Letter CLXXVIII. To the Same, on Behalf of the Same

(A.D. 1139.)

He complains that some evil-disposed persons abuse their powers to the injury of the Church, while zealous prelates are powerless.

To his most loving Father and Lord, INNOCENT, Supreme Pontiff, his BERNARD writes in entire devotedness.

1. I write confidently because I love faithfully. For that is no sincere love which cherishes doubt, and retains the <lregs of suspicion. The complaint of my Lord of Treves is not his alone, but of many, and of those especially who love you with a more sincere affection. The one cry of all who faithfully preside over the flock among us is that justice in the Church is perishing, that the keys of the Church are mere ornaments, that the Episcopal authority is altogether become vile, since no one of the Bishops is able to avenge the wrongs done to God, nor is allowed to punish for misdeeds, however glaring, no, not even in his own diocese. They refer the cause to you and to the Roman Curia. You annul, they say, what they have rightly established, and establish what they have justly annulled. All the evil and quarrelsome men, whether from the clergy or the monasteries, hasten to you when they are expelled, and then return and boast, and rejoice that they have obtained as protectors those whom they ought to have felt as their chastisers. Was not the sword of Phinees most promptly and righteously unsheathed to punish the incestuous alliance of Drosro and Milis? But it returned to O Its sheath dulled and blunted, being met by the shield of an Apostolic defence. Alas! wrhat ridicule has this caused,, and is still causing, among the enemies of the Church, and especially among those very men who have made us wander out of the right way through fear or favour. Our friends are confounded, the faithful are insulted, the Bishops everywhere come into shame and contempt. And when their just judgments are contemned your authority is also diminished.

2. It is these very men who are zealous for your honour, who labour faithfully, if fruitlessly, for your peace and exaltation. Why do you lessen their influence? — why do you weaken their power? For how long will you blunt the weapons of those who are faithfully fighting for you, and lower the standards raised in defence of your power and safety? The Church of S. Gengulph at Toul grievously bewails her desolation, and there is none to comfort her. For who can oppose himself to the stroke of a powerful arm, to the force of a torrent, to the decision of the Supreme Power? The Church of S. Paul at Verdun¹ complains that it suffers the same violence, as the Arch-l.KTTKR CLXXVI1I. 525 bishop has now no power to defend it against the violence of the monks; and as though they were not outrageous enough, they are further supported by the Apostolic See. What fresh reason, I ask, has been found why that should again come into court and be brought under discussion which has been once granted, wisely and without question, to canons of good fame and life, then confirmed and, as they say, again renewed? Indeed, the establishment of both those places above mentioned is said to have been first sanctioned by you, and yet is now revoked. With such sacrifices God is not well-pleased. Alas! His anger is not turned away, His grace is not won, His mercy is not called forth. For these and such things the wrath of the Lord is not yet averted; but His arm is stretched out still, and the rod mentioned by Jeremiah is ever ready for our sins.

3. In truth, God is wroth with the schismatics; but He is by no means well-pleased with the Catholics. The Church of Metz is, as you have found, in danger, through a grievous quarrel between the Bishop and the clergy. You know what it may be your pleasure to decide about it; but there is there no peace yet, nor is it hoped for in the near future. I (not to conceal what seems best to my unworthiness) think that this and the troubles of the Churches of Toul and Verdun can be most safely and conveniently settled by the Metropolitan, who knows all the facts, has had great experience, and by the testimony of the Church has been found faithful. Moreover, think what evil you are inflicting on those two dioceses of Toul and Metz ;x for, to speak truth,² they seem to be without Bishops, and³ would that they were without tyrants. When such men are protected, sup ported, honoured, cherished, many are greatly amazed and scandalized; since they most surely know of that in their characters and lives, which in any of the laity, to say nothing of a Bishop, should be severely censured and execrated. What it is I should be ashamed to write, and it would not befit you to read. Be it so, that without an accuser they cannot be deposed, yet why should those whom common rumour accuses be honoured, and yet further exalted, with the special favour of the Apostolic See?

4. For by what merit of his own, whether of his sanctity as priest, or honour as bishop, has the Bishop of Metz obtained leave to quash, together with the liberty of the Church, at his mere bidding, an election duly made by the Canons, and to have the Primicerius l elected on his recommendation against the privileges of the Church?⁴ W^ould it not be more just and honest, if it should seem good to your discretion, that a man worthy of greater honour should not be deprived of that which is deservedly his own? I mean the Archbishop of Treves, whom, to the great indignation of many who fear God, you have excluded from ending these and other matters in his diocese, as though he were under suspicion, or were inexperienced. Believe your faithful servant that, as far as I have found, this is wholly injurious to that province.

5. In writing these things I should fear the charge of presumption if I knew not to whom I am writing, and who I am that write. But I know your natural gentleness, and I feel assured that you know both me and the disposition with which I venture on these matters with you, my most sweet and loving father. One word more with regard to the Arch bishop; in order that you may know how his messenger ought to be regarded, I may mention to you that he holds a high position in that realm, that he is a man faithful and constant to you and the Church of God, and gives no countenance to our ill-wishers, and to those who would overturn you, by whom he is frequently and sorely tempted; and that we shall be derided if by any chance he should not be listened toby you. I wished lastly to commend the messenger to you, but the merit of his honesty sufficiently commends him, and especially his exceeding love and faithful devotion to you. Indeed, if I thought he had not this, I would by no means send by his hand such private letters.

Footnotes

1. The monastery of S. Paul of Verdun, of the Order of Benedictines, having relaxed the bonds of discipline, had fallen into great license; and therefore Albero II., Bishop of Verdun, who had succeeded Ursio in the year 1131, had it transferred to the Praemonstratensians, with the approval of Pope Innocent. The monks of the place for a long time withstood the change; and even Peter the Venerable, generally a most retiring man, warmly expostulated with Matthew, Bishop of Albano. Innocent, somewhat shaken by their complaints, was preparing to rehear the cause, but was persuaded by S. Bernard to let the matter stand; and he, therefore, confirmed by letter what Albero had done. ↩

2. The charges brought here by S. Bernar.l against the Bishops of Metz and Toul are to be understood of Stephen of Metz and Henry of Toul, since this Letter was written during the schism of Anacletus, about the year i 135. The first Appendix of the History of Ike. Bishops of MtU speaks of Stephen as follows: " Stephen, illustrious for his birth, still more illustrious for his virtue and uprightness, succeeded Poppo as Bishop of the Burgundians and Lorrainers in A.I). 1120, the second year of Calixtus II. Henry V. was at that time Kmperor, and owing to the contest between the Church and State, refused to put him in possession of his See; and accordingly Stephen was consecrated at Rome by the Supreme Pontiff, and honoured with the pall and title of Cardinal. It is not easy to conjecture why S. Bernard complains of him so bitterly. For besides the quotation above, we also find it said of him in the same History: " If I were to try to reckon up and record the good deeds done by him and worthy to be handed down I should have more matter than paper." Nay, S. Bernard himself, in his 2(;th Letter, congratulates him on the restoration of peace to the Church at Metz, and in Letter 367 commends him to Guido, the Chancellor. It is possible that Stephen may have displeased S. Bernard through having stirred up several contests, caused cities to be besieged, and castles to be destroyed in trying to recover the goods of the Church which had been stolen by the nobles. It was things of this sort, as described in the same History, which made S. Bernard call him, in Letter 230, " a lion rather than a shepherd of the sheep." When Albero was chosen for the Bishopric of Lie'ge, in the year 1135, and the Canons had duly chosen a successor to him, Stephen attempted to intrude a nominee of his own. Thence ensued a bitter strife which Innocent endeavoured to put an end to directly, passing over the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan, the Archbishop of Treves. It is this that S. Bernard here complains of. As far as Henry of Toul is concerned, perhaps S. Bernard was in the same way badly informed about the protracted negotiations with respect to war carried on with Frederick, Count of Toul, and at length brought to an end m the year 1 136. ↩

3. With respect to this title, see Note on Letter 30. — [E.] ↩

4. The Archbishop of Treves claimed for himself the monastery of S. Maximin, near Treves, against the Abbot and monks. On the othtr hand, Henry, Count of Luxembourg, endeavoured to claim obedience to himself in temporal matters as the advocate of the monastery. This claim caused strife, led to war and great slaughter on both sides. This explains S. Bernard's allusion when he says that the Archbishop had recovered the Church's goods, and had freed the captive Church from a lay-hand. ↩