St. Bernard: Apologia

 

St. Bernard: Apologia: The Last of the Fathers: M. Basil Pennington: pp. 53-54

 

Balance and Discretion

 

There are people who go clad in tunics and have nothing to do with furs, who nevertheless are lacking in humility. Surely humility in furs is better than pride in tunics. After all, God himself made clothes for the first man out of animal skins, John the Baptist in the desert wore a leather girdle round his waist, and Benedict himself, in his hermit days, wore animal skins instead of a tunic. We condemn rich food as though it were not better to take delicate fare in moderation than to bloat ourselves to the belching point with vegetables. Remember that Esau was censured because of lentils, not meat; Adam was condemned for eating fruit, not meat; and Jonathan was under sentence of death for tasting honey, not meat. On the other hand, Elijah ate meat without coming to grief, Abraham set a delicious meat dish before the angels, and God himself ordered sacrifices of the flesh of animals.

 

Surely it is more satisfactory to take a little wine on account of weakness than to down greedy draughts of water, since Paul counsels Timothy to take a little wine. The Lord himself drank wine and was called a wine bibber because of it. He gave it to his Apostles to drink and from it was established the sacrament of his Blood. On the other hand, he would not countenance the drinking of water at a marriage feast, and it was at the waters of Meribah that he punished the people severely for their complaining. David, too, was afraid to drink the water that he desired, and those of Gideon's men who in their eagerness to drink from the stream, fell on their faces, were considered unworthy of the fight.

 

Manual Work

 

And what have you to boast about in your manual work? Martha worked as you do and was rebuked, whereas Mary remained at rest and was praised. Paul says quite plainly that "bodily work is of some value but spirituality is valuable in every way”.

 

If you think that all those who make profession of the Rule are obliged to keep it literally (ad literam) without any possibility of dispensation, then I dare say you yourself fail as much as the Cluniac. It may be that he is deficient in many points of external observance but even you cannot avoid occasional faults and you know of course that anyone who fails in single point is guilty of everything. If, on the other hand, you admit that some things can be changed by dispensation, then it must be true that both you and the Cluniac are keeping the Rule, though each in his own way. You keep it strictly; he, perhaps, keeps it more reasonably.

 

Not Comprise and Unwarranted Mitigation

 

I would hate to think that the holy Fathers would have commended or allowed the many foolish excesses I have noticed in several monasteries. I am astonished that monks could be so lacking in moderation in matters of food and drink and in respect to clothing and bedding, carriages and buildings. . . . Abstemiousness is accounted miserliness; sobriety, strictness; silence, gloom. On the other hand, laxity is labeled discretion; extravagance, generosity; talkativeness, sociability; and laughter, joy. Fine clothes and costly caparisons are regarded as mere respectability, and being fussy about bedding is hygiene. When we lavish these things on one another we call it love. Such love undermines true love. Such discretion disgraces real discretion. This sort of kindness is full of cruelty, for it so looks after the body that the soul is strangled.