The Making of a Saint: Literary Representations of Bernard of Clairvaux's Holiness in the Vita Prima (original) (raw)
Related papers
1989
The essential problem for the study of Bernard’s Apologia ad Guillelmum (1125), the most important document pertaining to the medieval attitude toward art, has been that scholars have felt it does not specifically name one monastery or monastic order as a subject of the criticisms contained in it. Although Bernard–one of the most influential men of his time–quite clearly and repeatedly addressed his admonitions to William of Saint-Thierry’s “order,” scholars have known that William was a friend of Bernard and therefore have believed that this address must have been a front for an indirect attack upon someone else. At the same time they have assumed that the Apologia was aimed at Cluny in particular. Undoubtedly from the earliest times a major factor in this conception has been the similarity of Bernard’s Letter 1 and the Apologia. Yet crucial distinctions between the two have not been noticed. These are that Bernard never hesitated to repeatedly mention Cluny by name in Letter 1, and that there is no criticism of the art of Cluny in the same letter. The problem of clarity of address was solved by prefixing to the Apologia, on inconclusive evidence, a certain letter of Bernard’s. This letter, in recounting an earlier one of William’s, did mention the Cluniacs. However, when the text proper was quoted either extensively or without the aid of the spurious preface, later scholars felt that it was necessary to interpolate the word “Cluniac,” as Bernard did not sufficiently use that word to accommodate their conception of the treatise. As a result, attention focused on Cluny as the major, or even sole, recipient of the Apologia. Many scholars have thought that if it were Cluny that Bernard had complained about in his treatise, it must also be Cluny that he had described in his chapters on art. Therefore theApologia was substituted for historical evidence in their reconstruction of the art program of that abbey. The use of Bernard’s denunciation of the worst aspects of excessive art as a catalogue of the artworks as they were believed to have existed at Cluny in 1125 has led to an image of Cluny as bent on a program of excessive art. This image was compounded by a somewhat misleading comparison with Cîteaux when Cîteaux was at its financially most impoverished level. Such a polarization of the two most visible representatives of contemporary monasticism has contributed to a rather limited understanding of the monastic controversy in the early twelfth century. The inflexibility of this view has also had as a consequence the impression that excessive ornamentation was somehow distinctively Cluniac, and to be consistently found throughout the Cluniac Congregation. As to an analysis of what Bernard actually said about art, scholars have tended to concentrate their attention on two main aspects of Apologia 28-29: Bernard’s censure of art as a spiritual distraction and his recognition of the utility of a secular religious art. The first point has, in the most thorough work, received a certain amount of recognition. But although Bernard’s comments on secular religious art were only made in passing, they have been dealt with by some as a major tenet of the Apologia. In short, these authors have fixed on to what may be termed the artistically positive aspects of the Apologia, rather than on to the more prominent negative criticisms of art. The same inclination is seen in efforts to explain the impetus behind Apologia 28-29. The premium set on medieval religious art by nineteenth-century Church enthusiasts compelled them to denounce Bernard’s criticism of art as personally motivated, rather than on monastic or social grounds. The approaches to Bernard’s personal attitude toward art have been varied and contradictory, with some authors suggesting that Bernard’s rejection of art indicated a revulsion, and to others a very strong attraction. In the end, this has detracted from seeing any more historically or politically based impetus to Bernard’s actions, which scholarship has only just begun to look at. Possibly because of the emphasis on personal stimulus, no direct connection has been made between the Apologia and the discontinuation of heavily ornamented manuscripts within the Cistercian Order. In any event, Bernard’s relation to Cistercian art and legislation on art has not been put into proper perspective. While a very few authors have noted similarities between his views and those of earlier Church fathers, Bernard’s position within a non-iconoclastic movement against religious art in his own time has been largely neglected. Ultimately, there has been no thorough analysis of the Apologia with the exception of Vacandard’s ground breaking effort. The tendency has been to isolate various passages ofApologia 28-29, rather than to coherently analyze the whole, especially in relation to the rest of the Apologia, Bernard’s other writings, the artistic evidence of Cluny and Cîteaux, and the political conditions of both Cîteaux and monasticism in general. The literature has established a rather inflexible and restricted view of the Apologia. But at the same time, questions have at least been raised on most major issues which, when developed, will lead to a more significant understanding of the part played by Bernard’s treatise in the controversy over monastic art in the twelfth century.
Bernard of Clairvaux: The Church and the Individual
Medieval Mystical Theology, 2020
Journal of Medieval Mystical Theology. Volume 29, 2020 - Issue 1, 2020 Medieval Mystical Theology Volume 29, 2020 - Issue 1 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/20465726.2020.1774170 How does the individual relate to the health of the Church? Bernard provides a complex and satisfying answer, which is primarily based on his interpretation of St Augustine, the Scriptures and the Apostolic Tradition. In particular Bernard identifies the role of personal holiness and purity within individuals as the crucial means through which the Church undertakes reform. Bernard is clear that it is not systems or temporal power arrangements that make the Church more harmonious or more effective at holiness. Individual change drives the earthly Church to become more like the heavenly Church, the City of God. Such an overview also helps to make clear that Bernard’s mysticism is world embracing, and is about immanence, as well as the transcendent.
Toward an Everyday Monasticism: The Monastic Theology of Bernard of Clairvaux
Bernard of Clairvaux does not simply espouse a theology of monasticism; rather, Bernard offers an entirely monastic theology. Still, this monastic theology can to a great degree be examined and understood. Indeed, it offers an opportunity for readers in ages discontinuous with Bernard's own to chart a monastic spirituality for non-monastic life: a sort of "everyday monasticism."
Bernard of Clairvaux’s Writings on Violence and the Sacred
Vexillum, 2013
was not just a man of his times; he was a man who shaped his times. Bernard's writings on Christian morality and the transformation of the human spirit in the pursuit of God reverberated in his time and have remained influential through the Protestant Reformation and into the modern era. The apparent contradiction between his writings on love and those on warfare has resulted in an artificial separation of his writing by scholars; those who are studying monasticism or Bernard in general tend to ignore or gloss over his writings on violence, while those studying the Crusades, warfare, or masculine identity often only look at those writings while ignoring Bernard's less topical work. This separation of his writings, though convenient, conceals a deep continuity which runs throughout Bernard's corpus and cheats Bernard of his intellectual completeness. This paper explores Bernard's writings on the issues of physical and spiritual violence, demonstrates that they are a coherent part of his wider set of beliefs and shows that, when studied side by side with his other writings, they clarify his thoughts on acceptable monastic and Christian life.
Saint-à-porter: fashioning Saint Francis in the encyclopedias of Vincent and ps.Vincent of Beauvais
Cahiers Spicae, 2012
e vita of Saint Francis contained in the Speculum historiale of Vincent of Beauvais is a compilation of the Vita Sancti Francisci of Julian of Speyer, and is not often consulted in Franciscan studies. Yet the editor's revision of the Speculum reveals that even a digest of the saint's life posed a challenge to an increasingly Dominican agenda, and had to be adjusted. is paper explores the portrayal of Francis in the Speculum historiale alongside with the ps-Vincentian Speculum morale, composed by a Franciscan but revealing a similar manipulation of the saint's vita. I argue that both specula are threatened by the visionary and charismatic nature of the saint-the Historiale by the shadow he cast over Dominic and the Morale by the potentially dangerous zeal his example could inspire-and both construct a Francis that is an acceptable compromise fitting their particular needs. e analysis of the construction of the persona of Francis in the two works associated with Vincent of Beauvais provides further evidence for the fluid perception and pragmatic use of Francis in the second half of the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, and new understanding of the context surrounding the appearance of the Speculum morale. Résumé : La vita de saint François contenue dans le Speculum historiale de Vincent de Beauvais est une compilation de la Vita Sancti Francisci de Julien de Spire. Elle n'est pas souvent consultée dans les études franciscaines. Pourtant, la révision qu'en fait l'éditeur du Speculum maius révèle que même un résumé de la vie du saint constitue un défi pour une oeuvre de plus en plus dominicaine, raison pour laquelle elle a dû être ajustée. Cet article explore la représentation de François dans le Speculum historiale de Vincent de Beauvais, en regard de celle que livre le Speculum morale pseudépigraphe, composé par un franciscain, mais révélant une manipulation similaire de la vita du saint. Je soutiens que les deux specula sont menacés par le caractère visionnaire et charismatique du saint-l'Historiale par l'ombre qu'il jette sur Dominique comme fondateur de l'Ordre, et le Morale par le zèle potentiellement dangereux que son exemple pourrait inspirer-et visent dès lors à construire un François qui soit un compromis acceptable qui réponde à leurs besoins particuliers. L'analyse de la construction de la personne de François dans les deux oeuvres associées à Vincent de Beauvais est une preuve supplémentaire de la perception fluctuante et de l'utilisation pragmatique de François dans la seconde moitié du XIII e et au début du XIV e siècle, et offre une nouvelle compréhension du contexte entourant la composition du Speculum morale.
Bernard of Clairvaux to the Abbots
Bernard distinguished the abbots as vicars of Christ and the apostles. So he addressed them with titles such as: His Holiness, His Greatness, Reverend, Powerful, etc. However such titles were a bête noire to him which he feared and rejected, feeling uncomfortable when addressed to him in such a manner. Since being called “father” (abbot) or “lord” (abbot) is not in any way an honorific, but a burden that entails precarious responsibilities. In his own words: “there is only one father, the Heavenly Father, for that reason and taking into account our common origin and human condition, we are all brothers and companions in servitude”
SG Rindahl: SCRIPTURE AND MARIOLOGY IN BERNARD OF CLAIRVAUX
SCRIPTURE AND MARIOLOGY IN BERNARD OF CLAIRVAUX , 2019
Bernard’s use of scripture in his devotion to Mary provides a thoroughly biblical understanding of Mary and through his homilies provides encouragement toward meditation and contemplation which is in the manner of lectio divina. Although Bernard does not self-reference lectio divina, comparison of the use of his writing to lectio divina will draw a connection between them.
This presentation explored the theoretical, theological, and ascetic-pragmatic dynamics between monastic humility and humiliation in the First Life (Vita Prima I) and letters of Abbot Bernard of Clairvaux. Its focus was on the bond between the extended commentary on humility in chapter 7 of the Rule of Benedict and Bernard's life, treatises, sermons, and letters, with particular reference to his radical and idiosyncratic asceticism. The paper concluded with discussion of Bernard's submission to abbatial government according to the Rule of Benedict and as observed in Cistercian monasticism during the abbacy of Stephen Harding.