Bernard's Importance (§ 1).
Early Career. Abbot of Clairvaux (§ 2).
Activity for Innocent II and against Anacletus II (§ 3).
The Second Crusade (§ 4).
Asceticism (§ 1).
Study of the Bible (§ 2).
Grace and Works (§ 3).
Bernard's Mysticism (§ 4).
Doctrine of the Church (§ 5).
Monasticism (§ 6).
Bernard was born at Fontaines (20 m. n.e. of Dijon), France, 1090; d. at Clairvaux (in the valley of the Aube, 120 m. s.e. of Paris) Aug. 20, 1153. He was the third son of the knight Tecelin and Aleth, a very pious lady, whose influence decided his future. While yet a boy he lost his mother, and, not being qualified for military service, he was destined for a learned career. He was educated at Chatillon and for a time seemed to be influenced by the world (cf. MPL, clxxviii, 1857; Vita, I, iii, 6). But this period can not have been of long duration; the memory of his mother and the impressions of a solitary journey called him back, and he resolved quickly and firmly to break entirely with the world. He induced some of his brothers, relatives, and friends to follow him, and, after spending half a year together at Chatillon, they entered the "new monastery" at Cîteaux (see CISTERCIANS). In 1115 a daughter monastery was founded at Clairvaux and Bernard became abbot. He gave all his energies to the foundation of the monastery, and spent himself in ascetic practises, which the famous William of Champeaux, then bishop of Chalons, checked from time to time (Vita, I, vii, 31-32). Bernard soon became the spiritual adviser not only of his monks but of many who sought his advice and always left Clairvaux impressed by the spirit of solemnity and peace which seemed to be spread over the place (Vita, I, vii, 33-34). His sermons also began to exercise a powerful influence, which was increased by his reputation as prophet and worker of miracles (Vita, I, x, 46). According to the constitution which the new order adopted, Clairvaux became the mother monastery of one of the five principal divisions into which the Cistercian community was organized, and Bernard soon became the most influential and famous personality of the entire order. As early as the pontificate of Honorius II (1124-1130) he was one of the most prominent men of the Church in France; he enjoyed the favor of the papal chancellor Haimeric (Epist., xv), communicated with papal legates (Epist., xvi-xix, xxi), and was consulted on important ecclesiastical matters. At the Synod of Troyes (1128), to which he was called by Cardinal Matthew of Albano, he spoke in favor of the Templars, secured their recognition, and is said to have outlined the first rule of the order (M. Bouquet, Historiens des Gaules et de la France, xiv, Paris, 1806, 232). In the controversy which originated in the same year with King Louis VI, who was not antagonistic to the Church but jealously guarded his own rights, Bernard and his friars defended the bishop before the king (Epist., xiv), afterward also before the pope (Epist., xlvi, cf. xlvii), though at first unsuccessfully.
With the schism of 1130 Bernard enters into the first rank of the influential men of his time by espousing from the very beginning the cause of Innocent II against Anacletus II. This partizanship of Bernard and others was no doubt induced by the fear that Anacletus would allow himself to be influenced by family interests. On this account they overlooked the illegal procedure in the election of Innocent, regarding it as a mere violation of formalities, defending it with reasons of doubtful value, and emphasizing the personal worth of that pope. At the conference which the king held at Étampes with spiritual and secular grandees concerning the affair, Bernard seems to have taken the part of reporter. He also worked for the pope by personal negotiations and by writing (Epist., cxxiv, cxxv). When Innocent was unable to maintain his ground at Rome and went to France, Bernard was usually at his side. Later, probably in the beginning of 1132, he was in Aquitaine, endeavoring to counteract the influence of Gerhard of Angoulême upon Count William of Poitou, who sided with Anacletus (Vita, II, vi, 36). His success here was only temporary (Epist., cxxvii, cxxviii), and not until 1135 did Bernard succeed, by resorting to stratagem, in changing the mind of the count (Vita, II, vi, 37-38). When in 1133 Lothair undertook his first campaign against Rome, Bernard accompanied the pope from his temporary residence in Pisa to Rome, and prevented the reopening of the proceedings concerning the rights of the opposing popes (Epist., cxxvi, 8 sqq.). He had previously visited Genoa, animated the people by his addresses, and inclined them to an agreement with the Pisans, as the pope needed the support of both cities (cf. Epist., cxxix, cxxx). It was also
|
63 |
The ecclesiastico-political affairs of France soon made a new claim upon Bernard's attention. The young king, Louis VII, by making reckless use of his royal prerogatives, caused friction, as when he refused to invest Peter of Lachâtre, whom the chapter of Bourges had elected archbishop. The pope consecrated him, nevertheless, and thus provoked a conflict which was enhanced by the partizanship of Count Theobald of Champagne. After a while Bernard was asked to mediate; he faithfully performed this difficult task and enjoyed the confidence of the king to the end of his life (cf. Epist., ccciv), whereas his relations to the pope appear to have been troubled toward the end (Epist., ccxviii; ccxxxi, 3).
A very unexpected event was the election of Bernard, abbot of Aquæ Silviæ near Rome, formerly a monk in Clairvaux, as Pope Eugenius III (1145-53). Bernard writes a little later (Epist., ccxxxix) that all who had a cause now came to him; they said that he, not Eugenius, was pope. And it is true that he exercised a remarkable influence in Rome especially at first, but Eugenius did not always follow his counsels and views; he had to consider the cardinals who were envious of Bernard. About this time Bernard, at the request of Cardinal Alberic of Ostia, undertook a journey to Languedoc, where heresy had advanced greatly and Henry of Lausanne had a large following. Bernard's presence there, especially at Toulouse, was not without effect, but to win permanent success continual preaching was required. A more important commission was given to him in the following year by the pope himself, to preach the crusade. At Vezelay, where the king and queen of France took the cross, Mar. 21, 1146, Bernard's address was most effective. He then traversed the north of France and Flanders, and the officious doings of the monk Radulf induced him to go into the regions of the Rhine; he succeeded in checking the persecutions of the Jews at Mainz, which Radulf had occasioned. His journey along the Rhine was accompanied by numerous cures, of which the Vita (vi) contains notices in the form of a diary. But he regarded it as the wonder of wonders that he succeeded on Christmas day, 1146, in influencing King Conrad in favor of the crusade, in the face of all political considerations. During the crusade Eugenius sought a refuge in France. Bernard accompanied him, and was present at the great council in Reims, 1148; in the debates against Gilbert of Poitiers (see GILBERT DE LA PORRÉE) following the council, Bernard appeared as his main opponent; but the jealousy of the cardinals brought it about that Gilbert escaped unhurt (Vita, III, v, 15; Otto of Freising, De gestis Frid., i, 55-57; Hist. pont., viii, MGH, Scrip., xx, 522 sqq.). About this time the first unfavorable news of the crusade became known, and tidings of its complete failure followed. No one felt the blow more keenly than Bernard, who with prophetical authority to speak had predicted a favorable issue (De consid., ii, 1). In the last years of his life he had to experience many things which caused him sadness. Men with whom he had had a lifelong connection died; his relations with Eugenius III were sometimes troubled (Epist., cccvi); the frailty and the pains of his body increased. But his mental vitality remained active; his last work, De consideratione, betrays freshness and unimpaired force of mind.
Bernard's entire life was dominated by the resolution he made while a youth. To work out the salvation of his soul, and–which meant the same thing to him–to dedicate himself to the service of God, was thenceforth the sum of his life. To serve God demanded above all a struggle against nature, and in this struggle Bernard was in earnest. Sensual temptations he seems to have overcome early and completely (Vita, I, iii, 6) and an almost virginal purity distinguished him. To suppress sensuality in the wider sense of the word, he underwent the hardest castigations, but their excess, which undermined his health, he afterward checked in others (cf. Vita, I, xii, 60). He always remained devoted to a very strict asceticism (Epist., cccxlv; Cant., xxx, 10-12; Vita, I, xii, 60), but castigation was to him only a means of godliness not godliness itself, which demands of man still other things. The new life comes only from the grace of God, but it requires the most serious work of one's own nature. How much importance Bernard attached to this work, whose preliminary condition is a quiet collection of the mind, may be learned from the admonitions which he gives on that point to Eugenius. That he prefers the contemplative life to the active is nothing peculiar in him; and he doubtless had the desire to devote himself entirely to it. He may have believed that only duty and love impelled him to act. And yet, as he was eminently fitted for action, such work was probably also is harmony with his inclinations. From his own experience he received the strength to work, the thorough education of the personality, by which he exercised an almost
|
64 |
Of Bernard's quiet hours, in spite of the many pressing claims on him, one part was devoted to study, and his favorite study was the Holy Scripture. His knowledge of the Bible was remarkable; not only does he often quote Bible-passages, but all his orations are impregnated with Biblical references, allusions, and phrases, to pay regard to which is often essential for the correct understanding. It is true that his exegesis did not go beyond the average of his time, yet he allows the great fundamental thoughts and vital forms of the Holy Scripture to influence him the more. As he was nourished by them he also knew in a masterly manner how to bring them near to others. All qualities of the great preacher were united in him; besides being vitally seized by the grace of God, he had a hearty desire to serve his hearers, an impressive knowledge of the human heart, and a wealth of thoughts and fascinating exposition, which was indeed not free from mannerism. What is missing in his sermons is reference to the variety of the relations of life, and this is intelligible, because he had monks as his hearers.
Religious geniality is the most distinguishing quality in the whole disposition of Bernard; his other rich gifts serve it, to it is due the impression which he made upon his time, and the importance which he obtained in the history of the Church. At the same time, Bernard is also a child of his time; above all, of the Church of his time, in which his religious life could develop without conflict. In this respect Bernard is related not to Luther, but to Augustine, and between Augustine and him stand Leo I, Nicholas I, and Gregory VII. Thus elements are found in Bernard which point to future developments combined with those which belong only to the ecclesiastical consciousness of the time. Bernard is most deeply permeated by the feeling of owing everything to the grace of God, that on the working of God rests the beginning and end of the state of salvation, and that we are to trust only in his grace, not in our works and merits. From the forgiveness of sin proceeds the Christian life (De diversis, sermo iii, 1). Faith is the means by which we lay hold of the grace of God (In vigil. nativ. domini, v, 5; In Cant., sermo xxii, 8; cf. also In Cant., lxvii, 10; In vigil. nat. dom., sermo ii, 4). Man can never be sure of salvation by resting his hope upon his own righteousness, for all our works always remain imperfect. On the other hand, Bernard does not deny that man can and should have merits, but they are only possible through the preceding and continually working grace of God; they are gifts of God, which again have rewards in the world to come as their fruit, but without becoming a cause of self-glory. Before God there is no legal claim, but an acquisition for eternity through the work of the pious, made possible and directed by God's grace.
A characteristic contrast to these thoughts, which lead man again and again to humility, is the excessive glorification which Bernard devotes to the saints, above all to the Virgin Mary. Though he opposes (Epist., clxxiv) the new doctrine of her immaculate conception, he nevertheless uses expressions concerning the mother of Jesus which go very far (e.g., In nativ. Beat. Virg. Mariœ, v, 7; In assumpt. Beat. Virg. Mariœ, i, 4; In adv. dom., ii, 5). The same concerns also other saints (e.g., In vigil. Petri et Pauli, § § 2, 4, and at the end of the second oration In transitu B. Malachiœ). But the importance of such expression which a Protestant consciousness will never be able to adopt is restricted by this, that they are only used on special occasions, such as a feast of the saints. Otherwise the saints stand in the background, Christ alone stands in the foreground.
Bernard has always been regarded as a main representative of Christian mysticism, and his writings have been much used by later mystics and were the main source for the Imitatio Christi. But just here becomes evident how different the phenomena are which are comprised under the name of mysticism. With the Neoplatonic-Dionysian mysticism that of Bernard has some points of contact, but it differs from it as to its religious character. It is known how depreciatingly Luther speaks of the Areopagite, but this animadversion does not concern Bernard's mysticism. It is not man who soars to divine height, but the grace of God in Christ, which first pardons the sin and then lifts up to itself the pardoned sinner. On this account the whole mysticism of Bernard centers about Christ, the humbled and exalted one; it likes to dwell upon his earthly appearance, his suffering and death, for it is the "work of redemption" which more than anything else is fit to excite love in the redeemed (In Cant., xx, 2; De grad. hum. in its first chapters). At the same time Bernard perceives that a sensual devotion, as it were, to the suffering of Christ is not the goal with which one must be satisfied; the thing necessary is rather to be filled with the spirit of Christ and through it to become like Christ. By Christ's work of redemption the Church has become his bride. To it, i.e., to the totality of the redeemed, belongs this name first and in a proper sense, to the individual soul only in so far as it is a part of the Church (In Cant., xxvii, 6, 7; lxvii; lxviii, 4, 11). What it receives from him is in the first place mercy and forgiveness of sins, then grace and blessing. The climax of grace is the perfect union, but in the earthly life this is experienced by the pious at the utmost in single moments (De consid., V, ii, 1; De grad. hum., viii; De dilig. Deo, x). When Bernard speaks of becoming one with Christ and with God, his thought is clothed with Biblical expressions; but that Bernard in point of fact does not intend to go beyond the meaning of these words can be seen by reading the explanations (In Cant., lxxi, 7 sqq.), where the union with God, to which the pious soul attains, is most keenly distinguished from a consubstantiality, as it exists between Father and Son in the Trinity. Bernard is entirely free from pantheistic thoughts, and that mysticism does not
|
65 |
bring him in opposition to the Church his entire ecclesiastical attitude shows.
The Church as organized, with its hierarchy, at whose head stands the Roman bishop, as successor of Peter and vicar of Christ, is to Bernard the exhibition of the kingdom of Christ on earth. On this account it must enjoy perfect autonomy, having a right of supervision over everything in Christendom, even over princes and states. It even has a right over the worldly sword (De consid., IV, 7; cf. Epist., cclvi, 1). Nevertheless Bernard is no blind adherent of the views of Gregory VII. In the first place Bernard demands a perfect separation between secular and spiritual affairs; the secular as such is to be left to the secular government, and only for spiritual purposes and in a spiritual sense is the pope to have supervision (De consid., i, 6). But Bernard is also an opponent of the absolute papal power in the Church. As certainly as he recognizes the papal authority as the highest in the Church, so decidedly does he reprove the effort to make it the only one. Even the middle and lower ranks of the Church have their right before God. To withdraw the bishops from the authority of the archbishops, the abbots from the authority of the bishops, that all may become dependent on the curia, means to make the Church a monster (De consid., iii, 8).
Notwithstanding Bernard's many-sided activity, he was and remained above all things a monk, and would not exchange his monachism either for the chair of St. Ambrose or for the primacy of Reims. Monachism is to him the ideal of Christianity. He acknowledges indeed that true Christianity is also possible while living in the world (Apol., iii, 6; In Cant., lxvi, 3; De div., ix, 3), but such a life compared with monastic life seems to him a lower, and in spiritual relation, a dangerous position (De div., xxvii, 2), a partition of the soul between the earthly and heavenly. Monasticism itself he regards in an ideal manner; it appeals to him also not so much from the point of view of merit as from that of the safest way to salvation. To this the whole order of the monastery is subservient, aside from this it is of no value. Besides, Bernard had relations with the different monasteries and monkish associations and was interested in them (cf. with regard to the Premonstratensians Epist., viii, 4; lvi; and especially ccliii; concerning other regular canons, Epist., iii; xxxix, 1; lxxxvii-xc; and elsewhere). In his many relations with the Cluniacensians, frictions were not wanting (cf. Epist., i; clxiv; cclxxxiii; etc., and especially the Apologia ad Guilelmum), for the rise of the new order took place partly at the expense of the old. Nevertheless Bernard was highly esteemed by the Cluniacensians, and close friendship associated him with their head, the noble Peter the Venerable. That it was not interrupted is mainly due to Peter, who knew how to bear occasional lack of consideration by his great friend (cf. Epist., clxvi, 1; clxviii, 1) without resentment (Epist., ccxxix, 5). There existed a mutual true affection and admiration; the letters which they exchanged with each other are an honorable monument for both men, and without regard to differences of times and confessions modern readers can appreciate them.
The works of Bernard include a large collection of letters; a number of treatises, dogmatic and polemic, ascetic and mystical, on monasticism, and on church government; a biography of St. Malachy, the Irish archbishop; and sermons. Hymns are also ascribed to him (see below). The most important are the letters, which constitute one of the most valuable collections of church history; and the sermons, of which those on the Song of Songs furnish the chief source of knowledge of Bernard's mysticism. The first and fifth books of his De consideratione are also of a mystic character, whereas ii, iii, and iv contain a critique of church affairs of his time from Bernard's point of view and lay down a programme for papal conduct which a contemporary pope would have found it difficult to follow.
Five hymns are ascribed to Bernard, viz.: (1) the so-called Rhythmus de contemptu mundi, "O miranda vanitas! O divitiarum!" (2) the Rhythmica oratio ad unum quodlibet membrorum Christi patientis, a series of salves addressed to the feet, knees, etc. of the Crucified; (3) the Oratio devota ad Dominum Jesum et Beatam Mariam matrem ejus, "Summe summi tu patris unice"; (4) a Christmas hymn, "Lœtabundus exultet fidelis chorus"; (5) the Jubilus rhythmicus de nomine Jesu, "Jesu dulcis memoria," on the blessedness of the soul united with Christ. All these poetical productions, besides being beautiful in form and composition, are distinguished by a tender and living feeling and a mystic fervor and holy love. If they are really Bernard's, he deserves the title of Doctor mellifluus devotusque. An addition to the Salve regina, closing with the words, "O clemens, O pia, O dulcis virgo, Maria," is also ascribed to him. Mabillon denies Bernard's authorship of all these hymns in spite of the ancient and prevalent tradition. But one is inclined to accept the tradition, especially since the scholastic Berengar, in his Apologia Abelardi contra S. Bernardum, states that Bernard was devoted to poetry from his youth. German adaptations of the last section of (2) by Paul Gerhard (1659), "O Haupt voll Blut and Wunden," and of (5), "O Jesu süss, wer dein gedenkt", are in common use; there are several English versions–as by J. W. Alexander, "O Sacred Head, now wounded" and "Jesus, how sweet thy memory is," and Ray Palmer's "Jesus, the very thought of thee."
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A very accurate list of the literature (2,761 entries, arranged chronologically) is given by L. Janauschek, in Bibliographia Bernardina, Vienna, 1891. The best edition of the works of Bernard is by J. M. Horstius, revised and enlarged by J. Mabillon, Paris, 1687, corrected and enlarged 1690 and 1719, reprinted in
MPL, clxxxii-clxxxv, of which the last vol. contains the
old Vitœ, and some valuable additions not found in Mabillon. A new critical ed. of the Sermones de tempore, de sanctis, and de diversis has been published by B. Gsell
and L. Janauschek in vol. i of Xenia Bernardina, Vienna,
1891. An Eng. transl. by S. J. Eales of the Life and Works of St. Bernard Clairvaux from the ed. of Mabillon,
4 vols. only completed, London, 1888-97, contains
66
the preface of Mabillon to his second edition of the Opera,
a Bernardine Chronology, List and Order of the Letters, and transl. of the Letters, Sermons, and Cantica Canticorum. Of the early biographies the most important is
the Vita prima, MPL, clxxxv, 225-466, the first book of
which, by William of Thierry, was written during Bernard's lifetime, the second, by Ernald, abbot of Bona
Vallis, the other books by Gaufrid of Clairvaux, cf. G.
Hüffer Vorstudien zu . . . Bernhard von Clairvaux, Münster, 1886. Of later literature note J. Pinio, Commentarius de S. Bernardo, in ASB, Aug., iv, 101 sqq., and in
MPL, clxxxv, 643-944 (still very useful); and Mabillon's Prœfatio
(translated in Eales, ut sup.). Of modern
lives the following deserve mention: A. Neander,
Der heilige Bernhard und sein Zeitalter, Berlin, 1813, ed. S. M.
Deutsch, in Bibliothek theologischer Klassiker, vols. xxii-xxiii, Gotha, 1889, Eng. transl. of 1st ed., Life of St. Bernard, London, 1843;
J. C. Morrison, Life and Times of St. Bernard, London, 1877; F. Böhringer, Bernhard von Cairvaux, No. xiii, in Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen, Leipsic, 1878; S. J. Eales, St. Bernard, in The Fathers for English Readers, London, 1890 (Roman Catholic); A. C. Benson and H. F. W. Tatham, in Men of Might, ib. 1892;
R. S. Storrs, Bernard of Clairvaux, the Times, the Man, and his Work, New York, 1892;
W. J. Sparrow-Simpson, Lectures on St. Bernard of Clairvaux, London, 1895 (Roman Catholic);
E. Vacandard, Vie de Saint Bernard, Paris, 1895 (displays knowledge of the
subject and good taste and judgment so far as the ultramontane point of view of the author allows).
Consult further: W. von Giesebrecht, Geschichte der deutschen Kaiserzeit, vol. iv, Brunswick, 1874;
W. Bernhardi, Jahrbücher des deutschen Reichs unter Lothair von Supplinberg, Leipsic, 1879, and
unter Konrad III, ib. 1883;
B. Kugler, Analekten zur Geschichte des sweiten Kreuzzuges, Tübingen, 1879; idem,
Neue Analekten, ib. 1883;
K. F. Neumann, Bernhard von Clairvaux und die Anfänge des sweiten Kreuzzuges, Heildelberg, 1882;
G. Hüffer, Die Anfänge des zweiten Kreuzzuges, in Historiesches Jarhbuch der Görres-Gesellschaft, vol. viii, Bonn, 1887.
On Bernard's relation to Abelard: S. M. Deutsch, Die Synode zu Sens 1114 und die Verurteilung Abälards, Berlin, 1880;
E. Vacandard, Abélard, sa lutte avec S. Bernard, Paris, 1881.
On Bernard as a preacher: A. Brömel, Homiletische Charakterbilder, pp. 53-96, Berlin, 1869;
E. Vacandard, S. Bernard, orateur, Rouen, 1877;
R. Rothe, Geschichte der Predigt, pp. 216 sqq. Bremen, 1881;
A. Nebe, Zur Geschichte der Predigt, i, 250 sqq., Wiesbaden 1879;
E. C. Dargan, Hist. of Preaching, pp. 208 sqq., New York, 1905.
On Bernard's teaching: A. Ritschl, Die Christliche Lehre von der Rechfertigung und Versöhnung, i, §17, Bonn, 1870;
idem, Lesefrüchte aus dem heligen Bernhard, in TSK, 1879, pp. 317-335;
H. Reuter, in ZKG, vol. i, 1876;
G. Thomasius, Dogmengeschichte, ed. Seeberg, ii, 129 sqq., Leipsic, 1889;
A. Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, vol. iii, Freiburg, 1898.
On Bernard as a hymnist: R. C. Trench, Sacred Latin Poetry, pp. 138-141, London, 1864;
S. W. Duffield, English Hymns, pp. 299, 300, 317 430, 600, New York, 1886;
idem, Latin Hymn Writers, passim, especially pp. 186-193, ib. 1889;
Julian, Hymnology, pp. 136-137; P. Schaff, Literature and Poetry, ib. 1890.
Discussions of St. Bernard from various points
of view will be found in the Church Histories dealing with
his period and also in works on the History of Philosophy.
For Bernard's hymns: H. A. Daniel, Thesaurus hymnologicus, 5 vols., Halle, 1841-56; C. J. Simrock, Lauda Sion, Cologne, 1850; J. F. H. Schlosser, Die Kirche in ihren Liedern durch alle Jahrhunderte, Freiburg, 1863; P. Schaff, Christ in Song, New York, 1888; J. Pauly, Hymni breviarii Romani, 3 vols., Aachen, 1868-70; F. A. March, Latin Hymns with English Notes, pp 114-125, 276-279, New York, 1874; W. A. Merrill, Latin Hymns Selected and Annotted, Boston, 1904.
| Calvin College. Last modified on 05/10/04. Contact the CCEL. |  |