£ Cor. x. 29. 2 Acts iv. 35. 2 A hemo, £1 Cor, 12 16: o Mt. xxv. 34,40. € Jer. xivini10;
XXXYV.
XXXV. — Whether Several Brotherhoods Should be Formed in the Same Parish
The example of the limbs with their various uses is a good illustration of the problem before us. For we have already shown that if the body is to be well and suitably fitted for every kind of work it needs eyes and tongue, and the other necessary and important members, but a soul which can be an eye to a number of others is difficult and hard to find. For if our discipline requires as Superior of the brotherhood one able to look ahead, well-equipped with utterance, sober, compassionate, one who seeks the ordinances of God with a perfect heart, how is it possible in the same parish to hit upon a number of such men? But if it should happen that two or three are found—which is not easy, nor have we ever known it to happen—it is much better that they should share with one another the anxiety and lighten the toil. So that when the one is absent or busy or otherwise engaged, as the brotherhood is deprived of its one Superior, there is a second to console them for their loss. Or if this be not so, then one can go to another brotherhood that needs a guide. Moreover, experience of affairs outside the monastery can help us much in achieving the aim we have set before us. Just as in the case of arts generally their skilled exponents are jealously disposed towards rivals, since in the nature of things contentions arise, no one knows how, so also it happens for the most part in this life of ours. For we begin by striving after virtue and being eager to surpass one another, either in hospitality or in augmenting the number of our fellow ascetics, or in other matters of this kind, and go on to fall into contentions. Then again it happens that when brethren come to stay much doubt and difficulty arise in place of the refreshment they expected, since they are divided in mind which party to join. For to prefer one above the other is invidious, and it is impossible to do justice to both, especially when they are in a hurry. And to those who came at the outset to live a common life the disputants will cause much perplexity as to whom they must choose as Superiors over their life, especially as by choosing some they must reject the rest. From the very first then it comes to pass that men are injuriously affected and led into pride, since they do not conform themselves to be disciples but accustom themselves to become judges and critics of the brotherhood. When therefore no benefit is found in the separation of dwellings, but so many proofs to the contrary, it is entirely unfitting to remain parted from one another. If it should happen that an establishment has been already set up, speedy measures should be taken to rectify the mistake, especially when we have had experience of the evils. To refuse to alter the decision is clearly contentiousness. “But if any man seemeth to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God,” as the apostle says. For what reason will they say prevents them from coalescing? The necessaries of life? But these are much more easily procurable in co-operation, since one lamp and one fire are sufficient, and the same is true of all similar things. For we must in these things especially aim at good management in every way, so as to diminish our store of possessions as far as possible. Further, when you are separated you need a number of men to fetch necessaries for the brethren from outside, but living together only half as many. And how hard it is to find a man who will not bring disgrace on the name of Christ when he goes on journeys, but will meet the world in a manner worthy of his profession, you know without my telling you. Again how can those who persist in remaining apart edify those who are leading the common life either by being peace-makers, should it be necessary, or by urging the observance of other commandments, when they arouse evil suspicions against themselves by failing to show unity? Besides all this we hear the apostle writing to the Philippians: “Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be of the same mind, having the same love, being of one soul, having one mind, doing nothing through factions or vainglory, but in lowliness of mind, each counting others better than himself; not looking to his own things, but each also to the things of others.”
What greater proof of humility than that the Superiors of the brotherhood should be subject to one another! For if they are equal in spiritual gifts it is better that they should contend together—as the Lord Himself showed us when He sent out the disciples by two and two; and one of the two will gladly choose to be subject unto the other, remembering the Lord’s words: “He that humbleth himself shall be exalted.” But if it happens that the one suffers, the other gains, by comparison then it is more beneficial that the weaker should be helped by the stronger. And (if we refuse) is it not a clear disobedience of the apostolic command: “Not looking each to his own things, but each also to the things of others”? For I reckon this cannot be carried out in separation, when each section takes care for its fellow denizens, but thought for the others is outside its ken, which, as I said, is clearly opposed to the apostolic command. And the Saints in the Acts bear witness to this frequently, of whom it is written, in one place: “The multitude of them that believed were of one heart and soul,” and in another place: “All that believed were together, and had all things common.” So it is obvious that there was no division among them all, nor did each live under his own authority, but all had one and the same care—and that too although the total number was five thousand, and with such a number one would think perhaps there were no few obstacles to union. But where men living in a single parish are found so inferior in numbers to those, what in reason allows them to remain separated from one another? Would that it were possible, that not only those in the same parish were thus united, but that a number of brotherhoods existing in different places might be built up into a community under the single care of those who are able without partiality and wisely to manage the affairs of all in the unity of the spirit and the bond of peace!
1 Mt. xxv. 41 add of before xatnpxuévor K.
2 Mt. xii. 50 nor} for movnon, odtog for adtéc, add xxt before aderodc.
$52 Cor. vi. 1. Ac Bph. tv.
5 xan is used either = a village or a ward within a réXc, so that “parish ” is the exact English equivalent. B. seems to be thinking of country communities.
1 A class of superiors within the one monastery.
3 B. sets his face against small communities, but by no means contemplates a community of the Pachomian size.
1 Phil. ii. 2, 3 4 for unde nate K; 4 omit first éxaotoc.
2 This answer is of great importance and is the key to the understanding of the “ superiors ”’ in B.’s monasteries. They were apparently a peculiarity of the Basilian monasteries and arose from the formation of strong centres out of small and scattered communities; see Intr. p. 41. 3 Lk. xviii. 14 F. 4 Phil. ui. 4.
5 Note the consciousness of living in times which reproduced primitive enthusiasm.
§ Acts iv. 32.
XXXVI. — Concerning those who Secede from the Brotherhood
It cannot be a matter of indifference whether or not those who have once agreed to live together remain where they are or depart. Refusal to carry out one’s purpose has two causes, either harm received from living together, or instability on the part of him who changes his mind. Let him who separates from his brethren on account of the harm he is receiving not keep the cause to himself but rather denounce the harm after the fashion shown us by the Lord when He said: “If thy brother sin, go, show him his fault between thee and him alone, etc.” And if the required amendment is made he has both gained his brethren, and does not put the community to shame; but if he sees them abiding in evil, and not receiving correction, he will show the matter to those who are competent to judge such things; and then at last (if he cannot get redress) let him depart having got a number to witness what he is doing. He will then be departing no longer from brethren but from strangers, for the Lord compares him who abides in evil to a Gentile and a publican. For He says: “Let” such a man “be to thee as a Gentile and a publican.” But if he runs away from the community of the brethren through his own frivolity let him cure his own weakness, or if he is unwilling so to do let the brotherhoods refuse to accept him. But if brethren go to one place or another in order to keep the commandment of the Lord, such men are not severing themselves but fulfilling their duty. But no other cause of separation from one’s brethren can be allowed. In the first place, any other cause dishonours the name of our Lord Jesus Christ which has brought us together; secondly, because (if other causes are admitted) the minds of individuals towards others cannot be pure but they will be suspicious of each other. And this is clearly opposed to the commandment of the Lord Who said: “If thou art offering thy gift at the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.”
1 Acts il. 44 moteboavtes for motevovtec.:
2 B. practically requires the Benedictine promise of stabilitas, with certain safeguards necessary in the then unorganised state of monasticism. See B. 74, 102 for other answers on the subject of leaving the monastery.
3 Mt. xviii. 15 aucpry for ducetioy*, omit cic of.
4 Mt. xviii. 17.
XXXVII. — Whether we must Neglect Work for the Sake of the Prayers and Psalmody, and What Times are Suitable for Prayer, and First of All whether we Should Work at All
Since our Lord Jesus Christ says: “Worthy of his food is” (not just any or every one but) “the labourer,” and the apostle commands us to labour and work with our hands that which is good that we may have to give to him that is in need, it is self-evident that one should work diligently. For we must not treat the ideal of piety as an excuse for idleness or a means of escaping toil, but as an opportunity for contending, for more abundant toils, and for patience in tribulations, in order that we may be able to say: “In labour and travail, in watchings more abundantly, in hunger and thirst.” For such a mode of life is useful to us not only because of the body-buffeting it entails, but because of love to our neighbour, in order that God by our means may bring sufficiency to the weak among the brethren, after the example given us in the Acts by the apostle when he says: “In all things I gave you an example, how that so labouring ye ought to help the weak.” And again: “That ye may have to give to him that is in need”—that we may be counted worthy to hear the words: “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was an hungred, and ye gave me to eat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me to drink.”
How great an evil is that of idleness, what need is there to tell, since the apostle plainly commands that he who does not work neither shall he eat? As then daily food is necessary to each man, equally necessary is work according to his power. For not in vain did Solomon write by way of praise: “She ate not the bread of idleness.” And again the apostle says of himself: “Neither did we eat bread for nought at any man’s hands, but in labour, and travail, working night and day,” although he had power, since he was proclaiming the Gospel, to live of the Gospel. Moreover, the Lord coupled slothfulness with wickedness, saying: “Thou wicked and slothful servant.” And the wise Solomon not only praises the worker in the words just recorded, but also rebukes the slothful man by comparing him with the smallest creatures, saying: “Go to the ant, thou sluggard.” And so we should fear lest this be brought up against us in the day of judgment when He that gave us power to work demands of us work commensurate with the power. For He says: “To whom they committed much, of him they will ask the more.” Now since some get off work under pretext of prayers and psalmody, you must know that for each separate task there is a special time, as Ecclesiastes says: “There is a time for everything.” But for prayer and psalmody, as for many other things, every time is suitable; so that we praise God with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs while we move our hands in work with the tongue if it is possible, and conducive to the edification of the faith,—but if not, then in the heart, giving thanks to Him Who gave both strength of hand to work and wisdom of brain to know how to work, and also bestowed means by which to work both in the tools we use and the arts we practise, whatever the work be. We pray moreover that the works of our hands may be directed towards the mark of pleasing God.