RB 1980- The Rule Of St Benedict Page 4

  Hanslik, R. Benedicti Regula, CSEL 75. Vienna: Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky 1960, 19772. A major critical edition notable for its use of available manuscripts.

  Morin, G. Regulae Sancti Benedicti traditio codicum Mss. Casinensium a praestantissimo teste usque repetita codice Sangallensi 914. Montecassino 1900. A diplomatic edition.

  de Vogüé, A. See Abbreviations for full entry.

  See also Introduction, “Text and Editions of the Rule,” pp. 102–109, nn. 39–64.

  Concordances

  See the editions of Hanslik and de Vogüé 2 for complete concordances.

  Clément, J.-M. Lexique des anciennes règles monastiques occidentales. 2 vols. Steenbrugge: St. Peter’s Abbey 1978. Not a concordance, strictly speaking, but lists principal words in rules other than RB and RM.

  Text with Translation and Commentary

  Colombás, G., Sansegundo, L., Cunill, O. San Benito, su vida y su regia, BAC 115. Madrid: La Editorial Católica 1954, 19682.

  Lentini, A. S. Benedetto, La Regola, testo, versione e commento. Montecassino 1947.

  McCann, J. The Rule of Saint Benedict in Latin and English. London: Burns Oates 1952. Contains a widely used translation.

  Penco, G. S. Benedicti Regula: introduzione, testo, apparati, traduzione e commento. Florence: Editrice “la nuova Italia” 1958.

  Steidle, B. Die Benediktusregel: Lateinisch-Deutsch. Beuron: Kunstverlag 19772.

  Translation with Commentary

  Delatte, P. The Rule of St. Benedict, A Commentary, tr. J. McCann. London: Burns Oates 1921. A once widely used commentary that provided background information on monastic practices.

  Herwegen, I. Sinn und Geist der Benediktinerregel. Einsiedeln: Benziger 1944. Commentary only; interpretation based on charismatic approach.

  Steidle, B. Die Regel St. Benedikts. Eingeleitet, übersetzt und aus dem alten Mönchtum erklärt. Beuron: Kunstverlag 1952. Ancient monastic practice forms the basis of interpretation. For an English translation of this work, see The Rule of St. Benedict, tr. U. Schnitzhofer. Canon City, Colo.: Holy Cross Abbey 1967. Unfortunately this translation is not entirely reliable.

  Van Zeller, H. The Holy Rule. Notes on St. Benedict’s Legislation for Monks. New York: Sheed and Ward 1958. A valuable interpretation, now somewhat dated.

  English Translation Only

  Listed below are English translations that are representative of relatively successful versions of the Rule in the twentieth century. Some are better known because they were made for specific monastic audiences; others have gained attention by the merit of the translations themselves. Two of the versions listed were made by laymen (Doyle and Chadwick); the others by monks. For further information see Introduction, “Text and Editions of the Rule,” p. 112, nn. 68–70.

  Bolton, B. The Rule of St. Benedict for Monasteries. London: Ealing Abbey 1970.

  Chadwick, O. The Rule of St. Benedict in Western Asceticism, The Library of Christian Classics. Philadelphia: Westminster 1958.

  [DeJean, H.] The Holy Rule of Our Most Holy Father Benedict. Edited by the monks of St. Meinrad Archabbey. St. Meinrad, Ind.: Abbey Press 1937. Translated by a monk of the Swiss-American Federation.

  Doyle, L. St. Benedict’s Rule for Monasteries. Collegeville: St. John’s Abbey Press 1948.

  Verheyen, B. The Holy Rule of Our Most Holy Father St. Benedict in Latin and English. Atchison, Kans.: The Abbey Student Print 1902. With the third edition (1910) and in many subsequent printings, the English alone was published. The 1949 printing contained the official publication of the Declarations and Constitution of the American Cassinese Congregation.

  Lives of St. Benedict

  Herwegen, I. St. Benedict: A Character Study, tr. P. Nugent. St. Louis: Herder 1924.

  Lindsay, T. Saint Benedict: His Life and Work. London: Burns Oates 1949.

  Maynard, T. Saint Benedict and His Monks. New York: P. J. Kenedy 1954.

  McCann, J. Saint Benedict. New York: Sheed and Ward 1937; rpt. rev. ed. New York: Doubleday Image Books 1958. A widely accepted, objective study of the life of St. Benedict.

  Schuster, I. Saint Benedict and His Times, tr. G. Roettger. St. Louis: Herder 1951.

  For additional materials, see Introduction, “St. Benedict of Nursia,’ pp. 73–79, and nn. 13f.

  Monastic History

  Chapman, J. St. Benedict and the Sixth Century. London: Longmans, Green and Co. 1929; rpt. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press 1972. Emphasizes the legal background of Benedict.

  Colombás, G. El monacato primitive, BAC 351,376. Madrid: La Editorial Catôlica 1974–75. Invaluable for information on the early stages of monasticism.

  Cousin, P. Précis d’histoire monastique. Paris: Bloud & Gay 1956. A broad survey, with inaccurate bibliography.

  Daly, L. Benedictine Monasticism: Its Formation and Development through the 12th Century. New York: Sheed and Ward 1965.

  Hilpisch, S. History of Benedictine Nuns, tr. Sister M. J. Muggli, ed. L. Doyle. Collegeville: St. John’s Abbey Press 1958. One of the few attempts to write a history of nuns.

  Knowles, D. The Monastic Order in England. Cambridge Univ. Press 1940, 19632.

  ____The Religious Orders in England. 3 vols. Cambridge Univ. Press 1948, 1955, 1959.

  ____Christian Monasticism. New York: McGraw-Hill 1967. A brief survey in paperback.

  Schmitz, P. Histoire de I’Ordre de Saint-Benoît. 7 vols. Maredsous: Éditions de l’Abbaye 1942–56. The most complete modern history of Benedictines; vol. 7 treats the history of nuns.

  Southern, R. Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages. Harmondsworth, Eng.: Penguin Books 1970. See especially the section on religious orders, pp. 214–299.

  Workman, H. The Evolution of the Monastic Ideal from the Earliest Times down to the Coming of the Friars. London: C. H. Kelly 1913; rpt. Boston: Beacon Press 1962, with introduction by D. Knowles. A standard work on the growth of monasticism.

  For specific topics, refer to the General Index and the Introduction and accompanying notes.

  Studies in Monastic Spirituality

  Bouyer, L. The History of Christian Spirituality, vol. 1, Spirituality of the New Testament and the Fathers, tr. M. P. Ryan. New York: Desclée 1963. Includes a consideration of St. Benedict.

  Butler, C. Benedictine Monachism: Studies in Benedictine Life and Rule. London: Longmans, Green and Co. 1919. A statement on Benedict as an innovator of great originality.

  Leclercq, J., Vandenbroucke, F., and Bouyer, L. The History of Christian Spirituality, vol. 2, The Spirituality of the Middle Ages. London: Burns Oates 1968. St. Gregory the Great to the Counter Reformation.

  Leclercq, J. The Love of Learning and the Desire for God, tr. C. Misrahi. New York: Fordham Univ. Press 1961. A basic study of the importance of lectio in monastic life.

  Marmion, C. Christ the Ideal of the Monk. St. Louis: Herder 1922. A theological presentation of the spiritual foundation of monastic life.

  Merton, T. Contemplation in a World of Action. New York: Doubleday Image Books 1973. A well-known Trappist’s analysis of the tension between the contemplative life and the demands of the active apostolate.

  Morin, G. The Ideal of the Monastic Life Found in the Apostolic Age, tr. C. Gunning. New York: Benziger 1914. An early exploration of the foundations of monastic life.

  Peifer, C. Monastic Spirituality. New York: Sheed and Ward 1966. A compendium of essential elements found in traditional monastic teaching.

  Rees, D. (ed.) Consider Your Call. London: SPCK 1978. A statement of the English Benedictines on monastic renewal after Vatican II.

  Van Zeller, H. Approach to Monasticism. New York: Sheed and Ward 1960. Perceptive insights into monastic ideals previous to Vatican II.

  Wathen, A. Silence: The Meaning of Silence in the Rule of St. Benedict. Washington, D.C.: Cistercian Publications 1973. A model for the thorough study of topics in the Rule.

  For particular aspects and topics, see Introduction, Notes to the Rule, the Appendix and the General Index.


  Part One

  INTRODUCTION

  Historical Orientation

  INTRODUCTION

  The Origins of Monasticism in the Eastern Church

  1. INTRODUCTION *

  By the time St. Benedict wrote his rule for monasteries in the sixth century, the monastic movement had existed within Christianity for over two centuries, a period fully as long as the United States has existed as a nation. In the course of two centuries a nation or movement can accumulate both a body of traditions and a collection of heroic figures in whom those traditions are seen to be embodied. Such was certainly the case with the monastic movement by the sixth century. In what follows, no attempt will be made to write a full history of the monastic movement but only to indicate its origins, principal forms and heroic figures in the East that contributed to the monastic tradition as it passed into the West and formed the background to the Rule of St. Benedict.

  It is difficult to pinpoint the precise beginnings of the monastic movement. Some writers, both ancient and modern, have pushed it back as far as the Decian persecution in the mid-third century or even earlier. However, the great Church historian Eusebius of Caesarea makes no mention of it in his history, whereas he probably would have done so if he had known of it or had regarded it of any importance before A.D. 330. By the time Athanasius died in A.D. 373, the movement had witnessed extraordinary growth and had attracted international attention. It is unlikely that monasticism existed as a recognizable movement before the early part of the fourth century. Its beginnings would then coincide with the end of the age of the martyrs and the inauguration of the triumph of the Church, a fact which, as we shall see, may have had considerable influence on its development.

  The ascetic tradition in Christianity, on which the monastic movement is built, can of course be traced back to the New Testament.1 Of particular importance was the tradition of virginity and celibacy that was grounded in the example and teaching of Jesus (Matt 19:12) as well as in the writings of St. Paul (1 Cor 7). The writings of various Church Fathers, such as Ignatius, Clement, Tertullian, Origen and Cyprian, testify to the increasing importance of this aspect of asceticism in the life of the Church.2 What distinguishes the monastic movement from the earlier tradition of asceticism within Christianity is the practice of withdrawal from society. The early ascetics had led their lives in the midst of the society of the Church and often with their families. The monastic movement, however, was characterized from the beginning by a certain withdrawal from the ordinary framework of society and the creation of a special culture, whether this was in a colony of hermits or in a cenobitic monastery.3

  2. PRE-CHRISTIAN MONASTICISM 4

  Many historians have sought to find parallels with, and even the origins of, Christian monasticism in institutions and movements in the ancient world outside of Christianity. Weingarten, for example, thought the origin of monasticism could be found in the institution of the katachoi. This theory he based on papyrus texts found in the precincts of the Temple of Serapis at Memphis. These were people who lived in cells within the temple enclosure, a custom that can be traced from the second century B.C. until the fourth century A.D. Weingarten assumed that these katachoi had an ascetic motive and that the custom was practiced in all temples of the Serapis cult. From this he concluded that Antony would have had contact with them at Memphis, and Pachomius a similar contact at the Temple of Philae. This is based on considerable speculation, especially since the function of the katachoi remains a mystery and has given rise to the most diverse theories. These range from the notion that they were prisoners or possessed persons to the idea that they were people who had sought asylum in the temple. At any rate, the custom of living in a temple precinct does not connect them with the practices of the early Christian monks.5

  The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the excavation of Khirbet Qumran on the northern shore of the Dead Sea have raised considerable speculation in the last thirty years about the “monastic” character of the Essenes and their relationship with the origins of Christian monasticism.6 It has been suggested that the Essenes lived a celibate community life at the “monastery” of Qumran (and perhaps elsewhere), withdrawn from the world. The documents found in the environs of Qumran, especially the Rule of the Community (also known as the “Manual of Discipline”), which contains provisions for admission to the community, for its governance and discipline, have added to the comparisons with Christian monastic communities.

  It is far from clear, however, that the Essenes lived a life of permanent celibacy or that the site of Qumran served as a monastery. The evidence for the practice of celibacy among them comes from the ancient writers Philo, Josephus and Pliny.7 The Dead Sea documents themselves seem to suggest that the practice of celibacy was at most temporary and that it was undertaken from traditional Jewish notions of ritual purity.8 The evidence from the cemetery suggests that women and children were also present at Qumran. The practice of perpetual celibacy would certainly have been contrary to traditional Jewish theology, which regarded the injunction of Gen 1:28 to increase and multiply as the first command of the law. And the Essenes, though a separatist group, were certainly traditional in their beliefs. Indeed, it seems to have been their devotion to the observance of the law that led them to become a separatist group.9

  In regard to the monastic character of the site at Qumran, it is true that certain things, such as the kiln, the scriptorium and the elaborate system of cisterns, might suggest long-term occupation. The documents, however, do not presuppose a community of any appreciable size nor indicate that permanent residence was normal for the members of the Essene sect. Moreover, the lack of any continuous fresh water supply at the site and the intense heat at certain times of the year make it quite improbable that a group of any size could have maintained a community life the year round at Qumran. It seems rather that the site served as a seasonal gathering place for the Essene sect. Therefore, it is rather misleading to refer to the Essenes as monks or to the site of Qumran as a monastery.10 Since the Essenes do not appear to have occupied Qumran after its destruction during the war of A.D. 66–70 or even to have survived as a distinct group within Judaism after this time, there is no evidence of any historical connection between them and the early Christian monks more than two centuries later.11

  Another group that has fascinated both ancient and modern writers by its apparent resemblance to Christian monasticism is that of the Therapeutae.12 Our sole source of information about this group is the Hellenistic Jewish writer Philo of Alexandria, who compares them with both the Greek philosophers and the Essenes. According to Philo, the Therapeutae were to be found in many regions even outside of Egypt, but their center was on a hill outside of Alexandria near Lake Mareotis. They pursued the bios theorētikos (a term derived from Greek philosophy), which means ‘contemplative life,’ and acquired their name (therapeutae means ‘healers’) from the fact that they sought healing for the soul from all sorts of passions. The sect included both men and women who, however, lived apart and were separated by a wall even when they came together for instruction. Those who joined the sect left behind family, property and fatherland to give themselves over wholly to their high calling. They also sought to leave behind the noise and cares of the cities by living in a lonely place.

  Each member of the sect had a separate house, which contained a holy place called the semneion or monastērion. This room served as a place for study of the Law and the Prophets, the psalms and other writings. It was not used for bodily needs, which seem to have been held in some contempt. The entire day was spent in spiritual askēsis, the study of the Scriptures, in which the higher allegorical meaning was sought (a preoccupation of Philo himself), and at night bodily needs were cared for. On the Sabbath the members assembled, sitting in strict seniority, while the eldest gave a talk. Every seven weeks they held a special feast, for which they wore white clothing (as did the Essenes). They began with prayer and ate in silence. They drank no wine, but took water and ate bread
with salt and hyssop. Philo says that the reason for not drinking wine was the command in the law to the priests not to drink wine on the occasion of the sacrifice. Most of the women who belonged to the group were virgins, though a previous marriage was not an obstacle to joining the group. The members preserved chastity out of a desire for wisdom.

  Since Philo is our sole source of information about this group, it is difficult to assess the reliability of his report. He probably exaggerates the extent of the group. Some practices of the Therapeutae, such as the abstention from wine because of the command to the priests in the Old Testament and the study of Scripture, suggest obvious ties with Judaism, but there also appear to be present strong influences from the philosophic traditions of the Hellenistic world. This would have been particularly strong at Alexandria, which was the intellectual center of the Hellenistic world in the first century A.D. Philo himself was the principal representative of the attempt to make Judaism respectable in terms of Hellenistic culture and therefore was not at all representative of the mainstream of Jewish culture.

  About the origins and later history of the Therapeutae, only speculation is possible. This has not been wanting even in antiquity. The Church historian Eusebius of Caesarea decided that Philo had really misunderstood the nature of this group. Because some of their features, such as common ownership, resembled those of the early Christians, as portrayed in the Acts of the Apostles, they appeared to Eusebius to be the early Christian community in Egypt. St. Jerome noted the similarity between this description by Eusebius of the first Christians in Egypt and the monks of his day. Writing almost a century after Eusebius, at a time when the monastic movement was fully developed, Cassian went further and affirmed that the first Christians of Egypt were obviously monks, and thus monastic life was given an apostolic origin.13 This, of course, appears to the modern historian to be without foundation. There is no evidence of any connection between the Therapeutae and the origins of Christian monasticism other than this literary one.