Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Members of the Church · On Monks (Book II)
Chapter 39: On Hermits
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).
There follows the fifth disputation, on hermits. The institute of hermits, before the other religious orders, the Magdeburgians most gravely reprehend (Centuries 4 and 5, chapters 6 and 10), and also Calvin (Book 4 of the Institutes, chapters 13 and 16).
There are two things which they reprehend: solitude, and severity of life. By solitude they say they sinned in two ways against their neighbor. First, that as if out of hatred of the human race they withdrew into the solitudes, against that of Matthew 24: Behold, he is in the desert; go ye not out. And Hebrews 10: Not forsaking our assembly. Secondly, that they deserted those offices of charity which God commanded, against that of Hebrews 10: Let us help one another.
By severity of life they say they sinned against themselves. First, that they exposed themselves to many dangers and temptations without God’s command, against that of Matthew 4: Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. And therefore in punishment of their sin God permitted them to be vexed in various ways by the devil, as is evident of Anthony and Hilarion. Secondly, that they were murderers of themselves, by excessive fasts, hairshirts, and other afflictions voluntarily undertaken, against that of Exodus 20: Thou shalt not kill. And Colossians 2: Give honor to the body. Thirdly, that they vexed themselves with foolish labor, placing religion in ridiculous and silly things, as is evident of Simeon, who lived on a very high column, after the manner of a bird, for very many years; in which they say there appeared a marvelous fascination and illusion of the devil.
But that the eremitic life is holy, perfect, and pleasing to God is proved. First, by the testimony of Scripture, which vehemently praises Elijah and John, who were the princes of hermits, whether thou consider solitude or austerity of life. For of John it says (Matthew 11): Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John. And how great Elijah was appears even from this, that among the praises of John the Angel set that he would be like Elijah: He shall go before, he says, in the spirit and power of Elijah (Luke 1). Further, Elijah for the most part dwelt on Mount Carmel, and was clothed with hair, girt with a leathern girdle, as is said (4 Kings 1). Similarly John lived in the desert from infancy to the end of his life, and was clothed with camel’s hair, girt with a leathern girdle, and his food was locusts and wild honey, as is said (Luke 1 and Matthew 3). On which account the ancient Fathers make Elijah and John hermits and princes of hermits, as Basil (in the epistle to Chilo), Nazianzen (in the Apology after he had returned from flight), Chrysostom (homily 69 on Matthew), Jerome (partly in the epistle to Eustochium on virginity), Cassian (Conference 18, chapter 6), Sozomen (Book 1 of the history, chapter 12), Theophylact (on the first chapter of Luke), Isidore (Book 2, chapter 15, On the Divine Offices).
To this argument they answer, and especially of John they teach, that he was never in a true desert, nor used so austere a food and clothing as we say. The Magdeburgians (Century 1, Book 1, chapter 6, column 248) say that John’s preaching in the desert is to be taken by synecdoche, because, namely, he preached in the towns adjacent to the desert; and (chapter 10, column 357) they say that John dwelt with his parents, but is said to have dwelt in the desert because the house of his parents was in the mountains of Judea, which place was commonly called desert, on account of the mountains and sterility, although very many towns and villages existed there. Similarly expound Bucer and Zwingli (on Matthew 3).
Again the Centuriators in the same place (column 356) say that John’s garment was indeed of camel’s hair, but yet well woven, and such as the men of that place ordinarily used; which same Bucer says (on Matthew 3). And Chytraeus adds on the same passage that the garment was like those which we call watered, or in Italian are called ciambellotto, which certainly nobles now use, not rustics.
Finally the Centuriators (column 364) say that John’s locusts were a kind of crab — that is, of the best fish — which the fishermen threw away as forbidden in the law, but John was wont to eat them by evangelical liberty. Which same Melanchthon held (in the sermon on John the Baptist), and some others on Matthew 3.
These errors Peter Canisius accurately refutes (Book 1 On the Corruptions of the Word of God, chapters 2, 3, and 4). And first Canisius proves that John was in a most true desert. First, because the word “desert,” which is most frequent in Scripture, is always taken for a true desert.
Secondly he proves it, for Luke 1 says, He was in the deserts until the day of his manifestation to Israel; therefore the Israelites did not see him until his thirtieth year, in which, namely, he began to show himself and to preach; therefore all that time he did not dwell in the house of his parents, or in the towns and villages, but in a most true desert.
Thirdly, from those words of Luke 3: The word of the Lord was made unto John the son of Zacharias in the desert; and he came into all the country about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of penance. Where it is to be noted that that country about the Jordan, where John preached, was also deserted. For thus Matthew (chapter 3), speaking of the same matter, says: In those days came John the Baptist preaching in the desert the baptism of penance. Therefore John came from a desert into a desert. But that former desert, where John remained before he began to preach, was so much a desert that in comparison with it the other did not seem a desert; for otherwise why would Luke say, He came from the desert into the country, if this country was equally deserted? And so the opinion of Euthymius is true, who (on Matthew 3) teaches that there was a twofold desert in Judea: one interior, into which, namely, no one, or very few, penetrated; the other exterior, where indeed men did not dwell, yet they often made a journey through it; and that John up to the age of 30 was in the interior desert, then in the last year of his life in the exterior desert.
We can add a fourth reason from the doubt of the Jews, who (John 1) ask of John who he himself is, whether Elijah, or someone else. For if he had always dwelt in the house of his parents, certainly they would have known that he was John the son of Zacharias and Elizabeth. But because for so many years he had lain hidden — namely, from infancy up to thirty years — there was no one who recognized him, and therefore they ask, Who art thou? and because they saw him clothed in the way in which Scripture testifies Elijah was wont to be clothed, and at the same time knew that Elijah would return before Christ’s coming, therefore they ask, Art thou Elijah?
There come in lastly the testimonies of the Fathers. Eusebius (Book 9 of the Demonstrations of the Gospel, chapter 5): “He came forth,” he says, “from the desert, clothed in an unusual habit, and declining all common converse of men; for he went neither into any village, nor into a city, nor into any common assembly of men.” And below: “Suddenly coming forth, I know not whence, from the hiding-places of solitude, and after his preaching again withdrawing into solitude and hiding-places, without food, without drink, shrinking from the multitude, they deservedly were amazed, and did not think him even to be a man.”
Jerome (in epistle 4 to Rusticus): “John the Baptist,” he says, “had a holy mother, and was the son of a high priest, and yet was overcome neither by his father’s affection nor by his mother’s wealth, so as to live in the house of his parents with danger to his chastity. He lived in the desert, and with eyes desiring Christ deigned to look on nothing else.” Let there come in the testimonies cited above, which make John the prince of hermits.
Now of John’s garment, that it was not of cloth, nor in any way soft and delicate, appears from those words of the Lord (Matthew 11): What went you out into the desert to see? a man clothed in soft garments? Behold, they that are clothed in soft garments are in the houses of kings. Whence Chrysostom (homily 10 on Matthew) says that John’s garment was accommodated to compunction and penance, and in the same place says that it was of hair to indicate contempt of the world. Saint Bernard too (in the sermon on Saint John the Baptist): “John came,” he says, “not eating, nor drinking, plainly nor clothing himself; for as a locust is not food except perhaps of some irrational animals, so neither is camel’s hair the clothing of men.” So he. And why, I ask, did the holy Evangelist so solicitously describe John’s garment to us, if it was common and ordinary? Why did the Evangelists not also describe the garment of Christ, if regard was had to the person and not to the garment itself?
Further, as to the food, that those locusts were not delicate fish, but either true locusts, which are little animals, or certainly the tops of herbs, appears first, because the Greek word akrides can signify nothing else, as Euthymius teaches. Secondly, because Christ (Luke 7) says, John came neither eating nor drinking — that is, using food and drink so slender that he seemed to use none. Thirdly, because so expound all the Fathers, whom see in Canisius.
Secondly, the institute of the eremitic life is proved from the testimonies of the holy Fathers, who with one consent approve it. Basil (in the epistle to Chilo) compares the solitary life to martyrdom, and solves all objections which can be made against hermits; likewise (in epistle 1 to Gregory the Theologian) he disputes much of the utility of solitude. Nazianzen (in the Apology for his flight) calls the life of hermits heavenly, and (in the epistle to Hellenius) reports certain marvelous things of the hermits of his time, as that some never see men, some abstain from food for whole twenty days. He reports also of a certain one that for a whole year he stood in prayer, and did not even a little sleep, to whom a neighboring raven brought the remnants of a scanty food. And after he had reported these and like things, he subjoins: “Such is the part of Christ, such the fruit of the passions of Christ, which He Himself bears from earth to the Father: the pillar, I say, of the Christian religion, the glory of the people, the foundation of the world, almost contending in elegance with the heavenly beauties.”
Epiphanius (in the compendious doctrine), among those things which are kept in the Catholic Church without a precept, sets in the first place virginity, in the second solitude, to which he adds abstinence from meats, eggs, fish, and even from bread and wine, sleeping on the ground, wearing of sackcloth, and the like.
Chrysostom throughout proclaims the praises of the desert, as (homily 8 on Matthew), where he says thus: “If anyone now come to the solitude of Egypt, he will see all that desert altogether more worthy than Paradise, and innumerable choirs of angels shining in mortal bodies,” etc. The like he has (homilies 69 and 70 on Matthew, and homily 14 on the first to Timothy).
Jerome (in epistle 1 to Heliodorus): “O desert,” he says, “blooming with the flowers of Christ! O solitude, in which are born those stones of which in the Apocalypse the city of the great King is built! O desert, rejoicing in a more familiar nearness of God!” etc. The same (in the epistle to Eustochium on virginity) says that those who flee from the cenobia to the desert as to a more perfect life bear with them for food nothing but bread and salt.
Augustine (Book 1 On the Morals of the Church, chapter 31) extols the hermits with marvelous praises: “I will say nothing,” he says, “of those who, most secret, altogether away from all sight of men, content with bread alone and water, inhabit the most deserted lands, enjoying the converse of God, to whom they have clung with pure minds, and most blessed in the contemplation of that beauty which cannot be perceived except by the understanding of the Saints.” And below: “This so excellent height of sanctity, to whom does it not of its own accord seem to be admired and honored — how can it seem so by our discourse?”
To these add Justinian’s Novel Constitution 133, where he says thus: “The solitary life, and the contemplation in it, is a plainly sacred thing, and one which by its own nature leads souls to God, and profits not only those who lead it, but also all others,” etc.
Thirdly, it is proved by reasons. The first reason is taken from the effect; for we see that a great part of the ancient hermits became most perfect men and most illustrious with miracles, of which thing witnesses can be produced — all those who wrote the lives and deeds of the hermits, as Athanasius (in the life of Anthony), Jerome (in the life of Paul and Hilarion), Palladius (in the Lausiac History), Cassian (in the Conferences), Theodoret (in the Religious History), Sozomen (Book 1 of the history, chapters 12, 13, and 14; Book 3, chapter 13; and Book 6, chapter 28 and following), Rufinus (Book 2 of the history, chapters 3 and 4), Evagrius (Book 1, chapters 21 and 7). And, to be now silent of the rest, certainly God would not have fed Paul the first hermit for 60 years, sending him by a raven half a loaf each day; nor would Anthony have seen his soul borne to the choir of the Apostles in heaven; nor would those lions have dug his grave, unless his supreme solitude of nearly a hundred years, and above all the austerity of his life, had pleased God.
The second reason: the eremitic life is the summit and pinnacle of the religious life. For nearly all the Fathers teach that no one ought to pass to the eremitic life unless he have first diligently exercised himself in a cenobium, because the desert does not bring perfection, but presupposes it. Blessed Jerome (in epistle 1 to Rusticus), Cassian (Conference 10, chapter 3), Augustine (Book 1 On the Morals of the Church, chapter 3), Benedict (in the Rule, chapter 1), Bernard (sermon 3 on the Circumcision). And this perhaps is the cause why it is lawful for nearly all religious to pass to the order of the Carthusians, because, namely, their life is solitary, and accordingly of the perfect. Since, then, the eremitic life is most perfect, it cannot but be pleasing to God; for it was shown above that the perfect life so pleases God that it can most rightly be vowed.
The third reason: austerity and solitude are the best means to the best end. For the end of the austere and solitary life is the contemplation of God and of heavenly things, as appears from Cassian (Conference 19, which is on the end of the eremitic life); and that best part the Lord calls it (Luke 10). But the best means of all to contemplation is to have a collected and intent mind, to which solitude wonderfully serves, which keeps far off all the noise of things which could distract the mind. Hence the Lord, whenever He wished to pray, went into the mountains and deserted places (Luke 5): But he retired into the desert, and prayed. To Moses too (Exodus 24), when God wished to speak, He commanded that he alone ascend to the top of the mountain, and enter the darkness — namely, that he might see nothing which would call his mind away from God. Blessed Jerome too writes (Book 2 against Jovinian) that this is so true that even many philosophers, by the leading of nature, dwelt in deserts, and some even plucked out their own eyes, that they might contemplate without distraction.
The same can be said of fasting and the rest of the severity of life. For that fasting is the best means to prayer appears from this, that in Scripture it is everywhere joined to prayer. Tobit 12: Prayer is good with fasting. Matthew 17: This kind is not cast out but by prayer and fasting. Luke 2: She departed not from the temple, by fastings and prayers serving night and day. 1 Corinthians 7: That you may give yourselves to prayer and fasting. And Chrysostom (homily 1 on Genesis) says that fasting is to the soul as it were wings, that it may be borne aloft and contemplate the highest things. The like has Athanasius (in the book On Virginity), and Basil (oration 1 on fasting); and everyone experiences that, when the flesh is vigorous and flourishing and lives in delights, the mind too becomes in a manner carnal and earthly, and thinks more of luxury than of wisdom.
On which account Plato too chose a pestilent place, where he might dwell and teach, as Jerome says (Book 2 against Jovinian), that his disciples might love nothing but wisdom. And in the same place he reports that the Pythagoreans avoided not only cities, but also gardens, and all places which bring pleasure, lest their minds should grow soft and be retarded from the study of wisdom. The like he teaches of the priests of the Egyptians, who, that they might be free for the contemplation of the stars, neither had wives nor saw any of their kindred, and used the slenderest food. Galen too writes (in the exhortation to medicine) that the souls of men given to pleasures, sunk in much blood as in mire, can contemplate nothing subtle and heavenly.
Although those holy hermits lived so austerely not only for the sake of contemplation, but also for other most just causes. First, because the nature of the place required it; for they could not, even if they had wished, find in the desert those conveniences of life which are found in cities. And this is the cause why Paul the first hermit was clothed with palm leaves and fed on the fruits of the same tree, because, namely, there was nothing else there; and similarly why John lived on locusts and wild honey, because that desert abounded in things of that kind, as Jerome teaches (Book 2 against Jovinian).
Secondly, because, occupied with the delights of the mind, they partly forgot the body, as of John the abbot Cassian reports (Conference 19, chapter 4), who did not remember whether the day before he had eaten or not; and partly they also took it ill that servitude of the body, and therefore the more rarely and briefly they could satisfy the bodily necessity, the happier they thought themselves, as Philo writes of those first monks (in the book On the Contemplative Life of Suppliants). For many, on account of their eagerness for spiritual feasts, scarcely every fifth or sixth day refreshed the body.
Thirdly, because they knew that the victory over desires and the exercise of patience is most pleasing to God. For because the flesh always lusts against the spirit, it pleases God that the spirit always lust against the flesh. Whence Tertullian says that wild and dry foods, and the rest of the affliction of the body, are a most pleasing sacrifice to God (in the book On the Resurrection of the Flesh).
Fourthly, to perform worthy fruits of penance, and to satisfy for sins. For the saints, who seriously hunger after justice, will know how to punish light faults gravely. And this is one of the chief causes why John the Baptist lived so austerely; for although he himself perhaps had no voluntary sins at all, since it is written that he could not stain his life even with a light crime, yet because he had been sent by God to preach penance, he wished to preach it by example and word; therefore, as Chrysostom says (homily 10 on Matthew), he had a garment accommodated to compunction and penance. From these it will now be easy to answer the arguments.
To the first argument I answer that hermits withdraw into solitude not out of hatred of the human race, but out of zeal for a purer life. Whence Augustine (Book 1 On the Morals of the Catholic Church, chapter 31): “What is it,” he says, “that those see who cannot but love men, and yet can not see men? Surely that, whatever it is, is more excellent than human things, by the contemplation of which a man can live without man.” And so, although he sins against the human race who hates society, yet he does not sin who without hatred remains solitary.
But that passage of the Gospel, Go ye not out, is understood literally of the coming of Antichrist. And the mystical “desert” and “inner chambers” signified the false dogmas of the heathen and heretics, as Origen, Jerome, and Bede write (on Matthew 24). For the heretics wish to find Christ in certain senses of the Scriptures, plainly trackless and deserted, which the holy Fathers did not even salute from afar. Such is this very sense of these words, Go ye not out. For who would ever have thought that by these words the eremitic life was forbidden? And yet the Magdeburgians: Behold, here is Christ, in this desert, in this recondite sense is the true understanding of the divine word.
To that of Hebrews 10, Not forsaking our assembly, I say that Paul accuses those who out of hatred or envy did not come together into the Church, because, namely, they did not have the place they would have wished, and therefore apart with a few held conventicles. Whence Theodoret and Oecumenius note that Paul by “assembly” understands the agreement of minds. Add that even the hermits, except very few, came together to church in the very desert, as we now see the Carthusians and Camaldolese do.
To the second argument I answer with Augustine (Book 1 On the Morals of the Church, chapter 31), where he says thus: “The anchorites seem to some to have deserted human affairs more than they ought, those not considering how much their mind profits us in their prayers, and their life as an example, whose bodies we are not permitted to see.” Whence Justinian too (in the place cited) says that empire, warfare, the fields themselves, and whatever good secular men have, are preserved through the prayers of the holy hermits.
Thou wilt say: Not prayer alone is a work of charity commanded by God, but many others, as almsgiving, visitation of the sick, counsel, instruction, etc., which the hermits not only do not perform, but even render themselves unable to perform. I answer that private men are not obliged to the works of charity except when occasion offers itself. For this is the difference between prelates and non-prelates, that the former are bound by office to inquire whether the peoples entrusted to them need anything; but the latter are not bound to seek, but only, occasion being offered, to do to others what they wish to be done to themselves. And although to make oneself unable to perform those works by intention is a sin — as if one should always remain at home lest he meet any poor man — yet if this happen beside intention, it is no sin.
To the third I say that to expose oneself to danger is no sin; otherwise it would not be lawful to sail, or to fight, etc. But it is a sin rashly to expose oneself to danger; which he would do who without just cause, and conscious of his own weakness and nakedness, should wish to engage with a strong and armed man; and similarly in spiritual things, he who should seek solitude without cause — that is, without the purpose of a purer life — and had not first been taught in a cenobium to fight with the devil, as the cited Fathers teach; unless perhaps God extraordinarily call someone, as is established of Paul the first hermit and certain others.
To the fourth I say that so far were the holy hermits from being their own murderers that they even lived very long. For Paul the first hermit lived 113 years, Anthony 105, and nearly all the rest were very old, as is gathered from the Conferences of Cassian. Blessed Jerome too shows (Book 2 against Jovinian), from Hippocrates and Galen, that fasting conduces to health; which same Clement of Alexandria demonstrates from Antiphanes, a most learned physician (Book 2 of the Paedagogue, chapter 1).
But to that of Colossians 2, Give honor to the body, there is a twofold solution. One according to Augustine’s explanation (in epistle 59 to Paulinus), where he thus explains, which things have indeed a show of wisdom in superstition and humility, not in sparing the body, not in any honor to the filling of the flesh — that is, the abstinence of these seems to have certain reasons of wisdom, though it be superstitious, because they seem to do this to humble the heart and chastise the body, but not to honor or fill it. For these things would be good if they were not done superstitiously; for Paul too says, I chastise my body, and bring it into subjection (1 Corinthians 9).
The other explanation is Jerome’s (in the epistle to Algasia) and Chrysostom’s (on this passage), who say that those are reprehended who do not honor the body. Now the honor due to the body requires that necessaries be not withdrawn from it, nor that it be afflicted without utility or necessity. But the hermits were indeed afflicted, but with great utility, nor yet did they withdraw necessaries from themselves, as appears from their very long life. For although sometimes they seemed to withdraw necessaries from themselves, as when they fasted many days without any food, yet because they had strength to do this from a divine benefit, food of that kind was not necessary for them.
To the fifth the Apology of Theodoret suffices (in the Religious History, chapter 26), where in two ways he defends the deed of Simeon. First, because he did not do it of his own accord, but as it were compelled; for since very many flocked to him, and eagerly touched him, that they might be cured of their diseases, or certainly that they might thence receive some sanctity, he, judging himself unworthy of so great honor, and at the same time taking ill so great a distraction and impediment from prayer, devised that manner of living on a column, where no one could reach him.
Secondly he says that he did it by the instinct of the Holy Spirit, who wished by that new spectacle of a most singular penance and patience to rouse the torpor of men, just as of old God commanded His prophets to do certain things which seem foolish. For He commanded Isaiah to walk altogether naked through the city (Isaiah 20), Jeremiah to be surrounded of his own accord with a wooden chain (Jeremiah 28), Ezekiel to eat bread baked in cow’s dung, and for 390 days to sleep on his left side, and for 40 on his right (Ezekiel 4), and to shave his head and beard, and to weigh the hairs in a balance in the midst of the marketplace, and to burn one part, cut another with the sword, scatter a third to the wind, bind another in the hem of his cloak (Ezekiel 5); finally He commanded John the Baptist to dwell with beasts, to be clothed with camel’s hair, and to feed on locusts.
And that Simeon truly by the instinct of God dwelt on the column Theodoret proves from his life, most illustrious with miracles, and from the conversion of innumerable men who through him were made Christians. For this was the order of his life: the whole night, and a great part of the day — that is, until the ninth hour — he prayed. Then he made discourses to those who visited him; and so many visited that the road which led to him seemed, on account of the continual concourse of men coming and going, a certain perennial river. Further, by these discourses he brought many thousands of the heathen to Baptism, and often too confuted Jews and heretics. After the discourse he healed the sick, who were ordinarily brought. And so great was the fame of his name on account of the miracles that from the whole world there was a concourse to him — from Armenia, Persia, Scythia, Ethiopia, Arabia, Spain, Gaul, Britain.
And at Rome, in the vestibules and porticoes of all the workshops, his images were seen, by which the Romans procured themselves protection and help. After the healings he settled disputes; for very many brought their contentions and discords to that column, as to a supreme tribunal, to be judged. He foretold many future things, which Theodoret in the same place affirms were fulfilled in his time. He fasted the whole of Lent without any food and drink, and this he continued for more than 28 years. Finally, when he was now dead, his corpse still stood unmoved and erect on the column, as when he was alive; and after his burial most frequent miracles happened both at the coffin of his relics and at the column itself. Now of these things there is a marvelous silence among the Magdeburgians; for hence their calumnies would easily have vanished away.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XXXIX. De Eremitis. Sequitur disputatio quinta de Eremitis. Eremitarum institutum prae caeteris religio¬ nibus gravissime reprehendunt Magdebur- genses Centur. 1Y et V, cap. 6 et 10, necnon Calvinus lib. IY Instit. cap. 13 et 16. Duo sunt autem, quae reprehendunt, soli¬ tudinem, et vitae severitatem. Solitudine di¬ cunt eos pecasse dupliciter contra proximum. Primo, quod quasi odio humani generis in solitudines recesserint, contra illud Matth. XXIY : Ecce in deserto est, nolite exire. Et Hebr.X : Non deserentes collectionem, nostram. Secundo, quod illa officia charitatis dese¬ ruerint, quae Deus mandavit, contra iliud Hebr. X : Adjuvemus nos invicem (2). Vitae severitate dicunt eos peccasse in seipsos. Primo, quod se exposuerint multis periculis, ettentationibus, sine Dei mandato, contra illud Matth. IV : Non tentahis Domi¬ num Deum tuum (3). Et ideo in pcenam peccati Deus permiserit eos vexari variis modis a Diabolo, ut de Antonio et Hilarione patet. Secundo, quod sui ipsorum fuerint homici¬ dae, nimiis jejuniis, ciliciis, aliisque sponte susceptis afflictionibus, contra illud Exod. XX: Non occides. Et Coloss. II : Habeto honorem corpori (4). Tertio, quod stulto labore seip¬ sos vexaverint, in rebus ridiculis et fatuis ponentes religionem, ut patet de Simeone, qui in altissima columna more avis plurimos annos vixit, in quo appairuisse dicunt miram Diaboli falcinationem et illusionem. At vitam Eremiticam sanctam et perfec¬ tam, et Deo gratam esse probatur. Primo, testimonio Scripturae, quae vehementer lau¬ dat Eliam, et Joannem, qui Eremitarum Principes fuerunt, sive solitudinem , sive asperitatem vitae consideres; nam de Joanne dicit Matth. XI : Inter natos mulierum, non surrexit major Joanne. Elias autem quantus fuerit, vel ex eo patet, quod in laudibus Joannis, Angelus posuerit, futurum illum similem Eliae : Ipse , inquit, praecedet in spi¬ ritu , et virtute Elice (5), Luc. I. Porro Elias ut plurimum versabatur in monte Carmelo, et pilis induebatur, zona pellicea praecinctus, ut dicitur IV. Reg. I. Similiter Joannes vixit in deserto ab infantia ad finem usque vitae, et pilis Camelorum induebatur, praecinctus zona pellicea, victusque ejus erant locustae et mei sylvestre,ut dicitur Luc I. et Matth. III. Quocirca veteres Patres Eliam et Joannem Eremitas et Principes Eremitarum faciunt, ut Basilius in epistola ad Chilonem ; Nazian- zenus in Apologia postquam ex fuga rediis- set; Chrysostomus hom. 69. in Matth. Hie¬ ronymus partim in epist. ad Eustochium de (3) Matii. IV. 7. — (4) Exod. XX, (1) Eph. V, 32. — (2) Math. XXIV, 26 ; Hebr. X, 25 et 24. — 13; Coloss. II, 23. — (5) Math. XI, 11; Luc. I, 17. 614 LIBER II. virginit. Cassianus Collat. XVIII, cap. 6. Sozomenus lib. I. hist. cap. 12. Theophy- lactus in primum caput Luc. Isidorus lib. II, c. 15 de officiis divinis. Ad hoc argumentum respondent, ac prae¬ cipue de Joanne docent, eum numquam fuisse in vera eremo, nec tam aspero victu, et vestitu usum, ut nos dicimus. Magdebur- gentes Cent. I. lib. I. cap. 6. colum. 248, dicunt, Joannem praedicasse in deserto, esse accipiendum per Synecdochen, quia nimi¬ rum praedicabat in oppidis adjacentibus deserto, et cap. 10. coi. 357, dicunt, Joan- nera habitasse cum suis parentibus, sed dic¬ tum habitasse in deserto, quia domus paren¬ tum ejus erat in montanis Judaeae, qui locus vulgo dicebatur desertum, ob montes, et sterilitatem, quamquam plurima ibi oppida et pagi existerent, similiter exponunt Buce¬ rus et Zwinglius in cap. III. Matth. Rursus Genturiatores ibidem coi. 356, dicunt, vestem Joannis fuisse quidem ex pilis cameli, sed tamen bene contextam, et talem, qualibus ordinarie utebantur homi¬ nes ejus loci, quod idem ait Bucerus in cap. III. Matth. Addit vero in eumdem locum Chytraeus, fuisse vestem similem illis, quas undulatas vocamus ; vel Italice, dici ciam- bellotto, quibus certe nobiles nunc utuntur, non rustici. Denique Genturiatores coi. 364, dicunt, locustas Joannis fuisse genus cancrorum, id est, optimorum piscium, quos piscatores projiciebant tamquam in lege prohibitos, sed Joannem illos manducare solitum Evan- gelica libertate. Quod idem sensit Melanch- thon in concione de Joanne Baptista, et ali¬ quot alii in cap. III. Matth. Hos errores refellit accurate Petrus Cani- sius lib. I. de corruptelis verbi Dei cap. 2, 3 et 4. Ac primum in verissimo deserto fuisse Joannem, probat Canisius. Primo, quia vox desertum, quse in Scriptura frequenfisslma est, semper accipitur pro vero deserto. Secundo probat, nam Lucse I dicitur, erat in desertis usque in diem ostensionis suae ad Israel ; ergo non viderunt illum Israelitse usque ad annum ejus 30, quo nimirum se ostendere, et preedicare coepit, ergo toto illo tempore non habitavit in domo parentum, vel in oppidis, et pagis, sed in verissima eremo. Tertio ex illis verbis Luc. III : Factum est verbum Domini super Joannem Zacharice filium in deserto , et venit in omnem regionem Jordanis , praedicans Baptismum poenitentiae .(1) Ubi notandum est, eam regionem Jordanis, ubi Joannes praedicabat, fuisse etiam deser- _ tam. Sic enim ait Matth. cap. III. de re eadem loquens : In diebus illis venit Joannes Baptista, in deserto prcedicans Baptismum poenitentiae , (2) ergo Joannes venit a deserto in desertum : Sed prius illud desertum ubi mansit Joannes, antequam praedicare inci¬ peret, adeo erat desertum, ut ejus compara¬ tione illud alterum non videretur desertum: Nam alioqui cur Lucas diceret, venit a deserto in regionem, si haec regio erat aeque deserta? Itaque vera est Euthymii sententia, qui in cap. III. Matth. docet, duplex fuisse in JudaBa desertum ; unum interius, quo nimirum nemo, aut rarissimi penetrabant ; alterum exterius, ubi non habitabant qui¬ dem homines, tamen per illud saepius iter faciebant: ac Joannem quidem usque ad annum 30. fuisse in interiori deserto, dein¬ de postremo vitae suae anno in deserto ex¬ teriori. Possumus addere quartam rationem ex dubitatione Judaeorum, qui Joan. I. petunt a Joanne, quis ipse sit, num Elias, an ali¬ quis alius. Si enim versatus fuisset semper in domo parentum, certe scivissent illum esse Joannem filium Zachariee, et Elisabeth. At quia per tot annos latuerat, videlicet ab infantia, usque ad annos triginta'; nemo erat qui eum agnosceret, et ideo petunt : Tu quis es ? et quia videbant eum vestitum eo modo, quo Scriptura testatur indui con¬ suevisse Eliam, et simul sciebant rediturum Eliam ante Christi adventum, ideo quaerunt: Elias es tu ? Accedunt ultimo testimonia Patrum. Euse- bius libro IX. demonstrationum Evangel. cap. 5: « Procedebat, inquit, ex deserto inu¬ sitatum indutus habitum, omnemque com¬ munem hominum consuetudinem declinans ; nam neque in vicum ullum, neque in urbem, neque in communem aliquem virorum coe¬ tum commeabat. » Et infra : « Repente, inquit, nescio, unde a latebris solitudinis prodeuntem, et post praedicationem rursus in solitudinem, et latebras recedentem, sine cibo, sine potu, abhorrentem a multitudine, merito obstupescebant, et ne hominem qui¬ dem illum esse arbitrabantur. » (1) Luc. III. 2. — Matth. III, 1. CAPUT XXXIX. 615 Hieronymus in epist. 4. ad Rusticum: « Joannes, inquit, Baptista sanctam habuit matrem, Pontificisque filius fuit, et tamen nec patris affectu, nec matris opibus vince¬ batur, ut in domo parentum cum periculo viveret castitatis. Vivebat in eremo, et oculis desiderantibus Christum nihil aliud dignaba¬ tur aspicere. » Accedant testimonia supra citata, quae Joannem Eremitarum principem faciunt. Jam vero de Joannis veste, quod non fue¬ rit ex panno, nec ullo modo mollis, ac deli¬ cata, patet ex illis verbis Domini Matth. XI: Quid existis in desertum videre ? hominem mollibus vestitum ? ecce qui mollibus vestiun¬ tur in domibus regum sunt.Qt) Unde Chrysos- tomus hom. 10. in Matth. dicit Joannis ves¬ tem compunctioni, et poenitentiae acoimnoda- tam fuisse, et ibidem ait, fuisse cilicinam ad mundi contemptum indicandum. Sanctus quoque Bernardus in serm. de S. Joanne Baptista : « Venit, inquit, Joannes non man¬ ducans, nec bibens, plane nec vestiens, sicut enim non est locusta cibus nisi aliquorum forte irrationabilium animalium, sic nec pilus cameli hominum est indumentum.» Haec ille. Et cur quaeso sanctus Evangelista tam solli¬ cite nobis Joannis vestem descripsit, si ea communis, et ordinaria erat? Cur vestem Christi non etiam descripserunt Evangelis- tse, si personae et non ipsius vestis ratio habebatur ? Porro de victu, quod locustae illae non fuerint pisces delicati, secl aut verae locustae, quae sunt minuta animantia, vel certe her¬ barum summitates, patet primo, quia Graeca vos txHpirits nihil aliud significare potest, ut Euthymius docet. Secundo, quia Christus Lucae VII. ait : Venit Joannes non manducans , neque bibens, (2) id est, usque adeo tenui cibo et potu utens, ut nullo uti videatur. Tertio, quia sic exponunt omnes Patres, quos vide apud Canisium. Probatur Secundo vitae eremiticae institu¬ tum ex testimoniis sanctorum Patrum, qui uno consensu illud approbant. Basilius in epistol. ad Chilonem, Martyrio comparat vitam solitariam, et solvit omnes objectiones quae contra Eremitas fleri possunt similiter in epist. I. ad Gregorium Theologum de uti¬ litate solitudinis multa disputat. Nazianze- nus in Apologia pro fuga sua, vocat coeles¬ tem vitam Eremitarum, et in epist. ad Hel- lenium refert mira quaedam de Eremitis sui temporis, ut quod aliqui numqunm homines videant, aliqui integris viginti diebus cibo abstineant. Refert etiam de quodam, quod toto anno in oratione steterit, et ne tantillum quidem obdormierit, qui reliquias exigui cibi vicinus corvus adferebat. Postquam autem haec, et similia retulit, subjungit: « Talis est Christi pars, talis passionum Christi fructus, quem ipse e terra ad Patrem defert: religionis, inquam, Christianae colu¬ men, populi decus, mundi fundamentum, cum coelestibus pulchritudinibus elegantia prope- modum certans. » Epiphanius in compendiaria doctrina, inter ea, quae in Ecclesia Catholica servantur sine praecepto, primo loco ponit virginitatem, secundo solitudinem, quibus adjungit absti¬ nentiam a carnibus, ovis, piscibus, et ab ipso etiam pane, et vino, humi cubationem, sacci gestationem, et similia. Chrysostomus passim praedicat laudes Eremi,' ut hom. 8. in Matth. ubi sic ait : « Si quis nunc ad iEgypti veniat solitudinem paradiso prorsus omnem illam Eremum videbit digniorem, et innumeros Angelorum choros in corporibus fulgere mortalibus etc.» Similia habet hom. 69 et 70 in Matth. et hom. 14. in priorem ad Timotheum. Hieronymus in epist. I. ad Heliodorum: « 0 desertum, inquit, Christi floribus ver¬ nans, o solitudo, in qua illi nascuntur lapi¬ des, de quibus in Apocalypsi civitas magni Regis exstruitur, o Eremus familiarius Deo gaudens etc. » Idem in epist. ad Eusto- cbium de virginit. dicit, eos, qui ex coeno¬ biis ad Eremum tamquam ad vitam perfec¬ tiorem profugiunt, nihil secum ferre ad ci¬ bum, nisi panem, et salem. Augustinus lib. I. de moribus Ecclesiae cap. 31 . miris laudibus effert Eremitas : « Nihil, inquit, de iis dicam qui secretissimi penitus ab omni hominum conspectu, pane solo, et aqua contenti desertissimas terras incolunt, perfruentes colloquio Dei, cui puris mentibus inhaeserunt, et ejus pulchritudinis contemplatione beatissimi, quae nisi Sancto¬ rum intellectu, percipi non potest.» Et infra : « Hoc tam excellens fastigium sanctitatis, cui non sua sponte mirandum, et honorandum videtur, oratione nostra videri qui potest? » His adde Justiniani novellam constitutio¬ nem 133. ubi sic ait ; « Solitaria vita, atque (1) Matth. XI, 8. — (2) Luc. VII, 33, I / 616 LIBER II. in ea contemplatio res plane sacra est, et quae suapte natura animas ad Deum addu¬ cat, neque iis tantum, qui eam incolunt commodet, sed etiam omnibus aliis etc. » Tertio probatur rationibus. Prima ratio sumitur ab effectu, videmus enim magnam partem veterum Eremitarum evasisse viros perfectissimos et miraculis clarissimos, cujus rei testes produci possunt illi omnes qui scripserunt vitas et res gestas Eremitarum, ut Athanasius in vita Antonii, Hieronymus in vita Pauli et Hilarionis, Palladius in his¬ toria Lausiaca, Cassianus in Collationibus, Theodoretus in historia religiosa, Sozome- nus lib. I. hist. cap. 12. 13. et 14. lib. III. cap. 13. et lib YI. cap. 28. et sequent, Ruffinus lib. II. hist. c. 3. et 4. Eva- grius lib. I. c. 21. et lib. I. c. 7. Ac ut de c«eteris nunc taceam, certe Paulum I Eremitam, Deus non pavisset annis 60 , mittens ei per corvum singulis diebus di¬ midium panem ; neque Antonius vidisset animam ejus ad chorum Apostolorum in coelum deferri, neque Leones illi sepulcrum effodissent, nisi summa illius solitudo cen¬ tum fere annorum, et maxime vitae austeri¬ tas Deo placuissent. Secunda ratio, vita Eremitica est culmen et fastigium vitae religiosae. Nam omnes fere Patres docent, ad vitam Eremiticam non debere quemquam transire, nisi prius dili¬ genter in coenobio se exercuerit, propterea quod Eremus non adferat perfectionem, sed praesupponat. B. Hieronymus in epist. ad Rusticum I. Cassianus Collat. X. cap. 3. Augustinus lib. I. de moribus Ecclesiae, cap. 3. Benedictus in Regula cap. I. Ber- nardus serm. 3. de circumcisione; et haec fortasse est causa cur liceat omnibus fere religiosis transire ad ordinem Carthusien- sium, quia nimirum vita illorum est solitaria, et proinde perfectorum. Cum igitur vita Eremitica perfectissima sit, non potest Deo non esse grata ; supra enim ostensum est, vitam perfectam adeo placere Deo, ut rec¬ tissime voveri possit. Tertia ratio, austeritas, et solitudo sunt optima media ad optimum finem. Nam finis austerae et solitariae vitae est contemplatio Dei, rerumque coelestium, ut patet ex Cas¬ siano Collat. XIX. quae est de fine vitae Eremiticae ; eam autem optimam partem Dominus vocat Luc. X. Medium autem ad contemplationem omnium optimum, est ha¬ bere animum .collectum, et intentum ; cui rei mirum in modum deservit solitudo, quae omnem strepitum rerum, quae animum dis¬ trahere possent, procul arcet. Hinc Dominus quotiescumque orare volebat, pergebat in montes, et loca deserta. Luc. Y ; Ipse autem secedebat in desertum , et orabat (1). Moysi quoque Exod. XXIV. cum Deus loqui vellet, jussit ut solus ascenderet in montis verticem, et caliginem intraret, nimirum ut nihil vi¬ dere posset, quod animum ejus a Deo avo¬ caret. Scribit etiam B. Hieronymus lib. II. contra Jovinianum, adeo hoc esse verum, ut etiam multi Philosophi ductu naturae in desertis habitaverint, et quidam etiam sibi oculos eruerint, ut sine distractione con¬ templari possent. Idem de jejunio, et reliqua vitae severitate dici potest. Nam quod jejunium medium sit op¬ timum ad orationem, patet ex eo, quod in Scriptura ubique jungitur orationi. Tob. XII : Bona est oratio cum jejunio. Matth. XYII : Hoc genus non ejicitur nisi in oratione , et je¬ junio. Luc. II : Hcec non discedebat a templo , jejuniis , et obsecrationibus serviens nocte , et die. I. Corinth. VII. Ut vacetis orationi , et jeju¬ nio (2). Et Ghrysostomus hom. I. in Gen. dicit jejunium esse animae instar alarum ut sursum ferri, et summa contemplari queat. Similia habet Athanasius in lib. de virginitate, et Basilius orat. I. de jejunio : et quisque ex¬ aperitur, cum caro viget et floret, et in de¬ liciis agit, animum, quoque fieri quodam¬ modo carnalem et terrenum , et magis de luxuria quam de sapientia cogitare. Quocirca etiam Plato locum pestilentem elegit, ubi versaretur et doceret, ut ait Hieronvmus lib. II. contra Jovinianum, ut discipuli sui nihil amarent nisi sapientiam ; Et ibidem refert Pythagorseos vitasse non solum urbes, sed etiam hortos, et omnia loca, quae voluptatem adferunt ; ne animi mollescerent, et a studio sapientiae retarda¬ rentur. Similia docet de sacerdotibus Aegyp¬ tiorum , qui ut vacarent contemplationi siderum, neque uxores habebant, neque ullum propinquorum videbant, et cibo te¬ nuissimo utebantur. Scribit etiam Galenus in exhortatione medicinae, animas hominum, voluptatibus deditorum, in multo sanguine tamquam in luto demersas nihil subtile^ et coeleste contemplari posse. (1) Luc. Y, 16. — (2) Tob. XII, 8; Matth. XVII, 20]; Luc. II, 37; I. Cor. VII, 5. CAPUT XXXIX. 617 Quamquam sancti illi Eremitae, non so¬ lum propter contemplationem ita severe vivebant, sed etiam aliis justissimis de cau¬ sis. Primo, quia loci natura id exigebat, nec enim poterant, etiamsi voluissent, eas com¬ moditates vitae in deserto reperire, quae in urbibus reperiuntur. Et haec est causa cur Paulus primus Eremita foliis palmarum in¬ dueretur, et fructibus ejusdem arboris ale¬ retur, quia nimirum, et fructibus ejusdem arboris aleretur, quia nimirum, nihil aliud ibi erat ; et similiter cur Joannes locustis et meile syl vestri viveret, quia ejusmodi rebus illa eremus abundabat, ut Hieronymus do¬ cet lib. II. contra Jovinianum. Secundo, quia occupati deliciis animi, partim obliviscebantur corporis , ut de Joanne Abbate, refert Cassianus Collat.XIX. cap. 4. qui non recordabatur, an pridie comedisset necne : partim etiam aegre fere¬ bant istam corporis servitutem, et ideo quo rarius, et brevius poterant necessitati corpo¬ reae satisfacere, eo se feliciores putabant, ut Philo scribit de primis illis Monachis, in lib. de vita contemplativa supplicum. Multi enim propter aviditatem spiritualium epu¬ larum vix quinto aut sexto quoque die cor¬ pus reficiebant. Tertio, quia noverant Deo gratissimam esse victoriam cupiditatum , et patientiae exercitationem. Quia enim caro semper con¬ cupiscit contra spiritum, placet Deo, ut spi¬ ritus semper concupiscat adversus carnem. Unde Tertullianus, feras et aridas escas, et reliquam corporis afflictionem sacrificium Deo gratissimum esse dicit, libro de resur¬ rectione carnis. Quarto , ad fructus dignos poenitentiae peragendos, et pro peccatis satisfaciendum. Sancti enim qui serio justitiam esuriunt, leves culpas graviter vindicare scient. Et haec est una ex praecipuis causis, cur Joan¬ nes Baptista tam severe vixerit : Nam etsi ipse nulla fortasse peccata omnino volun¬ taria habuerit, cum scriptum sit ne levi saltem maculare vitam crimine posset, ta¬ men quia missus a Deo fuerat, ut poeniten¬ tiam praedicaret, voluit, exemplo, et verbo eam praedicare, idcirco, ut Chrysostomus dicit hom. 10. in Matth. vestem habuit com¬ punctioni et poenitentiae accommodatam. Ex his facile jam erit ad argumenta respon¬ dere. Ad primum argumentum respondeo, Ere¬ mitas non odio humani generis, sed studio purioris vitae concedere in solitudinem. Unde Augustinus lib. I. de moribus Ecclesiae Catholicae cap. 31 : « Quid est, inquit, quod vident qui non possunt homines non dili¬ gere, et tamen possunt homines non videre : Profecto illud quidquid est, -praestantius est rebus humanis, cujus contemplatione po¬ test homo sine homine vivere. » Itaque licet peccet contra genus humanum, qui odit societatem, non tamen peccat qui sine odio solitarius manet. Locus autem Evangelii : Nolite exire, ad litteram de adventu Antichristi intelligitur. Mysticum autem desertum, et penetralia si- gnificayit Ethnicorum et Haereticorum falsa dogmata, ut Origenes, Hieronymus et Beda scribunt in cap. XXIV Matth. Haeretici enim Christum invenire volunt in quibus¬ dam sensibus Scripturarum, plane inviis, et desertis, quas sancti Patres ne a longe qui¬ dem salutaverunt. Qualis est hic ipse sensus horum verborum : Nolite exire. Quis enim unquam cogitasset per haec verba prohiberi vitam Eremiticam, et tamen Magdeburgen- ses : Ecce hic est Christus, in hoc deserto, in ho©- sensu recondito, est vera verbi divini intelligentia. Ad illud Rebr. X : Non deserentes collec¬ tionem nostram , dico Paulum accusare eos, qui ex odio, vel invidentia non conveniebant in Ecclesiam, quia nimirum non habebant eum locum , quem cupivissent , et ideo seorsim cum paucis conventicula faciebant. Unde Theodoretus, et OEcumenius notant Paulum per collectionem i ntelligere consen¬ sionem animorum. Adde, quod etiam Ere¬ mitae, exceptis paucissimis, ad Ecclesiam in ipsa eremo simul conveniebant, ut nunc etiam Garthusianos, et Camaldulenses facere videmus. Ad secundum ! argumentum respondeo cum Augustino lib. I. de moribus Ecclesiae cap, 31. ubi ille sic ait : « Videntur nonnullis (Anachoreta) plusquam oporteret deseruisse res humanas, non considerantibus quantum nobis eorum animus in orationibus prosit, et vita ad exemplum, quorum corpora vi¬ dere non sinimur. » Unde et Justinianus loco citato dicit, imperium, militiam, agros ipsos, et quidquid boni habent homines sae¬ culares, per orationes conservari sanctorum Eremitarum. Dices, non sola oratio est opus charitatis a Deo preceptum, sedmulta alia, ut Eleemo¬ syna, visitatio aegrotorum, consilium, ins- 618 LIBER II. tructio etc. quae Eremitae non modo non praestant, sed etiam impotentes se reddunt ad ea praestanda. Respondeo, ad opera cha- ritatis non obligantur homines privati, nisi quando se offert occasio. Hoc enim interest inter Praelatos,- et non Praelatos, quod illi tenentur ex oflicio inquirere, an populi sibi crediti aliqua re indigeant : At isti non te¬ nentur quaerere, sed solum oblata occasione facere aliis, quod sibi fieri volunt. Et quam¬ quam ex intentione facere se impotentem ad ea opera praestanda, sit peccatum, ut si quis ideo semper maneat domi, ne ulli pau¬ peri occurrat : tamen si praeter intentionem id accidat, non est peccatum. m Ad tertium dico, exponere se periculo, non esse peccatum, alioqui non liceret na¬ vigare, nec praeliari etc. Sed peccatum esse temere exponere se periculo ; quod faceret qui sine justa causa, et conscius suae debili¬ tatis et nuditatis, cum viro forti, et armato congredi vellet ; et similiter in rebus spiritua¬ libus, qui solitudinem peteret sine causa, id est, sine proposito purioris vitee, et non prius in coenobio edoctus esset pugnare cum Diabolo, ut Patres citati docent, nisi fortasse extraordinarie Deus aliquem vocet, ut constat de Paulo primo Eremita, et aliis quibusdam. Ad quartum, dico, adeo, sanctos Eremitas non fuisse sui homicidas, ut etiam diutissime vixerint: Nam Paulus primus Eremita vixit annos 113, Antonius 105, csefceri fere omnes admodum senes fuerunt, ut ex collationibus Cassiani colligitur. Ostendit etiam B. Hie¬ ronymus lib. II. contra Jovinianum , ex Hypocrate, et Galeno , conducere sanitati jejunium, quod idem ex Antiphane medico doctissimo, demonstrat Clemens Alexandri¬ nus lib. II. Paedagogi cap. I. Ad illud autem Coloss. II : Habeto honorem corpori , est duplex solutio. Una secundum Augustini explicationem in epist. 59 ad Pau- linum, ubi sic explicat, quae videntur qui¬ dem rationem habentia sapientiae in supers¬ titione, et humilitate, non ad parcendum corpori, non inhonore aliquo ad saturitatem carnis, id est, videtur abstinentia istorum habere quasdam rationes sapientiae, licet superstitiosa fit, quia hoc facere videntur ad humiliandum cor, et castigandum corpus, non autem ad honorandum vel saturandum. Haec enim bona essent, si non fierent su¬ perstitiose : Nam et Paulus ait : Castigo corpus meam , et m servitutem redigo I. Cor. IX. Altera explicatio est Hieronymi in epistola ad Algasiam, et Chrysostomi in hunc locum, qui dicunt reprehendi eos, qui corpus non ho¬ norant. Porro honor corpori debitus id re¬ quirit, ut non subtrahantur ei necessaria, neque sine utilitate vel necessitate affliga¬ tur. Eremitae autem affligebantur quidem, sed magna cum utilitate, nec tamen neces¬ saria sibi subtrahebant, ut patet ex longis¬ sima vita ipsorum ; Nam etsi interdum ne¬ cessaria sibi ipsi subtrahere videbantur, ut cum jejunabant multis diebus sine ullo cibo, tamen quia vires ad hoc faciendum ex di¬ vino beneficio habebant, non erat illis ejus¬ modi cibus necessarius. Ad quintum sufficit Apologia Theodoreti in historia religiosa cap. 26 ubi duobus mo¬ dis defendit factum Simeonis. Primo, quia id non fecit sponte, sed quasi coactus, cum enim plurimi ad eum confluerent, eumque certatim tangerent, ut curarentur a lan¬ guoribus suis, vel certe, ut sanctitatem ali¬ quam inde perciperent, ille indignum se ju¬ dicans tanto honore, et simul aegre ferens tantam distractionem, et impedimentum ab oratione, excogitavit rationem illam in co¬ lumna vivendi, quo nemo attingere posset. Secundo dicit, id eum fecisse instinctu Spiritus sancti, qui voluit novo illo specta¬ culo singularissimae poenitentiae, et patien¬ tiae excitare torporem hominum, quemad¬ modum quondam Prophetas suos Deus quae¬ dam facere praecepit, quae stulta videntur : Nam Isaiam jussit nudum prorsus incedere per civitatem Isaiae XX, Hieremiam catena lignea sponte sua circumdatum, Hierem. XXVIII, Ezechielem comedere panem in fimo bovino coctum, et per dies 390, dor¬ mire super latus sinistrum, et per 40, super dextrum, Ezech. IV, et caput, ac barbam radere, et polos in 'medio foro in statera ponderare, et unam partem cremare, alte¬ ram eoncidere gladio, tertiam dispergere in ventum, aliam ligare in summitate pallii Ezech. V. denique Joannem Baptistam jussit habitare cum bestiis, indui pilis camelo¬ rum et vesci locustis. Quod autem vere Simeoniste Dei instinctu in columna habitaverit, probat Theodoretus ex vita ejus miraculis clarissima, et ex con¬ versione innumerabilium hominum, qui per eum Christiani facti sunt. Nam hic erat ordo vitae ejus, tota nocte, et magna diei parte, id est, usque ad horam nonam orabat. Deinde verba faciebat ad eos, qui illum invisebant; CAPUT XL. 619 invisebant autem tam multi, ut via quae ad illum ducebab propter continuum euntium et redeuntk* hominum concursum, pe¬ renne quoddam flumen videretur. Porro his concionibus multa millia Ethnicorum ad Baptismum adduxit, saepe etiam Judaeos et Haereticos confutavit. Post concionem cura¬ bat aegrotos , qui ordinarie adferebantur. Tanta autem erat fama nominis ejus propter miracula, ut ex toto orbe terrarum eo con¬ curreretur, ex Armenia, Perside, Scythia, iEthiopia, Arabia, Hispania, Gallia , Bri¬ tannia. Romae vero in omnium officinarum vesti¬ bulis, et porticibus imagines ejus visebantur, quibus Romani sibi praesidium, et opem parabant. Post curationes dirimebat lites, plurimi enim ad illam columnam, tamquam ad summum tribunal contentiones suas, et discordias dijudicandas adferebant. Multa futura praedixit, quae suo tempore impleta fuisse idem Theodoretus ibidem affirmat. Jejunabat integram Quadragesimam sine ullo cibo et potu , idque plusquam ,per annos 28 continuavit. Denique, cum jam mortuus esset, adhuc stabat cadaver ejus im¬ motum, et erectum in columna, quemadmo¬ dum cum vivebat, et post sepulturam mira¬ cula creberrima tam ad loculum reliquiarum, quam ad ipsam columnam fiebant. Porro harum rerum mirum silentium apud Magde- burgenses ; nimirum hinc facile evanuissent omnes ipsorum objectiones.