Israel has proceeded from the kingdom of the Jewish people. In the kingdom of Israel are found the remnants of the elect, as well as the spiritual men, among whom were Elijah and Elisha and the sons of the prophets who lived in Jericho. Likewise the Church of the Greeks has proceeded from the universal church committed to Peter. In this Church are found the remnants in their days and the renowned fathers who lived in the desert, like Elijah, Elisha, and the sons of the prophets who dwelled in Jericho. This should not be thought irrelevant to the mystery that then ten tribes seceded from the house of David and now the Greek churches have seceded as it were from the Roman Church, because it is true what the apostle says: "There are different kinds of grace, but the same Spirit."

   You ought also to note that the letter of the Old Testament was committed to the Jewish people, the letter of the New to the Roman people. The spiritual understanding that proceeds from both Testaments has been committed to the spiritual men.

CHAPTER 9

   We ought to review what we have just discussed about the three orders and the two peoples, so that by paying attention to the one the other may be more easily understood. When the two peoples were discussed, it was demonstrated that the Holy Spirit is sent by the Father and Son.  When he is sent, he breathes where he wishes and gives his gifts to individuals as he wishes.

   The principle that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son without either beginning or end prompts us to consider the three orders we spoke of above, because what we unswervingly hold about his nature appears there even more lucidly. For when we dealt with these orders, we said that the order of monks according to one proper form was started by Saint Benedict, but according to a likeness by Elisha, the prophet. For we said: "There were monks, even rather famous monks, before the time of Saint Benedict in whom the monastic order had already preceded."

   Both because this is the place to treat it and also because we are bound by our promise, we ought now to fulfill what we said when we vowed that we would explain the likeness of the sacred mystery of the Trinity in these three orders. Note here that he who made man in his image and likeness also created Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in order that they might bear the type of the divine Trinity, just as he created many other trios. God wanted to establish those three orders so that they themselves might be the image and likeness of the Trinity, according to that saying of the apostle: "Until we all attain to the unity of the faith, into a perfect man in the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ."

   For God considers the whole multitude of believers as if they were a single man, created out of flesh, blood, and the breath of life. For as blood is the medium between the flesh and the soul, thus the clerical order is the medium between the married and the monks. The married order bears the image of the Father, because as the Father is the Father because he has a Son, so the married order has been established by God solely in order to procreate sons. This is so even though Moses allowed them something contrary on account of the hardness of heart that made them wise in the things of the world and Paul the apostle permitted them one thing lest a worse occur.

   The clerical order bears the image of the Son, who is the Word of the Father, because it has been established to preach and teach the people the way of the Lord and the rules of their God. The monastic order bears the image of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of God, because this order could not despise the world and those things that are worldly unless it was invited by the love of God and drawn by the same Spirit who drove the Lord into the desert. It is also called spiritual because it walks not according to the flesh but according to the spirit.

   The first order was started by Adam; the second by Josiah, king of Judah; the third in one way by Elisha, the prophet, in another by Saint Benedict. Why is it thus? Because the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. For if the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father alone – like the Son – it would seem to be more suitable for the clerical and monastic orders both to begin simultaneously and to attain their consummation simultaneously. If, on the contrary, the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Son alone – as the Son did from the Father alone – then it would seem more suitable for the third status to pertain only to the Holy Spirit, just as the second would pertain to the Son. Because, in fact, there is one Father from whom the Son and the Holy Spirit proceed, one Spirit who proceeds simultaneously from the Father and the Son, two who proceed from one Father, the first status is correctly ascribed to the Father alone, the third to the Holy Spirit, the second to the Son and the Holy Spirit in common. […]

Fourth Lateran Council (1215), Chapter 3 – decree against the Waldensians

Source: Denzinger. The Sources of Catholic Dogma. Translated by Roy J. Deferrari from the Thirtieth Edition of Henry Denzinger's Enchiridion Symbolorum. Fitzwilliam, N.H.: Loreto Publications, 1955, 172.

The Fourth Lateran Council (11 to 30 November 1215), gathering around 1,200 prelates (i.e., bishops or abbots), was the most important council of the medieval era. It adopted several decisions – about the reclamation of the Holy Land, about the reform of the church, and against heretical teachings, among them the Albigensians (Cathars), the teachings of Abbot Joachim of Fiore, the Waldensians, and others.

The text below is a decree that criticizes the lay preaching of the Waldensians. Although the Waldensians had actively sought the approval of the church, they came into conflict with the church by insisting on lay preaching.

   Because some indeed "under the pretext of piety, denying his power" (according to what the Apostle says) [II Tim. 3:5], assume to themselves the authority of preaching, when the same Apostle says: "How ... shall they preach, unless they are sent?" [Rom. 10:15], let all who, being prohibited or not sent, without having received authority from the Apostolic See, or from the Catholic bishop of the place, shall presume publicly or privately to usurp the duty of preaching be marked by the bond of excommunication; and unless they recover their senses, the sooner the better, let them be punished with another fitting penalty.

The will of St Francis (1226)

Source: Frederic Austin Ogg (ed.), A Source Book of Medieval History. Documents Illustrative of European Life and Institutions from the German Invasions to the Renaissance, New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: American Book Company 1908, 376-9.

In his last will, prepared shortly before his death (1226), St Francis clearly states the core principles of his community. Among the Franciscans, the Will received high respect. However, although the principles were clearly spelled out, controversies about the right understanding soon emerged, most importantly on the question of whether the Franciscan Order as a whole was allowed to own properties. The will contains an interesting emphasis on Francis’ respect for the ordinary, so-called ‘secular’ priests, i.e., those who are not ‘regular’ priests following a rule like that of the Franciscans. It appears as if he already anticipated the future conflicts between regular and secular clergy, as secular priests often perceived the former as intruders in their churches. We see here the emergence of a conflict between a more institutional and a more revivalist church, both within the Roman Catholic Church.

   God gave it to me, Brother Francis, to begin to do penance in the following manner: when I was yet in my sins it seemed to me too painful to look upon the lepers, but the Lord Himself led me among them, and I had compassion upon them. When I left them, that which had seemed to me bitter had become sweet and easy. A little while after, I left the world [i.e., abandoned the worldly manner of living], and God gave me such faith that I would kneel down with simplicity in any of his churches, and I would say, "We adore thee, Lord Jesus Christ, here and in all thy churches which are in the world, and we bless thee that by Thy holy cross Thou hast ransomed the world."

   Afterward the Lord gave me, and still gives me, so great a faith in priests who live according to the form of the holy Roman Church, because of their sacerdotal character, that even if they persecuted me I would have recourse to them, and even though I had all the wisdom of Solomon, if I should find poor secular priests, I would not preach in their parishes against their will. I desire to respect them like all the others, to love them and honor them as my lords. I will not consider their sins, for in them I see the Son of God, and they are my lords. I do this because here below I see nothing, I perceive nothing physically of the most high Son of God, except His most holy body and blood, which the priests receive and alone distribute to others. I desire above all things to honor and venerate all these most holy mysteries and to keep them precious. Wherever I find the sacred name of Jesus, or his words, in unsuitable places, I desire to take them away and put them in some decent place; and I pray that others may do the same. We ought to honor and revere all the theologians and those who preach the most holy word of God, as dispensing to us spirit and life.

   When the Lord gave me the care of some brothers, no one showed me what I ought to do, but the Most High himself revealed to me that I ought to live according to the model of the holy gospel. I caused a short and simple formula to be written and the lord Pope confirmed it for me [the Rule approved 1210 by Pope Innocent III].

   Those who volunteered to follow this kind of life distributed all they had to the poor. They contented themselves with one tunic, patched within and without, with the cord and breeches, and we desired to have nothing more. . . . We loved to live in poor and abandoned churches, and we were ignorant and were submissive to all. I worked with my hands and would still do so, and I firmly desire also that all the other brothers work, for this makes for goodness. Let those who know no trade learn one, not for the purpose of receiving wages for their toil, but for their good example and to escape idleness. And when we are not given the price of our work, let us resort to the table of the Lord, begging our bread from door to door. The Lord revealed to me the salutation which we ought to give: "God give you peace!"

   Let the brothers take great care not to accept churches, dwellings, or any buildings erected for them, except as all is in accordance with the holy poverty which we have vowed in the Rule; and let them not live in them except as strangers and pilgrims. I absolutely forbid all the brothers, in whatsoever place they may be found, to ask any bull from the court of Rome, whether directly or indirectly, in the interest of church or convent, or under pretext of preaching, or even for the protection of their bodies. If they are not received anywhere, let them go of themselves elsewhere, thus doing penance with the benediction of God. . . .

   And let the brothers not say, "This is a new Rule"; for this is only a reminder, a warning, an exhortation. It is my last will and testament, that I, little Brother Francis, make for you, my blessed brothers, in order that we may observe in a more Catholic way the Rule which we promised the Lord to keep.

   Let the ministers-general, all the other ministers, and the custodians be held by obedience to add nothing to and take nothing away from these words. Let them always keep this writing near them beside the Rule; and in all the assemblies which shall be held, when the Rule is read, let these words be read also.

   I absolutely forbid all the brothers, clerics and laymen, to introduce comments in the Rule, or in this Will, under pretext of explaining it. But since the Lord has given me to speak and to write the Rule and these words in a clear and simple manner, so do you understand them in the same way without commentary, and put them in practice until the end.

   And whoever shall have observed these things, may he be crowned in heaven with the blessings of the heavenly Father, and on earth with those of his well-beloved Son and of the Holy Spirit, the Consoler, with the assistance of all the heavenly virtues and all the saints.'

   And I, little Brother Francis, your servant, confirm to you, so far as I am able, this most holy benediction. Amen.

The Book of the Two Principles (anonymous Cathar writer, 13th century), Part 1: 1-2. 13

Source: Walter L. Wakefield and Austin P. Evans, Heresies of the High Middle Ages. Selected Sources Translated and Annotated. Second Edition. New York: Columbia University Press, 1991, 515-6. 523-4.

The Cathars posed a significant challenge to the Catholic Church during the high medieval time. They taught a dualist theology that was probably influenced by Manichaeism entering Europe from the East. The Cathars understood themselves clearly as Christians, called themselves ‘Good Christians’, and made ample reference to the Bible. The movement became widely popular, particularly in the south of France, and it died out only because of the church’s violent crusading wars and the inquisition.
The Book of the Two Principles is the most important surviving work of Cathar literature. Its author is not known, but it may have been written around 1240 in Northern Italy. Following are the two first sections and section 13 of the long treatise.  

Part 1. On Free Will

   [1] Here Begins the Book of the Two Principles.  Since many persons are hampered in rightly understand the truth, to enlighten them, to stimulate those who do have right understanding, and also for the delight of my soul, I have made it my purpose to explain our true faith by evidence from the Holy Scriptures and with eminently suitable arguments, invoking to my efforts the aid of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

   [2] On the Two Principles. To the honor of the Most Holy Father, I wish to begin my discussion concerning the two principles by refuting the belief in one Principle, however much this may contradict well-nigh all religious persons. We may commence as follows: Either there is only one First Principle, or there is more than one. If, indeed, there were one and not more, as the unenlightened say, then, of necessity, He would be either good or evil. But surely not evil, since then only evil would proceed from Him and not good, as Christ says in the Gospel of the Blessed Matthew: "And the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit."  And the Blessed James says in his Epistle: "Doth a fountain send forth out of the same hole sweet and bitter water? Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear grapes; or the vine, figs? So neither can the salt water yield sweet."

   [13] On the Principle of Evil. Therefore, it behooves us of necessity to confess that there is another principle, one of evil, who works most wickedly against the true God and His creation; and this principle seems to move God against His own creation and the creation against its God, and causes God himself to wish for and desire that which in and of himself He could never wish for at all. Thus it is that through the compulsion of the evil enemy God yearns and is wearied, relents, is burdened, and is served by His own creatures. Whence God says to His people through Isaiah: "But thou hast made me to serve with thy sins, thou hast wearied me with thy iniquities"; and again, "I am weary of bearing them."  And Malachi says, "You have wearied the Lord with your words." And David says, "And [he] repented according to the multitude of His mercies."  And the Apostle says in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, "For we are God's coadjutors." Of the compulsion of God, however, the Lord himself says to Satan in the Book of Job, "But thou hast moved me against him, that I should afflict him without cause." And through Ezechiel the same Lord says, "And when they caught the souls of my people, they gave life to their souls. And they violated me among my people, for a handful of barley and a piece of bread, to kill souls which should not die and to save souls alive which should not live."  And the Lord, lamenting over His people, says through Isaiah: "Because I called and you did not answer; I spoke and you did not hear, and you did evil in my eyes, and you have chosen the things that displease me."

   And so it appears plainly that this concept of how one may serve God buttresses my argument. For if there were only one First Principle, holy, just, and good, as has been declared of the true Lord God in the foregoing, He would not make Himself sorrowful, sad, or dolorous; neither would He bear pain in himself, nor grow weary or repent, nor be aided by anyone, nor be burdened with the sins of anyone, nor yearn or wish for anything to be done which was delayed in coming to pass, since nothing at all could be done contrary to His will; nor could He be moved by anyone or injured, nor could there be anything which would trouble God, but all things would obey Him from overwhelming necessity. And most especially would this be true because all things would be by Him and in Him and of Him," in all their dispositions, if there were only one First Principle, holy and just, as I have shown above in discussing the true God.

Council of Vienne (1311-12) – on the errors of the Beghards and the Beguines

Source: Denzinger. The Sources of Catholic Dogma. Translated by Roy J. Deferrari from the Thirtieth Edition of Henry Denzinger's Enchiridion Symbolorum. Fitzwilliam, N.H.: Loreto Publications, 1955, 188-9.

The Beguines were a medieval movement of women who chose a communitarian life. The movement emerged from the 12th century on, and the Beghards were its male counterpart. The movement was at first tolerated, but increasingly it attracted the suspicion of the church. The eventual condemnation, not only of its supposed teachings, but of the movement as a whole, is an example of how the (male) ecclesial hierarchy tried to maintain control over independent women’s movements.

The Council of Vienne in France is, in the Catholic list, the fifteenth ecumenical council of the church. How much the errors listed below truly reflect the reality of the Beguines’ teaching, and how much the errors were fabricated and used to discredit the movement, may be debated.

The Errors of the Beghards and the Beguines (the State of Perfection)

   I. That man in the present life can acquire so great and such a degree of perfection that he will be rendered inwardly sinless, and that he will not be able to advance farther in grace; for, as they say, if anyone could always advance, he could become more perfect than Christ.

   2. That it is not necessary for man to fast or to pray, after he has attained a degree of such perfection; because then his sensuality is so perfectly subject to the spirit and to reason that man can freely grant to the body whatever it pleases.

  3. That those who are in the aforementioned degree of perfection and in that spirit of liberty are not subject to human obedience, nor are they bound to any precepts of the Church, because (as they assert) "where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty [II Cor. 3: 17].

   4. That man can so attain final beatitude according to every degree of perfection in the present life, as he will obtain it in the blessed life.

   5. That any intellectual nature in its own self is naturally blessed, and that the soul does not need the light of glory raising it to see God and to enjoy Him beatifically.

   6. That it is characteristic of the imperfect man to exercise himself in acts of virtue, and the perfect soul gives off virtues by itself.

   7. That a woman's kiss, since nature does not incline to this, is a mortal sin; but the carnal act, since nature inclines to this, is not a sin, especially when the one exercising it is tempted.

   8. That in the elevation of the body of Jesus Christ they ought not to arise nor to show reverence to it, declaring that it would be characteristic of the imperfection in them, if from the purity and depth of their contemplations they should descend to such a degree as to think about other things regarding the minister [other text, mystery] or the sacrament of the Eucharist or the passion of the humanity of Christ.

   A judgment: We with the approval of the Sacred Council condemn and disapprove completely that sect together with its past errors, restraining more strictly lest anyone in the future hold, approve, or defend them.

 
Copyright 2015 Tobias Brandner. All rights reserved.
Back to Top