THE MENDICANT ORDERS ASSAILED.
From 1248 to 1255 Bonaventure taught publicly at Paris with great
distinction. About this time, however, owing to a violent outburst of
opposition to the Mendicant Friars on the part of the secular
professors of the University, he was compelled to suspend his
lectures. This occurrence affords us a valuable insight into the
condition of the Friars at that epoch. It shows us how they were
regarded by their friends and by their enemies, and it enables us to
form a better estimate of their merits. Their lives and actions were
openly and unsparingly impeached. They were put on their trial before
the entire Church, and their very existence depended on the issue.
Every weak spot in their constitution was laid bare--their faults and
failings were proclaimed with emphasis: Their adversaries were men of
repute and learning--doctors and professors of the most renowned
Theological School of Christendom. Thoroughly versed in all the {18}
wiles of controversy, and apparently animated by religious zeal, they
were unscrupulous in their methods, and frequently had recourse to
slander and falsehood. The conflict was thorough and decisive. Issuing
triumphant from such an ordeal the Mendicant Orders proved once and
for all that their position in the Church of Christ is impregnable. So
important an incident ought not to be lightly dismissed.
Various causes tended to create a spirit of opposition to the Friars.
Jealousy at their success, and a spirit of worldliness to which their
lives was a constant reproach, appear to be the chief. The Friars
succeeded in attracting universal admiration. Their professors were
the most brilliant in the University; their lecture halls the best
appointed; their audience the most enthusiastic. They enjoyed the
favour of the Pope and of the King, both of whom conferred many
privileges on them. They possessed neither money nor lands, yet they
stood in need of nothing. They had renounced the pomp and glory of the
world, but the world ran eagerly after them. Their preaching attracted
immense crowds and their confessionals were thronged. They were the
least by profession but the greatest by repute. To some extent they
supplanted the secular clergy. The bishops and the Faithful found
themselves less dependent upon the latter, for the Friars formed
willing and efficient substitutes for them in almost every capacity.
The spirit of {19} the secular clergy of Paris at that period was not
such as to enable them to view this new development without hostility.
An indevout and worldly spirit reigned amongst them, and they were
profoundly indifferent to the highest maxims of the Gospel. This we
learn from the strain in which Pope Alexander [Footnote 9] writes to the
Bishop of Paris in the year 1256: "Concerning certain masters and
scholars of Paris it is notorious that they glory not in being
considered the children of peace but rather in being the authors of
scandal; they glory not in being called the sons of God, but of Satan.
So great is their disorder that they hinder piety not only in
themselves but also in others, and impede the salvation of souls which
we so greatly desire."
[Footnote 9: Cf. "Wadding," Tom. IV, Anno 1256. No. 23.]
The smouldering elements of discord were fanned into flame in the year
1254, and the secular and regular professors came to an open rupture.
The matter arose thus. A noisy brawl occurred amongst the students.
The civil guard intervened; a riot ensued, and one student was killed
and several were wounded. Such encounters were not infrequent, and
they resulted in creating a bad spirit between the magistrates and the
authorities of the University. The latter sought to exempt the
students from civil jurisdiction, whilst the former, in the interests
of public order, insisted on subjecting them to it. The occurrence
just recorded brought matters to a {20} climax. The University
demanded the punishment of the civil guard, the magistrates refused
compliance. Thereupon the entire staff of secular professors suspended
their lectures and withdrew from the city. The Regulars kept their
halls open and continued to teach. This gave great offence to the
secular professors, and when the difference between them and the
municipal authorities was eventually settled, and they had once more
resumed their duties, they did not forget it. Determined to prevent
its recurrence, they framed a statute binding the Regulars to act in
accordance with the majority of the professors. To this they refused
to submit, and in consequence they were forced to abandon their
Chairs. They appealed to the Pope who eventually reinstated them and
revoked the obnoxious statute.
Meantime the agitation against them was vigorously carried on. Its
leading spirit was William of St. Amour, a doctor and professor of the
University. Prominently associated with him were Odo of Douay,
Christian, Canon of Beauvais, John Belin and John of Gectville, an
Englishman and Rector of the University--all men of consequence and
possessing considerable influence. William of St. Amour was a type of
the worldly-wise Christian, and he represented a large and powerful
element at Paris. He was a man of undoubted ability and learning, but
wanting in moderation and soundness of judgment. Possibly he may have
meant well, {21} but blinded by prejudice he did not see the injustice
of his conduct, nor the falseness of his views. He aimed at expelling
the Regulars from the University and eventually obtaining their
suppression. He wrote and preached, against them. His book on the
"Perils of the Last Times," his sermon on the "Publican and the
Pharisee," his pamphlet on the "Robust Beggar," were violent
onslaughts upon them. They were based on false principles and teemed
with slander and invective. William endeavoured to show that the
mendicant form of life was unchristian and pernicious, and that those
who professed it were outside the pale of salvation. Mendicancy,
preaching, hearing confessions, and teaching publicly were the capital
sins that consigned the Friars to reprobation.
He speaks thus of mendicancy: "There is a great danger attendant upon
begging. Those who live by it become flatterers, liars, detractors,
thieves and unjust. To leave all things for Christ and to follow
Christ begging is not an act of perfection. Regulars may not beg even
though the Church permits it. Whoever begs whilst in good health sins
grievously. Hence, whoever places himself in the necessity of doing so
is not within the pale of salvation."
To preach and hear confessions was also on the part of the Friars
wrong and unjustifiable: "All though authorized by the Pope or the
bishop they may not preach unless invited by the parish priest. {22}
They may not live by the Gospel. Those who preach to the Faithful who
have their own pastors, viz. bishops and priests, are not true but
false Apostles. It is greatly to be feared that such as these will
grievously injure the Church unless they are expelled from it.
Confession to Mendicants, approved of by the Pope, does not satisfy
the Easter Precept."
To become professors and teach publicly was another grievous
transgression: "The office of master is an honour, and Religious
should not aspire to honours. Seeing that they belong to a state of
perfection, they should observe the Gospel Counsels, one of which is:
'Wish not to be called master'. Aspiring to the dignity of master they
transgress this counsel and thereby sin publicly, scandalize the
Faithful and deserve to be shunned."
Such were the opinions proclaimed by William, and the effect they
produced was deplorable. A species of universal boycott was instituted
against the Mendicants. Students were dissuaded from attending their
lectures; they were excluded from the University, and the people were
exhorted to refuse them alms. Matters reached such a crisis that the
Dominicans were way-laid and beaten in the streets so that they were
afraid to leave their convent. The opposition to the latter seems to
have been much keener than to the Franciscans, and it would appear
that they were forced to quit the University earlier. It is certain
that {23} St. Bonaventure lectured publicly on the question in
dispute. His treatise on "Evangelical Perfection" is a reply to the
utterances of William of St. Amour. It is recorded that the latter,
hearing of the Saint's action, sent one of his adherents to report the
substance of his lectures--to which he wrote a rejoinder. As we intend
to treat in detail of Bonaventure's apology for the Franciscan Order,
we shall make no further reference to it here. Lest, however, a false
impression concerning the merits of this controversy should remain on
the minds of my readers, I consider it expedient to point out, in the
next chapter, how it was regarded by the Holy See.