Medieval Sourcebook:
Guibert de Nogent:
On Relics
[Coulton Introduction] Guibert de Nogent, from the first publication
of his works in the seventeenth century, has been known as one
of the most interesting autobiographers of the Middle Ages: his Treatise on Relics and God's Dealings the Franks [in the
Holv Land] are no less interesting. His style, especially in
his Own Life, is involved and obscure, quite apart from corruptions
of the text; but he was one of the most honest and learned writers
in an age of great intellectual activity; and, though he took
St. Bernard's side against Abelard, he shows a critical acumen
which can seldom be paralleled in any period of the Middle Ages.
Born near Beauvais in 1053, of noble blood, he lost his father
in childhood and his mother at the age of twelve by her retirement
to a convent. His old master having at the same time become a
monk, Guibert ran wild for a few years. At last, though his mother's
and master's influence, he took the vows at St. Germer, that magnificent
abbey-church which may still be seen between Gournay and Beauvais.
The regularity of his life and his fame as a student earned him
the honourable position of Abbot at Nogent-sous-Coucy. After
playing a conspicuous part in the church politics of 1106 and
succeeding years, he retired again to the peace of his abbey,
wrote several more books of great value, and died between 1121
and 1124.
POPULAR RELIGION: RELICS AND CANONIZATION
Guibert's Treatise on Relics, bk.1, chap. i, col. 614-
What shall I say of those [saints] whose fame is
supported by no shred of testimony from without, and who are rather
darkened than illustrated by the fact that they are believed to
be celebrated in certain worthless records? What shall I do in
their case whose beginnings and middle life are apparent to no
man, and whose latter end (wherein all their praise is sung) is
utterly unknown? And who can pray for their intercession when
he knows not whether they possess any merits before God?... I
have indeed known some men possessed of a certain saint, as they
called him, brought from Brittany, whom they long revered as a
confessor; until, suddenly changing their minds, they celebrated
him as a martyr. When I inquired closely into their reasons, they
had nothing better to plead for this man's martyrdom than for
his aforesaid confessorship. I call God to witness, that I have
read - and read again in utter loathing to them that were with
me - in the Life of Samson, a saint of great reputation in France
and Brittany, concerning a certain abbot whom that book names
St Pyro. When, however, I sought into the latter end of this man
whom I held for a saint, I found his special mark of sanctity
to be this: to wit, that he fell into a well while drunken with
wine, and thus died. Nor have I forgotten the question propounded
by Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, to his successor Anselm,
then Abbot of Bec, concerning one of his predecessors who had
been cast into prison, and was slain because he would not ransom
himself ... Let the pontiffs therefore see to it, let the guardians
of God's people see to it, and provide that, if the people have
a zeal of God, they may at least have it according to knowledge,
lest they sin by offering aright and not dividing aright. [Coulton
note: referring to Lev. 1:17 and 2: 6, with a play upon divide,
which might also mean discern. See also St Bernard, Epp. 4., #
3 and 87, #3.] If the prophet say truly, "Woe unto them
that call evil good and good evil," [Isaiah 5:20] then what
perversity can be greater than to thrust men upon the sacred altars
who perchance, in their lifetime, deserved to be thrust forth
from the Church itself!
I have indeed seen, and blush to relate, how a common
boy, nearly related to a certain most renowned abbot, and squire
(it was said) to some knight, died in a village hard by Beauvais
.on Good Friday, two days before Easter. Then, for the sake of
that sacred day whereon he had died, men began to impute a gratuitous
sanctity to the dead boy. When this had been rumoured among the
country-folk, all agape for something new, then forthwith oblations
and waxen tapers were brought to his tomb by the villagers of
all that country round. What need of more words? A monument was
built over him, the pot was hedged in with a stone building, and
from the very confines of Brittany there came great companies
of country-folk, though without admixture of the higher sort.
That most wise abbot with his religious monks, seeing this, and
being enticed by the multitude of gifts that were brought, suffered
the fabrication of false miracles. Even though the covetous hearts
of the vulgar herd may be impressed by feigned deafness, affected
madness, fingers purposely cramped-into the palm, and soles twisted
up under men's thighs, what then does the modest and wise man,
who professes to aim at holiness, when he makes himself the abettor
of such things? Oftentimes we see these things made trite by vulgar
gossip, and by the ridiculous carrying round of sacred shrines
for the sake of collecting alms; and daily we see the very depths
of some man's purse emptied by the lies of those men whom St Jerome
calls rabulas in mockery of their rabid eloquence; who
shake us so with their rogueries, and bear us along with such
religious flattery that (to quote the saintly Doctor again) they
gobble more busily than parasites, gluttons, or dogs, and surpass
ravens or magpie with their importunate chatter.
But why do I accuse the multitude, without citing
specific examples to rebuke this error? A most famous church sent
its servants thus wandering abroad [with its shrine]. [Coulton
note: probably the Cathedral of Laon, which our author knew very
well. It was burned down in 1112 and sent round its shrine to
beg for help; cf. Guibert's autobiography col. 938, and Herman's
Book of Miracles performed on this tour, ib. col 963. It is noteworthy
that the large majority of the miracles there described belong
precisely to the three classes which Guibert describes as most
easily feigned]. It engaged a preacher to seek alms for repairing
its loss. this man, after a long and exaggerated discourse on
his relics, brought forth a little reliquary and said, in my presence,
"Know that there within this little vessel some of that very
bread Lord pressed with His own teeth; and, if you believe not,
here is this great man" - this he said of me - "here
is this great man to whose renown in learning ye may bear witness,
and who will rise from his place, if need be, to corroborate my
words." I confess that I blushed for shame to hear this;
and, but for my reverence of those persons who seemed to be his
patrons, which compelled me to act after their wishes rather than
his, I should have discovered the forger. What shall I say? Not
even monks (not to speak of the secular clergy) refrain from such
filthy gains, but they preach doctrines of heresy in matters of
our faith, even in mine own hearing. For, as Boethius says "I
should be rightly condemned for a madman if I should dispute with
madmen."…
If, therefore, it be so doubtful a matter to judge
of the claim to martyrdom, how shall we decide in the matter of
confessors, whose end is often less certain? What though the common
consent of the Church agree in the case of St. Martin, St. Remy,
and such great saints, yet what shall I say of such as are daily
sainted and set up in rivalry to them, by the common folk of our
towns and villages? Let them tell me how they can expect a man
to be their patron saint concerning whom they know not even that
which is to be known? For you shalt find no record of him but
his mere name. Yet, while the clergy hold their peace, old wives
and herds of base wenches chant the lying legends of such patron
saints at their looms and their broidering-frames; and, if a man
refute their words, they will attack him in defence of these fables
not only with words but even with their distaffs. Who but a sheer
madman, therefore, would call on those to intercede for him concerning
whom there is not the merest suspicion left in men's minds to
tell what they once were? And what avails that prayer wherein
the petitioner himself speaks in utter uncertainty of him whom
he would make into his intercessor with God? How (I say) can that
be profitable, which can never be without sin? For If you pray
to a man whose sanctity you know not, then you sin in that very
matter wherein you should have prayed for pardon; for though you
offer aright you divide not aright…But why should I labour
this point at such length, when the whole Holy Church is so modest
of mouth that she dares not to affirm even the body of the Lord's
Mother to have been glorified by resurrection for the reason that
she cannot prove it by the necessary arguments! [Coulton note:
This question has never, in fact, been officially decided, though
the bodily assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary is one of the
favourite themes of medieval art. "Melchior Canus sums up
the general teaching of theologians on this head when he says:
'The denial of the Blessed Virgin's corporal assumption into heaven,
though by no means contrary to the faith is still so much opposed
to the common agreement of the Church, that it would be a mark
of insolent temerity." Arnold and Addis, Catholic Dictionary,
s.v. Assumption.. Additional note 1996: this doctrine was defined
as de fide by Pope Pius XII following a world wide petition in
1952] If, therefore, we may not affirm this of her whose glory
no creature can measure, what must we enjoin but eternal silence
for those of whom we know not even whether they be saved or damned?
Moreover, there be some things written concerning certain saints
which are far worse than old wives' fables, and with which we
ought not to pollute the ears even of swineherds. For indeed,
since many attribute the highest antiquity to their patron saints,
they demand in these modern times that their lives should be written:
a request which has oftentimes been preferred to me. Yet I may
be deceived even in that which passes under mine own eyes; how
then can I tell the truth of those things which no man ever saw?
Were I to say what I have heard said (and I have been besought
also to speak the praises of such unknown saints-nay even to preach
them to the people-) then I, who say what men ask of me, and they
who have suggested it to me, would be alike worthy of a public
reprimand.
But, omitting those whom their own authority proves
to be unauthorized, let us touch upon those others which are attended
with certain faith. Even among these, error is infinite; or perchance
one and the same saint is claimed by two different churches; for
example, the clergy of Constantinople claim to possess the head
of John Baptist, yet the monks of Angers maintain the same claim.
What greater absurdity, therefore, can we preach concerning this
man, than that both these bodies of clergy should assert him to
have been two-headed? But a truce to jest, since we are certain
that the head cannot be duplicated, and therefore that either
these or those are under a grievous falsehood. If, however, in
this matter, which is altogether associated with piety, they contend
together with mutual arrogance and lies, then they worship not
God but the Devil. Therefore, both the deceived and deceivers
the worship wrongfully that very relic wherein they make their
boast. If, however, they worship an unworthy object, it is evident
how great must be the peril to which all the worshippers are exposed.
Even though, not being John Baptist's head , it be that of some
other saint, even then there is no small guilt of lying. [Coulton
note: Amiens also claimed to possess the Baptist's head: but this
tradition was still without authority in Guibert's days.]
But wherefore speak I of the Baptist's head, when
I hear the same tale daily concerning innumerable saints' bodies?
In truth my predecessor, the Bishop of Amiens, when he would have
translated the body of St. Firmin (as he thought) from the old
shrine to a new, found there no shred of parchment - not even
the testimony of a single letter - to prove who lay there. This
I have heard with mine own ears from the bishops of Arras and
Amiens. Wherefore the Bishop wrote forethwith on a plate of lead,
that it might be laid in the shrine; FIRMIN THE MARTYR, BISHOP
OF AMIENS. Soon afterwards, the same thing was repeated at the
monastery of St Denis. The abbot had prepared a more splendid
shrine; when lo! in the ceremony of translation, while his head
and bones were from their wrappings, a slip of Parchment was found
within his nostrils, affirming him to FIRMIN, BISHOP OF AMIENS…
Hear how an illustration of our complaints, which
may pass judgment on these instances aforesaid. Odo, Bishop of
Bayeux, eagerly desired the body of St Exuperius, his predecessor,
who was honoured with special worship in the town of Corbeil.
He paid, therefore, the sum of one hundred pounds to the sacristan
of the church which possessed these at relics that he might take
them for himself. But the sacristan cunningly dug up the bones
of a peasant named Exuperius and brought them to the Bishop. The
Bishop, not content with assertion, exacted from him an oath that
these bones brought were those of Saint Exuperius. "I swear,"
replied the man, "that these are the bones of Exuperius:
as to his sanctity I cannot swear, since many earn the title of
saints are far indeed from holiness." Thus the thief assuaged
the Bishop's suspicions and set his mind at rest. But the townsfolk
heard of the bargain which the custodian had made with their patron
saint, and called him before them; whereupon he replied: "Search
again the seals on his shrine; and, if ye find them not unbroken,
let me pay the penalty!" See now what disgrace this Bishop's
bargain brought upon religion when the bones of this profane peasant
Exuperius were thrust upon God's holy altar, which perchance will
never more be purged of them. I can recall so many like deeds
in all parts that I lack time and strength to tell them here;
for fraudulent bargains are made, not so much in whole bodies
as in limbs or portions of limbs, common bones being sold as relics
of the saints. The men who do this are plainly such of whom St
Paul speaks, that they suppose gain to be godliness; for they
make into a mere excrement of their money-bags the things which
(if they but knew it) would tend to the salvation of their souls.
From C.G. Coulton, ed, Life in the Middle Ages,
(New York: Macmillan, c.1910), Vol I, 15-22
This text is part of the Internet Medieval Source Book.
The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted
texts related to medieval and Byzantine history.
Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the
document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying,
distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal
use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source.
No permission is granted for commercial use.
(c)Paul Halsall August 1996
halsall@murray.fordham.edu
The Internet History Sourcebooks Project is located at the History Department of Fordham University, New York. The Internet
Medieval Sourcebook, and other medieval components of the project, are located at
the Fordham University Center
for Medieval Studies.The IHSP recognizes the contribution of Fordham University, the
Fordham University History Department, and the Fordham Center for Medieval Studies in
providing web space and server support for the project. The IHSP is a project independent of Fordham University. Although the IHSP seeks to follow all applicable copyright law, Fordham University is not
the institutional owner, and is not liable as the result of any legal action.
© Site Concept and Design: Paul Halsall created 26 Jan 1996: latest revision 15 November 2024 [CV]
|
