Glimpses of the dark ages : $b or, Sketches of the social condition of Europe, from the fifth to the twelfth century — John Shaqi
Glimpses of the dark ages : $b or, Sketches of the social condition of Europe, from the fifth to the twelfth centuryAnonymous
History
Glimpses of the dark ages : $b or, Sketches of the social condition of Europe, from the fifth to the twelfth century
Anonymous
Civilization, Medieval
On looking at the social influence of monachism, one of the first
things which strikes us, is, the effect which it was calculated to
produce upon the mind of the fraternity; who, after the order had
spread, formed no small portion of the population of Europe. Strict
conformity to the rules of St. Benedict, and obedience to the
superior of the convent, formed the beau ideal of the monk. Implicit
submission, moral and religious, was yielded to a fellow man. The
more abject this submission, the more meritorious it was deemed. St.
Columbanus, who has been described as "the most remarkable character
of his age,"[1] stretched the principle of obedience so far, in his
penitential discipline, as to lay down the following rules: that any
monk who did not sign with a cross the spoon with which he ate, or
who struck the table with his knife, or who should cough at the
beginning of a psalm, should receive the punishment of six lashes.[2]
The way in which submission to a superior was sometimes expressed, by
the monkish fraternity, is amusing enough. We read of one of these
worthies, who, when his superior, an illiterate man, stopped him as
he was reading a Latin sentence, and bade him pronounce the _e_ in
_dŏcēre_ short, he at once gave up the right pronunciation:
knowing, it is remarked, that to disobey his abbot,
who commanded him in Christ's name, was a greater sin than to adopt a
false quantity.[3] And this very monk was no other than the
celebrated Lanfranc, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury. This
picture of the prostration of the human understanding to the vows of
monastic obedience is truly humiliating; and, in many cases, there
can be no doubt that the minds of the monks were decidedly enfeebled
by the discipline they observed. Monasteries soon became, but too
generally, most corrupt establishments, which the energy and zeal of
the more devout of the order in vain attempted to reform. There is
sufficient evidence running through the whole history of the middle
ages, of the moral evils of the system. While an extreme party often
appeared doing their utmost to tighten the cords of discipline, and
rushing to the most ridiculous excesses of monkish severity; another
party, more numerous, was never wanting, who practically relaxed the
bonds of their order, and indulged in various irregularities. Nor
were the scenes of monastic seclusion quite so peaceful as the
romantic imagination is wont to picture, or the vows of obedience
quite so binding as would appear from the theory of the system
established by Benedict: for, if we are to believe the testimony of
those times, it not seldom happened that one fraternity quarrelled
with another; that monasteries were scenes of confusion; that monk
fell out with monk; that the brotherhood rebelled against their
superior, and that some discontented member turned fugitive, fairly
escaped from the convent, and sought refuge in another establishment,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account