Skip to the text

Letter CCV. To the Bishop of Rochester

(Circa A.D. 1140.)

Bernard complains of the severity of his letter, which he lias done nothing to deserve, You write severely to one who does not deserve it. What have I done wrong? If I advised Master Robert Pullen } to spend some time at Paris, because of the sound learning which is known to be gained there, it was because 1 thought it necessary for him, and I still think so. If I asked your Highness to permit it, I would again make the same request, if I were not aware that you had rejected my former petition. If I said that the man is supported by the kindness of his friends, whose influence at the Curia is by no means small, I said it because I had fears for you, and I still have. For in that after appeal was made, you, as I hear, stretched out your hand to the property of the appellant; I neither praised you in this, nor do I now. But certainly I never advised him, nor do I now, to go against your wish in any way. For the rest I am your servant,1 ready always to hold and honour your crown2 in due and worthy veneration. I venture again on the strength of this consciousness to pray and advise you that Master Robert with your full goodwill may be allowed to spend some time at Paris. May the Lord repay you in eternal life the good you have done to my offspring, I mean my sons whom I have sent into Ireland.3

Footnotes

  1. An Englishman by birth. He first studied letters at Paris, and then, returning to his native land, restored the school at Oxford, which had well nigh perished. He was then summoned to Home, because of his intellectual gifts and great learning, by Innocent II., who created him a Cardinal under the title of S. Eusebius. He was the first Cardinal of his nation, unless a certain Ulrinus is earlier than he. But in what year? In 1 134, if we believe Onuphrius and Ciaconius. One thing is very evident, and that is, that he had not obtained this dignity when this Letter was written, which from its place in the list of S. Bernard's Letters seems to have been penned about A.D. 1 140. In the next place Go.lwin says that this Letter was sent to Anselm, or Ascelin, who, in the year 1 137, was made Bishop of Rochester. Again, at the end of his Letter Bernard thanks the Bishop of Rochester for having shown care for " his children, the sons that he had sent into Ireland." But that no monks of the Cistercian Order lived in Ireland before the year 1139, when S. Malachy first went to Clairvaux, is evident from what S. Bernard says in his life of him (cxvi.), where he writes that some of his companions had been sent by the holy Bishop to Clairvaux to learn the Cistercian rule, who took it back with them to Ireland in the year 1 141, when the monastery of Mellifont was founded, which was the first Cistercian foundation in that province, except that of S. Mary at Dublin, which some writers say submitted itself to the Cistercian rule about the year i 139. And, theretore, the opinion of the Anglo-Benedictine writer is preferable (it is referred to in the preface to the works of Pullen), who holds that Robert Pullen was invited to Rome by Innocent, was again proclaimed Cardinal by his successor, Lucius, afterwards obtained the dignity of Chancellor, and died uirder Eugenius III. They call him the oldest of Theologians; his remains, which were indexed bv Pitsaeus, prove his great learning. They would have altogether perished had they not been rescued by Hugh Mathoud, head of the Benedictine house of S. Columba, at Sens, who published eight books of his Sentences, illustrated by learned notes. If more about him is wanted it will be found in the notes to Letter 334. ↩

  2. S. Bernard not unfrequently addresses Bishops, wore vetertnn, as having" a crown, i.e., royal honour. See Ep. 221. ↩

  3. Ascelin or Anselm was then presiding over this English See. He suc ceeded John, A.D. j 137, and was Bishop of it for 10 years. — [Mabillon's Note.] But according to the Diocesan Registers, the Diocese was administered by John of Seez for five years from A.D. 1 137, and Ascelin was consecrated in A.D. 1142. 'This Letter should therefore be dated not before 1 142. See note on next page. — [E.] ↩

Chapter 205 of 491