Abstract
In 1942 G. Schreiber declared that the problem of Cluny had not yet been solved, and this surprising judgement still holds good.2 In spite of E. Sackur’s monumental work and mounting piles of literature on the subject we have still not nearly fathomed the phenomenon of Cluny in all its depths.3 We do not even possess an adequate list of all its affiliated houses, and as for Cluny’s own inward life, it remains for us a thing practically unknown.4 Sackur’s tendency to exaggerate the importance of Cluny meets with growing opposition, and recent research has not only modified our former conception of Cluny: it has even detached from it altogether the vast area of reform in Lorraine.5
This article appeared first in DA 10 (1954) 417–45. The [French] edition was an abridged and modified version of the original, made at the request of Dom J. Leclercq and translated by Dom H. Rochais. To these two confrères I wish to express my gratitude. [It is from the French edition, ‘Le climat spirituel des premiers temps de Cluny’, in RM 46 (1956) 117–40, that the present translation has been made. Ed.]
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
This article appeared first in DA 10 (1954) 417–45. The [French] edition was an abridged and modified version of the original, made at the request of Dom J. Leclercq and translated by Dom H. Rochais. To these two confrères I wish to express my gratitude. [It is from the French edition, ‘Le climat spirituel des premiers temps de Cluny’, in RM 46 (1956) 117–40, that the present translation has been made. Ed.]
G. Schreiber, Gemeinschaften des Mittelalters (Münster, 1948) pp. 81–8.
E. Sackur, Die Cluniacenser in ihrer kirchlichen und allgemeingeschichtlichen Wirksamkeit, 2 vols (Halle, 1892–4).
A bibliography of later work is given by K. Hallinger in Enciclopedia cattolica, 111 (1949) cols 1883–98.
On the question of Cluniac houses, the two publications of J. Bouton, in Bernard de Clairvaux, Comm. d’Histoire de l’Ordre de Cîteaux (1953) pp. 193–249, need some revision.
The most useful lists are in G. de Valous, Le monachisme clunisien (Paris, 1935) 11 179–270
J. Evans, Romanesque Architecture of the Order of Cluny (Cambridge, 1938) pp. 153–218.
See also N. Hunt, Cluny under St Hugh (London, 1967) pp. 5 ff. and 124 f Ed.
See P. E. Schramm, in Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, 207 (1953) 80 ff.
T. Schieffer, in DA 1 (1937) 352 ff.
On reform in Lorraine, see K. Hallinger, Gorze–Kluny (‘Studia Anselmiana’, XXII–XXV, Rome, 1950–1).
The main conclusions are summarised in Bruno Gebhardt, Handbuch der deutschen Geschichte, I: Frühzeit und Mittelalter (1954) pp. 215–18.
See also p. 117, n. 9 of the French edition of the present article for a lengthy bibliography in which the sole English publication is that of H. Dauphin in Downside Review, 7 (1952). Ed.
See F. Heer, Aufgang Europas, 1 (1949) pp. 387, 407; Schreiber, op. cit. pp. 102 ff. For a better understanding, see the detailed treatment in the German original of the present article in DA 10 (1954) 418 ff.
See A. Brackmann, Hist. Zeitschrift, 139 (1929) 34 ff. See also the following notes.
G. Tellenbach, Church, State and Christian Society at the Time of the Investiture Contest (Oxford, 1940) pp. 189 ff.;
A. Fliche, La réforme grégorienne, 1 (Louvain, 1924) pp. 39–60.
Most important is the short study by C. H. Talbot, ‘Cluniac Spirituality’, in The Life of the Spirit, 2 (1945) 97–101.
E. Werner, Die Gesellschaftlichen Grundlagen der Klosterreform im rr. Jahrhundert (dissertation, Leipzig, 1952; publ. Berlin, 1953).
P. E. Schramm, Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, 11–12 (1954) 754. To his opinion can be added the observation that E. Werner has not achieved his object: Marian devotion, an increase in the number of Masses, the cult of the cross are something quite other than a sociological phenomenon. At Cluny, prayer for the dead had roots that were deeper than superficial economic considerations. In short, Werner has yet to prove that the whole interior and external life of Cluny was merely a façade.
Such was the reaction of C. Schmitt, Encicl. cattol. IX (1952) cols 65–7.
See also A. Hessel, in Hist. Zeitschrift, 128 (1923) 1–25;
W. Williams, in Monastic Studies (1938) 24–8; J. Laporte, in Congrès, pp. 138–43;
A. Nitschke, ‘Die Welt Gregors VII’ (diss. Göttingen, 1950). Compare the discussions of P. E. Schramm, in Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen 207 (1953) 72 and K. Voormann, ‘Studien zu Odo von Kluny’ (diss. Bonn, 1951). I am grateful to Professor W. Holtzmann for having allowed me to examine the last named work.
For the works of Odo of Cluny, see M. Manitius, Geschichte der latein. Literatur des Mittelalters (Munich, 1923) 11 20–7.
Odonis abbatis Cluniacensis Occupatio, ed. A. Svoboda (Leipzig, 1900). See Manitius, op. cit. II 22 and L. Kolmer, Beilage z. Jahresber. d.H. Gymn. Metten (1912) pp. 31 ff.
St Basil, Regula ad Monachos, 3, PL 103, 496; St Augustine, Enarratio in Ps. 132: PL 37, 1729 ff. See A. Zumkeller, Das Mönchtum des hl. Augustinus (1950) pp. 129 ff.
For St Gregory’s influence on St Odo, see Laporte, loc. cit. pp. 138 ff. Statements by St Gregory in favour of the eremitic life may be found in Dialogues, 2, ed. U. Moricca, Fonti per la Storia d’Italia, 4 (1924) p. 14 and in Regist. Epist. 1, 5; MGH Epist, 15. See also O. Pored, ‘La doctrina monastica de San Gregorio M.’ (diss. Washington, 1950).
VG II 16, col. 94. For the authenticity of this life, see A. Poncelet, in Anal. Boll. 14 (1895) 89–107.
A. Zimmermann, Lexicon f. Theol. u. Kirche, 4 (1932) 406 ff. In the Collationes Odo places the monks among the ranks of celestial beings: they lose their kingdom when they are led astray through earthly things. See below, n. 5 for further references.
VG n 8; Coll. I, 1o, cols 91, 168: ‘ad desiderium conditoris incalescere’. VG 2, praef., col. 87. See also the homily for the feast of St Martin, Bibl. Cl. 126, and Coll. 2, I I, col. 196 (conditio portandae cruris: daily martyrdom). Stress is frequently laid on austerity: see, for. example, Coll. 2, 8, cols 167 ff. The necessity of struggling against the vices is expressed in VG 2, 1, col. 88. For the previous history of the theme of monastic martyrdom, see E. Malone, ‘The monk and the martyr’ (diss. Washington, 1950) and J. Leclercq, La vie parfaite (Paris, 1953) ch. 5, pp. 125–60.
A valuable introduction to this concept of the patristic age is given by J. Daniélou, Sacramentum futuri (1950) pp. 3–52. For the fathers a life free from marriage was equivalent to a return to paradise (reditus in paradisum): see D. Dumm, ‘St Jerome’s theory of virginity’ (diss. S. Anselmo, Rome, 1950).
G. Bürke, ‘Die Origenes Lehre vom Urstand des Menschen’, in Zeitschrift f. Kathol. Theol. (1950) 20 ff.
E. Peterson, ‘Der Stand der Vollkommenheit in der Urkirche’, in Acta et documenta Congressus generalis de statibus perfectionis, 1 (1950) 476–9.
JS 114, col. 50. On the peace which exists between the ‘perfect’ and the wild beasts, see A. Stolz, Theologie der Mystik (1936) pp. 26 ff.
De Genesi ad litteram, VI 24: CSEL 28, 1196. Numerous references to other sources are given by G. Ladner, Mitt. des Inst. Österr. Geschichtsforsch. 60 (1952) 41–8, esp. n. 82.
Tertullian, De carnis resurrectione, 61: PL 2, 932. Here, asceticism is a means of anticipating the final and eternal silence: ‘uirtutis futurae liniamenta’. Similarly St Cyprian, De oratione, 36, CSEL 3, 1, p. 294, 11: ‘imitemur, quod futuri sumus’; and St Augustine, Enarratio in Ps. 132, n. 13: PL 37, 1736: ‘corde praecede, quo sequaris corpore’. Others also, outside Africa, had the same ideas: e.g. St Jerome, Epistolae, 22, 41: CSEL 54, 210: ‘esse incipe, quod futura es’, and earlier Origen, Exp. in Eph. 5: ‘qui similes angelis futuri sumus, iam nunc incipiamus esse’: text in Fr W. B. Bornemann, In investigation monachatus origin (1885) p. 24.
Pachomius, Regula, 60, ed. A. Boon, Pachomiana latina (Louvain, 1952) p. 32; St Basil, Regula, praef.: PL 103, 487; St Benedict, Regula, cap. 6, ed. C. Butler (1935) pp. 28 ff.
The information supplied by JS 1 32, col. 57 is confirmed by the customaries of Cluny edited by B. Albers, Consuetudines monasticae, 11 (1905) p. 22: see Gorze-Kluny, 11 872–1 ff and 925–33.
G. Brugnoli, ‘La biblioteca dell’abbazia di Farfa’, in Benedictina, 5 (1951) 10 ff. betrays a total ignorance of Cluniac customs and tradition.
The list of books given in the Consuetudines Farfenses belongs to Cluny: see A. Wilmart in RM (1921) 89–126.
I. Cechetti, ‘Tibi silentium laus’, in Miscellanea Mohlberg (Rome, 1949) pp. 521–70, esp. pp. 522 ff., which contains studies on gnostic, biblical, christological, ascetic, mystical and liturgical silence. He does not deal with monastic silence.
On this see D. P. Salmon, ‘Le silence religieux’, in Mélanges bénédictins (Paris, 1947) pp. 11–57. St Odo knew St Gregory the Great’s Moralia, 30 XVI, n. 53: PL 76, 533, where apocalyptic silence is treated. It is hardly likely that Odo depended directly on St Ignatius of Antioch.
G. Bekès, De continua oration Clementis Alexandrini doctrina (‘Studia Anselmiana’, Rome, 1942). See also n. 5 below.
Occupatio, lib. VII, VV. 542–50 (uita angelica and sexual abstinence); similarly in VG n 8, col. 91: ‘monachi perfecti beatis angelis assimilantur’. Monasticism is for St Odo caelestis disciplina, caelestis militiae tyrocinium: see his sermon on St Benedict, Bibl. Cl. 138, 141, where Benedict is described as an angel: col. 141. When speaking of St Odo, John of Salerno can think of no better expression than angelicus uidelicet et humanus. On patristic references to the uita angelica, see Leclercq, La vie parfaite, pp. 19–56; L. Bouyer, Le sens de la vie monastique (Paris, 1950) pp. 43–68;
J. Daniélou, ‘Terre et paradis chez les Pères de l’Église’, in Eranosjahrbuch, 22 (1953) 433–73.
E. Norden, P. V. Maro Aeneis Buch VI 2 (1916) p. 52 (there, nec mortale sonans). The liturgical application of this quotation from Vergil shows how highly Odo esteemed the liturgy. Similarly Coll. 2, 6, col. Igo: ‘quibus eloquia Dei credita sunt’; ibid. the condemnation of terrenis inhiare.
Heer, op. cit. 1 402, 393, 396, 398, 410; W. Weisbach, Religiöse Reform and mittelalterliche Kunst (1945) pp. 37–41;
I. Herwegen, Kirche and Seele (1928) pp. 22 ff. It seems however to be during the Carolingian era that Christ the king began to be represented in ways which highlighted his humanity rather than his divinity. So, in the following era, the tenth century, it was necessary to re-emphasise his divinity.
humilis Deus; dulcedo praesens; cordis secretum. In Cluny’s early years Christ is sometimes presented as a king: e.g. De S. Bened.: Bibl. Cl. 142; Coll. I, 31, col. 179 and passim. But this is neither the only nor the main concept: Coll. I, 19, col. 172 (shepherd); cols 170, 182 (humilis rex, humilis Dews); cols 214, 26, (the one who is scourged, crowned with thorns, given gall to drink); VG 2, praef. cols 13 and 87 (carrying his cross); ibid. col. 88 (agnus); ibid. col. 75 (pauper); Coll. 2, 30, col. 210 (sacerdos); VG 115, and Coll. 1, 18, cols 76 and 172 (veritas), and passim. In the primitive church the concept of Christ the king was not predominant in the liturgy, as is shown by A. Dumon, ‘Grondleggers der Middeleeuwse vroomheid’, in Sacris Erudiri, 1 (1948) 206–24. The same has been proved of the writings of St Ambrose: K. Baus, Das Gebet zu Christus beim hl. Ambrosius (Trier). My pupil M. Balsavich has shown that the same is true of Gregory the Great: ‘The testimony of St Gregory the Great on the place of Christ in prayer’ (diss. S. Anselmo, Rome, 1955). On the affective character of Cluniac devotion to Christ, see VG 1 6, col. 7o (cordis secretum, refectio, riuos dei); ibid. cols 71, 73, 76 (the interior guest); ibid. cols 7o, 72, 79, 91 (dulcedopraesens); col. 94 (in Christo delectation); col. 74 (suauis amplexus sponsi); sermon for the feast of St Benedict, Coll. 2, 6, 11; VG 1 12, cols 143, 191, 195, 74 and passim (Christus = sponsus); Coll. 2, 23, col. 203 (puer Jesus); Coll. 2,,6 and 3, 37, cols 199 and 246 (benignus iudex) and VG 1, praef. col. 60 (benefactor populi).
On the contrast between Cluny and the monasteries of the empire, see Gorze–Kluny, 1 417 ff. The difference between the two monastic branches does not, however, signify an iron curtain between Burgundy and Lorraine, as Dom H. Dauphin suggests (see above, p. 30 n.); nor did it amount to lasting ill-feeling, and I would not agree with Weigle, according to whom the two groups would have nothing to do with each other (DA 9, 584). Some hostile reactions did indeed result from the reform. Later the two sides came to collaborate, regarding each other at times with indifference, at times with admiration. On this subject, see what is said about Fleury and the development of the young reform movement at Gorze, about the modifying of customs, about personalities such as Richard of Verdun, Herrand of Halberstadt, Bern of Reichenau, Eckard of Tegernsee-Aura (see the index of Gorze–Kluny). It is from such, research on common problems that I approach the question of the independence or dependence of the two types of monastic observance (ibid. pp. 663, 983 and passim). On Richard’s reform I would refer, in spite of some differences of opinion, to the valuable and penetrating work of Dom H. Dauphin, Le Bienheureux Richard, Abbé de St-Vann de Verdun (Louvain, 1946).
Coll. 2, 25, col. 205: pretiosa anima; VG 1 16, cols 193 and 76: cultus animas; VG 1 9, col. 71: arx pietatis in corde. An example of the affective aspect of private devotion is Odo’s veneration of Mary as Mater Misericordiae. On this subject, see P. Cousin in Congrès, pp. 210–18, and H. Barré, ‘Marie et l’Église du Vénérable Bède a S. Albert le Grand’, in Marie et l’Église (Société française d’études mariales, Paris, 1951) p. 78, n. 190. Long before Bernard, Odo evoked the theme of mystic marriage: see above, p. 42 n. Contrary to what Heer puts forward, op. cit. 14.01, Odo, before Mayeul, insisted on the idea of Christ as head of the mystical body. See his sermon for the feast of St Peter, Bibl. Cl. 129 and 200 ff. Also prior to Mayeul, he placed the accent on contemplation: see JS III 12, col. 84; VG II 9, col. 92: ‘suspensus in contemplatione’ and passim.
Sackur, op. cit. II 445 ff.; W. Schwarz in Zeitschrift f. Kirchengesch. 42 (1923) 257; Fliche, op. cit. 139 ff. See also the bibliography in Tellenbach, Church, State and Society.
C. Erdmann, Die Entstehung des Kreuzzugsgedankens (1935), insists on this.
See also T. Schieffer, in Archiv f. mittelrhein. Kirchengeshich. 4 (1952) 37. See above, p. 35, n. I, for the authenticity of VG.
B 1 i 135. On the chronology of the customaries, see R. Philippeau in RM 44 (1954) 141–51
and the basic study of M. Rothenhauesler in Stud. Mitt. OSB 33 (1912) 605–20. [See also Hunt, op. cit. pp. 11 ff. Ed.]
T. Mayer, Fürsten und Staat (1950) pp. 65 ff. See also Gorze–Kluny, pp. 564 ff. To stand for freedom in abbatial elections was to oppose the bishops and also the seigneurs: ibid. pp. 565 ff. (case of St Mihuel in 1076).
On the system of Cluniac priories, see Gorze–Kluny, p. 757. The Cluniac hierarchy was, so to speak, ‘afeudal’ to the extent that it was hardly influenced by French feudal vassalage, as is shown by J. F. Lemarignier, in Revue historique de droit français et étranger, 31 (1953) 171–4.
The anti-feudal aspect of the Cluniac priories had already been indicated by G. Schreiber, in Zeitschrift f. Kirchengesch. 62 (1943) 65 ff. E. Werner, see above, p. 31, n. 3, does not fail to recognise this partly anti-feudal aspect but he prefers to concentrate on the feudal aspects of the Cluniac structure. See also p. 53, n. below. [Hunt, op. cit. pp. 124 ff. and esp. pp. 154 ff., gives a description of the Cluniac structure. Ed.]
Sackur, op. cit. 1 289 ff.; R. Molitor, Aus der Rechtsgeschichte bened. Verbände, 1 (1928) pp. 139–41; Gorze–Kluny, p. 86o. [See also Hunt, op. cit. p. 164. Ed.]
T. Mayer, in Zeitschrift f. Schweiz. Geschichte, 28 (1948) 145–76, dealing especially with JL 5167 for Schaffhausen and 5184 for Marseilles, and with the refusal to bestow the privilege recommended by Abbot William of Hirsau, who in the pope’s eyes was still too inclined to acknowledge the rights of lay seigneurs. On the independence of Pope Gregory VII, see Werner, op. cit. pp. 89 ff.
So H. Jedin. In justifying a total liberty, the foundation charter of 910 tried to achieve, in the midst of a feudal society, a certain ideal inherited from ancient monasticism: the ideal of an existence extra mundum (see DA 10 (1954) 437). Here the problem of Cluniac feudalism is barely touched. Final judgements on this subject seem premature. Cluny was neither exclusively feudal nor in every aspect anti-feudal. One finds a basic structure which is feudal and which, at the same time, has characteristics which can be described as strongly anti-feudal. See Gorze–Kluny, pp. 755, 774, 1018. I have never, as Werner says (op. cit. p. 33), defined Cluny simply as antifeudal.
The formula ‘Gregorian Cluniacism’ used by F. Weigle, in DA 9 (1953) 584, takes no account of all the explanations which I have summarised (Gorze–Kluny, pp. 544–97, esp. p. 584) by saying that Gregorianism and Cluniac monasticism are, in their ultimate development, very different from each other despite their common sources. A dispassionate appreciation is given by T. Mayer, in Histor. Zeitschrift, 174, 573.
A. Blumenstock, Der päpstliche Schutz im Mittelalter (1890);
L. Taché, in Revue de l’Université d’Ottowa, 11 (1941) 5 ff. and 149–77; J. F. Lemarignier, in Congrès, pp. 288–40.
On the canonical movement and the investiture contest, see G. Ladner, Theologie und Politik vor dem Investiturstreit (Baden–Vienna, 1936) pp. 42 ff.
On the part played by the canonical movement, see the very balanced view of C. Dereine in RHE 46 (1951) 767–70.
extra mundum. Even at the beginning of the twelfth century there were contacts between the two parties. See J. Sydow, Stud. Mitt. OSB 63 (1951) 45–66.
A. Chagny, Cluny et son empire (1949) pp. 275 f, shows the slow decline of Cluny at the time of its supremacy.
Editor information
Copyright information
© 1971 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hallinger, K. (1971). The Spiritual Life of Cluny in the Early Days. In: Hunt, N. (eds) Cluniac Monasticism in the Central Middle Ages. Readings in European History. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-00705-9_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-00705-9_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-00707-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-00705-9
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)