PROLOGUS

[Ms P, fol. Ar – Paulus Diaconus –
Ps.-Basil: Ms K², fol. 1v; Ms E¹, fol. 2v; Ms E², fol. 1v]

PROLOGUE

Translated by: Matthieu van der Meer and Bruce Venarde

Incipit prologus sive adhortatio ejus. Tres enim sunt ecclesiasticae disciplinae: Prima physica, id est naturalis, secunda ethica, i. e. moralis, tertia logica, i. e. rationalis. Physica derivatur ab eo, quod est physin; physin enim graece latine natura dicitur. Ethica autem derivatur ab eo, quod est ethin, ethin quidem graece latine mores dicuntur. Logica derivatur ab eo, quod est logos; logos enim graece latine ratio dicitur.

There are three ecclesiastical disciplines. The first one is the physical, that is natural discipline, the second is the ethical, that is moral discipline and the third one is the logical, that is rational discipline. The physical discipline takes its name from physin – the Greek word physin is called nature in Latin. The ethical takes its name from ethin – the Greek word ethin is called custom in Latin. Logic takes its name from that what is logos – for the Greek logos is called in Latin ratio (reason).

Et propter has tres disciplinas ecclesiasticas Salomon, sapientissimus omnium regum, tres libros edidit. Primum librum vocavit parabolam, secundum ecclesiasten, [page 4] tertium vero cantica canticorum. [cf. Isidore of Seville, De libris Salomonis in Libros veteris et novi testamenti prooemia PL 83, col. 164] Primus quidem liber convenit parvulis, in quo saepe parvulos quasi filios alloquitur dicens: Audi fili mi, et caetera; unde in ipso libro saepe mentio malarum rerum fit, id est meretricum et haereticorum. Secundus autem liber convenit majoribus, in quo libro majores admonentur, vanitates mundi despicere, unde ipse liber a vanitate inchoatur dicens: Vanitas vanitatum et omnia vanitas. [Ecl 1:2] Tertius autem liber congruit perfectis; nam in eo libro non adversa, sed laeta reperiuntur.

And in accordance with these three ecclesiastical disciplines, Salomon, the wisest of all kings, has published three books. He called the first book Proverbs, the second Ecclesiast [page 4] and the third Song of Songs. [cf. Isidore of Seville, De libris Salomonis in Libros veteris et novi testamenti prooemia PL 83, col. 164] The first book is suited for the small ones, as he often speaks to the small as if they were his sons, saying: Listen, my son, etc. Therefore, often mention is made in that book of bad things, that is of prostitutes and heretics. The second book is suited for the older ones, as in that book the older ones are admonished to spurn the vanities of the world. Therefore, that very book begins with ‘vanity’, saying: Vanity of vanities and all is vanity. [Ecl 1:2] The third book, however, is fitted for the perfect, for in that book are not found the unpropitious things but the joyful things.

Istius enim Salomonis ordinem tenens B. Benedictus non ignarus ecclesiasticae disciplinae dixit: ₁Ausculta o fili, id est sicut Salomon in primo suo libro parvulos quasi filios allocutus est.

The blessed Benedict, in keeping the order of Salomon, said, not unaware of the ecclesiastical discipline: ₁Listen, o son, just like Salomon has spoken in his first book to the small ones as his sons.

Quidam libri habent ausculta, et quidam obsculta; sed sive dicas ausculta, sive obsculta, nihil obstat, eo quod auscultare est  scultare; scultare ponitur pro audire, obscultare vero est communiter audire, quia ob in hoc loco pro simul ponitur.

Certain books have (for ‘listen!’) ausculta and others have obsculta, but whether you should say ausculta or obsculta does not matter, because auscultare is scultare (to listen) with the ears (auribus). Scultare is given for hearing, but obscultare is hearing-at-once, because (the prefix) ob is given here instead of simul (at once).

Nunc videndum est, qua ratione Benedictus cum dixit: fili! praemisit o; suffecisset illi enim dixisse fili tantum, quia in illo nomine, quod est fili, vocatio intelligitur. Sed [quia] sicut solent multa nomina pro exaggeratione, id est augmentatione intellectus sui assumere quasdam adjectiones sillabarum, verbi gratia, sicut dives, potens, excelsus et caetera assumunt prae et ex i. e. praedives et praepotens, hoc est valde dives et valde potens, et excelsus, id est, valde celsus: ita S. Benedictus in hoc loco ut exaggeraret vocationem suam, praemisit o, cum dixit: fili! Nam o fili duo sunt vocativa, ac si diceret: fili! fili! Filius enim multis modis dicitur, id est natura, adoptione, imitatione, doctrina et gente.

Now we must see, why Benedict, when he said: Son!, set o in front. It would have sufficed for him to have just said son, because in that name son, a summons is understood. But many names usually assume certain additions of syllables for the sake of amplification, that is, enhancement, of their concept. For example, dives (rich), potens (powerful), celsus (lofty), etc. take prae- and ex-, resulting in praedives, praepotens, that is very rich and very powerful, and excelsus, that is very lofty (celsus). Likewise, Saint Benedict set o in front at this spot, so as to exaggerate his summons when he said: Son! For O, son are two vocatives, as if he was saying: Son! Son! For son is said in many ways, that is by nature, adoption, imitation, teaching and nation.

Natura enim et adoptione omnibus notum est; imitatione autem, quia illius est filius quis, cujus opera imitatur, unde Dominus in Evangelio dixit Judaeis: Vos ex patre diabolo estis, quia ejus opera facere vultis. [Io 8:44]

[What is meant with] ‘by nature’ and ‘by adoption’ is known to all, with ‘by imitation’ however [is meant] that someone is the son of that person whose works he imitates. Therefore, the Lord said in the Gospel to the Jews: You are of your father, the devil, because you want to do his works [Jn 8:44].

Doctrina vero, sicut sunt filii docti a suis magistris; gente autem, sicut fuit ille dives, positus in inferno, videns Lazarum in sinu Abrahae; unde illum Abraham filium vocavit dicens: Fili recordare, quia recepisti bona in vita tua, et Lazarus similiter mala. [Lc 16:25] Et similiter [page 5] ille dives eum patrem nominavit dicens: Pater Abraham.

‘By teaching,’ however, [we say sons] just as sons have been taught by their teachers. [We say] ‘by nation’ though, just as that rich person, placed in hell, when he saw Lazarus on the lap of Abraham. Abraham called him son, saying: Remember, son, that you have received good things in your life and Lazarus, likewise, bad things [Lk 16:25]. And likewise [page 5] that rich man called him father, saying: Father Abraham [Lk 16:24].

Et quamquam multis modis dicatur filius, tamen ubi filius invenitur, etiam non scriptus semper pater subintelligitur, quia filius non potest esse sine patre. In hoc vero loco cum dicit: fili, paternitatis affectum atque magisterii disciplinam erga te ostendit se habuisse. Te vero sua oratio, qua dicit: fili, ostendit, ad quod te ducat, id est ostendit, te ducere ad paternitatis affectum, seu magisterii disciplinam suscipiendam.

And although ‘son’ is used in many ways, still, when a ‘son’ is found, always a ‘father’ is implied, even if it is not written, because a son cannot be without a father. In that place, though, when he says: Son, he shows that he has held paternal affection and professorial discipline towards you. The speech in which he says: Son, shows whereto he leads you, that is, it shows that you are moving to paternal affection or to receiving professorial discipline.

Sequitur: Praecepta dicuntur quasi praemium captent, eo quod sui servatores ex illis praemia capiant.

Next: the instructions are called praecepta as if they hold a reward (praemium) because those who preserve them may take rewards from them.

Magister dictus est quasi magis tritus, id est magis doctus, sicuti dicitur discipulus a discendo.

A teacher has been called magister as from more practiced (magis tritus) that is, more learned, just as disciple is called after learning (discendo).

Nunc videndum est, quare dixit Benedictus inclina, cum potuit dicere aperi? Sed quia multi aperiunt aures et non inclinant i. e. non humiliant, ideo dixit inclina, id est: humilia. Nam multi, quamquam raro econtrario, superbi reperiuntur aures et cetera membra erecta habere, ut est illud: aures eorum adgrava et oculos superborum humiliabis [Is 6:10; Ps 17:18]; semper enim superbi in fastu superbiae erecti sunt; non enim ita dicuntur membra superborum superba, quasi illa sint superba, sed quia officia eorum superbia est, idcirco membra superba dicuntur. Nam in oculis solet cognosci superbia, in ceteris vero membris officia intelligentur superba.

Now we have to see, why Benedict said bend (inclina) when he could say open (aperi). But since many people open their ears and do not bend them, that is, do not humble them, for that reason he said bend, that is humble. For many proud people – although occasionally the opposite is true – are found in such a state that they have their ears and other members erect, just like this citation: make their ears heavy and you will humble the eyes of the proud. [Isa 6:10; Ps 17:18] For the proud have always been erected in the arrogance of pride; for, the limbs of the proud are not called proud in this way that they [themselves] are proud, but because they act proudly. For that reason their limbs are called proud. For, pride is usually situated in the eyes, but in the other limbs pride is understood as a function.

Et est sensus, cum dicit: inclina aurem, id est, ad humilitatem discendam aures submitti; nam inclinare est ab excelsioribus ad humilia submitti.

That is also the point, when he says: Bend your ear. That means that the ears are brought down to learning humility. For, to bend is to be brought down from higher places to the low (humble).

Iterum videndum est, quare, cum dicit aures, subjunxit cordis, cum suffecisset illi dixisse aures sine adjectione cordis, quia scriptura divina ubi aures dicit, cordis aures requirit; unde Dominus in Evangelio dicit: Qui habet aures audiendi audiat; [Mt 11:15; Mc 4:9; Lc 8:8, Lc 14:35] ibi enim non de auribus corporeis dixit, quia omnes, qui illic aderant, aures corporis habebant, et nemo illic venisset ad audiendum, nisi aures corporis habuisset, sed quia Dominus cognoscens ut Deus vidit, ibi multos non aures cordis habuisse, [et] ideo dixit: Qui habet aures audiendi, audiat, ac si diceret: Illos alloquor, qui aures cordis habent; nam aures exterioris hominis sonum audiunt, sed non discernunt, aures autem [page 6] interioris hominis audiunt et discernunt.

Again, we need to see why, when he says ears, he added of the heart, because it would have been enough for him to have said ears without adding of the heart, because when the divine scripture says ears, it requires [to understand] the ears of the heart. Therefore, the Lord says in the Gospel: He who has ears to hear, let him hear! [Mt 11:15 etc.]. He did not speak of corporeal ears, because all people who were present there, were having ears, and no one would have come there to hear, unless he had had ears of the body. But because the Lord, knowing just like God, saw that many people there had not had ears of the heart, therefore he said: he who has ears to hear, let him hear, as if he was saying: I am speaking to others who have ears, for ears of the outer man hear the sound, but they do not discern. The ears of the inner man, however, [page 6] hear and discern.

Et ipse homo exterior communis est cum bestiis; homo autem interior communis est cum angelis, et ipse ad imaginem Dei factus est.

And man himself, as outer man, has the same nature as the animals; but the inner man has the same nature as angels, and he himself has been made after God’s image.

S. vero Benedictus ideo dixit cordis, ut ibi nulla difficultas esset intelligendi, de quibus auribus diceret, quia humilibus et simplicibus loquebatur.

Saint Benedict, however, said of the heart in order that there would be no difficulty of understanding about what ears he was speaking, because he was talking to humble and simple people.

Aures autem secundum antiquorum sapientium sensum dictae sunt quasi audes ideo, quod audiant. [source not identified] Secundum vero novorum sapientium aures dictae sunt ab hauriendo, eo quod hauriant sonum.

According to ancient wise men, ears (aures) were [originally] called audes for this reason that they hear (audire). But according to modern wise men, ears have been called after [the verb] to draw (haurire), because they draw the sound.

Nunc iterum videndum est, qua ratione S. Benedictus, cum dixit cordis, subjunxit tui, cum suffecisset illi cordis dixisse tantum. Sed ideo dixit propter exaggerationem cordis, id est propter nimiam intentionem cordis.

Now we need to look again, with what reason Saint Benedict added your, when he said of your heart, because it would have sufficed for him to only have said of the heart. But he said it because of the amplification of the heart. That is: because of the very great intention of the heart.

Ea quippe intentione dixit S. Benedictus tui, qua intentione dixit Deus ad Ezechielem prophetam tuis, ait enim: Fili hominis, vide oculis tuis et auribus tuis audi et pone cor tuum in omnia, quae ego ostendam tibi, quia ut ostendantur tibi, adductus es huc. [Ez 40:4]

Indeed, St. Benedict said your with the same intention with which God said to Ezekiel, his prophet, your. He said: Son of man, see with your eyes and hear with your ears and put your heart in everything that I will show you, because you have been brought hither in order that it be shown to you [Ez 40:4].

Ideo dixit tuis, quia oculos cordis vel aures cordis requirebat, ac si diceret: quia non potes ista, quae ego ostendo tibi, oculis corporeis videre, et auribus corporeis audire, idcirco dico tuis, ut ea propheticis oculis videas et auribus propheticis audias. Ita S. Benedictus in hoc loco dixit tui, ac si diceret: et quia haec, quae ego loquor tibi, non potes auribus corporeis audire, idcirco dixi tui, ut ea auribus cordis audias.

He said your for this reason that he was demanding the eyes of the heart or the ears of the heart, as if he was saying: since you are not able to see with corporeal eyes those things that I show you and hear them with corporeal ears, therefore I say your in order that you see those things with prophetic eyes and hear them with prophetic ears. Thus St. Benedict said your in that place: and since you are not able to hear with corporeal ears those things that I say to you, therefore I said your in order that you hear them with the ears of the heart.

₁Et admontionem pii patris libenter excipe.

₁And gladly receive the admonition of the loving father.

Inter admonitionem et doctrinam hoc potest interesse: doctrina est ostensio rei, quae debet fieri, et quae non debet fieri; admonitio vero est exoratio, ut fiat vel non fiat.

This can be the difference between admonition and teaching: teaching is the showing of a thing that ought to happen, and that not ought to happen; admonition, however, is an exhortation, in order that it happens or not.

Nunc iterum videndum est, qua ratione S. Benedictus cum dixit patris praemisit pii, cum suffecisset dixisse tantum patris? Sed ideo dixit pii propter exaggerationem paternitatis affectus id est, ut ostenderet, se nimium paternum amorem habere.

Now we have to see again, with what reason St. Benedict set loving in front when he said of the father as it would have sufficed for him to have only said of the father. But he said loving because of the amplification of affection of fatherhood, that is, in order to show that he had very great paternal love.

Altero modo dixit pii ad seperationem illorum, qui crudeles sunt patres, veluti est diabolus, de quo Dominus in Evangelio dicit: Vos ex patre diabolo estis, quia opera ejus facere vultis. [Io 8:44] Diabolus enim, quanquam blanda et [page 7] dulcia tibi promittat, tamen quia intentio illius deceptionis atque perditionis est, ideo est crudelis, et ipse, qui nunc est suasor dulcedinis, ille erit accusator noster ante Deum.

In another way he said loving with regard to the distinction of those who are cruel fathers, such as the devil, about whom the Lord says in the Gospel: You are of your father, the devil, because you want to do his works. [Io 8:44] For the devil, although he may promise you pleasant and sweet things, [page 7] still, because it is his intention to deceive and ruin, he is cruel; and the same one who is now the seducer to sweetness, will later be our accuser in front of God.

Multi vero carnales patres crudeles sunt in eo, quod mittunt filios suos ad furandum et ad rapiendum seu ad cetera mala, peragenda causa dilectionis eorum, ut ex hoc abundent divitiis. Deinceps quidem sunt patres carnales, qui, quamvis non mittunt filios suos ad mala perpetranda, tamen quia non docent illos bene agere, aut non permittunt vel concedunt illos doceri, crudeles sunt. Et quid mirum, si multi patres carnales sunt crudeles, cum etiam multi doctores atque praepositi ecclesiae crudeles existunt? quia omnis, qui locum tenet regiminis ecclesiae, si plus amat vel diligit terrena quam coelestia, crudelis est.

But many fathers are cruel because they send their sons out for stealing and plundering or to pursuing other evils, out of love for these things, so as to abound in riches from this. Subsequently, there are carnal fathers who, even if they do not send out their sons to perpetrate evils, are cruel because they do not teach them to behave well or do not allow or assent that they be taught. And is it a surprise if many carnal fathers are cruel when even many doctors and teachers of the church turn out to be cruel? Because every one who holds a position of power in the church, is cruel if he loves or cherishes the matters of the earth more than the matters of heaven.

Et sive intelligas in hoc loco patrem Benedictum sive alium quemquam doctorem in loco ejus constitutum, sive ipsum Dominum, est sensus, cum dicit: ₁admonitionem pii patris libenter excipe, i. e. si forte quemquam crudelem patrem secutus es, hortor te atque admoneo, ut deseras illum crudelem et sequaris istum, qui pius est.

And whether you should understand in this place father Benedict or any other doctor put in his position, or the Lord himself, when he says gladly receive the admonition of your loving father, the meaning is this: if you by chance have followed some sort of cruel father, I urge you and admonish you, to leave that cruel man behind and to follow him who is loving.

Iterum videndum est, qua ratione cum dixit excipe, praemisit libenter? Et non dixit excipe tantum, sed ideo dixit libenter propter exaggarationem devotionis tuae, ut imperium patris atque magistri summa cum devotione excipias.

Once again we need to see, with which argument he put in front gladly, when he said receive. He did not just say receive but he said gladly because of the amplification of your devotion, in order that you receive the command of a father and teacher with the highest devotion.

Nam sunt multi, qui imperium suscipiunt patris vel magistri, tamen non libenter suscipiunt, eo quod non bona voluntate suscipiunt illud: libenter namque potest intelligi quasi placenter, id est, sponte vel voluntarie, eo quod devotionem tuam voluit perfectam esse, cum ostendit in illo verbo, quod dicit excipe; excipere enim est valde accipere, id est: aeque atque devote accipere.

For, there are many, who undergo the command of a father or teacher, but do not undergo it gladly, because they do not undergo it with goodwill: for gladly can be understood as willfully, that is freely or willingly, because he wanted that your devotion is perfect, when he said receive. For, to receive (recipere) is to take in very much (valde accipere), that is: to take in justly (aeque) and devoutly.

Iterum videndum est, qua ratione, cum dicit comple, praemisit efficaciter? Ideo enim dixit efficaciter propter exaggerationem, id est perfectionem operis, quia voluit ostendere, ut nihil perfectionis deesset tuo operi; efficaciter enim quasi effectum, id est consummationem capienter dicitur.

Once again, we have to see with what reason he put in front effectively when he said fulfill. He said effectively because of amplification, that is because of the fulfillment of the work, because he wanted to show that no perfection was missing from your work. For effectively means, as it were, completed, that is seizing completion (consummationem capienter)¹.

Efficaciter namque est: pefecte, pleniter; nam quia sunt [page 8] multi, qui opus sibi injunctum non efficaciter, id est studiose vel perfecte complent, propterea dixi tibi, efficaciter complere, ut non tepide aut negligenter compleas. Egregius enim est in hoc loco ordo; ideo enim est egregius, quia prius docuit libenter excipere, et postmodum efficaciter complere.

For, effectively is: perfectly, fully. Because there are many [page 8] who do not effectively finish the works imposed on them, that is carefully or perfectly, for that reason he said² to you: fulfill effectively in order that you do not fulfill it tepidly or heedlessly. Indeed, the order [of words] in this place is excellent; it is excellent for this reason that he taught us to receive gladly and thereafter to fulfill effectively.

Nunc quasi tu aut aliquis, cui haec imperantur, interrogasset illum dicens: ‘Quo fructu aut qua ratione’, pater Benedicte, ‘jubes me ita agere, id est libenter praeceptum patris excipere et efficaciter complere?’ reddit causam, qua hortetur haec agere, quasi dicat: Vis scire, quo fructu aut qua ratione, fili, ita dico tibi agere? Ideo te moneo, haec agere, ₂ut ad eum per obedientiae laborem redeas, a quo per inobedientiae desidiam recesseras.

Now if you or someone to whom these things are commanded, had asked him: ‘To what effect or with what reason’, father Benedict, ‘do you order me to do so, that is to receive gladly the teaching of the father and to fulfill it effectively?’ he gives as reason: to encourage you to do these things, as if he would say: 'Do you want to know to what effect and with what reason, my son, I tell you to do so? I admonish you to do this ₂in order that you may return through the work of obedience to him, from whom you had withdrawn through the sloth of disobedience.'

Sunt enim multa loca in divinis scripturis, in quibus nota persona manifestatur per pronomen et officium, veluti est in hoc loco, cum dicit eum.

For, there are many places in divine scriptures, in which a known person is revealed through the pronoun and office, just as in this place, when he says him.

Ecce eum pronomen est relativum et positum est sine praemissione nominis. Sed quamvis S. Benedictus non nominatim indiceret personam, ad quam debeas redire, tamen quia Dei persona nota est omnibus, ideo manifestavit illam tibi per pronomen istud relativum et per officium illud, quod subjunxit: a quo per inobedientiae desidiam recesseras. Omnibus enim notum est, quia per inobedientiam recesseramus a Deo.

Behold, him is a personal pronoun and is used without first saying the name. But although Saint Benedict would not indicate the person by name to whom you have to return, still, since God’s person is known to all, therefore he revealed it to you through that personal pronoun and that office, when he added: from whom you had withdrawn through the sloth of disobedience. For, it is known to all that we had withdrawn from God through disobedience.

Nunc iterum videndum est, quare S. Benedictus adjunxit laborem obedientiae? Ideo enim junxit laborem obedientiae, quia cognovit, non posse esse obedientiam sine labore.

Now we have to see again, why Saint Benedict added the work of obedience. He added the work of obedience because he knew that obedience cannot exist without effort.

Adam enim pater noster cum esset in paradiso, potuit sine labore obedientiam Deo exhibere; nos vero e contrario expulsi de paradiso et in hoc exilium missi non possumus sine labore obedientiam Deo exhibere.

When our father Adam was in paradise, he could perform his obedience to God without effort. But we, on the contrary, have been expelled from paradise and we, sent into this exile, cannot perform obedience to God without effort.

Nunc iterum videndum est, qua ratione junxit S. Benedictus inobedientiae desidiam? Ideo junxit inobedientiae desidiam, quia cognovit, inobedientiam non posse esse sine desidia, eo quod desidia dictum est quasi desinens. Et ille est inobediens, qui desinit implere, quod sibi injunctum est.

Now we have to see, why Saint Benedict added sloth (desidia) to disobedience. He added sloth to disobedience because he knew that disobedience cannot exist without sloth (desidia), because sloth is said as if (it means) stopping (desinens). And he is disobedient who stops to fulfill what had been imposed on him.

Item advertendum est, quia S. Benedictus in hoc loco [page 9] inobedientiam primi hominis tetigit et per illius inobedientiam tetigit nostram, cum dixit: quo per inobedientiae desidiam recesseras, quia nostra inobedientia ex illius inobedientia nata est; et nisi ille inobediens esset, nos nequaquam inobedientes essemus, nos enim per illius inobedientiam omnes aequaliter recessimus a Deo, post vero unusquisque, in quantum plus peccat, tantum plus recedit a Deo.

Likewise, we must notice, that Saint Benedict in this place [page 9] touched on the disobedience of the first man and touched through his disobedience on our disobedience, when he said: from whom you had withdrawn through the sloth of disobedience, because our disobedience has been born from his disobedience; and if he would not be disobedient, we would by no means be disobedient, for we have all equally withdrawn from God through his disobedience. But thereafter, in as much as each one sins more, he withdraws more from God.

Et quod alii valde, alii minus longe recedunt a Deo, testatur sermo propheticus, qui ad Jerusalem dicit; ait enim: Filii tui de longe venient et filiae tuae de latere surgent. [Is 60:4] Per hos, quos dixit de longe venire, indicat illos, qui de plurimis et de magnis peccatis convertuntur ad Deum, per illos vero, quos dixit de latere surgent, illos significat, qui non de multis vel magnis convertuntur, quia, sicut diximus, quantum plus peccat unusquisque, tantum plus recedit, et quantum minus peccat, tantum minus longe recedit.

And the fact that some withdraw very much and others less far from God, is testified by the prophetic sermon, that says to Jerusalem: Your sons will come from far and your daughters will rise at your side [Is 60:4]. With them, about whom he said that they come from far, he refers to those who turn to God from very many and great sins. But with them, about whom he said they will rise at the side, he signifies those who do not turn from many and great [sins] because, as we said, the more anyone sins, the more he withdraws, and the less he sins, the less far he withdraws.

Apte enim et congruenter nunc dicit: ₃Ad te ergo nunc meus sermo dirigitur, postquam allocutus est parvulos quasi filios libenter excipere et efficaciter complere praeceptum patris, et postquam reddidit causam, qua debuisset ille discipulus libenter excipere et efficaciter complere.

Fittingly and suitably he now says: ₃My speech is therefore now directed at you, after he had told the small ones – like sons – to gladly receive and effectively fulfill the teaching of the father, and after he had given the reason why that disciple had to receive gladly and fulfill effectively.

Neque enim consequens erat, ut prius coepisset docere, nisi ante allocutus fuisset illum, qui docendus esset, qualiter debuisset excipere vel perficere, quod sibi injunctum fuisset; prius enim sub generalitatis nomine quasi uni de multis dixit: ausculta o fili, nunc vero postquam tu decrevisti auditor esse et obtulisti te ei ad suscipiendam ejus doctrinam, idcirco specialiter tibi assumpto de multis dixit: Ad te nunc sermo meus dirigitur.

For, it was not logical that he began to teach first, if he had not spoken earlier to him who must be taught, in what manner he had to receive or accomplish what had been imposed on him. For, under the name of universality he spoke first to one out of many: Listen, o son, but now, after you have decided to be the hearer, and have offered yourself to him to receive his doctrine, he said specifically to you, adopted out of many: I direct now my speech to you.

Istud enim adverbium, quod est nunc, in isto loco positum est, quia ab hinc coepit docere.

For, that adverb now has been put in that place because he begins to teach from this point onward.

Nunc videndum est, qua ratione dicit S. Benedictus meus sermo, cum Dominus dicat: Mea doctrina non est mes, [Io 7:16] et item ad Ezechielem prophetam Dominus dicat: Fili hominis! speculatorem te dedi domui Israel; audies ex [page 10] ore meo sermonem et annuntiabis eis ex me. [Ez 3:17] Et item in Evangelio dicitur: Quare non dedisti pecuniam meam nummulariis? [Lc 19:23]

Now, it must be seen, with what reason Saint Benedict says my speech, although the Lord says: My doctrine is not mine [Io 7:16.] and likewise the Lord says to Ezekiel the prophet: Son of man! I gave you as overseer to the house of Israel; you will hear [page 10] from my mouth a speech and you will announce to them from me [Ez 3:17]. And likewise it is said in the Gospel: Why did you not give my money to the money-lenders? [Lc 19:23].

Jam si Domini pecunia est, restat, ut doctrina sanctorum non sua sit sed Domini. Et si praedicatio sanctorum non sua est sed Domini, videtur nunc contrarium esse, quod S. Benedictus dixit: meus sermo. Sed hoc non est contrarium, quod Benedictus meus dixit, quia doctrina sanctorum et sua, et Domini est: sua est per susceptionem, Domini est per administrationem.

Now, if the money is the Lord’s, it is clear that the teaching of the saints is not theirs, but the Lord’s. And if the preaching of the saints is not theirs but the Lord’s, it seems now to be contradictory that Benedict said my speech. But it is not contradictory that Benedict said my, because the teaching of the saints is both theirs and the Lord’s: it is theirs through acceptance, it is the Lord’s through direction.

Si vero interrogasses S. Benedictum dicens: ‘cur tuum sermonem esse dicis et non Domini?’ ille vero similiter respondisset tibi dicens: ‘iste sermo Domini est et meus’. Domini est per administrationem, meus est per susceptionem. Sicut enim doctrina dicitur Domini esse et sanctorum, ita etiam et de virtutibus dicitur, veluti sunt hae: spes, fides, caritas, patientia et cetera. Domini quidem sunt per administrationem, sanctorum sunt per susceptionem.

But if you would have asked Saint Benedict: Why do you say the speech is yours and not the Lord’s? he, then, would have answered you: that speech is the Lord’s and mine. It is the Lord’s through direction, mine through acceptance. For, just as teaching is said to be of the Lord and of the saints, just so it is said of the virtues, such as these are: hope, faith, love, patience, etc. They are the Lord’s through direction, the saints’ through acceptance.

Et quod doctrina sive virtus et Domini et sanctorum sint, testatur Paulus apostolus una eademque sententia, cum dicit: plus omnibus laboravi, [I Cor. 15:10] sed non ego. Ecce Paulus et se dixit laborasse et dicit non laborasse; in eo quod dicit: plus omnibus laboravi, per susceptionem dixit, et in eo, quod dixit: non ego, per administrationem dicit.

And the fact that teaching or virtue are both of the Lord and of the saints, is testified by the Apostle Paul in one and the same sentence, when he says: I have worked more than everyone, but not I [I Cor. 15:10]. Behold, Paul both said that he had worked and he says that he has not worked. He spoke in terms of acceptance in the words that say: I have worked more than everyone. He spoke in terms of direction in the words that said: not I.

Magna enim differentia est inter falsos et veros praedicatores; falsi enim dicunt: mea est doctrina, veraces iterum dicunt: mea est doctrina, utrumque enim verum est; et verum est, quod falsi dicunt, et verum est, quod veraces praedicatores dicunt; nam falsi praedicatores veraciter dicunt: mea doctrina est secundem inventionem, veraces e contrario verum dicunt: mea doctrina est secundum susceptionem.

For, great is the difference between false and true preachers; the false say: The teaching is mine. The truthful say in their turn: The teaching is mine, for it is true either way: true is what the false say and true is what the truthful say. For, the false preachers say truthfully: It is my teaching according to [their own] invention, the truthful, though, say on the contrary: It is my teaching according to acceptance.

Nunc videndum est, quis sensus sit in isto verbo, quod est ₃abrenuncians, vel utatur isto sermone. Abrenuntians enim intelligitur repellens aut respuens seu dejiciens. Isto enim sermone utitur sancta ecclesia, quando intromittuntur fideles in unitatem ecclesiae. Et nisi interrogati fuerint a sacerdotibus dicentibus sibi ita, id est: Abrenuntias diabolo et operibus ejus, et iterum seculo [page 11] et pompis ejus [source not identified] non intromittuntur intra sanctam ecclesiam.

Now we must see, what meaning is implied in that word ₃renouncing or [what meaning] uses this sermon.³ Renouncing is understood as rejecting or spurning or declining. The holy church uses this language when the faithful are let into the unity of the church. And if they are not interrogated by the priests saying to them this: Do you renounce the devil and his works, and again [do you renounce] the world [page 11] and its pomp? they are not let into the holy church.

Vide modo, quia sicut non intromittuntur fideles in sanctam ecclesiam, nisi abrenuntiaverint diabolo et operibus ejus, seculo et pompis ejus, ita etiam non suscipiuntur isti a disciplina monasticae doctrinae, nisi abrenuntiaverint prius ₃propriis voluntatibus. Et sicut ecclesiae studium est maxime in abrenuntiando idolorum servitutibus, ita studium est monasticae disciplinae in abrenuntiando propriis voluntatibus.

Just see, that just as the faithful are not let into the holy church unless they renounce the devil and his works, the world and its pomp, so too these men are not received by the discipline of monastic teaching, unless they renounce first their ₃own wills. And just as the zeal of the church consists mostly of renouncing the subjection to idols, so the zeal of monastic discipline [consists mostly] of renouncing one’s own will.

Nunc videndum est, quid sit propria voluntas. Hic adtende, quia per circumlocutionem venit ad hoc, quod interrogatur, quid sit propria voluntas.

Now we have to see, what one’s own will is. Pay attention here, because he [Benedict] arrives through circumlocution at the point where we can ask what one’s own will is.

Si enim interroges, quid sit proprium hominis, proprium hominis est, nil boni habere, quia, postquam primus homo libero arbitrio male utens ejectus est de paradiso, nil boni proprium habuit.

For, if you should ask, what is man’s own, then [the answer is:] man’s own is to have no goodness, because, after the first man who had used his free judgment badly, was ejected from paradise, he had no goodness.

Verum sciendum est, quia ita non dicimus, postquam expulsus est de paradiso, non habuisse hominem aliquid boni a se, quasi prius, cum erat in paradiso, habuisset, sed homo bonum, quod habuit in paradiso, a Deo habuit, et ita, habuit, ut sine labore haberet. At nunc postquam pulsus est de paradiso, illud bonum, quod a Deo sibi datum sine labore in paradiso exercebat per liberum arbitrium infirmatum est ipsum liberum arbitrium, ita ut sine labore nunc non possit illud bonum operari.

But it ought to be understood that, after he was expelled from paradise, we do not accordingly say that man did not have some goodness of himself, as if he earlier, when he was in paradise, had had [some goodness]. But man had the goodness that he had in paradise from God, and he had it in such a way that he had it without effort. But now he has been expelled from paradise and that former goodness, given to him by God without effort in paradise and exercised by man with his free judgment, [that goodness] weakened that very free judgment, in such a way that he cannot do goodness without effort.

Et quod homo nihil boni proprium habeat, testatur Dominus in evangelio, qui dicit: Sine me nihil potestis facere, [Io 15:5] et in hoc loco, ubi dicit nil, subaudiendum est boni. Et sicut in hoc loco non potest excludi bona operatio vel cogitatio, ita etiam ipsarum bonarum cogitationum intentio non potest excludi. Et ita psalmista dicit: Misericordia ejus praeveniet me, et Paulus apostolus dicit: Qui operatur in vobis velle. [Phil 2:12]

And the fact that man has no goodness of his own, is testified by the Lord in the Gospel: You can do nothing without me [Io 15:5] and in that place, where he says nothing, ‘good’ must be supplied. And as little as in that place a good deed or thought can be excluded, so little, too, the intention of those good thoughts can be excluded. And thus the psalmist says: His mercy will prevent me [Ps 58:11] and Paul the Apostle says: He who makes in you your will [Phil 2:12].

His ergo exemplis testantibus noscimus, non solum bona opera vel cogitationes, sed etiam ipsas rimas bonarum cogitationum ab homine non esse. Jam ergo si nil boni habet homo a se, sed malum, tunc [page 12] cum dixit: propriis voluntatibus, consequens est, ut de vitiis intelligamus.

Therefore, with the help of the witness of these examples, we know that not only the good works or thoughts, but even the flashes (rimae) themselves of good thoughts do not come from man. Now then, if man has no goodness of himself, but [only] evil, and [page 12] when he [Benedict] says: [your] own wills, the consequence is that we understand it with regard to [our] vices.

Sed quia solet diabolus sub specie bonitatis hominem decipere, idcirco volens S. Benedictus utroque periculo carere suum auditorem, dixit: abrenuntians propriis voluntatibus, id est non solum illam, quae aperte mala suggerit, sed etiam illam, quae sub specie bonitatis occulte suadetur, debet respuere voluntatem.

But since the devil is used to deceive man under the pretense of goodness, Saint Benedict, because he wants that his listener be free from either danger, said: renouncing one’s own will. That is: he ought to cast out not only that will which openly advices evil deeds, but also that will which secretly is persuaded under the pretense of goodness.

Secundum vero aliorum sensum proprio voluntas intelligitur etiam de bona re, verbi gratia, vigiliae bonae sunt, orationes bonae sunt, jejunium bonum est, sed item propriae nostrae fiunt, cum ea separamus a senioris vel a bonorum fratrum consensu.

But according to others, one’s own will is even understood with regard to a good thing, for example: vigils are good, prayers are good, fasting is good, but likewise they become our own when we separate them form the consent of the elder or of the good brothers.

Verbi gratia, sicut equus aut bos aut aliqua res, quam cum possidemus sine communione aliorum fratrum, efficitur nostrum proprium. Necnon et iterum si bos aut ager est communis, dicitur noster, si vero non est communis, dicitur meus; ita etiam oratio aut nuditas aut caeterae operationes bonae si cum consensu spiritalis patris fiunt vel bonorum fratrum, tunc dicuntur nostrae; si vero proprio arbitrio, id est sine consensu spiritalis patris vel bonorum fratrum, dicitur meum. Ita etiam orationes vel nuditates, aut caeterae bonae virtutes, si eas proprio arbitrio, id est sine consensu spiritualis patris vel bonorum fratrum exercuerimus, efficitur nostrum proprium, quia, quamquam bonae sint, tamen si eas proprio arbitrio usi fuerimus, in proprium nobis reputabuntur.

For example: a horse or cow or something else is made our own, when we possess it without the communion of other brothers. And again, if a cow or a field is communal, it is called ours, but if it is not communal, it is called mine. Thus, even prayer or nudity⁴ or other good works are called ours if they are done with the consent of the spiritual father or of good brothers; but if [something is done] with my own judgment, that is without the consent of the spiritual father or good brothers, it is called mine. Thus, even prayers of nudities or other good virtues – if we exercise them with our own judgment, that is without the consent of the spiritual father or of good brothers, become our own, because, although they are good, still, if we use them with our own judgment, they will be ascribed to us as our own possession.

Ita enim dicimus bonas has res propriam voluntatem, verbi gratia, si vis triduanam aut biduanam agere aut totam quadragesimam jejunare, et dixerit abbas aut spiritalis frater, non esse bonum, tu debes dimittere, aut certe quidquid tu agis, ut displiceat aut abbati spiritali aut fratribus spiritalibus, et tu cognoveris, non debes in tua voluntate ipsa bona operando persistere dicens, bonum esse.

So, we call these good things one’s own will, for example: if you want to hold a three-day or two-day fast, or fasting the entire lent, and the abbot or the spiritual father says that it is not good, you ought to let it go. Certainly, whatever you do so that it displeases the spiritual abbot or the spiritual brothers, and you find that out, you ought not to persist in your will with doing these good things, saying that they are good.

Et hoc, si boni fuerint, quibus displicuerit nam si mali fuerint, non est auscultandum, nam debes semper bona agere, ut tibi et aliis proficias.

And this must be paid heed to if they, whom it displeases, are good. For, if they are bad, it must not be paid heed to. For, you always ought to do good things, in order that you make progress for yourself and others.

Sequitur: ₃Domino Christo vero regi.

Next: ₃To the Lord Christ, the true king.

Ista enim singula verba plena sunt gravitate; Dominus enim a domo dictus est, quia sicut ille, qui praeest domui, [page 13] ea, quae in domo sunt, regit et gubernat, ita Dominus omnia regit atque gubernat.

Truly, these words, one for one, are full of gravity; for, the Lord (dominus) has been called after house (domus), because just as he, who is in charge of the house, [page 13] rules and steers the things which are in the house, so the Lord rules and steers all things.

Ubi enim mentionem Filii Dei audis vel legis, mysterium tuae redemptionis vel totius humani generis ibi recole. Et quamquam redemtio humani generis ad operationem sive miserationem sanctae et individuae Trinitatis referatur, tamen ad Filium specialiter referetur quia ille sanguinem fudit pro redemtione humani generis, non Pater et Spiritus sanctus, eo quod Pater et Spiritus Sanctus non assumpsit carnem, sed Filius.

When you hear or read a mentioning of Son of God, then remember the mystery of your redemption or of the entire human race. And even though the redemption of the human race is related to the operation or commiseration of the Holy and undivided Trinity, still it will especially be related to the Son because he poured his blood for the redemption of the human race, not the Father and the Holy Ghost, because the Father and the Holy Ghost did not assume the flesh, but the Son did.

Nunc videndum est, quare non dixit S. Benedictus tantum Domino, sed addidit Christo? Ideo addidit Christo, quia per istud nomen, quod est appellativum Filii, mysterium redemptionis tuae tibi voluit in memoriam reducere; superius enim dixerat, a quo per inobedientiae desidiam recesseras, nunc autem ideo addidit Christum, ut manifestaret tibi, quia per ejus specialiter redemptionem revocatus es ad Deum. Nam Christus ideo est appellativum nomen Filii, eo quod multi fuerunt, qui christi dicti sunt; sed quamquam cum hominibus appellativum sit, illi tamen non est appelativum cum Patre et Spiritu sancto, quia hoc nomen ad incarnationem Filii attinet.

Now we must see, why St. Benedict did not only say Lord but added Christ. He added Christ for this reason that through that name, which is the title (appellativum) of the Son, he wanted to bring to memory the mystery of redemption. For, he had said earlier from what point you had removed yourself through the slothfulness of disobedience, but now he added Christ in order to show to you that you have been called back to God, particularly through his redemption. For Christ is for this reason the name with which we address the Son, because there have been many who have been called Christ; but although it is the address among men, it is for him not the address together with the Father and the Holy Spirit, because this name belongs to the incarnation of the Son.

Unde Beda in tractatu actuum apostolorum ita dicit: Christus enim a chrismate, i. e. ab unctione nomen accepit, juxta quod dicitur: Unxit te Deus Deus tuus oleo laetitiae, [Bede, Expositio Actuum Apostolorum, c. 4, CCSL 121, p. ?] i. e. Spiritu sancto; Christus enim graece latine unctus dicitur.

Therefore Bede says in his tract on the Acts of the Apostles: Christ comes from chrisma, that is, it takes its name from ointment, according to the Scriptures: God, your God, anointed you with the oil of gladness, [Bede, Expositio Actuum Apostolorum, c. 4]⁵ that is: with the Holy Spirit. For, Christ is Greek, in Latin he is called anointed (unctus).

Quotquot enim antiquitus reges erant, christi dicebantur, quia uncti erant a prophetis unctione corruptibili. Iste autem Christus unctus est non unctione corruptibili, sed unctione spiritali, id est plenitudine Spiritus sancti, de quo dictum est: Spiritus Domini super me, propter quod unxerit me, [Lc 4:1] cui etiam Psalmista dicit: propterea unxit te Deus Deus tuus in aeternam oleo laetitiae prae consortibus tuis. [Ps 44:8]

However many kings there were in antiquity, they were being called christs because they had been anointed by the prophets with perishable oil. However, that one Christ has not been anointed with perishable oil, but with spiritual oil, that is with the fullness of the Holy Ghost, about whom it has been said: The Spirit of the Lord is over me, because he has anointed me. [Lc 4:1] Also the Psalmist says to him: Because God, your God, anointed you for ever with the oil of gladness before your consorts. [Ps 44:8]

Quando enim consortes nominantur, naturam carnis intellige, quia Deus consortes substantiae suae nos non habet. Et quia erat unctio spiritalis et nequaquam humani corporis, ut fuit in sacerdotibus Judaeorum, idcirco prae consortibus, id est prae ceteris sanctis unctus esse memoratur cujus unctio illo expleta est tempore, quando [page 14] baptizatus est in Jordane et Spiritus sanctus in specie columbae descendit super eum et mansit in illo. Unctus est igitur oleo spiritali et virtute coelesti, ut paupertatem conditionis humanae thesauro resurrectionis rigaret aeterno et captivitatem mentis auferret atque caecitatem illuminaret animarum nostrarum. [Bede, In Lucae Evangelium Expositio II, CCSL 120, pp. 102-103]¹

When, therefore, the consorts are mentioned, understand the nature of the flesh, because God does not have us as consorts of his substance. And because his anointment was spiritual and not at all of the human body, as it was [practiced] among the priests of the Jews, for that reason he is said to have been anointed before the other saints, he whose anointment was fulfilled at that time when [page 14] he was baptized in the river Jordan and the Holy Spirit descended over him in the appearance of a dove and remained onto him. He has therefore been anointed with spiritual oil and with celestial virtue, in order that he bedew the poverty of the human condition with the treasure of the resurrection and carry away the captivity of the mind and enlighten the blindness of our souls. [Bede, In Lucae Evangelium Expositio II]

Nunc etiam videndum est, qua ratione B. Benedictus cum dixit regi praemisit vero. Ideo enim dixit vero regi, ut separaret eum ab his, qui non sunt veri reges natura, eo quod alii sunt, qui non sunt veri reges natura.

Now we must also see, with what argument the blessed Benedict put true first when he said king. He said to the true king so as to separate him from those who are not true kings by nature, because there are others who are not true kings by nature.

Sic enim B. Petrus apostolus cum dixit Domino: Tu es Christus filius Dei, [Mt 26:63] addidit vivi ad separationem deorum mortuorum. Ita etiam lux sanctorum apostolorum non erat vera lux natura, nam Petrus lux erat, Johannes lux erat, de quo dictum est: Erat Johannes lucerna ardens; [Io 5:35] ardens erat Johannes fide et dilectione, lucerna autem verbo et actione, sed sicut dixit, non erat vera lux natura, quia alius erat vera lux, qui eos illuminabat, de quo dictum est: Erat lux vera, quae illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum. [Io 1:9]

In such a way, then, the blessed Apostle Peter added, when he said to the Lord: Thou art Christ, the son of God [Mt 26:63], the word living to separate him from the dead gods. So, too, the light of the holy apostles was not the true light by nature, for Peter was light and John [the Baptist] was light, about whom it was said: John was the burning torch [Io 5:35]. John was burning with faith and love. But although he was a torch in word and action, he was not the true light by nature, because another was the true light, who was enlightening them and about whom it is said: He was the true light, that, coming into this world, enlightens every person. [Io 1:9]

Iterum videndum est, quid sit militaturus, aut cur dixit S. Benedictus militaturus, et non dixit serviturus vel obediturus. Militaturus enim intelligitur certaturus vel pugnaturus; et quia voluit tibi S. Benedictus indicare, ad pugnam vel laborem te accessurum, ideo dixit militaturus, quia militare proprio pugnare est.

Again, we need to see what about to battle (militaturus) means, or: why does St. Benedict say about to battle and did not say about to serve or about to obey? About to battle is understood as about to struggle or about to fight. And because St. Benedict wanted to indicate to you that you are about to enter a fight or struggle, he said about to battle, because to battle is actually to fight.

Hic etiam animadvertendum est, quia illud, quod Salomon multiplicibus verbis comprehendit dicens: Fili! accede ad servitutem Dei et praepara animam tuam ad laborem, [Sir 2:1] ipsum etiam S. Benedictus uno eodemque sermone comprehendit, cum dixit militaturus. Nam cum superius dixit: abrenuntians propriis voluntatibus, nunc autem subjunxit militaturus, quid aliud ostendere voluit, nisi pugnam et laborem te esse subiturum? Tu vero quando propriis voluntatibus abrenuntias et alterius voluntati te submittis, quasi ad pugnam accedis.

Here you have to pay attention, because Salomon expresses it in many words as he says: Son! Enter the service of God and prepare your soul for effort. [Ecl 2:1]  St. Benedict expresses that very idea in one word, when he said: about to battle. For when he said earlier: renouncing your own will, and now has added about to battle, what else did he want to demonstrate than that you are about to undergo fight and effort? But when you renounce your own will and submit yourself to the will of another, you enter, as it were, a fight.

Hic etiam videndum est, quia cum dixit: Christo vero regi militaturus, non dixit; contra Christum, sed pro Christo militaturus, [page 15] sicuti cum dicitur miles terrenus regi terreno militaturus, non dicitur contra regem, sed pro rege terreno militaturus. Et quia pugnam te indicavit subiturum, ideo subjunxit: obedientiae arma.

Here, we also need to see, that when he said about to battle for Christ, the true king, he did not say against Christ but about to battle for the sake of Christ, [page 15] just as, when the earthly soldier is said to be about to battle for the earthly king, it is not said against the king, but about to battle for the earthly king. And since he indicated that you will enter a fight, he added: the weapons of obedience.

Nam sicut reges isti, reges terreni, cum mittunt militem suum ad pugnam, arma illi praebent, ita et B. Benedictus, quia ad pugnam cognovit te accessisse, armatum te indicavit esse, et non alterius armis armatum te indicavit accessisse, sed armis obedientiae; nam quamvis sint arma castitatis aut jejunii aut ceterarum virtutum, tamen non te indicavit alterius virtutis arma sumsisse nisi obedientiae, eo quod sicut est initium peccati recedendi a Deo inobedientia, ita initium convertendi ad Deum est obedientia.

For, just as those kings, the earthly kings, when they send their soldier to battle, provide him with weapons, so also the blessed Benedict, because he knows that you have entered a fight, declared that you have been armed. He did not declare that you have entered [the fight], armed with the weapons of another [virtue], but with the weapons of obedience. For, although there are weapons of chastity or fasting or of the other virtues, still he did not declare that you have taken up the weapons of another virtue than obedience, because just as the beginning of the sin of withdrawal from God is disobedience, just so the beginning of turning to God is obedience.

Nam sicut in exordio conversionis abrenuntiando idolorum cultibus ab his, qui percipiunt baptismatis sacramentum, requiritur, ita etiam requiritur in initio conversionis ab his, qui recipiuntur a monastica disciplina, abrenuntiatio propriarum voluntatum, quae intelligitur obedientia.

For, just as it is required for those who receive the sacrament of baptism to begin their way of life (conversio) by renouncing the cults of idols, just so, at the beginning of their way of life, renunciation of the own will – which is understood as obedience – is required for those who are being received by the monastic discipline.

Item etiam intuendum est, quare S. Benedictus indicavit, illum abrenuntiantem propriis voluntatibus arma suscepisse, et ipsa arma quare fortissima et non fortia? Cognoverat enim B. Benedictus, inimicum nostrum diabolum fortem esse et armatum testante Domino, qui de illo etiam in Evangelio dicit: Cum fortis armatus custodit atrium suum, in pace sunt ea, quae possidet. [Lc 11:21]

Likewise, we also have to look into the question why St. Benedict mentioned that the one who renounces his own will has taken up arms, and that those very weapons are very strong and not [just] strong. The blessed Benedict knew, for sure, that our enemy, the devil, is strong and armed – as is testified by our Lord, who in the Gospel says about him: When the strong and armed one protects his court, the things that he possesses are in peace. [Lc 11:21]

Ideo indicavit illi, arma sumpsisse, ut se cognoscat armatum contra armatum pergere; et propterea fortissima et non fortia, quia fortis non vincitur nisi a fortiore.

He [Jesus] mentioned to him [the devil] that he had taken up arms in order that he might know that he was marching as armed man against an armed man. Thence this very strong and not strong, because the strong [i.e. the devil] is not conquered unless he is conquered by someone stronger.

Et bene postquam dixit militaturus, armorum fecit mentionem, ut se cognosceret ille, quando ad hoc opus venit, quasi ad proelium venisse. Nam sicut indecens est et periculosum, qui ad proelium pergit, sine armis pergere, ita inconsequens est, qui hoc opus adgreditur, arma, per quae virtutes intelliguntur, non sumere, ac si diceret illi, cum dixit militaturus: obedientiae fortissima atque praeclara arma assumis, id est, quia cum abrenuntiasti omnibus et meo discipulatui adhaesisti, ad [page 16] proelium te cognosce accessurum, et ideo te cognosce arma obedientiae sumpsisse.

And after he had said about to battle, he made mention of weapons in order that the other knew that he, when he came to that task, had come as it were to battle. For, just as it is unfitting and dangerous that he who marches to battle, marches without arms, so it is illogical that he who approaches this task, does not take up weapons, which are understood as virtues, as if he would say to him with about to battle: You are taking up very strong and most splendid (praeclara) weapons of obedience. That is, because you have renounced everything and have clung to my discipleship, know that you are [page 16] about to enter battle and therefore know that you have taken up weapons of obedience.

Iterum videndum est, quia sicut Paulus apostolus hortatus est suos auditores arma sumere dicens: Sumite armaturam Dei, ut possitis resistere diabolo, [Eph 6:13]² ita S. Benedictus suum auditorem iudicavit arma obedientiae sumpsisse.

Again, we have to see that just as the Apostle Paul encouraged his listeners to take up arms, saying: Take up the armature of God, so that you can know how to resist the devil [Eph 6:13], just so St. Benedict declared that his listener had taken up the weapons of obedience.

Et hoc etiam intuendum est, quia hostis noster diabolus aut vincitur per similia arma, aut per similia et dissimilia. Per similia vincitur, cum obedientia inobedientiam superat; similia enim sunt genere pugnae, quamvis sensu dissimilia sint; aut vincitur per similia, sicuti diximus, et dissimilia, id est, cum obedientia pugnat contra inobedientiam et videt sibi fortiter resistere inobedientiam, et tunc adbibet sibi alias virtutes in adjutorium, id est humilitatem, orationes atque lacrimas, et tunc faventibus sibi istis virtutibus, quae dissimilia sunt arma inobedientiae, et tunc obedientia inobedientiae victrix existit.

And again, it has to be understood that our enemy, the devil, is either conquered through similar weapons or through similar and dissimilar weapons. He is conquered with similar weapons when obedience conquers disobedience. They are similar weapons in the kind of fighting, but dissimilar in meaning. Or he is conquered through similar – as we said – and dissimilar weapons, that is when obedience fights against disobedience and sees that disobedience is resisting it (obedience) strongly, and then assumes for itself the help of other virtues, that is: humility, prayers and tears. And then, if those virtues – that are weapons dissimilar to disobedience – are favorable to it (obedience), obedience appears as the winner over disobedience.

Sequitur: ₄Imprimis ut quidquid agendum inchoas bonum, ab eo perfici instantissima oratione deposcas.

Next comes: ₄You should first ask in most urgent prayer that whatever good work, that must be done, is begun by you, be perfected by him.

Forte quaerit quis, quare dixit S. Benedictus: imprimis quidquid inchoaveris bonum, ab eo perfici instantissima oratione deposcas, cum homo non potest a se ipso aliquid boni inchoare?

Maybe someone asks, why St. Benedict said: You should first ask in most urgent prayer that whatever good work, that must be done, is begun by you, be perfected by him. $$$$

Cui respondendum est, quia illud imprimis duobus modis potest intelligi, primo quidem, ut mox dicturi sumus, deinde quod dicit inchoare, non est intelligendum, ut homo a se possit inchoare nisi a Deo, sicut dicit psalmista: Misericordia ejus praeueniet me; [Ps 58:11] sed inchoatio boni et nostra est et Dei; nostra per susceptionem, Dei vero est per praevenientem gratiam suam, sicut dicimus: Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie. [Lc 11:13]

We should answer him that this first can be understood in two ways: ‘at first’ [that is:] as we shall soon say, then that which he calls to begin must not be understood as if a man can begin of himself, just as the psalmist says: His mercy will come before me [Ps 58:11], but the beginning of a good deed is both ours and God’s: ours through reception, God’s, though, through his preceding grace, just as we say: Give us today our daily bread [Lc 11:13].

Ecce et nostrum dicimus et dari poscimus, sicut legitur in Moralia quintae partis beatissimi Job. Et iterum Paulus: plus omnibus laboravi, sed non ego. [1 Cor. 15:10] Et hoc, quia non est nostra tota inchoatio, manifestat, cum subjungit: ₅ut qui nos jam in [page 17] filiorum numero dignatus est computare, non debeat aliqundo de malis actibus nostris contristari.

Behold, we both call it ours and demand that it be given, just as we can read in [Gregory’s] Moralia on the most blessed Job, part five. Paul says once again: I have more toiled than all the others, but it was not I [I Cor. 15:10]. And it is clear that this entire beginning is not ours, when he adds: ₅so that he who has now granted us [page 17] the dignity of being counted among the number of his sons may not at any time be saddened by our evil deeds.

Sequitur: ₄In primis ut quidquid agendum inchoaveris bonum, ab eo perfici instantissima oratione deposcas.

Next comes: ₄First, that, whatever good deed, that must be done, you will have begun, you ask to be perfected by him with pressing prayer.

Multi enim, qui nesciunt, emendant in hac regula, ubi assumis habetur, pro assumis, assume, et faciunt imperativum pro indicativo, ut sit: obedientiae fortissima atque praeclara arma assume, ut sit sensus, id est, ad te nunc meus sermo dirigitur, quisquis abrenuntians propriis voluntatibus Domino Christo vero Regi militaturus, assume obedientiae fortissima atque praeclara arma, et admoneo te inprimis, ut poscas instantissima oratione ab eo perfici, quidquid inchoas bonum agendum, ita ut suus sermo sit primus [prima?] oratio, quam assumtio armorum, quia genus locutionis est, ut primum dicat multa agi, et in fine dicatur: in primis hoc fac, sicut Dominus in Evangelio dicit multa prius, postea dicit: primum quaerite regnum Dei. [Mt 6:33]

For, many people who do not know, emendate in this [line of the] rule, where assumis (you are taking) is written, with assume (take!) and make it imperative instead of indicative, so that it says: take up the very strong and most splendid weapons of obedience so that the meaning is this: My speech is now directed at you, whoever renouncing his own will is about to battle for the Lord Christ, the true king, take up the very strong and most splendid weapons! And I admonish you especially, that you ask with most urgent prayer that, whatever good deed that must be done is begun by you, be perfected by him. In this way, his speech is rather a prayer than an assumption of weapons. The way in which he speaks is this: he first says that many things are done and in the end it is said: First do this, just as the Lord in the Gospel says many things earlier, [and] afterwards he says: first, search the kingdom of God. [Mt 6:33]

Si vero fuerit indicativus assumis, est sensus: ad te nunc meus sermo dirigitur, tu, quisquis assumis obedientiae fortissima atque praeclara arma militaturus Domino Christo vero Regi, abrenuntians propriis voluntatibus, ac si diceret: tu qui hoc agis, id est, qui assumis arma obedientiae militaturus Domino Christo vero Regi, ad te modo meus sermo dirigitur, quisquis abrenuntians propriis voluntatibus Domino Christo vero Regi militaturus obedientiae fortissima atque praeclara arma assumis, inprimis ut quidquid agendum inchoas bonum, ab eo perfici instantissima oratione deposcas, ut qui jam nos in filiorum dignatus est numero computare, non debeat aliquando de malis actibus nostris contristari, id est, ut in primis deposcas Dominum.

But if [Benedict’s text] gives assumis, in the indicative, the meaning is: My speech is now directed at you, you, whoever takes up the very strong and most splendid weapons of obedience, about to battle for the Lord Christ, the true King, renouncing your own will. Then, the meaning would be: You who are doing this, that is, who are taking up the weapons of obedience, about to battle for the Lord Christ, the true King, my speech is directed just at you – whoever you are – renouncing your own will, about to battle for the Lord Christ, the true King, and you are taking up the very strong and most splendid weapons of obedience, firstly so that you ask with most urgent prayer that, whatever good deed that must be done is begun by you, be completed by him, so that he who has deigned it worthy to count us in the group of his sons, ought not sometime be saddened about our evil deeds.That is: so that you firstly ask the Lord.

Sed sive sit imperativus, sive indicativus, nihil sensui impedit.

But whether it is imperative or indicative, nothing hinders a meaningful interpretation.

Istud enim adverbium, quod est inprimis, duobus modis intelligitur, id est, si enim velis, illud ad superiorem sensum referre potes; similiter et ad inferiorem sensum potes.

 For, that adverb inprimis (firstly, especially) is understood in two ways: that is, you can, if you should want to, take it in a higher sense and you can take it in a lower sense.

Quod si ad superiorem sensum istud retuleris, ita intelligitur: Dixerat enim [page 18] Pater Benedictus superius sub generalitatis nomine: Ausculta o fili praecepta magistri et inclina aurem cordis tui et admonitionem pii patris libenter excipe et efficaciter comple, ut ad eum per obedientiae laborem redeas, a quo per inobedientiae desidiam recesseras.

But if you take it in its higher sense, it is understood in this way: for [page 18] father Benedict had said above by way of a general address: Listen, o son, to the teachings of the master and bend the ear of your heart and receive the admonition of your loving father gladly and fulfill it effectively in order that you return through the work of obedience to him, from whom you had withdrawn through the sloth of disobedience.

Audita hac voce quis reliquit omnia et assumpsit arma obedientiae et separavit se ab aliis, stetit ante illum dicens: Et ‘Pater Benedicte, relictis omnibus, quae possedi et assumptis armis obedientiae, quia te cognovi pium, ecce sto ante te; nunc quid vis, jube’.

Having heard this voice, he who⁶ left everything behind and took up the weapons of obedience and separated himself from others, stood before him saying: 'Look here, father Benedict, having left everything behind which I possessed and having taken up the weapons of obedience, because I know that you are loving – behold! – I stand in front of you; now, order what you like!'

Ille vero quasi respondens dixisse videtur: 'Jam postquam relictis omnibus et assumptis armis obedientiae decrevisti, meus discipulus esse, ad te nunc ergo meus sermo dirigitur. Tu vero iterum, quasi interrogasses illum dicens: ‘Quis est ille sermo, Pater, quem ad me dirigis?’

Benedict seems to have said by way of responding: 'Now, after everything has been abandoned and the weapons of obedience have been taken up and you have decided to be my disciple, my speech is now directed at you.' But you had, as it were, interrogated him again, saying: 'What is that speech, that you are directing at me, Father?'

Ille iterum, quasi respondisset dicens: ‘Inprimis, inquit, meum praeceptum istud est, id est, ut quidquid agendum inchoas bonum, ab eo perfici instantissima oratione deposcas, ut qui nos jam in filiorum dignatus est computare numero, non debeat aliquando de malis actibus nostris contristari.’

And he, as it were, had answered: 'Firstly, my instruction is this, namely that, whatever good deed that must be done, is begun by you, you ask with most urgent prayer, that it be perfected by him so that he who has deigned it worthy already to count us in the group of his sons, ought not sometime be saddened about our evil deeds.'

In isto namque sensu concordat se Apostolis dicentibus Domino: Domine auge nobis fidem [Lc 17:5] et iterum concordat se Domino dicenti: Oportet semper orare et non deficere [Lc 18:1], necnon Paulo Apostolo dicenti: Sine intermissione orate. [1 Th 5:17]

In that sense, he brings himself in accordance with the Apostles who say to the Lord: Lord, make our faith greater [Lc 17:5], and also with the Lord who says: Men ought always to pray and not to faint [Lc 18:1], and also with the Apostle Paul who says: Pray without intermission [1 Tess 5:17].

Item alter sensus est ita, id est, si volueris istud inprimis ad inferiorem sensum referre, ita intelligi debet: Superius enim dixerat sub generalitatis nomine: Ausculta o fili praecepta magistri et admonitionem pii patris libenter excipe et efficaciter comple, ut ad eum per obedientiae laborem redeas, a quo per inobedientiae desidiam recesseras. Ad te ergo nunc, meus sermo dirigitur, quisquis abrenuntians propriis voluntatibus Domino Christo vero Regi militaturus obedientiae fortissima atque praeclara arma assumis. Sermo meus namque, qui ad te dirigitur, fili, iste est, id est, ut inprimis quidquid agendum inchoas bonum ab eo perfici instantissima oratione deposcas.

Likewise, another sense is this, namely: if you will want to take that inprimis (firstly) in its lower sense, it ought to be understood like this: earlier, he had said under the name of the general form of addressing: Listen, o son, to the teachings of the master and receive the admonition of your loving father willingly and fulfill it effectively in order that you return to him through the work of obedience, from whom you had withdrawn through the sloth of disobedience. To you my speech is now directed, whoever takes up the very strong and most splendid weapons of obedience, renouncing your own will, about to battle for the Lord Christ, the true King. For, my speech, that is directed at you, my son, is this, namely that you firstly ask with most urgent prayer that, whatever good deed that must be done, is begun by you, be perfected by him.

Sed tamen videtur in hoc sensu aliqua contrarietas esse in eo, quod dixit: Inprimis, et instantissima oratione, eo quod jam, quando inprimis homo orare debet Deum, [page 19] cum inchoat bonum, ut ab eo perficiatur suum opus, apparet, quia postea non debeat orare sed, sicut diximus, contrarium videtur esse, cum dicit instantissima, eo quod si instantissime, id est invictissime debet orare, tunc non inprimis orat, sed semper.

But still there seems to be some kind of contradiction in this sense with regard to the fact that he said: Firstly and with most urgent prayer because, when a person first ought to pray to God, [page 19] when he begins a good deed, in order that his work be perfected by him, it seems that he ought not to pray thereafter. But, as we said, there seems to be a contradiction, when he says most urgent because, if he ought to pray most urgently (instantissime) that is most invincibly (invictissime), then he does not pray firstly but always.

Et ideo istud inprimis in hoc loco positum est pro semper sicuti est illud: Primum quaerite regnum Dei et justitiam ejus et haec omnia adjicientur vobis. [Mt 6:33]

And for that reason, firstly is put in this place instead of always, just like this [quotation]: First, search the kingdom of God and his justice and all these things will be added for you [Mt 6:33].

Hic primum pro semper positum est. Nam quid sit illa inchoatio, manifestat, cum dicit: ut qui nos jam in filiorum dignatus est numero computare, non debeat aliquando de malis actibus nostris contristari, ac si diceret: ideo instantissime orandum est, ne bonum, quod nobis tribuit, id est in adoptando in filiorum numero, per nostram negligentiam perdamus, ut, qui nos jam in filiorum dignatus est numero computare, non debeat aliquando de malis actibus nostris contristari.

This first has been put instead of always. For, he shows what that beginning is, when he says: so that he who has deigned it worthy to count us in the group of his sons, ought not to be saddened by our evil deeds as if he was saying: you have to pray most urgently for this reason that we do not waste through our negligence the good thing that he has given us, namely our adoption in the group of his sons, so that he who has deigned it worthy to count us in the group of his sons, ought not to be saddened by our evil deeds.

Reddit enim causam, qua quis debeat instantissime orare, cum dicit: ut, qui nos jam in filiorum numero dignatus est, computare, non debeat aliquando de malis nostris actibus contristari.

For, he gives the reason for which someone ought to pray with most urgent prayer when he says: so that he who has deigned it worthy to count us in the group of his sons, ought not to be saddened by our evil deeds.

In hoc loco quia voluit S. Benedictus dignationem Dei ostendere el dignitatem nostram, ideo dixit: dignatus est in filiorum etc., quia in eo, quod dixit, illos filios habere, patrem illum esse ostendit. Quomodo dignatio Dei ostenditur vel dignitas nostra?

Because the blessed Benedict wanted in this place to show God’s deeming worthy and our worthiness, therefore he said: He deigned it worthy to count us... etc. because in the fact that he said that he⁷ has sons, he showed that he is the father. How is God’s deeming worthy or our worthiness shown?

Dignatio Dei est in eo, quod, cum ille est omnipotens et immortalis ei, aeternus, condescendit nobis et se humiliando fecit se patrem nostrum. Nostra enim dignitas est in eo, quod ascendimus. Quomodo ascendimus? Nos enim cum simus mortales et temporales et corruptibiles ascendendo facti sumus filii inmortales et incorruptibiles et aeterni.

God’s deeming worthy is situated in this that, since he is almighty and immortal and eternal, he descended for us and made himself our father by humiliating himself. Our worthiness is situated in this that we ascend. How do we ascend? Since we are mortal and temporal and corruptible we have been made, by ascending, his immortal and incorruptible and eternal sons.

Isto enim modo locutionis nunc loquitur B. Benedictus, cum dicit filiorum, quomodo loquitur B. Johannes Evangelista, cum dicit: Quotquot autem receperunt eum, dedit eis potestatem filios Dei fieri, [Io 1:12] quo etiam modo loquimur accepta licentia in oratione dicentes: Pater noster, qui es in coelis. [Mt 6:9, Lc 11:2] [page 20]

In this way of speaking the blessed Benedict now speaks when he says of the sons, just as the blessed John the Evangelist speaks when he says: However many, though, have found him, he gave them power to become sons of God [Io 1:12] – in which manner we also speak when we say, after having received the license in praying: Our father, who art in heaven. [Mt 6:9, Lc 11:2] [page 20]

Nunc videndum est, qua ratione S. Benedictus dicit, Deum contristari, cum Dei natura simplex sit et inmutabilis, non contristetur, non irascatur? Non enim B. Benedictus proprio dicit, Deum contristari, sed figuraliter.

We have to see now, with what argument Saint Benedict says that God is saddened. When God’s nature is simple and unchangeable, he would not get saddened, he would not get angry. The blessed Benedict does not literally (proprie) say that God is saddened, but metaphorically (figuraliter).

Cognoverat enim ille, quin, quibus modis loquuntur homines inter se, ipsis etiam modis loquitur de Deo vel ad Deum scriptura divina; nam decem modi sunt, quibus loquuntur homines inter se.

Certainly, he knew that, just as people speak among themselves in certain ways, likewise also divine scripture speaks about God or to God. For, there are ten ways in which people speak among themselves.

Primus enim modus est natura, secundus qualitas, tertius quantitas, quartus facere, quintus: ad aliquid, sextus habitus, septiums situs, octavus locus, nonus tempus, decimus pati.

The first is nature, the second quality, the third quantity, the fourth action (facere), the fifth relation (ad aliquid), the sixth habit, the seventh situation, the eighth place, the ninth time, the tenth experience of emotions (pati).

Natura enim sive substantia est, cum dicitur Deus. Qualitas Dei est, cum dicitur bonus, sicuti est illud: Quam bonus Israel Deus! [Ps 72: 1] Quantitas Dei est, cum dicitur magnus, ut est illud: Magnus Dominus et laudabilis valde. [Ps 95:4] Facere Dei est, ut est illud: In principio creavit Deus coelum et terram. [Gn 1:1] Et iterum: Omnia, quaecunque voluit, fecit in coelo et in terra. [Ps 134:6]

Nature or substance is expressed when God is mentioned. Quality of God is expressed when he is called great, as in The Lord is great and very laudable [Ps 95:4]. Action of God is expressed in this: In the beginning God created the heaven and earth [Gn 1:1]. And also: Everything that he wanted, he created in heaven and earth [Ps 113:11 (Vulg.), 115:3]

Ad aliquid Dei est, cum dicitur Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, quamvis secundum personas proprium sit Patris, quod pater est, et Filii, quod filius est, et Spiritus Sancti, quod spiritus sanctus est, id est, nec persona Patris est persona Filii et Spiritus Sancti. Similiter et persona Filii nec persona Patris est et Spiritus Sancti. Et iterum nec persona Spiritus Sancti persona est Patris et Filii. Tamen cum dicitur Filius, respicit ad Patrem , et iterum cum dicitur Pater, respicit ad Filium, quia nec pater intelligitur sine filio, nec filius sine patre. Similiter cum dicitur Spiritus Sanctus, respicit ad Patrem et Filium, quia, ex utroque procedit; nam Deo proprium est, quod Deus est; bonus enim et magnus proprium est Dei, quia non ex accidentia illi accidit, bonum esse et magnum, sed ipsum, quod illi est esse, bonum et magnum est atque perfectura.

God’s relation (ad aliquid Dei) is expressed when he is called Father and Son and Holy Ghost, although, in terms of persons, the proper quality (proprium) of the Father is what is the Father, and of the Son that which is Son and of the Holy Ghost that which is Holy Ghost. That is: the person of the Father is not the person of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Likewise, the person of the Son is not the person of the Father not of the Holy Ghost. And again: the person of the Holy Ghost is not the person of the Father nor of the Son. And yet, when he is called Son, he is related to the Father. And also when he is called Father, he is related the Son, because neither is the Father understood without the Son, nor the Son without the Father. Likewise, when he is called Holy Ghost, he is related to the Father and the Son because he proceeds from either. For to God belongs that which is God. Good and great is God’s own quality (proprium), because the fact that he is good and great does not befall him out of chance, but he is good and great and perfect by nature.⁸

Facere enim Dei proprium est, eo quod ipso fecit omnia, sicut Dominus in Evangelio dicit: Pater meuns usque modo operatur, et ego operor. [Io 5:17]

Action is God’s own quality because he himself made everything, just as the Lord says in the Gospel: My father is working until now and I am working. [Io 5:17]

Reliqui vero modi quinque isti sunt: primus habitus, secundus situs, tertius locus, quartus tempus, quintus pati.

But I have left unnoticed (so far) these five modes: 1. Habit, 2. Situation, 3. Place, 4. Time, 5. Experience of emotions.

Habitus enim in Deo dicitur, sicuti [page 21] est illud: Abyssus sicut vestimentum opertorium ejus. [Ps 103:6] Situs enim in Deo dicitur, ut est illud: Qui sedes super Cherubim. [Ps 79:2]

Habit in God is mentioned in this: [page 21] The abyss like a robe, his covering [Ps 103:6 (Vulg.), 104:6]. Situation is mentioned in God in this: You who are seated over the Cherubim. [Ps 80:2 (Vulg.), 79:2]

Iste enim modus, qui dicitur situs, tribus modis constat: jacere, sedere, stare. Item locus in Deo dicitur, ut est illud: Qui es in coelis, [Mt 6:9, Lc 11:2.] et iterum: Si ascendero in coelum, tu illic es, si descendero ad infernum, ades. [Ps 138:8]

This mode which is called situation exists in three ways: to lie, to sit and to stand. Likewise, place is mentioned in God with this: Who art in heaven [Mt 6:9, Lc 11:2] and also: If I ascend to heaven, you are there, if I descend to hell, you are present [Ps 138:8 (Vulg.), 139:8].

Tempus in Deo dicitur, ut est illud: Anni tui non deficient. [Ps 101:28]

Time is expressed in God as in this quotation: Your years will not end [Ps 101:28 (Vulg.), 102:28].

Pati vero est tristari, laetari, irasci, gaudere, oblivisci, recordari, poenitere et cetera.

Experience of emotions is: to be saddened, to be glad, to get angry, to rejoice, to forget, to remember, to feel remorse, etc.

Sed hi quinque modi non proprio dicuntur in Deo, sed abusive; nam habitus Dei, situs Dei, locatio Dei, tempus Dei, pati Dei, more nostro dicuntur. Hoc notandum est, quia natura proprium hominis est et Dei. Hominis, quia accepit, Dei, quia Deus illam fecit.

But those five modes are not properly said to be in God but by improper use. For God’s habit, situation, place, time and experience are spoken about in our fashion. It must be noticed that nature is the possession of man and God. Of man, because he received it, of God, because he made it.

Qualitas autem et quantitas, si in malo est, tunc est proprium hominis; si autem bonum est, et Dei et hominis, Dei dando, hominis vero accipiendo.

Quality, however, and quantity, if it is meant in a bad sense, is the possession of man. But if it is good, it is of God and man. It is God’s in that he gives it, it is man’s, though, in that he receives it.

Similiter et facere Dei est per dationem, hominis vero persusceptionem.

Likewise, also God’s action is through giving, man’s through receiving.

Decimus enim modus est iste, cum dicit B. Benedictus, tristari Deum; nam figura est, quae dicitur a propria signilicatione ad non propriam siguificationem; nam proprium est hominis tristari, Dei enim non est proprium, quia ille immutabilis est ut in uno tenore semper permanet, sicut de illo scriptum est: apud quem non est transmutatio nec vicissitudinis obumbratio. [Iac 1:17]

The tenth mode is expressed when the blessed Benedict says that God is saddened. It is a figure [of speech], that is transferred from a proper meaning to a not proper meaning. For, it is the proper quality (proprium) of a man to be saddened, but it is not God’s proper quality, because he is unchangeable and always remains in the same mood (tenor) just as it has been written about him: With whom there is no change nor darkening of alterations [James 1:17].

Sed quamvis non proprie, tamen ideo dicitur Deus tristari de malis nostris actibus, ut cognoscamus nos, cujus poenae digni sumus, si ea fecerimus, quae illi displicent, verbi gratia, generas filium vel optas aliquem in filium et das illi haereditatem vel bona tua; ille vero confortatus plenuus divitiis tuis facit amicitiam cum inimico tuo et erigit se contra te faciens ea, quae tibi displicent.

But although not in proper use, still God is said to be saddened about our evil deeds in order that we ourselves know, what punishment we deserve if we do those things which will displease him, for example, you beget a son or you choose someone to be your son and give him the inheritance or your goods. But he, much strengthened by your riches, makes friendship with your enemy and rises up against you, doing those things that displease you.

Tu vero vides illum tuis bonis confortatum ac plenum contra te erigere; statim contristaberis vel poenitebit te, eo quod illi dedisti bona tua, quia, nisi haberet bona tua, non potuisset facere contra tu quidquam. Ita et in Deo; Deus enim cum creavit nos et adoptavit nos in filios, [et] tribuit nobis sua bona, nos vero pleni de ejus bonis atque confortati facimus amicitiam cum diabolo, qui est inimicus Dei [page 22] et agimus ea, quae Deo displicent, Deus vero videndo hoc, quia ei displicent, dicitur tristari, non ut ille tristitiam habeat, sed ut nobis demonstret, sicut diximus, cujus poenae digni sumus facientes illud, quod illi displicet.

You, however, see that he, strengthened and full of your goods, rises against you; immediately you will be saddened and you will be sorry that you gave him your goods because, if he had not had your goods, he had not been able to do anything against you. Just so with God: when he created us and adopted us as his sons, he gave us his goods. We, however, satisfied from his goods and strengthened, make friends with the devil, who is God’s enemy, and do the things that displease God. [page 22] God, however, seeing this, is said to be saddened because these things displease him – not in such a way that he has grief, but in order that he shows us, as we said, what punishment we deserve because we do what displeases him.

Haec autem locutio talis est, qualis illa, quae in psalmis legitur, ubi Christus ad Judam dicit; ait enim: Quoniam si inimicus meus maledixisset mihi, sustinuissem utique, et si is, qui oderat me, super me magna locutus fuisset, absconderem me utique ab eo; tu vero homo unanimis, dux meus et notus meus, qui simul dulces capiebas cibos! [Ps 54:13-15]

This form of speaking is of such a character as the one read in the psalms, where Christ says to Judas: For if my enemy had reviled me, I would verily have borne with it. And if he that hated me had spoken great things against me, I would verily have hidden my self from him. But you a man of one mind, my guide, and my familiar, who took sweetmeats together with me [Ps 54:13-15 (Vulg.), 55:13-15].

Subaudiendum est in hoc loco: cur me tradis? Et est sensus in hoc loco, cum dicit, Deus tristari de malis nostris actibus, econtrario intelligitur gaudere Deus de bonis nostris actibus, quamvis non proprie, sed abusive, quia cum dicitur, ut ille gaudeat, non ut ille gaudeat, sed ut nobis demonstret, quia gaudii sumus digni, si ejus tamen voluntatem implemus.

We have to add at this point: Why do you hand me over? And there is a meaning in this place, when he says that God⁹ is saddened by our evil deeds, [but] on the contrary God is understood to rejoice in our good deeds, although not in the proper sense, but in the improper sense, because, when it is said that he rejoices, [it is said] not in order that he rejoices but in order that he demonstrates us that we are worthy of joy, provided, however, that we fulfill his will.

Sequitur: ₆Ita enim ei omni tempore de bonis suis in nobis parendum est, ut non solum (ut) iratus pater suos non aliquando filios exhaeredet, ₇sed nec ut metuendus Dominus irritatus malis nostris ut nequissimos servos perpetuam tradat ad poenam, qui eum sequi noluerint ad gloriam.

Next: ₆We have to obey him all the time concerning his good deeds in us in such a way that not only the irate father at some time does not disinherit his sons, ₇but also the in order that the awe-imposing Lord, angered about our evil deeds, hand those people over to punishment – as if they were worthless slaves – who did not want to follow him to glory.

Perseverat adhuc Benedictus in intentione sua i. e. in illa similitudine, quam superius dixit contristari, cum dicit: ita enim ei omni tempore de bonis suis in nobis parendum est, ut non solum (ut) iratus pater suos non aliquando filios exhaeredet, ₇sed nec ut metuendus Dominus irritatus malis nostris ut nequissimos servos perpetuam tradat ad poenam, qui cum sequi noluerint ad gloriam.

Earlier, Benedict still had that image of to be saddened in mind. Now he says: We have to obey him all the time concerning his good deeds in us in such a way that not only the irate father at a time does not disinherit his sons, but also in order that the awe-imposing Lord, angered about our evil deeds, hand those people over to punishment – as if they were worthless slaves – who did not want to follow him to glory.

Sed nunc prius ipsa verba inspicienda sunt. Ita enim intelligitur taliter; ei subauditur Deo, qui nos in filiorum dignatus est numero computare.

But first, now, these very words need to be investigated. In such a way means thus. We must add to him: God who has deigned it worthy to count us in the group of his sons.

Omni tempore, i. e, non per intervallum temporis, sed jugi tempore.

All the time is not through an interval of time but in perpetual time.

Egregia enim admonitio est, cum dicitur; omni tempore, quia, ubi dicitur servitus Dei, monetur omni tempore ea esse; [nam] hominis vero servitus non [page 23] potest omni tempore esse, sed per intervallum temporis.

The admonition all the time is excellent, because when the service to God is mentioned, it is reminded that it is all the time; but the service of man cannot [page 23] be all the time, but through an interval of time.

Sed hic inspiciendum est, quia istud, quod dicitur omni tempore, non ad exterioris hominis officium attinet, sed interioris, quia noster exterior (homo) non potest assidue Dei servitium exercsere propter singulas praeoccupationes terrenas, quibus praeoccupari solet, sine quibus non potest subsistere, sed ad interioris hominis officium attinet, quia ille semper potest Dei servitium exhibere. Et quamquam noster homo exterior sicut diximus, praeoccupetur diversis curis terrenis, sine quibus non potest subsistere, tamen interior noster homo intentione Deo semper potest servire, i. e. si ejus intentio in Deo consistit.

But here we need to see that this all the time does not refer to the task of the outer man, but of the inner man, because our outer man cannot continuously exercise service to God because of his separate earthly preoccupations, by which he is usually preoccupied, [and] without which he cannot exist; but it refers to the task of the inner man, because he can always exercise service to God. And although our outer man, as we said, is preoccupied with various earthly worries, without which he cannot exist, still our inner man can serve God always in intention, that is, if his intention stands firm in God.

Hoc, etiam animadvertendum est, quia istud omni tempore ad illas virtutes attinet, quae omni tempore debent fieri, nec ad momentum praeteriri.

This, too, has to be kept in mind, that this all the time refers to those virtues that ought to be done all the time, and ought not to be foregone at the change of times (ad momentum).

Nam sunt virtutes, quae jugiter exerceri possunt et debent, ut sunt istae: Caritas, gaudium, pax, patientia, bonitas, longanimitas, benignitas, lides, modestia, continentia. Hae autem virtutes ideo possunt et debent semper exerceri, quia si aliquando pro aliquibus causis, quae accidere solent, non possunt in ostentatione operis fieri, tamen in intentione mentis semper possunt et debent exerceri, eo quod sive his interior homo noster non potest salvus consistere. Et sunt iterum aliae virtutes, quae non possunt nec etiam debent semper exerceri tam in ostensione operis quam in mente, ut sunt istae: lectio, jejunium, silentium.

For, there are virtues that can and ought to be exercised perpetually, like charity, joy, peace, patience, goodness, forbearance, kindness, trust, modesty and temperance. These virtues can and ought to be exercised always, because, if for some reasons that usually occur, they cannot be done in the exhibition of [visible] work, still they always can and ought to be exercised in the intention of the mind, because our inner man can not be a saved person (salvus) without them. There are also other virtues that never can or even ought to be exercised in the exhibition of [visible] work but [are only done] in the mind: reading, fasting and silence.

Unde Salomon dicit: tempus tacendi et tempus loquendi, tempus jejunandi et tempus manducandi etc., [Ecl 3:7] quia, cum pro aliqua accidentia non possunt in ostensione operis fieri, quamvis pro his faciendis si in corde voluntas fuerit legendi aut jejunandi, tamen non dicitur lectio vel jejunium, sed tantum bona voluntas. Nam istae tales virtutes si pro aliqua re meliore, verbi gratia pro caritate dimittuntur, sicut in ostensione operis non sunt, ita etiam nec in corde debent teneri, eo quod caritas de corde debet procedere puro.

Therefore, Salomon says: there is a time of silence and a time of speaking, a time of fasting and a time of eating, etc. [Ecl 3:7] because, since they cannot be done in the exhibition of [visible] effort, except for some accidental occurrences, reading or fasting are not virtues in themselves. It is the good will in them that is the real virtue.¹⁰ For, if these virtues are dispatched for some greater good, for example for charity: just as they are not done in the exhibition of effort, likewise they ought not even to be held in the heart, because charity ought to proceed from a pure heart.

Sequitur: de bonis suis, i. e. pro bonis, quia de pro pro ponitur; in nobis, id est a vobis; nam in pro a ponitur, [page 24] quia solet poni praepositio in in scripturis divinis pro praepositione alia, ut est illud: locutus est Deus in Filio, [Hbr 1:2] id est per Filium. Parendum, id est obtemperandum vel obediendum.

Next: concerning his good deeds, that is for his good deeds, because concerning (de) is placed instead of for (pro); in us that is by us; for, in (in) is put instead of by (a), because [page 24] it is custom that the preposition in in divine scriptures is put here instead of another preposition, like: God has spoken in the Son [Heb 1:2], that is: through the Son. To obey is: to comply to or to give ear to.

Sequitur: ut non solum (ut) iratus pater suos non aliquando filios exhaeredet, sed nec ut nequissimos servos perpetuam tradat ad poenam.

Next: in such a way that not only the irate father does not at some time disinherit his sons, but also in order that the awe-imposing Lord, angered about our evil deeds, hands those people over to punishment.

In hoc enim loco dividit illam similitudinem, quam superius dixerat, Deus tristari, in duas species vindictae; prima species, id est in ultione mali filii, secunda in vindicta mali servi.

In this place he divided the image, that he had mentioned before, that God¹¹ is saddened, in two forms of revenge. The first form is in the vengeance of the evil son, the second in the revenge of the evil slave.

Verbi gratia: Ecce! quis habet filium et servum, et isti ambo provocant animum ejus ad iram. Ille vero filium suum exhaeredat, servum autem mittit in carcerem aut excutit illi oculos aut caetera mala, quae servus promeretur pati, illi facit. Ita et Dominus vobis facit, si ejus voluntati non fuerimus obedientes; nam ille noster et pater et dominus est. Pater est in filios adoptando, quia nos adoptavit in filios, id est, fecit nos haeredes esse suos, cohaeredes autem filii sui, sicut Paulus Apostolus dicit: haeredes quidem, Dei, cohaeredes autem Christi. [Rm 8:17] Dominus enim noster est creando, quia nos, cum nihil essemus, fecit nos esse aliquid. Et ideo nobis duo sua beneficia donavit, id est creationis ex nihilo et adoptionis ex perditione.

For example: Look! Someone had a son and a slave and both of them provoke his soul to anger. But he disinherits his son. He sends his slave, however, to prison or drives out his eyes or does other evils to him – evils which the slave deserves to suffer. Thus the Lord also does to us if we will not give ear to his will. For, he is our father and Lord. He is father in that he adopts sons, because he adopted us as his sons, that is: he made us his heirs – the co-heirs of his own son, just as the Apostle Paul says: heirs, for sure, of God, but co-heirs of Christ [Rm 8:17]. He is our Lord in that he creates, because he made us something when we were nothing. And therefore he donated us his two benefactions, that is of his creation from nothing and of the adoption from ruin.

Metuenda est valde haec sententia nobis, qua dicit: ut non solum (ut) iratus pater suos non aliguando filios exhaeredet, sed nec ut metuendus dominus irritatus malis nostris ut nequissimos servos perpetuam tradat ad poenam.

We have to fear greatly this sentence in which he says: in such a way that not only the irate father does not at some time disinherit his sons, but also in order that the awe-imposing Lord, angered about our evil deeds hand those people over to punishment.

Et reddit causam, in quos id est in illos, qui cum sequi noluerint ad gloriam, id est, quia non solum pro tantis beneficiis nobis impensis, si suae voluntati non placuerimus, exhaeredat nos ab illa haereditate, quam nobis dedit per gratiam, verum etiam tradet nos in poenam perpetuam, sicut in subsequentibus manifestat, cum dicit: qui eum sequi noluerint ad gloriam.

And he makes an accusation – against whom? Those who did not want to follow him to glory. He does not only, in keeping with so great benefactions bestowed on us, disinherit us from that heritage if we do not please his will, but he will also hand us over to the perpetual punishment, just as is evident when he says: Who did not want to follow him to glory.

In hoc enim loco notandum est, quia plus est irritatus quam iratus; nam ille irritat, id est provocat, qui es studio malae voluntatis alterum facit irasci; nam irasci facere potest, qui simpliciter peccat. [page 25]

Here we have to take note that he is more irritated than angry. For, he who out of zeal for an evil will causes another to get angry, irritates, that is: provokes. He who simply commits a fault, can give rise to becoming angry. [page 25]

Sequitur: ₈Exsurgamus ergo tandem aliquando excitante nos scriptura ac dicente: Hora est jam nos de somno surgere.

Next comes: ₈Let us, therefore, arise, finally at last, when the Scriptures incite us and say: It is time now that we rise from sleep.

Apte enim et congrue, postquam diviserat illam similitudinem in duas species, id est in vindictam mali filii, qui exhaereditatur, et in ultionem mali servi, qui poenis traditur, nunc subjunxit: Exsurgamus ergo tandem aliquando; solem enim divina scriptura aliquando praeceptum dare, aliquando narrare, aliquando exhortari sive admonere. Praecipit enim divina scriptum, ut est illud: Diligite inimicos vestros, benefacite his, qui oderunt vos, [Lc 6:27; Mt 5:44] et cetera multa, quae praeteriri sine peccato non possunt. Narrat enim ut est illud: In principio fecit Deus coelum et terram; [Gn 1:1] nam ille narrat, qui rem praeteritam vel praesentem dicit. Exhortatur enim vel admonet, sicuti idem B. Benedictus in hoc loco facit, cum dicit: Exsurgamus tandem ergo aliquando.

After he had divided that image into two sorts, namely in revenge of the bad son who is disinherited and in vengeance of the bad slave who is handed over to punishments, he (Benedict) aptly and fittingly adds: Let us, therefore, arise, now at last. Usually divine scripture gives us at some point an instruction, at another it narrates, then, it exhorts or admonishes. divine scripture instructs, as in this quotation: Love your enemies, do well to those who hate you [Lc 6:27; Mt 5:44] and many other things that cannot be forgone without sin. Scripture narrates, as in: In the beginning God made heaven and earth [Gn 1:1], for, he who tells about a past and present situation, narrates. It exhorts or admonishes, just as the blessed Benedict does in that place, when he says: Let us, therefore, arise, finally at last.

Istud enim aliquando sub uno accentu proferri debet et intelligitur vel sero saltem, tarde vel nunc.

This at last (aliquando) ought to be named in one breath and is understood as in the end, finally or now (vel, sero, saltem, tarde, nunc).

Istud enim exsurgamus situm mentis signiticat.

Let us arise describes the situation of the mind.

In situ enim tria sunt, consideranda, sicut diximus: jacere, severe et stare. Sed surgamus ad jacere et sedere respicit, quia nemo nisi jacenti aut sedenti surgere dicit.

Three things must be considered with regard to situation: lying, sitting and standing. But let us arise refers to lying and sitting, because one only says arise to someone who is lying or sitting.

Ubi vero ergo repetitur semper ad superiorem sensum respicit. Et est sensus cum dicit: Exsurgamus ergo tandem, aliquando, id est, si ita est, ut malus filius exhaeredetur et malus servus puniatur, nos ergo, qui filii sumus et servi, surgamus vel sero, vel nunc, ut qui usque modo jacuimus in peccatis nostris, nunc exsurgamus ad bona, facienda, ne nobis talia contingant, qualia filio vel servo malo contingunt, quia utrumque sumus, id est filii et servi.

But where therefore is repeated, it always refers to a higher meaning. And the meaning – when he says: Let us, therefore, arise, finally at last – is as follows. If it is so that the bad son should be disinherited or the bad slave be punished, let us, therefore, who are sons and slaves, arise, either in the end, or now. Just as if [he says that we] who have lain continuously until now in our sins, must arise to do good, lest us befall the things that befall the bad son or slave, because we are both of them: sons and slaves.

Somnus enim iste non de somno corporis, sed de somno mentis dicit; multi enim sunt, quibus iste somnus somnus est, et sunt alii, quibus iste somnus mors est; illis enim est iste somnus mors, qui a sua malitia non sunt conversuri, et illis est iste somnus somnus, qui a suo torpore conversuri sunt. Felices enim illi, quibus iste somnus somnus est, et infelices illi, quibus iste somnus mors est. [page 26]

That sleep does not refer to the sleep of the body, but to the sleep of mind. There are many people for whom sleep is sleep, and there are others, for whom sleep is death. Sleep is death for those who are not about to convert from their ill-will and sleep is sleep for those who are about to convert from their numbness. Happy are those for whom that sleep is sleep, and unhappy are those, for whom that sleep is death. [page 26]

Sequitur: Excitante nos scriptura ac dicente: Hora est jam nos de somna surgere.

Next comes: Because Scripture incites us and says: It is time, now, for us to arise.

Bene sermo magistralis cum scriptura divina exhortatur suum auditorem: exsurgere. Voluit B. Benedictus exemplum dare suis sequacibus, ut ea quae docenda vel admonenda sunt, cum auctoritate divinarum scripturarum admoneantur; ideo dixit: excitante nos scriptura, ac si diceret: O fili! non meus sermo solus, sed cum scriptura exhortatur te, exsurgere velociter.

Together with the divine scripture, the speech of the master exhorts his listener to rise. The blessed Benedict wanted to give to his followers an example in order that the things that have to be taught or admonished, be admonished. Therefore he said: Because Scripture incites us, as if he was saying: O son! Not only my speech, but together with Scripture it exhorts you to quickly arise.

Et hoc animadvertendum est, quia non qualicumque modo dixit: surgamus, sed: exsurgamus, id est: cito surgamus; nam in hoc loco, ubi scriptura dicit, subaudiendum est divina.

And this must be marked well, that he does not say in whatever kind of way: let us rise (surgamus) but let us arise (exsurgamus), that is: let us rise fast.

Istud enim, quod dixit: Hora est jam nos de somno surgere, [Rm 13:11] de Paulo apostolo sumpsit; dixerat enim B. Paulus ad gentes sub allegorico sensu dicens: hora est, in quantum somnus dicitur, eo quod somnus dicitur et infidelitatem significat, jam nos de somno, id est de infidelitate mentis surgere. Sufficit enim vobis, tanto tempore in infidelitatis permansisse somno, quia ab ipsius primi hominis deceptione usque modo in infidelitatis somno permansistis.

In this place, where he says Scripture, we must add divine. For he took the words It is time, now, for us to rise from sleep [Rm 13:11] from the Apostle Paul. The blessed Paul had said to the peoples, speaking in an allegorical sense: It is time in as much as sleep is mentioned –because sleep is said and it means unbelief – that we arise now from sleep, that is from the unbelief of the mind. It suffices for you to have remained such a great time in the sleep of unbelief, because you have remained from the deceit of the very first man until now in the sleep of unbelief.

Hora est jam nos de somno surgere, id est, jam maxima pars saeculi, hoc est quinque aetates consumtae sunt; nunc vero parva pars saeculi, i. e. ultima aetas est. Et quod per horam ultima aetas saeculi intelligatur, testatur Joannes coapostolus ejus, cum dicit; ait enim: Filioli, novissima hora est. [1 John 2:18] Et idem ipse Paulus alibi hoc manifestat dicit enim: Nos sumus, in quos fines saeculorum devenerunt. [1 Cor 10:11] Et quamquam intentio Pauli ista fuit, dicere gentibus sub allegorico sensu, tamen et moraliter potest ad christianos referri.

It is time, now, that we arise from sleep, now that the greatest part of the world-age, that is the five ages, have been consumed. Now, though, is the small part of the world-age, that is the last age. And the fact that with time (hora) the last part of the world-age is understood, is testified by John, his co-apostle, when he says: Little sons, it is the last hour [1 John 2:18]. And likewise Paul himself shows this elsewhere, for he says: We are the ones to whom the ends of the ages have come [1 Cor 10:11]. And even though it was the intention of Paul to speak to the peoples in an allegorical sense, still it can be related to the Christians in a moral sense.

Unde Benedictus sciens illum allegoricum sensum supradictum, non secundum allegoricum, sed secundum moralem hic illud locutus est. Et est sensus, cum dicit: Hora est, jam nos de somno surgere, id est: o peccator! jam hora est, ut nos convertamur a nostris iniquitatibus, quia ultimum tempus vitae nostrae instat, et non solum ad ultimam aetatem hominis hoc attinet, verum etiam ad unamquamque aetatem hoc referri potest, si mortis tempus [page 27] adtendimus, verbi gratia; hora est jam nos de somno surgere, id est, o infans! hora est jam a tua malitia convertendi, quia hora est, id est, finis vitae tuae instat.

Therefore Benedict, knowing this allegorical sense that I mentioned above, said this not according to the allegorical sense, but according to the moral sense. When he says: It is time, now, for us to arise from sleep, the meaning is: O sinner, it is time that we convert from our iniquities, because the final period (tempus) of our life is impending and this does not only bear relevance to the last age of man but can also be related to whatever age, if we think of the time of death, [page 27] for example. It is time, now, that we rise from sleep that is: O child! It is the time, now, of your conversion from ill-will because it is time, that is, the end of your life is impending.

Sequitur: ₉Et apertis oculis nostris ad deificum lumen attonitis auribus audiamus.

Next: ₉And our eyes having been opened to the deifying light, let us hear with our thunderstruck ears.

Quia perseverat [enim] in excitatione somni mentis, quam superius dixerat, manifestat ista particula, quae est et.

This detail and shows that he sticks to the image of arising from the sleep of mind, which he had mentioned above.

Et bene apertis oculis dixit, quia sicut ille, qui a somno corporali excitatur, oculos corporis aperit, ita et ille, qui a somno mentis, i. e. torpore, oculos aperit cordis.

And he said well eyes having been opened, because just as he who wakes up from corporeal sleep, opens the bodily eyes, just so he, too, who wakes up from the sleep of mind, that is from sluggishness, opens the eyes of the heart.

Et forte ideo dixit nostris, quia mentis oculos voluit intelligi: nam quod ad oculos cordis hoc attineat, etiam istud manifestat, quod subjunxit: ad deificum lumen, ac si diceret: Non te, o fili, ad istud lumen temporale videndum excito, quod omnes bestiae seu animalia vident, sed ad illud, quod a nullo nisi ab angelis seu hominibus spiritalibus videtur, sicut scriptum est: Beati mundo corde, quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt. [Mt 5:8]

And perhaps he said our for this reason that he wanted that the eyes of our mind are understood. For, the fact that it refers to the eyes of the heart is also proven by the fact that he adds: to the deifying light, as if he was saying: I do not wake you up, o son, to see that temporal light, which all wild beasts and animated beings see, but to that which is seen by no one but by the angels and spiritual people, just as is written: Blessed the pure of heart, for they will see God. [Mt 5:8]

Deificum enim divinum intelligitur. Nam bene post apertionem oculorum subjunxit sollicitudinem aurium, quae per attonitis intelligitur; quia nostri interioris hominis auditus et visus non sunt divisa, sicut exterioris hominis, eo quod videre el audire insimul habet ille interior, et ubi videt, audit et intelligit. Exterior autem potest caecus audire et surdus videre.

Deifying must be understood as divine. For, he rightly added after the opening of the eyes, the solicitude of the ears, which is understood by this thunderstruck, because hearing and seeing of the inner man are not distinguished, as in the outer man, because that inner man has seeing and hearing at the same time, and when he sees, he hears and understands. The outer man, though, can listen while he is blind and see while he is deaf.

Sequitur: ₉divivina quotidie clamans quid admoneat vox dicens. divina ideo dixit ad separationem humanae vocis.

He continues with: ₉to what the divine voice admonishes us, daily crying out, saying (...). He says divine with regard to the distinction of the human voice.

Nunc videndum est, quo modo est ista vox divina, cum ea non Dominus, sed David dixit. Vere divina est, quia quamquam David hoc dicat, tamen Spiritus sanctus per David locutus est; et quod Dominus per os prophetarum seu apostolorum et cunctorum sanctorum loquatur, testatur Paulus apostolus, cum dixit: An experimentum ejus quaeritis, qui in me loquitur Christus? [2 Cor 13:3]

Now we have to see, how that voice is divine, when not the Lord, but David said these things. It is truly divine, because, although David says this, still the Holy Ghost has spoken through David. And that the Lord speaks through the mouth of prophets or apostles and all the saints, is testified by the Apostle Paul, when he said: Or do you seek experience of him who speaks in me – that is Christ? [2 Cor 13: 3]

Nunc iterum videndum est, quo modo quotidie divina clamet vox, cum sint multi, qui non habent expositores vel etiam librum divinarum scripturarum? [Et] quamquam illis vox divina non clamet per exterioris hominis officium, tamen illa lex naturalis in cordibus eorum clamat; lex enim naturalis est cognitio creaturae [page 28] et creatoris.

Now again we need to look how the divine cries out daily, because there are many who do not have interpreters or even the book of divine scriptures. Although the divine voice does not cry out to them through the activity (officium) of the outer man, still that natural law cries out in their hearts; for, the natural law is the knowledge of creature [page 28] and creator.

Et tunc enim, quando se cognoscit unusquisque creaturam esse et habere creatorem, quid aliud est ista cognitio nisi clamatio legis naturalis?

And then, indeed, when each person knows that he is a creature and has a creator, what else is that knowledge than a cry of the natural law?

Et tunc monetur ille ab hac cognitione, ut nonnulli creaturae, nisi creatori suo creatura serviat. Est etiam alia lex, quae clamat in cordibus fidelium, ut de virtute in virtutem ascendat, unde sub allegorico sensu de Domino Jesu dictum est: Et erat Jesus quotidie docens in templo. [Lc 19:47]

And then he is admonished by that knowledge that he, as a creature, must serve not just any creature, but only his creator. There is also another law which cries in the hearts of the faithful that he must ascend from virtue to virtue, whence there is the saying about the Lord Jesus in an allegorical sense: And Jesus was daily teaching in the temple. [Lc 19:47]

Quotidie enim Jesus docet in templo suo, cum quotidie dignatur inspirare in corde uniuscujusque fidelis, ut de virtute in virtutem ascendat. Hodie enim pro praesenti vita ponitur, quia in hac vita sibi dies succedunt, in futura vero vita unus dies est. Et quod hodie ad praesentem vitam attineat, manifestat Paulus, cum dicit ad Hebraeos; ait enim: Videte fratres, ne forte sit in aliqno vestrum cor malum incredulitatis (habens) discedendi a Deo vivo, sed cxhortamini vosmetipsos per singulos dies, donec hodie cognominatur, ut nemo ex vobis obduretur fallacia peccati. [Hbr 3:12-13]

Jesus teaches daily in his temple, when he daily deigns it worthy to inspire each individual believer in his heart to ascend from virtue to virtue. For, today is put instead of the present life, because the days follow each other in this life, but in the future life there is one day. And the fact that today refers to the present life, is shown by Paul, when he says to the Hebrews: Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called today; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. [Hbr 3:12-13]

Istud enim, quod dicit: ₁₀Hodie si vocem ejus audieritis, nolite obdurare corda vestra, [Ps 94:8] David propheta dixerat ad populum Israel; necnon et Paulus id ipsum eidem populo dicens interpretatus est: hodie si vocem ejus audieritis [Hbr 3:16; Hbr 4:7] et caetera.

The words ₁₀If you will have heard his voice today – do not harden your hearts [Ps 94:8] had been said by David to the people of Israel. Also Paul explained this as he spoke to the same people: If you will have heard his voice today, etc. [Hbr 3:16; Hbr 4:7]

Dixerat enim, sicut diximus, David ad illos Israelitas, qui fuerant filii eorum, qui erant liberati de Aegyptiaea, servitute et transierant mare rubrum et in deserto suscepti sunt et manna de coelo perceperunt et XL annis in deserto morati sunt et ibi contra Deum murmurati sunt, et ob hoc nullus eorum intrare meruit in terram repromissionis, nisi solus Caleph et Josue. Ideo dixerat hoc David propheta, ne sicut patres eorum obdurarent corda, sua.

As we said, David had spoken to those Israelites, who had been his sons, who had been freed from Egyptian slavery and had crossed the Red Sea and have been taken up in the desert and have received the manna from heaven and have remained in the desert forty years and there have murmured against God, and for that reason none of them was allowed to enter the promised land, except for Caleph and Joshua. The prophet David had said this so as to warn them not to harden their hearts like their fathers.

Et quamvis hoc historialiter ad Judaeos attinet, tamen ad Christianos, id est confessores Christi moraliter refertur, quia sicut illi de Aegyptiaca historialiter servitute liberati sunt, ita et isti moraliter de diaboli servitute, quae per Aegyptiacani servitutem intelligitur, liberati sunt.

And even though this refers to the Jews in the historical sense (historialiter), still, in the moral sense (moraliter), it relates to the Christians, that is to the confessors of Christ, because, just as the former (Israelites) have been freed from slavery in the historical sense, the latter (Christians) have been freed in the moral sense from the devil’s slavery, which is meant with the Egyptian slavery.

Et sicut illi historialiter per mare rubrum transierunt, ita et isti moraliter quasi per mare rubrum transeunt, cum baptizantur, quia mare rubrum [page 29] baptismum intelligitur; rubrum vero est baptismum propter passionem sanguinis Christi. Et sicut illi historialiter suscepti sunt in eremo post transitum maris rubri, ita isti moraliter suscipiuntur ab ecclesia post baptismum, quae per eremum intelligitur. Et sicut illi historialiter in eremo manna perceperunt, ita et isti moraliter in ecclesia corpus et sanguinem Christi percipiunt, quod per manna, intelligitur. Et sicut post XL annos historialiter in terram repromissionis intraverunt, ita et isti moraliter post praesentem vitam, quae per illos annos intelligitur, ad gaudia coelestis patriae intromittuntur. Et sicut illi historialiter murmuraverunt in eremo, ita ex istis multi in ecclesia moraliter murmurant, cum per adulterium et caetera vitia ad pristinam vitam vel actionem revertuntur. Et sicut ex illis pauci id est tantum duo, hoc est Joaue et Caleph in terram repromissionis intrarunt, ita ex istis moraliter pauci ad aestimationem multorum malorum intromittuntur in terram coelestis patriae, hoc est in paradisum, sicut scriptum est: Multi sunt vocati, pauci vero electi. [Mt 22:14]

And just as the former have crossed the Red Sea in the historical sense, just so the latter are crossing the Red Sea in the moral sense, when they are baptized, because the Red Sea is understood as baptism. [page 29] Baptism is red because of the passion of Christ’s blood. And just as the former have historically been admitted to the desert after the passage of the Red Sea, just so the latter are admitted morally by the Church, which is meant with the desert, after baptism. And just as the former historically received manna in the desert, just so the latter received the body and blood of Christ in the Church – which is meant with the manna. And just as they entered the promised land after forty years, just so the latter too are admitted to the joys of the heavenly fatherland after the present life, which is understood by those years. And just as the former historically murmured in the desert, just so many of the latter are murmuring morally in the Church, when they turn through adultery and other faults to their former live or action. And just as few of the former, that is only two, namely Joshua and Caleph, had entered the promised land, just so few of the latter, upon valuation of the many evils, are – in the moral sense – let into the land of the heavenly fatherland, that is paradise, as it is written: Many have been called, but few chosen. [Mt 22:14]

Et sicut ex illis historialiter multi tribus plagis perierunt propter murmurationem, i. e. terrae hiatu et igni atcque morsu serpentium, ita et isti propter mala sua opera moraliter plagis sibi divinitus illatis pereunt.Et sicut ex illis historialiter multi tribus plagis perierunt propter murmurationem, i. e. terrae hiatu et igni atcque morsu serpentium, ita et isti propter mala sua opera moraliter plagis sibi divinitus illatis pereunt.

And just as in the historical sense many of the former have perished in three plagues because of their murmuring, namely by a gap in the earth and by fire and by the bite of snakes, just so in the moral sense also the latter perish because of their evil works through plagues imposed on them by heaven.

Et quid mirum, si hoc moraliter ad populum catholicum, hoc est christianum generaliter refertur, cum etiam ad unumquemque monachorum moraliter hoc potest similiter referri?

And is it a surprise, if this relates in the moral sense to catholic people, that is to the Christians in general, when this can similarly be related to each of the monks in the moral sense?

Et quod ad unumquemque monachorum hoc attineat, testatur Spiritus Sanctus, qui per B. Benedicti os in hac regula in testimonium adhibuit, ne sicut illi Israelitae perierunt post perceptionem donorum Dei et ingrati dono divino extiterunt, ita monachus per conversionem, retro respiciens pereat. Nequaquam enim B. Benedictus istud in testimonium adhibuisset suo auditori, cum eum monere studuit, nisi illud per Spiritum Sanctum cognovisset, ad monachos etiam adtinere.

And that this refers to each of the monks is testified by the Holy Ghost who warned through the mouth of the blessed Benedict in the Rule, that just as those Israelites perished after the reception of God’s gifts and showed themselves ungrateful to the divine gift – that just so the monk perishes through his way of life (conversio) when he looks back. The blessed Benedict would not at all have warned his listener about this when he made the effort to warn him, if he had not known through the Holy Ghost that this also applies to monks.

Nam sicut illi populi historialiter de Aegyptiaca servitute exierunt, ita, etiam monachi moraliter, cum de saeculari conversione exeunt, quasi de Aegyptiaca servitute liberantur. Et sicut illi historialiter [page 30] ad mare rubrum venerunt, ita et isti moraliter quasi ad mare rubrum veniunt; cum ad monasterium veniunt. Et sicut illi historialiter mare rubrum transierunt, ita etiam et isti quasi mare rubrum transeunt, cum propriis voluntatibus abrenuntiant, i. e. cum tria promittunt, i. e. de stabilitate sua et conversione morum suorum et obedientia coram Deo et Sanctis ejus. Et sicut illi in eremo suscepti sunt post transitum maris rubri, ita, etiam isti quasi in eremo, cum post promissionem suam in monasterio suscipiuntur. Et sicut historialiter isti manna in eremo et aquam de petra acceperunt ita etiam et isti moraliter manna quasi in deserto accipiunt, cum in monasterio spiritalem praedicationem a spiritali patre percipiunt, necnon etiam spiritalem cibum et potum percipiunt, cum panem vel potum monasterii percipiunt, quia ipse panis et potus monasterii spiritalis est, eo quod a fratribus pro caritate servientibus illum percipiunt.

For, just as those peoples historically departed from Egyptian slavery, just so the monks too, in the moral sense, are freed from Egyptian slavery, as it were, when they leave the worldly way of life (conversio). And just as the former [page 30] historically came to the Red Sea, just so also the latter are morally coming to the Red Sea, as it were, when they come to the monastery. And just as the former historically crossed the Red Sea, just so also the latter cross the Red Sea, as it were, when they renounce their own wills, that is when they vow three things: concerning their stability, their way moral way of life and their obedience to God and his Saints. And just as the former have been admitted to the desert after their passage through the Red Sea, so the latter too are admitted in the desert after their vow in the monastery. And just as the former historically received the manna in the desert and water from the rock, just so the latter too morally receive manna in the desert, as it were, when they receive in the monastery the spiritual preaching from the spiritual father, and also receive the spiritual food and drink, when they receive bread and drink in the monastery, because that bread and drink of the monastery is spiritual, because they receive it from the brothers who serve it as charity.

Etiam ipse Benedictus alibi testatur, rem monasterii quasi vasa altaris sacratam esse: ait enim: Omnia vasa monasterii cunctamque substanciam ac si altaris vasa sacrata conspiciat. [Regula Benedicti, c. 31, 10]

Also Benedict himself testifies elsewhere that the state of the monastery is sacred like the altar vessels. He says: Let him regard all vessels of the monastery and all the property as sacred, as if they are altar vessels [Regula Benedicti, c. 31:10].

Et sicut XL annis historialiter illi morati sunt in eremo, ita et isti moraliter quasi in eremo XL annis permanent, cum omnibus diebus vitae suae, i. e. tota vita sua, quae per illos annos intelligitur, intra claustra monasterii perseverant. Et sicut illi post XL annos historialiter in terram repromissionis ingressi sunt, ita, etiam et isti moraliter post praesentem vitam, cum ad gaudia coelestia intromittuntur, quasi in terram repromissionis intrant. Et sicut multi eorum murmuraverunt in eremo, ita, et isti moraliter multi in monasterio murmurant. Et sicut illi murmuratores perierunt tribus plagis, ita, et isti pereunt tribus plagis divinitus illatis; nam potest intelligi per hiatum terrae claustra inferni. et per illum ignem ignem perpetuum, et per morsus serpentium suasiones pestiferas daemonum similiter potest intelligi. [page 31]

And just as the former historically remained in the desert for forty years, so too the latter stay in the desert for forty years, when they continue all the days of their life, that is their entire life, that is understood by those years, within the cloister of the monastery. And just as the former historically, after forty years entered the promised land, so also the latter, after the present life, when they are let into the celestial joys, enter, as it were, the promised the land. And just as many of them murmured in the desert, so many of the latter too murmur in the monastery. And just as the former grumblers perished in three plagues, just so the latter perish in three plagues inflicted by heaven. For, by the gap in the earth, the gate (claustra) of hell can be understood, and by that fire, the eternal fire¹² and by the bite of serpents similarly the pestilential¹³ counsels of demons can be understood. [page 31]

Sequitur: ₁₁Qui habet aures audiendi audiat, [Mt 11:15; Mc 4:9; Lc 8:8; Lc 14:35] quid spiritus dicat ecclesiis.

Next: ₁₁He who has ears to hear, let him hear what the spirit says to the churches.

Hoc autem B. Joannes Evangelista in libro Apocalypsi multipliciter, sicut sibi revelatum est, dixit; nam in fine uniuscujusque sermonis, quem singulae ecclesiae loquebatur, locutus est. [Apc 3:6, 3:13, 3:22, etc.]

The blessed John the Evangelist said this, however, in the book of the Apocalypse as it had been revealed to him. For, he said it at the end of each speech that he spoke to each individual church. [Apoc. 3:6, 3:13, 3:22, etc.]

Nunc videndum est, quare S. Joannes Evangelista ecclesiis pluraliter dixit, cum Paulus apostolus unam ecclesiam esse praedicavit; ait enim: despondi enim vos uni viro virginem castam exhibere Christo. [2 Cor 11:2] Ecce per virginem et castam unam ecclesiam designavit, sed quia unus Christus est, ita una est ecclesia; et sicut septem dona S. Spiritus, item et septem ecclesiae sunt propter septem dona, Spiritus sancti.

Now we need to see, why the holy John the Evangelist said to the churches in plural, whereas the Apostle Paul preached that there is one church: For I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ [2 Cor 11: 2]. See, he means with virgin and chaste the one church, but since Christ is one, so the church is one (too); and just as the gifts of the Holy Ghost are seven, so too the churches are seven according to the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost.

Quae septem ecclesiae per septem dona, S. Spiritus ita intelliguntur: primum enim donum S. Spiritus est sapientia, ac, per hoc, qui isto dono S. Spiritus, i. e. sapientia, plusquam alii repleti sunt, una esse ecclesia dicuntur. Deinde secundum donum S. Spiritus intellectus; similiter secunda ecclesia dicuntur illi, qui isto dono S. Spiritus, i. e. intelectu plusquam caeteri repleti sunt. Tertium donum S. Spiritus est consilium; similiter tertia, ecclesia, est, quotquot dono isto S. Spiritus, i. e. consilio plus quam caeteri abundant. Quartum donum S. Spiritus est fortitudo; similiter quarta ecclesia est omnes illi, qui isto S. Spiritus dono, i. e. fortitudine plus quam alii repleti existunt. Quintum donum S. Spiritus est scientia, ac per hoc quinta ecclesia dicuntur illi, qui isto dono quinto S. Spiritus, i. e. scientia, plus quam caeteri abundant. Sextum donum S. Spiritus est pietas, deinde illi, qui istum donum sextum, quod est pietas, plus quam caeteri videutur habere, sexta ecclesia dicuntur. Similiter etiam septima ecclesia dicuntur omnes illi, qui isto septimo dono S. Spiritus, i. e. timore plus quam caeteri superabundant.

And these seven churches are meant by the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost in this way: the first gift of the Holy Ghost is wisdom, and those who by the gift of the Holy Ghost, namely wisdom, have been filled more than others, are said to be one church. Then, the second gift of the Holy Ghost is intellect. Similarly the second church are called those people who by that gift of the Holy Ghost, namely intellect, have been filled more than the others. The third gift of the Holy Ghost is counsel. Likewise, the third church is that group, however many, who abound more than the rest in the gift of the Holy Ghost, namely counsel. The fourth gift of the Holy Ghost is strength. Likewise the fourth church is all those people who turn out to be filled more than others with that gift of the Holy Ghost, namely strength. The fifth gift of the Holy Ghost is knowledge, and on account of this, the fifth church are called those people who more than the rest abound with that fifth gift of the Holy Ghost, namely knowledge. The sixth gift of the Holy Ghost is piety. Thus, those who seem to have that sixth gift, namely piety, more than the rest, are called the sixth church. Likewise, also the seventh church are called all those who overflow more than the rest with that seventh gift of the Holy Ghost, namely fear.

Minus enim aptum videtur hoc esse testimonium superiori testimonio, i. e. non recte intelligentibus, eo quod in isto fit mentio aurium, et in superiore fit mentio cordis; sed in his nulla est contrarietas, quia superiora verba istius S. Benedicti, in quibus fecit mentionem aurium dicens: attonitis auribus audiamus, et istud inferius testimonium [page 32], in quo similiter mentio aurium fit, cum dicitur: Qui habet aures audiendi audiat, faciunt intelligi illud testimonium, ubi meptio cordis est, de auribus cordis esse dictum.

This statement seems to be less suitable than the previous statement (testimonium). That is, [it only seems to be less suitable] to those who do not understand correctly. Because here mention is made of ears, and in the previous part mention is made of the heart. But there is no contradiction between these two, because the previous words of the holy Benedict, in which he made mention of ears (Let us hear with thunderstruck ears) and that later statement, [page 32] in which similarly mention is made of ears (He who has ears, let him hear) make that his statement is understood, when mention is made of the heart, as referring to the ears of the heart.

Nec non etiam superiora verba ipsius testimonii similiter aurium faciunt mentionem, cum dicunt: hodie si vocem ejus audieritis. [Ps 94:8 (Vulg.), 95:7]

And earlier too, the words of that statement similarly make mention of ears, when they say: Today you will hear his voice. [Ps 94:8 (Vulg.), 95:7]

Et est sensus, cum dicit: Qui habet aures audiendi audiat, quid Spiritus dicat ecclesiis, i. e. qui habet aures cordis, intelligat, quae dona S. Spiritus impertit ecclesiis, sive etiam, sicut Beda dicit: Qui habet aures audiendi audiat, quid Spiritus dicat ecclesiis, i. e. qui habet aures intelligentiae, quibus Dei verbum percipere possit, non contemnat, sed audiat, obediendo videlicet et faciendo, quae didicit, corcordans cum B. Jacobo apostolo dicente: Non auditor obliviosus factus, sed factor operis, hic beatus in facto suo erit. [Iac 1:25] [Bede, In Lucae Evangelium Expositio 4, ch. 14:35, CCSL 120, p. 284]

When he says: He who has ears to hear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches, the meaning is: he who has ears of the heart, let him understand what gifts the Holy Ghost bestows on the churches. Or even, as Bede says: He who has ears to hear, let him hear what the Ghost says to the churches, the meaning is: he who has the ears of intelligence, with which he can perceive the word of God, let him not spurn [it] but let him hear, namely by being obedient and by doing what he has learned, in agreement with the Apostle James as he said: not becoming a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work: this man shall be blessed in his deed. [Jac 1:25]

Sequitur: ₁₂Et quid dicit? Subaudiendum est: illa vox divina, ac si diceret interrogando: Quid dicit illa vox divina? Nunc vero quasi respondendo dicit: ₁₂Venite filii, audite me, timorem Domini docebo vos.

Next: ₁₂And what does he say? We have to add: that divine voice, as if he was asking: What does that divine voice say? Now, however, he answers: ₁₂Come, sons, listen to me, I shall teach you fear of the Lord.

Si enim in hoc loco sensum proprium adtenderimus, sermo prophetae gentes allocutus est; hortatur enim sermo propheticus gentos, ad credulitatem venire, et bene dixit venite, et postimodum audite, quia nullus valet intelligere divina, nisi ea prius crediderit, ac si diceret: Venite credendo, quia nisi prius fidem habueritis, nequaquam poteritis verba doctrinae percipere, sicut dictum est: Nisi prius credideritis, nequaquam intelligetis. [Is 7:9 Vetus Latina]

If we grasp the proper sense at this spot, the prophet’s word spoke to the peoples. The prophetic word encourages the peoples to come to belief and it said well come and then listen, because no one can understand the divine, unless he has earlier believed it. It is as if he was saying: Come in faith, because if you have no faith first, you will not at all be able to receive the words of the [divine] instruction, as it is said: Unless you first believe, you will not at all understand [Is 7:9 (Vetus Latina)].

Et propterea vocavit filios eos, qui necdum crediderant, quia futuri erant filii credentes; nam unusquisque, qui imbuitur, ejus filius est, qui imbuit. Unde Paulus apostolus suos auditores filios vocat diceas: Filioli mei, quos iterum parturio, [Gal 4:19] eo quod illos docebat credulitatem habere.

And thereafter, he called those people sons who had not yet believed, because they were about to be his sons as they believed, for, each one who is initiated is the son of him who initiates. Therefore, the Apostle Paul calls his audience sons: My little children, of whom I am in labor again [Gal 4:19], because he was teaching them to have confidence.

Quia cognovit B. Benedictus tam sermonem propheticum, quam etiam Paulum plurimum suos auditores filios vocare, ideo in principio doctrinae suae suum auditorem filium vocavit dicens: Ausculta, o fili! Nam ipsi filii quasi respondendo dicunt: Ecce venimus, quid nobis proderit? Ille vero sermo propteticus quasi respondendo [page 33] dicit: Timorem Domini docebo vos.

Since the blessed Benedict was familiar with the prophetic way of speaking with which Paul usually called his listeners sons, for that reason at the beginning of the teaching Benedict called his listener son: Listen, o son! For, the sons say, as if they were answering: Look! We have come, what good will it do to us? But that prophetic saying gives as an answer: [page 33] I will teach you the fear of the Lord.

Et bene addidit Domini, quia non timorem hominis, sed timorem Domini docere cupiebat, ac si diceret: Non timorem humanum, sed Domini vos docebo, quia timor hominis poenam habet, timor vero Domini non poenam, sed requiem habet. Vox autem ista etiam moraliter potest intelligi.

And rightly he adds of the Lord, because he was not wishing to teach the fear of man but the fear of the Lord, as if he was saying: I will not teach you human fear, but fear of the Lord, because fear of man leads to punishment, fear of the Lord, however, does not lead to punishment but to rest. That voice, though, can also be understood in the moral sense.

Omnes autem, qni post perceptionem baptismatis ad vitia revertuntur, a Deo longe recedunt, et tamen non pedibus, sed moribus recedunt; nam si non recessissent peccatores, nequaquam illos sermo propheticus vocasset venire, quia nemini dicitur venire nisi illi, qui recedit, ac si dicat illi sermo propheticus, cum dicit illis: Venite, filii, audite me, id est, quia recessistis a Deo pravis moribus, quamvis non fide, ideo hortor vos, o peccatores, id est, flendo venite et poenitendo atque mores vestros corrigendo venite. Et nunc videndum est, quare dicat filii, si peccatoribus dicit? Ideo dicit filii, ut audiendo nomen filii non se desperent, sed confidentiae vires sumant, ac si diceret: Nolite desperare, sed fiduciam convertendi atque poenitendi sumite.

All people, who turn to vices after the reception of baptism, withdraw themselves far from God, and yet do not withdraw themselves by feet but in behavior. For, if the sinners had not withdrawn, the prophetic saying would not at all have called them to come, because it commands no one else to come than him who withdraws himself. It is as if the prophetic saying speaks to that person, when it says to them: Come, sons, listen to me. That is: because you have withdrawn yourself from God with bad behavior, although not in faith, for that reason I urge you, o sinners: come in tears and come while you do penitence and correct your behavior. And now we need to see, why he says sons if he speaks to sinners. He says sons for this reason that they do not despair about themselves, hearing the name son, but take strength of confidence, as if he said: Do not despair, but take reliance on conversion and penitence.

Sequitur: Audite me, ac si diceret: Nisi prius voluntatem convertendi seu poenitendi habueritis, nequaquam poteritis audire, quae vos docuero.

Next: Listen to me. That is: Unless you first have the will to convert and do penitence, you will not be able to hear what I teach you.

Sequitur: Timorem Domini docebo vos.

Next: I will teach you the fear of the Lord.

Nunc iterum videndum est, quare dixit: timorem, et non dixit: fidem? Ideo non dixit: lidem, quia quamquam peccatoribns, tamen fidelibus loquitur. Et quare ergo non dixit: caritatem? ideo non dixit: caritatem, sed timorem, quia caritas a timore inchoatur et nisi a timente Deum non habetur, eo quod fundamentum omnis boni operis timor Dei est. Unde Dominus dicit ad Job: Ubi eras, quando fundamentum terrae ponebam? [Iob 38:4]

Now we have to see again, why he said fear of and did not say faith in. He did not say that for this reason that he speaks to believers, even though they are sinners. And why did he not say charity? He did not say charity but fear, because charity begins with fear and can only be held by him who fears God because the foundation of every good work is the fear of the Lord. Why did the Lord say to Job: Where were you, when I was laying the foundation of the earth? [Job 38:4].

Istum enim versiculum B. Papa Gregorius exponit dicens: Per terram intelligitur anima peccatrix, et per fundamentum intelligitur timor Dei, quia sicut in fundamento omnis operis fabrica collocatur, ita et in timore Dei omnis boni operis fabrica constituitur.

The blessed Pope Gregory explained this little phrase thus: By ‘earth’ we understand the sinful soul and by the ‘foundation’ the fear of God, because just as the entire production of good work is placed in the foundation, so too in the fear of God the entire production of good work is established.¹⁴

Sequitur: ₁₃Currite, dum lumen vitae habetis, ne vos tenebrae mortis comprehendant.

Next: ₁₃Run, while you have the light of life, lest the darkness of death seize you.

Currite, ac si diceret quis: [page 34] quando curramus? dicit enim: dum lumen vitae habetis. Iterum quasi interrogaret aliquis, quare? reddit causam: ne vos tenebrae mortis comprehendant; verba enim superiora non sunt Benedicti sed prophetae, ubi dicitur: Venite, filii, audite me.

Run as if someone was saying: [page 34] When are we to run? He says: While you have the light of life. Again, as if someone was asking: why? he give the reason: Lest the darkness of death seize you. For, the earlier words are not of Benedict but of the prophet, when we hear: Come, sons, listen to me.

Nunc vero sunt S. Benedicti, id est: Currite, dum lumen vitae habetis, ac si diceret suis auditoribus B. Benedictus: Audistis, o filii, vocem curritte; Quo? Id est, ad illam vocem divinam, quam audistis. Quasi quidam hortatur suum amicum, qui audit vocem se clamantis: Cur stas et quare non curris ad illam vocem, quam audisti? Et reddit causam, quare debeant currere, cum subjunxit: dum lumen vitae habetis, id est, dum tempus habetis, dum tempus habetis convertendi.

But now these are Saint Benedict’s: Run, while you have the light of life. As if the blessed Benedict was saying to his listeners: You hear, o sons, a voice [saying:] ‘run!’ Whither? To that divine voice that you hear. As if someone urges his friend, who hears the voice of someone who calls him: Why do you stand still and are you not running to that voice that you hear? And he give the reason why they ought to run, when he added: While you have the light of life, that is: while you have the allowance, while you have time for conversion.

Hoc etiam Paulus Apostolus latius exponit, cum dicit: Ecce nunc tempus acceptabile, ecce nunc dies salutis. [2 Cor 6:2] Superius enim dixerat testimonium prophetae dicens: Tempore accepto exaudivi te et in die salutis adjuvi te. [ibid.] Deinde exposuit, quid sit illud tempus dicens: Ecce nunc tempus acceptabile, ecce nunc dies salutis. Tempus acceptabile istud est ad exaudiendum, quia in eo exaudimur dies vero salutis isti sunt, quia in his invenitur salus. Necnon et Esaias ait: Quaerite Dominum, dum inveniri potest. [Is 55:6]

Also the Apostle Paul explains this more extensively when he says: Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation. [2 Cor 6:2] For, earlier the statement of the prophet had said: I heard you at the accepted time and I have helped you on the day of salvation. [ibid.] That time is acceptable for hearing, because we are heard at that time. But those are the days of salvation, because salvation is found on them. Isaiah too says: Search for God while he can be found. [Is 55:6]

Et iterum: ₁₃ne tenebrae mortis vos comprehendant.

And again: ₁₃Lest the darkness of death seize you.

De his quippe Dominus tenebris dicit sub noctis nomine, cum loquitur: Dum sum in mundo, lux sum hujus mundi; veniet autem nox, in qua nemo potest operari. [cf. Io 9:15 and 9:4]

Certainly, the Lord speaks about this darkness in terms of the night, when he says: While I am in the world, I am the light of this world; the night will come, however, in which no one can work. [Io 8:12; Io 9:4]

Jam si in illa nocte nemo potest operari, currendum est nobis et satagendum, dum lumen vitae habemus, ne, cum voluerimus, non possimus. Sic enim Dominus dicit: Me oportet operari, donec dies est; veniet autem nox, in qua nemo potest operari. [Io 8:12; Io 9:4] Et est sensus, cum dicit: dum lumen vitae habetis, i. e. dum licentiam habetis currendi, dum tempus, dum spatium habetis operandi, ne dies mortis vos praeoccupet.

Now, if in that night no one can work, we have to run and be busy while we have the light of life, lest we can not do anything, even though we want to. For, so says the Lord: I must work as long as it is day; the night will come, however, in which no one can work [Io 8:12; Io 9:4]. And the meaning of this citation While you have the light of life is this: While you have the allowance to run, while you have time, while you have an opportunity to work, lest the day of death gets you beforehand.

₁₄Et quaerens Dominus in multitidine populi sui, cum haec clamat, operarium suum.

₁₄And the Lord, searching in the crowd of his people for his laborer to whom he calls out theses words.

Et iterum dicit: Dominus quaerens operarium suum in multitudine populi sui haec clamat. Perseverat adhuc B. Benedictus in intentione sua, [page 35] cum dicit: Iterum dicit.

Again he says: The Lord, searching in the crowd of his people for his laborer, calls out theses words. Saint Benedict still keeps to his plan [page 35] when he says: He says again.

Nam prius exemplum scripturae dicit, quod provocat audire; nunc vero subjunxit alterum exemplum, quod similiter provocat audire, cum dicit: ₁₅Quis est, qui vult vitam et cupit videre dies bonos? Si vero haec multitudo ad multitudinem generis humani referatur, operarius Domini intelligitur sancta ecclesia, quae quasi pro uno nomine posita sub hoc intellectu de multitudine humani generis quaesita est a Deo.

For he first gives the example of scripture, which provokes listening. But now he added a second example, that likewise provokes listening, when he says: ₁₅Which is the man who wants life and desires to see good days? If this crowd refers to the crowd of the human race, the laborer of the Lord is understood as the holy church, who is understood by this very name of crowd of the human race and is searched for by God.

Si autem ad sanctam ecclesiam referatur, quod magis ad hunc sensum attinet, operarius Domini intelligitur ordo sequacium apostolorum. Et bene ecclesia pro multitudine populi in hoc sensu ponitur, quia sibimet comparata multitudo est.

But if it refers to the holy church, which makes more sense here, the laborer of the Lord is understood as the order of the following apostles. And we interpret the crowd of people as the church, because the church – in and of itself – is a crowd.

Nunc videndum est, qua ratione dicatur Dominus operarium suum quaerere in multitudine populi. Numquid caeteros relinquit et unum operarium quaerit? Non, sed sicut facit rex. Ecce habet rex maximam multitudinem populi, sed ex ipsa multitudine eligit aliquos, quos praedestinat singulis officiis, alios quidem ad consilium dandum, alios autem ad caetera officia peragenda.

Now we must see, with what reason he says that the Lord searches his laborer in the crowd of his people. Does he perhaps leave the others out and search [just] one laborer? No. But he acts like a king. Look, a king has a very great crowd of people, but he chooses out of this crowd some whom he predestines for separate tasks: some for giving advice, others for executing other tasks.

Ita et Dominus facit; Dominus enim de ecclesia, sua eligit illum ordinem, qui audiat vocem illam, quam diviti dixit: Si vis perfectus esse, vade et vende omnia, quae habes, et veni, sequere me. [Mt 19:21] Necnon etiam Dominus praedicans in carne fecit, cum multos discipulos habuit et elegit de illa multitudine duodecim.

The Lord does exactly the same: for the Lord chooses from his church that order which listens to that voice which said to the rich man: If you want to be perfect, go and sell everything you have, and come, follow me [Mt 19:21]. The Lord did also [the same] as a preacher in the flesh, when he held many disciples and chose from that multitude twelve.

Et quid mirum, si hoc Dominus fecit praedicans in carne vel in sancta ecclesia quotidie faciat, cum etiam ab initio mundi hoc fecit? Nam de multitudine totius generis humani elegit Noe cum domo sua, qui superstes fuit primi saeculi et auctor saeculi secundi. Necnon de multitudine populi sui elegit Abraam, elegit Moysen et Aaron, similiter et caeteros sanctos.

And is it a surprise if the Lord did this while preaching in the flesh or does this every day in the holy church? For he chose from the crowd of the entire human race Noah with his house, who was the leader of the first era and originator of the second era. He also chose from the crowd of his people Abraham, Moses, Aaron and similarly the other saints.

Sed quid enim dicat Dominus de operario suo, quem de multitudine populi quaerit, in subsequentibus manifestat; ait enim: Quis est homo, qui vult vitam et cupit videre dies bonos? In hoc enim loco S. Benedictus testimonium sumpsit propheticum; nam iste sermo propheticus gentibus est locutus.

But what the Lord says about his laborer, whom he searches from the crowd of his people, is manifest in the following, for he says: Which is the man who wants life and desires to see the good days? Here, Saint Benedict took a prophetic testimony, for this prophetic word spoke to the peoples. We must see here, what life [page 36] is being discussed.

Videndum est enim in hoc loco, de qua vita [page 36] dicatur; non enim in hoc loco, cum dicit vitam, de praesenti dicit vita, sed de vita aeterna, et ideo, ubi vitam dicit, subaudiendum est: aeterna.

We have to investigate here what kind of life [page 36] is being discussed; for when he says life, he does not speak about the present life, but about the eternal life, and therefore, when he says life, we have to add ‘eternal.'/p>

Nam si de hac vita dixisset, superfluum fuisset dicere, eo quod illos alloquitur, qui in hac vita praesenti sunt; haec enim vita non est vita, sed iter vitae est, per quam ad illam vitam aeternam pervenitur. Vita vero, quae in inferno est, et vita est et non est vita. Vita, est quidem per substantiam, eo quod illi, qui illic cremantur, nunquam per substantiam deficiunt; et non est vita per bonitatem, quia illi, qui illic ardent, nunquam bono fruuntur.

If he had spoken about this [mortal] life, it would have been superfluous to mention it, because he addresses those who are present in this life. For this life is not a life, but a life’s journey, through which we arrive at that eternal life. But life that is in hell both is life and is not life. It is life in terms of its substance because those who are being burned there never die [deficiunt] in terms of substance; and [yet] it is not life in terms of goodness because those who burn there never enjoy the good.

Nam de qua vita dicat, idem ipse propheta manifestat, cum subjungit: ₁₅et cupit videre dies bonos. Bene autem addidit bonos ad separationem malorum dierum praesentis vitae; in praesenti etenim vita, non sunt boni, sed mali dies. Mali etenim dico non per substantiam, sed per actionem malorum.

The very same prophet shows what life he speaks about when he adds: ₁₅and desires to see good days. He rightly added good so as to separate them from the evil days of the present life; for in the present life the days are not good but bad. I say “bad” not in terms of substance, but in terms of the action of evils [malorum].

Et quod mali dies sint in praesenti vita, testatur Paulus, cum dicit, ait enim: Redimentes tempus, quoniam dies mali sunt [Eph 5:16]. In hoc enim loco cum Paulus dicit: dies mali de diebus praesentis vitae dicit, non ut per substantiam, sicut jam diximus, dies mali sint, sed secundum actionem malam, quae in praesentis vitae diebus agitur. In futura vero vita dies boni sunt, eo quod ibi illa, vita, fruuntur, quae (qui) dicit: Ego sum via, veritas et vita. [Io 14:6]

Paul testifies that the days in this life are evil when he says: Redeeming the time because the days are evil [Eph 5:16]. When Paul says ‘evil days’ here, he is talking about the evil days of the present life, not so that the days are evil in terms of substance, as we just said, but according to evil action that is done in the days of the present life. But in the future life the days are good because they enjoy there that life which says: I am the way, the truth and life.¹⁵

Sequitur: ₁₆quod si audiens respondeas: Ego, id est, si ad hanc vocem audiendam temetipsum obtuleris illi, dicit tibi Dominus. Hic enim talis, qui ita, agit, similis est Esaiae, qui audiens Dominum dicentem: Quis ibit ex nobis? respondit dicens: Ecce ego, mitte me. [Is 6:8]

Next: ₁₆But if you, on hearing this, reply, “It is I,” that is, if you bring yourself forward to him so as to hear that voice, the Lord speaks to you. For such a person who does that is similar to Isaiah, who, hearing the Lord saying: Who will go out of us? [Is 6:8] answers by saying: Look! I! Send me [Is. 6:8].

Sequitur: ₁₇Si vis habere veram et perpetuam vitam, prohibe linguam tuam a malo, et labia tua ne loquantur dolum.

Next: ₁₇If you want to have true and perpetual life, withhold your tongue from evil and do not let your lips speak deceit.

In hoc enim loco nomine mali omnis malitia comprehenditur: nam speciem manifestavit, cum dixit dolum, ait enim: labia tua ne loquantur dolum; dolus enim inelligitur fraus. Omnis enim fraus sive dolus malum dicitur; nam omne [page 37] malum non potest dici dolus, eo quod est et aliud malum, hoc est adulterium et cetera.

All wickedness is included here under the name of evil: for he spoke in a metonym [species] when he said deceit: Do not let your lips speak deceit, for deceit is understood as wrong. Every wrong or deceit is called evil, [but] not every [page 37] evil can be called deceit, because there are also other evils, that is adultery and so on.

Dolus enim duobus modis dicitur, uno enim modo, sicut hypocritae faciunt; illi enim aliud praetendunt extrinsecus et aliud sunt intrinsecus, id est, manifeste faciunt opera bona, occulte vero mala. Altero quidem modo dolus sive fraus dicitur, cum quis aliud habet in corde et aliud loquitur ore.

For deceit is meant in two ways. The first is what hypocrites do. For they pretend [to be] one thing on the outside and are another thing on the inside, that is, they do good works out in the open [manifeste], but evil things in secret [occulte]. The second form of deceit, however, is called fraud, i.e. when someone has one thing in his heart and speaks another thing with his mouth.

Nam non unius sunt poenae digni, qui malum simpliciter agit et ille, qui simulate, id est callide. Sive aliter: dolus est mentis calliditas, eo quod deludat; aliud enim agit et aliud dissimulat. Et quod non sint unius poenae digni vel perditionis, manifestat illud, quod in libro beati Job dicitur: legitur enim ibidem: Simulatores et callidi provocant iram Dei. [Iob 36:13]

who simply does evil and he who does it deceitfully [simulate], that is, deviously [these people] do not deserve one and the same punishment. In other words: deceit is deviousness of the mind, because it deludes. For it does one thing and feigns another. And the fact that they do not deserve one and the same punishment or ruin is shown by this citation from the book of Job: The pretenders and the devious provoke the wrath of God [Iob 36:13].

Qui enim simpliciter malum agit, meretur iram Dei; nam qui callidi sunt et simulatores, isti non solum merentur iram Dei, sed etiam provocant iram Dei. Sed aliud est mereri, aliud provocare. Bene ergo, cum dixit simulatores subjunxit callidi, quia non possunt simulatores sine calliditate esse.

For he who simply does evil deserves God’s wrath. Those who are devious and pretenders only deserve God’s wrath but also provoke God’s wrath. But to deserve is one thing, to provoke is another. Therefore, he rightly added ‘devious’ when he said ‘pretenders,’ because they cannot be pretenders without deviousness.

Sequitur: ₁₇Declina a malo et fac bonum.

Next: ₁₇Turn from evil and do good.

Egregius enim ordo est, prius mala destrui et post bonum bona aedificari. Secundum hunc ordinem etiam Dominus locutus est ad Jeremiam dicens: Ecce posui te, ut evellas et destruas et dissipes et disperdas, [Ier 1:10] et subjunxit: et aedifices et plantes.

The order is excellent: that first evil be destroyed and afterwards good be established.¹⁶ According to this order the Lord also spoke to Jeremiah when he said: Look. I have set thee [over the nations and over the kingdoms] to root out and to pull down and to destroy and to scatter [Ie 1:10] and he added: and to build, and to plant.

Ecce in hoc loco ideo dixit quatuor mala, et duo bona, quia plus sunt mala quam bona. Similiter etiam Simeon de Domino dicit: Ecce positus est hic, in ruinam et in resurrectionem multorum in Israel. [Lc 2:34] Necnon B. Jacobus apostolus dicit: Abjicientes omnem immunditiam et abundantiam malitiae, in mansuetudine suscipite insitum verbum, quod potest salvare animas vestras. [2 Iac 1:21] Vide modo, quia, non potest bonum aedificari, nisi prius eradicatum fuerit malum.

Look, he noted in this passage four evils and two good things because there are more evils than good things. Likewise, Simeon too says about the Lord: Look, he is set up for the fall and rising again of many in Israel [Lc 2:34]. Also the blessed Apostle James says: Lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of wickedness and meekly receive the planted word that can save your souls [2 Iac 1:21]. See now that the good cannot be established unless first evil is eradicated.

Sequitur: ₁₇Inquire pacem et sequere eam.

Next: ₁₇Seek peace and pursue it.

Homo rem, quam non habet ex toto et diligit, aut ex parte habet et diligit, quam non habet, quaerit; nam illam, quam habet ex toto, non quaerit.

A person seeks the thing that he does not completely have and that he loves, or has and loves in part what he does not have. For the thing that he completely has, he does not seek.

Bene enim dixit: Inquire pacem, et [page 38] non qualemcunque habe, eo quod perfecta pax in praesenti vita non potest haberi, sed tantum inquiri, ut in futuro habeatur.

He said well: Seek peace and [page 38] do not have any kind [of it] because perfect peace cannot be had in the present life, but can only be sought so that it be had in future.

Vide modo, quia pax magna virtus est, ideo postquam dixit: Fac bonum, subsecutus est: Inquire pacem; adeo est enim pax magna virtus, ut sine illa nemo possit Deum videre. Et quod sine pace Dominum nemo possit videre, testatur Paulus apostolus, ait enim: Pacem sequimini cum omnibus hominibus et sanctimoniam, sine qua nemo videbit Deum. [Hbr 12:14]

Now you must see that peace is a great virtue. After he said: Do good he added seek peace, for peace is such a great virtue that no one can see God without it. And the Apostle bears witness to this when he says: Follow peace with all men and the holiness without which no man will see the Lord [Hbr 12:14].

Pax enim valde pernecessaria est; et quod pax valde pernecessaria sit, testatur chorus Angelorum, qui in nocte, in qua natus est Dominus, pacem hominibus commendavit, ait enim: Gloria in excelsis Deo et in terra pax hominibus. [Lc 2:14] Et reddit causam, quibus hominibus? bonae voluntatis. [Lc 2:14]

For peace is absolutely necessary. And that peace is absolutely necessary, as the choir of angels that commended peace to men in the night on which the Lord was born bore witness. It said: Glory to God in the highest and peace on earth to men [Lc 2:14]. And he gives as answer to the question: to which men? Those of good will. [Lc 2:14]

Similiter et Dominus in nocte, in qua tradebatur, antequam traderetur, pacem commendavit dicens: Pacem relinquo vobis, pacem meam do vobis. [Io 14:27] Pacem, inquit, meam relinquo vobis, ut concorditer vivatis, pacem meam do vobis, ut non dissentiatis.

Likewise, also the Lord, on the night he was being betrayed, commended peace before he was betrayed, saying: Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you [Io 14:27]. He said: Peace I leave with you so that you may live harmoniously; my peace I give you so that you not disagree.

Sequitur: ₁₈Et cum haec feceritis, oculi mei super vos et aures meae ad preces vestras.

Next: ₁₈And when you have done this, my eyes will be on you and my ears open to your prayers.

Usque modo dixit verba et sensum psalmistae; nunc autem verba dimittens sensum dicit. Nam superius dixerat, sicut psalmista: prohibe linguam tuam a malo et labia tua ne loquantur dolum, declina a malo et fac bonum, inquire pacem et persequere eam. [Ps 33:14-15]

Until now he [Benedict] expressed the words and the meaning of the psalmist, but now he says the words, leaving aside the meaning. For earlier he had said, like the psalmist: Withhold your tongue from evil and do not let your lips speak deceit, turn away from evil and do good, seek peace and follow it. [Ps 33:14-15]

Psalmista enim subjunxit post haec in vice Domini causam, qua quis debeat linguam suam a malo prohibere et labia sua a dolo et caetera, dicens: Oculi Domini super justos et aures ejus ad preces eorum. [Ps 33:16]

Speaking on behalf of the Lord, the psalmist subsequently added the reason why someone has to withhold his tongue from evil and his lips from deceit etc., saying: The eyes of the Lord [are] upon the just and his ears [are open] to their prayers. [Ps 33:16]

S. Benedictus vero verba dimittens et tenens sensum non in vice Domini, sed ipsum Dominum intromittit dicentem per semetipsum, ait enim: Et cum haec feceritis, oculi mei super vos et aures meae ad preces vestras.

But St. Benedict leaves aside the words and holds onto the meaning not on the Lord’s behalf, but introduced the Lord saying the very same thing: And when you have done this, my eyes will be upon you and my ears open to your prayers.

Nunc videndum est, qua ratione dicatur oculos Dominus habere vel aures. Non enim proprie sed translative dicitur Deus habere oculos aut aures vel manus aut caetera membra, i. e. a propria significatione ad non propriam significationem, quia proprium est hominis, manus vel pedes [page 39] vel caetera membra habere, Deo autem non proprium est; Deus enim non localis, sed ubique est; ille enim omnia videt, omnia audit. Sed scriptura divina condescendendo nobiscum Deum dicit oculos vel aures habere.

Now we have to see why the Lord is said to have eyes or ears. For he says not literally but metaphorically that God has eyes or ears or hands or other limbs. That is, [he transposes the use of these words] from their proper meaning to a not-proper meaning, because it is a trait of man [page 39] to have eyes or feet or other limbs, but this is not God’s trait. God is not of a place but everywhere. For he sees everything and hears everything. But divine scripture says that God has eyes and ears for reaching down to us.¹⁷

Et hoc nostro more loquitur, i. e. quin, nos non possumus videre et audire, nisi oculis et auribus, ut sciamus, dicitur ipsa visio divina, qua cuncta videt, oculus, et illa vis divina, qua cuncta Deus audit, dicitur auris, et illa vis divina, qua cuncta Dens operatur, dicitur manus. Nisi enim scriptura divina nostro more, sicut diximus, Dominum videre vel audire dixisset, nequaquam nos Deum videre vel audire intellexissemus.

And he speaks in our manner. That is, because we cannot see and hear him except with eyes and ears, in other that we know [him], the divine vision itself with which he sees everything is called eye, and that divine power with which God hears everything is called ear and that divine power with which God does everything is called hand. For if divine scripture had not said that the Lord sees and hears in our way, as we said, we would by no means have understood that God sees and hears us.

Sed nunc videndum est, quid per Dei respectionem intelligendum sit. Dei enim respectus duobus modis dicitur. Scriptura enim divina aut Deum dicit, quamvis raro, respicere malos, aut certe dicit respicere bonos. Sed ipsi boni cum respiciuntur a Deo, aut respiciuntur, si in peccatis sunt, ut corrigantur, aut certe si boni sunt, ut perficiant in melius. Mali vero cum respiciuntur, idcirco dicuntur respici tantum, ut puniantur.

But now we have to see, what is to be understood by God’s watching [respectio]. God’s watching is being discussed in two ways: divine scripture either says that God watches evil people – although rarely¹⁸ – or says that he certainly watches the good. But those good people, when they are watched by God, are either watched to be corrected if they are sinners, or in order that they make themselves better if they are truly good [already]. But when the evil are being watched, they are only said to be watched to be punished.

Unde per respectionem Dei in bonos respectus divinae clementiae intelligitur, in malos autem per respectionem Dei ipsa condemnatio intelligitur, quia aliter respicit in bonos, aliter vero in malos. Nos autem illam rem animadvertimus, quam diligimus, illam vero rem, quam non diligimus, intendere volumus.

Therefore, by God’s watching the good we understand the sight of divine clemency, but by God’s watching the evil, we understand condemnation, because he watches the good in one way, the evil in another. We, however, attend to (animadvertimus) what we love, but we want to turn (intendere volumus) to what we do not love. Therefore, those good people who are being watched by God are known to be loveable to God.

Unde illi boni qui a Deo respiciuntur, Deo amabiles esse comprobantur. Dicitur autem et alia visio, ut est visio Esaiae et Jeremiae, et in hoc loco, cum dicit: visio Jeremiae, subaudiendum est Domini. Nam etiam per respectionem humanitatis Christi possumus animadvertere, quid intelligi debeat per respectionem divinam; legitur enim: respexit in arborem sycomorum. [Lc 19:4] Sed ipse Evangelista reddit fructum respectionis, ubi subjunxit: Amen, dico vobis, quia hodie salus huic domui facta est. [Lc 19:9]

Also another [form of] vision is mentioned, as in ‘the vision of Isaiah’ and ‘of Jeremiah.’ And where [scripture] says: ‘the vision of Jeremiah’ we have to add ‘of the Lord’. We can also know through the watching of Christ’s humanity what ought to be understood by divine watching. We read: he watched a sycamore tree. [Lc 19:4] But the evangelist himself represented the fruit of watching when he added: Amen I say to you that today salvation came to this house. [Lc 19:9]

Necnon et alibi respexit Petrum, [page 40] et reddit causam, quare respectus est dicens: Et egressus foras flevit amare [Lc 22.62]. Nequaquam enim Petrus amare flevisset, nisi respectus esset.

Elsewhere too, he looked at Peter [page 40] and gives the reason why he was watched: And having gone outside, he wept bitterly [Lc 22:62]. Peter would have by no means wept bitterly if he had been watched.

Similiter et Zachaeus ideo respectus est a Domino, quia dicturus erat illi Dominus: Domui huic salus facta est. [Lc 19:9] Semper enim, ubi Dominus respiciebat secundum carnem, causa misericordiae suae respiciebat.

Likewise, also Zachaeus has been watched by the Lord because the Lord was about to say to him: Salvation came to this house [Lc 19:9] Always when the Lord was watching in the manner of the flesh, he was watching because of his mercy.

Et ita intelligitur respectus divinitatis, id est, sicut jam diximus, respectus divinae misericordiae. Nam etiam per oculos Dei dona S. Spiritus intelliguntur; et quod dona S. Spiritus per oculos Dei intelligantur, testatur illud, quod legitur in Apocalypsi: Septem oculos, qui sunt Spiritus missi in omnem terram. [Apc 5:6]

And in this way divine watching is understood, that is, just as we said already, as the watching of divine mercy. For by God’s eyes we mean the gifts of the Holy Spirit. What we read in the book of the Apocalypse confirms that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are understood by God’s eyes: Seven eyes that are spirits sent over the entire earth [Apc 5:6].

Et illud in Zacharia: Et vide lapidem Septem oculos habere. [Za 3:9] Per lapidem intelligitur Christus, per septem oculos Septem dona S. Spiritus.

Also the phrase in Zachariah: And see that the stone has seven eyes. [Zac 3:9] By the stone, we understand Christ; by the seven eyes we understand the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit.

Et bene per oculos Domini dona S. Spiritus intelliguntur, quia ille salvatur per respectum Dei, qui dona S. Spiritus accipit; non enim salvabitur quis, nisi dona S. Spiritus acceperit.

And rightly the gifts of the Holy Spirit are understood by 'the eyes of the Lord,' because he who receives the gifts of the Holy Spirit, is saved by God’s watching. If someone does not receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit, he will not be saved.

Nam quia per Spiritum S. gratia distribuatur, testatur Paulus apostolus, cum dicit, ait enim: divisiones gratiarum sunt, idem autem Spiritus [1 Cor 12:4] et reliqua, et pervenit usque ad illum locum, ubi subjunxit dicens: Haec autem omnia operatur unus atque idem Spiritus dividens singulis, prout vult. [1 Cor 12:11]

The apostle Paul testifies that grace is disseminated by the Holy Spirit when he says: There are differences in graces, but the same Spirit [1 Cor 12:4] and so on, and he reached the point where he added: One and the same Spirit does all these things, distributing to each one individually as he wills. [1 Cor 12:11]

Sequitur: ₁₈Et aures meae ad preces vestras.

Next: ₁₈And my ears to your prayers.

Sicut enim per oculos intelligitur respectus divinae clementiae, ita per aures Dei intelligitur facilis exauditio, ut est illud: Cum invocarem, exaudisti me Deus, [Ps 4:2] id est, in ipsa invocatione me stantem exaudisti. Nam cum omnia Deus videat et omnia audiat, tamen ubi visus Dei et aures dicuntur, respectus divinae clementiae per visum, et facilis exauditio per aures intelligitur.

Just as by the eyes we understand the watching of divine clemency, so we understand with ears the easy hearing [exauditio], as in: When I was calling, you heard me, God [Ps 42:2], that is, you have heard me as I stayed calling. For although God sees and hears everything, still, when God’s seeing and ears are mentioned, we understand the watching of the divine clemency by seeing and the easy hearing by the ears.

Sequitur: ₁₈Et antequam me invocetis, dicam vobis: Ecce adsum.

Next: ₁₈And before you call on me, I will say: “Here I am.”

Hic oritur quaestio, quid est, quod Dominus dicit: Antequam me invocetis, dicam volis: Ecce adsum, cum multos legamus atque videamus sanctos laborantes sub fasce tentationum et clamantes ad Deum liberari et nequaquam exauditos?

Here the question rises, what the Lord means by: And before you call upon me, I will say: “Here I am,” since we read and see that many saints struggle under the burden of temptations and cry to God to be delivered¹⁹ and are not heard at all.

Quod si forte dicas: nequaquam sunt sancti, qui non exaudiuntur, ideo necesse est, ut etiam ille [page 41] sanctus adhibeatur tibi in testimonium, de cujus sanctitate nemo dubitat, qui hujuscemodi oravit et non est exauditus.

But if you should say: ‘Those who are not heard are no saints at all,’ it is necessary that [page 41] this holy man be shown to you as a witness, whose sanctity is doubted by no one, [and] who prayed in such a manner and was not heard.

Ecce Paulus rogavit Deum, et non est exauditus, ait enim: Et ne magnitudo revelationum extollat me, datus est mihi stimulus carnis meae, angelus satanae, qui me colaphizet; propter quod ter Dominum rogavi, vi discederet a me. [2 Cor 12:7-8]

See, Paul asked the Lord and was not heard, for he said: And lest I should be exalted above measure by the abundance of the revelations, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me; for which reason I asked the Lord thrice that it depart from me. [2 Cor 2:7-8]

Ecce Paulus, sicut diximus, rogavit Dominum, et non est exauditus, sed tantum tarde audivit Dominum dicentem sibi: Sufficit tibi gratia mea, quin virtus in infirmitate perficitur. [2 Cor 12:9]

See, Paul, as we said, asked the Lord and was not heard, but he heard the Lord only late, saying to him: My grace is enough for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness [2 Cor 12:9].

Sed ista quaestio ita solvitur. Sancti enim, si non exaudiuntur ad votum, tamen exaudiuntur ad salutem et melius exaudiuntur, cum non exaudiuntur, quam si exaudirentur, sicuti Paulus. Ille enim est melius exauditus, cum non est exauditus, quam si exaudiretur, eo quod ille, sicut jam dictum est, exauditus est ad salutem, sed non exauditus est ad votum.

But the question is resolved in this way. If the saints are not heard with regard to prayer, they are nevertheless heard with regard to salvation. And they are better heard when they are not heard than if they were heard, just like Paul. For he was heard better when he was not heard than if he were being heard because, as has already been stated, he was heard with regard to salvation, but he was not heard with regard to prayer.

Et in hoc se cognovit Paulus apostolus exauditum esse ad salutem, cum audivit: Sufficit tibi gratia mea; nam virtus in infirmitate perficitur. [2 Cor 12:9] Et quia se cognovit esse ad salutem exauditum, ideo dicebat: Libenter gloriabor in infirmitatibus meis. [2 Cor 12:9]

And the Apostle Paul knew that he was heard with regard to salvation when he heard: My grace is enough for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness [2 Cor 12:9]. And because he knew that he had been heard with regard to his salvation, he said: I gladly take pride in my weaknesses [2 Cor 12:9].

Ecce iterum qui petit Deum castitatem, humilitatem, aut caeteras virtutes, et non exauditur ad votum, quia exauditur ad salutem.

To repeat it again: he asks God for chastity, humility and other virtues and is not heard with regard to his prayer, because he is heard with regard to his salvation.

Verbi gratia petit infantulus matrem suam panem, illa autem non illi dat, et solum non dat, verum etiam subtrahit illi. Non ideo illi non dat, quia nunquam vult dare, sed quia scit tempus, in quo melius debeat dare, et ille melius accipere. Tunc ille infantulus melius exauditur, cum non exauditur, quam si exaudiretur, quia exauditur ad salutem, si non exauditur ad votum.

[By way of] example: a small child asks his mother for bread, but she does not give it to the child, and does [not] only not give it, but even takes it away from him.²⁰ She does not give it to him, not because she does not want to give him bread at any time, but because she knows the time in which she better ought to give it and he better to receive it. Then that small child is heard better, when he is not heard than if he were heard, because he is heard with regard to its salvation if he is not heard with regard to its prayer.

Haec autem sancti scientes Deum agere, ideo non murmurant, cum non exaudiuntur, sed submittunt alas suas et stant humiles. Unde S. Augustinus dicit: Nil fixum orandum est praeter vitam aeternam, quia sicut Apostolus dicit: nam quid oremus sicut oportet, nescimus. [Rm 8:26]

Knowing that God does these things, the saints do not grumble when they are not heard but ‘lower their wings and stand humbly.’²¹ Whence St. Augustine says: Nothing specific ought to be prayed for except eternal life, just as the Apostle says: for we do not know what to pray as it is proper.²² [Rm 8:26]

Sequitur: ₁₉Quid nobis dulcius hac voce dominica invitante nos, fratres clarissimi?

Next: ₁₉What is sweeter for us, dearest brothers, than this voice of the Lord inviting us?

Consuetudo est sanctorum [page 42] praedicatorum, post doctrinam aut exhortationem aut certe orationem subjungere, quod frequentissime Paulus apostolus fecisse legitur.

It is the custom of holy [page 42] preachers to add, after their teaching or exhortation or certainly a prayer, which, as we read, the Apostle Paul has done very often.

S. vero Benedictus, quia, sicut non distabat longe a merito sanctorum, ita etiam noluit distare doctrina, propterea post doctrinam exhortationem subjunxit. [Cod. divionens. ex Marten]

St. Benedict, however, did not want to deviate from the saints concerning his teaching – as little as he stood apart from the saints in importance – and accordingly added an exhortation after his teaching.²³

Nam etiam in hoc loco consuetudinem tenuit illius, qui cibum ministrat vel tribuit; ille enim qui cibum ministrat, prius gustat de cibo et postmodum hortatur ceteros dicens: Quid dulcius, fratres, hoc cibo vel potu? Subaudiendum est: nihil.

For here he held also to the custom of one who serves or distributes food: he who serves food, first tastes from the food and then exhorts the others, saying: What is sweeter, brothers, than food or drink? We are to understand: ‘Nothing.’

Ita S. Benedictus gustavit de cibo Dei, hoc est intelligentia mandatorum ejus, et quia sapuit in palato cordis sui, hortatur etiam nos sumere dicens: Quid dulcius nobis hac voce Domini invitantis nos, fratres charissimi?

Thus St. Benedict tasted from the food of God, that is the understanding of his commandments, and because he had the taste in the palate of his heart, he exhorts us as well to take it up, saying: What is sweeter for us, dearest brothers, than this voice of the Lord inviting us?

Et in hoc loco, ubi dicit: quid dulcius? subaudiendum est; nihil. Qua voce? Illa, qua superius dixerat: Prohibe linguam tuam a malo et labia tua, ne loquantur dolum; declina a malo et fac bonum; inquire pacem et sequere eam, et cetera his similia. Necnon et illa voce, qua dictum est: Et cum haec feceritis, oculi mei super vos, et aures meae ad preces vestras, et antequam me invocetis, dicam vobis: Ecce adsum.

And where he says: ‘What is sweeter?’ we are to understand: ‘Nothing.’ With what voice? That one with which he had earlier said: ₁₇Keep your tongue from evil and let your lips speak no deceit; turn from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it and the other things like these. Also with that voice in which it was said: ₁₈And when you have done these things, my eyes will be on you and my ears open to your prayers and even before you call on me, I will say to you: “Here I am.”

In hoc enim loco notandum vobis est, quia ista dulcedo non palato corporeo, sed palato cordis percipitur; nam sicut noster homo exterior habet palatum suum vel fauces, quibus cibum vel potum degustat ita etiam noster homo interior habet palatum suum vel fauces, quibus cibum spiritalem percipit.

Here you have to note that that sweetness is not perceived with the corporal palate, but with the palate of the heart. For just as our outer man has his palate or throat with which he tastes food or drink, just so also our inner man has a palate or throat with which he perceives the spiritual food.

Et quod noster homo interior habet fauces, testatur psalmista, qui ait: Gustate et videte, quoniam suavis est Dominus. [Ps 33:9] Et, iterum: Quam, dulcia faucibus meis eloquia tua. [Ps 118:103]

The psalmist, too, bears witness that our inner man has a throat when he says: Taste and see that the Lord is sweet. [Ps 33:9] And again: How sweet for my throat are your words. [Ps 118:103]

Non enim in hoc loco de faucibus corporeis, sed de faucibus cordis dicit, quia eloquia Domini non in faucibus corporeis sed cordis sapiunt, quia, sicut jam diximus, palato corporeo percipitur cibus et potus temporalis, ita, etiam palato cordis percipitur cibus spiritalis.

For he does not speak here about a corporal throat, but about the throat of the heart, because the speeches of the Lord do not have taste in the corporal throat but, as we already said, just as temporal food and drink is perceived with the corporal palate, so too is spiritual food perceived with the palate of the heart.

Sequitur: ₂₀Ecce pietate sua demonstrat nobis Dominus viam vitae.

Next: ₂₀Look: the Lord in his love shows us the way of life.

Nos enim, cum aliquid digito monstramus, ecce! [page 43] dicimus, quia ecce adverbium demonstrantis est. S. vero Benedictus, quia superius exempla posuit, in quibus nos Dominus admonet bene agere, ecce! demonstrando dixit. Nam bene dixit: pietate sua, quia nullus suo merito salvatur; nam postquam in Adam expulsi sumus de paradiso, tota massa humani generis periit.

When we show something with the finger, we say: Look! [page 43], because look! is an interjection of someone who shows [something]. But because St. Benedict had earlier given examples by which the Lord urges us to do well, he said look! by way of demonstration. He rightly said in his love, because no one is saved by his own merit, for after we were driven out of paradise in Adam, the entire mass of the human race died.

Nunc vero qui ex illa salvatur, non suo merito, sed pietate et misericordia Dei salvatur. S. vero Benedictus sciens hoc, idcirco dixit: pietate sua, ac si diceret: non nostro merito, sed pietate sua demonstrat vobis viam vitae, qua redeamus ad vitam.

But the one who is now saved from it [i.e. from death] is not saved by his own merit but by the love and mercy of God. Knowing this, St. Benedict said: in his love, as if he were saying: ‘not by our merit, but in his love he shows you the way of life by which we may return to life.’

Sequitur: ₂₁Subcinctis ergo fide vel observantia bonorum actuum lumbis nostris et calciati in praeparatione evangelii pacis pergamus itinera ejus.

Next: ₂₁Therefore, our loins girded with faith and the practice of good works and shod in preparation for the gospel of peace, let us set forth on his path.

Intuendum est enim in hoc loco, cujus consuetudinem tenet B. Benedictus, cum dicit: succinctis lumbis. Morem tenet ducis mittentis militem suum ad bellum; dux enim cum mittit militem suum ad proelium, hortatur illum subcinctos lumbos habere, quia si subcinctos lumbos non habuerit, impedientur gressus ejus vestibus dissolutis, et ex hoc nequaquam poterit in hostem irruere vel ab hoste eripi.

We have to understand here whose custom St. Benedict follows, when he says: our loins girded. He assumes the role of a general sending his soldier to war. When the general sends his soldier to war, he urges him to have his loins girded, because, if he does not have his loins girded, his steps will be hindered by his loose clothes, and because of this he will not at all be able to rush against the enemy or will be captured by the enemy.

Ita, B. Benedictus in hoc loco facere comprobatur. Ille vero, quia mittit auditorem suum contra invisibilem hostem, idcirco hortatur illum, subcinctos lumbos habere, quia, sicut jam diximus, si subcinctos lumbos non habuerit, nequaquam contra hostem suum praevalebit irruere vel ab illo eripi.

Here St. Benedict approves doing likewise. Because he sends his listener out against an invisible enemy, he urges him to have his loins girded, because, as we already said, if he does not have loins girded, he will not be able to rush against his enemy at all or be captured by him.

Videndum est etiam nunc, de quibus lumbis in hoc loco dicat S. Benedictus. Numquid de carnalibus lumbis dicit? Non; nam nequaquam aliquid magni diceret, si de carnalibus lumbis dixisset, cum est consuetudo paene omnium, subcinctos lumbos habere, sed scriptura divina solet aliquid spiritaliter designare per quem omnium est facere consuetudo, sicuti est illud, quod Dominus in evangelio dicit: Tu autem cum jejunas, unge caput tuum et faciem tuam lava. [Mt 6:17]

Now we have to see too about what loins St. Benedict is talking here. Does he speak about carnal loins? No, for he would by no means something important if he had spoken of carnal loins, because it is the custom of almost everyone to have the loins girded. divine scripture usually describes something in a spiritual way through that which everyone usually does.²⁴ Just as [in] this quotation in the gospel, where the Lord says: When you fast, anoint your head and wash your face. [Mt 6:17]

Omnes enim faciem suam lavant; caput enim ungere pertinet ad laetitiam spiritalem, id est, cum quis aliquid boni agit, gaudet in spiritali in [page 44] tentione, quia id agendo subtrahitur ab amore terreno. Lavare enim faciem, pertinet ad munditiam mentis.

For all people wash their faces. Anointing the head is part of spiritual joy, that is, when someone does something good, he rejoices with a spiritual purpose [page 44], because by doing this, he is drawn away from earthly love. For washing the face refers to the cleanliness of the mind.

Ita et in hoc loco per lumbos subcinctos aliquid nobis scriptura divina spiritaliter innuit; nam hoc, quod dixit B. Benedictus, subcinctos lumbos et calciatos pedes evangelii habere, de Pauli apostoli epistola ad Ephesios data sumpsit [cf. Eph 6:14-15].

Thus, also in this place divine scripture signifies by the loins girded something to us in a spiritual way; for what St. Benedict calls having the loins girded and the feet of the gospel shod, he took from the letter of the Apostle Paul given to the Ephesians. [Eph 6:14-15]

Paulus enim apostolus prius admonuerat unumquemque singillatim, id est virum et uxorem, filios et parentes, servos et dominos; deinde pervenit ad cum locum, ubi postea generali admonitione omnes admonuit dicens: De caetero, fratres, confortamini in Domino, et in potentia virtutis ejus. Induite vos armaturam Dei, ut possitis resistere in die mala et in omnibus perfecti stare. State ergo subcincti lumbos vestros in veritate et induti loricam justitiae et calciati pedes in praeparatione Evangelii pacis. [Eph 6:10, 13-15]

For the Apostle Paul had first urged each and everyone individually, that is, husband and wife, children and parents, slaves and masters; then he came to the place where he in a general admonition urged all, saying: Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm. Stand, therefore, having girded your loins with truth, having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace [Eph 6:10, 13-15].

Ac si diceret: Scio vos exercitatum hostem habere, et idcirco vos adhortor, ut non in vestris viribus sed in Dei omnipotentis virtute confidatis.

It is as if he were saying: ‘I know that you have a trained enemy and I urge you therefore not to trust in your own powers, but rely on the power of the almighty God.’

Haec autem succinctio lumborum non tantum in libro Job reperitur, ubi ait Dominus ad Job: Accinge sicut vir lumbos tuos; interrogabo te, et responde mihi; [Iob 38:3, 40:2] verum etiam in Evangelio haec succinctio lumborum invenitur; ait enim Dominus: Sint lumbri vestri praecincti et lucernae ardentes in manibus vestris. [Lc 12:35]

This girding of the loins is found not only in the book of Job, where the Lord says to Job: Gird your loins like a man; I will ask you; answer me [Iob 38:3, 40:2], but also in the gospel this girding of the loins is found, for the Lord says: Let your loins be girded and lamps burn in your hands. [Lc 12:35]

Nam ista succinctio lumborum varie intelligitur a magnis praedicatoribus. Alii quidem intelligunt per succinctionem lumborum refraenationem delectationis carnalis, alii autem per succinctionem lumborum intelligunt coercitionem omnium vitiorum, nonnulli vero per succinctionem lumborum intelligunt compressionem vanae gloriae, quia sicut isti, qui non refraenant (secundum quosdam) delectationem carnalem, aut etiam non refraenant delectationem (secundum multos) omnium vitiorum, non [page 45] dicuntur lumbos succinctos habere, ita etiam et hi non dicuntur succinctos lumbos habere, qui de superatis vitiis superbiunt vel intumescunt.

This girding of the loins is understood in a variety of ways by the great preachers. Some understand by girding of the loins the bridling of carnal delight, others, however, understand by girding of the loins the restraining of all faults, but some understand by the girding of the loins the suppression of vainglory because just as those who do not bridle (according to some) carnal delight, or do not even bridle the delight (according to many) of all faults, are not [page 45] considered to have their loins girded, just so are those people not considered to have their loins girded who, become proud or arrogant concerning faults overcome.

Verum etiam intuendum est in hoc loco, qualiter B. Benedictus dixit praecinctos lumbos habere; ait enim: succintis fide vel observantia bonorum actuum lumbis vestris.

But we need also to see here how St. Benedict spoke of having the loins girded. For he said: your loins girded with faith and the practice of good works.

Bene enim dixit fide et observantia bonorum actuum, eo quod omnia illa, quae ab aliis intellecta sunt, in fide et observantia bonorum actuum consistunt; nam pulchre, postquam dixit fide, subjunxit bonorum actuum, quia unum sine altero nil proficit. Nam quod fides sine operibus nil sit utile, testatur Jacobus apostolus, qui dicit: Fides sine operibus mortua est. [Iac 2:20/26]

He rightly said with faith and the practice of good works because everything that has been understood by others consists of faith and the practice of good works. He beautifully added of good works after he said faith, because the one cannot succeed at all without the other. The apostle James bears witness of the fact that faith without works is not useful at all, when he says: Faith without works is dead. [Iac 2:26]

Et quod opus similiter sine fide nihil valeat, idem ipse B. Jacobus (?) testatur dicens: Impossibile est, enim, sine fide placere Deo. [Hbr 11:6]

And that, similarly, faith without works avails nothing is testified by the same St. James [sic!] as he says: It is impossible to please God without faith. [Hbr 11:6]

Et bene post succinctionem lumborum calciatos pedes in praeparatione Evangelii pacis hortatur suum auditorem habere, quia, sicut diximus, morem ducis tenet; dux enim primum hortatur suum militem succinctos lumbos habere, deinde calciatos pedes, ne pungatur spinis aut offendat in lapidem, et ex hoc debilitato toto corpore non poterit contra hostem suum dimicare vel ab illo eripi.

And he rightly urges after girding the loins that his listener have the feet shod in preparation of the gospel of peace, because, as we said, he assumes the role of a general. A general urges first his soldier to have his loins girded, then his feet shod, lest he be stung by thorns or stumble against a stone, and will not be able to fight against his enemy or will be captured by him because his body has been weakened by this.

Ita, et B. Benedictus; ille enim, qui auditorem suum contra invisibilem et exercitatum hostem dirigit, ideo hortatur illum pedes suos calciatos, i. e. munitos habere, ne forte debilitetur coram inimico suo. Notandum est etiam, quia non de exterioris hominis pedibus dicit sed interioris, quia sicut noster homo exterior habet pedes suos, in quibus movetur, ita interior homo. Et quod homo noster interior habeat pedes, testatur psalmista, cum dicit: Lucerna pedibus meis verbum tuum. [Ps 118:105]

Thus St. Benedict [does] also. For he who leads his listener against an invisible and trained enemy, urges him to have his feet shod, that is, strengthened, lest perchance he be weakened in the face of his enemy. We have to note here too that he does not speak about the feet of the outer man, but of the inner, because, just as the outer man has feet with which he moves, so too does the inner man. And that our inner man has feet is testified by the psalmist, when he says: Your word – a torch for my feet. [Ps 118:105]

Non enim de exterioris hominis pedibus dicit sed interioris, quia nullum lumen praebent divinae scripturae exterioris hominis pedibus ambulantibus in tenebris, sed magis offendiculum, in quod offendant.

He does not speak about the feet of the outer person but the inner, because the divine scriptures do not provide any light for the feet of the outer man walking in darkness, but rather a stumbling-block over which they trip.

Unde sicut indiget homo noster exterior lumine temporali ambulans in tenebris, quia sine illo non valet iter suum peragere in tenebris, ita etiam [page 46] noster homo ambulans hoc nocturnum iter hujus vitae praesentis, quae aeternae vitae comparata mors est potius dicenda quam vita, indiget lucerna spiritali, scilicet verbo Dei, ut valeat hanc praesentem vitam sine offendiculo pertransire, eo quod sine illo lumine, hoc est verbo Dei errat in praesenti vita, sicuti et ille exterior homo, cum in tenebris absque lumine ambulat, errat.

Therefore, just as our outer person needs temporal light as he walks in darkness, because he is not able to make his journey in darkness without it, just so [page 46] our inner person, walking in this nocturnal journey of this present life – which, compared with the eternal life, we must rather call death than life – needs a spiritual torch, namely the word of God so as to be able to pass trough this present life without a stumbling-block, because without that light, that is God’s word, he errs in the present life, just as that outer man wanders when walks in darkness without light.

Horum enim pedes propheta videbat, quando sub admiratione dicebat: O quam speciosi pedes evangelizantium pacem. [Rm 10:15; Is 52:7; Na 1:15]

The prophet was looking at their feet when he marveled saying: How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace. [Rm 10:15; Is 52:7; Na 1:15]

Pacis enim ideo adjectionem fecit B. Benedictus, ut declararet, cujus evangelii esset illa praeparatio, i. e. pacis.

St. Benedict added of peace in order to reveal of what gospel this was a preparation, namely [the gospel] of peace.

Et bene dixit ergo, cum dixit: Succinctis ergo lumbis nostris et calciatis pedibus; succinctio enim lumborum tribus modis potest intelligi, sive subjugatio luxuriae, sive refraenatio vanae gloriae, vel etiam compressio omnium vitiorum.

And he therefore spoke well when he said our loins girded and our feet shod, for the girding of loins can be understood in three ways: either as subjugation of luxury, or bridling of vainglory, or even the suppression of all faults.

Per calciatos enim pedes intelliguntur exempla sanctorum.

By the shod feet we understand the examples of the saints.

Et bene, cum dixit: succinctis lumbis, subjecit: et calciatis pedibus pergamus itinera ejus, i. e. refraenata delectatione carnali vel compressis omnibus vitiis sive subjugata vana gloria et vestigiis nostris, hoc est gressibus mentis nostrae munitis sanctorum exemplis, pergamus itinera ejus.

And when he said our loins girded, he rightly added and let us with shod feet set forth on his path, that is, after carnal delight has been bridled or all faults have been suppressed or vainglory has been subjugated or our footsteps – that is: the paces of our mind – have been strengthened by the examples of the saints, let us set forth on his path.

Ergo enim, sicut jam diximus, ubi invenitur, ex superioribus pendet. Et est sensus, cum dixit ergo, id est, si ita est, ut, qui prohibuerit linguam suam a malo et labiis suis non locutus fuerit dolum et declinaverit a malo et fecerit bonum et inquisierit pacem ac secutus fuerit illam, oculi Domini super illum sint et aures ejus ad precem suam, et Dominus, antequam illum invocaverit, dicat: Ecce adsum tibi: nos ergo succinctis lumbis et pedibus calciatis faciamus, quae ille praecepit, ut nobis talia contingant.

Therefore, as we said already, when it is found [in a text], it refers to what has been said before. And the meaning of therefore is this that he who will have restrained his tongue from evil and will not have spoken deceit with his lips and turned away from evil and done good and sought peace and pursued it: may the eyes of the Lord be upon him and his ears open to his prayer and may the Lord, before [the man] calls him [God] say: Look! Here I am for you. Let us therefore, our loins girded and our feet shod, do what he teaches so that such things happen to us.

Sequitur: ₂₁Pergamus itinera ejus. Itinera ejus, non nostra pergamus, quia ejus itinera ad vitam, nostra autem ducunt ad mortem.

Next: ₂₁let us set forth on his path. Let us go forth on his path, not ours, because his path leads to life, our path, however, to death.

Sequitur: Ut mereamur cum, qui nos vocavit, in regno suo videre.

Next: ₂₁so that we may deserve to see him in his kingdom²⁵ he who has called us.

De hac visione, qua nobis B. Benedictus nunc [page 47] narrat Dominum videre in regno suo, Dominus in Evangelio dicit; ait enim: Beati mundo corde, quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt. [Mt 5:8]

Concerning this vision about which St. Benedict tells us [page 47] that we see the Lord in his kingdom, the Lord says in the gospel: Blessed are the pure of heart, for they will see God [Mt 5:8].

Et hoc etiam notandum, quia quod in Evaugelio dicitur per futurum tempus, i. e. videbunt, hic B. Benedictus dixit suo, quia non in praesenti vita Deus videtur, sed in futura, h. e. in regno suo.

Also this must be noted, that what is said in the Gospel in the future tense, i.e. ‘they will see,’ St. Benedict said here ‘his’ because God is not seen in the present life, but in the future life, that is in his kingdom.

Hoc etiam iterum notandum est, quia haec visio spiritalis est, quia ille, qui videtur, spiritus est et a spiritalibus videbitur.

Again, we have to notice here too that this vision is spiritual, because he who is seen is spirit and will be seen by spiritual beings.

Similiter etiam hoc notandum est, quod ista visio non aequaliter omnibus tribuitur. Et quod non aequaliter omnibus tribuatur, testatur Dominus, qui dicit: In domo patris mei mansiones multae sunt. [Io 14:2]

Likewise, we also have to notice that this vision is not equally bestowed on everyone. The Lord testifies too that it is not equally bestowed on everyone when he says: In my father’s house are many mansions. [Io 14:2]

Mansiones ideo dixit multas propter disparia merita. Et quamquam non aequaliter haec visio propter dissimilia merita tribuatur; tamen una visio erit, sicut unum regnum.

He said many mansions because of the dissimilar merits. And although this vision is not equally bestowed on account of dissimilar merits, still it will be one [single] vision, just as [there will be] one kingdom.

Et hoc etiam est notandum, quia, cum dicitur videre, non ita dicitur, ut videatur Deus, sicut aliqua res materialis oculis videtur, sed istud videre ponitur pro intelligere. Et hoc, quod diximus, quia Deus non aequaliter videatur, id est intelligatur, possumus animadvertere in rege terreno.

We also have to notice here that, when he says to see, he does not mean that God is seen in the same way as some material thing is seen with the eyes, but he uses this seeing to mean understanding. And we can, as we said before, observe that God is not seen, that is understood, just as by the example of an earthly king.

Rex enim quamquam intelligatur ab omnibus, quia rex est, tamen non aequaliter ab omnibus intelligitur ejus qualitas; alii enim sunt, qui eum intelligunt plus, alii minus, id est tantum unusquisque eum intelligit, quantum se ipse permittit intelligi. ita et Deus; Deus enim in uno semper tenore consistit, sed tamen non aequaliter ab omnibus intelligitur, quia non omnium aequalia merita sunt.

Although everyone understands the meaning of ‘king’ – still it is not equally understood by all what kind of king he is; for there are some people who understand him more, and others less. That is, anyone understands him to such a degree as he himself allows himself [se] to be understood. This is the case with God. For God always exists in one way [tenor], but is nevertheless not understood equally by all people, because the merits of all people are not equal.

Haec autem visio non erit fastidialis sed concupiscibilis. Et quod haec visio non erit fastidialis, sed concupiscibilis, testatur Petrus apostolus, qui dicit, ait enim: In quem concupiscunt angeli prospicere. [1 Pt 1:12] Ista visio erit sanctis refectio et claritas atque regnum.

This vision, however, will not be despicable²⁶ but desirable. And the Apostle Peter testifies that this vision will not be despicable but desirable when he says: at whom the angels desire to look [1 Pt 1:12]. That vision will be refreshment for the saints and splendor and kingdom.

Et forte dicit aliquis: ‘Quomodo ista visio a spiritalibus videbitur, cum nos in corporibus nostris videbimus Deum?’ sicut scriptum est: Et videbit omnis caro salutare Dei. [Lc 3:6] Non videbitur Deus corporalibus oculis, sed tantum spiritalibus sensibus et oculis intelligitur.

And perhaps someone says: ‘How will that vision be seen by spiritual beings when we will see God in our bodies?’ It is written: And all flesh will see the salvation of God [Lc 3:6]. God will not be seen with corporal eyes, but only understood with the spiritual senses and eyes.

Nam qualia erunt corpora sanctorum, docet B. Augustinus, cum de novitate corporis spiritalis [page 48], in qua sanctorum caro mutabitur, (tractat et dicit: tale erit,) quale erit corpus, quod omnino spiritui subditum et eo sufficienter vivificatum nullis alimoniis indigebit. [cf. Augustine, Retractationes I, ch. 13.4, CCSL 57, p. ?]

For Augustine teaches of what kind the bodies of the saints will be, when he discusses the new state of the spiritual body [page 48] into which the flesh of the saints will be changed: It will be such as the body will be, because it will be completely subject to the spirit and, sufficiently enlivened by it, it will need no nourishment at all [cf. Augustine, Retractationes I, ch. 13.4].

Non enim animale sed spiritale erit, habens quidem carnis, sed sine ulla carnali corruptione, substantiam.

It will not be animal but spiritual, having the substance of flesh but without any carnal corruption.

Ideo enim non est credendum, ut Deus corporalibus oculis videatur, quia non est Deus localis, ut aliquam similitudinem habeat, sed spiritus est, qui omnia in se comprehendit et continet.

Therefore, we should not believe that God is seen with corporal eyes, because God is not place-bound, so that he has some kind of image [similitudo] but he is a spirit who understands everything and contains everything in himself.

Et quod non sit Deus localis, docet B. Augustinus dicens: Quod alicubi enim est, continetur, quod continetur loco, corpus est. Deus autem non est corpus, non igitur alicubi est. Et tamen, qui est et in loco non est, in illo potius sunt omnia, quam ille alicubi. Nec tamen ita in illo, ut ipse sit locus; locus enim in spatio est, quod longitudine, latitudine, altitudine corporis occupatur, nec Deus tale, aliquid est.

Saint Augustine teaches that God is not place-bound, saying: For what is at some place, is contained [by the place]. What is contained by a place, is a body. God, however, is not a body, because he is not at any place. And yet: all things are in him who is not in a place, rather than that he is in some place. Nor are all things in him in such a way that he himself is a place. For a place is in space occupied by the length, width, and height of a body. And God is not such a thing.

Et omnia igitur in ipso sunt, et locus non est. Locus tamen abusive dicitur templum Dei, non quod eo contineatur, sed quod ei praesens sit; id autem nihil, melius quam munda anima intelligitur. [Augustine, De diversis quaestionibus octaginta tribus, CCSL 44, p. 20 CHECK]

Therefore all things are in him and he is not a place. The temple of God is nevertheless erroneously called a place, not because he is contained in it, but because he is present in it. In the understanding of this, however, nothing excels the pure soul. [Augustine, De diversis quaestionibus octaginta tribus]

Sequitur: ₂₂In cujus regni tabernaculo si volumus habitare, nisi illuc bonis actibus curratur, minime pervenitur.

Next: ₂₂If we want to live in the dwelling-place of his kingdom, we will not reach it unless we press forward in good works.

Superius enim dixerat: in regno suo videre, nunc vero ejusdem regni facit mentionem cum adjectione tabernaculi.

He had said earlier: to see in his kingdom. Now, however, he makes mention of that same kingdom with the addition of dwelling-place.

Intelligens B. Benedictus contra opinionem ceterorum sanctorum, idem esse regnum et tabernaculum, ideo dixit: in cujus regni tabernaculo si volumus habitare, veluti quis dicit alicui iter agenti: Ingens palatium et magna domus ad habitandum est in illo loco, et nisi currendo ieris, non poteris illuc pervenire.

Because St. Benedict understood that kingdom and dwelling-place are identical – thus going against the opinion of the other saints – he said If we want to live in the dwelling-place of his kingdom as if someone said to another who made a journey: ‘Over there is a huge palace and a great house to live in, and if you do not start running, you will not be able to get there.’

Ita B. Benedictus facit, cum dicit: tabernaculum vel regnum Dei, et subjunxit: nisi illuc bonis actibus curratur, minime pervenitur.

St. Benedict speaks in like manner when he says: the dwelling-place or kingdom of God, and added we will not reach it unless we press forward in good works.

Sed ille, qui palatium denuntiat, vel sero vel tarde dicit illuc pervenire, B. vero Benedictus ex toto denegat, illuc posse quemquam pervenire, nisi bonis actibus illuc curratur. Quapropter nullus illuc pervenire, nisi bonis actibus currendo venerit. [page 49]

But when he who proclaims the palace says that he arrives there late or slowly, St. Benedict wholly denies that he is able to reach it, unless he will press forward in good works. Therefore no one will reach it unless by pressing forward in good works. [page 49]

Sequitur: ₂₃Sed interrogemus cum propheta Dominum dicentes ei, ac si diceret aliis verbis: jam postquam cognovimus tabernaculum, necesse nobis est, ut interrogemus Dominum cum propheta suo: Qui sunt illi, qui in ejus tabernaculo habitant, vel per quam viam potest quis illuc pervenire?

Next: ₂₃But let us ask the Lord, along with the prophet, saying to him, as if he were saying in other words: ‘Now, after we know the dwelling-place, it is necessary for us to ask the Lord, along with his prophet: Who are they who live in his dwelling-place and by which path can someone reach it?’

Sequitur: Domine! quis habitabit in tabernaculo tuo, aut quis requiescet in monte sancto tuo?

Next: ₂₃Lord, who will live in your dwelling-place and who will rest on your holy mountain?

Haec locutio sub una interrogatione debet dici, id est: Domine! Quis habitabit in tabernaculo tuo, aut quis requiescet in monte sancto tuo? Nunc videndum est, quid sit tabernaculum aut mons, et quare prius tabernaculum et postmodum montem dicit? aut quare in tabernaculo habitare et in monte requiescere? Tabernaculum enim dicitur domus non habens fixum fundamentum, quod ad libitum movetur, sicuti fuit illud, quod Moyses in deserto fecit, quod ad placitum portabatur.

 This phrase ought to be said as one single question, that is Lord! Who will live in your dwelling-place and who will rest on your holy mountain? Now we have to see what is the dwelling-place or mountain and why he first says dwelling-place and then mountain. Or why live in the dwelling-place and rest on the mountain? For a house that has no fixed foundation is called dwelling-place; it is moved at will like the one that Moses made in the desert, which was being carried as it pleased.

Et per tabernaculum enim intelligitur praesentis peregrinatio ecclesiae. Ecce videmus multas ecclesias, quae periturae sunt, nec non et nos, qui ecclesia sumus, transituri sumus.

And by dwelling-place we understand the pilgrimage of the present church. Look, we see many churches that will perish, and also we, who are the church, will pass.

Per montem autem intelligitur coelestis Jerusalem.

By mountain the heavenly Jerusalem is understood. And Benedict rightly first said church and then mountain, because we reach the heavenly Jerusalem through the pilgrimage of the present church.

Et bene prius ecclesiam et postmodum montem dixit, quia per praesentis ecclesiae peregrinationem pervenitur ad coelestem Jerusalem. Nam bene in tabernaculo habitare et in monte requiescere dicit, quia in hac praesentis ecclesiae peregrinatione habitatio est, non requies; in coelesti autem Jerusalem requies est. Aliud est enim habitare, et aliud requiescere; potest enim habitare et non requiescere.

So he rightly says to live in the dwelling-place and to rest on the mountain, because in the pilgrimage of the present church there is living, not rest. In the heavenly Jerusalem there is rest, however. Living is one thing, resting another. It is possible to live and not rest.

Sequitur: ₂₄Post hanc interrogationem, fratres, audiamus Dominum respondentem et ostendentem nobis viam ipsius tabernaculi dicens, id est, non ab aliquo homine vel ab angelo, sed ab ipso Domino nobis respondente audiamus viam tabernaculi, qua quis possit illuc pervenire.

Next: ₂₄After this question, brothers, let us hear the Lord in reply, showing us the way to his dwelling-place, ₂₅saying, that is: ‘[let us hear] not from some person²⁷ or angel, but from the Lord himself as he answers us, let us hear the way to his dwelling-place, through which one can reach it.’

Sequitur: ₂₅Qui ingreditur sine macula. [Ps 14:2]

Next: ₂₅It is he who sets out without fault. [Ps.14:2]

Ecce prima vox est ostendentis viam tabernaculi, cum dicit: Qui ingreditur sine macula; ingredi enim inchoanti viam carpere convenit. [page 50]

Look, the first statement is about the one who shows the way to his dwelling-place, when he says: It is he who sets out without fault; for to set out is used for someone who begins to take a road.

Vide modo, quod hic dicit: Qui ingreditur sine macula.

Now, see that he says: He who set outs without fault.

In alio psalmo dicit: Beati immaculati in via, qui ambulant in lege Domini; [Ps 118:1] non est enim beatus, nisi immaculatus, et ille est immaculatus, qui in via ambulat; via enim praecepta Dei, intelliguntur; ergo ille est beatus, qui in via, i. e. in lege Dei ambulando immaculatus existit.

In another psalm [page 50] it says: Blessed are the faultless on the road who walk in the law of the Lord. [Ps 118:1] For no one is blessed unless he is faultless, and he who walks on the road is faultless. For by “road” we understand the teachings of the Lord. Therefore, he is blessed who leads a faultless life by walking on the road, that is in the law of God.

Sive etiam sicut Cassiodorus dicit: Beati immaculati in via, qui ambulant in lege, i. e. qui aut non peccant aut per gratiam coelestem digna sibi satisfactione prospiciunt. [Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum 118:1, CCSL 98, p. 1060]

Or as Cassiodorus put it: Blessed are the faultless on the road who walk in the law, that is who do not sin and provide for themselves with worthy satisfaction through heavenly grace [Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum 118:1].

Forte dicit aliquis: ‘sufficit mihi, ut sine macula sim, i. e. ut non operer solum modo malum’. Non enim sufficit tibi, frater, tantum modo sine macula esse, quia ille, qui dixit: ₂₅qui ingreditur sine macula, subjunxit etiam: et operatur justitiam.

Perhaps someone says: ‘It is enough for me to be without fault, that is simply do no evil.’ It is not enough for you, brother, only to be without fault, because he who said: he who sets out without fault, also added: ₂₅and exercises justice.

Nunc videndum est, quare dixit: operatur justitiam, et non dixit: operatur castitatem aut orationem aut jejunium? Ideo dixit justitiam et non castitatem aut jejunium aut orationem, quia ille, qui operatur castitatem, se adjuvat sua castitate, et non alterum; similiter qui orat; vel jejunat, se et non alterum laetificat. Nam qui justitiam operatur, magis alterum quam se adjuvat.

Now we have to see why he said: exercises justice and did not say: exercises chastity or prayer or fasting. He said justice and not chastity or fasting or prayer, because he who exercises chastity helps himself with his chastity, not another. Likewise he who prays or fasts makes himself happy, not another. [But] he who exercises justice helps another more than himself.

Verbi gratia, habes patrem potentem, et ille opprimit pauperem, tu autem si jejunas vel oras aut castitatem habes, quid illum pauperem adjuvat tua oratio aut jejunium aut castitas? si vero inter patrem tuum et illum pauperem justitiam feceris, tunc magis illum quam te adjuvabit tua justitia.

Say, for example, that you have a powerful father and he oppresses a poor man. If you keep the fast or pray or are chaste, what good does your prayer or fasting or chastity do for that poor man? But if you make justice between your father and that poor man, then you will help him with your justice more than yourself.

Sequitur: ₂₆Qui loquitur veritatem in corde suo.

Next: ₂₆Who speaks the truth in his heart.

Bene dixit: in corde suo, quia sunt multi, qui veritatem in ore loquuntur et non in corde, et sunt multi, qui in corde tantum et non in ore veritatem loquuntur.

He rightly said: in his heart, because there are many who speak truth with their mouth and not in their heart, and there are many who only speak truth in their heart and not with their mouth.

Et propterea subjunxit: Qui non egit dolum in lingua sua. Nam si loquaris in ore tantum et non in corde, non ambulabis perfecta in via Dei, quae ducit ad tabernaculum sive montem; et sive loquaris in corde tantum et non in ore, non ambulas in via Dei, quamquam pejor sit ille, qui in ore tantum et non in corde, quam ille, qui in corde et non in ore loquitur veritatem.

And therefore he added: ₂₅Who has practiced no deceit with his tongue. For if you speak only with your mouth and not in your heart, you will not walk on God’s perfect road that leads to the dwelling-place or the mountain. And if you should speak only in your heart and not with your mouth, you are not walking on God’s road -- although he who only speaks with his mouth and not in his heart is worse than he who speaks the truth in his heart and not with his mouth.

Et quia vult te Deus perfecte in via Dei ambulare, ideo cum dixit: qui loquitur veritatem [page 51] in corde suo, subjunxit: qui non egit dolum in lingua sua.

And since God wants you to walk in perfection on God’s road, when Benedict said: he who speaks the truth [page 51] in his heart, he added: who has not practiced deceit with his tongue.

Sequitur: ₂₇Qui non fecit proximo suo malum. [Ps 14:3]

Next: ₂₇Who has done his neighbour no harm. [Ps 14:3]

Nunc videndum est, (quis?) quid sit noster proximus. Proximus noster est secundum quosdam, qui nobis miseretur, propter illum parabolam, quam Dominus proposuit de illo, qui descendit in Jericho dicens: Homo quidam descendebat ab Jerusalem in Jericho et incidit in latrones [Lc 10:30] et reliqua, et pervenit usque ad illum locum, ubi subjunxit dicens: Quis horum trium videtur tibi proximus fuisse illi, qui incidit in latrones? At ille dixit: Qui fecit misericordiam cum illo. Et ait illi Jesus: Vade et tu fac similiter. [Lc 10:36-37]

ow we must see who is our neighbour. Our neighbour is, some people say, he who feels sorrow for us in accordance with that parable the Lord told about the man who descended to Jericho. The Lord said: A certain man was descending from Jerusalem to Jericho and ran into robbers, [Lc 10:30] etc. and he reached the point [in the story] where he added: Who of these three seems to you to have been the neighbour to him who ran into the robbers? And he said: He who had mercy with him. And Jesus told him: Go and you, too, do likewise. [Lc 10:36-37]

Alii quidem dicunt: ‘Proximus noster est omnis christianus propter illud , quia unum patrem habemus in coelo’. Alii dicunt, ‘proximum nostrum esse omnem hominem, quia omnes unum patrem terrenum habemus Adam’. Sed in hoc loco de omni homine dicitur proximus noster; et est sensus, cum dicit: qui non fecit proximo suo malum, i. e. qui nulli homini fecit malum.

Other people say: ‘Every person is a neighbour, because we all have Adam as earthly father.’ Here, then, every person is called our neighbour. That is what [Benedict] means when he says: who has done his neighbour no harm, that is, he has done no harm to a single person.

Et tamen, sicut Beda dicit, juxta litteram manifestat Domini sententia, nullum nobis amplius, quam qui miseretur, esse proximum, si Jerosolimitae civi non sacerdos, non levita ex ea gente, sed accola, quia magis misertus est, factus est proximus.

And yet, as Bede says, according to the letter the speech of the Lord reveals that no one is more closely our neighbour than the one who takes pity: not a priest, nor a Levite from that people, but a foreigner [accola] has become the neighbour to that citizen of Jerusalem, because he took pity more.

Sequitur: ₂₇Qui opprobrium non accepit adversus proximum suum.

Next: ₂₇Who does not accept abuse against his neighbour.

Hunc enim versum B. Hieronymus intelligit dicens: Ille enim non accipit opprobrium adversus proximum suum, qui nullum laesit, neminem nocuit, neminem scandalizavit, ut ab illo debuisset accipere opprobrium. [source not identified]

St. Jerome understands this verse [thus], saying: For he does not accept abuse against his neighbour who has hurt no one, harmed no one, scandalized no one in such a way that he had to receive abuse from him.²⁸

Sed difficile est; et quamquam difficile sit, tamen inveniuntur duo sine querela, de quibus scriptura divina dicit: Erant ambo sine querela. [cf. Lc 1:6]

But is it difficult, and although it is difficult, there are nevertheless two people found without a quarrel, about whom divine scripture says: They both were without quarrel. [cf. Lc 1:6]

Aliter, ille accipit opprobrium adversus proximum suum, qui libenter malum de proximo suo audit.

Alternatively, he who gladly hears evil about his neighbour accepts abuse against his neighbour.

Sequitur: ₂₈Qui malignum diabolum aliqua suadentem sibi cum ipsa suasione sua a conspectibus cordis sui respuens deduxit ad nihilum.

Next: ₂₈It is he who, banishing from his heart’s sight the wicked Devil who urges something on him, has reduced him to nothing.

Hactenus B. Benedictus verba et sensum Domini tenuit nunc autem dimisit verba, tenuit sensum, cum dixit: Qui malignum diabolum aliqua suadentem [page 52] sibi cum ipso, suasione sua a conspectibus cordis sui respuens deduxit ad nihilum.

So far, St. Benedict held to the letter and sense of the Lord. But now he lets the letter go and retains the sense, when he says: It is he who, banishing from his heart’s sight the wicked Devil who urges [page 52] something on him, has reduced him to nothing.

Nam Dominus subjunxit: ad nihilum deductus est in conspectu ejus malignus, timentes autem Dominum glorificat, [Ps 14:4] quem versum B. Hieronymus ita intellexit dicens: verbi gratia, est rex malignus vel episcopus aut presbyter, de istis enim personis dico, qui aliis praeminent; hos tales, qui maligni sunt, videns justus ad nihilum deducit; nam pauperem sive mendicum Deum timentem cum viderit, honorat atque magnificat. [source not identified]

For the Lord added: In his eyes a wicked person is reduced to nothing, but he honors those who fear the Lord. [Ps 14:4]. St. Jerome understood this verse in this way: there is, for example, a wicked king or bishop or priest, for I speak of those people who excel others. A just man, seeing such people, who are vile, reduces them to nothing. For when he has seen a poor man or a beggar in fear of God, he honors and praises him.²⁹

Sed S. Benedictus aliter hoc intelligens, malignum dixit esse³ diabolum, qui mala nobis suggerit. Et bene dixit: a conspectibus cordis respuens, quia hominem interiorem magis scriptura studet admonere.

But St. Benedict, who understood this differently, said that the Devil is wicked because he suggests evil things to us. And he well said: banishing from his heart’s sight, because scripture is more concerned to admonish the inner man [than the outer man].

Nam quid sit malignum diabolum et illum ad nihilum reducere, idem ipse B. Benedictus exponit, cum subjunxit, ait enim: Et parvulos cogitatus ejus tenuit et allisit ad Christum.

For St. Benedict himself explains what the wicked Devil is and what it means that he is reduced to nothing. He says: ₂₈And he seized his petty plans and smashed them against Christ.

In hoc enim loco intravit in ordinem alterius psalmi; legitur enim: Filia Babylonis misera, beatus, qui retribuet tibi retributionem tuam, quam retribuisti nobis. [Ps 136:8]

In this place went into the spirit of another psalm that reads: O unhappy daughter of Babylon, happy the one who will return to you the retribution that you have given us! [Ps 136:8]

Sed quid sit retributionem retribuere, idem ipse propheta exponit, cum subjunxit, ait enim: Beatus, qui tenebit et allidet parvulos tuos ad petram. [Ps 136:9] Historialiter enim intelligitur de illo populo Babylonico, qui Israelitas in captivitatem ducebat, parvulos autem eorum tenentes pedibus allidebant ad petram.

But what it means to return a retribution is explained by the prophet himself, when he adds: Happy the one who will take and smash your children against the rock [Ps. 136:9]. In the historical sense, this refers to that Babylonian people leading the Israelites into captivity, taking their children at the feet and smashing them against the rock.

Populus autem catholicus intelligens haec spiritaliter dicit de diabolo, quia unusquisque cum sibi in principio suggeritur a diabolo, i. e. dum parvula illa est cogitatio, debet illam ad petram allidere, i. e. amore Christi eam extinguere; nam si creverit illa cogitatio et lactata fuerit, non poteris eam nisi cum grandi labore extinguere, sicuti homo grandis non potest pedibus teneri et ad petram percuti.

Catholic people, however, understanding this in the spiritual sense, relate this to the Devil. Because, when at first the Devils suggests something to someone, and the [diabolical] thought is [still] very small, every person has to smash that thought against the rock, that is, extinguish it with the love of Christ, for if that thought will grow and be fed, you will not be able to extinguish it except with great effort, just as a large man cannot be held by his feet and dashed against a rock.

Sequitur: ₂₉Qui timentes Dominum de bona observantia sua non se reddunt elatos, sed ipsa in se bona non a se, sed a Domino fieri existimantes ₃₀operantem in se Dominum [page 53] magnificant.

Next: ₂₉It is they who, fearing the Lord, do not pride themselves on their good observance, but instead judging that the good in them cannot be created by themselves but by the Lord, ₃₀glorify the Lord [page 53] working in them.

Perseverat adhuc B. Benedictus in intentione ostendendi viam, quae ducit ad tabernaculum sive montem, quam jam monstraverat; nunc dicendo verba Domini et sensum, nunc dicendo solummodo sensum Domini cum verbis suis et nunc exponendo verba psalmistae, incipiens ab eo loco, in quo dicit: Qui ingreditur sine macula, et pervenit ad hunc locum, ubi dixit de elatione cavenda; ait enim: Qui timentes Dominum de bona observantia sua non se reddunt elatos.

So far St. Benedict had continued in his plan to show the road that leads to the dwelling-place or mountain, [the road] which he had already shown, at times by discussing the words of the Lord and their meaning, at times only by discussing the meaning of the Lord’s words, at times by explaining the words of the psalmist, beginning with that place in which he says: He who goes along without fault and arriving at this place where he speaks about the avoidance of pride. For he says: It is they who, fearing the Lord do not pride themselves on their good observance.

Parum enim fuerat Benedicto solummodo dicere de compressione vitiorum et operatione virtutum, nisi etiam addidisset coertionem vanae gloriae. Cognoverat, non minus posse nasci vanam gloriam de perfectione virtutum, quam de compressione vitiorum.

It would have been little for St. Benedict to speak only about the suppression of vices and the exercise of virtues if he had not also added the chastisement of vainglory. He knew that vainglory can be born no less from the perfection of virtues than from the suppression of sins.

Et bene, postquam dixit, mala esse cavenda et bona agenda, subjunxit, cavere debere vanam gloriam, quia solet vitiare bonum malum elationis, aliquando in principio, aliquando in medio, aliquando in fine. Intuendum est hoc, quia in eo, quod dixit: timentes Dominum, ostendit timore Domini posse vitari vanam gloriam; nam timendo Dominum potest quis elationem cavere, i. e. si se considerat, qualem eum invenit gratia Dei, de hoc quod agit, nequaquam superbit.

And after he had said that evils must be avoided and good be done, he rightly added that [one] ought to avoid vainglory because the evil of pride often corrupts a good thing, sometimes at the beginning, sometimes in the middle, sometimes at the end. We have to understand that when he said fearing the Lord, he showed that with the fear of the Lord vainglory could be avoided. Someone can avoid pride by fearing the Lord, that is, when he thinks about himself [and realizes] in what state the grace of God finds him, he will never pride himself about what he does.

Ad quam considerationem nos provocat Deus, cum dicit ad Job: Ubi eras, quando fundamenta terrae ponebam? [Iob 38:4] ac si diceret: Si te consideras, qualem te reperi, de hoc, quod egisti, non te reddis elatum.

God incites us to this consideration when he says to Job: Where were you when I was laying the foundations of the earth? [Iob 38:4]. It is as if he were saying: ‘If you think about what kind of person you are found to be, you do not take pride in what you have done.’

Iterum intuendum est in hoc loco, quia cum dixit:⁴ ₂₉sed ipsa bona in se non a se posse, sed a Domino fieri existimantes ₃₀operantem in se Dominum magnificant illud cum propheta dicentes: Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam; haec (autem) vox humilium est.

We have to look at this spot once more, because he spoke with the voice of the humble, when he said but judging that the good in them cannot be created by themselves but by the Lord, ₃₀they glorify the Lord working in them, saying with the prophet: “Not to us, Lord, not to us, but to your name give glory.

Nunc videndum est, quomodo vel quando dat Deus gloriam nomini suo. Sub hoc sensu dat Deus gloriam nomini suo, cum ita nos dignatur protegere atque custodire, ut non nostri sed sui nominis gloriam quaeramus. [page 54]

Now we have to see how and when God gives glory to his name. God gives glory to his name in the sense that when he deems it worthy to protect and guard us, we do not seek the glory of our name but of his. [page 54]

Sequitur: ₃₁Sicut nec Paulus apostolus de praedicatione sua sibi aliquid imputavit dicens: Gratia Dei sum id, quod sum. [1 Cor 15.1]

Next: ₃₁Just as the Apostle Paul credited nothing of his own preaching to himself, saying: By the grace of God I am what I am. [1 Cor 15:1]

Quaerendum est, qua ratione dicit B. Benedictus. Paulus de sapientia, et non dixit de virtute, cum ipse eximius fuit virtute etiam, sicut ipse Paulus testatur dicens: Plus omnibus laboravi. [1 Cor 15:10] Paulus apostolus fuit incomparabilis sapientia, quam sapientiam Petrus Apostolus miratus est, cum dixit: Sicut carissimus frater noster Paulus secundum sibi datam sapientiam scripsit vobis. [2 Pt 3:15]

We have to investigate why St. Benedict says [this]. Paul spoke of wisdom and not of virtue, because he himself was excellent in virtue, just as Paul himself testifies: I have worked more than all [others] [1 Cor 15:10]. The Apostle Paul was unique [incomparabilis] in his wisdom, which the Apostle Peter admired when he said: As our most beloved brother Paul wrote to us according to the wisdom given to him. [2 Pt 3:15]

Hanc sapientiam admiratus est B. Benedictus, ideo dixit sapientia et non dixit virtute, quia forte virtute fuit aliquis sanctus similis illi, sed sapientia nullus, ac si diceret: ita non se reddunt elatos, qui per viam Dei tendunt ad tabernaculum sive montem operantes bona, quod non sunt incomparabilia, id est, non sibi imputant sed Deo, sicut nec apostolus Paulus sibi de incomparabili sapientia sua sed Deo adscripsit.

St. Benedict admired this wisdom. He spoke about wisdom, not virtue, because perhaps some saint was similar to him in virtue, but no one [was similar to him] in wisdom, as if he were saying: those who try to reach through God’s road the dwelling-place or the mountain, doing good works, do not pride themselves, because [their deeds] are not unique, that is, they do not give credit to themselves, but to God, just as Apostle Paul credited God, not himself, for his unique wisdom.

Sequitur: Gratia Dei sum id, quod sum.

Next: ₃₁By the grace of God, I am what I am.

 Gratia ideo dicitur, eo quod gratis datur; ubi enim gratia dicitur, omne meritum excluditur.

strong>  Grace is said here because it is given for nought [gratis]. When you use the word grace, you exclude all merit.

Paulus itaque apostolus eximius praedicatione atque virtute cognovit, quia a se non habebat, quae habebat, et ideo dixit: Gratia Dei sum, ac si diceret: quidquid habeo, non meo merito, sed gratia Dei habeo. Et tamen quia in gratia Dei laboraverat, propterea subjunxit: et gratia Dei in me vacua non fuit; [1 Cor 15:10] nam non fuisset magni dicere: gratia Dei in me vacua non fuit, nisi scivisset, in aliis gratiam Dei vacuam esse: et quia scivit, gratiam Dei in aliis vacuam esse, ideo alias dixit: Hortamur vos fratres, ne in vacuum gratiam Dei recipiatis; [2 Cor 6:1] ille enim in vacuum gratiam Dei recipit, qui non vivit secundum donum Dei, quod accepit; verbi gratia, accepisti baptismum; si non vivis secundum baptismum, gratiam Dei in vacuum accepisti.

The Apostle Paul, excelling in preaching and virtue, knew that he did not have from himself what he had, and said therefore: By the grace of God, I am, as if he were saying: Whatever I have, I do not have on account of my merit but by the grace of God. And yet, because he had labored in the grace of God, he subsequently added: and the grace of God was not in vain in me. [1 Cor 15:10] For it would not have been worth much to say: ‘God’s grace was not in vain in me’ if he had not known that God’s grace was in vain in others. And because he knew that God’s grace was in vain in others, he said elsewhere: We encourage you, brothers, not to receive God’s grace in vain [2 Cor 6:1]. For he who does not live according to God’s gift that he received, receives God’s grace in vain. Say, for example, that you have received baptism.

Iterum: accepisti donum obedientiae; si non vis obedientiam exhibere, in vacuum gratiam Dei accepisti. Accepisti donum praedicationis, si non vis aliis praedicare, gratiam Dei in vacuum accepisti. [page 55]

If you do not live according to baptism, you have received God’s grace in vain. Again: you received the gift of obedience: if you do not want to show obedience, you have received the grace of God in vain. [Or say,] you have received the gift of preaching: if you do not want to preach to others, you have received God’s grace in vain. [page 55]

Sequitur: ₃₂Et iterum ipse dicit: Qui gloriatur, in Domino glorietur.

Next: ₃₂And again he said: He who boasts should boast in the Lord.

Pseudoapostoli gloriabantur se de nobilitatis genere, non in virtutibus, eo quod erant de semine Abrahae; et ideo, sicut dixi, gloriabantur, sed de genere nobilitatis, non in virtutibus; non enim poterant dicere:⁵ pericula in fluminibus. [2 Cor 10:26]

The pseudo-apostles boasted about their noble birth, not about their virtues, because they were from Abraham’s seed. Therefore, as I said, they were boasting, but about their noble birth, not their virtues. For they could not boast about the dangers in the rivers.³⁰ [2 Cor 10:26]

Et ab his decepti Corinthii gloriabantur de sapientia sua. Unde apostolus Paulus tam de illis falsis Apostolis se gloriantibus quam etiam Corinthiis, qui ab illis fuerant decepti, necnon etiam per illos dicit omnibus nobis utens testimonio prophetico: Qui gloriatur, in Domino glorietur, ac si diceret: qui nobilis est genere et vult gloriari nobilitatis genere, in Domino glorietur.

And having been deceived by them, the Corinthians boasted about their wisdom. That is why the Apostle Paul, using prophetic testimony, says both about those false, boasting prophets and about the Corinthians who had been deceived by them – and through them to us all –: He who boasts should boast in the Lord, as if he were saying: ‘he who is noble by birth and wants to boast about his noble birth, he should boast in the Lord.

Similiter qui potens est, de potentia sua in Domino glorietur, non in potentia sua.

Likewise, he who is powerful, he should boast about his power in the Lord, and not in his own power.’

Quid est: in Domino glorietur? id est, in Domino gloriam suam et non in se transferat, quia in Domino gloriari est: quidquid habet, non sibi, non suo merito, sed Deo abscribat.

What does he should boast in the Lord mean? It means: he should attribute his glory to the Lord and not to himself, because boasting in the Lord means whatever one has, one should not ascribe it to oneself or to one’s own merit, but to God.

Sequitur: ₃₃Unde et Dominus in evangelio ait: Qui audit verba mea haec et facit ea, similabo eum viro sapienti, qui aedificavit domum suam supra petram; ₃₄venerunt flumina, flaverunt venti et impegerunt in domum illam et non cecidit, quia fundata erat supra petram.

Next: ₃₃Therefore also the Lord said in the Gospel: He who hears these my words and acts on them I will compare to the wise man who built his house on rock; ₃₄the waters came, the winds blew, and they smashed against the house and it did not collapse, because is was founded on rock.

Subaudiendum est: Qui audit verba mea haec et non facit ea, similis erit viro stulto, qui aedificavit domum suam super arenam; descendit pluvia, flaverunt venti, advenerunt flumina et offenderunt in domum illam, et cecidit et erat ruina ejus magna. [Mt 7:26]

We have to add: He who hears my words and does not do act on them will be like the foolish man who built his house on san; the rains came down, the winds blew, the rivers came and struck that house and it fell and great was its ruin. [Mt 7:26]

Hactenus B. Benedictus manifestavit viam, quae ducit ad tabernaculum sive montem Dei dicendo compressionem vitiorum sive perfectionem virtutum et subjunxit refraenationem vanae gloriae, eo quod cognoverat, non minus instare periculum jactantiae in perfectione virtutum quam in coertione malorum.

Thus far St. Benedict showed the way that leads to the dwelling-place or mountain of God by mentioning the suppression of faults or the perfection of virtues. He added the bridling of vainglory, because he knew that the danger of pride does not threaten the perfection of virtues less than the force of evils.

Nunc perseverat in intentione B. Benedictus, cum dicit: Qui audit verba mea et facit ea, similabo cum viro sapienti, qui aedificavit domum suam supra petram et reliqua.

Now St. Benedict proceeds in the same spirit when says: He who hears these my words and acts on them I will compare to the wise man who built his house on rock, etc.

Istud enim unde superius respicit, ac si diceret, cum dicit: unde et Dominus in Evangelio ait, i e. de ipsa ostensione viae [page 55] tabernaculi non solum in psalmis, verum etiam in Evangelio dicit. Nam idcirco in ostensione viae est, quia, qui in via est, adhuc sustinet aliquid, i. e. pluvias et flumina seu ventos patitur.

This Therefore relates to the above. When he says: Therefore also the Lord in the Gospel said – speaking about showing the way [page 55] to the dwelling-place – he does speaks about that not only in the psalms but also in the Gospel. He is speaking here about showing the way because he who is on his way still endures something, that is, he suffers from rain and rivers or winds.

Istud vero, quod dicit: quia qui audit verba mea haec, in fine sermonis, quem in monte habuit, Dominus locutus est. Ille enim in monte dixit praecepta moralitatis, maxime ea, quae erga communem conversationem attinent, et idcirco non absolute dixit mea, sed subjunxit haec, ac si diceret: ista quae in hoc monte locutus sum.

But these words He who hears these my words have been spoken by the Lord at the end of the Sermon on the Mount. He set out his teachings of morality on the mountain, especially those that relate to human interaction [communis conversatio] and therefore he did not say plainly my words, but added these, as if he were saying: ‘these things I said on this mountain.’

B. vero Benedictus quia ex diversis locis scripturarum divinarum verba adhibuit, idcirco istud haec hic locutus est, i. e. quia, sicut istud haec concludit illa verba, quae Dominus locutus est in monte, ita etiam ista concludit, quae S. Benedictus hinc adhibuit. Nec non in fine psalmi quarti decimi istud haec propheta concludens posuit; ait enim: Qui facit haec, non movebitur in aeternum. [Ps 14:5]

But St. Benedict used words from diverse places in the holy scriptures. Therefore he said here this these, that is, just as this these concludes those words the Lord spoke on the mountain, so it concludes these words which St. Benedict used from there [i.e. from the Gospel]. Also at the end of the fourteenth psalm the prophet put down these words by way of conclusion. He said: He who does this will not be moved in eternity. [Ps 14:5]

Vide modo, quia sicut ibi dicitur: Qui facit haec, von movebitur in aeternum, [Ps 14:5] ita et in Evangelio: Qui audit verba mea haec, similabo cum viro sapienti, qui aedificavit domum suam supra petram. [Mt 7:24]

Now see, that just as it says: He who does this, will not be moved in eternity, just so also in the Gospel it is said: He who hears these my words, I will compare him to the wise man who built his house on a rock. [Mt 7:24]

Duos enim viros Dominus in Evangelio, qui aedificium aedificant, proposuit, id est, qui aedificat super petram, et qui aedificat super arenam. Sed quamvis haec duo aedificia aequaliter videantur, tamen non aequaliter sunt permanentia; nam illa domus, quae super petram aedificata est, firma et stabilis est, eo quod petram, i. e. firmum fundamentum habet, illa autem, quae super arenam aedificata est, infirma est et instabilis, eo quod arena, quae fluida est et augmentari non potest, nec in unum copulam redigi, fundamentum non habet.

For the Lord presented in the Gospel two men who are building a building, he who builds on rock and he who builds on sand. But even though these two buildings seem to be equal, they are not equal forever. For that house that has been built on rock is firm and stable because it has rock, that is a firm foundation, but that house that has been built on sand is shaky and instable because sand, being fluid and unable to be increased or to be formed into one bond, has no foundation.

Vide modo, quia aequaliter haec utraque domus undique concutitur; desuper concutitur pluviis, subtus fluminibus, e regione, id est e latere ventis. Sed sicut diximus, illa domus, quae super petram firmata est, his concussionibus pulsata non cadit, illa autem domus, quae super arenam fundata est, corruit. Ita et in spiritalibus.

Now see, that each of these two houses is equally shaken from all sides: from above it is shaken by rain, from below by rivers, [and] horizontally, that is at its side, by winds. But as we said: the house that has been established on rock does not fall after it has been stricken by these blows, but the house that has been founded on sand collapses.

In spiritalibus vero rebus duo sunt aedificatores, id est unus, [page 57] qui aedificat supra petram, et alter, qui aedificat super arenam; ille enim aedificat supra petram, qui amore Christi bona opera agit, qui Christum in fundamento, id est in intentione operis habet, quia per petram multis testimoniis scripturarum divinarum Christus comprobatur intelligi.

It is the same in spiritual affairs. But in spiritual affairs there are two builders: one [page 57] who builds on rock and another who builds on sand. He who does the good works of Christ, [and] who has Christ as his foundation, that is in the intention of working, builds on rock, because on account of many witnesses of the divine scriptures it is acknowledged that Christ is understood by the rock.

Et ille aedificat super arenam, qui in intentione humanae laudis aliquid agit boni, verbi gratia, iste jejunat et ille jejunat, iste orat, et ille orat, et caetera his similia; sed quamvis utraque aedificia aequaliter videantur fieri, tamen non aequaliter istorum aedificium, id est actio, firmum et stabile est, eo quod non aequaliter fundamentum, id est intentionem habet. Vide modo, quia utraque istorum actio undique concutitur; desuper concutitur pluviis, subtus fluminibus, e regione, id est e latere ventis.

And he who does some good deed with the intention of earning human praise, e.g. he who fasts and prays like the other people, etc., builds on sand. But even though each of the two buildings seems to be made equally, still the building – that is the action – of them is not equally steady and stable, because it does not have a foundation in an equal way, that is, an intention Now see, that the action of both men is shaken from all sides: it is shaken from above by rain, from below by rivers, and horizontally – that is at its side – by winds.

Sed nunc videndum est, quid per pluvias sive flumina atque ventos intelligi debeant. Per pluvias enim intelliguntur superstitiones caliginosae, per flumina autem delectationes carnales, per ventos enim rumores humani. Caliginosae superstitiones sunt, sicut hypocritae faciunt.

Now you have to see what ought to be understood by the rain or rivers or winds. By rain we understand dark superstitions, by rivers carnal pleasures, by winds human opinion. Dark superstitions are the things that the hypocrites do.

Quamquam rationabiliter non quaeratur, si quis quaerit, quare per pluvias superstitiones caliginosae, et per ventos rumores humani, et per flumina delectationes carnales intelligantur, tamen ita conjicere possumus: caliginosae superstitiones idcirco per pluvias intelliguntur, quia sicut pluviis fuscatur aer et tenebratur, ita hypocritarum actio obscura et tenebrosa est, eo quod ignoratur, qua intentione fiat, id est utrum amore Christi an saeculi nescitur.

Even though, if someone asks why by the rain dark superstitions [are meant], he does not look for a rational answer, and why by the winds human opinion and why by rivers carnal pleasures [are meant], still we can guess this much: by rain we understand dark superstitions because just as the sky is made swarthy and dark by rain, just so the action of hypocrites is swarthy and dark, because one does not know with what intention it happens: it is unclear whether it is out of love of Christ or of the world.

Per flumina delectationes carnales conjicimus, quia sicut in fluminibus coercendis solet esse necessarius magnus labor adhibendus, ita etiam in multis delectationibus carnalibus amputandis magnus necessarius est labor adhibendus. Et sicut flumina solent aliquando fortiter currere et aliquando extra terminos exire, ita, et delectationes carnales solent aliquando fortes esse, aliquando extra terminos transire, sicuti est in cibo et potu, si sit ultra mensuram progressio.

By the rivers we guess that carnal pleasures are meant because just as a great effort usually has to be applied to the control of rivers, just so a great effort has to be applied to the removal of many carnal pleasures. And just as rivers flow at times rapidly and at times tend to overflow their banks, just so, at times, carnal pleasures are strong and at times tend to flow over their confines, inasmuch as there is an increase in food and drink beyond measure.

Per ventos autem idcirco [page 58] conjicimus rumores humanos posse intelligi, quia sicut venti e latere veniunt, ita laudes humanae illi solent evenire, qui intentione placendi Deo aliquid agere incipit. Sed illa actio, quae amore Christi fit et incipitur, his tentationibus concussa non cadit, illa autem, quae intentione humanae laudis incepta est et agitur, cum his concutionibus concussa fuerit, cadit et evanescit.

We surmise that by winds [page 58] the human opinion can be understood because just as winds come at the side, so too human praises usually come to him who begins to do something with the intention to please God. But that action that happens and is begun in love of Christ does not fail if it shaken by temptations, but that activity that was begun and is done with the intention of human praise falls and evaporates when it is shaken by these blows.

Animadvertendum est, quia hoc, quod dixi, quare per flumina delectationes carnales et per pluvias caliginosae superstitiones et per ventos rumores humani intelligantur, non secundum auctoritatem dictum est sed secundum aestimationem; nam Augustinus ita intellexit. Propterea haec tria per flumina et ventos atque pluvias propter numerum intellexi.

We must take note that, as I said, it is not according to authority but by conjecture that we understand by rivers carnal pleasures and by rain dark superstitions and by winds human opinion. For Augustine thought so. Therefore he understood these three things by rivers, winds, and rain according to their number.

Altero vero modo intelligitur per domum fundatam super petram sancta ecclesia fundata in Christo, per ventos intelligitur Antichristus et ejus sequaces, per pluvias gentilitatis perfidia, per flumina haereticorum errores.

But in another way we understand by the house founded on rock the holy church founded in Christ, by winds the Antichrist and his followers, by the rain the faithlessness of heathens, and by rivers the errors of the heretics.

Sequitur: ₃₅Haec complens Dominus exspectat nos quotidie his suis sanctis monitis factis nos respondere debere.

Next: ₃₅Fulfilling these words, the Lord expects that we should daily answer these his sacred admonitions with deeds.

Legerat B. Benedictus illa verba, quae Dominus in monte secundum Mathaeum locutus est, et cognovit, omnem perfectionem in his esse, volens ille omnem perfectionem similiter in his verbis esse ostendere, hoc est in suo sermone hoc, quae tam de psalmo XIV, quam etiam ex aliis locis scripturarum huc adhibuit, idcirco finem verborum illorum, quae Dominus in monte locutus est, his verbis, quae huc adhibuit, subjungere studuit; et est sensus, cum dicit: Haec complens Dominus exspectat nos, id est, haec narrando complevit et exspectat nos quotidie.

St. Benedict had read those words that the Lord, according to Matthew, spoke on the mountain, and realized that all perfection is in them. Wanting to show that all perfection is likewise in these words, that is, in this his sermon, which Benedict used both from the fourteenth psalm and from other places in the scriptures, he was eager to add the end of those words the Lord spoke on the mountain to these words which he used at this spot. And this is the meaning when he says: Fulfilling these words the Lord expects that we… That is, by telling he fulfilled this and expects us daily.

Quotidie enim intelligitur omni die. Et bene dixit quotidie, ut si forte diu praeceptum Domini implere distulisti, non te desperes, quia quotidie exspectat Dominus, i. e. omnibus diebus vitae tuae. His suis intelligitur quasi: istis suis. Sanctis monitis idcirco dixit, ad separationem illorum, quae non sunt sancta, factis nos respondere debere.

Daily means every day. He rightly said daily, in order that, if you perhaps have put off fulfilling the teaching of the Lord for a while, you do not despair, because the Lord expects daily, that is: all days of your life. These his means ‘those his.’ He said that we should answer sacred admonitions with deeds in order to separate these [deeds] from those that are not sacred.

In hoc loco B. Benedictus sacrarum scripturarum morem observavit, cum dicit: factis respondere debere, quia scriptura divina, ubi dicit respondere, [page 59] factis subintelligi vult, ut est illud, quod ad duritiam cordis illorum dicitur, qui Dei monitis factis respondere nolunt; ait enim: Vocavi, et nemo respondit mihi. [Is 66:4; Ct 5:6]

At this point St. Benedict followed the custom of the holy scriptures, when he says: should answer with deeds, because when holy scripture says ‘answer’ [page 59], it wants ‘with deeds’ to be implied, just like what is said concerning the stubbornness of heart of those who do not want to answer God’s admonitions with deeds. It says: I called and no one answered me. [Is 66:4]

In hoc loco subaudiendum est factis; quod enim factis debemus respondere praeceptis Domini, docet Cassiodorus in versiculo psalmi centesimi primi, ubi dicitur: Respondit ei in via virtutis suae. [Ps 101:24]

Here we have to understand with deeds because we should answer the teachings of the Lord with deeds, as Cassiodorus teaches in the verse of the hundred and first psalm, where it said: He answered him in the way of his virtue. [Ps 101:24]

Ait enim: Ipse ei respondere cognoscitur, qui imperiis ejus obsequens esse monstratur. Quapropter respondetur illi non lingua sed vita, non voce sed fide, non clamore sed corde. [Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum 101:24, CCSL 98, p. 910]⁶

Cassiodorus says: He is known to answer him who is proven to be a follower of his commands. Therefore an answer is given to him, not by tongue but in life, not by voice but in faith, not by shouting but in the heart. [Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum 101:24]

Sunt enim multi, qui nolunt Dei monitis respondere factis, idcirco sunt imperfecti; B. vero Benedictus propterea dixit tibi, factis respondere, eo quod voluit te esse perfectum; ille enim respondit factis, qui, quod aure audit, opere complet.

There are many who do not want to answer God’s admonitions with deeds. Therefore, they are imperfect. St. Benedict therefore told you to answer with deeds because he wanted you to be perfect. For if you fulfil with work what you have heard with the ear, you are answering with deeds.

Sequitur: ₃₆Ideo nobis propter emendationem malorum hujus vitae dies ad inducias relaxantur ₃₇dicente Apostolo: An nescis, quia patientia Dei ad poenitentiam te adducit?

Next: ₃₆Therefore the days of this life are lengthened for us as a truce, for amendment of evils, ₃₇the Apostle saying, Do you not know that God’s patience leads to repentance?

Istud ideo ad superiorem sensum attinet et est sensus, cum dicit ideo, i. e. quia exspectat nos Dominus quotidie his suis sanctis monitis factis nos respondere debere, ideo, hoc est propterea, isti dies hujus vitae ad inducias nobis relaxantur propter emendationem malorum nostrorum.

This therefore is related to the previous content. Its meaning is this: because the Lord expects that we should daily answer these his sacred admonitions with deeds, therefore those days of this life are lengthened for us as a truce, for amendment of our evils.

Ubi sollerter animadvertere debemus, quia his diebus, qui nobis relaxantur causa emendationis malorum nostrorum, nos econtrario non solum non emendamus ea, quae fecimus mala, verum etiam augmentationem malorum facimus.

We have to pay close attention here, that in these days lengthened for us for the sake of the amendment of our evils, we, instead, not only do not amend them – we who have done evils – but even make an increase of evils.

Inducia enim est spatium, quod quantulumcunque agendi vel discendi tribuitur. Nam quid sensus sit in istis verbis, quae B. Benedictus dixit, i. e.: Ideo nobis propter emendationem malorum nostrorum hujus vitae dies ad inducias relaxantur, hoc prolatum testimonium Paulus exponit dicens: An nescis, quia patientia Dei ad poenitentiam te adducit? [Rm 2:4]

A truce is a span of time allotted as a small amount of doing or learning. What the meaning is of these words that St. Benedict says – Therefore the days of this life are lengthened for us as a truce, for amendment of evils – is explained by Paul saying this: Do you not know that God’s patience leads to repentance? [Rm 2:4]

Vide modo, quia B. Benedictus dixit inducias, Paulus dixit patientia, et quod S. Benedictus dixit emendationem [page 60] malorum, Paulus dicit poenitentia, et quod ille dicit relaxantur, Paulus dicit adducit.

Now see that St. Benedict said truce, Paul said patience, and what St. Benedict called amendment [page 60] of evils, Paul calls repentance, and what the former called are lengthened, Paul calls leads.

Patientia, autem cum in Deo dicitur, non proprio dicitur sed abusive, hoc est a propria significatione ad non propriam significationem; nam nostrum proprium est patientia, Dei autem translative.

When patience is used in reference to God, it is not used properly but erroneously, that is [taken] from its proper meaning [and applied] to an improper meaning. For ours is proper patience, but God’s is patience in a metaphorical sense.

Nos enim tunc dicimur patientes, cum aliquem contra votum nostrum agere videmus et ulcisci nolumus. Ita et, Deus tunc patiens dicitur, cum nos contra dispositionem suam videt agere et non vult nos aeternae damnationi mancipare.

For we are said to be patient when we see that someone acts against our wishes and we do not want to punish. God is also said to be patient when he sees that we act against his will and he does not want to send us to eternal damnation.

Et est sensus, cum dicit Paulus: An nescis, quia patientia Dei ad poenitentiam te adducit? ac si dicat: ‘o peccator! quare te non convertis? quare non emendas mala tua, quae fecisti? An non sapis, quia patientia Dei istos dies vitae tuae ideo tibi relaxat, ut convertaris?’

This is what Paul means when he says: Do you not know that God’s patience leads to repentance? as if he were saying: ‘O sinner! Why do you not convert? Why do you not amend the evils that you did? Do you not know that God’s patience lengthens these days of your life in order that you convert?’

Sequitur: ₃₈Nam pius Dominus dicit: Nolo mortem peccatoris, sed ut convertatur et vivat.

Next: ₃₈For the loving God says, I do not want the death of a sinner, but that he convert and live.

Nunc videndum est, qua ratione dicat: Nolo mortem peccatoris, cum multi peccatores legantur mortui et perditi? In hoc enim loco videntur duae istae sententiae discordare, cum peccatores utique moriantur. Ergo si peccatores moriuntur, cum voluntate Dei moriuntur; voluit et fecit, sicut legitur in psalmis: Omnia quaecunque voluit Dominus, fecit in coelo et in terra. [Ps 134:6]

Now we need to see why he says: I do not want the death of a sinner, when we read that many sinners are dead and lost. In this place these two sentences seem to contradict each other, because sinners surely die. Therefore, if sinners die, they die with God’s will. He wanted and did it, according to what is read in the psalms: Everything whatsoever the Lord wanted, he made in heaven and earth. [Ps 134:6]

Sed ita intelligitur, cum dicit: Nolo mortem peccatoris, ac si diceret: illorum peccatorum nolo mortem, qui a sua pravitate converti merentur.

But this phrase I do not want the death of a sinner is understood as if he were saying: ‘I do want the death of those sinners, who deserve to be converted from their wickedness.’

Ita etiam et illud, quod in Evangelio legitur, intelligitur, ut est: Erat lux vera, quae illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum, [Io 1:9] et illud Pauli: Qui vult omnes homines salvos fieri. [Tm 2:4]

This is also the case with what we read in the Gospel, as in: The light was true that enlightens every man coming into this world, [Io 1:9] and the words of Paul: He who wants that all men are saved. [Tim 2:4]

Numquid, cum dicit: illuminat omnem hominem, illuminat haereticos, illuminat paganos, sive Judaeos, qui in sua pravitate perseveraturi sunt? Non; sed ita intelligitur, i.e. illum illuminat, qui meretur illuminari, et illos salvat, qui salvari merentur.

When he says: He enlightens every man, does he enlighten the heretics, the heathens, or the Jews who will persevere in their wickedness? No. But is understood thus: he enlightens him who deserves to be enlightened and saves them, who deserve to be saved.

Et hoc notandum, quia cum dicit merentur, non pro meritis hominum, sed pro misericordia Dei accipiendum est.

And we must note that when he says ‘they deserve,’ it must not be taken in keeping with the merits of men, but God’s mercy.

Iterum videndum est, de qua morte Dominus dicat, cum dicit mortem peccatoris; non enim de morte corporis, sed de morte animae dicit. Nam sicut est [page 61] mors corporis, ita et mors animae; mors corporis est separatio animae a corpore, mors animae est separatio Dei ab anima; et sicut mortuum est corpus, cum ab illo separatur anima, ita mortua est anima, cum separater a Deo.

Again, we have to see about what sort of death the Lord speaks, when he says the death of a sinner. For he did not speak of the death of the body but of the soul. [page 61] The death of the soul is like the death of the body. The death of the body is the separation of the soul from the body [but] the death of the soul is the separation of the soul from God. And just as the body is dead when the soul is separated from it, just so the soul is dead when it is separated from God.

Et est sensus, cum dicit: Nolo mortem peccatoris, sed magis ut convertatur et vivat, id est, nolo in perpetuum separatus esse ab his, qui merentur converti a pravitatibus suis. Illarum duarum mortium distinctio in Evangelio legitur; ait, enim Dominus: Si quis sermonem meum servaverit, mortem non videbit in aeternum. [Io 8:51] Ad haec e contrario respondentes Judaei dicentes dixerunt: Abraam mortuus est et prophetae, et reliqua. [Io 8: 52]

This the sense of the words I do not want the death of the sinner, but rather that he convert and live, that is: ‘I do not want to be separated from those who deserve to convert from their wickedness for eternity.’ The difference between those two deaths is given in the Gospel when the Lord says: If someone keeps my word, he will not see death in eternity. [Io 8:51] On the other hand, the Jews answered to this that Abraham is dead and the prophets, etc. [Io 8:52]

Verum est, quod Dominus dicebat, et verum est, quod Judaei dicebant; Dominus dicebat de morte animae, Judaei dicebant de morte corporis.

It is true what the Lord said and it is true what the Jews said. The Lord was speaking of the death of the soul, the Jews were speaking of the death of the body.

Sequitur: convertatur et vivat.

Next: that he convert and live.

Vide modo, quia tunc peccator vivit, cum se convertit, et tunc fit mansio Domini in eo, sicut dicit Dominus; ait enim: Ego et pater ad eum veniemus et mansionem apud eum faciemus. [Io 14:23]

Now see that the sinner lives at that moment when he converts and then the Lord’s dwelling is made in him, just as the Lord says: I and the Father will come to him and will make our dwelling with him. [Io 14:23]

Sequitur: ₃₉Cum ergo interrogassemus Dominum, fratres, de habitatore tabernaculi ejus, audivimus habitandi praeceptum, sed si compleamus habitatoris officium.

Next: ₃₉Thus brothers, when we had asked the Lord about who lives in his dwelling-place, we heard his teaching about living there, if we fulfil the dweller’s duties. 

In isto, quod dixit: Cum ergo interrogassemus, fratres, de habitatore tabernaculi ejus, ostendit, se superius nobiscum Dominum interrogasse de habitatore tabernaculi ejus, et in eo, quod dicit: audivimus habitandi praeceptum, ostendit, Dominum respondisse nobis.

With the words Thus brothers, when we had asked the Lord about who lives in his tabernacle he shows that he had asked the Lord earlier, together with us, about who lives in his dwelling-place. And with the words we heard his teaching about living there he shows that the Lord has answered us.

Istud vero, quod dicit: Sed si compleamus habitatoris officium, duobus modis intelligi potest. Uno enim modo intelligitur ita: sed si compleamus habitatoris officium, quasi diceret: si officium, hoc est exemplum illius habitatoris, sive qui nunc habitat, sive qui habitaturus est in tabernaculo, imitati fuerimus, tunc audivimus vel erimus auditores praeceptorum habitandi.

But the words if we fulfil the dweller’s duties can be understood in two ways. In the first way, he says, as it were, if we imitate the duties, that is, the example of that dweller, whether he lives now or will live later in that dwelling-place, we have heard or will hear the teachings about living there.

Et secundum hunc sensum subaudiendum est: tunc audivimus habitandi praeceptum. Altero modo intelligitur ita: sed si compleamus habitatoris officium, quasi diceret: si talia fecerimus, pro quibus mereamur esse habitatores tabernaculi, tunc [page 62] erimus haeredes regni coelorum; et secundum hunc sensum subaudiendum est: ‘erimus haeredes regni coelorum’.

According to this sense, we have to add: ‘at that moment we have heard the teaching about living there.’ In the second way these words are taken as follows. With if we fulfil the dweller’s duties he says, as it were: ‘if we have done such things, for which we deserve to be the dwellers in the dwelling-place, at that moment [page 62] we will be the heirs of the kingdom of heaven.’ According to this sense, we have to add: ‘We will be the heirs of the kingdom of heaven.’

Sequitur: ₄₀Ergo praeparanda sunt corda et corpora nostra sanctae praeceptorum obedientiae militanda.

Next: ₄₀Therefore our hearts and bodies must be prepared to fight for holy obedience to his instructions.

Istud ergo ad suporiorem sensum respicit; nam illud, quod superius dixit, id est: ‘Cum ergo interrogassemus Dominum, fratres, de habitatore tabernaculi ejus, audivimus habitandi praeceptum,’ et reliqua, narratio est.

This therefore refers to the aforementioned. For what he said before – Thus brothers, when we asked the Lord about who lives in his dwelling-place, we heard his teaching about living there, etc. – that is all narrative.

Istud vero, quod nunc sequitur id est: Ergo praeparanda sint corda et corpora nostra sanctae praeceptorum obedientiae militanda, exhortatio est, quia solet ex narratione exhortatio descendere. B. vero Benedicti cor et corpus jam in observatione Dei praeceptorum praeparatum erat, sed idcirco dixit: Praeparanda sunt corda et corpora nostra, se conjungens cum auditoribus suis, ut facilius audiatur, eo quod est mos sanctorum praedicatorum, se conjungere cum auditoribus suis, quando illos aliquid agere exhortantur, ut facilius, sicut diximus, audiantur.

But what now follows: Therefore our hearts and bodies must be prepared to fight for holy obedience to his instructions is exhortation because an exhortation usually proceeds from a narrative. St. Benedict’s heart and body, however, had already been prepared in observation of God’s teachings, but he said our hearts and bodies must be prepared – thus connecting with his audience – in order that he be more easily heard, because it is the custom of holy preachers to connect with their audience when they urge them to do something, so that they are more easily heard. For those whose hearts have been prepared and not their bodies are less cautious.

Sunt enim minus cauti, quorum corda praeparata sunt et non corpora, et sunt iterum alii, quorum solummodo corpora et non corda praeparata sunt; sed illi, qui corde sunt tantummodo devoti, imperfecti sunt, illi autem, qui corpore et non corde sunt praeparati, longe ab omni bonitate existunt, quia hyprocritae sunt.

There are also others of whom only the bodies and not the hearts have been prepared. But those who are only devout in their hearts are imperfect; those, however, who have been prepared with the body and not with the heart live far removed from any goodness, because they are hypocrites.

B. vero Benedictus, quia voluit te perfectum esse, ideo utrumque comprehendit, id est cordis et corporis devotionem; cordis vero devotionem comprehendit propter Dominum, quia Deus inspector est cordis et omnia opera nostra ex qualitate cordis dispensat; corporis autem praeparationem comprehendit propter homines, quia homo homo est, et idcirco non valet devotionem cordis comprehendere, sed per continentiam corporis deprehendit devotionem cordis.

But St. Benedict wanted you to be perfect and therefore took them both together, that is the devotion of the heart and of the body. But he took the devotion of the heart because of God, for God is the inspector of the heart and arranges all our works on the basis of the quality of our heart. He took the preparation of the body, however, because of men. Man is a man and therefore is not able to comprehend the devotion of the heart, but he understands the devotion of the heart through the restraint of the body.

Vide modo, quia ita B. Benedictus exhortatus est suos auditores, corda et corpora praeparata sanctae obedientiae habere, sicuti Dominus in Evangelio fecit; ait enim: Sic luceat lux vestra coram hominibus, [page 63] ut videant vestra bona opera et glorificent Patrem vestrum, qui in coelis est, [Mt 5:16] necnon sicut et Paulus fecit; ait enim: Providentes bona non tantum coram Deo sed etiam coram hominibus. [Rm 12:17]

Now notice that St. Benedict has urged his audience to have their hearts and bodies prepared for holy obedience, in the same manner as the Lord does in the Gospel. For he says: May your light shine in such a way before people [page 63] that they see your good works and glorify your father who is in heaven [Mt 5:16], and also Paul says: Having good regard, not only before God but also before men. [Rm 12:17]

Sequitur: Sanctae praeceptorum obedientiae.

Next: ₄₀For holy obedience to his instructions.

Ideo enim dixit obedientiae cum adjectione sanctae, quia obedientia sancta est. Et reddit causam, quare est sancta, cum dixit praeceptorum. Et in hoc loco subaudiendum est divinorum.

He said for obedience with the adjective ‘holy’ because obedience is holy. And he explains why it is holy, when he said to his instructions. Here we have to add ‘divine.’

Et bene dixit praeceptorum, quia obedientia tunc obedientia, est, cum in praeceptorum Dei est custodia; nam transgressio praeceptorum Dei non obedientia, sed transgressio Dei est.

He rightly said to his instructions because obedience is only obedience when it is in the observance of God’s instructions. For the transgression of God’s teachings is not obedience, but transgression.

Et bene dixit militatura, quia cognovit, obedientiam non posse existere sine labore et sudore; ideo dixit militatura, quia militare ad laborem et sudorem et certamen attinet.

And he rightly said prepared to fight because he knew that obedience cannot exist without effort and sweat. He said prepared to fight because fighting is about effort, sweat, and struggle.

Et quod obedientia, sine labore non sit, testatur psalmista, cum dicit: Propter verba labiorum tuorum ego custodivi vias duras. [Ps 16:4] Et hoc ad inchoantes attinet; nam perfectis illud convenit, quod in evangelio legitur: Jugum meum suave est, et onus meum leve est. [Mt 11:30]

And that obedience does not exist without effort is shown by the psalmist when he says: Because of the words of your lips I have guarded the harsh roads [Ps 16:4]. And this refers to those who begin. But to those who are perfect is fitting what is read in the Gospel: My yoke is easy and my burden is light. [Mt 11:30]

Sequitur: ₄₁Et quod minus habet in nobis natura possibile, rogemus Dominum, ut gratiae suae jubeat nobis adjutorium ministrare.

Next: ₄₁And what is not possible in us by nature, let us ask God to order the aid of his grace to supply us.

Nunc vero quasi quidam interrogaret S. Benedictum dicens: ‘Pater Benedicte! praecepisti mihi obedientiam exhibere: ecce video, praeceptum Domini vel magistrorum spiritalium vires meas excedere; sed quid mihi agendum est pro hoc, opto, ut dicas’. Ille vero quasi respondens dicit: ‘Fili! quod minus habet in nobis natura possibile, rogemus Dominum, ut gratiae suae jubeat nobis adjutorium ministrare.

But if someone were to ask St. Benedict, as it were, saying: ‘Father Benedict! You taught me to show obedience. Look here. I see that the teaching of the Lord or of the spiritual masters exceed my powers. I wish that you tell me what I must do about this.’ He says, however, by way of answering: ‘Son! What is not possible in us by nature, let us ask God to order the aid of his grace to supply us.

Sunt enim quaedam res impossibiles corpori, veluti est domum uno die fabricare, aut pondus infinitae magnitudinis levare, et caetera his similia. Et sunt quaedam res, quae impossibiles sunt animae, veluti est foetorem infirmorum sustinere, et mortuum fastidire, et caetera bis similia.

Certain things are impossible for the body, like building a house in one day or lifting a weight of infinite magnitude, and the like. There are also things that are impossible for the soul, like bearing the stench of the sick and feeling disgust at a dead person, and the like.

Sed impossibilitas corporis naturae deputanda est, impossibilitas animae vitio magis deputanda est quam naturae, quia Deus animam bonam creavit, unde si in dignitate creationis suae permansisset, nil a sufficiente bonitate [page 64] minus haberet; sed quia recessit a dignitate creationis suae, nunc ad eandem bonitatem, quam autea sine labore habebat, sine labore non valet ascendere.

But the impossibility of the body has to be attributed to nature, the impossibility of the soul has to be attributed to vice rather than nature, because God created the soul good. Therefore, if [the soul] had stayed in the perfect state at its creation, it would now have nothing less of the goodness that was perfect in itself. [page 64] But since it withdrew from the perfect state at its creation, it is now unable to rise without effort to that same goodness, which it had before without effort.

Forte B. Benedictus simpliciter utriusque qualitatem substantiae nomine naturae comprehendit.

Perhaps St. Benedict comprehends in the one word ‘nature’ the quality of both substances.

Et bene dixit: rogemus Dominum, quia, quod meritis non valemus obtinere, frequenter orationinibus obtinemus.

And he rightly said: let us ask God, because what we cannot obtain with merits we frequently obtain with prayer.

Et hoc animadvertendum est etiam, quod dicit orare. Ostendit enim, quia ea, quae habemus, non a nobis habemus, sed a Domino, quem praecipimur orare. Propterea dixi: magis vitio, quam naturae, propter illud, quod Paulus dicit: Eramus filii irae. [Eph 2:3]

We also need to note that he says to pray. For he shows that the things we have, we do not have from ourselves but from the Lord, to whom we are taught to pray. Subsequently I said ‘more in vice that in nature,’ because of what Paul says: We were sons of anger. [Eph 2:3]

Ideo dixit: irae filii, quia adeo natura vitiata est, ut in naturam verteretur illud vitium.

He said sons of anger because nature has been so corrupted that this vice has been changed into nature.

Sequitur: ₄₂et si fugientes gehennae poenas ad vitam volumus pervenire perpetuum, ₄₃dum adhuc vacat, et in hoc corpore sumus, et haec omnia per hanc lucis vitam vacat implere, ₄₄currendum et agendum est modo, quod in perpetuum nobis expediat.

Next: ₄₂And if, fleeing the punishments of hell, we desire to attain eternal life, ₄₃while there is still time and we are in this body and there is time to carry out all these things by the light of life, ₄₄we must hurry and do now what would profit us for eternity.

Perseverat adhuc B. Benedictus in intentione exhortationis suae, qua coeperat exhortari, sed tamen alio genere locutionis loquitur, eo quod prius exhortatus est orare, ut fiat possibile, quod impossibile est, ac si diceret auditoribus suis: jam quia cognovistis poenas gehennae et coepistis fugere illas, currendum et agendum est modo, i. e. cum cursu et festinatione agendum est.

So far St. Benedict continues [to speak] with the purpose of encouraging – the kind of encouragement that he had begun with – but he nevertheless speaks in another genre of speech, because first he encouraged to pray for what is impossible, to become possible, as if he were saying to his audience: ‘since you know now the punishments of hell and have begun to flee from them, we must hurry and do now, that is we must act at a run and with haste.’

Et reddit causam, quid agendum sit, cum dicit: quod in perpetuum nobis expediat, i. e. prosit. Et reddit etiam causam, quando, cum dicit: dum adhuc vacat, et in hoc corpore sumus.

And he gives reason why we must act when he says: what would profit us, that is what would benefit us. And as answer to the question ‘when,’ he says: while there is still time and we are in this body.

In hoc enim loco, cum dicit: dum adhuc vacat et in hoc corpore sumus, ostendit, quia tempus praesentis vitae agendi est bonum et poenitendi malum, et post terminum vitae tempus est recipiendi tantum pro bonis sive malis, quae gessimus.

There where he says: while there is still time and we are in this body, he shows that the time of our present life is for doing good and repenting evil, and that after the end of life there is only time to receive [rewards] for the good deeds or evil deeds we have done.

Sequitur: ₄₅Constituenda est ergo a nobis dominici schola servitii.

Next: ₄₅Thus we must found a school for the Lord’s service.

Istud enim ergo ad superiorem sensum attinet; superius enim dixit: dum adhuc vacat, et in hoc corpore sumus, currendum et agendum est modo, quod in perpetuum nobis expediat, et nunc dicit: Constituenda est ergo schola dominici servitii, ac si diceret: ergo si ita est, i. e. si in [page 65] hoc praesenti saeculo agendum est bonum, quod in perpetuum nobis expediat, constituendus est locus, in quo sine impedimento saeculari agere debeamus illud bonum.

The word thus refers to the sentence above. For he said above: while there is still time and we are in this body, we must hurry and do now what would profit us for eternity. Now he says: Thus we must found a school for the Lord’s service, as if he were saying: ‘Thus, if it is the case that in [page 65] this present world we must do good, which would profit us for eternity, we must found a place wherein we ought to do that good [work] without worldly hindrance.’

In hoc enim loco scholam nominat monasticam disciplinam; nam sunt et aliae scholae; est enim schola ecclesiastica disciplina, schola est liberalium artium, schola est etiam alicujus artis, in qua aliquid discitur. Sicut in illis locis liberalium artium aliquid discitur et agitur, ita et in hac schola aliquid discitur et agitur.

He calls here the monastic discipline a school, for there are different kinds of school: ecclesiastical teaching [disciplina] is a school, there is the school of the liberal arts, and there is the school of any skill in which something is learnt. Just as in the places of the liberal arts something is learnt and done, just so also in this school something is learnt and done.

Schola autem graece, latine vacatio intelligitur, nam ubi hos dicimus vacare, graeci dicunt scholasare; ergo cum dicit: Constituenda est schola, tale est, ac si diceret: Constituenda est vacatio. Sic enim alibi dicit: Dominico die lectioni vacent omnes; [Regula Benedicti, c. 48.22] vacare enim est a rebus.

‘Schola’ is Greek. The Latin word is vacatio [being free]. For when we say to be free [vacare], the Greeks say scholasare. Therefore, when [Benedict] says: We must found a school, it is as if he were saying: ‘We must found free time’ He says elsewhere: Let all be free for the reading on Sunday [Regula Benedicti, c. 48.22]. For being free means ‘free from things.’

Ille autem vacat lectioni, qui ab alienis rebus separatus deditus est lectioni solummodo, quia nemo potest divinis rebus vacare, qui a terrenis rebus separatus prius non fuerit, sicut scriptum est: Vacate et videte, quoniam ego sum Deus [Ps 45:11], ac si diceret: nisi prius separati fueritis a terrenis rebus, nequaquam poteritis cognoscere, quid sit, Deus.

However, he who, cut off from outside influences, is dedicated only to reading is free for reading because no one can be free for divine things who has not been cut off from earthly affairs, just as is written: Be free [vacate] and see that I am God [Ps 45:11] as if he were saying: ‘Unless you are cut off from earthly affairs, you will by no means be able to know what God is.’

In hoc enim loco quaeri potest, quare B. Benedictus dixit schola? Intellexit B. Benedictus, in uno homine duas intentiones esse non posse, i. e. cogitationem, quae secundum Deum est, et secundum saeculum, dicente Domino: Nemo potest duobus dominis servire, i. e. Deo et mammonae, [Mt 6:24] hoc est duas intentiones, i. e. quae secundum Deum et secundum saeculum est.

At this place we can investigate why St. Benedict said school. St. Benedict understood that there cannot be two intentions in one person, that is a thought that is in accordance with God and in accordance with the world, because the Lord says: No one can serve two lords, that is God and mammon [Mt 6:24], that is, two intentions, what is in accordance with God and in accordance with the world.

Sunt enim multi, qui regnum coelorum quaerunt propter regnum coelorum, et sunt multi, qui terrenam curam habent propter amorem regni coelorum; isti tales Deo vacant, sicut superiores.

There are many who search the kingdom of heaven for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, and there are many who have earthly worries for the sake of their love of the kingdom of heaven. These people are free for God, just like those above.

Et sunt, alii, qui quaerunt regnum Dei propter lucra saeculi; et sunt multi, qui et regnum coelorum quaerunt propter amorem regni coelorum et quaerunt terrena lucra et agunt propter amorem terreni lucri; et quia in istis sunt duae intentiones, idcirco redarguuntur a Domino dicente: Nemo potest duobus dominis servire [Mt 6:24], i. e. intentiones secundum Deum et secundum saeculum.

And there are others, who search the kingdom of God for the sake of worldly gain of. And there are many who search the kingdom of heavens for the sake of love of the kingdom of heavens and search earthly gain and act in accordance with the love of earthly gain. And because in these people there are two intentions, they are convicted by the Lord who says: No one can serve two lords, that is God and mammon [Mt 6:24], that is in accordance with God and in accordance with the world.

Nam de istis intentionibus [page 66] docet Beda dicens: Nemo potest duobus dominis servire, quia non valet simul transitoria et aeterna diligere; si enim aeternitatem diligimus, cuncta temporalia in usu, non in affectu possidemus. [Bede, Homiliae III, no. 14 In Dominica Decima Post Trinitatem, PL 94, col. 298B]

Bede teaches this about those intentions [page 66]: No one can serve two lords because one cannot simultaneously love the transitory and the eternal. If we love eternity, we make use of all temporal things without getting attached to them [Bede, Homiliae III, no. 14, In Dominica Decima Post Trinitatem].

Sequitur: constituenda est, i. e. ordinanda est, docenda est.

Next: ₄₅We must found, that is: ‘we must arrange,’ ‘we must institute.’

Et bene dixit: a nobis, sed non a me, quia solus non erat, sed cum Deo erat et sensum omnium sanctorum describebat.

And he rightly said we and not ‘I’ because he was not alone, but he was with God and he was describing the thought of all the saints.

Sequitur: schola dominici servitii.

Next: ₄₅a school for the Lord’s service.

Bene dixit divini servitii, quia est et alia schola humani servitii; magna enim differentia est inter scholam divini servitii et humani. In schola etenim humani servitii militant homines regi et discunt genera bellorum et genera venationum et omnia, quae ad honestatem cultus saeculi attinent, et intuentur qualicumque7 oculo illi aliquid, ob quod tollerant mala omnia, id est famem, tribulationem et caetera his similia

He rightly said for the Lord’s service because there is also another school, viz. for human service. There is a great difference between the school for divine service and the one for human service. For in the school for human service people fight for the king and learn the kinds of wars and the kinds of hunting and all the things that pertain to the honor of worldly education. They keep their carnal³¹ eye on this thing [namely respectability/honor] and they put up with all kinds of troubles, that is hunger, tribulation etc., for the sake of it.

Ita, econtrario isti in schola dominici servitii militant regi coelesti et discunt salutem animae suae, et intuentur oculo spiritali coelestem beatitudinem, ob quam sustinent tribulationes et omnia mala.

On the other hand, people in the school for the Lord’s service fight for the heavenly king and learn the salvation of their soul, and keep their spiritual eyes on celestial happiness, because of which they bear tribulations and all kinds of evil.

Unde quia non vident multi hanc beatitudinem, ideo revertuntur ad saeculum, et non possunt (propter Deum) sustinere aliquid mali. A schola enim derivatur scholasticus; nam quia sit scholasticus vel discolus, docet Beda in epistolam B. Petri apostoli, ubi ipse apostolus dicit: non tantum bonis et modestis, sed etiam discolis. [1 Pt 2:18]

Because not many people see this happiness, they turn to the world and are not able to bear any kind of evil for the sake of God. From school we derive the word ‘scholastic,’ for Bede teaches what a scholastic or ill-tempered person in the [commentary on] the letter of St. Peter the Apostle, where the Apostle himself says: not only to the good and modest, but also to the ill-tempered. [1 Pt 2:18]

Ait enim: discolis, indisciplinatis dicit nomine ducto a graeco eloquio, quia graece schola vocatur locus, in quo adolescentes literalibus studiis operam dare et audiendis magistris solent vacare; unde schola vacatio interpretatur.

He says ‘ill-tempered’ [discolus]. By this name, derived from the Greek language, he means ‘undisciplined’ because in Greek schola denotes the place in which the young men put their energy to the study of letters and are accustomed to being free for hearing their teachers. That is why schola is called vacatio [free time].

Denique in psalmo, ubi canimus: Vacate et videte, quoniam ego sum Deus, [Ps 45:11] pro eo, quod nos dicimus vacate, in graeco habetur σχολαζετε (scholazete). Scholastici graece sunt eruditi; discoli indocti et agrestes. Sed utrisque vult obedire subditos explicans apertius, quomodo nos supra omni humanae creaturae jusserit, esse subjectos.

Then, in the psalm where we sing: Be free and see that I am God [Ps 45:11] we have in Greek for what we call ‘be free’ [vacate]: σχολαζετε [scholazete]. Scholastici are in Greek the erudite, discoli are the unlearned and barbarous. But he [Peter] wants inferiors to obey to both kinds [of masters], explaining quite plainly how he has ordered us to be subject to the entire creation.³²

Alia translatio (editio?) pro discolis difficiles habet, et S. antistes Fulgentius in opusculis suis sic ponit: servientes cum [page 67] timore non tantum bonis et modestis, sed etiam difficilioribus. [1Pt 2: 18]

Another version has ‘difficiles’ instead of ‘discolis.’ The bishop St. Fulgentius gives in his lesser works: serving with [page 67] fear, not only the good and modest, but also the more difficult. [1 Pt 2:18]³³

Sequitur: ₄₆In qua institutione nihil asperum, nihil grave nos constituturos speramus.

Next: ₄₆In its design we hope we will establish nothing harsh, nothing oppressive.

In qua institutione, i. e. in qua schola, speramus, i. e. credimus. B. vero Benedicto nihil erat asperum nihilque grave, eo quod audierat illam sententiam Domini, in qua dixit: Venite ad me omnes, qui laboratis et onerati estis, et ego vos reficiam; tollite jugum meum super vos et discite a me, quia mitis sum et humilis corde, et invenietis requiem animabus vestris; jugum enim meum suave est, et onus meum leve. [Mt 11:28-30]

 In its design, that is: in that school; we hope, that is: we believe. For St. Benedict, however, nothing was harsh and nothing oppressive because he had heard the sentence of the Lord in which he said: Come unto me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and you shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light. [Mt 11:28-30]

Et quamvis illi leve et suave erat, tamen sunt multi, quibus grave et asperum est, illis quippe, qui imperfecti sunt et minus mortificationem habent et non possunt dicere cum Paulo: Vivo autem jam non ego, vivit vero in me Christus. [Gal 2:20]

And even though it was light and easy for him, still there are many for whom it is harsh and oppressive, those, indeed, who are imperfect and have less mortification and are not able to say with Paul: I live, and yet, not I but Christ lives in me. [Gal 2:20]

Et quia mortificationem perfectam non habent et imperfecti sunt, cum aliquid adversitatis in monasterio vident, revertuntur ad saeculum et pereunt.

And because they do not have perfect mortification and are imperfect, when they see something burdensome in the monastery, they return to the world and perish.

Unde pater Benedictus quia cognovit, hos tales ita perire, ideo quasi consilium dando et admovendo praevenit eos dicens: ₄₇Sed et si quid paululum restrictius dictante aequitatis ratione propter emendationem vitiorum vel conservationem caritatis processerit, ₄₈non illico pavore perterritus refugias viam salutis, quae non est nisi angusto initio incipienda. 

Because Father Benedict knows that that such people perish in this manner, he, by way of giving advice and motivation, came to their help, telling them: ₄₇But if, according to the reason that dictates fairness, there emerges something a little severe in the interest of amending sins or preserving love, ₄₈do not at once be frightened by fear and flee the path of salvation, which can only be narrow at the start.

Ac si diceret: Nolite timere, quia nos non durum credimus exposituros esse; tamen si propter emendationem vitiorum vel conservationem caritatis fecerimus, nolite fugere, quia servitium Dei et haec disciplina in principio dura est et postmodum dulcis, sicut inferius subdit, cum dicit: processu et reliqua.

This is as if he were saying: ‘Do not fear, because we do not believe that we are about to expound [something] harsh. Still, if we will act in the interest of amending sins or preserving love, do not flee because the service to God and this discipline is harsh in the beginning and later sweet.’ He adds below: ₄₉By progress etc.

Restrictius, i. e. durius.

A little severe: that is, ‘rather harsh.’

Dictante, i. e. suggerente, docente.

That dictates, that is, ‘advises,’ ‘teaches.’

Aequitatis, i. e. justitiae. Justitia enim est, unicuique jus proprium tribuere.

Of fairness, that is, ‘of justice.’ For justice is to allot to each and every person his proper right.

Ratione, i. e. sapientia.

Reason that is, ‘wisdom.’

 Et bene dixit ratione, i. e. sapientia justitiam esse, quia ex sapientia procedit justitia; et nisi quia sapiens fuerit, judicare non poterit. Reddit vero causam, quare ex ratione justitiae procedat aliquid durius, [page 68] cum subdit: propter emendationem vitiorum vel conservationem caritatis.

And he rightly said that justice comes from reason, that is, from wisdom, because justice proceeds out of wisdom. And unless [someone] is wise, he will not be able to judge. Why should something rather harsh proceed by reason of justice? [page 68] Benedict answers: in the interest of amending sins or preserving love.

Deus enim duobus modis loquitur homini, i. e. aut interdicit malum aut praecipit bonum agere; homo vero duobus modis peccat, i. e. aut peccat cum agit interdictum malum, i. e. prohibitum, aut certe cum negligit agere bonum praeceptum.

For God speaks to man in two ways, that is, he either forbids evil or teaches good behavior. But man sins in two ways, that is, he either sins when he does a forbidden evil, that is a prohibited [evil], or certainly when he neglect to do a good thing that was taught him.

Et quia homo duobus modis peccat, idcirco B. Benedictus duas rationes dixit, cum subdit: propter emendationem vitiorum vel conservationem caritatis; emendatio enim vitiorum attinet ad illos, qui ea agunt, quae Deus interdicit, hoc est prohibet.

And because man sins in two ways, St. Benedict gives two reasons when he says: in the interest of amending sins or preserving love. Amending of sins concerns those who do what God forbids, that is, prohibits.

Conservatio vero caritatis attinet ad illos, qui negligunt agere ea, quae Deus praecepit. Caritas enim in hoc loco pro omni bonitate ponitur.

Preserving love, however, concerns those who neglect to do what God teaches. Love is used here for any form of goodness.

Non illico, i. e. non statim.

Not at once, that is, ‘not immediately.’

Pavore, i. e, timore.

By fear, that is, ‘in dread.’

Perterritus, i. e. perturbatus sive timidus.

Frightened, that is, ‘disturbed’ or ‘fearful.’

Sequitur: quae non est nisi angusto initio incipienda.

Next: ₄₈which can only be narrow at the start.

Meminerat enim B. Benedictus illud scriptum, in quo Dominus dixit: Contendite intrare per angustam portam. [Lc 13: 24]

St. Benedict bore in mind that piece scripture in which the Lord said: Hurry to enter through the narrow gate. [Lc 13:24]

Per augustam portam in aulam salutis intratur, quia per labores necesse est, ut jejunio saeculi fallentis illecebra vincatur.

People enter through the narrow gate into the court of salvation, because it is necessary that the allurement of the failing world be conquered through fasting.

Et bene dixit: Contendite intrare, quia nisi mentis contentio ferveat, unda mundi non vincitur, per quam anima semper ad ima revocatur, quia multi, dico vobis, quaerunt intrare et non possunt, quaerunt intrare salutis amore provocati, et non possunt itineris asperitate deterriti.

And he rightly said: Hurry to enter, because unless the zeal of the mind glows, the flood [unda] of the world through which the soul is always dragged into the deep is not overcome, because many, I tell you, seek to enter and are not able to.

Quaerunt hoc ambitione praemiorum, a quo mox laborum timore refugiunt, non quia jugum Domini asperum, aut onus est grave, sed quia nolunt discere ab eo, quoniam mitis est et humilis corde, ut inveniant requiem animabus suis, [cf. Mt 11:29] eoque fit angusta porta, qua intratur ad vitam. Quam lata porta, et spatiosa via est, quae ducit ad perditionem, et multi sunt, qui intrant per eam! Quam angusta porta, et arcta via est, quae ducit ad vitam et pauci sunt, qui inveniunt eam! [Mt 7:13-14]

They seek to enter, incited by the love of salvation and deterred by the harshness of the journey are not able. What they seek in their strong desire for rewards, they soon flee in fear of struggles, not because the Lord’s yoke is harsh or his burden oppressive, but because they do not want to learn from him – because he is meek and humble in heart – so that they should find rest for their souls [cf. Mt 11:29] and the gate, through which one enters into life, is made narrow for this reason. How wide is the gate, and how spacious the road which leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. How narrow is the gate and confined the road which leads to life, and there are few who find it! [Mt 7:13-14]

Dixi [dixit?]: quae non est nisi angusto initio incipienda.

He said³⁴ which can only be narrow at the start.

In illo loco Dominus secundum quosdam angustam portam dixit subtililatem fidei et abrenunciationem veteris Adae; hanc enim angustam portam, in quantum ad subtilitatem fidei attinet, non intrant haeretici, et in quantum ad abrenunciationem [page 69] veteris Adae attinet, non intrant carnales, qui fidem habent.

According to some people, in that place the Lord called the narrow gate the ‘simplicity [subtilitas] of faith’ and the renunciation of old Adam, for the heretics do not enter through this narrow gate, in as much as it refers to the simplicity of faith. And in as much as it refers to the renunciation [page 69] of old Adam, it is not entered by the people who have faith but live according to the flesh.

In illo enim loco Dominus generaliter omnes alloquitur, et omnibus congruit generaliter; et si omnes generaliter Dominus alloquitur, et omnibus generaliter congruit, quanto magis monachis congruit, qui sunt abrenunciatores saeculi?

In this place the Lord generally addresses all and it generally applies to all. And if the Lord generally addresses all and it generally applies to all, how much more does it apply to monks, who renounce the world?

Sed in hoc loco angusto initio intelligitur abrenunciatio propriarum voluntatum; valde enim angustum est his, qui per multos annos in suis propriis voluntatibus vixerunt, et si postmodum se alterius dominationi et potestati subdant non facientes suas voluntates.

By narrow at the start we understand here the renunciation of our own wills. This is very narrow for those who have lived by their own will for many years, even if they afterwards subject themselves to the domination and power of someone else by not following their own wills.

Hos tales hortatur B. Benedictus, cum subdit: ₄₉Processu vero conversationis et fidei dilatato corde inenarrabili dilectionis dulcedine curritur via mandatorum Dei.

St. Benedict encourages such people, when he adds: ₄₉By progress in monastic life and faith, with hearts expanded in love’s indescribable sweetness, we run along the path of God’s commands.

Verbi gratia, cum videt quis aliquem per arctum et arduum iter gradientem timendo, hortatur illum, ut cum fiducia vadat, dicens: ‘Cur times, frater, ire, cum, postquam de isto malo itinere exieris, statim ad requiem vadis et ad delectabile iter?’

For example, when someone sees another going in fear on a confined and steep course, he encourages him to go with trust, saying: ‘Why do you fear, brother, to go, when after you leave that bad course, you [will] at once go to peace and to a pleasant journey?’

Ita B. Benedictus facit, cum dicit: Processu conversationis et fidei dilatato corde inenarrabili dilectionis dulcedine curritur via mandatorum Dei, ac si diceret illis: ‘Cur timetis, fratres, cum angustum initium videtis, cum postmodum cum magna dulcedine viam mandatorum adimplebitis?’

This is what St. Benedict does when he says: By progress in monastic life and faith, with hearts expanded in love’s indescribable sweetness, we run along the path of God’s commands, as if he were telling them: ‘Why do you fear, brothers, when you see the narrow start, when after this you will fill the road of the commands with great sweetness?’

In hoc enim loco, ubi dicit fidei, subaudiendum est processu, ut sit: processu fidei. Processu autem conversationis attinet ad augmentationem dierum, ex quo quis convertitur, i. e. a quo coepit conversari, fidei vero attinet ad illam fidem, quae cognitione et actione operatur, de qua Dominus in Evangelio dicit: Qui autem crediderit et baptisatus fuerit, salvus erit. [Mc 16:16]

At this point, when he says in faith we must understand by progress so that it says by progress in faith. The phrase by progress in monastic life refers to the increase of days, from the day on which someone converts [to the monastic life], that is from the day when he begins to live monastically. In faith, however, refers to that faith which operates by knowledge and action. The Lord says about it in the gospel: He who will believe and be baptized will be saved. [Mc 16:16]

Et Paulus dicit: Omnem plenitudinem fidei. [Eph 3:19] Vita enim beata duobus modis constat.

And Paul says: The whole fullness of faith. [Eph 3:19] For the blessed life [vita beata] exists in two ways.

Et bene dixit: processu fidei, i. e. augmentatione fidei, quia fides, quae cognitione et actione constat, gradus habet, i. e. initium et processum, hoc est augmentationem atque consummationem. Initium fidei est, ut est illud: Credo Domine, adjuva incredulitatem meam. [Mc 9:23] Vide modo, quia tam parvam fidem habebat, ut eam non fidem, sed incredulitatem nominaret. Augmentatio fidei est, ut illud: Domine, adauge nobis fidem. [Luke 17:5]

And he rightly said: by progress in faith that is ‘by increase of faith,’ because faith that consists of knowledge and action has degrees, that is, a beginning and a progression, that is increase and fulfillment. The beginning of faith is like this: I believe, Lord, help my unbelief. [Mc 9:23] Now see that he had such small faith, that he did not call it faith, but unbelief. Increase of faith is expressed in Lord, increase our faith. [Lc 17:5]

De hoc enim loco [page 70] ita exponit Beda dicens: Et dixerunt Apostoli: Domine adauge nobis fidem. [Lc 17:5] Dixerat supra Dominus: Qui fidelis est in minimo, et in majore fidelis est; [Lc 16:10] et si in alieno fideles non fuistis, quod vestrum est, quis dabit vobis? [Lc 16:12]

Bede explains this place in this way: The Apostles said: Lord, increase our faith. The Lord had said earlier: He who is faithful in that which is a lesser thing is also faithful in a greater one [Lc 16:10]; and if you have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you what is yours? [Lc 16:12]

Et ideo apostoli, qui in alieno ac minimo, hoc est in terrenorum contemptu jam fuere fideles, in suo sibi ac majore fidem postulant augeri; nemo enim repente fit summus, sed in bona conversatione a minimis quisque inchoat, ut ad magna perveniat. Alia namque sunt virtutis exordia, aliud profectus, aliud perfectio, quam magnopere apostoli quaerentes ajunt: Domine adauge nobis fidem. [Beda, In Lucae Evangelium expositio V, 17:5, CCSL 120, p. 309]

The Apostles who were faithful in that which is another man’s and in what is lesser, that is in contempt of earthly things, asked that for them also faithfulness be increased in what their own and is greater. For no one suddenly becomes the best, but begins in a good monastic form of life [conversatio] from the smallest beginnings in order to arrive at the great things. Some things are beginnings of virtue, another thing is progress, and yet another is perfection, which the Apostles, who strove for it greatly, meant when they said: Lord increase our faith. [Bede, In Lucae Evangelium expositio V, 17:5]

Vide modo, quia apostoli fidem habebant, eo quod apostoli erant et tamen augmentationem fidei quaerebant, ut perfectam fidem haberent. Consummatio fidei est, ut est illud: Si habueritis fidem sicut granum sinapis, dicetis monti, ut transferatur in mare, et fiet vobis. [Mt 17:20]

Now look: the Apostles had faith because they were Apostles and yet were seeking to increase their faith to perfection. The perfection of faith is like this: If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say unto to the mountain that it should move itself into the sea and it will be done for you. [Mt 17:20]

Idcirco fides grano sinapis comparatur, quia sicut granum sinapis, cum integrum fuerit, minimum et vilius est omnibus oleribus, ita et fides, cum integra est, id est sine tribulatione, videtur esse vilis et minima, sed cum passionibus coepit conteri, statim fragrantiam sui odoris emittit, quae superat omnem fidem.

Faith is compared to a mustard seed because just as a mustard seed, when it is whole, is very small and cheaper than all herbs, so also when faith is whole, that is, without tribulation, it seems to be cheap and very small, but when it begins to be crushed (by pressure), it immediately sends out the fragrance of its smell that surpasses every faith.

Processu enim multis modis dicitur; dicitur enim processu temporis, quia dies succedit diei et mensis mensi et annus anno.

For by progress is used in many ways: it means the ‘by progress in time’ because a day follows a day and a month a month and a year a year.

Processu corporis est, cum de loco ad locum movetur. De hoc enim loco ita exponit Beda dicens, ait enim: Nam est et altera fides verbotenus, id est sine operibus, qua daemones credunt, sicut scriptum est: Daemones credunt et contremiscunt; qua etiam fide credunt mali homines, de qua fide Jacobus dicit: Fides sine operibus mortua est. [Iac 2:19-20] [source not identified]

By progress refers to the body, when it is moved from place to place. Bede explains about this place when he says: For there is another so-called ‘faith,’ that is, one without works, in which the demons believe, just as it is written: Demons believe and are saddened. Even the evil people believe with this faith. James says about it: Faith without works is dead [Iac 2:19-20]. [source not identified]

Nunc videndum est, quid sit dilatatio cordis.

We should now ask what is the hearts expanded.

Dilatatio cordis est, cum quis transcendit semetipsum, transcendit aerem, transcendit coelum, transcendit etiam angelos, et, figit oculum cordis in Deo et videt ibi omnem bonitatem, omnem suavitatem atque omnem dulcedinem, et adeo est [page 71] illi ista dulcedo delectabilis et suavis atque concupiscibilis, ut nihil aliud quam illam desideret dulcedinem.

The heart expands when someone transcends himself, transcends the air, heaven, even the angels, and attaches the eye of his heart to God and sees there all goodness, delight and sweetness. [page 71] His sweetness is so enjoyable, sweet, and desirable, that he desires nothing but that sweetness.

Et quod concupiscibilis sit ista dulcedo, manifestat B. Benedictus, cum subsecutus est dicens: via mandatorum Dei curritur.

St. Benedict shows that this sweetness is desirable, when he subsequently says: we run along the path of God’s commandment.

Bene dixit curritur, et non graditur, quia, sicut diximus, semper ad illam dulcedinem recurrit, qui de illa gustavit, quamvis etiam praeoccupatus sit in aliquibus rebus. Hoc enim desiderabat David, cum dixit: Unam petii a Domino, hanc requiram. [Ps 26:4]

He rightly said we run and not ‘we go,’ because, as we said, he who has tasted from that delight, always runs back to it, even though he may be busy with some [other] things. David desired this when he said: One thing have I asked of the Lord, that I will seek after. [Ps 26:4]

Vide modo, quia virtus gradus habet. B. Benedictus primitus dixit angusto initio, deinde dilatato corde subjunxit, postmodum dixit inenarrabili dilectionis dulcedine.

Now you must know that there are degrees in virtue. St. Benedict first said narrow at the start, then he added with hearts expanded and after that he said in love’s indescribable sweetness.

Quid dicendum est de his, qui in eadem angustia perseverant, qua coeperunt, verbi gratia, si durum fuit illis vigiliae, jejunium etc., durum et grave est illis semper? isti tales, quamvis videantur jugum Domini ferre corpore, tamen mente excussum habent; dolendum est.

What should we say about those who continue in the same narrowness with which they begun, e.g., if their vigils, fasting, etc. are always hard and onerous for them? Such people, even though they seem to carry the Lord’s yoke with their body, have damage [excussus] to their mind – this is regrettable.

Aut, quid dicendum est de his, quorum angustia augmentationem capit, i. e. si uno loco primis quamvis graviter contenti sunt, postmodum per loca discurrunt diversa, et si primitus graviter et dure fecit obedientiam, postmodum superbiendo noluit implere, et reliqua; valde dolendum est.

Or what should we say about those whose narrowness hinders their growth, that is, if they were first confined strictly to one place, but after that they run about through various places? And if [someone] first was obedient, with difficulty and trouble, and after that, in his arrogance, he did not want to comply, etc. This is very regrettable.

Nam sunt nonnulli, quibus quamvis gravis fuit obedientia, aut vigilia, et caetera, in initio conversionis, tamen per consuetudinem sit illis leve, i. e. per consuetudinem et amorem Christi.

For there are some people for whom, although obedience or vigils etc. at the beginning of the monastic life have been hard, still it is easy for them through habit, that is through the habit and love of Christ.

Sequitur: ₅₀ut ab ipsius magisterio nunquam discedentes.

Next: ₅₀so that, never turning away from his instruction.

Ab ipsius, subaudiendum est Dei sive institutionis; discedentes, id est recedentes; magisterio i. e. disciplina.

We have to understand this from his [instruction] as ‘God’s instruction’ or ‘the rule’s instruction’; turning away is ‘withdrawing from’; instruction is ‘discipline.’

Sequitur: ₅₀In ejus doctrina usque ad mortem in monasterio perseverantes passionibus Christi per patientiam participemur, ut regni ejus mereamur esse consortes. In ejus, subaudiendum est Dei sive institutionis.

Next: ₅₁persevering in his doctrine in the monastery until death, through patience we may share the sufferings of Christ and also deserve to be sharers in his kingdom.

Monasterium autem graecum est; mona enim graece latine unus sive solus, sterium graece latine statio interpretatur. Monasterium [page 72] itaque intelligitur: unius hominis statio.

We must understand in his as ‘God’s’ or ‘the rule’s.’ Monastery is Greek. The Greek ‘mona’ in Latin means ‘one’ or ‘alone,’ the Greek ‘sterium’ is translated in Latin as ‘place.’ Monastery, [page 72] then, means: ‘the place of one person.’

Ubi animadvertere debemus, quia sunt multi in monasterio, et tamen foris monasterium sunt, eo quod si videantur corpore jugum Domini ferre, tamen mente et corde excussum habent, quia, quamvis corpore propter timorem flagelli aut excommunicationis aliquid obedire videntur, tamen mente non obediunt.

We have to notice here that there are many in a monastery, and yet they are outside the monastery because if they seem to bear the Lord’s yoke with the body, they have damage [excussus] to their mind and heart because, although they seem to obey to something out of fear of the whip or excommunication, they do not obey with their mind.

Et sunt multi, qui, quamvis de monasterio exeant corpore; tamen mente et corde in monasterio sunt, eo quod aut ad meliorem conversationem vadunt vel similem, aut causa obedientiae. Isti tales plus sunt in monasterio, qui mente sunt in monasterio et non corpore, quam illi, qui corpore videntur et non sunt mente.

And there are many who, even though they leave the monastery with the body, are in mind and heart in the monastery, either because they go to a better or similar monastic life [conversatio], or because of obedience. Those people who are in mind in the monastery and not in body are more in the monastery than those who seem [to be in the monastery] in body and are not in mind.

Et bene dixit passionibus Christi per patientiam participemur, ut regni ejus mereamur esse consortes, quia nullus erit compos regni coelestis, qui non fuerit particeps passionum Christi.

And St. Benedict rightly said: through patience we may share the sufferings of Christ and also deserve to be sharers in his kingdom, because there will be no sharer in the heavenly kingdom, who will not be a sharer in Christ’s sufferings.

Animadvertendum est, quia hoc, quod B. Benedictus dixit: passionibus Christi per patientiam participentur, ut regni ejus mereamur esse consortes, Paulus brevi eloquio exponit, cum dicit: Si fuerimus socii passionum, simul et consolationis erimus. [2 Cor 1:7]

We need to notice that what St. Benedict said, namely through patience we may share the sufferings of Christ and also deserve to be sharers in his kingdom, is also put forward by Paul in the brief phrase: If we will be sharers of sufferings, we will simultaneously also be [sharers] of consolation [2 Cor 1:7].

Vide modo, quod H. Benedictus dixit: passionibus Christi per patientiam participemur, Paulus dicit: si fuerimus socii passionum; [2 Cor 1:7] et quod ille dixit: ut regni ejus mereamur esse consortes, Paulus dicit: et consolationis erimus. [cf. 2 Cor 1:7]

Now see: what St. Benedict calls through patience we may share the sufferings of Christ Paul calls: if we will be sharer of sufferings. And what Benedict calls we may deserve to be sharers in his kingdom, Paul calls: and we will also be [sharers] of consolation.

Prologus est praelocutio; praelocutio est, in qua doctor manifestat, qua ratione librum scripsit. Notandum est enim, quia pars praelocutionis fuit illa, in qua suo auditori dixerat Ausculta, o fili, praecepta ei reliqua.

A prologue is a foreword. A foreword is that in which a learned man shows why he has written the book. We have to notice that a part of the foreword was that in which he had said to the listener: Listen, o son, to the teachings etc.

Nunc autem, quia decreverat ille suus auditor esse, abrenuntians omnibus suis facultatibus, rectum ordinem tenuit, cum post illam admonitionem dicit de generibus vel vita monachorum, quasi diceret: Quia jam decrevisti meus auditor esse, ideo manifesto tibi, quot et quae sunt genera monachorum, deinde ad quod genus te praedicando traho; ideo subjunxit in fine: His ergo omissis ad coenobitarum, fortissimum, genus disponendum (et reliq.) adjuvante Domino veniamus. [Regula Benedicti, c. 1.13]

But now that [the young monk] had decided to be his listener, renouncing all his powers, [Benedict] held the right order when he speaks after that admonition about the kinds or the life of monks, as if he were saying: ‘Since you have decided to be my listener, I show you how many kinds of monks there are and what characterizes them, then to what kind I draw you with preaching. At the end he adds: Therefore, leaving them aside, with God’s help let us proceed to specifications for a very strong kind of monk, the cenobites. [Regula Benedicti, c. 1.13]

Cap. I
INCIPIT REGULA S. BENEDICTI
DE QUATUOR GENERIBUS VEL VITA MONACHORUM

[Ms P, fol. 19r – Paulus Diaconus –
Ps.-Basil: Ms K², fol. 52r; Ms E¹, fol. 25r; Ms E², fol. 32r]

Ch. 1
HERE BEGINS THE RULE OF SAINT BENEDICT
THE FOUR KINDS OF MONKS AND THEIR LIVES


Translated by: Albrecht Diem

₁ Monachorum quatuor esse genera manifestum est. ₂Primum est¹ coenobitarum, hoc est monasteriale, militans sub regula vel abbate. ₃Deinde secundum genus est anachoretarum, id est eremitarum, horum, qui non conversionis fervore novitio sed monasterii probatione diuturna ₄didicerunt² contra diabolum multorum solatio jam docti pugnare.

₁It is clear that there are four kinds of monks. ₂First are the cenobites, those in a monastery serving (like soldiers) under a rule and/or an abbot. ₃The second kind are anchorites, that is, hermits, those no longer fresh in the fervor of monastic life but long tested in a monastery ₄who have learned, by now schooled with the help of many, to fight against the devil.

Apte enim et congrue fuit, ut descripturus vitam et normam monachorum prius diceret de generibus vel ordinibus eorum, quatenus per genus cognosceretur auctor uniuscujusque vitae, quia eo verius et securius unaquaeque ars vel disciplina tenetur, quo auctor ejus ad probabilem fidem venisse comprobatur, veluti quis cum aliquod aedificium aedificare voluerit, primitus fundamentum ponit. Ita B. Benedictus in hoc loco facere cognoscitur, cum prius de generibus monachorum dixit.

It was appropriate and suitable that Benedict first spoke about the kinds and ranks of monks in order to describe their life and their standard, and to what extent one can recognize the founder of each way of life, because one performs a skill or a discipline more truthfully and steadfastly if its founder is known to have come to a credible faith, just as when someone wanted to build some kind of building he first places the foundation. We can see that Benedict did this here, when he first spoke about the kinds of monks.

Coenobitae enim intelliguntur communiter viventes. Coenobitae enim sumpserunt initium a primitiva ecclesia Jerosolymis constituta. Narrat enim historia actuum apostolorum, quia uno die credebant tria millia et alio die quinque millia, et quotquot erant possessores agrorum, vendebant praedia sua et pretia eorum ponebant ante pedes apostolorum, et apostoli tribuebant unicuique, ut opus erat. [cf. Act 4:1-35] Et sic vivebat tunc omnis illa ecclesia, sicut perpauci nunc inveniuntur vivere in monasteriis. Sed post excessum, id est obitum apostolorum coepit illa ecclesia tepescere, et non solum praelati, verum etiam subjecti, eo quod apostoli concesserant gentibus, retinendo substantiam suam ad fidem venire. Nam quod apostoli concesserant gentibus pro infirmitate, illa ecclesia putabat etiam sibi licitum esse. Et unde hoc probatur, quia apostoli concesserant gentibus, habere substantiam suam et sic venire ad fidem.

We understand as cenobites those who live in communities. Cenobites have their origins in the primitive Church founded in Jerusalem. The story of the Acts of the Apostles tells that on one day three thousand people came to faith and on another day five thousand. Those who owned fields sold their estates and placed the money at the feet of the Apostles, who gave everyone what was needed. [cf. Act 4:1-35] And the entire Church lived at that time in the same way as today only a few live in monasteries. But after the passing, that is, the death of the Apostles this Church began to grow lukewarm, not only the leaders but also the followers, because the Apostles had allowed the gentiles to come to faith while keeping their possessions. Because what the Apostles had allowed to the gentiles due to their weakness, this Church now considered legitimate for itself as well. It became thus commendable, because the Apostles had given the gentiles permission to keep their possessions and to come to faith in such a way.

Legitur in Actibus apostolorum: Cum praedicarent apostoli Antiochiae, surrexerunt falsi apostoli adversum veraces apostolos dicentes: 'Quare non circumciduntur gentes, cum ad fidem [page 74] veniunt?' [cf. Act 15-16] Illi vero miserunt Paulum et Barnabam Jerosolymam ad apostolos super hac quaestione. Similiter illi falsi apostoli miserunt suos missos ad apostolos, qui Jerosolymis erant. Qui Apostoli convenerunt in unum, et ait Petrus ad falsos apostolos: 'Cur imponitis hoc jugum super nos, quod non potuerunt portare patres nostri neque nos? Sed per gratiam Domini Jesu Christi credimus salvari, quemadmodum et illi'. [cf. Act 15:10-11] Ait autem gentibus: 'Nos enim non imponimus super vos nisi tantum, ut abstineatis vos a fornicatione, a sanguine et suffocato'. [cf. Act 15:20].

We can read in the Acts of the Apostles that when the Apostles preached in Antioch, false apostles stood up against the true Apostles and said: 'Why do the gentiles not get circumcised when they come to faith?' [cf. Act 15-16] [page 74] In fact they sent Paul and Barnabas with this question to the Apostles in Jerusalem. Likewise those false apostles sent their envoys to the Apostles who were in Jerusalem. When they came together, Peter spoke to the false apostles: 'Why do you impose this yoke upon us, which neither our fathers nor we could bear? But we believe ourselves saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, just as they do.' [cf. Act 15:10-11] And he spoke to the gentiles: 'We do not impose anything upon you except that you abstain from fornication, from bloodshed and from murder.' [cf. Act 15:20]

In hoc enim loco claret, quia cum substantia sua venerunt gentes ad fidem. Et quamquam tepuerat ecclesia, sicut diximus, tamen erant in illa ecclesia, in quibus erat fervor apostolicus, meminentes ordinis et vitae, qualiter apostoli vixerant. Qui videntes hunc teporem, exibant a consortio illorum et ibant in suburbana et secretiora loca, et prout recordbantur, ea, quae apostoli docuerant, exercebant, et ita ortum est genus coenobitarum, et permansit hoc genus solum multis annis, et adeo permansit multis annis, ut solum usque ad tempus Pauli et Antonii duraret. [cf. Cassian, Collationes XVIII, c. 5, SC 64, pp. 14-16]

This passage makes clear that the gentiles came to faith with their possessions. And, as we have said, although the Church had grown lukewarm, there were still in this Church people who retained the zeal of the Apostles and remembered the rules and the lives that the Apostles had lived.¹ When they saw this tepidity, they left their company and went to the outskirts and secret places, and they performed from memory what the Apostles had taught. And this is the origin of the cenobites. For many years they were the only kind of monks – for a period that lasted until the time of Paul and Antony. [cf. Cassian, Collationes XVIII, c. 5, SC 64, pp. 14-16]

Sed sicut solet ex radice bona fructus bonus procedere, ita ex hac sancta radice bonus fructus processit, id est aliud genus monachorum, id est eremitarum, quorum auctores fuerunt in veteri testamento Elias et Elisaeus, in novo testamento Joannes Baptista, Paulus et Antonius.[cf. Cassian, Collationes VIII, c. 6, SC 64, pp. 16-17]

A good root bears good fruit and the good fruit from this holy root was another kind of monks, the hermits whose founders were Elias and Elisha in the Old Testament, John the Baptist in the New Testament and Paul [of Thebes] and Anthony. [cf. Cassian, Collationes VIII, c. 6, SC 64, pp. 16-17]

Deinde cum religio christiana gauderet his duobus generibus monachorum, ortum est tertium genus Sarabaitarum, quod lingua syriaca dicitur, latine interpretatur renuitarum, eo quod aliorum imperia vel voluntates implere renuunt et suas volunt facere. Quorum auctores fuerunt Ananias et Saphira, qui tempore apostolorum, cum vendidissent possessiones suas, causa diffidentiae fraudaverunt de pretio agri et partem posuerunt ante pedes apostolorum. Quos Petrus, quia radicitus voluit amputare hoc vitium, non carcere, non aliqua sententia, sed solummodo celeri morte plexit. id est condemnavit. [cf. Act 5:1-10]

Then, while the Christian faith rejoiced at these two kinds of monks, a third one emerged, the sarabaites, as they were called in the Syrian language. In Latin we call them 'refusers', because they refuse to fulfill the orders or the will of others and fulfill only their own will. Their founders were Ananias and Sapphira, who in the time of the Apostles out of distrust cheated over the price of a field when they sold their possessions and placed only part of the money at the feet of the Apostles. Because he wanted to cut off this vice at its root, Peter did not punish, that is, pronounce imprisonment or any other sentence, but punished them with no more than sudden death.

Ubi animadvertere debemus: si illi, qui sua detinuerunt, tali poena mulctati sunt, quali poena mulctandi sunt illi, qui [page 75] aliena vel oblata Deo rapiunt? Nam si talis fuisset tempore apostolorum, quali poena plexus esset?[cf. Cassian, Collationes XVIII, c. 7, SC 64, pp. 18-19]

Therefore we have to consider that if those who kept their possessions are treated with such a punishment, what punishment will they face who [page 75] rob belongings from another or those given to God? For, if a person who steals from God had existed in the time of the Apostles, what kind of punishment would he have faced? [cf. Cassian, Collationes XVIII, c. 7, SC 64, pp. 18-19]

Gyrovagi dicuntur, eo quod in giro vadunt, id est per diversas provincias. Horum auctores non facile reperiuntur. Nam est etiam aliud genus monachorum, sicut Cassianus dicit; ait enim: 'Est etiam quintum genus monachorum, quod nuper surrexit, qui paucis diebus habitant in monasteriis, sed quia nolunt vitia sua resecare, cellas secretiores ad similitudinem anachoretarum expetunt'. [cf. Cassian, Collationes XVIII, c. 8, SC 94, pp. 21-22 and Isidore, De ecclesiasticis officiis II, c. 16(15).5, CCSL 113, pp. 75-76]

Gyrovagues have their name because they walk in circles (in giro). That means they wander through different provinces. Their founders cannot be easily traced because there is also another kind of monks that Cassian says is a fifth kind of monks that emerged recently. They live only a few days in monasteries but since they do not want to cut off their vices, they ask for separate cells in the way the anchorites do. [cf. Cassian, Collationes XVIII, c. 8, SC 64, pp. 21-22 and Isidore, De ecclesiasticis officiis II, c. 16(15).5, CCSL 113, pp. 75-76]

Hi tales, quia videntur formam sanctitatis habere, idcirco non redarguuntur, et quia non redarguuntur, ideo remanent eorum vitia incurata; nam virtutes non ex occultatione vitiorum, sed ex impuguatione oriuntur.

Because they appear to be holy, no one criticizes them, and because they are not criticized their vices remain untreated because virtues do not come of hiding vices but attacking them.

Sequitur: ₂Primum genus³ est coenobitarum, hoc est monasteriale.

Next: ₂First are the cenobites, those in a monastery.

Inter coenobium et monasterium hoc interest: coenobium attinet ad professionem et disciplinam atque locum, monasterium vero attinet solummodo ad locum. Tamen abusive pro coenobio ponitur monasterium, et coenobium pro monasterio similiter ponitur. Et cum dixit coenobitarum, subjunxit monasteriale. Per illud monasteriale manifestavit locum, in quo coenobium est.

The difference between a coenobium and a monasterium is as follows: coenobium refers to the profession, to the discipline and to the place, while monasterium only refers to the place. Even though it is incorrect, people use monasterium for coenobium and, likewise, coenobium for monasterium. And when he talked about 'cenobitical', he implied 'monastic' because 'monastic' refers to the place where the coenobium is located.

Sequitur: militans sub regula vel abbate.

Next: serving under the rule and/or (vel) the abbot.

Per istud militans ostendit B. Benedictus, laborem esse in monasterio, eo quod istud nomen, quod est militans, ad laborem et certamen attinet.

By using militans (serving) the Blessed Benedict makes clear that there is exertion in the monastery, because this word - militans - refers to exertion and struggle.

Nunc videndum est, quare B. Benedictus, cum dixit: sub regula et abbate, interposuit istud vel, quia istud separationem facit, et abbas non potest esse sine regula; nam si alteram vitam duxerit, illius ordinis non est abbas, sed ejus, cujus vitam duxit. Regula autem potest esse sine abbate, sicuti sunt multa monasteria, quae, quamvis abbatem regularem non habeant, tamen praepositos, decanos et caeteros ordines regulares habent, eo quod multi abbates canonici non minus sunt solliciti de regulae observatione, quam si regulares abbates fuissent.

Now we have to see why Benedict inserted the word 'vel' (rather: 'or') instead of saying 'under the rule and (et) the abbot'. He does this because he makes the following distinction: The abbot cannot be without a rule since if he leads a life different from the rule he is not an abbot of this order but of that order in which he led his life. A rule, however, can exist without an abbot, as we see in many monasteries that, despite not having a regular abbot, still have priors, deacons and other ranks according to the rule, because many canonical abbots [= lay abbots] are just as zealous in the observation of the rule as if they were regular abbots.

Istud enim vel duobus modis intelligi potest; uno enim modo, forte quia B. Benedictus fuit plenus spiritu prophetiae et vidit spiritu prophetiae istud tempus, in quo sunt multa monasteria [page 76] sine abbatibus regularibus, sicuti superius diximus, ideoque posuit: militans sub regula vel abbate.⁴ Aut certe posuit simpliciter vel pro et.

This vel can be understood in two ways: either Benedict happened to be full of the spirit of prophecy and foresaw in this spirit of prophecy that there would be a time in which there would be many monasteries [page 76] without regular abbots, as we just said, which was for him the reason to say serving under the rule or (vel) the abbot. Or he just meant et and said vel.

Deinde: Secundum genus est anachoretarum, id est eremitarum, qui⁵ non conversionis fervore novitio, sed monasterii probatione diuturna [qui] didicerunt contra diabolum multorum solatio jam docti pugnare.

Further: The second kind are anchorites, that is, hermits, those no longer fresh in the fervor of monastic life but long tested in a monastery, who have learned, by now schooled with the help of many, to fight against the devil.

Fervore novitio intelligitur: in primo fervore conversionis, hoc est dicere: non statim vadunt in eremum, quando incipit illis cogitatio eundi in eremum. Quare? quia nesciunt, utrum sint perseveraturi in hoc fervore, eo quod solet diabolus aliquando per speciem bonitatis decipere hominem.

The expression fresh in the fervor has to be understood as 'in the first fervor of conversion'. Thus he says: they do not immediately go into solitude when they come up with the idea of going into solitude. Why? Because they do not know whether they will persevere in this fervor, since the devil is used to deceiving man under the guise of goodness.

Verbi gratia, videt diabolus hominem in malitia positum, dat illi compunctionem, suggerit illi, ut vadat in eremum. Ideo hoc facere studet, ut, ille, quantum⁶ majorem professionem Deo devoverit et neglexerit, tanto illum diabolus arctius et strictius valeat tenere.

To give an example: the devil sees a man doing evil [literally: placed in ill will]. He makes him remorseful and prompts him to go into solitude. The devil is eager to do that, so that the greater the promise was that the sinner had made to God and then broke, the closer and tighter the devil could hold him.

Ea intentione B. Benedictus dixit in hoc loco: non vadunt in eremum, qua intentione praecipit Paulus apostolus de episcopis; ait enim: non neophytum, [1 Tm 3:6] id est novellum, eo quod nescitur, utrum perseveraturus sit in fide annon.

Here the Blessed Benedict discourages going into solitude for the same reason as the Apostle Paul prescribed that no neophytes [1 Tim 3:6] should become bishops. 'Neophyte' means newcomer. He says that because one does not know whether a newcomer will persevere in his faith or not.

Nam quid sit neophytus, B. Gregorius in quadam epistola sua, quam direxit ad Syagrium episcopum et ceteros alios episcopos Galliarum, exponit hoc modo dicens: Sicut autem tunc neophytus dicebatur, qui initio in sanctae fidei erat conversatione plantatus, sic modo neophytus habendus est, qui in religionis habitu plantatus ad ambiendos honores sacros irrepserit. [Gregory the Great, Registrum IX, no. 219]

The Blessed Gregory gives a definition of 'neophyte' in a latter he sent to Bishop Syagrius and other bishops of provinces of Gaul. Here he explains: But just as one was then called a neophyte, who had been placed at the beginning of a life of holy faith, even so the one should be treated as neophyte who is placed in a religious habit and has insinuated himself to strive for holy honors. [Gregory I, Registrum IX, no. 219]

Necnon idem B. Benedictus in alio loco praecipit, propterea non debere monachum cito suscipere, sed illum uno anno probare, quia nescitur, utrum perseveraturus sit in hac professione annon. [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 58] Ac si interrogaret B. Benedictum quis: 'et quid faciunt in principio conversionis eundi⁷ ad eremum?' respondit ille dicens: ... sed in monasterio⁸ probatione diuturna [qui] didicerunt contra diabolum multorum solatio jam docti pugnare. Diuturna, id est [page 77] spatium longi temporis, veluti quis, cum vult ire contra hostem exercitatum, prius se exercitat et discit omnia genera bellorum et ingenia, ut valeat resistere et superare hostem suum, quia si inexercitatus contra exercitatum ierit, periturum se cognoscit.

The Blessed Benedict prescribed the same at another place, saying that one should not accept a monk immediately but test him for a year because it is not known whether he will persevere in his profession or not. [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 58]. And if someone would ask the Blessed Benedict what those should do at the beginning of their conversion if they want to go into solitude, he responds ... but long tested in a monastery, who have learned, by now schooled with the help of many, to fight against the devil. Long (diuturna) means [page 77] for a great span of time. If someone wants to attack a well-trained enemy, he first trains himself and learns all the techniques and arts of war, in order to be able to resist and overcome his enemy, since someone untrained who attacks someone experienced will find himself perishing.

Ita et monachus prius discit in monasterio ingenia diaboli et pugnas illius et postmodum vadit in eremum ad singularem pugnam. Et bene dixit: multorum solatio, quia sicut ille, qui inter suos vel cum aliis pugnat contra hostem suum, si forte vulneratur aut percutitur, adjuvatur vel eripitur ab illis, ita et monachus, cum in monasterio pugnat contra diabolum, cum vulneratur aut percutitur a diabolo, adjuvatur a fratribus, id est, oratione, consolatione atque exhortatione.

Therefore a monk first learns in the monastery the arts of the devil and his battle tricks, and afterwards he goes into solitude for single combat. And rightly he said: with the help of many, because if someone who fights against his enemy together with his people or in a group perhaps gets injured or wounded, he is helped and rescued by his people. Likewise, if a monk within the monastery gets wounded or injured while fighting against the devil, he gets help from his brothers through prayer, comfort and exhortation.

Sequitur: ₅Et bene instructi fraterna ex acie ad singularem pugnam eremi securi sine⁹ consolatione alterius sola manu vel brachio contra vitia carnis vel cogitationum Deo auxiliante sufficiunt pugnare;¹⁰ ac si diceret: postquam docti fuerint, tunc vadunt in eremum.

Next: ₅...well trained in the brotherly line of battle for single combat in the desert, by now confident even without another's encouragement, they are ready, with God's help, to fight the vices of the body and of thoughts with hand and arm alone. It is if he was saying: 'after they have been instructed they go into solitude'.

Acies enim tribus modis dicitur; dicitur enim acies ferri, hoc est acumen, dicitur oculorum, hoc est illa vis, qua oculus videt, dicitur etiam acies multitudo exercitus, id est militum ordinata. In hoc quippe loco pro multitudine fratrum ponitur.

The term acies (literally: 'sharpness') can be used in three ways. Used as acies ferri it means the point of a sword; as acies oculorum it means the power with which the eye sees. But acies also means the multitude of the army, that is, the ordered mass of soldiers. In this context, however, it refers to the group of brothers.

Est enim acies, quae est constipata, id est constricta, et est acies, quae non est stipata, et est acies, quae habet fortes bellatores, et est acies, quae non habet fortes bellatores, et est acies, quae est magna, et est acies, quae non est magna; sed illa acies timetur ab hoste, quae est stipata et habet fortes bellatores. Ita etiam acies illa timetur a diabolo, quae est stipata fraterna caritate et habet fortes bellatores, sicuti est ecclesia, ad quam in Canticis canticorum dicitur: Pulchra es, amica mea, et suavis et decora sicut Jerusalem, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata. [Ct 6:4]¹¹ Ista enim acies, de qua hic dicitur, ponitur pro congregatione fratrum.

There is a battle line that is tight, that is, bound together. But there is also a battle line that is loose. There are battle lines with or without strong warriors and there are large and small battle lines. The enemy fears a tight battle line with strong warriors, thus the battle line that is tied together by brotherly love and strong warriors, just like the Church as it is referred to in the Song of Songs: You are as beautiful, my friend, and sweet and adorned as Jerusalem and terrifying as an ordered battle line of forts. [Ct 6:4] The battle line of which we speak here stands for the community of brothers.

Ex enim ponitur pro 'ab', quasi diceret: ab acie fraterna. Duobus modis potest jungi, id est: instructi ab acie fraterna, sive: ab acie fraterna pergunt in eremum ad singularem pugnam.

The word ex (in fraterna ex acie = out of the line of battle of the brothers) is used instead of ab. He could also have said ab acie fraterna (= from the brotherly line of battle). We can read this part in two ways: either as instructi ab acie fraterna, which means 'instructed by the brotherly line of battle' or as ab acie fraterna pergunt in eremum ad singularem pugnam, which means 'from the brotherly line of battle they move into solitude into single combat'.

Nunc videndum est, quomodo instruitur? Instruitur enim [page 78] ita: verbi gratia, interrogat quis priorem suum vel quemlibet, quem videt studiosum, quomodo illi nascitur compunctio, aut quomodo vincit iram, aut quali modo est tam devotus in lectione aut in oratione, in obedientia et ceteris his similibus; aut si impugnatur cogitatione, qualiter debeat illi resistere, aut si forte bonam cogitationem habet, qualiter debeat cognoscere illam, utrum finem habeat bonum an non? Ille alter dicet illi, si videt eam deceptricem: Noli consentire illi, quia mala est, et reliqua. Necnon videt ibi vulneratum fratrem a diabolo, et iterum videt illum vincentem diabolum et cetera hujusmodi. Nam sic contingit illi, qui indoctus exit de acie castrorum; vadit contra invisibilem inimicum pugnare et perit.

Now we have to look how they are trained. [page 78] For example: someone asks his superior or another person he regards as skilled how to become remorseful or how to overcome anger or how to be dedicated to reading and prayer, devout in obedience, etc., or, if he is attacked by evil thoughts, how to resist them or, if he happens to have a good thought, how one ought to recognize if it is for good or not. If the other sees that that thought is deceiving, he tells him: 'Don't give in to it because it is evil,’ etc. In fact, sometimes he sees a brother being wounded by the devil, sometimes he sees him overcoming the devil, etc. This happens to him who leaves the fortified line of battle without instruction: He fights against an invisible enemy and perishes.

Sicut legitur in libris gentilium: Venerunt hostes contra quandam civitatem et non poterant per fortitudinem illam civitatem capere, et cum vidissent, non posse praevalere adversus illam, dixerunt: 'Quid opus est, ut tanta multitudo pugnet? Exeat unus e nostris adversus singulare certamen contra unum de vestris, et post, qui vicerit, illius pars sit victrix'. Et cum hoc statuissent, exiit unus minus cautus de civitate, et erat pons inter civitatem et hostem. Deinde veniens in medium pontem obviavit illi, contra quem singulare certamen debuerat inire, dixitque ille, qui contra urbem veniebat: 'Contra quem vadis?' Respondit alter dicens: 'Contra te, ut tecum ineam certamen, sicut dixistis'. Respondit alter dicens: 'Vestrum placitum fuit, ut unus solus exiret de civitate contra me; tu cur cum multis venisti? Vide, quanti te sequuntur!' Ille vero incautus cum respexisset retro, ille alter percussit eum et occidit.

In the books of the heathens we read that enemies attacked a certain city and could not conquer it by force. When they realized that they could not prevail, they said: 'What is the use if such a great multitude fights? Let one of us fight in single combat against one of yours. The side of the one who wins will be the winner.' After they agreed on that, one reckless soldier came out from the city. There was a bridge between the city and the enemies. In the middle of the bridge he met the one he had to fight in single combat. The one fighting against the city said: 'Whom are you approaching?' He responded: 'I meet you to fight you, just as you all said.’ The other said: 'You made the pledge that only one would come out of the city against me. Why have you come with many? Look how many are following you!' When the incautious man turned his head, the other one struck him and killed him.²

Vide modo, quia iste incautus nescivit ingenia bellandi, ideo periit.¹² Ita et monachus; monachus enim quasi cum multis pugnat contra diabolum, cum in monasterio contra diabolum pugnat; cum vero in eremum vadit, quasi ad singulare certamen pergit contra diabolum; deinde si minus cautus fuerit et fortis et non cognoverit insidias diaboli sedens in monasterio, cum in eremum fugerit, superabitur a diabolo, quia multa ingenia et insidias habet. Nam sicut legitur in collationibus patrum, magna erat [page 79] nimis tentatio diaboli contra monachos, et adeo magna, ut non omnes auderent dormire, sed quidam dormiebant, et quidam pro dormientibus orabant. [cf. Cassian, Collationes VII, c. 23]

Now see that this reckless man did not know the arts of war. Therefore he died. It is the same with a monk. He fights, as it were, along with many against the devil if he fights within the monastery, but when he goes into solitude he fights the devil as if in single combat. If someone who lives the monastery is less cautious and strong and does not know sufficiently the snares of the devil, and he flees into solitude, he will be overcome by the devil, because the devil has many arts and traps. We read in the Conferences of the Fathers that the [page 79] devil's temptations of the monks were so great that they did not even dare to sleep all at the same time, but some slept and others prayed for the ones who slept. [cf. Cassian, Collationes VII, c. 23]

Et bene dixit: ad singularem pugnam eremi securi jam sine consolatione alterius sola manu et brachio.

And rightly Benedict says: for single combat in the solitude, by now confidant even without another's encouragement, (...) with hand and arm alone.

Prius enim dixerat, cum in monasterio erat: multorum solatio discere insidias diaboli; nunc dicit: sola manu vel brachio sine constitutione alterius, ac si diceret: constitutus in monasterio habet adjutores, in eremo vero nullum adjutorem habebit, sed sola, manu vel brachio.

Earlier he had said that those in the monastery learned with the help of many the snares of the devil. Now he says without another's encouragement (...) with hand and arm alone. He means that in a monastery a monk has helpers, but in solitude he will not, and has to fight with his hand and arm alone.

Per manum operationem simplicem, per brachium vero fortitudinem operationis designat, quasi diceret: aut pugnabit simpliciter aut fortiter, quia non omnes aequaliter aggreditur, id est tentat diabolus.

The hand refers simply to the act; the arm to the vigor of the act. It is as if he was saying that he either fights simply or vigorously, since the devil does not attack, that is, tempt everyone in the same way.

Si fuerit fortis et solicitus et studiosus nimis, nimiam sustinebit diaboli tentationem; si autem simplex fuerit, non maguam sustinebit tentationem, eo quod juxta fortitudinem hominis permittit Deus diabolum illum tentare. Unde psalmista dicit: Proba me Domine et tenta me, [Ps 25:2] hoc est: cognosce vires meas et tunc da licentiam diabolo me tentandi.

If someone is very vigorous and engaged and zealous, he will endure enormous temptation from the devil. But if he is simple, he will not endure great temptation because God allows the devil to tempt man according to his strength. Therefore says the Psalmist: Test me, God, and tempt me [Ps 25:2]. That is: Know my strengths and then give the devil permission to tempt me'.

Sequitur: Contra vitia carnis et cogitationum Deo auxiliante sufficiunt pugnare.

Next: They are ready with God's help, to fight the vices of the body and of thoughts.

Alia enim sunt vitia corporis, alia animae; vitia corporis sunt, veluti sunt: loquacitas, immunditia, fornicatio, gula et caetera vitia, quae per corpus fiunt; vitia animae sunt, veluti ira, superbia, invidia et caetera his similia, quae per animum perpetrantur.

There are different vices of the body and of the soul. Bodily vices are loquacity, uncleanliness, fornication, gluttony and others that happen through the body. Vices of the soul are anger, pride, envy and others that are performed through the mind.

Et bene dixit Deo auxiliante, quia si homo nil boni potest agere sine Dei adjutorio, quanto minus cum contra se pugnat vel contra diabolum?

And rightly he says: with God's help, because if man cannot do anything good without God's help, how much less so if he fights against himself or against the devil?

Sequitur: ₆Tertium vero¹³ teterrimum genus est Sarabaitarum, qui nulla regula adprobati experientia magistra sicut aurum fornacis, sed in plumbi natura molliti ₇adhuc operibus servantes saeculo fidem mentiri Deo per tonsuram noscuntur

Next: ₆The third, a very vile kind, are the sarabaites, tested by no rule nor instructed by experience, like gold in the furnace; but softened like lead, ₇still keeping faith with worldly ways, they are known to lie to God by having tonsures.

Teterrimum, id est pavendum, timendum seu horrendum; probati, id est ad probationem ducti; regula attinet ad doctrinam, experientia vero ad exercitationem operis, magistra autem et ad regulam et ad experientiam potest referri, id est regula, magistra et experientia magistra [page 80] sit. Utrumque convenit Dei servo, id est opus et doctrina.

The expression very vile means horrific, fearsome, or dreadful. Read tested as approved, rule as teaching, and experience as the execution of work. The term instructed (magistra) can refer to both rule and experience, thus it means instructed by the rule or instructed by experience. [page 80] Both work and teaching are fitting to a servant of God

Sequitur: aurum fornacis.

Next: like gold in a furnace.

  Auri enim natura est tam durabilis, ut per ignem nunquam deficiat; nam si adulterinum fuerit, id est mixtum cum argento et reliquo metallo et missum fuerit in ignem, id quod ei junctum fuerit alterius metalli, ardebit, ipsum vero aurum indeficiens permanebit. Per aurum autem vult B. Benedictus bonos monachos intelligi.

 Gold is by nature so durable that it never perishes through fire. If it is alloyed, that is, mixed with silver or other metals and it is put into the fire, the other metals that are mixed with it burn away and all the gold will remain. The Blessed Benedict wants us to identify good monks with gold.

Et quod justi intelligantur per aurum, testatur Solomon, cum dicit: Tunquam aurum in fornace probavit illos et quasi holocausti hostiam accepit illos. [Sap 3:6]

Solomon testifies that gold has to be understood as the just when he says: He tested them as gold in a furnace, and he accepted them as the gift of burnt offering. [Sap 3:6]

Vide modo, per aurum significavit bonos, per fornacem vero tribulationem praesentis temporis. Et est sensus, cum dicit: tanquam aurum in fornace, id est quia sicut aurum purgatur in fornace, ita et justi probantur in praesentis temporis tribulatione.

Now see: he signified through the gold the good people and the furnace referred to the tribulations of the present time. This is the meaning when he says like gold in a furnace: just as gold is purified in the furnace, just so just are the just tested through the tribulations of the present.

Sequitur: sed in plumbi natura molliti.

Next: ...but softened like lead.

 Plumbi enim natura gravis est et mollis, et est adeo mollis, ut, si in ignem fuerit missum, statim liquescit et deficit. Per plumbum enim intelligi vult malos monachos, id est peccatores. Per plumbum mali intelliguntur, quia peccatores graves sunt malitia, molles sunt impatientia.

 Lead is by nature heavy and soft. It is so soft that, when thrown into fire, it liquefies immediately and vanishes. He wants us to understand lead as the bad monks, that is, the sinners. This is because sinners are heavy with evil and soft with impatience. Scripture witnesses that they are soft through impatience when saying: They do not stand firm in their miseries. [Ps 139:12].

Et quod molles sunt impatientia, testatur scriptura, cum dicit: In miseriis non subsistent. [Ps 139:12]

Heaviness is ambiguous. It appears with a positive and a negative meaning. It is a good term in I will praise you among the weighty people [Ps 34:18].

Gravitas enim aequivocum est, id est in bono et in malo ponitur; in bono, ut est illud: In populo gravi laudabo te [Ps 34:18]: in populo gravi, in est in populo perfecto; in malo, ut est illud: Vae genti peccatrici, populo gravi iniquitate, semini nequam, filiis sceleratis! [Is 1:4]

Weighty people means perfect people. It appears as a negative term in Woe, sinful tribes, people weighty with injustice, of useless stock and with defiled children! [Is 1:4]

Et in bono dicitur etiam gravitas, sicuti dicimus: homo gravis consilio, id est per consilium.

And heaviness has a good meaning when we say 'a man weighty in prudence', that is, 'through prudence'.

Et quod per plumbum peccatores intelligantur, docet B. Gregorius in Ezechiele dicens hoc modo: Venit ergo Ezechiel juxta fluvium Chobar; nam Chobar interpretatur gravitudo. Quid per Chobar fluvium nisi humanum genus congrue designatur, quod ab ortu defluit ad mortem, et grave sibi ex peccatis, quae perpetrat et [page 81] portat, quia scriptum est: Iniquitas in talento plumbi sedit? [cf. Zec 5:7, not Vulgate] [Gregory the Great, Homilae in Hiezechihelem Prophetam I, 2, c. 6, CCSL 142, p. 20]

And the Blessed Gregory teaches in his commentary on Ezekiel how lead has to be understood as sinners when he says: Ezekiel arrived at the river Chobar. Chobar has to be read as heaviness. How can the river Chobar be understood other than standing for human nature, which flows from its beginnings to its death and is heavy for itself from sins, which it performs and carries [page 81], since it is written: 'Unjustness settles in a heavy weight (talentum) of lead?' [cf. Za 5:7, not Vulgate] [Gregory, In Ezechielem Homilia II, c. 6].

Omne enim peccatum grave est, quia non permittit animum ad sublimia levari, unde et per psalmistam dicitur: Filii hominum usquequo graves corde? [Ps 4:3] Et quod per plumbum peccatores intelligantur, testatur iterum Zacharias propheta, cum dicit inter caetera: Vidi duas mulieres elevantes amphoram inter terram et coelum, et erat illi os ingens; et una mulier jactavit massam plumbi in os amphorae. Et dixit mihi angelus: Quo defertur haec amphora? Et dixi: Nescio. Et dixit: Haec defertur amphora, ut aedificetur ei domus in terra Sennaar. [cf. Za 5:9-11, not Vulgate]¹⁴

All sin is weighty because it does not allow the mind to be lifted up to the highest, as it is said by the Psalmist: Sons of men, why is your heart so heavy? [Ps 4:3] And the Prophet Zacharias also shows that lead stands for sinners when among other things he says: I saw two women lifting an amphora up between earth and heaven. And this amphora had a huge mouth. One woman threw a piece of lead into the mouth of the amphora. An angel said to me: 'To where is this amphora being carried?' I responded: 'I do not know.' He said: 'This amphora is carried in order that a house for be built in the land of Sennaar (Babylon)'. [cf. Za 5:9-11, not Vulgate]

Per amphoram intelligitur cupiditas, per os ingens amphorae intelligitur impietas, quia cupiditas semper os habet patens ad concupiscendum.

The amphora refers to desire and its large mouth to impiety, because desire always has a mouth standing open for desire.

Et bene plumbum in os amphorae mittitur, quia impietas semper in cupiditate est.

And it is right to throw lead into the mouth of the amphora because in desire there is always impiety.

Per Sennaar intelligitur foetor.

Sennaar has to be understood as stench.

Pulchre in terra Sennaar domus amphorae aedificatur, quia malis domus in foetore construitur. Inter terram et coelum levatur, qui nec terram tangit nec coelum; significat superbum, qui per exaltationem fratri non compatitur, et coelum non tangit per meritum.

The house of the amphora is built aptly in the land of Sennaar, because the house for evil people is built in stench. He who touches neither earth nor heaven is lifted up between earth and heaven. This points to the proud person who in his arrogance does not feel compassion for his brother and who does not reach heaven through merits.

Sequitur: Adhuc operibus servantes saeculo fidem, mentiri Deo per tonsuram noscuntur.

Next: ...still keeping faith with worldly ways, they are known to lie to God by having tonsures.

Finis coenobitae est, nil de crastino cogitare, et quidquid agit, non ad suam voluntatem agere et proprium non habere; finis vero eremitae est, de crastino cogitare et mentem suam exutam a cunctis habere terrenis, eamque, quantum humana imbecillitas sinit, unire cum Christo. Sarabaitae vero habent aliquid commune per hanc formam cum eremita, id est cogitare aliquid de crastino, sed tamen in hoc discrepant ab illis, quia, si eremitae cogitant de crastino, ideo cogitant, ut possint Deo, quantum humana fragilitas permittit, mente sua adhaerere; sarabaitae vero si cogitant de crastino, ideo cogitant, ut mentem suam saeculo jungant et; non solum in crastinum, verum etiam per multorum spatia annorum mentem suam cogitando extendunt. Cum coenobita habent aliquid commune [page 82], id est opera manibus exercere, sed in hoc discrepant ab illis, quia coenobitae, quidquid agunt, nihil secundum voluntatem suam agunt, isti vero omnia secundum voluntatem suam laborant.

The goal of a cenobite is not to think about tomorrow and to do whatever he does not according to his own will and to have nothing of his own. The goal of a hermit is to think about tomorrow and to have his mind stripped from all earthly things, and to unite his mind with Christ, as far as human weakness allows. But in this pattern sarabaites have something in common with a hermit: they both think about tomorrow. However, they differ from each other because if hermits think about tomorrow, they do it in order that they can fasten their minds to God as far as human weakness permits. But if sarabaites think about tomorrow, they do it for that reason that they join their minds with the world – and this not only for tomorrow but they also extend their thinking through many years. They share with cenobites [page 82] performance of manual labor, though in a different way, since cenobites never do their work according to their own will, while sarabaites always work according to their own will.

Coenobitae non laborant, ut domini sint laborum suorum, sed omnem laborem in potestate prioris consistunt; isti vero idcirco laborant, ut domini sint laborum suorum et ditiores fiant.

Cenobites do not work in order to be the masters of their own efforts, but all effort remains under the power of the superior. The sarabaites, however, work for to be masters over their own efforts and to become richer.

Vide modo, quia, quamvis habitu videantur monachi, tamen actionibus saeculares existunt, et propterea dixit S. Benedictus: Adhuc operibus servantes saeculo fidem, mentiri Deo per tonsuram noscuntur.

Now see that they, though they look like monks in their habit, still remain worldly in their deeds. Therefore says the Blessed Benedict: still keeping faith with worldly ways, they are known to lie to God by having tonsures.

Sequitur: ₈Qui bini aut terni aut certe singuli sine pastore, non dominicis, sed suis inclusi ovilibus, pro lege eis est desideriorum voluptas.

Next: ₈They go around in pairs or threes or, of course, alone, with no shepherd, but in their own sheepfolds, not the Lord's, and the pleasure of their desires is their law.

Certe de istis enim, quamvis bini aut terni aut singuli inveniri possint, tamen potest intelligi per binos et trinos et singulos multitudinem sive paucitatem. Sine pastore idcirco dicit, quia aut sine pastore sunt, aut certe si pastorem videantur habere, tamen sine pastore sunt, quia similem sibi, id est consentientem vitiis suis habent.

We certainly find them in pairs or groups or three or alone but we can read two or three or one also as large or small groups. He says with no shepherd because they either do not have a shepherd at all or, if they seem to have one, they still do not because they have a person like themselves who consents to their vices.

Nunc videndum est, quare dicat S. Benedictus ovilibus pluraliter, cum Dominus dicat: Unus pastor et unum ovile est. [Io 10:16] Si enim pastor referatur ad Christum, unus pastor est et unum ovile est; si referatur ad unam fidem, ad unum baptismum et ad unam remunerationem aeternae felicitatis, unum ovile est, id est, una ecclesia est. Item si referatur unus pastor ad diversos episcopos et ceteros praepositos sanctae ecclesiae, multi pastores sunt. Similiter si referatur unum ovile, id est sancta ecclesia ad diversitatem linguarum sive ad dona Sancti Spiritus, multae ecclesiae sunt. Unde Joannes Evangelista propter septem dona, Sancti Spiritus Septem ecclesiis scripsit Apocalypsin. [cf. esp. Act 1 and 3]

Now we have to see why the Holy Benedict uses the plural of sheepfolds (ovilibus) even though the Lord says: There is one shepherd and one sheepfold. [Io 10:16] For, if shepherd refers to Christ, then there is one Shepherd and one sheepfold. If it refers to one faith, to one baptism and to one reward of eternal happiness, then there is one sheepfold, that is, one church. Likewise, if one shepherd refers to a number of bishops or other prelates of the Holy Church, then there are many shepherds. Accordingly, if one sheepfold, that is, the Holy Church, refers to a diversity of different languages or to the gifts of the Holy Spirit, then there are many churches. Therefore the Evangelist John wrote the Apocalypse to the seven churches of the Holy Spirit because of the Seven Gifts. [cf. esp. Act 1 and 3]

Sequitur: ₈Pro lege eis est desideriorum voluptas, ₉cum, quidquid putaverint vel elegerint, hoc dicunt sanctum, et quod noluerint, hoc putant non licere.

Next: ₈...and the pleasure of their desires is their law, ₉since they call holy whatever they have thought or chosen and they deem forbidden what they have not wished to do.

Voluntas per n. proprie semper in bono ponitur, quamvis abusive in malo ponatur; voluptas vero per p. proprie semper in malo ponitur, quamvis [page 83] forte et in bono ponatur.

The term voluntas (‘will’) – written with letter 'n' – usually appears in a positive context, even though it appears by improper use also in a negative context. The term voluptas (pleasure) – written with a ‘p’ – is always used correctly in a negative context, though [page 83] it accidentally can be used as something good.

Pro lege eis est desideriorum voluptas, id est, ac si diceret: voluptas eorum est eorum. Cum quidquid putaverint vel elegerint, hoc dicunt sanctum, et quod noluerint, hoc putant non licere.

And the pleasure of their desires is their law. He wants to say that their pleasure is their law. ...Since they call holy whatever they have thought or chosen and they deem forbidden what they have not wished to do.

In hoc loco animadvertendum est: si boni pro ignorantia aliquando eligunt mala pro bonis, errant; quanto magis errant isti, qui mali sunt voluntarie?

Here we have to consider the following: if those who are good choose out of ignorance something evil instead of something good, they are doing wrong. But how much more are those doing wrong who are evil out in their own will?

Quam sententiam B. Gregorius ita exponit: Certe cum Israeliticus populus ante Dei oculos pene inveniabilem contraxisset offensam, ita ut ejus rector audiret: Descende, peccavit populus tuus [Ex 32:7], ac si ei divina vox diceret: Qui in tali peccato lapsus est, jam meus non est, etc. etc. [Gregory the Great, Expositio veteri ac novi testamenti I, II, c. 53, PL 79, col. 746D-747A]

The Blessed Gregory explains this statement: Surely, when the people of Israel had bought on themselves an almost unforgivable offence in the eyes of God, to the point that that its leader heard: 'Go down, your people have sinned' [Ex 32:7], it is as if the divine voice was saying: 'He who has fallen in such sins, is not mine any more, etc. etc. [Gregory, Expositio veteri ac novi testamenti I, II, c. 53, PL 79, col. 746D-747A]

Sequitur: ₁₀Quartum vero genus est monachorum, quod nominatur gyrovagum, qui totam vitam¹⁵ suam per diversas provincias ternis aut quaternis diebus per diversorum cellas hospitantur, ₁₁semper vagi et nunquam stabiles, et propriis voluptatibus et gulae illecebris servientes et per omnia anteriores¹⁶ Sarabaitis. ₁₂De quorum omnium horum miserrima conversatione melius est silere quam loqui. ₁₃His ergo omissis ad coenobitarum dzsimum genus disponendum adjuvante Domino perveniamus.

Next: ₁₀The fourth kind of monks are those called gyrovagues, who spend their whole lives lodging in different regions and different monasteries three or four days at a time, ₁₁always wandering and never stable, serving their own pleasures and the lure of gluttony, worse than sarabaites in every way. ₁₂It is better to keep silent than to discuss the utterly wretched monastic ways of all these people. ₁₃Therefore, leaving them aside, with God's help let us proceed to specifications for the strongest kind of monk, the cenobites.

 Ternis ant quaternis diebus ideo hospitantur per diversorum cellas, quia consuetudo est et fuit monasteriorum, cum suscipiunt hospites, tribus vel quatuor diebus omnem humanitatem hospitibus exhibere, postmodum vero, si plus steterint, sicut familiaribus, ita, illis exhibere. [cf. Regula magistri, c. 78] Et ab hoc illi quatuor aut tribus diebus manent in diversorum cellis.

They lodge at different cells for three or four days, because it is and was common for monasteries when they receive guests to show them all human kindness for three or four days but, if they stayed longer, to treat them as family members [cf. Regula magistri, c. 78] Therefore, they stay in the cells of different people only for four or three days. 

Semper vagi et nunquam stabiles, subaudiendum est: sunt.

Always wandering and never stable, add 'they are'.

Voluptas pertinet ad delectationes carnales, veluti sunt somnus et cibus et caetera, illecebra vero attinet ad gulam, et ideo dicta est illecebra, eo quod illiciat in aliud peccatum, verbi gratia ex gula nascitur nimia saturitas, et ex nimia saturitate aliquando fornicatio et reliqua. [Cassian]

Pleasures refer to the carnal pleasures, such as sleep and eating and others, lure is related to gluttony, and is called lure because it seduces someone into another sin. For example, gluttony causes too much satiation and from it comes fornication etc. [Cassian]

Et per omnia deteriores Sarabaitis. Bene dixit: per omnia, quia in omnibus pejores gyrovagi quam sarabaitae sunt, id est sarabaitae quamvis mali sint, tamen pejores sunt gyrovagi sarabaitis.

...Worse than sarabaites in every way. He rightly says in every way, because gyrovagues are really in everything worse than the sarabaites. Sarabaites may be bad, but gyrovagues are still worse than sarabaites.

Verbi gratia, sarabaitae sibi cellas aedificant, gyrovagi vero non aedificant [page 84] cellas, sed discurrunt per diversa loca. Sarabaitae quamvis mali sint, tamen labore manuum suarum vivunt, gyrovagi labore aliorum. Illi non dant aliis malum exemplum, isti autem, quia currunt per diversa loca, ideo exempla mala, tribuunt. Illi quia in uno loco stant, non vident bona exempla, isti, quia vadunt, vident bona exempla et nolunt illa imitari. Sarabaitae multa nescientes agunt, isti autem scientes malum esse discurrere per loca propter gulam, [et] tamen non emendantur.

For example, sarabaites build cells for themselves; gyrovagues do not build [page 84] cells but wander around to different places. Sarabaites may be bad, but at least they live from they own hands' work; gyrovagues live at others' expense. Sarabaites do not offer others a bad example. Gyrovagues, however, spread bad examples because they wander around in different places. Sarabaites do not see good examples because they stay at one place; gyrovagues are exposed to good examples since they get around, but they refuse to follow them. Sarabaites do many things out of ignorance; gyrovagues, knowing that it is bad to wander around for the sake of gluttony, still do not improve.

Et forte dicit aliquis: 'Aliquid simile habent Sarabaitae cum gyrovagis, id est, quia renuunt voluntati aliorum obedire et suam voluntatem adimplere'; tamen quia ad pejorem finem tendunt gyrovagi quam sarabaitae, idcirco pejores sunt sarabaitis gyrovagi.

Perhaps someone says that there is something sarabaites and gyrovagues have in common: they refuse to obey to the will of others and fulfill their own will. Still, the gyrovagues are worse than sarabaites because they tend to an end worse than that of the sarabaites.

De quorum, subaudiendum est: gyrovagorum, miserrima conversatione est melius silere quam loqui. Nunc videndum est, quare dixit: melius est silere, quam loqui? Quia eorum vitam pessimam esse cognovit, ideo tacere voluit, ne aliis in exemplum veniret. In hoc loco, ubi dicit his, subaudiendum est: tribus generibus, id est, eremitarum, sarabaitarum atque gyrovagorum; omissis, id est dimissis; fortissimum genus coenobitarum.

To It is better to keep silent add: about the gyrovagues than to discuss the utterly wretched monastic ways of all these people. Now we have to see why he says it is better to keep silent than to discuss. It is because Benedict regards this as the worst kind of life. Therefore he wants to remain silent lest he gives others bad examples. In the next sentence when he says 'these', we have to understand 'the three kinds', that is, hermits, sarabaites and gyrovagues. Leaving aside means 'leaving out'. Benedict proceeds to the strongest kind of monk, the cenobites.

Nunc videndum est, quod sit melius inter coenobitarum et anachoretarum genus, cum superius praetulit genus anachoretarum, eo quod dixit, monachos de coenobio exire ad eremum. Nam praedicatorum cousuetudo est, semper de minoribus ad majora praedicare¹⁷ auditores suos exire; nam si non cognoscunt meliora, ad quae debent progredi, nequaquam hortatus fuisset¹⁸ illos, illuc exire (maybe: exigere). Et nunc dicit: fortissimum genus monachorum coenobitarum; jam quando dicit fortissimum, nullum genus praecellit istud genus coenobitarum.

Now we have to see what are better, cenobites or anchorites, since he had earlier preferred anchorites, since he had said that monks leave the community to enter solitude. Preachers are accustomed in their sermons to work from the lesser to the greater so that their audience moves forward. For, if they do not know the better things to which they ought to proceed, he would never have encouraged them to move forward. But now he says: for the strongest kind of monk, the cenobites. Already when he says the strongest, he makes clear that no kind excels that of the cenobites.

Verbi gratia: dic mihi, quid melius est inter illud, quod dicitur fortissimum, et illud, quod alio nomine explicatur, sicuti est forte aut fortius et caetera, his similia? Melius est illud, quod per fortissimum genus narratur. Ecce melius genus coenobitarum, eo quod illud [page 85] explicavit S. Benedictus per fortissimum, et genus anachoretarum explicavit alio nomine. Iterum dic mihi, quis discipulus melior est e duobus inter illum, qui plus diligit Jesum, et illum, qui minus? Ille, qui plus, sicuti est Petrus; nam Petrus plus dilexit Jesum quam Johannes. Et ubi cognoscitur Petrus plus dilexisse Jesum quam alii apostoli? Manifestat Scriptura divina, ubi Dominus ait: Simon Johhannis! diligis me plus his? [Io 21:15] Vide modo, quia, nisi Dominum plus aliis discipulis dilexisset, nequaquam illum Dominus ita interrogasset. Ille autem, quia se cognovit hominem esse, nescivit aliorum intentiones, ideo dixit: 'Domine, tu scis, quia amo te', [Io 21: 15] ac si diceret: Tu, quia Deus es, cognoscis, quis te plus diligit. Et iterum dic mihi, quis melior discipulus ex istis duobus, id est Petro et Johanne, inter illum, quem plus dilexit Jesus, et illum, quem minus? Dicis mihi: ille, quem plus dilexit Dominus. Ecce Johannes videtur melior esse quam Petrus. Ita et de istis duobus generibus monachorum, id est coenobitarum et anachoretarum potest conjicere, quia Petrus tenet figuram vitae activae, Johannes vitae contemplativae. Ergo sicut isti discipuli non videntur invicem sibi praecellere, ita et de istis generibus potest conjicere, unum alterum non posse praecellere.

For example, tell me what is better, that which is called the strongest or that which is described in other terms, for example 'strong' or 'stronger' or something of that kind? What is described as the strongest kind is better. [page 85] Look, the best kind is that that of the cenobites because Saint Benedict explained it through the word the strongest and he describes the kind of anchorites with another name. Now, again, tell me which of two disciples is better: the one who loves Jesus more, or the one who loves him less? The one who loves him more, therefore Peter, because Peter loved Jesus more than John. And where do we realize that Peter loved Jesus more than the other Apostles? Divine Scripture shows it, when the Lord says: ‘Simon, son of John, do you love me more than they do?’ [Io 21:15] Now see, if he had not loved the Lord more than the other disciples had loved the Lord, he would never have asked him in that way. But Peter, since he knew that he was human and did not know the intentions of the others therefore said: 'Lord, you know that I love you', [Io 21:15] as if he wanted to say: 'Because you are God, you know who loves you more'. And now tell me: who is the better disciple of those two, Peter or John? The one who loves Jesus more or the one who loves him less? You reply: the one whom the Lord loves more. Thus seems John to be better than Peter. We can assume the same with regard to the two kinds of monks, the cenobites and the anchorites, because Peter stands for the active life while John stands for the contemplative life. Thus, just as these disciples do not seem to surpass each other, so can we assume about these kinds that one cannot surpass the other.

Sciendum autem est, quia sarabaitae in ba dixit¹⁹ esse accentum, hoc est, ut sarabáytae dicantur.

One should know that the accent in sarabaites is on 'ba'. It is pronounced sarabáites.

Cap. II
QUALIS DEBEAT ESSE ABBAS

[Ms P, fol. 22v – Paulus Diaconus –
Ps.-Basil: Ms K², fol. 70v; Ms E¹, fol. 29r; Ms E², fol. 37v]

Ch. 2
WHAT KIND OF PERSON THE ABBOT SHOULD BE

Translated by: Mariël Urbanus, Corinna Prior, and Bruce Venarde

Egregium enim ordinem tenuit B. Benedictus in hoc loco, eo quod prius dixit de generibus vel vita monachorum [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 1] et postmodum subjunxit de sententia¹ abbatis, qualis ille debet esse. Veluti quis, cum aliquod aedificium construere vult, fundamentum ponit, ita et B. Benedictus facere comprobatur [page 86], cum prius de generibus monachorum dicit et post monasterialem normam descripsit; et post electionem coenobialis vitae quid aliud debuit inprimis describi nisi caput, cum descripturus erat et cetera membra? Et bene postquam coenobialem vitam elegit, de abbate, qui est caput, dixit, quia capite firmo et sano cetera membra vigebunt.

For in this section, blessed Benedict kept excellent order because earlier he spoke about the kinds and life of monks [cf. Regula Benedicti, ch.1] and afterwards added his opinion of what kind of person the abbot should be. Just as when someone wishes to construct any building, he places the foundation [first], so also St. Benedict is shown to do, [page 86] when earlier he spoke about the kinds of monks and afterward he described the monastic rule; and after the choice of monastic life, what else should be described first if not the head, when he is about to describe the other members of the monastery? And he chose well to speak about the abbot, who is the head, after monastic life, because the other members of the monastery will flourish with a strong and sensible head.

Sequitur: ₁Praeesse dignus est.

Next: ₁He who is worthy to lead.

Praeesse, i. e. superesse.

 To lead, that is, to be in charge.

In hoc enim loco animadvertendum est, quia non dixit absolute praeest, sed praeesse cum adjectione dignus; ista, enim adjectio, quae est dignus, admonet illum abbatem, ut interiora cordis sui consideret, ut cognoscat, utrum hunc honorem dignus sit accipere. Quod si se cognoverit dignum esse, referat gratias largitori suo; et si se invenerit indignum, jam ista cogitatio humilitas in illo esse cognoscitur. Deinde humilitate suscepta, ejecta superbia, ad hoc laboret et conetur, ut dignus inveniatur, quatenus sibi et auditoribus proficiat. Et non solum illum hortatur et admonet, illud considerare, verum etiam bona, quae discipuli sui agunt, indicare illis, quatenus illi, cum sua opera approbare magistrum cognoverint, arctius teneant, ut non perdant.

For in this place it must be observed, that he did not simply say he leads, but to lead with the adjective worthy; for the adjective (worthy) reminds the abbot to inspect the interior [workings] of his heart, so that he may know if he is worthy to receive this honor. If he finds himself worthy, he should thank his Benefactor; and if he finds himself unworthy, then that thought should be recognized as humility in him. Subsequently, with humility received and pride cast aside, let the abbot work and strive to be found worthy to improve himself and his listeners. And not only does [humility] encourage and admonish the abbot to consider this, but also it encourages him to point out the good things which his disciples do, in order that they may hold more closely to the abbot when they learn that their master approves of their work, so that they will not be lost.

Similiter etiam mala, si forte agunt, illis indicare magister studeat, ut illi, cum magistrum suum sua opera cognoverint reprobare, super his poenitentiam agant et de cetero emendent. Et hoc ita sive malum sive bonum illis manifestare studeat, ut illi pro bonis non se extollant et pro malis non desperent, et nec plus aut minus, quam oportet, illis sive mala vel bona indicare studeat, sed secundum competentiam unicuique dicat.

Likewise with bad things, if perhaps [disciples] do them, let the master strive to point this out to them, so that when they learn that their master condemns their works, they may do penance for these and subsequently emend. And thus let him endeavor to make clear to them the bad as well as the good, so that they may not elevate themselves on account of good things and not despair on account of bad things. And let him endeavor to point out bad and good things no more or less than it is fitting, but let him speak to everyone according to their capacities.

Sequitur: ₁Semper meminere debet abbas, quod dicitur, i. e. semper recordari debet hoc, quod ab aliis dicitur. i. e. abbas, quia si semper illud recordatus fuerit, poterit implere, quod sequitur: ₁et nomen majoris factis implere.

Next: ₁The abbot should always remember what he is called, that is he ought always to remember what he is called by others, that is abbot, because if he always remembers that, he will be able to fulfill what follows: ₁and to fulfill in his deeds the name of superior.

In hoc loco, ubi dicitur majoris, subaudiendum est: dignitatis vel officii aut personae.

In this place, where of superior is said, it must be understood: With regard to the dignity, either of the office or the person.

Nunc videndum est, quomodo debet abbas nomen majoris factis implere. Ita enim implet factis suum nomen majoris, si sic, ut est primus in sedendo, primus in ambulando, primus in cetera distribuendo sive [page 87] disponendo, ita debet esse primus in humilitate, in jejunio, in silentio, in lectione, in caritate; et sicut est, in corporalibus rebus, ita etiam in spiritalibus rebus.

Now it must be seen, how the abbot, through his deeds, ought to fulfill the name of the superior. For thus he fulfills his name of superior in deeds if just as he is first in sitting, first in walking, first in other distribution or [page 87] arrangement, thus he ought to be first in humility, in fasting, in silence, in reading, in charity; and just as he is in corporal matters, he must also be in spiritual matters.

Sequitur: ₂Christi enim agere vices in monasterio creditur.

Next: ₂For he is believed to act in the place of Christ in the monastery.

Iterum videndum est, quomodo agat Christi vices in monasterio. Ita enim agit: Christus enim descendit de coelis et elegit apostolos; ad hoc elegit, ut illos amaret, sicut dicit ipse Dominus; ait enim: Sicut dilexit me Pater, et ego dilexi vos [Io 15:9]. Et iterum ad hoc elegit, ut illos doceret, sicut idem Dominus dicit: Omnia, quaecunque audivi a Patre meo, nota feci vobis. [Io 15:15]

Again it must be seen how he should act in the place of Christ in the monastery. For he acts thus: Christ descended from heaven and chose his apostles; he chose for this reason, that he might love them, just as the Lord himself says. For he says: Just as the Father loved me, I have also loved you. [Io 15:9] And again he chose for this reason, that he might teach them, just as the Lord himself says: All thing whatsoever I have heard from my Father, I have made known to you. [Io 15:15]

Et iterum ideo apostoli elegerunt Dominum, ut diligerent illum, et obedirent ei; nam quod ideo elegerunt Dominum, ut diligerent illum, testatur Dominus, cum dicit illis: Ipse enim Pater amat vos, quia vos amatis me et credidistis mihi, quia a Deo exivi [Io 16:27]. In hoc, quod dixit amatis, ostendit amorem apostolorum erga se, et in eo, quod dixit credidistis, ostendit obedientiam apostolorum.

And again the Apostles indeed chose the Lord, so that they might love and obey him. They chose the Lord for this reason, so that they might love him. They chose the Lord for this purpose, so they might love him, as the Lord bears witness when he says to them: For the Father himself loves you, because you love me and believed in me, since I came from God [Io 16:27]. That he said you love me shows the love of the apostles towards him, and that here he said you believed in me shows the obedience of the apostles.

Vide modo, sicut Dominus elegit discipulos, ut amaret et doceret eos, ita et abbas monachos ad hoc debet eligere, si vicem vult agere Christi, ut illos diligat et doceat; nam si alias elegerit, non vicem Christi agit; ille autem videat, cujus vicem ita eligendo discipulos agat.

Now see that just as the Lord chose his disciples so that he might love and teach them, thus also the abbot ought to choose his monks according to whether he wishes to act in the place of Christ, so that he might love and teach them. For if he chooses others, he does not act in the place of Christ. Moreover, let [the abbot] see in whose place he should act in choosing his disciples.

Et iterum monachi ad hoc debent eligere abbatem suum, ut ament illum et obediant ei, sicut discipuli Christum; nam si aliter elegerint, i. e. non ut abbatem suum ament et obediant, non vicem discipulorum tenent, sed aliorum; illi videant, in quorum vice eligunt sibi abbatem.

And again the monks ought to choose their abbot accordingly, so that they may love and obey him, just as the disciples loved and obeyed Christ; for if they choose differently, that is so that they may not love and obey their abbot, they do not keep the place of the apostles, but of others; let those men in the place of [the apostles] see that they choose the abbot for themselves.

Nam idcirco praecipit S. Benedictus, abbatem novitium per unum annum probare, ut cognoscat abbas illum, si possit illum amare et docere, et similiter ille novitius debet providere per unum annum abbatem, quem amet et cui obediat.

For therefore St. Benedict instructs the abbot to test a novice for one year, so that the abbot may know him, [and] if he is able to love and teach him, and likewise that novice ought to see for a year what to expect concerning the abbot whom he would love and obey.

Nam iterum dico; nam si abbas, sicut diximus, non eligit monachos et in dilectione et doctrina Dei non habet illos, non abbas Christi, sed diaboli est abbas. Similiter et illi monachi, si non obedierint abbati aut dilexerint eum, non illum in vice Christi habent patrem. Et est sensus, cum dicit: Christi enim vicem agere creditur in monasterio, i. e. in vice Christi [page 88] creditur esse abbas in monasterio; et ubi dicit creditur, subaudiendum est: ab aliis.

For again I say that if the abbot, as we have said, does not choose his monks and does not hold them in love and in the doctrine of God, then the abbot is not Christ’s, but the devil’s. Likewise also those monks, if they do not obey the abbot or love him, they do not hold their father in the place of Christ. It this is the sense, when he says: For he is believed to act in the place of Christ in the monastery, that is, the abbot is believed to be in the place of Christ [page 88] in the monastery; and when he says is believed, it must be understood: by others.

Sequitur: ₂Quando ipsius vocatur praenomine ₃dicente apostolo: Accepistis spiritum adoptionis filiorum Dei, in quo clamamus: Abba, pater [Rm 8:15].

Next: ₂When he is called by Christ’s title, ₃as the Apostle says: You have received the spirit of the adoption of the sons of God, in which we cry out: Abba, father. [Rm 8:15]

In hoc, quod dicit praenomine, ostendit, nomen et dignitatem Christi in monasterio abbatem habere. Dignitatem enim dico, quantum ad hominem attinet, quantum vero ad Deum, dignatio Dei est, eo quod Deus condescendendo nobis fecit se patrem nostrum, sicut jam superius diximus; praenomen enim nomen est dignitatis.

Because he says by [Christ's] title, he shows by this that the abbot has the name and authority of Christ within the monastery. I say authority, as much as it pertains to man, but also as much as it pertains to God. Authority is God’s because God in descending to us made himself our father, as we already said earlier; for his name is the name of authority.

Deinde quia S. Benedictus dixit rem grandem, cum dixit, abbatem vicem Christi agere in monasterio, idcirco illam firmavit hoc testimonio, quod dicit: Accepistis spiritum adoptionis filiorum, in quo clamamus: Abba, pater.

Then, because St. Benedict said a great thing when he said that the abbot acts in the place of Christ in the monastery, he therefore strengthened that statement with this testimony, because he says: You have received the spirit of the adoption of sons, in which we cry out: Abba, father.

Paulus enim hoc jam baptizatis dicebat, et illis dicebat cum caritate, qui non cum timore serviebant; et hoc sciendum est, quia narrando Paulus dixit et indicavit illis, quia non spiritum servitutis acceperunt, sed spiritum adoptionis filiorum.

For Paul said this to the newly baptized and he spoke with love to those men, who did not serve with fear; and it must be understood that Paul, in relating this, said and indicated to them that they did not receive a spirit of servitude but rather a spirit of the adoption of sons.

Ubi animadvertendum est, quia debet unusquisque suam conscientiam inquirere, utrum Deo per timorem an per amorem servit; si autem cognoverit, se per timorem servire, tunc se cognoscat filiorum spiritum adoptionis non accepisse, sed spiritum timoris; si autem cognoverit, se per amorem servire, tunc se cognoscat spiritum adoptionis filiorum accepisse. Similiter et monachi, si per timorem obediunt abbati, tunc non est causa sua bona, quia non acceperunt spiritum adoptionis filiorum, sed timoris.

Whereby, it must be observed whether one serves God through fear or through love, since each person ought to examine his own conscience. But if [a person] recognizes that he serves through fear, then he should recognize that he did not receive the spirit of the adoption of sons, but rather the spirit of fear. But if he recognizes that he serves through love, then he should recognize that he received the spirit of the adoption of sons. Likewise also the monks: if they obey the abbot through fear, then this is a bad motive, because they did not receive the spirit of adoption of sons, but rather the spirit of fear.

Vide modo, sicut Paulus dicit, illos spiritum adoptionis Domini accepisse, in quo clamant Deum patrem, ita et monachi quasi spiritum adoptionis accipiunt ab abbate suo, quem sibi in vice Christi elegerunt patrem, in quo clamant illum patrem.

Now see, just as Paul says, that they received the spirit of the adoption of the Lord, in which they cry out to God the father, thus also the monks receive the spirit of adoption from their abbot, whom they chose for themselves as father in the place of Christ, when they call him father.

Abba hebraica et syriaca lingua est, graeca vero et latina lingua pater dicitur. Quia cognovit B. Paulus apostolus, gentes suas epistolas esse lecturas, ideo dixit Abba, pater, ut unaquaequae gens in sua liugua haberet hoc nomen, quod est pater.

Abba is a Hebrew and Syrian word, but called pater in Greek and Latin. Because the blessed apostle Paul recognized that gentiles would read his epistles, he therefore said Abba, pater, so that every people might have this name, that is pater, in his own language.

Sequitur: ₄Ideoque abbas nihil extra praeceptum Domini, quod absit, debet docere aut constituere vel jubere.

Next: ₄Therefore the abbot must not, heaven forbid teach or establish or command anything that is outside the Lord’s commandments.

Istud [page 89] enim ideo ad superiorem sensum attinet, ac si diceret: Si abbas vicem Christi agere creditur, propterea non debet docere aut constitnere vel jubere, quod absit, i. e, quod nunquam sit, contra praeceptum Domini; extra praeceptum Domini ponitur pro 'contra' praeceptum; extra enim pro 'contra' ponitur.

This [page 89] therefore pertains to the earlier sense, as if he said: If it is believed that the abbot acts in the place of Christ, for this reason he must not teach or establish or decree, heaven forbid, that is, never teach what is contrary to God’s teaching; outside the Lord’s commandments is in place of ‘against’ the commandments; for outside is in place of ‘against’.

Docere enim attinet ad doctrinam, quae est in scripturis divinis, ac si diceret: nihil aliud debet docere, nisi quod in textu regulae et in scripturis divinis invenitur.

For to teach pertains to doctrine, which is in the holy scriptures, as if he said: He must teach nothing else except what is found in a text of the Rule and in the holy scriptures.

Sic enim B. Hieronymus dicit: Cave prudens lector superstitiosam intelligentiam, ut non sensui tuo jungas scripturas, sed scripturae jungas sensum tuum, ut intelligas, quod sequatur [Jerome, Commentarii in Evangelium Matthaei I, 10:29, PL 26, col. 66D].

For thus the blessed Jerome says: Beware, prudent reader, of superstitious interpretation, so that you do not join the scriptures to your own meaning, but that you bring your meaning to the scriptures, so that you may understand what follows [Jerome, Commentarii in Evangelium Matthaei I, 10:29].

Constituere vero attinet, ad locus, qui constituuntur in monasterio. Et quomodo isti loci constitui possunt contra praeceptum Domini? Possunt etiam, si ita constituuntur, ut non honeste et recte constituantur, ita ut saluti animae in illis locis aliqua contrarietas generetur; recte et honeste constituuntur, ut fratres, qui ibi laborant aut quidquid agunt, possint sine contrarietate animae laborare.

But to establish pertains to the places, which are established in the monastery. And how can these places be established contrary to the Lord’s commandments? They can indeed, if they are established in such a manner that they are not established honorably and properly, but so that in these places some opposition to the salvation of the soul is created; it is established properly and honorably so that the brothers, who work there or who do something there can work there without opposition to their soul.

Verbi gratia, loci sunt, quos alii affectus (?) vocant, ut sunt isti, ubi fratres operantur manibus aut ubi lavantur, quando polluti in nocte fuerint, aut ubi legunt aut aliquid agunt, sicut diximus.

There are for example places that others call affectus,¹ just as there are those places where brothers work with their hands or where they are washed when they have been polluted in the night, or where they read or do something else, as we have said.

Jubere vero attinet ad imperium, sicut imperat abbas monacho, vadere in aliquem locum aut aliquid agere. Talia enim jussa contra praeceptum Domini sunt, si in his praeceptis scandalum animae reperitur; illa enim studeamus discere in terris, quorum nobis notitia proficiat in coelis.

To command certainly pertains to authority (imperium), just as the abbot orders (imperat) a monk to go to someplace or to do something. For such orders are contrary to the Lord’s commandments, if in these commandments there is an offence of the soul. Let us strive to learn these things on earth, knowledge of which may benefit us in heaven.

Sequitur: ₅Sed jussio ejus vel doctrina fermentum divinae justitiae in discipulorum mentibus conspergatur.

Next: ₅But instead his command and his teaching should sprinkle the yeast of divine justice in the minds of his disciples.

Nunc videndum est, quare S. Benedictus superius dixit tria, id est docere vel constituere vel jubere, et hic dixit duo, jussio et doctrina. Ideo non dixit constitutio, quia constituere attinet, sicut dixi, ad constitutionem locorum, quae magis ad exteriorem hominem attinet, eo quod ibi noster exterior homo corporaliter agit in illo, quamvis salus animae in illis possit reperiri; doctrina vero vel jussio ad cordis aures attinet, id est interioris hominis, eo quod per illum homo exterior percipit verba.

Now it must be seen how St. Benedict said three things above, that is to teach or to establish or to command, and here he said only two, command and teaching. He did not say establishment (constitutio) because it pertains to establishing (constituere). Just as I said [earlier], the establishment of places relates more to the exterior man because our exterior man exists there physically, although the salvation of the soul can be found in those [physical places]. But teaching or command pertains to the ears of the heart, that is to the inner man, because the exterior man learns the words through him.

Fermenti enim natura [page 90] est, omnem saporem farinae ad se trahere. Fermentum autem in malo et in bono ponitur; ponitur enim in malo, ut est illud: Expurgate vetus fermentum, ut sitis nova conspersio, sicut estis azimi [1 Cor 5:7]. Fermentum enim ad veteris Adae conversationem attinet; Adam enim fermentum fuit in massa generis humani, quia sicut ille corruptus fuit, ita traxit omnem saporem generis humani, i. e. corrupit genus humanum. Sed Deus misertus humanae naturae misit aliud fermentum in terris, hoc est filium suum, qui faceret novam conspersionem, ut omnes, quotquot voluerint, salvarentur. Ille vero fecit novam conspersionem et traxit omnia ad suum saporem, sicut ipse dixit: Si exaltatus fuero a terra, omnia traham ad me [Io 12:32].

For it is the nature of yeast [page 90] to draw all the flavour of the flour to itself. But yeast is placed within the bad as well as the good. It is placed in the bad, as it is said: Purify the old yeast, so that you will be as new dough, just as you are morally pure.² [1 Cor 5:7] For yeast belongs to the way of life of Adam in the Old Testament; for Adam was the yeast in the dough of the human race, and just as he was corrupted, so he drew all his flavour to the human race, that is he corrupted the race of man. But God, having mercy on human nature, sent another yeast to earth, that is his son, to make new dough, so that all who wished would be saved. Indeed, he made new dough and drew all things to his flavour, just as he said himself: If I am exalted, I will draw all things from the earth to me. [Io 12:32]

In hoc enim loco, ubi dicit omnia, subaudiendum est: electa. Et propterea Paulus dicit: Expurgate vetus fermentum [1 Cor 5:7], i. e. expellite a vobis veteris Adae conversationem, ut possitis suscipere novi Adae, qui est Christus.

For in this place, where he says ‘all things’, it is to be understood as “chosen things.” And therefore Paul says: Purify the old yeast, [1 Cor 5:7] that is drive away from yourself the way of the old Adam, so that you can receive the way of the new Adam, who is Christ.

B. vero Benedictus, quia superius dixerat, abbatem vicem Christi agere, idcirco dicit nunc: Jussio ejus vel doctrina fermentum divinae justitiae in discipulorum mentibus conspergatur, ac si diceret: quia vicem agit Christi, ita debet trahere ad suum saporem omnem massam monachorum, sicut Christus traxit ad se omnia, hoc est per patientiam, per humilitatem, per doctrinam et ceteras virtutes.

Indeed St. Benedict, because he had said above that the abbot acts in the place of Christ, therefore now says His command and his teaching should sprinkle the yeast of divine justice in the minds of his disciples, as if he said: because he acts in the place of Christ, he must thus draw the entire dough of monks to his flavour, just as Christ drew all things to himself, that is through patience, humility, teaching, and other virtues.

Ubi enim dicit fermentum; subaudiendum est: quasi ut sit fermentum divinae legis justitiae; fermentum enim tunc bene trahit saporem massae ad suum saporem, si prius fuerit comminutum atque minutatum; ita et abbas tunc recte potent trahere voluntates et mores monachorum ad suum morem, si prius fuerit comminutus et contribulatus, hoc est, si compassionem et tribulationem fratrum suorum habuerit.

For where he says yeast, it must be understood: as though it may be the yeast of the law of divine justice; for then the yeast draws well the taste of the dough to his own flavour, if first it is broken down and weakened; thus then the abbot can also rightly draw the will and the ways of the monks to his way, if he shall first be broken down and afflicted, that is, if he has compassion and distress for his brothers.

Item fermentum, sicut Isidorus dicit, a fervore dictum est, quod plus prima hora non potest continere, crescendo enim excedit [Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae XX, c. 2.18]. De fermentis² enim in scripturis divinis, sicut Beda dicit, pro dilectione ponitur [cf Bede, In Lucae Evangelium Expositio IV, 13:21, CCSL 120, p. 270] [page 91].

Likewise yeast (fermentum), as Isidore says, it is named from the word heat (fervore), which cannot be contained for more than the first hour, for it expands by growing.³ Yeast, in the divine scriptures, stands for love, as Bede says. ⁴

Sequitur: ₆Memor semper abbas, quia doctrinae sua vel discipulorum obedientiae utrarumque rerum in tremendo judicio Dei facienda erit discussio.

Next: ₆The abbot must always be mindful that there will have to be a trial in God’s fearsome court concerning two matters: his teaching and his disciples’ obedience.

Istud enim vel pro ‘et’ positum est.

Indeed, that word vel is used in place of et.

Egregius enim ordo est in hoc loco in eo quod superius admonuit abbatem, ut doctrina ejus vel jussio talis sit, quale fermentum divinae justitiae in mentibus discipulorum, et nunc subjunxit dicens: Memor semper abbas, quia ille de doctrina sua, et monachi de obedientia sua reddituri sunt rationem in die judicii; et ob hoc dixit solummodo abbati memorem esse, ut ille sollicitus sit de doctrina sua et discipulos suos reddat sollicitos de obedientia sua.

For there is an excellent [word] order in this place because he cautioned the abbot above that his teaching and command might be like the yeast of divine justice in the minds of the disciples, and now Benedict he adds this, saying: The abbot must always be mindful that he [will be tried] on his teaching, and that the monks will deliver an account of his obedience on the day of judgement. And he said only to the abbot to be mindful on this account, so that he may be attentive to his teaching and make his disciples attentive to their obedience.

Altero vero modo idcirco dixit, solummodo abbatem memorem esse debere, eo quod ille tam de sua doctrina quam de obedientia discipulorum suorum redditurus est rationem Deo in die judicii. Et propterea dixit: (de) obedientia discipulorum suorum, utrum sit perfecta an imperfecta obedientia, sicut et: (de) doctrina abbatis, si plus fuerit aut minor illa doctrina, quam debet.

Therefore he said, but in another way, that only the abbot must be mindful because he will deliver an account to God on the day of judgement not only about his teaching but about his disciples’ obedience as well. And therefore he said: (concerning) his disciples’ obedience, whether it may be perfect or imperfect obedience, and likewise (concerning) the abbot’s teaching, whether that teaching is more or less [perfect] than it must be.

Nunc iterum videndum est, quare dicit semper, cum dixit: memor abbas. Ideo dixit semper, quia voluit B. Benedictus, ut nunquam a corde abbatis discussio ista, id est inquisitio ista recedat.

Now it must be seen again in what way he said always, when he said: the abbot must be mindful. He said always, because blessed Benedict wished that this trial never [be absent from] the heart of the abbot, that is, that the investigation be far [from his heart].

Et iterum videndum est, quare dixit tremendo, cum suffecisset illi dicere: in die judicii facienda erit discussio? Ideo dixit tremendo, ut tremorem incuteret legentibus et audientibus hanc legem.

And it must be seen again in what way he said fearsome, when it would have been sufficient for him to say that a trial will be held on the day of judgement. He said fearsome [tremendo], so that he might instill trembling in those reading and hearing this law.

Et quia voluit, ut abbas hanc discussionem manifestus et plenius cognosceret, idcirco hoc exemplum pastoris subjungere studuit; ait enim: ₇Sciatque abbas, culpae pastoris incumbere, quidquid in ovibus paterfamilias utilitatis minus potuerit invenire, ac si diceret: sicut paterfamilias inquirit diligenter pastorem ovium suarum de negligentiis earum.

And because he wished the abbot to find this examination [of his own heart] to be clearer and more complete, he therefore strived to join it with this example of a shepherd, for he says: ₇And an abbot should know that whatever use the father of the household finds lacking in the sheep will be blamed on the shepherd, as if he said: just as the father of the household carefully examines a shepherd of his sheep about his neglect.

Verbi gratia, inquirit eum: 'Quare mortua est ovis mea? quare lupus rapuit illam? quare ovile non fuit bene coopertum? quare, cum infirma fuit, non medicavit illi, vel quare forsitan flagellavit illam?' et cetera his similia; quodsi pastor potuerit illi mittere rationem de infirma vel mortua [page 92] ove, tunc liberabitur, si vero non potuerit, poenae subjacebit: ita et Dominus faciet cum abbate.

For example, he asks: 'How did my sheep die? How did a wolf seize her? Why was the sheepfold not well covered? Why, when she was sick, did you not medicate her, or why perhaps did you flog her?' and other questions like these. But if the shepherd is able to give him an account of a sick or dead [page 92] sheep, then he is acquitted; if however he cannot, then he is liable to punishment. And so God does with the abbot.

Paterfamilias est Dominus, pastor vero est abbas, oves autem intelliguntur monachi, tempus, quo missurus est abbas rationem, intelligitur vita futura, in qua debet abbas mittere rationem de negligentiis monachorum suorum.

The father of the household is the lord, but the shepherd is the abbot, while the sheep are understood to be the monks, and the time, in which the abbot makes account, is understood to be the future life, in which the abbot must render an account for the failings of his monks.

Et bene dixit: quidquid in ovibus paterfamilias utilitatis minus potuerit invenire, id est non solum de spiritali negligentia, verum etiam de temporali eorum necessitate missurus erit rationem; quodsi non poterit mittere rationem tam de spiritali quam de temporali negligentia eorum, tunc condemnabitur.

And he said well: whatever use the father of the household finds lacking in the sheep will be blamed on the shepherd, that is not only concerning spiritual neglect, but also concerning their earthly needs he will render an account. But if he is not able to render an account of spiritual as well as earthly neglect of them, then he will be condemned.

Et hoc animadvertendum est, quia non liberabuntur monachi, cum abbas condemnatus fuerit, sed monachi condemnabuntur juxta meritum suum; abbas vero duplici poena luet, id est una pro sua negligentia, altera, quia illius negligentia non recta egerunt monachi.

And this must be observed, that the monks will not be acquitted when the abbot is condemned, but rather the monks will be condemned according to their own merit. Certainly the abbot pays a double punishment, that is one for his neglect, the other because through his neglect the monks did not act properly.

Si autem potuerit mittere rationem, quia non sua negligentia perierunt, tunc liberabitur, sicut in subsequentibus manifestat; ait enim: ₈tantum iterum erit liber, ut si inquieto vel inobedienti gregi pastoris fuerit omnis diligentia attributa.

If, however, he is able to give an account that [the monks] did not perish through his neglect, then he will be acquitted, as is made clear in the following, for [Benedict] says: ₈Likewise he will be equally free if all diligence is applied to a shepherd’s unsettled and disobedient flock.⁵

Vide modo, quia, sicut prius terrorem incussit abbati de ratione mittenda, ita nunc laetificare eum studet, dum dicit: Tantum iteram erit liber.

Look at the way that, just as [Benedict] earlier instilled fear in the abbot concerning the account that must be given, thus now he desires to delight him, when he says: Likewise he will be equally free.

Et cum dicit liber, subaudiendum est: a vinculis negligentiae monachorum.

And when he says free, it must be understood: [free] from the chains of the monks’ neglect.

Animadvertendum est in hoc loco, quia inquietus et ad animam et ad corpus attinet, eo quod est inquietudo animae et corporis, et per inquietudinem corporis ostenditur inquietudo animae, et ex inquietudine animae procedit inquietudo corporis.

It must be observed in this place, that unsettled [inquietus] concerns both the mind and the body, because disturbance [inquietudo] is of the mind and of the body, and disturbance of the mind is exhibited through the disturbance of the body, just as disturbance of the body proceeds from the disturbance of the mind.

Inquieto, id est non quieto. Inquietudo corporis est, cum monachus vagatur de loco in locum; inquietudo animae est, cum audit signum et tardius occurrit [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 43], vel negligenter agit ea, quae sibi injuncta fuerint, eo quod anima non est in suo statu, in quo debuit esse, sed quasi jam vacat, ³ cum a sua rectitudine cecidit in negligentiam.

Unsettled, that is not settled. Disturbance of the body is when a monk wanders from place to place; disturbance of the mind is when he hears the bell and comes to meet it slowly [c.f. Regula Benedicti, c. 43], or he carries out those things which have been imposed upon him negligently because his mind is not in the condition ought to be, but is as if already vacant,⁶ when it falls from correctness into neglect.

Omnis pastoris fuerit diligentia attributa.

All diligence is applied [to a] shepherd’s [flock].

Nunc videndum est, quare dixit omnis, cum dixit diligentia? Ideo dixit [page 93] omnis, ut non solum abbas debeat de diligentia spiritali studium habere, sed etiam de necessitate eorum temporali. Ideo, enim dixit omnis, cum dicit diligentia, quia ad spiritalem et temporalem diligentiam attinere voluit: ad temporalem, sicut est domus, locus, cibus, potus, vestimentum, et caetera his similia. Quia si solummodo de spiritali diligentia et non temporali sollicitus fuerit, nil adjuvat, et iterum nil adjuvat, si solummodo de temporali necessitudine eorum sollicitus fuerit, (si) non⁴ spiritali. Sed tamen plus debet de spiritali diligentia studiosus esse quam de temporali.

Now it must be seen why he said all when he said diligence. He said [page 93] all, so that the abbot should not only be zealous for spiritual diligence, but as well for their temporal need. Therefore he said all, when he said diligence, because he wished to refer to spiritual and to worldly diligence such as house, a place, a meal, a drink, clothes, and other similar things. Because if he is only concerned with spiritual diligence and not with worldly [diligence], [then] he is of no use, and again he is of no use if he is only concerned with their worldly needs, not with spiritual [needs]. But nevertheless he ought to be more devoted about the spiritual diligence than about the worldly [diligence].

Attributa, id est impensa.

Applied, that is, devoted to.

Sequitur: ₈morbidis eorum actibus fuerit universa cura exhibita.

Next: ₈Every effort to cure its unhealthy actions is applied.

Quod dicit: morbidis actibus, ad infirmitates mentis attinet, quia de corporalium infirmitatum cura inferius dicturus est.

 When he says unhealthy actions, it pertains to the sicknesses of the mind, because he will discuss the treatment of corporal sickness below.

Et bene dixit: morbidis actibus, quia infirmitas animae per actiones corporis intelligitur, sicuti est, cum pigre ad officium venit et somnolentiam habet, et caetera, his similia.

And well he said: unhealthy actions, because sickness of the mind is understood through actions of the body, just as it is when [a monk] comes slowly to the office and he is drowsy, and similar things.

Morbidis actibus intelliguntur: infirmis actibus, hoc est negligentibus operibus. Morbidi actus sunt opera negligenter facta et caetera vitia.

Unhealthy actions is understood to be weak actions, that is neglected works. Unhealthy actions are works done carelessly and other sins.

Et hoc animadvertendum est, quia iste morbus, id est infirmitas, ex infirmitate animae procedit, quia sicut corpus habet infirmitates suas, id est febrem et caetera his similia, ita habet anima suas infirmitates, id est iram, furorem, indignationem et caetera his similia: et quantum plus fuerint opera negligenter facta, tanto ex majore infirmitate animae descendunt. Quod si majora vitia fuerint quasi poenae (paene?) morte⁵ infirmitates majores intelliguntur. Nam cum videris fratrem negligentem, cognosce, ejus animam esse infirmam.

And this must be observed, that this illness, that is sickness, proceeds from the sickness of the soul, because just as the body has its sicknesses, that is fever and other similar things, so the soul has its sicknesses, that is anger, rage, indignation and other similar things. And the more carelessly works are done, the more they derives from great illness of the soul. Because if there are major faults, like the punishments of death, then they should be understood as major illnesses. For when you see a negligent brother, know that his soul is sick.

Et hoc animadvertendum est, quia unum significat istud, quod hic dixit: universa cura fuerit exhibita, et illud, quod superius dixit: omnis diligentia attributa; et ob hoc hic illud replicavit causa exaggerationis verborum.

And it must be observed that it means one and the same thing when Benedict said here and every effort to cure is applied, and when he said above all diligence is applied. He repeated it for the sake of emphasizing the words.

[page 94] Sequitur: ₉Pastor eorum in judicio Domini absolutus dicat cum Propheta Domino.

[page 94] Next: ₉Let their shepherd, acquitted in the Lord’s judgement, speak to the Lord, with the Prophet.

Absolutus, subaudiendum est: a vinculis negligentiae discipulorum suorum.

Acquitted, must be understood as from the negligence of his disciples.⁷

Dicat positum est pro ‘dicet’.

Let him speak [dicat] is instead of he will speak [dicet].

Sequitur: ₉Justitiam tuam non abscondi in corde meo, veritatem tuam et salutare tuum dixi [Ps. 39:11].

Next: ₉I did not hide your justice in my heart and I spoke your truth and your salvation [Ps 39:11].

Justitia enim in hoc loco pro generali justitia est posita, quae ad omnes virtutes attinet, veluti est illud Prophetae; ait enim: Indicabo tibi, o homo, quid Dominus tuus requirat a te, judicium et justitium, et ambulare sollicitum cum Deo tuo [Mi 6:8]. Quasi errans genus humanum a Deo, idcirco dixit: Indicabo tibi.

For justice was put forth here instead of general justice, which pertains to all virtues, just as this statement of the prophet; for he said: I will show you, o man, what your God requires of you, judgement and justice, and to walk anxiously with your God [Mi 6:8]. Just as if the race of man wanders from God, he therefore said: I will show you.

Judicium vero est discernere inter bonum et malum, justitia autem est, recedere a malo et facere bonum. Ambulare sollicitum dixit, ut sollicite custodiat bonum, quod agit; veritas vero attinet ad Deum, quia ipse dixit: Ego sum via, veritas et vita [Io 14:6]; et iterum attinet ad specialem virtutem, de qua dicit Apostolus: Veritatem loquimini unusquisque ad proximum suum [Eph 4:25; also Za 8:16], ac si diceret: 'Nolite mentiri invicem.'

Judgement is to discern between right and wrong, justice however is to retreat from evil and do right. [The prophet]⁸ said walk anxiously, in order that a man protects anxiously the good he does; truth however pertains to God, because he [Christ] himself said: I am the way, the truth and the life [Io 14:6]; and again it pertains to special virtue, of which the apostle [Paul] says: Speak the truth, every person with his neighbour [Eph 4:25; also Za 8:16], as if he said: “Refuse to lie to each other.”

Salutare enim attinet ad Christum, de quo dictum est: Salutare tuum da nobis [Ps 84:8], et potest referri ad praecepta divina, quia salutaria sunt. Et est sensus, cum dixit: Justitiam tuam non abscondi in corde meo, veritatem tuam et salutare tuum dixi, i. e. dixi illis recedere a malo et facere bonum, et praecepta tua indicavi illis, necnon et te ipsum illis manifestavi.

For salvation pertains to Christ, of which is said: Grant us your salvation [Ps 84:8], and it can refer to divine teachings, because they save. And this is the sense when he said: I did not hide your justice in my heart and I spoke your truth and your salvation, that is, I have said to them to retreat from evil and do good, and I have showed your teachings to them, and I have also revealed you yourself to them.

Sequitur: ₉Ipsi autem contemnentes spreverunt me. [Ez 20:27].

Next: ₉Yet they scornfully rejected me. [Ez 20:27]

Contemnere, i. e. spernere, i. e. rejicere vel repellere. Tunc contemnit quis, quando non vult audire praeceptum; spernit autem, quando ea, quae audit aut habet forte, de corde suo repellit; quia aliud est, in domum non sinere intrare, sicut est contemnere, et aliud, si susceptum habet, de domo sua rejicere. Et est sensus, cum dicit: Ipsi autem contemnentes spreverunt me, i. e. noluerunt audire, et si audierunt, a cordibus suis ea, quae dixi, expulerunt.

To scorn [contemnere], that is to reject [spernere], that is to refuse [rejicere] and to drive away [repellere]. Someone scorns, when he does not wish to hear teaching; moreover he rejects [it], he drives it out of his heart, what he hears or perhaps has. For it is one thing to forbid entrance into a house, as if to scorn, and another to refuse someone already received. And this is the sense when he says Yet they scornfully rejected me, that is, they did not wish to hear me, and if they listened, still they drove from their hearts those things I said.

Sequitur: ₁₀Et tunc demum inobedientibus curae suae ovibus poena sit eis praevalens ipsa mors.

Next: ₁₀And then in the end the punishment for disobedient sheep in his care will be death itself prevailing over them.

 Tunc demum, i. e, tunc, deinde, postea; curae suae, i. e, saluti suae.

Then in the end, that is, then, later, afterwards.

Curae suae attinet ad spiritalem salutem et ad salutem [page 95] corporis, verbi gratia, tunc non obediunt curae suae, cum praeceptis divinis, quae salutem hominibus se observantibus praebent, non oboediunt; vel tunc non oboediunt saluti suae, cum sibi servitium aut necessitas sive pro infirmitate sive pro sanitate impensa fuerit, et illi, cum debent pro illo servitio vel necessitate sibi impensa in melius proficere, non solum non proficiunt, verum etiam in pejus proveniunt.

His care, that is, his salvation. His care pertains to spiritual salvation and to bodily salvation [page 95], for example when [brothers] do not submit to his care, when they do not obey divine teachings that provide salvation [salutem] to men who observe them. And then they do not submit to his care, when there is servitude or need for him whether for sickness or for excessive health, is applied; when they ought to do better with regard to servitude or need, not only do they not do better, but even do worse.

Sit poena suapraevalens eis ipsa mors, ita enim construitur, i. e. tunc sit, hoc est fiat poena, subaudiendum est, sua ipsa. ⁶

Will be death itself prevailing over them: thus [the sentence] is constructed, that is, then the punishment that should be done, and it must be understood: their own punishment.

Praevalens mors: Praevalens, i. e. valde valens. Et est sensus, cum dicit: Tunc demum inobedientibus curae suae ovibus poena sit eis praevalens ipsa mors, i. e., quantum minus studium vel minorem curam habuerint erga salutem suam tam spiritalem quam etiam corporalem, tantum majorem poenam habebunt. Et propterea dicit curae suae, i.e. salutis suae.

Death prevailing: prevailing [praevalens], that very powerful [valde valens]. And this is the sense when he says: Then in the end the punishment for disobedient sheep in his care will be death itself prevailing over them, that is, the less zeal or care they have regarding their own salvation, spiritual as well as bodily salvation, the greater will their punishment be, and therefore he says his care, that is, their salvation.

Sequitur: ₁₁Ergo cum aliquis suscipit nomen abbatis, duplici debet doctrina suis praeesse discipulis.

Next: ₁₁Therefore, when anyone takes up the name of abbot, he must lead his disciples with twofold teaching.

Istud enim ergo ex superioribus pendet, ubi B. Benedictus dicit: ₆Memor semper abbas, quia doctrinae suae vel discipulorum obedientiae utrarumque rerum in tremendo judicio Dei facienda erit discussio, ac si diceret: Si ita est, ut ille abbas tam de sua doctrina quam de obedientia discipulorum suorum redditurus erit⁷ rationem, ergo, qui suscipit nomen abbatis, duplici debet doctrina suis praesse discipulis, i. e. omnia bona et saccta factis amplius quam verbis ostendat, videlicet prius bona faciendo et postmodum verbis docendo.

For that therefore depends on what was written above, where blessed Benedict says: ₆The abbot must always be mindful that there will have to be a trial in God’s fearsome court concerning two matters: his teaching and his disciples’ obedience, as if he said: If it is thus that the abbot will hand over an account of his teaching as well his disciples’ obedience, therefore, he who takes up the name of abbot, must lead his disciples with twofold teaching, that is he should show [them] all that is good and holy by his deeds even more than by his words, namely first by doing good things and then by teaching with words.

Sunt enim multi, qui dicunt, solummodo esse doctrinam verbis, et iterum sunt alii, qui dicunt, solummodo esse doctrinam operibus. B. vero Benedictus quia cognovit, utrumque esse necessarium, i. e. doctrinam, quae verbis fit, et doctrinam, quae operibus, idcirco dixit duplici doctrina, i. e. doctrina, quae fit verbis, et doctrina, quae operibus.

For there are many who say that there is teaching only by words, and again there are others who say that there is teaching only by works. But blessed Benedict, because he recognizes that both are necessary, that is teaching, which takes place through words, and teaching, which takes place through works, therefore said a twofold teaching, that is teaching through words and teaching through works.

Et ut ad superiora redeamus, ubi dicitur: ₁₂omnia bona et sancta factis amplius quam verbis ostendat: quia magis [page 96] doctor actibus quam verbis praeesse debet, docet B. Gregorius in libro pastorali hoc modo dicens, ait enim: Sed inter haec ad ea quae jam diximus, caritatis studio retorquemur... [omitted in Mittermüller, added from SC 382: ut praedicator quisque plus actibus quam vocibus insonet, et bene vivendo vestigia sequacibus imprimat quam loquendo quo gradiantur ostendat.

And let us return to the previous discussion,⁹ where it is said: ₁₂He should show all good and holy things in deeds more than in words, that a teacher [page 96] ought to take the lead more through deeds than through words. St. Gregory teaches [this] in the Liber Pastoralis in this way, for he said: But in the midst of these things we are brought back by the earnest desire of charity to what we have already said above; [omitted in Mittermüller: that every preacher should give forth a sound more by his deeds than by his words, and by good living imprint footsteps for men to follow rather than by speaking show them the way to walk.

Quia et gallus iste, quem pro exprimenda boni praedicatoris specie in loquutione sua Dominus assumit, cum jam edere cantus parat, prius alas excutit, et semetipsum feriens vigilantiorem reddit Quia nimirum necesse est ut hi qui verba sanctae praedicationis movent, prius studio bonae actionis evigilent, ne in semetipsis torpentes opere, alios excitent voce; prius se per sublimia facta excutiant, et tunc ad bene vivendum alios sollicitos reddant; prius cogitationum alis semetipsos feriant; quidquid in se inutiliter torpet, sollicita investigatione deprehendant, districta animadversione corrigant; et tunc demum aliorum vitam loquendo componant; prius punire propria fletibus curent, et tunc quae aliorum sunt punienda denuntient; et antequam verba exhortationis insonent, omne quod locuturi sunt,] ... operibus clament. [Gregory the Great, Regula Pastoralis III, c. 40, SC 382, pp. 530-532]

For that cock, too, whom the Lord in his manner of speech takes to represent a good preacher, when he is now preparing to crow, first shakes his wings, and by striking himself makes himself more awake; since it is surely necessary that those who give utterance to words of holy preaching should first be well awake in earnestness of good living, lest they rouse others with their voice while themselves torpid in performance; that they should first shake themselves up by lofty deeds, and then make others solicitous for good living; that they should first strike themselves with the wings of their thoughts; that whatsoever in themselves is unprofitably torpid they should discover by anxious investigation, and correct by strict reproach, and then at last set in order the life of others by speaking; that they should first take heed to punish their own faults in tears and then denounce what calls for punishment in others; and that, before they give voice to words of exhortation, they should proclaim in their deeds what they are about to speak. [[Gregory the Great, Regula Pastoralis III, c. 40, SC 382]¹⁰

Unde subditur, ₁₂id est: omnia bona et sancta factis amplius quam verbis ostendat.

When is added ₁₂He should show all good and holy things in deeds more than in words.

Nunc animadvertendum est, quare praemisit omnia, cum dixit bona et sancta? Ideo dixit omnia, quia nil excludit abbati, hoc est, non secundum quod abbas eligit aut ei libitum solummodo fuerit, sed omnia debent esse bona et sancta, hoc est, quae in scripturis divinis repererit hoc est secundum auctoritatem divinarum scripturarum.

Now it must be observed, why he placed all before good and holy? He said all because he excludes nothing concerning the abbot, that is, not according to what the abbot chooses or only what is pleasing to him, but all things ought to be good and holy, that is what he learns in the divine scripture, that is, according to the authority of the divine scripture.

In hoc enim loco, quo dicit: factis amplius quam verbis ostendat, utrumque vult. s. Benedictus, id est doctrinam verborum et operum. Sed quia sunt multi, qui non possunt utrumque peragere, id est doctrinam verborum et operum, idcirco dixit: factis amplius, ac si diceret: utrumque debet peragere, sed quamvis utroque modo debet praeesse, tamen magis factis; et si periculum est in illo, qui factis solummodo praeest, tamen magis periculum est in illo, qui solummodo verbis praeest, ac si diceret: et doctrina et opere debet praeesse, maxime opere.

For in this place, where he says: He should show in deeds more than in words, and St Benedict wants both, that is the teaching by words and by deeds. But because there are many who cannot carry out either, that is the teaching by words or deeds, he therefore said: more in deeds, as if he said: he ought to carry out both, but even though he ought to lead [them] in both ways, still [he ought to lead them] more through his deeds. And if there is danger in one who leads only through deeds, there is still more danger in one who leads [them] only through words as if he said: and he ought to lead through teaching and work, [but] most of all through work.

Nam quod utrumque necessarium sit, id est doctrina verborum et doctrina operum, plurima habemus exempla. Legitur enim de Domino Jesu, quia coepit Jesus facere et docere. Vide modo, quia prius dixit facere, et postmodum docere.

That both are necessary, that is the teaching of words and the teaching of deeds, we have many examples. For it is read of the Lord Jesus that he began to act and to teach. You see in this way that he said first to act, and afterwards to teach.

Et iterum: Erat autem Jesus docens in synagogis eorum quasi potestatem habens, non sicut scribae eorum [Mc 1:22]. Sermo scribarum non habet potestatem, quia, non complent opere, quod verbis dicunt; sermo autem Domini habet potestatem, quia prius opere complebat et postmodum verbis praedicabat. Unde unusquisque, membrum ejus, si caput suum vult sequi, hoc, quod verbis praedicat, opere compleat.

And again: However Jesus was teaching in their synagogue as one having power, not as their scribes [Mc 1:22]. The word of the scribes has no power because they do not fulfil through work what they say in words; however, the word of the Lord has power because he fulfilled it first through work and afterwards he preached in words. Whence if anyone each one wants his limb to follow his head, he should fulfil in deeds what he preaches in words.

Et quod utrumque sit necessarium, testatur Papa Gregorius, cum dicit: Cujus vita despicitur, restat, ut ejus praedicatio contemnatur [Gregory the Great, Homiliae in Evangelia XII, c. 1, CCSL 141, p. 82].

And Pope Gregory testifies that both are necessary when he says: The preaching of those whose life is despised will also be despised [Gregory the Great, Homoliae in Evangelia XII, c. 1].

Et [page 97] B. Hieronymus dicit: Utrumque enim Dei servis necessarium est, ut et opus sermone, et sermo operibus comprobetur. [Jerome, Commentarii in Evangelium Matthaei I, 7:21, CCSL 77, p. 45]

And [page 97] the blessed Jerome says: For both are necessary to God’s servants, that works are proven by words, and the words are proven by works. [Jerome, Commentarii in Evangelium Matthaei I, 7;21]

Sequitur: ₁₂Ut capacibus discipulis mandata Domini verbis proponat, duris vero corde et simplicioribus factis suis divina praecepta demonstret.

Next: ₁₂He sets out God’s commandments verbally for receptive disciples, but teaches the hard-hearted and less intelligent the divine precepts by example.

In hoc enim loco, cum dicit: ut capacibus discipulis mandata Domini verbis proponat, reddit causam, quare debeat ille abbas duplici doctrina praeesse suis discipulis, ac si diceret: aliis praeesse debet verbis, aliis autem discipulis operibus.

For in this place, where he says: he sets out God’s commandments verbally for receptive disciples, he returns to the reason why the abbot ought to lead his disciples in a twofold teaching, as if he said: he ought to lead some disciples through words, others through works.

Et bene dixit, capacibus discipulis mandata Domini verbis proponere, quia sunt aliqui subjecti, qui in quibusdam operibus praeeunt abbatem suum, et idcirco inconsequens est, ut abbas, quos gaudet habere praeeuntes, velit eos habere sequentes.

And well he said: setting out God’s commandments verbally for receptive disciples, because some [monks] placed under [the abbot] exceed their abbot in certain works, and therefore it follows that the abbot, who rejoices that they excel, would wish that they follow him.

Et forte dicit aliquis: 'quare superius dixit factis amplius, et nunc dicit verbis?' Ideo dixit verbis, quia sunt multi, qui quamvis propter aliquod impedimentum non possunt complere opere, quod verbis praedicant, tamen devotione complent. Unde quia ipsam perfectionem devotionis non possunt operibus manifestare, idcirco verbis manifestant.

And perhaps someone says: “How did he say above more in deeds, and now he says verbally?” He said verbally because there are many who, although they cannot fulfil in works what they proclaim verbally because of some hindrance, nevertheless they fulfil through devotion. Whence because they cannot make their own ideal of devotion visible through works, they make it visible verbally.

Duri corde sunt, qui intelligunt et nolunt complere. Simpliciores sunt, qui intelligunt et non possunt. Duri sunt, qui non intelligunt et possunt intelligere; sed pejores sunt illi, qui possunt intelligere et nolunt, quam illi, qui nec intelligunt nec intelligere possunt. Simpliciores sunt, qui non intelligunt, sed volunt, aut volunt et non possunt intelligere, ⁸ sicut diximus.

The hard-hearted are they who understand but who are unwilling to fulfill. The less intelligent are they who understand and cannot [fulfill]. The hard are they who do not understand [even though] they are able to understand; but they who can understand and do not want to are worse than those who neither understand nor are able to understand. The less intelligent are they who do not understand but want to, or want to and cannot understand, just as we have said.