Letter XLVIII. To Haimeric, the Chancellor, on the Same Subject, and Against Detractors

(Circa A.D. 1130.)

He justifies himself against attacks made upon him, and begs to be allowed to enjoy solitude and silence.

To the illustrious HAIMERIC, Chancellor of the holy Roman See, Brother BERNARD, called Abbot of Clairvaux, health eternal.

1. Does truth bring hatred even to the poor and indigent, and does not even their misery secure them against envy? Ought I to complain or to glory because I am made an enemy for speaking the truth or for doing right? That is what I leave to be considered by your brethren, who, against the law, speak evil of one deaf (Lev. xix. 14), and not fearing the malediction of the Prophet, call evil good and good evil (Is. v. 20). I ask of you, O good men, what in me has displeased your brotherhood?¹ Is it because at Chalons was deposed the Bishop of Verdun,² a man everywhere decried, because he had dissipated in management the goods of his Lord committed to him in the Church over which he presided? Or was it because at Cambray, Fulbert, who conducted his monastery manifestly to its destruction, was obliged to yield his place to Parvin,³ a prudent and faithful servant, according to the testimony of all? Or, again, was it because, at Laon, a sanctuary2 of God was restored to him after having been made a shrine of Venus? For which of these things do you, I do not say stone me, so that I may not borrow the language of my Lord (S. John x. 32), but tear me to pieces? And this I should be right to reply to you with pride, if any of the credit of these things belong to me. But, now, why am I judged for what others have done? Or if for my actions, why am I accused as if I had done something wrong, when no one can be so silly as to doubt, or so shameless as to deny that all these things were done justly and well? Choose now which alternative you please; either deny or assert that I am the author of these things. If I have done them, it is a thing worthy of praise to have brought about praiseworthy actions, and I am wrongly blamed for that which renders me worthy of praise. If I have not done them, as I have deserved no praise, I deserve no blame. It is a new kind of detraction that is employed against me, and has some resemblance to the work of Balaam, who, being brought and paid to curse the people, heaped them with blessings instead (Num. xxii. and xxiv.). What more just and more consoling for him whom the design was to blame than to see that, though willing to blame him, you unwillingly praise, and unknowingly employ the language of laudation for that of insult? Could you not find enough of real⁴ defaults in me that you reproach me for a good action as if it were evil, or rather that you impute to me what I have not done?

2. But I am not distressed by undeserved reproaches, nor do I accept unmerited praises; nothing concerns me which I have not done. Let them praise if they will or blame if they dare his lordship of Albano for the first matter, for the second his lordship of Rheims, and for the third the same archbishop, with the Bishop of Laon, with the King in the same degree, and with many other reverend persons, who will by no means disown that they have taken a principal part in them. If they have done well, or if otherwise, what is it to me? My sole and only fault is that I have been present at these assemblies, being a man deserving only of solitude, who ought to judge only myself, to be the accuser and arbiter of my own conscience only, if I wish that my life should display what my profession declares, and my name of monk describe truly my solitary habit of life. For I was present, I avow it; but it was because I had been summoned, and, as it were, forced to come. If this has been displeasing to my friends, I confess it has displeased me also. Would that I had not gone to these assemblies, would that I may not go to any similar to them! Would that I had never gone where I had the sorrow to see (as lately) a violent tyrant armed against the Church by the authority of the Holy See, as if he had not been already by himself sufficiently powerful! Then at length I felt as the Prophet says, my tongue cleave to my mouth (Ps. cxxxvii. 6), when I saw that unquestionable authority bear us down with its weight, and when the Pope's letter was brought forward. Alas! I was mute, / was humbled, I was silent even from the good: and my sorrow was renewed (Ps. xxxix. 3, VULG.), when suddenly I saw the letter of the Pope cover the faces of the innocent with confusion, make the impious and sinners to rejoice and triumph in their wickedness. The indulgence which was shown to the wicked, as says the Prophet, did not teach him to do righteousness; and he who dealt unjustly in the land of the righteous (Is. xxvi. 10) was freed from the most just interdict under which his domain was held.⁵

3. For reasons of this kind, even if there were no others, I am vexed to have meddled in the transaction of business, especially as I know that in it there is nothing that concerns me. I am vexed, yet I am forced to go. But by whom could I better hope to be relieved from this necessity than by you, O best of men! to whom in such a matter neither is power wanting nor, as I know well, the will. I rejoice, therefore, to know that my occupation in such matters is displeasing to your wisdom; you are entirely right, and I recognize in it your friendship for me. Since, then, such is your desire, or rather since you perceive and determine that it is better for your friend and more becoming to a Religious, take means, I pray you, to ensure that both your will at once and mine may be accomplished as soon as possible, that justice may be satisfied, and the safety of my soul cared for. Forbid, if you please, those clamorous and importunate frogs to come forth from their hiding-places, but let them stay contentedly in their marshes. Let them not be heard in Councils, nor enter into palaces; let no necessity, no authority draw them to mingle in the settlement of disputes or of any business. So, perhaps, your friend may be able to escape from the charge of presumption. I do not know, indeed, how there can be any occasion for it, for my resolution is fixed not to set foot out of my monastery unless summoned by the Legate of the Apostolic See, or, at least, by my own Bishop, since, as you well know, it would be altogether wrong for a humble person like my self to resist these unless by privilege of some higher authority. If ever you shall succeed in effecting this, as I sincerely hope, then, without doubt, I shall have peace my self and leave others in peace. Yet, even although I shut myself up and keep silence, I do not suppose that the murmurs of the Churches will cease, if the Roman Curia continues to do injury to the absent in order to be complaisant to those who are near at hand. Farewell.

Footnotes

1. Fraternitati. So all, or almost all, write constantly, and rightly so; for Cardinals formerly used to be called simply Bruthn-s (Life of S. Bernard, B. ii. n. 42), and in Chrnn. Andrent. Spicilegii, Vol. ix. p. 481, the Abbot Peter is brought forward as having visited " not only the lord Pope, but also the Brothers according to the custom." Some wrongly read " our brethren," instead of " ynur brethren, '' at the beginning of this Letter. See also IPilliam of Tyre, B. iii. c. 15: "The Cardinals are Brothers whether bishops, priests, or deacons." ↩

2. Henry, the same to whom Letters 62 and 63 are addressed. Laurence of Lie'ge, speaks of his deposition in his " History of Verdun '' (Spicilcginm, Vol. xii. p. 311), saying that this affair had been confided by Pope Honorius to the care of his Legate in France, Matthew, Bishop of Albano, who assembled a Council at Chalons-sur-Marne to deal with it. " Henry at first consulted Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux, of holy memory, whose counsels are at this day," says Laurence, " the support of the realms and churches of France. He advised Henry that it was a very grave thing to retain an episcopal charge over unwilling people. Therefore, before a very ignominious charge should come against him in the public hearing of so many great men, he, being alone, should yield to all and resign the See. He followed this counsel, gave up the pastoral staff, and retired from the See in the thirteenth year after he had received it from the hand of Caesar," i.e., in A.D. 1 129. ↩

3. Parvin was a monk of S. Vincent at Laon when he was made abbot of S. Sepulchre of Cambray, after Fulbert had been displaced by Rainauld des Pres, Archbishop of Rheims, on account of his bad administration. The monastery of S. Sepulchre, of the Order of S. Benedict, was formerly beyond the walls of Cambray, and was founded A.D. 1064 by Bishop Lietbert. ↩

4. This refers to the convent of S. John Baptist at Laon, from which the nuns who had previously occupied it were driven out because of the irregular lives of some of them. They were replaced in 1128 by monks who had at their head as abbot, Drogo, a monk of S. Nicasius at Rheims. VOL. I. 15 ↩

5. See Letters 46, 47. ↩