August 20, 2020
ST. BERNARD
IS A VERY INTERESTING CHARACTER TO KNOW A FEW THINGS ABOUT
The title of my thoughts and reflections is this: "St. Bernard Is a Very Interesting Character
to Know A Few Things About.”
So here are about a dozen comments about St. Bernard.
He wrote thousands of letters - with
a little help from secretaries.
He was born in what later on will be
France. His dates are 1090-1153.
He had a bad stomach ulcer they think –
for a good bit of his life.
He came from an elite family.
He was the third of seven children, six
of whom were boys.
He joined the Abbey of Cîteaux in his early 20’s with 30 other young men. In time a lot more young men joined because
of him – the result being they needed room so they were moved around a bit and were told to begin
new sites. Eventually his father also
joined – and his one sister became a nun after permission from her husband.
He had a brother who is listed as
Blessed and as Saint – Gerard of Clairvaux – dates about 1120 - 1177. He became abbot of Clairvaux. He was known as
a strict disciplinarian. Then while making a visitation of the abbey at Igny, he was murdered by Hugh, a monk, whom Gerard had threatened with disciplinary punishment.
Bernard was also known to be quite strict and quite caustic. In Butler's description of Bernard we read: "He was not afraid to expose wickedness and condemn stupidity in even the great and powerful - in cardinals, abbots, the members of the Curia - and meanness and narrow-mindedness in anyone. Though people often heeded his rebukes, some resented them." (page 195)
He wrote lots of stuff – especially
about Mary. He’s not made a doctor of the church till 1830. Pius XII described
him as the last of the fathers of the church on the 800th anniversary of his death.
He became involved in church
controversies – schisms, crusades, papal elections – 2 popes.
Cardinal Harmeric, on behalf of the pope, wrote Bernard a
sharp letter of criticism. It said, "It is not fitting that noisy and
troublesome frogs should come out of their marshes to trouble the Holy See and
the cardinals."
Bernard answered that letter by noting that he had assisted at the council, because he had been dragged to it by force.
Then Bernard added: “Now illustrious Harmeric - if you so wished, who would have been more
capable of freeing me from the necessity of assisting at the council than
yourself? Forbid those noisy troublesome frogs to come out of their holes, to
leave their marshes .... Then your friend will no longer be exposed to the
accusations of pride and presumption.”
He got into a big time argument and theological fight
with Peter Abelard. Abelard was rational
– Aristotelian – and logical. There was
name calling like “heretic” by Bernard. Abelard publicly challenged Bernard
to a debate. Bernard eventually said,
“Yes” but before the debate he went to those who would be making the judgment to get their support against Peter Abelard. Abelard left – saying, “It ain’t worth it.”
So that's just a few comments about Bernard. If I discover a well documented life of
Bernard, I’ll read it.
Thomas Cahill - in his book, Mysteries of the Middle Ages - which I just happened to finish today - tells us he gives a hasty caricature of Bernard. The one comment by Cahill that intrigues me is found in a footnote about Dante on page 305: "Similarly, he [Dante] places Bernard of Clairvaux in Heaven, whereas I would exclude him, despite his undoubted importance, on account of his insufferable self-righteousness. Dante knew far less than we do about the life (as opposed to the pious writing) of Bernard. Bernard had been canonized in 1174, almost a century before Dante was born; and Dante, despite his bad opinion of many popes, took with all seriousness the act of papal canonization. Dante's assignments to the afterlife are spot on whenever he actually knew someone (e.g. Boniface VIII) but less accurate for those he knew only by their medieval reputation."
I wouldn't put anyone in hell - a sure way of gaining a reputation as a softie.
