Cassian became an important figure in the ascetical circles of Provence. Monasteries had sprung up everywhere since the days of Martin, but there was no system, no rule, no agreed observance to regulate the life. Who could be better qualified than a man who had had vast experience as both a cenobite and a hermit in the fabled deserts of Egypt and Palestine, and had absorbed the accumulated wisdom of the monastic founders? Cassian was looked to as an authority. From the dedications of his works, it is clear that he was in contact with monks and bishops of the Lerins group and other monastic circles, sometimes responding to their appeals for advice. Cassian himself established two monasteries at Marseilles — one for men, which must have been the monastery of St. Victor, and one for women.
His monastic writings date from the period 420 to 430. The first of these is the Institutes, of which the first four books treat of the monastic customs of Egypt: dress, prayer and psalmody, poverty, food, obedience, discipline, and an exhortation on renunciation. These are followed by eight books, each devoted to one of the eight principal vices. The content of this section is taken over from the Evagrian system. After completing the Institutes, Cassian proceeded to compose twenty-four books of Conferences in three stages of ten, seven, and seven, respectively, each section with a separate preface. These Conferences purport to reproduce the instructions he and Germanus received from various Egyptian elders whom they interviewed in the course of their tour of the deserts. They treat of ascetical topics, though the famous Conference 13 is a discourse on the theology of grace, in which Cassian adopts an anti-Augustinian position that was later declared unorthodox.
About 430 Cassian wrote his seven books on the Incarnation, a refutation of the incipient Nestorian heresy, at the request of Leo the Great, whom he had met at Rome. The fact that Leo turned to Cassian for such an important theological task indicates the stature of his reputation. He must have died soon after this. Of all Western monastic writers before St. Benedict, he was by far the most influential. His teaching was first preserved by the Lerins circle, who shared his views on monastic observance as well as on the theology of grace. The first four books of the Institutes were codified into a monastic rule by an unknown author. Cassian was read by the monks of Condat and by Caesarius of Arles, though the latter gave pride of place to Augustine. In the sixth century, the Rule of the Master is heavily dependent upon Cassian, and Cassiodorus recommended him. Above all, the Benedictine Rule referred its readers to the Collationes Patrum et Instituta and thus ensured the continued reading of Cassian (RB 73.5).21 The number of extant manuscripts testifies to the popularity of Cassian in the Middle Ages, and his effect upon Western spirituality is incalculable.
5. MONASTICISM IN ROMAN AFRICA
Like every other aspect of the Church’s life and thought in North Africa, the development of monasticism there was dominated by the genius and sanctity of St. Augustine. It is not likely, however, that monastic life in Roman Africa began only with the efforts of Augustine.22 The ascetic tradition in this region had a long history, as well as the support of such prestigious leaders as Tertullian and Cyprian, and there is evidence that it continued through the fourth century. It appears that communities of ascetics had been formed by the latter part of the century, for the Council of Hippo in 393 prescribed the common life for virgins who had no parents. Monastic influences from the East must also have penetrated to Africa, for the monks at Carthage, whose disdain for work prompted Augustine to write his De opere monachorum in 400, seem to have been affected by Messalian views.23
Augustine, as we have seen, first became acquainted with monasticism at Milan, when the narrative of Pontitianus impressed him so deeply. In 386 he withdrew with some friends to the country estate of Cassiciacum, the first of his quasi-monastic retreats. This first attempt at the common life seems to have been more like a society of Christian philosophers than a monastery. In 387 Augustine began to make his way back to Africa, staying for some time at Rome, where he took a great interest in the monasteries that had grown up there. The following year he arrived in Tagaste and there began to live the common life with his friends in much the same manner as at Cassiciacum.24 In 391 he was ordained priest by the bishop of Hippo Regius, Valerius, in response to a popular request during a visit of Augustine. Valerius gave him the use of a garden that belonged to the church, and there Augustine established his first real monastery, whose principal characteristic was the common ownership of all goods. The members of the community, laymen whom Augustine called servi Dei, totally renounced individual ownership.
For five years Augustine enjoyed an authentic monastic peace in this community. But when he became bishop in 396, he moved to the episcopal residence in order to prevent the frequent disturbance of the servi Dei, who continued to occupy the garden monastery. Augustine then turned his own household of clerics into a quasi-monastery by insisting on the vita apostolica, the common life and common ownership of property. This custom, which was to become widespread in the West through his influence, would eventually lead to the development of orders of canons regular. Augustine was unwilling to ordain a priest for his diocese unless he agreed to accept poverty and the common life. The idea was not universally popular with his clergy, however, and in his last years he was obliged to mitigate this discipline somewhat. Certainly his monastic ideal was best realized in the garden monastery.
Several works of monastic legislation have come down to us under the name of Augustine. Three separate pieces, known as the Obiurgatio, the Ordo monasterii, and the Praeceptum, appear in the manuscripts in various combinations and in both masculine and feminine forms, constituting an intricate labyrinth of literary problems. The effort to determine the origin and authenticity of these documents has been one of the most complex investigations in the modern study of Patristic literature. Though there is not yet complete agreement, it is now widely held that the Praeceptum or Regula ad servos Dei, the masculine form of the rule, is an authentic work of Augustine. It was written perhaps about 397 for the garden monastery at Hippo. The Obiurgatio, probably also authentic, was addressed to a community of virgins at Hippo formerly ruled by Augustine’s sister. To it was later appended a feminine version of the Praeceptum, constituting Letter 211 as it now stands. The Ordo monasterii, on the other hand, does not appear to be the work of Augustine, though it probably comes from his circle; it has been conjectured to be the work of Alypius.25 The “Rule of St. Augustine,” which is commonly circulated today among the many religious who follow it, consists of the opening sentence of the Ordo monasterii followed by the complete Praeceptum.
Augustine’s rule is brief and was no doubt intended to be merely a summary and a reminder of the fuller teaching he had given orally. For his complete monastic teaching, it is necessary to look further into his enormous literary production. He never wrote a unified theoretical exposition of his concept of the monastic life, and only two of his smaller works deal explicitly with monastic subjects, the De opere monachorum and the De sancta virginitate. His views on particular aspects of the subject are frequently expressed in brief passages of his letters and sermons, especially Letters 210 and 211, Sermons 355 and 356, and the Enarratio on Psalm 132.26
Despite his admiration for the Egyptian anchorites, Augustine’s understanding of Christianity led him in a quite different direction. He was incurably cenobitic, and his whole concept of the monastery centered around the value we today call “community.” The key to his rule is the description of the primitive Christian community of Jerusalem as given in Acts 4:32-35. The ideal of the monastic community was to reproduce the close union of purpose, thought and action depicted in the Scriptures: a real unanimitas activated by charity. Hence, a fully common life was required, including common ownership of all goods, that there might truly be “one heart and one soul.”
The essentials of Augustine’s ideal are presented in the opening paragraph of the Regula ad servos Dei:
In the first place, live together in harmony and be of one mind and heart in God;
for this is the purpose of your coming together. Do not call anything your own, but hold all that you have in common; and let distribution of food and clothing be made by your superior, not to all alike, because all have not the same health, but to each according to his need. For thus you read in the Acts of the Apostles, that they had all things in common, and distribution was made to each, according as anyone had need.
The remaining precepts of the rule are but practical applications of this ideal of “apostolic life.”
So dominant in the thinking of Augustine was the ideal of total harmony of brothers united in heart and mind that he even interpreted the word “monk” to conform to this concept. He provides an etymology for the term monachus that scarcely corresponds to its original meaning. Whereas the Greek term monachos was derived from monos, ‘one,’ and hence was taken by Jerome and others to mean ‘a solitary,’ Augustine explains in his characteristic fashion:
Since the Psalm says, “Behold how good and how pleasant it is that brothers should dwell together in unity,” why then should we not call monks by this name? For monos is ‘one.’ Not one in just any way, for an individual in a crowd is ‘one,’ but, though he can be called one when he is with others, he cannot be monos, that is ‘alone,’ for monos means ‘one alone.’ Hence those who live together so as to form one person, so that they really possess, as the Scripture says, “one mind and one heart,” who have many bodies but not many minds, many bodies but not many hearts, can properly be called monos, that is, ‘one alone’ (Aug. in psalm. 132,6).
While the life of Augustine’s monastery is dominated by the demands of fraternal charity, the observances themselves are the traditional monastic practices: humility, psalmody, private prayer, lectio, fasting, silence, simplicity of food and clothing, obedience, manual labor, renunciation of property, strict chastity. In general, the regime is quite mild compared to Egyptian austerity, though Augustine can be severe in matters of principle, such as private property and unsuitable relationships with women. The monks slept in individual cells, but meals were taken in common to the accompaniment of table reading. The majority of the African monks were ex-slaves or at least from the poorer classes. Communities were presided over by a presbyter, probably a priest appointed by the bishop, and a praepositus, who was second in command. If the basic observances were the same as in the East or in Europe, there was nevertheless a difference of tone in the monasticism of Augustine. His concern with the value of community led to an emphasis upon the relationships of brothers to one another, whereas the Egyptian tradition was more concerned with the relationship of each individual to God via the spiritual father.
Augustine’s enthusiasm for monastic life promoted its rapid growth in his own diocese, but his preponderant influence in the African Church ensured it a still wider extension. As his friends and disciples came to fill the sees of Africa, they likewise established communities of monks, virgins and clerics in other places. His biographer, Possidius, tells us that monasticism was flourishing at his death (Possid. vit.Aug. 31). The invasion of the Arian Vandals, who were already at the gates of Hippo Regius as Augustine lay dying in 430, destroyed many churches and monasteries, and numerous monks and virgins suffered martyrdom. But monasticism did not disappear even during the worst period of persecution. During the century that followed the death of Augustine, the most outstanding figure in African monasticism was Fulgentius of Ruspe, whose devotion to the monastic ideal inspired him to persevere through countless setbacks and sufferings. Both theologically and monastically he was a disciple of Augustine, and the monastic life that he and others promoted during this period remained essentially Augustinian in inspiration.27
Augustine’s influence, however, spread even farther than Africa because of his enormous prestige as a theologian and the extensive diffusion of his writings. In both Gaul and Italy, his influence upon monastic writers became so massive in the first half of the sixth century that it has been spoken of as an “Augustinian invasion.”28 In southern Gaul, Caesarius of Arles broke with the “semi-Pelagian” teaching of Cassian and of his own predecessors at Lerins, and adopted the Augustinian position on grace at the Council of Orange in 529. Likewise, his Rule for Virgins shows the literary influence of Augustine’s rule, which it follows quite closely, even if his thought is still largely determined by the Egyptian tradition, which he seems to have derived more from his Lerinian background than from dependence upon Cassian.29 Augustine continued to influence the Gallic successors of Caesarius, such as Aurelian and the Regula Tarnantensis, as well as Isidore of Seville in Spain at the end of the sixth century.
A little later than Caesarius we find a similar wave of Augustinianism in Italy. While the Regula Magistri shows very little if any knowledge of Augustine, the florilegium E, which has been identified with the rule of Eugippius, abbot of Lucullanum, near Naples,30 and which consists entirely of extracts from existing works, takes more from the Praeceptum and Ordo Monasterii than from any other source, though it also draws extensively upon the Regula Magistri, Basil and Cassian. Later the Rule of St. Benedict was likewise influenced by Augustine; though here the actual quantity of literary borrowing is rather discreet, the qualitative influence of Augustine’s thought, derived not only from his rule but from numerous other works as well, is extremely significant. While the RB remains primarily in the tradition of Egypt as mediated by Cassian and the RM, the second most important influence upon it is that of Augustine, whose humaneness and concern for fraternal relationships have contributed to the RB some of its best known and most admired qualities. It has rightly been said that “with the Rule of Augustine western monasticism entered upon the road which led to Benedict.”31
_______________
1 The best treatment of monastic origins in the West is R. Lorenz “Die Anfänge des abendländischen Mönchtums im 4. Jahrhundert” ZKG 77 (1966) 1–61. See also G. Colombás, El monacato primitivo, BAC 351, 376 (Madrid: La Editorial Católica 1974–75) 1.211–215 and J. Gribomont “L’influence du monachisme oriental sur le monachisme latin à ses débuts” L’Oriente cristiano nella storia della civiltà (Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei 1964) pp. 119–128.
2 An anonymous translation existed even before the more polished version of Evagrius of Antioch appeared in 374. See H. Hoppenbrouwers, La plus ancienne version latine de la vie de S. Antoine par S. Athanase. Étude de critique textuelle, Latinitas Christianorum Primaeva 14 (Nijmegen: Dekker & Van de Vegt 1960); and L. Lorié, Spiritual Terminology in the Latin Translations of the Vita Antonii with References to Fourth and Fifth Century Literature, Latinitas Christianorum Primaeva 11 (Nijmegen: Dekker & Van de Vegt 1960).
3 We learn from Hier. epist. 45,7 that she was Marcella’s sister.
4 On Jerome, see J.N.D. Kelly, Jerome (New York: Harper & Row 1975).
5 We are told of her consecration by Paulinus, the secretary and biographer of Ambrose, who was personally acquainted with Marcellina and with the sister of her companion. See Paulin. vita Ambr., prol. and ch. 4. Ambrose gives the discourse of Pope Liberius at her consecration in Ambr. virg. 3,1.
6 See Aug. conf. 8,6; Aug. mor.eccl. 1,70. On Ambrose, see A. Paredi, Ambrose: His Life and Times (Notre Dame: Univ. of Notre Dame Press 1964); A. Roberti “S. Ambrogio e il monachesimo” Scuola Cattolica 68 (1942) 140–159; 231–252.
7 J. Lienhard “Patristic Sermons of Eusebius of Vercelli and Their Relation to His Monasticism” RBén 87 (1977) 164–172.
8 Hier. epist. 6–10 are addressed to members of the group after his departure from Aquileia; likewise epist. 1 to Innocent and epist. 3 to Rufinus.
9 On Paulinus of Nola, see J. Lienhard, Paulinus of Nola and Early Western Monasticism, Theophaneia 28 (Cologne: Hanstein 1977).
10 On Rufinus and Melania, see F. X. Murphy, Rufinus of Aquileia (345–411): His Life and Works (Washington: Catholic Univ. Press 1945); “Melania the Elder: A Biographical Note” Traditio 5 (1947) 59–77.
11 On Melania the Younger, see D. Gorce, Vie de Sainte Mélanie, SC 9
0 (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf 1962).
12 The thesis that early Gallic monasticism grew out of two principal sources originally confined to separate regions has been persuasively argued by F. Prinz, Frühes Mönchtum im Frankenreich (Munich: Oldenbourg 1965) pp. 19–117. Prinz has assembled extensive evidence to show that the cult of Martin was unknown in eastern Gaul up to the time of Clovis, but was extensively propagated by the saint’s disciples in Aquitaine. The Lerins tradition, on the contrary, spread through the Rhone valley owing to the influence of bishops who had been in contact with that monastery.
13 On Martin of Tours, see the collective volume Saint Martin et son temps, StA 46 (Rome: Herder 1961) and the edition of his Life, with extensive introduction and commentary, by J. Fontaine, Vie de Saint Martin, SC 133–134–135 (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf 1967–69).
14 On Sulpicius Severus, see N. Chadwick. Poetry and Letters in Early Christian Gaul (London: Bowes and Bowes 1955).
15 On Victricius, see P. Andrieu-Guitrancourt “La vie ascétique à Rouen au temps de saint Victrice” Ricerche di storia religiosa 40 (1952) 90–106.
16 Hil. vita Hon. The edition of M.-D. Valentin in SC contains extensive introductory material. See also A. de Vogüé “Sur la patrie d’Honorat de Lérins, évêque d’Arles” RBén 88 (1978) 290–291.
17 For a study of the fifth-century circle associated with Lerins, see Chadwick, Poetry and Letters in Early Christian Gaul.
18 Vita pat. iuren. The SC edition contains useful introductory material.
19 There appears to be a lacuna between paragraphs 174 and 175 in the Life of St. Eugendus, which F. Martine, Vie des Pères du Jura, SC 142 (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf 1968), following Tillemont, thinks once contained the rule, since the title of the entire work is Vita vel Regula Sanctorum Patrum. Others believe the “rule” is contained in paragraphs 169–174. Thus A. de Vogüé “La Vie des Pères du Jura et la datation de la Regula Orientalis” RAM 47 (1971) 121–127.
RB 1980- The Rule Of St Benedict Page 12
