CHAPTER VII.

Alas poor country;

Almost afraid to know itself! It cannot

Be called our mother, but our grave. Where nothing,

But who knows nothing, is once seen to smile;

Where sighs, and groans, and shrieks that rend the air,

Are made, not mark’d; where violent sorrow seems

A modern ecstasy; the dead man’s knell

Is there scarce asked, for who; and good men’s lives

Expire before the flowers in their caps,

Dying or ere they sicken.

MACBETH.

The day after Atherton’s return, Willoughby and Gower met about noon, at

Lowestoffe’s lodge gate, the one returning from a piscatory expedition

of six hours, with fish, the other from a pictorial ramble of four days,

with sketches. Willoughby had to tell of the escapades of tricksy trout,

and of the hopes and fears which were suspended on his line. But not a

word, of course, had he to say of the other thoughts which busied him

the while,—how his romance was in his head, as he carried those

credentials of idleness, the fishing-tackle, and how, while he was

angling for fish, he was devising the fashion in which Blanche should

throw the fly for Florian. Gower had seen such glades and uplands—such

wondrous effects of light and shadow—he, too, had had his adventures,

and could show his trophies.

Dinner was succeeded by that comparatively somnolent period which

preceded the early tea so dear to Lowestoffe. Atherton found that a book

of Schubert’s, which had interested him in the morning, was, in the

afternoon, only a conducting-rod to lure down the subtile influence of

sleep. Lowestoffe, lulled by the buzzing flies, dropped off into an

arm-chair doze, without apology or disguise. He had been early up, and

had been riding about all day on a new chestnut mare. Violently had he

objurgated that wretch of a groom for giving her too many beans, thereby

rendering her in danger of flying at the heels; and what was worse, the

monster had put on a gag snaffle with the martingale, and narrowly

escaped getting her into mischief. But the flying storm had long since

swept away. Before tea, Lowestoffe was in his good-humoured, irrational

humour; after tea he would be in his good-humoured rational one. As for

Gower and Kate, they had quietly withdrawn together to see a water-lily

that had just blown, and were not heard of till tea-time.

After tea, when certain sleepy people had again become responsible

creatures, conversation began.

GOWER. Don’t you think Atherton has a very manuscriptural air to-night?

KATE. There is a certain aspect of repletion about him.

MRS. ATHERTON. We must bleed him, or the consequences may be serious.

What’s this? (_Pulls a paper out of his pocket._)

KATE. And this! (_Pulls out another._)

WILLOUGHBY. He seems better now.

ATHERTON (_abstractedly_). I was thinking of the difference between

Gower’s studies and mine for the last few days. I have been reading a

dark, miserable chapter in the history of man. He has been the

chronicler of pleasant passages in the history of rocks and trees,—his

great epochs, a smile of sun-shine or sudden chill of shadow,—the worst

disasters, a dull neutral-tint kind of day, or a heavy rain,—his most

impracticable subjects, beauties too bright or evanescent to be caught.

It is sad to think how every subject of our study deepens in sorrow as

it rises in dignity.

WILLOUGHBY. And yet it is only by the manful struggles of past

generations through calamity and against wrong, that we have bequeathed

to us the leisure, the liberty, and the knowledge essential to the

highest enjoyment of nature. Atherton, in fact, studies the chequered

and intricate causes which issue in the taste of Gower as one of their

effects. I should think it must be no small gain for an artist to be

placed beyond the mediæval idea which set the _Inferno_ in the centre of

the earth, and imagined, far below the roots of the mountains and the

channels of the sea, eternal flames as the kernel of the world.

GOWER. I have sometimes endeavoured, while lying on the grass, to

realise in my own way the conception of the world by the light-hearted

Greeks as an animal, or as a robe or peplus. I have imagined the clouds

the floating breath of the great creature, rising against the crystal

sphere of the sky, under which it lies as in an enchanter’s glass;—the

seas, some delicate surfaces of the huge organism, that run wrinkled

into a quick shiver at the cold touch of wind;—the forests, a fell of

hair which is ruffled by the chafing hand of the tempest. Then, when I

look at the earth in the other aspect, as a variegated woven robe, I see

it threaded silverly with branching rivers spangled with eyes of lakes;

where the sleek meadows lie, it is rich with piled velvet, and where the

woods are, tufted with emerald feathers. But now I want to hear

something more about our Strasburg people.

ATHERTON. Bad news. There is a great hiatus in Arnstein’s journal, which

history fills up with pestilence and bloodshed. I have drawn up a few

notes of this interval which must serve you as an outline. (_Reads._)

In the year 1348 that terrible contagion, known as the Black Death,

which journeyed from the East to devastate the whole of Europe,

appeared at Strasburg.[129] Everywhere famine, floods, the inversion

of the seasons, strange appearances in the sky, had been its

precursors. In the Mediterranean Sea, as afterwards in the Baltic,

ships were descried drifting masterless, filled only by

plague-stricken corpses. Every man dreaded, not merely the touch and

the breath of his neighbour, but his very eye, so subtile and so

swift seemed the infection. In many parts of France it was computed

that only two out of every twenty inhabitants were left alive. In

Strasburg sixteen thousand perished; in Avignon sixty thousand. In

Paris, at one time, four or five hundred were dying in a day. In

that city, in the midst of a demoralization and a selfish horror

like that Thucydides has painted, the Sisters of Mercy were seen

tending the sufferers who crowded the Hôtel-Dieu; and, as death

thinned their martyr-ranks, numbers more were ready to fill the same

office of perilous compassion. Pausanias says that in Athens alone

out of all Greece there was raised an altar to mercy. But it was an

altar almost without a ministry. Heathendom, at its best, might

glory in the shrine; Christianity, at its worst, could furnish the

priesthood.

In Strasburg Tauler laboured fearlessly, with Thomas and Ludolph,

among the panic-stricken people—doubly cursed by the Interdict and

by the plague. Great fires of vine-wood, wormwood, and laurel were

kept burning in the squares and market-places to purify the air,

lighting up the carved work of the deserted town-hall, and

flickering aslant the overhanging gables of the narrow crooked

streets and the empty tradesmen’s stalls. The village was ravaged as

fatally as the town. The herds grew wild in the fields of the dead

peasants, or died strangely themselves—victims, apparently, to the

universal blight of life. The charlatans of the day drove for awhile

a golden traffic with quintessences and distillations, filthy and

fantastic medicines, fumigation of shirts and kerchiefs, charms and

invocations, only at last to perish in their turn. Even the monks

had lost their love for gold, since every gift was deadly. In vain

did trembling men carry their hoards to the monastery or the church.

Every gate was barred, and the wealthy might be seen tossing their

bags of bezants over the convent walls. In the outskirts of towns

and cities, huge pits were opened, whose mouths were daily filled

with hideous heaps of dead. The pope found it necessary to

consecrate the river Rhone, and hundreds of corpses were cast out at

Avignon, from the quays and pleasant gardens by the water-side, to

be swept by the rapid stream under the silent bridges, past the

forgotten ships and forsaken fields and mourning towns, livid and

wasting, out into the sea.

In a frenzy of terror and revenge the people fell upon the miserable

Jews. They were accused of poisoning the wells, and every heart was

steeled against them. Fear seemed to render all classes more

ferocious, and the man who might sicken and die to-morrow found a

wretched compensation in inflicting death to-day on the imagined

authors of his danger. Toledo was supposed to be the centre of an

atrocious scheme by which the Jews were to depopulate Christendom.

At Chillon several Jews, some after torture and some in terror of

it, confessed that they had received poison for that purpose. It was

a black and red powder, made partly from a basilisk, and sent in the

mummy of an egg. The deposition of the Jews arrested at Neustadt was

sent by the castellan of Chillon to Strasburg. Bishops, nobles, and

chief citizens held a diet at Binnefeld in Alsace, to concert

measures of persecution. The deputies of Strasburg, to their honour

be it spoken, declared that nothing had been proved against the

Jews. Their bishop was the most pitiless advocate of massacre. The

result was a league of priests, lords, and people, to slay or banish

every Jew. In some places the senators and burgomasters were

disposed to mercy or to justice. The pope and the emperor raised

their voices, alike in vain, in behalf of the victims. Some

Christians, who had sought from pity or from avarice to save them,

perished in the same flames. The noble of whom they bought

protection was stigmatised as a Jew master, execrated by the

populace, at the mercy of his enemies. No power could stem the

torrent. The people had tasted blood; the priest had no mercy for

the murderers of the Lord; the baron had debts easily discharged by

the death of his creditor. At Strasburg a monster scaffold was

erected in the Jewish burial ground, and two thousand were burnt

alive. At Basle all the Jews were burnt together in a wooden edifice

erected for the purpose. At Spires they set their quarter in flames,

and perished by their own hands. A guard kept out the populace while

men commissioned by the senate hunted for treasure among the smoking

ruins. The corrupting bodies of those slain in the streets were put

up in empty wine casks, and trundled into the Rhine. When the rage

for slaughter had subsided, hands, red with Hebrew blood, were

piously employed in building belfries and repairing churches with

Jewish tombstones and the materials of Jewish houses.

The gloomy spirit of the time found fit expression in the fanaticism

of the Flagellants.[130] Similar troops of devotees had in the

preceding century carried throughout Italy the mania of the scourge;

but never before had the frenzy of penance been so violent or so

contagious. It was in the summer of 1349 that they appeared in

Strasburg. All the bells rang out as two hundred of them, following

two and two many costly banners and tapers, entered the city,

singing strange hymns. The citizens vied with each other in opening

to them their doors and seating them at their tables. More than a

thousand joined their ranks. Whoever entered their number was bound

to continue among them thirty-four days, must have fourpence of his

own for each day, might enter no house unasked, might speak with no

woman. The lash of the master awaited every infraction of their

rule. The movement partook of the popular, anti-hierarchical spirit

of the day. The priest or friar could hold no rank, as such, among

the Flagellants. The mastership was inaccessible to him, and he was

precluded from the secret council. The scourging took place twice a

day. Every morning and evening they repaired in procession to the

place of flagellation outside the city. There they stripped

themselves, retaining only a pair of linen drawers. They lay down in

a large circle, indicating by their posture the particular sin of

which each penitent was principally guilty. The perjured lay on his

side, and held up three fingers; the adulterer on his face. The

master then passed round, applying his lash to each in succession,

chanting the rhyme—

Stand up in virtue of holy pain,

And guard thee well from guilt again.

One after the other, they rose and followed him, singing and

scourging themselves with whips in which were great knots and nails.

The ceremony closed with the reading of a letter, said to have been

brought by an angel from heaven, enjoining their practice, after

which they returned home in order as they came. The people crowded

from far and near to witness the piteous expiation, and to watch

with prayers and tears the flowing blood which was to mingle with

that of Christ. The pretended letter was reverenced as another

gospel, and the Flagellant was already believed before the priest.

The clergy grew anxious as they saw the enthusiasm spreading on

every side. But the unnatural furor could not last; its own

extravagance prepared its downfall. An attempt made by some

Flagellants in Strasburg to bring a dead child to life was fatal to

their credit. The Emperor, the Pope, and the prelates took measures

against them simultaneously, in Germany, in France, in Sicily, and

in the East. The pilgrimage of the scourge was to have lasted

four-and-thirty years. Six months sufficed to disgust men with the

folly, to see their angelic letter laughed to scorn, their

processions denounced, their order scattered.

Meanwhile the enemies of Tauler were not idle. Louis of Bavaria was

dead. The new Emperor Charles IV. was of the papal party, and called

the Parsons’ Kaiser, but a man of vigour and enlightenment; so weary

Germany, broken by so many calamities, was generally inclined to

acknowledge his claim. About the year 1348 he visited Strasburg, and

the clergy brought Tauler and his two friends before him. They were

to answer for their hard words against priests and princes. Charles

listened attentively to the statement of their principles, and to

their spirited defence of what they had said and done. At last he

said (conceive the dismay of the prelates!) that, after all, ‘he was

very much of their mind.’ But the ecclesiastics did not rest till

they had procured a condemnatory sentence. The accused were

commanded to publish a recantation, and to promise to refrain for

the future from such contumacious language concerning the Church and

the Interdict, on pain of excommunication. It is said that, in spite

of this decision, they did but speak and write the more in the same

spirit. This, however, is not certain. It is known that Tauler

shortly afterwards left his native city, and fixed his residence in

Cologne, where he mostly spent the remainder of his life, actively

engaged as a preacher in endeavouring to promote a deeper

spirituality, and in combating the enthusiasm of the pantheistic

Beghards who abounded in that city.[131]

_Chronicle of Adolf Arnstein, continued._

STRASBURG. 1354. _January._—In the comparative leisure of the winter

time, I set down in order (from such fragmentary notes as I then

made) records of a journey undertaken last year to Flanders.

When I left Strasburg, to sail down the Rhine, our city had enjoyed

at last nearly two years’ prosperity. We could scarcely believe the

respite real. First of all, after so many troubles and dissensions,

the Black Death had laid us waste. Then came the Flagellants,

turning all things upside down—the irresistible infection of their

fury—the thirst for blood they stirred up everywhere—the slaughter

of the miserable Jews. Then we had the Emperor among us, demanding

unrighteous imposts. Our old spirit rose. For two years and a half

our chains and guard-ships barred the passage of the Rhine.[132] We

would endure any extremity rather than submit, and our firmness won

the day. Now, for the last three years,—the pestilence and its

horrors over; blockaded business free again;—our little world has

been gambolling like children let loose from school. Never such

rapid and fruitful buying and selling, such marrying and giving in

marriage, such feasting, pageantry, and merriment, among high and

low alike.[133] All the year is May for the morris-dancers. No one

remembers now the scourge or the torch.

The clergy might have learnt a lesson from the outbreak of the

Flagellants. It should have shown them how hateful their vices and

their pride had made them to the people. But the universal levity

now pardons clerical crime and folly as it does every other. The

odious exaggeration of the Flagellants has given men a pretext for

licence, and ruined the hopes of reform. The cause of emperor

against pope exists no longer. In the hour of conflict and of

sorrow, men hailed the help and listened to the teaching of the

Friends of God. Tauler himself, were he among us, would find it

another Strasburg.

Landed at Cologne, I hastened to the cloister of St. Gertrude to

find Dr. Tauler. With what delight did I see him once more! I

thought him looking much older, and, indeed, he said he thought the

same of me. The time has been long but a stepmother to merry faces

and ruddy cheeks. He told me that he had met with great kindness in

this city, which he had always loved. His friends were numerous; his

preaching, he hoped not without fruit, and he had succeeded in

reforming much that had been amiss.[134] I had many messages for him

from his old friends in Strasburg, and he had so many questions to

ask, he knew not where to begin.

He inquired particularly after Rulman Merswin. This rich merchant

had withdrawn from the world (with the consent of his wife) and

devoted himself altogether to the contemplative life, a short time

previous to the coming of the Black Death. His austerities had been

almost fatal. Tauler’s last counsel to him was to lessen their

severity. I saw him before I left, and he desired me to tell Tauler

that the Layman had visited him more than once, and was now his

spiritual guide. I informed the Doctor, moreover, that during the

last year Merswin had been privately busied in writing a book, to be

called _The Nine Rocks_, of which he did me the honour of reading to

me a part.[135] The Doctor asking what I thought, I said it seemed

to be the work of a powerful and sombre imagination, excited by the

sufferings he had inflicted on himself, yet containing many solemn

and most just rebukes of the vices prevalent. Tauler said that such

excessive mortification in all classes, and especially among the

clergy, often weakened, instead of exalting the intellect. He feared

that the good Rulman would always lean too much on visions, voices,

ecstasies, and the like, and never rise to the higher calm of

unsensuous, imageless contemplation.

The second time I visited Tauler, I found him reading—he told me for

the fourth time—a book called _The Spiritual Nuptials_, by John

Ruysbroek.[136] The Doctor praised it highly, and as I questioned

him about it, offered to lend it me to read. I had heard of

Ruysbroek as a master in spiritual mysteries, often holding

intercourse by letter with the Friends of God in Cologne, Alsace,

and even in the Oberland. I took the book home to my inn, and shut

myself up to read it. Many parts of it I copied out. Not a few

things in it I found hard to be understood, and consulting with the

Doctor about them, he told me he purposed setting out in a few days

to visit the author. Should I like to accompany him? I said ‘Yes,

with all my heart.’ So we left Cologne to travel to the convent of

Grünthal, in the heart of the forest of Soigne, not far from

Louvain, whither the holy man, now sixty years of age, had of late

retired.[137]

From Cologne we journeyed direct to Aix-la-Chapelle. There we saw

the chair in which the emperors sit when they are crowned. Its sides

are of ivory, and the bottom is made of a piece of wood from Noah’s

Ark. Tasted the water in the famous hot springs there. It is

saltish; the physicians say of singular virtue, whether taken

inwardly or outwardly. Saw near the town a water which is lukewarm,

by reason of one of the hot springs which passes under it. There are

bred in it fine fish, they say, which must be put in cold water two

months before they are eaten.

From Aix-la-Chapelle we went to Maestricht, and thence through

Tirlemont, to Louvain. This last is a wealthy city, with a fine

town-hall. The Flemings seem very fond of bells, which are always

chiming, and the great multitude of storks was a strange thing to

me; they make their nests on the tops of the chimneys. The country

round is very fertile, and the great guilds exceeding prosperous.

The small handicrafts have more power there than with us at

Strasburg. At Ypres, I hear, they lately mustered five thousand

strong in the market-place, and headed by their deacons, engaged and

routed the knights and men-at-arms who wished to hold the town

against the men of Ghent.[138] They are very brave and determined,

and keep better together, as it seems to me, than our folk. I found

no small excitement in the city, on account of the war then carrying

on between the men of Ghent and their allies, on the one side, and

the Earl of Flanders on the other. It began with the old rivalry

between Ghent and Bruges—some dispute about a canal from the Lys.

The real struggle is between lords and commons. What Bishop Berthold

and his party have been to us, that is the Count de Male to these

Flemings. The popular side has lost a brave leader in John Lyon. He

revived the White Hoods, and stirred up all Flanders against the

earl. But two at least of the new captains, John Boule and Peter du

Bois, bid fair to fill his place. When I was at Louvain, the troops

of the earl were besieged in Oudenarde by upwards of a hundred

thousand men, gathered out of all the principal towns, well

provisioned and appointed. The besiegers were very strong in

cross-bow men, and had with them some great guns, which did no small

damage. Many hot assaults were made, both by land and water, and on

both sides many brave men slain (Heaven rest their souls!) for the

Flemings were no whit behind the knights in foolhardiness. When I

left Brabant, report said that a peace was, or soon would be

concluded, to be ratified, according to their wont there, by

enormous dinners. Certain it is that neither Oudenarde nor

Dendermonde were carried after all.[139]

They still talked at Louvain about that flower of chivalry Edward

III. of England, who was there for a season some few years

back.[140] His princely entertainments to lords and ladies left the

country full of golden traditions about him. The islanders won all

hearts by their unparalleled magnificence and generosity. They say

the English king called James von Artaveld—brewer of metheglin as he

was—his cousin, and was passing wroth when he heard of his murder.

Yet methinks he cares but little after all for the Flemish weavers,

save as they may help him and his knights against France.

Nevertheless, the weaker France, the better for Germany. I think I

understand why our emperor Charles so flatters the pope. If his

Holiness could confide in Germany he would fain break with France.

Be this as it may, not a word now is heard about the claims of the

empire. The Ghibelline cause finds no leader. The spirit of the

Hohenstaufen lives only in the rhymes of the minstrel. No doubt

times are changed. There may be policy in the submission, but I love

it not. The Doctor interpreted to me the other day the emperor’s

Latin motto, which set me thinking. It means—the best use you can

make of your own wits is to turn to good account the follies of

other people.[141] So cardinals and envoys riding to and fro,

plotting and treaty-making, will manage Christendom now, not strong

arms and sword-strokes. Whether, in the end, this change will lead

to better or to worse, it baffles my poor brain to decide.

We set out from Louvain for Grünthal, quite a troop of us. There was

a noble widow-lady, with her attendants, who was going to crave

ghostly counsel from the prior. She had lost her husband by the

plague, three years since, and appeared still overwhelmed with

grief, speaking to no one, and never suffering her face to be seen.

Her women, when not near her, were merry enough with the followers

of a young Frenchman of family who carried letters to Ruysbroek from

his uncle, an abbot in Paris. We had with us besides two Minorite

friars from Guelders. The head dresses of the women were fit for

giantesses, rising up like a great horn, with long ribbons

fluttering from the top. One of them had a little dagger in her

girdle, and managed a spirited horse to admiration. The Frenchman,

with whom I had much talk, was an arrant fop, yet a shrewd fellow

withal. He jingled like a jester with his many silver bells, his

hair was tied behind in a tail, the points of his shoes turned up,

his parti-coloured doublet cut short round (a new fashion, adopted

for greater swiftness in flying from an enemy), and his beard, long

and bushy, trimmed with a sort of studied negligence. He gave me a

melancholy account of the state of France, divided within, overrun

by the English invaders, nobles plundering and burning—here to-day

and there to-morrow, without pity, law, or loyalty; knights

destroying, not helping the weak: troops of robbers surprising

castles and even taking towns; and the wretched peasantry fain often

to hide themselves and their cattle for weeks and months in great

caves hollowed out underneath the ground.

One of the friars told me a story current about Prior Ruysbroek,

how, one day, he was absent longer than usual in the forest, whither

he was accustomed to retire for meditation, and as some of the

brethren went to seek him they saw a tree at a distance which

appeared surrounded by fiery glory. The holy man was sitting at its

foot, lost in contemplation! The Saviour and our Blessed Lady

herself are said to have appeared to him more than once.[142]

We reached Grünthal—a great building of exceeding plainness—soon

after nightfall. Found there visitors from Brussels, so that,

between us, nearly all the guest chambers were filled. The good

Ruysbroek has been there but a year, yet if he is always to be thus

sought unto, methinks he is as far from his longed-for seclusion as

ever.[143]

We remained three weeks at Grünthal, for whenever the Doctor would

be going, the good Prior so besought him to tarry longer that he

could not in courtesy say him nay. Often Ruysbroek and Tauler would

spend all the summer morning in the forest, now walking, now sitting

under the trees, talking of the concerns of the soul, or of the

fears and hopes awakened by these doubtful times. I was permitted

repeatedly to accompany them, and afterwards wrote down some of the

more remarkable things I heard said. These two saintly men, prepared

to love each other as brothers in a common experience, seemed at

once to grow together into a friendship as strong as though many

years had been employed in the building thereof. Neither of them

vain, neither jealous, each was for humbling himself beneath the

other, and seemed desirous rather to hear and learn than to talk

about himself.

Speaking about the Son of God and the soul of man, Ruysbroek

said—‘I believe that the Son is the Image of the Father, that in

the Son have dwelt from all eternity, foreknown and contemplated

by the Father, the prototypes of all mankind. We existed in the

Son before we were born—He is the creative ground of all

creatures—the eternal cause and principle of their life. The

highest essence of our being rests therefore in God,—exists in his

image in the Son. After our creation in time, our souls are

endowed with these properties, which are in effect one; the first,

the Imageless Nudity, (_die bildlose Nacktheit_)—by means of this

we receive and are united to the Father; the second, the Higher

Reason of the Soul (_die höhere Vernunft der Seele_), the mirror

of brightness, by which we receive the Son; the third, the Spark

of the Soul (_Funken der Seele_) by which we receive the love of

God the Holy Ghost. These three faculties are in us all the ground

of our spiritual life, but in sinners they are obscured and buried

under their transgressions.[144]

‘The office of the Son in time was to die for us, fulfil the law,

and give us a divine pattern of humility, love, and patience. He is

the fountain whence flows to us all needed blessing, and with him

works the Holy Spirit. What the Son did he did for all—is

Light-bringer for all mankind, for the Catholic Church especially,

but also for every devoutly-disposed mind. Grace is common, and

whoever desires it has it. Without it no natural powers or merits

can save us. The will is free by nature, it becomes by grace more

free; yea, a king, lord of every lower power, crowned with Love,

clad in the might of the Holy Ghost. There is a natural will towards

good (_Synderesis_) implanted in us all, but damped by sin. We can

will to follow this better impulse, and of ourselves desire the help

of divine grace, without which we can never overcome sin and rise

above ourselves. Everything depends on will. A man must will right

strongly. Will to have humility and love, and they are thine. If any

man is without the spirit of God, it is his own fault, for not

seeking that without which he cannot please Him.[145]

‘True penitence is of the heart; bodily suffering is not essential.

No one is to think he is shut out from Christ because he cannot bear

the torturing penance some endure. We must never be satisfied with

any performance, any virtue—only in the abyss, the Nothingness of

Humility, do we rise beyond all heavens. True desire after God is

not kept back by the sense of defect. The longing soul knows only

this, that it is bent on God. Swallowed up in aspiration, it can

take heed of nothing more.’[146] (A very weighty saying this,

methinks, and helpful.)

Speaking of the inner life, and the union of the soul with God,

Ruysbroek said—

‘God dwells in the highest part of the soul. He who ascends this

height has all things under his feet. We are united to God when, in

the practice of the virtues, we deny and forsake ourselves, loving

and following God above all creatures. We cannot compel God by our

love to love us, but He cannot sanctify us unless we freely

contribute our effort. There is a reciprocal desire on our part and

that of God. The free inspiration of God is the spring of all our

spiritual life. Thence flows into us knowledge—an inner revelation

which preserves our spirit open, and, lifting us above all images

and all disturbance, brings us to an inward silence. Here the divine

inspiration is a secret whispering in the inner ear. God dwells in

the heart pure and free from every image. Then first, when we

withdraw into the _simplicitas_ of our heart, do we behold the

immeasurable glory of God, and our intellect is as clear from all

considerations of distinction and figurative apprehensions, as

though we had never seen or heard of such things. Then the riches of

God are open to us. Our spirit becomes desireless, as though there

were nothing on earth or in heaven of which we stood in need. Then

we are alone with God, God and we—nothing else. Then we rise above

all multiplicity and distinction into the simple nakedness of our

essence, and in it become conscious of the infinite wisdom of the

Divine Essence, whose inexhaustible depths are as a vast waste, into

which no corporeal and no spiritual image can intrude. Our created

is absorbed in our uncreated life, and we are as it were transformed

into God. Lost in the abyss of our eternal blessedness, we perceive

no distinction between ourselves and God. As soon as we begin to

reflect and to consider what that is we feel, we become aware of

such distinction, and fall back to the level of reason.’[147]

Here Tauler asked whether such language was not liable to abuse by

the heretics who confound man and God? He referred to a passage in

the _Spiritual Nuptials_, in which Ruysbroek said that we became

identical, in this union, with the glory by which we are

illumined.[148]

Ruysbroek answered, that he had designed to qualify duly all such

expressions. ‘But you know, Doctor,’ continued he, ‘I have not your

learning, and cannot at all times say so accurately as I would what

I mean. Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings!—I would say that

in such a state all our powers are in repose, not that they are

annihilated. If so, we should lose our existence as creatures. We

are one with God, but yet always creature existences distinct from

God. I do humbly believe, let my enemies say what they may, that I

wrote no word of that book save at the impulse of the Holy Ghost,

and with a peculiar and most blessed presence to my soul of the Holy

Trinity. But what shall I call this blessedness? It includes peace,

inward silence, affectionate hanging on the source of our joy, sleep

in God, contemplation of the heaven of darkness, far above

reason.‘[149]

The conversation then turned on the heresies of the time, the

corruptions of the Church and of the State, and other practical

matters more within my compass. Ruysbroek said that the great sin

and error of these heretics lay in their aspiring to union with God

by a summary and arrogant method of their own. They persuaded

themselves that, merely by ceasing to think and distinguish, they

could withdraw themselves into the essence of their nature, and so,

without the help of grace or the practice of virtue, attain by bare

nature the rest and blessedness of absolute simplicity and

superiority to all modes and images.

‘Verily,’ quoth Tauler, ‘though they give themselves out for the

wisest and the holiest, it is only themselves, not God, they enjoy.

Yet mischievous as they are, often as I have preached against them,

I never have taken, nor shall I take, any part in their

persecution.’[150]

‘I have had plentiful opportunity,’ continued Ruysbroek, ‘for

observing these men. I would divide them into four classes.[151]

First of all there are those whose doctrine sins especially against

the Holy Ghost. They say the essential Godhead works not, but the

Holy Ghost doth: that they belong to that Divine Essence, and will

rest in like manner;—that they are, therefore, above the Spirit of

God. They hold that, after time, all things will be God, one

absolute Quiescence, without distinction and without change. So they

will neither know nor act, neither think nor thank, but be free from

all desire, all obligation. This they call Poverty of Spirit. I say

it is a devilish poverty, and such souls must be poor as hell in

divine love and knowledge.

‘The second class say, with like blasphemy, ‘We are divine by

nature. There is one God, and we are identical with Him. We with Him

have created all things; if we had not chosen, we had not been born.

It was our own choice to exist as we do. God can do nothing without

us, and we give Him therefore no preference, pay Him no homage.

Honour to Him is honour to us. What we are we would be, what we

would be we are; with God we have created ourselves and all things;

heaven and earth hang on our will.’ This insane spiritual pride is

flatly contrary to all catholic doctrine.

‘The third class sin not less against the Son. They say, we are as

much incarnate as Christ was, and, in the same sense, divine sons of

God. Had He lived long enough, He would have attained to the same

contemplative quiet we enjoy. Retired into our inmost selves, we

find ourselves the same Wisdom of God which Christ is. When He is

honoured, we are honoured, for we are identical with Him.

‘The fourth class declare that neither God nor themselves,

heaven nor hell, action nor rest, good nor evil, have any real

existence. They deny God and the work of Christ, Scripture,

sacraments,—everything. God is nothing; they are nothing; the

universe is nothing.

‘Some hold doctrines such as these in secret, and conform outwardly,

for fear. Others make them the pretext for every kind of vice and

insolent insubordination. Of a truth we should cross ourselves when

we but speak of them, as in the neighbourhood of spirits from the

pit.’

‘And what hope,’ said Tauler, ‘of better things, while the Church is

crowded with hirelings, and, with lust and bravery, everywhere leads

on the world in sin?’

‘What hope, indeed!’ mournfully responded Ruysbroek. ‘The grace of

the sacraments is shamefully bought and sold. Rich transgressors may

live as they list. The wealthy usurer is buried before the altar,

the bells ring, the priest declares him blessed. I declare that if

he died in unrighteousness, not all the priests in Christendom, not

all his hoards lavished to feed the poor, could save him from

perdition. See, too, the monks, mendicants and all, what riches!

what sumptuous fare! what licence, in violation of every vow! what

odious distinctions! Some have four or five garments, another

scarcely one. Some revel with the prior, the guardian, and the

lector in the refectory, at a place of their own. Others must be

content with herring and cabbage, washed down with sour beer. Little

by little the habit is changed, black becomes brown, grey is

exchanged for blue, the white must be of the finest stuff, the shape

of the newest cut.’

‘This,’ said Tauler, ‘is what I so much admire in your little

community here. You have practically abolished those mischievous

distinctions, the cause of so much bitterness in our religious

houses. Every one has his place, but no one is degraded. You

yourself will perform the meanest offices, as the other morning,

when Arnstein found you sweeping the lectorium. Yours is the true

canonical life—the life of a family. Every one is ready to do kind

offices for his brethren, and your own example teaches daily

forgetfulness of self.’

Ruysbroek looked uneasy under these praises, and they spoke again of

the prevalent evils in the Church.[152]

‘How many nuns have I seen,’ said Ruysbroek, ‘daintily attired, with

silver bells to their girdles, whose prison was the cloister and

their paradise the world! A retinue of forty reiters is a moderate

attendance for a prelate out on a visitation. I have known some

priests who engaged themselves as business agents to laymen; others

who have entered the service of ladies of rank, and walked behind

them as footmen into church. A criminal has but to pay money down,

and he may serve the devil for another year. A trim reckoning, and

satisfaction for all parties! The bishop gets the gold, the devil

gets the soul, and the miserable fool the moment’s pleasure of his

lust.’[153]

When, one day, they were conversing on future rewards and

punishments, I remember hearing Ruysbroek say—‘I trust I am ready

for all God sends me, life or death, or even hell-pains themselves.’

An attainment of virtue inconceivable to me.[154]

At Grünthal I saw much of a lay brother named John Affliginiensis,

the cook of the community.[155] He accompanied Ruysbroek thither.

Though wholly unlettered, he serves daily as a goodly ensample of

the active and contemplative life united. It is his calling to see

to the dinners of the brethren; he is scarce less helpful to their

devotions. That he is a good plain cook I can bear witness, and to

the edifying character of the discourses he sometimes delivers to

the canons, all testify. He scarcely sleeps at all, goes meanly

clad, and eats the veriest refuse of the convent fare. He is one of

the meekest and most humble of men—has had his sore fights of

temptation, fierce inward purgations, and also his favoured hours

and secret revelations. Ruysbroek loves him like a brother. The

esteem in which he is held, and the liberty of speech allowed him,

is characteristic of the simple and brotherly spirit which dwells

among these worthy canons. Grünthal is not, like so many religious

houses, a petty image of the pettiest follies of the world. There

they do seem to have withdrawn in spirit from the strife and pomp of

secular life. Gladly would I spend my last years among the beeches

and the oaks that shut in their holy peace. But while I may I must

be doing; had my call been to the contemplative life I should have

been moulded in another fashion.

On our journey back from Louvain I had rare entertainment. We had

scarcely passed out beyond the gates, when Tauler rode forward, in

deep discourse with an ecclesiastic of the party. A hasty glance at

our fellow-travellers, as we mustered at the door of the hostelry,

had not led me to look for any company likely to eke out a day’s

travel with aught that was pleasant or of profit. But I was

mistaken. I espied ere long, a neat, merry-looking little man, in a

minstrel’s habit, with a gittern slung at his back. To him I joined

himself, and he, pleased evidently with the notice I took of him,

sang me songs and told me stories all the way. He said his name was

Muscatblut, and I was not sorry to be able to gratify him by

answering that his fame had already reached my ears.[156] He had

store of songs, with short and long lines curiously interwoven in a

way of his own, a very difficult measure to write, as he assured

me—the very triumph of his heart. These love-lays he interspersed

with riddles and rhyming proverbs, with quaint allegories, satires

on clerks and monks, and stories about husbands and wives, making

all within hearing roll in their saddles with laughter. He had

likewise certain coarse songs, half amatory, half devotional, tagged

with bits of slang and bits of Latin, about the wooing of our Lady.

I told him, to his surprise, to stop; it was flat blasphemy. He said

the voluptuous passages of his lay were after Frauenlob’s best

manner, and as to the sacred personages, by St. Bartholomew! many a

holy clerk had praised that part most of all, calling it a deep

allegory, most edifying to the advanced believer.

At Cologne I parted from the Doctor with many embraces. On my way

back to Strasburg I took boat up the Mayne to Frankfurt, whither

business called me. We passed a little woody island in the midst of

the river, which was pointed out to me as the residence of the

leprous barefooted friar, whose songs and airs are so popular

throughout the Rhineland. I looked with reverence at the melancholy

spot. There he dwells alone, shut out from mankind, yet delighting

and touching every heart. His songs are sweet as the old knightly

lays of love, full of courtly grace and tenderness, and yet they are

songs for the people from one truly of themselves. The burgher has

his minstrelsy now, as well as the noble. This at least is a good

sign.

Note to page 321.

From this time forward, Rulman Merswin gave himself up to the spiritual

guidance of Nicholas the layman—taking him to be to him ‘in God’s

stead.’ He took no step without his direction, and wrote at his command

his book entitled _Von den vier ioren sins anevohenden lebendes_—a

record of what may be called his spiritual apprenticeship. Nicholas took

a copy of it back with him to the Oberland. Schmidt has brought together

what is known of Merswin, in the Appendix to his life of Tauler, pp.

177, &c.

The _Book of the Nine Rocks_ was commenced in 1352. It has been

published in Diepenbrock’s edition of the works of Suso, to whom it was,

till recently, attributed. The claim of Merswin to its authorship is

established beyond question—(Schmidt, 180). The work opens by relating

how, early one morning in Advent, a man (the author) was warned of God

to prepare himself, by inward retirement, for that which He should show

him. He was made to behold a vision full of strange and alarming

appearances. He cried out, ‘Ah, my heart’s Love! what meanest thou with

these mysterious symbols?’ He struggled hard against the phantoms of his

trance, but the marvellous forms only multiplied the more. He was

constrained by a divine voice to gaze, and commanded, in spite of his

humble remonstrances, to write in a book what he saw—the image of the

corruptions of Christendom, for the warning of the guilty and the

edification of the faithful. The dialogues are given at length between

him and God—‘the Man’ and ‘the Answer.’ For eleven weeks, in sickness

and spiritual distress, he wavered. He was but a poor, ignorant layman;

how should he presume to exhort the Church? ‘The Voice of the Answer’ is

heard saying, ‘Came not thy reluctance from humility, I would consign

thee to the pit. I see I must compel thee. In the name of the Holy

Trinity, I command thee to begin to write this day.’

The souls of men proceeding from God, but few of them returning to their

Original, are shown him under the similitude of multitudes of fish,

brought down by the descent of great waters from the summit of a

mountain. Men in the valley are catching them in nets. Scarce half of

them reach the sea below. There the remnant swim in all directions, and

at length endeavour to leap back, up to the source whence they came.

Numbers are taken in the nets; only a few reach even the base of the

mountain. Some who ascend higher fall back upon the rocks and die. A

very few, springing from rock to rock, reach exhausted, the fountain at

the top, and there forget their pains.

The twenty following chapters are occupied with a dialogue, in which the

divine Voice enumerates the characteristic sins of all classes of

mankind, from the pope to the begging friar—from the emperor to the

serf.

Then commences the vision of the Nine Rocks. A mountain, enormous in

breadth and height, fills all the scene. As the eye travels up the

ascent, it beholds nine steep rocks, each loftier than that which

preceded it,—the highest lost in the heavens. From the lowest the whole

surface of the earth is visible. A net is spread over all the region

beneath, but it does not reach the mountain. The multitudes seen beneath

it are men in mortal sin. The men standing on the first and lowest rock

are religious persons, but such as are lukewarm, defective in aspiration

and in zeal. They dwell dangerously near the net—(cap. xxiii.). Some,

from the first rock, are seen making their way up the precipice, and

reaching the second, where they become of dazzling brightness. Those on

the second rock have heartily forsaken the world; they will suffer less

in purgatory, enjoy more in heaven, than those beneath; but they, too,

are far from their Origin yet, and in danger of spiritual pride,

self-seeking, and of growing faint and remiss in their painful

progress—(cap. xxiv.). Those on the third rock, fewer in number,

suffering far more severely in time, are nearer to God, will suffer

little in purgatory, and are of yet more glorious aspect than their

predecessors—(cap. xxv.). Such is the process to the summit. All the

nine rocks must be surmounted, would we return to our Divine Source. But

few attain the last, which is indeed the Gate of the Origin—the

consummate blessedness, in which the believer, fearless of hell and

purgatory, has annihilated self, and hath no wish or will save that of

God. One of these true worshippers brings more blessing to Christendom

than thousands of such as live after their own will, and know not that

they are nothing.

Finally, ‘the man’ is permitted a moment’s glance into the Divine

‘Origin.’ The rapture of that moment he attempted in vain to

describe;—no reflection, no image, could give the least hint of it.

Both Rulman and ‘the Friend of God in the Oberland’ believed themselves

repeatedly warned of God in visions, that they should build a house for

him in Strasburg. The merchant purchased a ruined cloister on a little

island in the river Ill, without the city walls. He restored the church,

and erected a stone belfry. Nicholas advised him to bestow it on the

Johannites, in preference to any other Order,—for there had been no

little rivalry among the monks as to who was to enjoy the gift. The

conditions of the deed for which he stipulated with the Master of the

Order are indicative of the new and more elevated position which

mysticism had taught the laity to claim. The government of the house was

to rest entirely with a lay triumvirate; the two survivors always to

choose a third. The first three governors were Rulman himself, Heinzmann

Wetzel, knight, and John Merswin, burg-graf. The admission of brethren

rested with these heads of the house, and they were free to receive any

one, clerk or layman, knight or serving man, whether belonging to the

order of St. John or not, requiring only that he should bring with him

the moderate sum requisite to render his residence no burden on the

convent. (Schmidt, p. 189.)

Note to page 329.

The passage to which Tauler is made to refer is contained in the third

book of the Spiritual Nuptials, chap. 5:—‘Ind alle die minschen die

bouen ir geschaffenheit verhauen sin in eyn schauwende leuen, die synt

eyn mit deser gotlicher clairheit, ind sij sint die clairheit selver.

Ind sy sien ind gevoilen ind vynden sich selver ouermitz dit gotliche

licht, dat sy sin der selue eynveldige gront na wijse irre

ungeschaffenheit, da de clairheit sonder mias vs schynt in gotlicher

wijsen ind na sympelheit des wesens eynueldich binnen blijfft ewelich

sonder wise. Ind hervm soilen die innyge schauwende minschen vsgayn na

wijse des schauwens bouen reden ind bouen vnderscheit ind bouen ir

geschaffen wesen mit ewigen instarren ouermitz dat ingeboiren licht, soe

werden sy getransformeirt ind eyn mit desem seluen licht da sy mede sien

ind dat sy sien. Ind also vervolgen die schauwende minschen ir ewich

bilde da si zo gemacht sin ind beschauwen got ind alle dinck sonder

vnderscheit in eyme eynveldigen sien in gotlicher clairheit. In dat is

dat edelste ind dat vrberlichste schauwen da men zo komen mach in desem

leuen.’—_Vier Schriften_, p. 144.

[And all men who are exalted above their creatureliness into a

contemplative life are _one with this divine glory,—yea, are that

glory_. And they see, and feel, and find in themselves, by means of this

divine light, that they are the same simple Ground as to their uncreated

nature (_i.e._, in respect of their ideal pre-existence in the Son),

since the glory shineth forth without measure, after the divine manner,

and abideth within them simply and without mode (particular

manifestation or medium), according to the simplicity of the essence.

Wherefore interior contemplative men should go forth in the way of

contemplation above reason and distinction, beyond their created

substance, and gaze perpetually by the aid of their inborn light, and so

they become transformed, and _one with the same light, by means of which

they see, and which they see_. Thus do contemplative men arrive at that

eternal image after which they were created, and contemplate God and all

things without distinction in a simple beholding, in divine glory. And

this is the loftiest and most profitable contemplation whereto men may

attain in this life.]

This passage, and others like it, gave rise to the charge of pantheism

brought by Gerson against Ruysbroek in the following century. The prior

of Grünthal found a defender in Schönhoven, who pointed with justice to

numerous expressions in the writings of the accused, altogether

incompatible with the heresy alleged. Quite inconsistent with any

confusion of the divine and human is Ruysbroek’s fine description of the

insatiable hunger of the soul—growing by that it feeds on,—the

consciousness that all possessed is but a drop to the illimitable

undeemed Perfection yet beyond. (‘Wi leren in waerheit sijns aenschijns

dat al dat wi gesmaken tegen dat ons ontblijft dat en is niet een draep

tegen al die zee, dit verstormt onsen geest in hetten ende in ongeduer

van mynnen.’—_Von dem funkelnden Steine_, x. p. 194.) So again he says,

‘Want wy enmogen te mael niet got werden ende onse gescapenheit

verliesen, dat is onmoegelic’—p. 190; and similarly that we become one

with God in love, not in nature, (‘ouerformet ende een mit hem in sijnre

minnen, niet in sijnre naturen.’)—_Spiegel der Seligkeit_, xxiv.

Note to page 329.

Ruysbroek expressed to Gerard Groot, in these very words, his belief in

the special guidance of the Holy Spirit vouchsafed for the composition

of his books on these ‘deep things’ of the kingdom. (Engelhardt, p.

168.)

The doctrine of Ruysbroek is substantially the same with that of his

friend and brother-mystic, Tauler. Whether speaking the high German of

the upper Rhine or the low German of the Netherlands, mysticism gives

utterance to the same complaint and the same aspiration. Ruysbroek is

individually less speculative than Eckart, less practical than Tauler.

The Flemish mystic is a more submissive son of the Church than the

stout-hearted Dominican of Strasburg, and lays proportionally more

stress on what is outward and institutional. He is fond of handling his

topics analytically. His numerous divisions and subdivisions remind us

of the scholastic Richard of St. Victor, but Ruysbroek, less methodical

by nature, and less disciplined, more frequently loses sight of his own

distinctions. The subject itself, indeed, where it possesses the writer,

repudiates every artificial treatment. While he specifies with

minuteness the stages of the mystical ascent, Ruysbroek does not contend

that the experience of every adept in the contemplative life must follow

the precise order he lays down. (_Geistl. Hochzeit_, ii. § 30, p. 71.)

He loves to ally the distinctions he enumerates in the world of nature,

in the operations of grace, in the heavenly state, and in the Divine

Being, by a relationship of correspondence. Thus the seven planets and

the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit answer to each other. The Empyrean in

the external world corresponds to Pure Being in the divine nature, to

the Spark of the soul in man, and to the Contemplative stage of his

spiritual experience. This scheme of analogies, incidental in Ruysbroek

and the earlier mystics, makes up almost the whole system of mystics

like Behmen and Swedenborg. His elaborate comparison of the operations

of grace to a fountain with three streams (one of which refreshes the

memory, another clarifies the understanding, while a third invigorates

the will), resembles strikingly the fanciful method of Madame Guyon in

her _Torrents_, and of St. Theresa in her _Degrees of Prayer_. (_Geistl.

Hochzeit_, xvii. § 36, p. 80.) The mysticism of Ruysbroek is less

sensuous than that of the poetical Suso. Beyond question the higher

elevation of the contemplative life must have been a welcome refuge to

many devout minds wearied with vain ritual, penance, and routine. As

acknowledged contemplatists, they could escape without scandal from

contact with the grosser machinery of their religion. Accordingly, to

claim superiority to means and modes was by no means always the arrogant

pretension it may seem to us. Tauler’s ‘state above grace’ was the ark

of an unconscious Protestantism. Where the means were made the end,

wisdom forsook them, and rejoiced to find that the name of mystic could

shelter spirituality from the dangers of the suspected heretic.

Ruysbroek, however, felt the want of such a protection for freer

thought, much less than did Tauler and some of his more active

followers.

Footnote 129:

See Hecker’s _Black Death_ (trans. by Dr. Babington, 1853).—Hecker

gives the documents relating to the trial of the Neustadt Jews in an

appendix, from the _Chronicle_ of Jacob of Königshoven. See also pp.

103-127.

Footnote 130:

These fanatics were everywhere foremost among the instigators of the

cruelties perpetrated on the Jews. Women, and even children, joined

their ranks in great numbers, wearing the hats with red crosses,

carrying flags, and scourging themselves with the rest. The

particulars given are taken from the account in Jacob von

Königshoven’s _Elsassische u. Strassburgische Chronik_, inserted

entire in Wackernagel,—(p. 931). The chronicler says:—‘Zuo Strôsburg

kam mê denne tûsent manne in ire geselleschaft, und siu teiltent sich

zuo Strôsburg: eine parte der geischelaere gieng das lant abe, die

ander parte das lant ûf. und kam sô vil volkes in ire bruoderschaft,

das es verdrôs den bôbest und den keiser und die phafheit. und der

keiser verschreip dem bôbeste das er etwas hie zuo gedaechte: anders

die geischeler verkêrtent alle die welt.’ The Flagellants claimed

power to confess and give absolution. The thirty-four days’ scourging

among them was to make a man as innocent as a babe—the virtue of the

lash was above all sacraments. Thus the people took religion into

their own hands, blindly and savagely,—no other way was then possible.

It was a spasmodic movement of the mass of life beneath, when the

social disorder that accompanied the pestilence had loosened the grasp

of the power temporal and spiritual which held them down so long.

Footnote 131:

See Schmidt’s _Tauler_, p. 58.

Footnote 132:

Laguille’s _Histoire d'Alsace_, liv. xxv. p. 290.

Footnote 133:

Hecker, p. 81.

Footnote 134:

Schmidt’s _Tauler_, p. 59.

Footnote 135:

See Note, p. 336.

Footnote 136:

Ruysbroek sent a copy of his book, _De ornatu spiritualium nuptiarum_,

to the Friends of God in the Oberland. He had many friends in Cologne,

and it is very likely that the work may have reached Tauler there,

either through them or from the author, who must have heard of him.

Footnote 137:

See _Johannes Ruysbroek_, by Engelhardt, p. 168.

Footnote 138:

Froissart, book ii. chap. 40.

Footnote 139:

Froissart, chapp. 41, 42.

Footnote 140:

_Ibid._, book i. chap. 34.

Footnote 141:

Optimum aliena insania frui.

Footnote 142:

Engelhardt, p. 326.

Footnote 143:

It is certain that Ruysbroek was visited during the many years of his

residence in Grünthal, much after the manner described, and also that

Tauler was among the visitors, though the exact time of his journey is

not known.

Footnote 144:

See Engelhardt, pp. 189, 288.—According to Ruysbroek, the Trinitarian

process lies at the basis of the kingdoms both of Nature and of Grace.

There is a flowing forth and manifestation in the creative Word,—a

return and union of love by the Holy Ghost. This process goes on

continually in the providential government of the universe, and in the

spiritual life of believers. The upholding of the world, and the

maintenance of the work of grace in the heart, are both in different

ways a perpetual bringing forth of the Son, by whom all things

consist, and who is formed in every devout soul. Ruysbroek is careful

to state (as a _caveat_ against pantheism) that such process is no

necessary development of the divine nature,—it is the good pleasure of

the Supreme. (See _Vier Schriften von J. Ruysbroek, in niederdeutscher

Sprache_, by A. v. Arnswaldt; Hanover, 1848.) ‘Wi hebben alle boven

onse ghescapenheit een ewich leuen in gode als in onse leuende sake

die ons ghemaect ende ghescapen heest van niete, maer wi en sijn niet

god noch wi en hebben ons seluen niet ghemaeckt. _Wi en sijn ooc niet

wt gode ghevloten van naturen_, maer want ons god ewelijc ghevoelt

heest ende bekent in hem seluen, so heest hi ons ghemaeckt, niet van

naturen noch van node, _maer van vriheit sijns willen_,’—p. 291.

(_Spiegel der Seligkeit_, xvii.)

The bosom of the Father, he says, is our proper ground and origin (der

schois des vaders is onse eygen gront ind onse oirsprunck); we have

all, therefore, the capacity for receiving God, and His grace enables

us to recognise and realise this latent possibility (offenbairt ind

brengit vort die verboirgenheit godes in wijsen),—p. 144.

Footnote 145:

Engelhardt, pp. 183, 186. Ruysbroek speaks as follows of that

fundamental tendency godward of which he supposes prevenient grace

(vurloiffende gracie) to lay hold:—‘Ouch hait der mynsche eyn

naturlich gront neygen zo gode overmitz den voncken der sielen ind die

overste reden die altzijt begert dat goide ind hasset dat quaide. Mit

desen punten voirt got alle mynschen na dat sijs behoeven ind

ecklichen na sinre noit,’ &c.—_Geistl. Hochzeit_, cap. 3.

Ruysbroek lays great stress on the exercise of the will. ‘Ye are as

holy as ye truly will to be holy,’ said he one day to two

ecclesiastics, inquiring concerning growth in grace. It is not

difficult to reconcile such active effort with the passivity of

mysticism. The mystics all say, ‘We strive towards virtue by a

strenuous use of the _gifts_ which God communicates, but when God

communicates _Himself_, then we can be only passive—we repose, we

enjoy, but all operation ceases.’

Footnote 146:

Engelhardt, pp. 195, 199.

Footnote 147:

Engelhardt, pp. 201, 213. In the season of spiritual exaltation, the

powers of the soul are, as it were, absorbed in absolute essential

enjoyment (staen ledich in een weselic gebrucken). But they are not

annihilated, for then we should lose our creatureliness.—Mer si en

werden niet te niete, want soe verloeren wy onse gescapenheit. Ende

alsoe lange als wy mit geneichden geeste ende mit apen ogen sonder

merken ledich staen, alsoe lange moegen wy schouwen ende gebruken. Mer

in den seluen ogenblijc dat wy proeven ende merken willen wat dat is

dat wy geuoelen, so vallen wy in reden, ende dan vynden wy onderscheit

ende anderheit tusschen ons ende gade, ende dan vynden wy gade buten

ons in onbegripelicheiden.—_Von dem funkelnden Steine_, x.

Footnote 148:

See first Note, p. 338.

Footnote 149:

See second Note, p. 338.

Footnote 150:

Engelhardt, p. 225. Schmidt’s _Tauler_, p. 61.—The same doctrine which

furnished a sanctuary for the devotion of purer natures supplied also

an excuse for the licence of the base. Wilful perversion, or mere

ignorance, or some one of the manifold combinations of these two

factors, would work the mystical exhortation into some such result as

that denounced by Ruysbroek. We may imagine some bewildered man as

speaking thus within himself:—‘So we are to covet ignorance, to

surmount distinctions, to shun what is clear or vivid as mediate and

comparatively carnal, to transcend means and bid farewell to the

wisdom of the schools. Wise and devout men forsake all their learning,

forget their pious toil and penance, to lose themselves in that ground

in which we are united to God,—to sink into vague abstract confusion.

But may I not do at first what they do at last? Why take in only to

take out? I am empty already. Thank heaven! I haven’t a distinct idea

in my head.’

It is so that the popular mind is sure to travesty the

ultra-refinements of philosophy.

Footnote 151:

Engelhardt, pp. 224-228.—Eckart, like Hegel, would seem to have left

behind him a right-hand and a left-hand party,—admirers like Suso and

Tauler, who dropped his extreme points and held by such saving clauses

as they found; and headstrong spirits, ripe for anarchy, like these

New-Lights or High-Fliers, the representatives of mysticism run to

seed. Ruysbroek’s classification of them is somewhat artificial;

fanaticism does not distribute itself theologically. In the treatise

entitled _Spiegel der Seligkeit_, § 16, he describes them generally as

follows:—‘Ander quade duulische menschen vint men, die segghen dat si

selue Cristus sijn of dat si god sijn, ende dat haer hant hemel ende

erde ghemaect heest, ende dat an haer hant hanghet hemel ende erde

ende alle dinc, ende dat si verheuen sijn boven alle die sacramenten

der heiligher kerken, ende dat si der niet en behoeuen noch si en

willen der ooc niet.’ He represents their claim to identity with God

as leading to a total moral indifference (§ 17):—‘Ende sulke wanen god

sijn, ende si en achten gheen dinc goet noch quaet, in dien dat si hem

ontbeelden connen ende in bloter ledicheit haer eighen wesen vinden

ende besitten moghen.’ Their idea of the consummation of all things

savours of the Parisian heresy—the offspring of John Scotus,

popularised by David of Dinant and his followers. The final

restitution is to consist in the resolution of all creatures into the

Divine Substance:—‘So spreken si voort dat in den lesten daghe des

ordels enghele ende duuele, goede ende quade, dese sullen alle werden

_een eenvoudighe substancie der godheit_ ... ende na dan, spreken si

voort, en sal god bekennen noch minnen hem seluen noch ghene

creature’—(§ 16).

Footnote 152:

Engelhardt, pp. 326-336.—Good Ruysbroek was fully entitled to the

encomium placed in the mouth of Tauler. He himself, like Bernard,

would frequently perform the meanest offices of the cloister. The

happy spirit of brotherhood which prevailed among the canons of

Grünthal made a deep impression on that laborious practical reformer,

Gerard Groot, when, in 1378, he visited the aged prior. What he then

saw was not without its influence in the formation of that community

with which his name is associated—the Brethren of the Common Life.—See

Ullmann, _Reformatoren vor der Reformation_, vol. ii.

Footnote 153:

Engelhardt, p. 330.—Ruysbroek inveighs with much detail against the

vanities of female dress—as to those hair-pads, sticking up like great

horns, they are just so many ‘devil’s nests.’

Footnote 154:

Ruysbroek expressed himself in these words to Gerard Groot

(Engelhardt, p. 168). In his touching description of the ‘desolation’

endured by the soul on its way upward toward the ‘super-essential

contemplation,’ he makes the sufferer say,—‘O Lord, since I am thine

(want ich din eygen bin), I would as soon be in hell as in heaven, if

such should be thy good pleasure; only do thy glorious will with me, O

Lord!‘—_Geistl. Hochzeit_, § 30. Ruysbroek, like Fénelon, abandons

himself thus only on the supposition that even in hell he should still

retain the divine favour;—so impossible after all is the absolute

disinterestedness toward which Quietism aspires. The Flemish mystic

distinguishes between the servants of God, the friends, and the sons.

Those worshippers who stand in the relation of friends have still

something of their own (besitten oer inwendichkeit mit eygenscap) in

their love to God. The sons ascend, ‘dying-wise,’ to an absolute

emptiness. The friends still set value on divine bestowments and

experiences; the sons are utterly dead to self, in bare modeless love

(in bloeter, wiseloeser mynnen). Yet, very inconsistently, he

represents the sons as more assured of eternal life than the friends.

(_Von dem funkelnden Steine_, § 8.)

Footnote 155:

A veritable personage. He died in 1377, and left behind him a book

recording the conflicts he underwent and the revelations vouchsafed

him. (Engelhardt, p. 326.)

Footnote 156:

The lyrics of Muscatblut are characterised by Gervinus (ii. p. 225),

and the same authority gives some account, from the _Limburg

Chronicle_, of the famous friar, leper, and poet mentioned by

Arnstein.

Hours with the Mystics: A Contribution to the History of Religious Opinion · 第 7 / 15 章