Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Members of the Church · On Monks (Book II)
Chapter 21: On the Vow of Obedience
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Monachis (De Membris Ecclesiae, Book II), On Monks (On the Members of the Church, Book II). The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
Now that religious obedience is rightly vowed to God can be proved by these reasons. First, obedience is pleasing to God even in those things which He Himself did not command. For (Jeremiah 35) the sons of Jonadab are praised and rewarded by God, who, that they might obey their father, drank no wine, sowed no fields, had no houses, but dwelt perpetually in tents. But everything which is pleasing to God can be vowed to Him; therefore obedience, even otherwise not due, can be vowed to God.
Peter Martyr answers (in the book On Vows) that the sons of Jonadab did nothing undue. For although God had not commanded them not to drink wine, nor to sow fields, nor to inhabit houses, yet He had commanded that they obey their parent, and accordingly they, while they obeyed their father, did only that which they were bound to do by a divine precept.
But this solution is refuted. First, from the testimony of Rabanus, who in his commentary on this passage says that the sons of Jonadab did more than the divine law commanded.
Secondly, from the very text of Jeremiah; for God in that place, by the example of the sons of Jonadab, reprehends His people, because they obeyed the voice of one man, but He Himself was unwilling to obey the voice of God Himself. The sons of Jonadab, He says, the sons of Rechab, have confirmed the precept of their father, which he commanded them; but this people hath not obeyed me. Which reasoning of the Lord would plainly grow cold if the sons of Jonadab had been bound by a divine precept to obey their father in those things, that they should not drink wine, etc.; for then there would be no antithesis between God and the creature; for both the sons of Jonadab would have obeyed God, and the sons of Israel would not have obeyed God.
Thirdly, the same is gathered from the divine praise and reward; for God would not so greatly have praised the sons of Jonadab, unless they had done something singular.
Lastly, a manifest reason persuades the same thing. For although sons are bound to obey their parents, yet they are not bound to obey in all things after they have come to the years of puberty. For each one is of his own right in choosing a state and kind of life; otherwise there would be no difference between servants and free men, if always and in all things sons were in their father’s power.
But as to what Blessed Paul says (Colossians 3), Children, obey your parents in all things, either it ought to be so understood that that (in all things) signify in all things to which the paternal power extends, as Saint Thomas rightly teaches (2a2ae, question 104, article 5) — just as if one should say that soldiers ought to obey their commander in all things, it would have to be expounded, in all things which pertain to warfare; or certainly sons are bound to obey their parents in all things, but while they are little; for as it is said (Galatians 4), As long as the heir is a child, he differeth nothing from a servant; and the Lord Himself was subject to His parents when He was a boy, as we read (Luke 2).
A second reason can be taken from the New Testament. For, as we said above in the disputation on the counsels, the counsel of perfection is to follow the Lord by perfectly denying oneself, as is gathered from that of Matthew 16: He that will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me; for although in the preparation of mind to deny oneself is a precept — since in the same place the Lord adds, For he that will save his life shall lose it — yet, outside the article of necessity, to deny oneself perfectly, and in all things to subject one’s judgment and will to the judgment and will of another, is not a precept, but a counsel. For therefore it is said (Matthew 19), If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell all, etc., and come, follow me.
Further, the perfect following of the Lord, which consists in the denial of oneself — that is, in perfect obedience — necessarily includes a vow, by which one so denies himself that he cannot go back; for it is not a perfect denial of self to obey another for a time and a little after not to obey. On which account the Lord in the same place added, And let him take up his cross; since, as John Cassian elegantly admonishes (Book 4 On the Institutes of the Cenobia, chapter 35), a true and perfect monk ought to be like one crucified; for he who is fixed to the cross not only does not walk where he wills, nor do what he wills, but cannot even walk or work unless he be moved by another.
A third reason: men do rightly who, desiring to lead a common life, by common consent choose someone as their superior. For this both right reason persuades, and Scripture too advises (Proverbs 3), when it says: Lean not on thy own prudence. Again, a superior being appointed, it is good and pleasing to God that he be obeyed, since it is written: He that heareth you, heareth me (Luke 10); and, Obey your prelates (Hebrews 13). But everything which is established by His own testimony to please God can rightly be vowed, as the adversaries grant; therefore the obedience to be shown to a superior chosen by ourselves, and whom otherwise we would not be bound to obey, can rightly be vowed.
A fourth reason, from the use of the ancient Church. It is certain that among the ancient saints monastic obedience was in use. For Saint Basil (in the monastic constitutions, chapter 22): “Now,” he says, “let us again exercise a discourse on obedience, showing how great obedience toward the superior the reasoning of exact discipline requires from the exercises,” etc. And in the whole chapter he discourses of obedience, and teaches that a monk ought to obey his superior, and not to discuss what it is that is commanded, provided it be not manifestly a sin; and briefly, to show himself to his superior such as sheep are to the shepherd, and instruments to the workman. Nor does he omit that it is necessary for monks to obey their superiors perfectly, and that otherwise they fall from eternal salvation. The same teaches Cassian (Book 4 On the Institutes of the Cenobia, chapter 23 and following).
Saint Jerome (in the epistle to Eustochium, on the keeping of virginity), describing the institutes of the monks: “The first,” he says, “covenant among them is to obey the elders.” And in the epistle to Rusticus the monk: “Through all these things,” he says, “my discourse tends to this, that I may teach thee that thou art not to be let go at thine own choice, but oughtest to live in a monastery under the discipline of one father, and the fellowship of many.” And below: “Thou shalt not do what thou wilt; thou shalt eat what thou art commanded; thou shalt wear what thou receivest.” And below: “Thou shalt fear the superior of the monastery as a lord, love him as a parent, believe salutary to thee whatever he shall command, nor judge of the opinion of thy elders, whose office it is to obey and to fulfill what is commanded.”
Sulpicius (in the first Dialogue on the virtues of Saint Martin), discoursing of monks: “The chief virtue there,” he says, “and the first, is obedience; nor is one coming to the monastery otherwise received by the abbot than as one who has first been tried and proved, never about to refuse any command of the abbot, however arduous and difficult and unworthy to be endured.”
Saint Augustine (Book 1 On the Morals of the Church, chapter 31): “But these fathers,” he says, “with no pride consult for those whom they call sons, with great authority of theirs in commanding, great will of those in obeying.” So he. And we could bring forward very many testimonies of this kind, if there were need.
They will perhaps answer that obedience was indeed in use among the ancient monks, but not so a vow of obedience. But John Cassian (Book 4 On the Institutes of the Renouncers, chapter 33) expressly mentions the vow and the profession, where he discourses of the observance of the monastic institutions, of which the chief was of obedience; whose words we cited in the preceding chapter.
Likewise Saint Gregory (homily 20 on Ezekiel): “When,” he says, “anyone vows something of his own to God, and something he does not vow, it is a sacrifice; but when he vows to almighty God all that he has, all that he lives, all that he understands, it is a holocaust.” So he. Where he speaks of the monastic vows, by which a man retains nothing for himself, nor even his judgment, which he does not offer to God.
Finally, Saint Augustine (on Psalm 75): “Let no one,” he says, “placed in a monastery, brother, say, I withdraw from the monastery; for neither are those alone who are in the monastery going to attain to the kingdom of heaven, and those who are not there do not belong to God. It is answered to him: But they did not vow, thou hast vowed.” And on Psalm 99: “While he does not persevere in fulfilling what he vowed, he becomes a deserter of so holy a purpose, and guilty of a vow not rendered.”
Let there come in last the miracles which God not rarely showed to confirm monastic obedience. Sulpicius (in the first Dialogue on the virtues of Saint Martin) writes two miracles in these words: “I will relate to you two very great miracles of incredible obedience, though more come to my recollection; but to excite an emulation of the virtues, for which few do not suffice, many will not profit. When, then, a certain man, the acts of the world being renounced, about to enter a monastery of great discipline, had begun to ask, the abbot began to set many things before him: that the labors of that discipline were grievous, that his own commands were hard, which no one could easily fulfill by patience. Let him rather seek another monastery where one might live by easier laws; let him not attempt to undertake what he could not fulfill. But he was not at all moved by these terrors, but rather promised all obedience so, that if the abbot commanded him to go into the fire, he would not refuse to enter. When the master received this profession of his, he did not delay to prove the professor. By chance an oven near by was burning, which, kindled with much fire, was being prepared for baking bread. The flame overflowed from the broken furnaces, and within the hollows of that oven the burning reigned with full reins. This, then, the master commands that newcomer to enter; nor did he delay to obey the command; he enters the midst of the flames, nothing hesitating, which soon, overcome by so bold a faith, gave way to him coming, as once to those Hebrew children; nature was overcome, the burning fled, and he who was thought to be about to burn, as if bathed with cold dew, marveled at himself. But what wonder, if that fire did not touch Thy recruit, O Christ, that neither the abbot might be sorry to have commanded hard things, nor the disciple repent to have obeyed the command? Who on the very day he had come, while he was tried, weak, was found perfect — deservedly happy, deservedly glorious, proved by obedience, glorified by suffering.
But in the same monastery that which I am about to tell was reported to have happened in recent memory. A certain man likewise had come to the same abbot to be received; when the first law of obedience was laid on him, and he promised perpetual patience even to the extreme. By chance the abbot bore in his hand a storax rod long since dry; this he fixed in the ground, and imposed on that newcomer this task, that he should so long minister watering to the little rod, until — which was against all nature — the dry wood should come to life in the dry ground. The newcomer, subject to the command of the hard law, daily carried water on his own shoulders, which was sought from the river Nile nearly two miles off; and now, a year’s space being measured out, the labor of the worker did not cease, and of the fruit of the work there could be no hope; yet the virtue of obedience endured in the labor. The following year too mocks the vain labor of the brother now worn out. At length, in the third rolling course of succeeding times, when neither by night nor by day that water-carrier ceased his work, the rod flowered. I myself saw the very shrub from that little rod, which today too is within the courtyard of the monastery with green branches, which, remaining as it were in testimony, shows how much obedience merited and how much faith can do.” So he.
Other things not unlike Saint Gregory narrates (Book 2 of the Dialogues, chapter 7) of Saint Maurus, who at the abbot’s command walked upon the waters; and John Cassian (Book 4 On the Institutes of the Renouncers, chapter 23) of Abbot John, who, on account of the virtue of obedience raised to the grace of prophecy, so shone to the whole world that even to the kings of this world he was, by his own merit, rendered illustrious.
But there are objections to be solved. The first is Luther’s (in the book On Monastic Vows), where he reasons in this way. Scripture commands that we obey all men (Philippians 2): Esteeming one another superiors. And (1 Peter 2): Be ye subject to every human creature for God’s sake. Therefore to bind oneself to obey one only superior is against Scripture; for it is the same as if one should vow thus: God, I vow to Thee that I will not be subject to all according to Thy Gospel, but only to one greater.
I answer that the Apostle Paul in that place does not wish that we hold all as princes whom we are bound to obey, but that we judge all to be our superiors — that is, better and holier; for he commends humility, as his very words indicate: In humility esteeming one another superiors. Add that if the Apostle wished that we obey all, he would wish a plainly impossible thing; for if all ought to obey all, there will be none who command, and none who obey. Further, Saint Peter by “every human creature” understands every man endowed with the power of commanding. For so he explains himself: Whether to the king as excelling, or to leaders as sent by him.
The second objection is of the same Luther in the same place. The superior of the monastery is free from the obedience which he had vowed, without any other dispensation; therefore it is a sign that that vow does not oblige before God. I answer that in him who is chosen as superior the obligation of the vow remains, though by accident the exercise of that vow ceases, because the matter is lacking; the sign of which is that if he who is now superior be deprived of the office, he will again be bound to obedience, even though he make no new vow. See Saint Thomas (2a2ae, question 88, article 11, and question 186, article 5).
The third is Peter Martyr’s (in his commentary on 1 Corinthians 7). Blessed Paul forbids that Christians make themselves servants, when he says: You are bought with a price; be not made the servants of men. Therefore it is not lawful to make a vow of obedience. For what else is this than of one’s own accord to deliver oneself into servitude to abbots?
But the answer is easy; for Blessed Paul does not forbid the servitude which is shown to men, but forbids this, that men be served chiefly for the sake of the men themselves, but not for God’s sake; which he expounded more clearly (Colossians 3), where he says thus: Servants, obey in all things your carnal masters, not serving to the eye, as pleasing men, but in simplicity of heart, fearing the Lord. Whatsoever you do, do it from the heart, as to the Lord, and not to men, knowing that you shall receive of the Lord the reward of inheritance. Serve ye the Lord Christ. On which account Saint Paulinus, although he was not ignorant that the Apostle had said, Be not made the servants of men, yet sold himself to redeem the son of a widow, which Saint Gregory relates with his praise (Book 3 of the Dialogues, chapter 1).
But, says Peter Martyr, Saint Paulinus sold himself out of charity toward his neighbor, and what is done out of charity is rightly done. As though indeed perfect monks out of cupidity, and not out of charity toward God, subject themselves of their own accord to abbots and other superiors. But of obedience thus far.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XXI. De voto obedientice. Jam vero obedientiam religiosam recte voveri Deo, his rationibus probari potest. Primo, grata est Deo obedientia etiam in iis rebus, quas ipse non praecepit. Nam Hiere- miae XXXV. laudantur, et remunerantur a Deo filii Jonadab, qui, ut obedirent patri suo, non bibebant vinum , non serebant agros, non habebant domo^, sed habitabant perpetuo in tentoriis : omne autem quod Deo gratum est, voveri illi potest, igitur obedientia, etiam alioqui non debita, Deo voveri potest, Respondet Petrus Martyr in lib. de votis, nihil indebitum fecisse filios Jonadab. Nam etiamsi Deus non jusserat illis, ut non bibe¬ rent vinum, nec sererent agros, nec domos inhabitarent, jusserat tamen ut parenti obe¬ dirent, ac proinde illi, dum patri obedie- (l)Math. V, 3; XIX, 21. LIBER II. 556 runt, id solum fecerunt, quod facere divino praecepto tenebantur. Sed refellitur haec solutio. Primo, ex tes¬ timonio Rabani, qui in commentario hujus loci dicit, filios Jonadab plus fecisse, quam lex divina praeciperet. Secundo, ex ipso textu Hieremiae ; nam Deus eo loco exemplo filiorum Jonadab re¬ prehendit populum suum, quod illi obedie- rint voci unius hominis, ipse autem voci ipsius Dei obedire noluerit. Firmaverunt, inquit, filii Jonadab, filii Rechab praeceptum patris sui, quod praeceperat eis, populus au¬ tem iste non obedivit mihi. Quae Domini ra¬ tio plane frigeret, si filii Jonadab divino praecepto obstricti fuissent obedire patri suo in rebus illis, ut non biberent vinum etc. tunc enim nulla esset antithesis inter Deum et creaturam; nam et filii Jonadab obedi- vissent Deo, et filii Israel non obedivissent Deo. Tertio, idem colligitur ex laude et remu- neratione divina ; non enim tantopere Deus laudasset filios Jonadab, nisi aliquid singu¬ lare fecissent. Postremo, idipsum ratio manifesta suadet. Nam etiamsi tenentur filii obedire parenti¬ bus, non tamen tenentur obedire in omnibus rebus, postquam ad annos pubertatis perve¬ nerint. Est enim unusquisque sui juris in deligendo statu, et genere vitae, alioqui nihil interesset inter servos, et liberos, si semper, et omnibus in rebus filii in patris potestate essent. Quod vero B. Paulus ait Coloss. III : Filii obedite parentibus per omnia (1). Vel ita in- telligi debet, ut illud (J Per omnia) significet per omnia ad quae se extendit patria potes¬ tas, ut recte docet S. Thomasin 2. 2. quaest. CIV, art. 5. quemadmodum si quis diceret, oportere milites obedire Imperatori per om¬ nia, exponendum esset per omnia , quae ad militiam pertinent. Vel certe tenentur filii per omnia parentibus obedire, sed dum par¬ vuli sunt; nam ut dicitur ad Galat. IV : Quanto tempore haeres parvulus est, nihil dif¬ fert a servo (2) ; et Dominus ipse parentibus subditus erat cum puer esset, ut legimus, Luc. II. Secunda ratio ex Testamento novo sumi potest. Nam, ut supra diximus in disputatione de consiliis, consilium perfectionis est sequi Dominum perfecte abnegando seipsum, ut colligitur ex illo Matth. XVI : Qui vult venire post me, abneget semetipsum , et tollat crucem suam , et sequatur me (3) ; nam etsi in praepa¬ ratione animi abnegare seipsum praeceptum sit, cum ibidem Dominus addat , qui enim voluerit animam suam salvam facere, perdet eam : tamen extra articulum necessitatis ab¬ negare seipsum perfecte, et omnibus in re¬ bus subjiciendo judicium , et voluntatem suam alterius judicio, et voluntati , non est praeceptum, sed consilium. Ideo enim Matth. XIX dicitur : Si vis perfectus esse , vade, vende omnia etc. et veni , sequere me (4). Porro, perfecta sequela Domini, quae in abnegatione sui ipsius , id est, in perfecta obedientia consistit, pecessario includit vo¬ tum, quo quis ita seipsum abneget, ut non possit retrocedere ; non enim perfecta est abnegatio sui, obedire alteri ad tempus, et paulo post non obedire. Quocirca Dominus ibidem addidit : Et tollat Crucem suam : si¬ quidem ut eleganter monet Joannes Cassia¬ nus, lib. IV de institutis coenobiorum, c. 35. verus, ac perfectus Monachus similis cruci¬ fixo esse debet ; qui enim cruci affixus est, non solum non ambulat quo vult, nec facit, quod vult; sed nec potest ambulare, aut operari, nisi ab alio moveatur. Tertia ratio ; recte faciunt homines , qui cupientes vitam communem agere, communi consensu eligunt sibi aliquem in praeposi¬ tum. Id enim et recta ratio suadet, et Scrip¬ tura etiam monet, Proverb. III cum dicit : Ne innitaris prudentiae tuae. Rursus, praeposito constituto, bonum est, et Deo gratum, ut illi obediatur, cum scriptum sit : Qui vos au¬ dit, me audit , Luc. X. Et : Obedite prmpositis vestris, Hebr. XIII (5). At omne quod Deo placere constat testimonio ipsius, recte voveri potest, ut adversarii concedant : poterit igi¬ tur obedientia exhibenda praeposito, a nobis ipsis electo, et cui alioqui obedire non tene¬ remur, recte voveri. Quarta ratio ex usu antiquae Ecclesiae. Certum est apud veteres sanctos obedientiam monasticam in usu fuisse. Nam S. Basilius in constitut. monasticis, c. 22 : « Nunc , in¬ quit, rursus sermonem de obedientia exer¬ ceamus, ostendentes quantam obedientiam ab exercitationibus erga praefectum exacta doctrinae ratio exigat etc. » Et toto capite de (1) Coloss. III, 20. — (2) Galat. IV, 1. — (3) Math. XVI, 24. — (4) Math. XIX, 21. — (5) Prov. III, 6; Luc. X, 16; Hebr. XIII, 17. » CAPUT XXI. 5o7 obedientia disserit, ac docet , debere Mona¬ chum praeposito parere, et non discutere quid sit quod praecipitur, modo non sit manifeste peccatum, ac breviter talem se exhibere praeposito, quales sunt oves ad pastorem, et instrumenta ad opificem comparata. Nec illud omittit , necessarium esse Monachis, perfecte obedire praepositis , et alioqui a sa¬ lute aeterna eos excidere, idem docet Cassia¬ nus, lib. IY de institutis coenobiorum, c. 23. et sequentibus. S. Hieronymus in epist. ad Eustochium de custodia virginitatis , describens instituta Monachorum : « Prima , inquit , apud eos confoederatio est, obedire majoribus. » Et in epist. ad Rusticum Monachum : « Per haec omnia, inquit, ad illud tendit oratio, ut do¬ ceam te non tuo arbitrio dimittendum , sed vivere debere in monasterio sub unius dis¬ ciplina patris, consortioque multorum. » Et infra : «Non facias quod vis, comedas quod juberis, vestiare quod acceperis. » Et infra : « Praepositum monasterii timeas ut Domi¬ num, diligas ut parentem, credas tibi salutare quidquid ille praeceperit, nec de majorum sententia judices, cujus officii est obedire, et implere quae jussa sunt. » Sulpitius in Dialogo primo de virtutibus sancti Martini, de Monachis disserens «Prae¬ cipua, inquit, ibi virtus, et prima, est obe¬ dientia ; neque aliter adveniens ad monaste¬ rium Abbatis suscipitur , quam qui tentatus prius fuerit, et probatus, nullum unquam recusaturus, quamlibet arduum ac difficile, indignumque toleratu Abbatis imperium. » S. Augustinus lib, I de moribus Ecclesiae, cap. 31 : « Hi vero Patres, inquit, nulla su¬ perbia consulunt iis, quos filios vocant , ma¬ gna sua in jubendo auctoritate, magna illo¬ rum in obtemperando voluntate. » Haec ille. Ejusmodi autem testimonia plurima afferre possemus, si opus esset. Respondebunt fortasse , obedientiam qui¬ dem in usu fuisse apud veteres Monachos, sed votum obedientiae non item. At Joannes Cassianus 1. IY de institutis renuntiantium, cap. 33. voti et professionis nominatim me¬ minit, ubi disserit de observatione monasti¬ carum institutionum, quarum primaria de obedientia erat, verba ejus capite superiore citavimus. Item S. Gregorius homil. 20. in Ezechie- lem : « Cum. inquit, quis suum aliquid Deo vovet, et aliquid non vovet , sacrificium est, cum vero omne quod habet , omne quod vi¬ vit, omne quod sapit, omnipotenti Deo vo¬ verit, holocaustum est. » Haec ille. Ubi de votis monasticis loquitur, quibus homo, nihil sibi retinet, ac ne judicium quidem , quod Deo non offerat. Denique S. Augustinus in Psalm. LXXV : « Nemo, inquit, positus in monasterio frater dicat, recedo de monasterio ; neque enim soli qui sunt in monasterio perventuri sunt ad regnum coelorum, et illi qui ibi non sunt ad Deum non pertinent. Respondetur ei, sed illi non voverunt, tu vovisti. » EtinPsal. XCIX: Dum non perseveraverit implere quod vovit, fit desertor tam sancti propositi, et reus voti non redditi. » Accedant postremo miracula, quae Deus ad confirmandum obedientiam monasticam non raro ostendit. Scribit Sulpitius in primo Dialogo de virtutibus sancti Martini duo miracula his verbis : « Duo vobis referam incredibilis obedientiae admodum magna miracula, licet suppetant plura recolenti, sed ad excitandam virtutum aemulationem, cui pauca non sufficiunt, multa non proderunt. Ergo cum quidam saeculi actibus abdicatis, monasterium magnae dispositionis ingressu¬ rus, caepisset rogare, Abbas ei caepit multa proponere, graves esse istius disciplinae la¬ bores, sua vero dura imperia, quae nullus facile valeret implere patientia. Aliud potius monasterium, ubi facilioribus legibus vive¬ retur , expeteret ; non tentaret aggredi quod implere non posset. Ille vero nihil his terroribus permoveri, sed magis ita omnem obedientiam polliceri, ut si eum Abbas in ignem ire praeciperet, non recusaret intrare. Quam illius professionem ubi magister acce¬ pit, non cunctatur probare profitentem. Ca¬ su clibanus prope ardebat, qui multo igne succensus coquendis panibus parabatur. Exundabat abruptis flamma fornacibus, et intra camini illius concava totis habenis re¬ gnabat incendium. Hoc igitur advenam il¬ lum jubet magister intrare, nec distulit pa¬ rere praecepto, medias flammas nihil cuncta¬ tus ingreditur, quae mox tam audaci fide vi¬ ctae, velut illis quondam Hebraeis pueris ces¬ sere venienti ; superata natura est, fugit in¬ cendium, et qui putabatur arsurus, velut frigido rore perfusus seipse miratus est. Sed quid mirum, si tuum Christe tyronem ignis ille non attigit, ut nec Abbatem pigeret dura mandasse, nec discipulum poeniteret impe¬ rio paruisse? Qui eo die quo advenerat dum tentaretur, infirmus, perfectus inventus est, 558 LIBER II. merito fcelix, merito gloriosus , probatus obedientia, glorificatus est passione. » « In eodem autem monasterio factum id, quod dicturus sum, recenti memoria fere¬ batur. Quidam itidem ad eumdem Abbatem recipiendus advenerat, cum prima ei lex obedientiae poneretur, ac pefpetem pollice¬ retur ad omnia vel extrema patientiam. Casu Abbas storacinam virgam jampridem aridam manu gerebat, hanc solo fixit, atque illi advenae id operis imponit, uttamdiu vir¬ gulae aquam irriguam ministraret, donec, quod contra omnem naturam erat, lignum aridum in solo arente viviseeret. Subjectus advena durae legis imperio aquam propriis humeris quotidie convehebat, quae a Nilo flumine per duo fere millia petebatur, jam- que emenso anni spatio labor non cessabat operantis, et de fructu operis spes esse non poterat, tamen obedientiae virtus in labore durabat. Sequens quoque annus vanum la¬ borem jam affecti fratris eludit. Tertio de¬ mum succedentium temporum labente cur¬ riculo, cum neque noctu, neque interdiu aquarius ille cessaret operator, virga floruit. Ego ipsam ex illa virgula arbusculam, quae hodie quoque intra atrium monasterii est ramis virentibus, vidi, quae quasi in tes¬ timonium manens , quantum obedientia meruit, et quantum fides possit, ostendit. » Haec ille. Alia non dissimilia narrat S. Gregorius lib. II. Dialogorum, cap. 7. de S. Mauro, qui ad Abbatis imperium super aquas am¬ bulavit: et Joannes Cassianus lib. IV. de institutis renuntiantium, cap. 23. de Abbate Joanne, qui propter obedientiae virtutem ad prophetiae gratiam sublimatus, sic universo claruit orbi, ut etiam regibus mundi hujus merito sUo redderetur illustris. Sed occurrunt solvendae objectiones. Prima Lutheri est in lib. de votis monasticis, ubi hoc modo ratiocinatur. Scriptura jubet, ut omnibus hominibus obediamus, Philip. II : Superiores invicem arbitrantes. Et I. Petri II : Subjecti estote omni humanes creaturce propter Deum (I). Igitur obligare se ad obediendum uni soli praeposito, contra Scripturam est ; idem enim est ac si quis ita voveret ; Deus, voveo tibi nolle me secundum Evangelium tuum omnibus subjici, sed tantum uni ma¬ jori. Respondeo, Apostolum Paulum eo loco non velle ut omnes habeamus tamquam principes, quibus parere teneamur, sed ut omnes judicemus nobis esse superiores, id est, meliores, et sanctiores ; commendat enim humilitatem, ut ipsa verba ejus indi¬ cant : Per humilitatem invicem superiores at- bitrantes. Adde, quod si vellet Apostolus, ut omnibus obediremus, rem plane impossibi¬ lem vellet ; si enim omnes omnibus obedire debent, nulli erunt qui jubeant, et nulli qui obediant. Porro S. Petrus per omnem hu¬ manam creaturam, intelligit omnem homi¬ nem pote&tate imperandi praeditum. Sic enim explicat ipse se : Sive , inquit, regi tanquam prcecellenti, sive ducibus tamquam ab eo missis. Secunda objectio est ejusdem Lutheri in eodem loco. Praepositus monasterii liber est ab obedientia, quam voverat sine alia dis¬ pensatione, igitur signum est, votum illud non obligare coram Deo. Respondeo, in eo, qui eligitur in praepositum, remanere obli¬ gationem voti, licet per accidens cesset exer¬ citium illius voti, quia deest materia : cujus signum est, quia si is qui nunc est praeposi¬ tus privetur officio, iterum tenebitur adobe- dientiam, etiamsi novum aliquod votum non faciat. Yide S. Thomam in 2. 2. quoest. LXXXYIII. art. 11. et quaest. CLXXXYI. art. 5. Tertia est Petri Martyris in comment. ad cap. YII. prioris ad Gorin. Yetat B. Paulus, ne Christiani servos se faciant, cum ait : Pretio empti estis , nolite fieri servi hominum , (2) Non igitur licet votum obedientiae facere. Quid enim hoc est aliud, quam sponte sua se in servitutem Abbatibus tradere ? At facilis responsio est; non enim B. Pau¬ lus prohibet servitutem , quae hominibus exhibetur, sed id prohibet,' ne hominibus propter ipsos homines potissimum, sed prop¬ ter Deum serviatur, id quod exposuit clarius ad Goloss. III. ubi sic ait : Servi obedite per omnia dominis carnalibus , non ad oculum ser¬ vientes , quasi hominibus placentes , sed in sim¬ plicitate cordis timentes Dominum. Quodcum- que facitis , ex animo operamini sicut Domino , et non hominibus , scientes quod a Domino recipietis retributionem hcereditatis. Domino Christo servite (3). Quocirca S. Paulinus etsi non ignorabat Apostolum dixisse : Nolite fieri servi hominum ; tamen seipsum vendidit, ut filium viduae redimeret, quod S. Grego- (1) Philipp. II, 3; I. Petr. II, 13.— (2) I. Cor. YII, 23. -(3) Coloss.III, 22 et 23. CAPUT XXII. 559 rius cum laude ejus refert, lib. III. Dialogo¬ rum, cap. i. Sed inquit Petrus Martyr, S. Paulinus ex ctiaritate erga proximum seipsum vendidit, quod autem ex charitate fit, recte fit. Quasi vero perfecti Monachi ex cupiditate, et non ex charitate erga Deum, se Abbatibus, aliis¬ que Praepositis sponte subjiciant. Sed de obedientia hactenus.