anomalous fabric: and while it was so closely intermixed with the peculiar circumstances of the age, that its nature could not have been rightly comprehended, unless described in connexion with them; it was at the same time an innovation so essentially affecting the form and character of monachism, that any account, not embracing it, would have conveyed very imperfect and even erroneous notions. Led by such considerations, we have selected the present period for this purpose; not unmindful how little justice after all can possibly be done to materials so ample within such scanty limits, and almost despairing to throw any new light on a subject which has exercised the genius, and deserved― as it still deserves the deepest meditation both of historians and philosophers. SECTION I. The origin of Monachism and its progress in the East. THE monastic spirit was alike congenial to the scenery and climate of the East, and to the peculiar character of its inhabitants. Vast solitudes of unbroken and unbounded expanse; rocks, with the most grotesque outlines, abounding in natural excavations; a dry air and an unclouded sky, afforded facilities-might we not say temptations-to a wild, unsocial, and contemplative life. The serious enthusiasm of the natives of Egypt and Asia, that combination of indolence with energy, of the calmest languor with the fiercest passion, which marks their features and their actions, disposed them to embrace with eagerness the tranquil but exciting duties of religious seclusion. And thus, even in earlier ages, before the zeal of devotion superseded all other motives to retirement, we observe, without any surprise, the mention of that practice, as indigenous and immemorial. * Therapeuta or Essenes. Pliny the philosopher has recorded the existence of an extraordinary race, who lived on the borders of the Dead Sea, the associates of the palm trees; and who had been perpetuated (as it was said) through thousands of ages without women and without property. Satiety and disgust with the business of life, rather than any religious feeling, are mentioned as the motives of their seclusion. Again, it is certain that the Therapeuta or Essenes inhabited the deserts both of Egypt and of Syria, as early as the days of our Saviour. They had probably dwelt there long before that time; and they appear to have sought to exalt the merit of their retirement by the practice of great austerities. Some Roman Catholic writers, being anxious to prove Monachism coeval with Christianity, have asserted, on the authority of Eusebius †, Sozomen, and Cassian, that the Therapeuta were Christians; and that they scattered the seeds of the monastic life through the populous villages of Lower * Lib. v. cap. xvii. Ab occidente Judææ litore Esseni fugitant; gens sola et in toto orbe præter cæteras mira, sine ulla fœmina, omni Venere abdicata, sine pecunia, socia palmarum. Indiem ex æquo advenarum turba renascitur, longe frequentantibus quos vita fessos ad mores eorum fortuna fluctibus agitat. Ita per sæculorum millia (incredibile dictu) gens æterna in qua nemo nascitur. Tam fœcunda illis aliorum vitæ pœnitentia est. The most_important references on this subject are collected by Hospinian. Orig. Monach.— Lib. I. cap. v. Hist. Eccles. lib. ii. c. xvi. He applied to the Christians that which Philo had written about the Jewish Essenes. Such at least is the opinion of Marsham, a very impartial as well as learned writer, in his pray to Dugdale's Monasticon.-See Joseph. de Bell. Judaic, lib. ii, cap. vii, for a particular description of that sect, Egypt, whilst St. Marc, their founder, presided over the Church of Alexandria. But the opinion is more probable, that they were, for the most part, Jews by religion as well as by birth; and of a much earlier origin. Nevertheless, it may well be, that such of them as became converts to the faith, still retained their rigid eremitical life; nor can it be doubted, that the example of their severities, and the popular respect which followed them, would excite the attention and emulation of surrounding Christians. This is one of the causes to which we may attribute the very early existence of a sect unquestionably Christian, called The Ascetics. the Ascetics; and these also have been erroneously confounded with the original Monks. The term Ascetic was applied by early* Christian writers to the most rigid and zealous among the primitive converts, whether they exhibited their fervour in unusual assiduity in prayer and the offices of charity, or extended it to the more equivocal merits of fasting and celibacy. But these persons did not withdraw themselves from the world; they merely exercised with ardour, perhaps in extravagance, the virtues which best qualified them to benefit and amend it. Possibly, in their rigid devotion to the duties of society, they may have shunned with aversion even its most innocent amusements. But such pious excess, which has ever marked the best forms and ages of Christianity, was eminently useful to its propagation, and should be sparingly censured under any circumstances t. It is at least manifest, that the rule of the Ascetics was essentially at variance with the monastic principle; they dwelt and associated with their fellow Christians; and perhaps they might never have acquired the historical distinction of a name, had it not been, that they affected a different garb, and assumed the philosophical cloak as the badge of their sect. Their origin is attributed by Mosheimt to the double doctrine of morals, which he supposes to have prevailed in the second century so that, while vulgar Christians were contented to obey the precepts of the Gospel, those who aimed at higher perfection, professed to be also directed by its counsels. This notion is unquestionably borrowed from heathen philosophy; and, if it really existed to any extent among the Ascetics, it affords another proof of their connexion with the schools of Greece. But the unsettled condition of the Church in those days, and the jealousies and sufferings to which it was subjected, the general demoralization of the pagan world, the example of popular austerities in another religion, and the melancholy genius of Egypt, where Ascetism chiefly prevailed, were causes alone sufficient to have produced as they did produce-forms of enthusiasm far less rational, than any which can justly be ascribed to the Ascetics. But about the middle of the third century the monastic spirit exhibited itself in a much less equivocal shape; and we may observe that the * Bingham (Christ. Antiq. b. vii.) confirms his account of the Ascetics by numerous and conclusive authorities. + The Ascetics were of all ranks and professions. Eusebius calls them of ouda the zealous. Clemens Alexandrinus ixλixrwv ixλszrórigo-the more elect among the elect. These expressions imply nothing more than a greater fervour (or at least greater pretension) of piety. The same writer (Cent. iii., p. 2., ch. ii.) seems disposed to attribute the rise of Monks and Hermits to the influence of the mystical theology. Yet he admits, in the same paragraph, that that method of life was very common in Egypt, Syria, India, and Mesopotamia even before the coming of Christ. Anchorets. purest and most legitimate character of seclusion was that which it first assumed. Flying from the fury of the Decian persecution, a number of Christians took refuge in caves, in deserts, or inaccessible islets, where they exercised their proscribed religion in solitary security. Egypt and Syria, and Mesopotamia, and the wildest parts of Asia Minor, were suddenly visited by a race of exiles, in whom devotion, irritated by injustice and fed by seclusion, sometimes sank into sullen and gloomy fanaticism. These probably were the earliest Christian Hermits or Anchorets; they professed an absolute religious solitude, occasionally interrupted indeed by the pious importunity of the neighbouring inhabitants, but never broken by any regular connexion or association with each other. Their numbers were further increased by the severities of Diocletian; and still more, perhaps, by the reverence and sympathy, which the spectacle of their austere piety excited among the vulgar. They continued for some time to deserve by their habits the title of Solitaries; nor do we learn that they were formed into assemblies until after the establishment of the Church by Constantine. The first institution of persons living in common for religious purposes, and therefore called Cœnobites, is attributed to St. Anthony, the contemporary and friend of Athanasius, and his fellowlabourer in the same soil. And it is obvious to remark, that while the greater of those champions of the ancient Church was engaged in defending the purity of the Christian faith, in the schools of Alexandria, the other was scattering in the same soil, with the same applause and success, the seeds of a system directly at variance with some of its best practical principles. Another Egyptian, named Pachomius, divides with St. Anthony the fame of this enterprise; in as far at least as he immediately extended to the Upper Thebaid the work which Anthony commenced in the Lower *. He even ventured thus early to enlarge upon the first scheme of religious union; and introduced the custom, which in much later ages was so generally adopted in the Western Church, of combining several monasteries into one Society, or 'Congregation.' These events took place during the first half of the fourth century; and it is from this epoch that we properly date the origin of the monastic system. Cœnobites. The multitudes who instantly embraced that manner of life, and thronged the primitive edifices of Upper Egypt, were, no doubt, exagge rated, when calculated at nearly half the population of the country. But it is certain, that the New Philosophy' (it was early designated by that name) was eagerly adopted by a crowd of proselytes; nor is this wonderful; since those to whom its advantages were the most obvious, and its duties the most easy, were the lowest of mankind-and since in Egypt, more than in any other land, religious novelties have flourished from the remotest ages with a peculiar fecundity. Since the original monks of Egypt are praised by Roman Catholic writers, as the true models of monastic perfec tion, and since some accounts of them remain, The Monks of Egypt. which may be followed with little suspicion, it is proper to employ some additional attention on that subject. John Cassian, a native of Scythia, a deacon by the ordination of St. Chrysostom, and an inmate of the Monastery of Palestine, near Bethlehem, went forth, about the year 395, to explore the holy solitudes of Egypt, and draw from * Histoire des Ordres Monastiques, Dissert. Prélim. 6 its more perfect institutions a profitable lesson of religious instruction; and seven years devoted to those inquiries give weight and credit to the descriptions which he published. The latter part of his life was passed in retirement at Marseilles; and to the two convents which he there established, he prescribed a rule founded on the venerable practice of the East. According to his account, the recluses of Egypt were divided into three principal classes: the Anchorets, the Cœnobites, and the Sarabaites. The two former, whose numbers were nearly equal, formed the respectable and genuine portion of the profession. The last were independent, and were regarded as spurious and unworthy brethren. The Anchorets occupied, either in perfect solitude or in very small societies, the rudest and most secluded recesses of the desert. We are not destitute of parental consolation, (said the Hermit Abraham to Cassian, who was beginning to sigh after the more agreeable solitudes of Asia and Europe,) nor devoid of means of easy sustenance-were we not bound by the command of our Saviour to forsake all and follow Him. We are able, if it seemed good, to build our cells on the banks of the Nile, instead of bringing our water on our heads from four miles' distance-were it not, that the Apostle has told us, that "every man shall receive his reward according to his labour." We know that in these our regions there are some secret and pleasant places, where fruits are abundant, and the beauty and fertility of the gardens would supply our necessities with the slightest toil-were it not that we fear "to receive in our lifetime our good things." Wherefore we scorn these things, and all the pleasures of this world; and we take delight in these horrors, and prefer the wildness of this desolation, before all that is fair and attractive, admitting no comparison between the luxuriance of the most exuberant soil and the bitterness of these sands**.' The establishments of the Cœnobites, which were spread from one end of the country to the other, contained, severally, from one hundred to five thousand inhabitants. In some instances, the wall which confined them inclosed also their wells and gardens, and all that was necessary for their sustenance, so as to leave no pretext even for occasional intercourse with a world, which they had deserted for ever. The discipline to which they were subjected was rigid, but neither barbarous nor at all charged with injurious austerities. We read nothing of those chains and collars of iron, which formed a necessary part of self-devotion in the Syrian convents, nor is there any mention of sackcloth or flagellation, or any other voluntary torture. The whole severity of their practice consisted in abstemiousness; but even that was moderate; positive fasting was not encouraged; nor was it thought necessary to macerate the body in order to purify the soul. Bread and water was indeed the only nourishment allowed to the healthy devotee; but the bread was abundantly supplied; and those who have drawn from their infancy the sweet waters of the Nile *Cassianus, Collationes, lib. xxiv. c. 2. Such passages are illustrated by other writers of the same, or nearly the same age. Among many others, the description of the Egyptian monks by Gregory Nazianzen (in Orat. xxi. Els ròv Miyav'Ataváriov) is perhaps worth citing: Οἱ κόσμου χωρίζοντες ἑαυτοὺς, καὶ τὴν ἔρημον ἀσπαζόμενοι ζῶσι Θεῷ πάντων μᾶλλον τῶν στεφομένων τῷ σώματι. Οἱ μὲν τὸν παντῆ μοναδικὸν καὶ ἄμικτον διαθλοῦντες βιὸν ἑαυτοῖς μόνοις προσλαλοῦντες καὶ τῷ Θεῷ, καὶ τοῦτο μόνον κόσμον εἰδότες ὅσον ἐν τῇ ἐρημίᾳ γνωρί ζουσι· οἱ δὲ νόμον ἀγάπης τῇ κοινωνίᾳ στέργοντες ἐρημικοί τε ὁμοῦ καὶ μιγάδες, τοῖς μὲν ἄλλοις τεθνηκότες ἀνθρώποις ἀλλήλοις δὲ κόσμος ὄντες, καὶ τῇ παραθέσει τὴν ἀρετὴν θήγοντες. The same writer describes the character of a true monk with great minuteness and fervor in his XIIth Oration, (Εἰρηνικος Α, Επὶ τῇ Ενώσει τῶν Μοναζόντων.) seldom require or seek an artificial beverage. Neither was this rule enforced on all with indiscriminate rigour; but it was frequently modified according to age, or sex, or constitution. They assembled to prayer twice in the twenty-four hours, at evening and during the night. Twelve psalms were chaunted, (the chaunt had been taught them by an angel,) each of which was followed by a prayer; and then two lessons were read from the Scripture to those who desired to be instructed in that volume. The hearers remained sitting during the greater part of the service, with very short interruptions of genuflexion or prostration. The signal which summoned them to prayer was a simple trumpet or horn; it was sufficient to break the silence of their deserts; and the hour of their night-prayer was indicated by the declining stars, which shine in that cloudless atmosphere with perpetual lustre. The offices of their worship were undisturbed by any sound of worldly care or irreverent levity. Their devotion, like their pyramids, was simple and solid, and they lived like strangers to the flesh and its attributes, like sojourners on earth and citizens of a spiritual community*. Four objects were comprehended in their profession-solitude, manual labour, fasting, and prayer; and we cannot forbear to observe, how large a portion of their time was devoted to the second. Indeed, so strictly was the necessity of such occupation inculcated, that the moderation of their other duties might almost appear to have been prescribed with that view. A body, debilitated by the excess of fasting or discipline, would have been disqualified for the offices of industry which were performed by the monks of Egypt. Without any possessions, and holding it alike discreditable to beg or to accept †, they earned their daily bread by their skill and diligence in making mats or baskets, as cutlers, as fullers; or as weavers-insomuch, that their houses may seem to have resembled religious manufactories, rather than places consecrated to holy purposes; and the motive of their establishment is liable to the suspicion of being, in some cases at least, worldly and political. Yet in the descriptions of their practice, both objects were so united, that the prayer seems to have been inseparable from the labour. To that end, the employments which they chose were easy and sedentary, so that the mind might be free to expatiate, while the hands were in exercise. At the same time, they maintained that perpetual occupation was the only effectual method to prevent distractions, and fix the soul on worthy considerations; that thus alone the tediousness of solitude, and its attendant evils, can be remedied; that the monk who works has only one demon to tempt him, while the monk unoccupied is harassed by demons innumerable §. The Sarabaites || are described by Cassian in language of violent and almost unmitigated censure. Yet if we neglect those expressions, which *See Fleury's admirable Eighth Discourse. + Cassian. Collat. xxiv. s. 11, 12, 13. Ita ut quid ex quo pendeat haud facile possit a quopiam discerni-i. e. utrum propter meditationem spiritalem incessabiliter manuum opus exerceant; an propter operis jugitatem tam præclarum profectum spiritus, scientiæque lumen acquirant. Cassian. Instit. lib. ii. c. 14. § Unde hæc est apud Ægyptum ab antiquis Patribus sancta (al. sancita) sententiaoperantem Monachum dæmone uno pulsari; otiosum vero innumeris spiritibus devastari. Cassiani Instit. lib. x. c. 23. It appears from Cassian's preceding chapter, that any superfluity which the monks might have acquired was frequently employed in charitable purposes, and especially in the redemption of captives. The same sect, no doubt, which St. Jerome calls Remoboth, and stigmatizes as genus deterrimum atque neglectum.' Epist, xviii, ad Eustochium. De Custodia Vir ginitatis. |