many observances which, to the reproach even of Christians, implied a great strictness of manners and discipline. Juno,' says he, has her priestesses, devoted to one husband, Vesta her perpetual virgins, and other idols their priests also, under vows of chastity."1 "He These notions and these circum. stances concurring, particular texts of Scripture were easily found that seemed to countenance austerities in general, and celibacy in pacticular; as that saying of our Saviour, Matt. xix. 12: "There are some.... which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it;" and Paul's saying, 1 Cor. vii. 38 : that giveth in marriage doeth well, but he that giveth not in marriage doeth better." Both these passages, however, probably relate to the times of persecution, in which it is either absolutely necessary to abandon the satisfaction of family relations and domestic society, or at least in which it is most convenient to be free from every attachment of that kind; that when men were persecuted in one city, they might, with more ease, and less distress of mind, flee to another. The persecution of Christians by the Heathen emperors, and consequently the more imminent hazard that attended living in cities, especially with the incumbrance of families, was another circumstance that contributed to drive many of the primitive Christians into deserts and unfrequented places. The irruptions of the Northern nations into the Roman empire had an effect of the same kind, making all cities less safe and comfortable. Moreover, when the great persecutions were over, and consequently the boasted crown of martyrdom could not be obtained in a regular way, many persons inflicted upon themselves a kind of But on every other occasion marvoluntary martyrdom, in abandoning riage is spoken of in the most honourthe world and all the enjoyments of able terms in the Scriptures, and is, life." Gregory Nazianzen, celebrating indeed, necessary for the propagation the absurd austerities and mortifica- of the human species. Besides, Paul tions of the monks of Naziansum, tells makes it a mark of that man of sin, us that some of them, through an ex- or antichristian power, which was to cess of zeal, killed themselves, to be arise in the latter times, that it was to released from the wicked world." It forbid to marry, as well as to make use 18 possible, however, that they might of "meats, which God hath created to not directly kill themselves, or intend be received with thanksgiving.” 1 Tim. to do it, but only died in consequence iv. 3. In fact, these two circumstances of depriving themselves of the usual greatly contribute to point out the comforts of life. It was these austerities, joined with such imaginary revelations, and intimate communications with heaven, as have usually accompanied them, that was the great recommendation of Montanism. The Montanists, Tertullian says, had the same rule of faith, but more fasting and less marrying, than others.3 1 Middleton's Letter, p. 238. (P.) " 'Quid nos oportet facere, in quorum condemnationem habet, et Juno Univiras, et Vesta Virgines, et alia Idola continentes." Hieron, T. iv. Par. i. p. 314. It. Par. ii. pp. 154 & 744. Middleton, Works, III. p. 127. 2 Jortin's Remarks, III. p. 22. (P.) Ed. 1805, II. p. 168. 3 De Jejuniis, C. i. Op. p. 544. (P.) Church of Rome as the principal seat of that antichristian corruption, of which so much is said, and against which we are so earnestly cautioned, in the books of the New Testament. Besides, men's passions are far from being improved by the long continuance of this miserable and solitary state. Instead of approaching by this means, as they vainly pretended, to the life of angels, they rather sink themselves to the condition of brutes, and some of the most worthless or savage kinds. Also, living without labour themselves, (as in time the monks came to do,) and upon the labour of others, and without adding and Ambrose into Italy. "St. Martin, to the number or strength of the com- the celebrated bishop of Tours, erected munity, they certainly defeat the great the first monasteries in Gaul, and... purposes of their creation, as social his funeral is said to have been atbeings; and are not only a dead weight upon the community, but, in many cases, a real evil and nuisance, in those states in which they are established.1 SECTION I. tended by no less than two thousand monks." But the Western monks never attained the severity of the Eastern." The number of these monks in very early times was so great, as almost to exceed belief. Fleury says, that in Egypt alone they were computed, at the end of the fourth century, to exceed seventy thousand. With this increasing number many disorders were necessarily introduced among them. At the OF THE MONASTIC LIFE, TILL THE FALL end of the fourth century the monks OF THE WESTERN EMPIRE. This Anthony, finding many disposed to adopt the same mode of life, reduced them into some kind of order; and the regulations which he made for the monks of Egypt were soon introduced into Palestine and Syria by his disciple Hilarion, into Mesopotamia by Aones and Eugenius, and into Armenia by Eustachius Bishop of Sebastia. "From the East this gloomy institution passed into the West; " Basil carrying it into Greece, were observed to be very insolent and licentious; and having power with the people, they would sometimes even force criminals from the hands of justice, as they were going to execution. In the time of Austin many real or pretended monks went strolling about, as hawkers and pedlars, selling bones and relics of martyrs. 66 The increase of monks was much favoured by the laws of Christian princes, and the encouragement of the popes, as well as by the strong recommendation of the most distinguished writers of those times. Justinian made a law that a son should not be disinherited for entering into a state of monkery against his father's will; and Jovian appointed "that whosoever courted a nun, and enticed her to marriage, should be put to death." But this law, being thought too severe, was afterwards mitigated.5 Syricius, Bishop of Rome, ordered that monks and virgins who married after their consecration to God should be banished from their monasteries, and confined in private cells; that by their continual 1 "Esteeming it to be evangelical poverty, to feed upon the labours of other men, in beggary tears they might efface their crime, and and idleness; these are they who, clad in mean become worthy of communion before they died. The same pope ordered that bishops and priests who were and vile habits,...profess themselves to wear these emblems of poverty and contempt for the sake of Christ and religion; yet swelling inwardly with ambition, and giving to the chiefs of their orders the most arrogant titles....I will not deny, but there are some pious aud devout men among them, but the generality of them... deform and deface religion." Agrippa de Incertitudine, &c. 1530. "Vanity of Arts and Sciences," Ch. lxii. On Monks, fin. 1634, p. 186. married, and had any commerce with their wives, should be degraded from their office.1 The language in which the writers of those times recommended a monkish life was sometimes shocking and blasphemous, especially that of Jerome, who was the greatest advocate for it in his time. Writing to Eustochium the nun, he calls her his lady, because she was the spouse of Christ; and he reminds her mother, that she had the honour to be God's mother-in-law.2 Many women were ambitious of distinguishing themselves by some of the peculiarities of the monkish life in these early times, devoting themselves, as they imagined, to God, and living in virginity, but at first without forming themselves into regular communities. Jerome prevailed upon many women in Rome to embrace this kind of life; but they continued in their own houses, from which they even made visits; and it appears by an epitaph which he wrote for Marcella, that before her there was no woman of condition in Rome who lived in this manner, the common people of that city considering it as disreputable, on account of the novelty of the thing. These early nuns were only distinguished by wearing a veil, that was given them by the bishop of the place. It was not till the year 567 that Queen Radigonda founded the first monastery for women, in France, which was confirmed by the Council of Tours.1 laid themselves under an absolute engagement to live according to certain rules, we find above a hundred kinds of them, who assumed different names, generally from their respective founders. But these divisions and sub-divisions were the offspring of late ages. The most early distinction among them was only that of those who lived quite single and independent, and those who lived in companies. The latter were called Coenobites in Greek, in Latin Monks, (though that term originally denoted an absolutely solitary life,) and sometimes Friars from fratres, freres, brethren, on account of their living together as brothers, in one family. These had a president called abbot, or father, and the place where they lived was called a monastery. On the other hand, those who lived single were often called eremites or hermits, and commonly frequented caves and deserts. And some make a farther distinction of these into Anachorites, whose manner of life was still more savage, living without tents or clothing, and only upon roots, or other spontaneous productions of the earth. In Egypt some were called Sarabaites. These led a wandering life, and maintained themselves chiefly by selling relics, and very often by various kinds of fraud.5 In early times it was not uncommon for persons to pass from one of these modes of life to the other; and in later ages it was found to be very advantageous to the revenues of the society, for the monks to become hermits for a No perfect uniformity can be expected in the customs and modes of living among men, and least of all, men whose imaginations were so eccentric time, retiring from the monastery with as those of the monks. Accordingly we find almost endless distinctions among them, some choosing to live in one manner, and some in another. And in later times when they formed themselves into regular societies, and the leave of the abbot. These being much revered by the people, often got rich by their alms, and then deposited their treasures in their monasteries." Persons who live in Protestant countries, or indeed in Roman Catholic countries at present, can form no idea of the high respect and reverence with 5 Mosheim, I. p. 309. (P.) Cent. iv. Pt. ii. Ch. iii. Sect. xv. 6 Simon on Church Revenues, p. 54. (P.) which monks were treated in early establishments, I proceed, in launchtimes. They were universally con- ing out into the dark ages, to point out sidered as being of a higher rank and the steps by which these monks atorder than the rest of mankind, and tained that amazing power and influeven superior to the priests; and ence which they acquired in the later wherever they went, or could be found, ages, and to note other remarkable the people crowded to them, loading facts in their history, showing both the them with alms, and begging an inte- good and the evil that arose from their rest in their prayers. In this light, institution. however, they were regarded in gene- The primitive monks, courting soliral. For some persons may be found tude, were equally abstracted from the who thought sensibly in every age, and affairs of the world and those of the consequently looked with contempt church; and yet, by degrees, a very upon this spurious kind of religion, considerable part of the business in and affectation of extraordinary sanc- both departments came to be done by tity. them. The principal circumstance that In the fourth century, when all Chris- favoured their advancement, and made tian countries swarmed with monks, their introduction into public life in a we find one who, though he chose that manner necessary, was the great ignomode of life, was sensible of the super- rance of the secular clergy. For by stitious notions that were very preva- this term the common clergy began to lent with respect to it, and strenuously be distinguished, on account of their remonstrated against them. This was living more after the manner of the Jovinian, who, towards the conclusion world; while the monks, on account of of that century, taught, first at Rome, their living according to an exact rule, and afterwards at Milan, that all who got the name of regulars, and religious. lived according to the gospel, have an The monks spending a great part of equal title to the rewards of heaven; their time in contemplation, many of and, consequently, that they who them were induced to give some attenpassed their days in unsocial celibacy, tion to letters, and soon attained a and severe mortifications, were in no manifest superiority over the clergy in respect more acceptable in the sight of that respect; and the Christian Church God than those who lived virtuously in was never without great occasion for the state of marriage. But these sen- learned men. sible opinions were condemned, first by Several heresies, in particular, springthe Church of Rome, and afterwards ing up in the church, and some learned by Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, in a monks very ably opposing them, it was council held in the year 390. The em- found convenient to draw them from peror Honorius seconded the proceed- their solitude, and to settle them in ings of the council, and banished the suburbs of cities, and sometimes Jovinian as a heretic. The famous in the cities themselves, that they Jerome, also, wrote in a very abusive might be useful to the people. In manner against the treatise of Jovinian, in which he maintained the above mentioned-opinions. SECTION II. consequence of this, many of them, applying to study, got into holy orders. This was much complained of for some time; but being found useful to the bishops themselves, both in spiritual and temporal affairs, those bishops who were fond of a numerous clergy, and wanted fit men to carry on their schemes, gave them considerable offices; HAVING given the preceding account of not imagining that they were encouragthe origin and nature of the monkish ing a set of men who would afterwards THE HISTORY OF THE MONKS AFTER THE supplant them in their dignities and revenues.1 Originally the monks, being subject to the bishops, could do nothing without their consent. They could not even choose their own abbot. But the election of an abbot being sometimes appointed by their institutions to be made by the monks of the community, they first obtained from the bishops the power of choosing their abbot, according to the tenor of their constitutions. Afterwards they sometimes got from the bishops exemptions from episcopal jurisdiction. But when the popes got the power of granting such exemptions, they commonly gave, or sold, to the monks as many of them as they pleased, so that their power grew with that of the popes.2 In the seventh century, pope Zacharias granted to the monastery of Mount Cassin an exemption from all episcopal jurisdiction, so that it was subject to the Pope only. Similar exemptions had been obtained in the preceding century, but they were very rare. In time they came to be universal, and were even extended to the chapters of regular cathedrals. In return for those privileges, the monks were distinguished by a boundless devotion to the see of Rome. These abuses were checked, but not effectually, by the Councils of Constance and Trent." ecclesiastical power was completed, and made equal to that of the other clergy, by Boniface IV. in 606. They could then preach, baptize, hear confessions, absolve, and do everything that any priest could do. Upon this the monks began to be, in a great measure, independent of the bishops, refusing to submit to their orders, on the pretence that they were contrary to their rules of discipline, and always appealing to the popes, who were sure to decide in their favour. The monks, besides theology, studied likewise the canon and civil laws, and also medicine; studies which they began through charity, but which they continued for interest. They were therefore forbidden by Innocent II., in 1131, to study either civil law or medicine. But in the beginning of the following century they were allowed to be advocates for the regulars. These things, says Fleury, brought them too much into the world.1 The clergy were soon aware of the encroachments of the monks, both upon their spiritual power and upon their revenues. But the tide of popularity was so strongly in their favour, that all attempts to withstand it were in vain. At the Council of Chalcedon it was ordered that the monks should be wholly under the jurisdiction of the bishops, and meddle with no affairs, civil or ecclesiastical, without their perThe first introduction of monks into mission. But this, and all other reguholy orders, was by the permission lations for the same purpose, availed which they obtained to have priests of nothing, both the popes and rich laity their own body, for the purpose of favouring the monks. When Greofficiating in their monasteries, to which there could be no great objection; it being for the convenience of the secular priests themselves, as well as of the monastery; and especially as, with respect to qualification for the office, they were superior to the priests themselves. The first privilege they obtained of this kind was from Boniface III.; but their 1 Simon on Church Revenues, p. 35. (P.) 2 Ibid. p. 65. (P.) 8 Anecdotes, pp. 298, 303. (P.) gory VII. made a law to compel laymen to restore whatever had been in the possession of the church, such restitutions were generally made either to the cathedral churches, where the clergy conformed to a regular monastic life, or to the monasteries, and seldom to those parish churches to which the estates had originally belonged.5 In later times the endowments of 4 Eighth Discourse, p. 17. (P.) 5 Simon on Church Revenues, p. 67. (P.) |