CHAPTER XV

THE MYSTICS

The schoolmen of the twelfth century thought they could reach God by

reason; the Council of Sens, guided by Saint Bernard, replied that

the effort was futile and likely to be mischievous. The council made

little pretence of knowing or caring what method Abelard followed;

they condemned any effort at all on that line; and no sooner had

Bernard silenced the Abbot of Saint-Gildas for innovation than he

turned about and silenced the Bishop of Poitiers for conservatism.

Neither in the twelfth nor in any other century could three men have

understood alike the meaning of Gilbert de la Poree, who seems to

one high authority unworthy of notice and to another, worthy of an

elaborate but quite unintelligible commentary. When M. Rousselet and

M. Haureau judge so differently of a voluminous writer, the Council

at Rheims which censured Bishop Gilbert in 1148 can hardly have been

clear in mind. One dare hazard no more than a guess at Gilbert's

offence, but the guess is tolerably safe that he, like Abelard,

insisted on discussing and analyzing the Trinity. Gilbert seems to

have been a rigid realist, and he reduced to a correct syllogism the

idea of the ultimate substance--God. To make theology a system

capable of scholastic definition he had to suppose, behind the

active deity, a passive abstraction, or absolute substance without

attributes; and then the attributes--justice, mercy, and the rest--

fell into rank as secondary substances. "Formam dei divinitatem

appellant." Bernard answered him by insisting with his usual fiery

conviction that the Church should lay down the law, once for all,

and inscribe it with iron and diamond, that Divinity--Divine Wisdom

--is God. In philosophy and science the question seems to be still

open. Whether anything ultimate exists--whether substance is more

than a complex of elements--whether the "thing in itself" is a

reality or a name--is a question that Faraday and Clerk-Maxwell seem

to answer as Bernard did, while Haeckel answers it as Gilbert did;

but in theology even a heretic wonders how a doubt was possible. The

absolute substance behind the attributes seems to be pure Spinoza.

This supposes that the heretic understands what Gilbert or Haeckel

meant, which is certainly a mistake; but it is possible that he may

see in part what Bernard meant and this is enough if it is all.

Abelard's necessitarianism and Gilbert's Spinozism, if Bernard

understood them right, were equally impossible theology, and the

Church could by no evasion escape the necessity of condemning both.

Unfortunately, Bernard could not put his foot down so roughly on the

schools without putting it on Aristotle as well; and, for at least

sixty years after the Council of Rheims, Aristotle was either

tacitly or expressly prohibited.

One cannot stop to explain why Aristotle himself would have been

first to forbid the teaching of what was called by his name in the

Middle Ages; but you are bound to remember that this period between

1140 and 1200 was that of Transition architecture and art. One must

go to Noyon, Soissons, and Laon to study the Church that trampled on

the schools; one must recall how the peasants of Normandy and the

Chartrain were crusading for the Virgin in 1145, and building her

fleches at Chartres and Saint-Pierre-sur-Dives while Bernard was

condemning Gilbert at Rheims in 1148; we must go to the poets to see

what they all meant by it; but the sum is an emotion--clear and

strong as love and much clearer than logic--whose charm lies in its

unstable balance. The Transition is the equilibrium between the love

of God--which is faith--and the logic of God--which is reason;

between the round arch and the pointed. One may not be sure which

pleases most, but one need not be harsh toward people who think that

the moment of balance is exquisite. The last and highest moment is

seen at Chartres, where, in 1200, the charm depends on the constant

doubt whether emotion or science is uppermost. At Amiens, doubt

ceases; emotion is trained in school; Thomas Aquinas reigns.

Bernard of Clairvaux and Thomas of Aquino were both artists,--very

great artists, if the Church pleases,--and one need not decide which

was the greater; but between them is a region of pure emotion--of

poetry and art--which is more interesting than either. In every age

man has been apt to dream uneasily, rolling from side to side,

beating against imaginary bars, unless, tired out, he has sunk into

indifference or scepticism. Religious minds prefer scepticism. The

true saint is a profound sceptic; a total disbeliever in human

reason, who has more than once joined hands on this ground with some

who were at best sinners. Bernard was a total disbeliever in

scholasticism; so was Voltaire. Bernard brought the society of his

time to share his scepticism, but could give the society no other

intellectual amusement to relieve its restlessness. His crusade

failed; his ascetic enthusiasm faded; God came no nearer. If there

was in all France, between 1140 and 1200, a more typical Englishman

of the future Church of England type than John of Salisbury, he has

left no trace; and John wrote a description of his time which makes

a picturesque contrast with the picture painted by Abelard, his old

master, of the century at its beginning. John weighed Abelard and

the schools against Bernard and the cloister, and coolly concluded

that the way to truth led rather through Citeaux, which brought him

to Chartres as Bishop in 1176, and to a mild scepticism in faith. "I

prefer to doubt," he said, "rather than rashly define what is

hidden." The battle with the schools had then resulted only in

creating three kinds of sceptics:--the disbelievers in human reason;

the passive agnostics; and the sceptics proper, who would have been

atheists had they dared. The first class was represented by the

School of Saint-Victor; the second by John of Salisbury himself; the

third, by a class of schoolmen whom he called Cornificii, as though

they made a practice of inventing horns of dilemma on which to fix

their opponents; as, for example, they asked whether a pig which was

led to market was led by the man or the cord. One asks instantly:

What cord?--whether Grace, for instance, or Free Will?

Bishop John used the science he had learned in the school only to

reach the conclusion that, if philosophy were a science at all, its

best practical use was to teach charity--love. Even the early,

superficial debates of the schools, in 1100-50, had so exhausted the

subject that the most intelligent men saw how little was to be

gained by pursuing further those lines of thought. The twelfth

century had already reached the point where the seventeenth century

stood when Descartes renewed the attempt to give a solid,

philosophical basis for deism by his celebrated "Cogito, ergo sum."

Although that ultimate fact seemed new to Europe when Descartes

revived it as the starting-point of his demonstration, it was as old

and familiar as Saint Augustine to the twelfth century, and as

little conclusive as any other assumption of the Ego or the Non-Ego.

The schools argued, according to their tastes, from unity to

multiplicity, or from multiplicity to unity; but what they wanted

was to connect the two. They tried realism and found that it led to

pantheism. They tried nominalism and found that it ended in

materialism. They attempted a compromise in conceptualism which

begged the whole question. Then they lay down, exhausted. In the

seventeenth century the same violent struggle broke out again, and

wrung from Pascal the famous outcry of despair in which the French

language rose, perhaps for the last time, to the grand style of the

twelfth century. To the twelfth century it belongs; to the century

of faith and simplicity; not to the mathematical certainties of

Descartes and Leibnitz and Newton, or to the mathematical

abstractions of Spinoza. Descartes had proclaimed his famous

conceptual proof of God: "I am conscious of myself, and must exist;

I am conscious of God and He must exist." Pascal wearily replied

that it was not God he doubted, but logic. He was tortured by the

impossibility of rejecting man's reason by reason; unconsciously

sceptical, he forced himself to disbelieve in himself rather than

admit a doubt of God. Man had tried to prove God, and had failed:

"The metaphysical proofs of God are so remote (eloignees) from the

reasoning of men, and so contradictory (impliquees, far-fetched)

that they make little impression; and even if they served to

convince some people, it would only be during the instant that they

see the demonstration; an hour afterwards they fear to have deceived

themselves." Moreover, this kind of proof could lead only to a

speculative knowledge, and to know God only in that way was not to

know Him at all. The only way to reach God was to deny the value of

reason, and to deny reason was scepticism:--

En voyant l'aveuglement et la misere de l'homme et ces contrarietes

etonnantes qui se decouvrent dans sa nature, et regardant tout

l'univers muet, et l'homme sans lumiere, abandonne a lui-meme et

comme egare dans ce recoin de l'umvers, sans savoir qui l'y a mis,

ce qu'il y est venu faire, ce qu'il deviendra en mourant, j'entre en

effroi comme un homme qu'on aurait porte endormi dans une ile

deserte et effroyable, et qui s'eveillerait sans connaitre ou il est

et sans avoir aucun moyen d'en sortir. Et sur cela j'admire comment

on n'entre pas en desespoir d'un si miserable etat. Je vois d'autres

personnes aupres de moi de semblable nature, et je leur demande

s'ils sont mieux instruits que moi, et ils me disent que non Et sur

cela, ces miserables egares, ayant regarde autour d'eux, et ayant vu

quelques objets plaisants, s'y sont donnes et s'y sont attaches Pour

moi je n'ai pu m'y arreter ni me reposer dans la societe de ces

personnes, en tout semblables a moi, miserables comme moi,

impuissants comme moi. Je vois qu'ils ne m'aideraient pas a mourir,

je mourrai seul, il faut donc faire comme si j'etais seul or, si

j'etais seul, je ne batirais pas des maisons, je ne m'embarrasserais

point dans des occupations tumultuaires, je ne chercherais l'estime

de personne, mais je tacherais settlement a decouvrir la verite.

Ainsi, considerant combien il y a d'apparence qu'il y a autre chose

que ce que je vois, j'ai recherche si ce Dieu dont tout le monde

parle n'aurait pas laisse quelques marques de lui. Je regarde de

toutes parts et ne vois partout qu' obscuritd. La nature ne m'offre

rien que ne soit matiere de doute et d'inquietude. Si je n'y voyais

rien qui marquat une divinite, je me determinerais a n'en rien

croire. Si je voyais partout les marques d'un Createur, je me

reposerais en paix dans la foi. Mais voyant trop pour nier, et trop

peu pour m'assurer, je suis dans un etat a plaindre, et ou j'ai

souhaite cent fois que si un Dieu soutient la nature, elle le

marquat sans Equivoque; et que, si les marques qu'elle en donne sont

trompeuses, elle les supprimat tout a fait; qu'elle dit tout ou

rien, afin que je visse quel parti je dois suivre.

When I see the blindness and misery of man and the astonishing

contradictions revealed in his nature, and observe the whole

universe mute, and man without light, abandoned to himself, as

though lost in this corner of the universe, without knowing who put

him here, or what he has come here to do, or what will become of him

in dying, I feel fear like a man who has been carried when asleep

into a desert and fearful island, and has waked without knowing

where he is and without having means of rescue. And thereupon I

wonder how man escapes despair at so miserable an estate. I see

others about me, like myself, and I ask them if they are better

informed than I, and they tell me no. And then these wretched

wanderers, after looking about them and seeing some pleasant object,

have given themselves up and attached themselves to it. As for me I

cannot stop there, or rest in the company of these persons, wholly

like myself, miserable like me, impotent like me. I see that they

would not help me to die, I shall die alone, I must then act as

though alone, but if I were alone I should not build houses, I

should not fret myself with bustling occupations, I should seek the

esteem of no one, but I should try only to discover the truth.

So, considering how much appearance there is that something exists

other than what I see I have sought whether this God of Whom every

one talks may not have left some marks of Himself. I search

everywhere, and see only obscurity everywhere. Nature offers me

nothing but matter of possible doubt and disquiet. If I saw there

nothing to mark a divinity, I should make up my mind to believe

nothing of it. If I saw everywhere the marks of a Creator, I should

rest in peace in faith. But seeing too much to deny, and too little

to affirm, I am in a pitiable state, where I have an hundred times

wishes that, if a God supports nature, she would show it without

equivocation; and that, if the marks she gives are deceptive, she

would suppress them wholly; that she say all of nothing, that I may

see my path.

This is the true Prometheus lyric, but when put back in its place it

refuses to rest at Port-Royal which has a right to nothing but

precision; it has but one real home--the Abbaye-de-Saint-Victor. The

mind that recoils from itself can only commit a sort of ecstatic

suicide; it must absorb itself in God; and in the bankruptcy of

twelfth-century science the Western Christian seemed actually on the

point of attainment; he, like Pascal, touched God behind the veil of

scepticism.

The schools had already proved one or two points which need never

have been discussed again. In essence, religion was love; in no case

was it logic. Reason can reach nothing except through the senses;

God, by essence, cannot be reached through the senses; if He is to

be known at all, He must be known by contact of spirit with spirit,

essence with essence; directly; by emotion; by ecstasy; by

absorption of our existence in His; by substitution of his spirit

for ours. The world had no need to wait five hundred years longer in

order to hear this same result reaffirmed by Pascal. Saint Francis

of Assisi had affirmed it loudly enough, even if the voice of Saint

Bernard had been less powerful than it was. The Virgin had asserted

it in tones more gentle, but any one may still see how convincing,

who stops a moment to feel the emotion that lifted her wonderful

Chartres spire up to God.

The Virgin, indeed, made all easy, for it was little enough she

cared for reason or logic. She cared for her baby, a simple matter,

which any woman could do and understand. That, and the grace of God,

had made her Queen of Heaven. The Trinity had its source in her,--

totius Trinitatis nobile Triclinium,--and she was maternity. She was

also poetry and art. In the bankruptcy of reason, she alone was

real.

So Guillaume de Champeaux, half a century dead, came to life again

in another of his creations. His own Abbey of Saint-Victor, where

Abelard had carried on imaginary disputes with him, became the

dominant school. As far as concerns its logic, we had best pass it

by. The Victorians needed logic only to drive away logicians, which

was hardly necessary after Bernard had shut up the schools. As for

its mysticism, all training is much alike in idea, whether one

follows the six degrees of contemplation taught by Richard of Saint-

Victor, or the eightfold noble way taught by Gautama Buddha. The

theology of the school was still less important, for the Victorians

contented themselves with orthodoxy only in the sense of caring as

little for dogma as for dialectics; their thoughts were fixed on

higher emotions. Not Richard the teacher, but Adam the poet,

represents the school to us, and when Adam dealt with dogma he

frankly admitted his ignorance and hinted his indifference; he was,

as always, conscientious; but he was not always, or often, as cold.

His statement of the Trinity is a marvel; but two verses of it are

enough:--

Digne loqui de personis

Vim transcendit rationis,

Excedit ingenia.

Quid sit gigni, quid processus,

Me nescire sum professus,

Sed fide non dubia.

Qui sic credit, non festinet,

Et a via non declinet

Insolenter regia.

Servet fidem, formet mores,

Nec attendat ad errors

Quos damnat Ecclesia.

Of the Trinity to reason

Leads to license or to treason

Punishment deserving.

What is birth and what procession

Is not mine to make profession,

Save with faith unswerving.

Thus professing, thus believing,

Never insolently leaving

The highway of our faith,

Duty weighing, law obeying,

Never shall we wander straying

Where heresy is death.

Such a school took natural refuge in the Holy Ghost and the Virgin,

--Grace and Love,--but the Holy Ghost, as usual, profited by it much

less than the Virgin. Comparatively little of Adam's poetry is

expressly given to the Saint Esprit, and too large a part of this

has a certain flavour of dogma:--

Qui procedis ab utroque

Genitore Genitoque

Pariter, Paraclite!

. . . . . . . . . Amor Patris, Filiique

Par amborum et utrique

Compar et consimilis!

The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the

Son; neither made nor created nor begotten,

but proceeding.

The whole three Persons are coeternal

together; and coequal.

This sounds like a mere versification of the Creed, yet when Adam

ceased to be dogmatic and broke into true prayer, his verse added a

lofty beauty even to the Holy Ghost; a beauty too serious for modern

rhyme:--

Oh, juvamen oppressorum,

Oh, solamen miserorum,

Pauperum refugium,

Da contemptum terrenorum!

Ad amorem supernorum

Trahe desiderium!

Consolator et fundator,

Habitator et amator,

Cordium humilium,

Pelle mala, terge sordes,

Et discordes fac Concordes,

Et affer praesidium!

Oh, helper of the heavy-laden,

Oh, solace of the miserable,

Of the poor, the refuge,

Give contempt of earthly pleasures!

To the love of heavenly treasures

Lift our hearts' desire!

Consolation and foundation,

Dearest friend and habitation

Of the lowly-hearted,

Dispel our evil, cleanse our foulness,

And our discords turn to concord,

And bring us succour!

Adam's scholasticism was the most sympathetic form of mediaeval

philosophy. Even in prose, the greatest writers have not often

succeeded in stating simply and clearly the fact that infinity can

make itself finite, or that space can make itself bounds, or that

eternity can generate time. In verse, Adam did it as easily as

though he were writing any other miracle,--as Gaultier de Coincy

told the Virgin's,--and any one who thinks that the task was as easy

as it seems, has only to try it and see whether he can render into a

modern tongue any single word which shall retain the whole value of

the word which Adam has chosen:--

Ne periret homo reus

Redemptorem misit Deus,

Pater unigenitum;

Visitavit quos amavit

Nosque vitae revocavit

Gratia non meritum.

Infinitus et Immensus,

Quem non capit ullus sensus

Nec locorum spatia,

Ex eterno temporalis,

Ex immenso fit localis,

Ut restauret omnia.

To death condemned by awful sentence,

God recalled us to repentance,

Sending His only Son;

Whom He loved He came to cherish;

Whom His justice doomed to perish,

By grace to life he won.

Infinity, Immensity,

Whom no human eye can see

Or human thought contain,

Made of infinity a space,

Made of Immensity a place,

To win us Life again.

The English verses, compared with the Latin, are poor enough, with

the canting jingle of a cheap religion and a thin philosophy, but by

contrast and comparison they give higher value to the Latin. One

feels the dignity and religious quality of Adam's chants the better

for trying to give them an equivalent. One would not care to hazard

such experiments on poetry of the highest class like that of Dante

and Petrarch, but Adam was conventional both in verse and thought,

and aimed at obtaining his effects from the skilful use of the Latin

sonorities for the purposes of the chant. With dogma and metaphysics

he dealt boldly and even baldly as he was required to do, and

successfully as far as concerned the ear or the voice; but poetry

was hardly made for dogma; even the Trinity was better expressed

mathematically than by rhythm. With the stronger emotions, such as

terror, Adam was still conventional, and showed that he thought of

the chant more than of the feeling and exaggerated the sound beyond

the value of the sense. He could never have written the "Dies Irae."

He described the shipwreck of the soul in magnificent sounds without

rousing an emotion of fear; the raging waves and winds that swept

his bark past the abysses and up to the sky were as conventional as

the sirens, the dragons, the dogs, and the pirates that lay in wait.

The mast nodded as usual; the sails were rent; the sailors ceased

work; all the machinery was classical; only the prayer to the Virgin

saved the poetry from sinking like the ship; and yet, when chanted,

the effect was much too fine to bear translation:--

Ave, Virgo singularis,

Mater nostri Salutaris,

Quae vocaris Stella Maris,

Stella non erratica;

Nos in hujus vitae mari

Non permitte naufragari,

Sed pro nobis Salutari

Tuo semper supplica!

Saevit mare, fremunt venti,

Fluctus surgunt turbulenti;

Navis currit, sed currenti

Tot occurrunt obvia!

Hic sirenes voluptatis,

Draco, canes cum piratis,

Mortem pene desperatis

Haec intentant omnia.

Post abyssos, nunc ad coelum

Furens unda fert phaselum;

Nutat malus, fluit velum,

Nautae cessat opera;

Contabescit in his malis

Homo noster animalis;

Tu nos, Mater spiritalis,

Pereuntes liberal!

Finer still is the famous stanza sung at Easter, in which Christ

rises, the Lion of Judah, in the crash of the burst gates of death,

at the roar of the Father Lion:--

Sic de Juda, leo fortis,

Fractis portis dirae mortis,

Die surgens tertia,

Rugiente voce patris

Ad supernae sinum matris

Tot revexit spolia.

For terror or ferocity or images of pain, the art of the twelfth

century had no use except to give a higher value to their images of

love. The figures on the west portal of Chartres are alive with the

spirit of Adam's poetry, but it is the spirit of the Virgin. Like

Saint Bernard, Adam lavished his affections on Mary, and even more

than Saint Bernard he could claim to be her poet-laureate. Bernard

was not himself author of the hymn "Stella Maris" which brought him

the honour of the Virgin's personal recognition, but Adam was author

of a dozen hymns in which her perfections were told with equal

fervour, and which were sung at her festivals. Among these was the

famous

Salve, Mater Pietatis,

Et totius Trinitatis

Nobile Triclinium!

a compliment so refined and yet so excessive that the Venerable

Thomas Cantimpratensis who died a century later, about 1280, related

in his "Apiarium" that when "venerabilis Adam" wrote down these

lines, Mary herself appeared to him and bent her head in

recognition. Although the manuscripts do not expressly mention this

miracle, they do contain, at that stanza, a curious note expressing

an opinion, apparently authorized by the prior, that, if the Virgin

had seen fit to recognize the salutation of the Venerable Adam in

this manner, she would have done only what he merited: "ab ea

resalutari et regratiari meruit."

Adam's poems are still on the shelves of most Parisian bookshops, as

common as "Aucassins" and better known than much poetry of our own

time; for the mediaeval Latin rhymes have a delightful sonority and

simplicity that keep them popular because they were not made to be

read but to be sung. One does not forget their swing:--

Infinitus et Immensus;

or--

Oh, juvamen oppressorum;

or--

Consolatrix miserorum

Suscitatrix mortuorum.

The organ rolls through them as solemnly as ever it did in the Abbey

Church; but in mediaeval art so much more depends on the mass than

on the measure--on the dignity than on the detail--that equivalents

are impossible. Even Walter Scott was content to translate only

three verses of the "Dies Irae." At best, Viollet-le-Duc could

reproduce only a sort of modern Gothic; a more or less effaced or

affected echo of a lost emotion which the world never felt but once

and never could feel again. Adam composed a number of hymns to the

Virgin, and, in them all, the feeling counts for more, by far, than

the sense. Supposing we choose the simplest and try to give it a

modern version, aiming to show, by comparison, the difference of

sound; one can perhaps manage to recover a little of the simplicity,

but give it the grand style one cannot; or, at least, if any one has

ever done both, it is Walter Scott, and merely by placing side by

side the "Dies Irae" and his translation of it, one can see at a

glance where he was obliged to sacrifice simplicity only to obtain

sound:--

Dies irae, dies illa,

Solvet seclum in favilla,

Teste David cum Sibylla.

Quantus tremor est futurus,

Quando judex est venturus,

Cuncta stride discussurus!

Tuba mirum spargens sonum

Per sepulchra regionum,

Coget omnes ante thronum.

That day of wrath, that dreadful day,

When heaven and earth shall pass away,

What power shall be the sinner's stay?

How shall he meet that dreadful day?

When shrivelling like a parched scroll

The flaming heavens together roll;

When louder yet and yet more dread

Swells the high trump that wakes the dead.

As translation the last line is artificial.

The "Dies Irae" does not belong, in spirit, to the twelfth century;

it is sombre and gloomy like the Last Judgments on the thirteenth-

century portals; it does not love. Adam loved. His verses express

the Virgin; they are graceful, tender, fervent, and they hold the

same dignity which cannot be translated:--

In hac valle lacrimarum

Nihil dulce, nihil carum,

Suspecta sunt omnia;

Quid hic nobis erit tutum,

Cum nec ipsa vel virtutum

Tuta sit victoria!

Caro nobis adversatur,

Mundus cami suffragatur

In nostram perniciem;

Hostis instat, nos infestans,

Nunc se palam manifestans,

Nunc occultans rabiem.

Et peccamus et punimur,

Et diversis irretimur

Laqueis venantium.

O Maria, mater Dei,

Tu, post Deum, summa spei,

Tu dulce refugium;

Tot et tantis irretiti,

Non valemus his reniti

Ne vi nec industria;

Consolatrix miserorum,

Suscitatrix mortuorum,

Mortis rompe retia!

In this valley full of tears,

Nothing softens, nothing cheers,

All is suspected lure;

What safety can we hope for, here,

When even virtue faints for fear

Her victory be not sure!

Within, the flesh a traitor is,

Without, the world encompasses,

A deadly wound to bring.

The foe is greedy for our spoils,

Now clasping us within his coils,

Or hiding now his sting.

We sin, and penalty must pay,

And we are caught, like beasts of prey,

Within the hunter's snares.

Nearest to God! oh Mary Mother!

Hope can reach us from none other,

Sweet refuge from our cares;

We have no strength to struggle longer,

For our bonds are more and stronger

Than our hearts can bear!

You who rest the heavy-laden,

You who lead lost souls to Heaven,

Burst the hunter's snare!

The art of this poetry of love and hope, which marked the mystics,

lay of course in the background of shadows which marked the

cloister. "Inter vania nihil vanius est homine." Man is an

imperceptible atom always trying to become one with God. If ever

modern science achieves a definition of energy, possibly it may

borrow the figure: Energy is the inherent effort of every

multiplicity to become unity. Adam's poetry was an expression of the

effort to reach absorption through love, not through fear; but to do

this thoroughly he had to make real to himself his own nothingness;

most of all, to annihilate pride; for the loftiest soul can

comprehend that an atom,--say, of hydrogen,--which is proud of its

personality, will never merge in a molecule of water. The familiar

verse: "Oh, why should the spirit of mortal be proud?" echoes Adam's

epitaph to this day:--

Haeres peccati, natura filius irae,

Exiliique reus nascitur omnis homo.

Unde superbit homo, cujus conceptio culpa,

Nasci poena, labor vita, necesse mori?

Heir of sin, by nature son of wrath,

Condemned to exile, every man is born.

Whence is man's pride, whose conception fault,

Birth pain, life labour, and whose death is sure?

Four concluding lines, not by him, express him even better:--

Hic ego qui jaceo, miser et miserabilis Adam,

Unam pro summo munere posco precem.

Peccavi, fateor; veniam peto; parce fatenti;

Parce, pater: fratres, parcite; parce, Deus!

One does not conceive that Adam insisted so passionately on his sins

because he thought them--or himself--important before the Infinite.

Chemistry does not consider an atom of oxygen as in itself

important, yet if it wishes to get a volume of pure gas, it must

separate the elements. The human soul was an atom that could unite

with God only as a simple element. The French mystics showed in

their mysticism the same French reasonableness; the sense of

measure, of logic, of science; the allegiance to form; the

transparency of thought, which the French mind has always shown on

its surface like a shell of nacre. The mystics were in substance

rather more logical than the schoolmen and much more artistic in

their correctness of line and scale. At bottom, French saints were

not extravagant. One can imagine a Byzantine asserting that no

French saint was ever quite saintly. Their aims and ideals were very

high, but not beyond reaching and not unreasonable. Drag the French

mind as far from line and logic as space permits, the instant it is

freed it springs back to the classic and tries to look consequent.

This paradox, that the French mystics were never mystical, runs

through all our travels, so obstinately recurring in architecture,

sculpture, legend, philosophy, religion, and poetry, that it becomes

tiresome; and yet it is an idea that, in spite of Matthew Arnold and

many other great critics, never has got lodgment in the English or

German mind, and probably never will. Every one who loves travel

will hope that it never may. If you are driven to notice it as the

most distinctive mark of French art, it is not at all for the

purpose of arguing a doubtful law, but only in order to widen the

amusement of travel. We set out to travel from Mont-Saint-Michel to

Chartres, and no farther; there we stop; but we may still look

across the boundary to Assisi for a specimen of Italian Gothic

architecture, a scheme of colour decoration, or still better for a

mystic to compare with the Bernadines and Victorians. Every one who

knows anything of religion knows that the ideal mystic saint of

western Europe was Francis of Assisi, and that Francis, though he

loved France, was as far as possible from being French; though not

in the least French, he was still the finest flower from the French

mediaeval garden; and though the French mystics could never have

understood him, he was what the French mystics would have liked to

be or would have thought they liked to be as long as they knew him

to be not one of themselves. As an Italian or as a Spaniard, Francis

was in harmony with his world; as a Frenchman, he would have been

out of place even at Clairvaux, and still more among his own

Cordeliers at the doors of the Sorbonne.

Francis was born in 1186, at the instant when French art was

culminating, or about to culminate, in the new cathedrals of Laon

and Chartres, on the ruins of scholastic religion and in the full

summer of the Courts of Love. He died in 1226, just as Queen Blanche

became Regent of France and when the Cathedral of Beauvais was

planned. His life precisely covered the most perfect moment of art

and feeling in the thousand years of pure and confident

Christianity. To an emotional nature like his, life was still a

phantasm or "concept" of crusade against real or imaginary enemies

of God, with the "Chanson de Roland" for a sort of evangel, and a

feminine ideal for a passion. He chose for his mistress "domina

nostra paupertas," and the rules of his order of knighthood were as

visionary as those of Saint Bernard were practical. "Isti sunt

fratres mei milites tabulae rotundae, qui latitant in desertis"; his

Knights of the Round Table hid themselves for their training in

deserts of poverty, simplicity, humility, innocence of self,

absorption in nature, in the silence of God, and, above all, in love

and joy incarnate, whose only influence was example. Poverty of body

in itself mattered nothing; what Francis wanted was poverty of

pride, and the external robe or the bare feet were outward and

necessary forms of protection against its outward display. Against

riches or against all external and visible vanity, rules and laws

could be easily enforced if it were worth while, although the purest

humility would be reached only by those who were indifferent and

unconscious of their external dress; but against spiritual pride the

soul is defenceless, and of all its forms the subtlest and the

meanest is pride of intellect. If "nostra domina paupertas" had a

mortal enemy, it was not the pride beneath a scarlet robe, but that

in a schoolmaster's ferule, and of all schoolmasters the vainest and

most pretentious was the scholastic philosopher. Satan was logic.

Lord Bacon held much the same opinion. "I reject the syllogism," was

the starting-point of his teaching as it was the essence of Saint

Francis's, and the reasons of both men were the same though their

action was opposite. "Let men please themselves as they will in

admiring and almost adoring the human mind, this is certain:--that,

as an uneven mirror distorts the rays of objects according to its

own figure and section, so the mind ... cannot be trusted ..."

Bacon's first object was the same as that of Francis, to humiliate

and if possible destroy the pride of human reason; both of them knew

that this was their most difficult task, and Francis, who was

charity incarnate, lost his self-control whenever he spoke of the

schools, and became almost bitter, as though in constant terror of a

poison or a cancer. "Praeodorabat etiam tempora non longe ventura in

quibus jam praesciebat scientiam inflativam debere esse occasionem

ruinae." He foresaw the time not far off when puffed-up science

would be the ruin of his "domina paupertas." His struggle with this

form of human pride was desperate and tragical in its instant

failure. He could not make even his novices understand what he

meant. The most impossible task of the mind is to reject in practice

the reflex action of itself, as Bacon pointed out, and only the

highest training has sometimes partially succeeded in doing it. The

schools--ancient, mediaeval, or modern--have almost equally failed,

but even the simple rustics who tried to follow Francis could not

see why the rule of poverty should extend to the use of a psalter.

Over and over again he explained vehemently and dramatically as only

an Italian or a Spaniard could, and still they failed to catch a

notion of what he meant.

Quum ergo venisset beatus Franciscus ad locum ubi erat ille

novitius, dixit ille novitius: "Pater, mihi esset magna consolatio

habere psalterium, sed licet generalis illud mihi concesserit, tamen

vellem ipsum habere, pater, de conscientia tua." Cui beatus

Franciscus respondit: "Carolus imperator, Rolandus et Oliverus et

omnes palatini et robusti viri qui potentes fuerunt in proelio,

prosequendo infideles cum multa sudore et labore usque ad mortem,

habuerunt de illis victoriara memorialiter, et ad ultimum ipsi

sancti martyres sunt mortui pro fide Christi in certamine. Nunc

autem multi sunt qui sola narratione eorum quae illi fecerunt volunt

recipere honorem et humanam laudem. Ita et inter nos sunt multi qui

solum recitando et praedicando opera quae sancti fecerunt volunt

recipere honorem et laudem; ... postquam habueris psalterium,

concupisces et volueris habere breviarium; et postquam habueris

breviarium, sedebis in cathedra tanquam magnus prelatus et dices

fratri tuo:--Apporta mihi breviarium!"

Haec autem dicens beatus Franciscus cum magno fervore spiritus

accepit de cinere et posuit super caput suum, et ducendo manum super

caput suum in circuitu sicut ille qui lavat caput, dicebat: "Ego

breviarium! ego breviarium!" et sic reiteravit multoties ducendo

manum per caput. Et stupefactus et verecundatus est frater ille ...

Elapsis autem pluribus mensibus quum esset beatus Franciscus apud

locum sanctae Mariae de Portiuncula, juxta cellam post domum in via,

praedictus frater iterum locutus est ei de psalterio. Cui beatus

Franciscus dixit: "Vade et facias de hoc sicut dicet tibi minister

tuus!" Quo audito, frater ille coepit redire per viam unde venerat.

Beatus autem Franciscus remanens in via coepit considerare illud

quod dixerat illi fratri, et statim clamavit post cum, dicens:

"Expecta me, frater! expecta!" Et ivit usque ad eum et ait illi:

"Revertere mecum, frater, et ostende mihi locum ubi dixi tibi quod

faceres de psalterio sicut diceret minister tuus." Quum ergo

pervenissent ad locum, beatus Franciscus genuflexit coram fratre

illo, et dixit: "Mea culpa, frater! mea culpa! quia quicunque vult

esse frater Minor non debet habere nisi tunicam, sicut regula sibi

concedit, et cordam et femoralia et qui manifesta necessitate

coguntur calciamenta."

So when Saint Francis happened to come to the place where the novice

was, the novice said: "Father, it would be a great comfort to me to

have a psalter, but though my general should grant it, still I would

rather have it, father, with your knowledge too." Saint Francis

answered: "The Emperor Charlemagne, Roland and Oliver, and all the

palatines and strong men who were potent in battle, pursuing the

infidels with much toil and sweat even to death, triumphed over them

memorably [without writing it?], and at last these holy martyrs died

in the contest for the faith of Christ. But now there are many who,

merely by telling of what those men did, want to receive honour and

human praise. So, too, among us are many who, merely by reciting and

preaching the works which the saints have done, want to receive

honour and praise; ... After you have got the psalter, you will

covet and want a breviary; and after getting the breviary, you will

sit on your throne like a bishop, and will say to your brother:

'Bring me the breviary!'"

While saying this, Saint Francis with great vehemence took up a

handful of ashes and spread it over his bead; and moving his hand

about his head in a circle as though washing it, said: "I, breviary!

I, breviary!" and so kept on, repeatedly moving his hand about his

head; and stupefied and ashamed was that novice. ... But several

months afterwards when Saint Francis happened to be near Sta Maria

de Portiuncula, by the cell behind the house on the road, the same

brother again spoke to him about the psalter. Saint Francis replied:

"Go and do about it as your director says." On this the brother

turned back, but Saint Francis, standing in the road, began to

reflect on what he had said, and suddenly called after him: "Wait

for me, brother! wait!" and going after him, said: "Return with me,

brother, and show me the place where I told you to do as your

director should say, about the psalter." When they had come back to

it, Saint Francis bent before the brother, and said: "Mea culpa,

brother, mea culpa! because whoever wishes to be a Minorite must

have nothing but a tunic, as the rule permits, and the cord, and the

loincloth, and what covering is manifestly necessary for the limbs."

So vivid a picture of an actual mediaeval saint stands out upon this

simple background as is hardly to be found elsewhere in all the

records of centuries, but if the brother himself did not understand

it and was so shamed and stupefied by Francis's vehemence, the world

could understand it no better; the Order itself was ashamed of Saint

Francis because they understood him too well. They hastened to

suppress this teaching against science, although it was the life of

Francis's doctrine. He taught that the science of the schools led to

perdition because it was puffed up with emptiness and pride.

Humility, simplicity, poverty were alone true science. They alone

led to heaven. Before the tribunal of Christ, the schoolmen would be

condemned, "and, with their dark logic (opinionibus tenebrosis)

shall be plunged into outer darkness with the spirits of the

darkness." They were devilish, and would perish with the devils.

One sees instantly that neither Francis of Assisi nor Bacon of

Verulam could have hoped for peace with the schools; twelfth-century

ecstasy felt the futility of mere rhetoric quite as keenly as

seventeenth-century scepticism was to feel it; and yet when Francis

died in 1226 at Assisi, Thomas was just being born at Aquino some

two hundred kilometres to the southward. True scholasticism had not

begun. Four hundred years seem long for the human mind to stand

still--or go backward; the more because the human mind was never

better satisfied with itself than when thus absorbed in its mirror;

but with that chapter we have nothing to do. The pleasantest way to

treat it was that of Saint Francis; half-serious, half-jesting; as

though, after all, in the thought of infinity, four hundred years

were at most only a serio-comic interlude. At Assisi, once, when a

theologian attacked Fra Egidio by the usual formal arraignment in

syllogisms, the brother waited until the conclusions were laid down,

and then, taking out a flute from the folds of his robe, he played

his answer in rustic melodies. The soul of Saint Francis was a

rustic melody and the simplest that ever reached so high an

expression. Compared with it, Theocritus and Virgil are as modern as

Tennyson and ourselves.

All this shows only what Saint Francis was not; to understand what

he was and how he goes with Saint Bernard and Saint Victor through

the religious idyll of Transition architecture, one must wander

about Assisi with the "Floretum" or "Fioretti" in one's hand;--the

legends which are the gospel of Francis as the evangels are the

gospel of Christ, who was reincarnated in Assisi. We have given a

deal of time to showing our own sceptical natures how simple the

architects and decorators of Chartres were in their notions of the

Virgin and her wants; but French simple-mindedness was already

complex compared with Italian. The Virgin was human; Francis was

elementary nature itself, like sun and air; he was Greek in his joy

of life:--

... Recessit inde et venit inter Cannarium

et Mevanium. Et respexit quasdam arbores

juxta viam in quibus residebat tanta multitudo

avium diversarum quod nunquam in

partibus illis visa similis multitudo. In campo

insuper juxta praedictas arbores etiam multitudo

maxima residebat. Quam multitudinem

sanctus Franciscus respiciens et admirans,

facto super eum Spiritu Dei, dixit sociis: "Vobis

hic me in via exspectantibus, ibo et praedicabo

sororibus nostris aviculis." Et intravit

in campum ad aves quae residebant in terra.

Et statim quum praedicare incepit omnes aves

in arboribus residentes descenderunt ad eum

et simul cum aliis de campo immobiles perman

serunt, quum tamen ipse inter eas iret plurimas

tunica contingendo. Et nulla earum penitus

movebatur, sicut recitavit frater Jacobus de

Massa, sanctus homo, qui omnia supradicta

habuit ab ore fratris Massei, qui fuit unus de

iis qui tune erant socii sancti patris.

Quibus avibus sanctus Franciscus ait:

"Multum tenemini Deo, sorores meas aves,

et debetis eum semper et ubique laudare propter

liberum quem ubique habetis volatum,

propter vestitum duplicatum et triplicatum,

propter habitum pictum et ornatum, propter

victum sine vestro labore paratum, propter

cantum a Creatore vobis intimatum, propter

numerum ex Dei benedictione multiplicatum,

propter semen vestrum a Deo in area reservatum,

propter elementum aeris vobis deputatum.

Vos non seminatis neque metitis, et Deus

vos pascit; et dedit vobis flumina et fontes ad

potandum, montes et colles, saxa et ibices ad

refugium, et arbores altes ad nidificandum;

et quum nec filare nec texere sciatis, praebet

tam vobis quam vestris filiis necessarium indumentum.

Unde multum diligit vos Creator

qui tot beneficia contulit. Quapropter cavete,

sorores mes aviculae, ni sitis ingratae sed

semper laudare Deum studete."

... He departed thence and came between

Cannara and Bevagna; and near the road he

saw some trees on which perched so great a

number of birds as never in those parts had

been seen the like. Also in the field beyond,

near these same trees, a very great multitude

rested on the ground. This multitude, Saint

Francis seeing with wonder, the spirit of God

descending on him he said to his companions:

"Wait for me on the road, while I go and

preach to our sisters the little birds." And he

went into the field where the birds were on

the ground. And as soon as he began to preach,

all the birds in the trees came down to him and

with those in the field stood quite still, even

when he went among them touching many

with his robe. Not one of them moved,

as Brother James of Massa related, a saintly

man who had the whole story from the mouth

of Brother Masseo who was one of those then

with the sainted father.

To these birds, Saint Francis said: "Much

are you bound to God, birds, my sisters, and

everywhere and always must you praise him for

the free flight you everywhere have; for the

double and triple covering; for the painted and

decorated robe; for the food prepared without

your labour; for the song taught you by the

Creator; for your number multiplied by God's

blessing; for your seed preserved by God in

the ark; for the element of air allotted to you.

You neither sow nor reap, and God feeds

you; and has given you rivers and springs

to drink at, mountains and hills, rocks and

wild goats for refuge, and high trees for nesting;

and though you know neither how to spin nor

to weave, He gives both you and your children

all the garments you need. Whence much must

the Creator love you, Who confers so many

blessings. Therefore take care, my small bird

sisters, never to be ungrateful, but always strive

to praise God."

Fra Ugolino, or whoever wrote from the dictation of Brother James of

Massa, after the tradition of Brother Masseo of Marignano reported

Saint Francis's sermon in absolute good faith as Saint Francis

probably made it and as the birds possibly received it. All were

God's creatures, brothers and sisters, and God alone knew or knows

whether or how far they understand each other; but Saint Francis, in

any case, understood them and believed that they were in sympathy

with him. As far as the birds or wolves were concerned, it was no

great matter, but Francis did not stop with vertebrates or even with

organic forms. "Nor was it surprising," said the "Speculum," "if

fire and other creatures sometimes revered and obeyed him; for, as

we who were with him very frequently saw, he held them in such

affection and so much delighted in them, and his soul was moved by

such pity and compassion for them, that he would not see them

roughly handled, and talked with them with such evident delight as

if they were rational beings":--

Nam quadam vice, quum sederet juxta ignem, ipso nesciente, ignis

invasit pannos ejus de lino, sive brachas, juxta genu, quumque

sentiret calorem ejus nolebat ipsum extinguere. Socius autem ejus

videns comburi pannos ejus cucurrit ad eum volens extinguere ignem;

ipse vero prohibuit ei, dicens: "Noli, frater, carissime, noli male

facere igni!" Et sic nullo modo voluit quod extingueret ipsum. Ille

vero festinanter ivit ad fratrem qui erat guardianus ipsius, et

duxit eum ad beatum Franciscum, et statim contra voluntatem beati

Francisci, extinxit ignem. Unde quacunque necessitate urgente

nunquam voluit extinguere ignem vel lampadem vel candelam, tantum

pietate movebatur ad ipsum. Nolebat etiam quod frater projiceret

ignem vel lignum fumigantem de loco ad locum sicut solet fieri, sed

volebat ut plane poneret ipsum in terra ob reverentiam illius cujus

est creatura.

For once when he was sitting by the fire, a spark, without his

knowing it, caught his linen drawers and set them burning near the

knee, and when he felt the heat he would not extinguish it; but his

companion, seeing his clothes on fire, ran to put it out, and he

forbade it, saying: "Don't, my dearest brother, don't hurt the

fire!" So he utterly refused to let him put it out, and the brother

hurried off to get his guardian, and brought him to Saint Francis,

and together they put out the fire at once against Saint Francis's

will. So, no matter what the necessity, he would never put out fire

Or a lamp or candle, so strong was his feeling for it; he would not

even let a brother throw fire or a smoking log from place to place,

as is usual, but wanted it placed gently (piano) on the ground, out

of respect for Him Whose creature it is.

The modern tourist, having with difficulty satisfied himself that

Saint Francis acted thus in good faith, immediately exclaims that he

was a heretic and should have been burned; but, in truth, the

immense popular charm of Saint Francis, as of the Virgin, was

precisely his heresies. Both were illogical and heretical by

essence;--in strict discipline, in the days of the Holy Office, a

hundred years later, both would have been burned by the Church, as

Jeanne d'Arc was, with infinitely less reason, in 1431. The charm of

the twelfth-century Church was that it knew how to be illogical--no

great moral authority ever knew it better--when God Himself became

illogical. It cared no more than Saint Francis, or Lord Bacon, for

the syllogism. Nothing in twelfth-century art is so fine as the air

and gesture of sympathetic majesty with which the Church drew aside

to let the Virgin and Saint Francis pass and take the lead--for a

time. Both were human ideals too intensely realized to be resisted

merely because they were illogical. The Church bowed and was silent.

This does not concern us. What the Church thought or thinks is its

own affair, and what it chooses to call orthodox is orthodox. We

have been trying only to understand what the Virgin and Saint

Francis thought, which is matter of fact, not of faith. Saint

Francis was even more outspoken than the Virgin. She calmly set

herself above dogma, and, with feminine indifference to authority,

overruled it. He, having asserted in the strongest terms the

principle of obedience, paid no further attention to dogma, but,

without the least reticence, insisted on practices and ideas that no

Church could possibly permit or avow. Toward the end of his life,

his physician cauterized his face for some neuralgic pain:--

Et posito ferro in igne pro coctura fienda, beatus Franciscus volens

confortare spiritum suum ne pavesceret, sic locutus est ad ignem:

"Frater mi, ignis, nobilis et utilis inter alias creaturas, esto

mihi curialis in hac hora quia olim te dilexi et diligam amore

illius qui creavit te. Deprecor etiam creatorem nostrum qui nos

creavit ut ita tuum calorem temperct ut ipsum sustinere valeam." Et

oratione finita signavit ignem signo crucis.

When the iron was put on the fire for making the cotterie, Saint

Francis, wishing to encourage himself against fear, spoke thus to

the fire: "My brother, fire, noblest and usefullest of creatures, be

gentle to me now, because I have loved and will love you with the

love of Him who created you. Our Creator, too, Who created us both,

I implore so to temper your heat that I may have strength to bear

it." And having spoken, he signed the fire with the cross.

With him, this was not merely a symbol. Children and saints can

believe two contrary things at the same time, but Saint Francis had

also a complete faith of his own which satisfied him wholly. All

nature was God's creature. The sun and fire, air and water, were

neither more nor less brothers and sisters than sparrows, wolves,

and bandits. Even "daemones sunt castalli Domini nostri"; the devils

are wardens of our Lord. If Saint Francis made any exception from

his univeral law of brotherhood it was that of the schoolmen, but it

was never expressed. Even in his passionate outbreak, in the

presence of Saint Dominic, at the great Chapter of his Order at

Sancta Maria de Portiuncula in 1218, he did not go quite to the

length of denying the brotherhood of schoolmen, although he placed

them far below the devils, and yet every word of this address seems

to sob with the anguish of his despair at the power of the school

anti-Christ:--

Quum beatus Franciscus esset in capitulo generali apud Sanctam

Mariam de Portiuncula ... et fuerunt ibi quinque millia fratres,

quamplures fratres sapientes et scientiati iverunt ad dominum

Ostiensem qui erat ibidem, et dixerunt ei: "Domine, volumus ut

suadetis fratri Francisco quod sequatur consilium fratrum sapientium

et permittat se interdum duci ab eis." Et allegabant regulam sancti

Benedicti, Augustini et Bernardi qui docent sic et sic vivere

ordinate. Quae omnia quum retulisset cardinalis beato Francisco per

modum admoni admonitionis, beatus Franciscus, nihil sibi respondens,

cepit ipsum per manum et duxit eum ad fratres congregatos in

capitulo, et sic locutus est fratribus in fervore et virtute Spirit

us sancti:--

"Fratres mei, fratres mei, Dominus vocavit me per viam simplicitatis

et humilitatis, et bane viam ostendit mini in veritate pro me et pro

illis qui volunt mini credere et imitari. Et ideo volo quod non

nominetis mihi aliquam regulam neque sancti Benedicti neque sancti

Augustini neque sancti Bernardi, neque aliquam viam et formam

vivendi praeter illam quae mihi a Domino est ostensa misericorditer

et donata. Et dixit mihi Dominus quod volebat me esse unum pauperem

et stultum idiotam [magnum fatuum] in hoc mundo et noluit nos ducere

per viam aliam quam per istam scientiam. Sed per vestram scientiam

et sapientiam Deus vos confundet et ego confido in castallis Domini

[idest dasmonibus] quod per ipsos puniet vos Deus et adhuc redibitis

ad vestrum statum cum vituperio vestro velitis nolitis."

When Saint Francis was at the General Chapter held at Sancta maris

de Portiuncula ... and five thousand brothers were present, A number

of them who were schoolmen went to Cardinal Hugolino who was there,

and said to him: "My lord, we want you to persuade Brother Francis

to follow the council of the learned brothers, and sometimes let

himself be guided by them." And they suggested the rule of Saint

Benedict or Augustine or Bernard who require their congregations to

live so and so, by regulation. When the cardinal had repeated all

this to Saint Francis by way of counsel, Saint Francis, making no

answer, took him by the hand and led him to the brothers assembled

in Chapter, and in the fervour and virtue of the Holy Ghost, spoke

thus to the brothers:

"My brothers, my brothers, God has called me by way of simplicity

and humility, and has shown me in verity this path for me and

those who want to believe and follow me; so I want you to talk of no

Rule to me, neither Saint Benedict nor Saint Augustine nor Saint

Bernard, nor any way or form of Life whatever except that which God

has mercifully pointed out and granted to me. And God said that he

wanted me to be a pauper [poverello] and an idiot--a great fool--in

this world, and would not lead us by any other path of science than

this. But by your science and syllogisms God will confound you, and

I trust in God's warders, the devils, that through them God shall

punish you, and you will yet come back to your proper station with

shame, whether you will or no."

The narration continues: "Tunc cardinalis obstupuit valde et nihil

respondit. Et omnes fratres plurimum timuerunt."

One feels that the reporter has not exaggerated a word; on the

contrary, he softened the scandal, because in his time the Cardinal

had gained his point, and Francis was dead. One can hear Francis

beginning with some restraint, and gradually carried away by passion

till he lost control of himself and his language: "'God told me,

with his own words, that he meant me to be a beggar and a great

fool, and would not have us on any other terms; and as for your

science, I trust in God's devils who will beat you out of it, as you

deserve.' And the Cardinal was utterly dumbfounded and answered

nothing; and all the brothers were scared to death." The Cardinal

Hugolino was a great schoolman, and Dominic was then founding the

famous order in which the greatest of all doctors, Albertus Magnus,

was about to begin his studies. One can imagine that the Cardinal

"obstupuit valde," and that Dominic felt shaken in his scheme of

school instruction. For a single instant, in the flash of Francis's

passion, the whole mass of five thousand monks in a state of semi-

ecstasy recoiled before the impassable gulf that opened between them

and the Church.

No one was to blame--no one ever is to blame--because God wanted

contradictory things, and man tried to carry out, as he saw them,

God's trusts. The schoolmen saw their duty in one direction; Francis

saw his in another; and, apparently, when both lines had been

carried, after such fashion as might be, to their utmost results,

and five hundred years had been devoted to the effort, society

declared both to be failures. Perhaps both may some day be revived,

for the two paths seem to be the only roads that can exist, if man

starts by taking for granted that there is an object to be reached

at the end of his journey. The Church, embracing all mankind, had no

choice but to march with caution, seeking God by every possible

means of intellect and study. Francis, acting only for himself,

could throw caution aside and trust implicitly in God, like the

children who went on crusade. The two poles of social and political

philosophy seem necessarily to be organization or anarchy; man's

intellect or the forces of nature. Francis saw God in nature, if he

did not see nature in God; as the builders of Chartres saw the

Virgin in their apse. Francis held the simplest and most childlike

form of pantheism. He carried to its last point the mystical union

with God, and its necessary consequence of contempt and hatred for

human intellectual processes. Even Saint Bernard would have thought

his ideas wanting in that "mesure" which the French mind so much

prizes. At the same time we had best try, as innocently as may be,

to realize that no final judgment has yet been pronounced, either by

the Church or by society or by science, on either or any of these

points; and until mankind finally settles to a certainty where it

means to go, or whether it means to go anywhere,--what its object

is, or whether it has an object,--Saint Francis may still prove to

have been its ultimate expression. In that case, his famous chant--

the "Cantico del Sole"--will be the last word of religion, as it was

probably its first. Here it is--too sincere for translation:--

CANTICO DEL SOLE

... Laudato sie, misignore, con tucte le tue creature

spetialmente messor lo frate sole

lo quale iorno et allumini noi per loi

et ellu e bellu e radiante cum grande splendore

de te, altissimo, porta significatione.

Laudato si, misignore, per sora luna e le stelle

in celu lai formate clarite et pretiose et belle.

Laudato si, misignore, per frate vento

et per aere et nubilo et sereno et onne tempo

per lo quale a le tue creature dai sustentamento.

Laudato si, misignore, per sor aqua

la quale e multo utile et humile et pretiosa et casta.

Laudato si, misignore, per frate focu

per lo quale enallumini la nocte

ed ello e bello et jocondo et robustoso et forte.

Laudato si, misignore, per sora nostra matre terra

la quale ne sustenta et governa

et produce diversi fructi con coloriti flori et herba.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Laudato si, misignore, per sora nostra morte corporale

de la quale nullu homo vivente po skappare

guai acquelli ke morrano ne le peccata mortali....

The verses, if verses they are, have little or nothing in common

with the art of Saint Bernard or Adam of Saint-Victor. Whatever art

they have, granting that they have any, seems to go back to the

cave-dwellers and the age of stone. Compared with the naivete of the

"Cantico del Sole," the "Chanson de Roland" or the "Iliad" is a

triumph of perfect technique. The value is not in the verse. The

"Chant of the Sun" is another "Pons Seclorum"--or perhaps rather a

"Pons Sanctorum"--over which only children and saints can pass. It

is almost a paraphrase of the sermon to the birds. "Thank you, mi

signore, for messor brother sun, in especial, who is your symbol;

and for sister moon and the stars; and for brother wind and air and

sky; and for sister water; and for brother fire; and for mother

earth! We are all yours, mi signore! We are your children; your

household; your feudal family! but we never heard of a Church. We

are all varying forms of the same ultimate energy; shifting symbols

of the same absolute unity; but our only unity, beneath you, is

nature, not law! We thank you for no human institutions, even for

those established in your name; but, with all our hearts we thank

you for sister our mother Earth and its fruits and coloured

flowers!"

Francis loved them all--the brothers and sisters--as intensely as a

child loves the taste and smell of a peach, and as simply; but

behind them remained one sister whom no one loved, and for whom, in

his first verses, Francis had rendered no thanks. Only on his death-

bed he added the lines of gratitude for "our sister death," the

long-sought, never-found sister of the schoolmen, who solved all

philosophy and merged multiplicity in unity. The solution was at

least simple; one must decide for one's self, according to one's

personal standards, whether or not it is more sympathetic than that

with which we have got lastly to grapple in the works of Saint

Thomas Aquinas.

Mont-Saint-Michel and Chartres · 第 15 / 16 章