THE IMPLICATIONS OF LITERACY
Wrillm LmgM/fgt an'MoJels of rnttrprttation in the Elwmlh ami Twelfth Cm/u,.ifS
BlANK PAGE
THE IMPLICATIONS
OF LITERACY
Wrium lAnguage tlnd Motkls 0/ inWjntllllion in the Elwmlh IInd Twtlfth CmluritJ
BRIA N STOCK
pa l NCETON UNIVERSITY ,"RUS
PII.INCETON, NEW JER SEY
CO PU. IG HT C
,,8, n
PRIHC!TOt< UtllVUSITY Puss
Publiobed by PrinC(1on UniYffsity Ptaa, 4' WilIlam So:fttt, Prinotton, New Jersey oIHO In the United Kingdom: Pri_pn Unl"" .. il1 Ptaa, Chicbco.ot, WO$< S........
A/J Rip,n &urwJ Library of o,nsrao Cawogins in Publication OaP will be round on the la.rd. [,,6). , . • R. K. 1IIettoo. "()" Soxiolot;iaoI Thtoti 01 the Middle 1llI\I
,
INTRODUCTION
ingredient of modern communicatiolU syStemS, in which words and texts are normally inrerdqxndent, However, it IS important to note that the medieval version of this state of affaies came about by two different routcs. Orn' took place within written tradition itself and involved if! gllldu.al exTension into formerly onl 5e(tors of life and thought. The mlier rook place within oral tradition and involved an equally slow accultul1ltion' of the written mode. As an example, we may consider the influence of canonical penitential theol1' on unwritten Irish and A.nglo-Saxon legal codcs bctw~n the sixth and eighth centurics. From the canon lawyer's point of view, onl.! adapted to written law. But, from the viewpoint of the practitioner of oral law, writing first appeared u a foreign clement. 10 the second case, as long as law funcrioned orally, the pre~nce of writing alone wu not indic_ adve of literacy. Instead, there wu a complex process of lWimilation by a different mentality, in which states of rextudity, rather than the oral or the wriuen alone, comprised the operative element. Only when the undetlying iIOCial psychology had changed can we speak of a geouine shift to Kribai culture. The stages were C(Ullplinted and often impercepti ble, as histories of education oriented around the survival of the classical tradition do not suffiCiently emphasize. Thete is in fact no dear point of transition from a nonliterate to a literate society. For, even at the high point of oral usage, let us say, in the medieval context, continental Europe during the tenth century, writing was not by any means absent from everyday transactiolU; and, when literate norrru were firmly re-established in law and governmeot, that is, by the mid-twelfth, the spoken word did nol Cta$C to play a large rul!ural role. The change, as suggested, was not so much from oral t~ written u from an earlier state, predominaotly onI, to various combinations of oral and written. In some areas of human activity like property law, oraliry was very largely superseded; in others, oral and written (orms found their equilihrium with respect to each other, dividing responsibility $0 to speak for imponant institutions of culture, as was tbe ~ ror instance of oral confession within struCtured penitential theology. The balance betw~n 0011 and written modes of communication brought about during the Middle Ages penisted in ffi.lny areas long afterwards , Medi~I linguis{ic evolution thereby provides an example, rare in cultural """,!tun""" in hiMOrince. In Olber words, tm-re i, both an external history, visible in events, debates, and leg islation, and an ioteC02I history, by which ,imilar problems and oriennIiom tum up in otherw~ unrelated areas of endeavour about the IIIlInl' time. For literacy, as it actually prnctrated medieval life and thought, bro\lBht about a tran,form.lion o( the ~ic skill, of rtading and writing imo instrumentS of analy,is and interpretation. It was, so to speak, the ontological cement binding the apparently isolate.l. activities. Accordingly, the book', proprr subject is not only a stt of intl'rrciated theIDl'$ in ekventh- and rwelfth-ccnrury history, but, viewed from the inside, the exploration of potential ]inJu between content and communicative form.
"
I. ORAL AND WRITTEN
TIM J/"'" of medieval
literacy's implications presuppasn an undersb.nding of the bro.der tr.nsition to • type: of society in which oral diK()uf$e exists largely within a framework of conventions deu:rmin«!. by tats. What follows is an introductory account of that I ............. of ooiden WRITTI!N
encounteR. Such meetings are rich in gesture, ritual, and ceremony: Imn communicate nOt only by what t~y say but by how they behave. The human sensorium is orienttd around the ear.' The meaning of woNS is not generalized inro a seties of standard definitions which can then act lIS points of referelKe; conKd0r>. 1s;66l. " F. C. B.,.d.". R • ,;.. (V-ho • • '11,.) •• " ." . Bard'«·'If'P,-h is britlIy 11 Not by accident, Livius Androllicus, a flCed Greek liave, began composing his plays and Latin o.wi4 about the same time. Livill5 was an archaiser, a conscious creator of poetic diction. JO Later autban, ....hile imiutin.g Greek modeh less crudely, followed his enmple. But the emulation went fat beyond languagetrainins and Iictratute: it "prepared the ....y for modern forms of bumanism. that arc ba,ed OD a second language, a cultural lingua (ranca which is used to uansmit a tnditioa generally recognized lIS having an essential superiority over all ochen, and therefocc to be imitated."" An identification was made between the cott«t attitude cowards rhe classical hl:ritage and thl: style of life considered approa< ObodwNQ&'. - ia H. Pi., [.Nidoen .. Ill.• ..... Otrd TI "1;". (0
u......" T. " '-
'917>. 8)"92 . .... Altbdm, - [)it AtoI'I..,. .... vulprlot. P-"I>>I';' _ _ (~,;d. ' 9S' ).
I> J. " f . Soho
o. w. D.
Ekod< Le< U1i rotn<S from .1>< .... 'l""rt< .~hd ninlll « • •",in; 1«. m.; ,I>< r;,.j}u ....... fn>m .1>< ~ISI < ni"'h; S.bottini, _ .m., , .... ,..1>< GIou.It) quod ipoi met in«Ui&un< rol"", : « ill< ' " Io!>dot>d"" qui ",",pr< ioqui.Ul lotin"", obocw-d od. : ! :, Tp,'), "4. Or: ... ittft: -.uo opoIm: ....,...., ,loo _,..",;",;, is fnicw But, by tbe time he w~, the standard was not spoken but written Latin. It was gnmmu in textual form, not speech habits, which henceforth iIolated the literate and by implication denoted the rustic. And cbe irony utw.ir::dyin,g the arlic!: disrinnioos t.ire erner~ in a new cootcrt. 1lIe simpliciry the countryside. was largely replated as • litcftry topes by that of the Bible. ~ Although Christian wthon from Augustiuc on studied and mutcl"td rhetoric, they wen: constantly reminded thar Jesus and the ap>stlcs spoke in the plain language of uncuItivued men. They were, as the New TelU.ment bore witness, itlifllM. This term, which 0CC\lC$ in Aca .nd Paul, h&cI a wide range of meaning in Greek; during the hellcnistic period tbe senses were gradually aoh.pted to the needs of Latin. In clas.sical .nd p.uisdc Greek, tbe tbutm,!; was the private person or the layman: the unskilled, unpr0fes5ionai, or uninitiated, as opposed. let us $I.y to tbe trained officer, physician, philO$opmr, or priest.'" In Latin, itliau came to mean $Omt'OllC who was igDOtaDt of a science, II docuiuc, or an area of study, and as a corollary one unpetkc::ted in II practical discipline." Vitruvius. for innanee, distinguished "between laymen and architectS. "66 Amons Christian-
or
or
or or
or
,. ItiJ., , .... .. Do 0 . - } . '~.,", t) say Amen . . . . "7 Paul does nDf cell us preci~ly who che idiDkU al'l:. In all probability they al'l: not yet full .. J. F. Nitt...,..r, lIIoJi. Uti';"';' .. Po< • full , .. k • • _
u.itoo 111;_ (l.<W do U .. I, P. '7'. 1>-7; c. '-}O, itOJ.• '79. ,_ o . a. -JOId tAlaarccrrl>adr. AlG# b 1_. ".., MGH UboIli de lit< I, ~Io-I' . .. r..88;cp>ted iD OlD, .... in 00 l'modr, V .. u Jc..(., HI6, ......eeI;" TobItr_ '-""'-". AIIfi ............ti ..d . t (\lI'itrbkn. ,960). "',: "'Si "'" • Iui "''''' onaJ .rtirudes 1'fOU1d seem to have ",puted with minor variations I !,meess that unfolded in the eastern Mediterranean centuries bcfure. M.rrou speaks of "the dark age" bd'ore Hesiod and of "the Homedc Middle Ages," in which the metaphor of darkness is largely jllStified by the lack of a wtitten tradition, Other parallels between the ancient world Ind the Middle Ages come to mind. Writing first developed in the Near East for the purpose of goverrunent; that is, it ~ "tIO( to fiI theological or metaphysical dogma . . . but for the practical needs of accountancy and .drninisuarion:"" Similarly, the utilitlrilin functions of writing, which included preserving and transmitting the cultural heritage. pft(eded dle rise of iDdividual medievaJ dis.ciplines, Again, in Homeric times, the use of the alphabet went hand in hand with a widespleld technical and commerdal revolution. "" In the West, from che eleventh century, innovations in Igriculture, warfare, and devices for tbe efficient use of water md .ir power helped to (teate the conditions of economic progress;"" and tbe rebinh of medievaJ literaCy coincided with the rt'monetiution of markets and c:xchange. Comparisons can abo be made in IitCtature. In Homer, U in B-'I, the Cbtnnl11l ik RiJl.tlUi, or the
Fa,......
." I'< • ",itw ,,( ,ho oId.er U - =. ... W . K . TIot 1I._w.- ;" Hu,., · ., T....... ,;., C'" ia I{I " ... (Ca.nbrid.p, Moa., '9-48). do&. , .,.,. • .. A Hu., Cn to stOO..., containing analytical and evt:n scientific cicmt'lln.·' The ideo. of a linear transition from oral [0 written tradition amtains a large degree of acc:uracy. Within the period under study, it is paralleled by such well-known developments as, in religion, the dedine of liturgical worship and the rise of theologiclll acholarship or. in politics, the shift from the priest-king, whose connections are with an oral, pinorial, jje5tural, and liturgical culture, to tlit desacraliud Jaw-king, whose links IU with the literate, the administrative, the insttumentllUy rational, aoo dx comticutionaL But, beyond such broad comparisons, the problem of communications in medieval culture is more complex than eidler the renaissance or the evolutionary theory al1ows. On tlit one hand, the spokcsmen on ~half of a prog~$$in modernity within ttH, Middle Ajje5 are not entirely to be trusted. The medievals believed thar they were tlit heirs to the Gretks, feting fanher, as Bemard of Chartres claimed, only because of the eminence to which earlier achie~ment had permitted them to rise.·' His point of view, like [hat of ~nth-anrury renai$ance throrisu, wa$ weighted in favour of learned rradition and in &vour of cultural diffusion, rhe laner being m~ helpful in accounting for the internal development of discipiin..., than why new attitudes or ways of thinkinjj came into ~ing. On the oth« hand, the th«is "from oral to wdtren" merely putS into new terminology tm, older 'ttge-rhcoty of culture, in which complelt communicative pnxCSSC"S are inevitably reduad ro adjuncts of material change. With teSpect to epic poetry, for insrance, we may ask what evidence there is fur a wholly "oral" state of mind. True, tbe /Ii",J and the Dlryss9. like medieval epics, are in J>IlI"t reposirori« of mo1'llls, customs, and other legal-religious material lodged in the collective memory. But 'epic poetry, it hlU long ~n known, also contains conceptualized texts, which [esemble written forlIl5 of record in the same way that the layoutJ of manuscript pages anticipated the first printed book,. They do not recall a living "o1'llI" iIOCiely but rather the conventions through which its lirerary stylists soujjhc ro render it for posterity .
1'
of WriJInI
TraJilion
The c1e.tfat instances of literaey's continuous emplOYJJJCnt an: furnished by rhe papd chancety. royd chanceries, and the lay nOtariar~.
"
ORAL AND WRITTEN
Long before t~ EJiN of Mil4" 8uarant~ corporate freedom for the church, the popes had employed tIOOlrin of the city of Rome for collcctins the acts of tM martyrs, keeping t~ minutes of synods, and pI't'pUing transcripts of documentS. From a( least the tim.= of Ihma· sus I these records wcre kept in an archive over which presided tM chief scribe ~",iarilU IIl11ArirInIIJI), who was an influential member of tOr paprJ COUrt."' SucCCSlivc pontiffs had to find the man with the tight combiDllrion of "busiMSS uaining and experience"" to act at once as CUIUOf, administrator, and supervisor of the copying of letters. Until the pontificate of Innocent III (r r98-r2 r6), "there appears nOt to have ~n a consistent archival policy. "I, The lack of original registers makes the early history of the chancery difficult to reconstruct. Yet, a virtually unbroken series of scribes has been brought to Jight* and the practices of the variOU$ popes i;,e(ome drarer after papyrus was replaced by pudun~nt under Benedict Vlll;u:ound rOlo." 1he eJ~nth century witnrssed a gteat rise in the volume of transactions." In an incre;uingly litigiOU$ age , Ullmann notes, "the unparallded advanrage which the papacy had over any O£her institution wu its own storehouse of ideological memory, the papal archives. """ Between Bentdicr VIII .nd Innocent Ill, four particularly important changes ronk place in the manner in which the chancery handled the written word. The form of paprJ bulls was clarified; the offices of writing and daring were combined; the curial script was abandoned and along wilh it reliance on the Roman Jcri"iarii; and the rules for the amm were standardized. These changes did not Olke place at the $ame tim~ but they all moved in the same dire Moh.l HoIJi"" ' 97'), 7 . .. L s.n.iftlIOl, ""Souio di uo.1I .
Noroou-..r.. · .AI 5 rS' f F;"J('n~), .. """ ,..,.... , •• itw, ay rum I..-.; ....... it. · A.'- fir '10_ 41 (.96)), ,6"20) ODd H. Puhrmaruo. ' 0.. I. .. ........... ,"'" """ dio J.~: I~J. Plo,' ",iq, od .. J-",.,$ji, nJ R . , w · fo of p~ Gm,
'"', ,6, .
a.
G . l.:>dnoru ....1< .. ."Je".. di uno .",,~ .. &o medi .. i.,ia," RWiM Ji I ..... 1 "'if.... , (,,6,). 4'4·81. - G . J dM'. "Two Grc.oriu: l.ft, ... on tl:< Sowno u:oi N.",... of GtqoJy vIr. R
on/r. (.,,6),
"
"·H. 7'·H .
OR.4-L .4-ND WRITT!lN
mucted by the Vis(godu, by the Langobards, and, iI is thought, ,., by the Anglo-Suons. But the model later imitated ~Ioped out of the transition from the Merovingian to the Carolingian kings. Pippin, crowned at SoiS5OllJ in ni, abandoned the chaotic record-keeping of Childeric HI and adopted instead the somewhat more methodological system of the palace mayon. '''' The Carolingian challCery grtw in size with sU«e$Siv~ ~mperon, only to become fragmented with different parts of the empire afrer &jo. In the hue ninth and renth centuries, the royal chanceries of Pro~nce, Burgundy, and luly utilized the Carolingian style of dip]oml.. Similar traditions dominated the diplomnic services of the culy Ortos. 1bey ~n served as I. point. of departure for the modest writing service of HUSh Caper.'''' The chanceries of Hugh, Robert I, Henry I, and Philip J were no man: extensive than was necessary fur !'\Iling a kingdom cncompassill8 little man: than the lle-de·France. But, from the rime of Robert the Pious, a ~ of simplification wu di5Ccmible. The new charrer was smaller in dimensions and lacked many of the traditional furmulat. Eventually it was simply called IrriPI_, /WgilY, ()!" tIIf14, ,06 indicating that thc tat rather than its symbolic trappill8s constituted tbe mes.sage. The position of the uthchancdlot correspondingly lO$C in prestige. A c~ in point ""as Etittllle de GarbOOe. Archdeacon of Paris, he bcatne chancellor under Philip I in 110,-1106. He kept his office under Louil VI, aod, ~n aftcr his dismissal in 1127, remained an influential seneschaJ. "'/ But genuinely "administrative kingship" does not appear in Europe until thc acression of Hcnry I ODto the English throne in 1100. Henry centralized accounting and ttel.Sury procedures, improved the quality and quantity of records, and greatly increased the royal C1)Otrol of jUlltice.'" He cra.taI. a _gutit' Kl'iplllrii ""hose office: carried on its ",tivitia .... htther the king was prnmt or not.'op In order to fin.!. such a radical reform of ~rnment in France one must look forward to the reign ) .. 1V""" I ....... '~" j. - G. T ... iu, fX~ ' ,.. ..,. fo 'Of ,;.. (I'Jri •• ,96.). 40 .
'" Se< N . T. CIsn Ni...w...." Ut P. Cl PIU, ni" Rd....... $drft ;. MitrW.J.... (Sip>o . udy. O. Leoy, 1V.,._doo V.I"" .... o.u ~;,.;.",.. ..... (Woim .... '9")6), , .", iJ., G" IJIJtSdri{"', 0. 'I' p, . . . "", v.n.:n. '49, 4K. uod ", F""" fJlriJ R_; .""",ti.;';, «I. S. Il;m,. ~, .. 01 . ('94hU) . ..,.. '. "'P .• S"fF.,.od 46so/1"·;.-«l by 0""1.01. -l'ortkb«o"1>II W_I .. . :. ,...
,r..
'" Ut.m.
oddi,;.,., tu ,,", cited -n '" E. Leoy. F. Wi=kl, VJv' m-s nJKhWIi..., . . . : ...., ·wZ",'-nJR_uuWoi."",E""' _ IJ',,_"""'" IWdw aUl J.omonum 101«1;; Ae.i I, '0, Miio.n, ,1)6,), ",6. wid....-lie< bibl",., '""'" mui>d W.ndo •• ..J ~ (I"""""'(Bo :ebrionlrup 01 , .." .... '0 ....Ii'!', R. BtennI1m.... of ont. i. uonolotion. J.. Bcuon.:bt, ~ /f<J,Jid, YOl. I (Poli" .968). 13'-71;' ___ ",iew of .... "'lit", SiLO! J. i.< Go«. ""U ",...1 rymbo!iq ... cl. la ....,.[i~, - p _ _ _ fMy< in.~ of r.- 10....... 11. NoytUol. H~ 10 mn;"" _,I ... """'It rim '''' . . dtoi< ....,.;a ... F _ .... XlIt .. XIIIr Ukloo: N.~ et,' ... " (Erl'4)'.' .9011. '11-84 . • " Esmt;a. C.... , 8"4-'"
cw.-...
_
,6
ORAL AND WRITTEN
as rati. JeripJa bm nOt always as jltl J(riptlllll. " .. , On the one hand, Roman irutruments for contractual obligations wete: almost uni~r_ sally adopted by the fourteenth Century. Yet, in many customaries, elements of on.! law ~re retained. A good. cxamplt is provided by the regional legislation of Normandy. The Latin venion of the Trb ",.mm CM/fllmitr, the earliest compilation to have survived, il datable between '199 and Il04 fur in lint plrr and between IllS .nd 1223 fur its sccond ... 6 Yet, even at such late darcs, it bears witness less to a po5icivc reinstatement of writttn law than to the written record necessitated by the setting up 0( the Norman stlltt.'" In the later thirrcenth<entuty Gra/Jd ClJllt"".itr, which su«euivc generations of historians have praised for in precise jurisprudence,'" the idea of proof" OOIH'theless involves both wuJial~ Itgh and /a:: it moves from a rolemn, ritual engagement, utilizing physiall symbols, to the admin _ istration of "the irutitutcs or laws through which disputes ate: terminated," in which, Besnier observes, one finds not an opposition between customary and written law but tlther throughout "a formalism dominated by a principle which make$ the rights of the parties dependent on the performance of external actions in which tbe judge does not cake part."· .. • In England, by compatiron, oral and written eltmenn combined in law in I diffetc:m way."o On the one hand, the development of the scaled writ, and, more importandy, of the royal courts, from which sprang other deputations such as the exchequer, the bench of common picas, and the itinerant justices, offered a precocious example oflitcrate b.w for which before the thirteenth century there was little •• , IMJ.• 19" ". R. iI
(Bctti~.
' 96-_,S,..,.J.I>o:.,..".
'., IIool (o.ford, ,If(i,), 18,-14.
"
187')' '9)'
OIl.AL AND WRITTEN
rn.wakening of a wide ranse of critioal methods for utilizing tens as evidence. -,. Among the various Jismfllilw wri tU faisi, diplom&tic eumination gmdlllllly became more frequent. The euliest example 6Y. 129'HODd loio~tnJV~.~I'~ •••. ...t . • (Snonpt . '972).
... c
•• '
5< J J 7. H. IV" inn. "o.l'rfdwimlaltflliond """ it,..,' .. " ...., ..... UIImonoo, TJo G-'> I{ I'..,.t Gu;; '. H ' f
.. ...
".
60
ORAL AND WRITTEN
tees or decrees which the sixth-century Lihir P()/fljfo:"fiJ stated well: mislaid or lost. His major sources well: the Bible, Roman 13110', recorded custum, opitularies, penitentiab, rrg"/a', patrisde writings, and ~lier ononkal collections like the spurious HisJ1d/la Gaflica AItgmrtNUt'/UJ/Sis.'" Plagiarizing hundreCtion of seals, and strict control of authcntiation.'H The growth of expertise in diplomatits went hand in hand with other critical instincu. Men began [0 think of facts OOt as recorded by texts but as cmbodied in texts, a transition of mainr importanCe in the rise of systems of infocmation retrieval and classification. As fact and text moved closer togcttt«. "scarchahilicy" shifted "from memory to PIIge layout. " ... The culiest alphabetically arranged ref~nct' work was the E.J~ri_ Dodri_ E.rJtJi_t.", of Papias, whieb was complcted by l OB ....' Between loB} and loB1 Dcusdcdit compiled a topical subject-index to his collection of eleven hundred seventy-three nOOflS. Around the middlc of thc twclfth century GiIhert of Poiticrs improved upon Cassiodorus's thematic classification of - So. ... 'IV. Swth. , I)i, 11:.-' .'/11. ODd ~ .... ,\164), ,»-22. Ii, Finaily, after his brief sojourn at Cooq~, Bernaro left his manuscript with the local monks, forbidding them to tranllCribe it before miracles as yet unedirc.::\ were ... O. J. Vom.iDl, ON! T, "/;. ., ell . " pp. RoM;
t" ."
"'1. .. , 1,2,
p.
I,.
".-.0.
p. 20 .
"'1. ... ,6 . ... Ut.m. ; "Hujus"; Yeri ...... qtIOL' . . . _ ...........; ....., pmn _iJOOn.i~rn jwvuo I"",;. i nl!ia"'........ _ · b,ll. « dot",.i ....... i...... ibuo moliao.i... i~ d«;p<eJ. J.,d ... t . ~ C' "OM . . , . . . . EJ..i fif- Ms ;.,.'-' tm'natiotl became the Romanesque chun:h, which provided an effective signpost of religious education and learning as well as of the p~mation in monumental form of traditional vaJuc:s. For the essential feature of the new style, Ernst Kitzinger remarks, was not only the attempt " to subordinate all partS of a building to a uniform system," but also to make of architetture "a frameworlc for the sculpture and .n integral part of the m~ it can:ic:s . . .. TM cathedral proclainu ... the Gospel in stone. "I" lbc: image is .Pt, uniting the respect for physical t,aditio with the beginnings of an in terpretive traditi on based on literate institutions. Moreover, the transition to Gothic in the I 130$ was similar to what took pl&Ce in law and liter. ature: the written no longer merely recorded but now d ictated the principles of coherence .nd 'inner meaning. "Two aspects of Gothic architecture . . . are wimout precedent or pan.nel: the use of light and the unique rel.tionship between structure .nd appearance. "!lol In both cuts we see a movement away from concrete symboJ illIl, to which textual evidence may be appended, and towards an order perct:ptible only to the mind. As Abbot Suger pointed out, the the!xy derived from prnious authorities like Augustine and the psrudo-Dmis. But the integtati()D of the visual with the idea of logical order could not have been achieved without the un
II.
TEXTUAL COMMUNITIES
sro
Ee, quid dicam? Non id idioxae fachmt, doccoru Christionorum. m:tores plebium, tl; ira, quodurunodo obe ..,u; omnilltn ta
1'.1. '. Air i.;-ttlll1 CORSequen« of li~racy in any human oommunity ariscs -Abbo ,
J. I...-U,
'" ,110 <m,w. '" ('91>)). On Caiborism lD portinolu.... A. fIotK, 0;. rN' • ISN ...... '9j}), ._, S. Non....- U _ ; , dior:uoood bJ 10(. lambett. M.iMw/ H-,. '.. •... rIf d .... fo- B H", (I , , ' •• 917). ,_,6. (In pu< on< '" ,bi. _8~"Vn
(Bdudt J. P. a.,...,.., od .• T..JM nJ .... F_ .. nrdV G' boo, .~)....:I J.. IolorpD ono:! M. Pye ...... . E_ T, IV......" .. Th'", nJ Bm,;.. G-w... "1n). 0 .. _ _ , - ' · '""-, • '~~~." ... v~ rt' _ "'. . ' ·9 . pp. ,.....,.17; , ....... H'~l.
".n..
.1".
.~
"
TEXTUAL COMMUNIT!ES
individual ack!lOWled.g~ iu univ~rsal capacity for administering grace. The sect by contrast compdled. its members to tak~ an lL("tiv~ part in rommulllll religious life, which was rich in inte'l'. 'Cl. B. 11.. Wibocl, R"it;,., $.... .4. 5otiII. ,!)6J). 1 ['-j8: .. "..cll /l96-1I. [116-99: 101-. (1970), "'JI; /01 ..., ('91l), , •. .... /oI""hon. "n _ioin", _ _ OT::· Pu ;:Un..io! .... br D. w-r,h _Ii> " C. eIt. 6, pp. , .... 89: hIip50t LiL". u..d Akkul .........; ODd, "" dIt n:Ie,*"" ~Ibo""" 1'1 :Ie' in late< _1
.. o . C. Viol." ... U
I«;,u ";16_ ..irtU I 'W "OMU"nd 001. (ikr;, [914), nonlo. On ,I>e ....... , ..... cl the J,.., 4i1 in tb< ..../ott roll> .... J. N . Pi".!]. "1..0 t..ndi«io 0101 oioo> '" rnojor is _loo prooidod '" lombm ( ' 977), AP!"ndi. A, pp. ",,·47. Cl. Nu., (1971), ,en, . .. &·'9; R"",,1l (1.,6,), ' 7·"; 0IId Bo .. ([9n), I'>-rn . Tb. _ibilil, 0( ..... U.. is ...;p.d trr N-. (' 970) •• ,.'8.
"'«."
,>n"
r.-s
,nlI_
_ " • modi6..! (.I""""b p}.
[I, ( _ d·"'hfty.
TEXTUAL COMMUNITIES
shortly afterwarc.l5. Before an assembly of l'ymen .Dd clerics in the chUKh of St. li.l . .. .
..... Bouriu ond Id .. t". ,8 (- "HP H), 41}8) . • Ado ..... .ca.. a.. . p. ,a"!dol... t. But Arefut saw through this simple-minded cvanselism. In Paul's view, he had already set off on a jOUtney of I. different sort. He knew the vi" jllStiti,".~ What trW by heresy essentially did was to teach him the diffenn« betweelllppeatl.oce I.nd reality, which was requited ftX' the petfection of his intellectuall.nd mow faculties. This i, evident in the subsequmt KenH. Roben the Piow, widdy known for his reformist ideals, ordeted An:fut and Herixrt to go to Orlbns in person, and prommd his full support. But, at this point, Herixrt drops out of sight. The reason is evidem: in P.u1·s scheme, he had already served the purpcse of setting Arefut off on his quest after truth. Within the nattative then: was little ld't for him [0 do. Arrtsst turned [0 the bishop of Chartres for spititual guicbnce, but Fulbert had gone to Rome " to pray." Quin aside from loal political considerations, the detail is perbl.ps significant; ArdJ.st, who twI. won the support of the scrolu I.uthority, now sought it from the religious. Embodying the two, he became Paul's IIJikr (bristilll1UlJ. When Evrud, the s.cdstllD It Chl.rtres, leuned of the piu, M (niftily advised ArdJ.st what sort of arms to tl.ke into battle "against the many IltS of diabolical deception. " Evllltd', counsel tOO ~5 to Ix: scrntinbed, Besides the euchl.tist, it was devoid of memion of dogma. Instead, he tnld ArdJ.st to protect hirmelf with pnl~r, "to fortify himself with sacred conununion," and to shiek! hirmelf with the Ji"",,"'_ hllICla# m«i1. 71 It follows that Paul, who put these words in Evrard's mouth, sees heresy in luge pan as rnagic:al ritual. He even links it elsewhere to the otgiastic pr.:tices of lIDCient sects.'" But intermingled with these thooshts U aoo the kin. that the evil can be overoome by the educated inrelligence. '!bt is deuly indi~ted by the nett scene. Ard'Ut journqed co Otlbns. Paul ~Iates that, although informed (rd«tIlJ), he sought OUt scctI.t'ian tel.Ching (_ _ JonriIl4) ud, although littnlte, he acted like an untaught pupil VuJ ;JlJW, nuliJ tlimPIlIt),'" He tlK:n underwent tlK: normal initia.tion. Findill8 his ..... y to the meeting-place, he made ronm for himself in the last row of seats, at fint observing the group
" •..___." , . , . ............. , .. " ,
p' .
i.
'~.
..,'" _
..
"0.
." _,-. .. 'W _ .. " •.
.. /Ni.• ,, 0: - r,-irW Aurdiaruo .Iewfti.... , uti odom.s Nont. oxidic MCttt «>mm"- K .oppI;'; ""';"'" "' ......... od """"" doi1Ii_I ...... : 0U«rft q~i I.,... '(li""", ... .,.".." i~ i.... riooi hami.,. • Spiritu So"""" « nichil oIiod """mw. aili quod. Dto, omnium «HKii
" -'u". . 3.'9, p. 0 .... - Cf. _
N.
CIN
",.-.. ,S.....t •.
(I\lnl. 10. ' N,
Ill,.
,,6
"!M.m.
TEJ(TUAL COMMUNITIES
be r«ondled With what one experienced ill 4,,"10, Ademar saw the same i"u~ in revelK. For him, the final irony cilIJle at the end of the anecdote. Believing in appearances, the he~dcs considered them5elves invulnerable to phySical harm. The illusion was shattered by their own burning Aesh. In sum, Ademar not only feared and distrusted the he~tics; he was al50 somewhat in awe of their rites. After thei r bodies we~ burnt, he notes, the~ ~~ no ash~ left. Were they taken back by the devil to be redistributed anew? Glaher's account of the same episode is a little more detailed but no mo~ substantial. Yet, more than Ademar, Glabcr is in 5Orne~ spectS the antith~is of Paul. The latter saw heresy primatily as a local affair. Although vaguely connened to manifestations of dissent elsewhere, it was Chiefly cxplainm a~inst the background of lay piety and monastic ~form in France and Normandy . For Glaber, by conIran, a particular heresy derived its importance from being part of a more widespread phenomenon. In a traditional metaphor , he likens it ro a diseaK spreading northwards through Gaul, or to seeds, which, having germinated secretly over a long period, suddenly bring forth evil fruit. '0' Iu in Ademar, its foreignness to established patterns of order is symbolized by its source, .n ouTSider, a vagabond. snd, what is wo~, a woman. Coming from Italy, he states, she was foil of the devil: she "5e8.
".
by SoU[;'" ('97)), 69-77. w..bm (11)77),
TEXTU,\l. COMMUNITIES
educated deries, could easily have historici1ed their position. It could also have taken shape &I rainane., w tMir mdeavour crysullixcd inw CM full-seal., J1t1'1mltlftio organi~ by Robert the Piow. But its chief source was undoubcrdly tM medieval commentators, woo believed, as ehey remind us, that "th.,re is nothinB covered that will not be uncovered, nothing hidden that will nO( be made kll(lllln. " ... For the hrtetics, cbe hidden meaning .,merged as they themse:l~ interp~ biblical tens, patrisdc writings, Ind their own muinu. FM the orthodox, the 0. p. >47 . .. , ",. ""'" .... h ... ..I; .... br I,.uo: d' khby, ~i_ (,6'/7), .... . , ~, ,-6~. 0.. th< .,h; ..... ..I; ...... , -'oido .....U booocI ... dUo OI'i,!;InoI, ... ~ . ... N i.,,,,.,. , "Nu. 5 , . Abbtu'" ("•• ,~ '" do 7OB-C.
TEXTU~l
CO M MUNITlI.!S
(harges in their own words. let us fitst summarize the teXt,'H then approach Ihcsc qucstions. The synod, we all: toid., took pIKe sometime early in Janu&r)' tO~5. Iu was the custom in the joint diocese, t~ bishop c:clebrated Christmas and Epiphany in Cambrai and then spent several days in Arras. While performing his normal duties he was informed tbat ~n ftom Italy had formed a new SOrt of heretical association (qllauiam tIOVAe htnJw Jtchf).'" They apparently rejected ··evangclic and apostolic teaching" and prrferm:! what is ulled their own sort of ··jusrice,"·'16 through which, they claimed, and not through the $3.Craments, men could alone be cleansed.. ~rard ordered that they be brought before him. They tried to fie.: but were apprehended. ~rard was too busy ro ask them more than a few routine questions, but, rnli!ing that they harboured. dangerous ideas, he had them held for thre.: days, during .... hich time all local monks and clef;" wae asked ro fast in the hOJ>: (ltq'" ('111111'4), and who is its author (4I1Ctor)?'" n They were followeu, they rep lied, of a certain halian called Gundulfo, who had personally instructed them in the gaspers principles (m",· gtlittl _",Ja14). He enjoined them to iidhen: literally to this tUt (h.t« scriptllm) and to pracrice it in word.nd dm:i (~el DJm't tt7ln"t).,,1 But Othet be liefs , the narrator adds, had been drawn to ~rard's at· tention: rejection of baptism and the eucharist, denial of penance, of the church's authority, and of the utility of marriage, invalidation of CQnfcssion, and wnera.tion of no one save the apostles and the mll· tyrs. 'll' Mindful of these reports, ~rard then asked: How is it you say you follow biblical teachings but pttaCh JUSt the opposite? He cited the case of Nirodemus, who, converted by merr ··,igns and mil"ll(les," s,...,tl ... , {. I, PL ' 4' . I271~-7>C. ""J,J.. l'7' ~· ' '' 1.«. within its teaching one finds the entire range o( the Lord's pr«epts. Further, there is no need for CUlItoms like baptism, to which, as a sacrament, three arguments can be oppooed. Fint, the minister may be corrupt and the mystery thereby contaminated. Thcn, although sins are disavowed at the font, they are repeare These ideas are reiterated and amplified in Gerard's s«ond discussion of justice in chaptcr sineen, where, as notoed, thc question is whed~r grue or OIlt'S merits insurcs salvation. Oncc again he pU5Cnts a strong ClISe for thc tl'llditional. view, Ixginning with twO quotations, John said, "A man (tn receive nt furthcr our chanCe! for tc$coration to pamdi5e without God's help. ,66 Jv. John said, "Without me )'QU can do nothing."'61 Grace, morrover, Gerard argue!, 15 a kind of foreknowltdgc, which takes account of individual merit in advarKe, It does not" preclude leading .. holy, ascetic life, for the gospels explicitly state, " Forgo impiety Ind vain desire that we mly live soberly, justly, and piously in this workl.", 6I But, It the sune timc, Christians ought to recogni~e chit grace's source Jil'S "neither in DlIture's fol'CC$ nor in legal pt«epts but in the enlightening of the heut .. nd the freely offered gift of divine will."' ''' Therefore, in the last IDlIlysis, it is God himself who inspires us to "good works," which, to that extent, are a preparation for his judgement and for u.lvltion. '1" For "h~ proedestincd whit divine equity would give back, not what humin iniquity lost. "'?' In other words, he rndicd man fOl: I positive, not I negative, judgment. The heretics' justice in Genud's vicw turns its back on such pouibil_ itiC!;. Onc~ again he refers to St. Paul, speaking of those who, "' ig_ norant of God's justi~ , try to set up their own ... ."' ,. True justice, ttpt mtcd by Jesus's w(ml$, W8$ handed down [0 [he apostles, whence it sprea9D . ". '-«.tit.
''' N:., c. 16, "'01).".0. .
.,.
7".: a./.,
, ~.
TEXTUAL COMMUNITIES
legitimK)'. The intenenins chaptml deal with t~ sacraments lIS underlying foundations for t~ churt"h ', practices. But the method of proceedins i. similar: first Gerard imputes to the heretics tbe ~jection of the institution in question, then he establishe:s itS "justke" through IICriptural. and patristic authority. The mules are thr«fold. Obviously, an ickal of the church is projected which is founded OD legislation and respect for pK«dent; in other woM', Gerard adopts tbe typicaJ. reformist iUlItegy of justifying CUStomary practices wherever necessary by written law. Ju a consequence, a distinction grows throughout the sermon between "popular" and "learned" traditions, which cutiously parallel. the thinking of tbe heretics themselves. Finally, the heretics are depdved of their group vitality and become identified only with disobedicna: and elTO(. This, in twn, is viem as a by-product of their theological illiteracy. The most imprcss.ive pieces of theological rcasonins are devoted to the sacraments of baptism and the eucharist. Like later defeoden of onhodoxy against Berengar, Gerard takes the All8usrinian view that in bal>fism one thins is n:perienccd through the scnRS but that another really takes pbce. '7< GI«k I.ptis! ! means latin /iMIN, throush which "man is changed through the spirit's gmcc into something better. . . . "'15 The mystery is called. "sacrament" from its ICCret or sacrecl powers, which, Gcrard adds, do mx depend for tbeir efficacy on the minister's mor;ol qualitio:l. ,,6 He can neither increase merit nor diminish vice: for tM gardener only plana and waten, while the creator makes thinss grow.'" The baptizins priest dOl'l not say, "I, omnipotent God ... bestow upon you the balm of eternal life.""" Otherwise we could not accept the baptism of a Judu. '19 Morrovet, «npbasiz.ins realism, Gerard insists that "the rDaterial water" baptizes, for the Lord decreed that invisible reality be meted out in a palpable form.'" As it washes the body, 110 it cleanses the mind: wilh tile invocation of God, mere watH i. sanctified and, like hcalins medicine, acquires the capacity for n:purgation . . . . '" In Pauline terms, the immersion is the death of tbe "old man" and tbe birth of the "new," thereby rc-cn.acting Quist's crucifixion and rcswrection. " Administerecl carnally, it works spiritually. "'f> Baptism's symbolic powers wen: ~ in Ge--si, wben "the spirit of God hovered over the lIiatml. ",a, It il also the starting point '" Aao, 1:2, HW. , "HB.
" ,4A.
'"
TEXTUAl. COMMUNIT IJ; S
of that earthly "j ustifiotion" which Matthew said his successors
W 78B . ... IWi., "78B-C. ,,.. 1Ii1.• "78C . .., M, .. >6:>6-.8; mJ.. u780-1?A· ''' A,,., ~.
u87C.
"'/MJ., ,,88C. ." 1nl.. c. 6, ,,~.... "'1nl., c. 7. 1:t96t.. ,. , lMi.• , uD.
'3'
·"IW." ,, >C.D.
TEXTUAL COMMUN I TlBS
rn,mics' beliefs, from which vantage poiot a whereoc rebuttal could be framed. Realism also played a role in undermining the function of literacy in the original group. In this scru;c" bolh sides UsN literacy to their own ends. Rational interprentcion of d~ gospels taught the heretics to ~t the ritu2l~tic, symbolic, and customary practices of the church. Ibeir hermeneutics resulted logically in • s)"tem of helief understandable at an intellec'tual level alone. The orthodox yiew was the other side of the coin. The heretio WeT!' first accused of the physicalism they abjured. They reaffirmN that churches, altars, bread, and wine wen' more than ··whac is seen by corporeal eyes." No one could be s.....ed but by "the water of rt"generation," which repte$ented forgiyeness and (mute grace. The euchariu was "the gage·· of our redemption and salVlltion, and 50 forth. The purpose of such statements is to suggest that the heretics' literacy was really. kind of illitency. This notion is effn supported by Ihe obvious runtndiction at .he Ar,..'s end: the heretia, understanding no Latin, make their choicc "" i"In-prtttflf _Ig",..".;'" it follows that they could hudly have repealcd thc profosio folD aloud with tbe "abbou, archdeacons, and ckrgy. "." What is perhap5 most remarhble about the Ao" is what it never says dj ~dy, namcly, that oral and wrirren, vt'rnaculat and Utin, have become $CriolU issues in religious wmmunic;ation.
Mrm/orlt The gap befW~n thc popular and learned intctpretations of heresy by wnremporary witnesses widens io the case of Monfime. The evcnts took place in Io~8'" not far from Turin. There are tW1) accounts, one by Rodulf Glaber, which is roughly contemporary , and another by Landulf Senior written some seventy-five ycats latcr. Historians have nied to rcoconcilc the twO, but this ha.s raised 11.$ many PtQblclll$ 11.$ it ha.s solved. '4' The Burgundian monk and the Lombard cleric have littlc in common. For Glaber, Monfortc is mx nnly an episode of heresy but abc a means by which Stoup wlidirity among Chris{ialU can be STrengthened after the millennium. Undulf rells us much about the group·s beliefs and principles of organization. But the story also plays. role in the historiogtflphy of Milan, as Aribert, The city's '" 1;iJ.• 'l',c . '" INJ.• Il"C. .. ' On ,h< dui"" _ llan .. d. Milaoo ( '9-47., 68n 11 , Bor .. (19H., 70. ,...,;", .
".'.4> ...,tt ,....
." To';"'; ('~H). t.. wu o,Imt... b", m.r. il .., ni6d ..., .. ..w, __ viol ..... (1951). In ond wokritld ond E...... (I51'1'i9), 87-88; on d>o ~ r:i aDo .... i,;..., r:i _,...., be >no! ",ith oio:bohlch i, iI """""",kou!d. A mItUt)' 0IId . '-If lot .. m. ....;.", ......... ty rwnmed "p i •• CL",e;'" K" ..... "" one r:i SI. Bemord', r._m ".n. cruor, 1;_ pmI.,..."io no 60 Rationuity, as ill5pired by litel'llte pursuits, is abo the foundation of the sect's world-denying way of life. ~ Its memlxrs gi~ up aU carnal relationships, whether through food, su, or possessions, for canu.lit}' is asJQCilted with the letter rather than with the spirit. Communication with "spirit" is maintained by com inual prayer. Natural death is looked upon as a contamination of the divine spirit in man; mortification of the flesh contributes towards ilS upward mOV1:ment back to God. All material generation and corrupt ion arc denied validity: if man hild not sinned, ~I'llrd reminds his listeners, he would still be able to procreate without $(Xual contaCt. The sect has no need of priests: the pondff who visiu the dispc:~ communities is none other than the spirit of interpretation itsclf. This ."jmMS, ""ing within mln, needs no tonsure or Bul'll of mystery. Ariben grasped immediately that the hcte$y at Monforrc was a h ighly intellectual affair: His method of combating the sect wlls accordingly based on theology and argument. But among the capitanei and vavasours of Milan it was und enitood either as I form of primitive superstition or as a politico-religious conspiracy. Possibly anticipating the Palaria, the ,m/id from the surrounding wumryside crowded into the episcopal court where the heretics were discussing their ideas, attracted, it would appear, as much by the doctrin.-s as the idea of interpreting &ripture for thcmselves.>6, To the lay nobility the her_ etics were therefore perceivcc:l as a threa.t to established authority. If they did not recant, they had to be destroyed.
The Making of "Henries" The period hetwO!Cn 1028 and 10 ,2 saw a number of recu rrences of heresy in the West. Although widely scattered in space and time, Spiri.u 5• .,«0
TBXTUAL COMMUNITIIIS
the diuidents n:iterated. bdicfs dJZr wen: revealed. in the betn:e-known epOOdes ilt Orlhm, Arras, and Monfurre. 11tey were. ab.;, brought together by a billS in the $OUt(es in which they were des.;cibo:d. As the frequency of hCley incfCilSC'd, the conventions for ponraying it also became more filmiliar. They began to fit into a minor historiographical tradition of their own, in which, inw.riably, an attempt was made to see sectarianism in a coherent framework inrerrelatiD8 the pan and the present. The result was "the making of heresies," that is, the placing of relatively itolated events in • literary format of snared. usumpdons unong authors and. readen. This Ipproach confirmed the orthodox view that hemy was tomtthing well koown and therefore curable with ancient remedies. But it milit.ted .gilinst iln ana.I)'lIis of the principles of group organiution. The norion of heresy itself became mon: and more I term of interpretation. Bttwttn 1030 .nd 1046, for instance, Genre! of CsarWl wrote of dissidents in unchristianiud Hungary who reminded him of similar movements in France, Greece, and. Italy. He even spoke suggestively of thn:e towns, Verona, Ravenna, .00 Venice, which lilY on the trade routes between Byuntium and the West. · 61 The possibility of dwtlist influence should not be ruled out: Csanid, Ioc.ted roughly on • piLnllel with Venice .t I point midway between the Adriltic and the Black Sea, "Ibutted the cradle of Bogomilism in Bulg.ria. " .6\1 But what is most n:markable in the .nti-dialectica!·'" Gerani'l vague account is his u.se of 6.." .. 111 itself, which btinp together in his mind events and beliefs thilt wen: only loosely related. ~ perhaps not n:1ated at .11, A similar picture emerges from vmous centres in the notth. Around 1048, Ill! noted, Theoduin ofLi~ge consciously or unconSCiously confused the "popullr" heredes who refu5e}6 . •,. G_, ! ' The major danger, then, IlS Roger ~ it , i5 thl: ",fl\ocriveness I)f the he~tiQ' means of communication, espedally among rhe uninstructed. This point is hardly touched upon in Walo's ~p ly, which views the heresy from an es~ntia1ly scholarly standpoint . His letter is in~rted into the G~/tl betw~n tWO better-known as~rtions of a division of labour betw~n secular and ~ligioU$ authorities, both involving the refotm ideals of H",nry HI. ,0, His Statement is alsu part uf the picture of enlightened aofurmism p&inted by Ansclm of Li~ge. Bishop Notker, the author tells us, encounged the education of childaon and curtailed the activiti es of priests who were rlltUs It iffittrtlti. "" Wazo WIlS NO£ket's chaplain and later m.>g;J/t"f Kho/ttNlm in the cathedral Khool.' ~ WIUI'S approach therdU~ is Iutdly surprising. For him, heresy is a " manifest error· '; rhe "Arians··'''' must simply be ··refuted:· His d efence of legal prindpJes takes him in two diffeaont dirKtions. It in_ terrelarl!$ the noti ons of pr«cdent, reform, and innerworldly activity: within the overall plan of salvation. wc may ··Jicitly··,06 ufiJi u rhe beasts of the field, as witness officia! comments Vtrllu"illlll scripta ) on the commandment ··,",If orridlJ :· Also, the precedence unites the life of Chlist with the Contemporary function of the pratdiCalfJfJml (mh, to which he and Roger belong. That, in part, is the point of the panble of the wheat and the tues. True, heresy is ··d.iabolical fraud:·'" But .. . /htl.• ..6. 44-41 . ... 00 ... hidgment. He must nronvert thosc wno have been misled. To return to our point of departure:: we bo.gan by reaffirming the wdl-estabJisbed scholarly ronclusion that nrly heretics in the West did noc: ~ common social Of doctrinal origins. lbe search for "origins" mOm>Wr dim:ted mergics away from the analysis of heresy's func_ tional interdependency with the riSf of a more literate society. For, if the herctio came from different backgrounds, they nonetne,ln-s underwent a similar CIpericnce within the group. And, if the sects varied in actual bo.liefs. they employed comparable intellectual methods. The common dcnominatO£ was texts, and attirudes ro-rds tats provide a leitmotif which rum through the handful of case histories we have eumined. In uutard the rontaCt with literacy was indirect. His story's value is chiefly symbolic: it r«ounts the way in which man, by becoming the Word's interpreter, acquires a formerly divine charisma. Again, at Orli!ans in IO:Z2, the mainspring of heresy was the sti>dy of the Bible and of religiOUS maxims dirt(tiy or indim:tly derived from it. This W!lli aho true of Arras in 102:> and of Monfotte in 1028. In each case, the sacral, mystical, and miraculous accretions of older tradition were discarded. in favour of .. rationalistic ethic botscd on the principles of the New Testament. Rationality in turn was a byproduct of the Iircnlte mentdity, sin« the various interptehltioru of tell!S were subsequenrly codilled into I set of written rules governing conduct. These norms 51ructured the bo.haviou[ of the individual in dlt group and resulted in I set of intetaCtions between the members which were designed to break down the barriers between the literate and the nonliterate. The SoOWces a.dmittedly present different views of these isollted OUtbursts of heresy, and the bias of the narratoR must be taken into account. However, (he vuie.:! perspectives ofren amount to no more than dtered perctpt"iom of the membeR' status on the spectrum of popular and learned culture. For Ademat of ChIlb..nnes and Rodulf GJ..ber, heretio belonged to the world of pagan supentition and idolatry. But tht question of initlltion, educatlon, and theological discussion did noc esape the ..ttention of Paul of St. ~re or the aoonylllOWl miser of the GGI4 Sy-u A.rd'hiuir. In both, a group aperienct bu :d on the interpretation oftnu ..od organited 15 sectarian behaviour was framed within aia.rger political and theological debate. Heresy, so to spealr, was reinterprercd to 5Ctve the needs of monastic and episcopal rdOrm. At Mgnforte, the gap between popular and lCW>Cd perceptions was patent. There was no pl::zct for the astute, self-assured
TEXTUAL COMMUNITIES
Gerard in Glabec's tale of the supernatural and of political pmphe!,..j • proop«t;'" dj ric<m. ",1100 ......... I~"" di Milano d ollo &... dd oecoIo XI 01 '['0,·· Po I'd '" S"",, "'if;"" r ' ,,,u. et,,; (Como. 1971). I~ . , C. Violon, •• L. ';1.-. .00\ d;M, "N~ prnhIemi. lNOIi ...Jl'oko mod ...... rniw..,. • lourbod, - ASt PPl ('9"1. ...0-11.; G. F.oIi, "1 iar,", drll< H. pp. ,JOIl',: Viol", ... !..< _ 7 .....
-1_,
"'u·....
•
-a.: ....
n
. . .
e ;
CU'"_"
""'-n.
'H
TEXTUAL COMMUNITIES
became (if)tJ M.,{ioL.nnulJ. 6 But their MW pl"l'Stige and polit ical dout rose in the shadow of the chun:h. Religious institutions owned most laymen·s houset; within the waU, as well as {Ol"l'Sts and {umlands outside. Ecclesiastia WeN' also proprietors of the slttlionei which merdu.nu and aniSllIU N'nttd in the central market. ' The teal guarantor of the merchanu· rights was not the count but the archbishop, who, through infeudation, had usurped many of his PN'ro8ati~. For insranee, in l..andulf Senior·s words, archbishop Arihere was "the father of OrphalU, the dergy's ornament, and the protector of widoW$. paupers, and merchants.· .. By the Hotly eleventh (entury upW2rd mobility wu calUing particular difficulties for tWO dasses within the social hierarchy. the C2pitanei and the ,,*vasours. The ,apitand were nobles who5e tsralts lay in the countryside iust outside the dry. Vassab of the archbishop, they monopolized decision-making in Milan through an intricate n
H-'.;
".-129' .....
'n ·
.. . :.''1_,8.
" See C. Mo.natn.i . ""Notiz", ",11. hmi, l;" dei!""",i ... """,, Ati"""" do. In' im;""'." ~~. 49 ('9"). '94-,6·
'"
A"'m.
TEXTUAL CO MMUNITI IiS
elected by the cardinal dergy, whkh the capiclMi dominated, on 18th March 10 18. He died a broken, disillusiooed man in his native city on J6th January 1045. His lIoChievemenu were prioc::ipa.lly threefold. He exteocied and coosolid&led the p&uimony of St. Ambrose, winning from Henty II the monaneries of St. Filinu.s and St. GtatilUl and from Conrad n the rich priu of Nonantula." He preventtd suc(e$lIive emperors fmm interfering in Milan's internal affairs. allying himKlf with Coorad between 10:9 He disapproved of the I.ITCSt on purely political grounds of Atibert's supponers, the bishops of Vercdli, Crcmon., .nd Piacenza. '" But he was not .~ meddling in episcopal c1tetions when it suited his purposes: on Oamian's advice.nd over the protests of Wazo of Liege, he removed Widger of Ravenna. As a general policy he favoured monasteries .gainst their local bishops," granting an undcsignated Milancse house autonomy as eady J.$ February l045 Y Of course, Milan was not a typical dieceH'. In contrast to Ravenna and other north Italian towns , it had been virtually uninftuenccd by ouuide reformers, including ClunillO. H The patronage of monasti c houses depended on the archbishop: St. Celso was founded by Landulf IJ in 996, St. Victor by Arnulf 1I in 1004, aDd. St. Dionysius by Aribcrt in 1013. Und"'r Aribert, reform was limited to obliging ClInOnt (0 take meals togeth",r and tn prncnting the alienation r:i church ptopcny, particularly through the marriage of infwdarcd. clerics tn free women . ~ By contrasr, in
-n._. ,8-."" w..
.. Viol"", •• u.,..."... " Hnhin un.;nn ... hhuin N"In on laho du ,to IU 'J< ...10.- ). ~ Golf. «1 ., HirlJia It~. '76-77 . "u. ~ _""-. 34 . .. H .E.]. Cowdrey, Th< CI••Un iN ,,,, G,.,..... Ifdtfrey. Henry IV named him arch.. So< C. Som;5li, ·"Son Pi«ro Duni.,.. • 1& P....ei. (RelWoni < om;";';"),·· oJ IX tt1I-';' MlII--. r l01i_191il. 0e brought the Patl. .... ~ movtment ro a standstill. From this point, the social and political issuts gravitated around the communal movement llDd the qu~l between ..mperor and pope took its plac.. in the larger conBict over investiture. By the first decade of the twdfth century a somewhat W
" ,W.. "'1>'"_
.. ~ ' . ' .)'P. 6-7· 7. "I. .. . I .B. p. •. .. , . ... I. ). p. 7· .. 'W.• I. ,. p. 8. .. ,.... 1. 10. p. 9. " I. .. , • . I , )'P. 'l"idftn outando. """; j ' p"'" 1UKil .;oi,... _ i o .id..... doIoN .. 8''''''''' • puc,tw~n Milan and Pavia had bune into the open (3.7-8). ,1n these '·stormy times," wMn much that the ca_ piflinei had WQrked for was threatetted from ouuide, the very foun_ dations of the Ambrosian clergy were shaken frum below. The guilt was shared by rbe archbishop and the Patarcnes: both "sinM-
.. I.... , -V.rum tal iI M: hor .... mu'''' I.. p. '9, G. N;";,,Ij ... _ that th< . . _ _ ptObobIy Io..;"p.,. I>. _ dell>. l'!ltorio. miw-." In C..... 1'4= . O'lom>
"""""'. -
- ~n
'9-
... ;",;u,-. ..,.; ___ • catiooimi.
.. 'W. , }.... p. ' 9. .. CIa ,hA" rh.,.....ioa. ... O. ...... ,6-].06,~ . .. Wt.o }_11. r· '9_
. ,....
et
itI In'bulau. oi
diu "",u
~[11lS tst jl,lIJ1J ItrbiJ d tt:t/ts;.u. '''' The major shift, as noted, is from penonal (0 institutional forms of authority and govem~m, bringing in its WlIkt the notion of rule by written law as OPposffl to custom, as well as the nebulous byproduct of class conS(iousnICSS. 1bc civICS are now viewed as an autonomous group: the CSSiCntial conflict involves the common people moved against the knights {J1kbI fWlmfJ/a {()nlra lIIilim).'oIj Iusociation among the rebels first appears as "oaths";'''' only later, in the Parad., do the illrdmtlf/a crystallize into writ ten prtecpu. ,.,. The revolt ctoS$CS social boundaries: Lanzo, "a well-born knight of the city, nonetheless preferred the plebeian mob.""'. And, indignant .t his action,. the nobility became united as a knightly class . "~ The blood spilt on Mi lan's Stt~t corners and back lanes fore_ shadows the Pataeia, but by 1057, when Ariald begins preaching, the insurgents have anchored their aspintions in the firm brdrock of ec· c1esiastical reform. In book thm-, SKllrian rivalry based on articulated institulional diffiorences n:placc:s the cult of pc'nonality, only to be sUpc'ucded in books four and five by rhe legal authority of the papacy. Written legislation hall thereby worktd itS way up Amulr, historical S(ale from the lowest sO(ial to the higheSf ecclesiastical sphere. Individuals re· main importllnt: as Amulf 5 s...o-:' lIS ' 4 ( , Il9S). 7' [l . ... Cf. O. c.p;""i. -~ •• ril'onna dell. dt.itsa in 1'-... " 5)1-67 . •>, flIUlttI. y, ... ........,. M A~_. JOi:u. IoIGJ.1 SS 8. , .... n-
)7
( ' 9",)' 140:
TEXTUAL COMMUNITIES
ilK'llpllble of conwying the sacramenu.'>6 R~'s ~rless.ness. or lack of resolve, only served to fuel the sectarian fires. For Landulf, then, there is not one K(;t by tWO, the Patarini and the Nicolaiti. And the church of Se Ambrose in hi, fanciful reconstruction hoven between being a "church" .nd a &.vorably dupes-d "sect:' Like a church, it has a hien.rchy, • fixed set of ecdHwtical institutions, and, within iu diocese, ir is the unique dispenser of grace; but, like a sect, it has a charismatic leader, an intense, inwat"dturning spirituality, and a disdain for outsiden. Landulf tailon his ponrait of Sr. Ambrose to lit rhis. dual perspective. The founder of the Milanese church i$ described both as a builder of institutions and as a dynamic teacher, "1 Mon to Landulfs point, he is the sort of leader who would naturally haV1: defended the right of Milanese priests to choose freely between celibacy .nd marriage. There are numerous imqes of sectarianism. For instance, while Ambrose's learning is stressed, he is aid to haV1: used p~hing all a means of transforming thought into action, nO thereby anticipating the Pawene debate over the control of literacy and the means of ecclHiatical communication. Honey, too, Bowed from Ambrose's lips; thereby the holy spirit descended:'''' like earlier heretia Landulf establishes a relationship bethetn the cognitive and txpit;lIi~ aspectS oC interpretation. Again, the bishop tended his Rock not under rompulsion but of his own free will, not for gain but out of devorion'tG-yinues which, if transposed in dme, neatly sum up Landulf5 ambivalence towards the established clergy and reform. As in orhet reli8ious movemenu, unity of purpose was achi~ by normative rules, whose chief monuments wete the church hierarchy and iu liturgy.'" These ~re directly inspired by God: similuly, Ambrose, granted: charisma, brought his talents to perfection through meditation, writing, reading, and preaching .• ,. He thus personified the original descent of wisdom from God through Chrin, a capacity, of course, claimed by many sectarian leaden. Not by accident, moteover, he decided to set up the church '''/iiJ.• li_ "-H . ... HisIwW N, UT' ;, 1.' . NGH ss 8, p. H. line "" ""ftNII " " , _ et do",or tO '" In Landulrs mind, then, wc find a utopian woception of the early MiJanese chutch, against which jalsi j"41~ are a[{empting to er«t a new religious order. Both are pictured ill abstr4CIl1; they are models around which the His/on., is organized, providing, in part, a theore tical backdrop for the eventS of books two and thrtt. As a consequence, ,he rise of social and religious mnHic! is not ~n as a contest between '" tOil.• la. 8-. 6. ' .. L. A . F....... " J fon,; _ _ . •- IQ_II;;M. "(;Ii An .... li d; 00>;".; Pa'Il;ni : ' , .......
!
~
,""
A~
'9 (,89,). 119l'f.
'" v. O{fio h....
muri«l ... k • • ... n i( -I."". •. pp. . _.,2. '1, p . n, 2,. 2 .. . ""' .... p ...... _ _ "'...... .,<jIW k " .. " I• . . . . Violsat he il put not 50 much in a political as in a narrative and religious COQrext. "'Mulf wanted to reil a good story, whose monl is the successful fulhlment of spiritual ends through temporal means. This Wl.$ a message which acCOfikd well with his tolerance for other "ancient cwtOms." The groundworlt then is laid in the outline of Aribel't's early episcopate. He b said fint to have organized a war on poverty during a famine of IUIpiciously Ions duration, ,if compelling bakm to increase productivity, enjoining economies upon cooks and servanu, and even giving a...ay garmenu from his IUIfIptOOW wardrobe from time to time.'''- He then emerged 11$ the""," /Wtur _ mUImIIII. He .. ~ constituted" the archbishopric's Plopmkt and became the tflllted ally of twO emperon;'6, He reasserted Milan's independence from Pavia, turning away from her gates by both won! and sword all who were in his words ob/iti i«i.s ",11, "". ,601 Heresy iJ bandied in a limilar fuhion: it is not 50 much a threa.t to the faith IIlI to the archbidlOi>'1 jurisdic· don over if. !ne free-chinken at Monfotte ut' JOOlai out witb tbe help eX the local nobility and the .;Jius in Milan. '67 Yet these triumphs are minor in Landulfs eyes compared to Atiben's victory over Conrad 11. !ne romantic epiSlXle eX his escape from the hands of his enebriated "Teutonic" captors with the aid eX a faithful servant and the abbess eX St. SixtUI iJ calculated to portray him as tbe only figure C'poble of uniting the different political and religious fOi CI$ in the city. ,51 On his impt'isonment "aJl Milan's citiZll'n5, priesu, clerics, and even pious dames put off their finety and donned IIlIbes and sackcloth,"'" devoting long hours to fasts, pt.,tiS, and vigils. The tmnors of his revenal were £elt thJO\lgbwt ltaly;'JO and, on his escape, he returned to a tumultuous welcome Cn;Jffi all, III r' - d III /'OPII/O lI"i· __ . 'n Unlike Arnu!f, who saw Ariben 11$ the capicanei's express agent, I.aDlMf does DO( elaborate upon -tbe archbishop's ability to reanimate Milan', Sqsins civic etbol. Instead, be emphasizes Ariben', mental. agility in eluding his oafish jailors and thf- city', coutlI8C in forcing Conrad to a showdown. For, in Landulfs eyes, there was a good deal more than personal honour at stake, The CgffStit.ri, tk F-'iI oC fO H gave ecclesiastical benefices to all those who had simply claimed pos-
.,.i_
.,,. .6G.
' .. Cl. VD • • c, U -o.w e H " "'IIiJ.. ...a } . ... H _ ' _20. W. H -,8 . ... IIiJ., . ...., p . ,8 (~ n ond ' .02, P. 19 (Crn od ID. ,.. ,",,, " ' ), p. 60 ••6-48. "' I",., ' .31, p. _Zl . ... 'IiJ" ' ,' 7, 6,-66 . '" IIiJ.. '.2}, P. 60. 4'-.6. • '''> _ .. ' .". p . '9, '(-'1· . '.. "" _., p. '9, " -'4·
,8.
'l4
TEXTUAL COMMUNITIES
session of (i1lf'4Jtrllllt) chun::h property. first in Milan and larer in other parts of Italy. ' " It also ga~ ri$t' In a hoard of unbirious claimants who rushed to the (Qurt 11 Pavia ··like water into a bilge .. ·") Landulf took a certain satisfaction in th~ uner arbitrariness of Conrad·s judg_ ments. For the ~mperor was acting consistently against God and St. Ambr(l$t'. attempting to uprOOt the ancienr customs of the church lltllWm legm .. hlllll4lJalll. " . He too. therefo~. playt
,,'m
." I",",.. ~.n. p. )8 .• ' ·. 9· ." Ui/.• p. )9. I. ." I~.• p. ,8.• ). .., I~.• •.• 6. p. 6> . • 6-p. 6,. 6. •... 1"'"'.• p. 6,. 13: .... . muimi, """.. i honorib", . .".;q..-um et "'OR"" f'U'orum tn< ...... i..., obIi" '37.
" 7
TEXTUAL CONNUNITlES
in the remaining chlpters of book two, lirst in che.- contl'ilSt bet_n Lanzo and Al:ibert, tben in landulfl outline of the onIitwliotm of tbe Alnbrosi..a c1t'tgy in I045. Attention is drawn to Lanzo's leadership of the poJnIli, while Aribert teecdes into the realm ofhf.giognlphy. Lan!O is described as the peoplc:"s ihKtlJl' tdq1It . .. /'flKlor. ,., Yet, be does not: so much advocate the JMIPII',"s inten~sts, LS romantic historians mainrained, ,. as offer the SOrt oflcadenhip apccccd of a mmlber of the capitanci. When he negotiates with Henry Il1, he speaks Of) behalf of both sidn;'" and when he !ttums to Milan afteCWtids, he oft"crs tbe peace plan to tbe lfDhila before sourxling OUt the popMii.' 90 He appcatS to be a happy blend of ethical viltUC and practicality. For d>e people be is " provident in mind, strong in body, prudenc in com!.t," etC.'9' Yet, be is also a reflective leader, who is capable of remaining loyal to tbe p0pulist cause while recognizing che n.ecnsity of compromise. He has some of Aribcrt', charisma: supported by God and Sr. Ambrosc: , landulf boasts, and taking C1)UDSCl with his faithful vavasour, Aibcrius, he.- decides alone to undertake. peace mission to the imperial C1)Urt;'" and this IIIffiC vir twuri& dixnllIJ ICCtptS lhe: cm!XiCX'S ger.c.oos terms, conveying them personally to the em!'ttkd MiJanes.c nobility. '9' Meanwhile Aribert, aging and in ill hcallh, slips inlo the background, less and il'Sl an active thn:c-dimcnsional fisure. According co i.andulf, who naturally wisbed to put him above factional quarrels, "he neither aided the knighu who daily threw the city into turmoil nor attempted to harm the besieged citizem. ,., ... The remaining cpilOdes of his life natnlccd in book two arc carefully .rnlnged to present him once a,v.in as the ideal archbishop, who was prevcnccd from being .. typological fulfihnent of Ambrose himself by !:Vents beyond his control. The list of hil IlChievemcnl$ recapitulated from landulf il imprcuive. He fOUSht heresy;'" during famine he aided the poot;'o
""/w.. ,.". pp.
,.,>.
67-68. '''/foJ.• pp. 68-69. - IW.. , .• 8. p. 66.~, and ~~"") . • , lid. >.j1, p. 6oJ. -I~. • 2.}6 whom Guido had only a short time bcfo~ ordained, demandcd "obedience" from both higher and lower orders of the MUlnese derBY for ilI_ defined reasons possibly coonccted to family interests. Guido took Ansclm to the emperor, who .settled the disaSret'tnent by aWllroing
me
_ .. ).), p. 7 4· '. '''>
M' l~. ,
).4, po
_., ).), p. n, '.. '"''
"2.
n. "".Iifti~d.--""i~, ... Y_,U~ .",•._
118-'0' . .. , H........ ,." p. n. u .•,. '" IIWI.. p. n .• ,. '" I~.. p. n, '9-16. w, Swamotial.., ,." pp. 76-]9... r-.:t..1f r '""'" Anodnt', iD",uI~ ... "~.",, iD Iho _if;. Pot. NU of hi. euly yeon, ... T. Sdomldt. """,.1-11 .• .. , ,-67, ond, ..-. btic!!). C. VioIan ..... ~ 11." Vi.in ;, Mlr. "'P ;uJ;.,;, ...... " 'J6-lI,.
,,,it..
'"
TEXTUAl- COMMUNITIES
him the see of Lrn:;ca. Anselm, it turns out , was a highly articulate person, who occasionally pro:-ached. polished but forthright sermons in local churches. On his leaving, Guido appointed $ '"
TEXTUAL CO NN UN ITlIIS
clerical ceHbal:y. TIle ~"ants were somewhat astonished, but, or SO we ate told, they reaffirmed the view that DO one ~ truly cbasre unless so creued by his maker. Then they banded togetbct with other outraged c1eria and laymen &ne! wenc to Guido as a group. The tKhbishop thereupon sumJnOned Landu.lf and Arillld and admonished them nor to nir up a sensdess mob. ancient customs of the AmbrosillIl chun:h, indetd those of Latin .00 Greek chrurendom, might be threatened. However, the pair remained adamant. Guido then pro. vided them with scriptural DitIII/JIA. A good Christim, be noted, should look after his own troubles before turning to those of his fellow men. But this tOO failed. If we recall once agtin that these chapten are almost entirely a literary fabrication, there are three ways in .....hich they may pro6tably be uooerstood. Landulfs own readins of even!! provides one logic. Another is suggested by outside witneues who do not share his point of view. A third impressiOll is crated DOt: so moch by the sequence of eventS as by d~ thematic arrangement of Landulfs inner concerns. On the surface, Landull presents the reader with a ronspiracy theory typical of many acCOunll of heresy's "Qligins." The: bearer of cvLl doctrines. altbough perhaps once IlII insider, comes from outside and let.ves when his per6dious work i5 done. He is a thinly disguised diabolical agent, and compels those under his influence w swear an oath of loyalty against their best interests. Landulf undoubtedly subscribed 10 the theory; for him, the "heresy" was clerical celibacy. But he adapted it to his own ends. Anse1m , U5ing his family's powerful conn.cu, he argUC$, tried w win the clergy', loyalty .......y from the tKhbi5hop , eng.ging "in mllIly evil acu aM. confrontations ...... The twubles, onc: SU5peIJ ,be "udon" i t ,be IooaI puM odIooI . "I Sum"",,;.ill$ chi. 8·'l, pp. 79·8 • . " J iliJ.. 309, p. 19. 37·38.
'97
TI!XTUAL CONNUNITlli$
other. He sent Anselm of Bagsio and Hildebnnd to Milan TO arrange a SC1:dement. But they tOO were unsucceuful. Landulf greatly d~torted the events dncribed in these chaptets. All sourcn arl: agreed that matters came to a head on the feast of the uall$ladon of St. Nazarius, which took place in the Ambf'Osian calendar on loth Mly. But from that point accounts of Aridd's anivity differ widely. Andrrw of Strum; and Bonizo of Sutri place him in the country;"1 Arnulf credits him with instigating reformist preaching on h~ own. '44 Reports of tile intenoiew before Stephen IX rJso vary considenbly.'" But what most 5C1S Landulf apart from other witnesses to the early Pataria is the fictive presentation of opposite sides as an intellectual deb&tt. The speeches of Anseltn and Dionysius are found nowhere dsc:. Us.ing these orations as fixed points, Landulf oriented his venion of the fint signs of dissent not so much around the principles as around the communication of ideas of reform, thereby providing I thematic link ~ this S2 (o,oyum pla<jNm~ , ·29. p. 9' ••. "", _ cnmpId berwttn man and woman. As St. Ambrosc points OUt, in ctelItion, Adam and Evt were ill 111/.~ fIh'P~' tt ill 1I/f0 Ipirilll."" A layman does nor cease to be a good Christian by marrying; nor are priests intended fO be a caste apart. '" All laymen and clerics, to the degr~ that they arc the chun::h"s sons, are ifS priesTS ... Ambrosc adds that only God embodies perfect charity, chastity, and goodness. W e know, Paul said, that the law is spiritual but that wc arc not."" Marri"'8 e, far fl"1Jm inhibiting spiritual existence, prevents the occurrence of WCI~ sins. Not only, therefore. do the Patucnes erect rigid barriers betw~n lay and religi()IJs in the church. They also 'attempt to apply to this world standards evidently only intended for the next. Their only mcam o( achieving their ends is by (om:. Their p/Mitllllr is nO( with God but with other men. In their misused idealism they try to replace Sf. Ambrosc as the church of Milan's true "pastDim.·'" By implication, they usurp the lictlllid granted to bishops to interpret Scripture for ordinary be!ievers. '" The reply of Ariald and Landulf indicatcs t/tat these chargcs were
·9.
-IIM.,
89. ,8.40' -ArWdu< .. Loll ,.",i6,·'"
"'1... , ) .• " p. 9[, 60 . .. ' I... , 11", [1>17 :". . . ord unuoq";IC(UC DOIttWII, am;'" 0.0. italri
TEXTUAL COMMUNITIES
the capitanei. The nobiliry and their popular followers prepared without enthusiasm for another civil disturbance. Erlembald, ccmfident of" victory, promised. his supporters rich rewanb and ~ uropntly into b..ttle, bearing the stancb.ro of" St. Peter. But, on this occasion fortune turned the other _y, .nd he was killed in the first attack. The b..ttle wall won by the capitanei. Later, UopniM, who lwt curied the CfOS$ on his behalf, lwt his nose and ears cut off. Each of the three major laders of the PIt.,it. thus met. fale .ppropriate to his offence. Landulf died with hiJ ton,:ue hanging our. Ariald, who mused. to recogni&e the elened archbishop, was cruelly murdered by his nia:e. Erlembald was swn in battle on behalf of the J4lKti Pdrl, which, in the chronicler's view, he had usurped. The deaths of" Ari1lld md Landulf 1llso take the reader close ro his conception of" the PaUl;.'S teal offi:n«. In both cues he i tarw.h back momentarily fram the action and comments on their misdeeds.'" Both meet their ends aroond Easter and both .rtempt to interfere with the liturgy, which, in Landulfs opinion, is the most t.ngible link with the J?IISt of the Ambrosian church and ",ith the Word itself. Tiling Erlembald's case first: Landulf, QtJ hearing of the cnuhed chal· ice, contrutl the godless feuda.I union '114dt_ silH 0.,) with the divinely CODseCnlted sacrament VMr"_u.", ... JIff" Dti WlUttrtd_). - We tttutn, in othtt words, to twO rypes of onl discourse, one evil, the other good. Funher, the beneficent verbal union , underpinned by the .uthority of Ambrose, is linked rirually to the past. Erlcmbald's principal offence is to ha\'!: criminally inrerruptCn.o .... - 99"' " • """;.. "'nod"", I>«ttnt obbot of S. fod. ,,. v.... ~, ]>.
'049.
,n 11U., «. ,"", p. ' '''..
.,. IlK. , c. " p . •"".
,-" 11U. , c. 6, p. "'n; Arno.o ' 0. "'IIU.. c. •,. p. ''''9. '" L...#I. ... 11U.• c. 01 , p. ,067. >0, 11U., . ,0066, H-H . "'/IU. , c. XI. p.•065. 20-2' ; N , ' .44 . .., 11U. , c. » , pp. 106869. ""IU., 'o6s> . .., I OU. , c. 21 , pp. '67-68. ... llU_ . c_ '}. p. '7' and then diS(U$$. According to Andrew, the entire ,mk r«UsimtiCIIS was living ;0 error. SnKely a priest could be found in his proper functions. Some had taken up frivolities like hunting; others had bewme shopkeepers, bailiffs, or usurers. Many had wives, and all were ··implicsred·· in the buying and seUing of offices. Aria/d 0.1116.
"7
TEXTUAL COMMUNITIJiS
bu.t has failed. And so he Iw tumod directly to the people; "I shal! lead. you back or perish by the sword for your salw.tion.·' Despire its maightforwatd mffillge, the contat and meaning of Ariald's first sermon require reflection. Although appearill8 as a sepatate unit in the Vittl, it is in fact carefully integrated with Andrew·s own thoughu. 1berefore, Ont mUffin, it was not only tnuuhued from the vertI2CUiar but probably also reworked. The pair·s statements, more, n·J.8: En ipoi, ... «n>.i';I, lieu, t.;c:; ""lutt .-.... ~, ArioId·,
""*"'........_
"""-.. . ." '''I!iJ.• c. >6, p . IOn , >~. U. Booi..... Sulri. 1Aw.J .1._ 6. pp. 191, 196, who .... pMo; ... tbot AMId ,. • ..:hod ;" tricaJ appearances. Again, Ariald's wisdom. like ~rard of Monfone's, derives dir«dy from God. the ha ttmJa. "through whom everything was made and in whom everything aists."'to No inttrmeo:l.iary (.:111gt/III) is placed bcrwecon the word and its interpreter.'" Christ's ministers. spread throughout the globe.'" all' empowerM [0 relieve Ihe j"JJilaliJ 1mb"" to defeat the enemy lurking beneath Ihe MIIClilatis sjmilillldo. Like Eriugena, with whose writings he may well have bec'n acquainted, Atiald scn knowledge arising from God, descending (JtJttndil) through Christ to man and returning (mEit) to the source whence it came.m irs appeara~ on earth is described in mystical ternu reminiscent of a thwphany: in the i«t(Jrlllll vifa. ··which ought 10 be light il~lf, Ihu very trulh (vtrifaJ) manifesrs ir~l( openly in its own words ... ,,. 1be circulariry of th~ word thus intersects th~ linear roUHC of human history in the sacred text. Howev~r, if divided by the written word, men Ill' Ilo~rrrcless reunited through the byproducrs of und~rstanding. which relat~ man's ... Cf. Mi«oIi• .."", I. >torio : " 0. .ita """ dom> ...... . qood .... _ I"". in w-rbi. ' ui. ViI.o. t. 4.
r·
ipOa por ....,;, .. "",It< mann... ..:·
TEXTUAL COMMUNITIES
intentions to the ;'lIil.lio Chrisli. Although trained in the schools, Ariakl nowhere .ckn to the accumulation of /acts. Por him. useful knowledge is a fora' influencing the minds and heans of men. ikfore Christ. men were: blind, _ o/is ~ljmiJ sui ~.'" God accordingly .stnt Christ to dispel rhe darkness "b cordibMs bo.illJt1ll. ,-,6 His mi1lis"; were: chosen "after all the shadows of falsehood were expelltd from their hearts. "117 The laity must follow them;'" but the reform movement consists DOl of theory but of individuah re-enacting the life of Christ under their guidlllltt. They must be pure not only in altril1ri !Jah;III ,m as the Milanest clergy pte$umably arc not, but also in inner contrilion.~ His thoughts can be summtd up in the notiOJl of vtrilllJ, which is repeated at key points.)" Andrew, as noted, complaincd that scarcely any of the regular dergy could be found ;" SIUJ IrK/} ""'(1(;/"'.'" Ariald said dwr he "truly believed" tbe populace knew all men were blind until the word', coming: " what was false they believed. truc. "~. Through Christ, " truth is openly manifested. ",.. The people, be argues, mUllI combat the devil, "who took holiness', truth from them. ")11, And he concludes with the admonition, "Return and take up truth and learn to repel falsehood.."~ Iu the word murns to God, the people mUllt 6nd tbeir way back to a reformed piety. Ariald's sermon, of course, was calculated to appeal to laymen dis$Itis6ed with the dergy', monl 'tate. But, as noted, it Iba 5C[ tbe lay community apan from the priesthood, both in tmIa and ~fftdll". Miccoli noro that the sprKh was full of good .stD$e. It invited men and women to think about the sac~n[s' meaning. '" It also emphasized moral as opposcd. to theological concerns. Ianduif Cotta romplimcnted the Sf E,hr. But an even more eloquent testimony came from Nazuio, whose way of life, Andtew noces, "was praiseworthy in all things, even though he was married. ".. If Ariald placed laymen '" IHJ., [0,1. l" ... 10;.1., '1. ' " 10;.1.. , Ol' . a·,. , .. IHJ., .,."" - 'Qu.I mi'" ministtu, me ............ (}D [ • .• 6). QIIod os< .,.,.. dUR: nemi ... .... ipp< mihi .. inis".."" Diu 010 eo, qui ",. _ i t ... " Spi""Ili, "11 . .,00.;" minisuriolr," 91"99.
a.
,.. Vii.. c.••
10,2.'0.
... IHJ., +0-41: -a.riotus ... Iem io oW • ....-.. miBistris Wlram lIIWM1iliuD queri ... n· _ . '" _ IOh... iII. ...., ................ O ", .. . >i_ ........in., ...i
r 10 otorio,- " 1; d . AM.t", '" "K", CoI_ C _ ' ).4, quoted f""" YSS by Nicmm_ d< c! Paran:nes maT\:hed through the streets, patently united in spirit. Also, they provided visible and tang ible links with physical n:lics whose influence on the popular imaginatiun was mon: powerful than theological arguments. And they offered an outlet for sympathetic emotion, binding the sufferings of past martyrs to those of the prescnt.·.>6 Even, therefon:, 10 the uninstructequr od hue
dooo.i»itriO), p. ,UI, H. ~'_'j. On .....ilotd ... ",0.",,,.... Romdl. 0;.., -.I R.p.., I". H "H, 'J~ 40. no. i~ ..A,,,Dtl. of in ...-ty rnmmo.o .... io ",;,oed "" lMrobe", MoIHtwI H".", )!>"·H· - ~ T'"i is Ea!ttiM M FiJ . wo Efi ./ • e,r,":;;:.;::- .. r-w-..1 "". t . 1. .v.ss JUI>O I. 8)%C-J>. "I. matiti"," p. ~'Tb< in"!pf
mow
... HiJ,..;' , . 11, p. 81 , 16.
... Va.. . .ct. Am"'f. G_ }.>
non .:Ii " 11"'" pOrary of the chuKh, and Ansdm of Baggio a student of canon law. Even ErJembaJd's intense piety reflected a possible ItCquainrance with mon.asric tCJ:ts, From the outset, moreover, the movement .... as rife with legal isms which each of the three rommentawrs emphasized in of the MiJancsc chun:h a diffetent way. Atnlllf record. that the opposed Ariald .... ith umu s"iplJmu and with s,,1Idio_ Cl'1I01lU:tu ••"" Ariald ~pond.ed. by drafting his phytllCillm tit. t:lUtitllt, Jtrn:I"a", .... hich cited a Justinian """,',, from the preface of the synod of Pavia of ut August 1022 to the efi'«:t that priests, deacons, 0< subdeacons who married after ordination were to be scripped of their offices and [Cduced w sm;i in the city', curia.'" The legally (flIined &nulf recognized this to be a "rcV'Olutionary" document and accuse
H''''. "";oId i. mo:ntlontd i • ." ,Io.ro,h-<en ... a. Nkoff, "Soco.Iu Rio.,.), """'" and loI.. i" .... ...". odi.,.... S«_ Rm..J (A,_, ''-'7), ,-,~, .,.i, h. bibtios-
ni",. ..·
nphr. '8'"9"
'4'
THE EUCHAJlIST AND NATU~F. $~t~matiud
his thoughts on tne s.acram~ntS, divers.: inttrprentions were possibk The chi~f issue which $urfacN on bOlh sid~s of tht dd)03.te was lh~ meaning of "nature" and of "reality," and tM dtgrec to which such conc~PtS could ~ undet$tood using tools d~rivN from logicd and tI"Xnud restarch. Th~ various solutions ptClpO:$td wnstitute th~ 6nil !Iag" in th~ later mtdi~l aS$ociation of natur~ and ttxtS, which scholastic philosophy devdoped in a pro6tabl~ dirt-Ction for science, literature, and th THfi fiUCHAltlST AND NATURfi
I_ GUIBERT AND "POPULAR" CULTURE At the centtt nf the ~mentioned issue' namely, the growth of religious intellectualiun and of scientific I1*turalism--one finds a single problem, the StatU5 of a physkd object having religious ass0ciations during an l18e of increasing literacy. Don it retain iu pteB, rerate symbolic status? Or does it no.., derive its meaning from being interpieted. through a [nd Some remukablc insights into these questions are ptm'ided. by Gui, ben of Nogen!'! D, Piporibu S./ICtqr."" which was completed by 11:15.' The treari~ was Guiben's last work, and was bailed by early histOfians as a synthe$is of "undiluted. skcpt"icism") in a unique "crit, ialand 5Cientific spirit,". which in' part it is. Yet, while discted.iting false relics , Guibert also ptupO$CI a set of 5tl1ndards fur RSJCS'ing their claims. This, in twn, inmlves a certain ambivalence towards tbe oral and the written. For, while relics are a«epted throughout as physical objects having Iymbolic content, tbeir validity is nonctbelcss jadged by a variety of tcxtual proofs. The telic in q~rion was the [OQcb of Christ claimed by the monks of St. M~ of Soissons. However, more gcncra.l matrers appear as early as the dedicatory letter to the erudite EOOts, abbot of St. Sym, phorien neat Beauvais. Several questions , Guiben states, were ad, dressed [0 him regarding the veDCtlIble tooth. But, as 50me ugued from popular llSSOCiatioos (1IIl/,lIIriltl'), he thought it worthwhile to put his thoughu io writing (jlr JittrriJ) and to explain (tJiart) what he kDew to be Olhets' well,meaning intentions.' The remainder of book
_ton.
' } . F. SJj_.Js.a.t,;" Md' , ~._. TAr ....,' 0/ AWol G.n..-t o/ N_ YorIE, '910), .)8.-l9· 'A. Lcf"""" "le , ...tt .... 1ibm de ~ et Ir< rn.iquoo hi" ~iq ...... DIOJm ""' ... JiJii. J t;__ ChriI.
El" -'__ ...
'"..... .;.... -
CN ...
ibm ... bridI, ....i<wed br Bt, • .", SJf -s.a.." 8-9. 0.. rile Ot 1ft J'C"IiWltM~ ~Jlt dowItJlr). In his view, the two must be kept in harmony to prevent $Chism. Some types of wonhip a~ Ctllicd on but nor tlught, such as the CUStoms (C6I1JI#IMdiTlu) for fasting aod chanting psalms. Despire a "diversity of offices," the church attains a "similar faith. " Other devotions are both m~ntaincd and tlIught (q_ ttne1ltll~ et JquIJ/llr), chiefly the $IcramentS of baprism and the eucharin. In these ins(2nces, Guibert argues, the ~ exists throughout Christendom the same teaching (paris f-.u drx/~i _I, since what is spoken (or~t;o) conforms to insuuction's obj~tives (id dixmliMm), as the examples of ancient marryn and saints reveal. Similarly, one may distinguish from among the church's preceptS , The Bible occasionally suggestS that salvation cln be achieved by both faith and works. But this is only a figurative way of" speaking, Works normally lead to faith, in which theory is guided by practice and vice versa. Moreover, some practices, although useful guides in life, "are !lOt coumed," and, although ptuched in ch urch, are not among the essential preconditions of salvation . Such is the cult of saints' ~Iics. ' In such cases, the only criterion of validity is authenticated reasoo (sD/Q aIIlMllli", r~li~). This consists of reason based on texts: it is not hearsay (opillio), but the firm tradition of verified ancieot $OUtc("5 (w1/JIl4tis "MI Jtript(Jf1tlll l'tf4CiM," Ir"dilio arl4). For how can an individual be considered holy if no one recalls the basis for his claim vll/{"/(Jf;lalis IfJe",."i4)? Such a repuration is defended neither by texts (lift...a, ) nnr by the dear demonstration of miracles (~jNrl~ miraru/OfIIm txptrimlia). Even lcrters, he adds, are no absolute guarantee. For hagiography is not ycr • high art. Often, .saints' lives are mere rec itations (prw01lia), which damage mther tban uplift tM faith, At ot her times, even when the facts are correct, the style is so lackluSt te that tM livtS have little credibility. Such so-called lives ate ru11y JUSt trifles (,""ill). With such figmtlll~ he contrasts th e lIo1itiae of" the gospels. What, he asks, can be
_._is
• Cl. A"..!m. liIu't14 .s. o:tt., .... c. " od. f. S. (kommtfr ttmPill, >rMtra MIiIJ), " but he secs discontinuity as often as continuity in the rxnrIPUt ",om"w. '. He 5CpI.B.tn custom and law, tmm and docwr. Also, he secs in the modern' a ftequent disjunction between outer IICtion and inner motivation, and this in turn becomes a way of distinguishiI18 purely popular from factual support for a sail\[. The most obvious type of externality is the local habit of surrounding sainn' remains with precious objects. >0 More subtle is his rejection of many contemporary holy men wbos,e commitment amOUntffl only C"O formalism. In sU(h observations Guiben singles OUt the sp«ial capacity of his own generation, which he secs as nascent literary activity. Yet he stands, so to speak, above the fray and actemptS to transcend tbl: uneducated US!:" of letten. What is teIIlly new in the 0. Pip'lribliJ is 1\0( the manner in which the divine operates but the consciousoess with which its activities are inlerpretffl. The link between the put and the present is the physic..l, the tangible, aod the objo:ctive. Throughout book ooc Guibcu il1$isu on the physicality of saints' remains and of relics before turning to thci r mynical, spiritual, or divine qualities. Of course, the ooe leads C"O thc ()(her. Paul, Guibtrt I\O{CS, ~fc", to (hc holy spirit lIS pigllllJ" (gllgC), but means splrruior glon", or i_go Dti." The physinl is frequently ~fcrred. to as the spiritual"s "irariMJ.') He refen ro (he transformation which takes place after the spirit leaves the body (..fb i"ltg_"lo f(Wpor-U t::XMt# Jpiritlt)." Men pierce through (frl'lIJigrrr) C"O heaven;" .. pp:: coven (atIIlrgrrr, lYJegwt) It saint's remains .... 11tc relics, thercfo~ , while associ;ltffl spiritually through (he IelIUlTCCtion," retain their status as evidence; claims for and ag.inst vaJidiry are based on the equation between eQscing attu'W:tS and historicallitcraliml. Similarly, the water " /HJ., ~ . '. 6.6D. 6.BB. R lIIo . '. c. 4. I, 6.6.\.0.
"/tw.. bk. 4, c. 1.4,668.1..
" £ph I: '4 . n $. '. 6098; He'" ,:" 1 eo. 4:> . " £M."'.; d . I>i. c. ,.6",8: " .. . .;.;..w.. ido» Merely encnlll signs therefore cannot be relied upon a.'I evidence unless situated in a textual continuum relating the individual vita to larger theolog ical concerns . " And this ~uires an imerprt:ter. Th, 6'00 . " 11iJ., 6,,1 . " IWi., [, 600;08 .
'49
THII IIUCHARIST AND NATURII
jeet of IUlturalinic aIJegory as both l8akri" l.ud and IfI4Ut' Q."j••. n Yec, as book onc p,oceeds, Guiberc gradully forms a pictUre which e<jutc$ the onl, the populu, the inauchentic, Ilnd the: disn:oputable. Good cwtomS do not: vary from the: sense of faith (Pfoki ItIU.);~ there is an identity bctweoen the spoken (tmftio) and the taught (dtxtriM).IO Texu, moreover, pa", from higher to lo~r cultura.llevcls. ErlebaJd, thought to be a holy man, gained credibility by prcachins ;u/ POP"bm. "" TextwU rectitude is associated with God', intentions (ur1itlldti foUt)," unrdiability with ntSOOWS , The popularly venerated son of the Dcauvaisis knight is described as alifllgllril His cult is spread by rusties dcsicow of novrlty (rwlid rmntI nwarIt. lllPitIJ). The local ab. bot, aithCJU8h "very wise," condones the "infected miracles," the 00.. gus pilgrimages, and the profane multitude.'> Similarly, merely local saints' lives an: d1005t which the popuhce Crc&!es in villages and towns.'l The body of St. Exup:rus WII.!i falsely diKOVcred by a fJUtiflU." In all such cases, Guihen argues, there is a replacement of common bones for holy relics (OJ./II Mllgllrill JWD StlMtonm pipKihJU).·' The theological framework for these observations is elaborated in book two.06 Christ's physical prcscnce and the sacraments were !:Xpt'rien«d "without any understanding ot: contemplation. "" Invisible mattets were thereby taught by visible signs, the objt('( (m) presental without aJlegot)'. C!i* typi.s, SW figllf"""'" ~i"jlnu).,1 On the other hand, Christ migrated wholly to heattn aftmvlltds, leaving no physical renuins on earth. The miiiJ0lI4 of which Paul spoke was not ItIJIIIISIit.u bur ;""IUrtulit.u." There wecc not tWO bo
I.
c. 4. &..6C .
.. t~. ,. I. 612D.
" 'HI.• 61}A.I!. . j t;;'/', , . 1. 6.. C.
~ I~.•
>'4. 619C.' I. ... ' .>. 6>4(' IW.. }.,. 6>,c.O. "'HI.. 6>6A.
4>/W.. '." 6>'AoB. ~ .. I'ar. diffomtt ,.;nr .... A. Lefn.n
2. INTERPRETING THE EUCHARIST Guibect atracked the uncritical ac«ptantt of relics from essenrially tWO dire«ions: the physical remains had to be authenticated, and the saint in question had to be guaran~ holy. Although refecting to the past, both ao::tivities involved the intcrprcring subject in the present. Like the transition from oral to writtcn tradition .., a whole, the change in mentdity shifted the criteria of belief from the community to the individual. ror, in the fllSt analysis, it was he who read, considered, and judged the probilrivc tat. But written culture did not rcplllCc the Onll. Unlike Rcfurmation critics of relic worship, Guibert did not reject all piP"'"" JalU;rhllf doog allegcdly rational grounds. His position involved the more typica.lly medieval lISSOCiation of orality with a written mode. While iICcepting physkal symbolism at face value, he tried to underpin its authority, where warn-nred, with textually established evidence. The oral clement thus survived the utiliution of writing and was itself transformed. For, as literate standards ~re applied to relics, the adjudicating prelate had. a simple choke. Eithet the concrete objcc:t was authenticated aod thereby assimilated. inro learned culture, or, with its validity questioned, it was ted.uced to the starns of popular hearsay. Guibert's mind shifted back and forth somewhat u~ily bctwl:'t"n two mentalities, which, for simplicity's sake, we may call the symbolic and the hcrmencutic. The achicvc:ment of phiJosophiC21 theology in the later dcvc:nth and twelfth centuries was to bring the two elcmenu together in harmonious union. The Dt Piporilnn $tllKtO, ..., applied to a new area a critica.l methodology observable in other religious conflicts of the period, namely simony, clerical celibacy, the eucharist, and investit\ll"C. It is not surprising therefOfC that Guibcn's commenu echo ideas which we have earlier discussed: cusrom VCrsU5 law; a diversity of spolcm furms within a unity of written doctri~; the equation oC truth, rationality, and textudity, supported by historiC2l and ardta.eoJogicaJ rt:Se\I.tCh; cbe distinguishing of the local ftom the univcrsal, the popular from the learned; and, above all, the association .. I"'. , •.•. 67oB.
'"
THE EUCHARIST ANO NAT U RE
of reform , modernit y, and Cllnonica! corn'cmess with the document, the wriceen verification, and the edunted U$eS of literacy. Yet Guiben goe$ beyond his pn'U1I11I in clauical Ladn, meaning an OI.th. a solemn engwment, the CIoution money pledged in support of a claim, Of" a civil suit itself; and (2) Jll(rll"""t_ as the translation of Greek ~uarl)~n.ov, meaning not only the modern "sacrament;' but any ritual ob$crvance of the church or, more generally, any spiritually significant object or action. " One of the unsolved and. perhaps insoluble problems in the word's history is the mllnnet in which the notion of verbal commitment became wedded to thllt of religious mystery. Early srodents of the qUC$rion provided an answc:r which stressed the continuities between pagan myJltrill and Christian S4CrtS/MIIlll. But in 19P. A.D. Nock, summarizing his own and others' investigations, reversed this trend and Stated cacl'gocically: "Any idea that what WC call the Christian "A ,h;nl pt.-....,. porbapo bt odcIod, non>tlr. tilt ..... ilUtion al. port al 'h< "i,inaJ ocal ~ do';..,. tilt R4
7
(1'Iri>. 19,01. .... '. 97- '4); 10< ,10< Jaw-
.. ,.."ro'
~
Jj
.).,... ..
~
.If Iv
THE EU C HARIST AND NATURIi
sacraments Wf:re in th,e;r origin indebted to pagan mysteries or even to the metaphorical concepts ba5Cd on them shatters on the rock of linguistic evidenc e."" Similar condu5ions were reached by phi lologists. Hans von Soden acknowledged the important range of meanings attached to illtl'4mmlllm I j.&urift fii< t& _",_,la. Wm.-IMf' >l ( '911). ,88->l7; ",m""';m:! by,. do Gho ....,..",i
1 ODd lit 6. iIii.. I. , . 88. Foe- G.-U. .. Do '" 'iI6 .• • iIii.• p. >0]. "1.
,,6
,ot""
THE EUCHARIST "ND NATUR.E
ttaSted the sacrammtlll1J JillillOnlm of tit.: Christians with the iJo/lJfltm mysltria of the pagans. f, Of coune, (t is a short step from the symboli( OlSsociations of such meanings to symbolism itself. Terrullian US"1" 'H'. ,6 , . .. !~.. ,~ . " .... ". ,}87.~-n . .. lIoW. ,If." ." ... 4. 40. "'.
;JiJ.•
r.
p. 6,).
,6-". 6,6. H.
lid., '.4 . ~, p . 6B. ,}.,~ . .. do: lI..;k ... · "«,~IJ;'n:· 1>9. '.\04f. " 010 GbolJind, ilU .• J ' , . .. Don> 6 . 6o
PaschaJillJ RatibertllJ and Raframnll! of Curbi. Four centuries Kparate Augustine (rom the revival of his views ttprtsenud by PllIchasiu, Rad~rtU$'5 ~ C~ .1 Sang"i," Dqm;ni, the fint version of which appe&red betwtcn 831 and 833. ,0() The sub· sequent controvcrsy over the mcaning of thc eucharist is usually di . vided into twO major phases. The first consists of Radbert"s trea tise and the reply of Ratramnus of Corbie, together with a number of disparate contributions from the later ninth and tenth centuries. The second begins in the cleventh century and is generally agreed to have !"ea(;hed a climax in the Roman council of i059. which condemned the docrrines of Berengar of Tours. The ttplies oflanfranc, Guitmund of Avena, and .hlge! o{ Liege effectively ende. PL H · «"4; e_.-..s;' i. P~I_ "9.', Pt )7" 44': r:lot, 43601 ... B. P,u)",. «I ., Or c..,...." SMvo;. 0-;.;. CCOoI ,~. p.•;;; . •~ I'<Jt • 1_. ,96,)·
'"
THE EUCHARIST AND NATUIlE
the formalistic surface. Iu noced, .... hat had been a set of distinCt"ions between the oral and the wriuen ~mergcd in .n inreU""tWllizc.d form. In Radben-, the id~ of henncIlWtics was introduced by accultundon. The c:enrnLl m~ning of the eu.charisr did not need intetpretation: it simply was. For Ratnmn and later symbolists. the physical element in rbe eucharist could only derive meaning from being siwat~ in an intcrprctiVl: framework. In other words. it ~ ro be allegorized. For them, to admit the existential dimension of the ceremony OD its own was to desccnd to popular cuJN", and to ritualism. This meetins of oppositCl, moreover, laid the groundW(lrk for the S«1)nd phase, in which CS5Cntially the same conflict was eJ<pr~ in more sophisticated terms. Beneath tbe .bstractions and logical exercises the old issues could easily be discerned. But now the entire question was intellectualized and tbe rival positions ....e"' dignifird by the participants and luer commentators lIS ""tealism"" and ··symbolism." The doctrine of tnnsubnantiation worked QUt in the twelfth cenwry .... as in &et .. compromise between the t .... o. Radbert therefore occupies a position in the euchariStk controversy similar to Guibert of Nogent on relics. He insiSts on the physical reality of the pigi'm or SMT"'IIlIItll1/l and makes .. litenl identification wich their antecedent historical events. Yet he deepens hum.n understanding of the ceremony in which the eucharistic mystery occun through Paulino: and Augustinian allegory. tu in Guiberr, che two sides of the question, the material. and che spiritual, form an unea.sy uOlon. His point of departure is not the eucharist itself but the principle of anglity by which its mysteriousness is aplaincd. There is no doubt, he Illgues, that the bread and wine are tbe true body and blood of Christ. For .ny Christian who believes that God created something OUt of n.othing should DOt be astOfli,bed if he merely cho.nged one thing jnm another, even "againse DZture. " 'OI For "narures" do not uist in themselves; nor do they truly give birth to what is produced from them. Their source is God', will: chis is che unique CAllS" rmt/IIJ. What appears to be in disaccord with nature may in f"acc be in harmony with his wishes. NO(hill8 lies beyond his power: in sum, "ihil air" Mt/ (II"Ir" IJ.j Mdk potut. '09 Accepted as fact, the eucbuist must, however, be explained. Although .ppc:atins "in the figure of bread. .00 wlOe," God arnngC$ - Do" , . ... S i.i. "'I~_, p.
I,.
0-;,,; ( ,
7"~ . ~,.
I,
o:cu
,6, p. I,. "7,
•
TI'IE EUCI'IAR I ST ANO NA.T U RE
that "the~ is nothing at all after the consecration but the flesh and blood of Christ. " , 00 This same flesh w
'.. u.
n·8 .. M. JOO«po>in. -IL )0.
I): ~
«
Soto8......
Oo.ruru do - . . . Ldh::t (1tJd1H NI"'4fiollu pw orm-) so as to put an end to disputes about its meaning. ')< He saw his role like Matthew's as spreAding the word to all; the gospel', aim was didaetic. Aware. perhaps, of his UnedUCIted auditn«', he both eI· cused hiJruclf for his lowly stylt and yet drew attention to its ibCIvan· tagf:! over "VergiliMn HaweD. " '!' He also ddimited the role of IJ,mwM WiD ; through "the simplicity of ignonnce" man rowd easily deceive himself with filiity, Yet he praised "the simple faith" of uncluttered minds; that, sutely. is the proper conre>::t of his "AnsdmilUl" state· ment of faith's ability to grasp where mt50n fails. ," In the preface to book thret. which was presumably written after the public-tion of rh!: fir~t version of the Or he ~rsed his ",rlier, tokr:ant views and took an uncompromising stand against the pagan dauics,'" speaking of "some of our number, who. because of inadeq\llltt under· sunding," turn to distortions: "Although their win eloquence is pol· ished . , , , their discourse is so uncultivated that it smacks of t\ISoo ticity."'" He became from that point .n unHinching critic of what he termed the tr"goJiAnmf _ill and the JDtt4r*. figmnutl of the an· cients, rl!Serving a ,mall rok in thrology for "human doq~nce" Of for "secular philosophy."'w But the contrast was not only between pagan and Christian. In place of ancient learning he proposed the divine Woo:d • word, how. e'tet, which was both on.llltld written. For, the biblical message was tOO complicated fot ordinary rndef$ and th~refore requi~ an accorn· panying explanation. His images all a consequence ~rain a liaVQur of oral delivery while his intention is literary and cxplicati~. His ex· position, he maincainecl, was an attempt to enl;ght~n through the ear Vuni"*' n;pJ.I11l"').· .... Scripture's obscuritics could be rnnlcd by sim·
C""""".
'MF4 -,,;, ;.£0 •" lHJ.. ~>C . •• , .
,.,,~
""_M,d
.... .. -"
'>","""",l'Ln.~[..c .
•• ~ .A
" ........ _.-.-, 10>,~.
,,, G......... , "P
,n a. '
[t< . .
Z'noI»ox';. }968.
". """rot
' .. "..{.-;, liIIri ,m.i. ~7"'. 'n J. Goi ..lm ... n. DiI E",b.ms,i<J" "'" V-'-iMrilt (P '
~
00Ut«t ....
"-
~
, .
w_ ... f..,J",.i,,.,
..w",.
~- "
~-- "
""pOIi'''''
p'"itti( _ . pp. '~19 .
'" for 1Nlo!;" in Coroli",;ion 11>'4" ' .. A. Vouchn, ~ .,w;,..JiU JJ.loUy The essential issue in his view was whether the eucharisr represented the body aDd blood undet' a figure (jiglmil) or veil (~U1) or whethet it was tbe uru.dorncd manife3tation of truth (_ ri14tiJ tuJ., _IIifa"'i~) .•6) Radben, he argued. had drawn auendon only to the realistic element in Augustine. But the bidJop of Hippo clearly disdnsuished berweenfipw and wriltn. A figure. in Rarramn's ...,.. "latiood bawall ...aw;.. i< ~ ..... liru'Jic&I pronim. Po< .... 8A),
c.,.... c. >. p.
,68
THE EUCH"II I ST "NO N"TUIlJi
view, WlI$ a kind of obscurity (MJlmbralio). It concn.JeR'tivt material supporting it had only thl: nafU$ of evidential documents. For Ratramn, the authl:ndcity of the cucharist was irueparable from the texts which relat~ its meaning. AlthOUgh the presence _ "real," its reality ha.:! co be consonant with gnmmar and logic. To undctstand the e\l(hatUt, thrmo«:, was to apply gnmmar and logic- in short, to allegorize it. Radben did nor wholly deny the ""Iut of interpretation, nor did RaulImn dcny che rnl (as opposed to historic) presence of Christ in the Cl:remony. But they diffcred in the manner in which they approached the issue of figM'" versus vtritlU. '" Foc Ratramn, the di .. tinction arose within the logic of human undcrstanding. In order for thr bread and wine to be the body and blood of Christ i" "",itat" Oldst had to be nperien«48), 67" •.
.....
d'Hk~,!or
'7'
1..oI:oboo:' $....
f ,""'.. . . .
THE EUCHARIST AND NATURE
lion. In Radben's cue, this involved a partial re habilitation of the oral, the symbolic, and the performM; in Rauamn 's, a rcronceiving of the whole question withio the framework of higher religious culture alone, More significantly, both threw into relief the phenomenal aspec:rs of reality, although once agllin from di/krent perspectivC$, For Radbm, the physical implied the spititual: hwnan imcrpretlltion merely amountM to underwriting. For Rarramn, $C O$C data were also the starting point of all genuine understanding of reality . But oddly, by questioning the nature of reali ty as it appcaffl.:! bcf'ore him, Rarramn was further able ro distinguish what was apprehended by the senses ftOm what was understood by the mind. This byproduct of textual te$ea~h was n:ploitM io the eleveoth ceotury by Bcrengar, as later by twelfth-century philosophers, who appliM it to scientific Nlhe! than to theological questions. To conclude this brief discussion of Radberr and Ratramn, we may turn briefly co the summary of the tWO ninth-century positions in Heriger of Lobbcs, who diM in 1007 . He was diSflInr enough from the origioal participants in the debate to distinguish confidently betwccn the "IIliqlli, that is, the fathers, and the modtmi. ,,6 He was also the first contributor to make selective quotations from pllnstic sources to suit his own design. o?? He therefore offers a bridge betwccn the fint phase of the eucharistic discussioo and the techniques which became fashionable in the eleventh century . •,. His short treacise, in fact, marked a new stage in th e development of an interpretive rradilion. It presupposed that the reader was familiar with Radbcrt's ideas, and, while fundamentally realisr in orientation, it tried to cff«t a union betw~n opposed positions. H eriger had read earlier attemplS at compromiK: he knew of Ratramn's letter to H eribald of Auxene and the letter (also perhaps by him) to Egi!/), both of which criticizM Radberr.· N He also quoted Gew of Torrona, who paraphrased Radbert around 9,0, and through him R~mi o( Aul<erre, '''' as well as lengthy statements by a quiJ..m Jilpims who authoccd a RtSjIOlIsio defending the r~aliH approach. ,I, With such con.,. 0. C","" d s~.;", 0-;,,;, R.",i8i", _
Lobba,iJI•• "1'bo c... Api_ !krtnp ofT..... ; A Ne..- Ten.- iIJ., 9 ('!n').
"lk.
"".i,•
.f•. ·..;'
,,-n.
' 7'
THE EUCHARIST AND NATURE
the in(rtl1Singly refurmist papa'J', the issue was universal .uthurity versus part;cularisric innovation; for studenu of the liturgy, mysticism, or theology, it was the deg~ to which intdl«:!Ualillm was permiss ible in the fio:kinic, ritualistic, or participarory areas of religion. Although differing on much else, the tWO sides had a similar response co such questions. As the number of contributions swelled and posicioru hardened, it was d.-at that tm, eucharist had be.::ome an ubjf(:t of cognition ro be discussed by experts on the legal, philosophic, and ~n diplomatic me.ming of tnU. After Bereng.r, Christians may still ha~ be-en divided on how the eucharist was to be interpreted, but only a tiny minority opposed the use of hcrmeneutics itself.
Bermga,.
0/ TOMS
Ikrengar's intellf(:fllal devdopment can be d ivide.! inw four Stages: the early correspondence, includill8 the letteu to Ascelin the Breton and Addmann of Li~ge; quotations from a los t treatise written shortly after the council of Rom e of 1059 and preserved in Lanfranc's D. C~ eJ Sa1lglli71t Do",i1l; from ca. 1065; the D. Salt.. CDnla, the lell8thiest stacement of h is position, which can be date.! arouM 1067; and a mImoirt on the Roman councils of 107 8 and 1079, probably composed in 1080. ' . The various treatiso.s do ft(It illustrate a lineal growth of ideas. Instead, rather similar notions recur agai n and again ami d carefully ClIkulated .... plies to thO$
" . ''''1''
,,"«1
,ba,
_opi,
THE llUCHARIST AND NATURE
doctrinal position with care ~(ore the coundl of VeruHi of 1St September 10,0, ,., but long before that ~ he "'IU widely known IU a sUC«S$ful tcacher committed to a philosophiclll methodology. Alter the Roman council of the same year he was more and more fn'qucnrly called upon to defend the content of his views. But what evidently interested him most was the 10gH:: by which they were reached. legislation and administrative correion were pani.Uy effective in silencing hi5 voice. Yet. the linal irony of the affair was that his opponents overcame his position only through an often less sophisticated adoption of the methods he himself pioneered. Of all the contributon to the aJCharisrk debut, Beren.gar aiJo speaks to us most clearly as an individual. His unusual lecturing style, his involvement in Anjou politics, and his subsequent appearance at papal couoci!! made a deep impression on the thinkers of his own day and have coloured hi5tQtical interpretation ever sino:. Nothing he wcote WIll f~ of polemic.: it is not alwaY' easy to separate his own reflections from hi5 rnction to the ideas of others. Yet, despite rhe difficulties of his style, his deliberate use of innuendo, and the fragmentary character of his woriu, there are several strands of thinking which pernde 8erengar's entire utIIfIn. They sur&.cc for thc lint time: in thc Ictter he wtote to his friend Ascelin towards the: cnd of IO~O and perhaps after the council of Vcreelli.''''' AKclin accused Ratramn (whom hc mi5rook for Eriugcna) of heresy. If the report is true, Strengar observed, thcn his fricnd i$ an unre_ flective, impious, and even unworthy priest. For, to have accused "Etiugena" of hete$y is to put oneself in the camp of Radbert and Lanfranc. ". This, in turn, implies an incorrect notion of the euchirist and, mote generally, of the philosophy of change. 8e~ngu ~plied that it is contrary to the gospel, the apostles, and the ruin of nature (-.lIff ".,tllJ'M r4/i_) to believe "that the bread's 5umtan« is entirel), withdrawn from the sacrament of the Lord's body."'·' But it is aLw untell50nable to forbid interpretation, Jincc the gospel of John clearl), stated that religious mysteries Ire not often evident to the senses. To oppose this is genuine hete$y.'" For the material bread no mort rep... Dt S - C-. c. 9.
"'liiJ. • H). N"",d... p. ' l) . tt.: cli";.",;",, ,oo fu. On ,t.. ~jfk" " i '" Au, P., n . Cam< .. ' ''' in .hi, """,",." qf W
'7'
H',..., I{ 0..- 6. 46.
THE
EUCtlA~rST
ANO NATURE
which li e behind the verbal arrangementS, whose formalistic and coo _ ventional qualities he nonelhdess recognizes. He dlUS lawns flom texts ro IftliIY, thal is, from words to things. His separation of the literal aoo the allegorical also leads IU did the auder formulation of R.attamn to a radical isolation of the world as po!rceptible to the senses. Yet Ihis romtS about in a different way. for the dualism of words and lhings as he undenrands it implies that things themselves cannol simply be broken d.own into substances and qualities. To pul the mlttt'r another way, he rakes the anci ent distinction betw~n substance and quality and reapplies it by .a.naJogy tu words and things. He thtll denies that ;t applies 10 things alone. Onc (;lnnot sum up this position as ' ·gl1l.mmalical, " as "nominalistic," or "en as an anticipation of the distinction betwet'n particulars and universals. Despite authorities, the implicalions of his Ihin king are largely his own. The ftllliqlli an: imporrant chieAy as reference points ror the indi vidual in his search for meaning. The book purports ro reassert a prc.medi. "al position, hut it is reaJly a Stat ement on behalf of modernity. In Berengar's mind, then, the distinction betWet'n sensible and spiritual is based on the analogy of tnt (or textual sign) and interprctation. Biblical and pattistic writing on th60 IlJId the middle sections, which tteat in otder christoJ08y,'6, baptism,.6> the eLKhati,t, and the range of possibilities for interpretation within the orehodox position, ' " Adelmann', treatise is written in a refined style, IlJId the rhetoric is deliberate, For he is really presenting tWO sons of ar8umenr ar once, His specific case is directed ag:ainst Beren8ar's ideas, or, matt particularly, his use of I08ic, But his juxraposition of imag:cs from the Bible and the classics helps to frame his arguments as • morc gCMrai (On_ trut between the ancients and the modems. 8erengar proposed that the Bible coold OOt be a:.:cpted without interpretttion. He also opposed the unsophistiCllted methods of many predecesson and cCN'Itemponries, What CllJled for in his view 'MIS a clean break with uneducated tradition. Adelmann, tOO, saw problems in bibliCllI criticism. But, whelUS 8erengat expressed differences &$ (Onfikr, he prefelled to emphasi~ cominuity. His view was dose to that of FuJben, >60 and, to !QOk forward to the follOWing ~nlUry. Bernard of Chanres. He asked Berengat to rclkct not ooly upon the memory of their common mastCJ', • "modern Socn.tes," but on the nature of tradition itsclf.•6, The best way to insure religious tcuth was to avoid "those who, deviating by heresies and schisms, break the C&tbolic peace. . . . ,,- He advised his friend to desist from his pointless "vapties," which had already spread dangUOUii ideas "into French and German ea", ".61 There were in fact prece68
w..,
," EI . ..J & ..
;-i.. , «I. I..II.C. Hu,Jft>'I ..,..., .. lot;,.. d~ XI< ... XlU. _ , - $"",, , ( ..,H. 3«1 Sot... 8 ( '967), ~71 . I;"" "'ltiJ.• • 38, li ... 4'3. ,,. Hu,~, 4'9. On die Ij,.'OJ . ... £I. ..J Bo~'", __.;._"• • 76, 418, - IMI., 4n, '7" 8. ... 16i4.• 4n, JJiJ.• 478. 666.
.'·.7.
"n.
I,.... ,·.0:
...
,s.".
p_". ...
'"
THE. EUCHAR I ST ANI} NA TUR J;
Further, the lCisons of history were reasonably clear. AI! the early battlCi were won by the church. Where, he asks, are the Manichacans, rhe Arians? '"Even their memory has rotted away, while Augustine. jerome, and the other opponenu nf th~ aren~ beasts are ~I ive today and flourishing . . . . ··.69 Young thinken should rake shelter under their colle0.
,,. FI. "" 11.... ,110.
.,.,..,.
... [.8 .. Mu" 9.4.!Id
J
~ 7fi. 1 ~·. 19.
'"
,.. In 6:,,·, • .
INi. . • ~. "'·'4 . Co< .,.8 . ' ~ fJ . ..lBw .. 48 •. ' 1 '·1' .
,8,
THE EUClIlt.RIST ANO Nlt.TURI!
defined faith as "the substance of things to be hoped for, the argument of non-apparent things."'1Io Paul had good rnsQDS: for, if the sacraments displa~ outwardly what they signify within, then faith, by which a JUSt man livtS, W1)uld se~ no purpose. "For who actually sees what he hopes foe?"'" Clearly, faith is an exercise of beJirf in what is non-apparent, "the vital sacrament beneath the bodily appearance," JUSt as, with ~ually good reasons, the inoorporttl soul lies hidden beneath the form of the body,'" Similarly, (ommcnting on the rEI hflT..mmui, Ade/mann asks: does baptism seem to be anything but water to those seeing but not understanding the mystery? Does the bapti~ed man seem to be anything but what he was before? Of course nO(: even the "bath of regeneration" cannot change black into white or educate an illiterate. "1 To think such thoughts is to be "drunk with carnal phantasies rather than wine," to believe in "the illusions of sleep ()J the refleCtions produced in mirrors and still waters, "... We can undentand this aCtivity better, Adelmann continues, if, instead of dividing man's "compact of human narure and power" into "the sense of the body" and "the intellect of the soul," we more carefully examine the chancteri!ti« of ~h. For there an: many things which occupy only the sen5e$, like seeing and hearing; ot:hers, like wriling and reading, which are adminilotered by tm- senses and the intellect in common; and several maltet$ to which access is not possible through the senses at all, such as the relations between numbers, the hLrmonious proportions of $OUnd, and all conceptions of incorporeal things. Here, even tlot purest and most polished mind has difficulty,'" But "no human multy," even with God's good wm, is sufficient in itself fOt understanding sacrllllental mysteries, which peru.in to the eternal salvation of Christ.'" For eumple, what can sense and reason really understand of baptism? The water can be tO\lched, seen, and tasted; beyond this sense cannot go. Reason can comprehend the pbY51ca1 qualities of water, its mobility, obtuseness, humidity, and its relationship to lir, fire, and ealth.'" But neither can unfold the "inscrutable R"t . .. ' ft. -' lW. , 48"
' H'48" '17. -1"-1.. • 8" '11-19. '" /H.I.. 48>, '19-8.. "'/INI.• 48 •• .., 11;,1., 461, IINI., 482, _·d" >08. ""'''., 48" >8-[7· "'1".,48" ''7-21,
[u·"".
-
,86
t8~-86 .
THE
IlUCllAII.I~T
ANO NATURIl
state in whkh Adam was before he sinned.'" By similar mtans we "know" the trinity, that divine "enigma," by which GQd, as nored , is "wholly ~rywhere and yet nowhere."·90 In other words, beyond sen~ and ffllSOn, there is really only faith, the "mediator betw«n God and man, betTing in itself all nature, both create.! and creating. "'9' With faith as guide, as eicero says, we are leJ over "the sea of thu tempestuous period, surrounded as we are on all sides by the densest cloud of error."'"
HlIgh of Lmgro and Durand if Troarn Adelmann of Li~ge was typical of early opponents of 8crengar in stating that reason's limitations could be overcome by "simple" faith: simple, above all, beo.use nothing is more odious to our maker than "excessive scrutinizers. " '9) The human mind is always bubbling with contradicrory philowphies, he mainraiM6 Like Adclmann, his realism is linked to the will and word of God, which has the power to change {mu/arr, /rawfonr:ariY'" the bread and wine. Yet, although written a little earlier than the laners treatise, hi5 argument opens up more philosophical possibilities. His short work therefore provides. bridge betwtcn the early critics of the master of Tours and the lengthier rcplin of Durand of Troam, Lanfrllnc, and Guitmund.·.. Bereng.i5 position, H ugh statn, ;5 a ~il of error (
4".
s..,..
",
eo·
THE EUCHAIUST AND NATURE
' Hugh, of course, misunderstands Berengar's actual position, which did not deny the intellectual production of categories in the mind, but insisted nonetheless that the sacramenr"s material reality cook! !lOt be uOOecstood without interpretation, which ultimately dependNf on them. He thereby Ittributes to Berengar I more radically symbolist starn:;e than the litter wu prepared to defend. Through tbe aame logic Hugh also adopu an interpretive position himself. If in their mmtil "" MI_, he argues, the bread and wine arc only whit one has befon: one's ern, tben they do not contain the pcKentW for bringing about salvation. They remain "impolem:' Therefore, in his opinion, onc hu a choice: either the bread and ....ine are simply material, and not sacraments at all, or they are in some mysterious w.y traruformed into Chri$l's body and blood ..... In separating tbe res from rhe Siplllll, Hugh rhus rejectS Rauamn's allegolism. For a Caesar, he says, cannot be judged. by tbosc beneath him. '''' But a more radical symbolism, as he conceives it, is really a straw man. His appfOllCh makes an intellectualization of ft.f itself unavoid able. His shift in rhinking can be thought of as the conclusion to a Ions previous tradition of interpretation, which resultNf in tbe orthodox adoption of .. genuinely reflective focus. His argument, in fact, unites the realism of Radbcrt and, in particuillC, its explanation of physical symbolism,)06 .... ith a prescholastic conception of essence and change. Reality. fat Hugh, is mntri" or "/WJ1n'•• If Bert'ngar argues that the bread and wine retain their "reality" and yet are po.... erless as sacraments, he proceeds "against rea"'VoC I.', ,,.~O. .- lhJ"'}' 7A. "'Ut.m. .... l-.t.. ""A.B . .... ,~. . 'H,A.,.D. -I~. . ' )'78. - I~.. ')'7C. . ., I~. , ' J'7B-C.
,88
THIl EIJCHARIST AND NATURIl
son.""" For a th ing's nature Or nsen(~ (annOt b., sepano.red from ItS qualities. If wat~r mms to wine, in no sensc is it any longer wl.tet.'OI Btrengar, h~ adds. also mistakes suptrficial fur eleme ntal (han~. A thing , aft~r all, may appnr to change before our ey« but in reality remain the same. "Air doe$ not suffer from the arrow's Aight.""" In orde r ro have essential change, which the cll(haristic mystery requires, on~ MMS divi~ intervc'ntion. For "$table Nature," veiled (or eons by appOl5ition makes us.- of Hilary's COOCOI5sible logical oontn&dictiolU. The sacraments att communicated equally by IICts rf-l and words (1-triw).Wl 'What I have done throu&h my povm"," said Christ, "you do thmugh my authority, I by n:ample, yoo by imiution. " ..., To do what? To fashion (~) his body Ind his blood through his words, not only to ptI.'SC~ his meIDOl)' but to see him spiritually, to Kns.- his pres.-nce..... Ritual, then, is viulizcd. by the Word, and Durand's centtal problem is how to move from word to tnt. His attirude towards written tn&dition is undentandably ambivalent. He is convinced that the eucharistic h.. resy is the cons.-quence of false ~."" But faith cannot be called into question by such "broken figures of the truth. ",,0 On the other hand, he is a~ of tbe pitfall5 of physical symbolism, as evid..nced in his discussion of th.- psalm "Eztol the lord our God; WOJShip at his footStool. . . . '"'" On the surface, he remarks, w.. would seem to be asked to display r.-vtrence towards a ooncrtte object. But, as in the snram..nt, ~ mina is befure us, anotm:r i. mcant."· Reality is present in pil"lWf.m Natural process.es art' subordinated to the word along lines suggested by Ambrosc, in which the .-u.mples iJlusullte not whac "nature formed" but what "th.- benediction consecrated. "'>4 Th .. 'NCII"d of Elias was sufficient to bring fir.- from heavm. Could Christ's word then not bring about. change in "the d ..m .. nts' .ppearan«"?'" Funher, if Christ W1IS able to invent what did not exist, surely he could ,hange aln:ady existing things into those which did not)'C1 aisr.njl For fint creation is mon: rcmulcable than simply changing essences (JlfltUI't ....tMIWP" Tht $IlrJ>C principle of aplanaw'tIM.. , . " '3S[B-C. .. , IIM., [,81B . .., IIM.. [,8'/l-C; ,.~. [,alA. -1101.. " ' •• ,!IoC. .., IIM.. ,.,• • 's,c. ... Uu;'. ..' '-«.m . ... IIM., [,81D. _ 1101., [,8.e. , .. lA(" was Ihe ·'brc&d of life.·' And he alone would raise the dead on Ihe last day. To the ensuing incr«!u1ity among Ihe rank! .t how someone could offer ··his flesh 10 eat"· Durand rnponds in largely allegorical terml. The uneducated. he argucs, failed to appreciate tM symbolic nature of Chris!"s words. J esus used everyda.y "" /IoiJ., 1l9.A.B.
". H<wt......, . o..-i ;f r __ • ,,8.
'" /1oiJ.• IW.B.
"' 1.iJfr .. c.,.,.~ . " . Ij9lA. 1 l9~8 .
,,, Hebt- ").
~n'.
o.r..I rf r_.
""IoiJ.,
," a.
» 9-
... LiM. C."... ' .I~-I ' , 1)9~-?8A. ,,, 11oiJ., , . [). Il948 . ". l~.• "'1.
l~eS and elaborates hi, own conception of the sacrunent. first acCQroing to amMi'''I. then according to ,afi~. In the ,.. ,. .. .
I~B,
,.1) . IJ904A.B .
...,., """" cb. ~~"'... ..J S ........ '49. Nocolonald. IM Rf",. ,.8 11
8~
and n }_
,,, Cl. IoI... tdao. >7'·H . . . - dtuil«l ,,",p9C .
THE IlUCHAIlIST AND NATI.IIlE
like Humbert truSted appearances and physical changes alone. This is precisel y Lo.nfranc·s argument. Through interpretive {e(hniques. he Statcs, ikrengar overumc those least o.pable of resisting; and he did so by focusing their attention on sUIXrfidallinguistic questions at the UIXnsc of d~pcr mysteries. The important point is not the actuol case presented by either side; it is the independent fC(ognitiop by both of a hiatus between popular and learned cultu~. However, if that a.ssumption is shared, Qthet views arc not. In Lanf..... oc's opinifl, Ik~ngar is a "heretic" bct::au$C his teachings arc flO'{ consistent with orthodoxy and bct::au$C he dares to contradict the church's legislation .... The handling of Humbert's case is illust ..... tive. Humbctt, r.anf..... nc argues, was anything but the uncouth "Burgundian" cn..r Berengar aUegt'O{ only opposed inherited authority bur afli.xcd his signature to teners he believed contrary to Catholicism.ll" Needless to say, this approach is different from Bercngar·s. Lanfn-ne's argument is from authority to understanding: the capacity of the church to legislate is the criterion of the beliefs legitimacy. If nn~ secs the chutch in an apostoljc role, th~ responsibililY for making I~gal and thcoJogiCllI decisions is also the criterion of truth. For Ikrengar, the ultimat ~ court of appeal is the human miod and reason. Legjslation and inh~rited doccrine play a scQinted OUt that Augustine den to ice as rhe crystals OUI of which it is made. But the master of Tours wann ro acccp< tbe lint part of the f:quation without r.ec:esu.rily admitting the second, dwt is, lIS he sees it, ro take the figure of speech without the rmlity. Howner wc wish ro name it, there is still .. rmlity ro contend with ..,06 H ere, "S.tn, Lan£ranc misrcp!uenu Bercngar's intentions. Reality \VU oot denied: Berengar merely said that interptetationl dealing with it belong essemially ro the realms of logic .nd language. ..., Lanfranc proposes that "names" ate only useful in describing realities and does oor :let any a priori value in a science of interpretation. In his view, expressions like brea.d and wine keep the appeanmce 1lIld the names of the realities they once were, but, after consecration, they are really transformed inro body and blood .... He concludes by putting into Betengar's mouth W01'dI very like those Bcrengu put inro his. "You," he says. "who deny the flesh and blood, do not accept the latter half of the (abovcmentinned) proposition, wht~ wc, who affirm both halves, nowhere okny the existence of a sacramental ligurc for many celestial chingl." This ritniJirll48, he adds, which impedes Berengu's ideas, advances his own. - If we peel away the rhetoric, the difference between the twO mIly be srated as follows: Lanfranc a$S :HI that names (.-i.,) ate always attached to mlities (m), while Bcrefl8&r maintains that, while realities exist, they reil us little about what names mean in expressions, which must be investigated throush the behaviour of bngua.ge. In other words, both Berengar and Laofranc '8ftt that "when Jivi"", /NIgi., nIb the body of Christ bI:ead, it is I question of Jll(l'ara tit "'Ystica 1«JIIiD. "4'~ Buc Lanfllltw; says that the figure describes a preexilting reality, wbile Bcrengar lIS5eru that what cnmes first is the linguistic description, from which inner reality can perhapl be inferted. Lanfranc addl that, in bis view, lIiI noted, there can be no purely loginI 5OIutions to theological problems.'" For the historic.t or spiritual realities !In given and cannot be expl.tncd away. He prefers ... Doe.,.... c. 6. 41&A; d. c. 18.4'14.
""Ni., c.
6, 416A.6. ... Sot ....... pp. '78(· ... 0. c. 6. 4'6&.C. " ' 1...... ,61:. , .. IJiJ., c. I. 408A-6: ;. ,,;
• " Mon«loo, ' 9' -9~ . Fur •• im ilor C-0_
... ~••, i&iJ_• • "O-'JA.
... I;;J.•
Co
'0. 4,,0_
~"". " ........ ' 1..1, . A""",I"".
Do c",..m..Nl, II.JiI
'" IW.,
u.p.. .. IU ..... . ,8. 4}OA.
\.0" ' . ,,. JliJ.• ~ jOC- D.
" . /liJ. • c. '9.
... I~.. c. '1. 4'oC . ... / H.I.• . OM ; cf. t . 9. ~,oC . .. ' I~.• IWis (I Sall'g"i"is ChriIli Vtri,a't in cmJ,arislia are framed as a dialogue between the author, who ,akC$ tM OI:thoiJ., c. ". ~ '9"" ... E.I ·, c. I. 40jlA .
THIj .6UCU"RIST "ND N"TUkll
el.e. France was then lacking in guides to "higher philosophy·, .ecrets ... So !w: amUKd hirnsdf by wlffiChing novel sm$eS (lfOll2"t . • . illll'fPttatilJlUS) from what he knew, thereby appropriating to himself a unique science ()ilfglllaris srim/iII). This, in turn, he "'-lInted publidy: ··Simulating Ihe style of a master instead of following the matter of insrruction, he cove~ his head with a hood, and, deep within its recesses. pretended to meditllte, deceiving many through the rasping of his Kar«"iy audible voice." H e WIi$ set straight by Lanfranc, Guitmund contLn~s. but, unable to bear the humiliation and the loss of hi, students, he turned to dissecring the sacramenrs, a subjecr obviously beyond his adolescent range. "He preferred to remain a heretic and to enjoy shifting public admiration rather than to live privately as a CathoHc under '300 ...••, These are strong worm. Yet, pruned of their rhetoric, do they not present Bt",ngar somewhat as he saw hirmclf, that is, as an individual interpreting Scri]>{ure in his own manner through logic? Guitmund concludes by acc:using the master of ToW$ of twO beliefs he did nQ( hold, namely denying the sacraments of marriage and of baptism. The former, he adds, enabled him to prost itute women, the la[[er to ( ondemn inh.nn to perdition. In both (IISCS he was the devil's mouthpiece.· M The central issue as Guitmund elsewhere putS it is ~ fll/lMiII venus (IItho1iu f'rriw.'" These arc familiar deuib. Berengar, like earlier heretics, becomes a stereotype, someone long ill "with the heretical pugue."'·" Moreover. he achieve1 4: '"lli ploc .. i,. 0.0 nulla """.. 'um Mt. . . . . . . _ , or.! quod.i pi""" il ..., ,i","1 .... ,," .... , .. ptp;",; i" .. , 100>101.
THE EUCHARIST AND NATURE
but IWIIdA/ittry6 'IlK role of the SCIUeS in appm::;atillg the eu(harin is also emphalliud by al\lllogiC'S with everyday eJlperience. Through qllotidi""lIm txpmmmtll1ll, Guitmund rrl3intains, wc learn that the eu(harinic mystery is similar to the relations bttwttn thougbts and words. Would Berengar not have agreed? Guitmund evidently did not think so. The SCJIsrs, he adds, often fiail, and Berengar, in his vie ... , erred in trying to disprove sacramental signs through material experiment alone.'" However, s\Kh adaptations of ··exptr~nce·· must be setn agilinst the biLckground of Guitmund's $Careh for biblical authoriry IlIId pm::edenr. Book thue of the Dt C"l-is is a virtual (hc, ' 4\>(;, 0: ."0 bot,.,ic. mali,;", bocci ......,...1,,,•.,"0._ .. ptu
(P,"""'".... '964). 494'
,6,; P. Wri ....... , "Dirlqil. So. ,,, IMJ.• ". 8.·8. . ". 10iJ.• 1>. ~. ''' 1001.. c . 8. p. '). 104-06. '" 11U., c. 22, p . 19 . 6,,,. /IU. • ' '' •• 87-30).
,.. "I'M., ., '0. ' ..9" a . c. n.
._.'77-7"'--" : ...... fUJCKO! no< c.......... . "' ". /1, . 1'1"",;;'" ",,, . . oM ,. ~, Sit_: A en';'.! ft/;_, cIiso. ,
(Pr,,,,,,.,,.
1£0,,,,,,,....
.., lIIm_,
T""", ... '979 . ... M"{iw-i AIIJ,,; E",,~;"'. pJ""",. N"''''". ........ t. «I. N. tU,'n.!:. $,"",,"'&"'/; 19 ('978), 806( " pt,to·Hrll). ~'/"'.';,. '''IW.. «I. H""n.!: 806-01 (PL >1 0.0,.11). ~' INJ., ,,.... " p. (H,B).
8.,
3"
THE EUCHAIlIST AND NATURE
her arrival through the eyes of the mortal narrator whose understand· ill8 is limited to the sensual world. In other words, we have the same perspective lIS the obJerver of the euchuistic rire who is Il5 yet 1101: initiated into its deeper mysteries. We are struCK by the rhecoric with which the poet portrays her hair, forehead, SKin, eyes, nose, lips, teeth, chedu, and chin. But in taCh 0ISl' the visible and tangible ~ first ...• And, although intricate mechanics of appearallCl' and rcality accomplllly het diadem, gown, and tunic, the concrete provides the ground for the vatious devices. Nature herself sham the amhiva· lellCl' of eucharistic rcalism, both visible and invisible. Although, Il5 the poet invtnts her, she is an abstraction based on tallier allegory, me is also a Creature who communicateS by means of the spoken word. Mol"l'OVl'f, she not only interpreu and aplains; w aiJO performs. Her moral and scientific instruction is delivered orally. And, as the drama unfolds, ritual plays an inctcll5ingly imponant roll'. The purely phil· OIIDphical issUl'l gradually yield the stage to mythical stories. Venus delll'ns her lawful bed with Hymen and takes up with Antigtmus; in the last act, Genius, the "fflr of Nature, makn his aPpl"-n.IKe with Truth and Fahebood, excommunicating all who deviate from legiti· mate furms of love. The ending may be poor philosophy and weak narrative, but, despite the orhecwoddly air which pervades the allegory, we ate IICtually led Il5 in the sacraments from ritual cowards mearung. Again, Alan is not so much indebted directly to the eucharinic debate lIIi he is aware of many of the same issues. Such new readings of nature implied a different approoo
3'7
J...u... ~« Ie: ·
LANG U AGE, TEXTS, AND REALITY
purpose of know1edse itself. Was its proper function, as St. Bernanl asserted, a meditati~ dialogue between one's inner Kif and God, or was it, as Abdard sa:med to imply, the prlXluction of logically defensible statements about the knowable? A mott fundamental philo
• J. Lt Golf. LIr;
196'), 6J-68. '1'0>
1. ANSELM OF CANTERBURY
Se Anselm is perhaps the most popular medieval thinker among contemporary philosophers and thrologians. His writings take w to the heart of matters interrelating faith and teK$On which remained under investigation throughout the Middle Ages. And, at the cenrre of his remarkable achievement lies the problem of texts: the concept of the text, tm uses of tCXt$, and. their relation to the Word. Anselm enrerc
'~9.
,nd io tJebt .. ".
LANGUAGE. TEXTS. AND REALITY
values; yet he pursued logi(, facwlI!ity, and the rrsolurion of op~ views. A grNl deal of Anselmian scholarship is devotd 10. single ;»ue. the "ontological" argument for the existence of God.' Le$s .ttenrion has been paid tQ hi5 nOtions of language. meaning, and reality.' & a result, while a large literature ha.s gf(lwn up around his dogmatic
c........ ,., ,.",,.,,,6•. 1" .
, (Bet!in. '9'S), 6,1.7
I.ANG U AGE , TEXTS, AND REAI.ITY
!he-ology, cerrain basic issues in his work have not yet rKeived adequale treatment. Some of thcsc--the notion of audi ence, of conv f. S. Se/om;". "Zur a.""",~;. do, w... k, do. hi . ... ".dm _ I.""" ~4 (19,.). ,,, .,,,. con,';", the moo< ... ,oo..i""i ... ",,,,men, 01 ,h< "'"';11$ of .......1.>. WGfh. ~
"hid. 1 fIkror ,h_bou, . .. 011"'4, .... ""'_. od. f . S. Sduni" \S . ....,.!,.; .
.
o,...~
a-...
£di..to..s8h. '9016)• .01. '. p. 7. ( ... 11 ~""""_ ... fl | 
