Baring-Gould’s sources: Benedictine and Gallican Martyrologies. Authorities: — His own letters and those of S. Bernard and Innocent II.] Pontius, abbot of Cluny, had been elected when young, his character having given great hopes of his proving an active ruler. But by degrees pride overmastered him, and when he appeared in 1116 at the Lateran Council, he arrogated to himself the haughty title of Abbot of Abbots. John of Gaeta, chancellor of the Roman Church, then sarcastically inquired whether Monte Cassino or Cluny was the cradle and head of the Benedictine Order. General discontent against the rule of Pontius prevailed among the Cluniacs, and its mutterings reached the ears of Callixtus II. Pontius then, in a fit of irritation, went to Rome, and insisted on resigning B. Peter the Venerable, his office into the hands of the Pope, who, with a formal exhibition of reluctance, accepted it, and Pontius departed for Jerusalem. The Pope informed the monks of Cluny of what had taken place, and they elected another abbot, Hugh, prior of Marcigny, but a man 90 old that he died three months after. Another chapter was held, in August, 1122, and Peter Maurice was elected abbot His nomination was confirmed by the Pope, and he received abbatial benediction from the hands of the bishop of Besan£on. Peter belonged to a noble family of Auvergne. He had been offered in childhood by his parents to the abbot, S. Hugh of Cluny (d. 1109). He had been prior of Vezelai, and was about thirty years old when elected to the government of the abbey of Cluny, which he governed nearly thirtyfive years. He is known by the title of Peter the Venerable, and is one of the most attractive figures which monastic and mediaeval history presents to us.
Peter Maurice had scarcely been three years in the enjoyment of his preferment, when Pontius, the former abbot, having got tired of the East, and regretting his precipitation in resigning the abbacy, returned to Europe, and built a monastery at Treviso in Italy. But that did not satisfy him, his envious eyes were turned on Peter and Cluny. He left Treviso and came into Aquitain, accoutred with all the insignia of holy asceticism likely to attract the admiration of the vulgar and superstitious. He wore bands of iron round his arms, eating into his flesh; a sackcloth shirt; scourged himself till blood was drawn, scarcely ate, and worked miracles.
He gradually approached the neighbourhood of Cluny, and took the opportunity, when he had learned by spies that Peter was absent, of swooping down on the vacant nest with a train oi monks, and, if we may believe his adversaries, of women, drove out the prior Bernard, and resumed his abbatial chair. Those monks who favoured Peter were driven out or fled. The rest took oaths of obedience to him. He now cast aside the mask of asceticism, called the neighbouring knights and robbers to his aid, enrolled them in an army of occupation, and gave up the villages on the abbey lands which would not acknowledge him to their mercy. The estates of the abbey were ravaged with fire and sword, not, doubtless, at his instigation, but by the lawless robbers whom he had called to his aid, and whom he could not control with the abbatial staff*. The prior Bernard and some of the monks threw themselves into castles and walled towns, and summoned the vassals of the abbey to their aid. The summer of 1125 was spent in warfare between the levies of the rival abbots. Pope Honorius II. heard of this disorder, and his legate [an official representative sent by the pope], Peter de Fontibus, with the archbishop of Lyons, pronounced anathema against Pontius and his adherents; and Honorius summoned both parties before the apostolic throne. Peter the Venerable hastened to Rome, and met Pontius there. And now a curious complication arose.
Pontius was excommunicated for having possessed himself of Cluny and certain estates of the Order. An excommunicate man cannot appear before the papal consistory to argue his cause. He is out of the Church, and therefore cannot plead as a member of it Yet he was again summoned before the Pope, and when he would present himself was repulsed. It was explained to him that he must surrender Cluny and all he had secured before the ban was taken off, and he could enter the court and be heard. He lost his temper: " No one has power thus to cast me out of the Church, save Peter in heaven I ” he incautiously exclaimed. This dangerous sentiment was speedily waited to the Pope’s ear, and exasperated him to the last degree. Pontius was a heretic, he defied the authority Doc- oj-J B. Peter the Venerable.
of the apostolic throne. Honorius bade the monks who were with Pontius state their case. They appeared, beating their breasts, with bare feet, and many prostrations, and were absolved. They then stated their case, and were answered by Prior Matthew of S. Martin [St. Martin of Tours (d. 397), soldier turned bishop] des Champs, who appeared for Peter the Venerable. There could be no doubt that the judgment would be adverse to the usurper, but it was so overwhelming as to petrify his party. Pontius, usurper, sacrilegious man, schismatic, and excommunicate, was deposed for ever from every ecclesiastical dignity and sacred function; Cluny was to be restored to its rightful abbot forthwith. But Pontius was not allowed to escape and revisit the East; by the Pope’s orders he was cast into a dungeon, where he conveniently died on the 28th December following. Matthew of S. Martin des Champs was rewarded with the cardinal bishopric of Alba. A miserable jealousy had sprung up between the monks of Citeaux and those of Cluny. The monks of Cite&ux accused those of Cluny of relaxation of their rule. Those of Cluny replied that the rule of Citeaux was unpractical in its severity, at all events for all monks. A cousin of S. Bernard, named Robert, was a bone of contention between the two Reforms. Robert had been offered by his parents to Cluny, but he had gone to Clairvaux after a while to his relative. Finding the discipline intolerable for his constitution, he went back to the milder monastic atmosphere of Cluny; on an appeal to Rome, the Pope ordered Robert to remain at Cluny. But to S. Bernard this was an apostacy of his cousin, scarcely less heinous than if he had married and eaten beef. He wrote him a violent letter, declaring the papal rescript null and void, and assuring the youth of damnation through an eternity of flames and gnawing worms unless he cast aside the weeds of Cluny and returned to the habit of Citeaux. [Dec.»s.
Peter the Venerable, with that gentle forbearance and love of peace which make him stand out conspicuous in his generation, when each man sought his own, or the things of his Order, not the things of Jesus Christ, sent Robert to his cousin at Clairvaux. But the monks of Cluny could not see this tame surrender, as they regarded it, without murmurs, and William, abbot of S. Thierry, near Rheims, wrote a sharp letter to S. Bernard, remonstrating with him for stirring up strife between two Orders which ought to live together in the Church in unity.
S. Bernard answered by sending a string of accusations. The Cluniacs had dishes of great variety at their table, and a great many kinds of fish to make up for not being allowed meat. These dishes have sauces flavoured with potherbs and spices. A variety of wines stand in their cellars. Monks shammed illness that they might eat meat in the infirmary, and those who were sick were allowed a stick to support their tottering steps. The material for the habits was of the best “ You say that religion is a matter of the heart, and not of the habit That may be true, but this daintiness of habit shows the softness of the heart” According to S. Bernard, the Kingdom of God, one would suppose, did consist in meat and drink rather than in righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
Peter the Venerable wrote an answer to the charges and invectives of S. Bernard, couched in the gentlest of tones, the answer of a man who stood above such petty disputes about trifles in the serene atmosphere of gospel charity. “ You allow fugitives to return more often than the three times prescribed by the Rule,” was one of Bernard’s charges. “We place no limits to the mercy 01 God,” was Peter’s answer.
“ You allow furs to be worn, and furs are not mentioned in the Rule,” urged Bernard. “ The brothers are allowed to B. Peter the Venerable.
clothe themselves according to the season/’ answered Peter. Other accusations were more difficult to answer, as that the Cluniacs had given up manual labour in the fields, and possessed castles and estates, and serfs, male and female, and had lawsuits and contests by arms about their lands. Peter the Venerable wound up with a remarkable general reply. There are two sorts of commandments of God, he said; — that of Charity, which is perpetually binding and immutable, and the precepts which vary with the times and mode of life, and which change subject to the directions of Charity. Charity is supreme. She may permit at one time what was forbidden or tolerated at another; and Charity is the law overriding all monastic regulations, which sits and rules in the heart of every true monastic superior. And then he gently added that surely it would be more charitable, more in accordance with the love of God, if the Cistercians [strict Benedictine reform begun at Cîteaux in 1098] allowed the brethren some of those little relaxations which are needed by those infirm or sickly, and without which their health must fail.
In 1138 died William de Sabran, bishop of Langres, and Hugh, son of the duke of Burgundy, wished to appoint to the vacant see a monk of Cluny, who was probably recommended to him by Peter the Venerable. But S. Bernard coveted the see for one of his Clairvaux monks. The archbishop of Lyons and the dean of Langres went to Rome to ask of the Pope permission for the chapter of Langres to elect a bishop. S. Bernard was then at Rome, and he opposed them with vehemence, and endeavoured to force an oath on the archbishop that he would only consecrate and confirm a nominee of his own. The archbishop gave an equivocal answer and hastened home. Bernard returned to Clairvaux, which was situated in the diocese of Langres, and found that the chapter was about to elect the monk of Cluny. Bernard interfered, and appealed against them to Rome. The abbot of Cluny, and the son of the duke of Burgundy, also wrote to Rome along with the chapter. But the monk was consecrated by the archbishop of Lyons, assisted by the bishops of Autun and M&con, before Bernard’s appeal was answered. His indignation and violence now knew no bounds. He raked together false charges against the unfortunate bishop elect on the merest hearsay, which Peter the Venerable indignantly repudiated, but which Bernard, when convicted of false accusations, never had the honesty to withdraw.
The Pope was too dependent on S. Bernard’s authority and influence at that time to be able to resist his imperious dictation: the Cluniac monk was dismissed, his consecration pronounced void, and a monk chosen by Bernard, his own cousin, the prior of Clairvaux, was forced on the reluctant chapter and diocese by his domineering will. Abelard appealed to Rome against his condemnation by the council of Sens, in which he had been vehemently denounced by Bernard, and ignorantly condemned by men who did not understand his logic. An appeal from Bernard to Rome was an appeal from Bernard to himself. Pope Innocent II. was too deeply indebted to him not to confirm his sentence. Absent, unheard, unconvicted, Abelard was condemned by the supreme pontiff. The condemnation was uttered almost before the charge was fully known. The decree of Innocent reproved all public disputations on the mysteries of religion. Abelard was condemned to silence; his disciples to excommunication.
Abelard had set out on his journey to Rome; he was stopped by severe illness, and found hospitable reception in the abbey of Cluny.
Peter the Venerable did more than protect the outcast to the close of his life. He did not relax his labours of tender charity till he had accomplished an outward reconciliation B. Peter the Venerable.
between the persecuted Abelard and the victorious Bernard It was but a hollow outward reconciliation. The reconciliation of minds was psychologically impossible. Abelard published an apology — if apology it might be called — which accused his adversary of ignorance or of malice. Ignorance there certainly was in Bernard, he had not the mental capacity to understand the arguments of Abelard, and his conduct bore at all events the outward aspect of vindictiveness. Among the most distinguished prelates there were many who sympathized, if not with the speculations, at least with the sufferings of Abelard. Bernard wrote to all whom he suspected of tenderness towards the old, broken-down, and hunted philosopher, to goad them into hostility. “Though a Baptist without in his austerities,” he wrote to Cardinal Ivo, “ Abelard is a Herod within.” Still, for the last two years of his life, Abelard found peace, honour, seclusion, in the abbey of Cluny, under the protection of the dove-like Peter. He died at the age of sixty-three. Peter had written to the Pope, entreating that the failing old man might be left at peace to die in that nest. “ Pray allow the last days of his life and old age — not many, I suspect — to be passed in your Cluny, and let not the impatience of certain ones prevail to obtain his expulsion from the house in which as a sparrow, from the nest in which as a dove, it delights the old man to find his home.”
He was allowed to remain there; and when he died, Peter the Venerable, with delicate kindness, at once communicated the tidings to the still faithful Heloisa. His language may be contrasted with that of S. Bernard. “ I never saw his equal for humility of manners and habits. S. Germain was not more modest, nor S. Martin more poor. He allowed no moment to escape unoccupied by prayer, reading, writing, or dictation. The heavenly visitor surprised him in the midst of these holy works.”
In 1143 Peter of Cluny wrote again to S. Bernard on the differences between the two Reforms, so that apparently S. Bernard had again been attacking the Cluniacs. He says in this letter that he loves both Bernard and the Cistercians, and that his charity must be very warm since it has stood the shock both of the strife about tithes, and of that concerning the bishopric of Langres. The question of tithes was the claim of the Cluniacs to demand a tax from a Cistercian monastery situated on their lands, which was indignantly resented, and led to appeal and counter appeal. At the end of the letter, Peter says that he sends S. Bernard a version of the Koran of Mohammed. This version Peter had made for him in Spain by Robert, archdeacon of Pampeluna, an Englishman, and a certain Hermann of Dalmatia, who was in Spain, studying astronomy. He paid them handsomely for the work.
Innocent II. died September 23rd, 1143, and was succeeded by Guido di Castello, cardinal of S. Mario, the scholar of Abelard. He was elected, as he says in a letter he wrote at once to Peter the Venerable, the third day after the death of Innocent, by the cardinal priests and deacons assembled in the Lateran [St. John Lateran, the pope’s cathedral in Rome] basilica, with the bishops and subdeacons, and with the acclamations of the Roman people.
He took the name of Coelestine IL Peter the Venerable had his letter read in full chapter; it was written at Rome on November 16th, and received at Cluny on November 29th. Coelestine died after a pontificate of less than six months, and was succeeded by Lucius II., who wrote to Peter the Venerable to send him thirteen of his monks whom he wished to establish in Rome in the monastery of S. Sabas. In 1146 the urgent preaching of Bernard against the infidels, and his efforts to rouse the interests of the Christian princes in a new crusade, led to the disastrous result of Dcc. as0 B. Peter the Venerable. 289 rousing the people in France and Germany to massacre the Jews, the nearest infidels at hand on whose bodies to exhibit their enthusiasm for the Cross and hatred of misbelief. S. Bernard did his utmost to stop the massacre. Peter of Cluny wrote to King Louis VII. to arrest the butchery. He urged the king to restrain the Jews from grinding down the poor by usury, and from being accomplices to burglars, who broke into churches and dwellings, stole chalices and other objects of precious metal, and carried them to the Jews, who bought them, and melted them up at once. But Peter of Cluny was not above the prejudices of his age. If he did not countenance the massacre, he did countenance the plunder of the Jews.
Peter the Venerable wrote a controversial letter on the errors of Peter de Brueys, who had been burned alive by a mob, zealous for the Catholic faith, but whose sect survived. Almost all we know of this obscure heretic is from the letter of the abbot of Cluny. Peter de Brueys is said to have been a clerk; he preached in the South of France during about twenty years. From the epistle of Peter the Venerable, we learn that the heretic denied infant baptism, respect for churches, the worship of the cross, transubstantiation, prayers for the dead, and fasting. “The people,” wrote Peter the Venerable, “ are re-baptized, altars thrown down, crosses burned, meat publicly eaten on the day of the Lord's Passion, priests scourged, monks imprisoned, or compelled by terror or torture to marry.”
It is clear that Peter de Brueys was influenced by Manichaean tenets, such as had produced in an earlier age the Priscillianist heresy, and was shortly to develop rapidly into Albigensianism.
Peter the Venerable went to Rome in 1150, and after spending five months there, returned to Cluny, where he found deputies from the monasteries of his Order in Spain, England, France, Italy, and Germany. He received a letter from S. Bernard, but was unable to answer it at once on his return, on account of the pressure of business which his absence had occasioned. When he answered S. Bernard, it was to give him an account of his reception by Eugenius III. Eugenius was a Cistercian, whose sole recommendation to the electors was that he was a friend of Bernard. “In electing you,” said Bernard, “ they made me Pope, not you.” With his characteristic gentleness and love of peace, Peter wrote to S. Bernard in the most kindly tone, giving a glowing description of the Pope, who, he said, had shown him the utmost honour and friendship.
In 1140, Roger, king of Sicily, had lost his eldest son, Roger, duke of Apulia, after having lost three other sons. In 1150 he had his only remaining son, William, prince of Capua, crowned king of Sicily. Peter of Cluny wrote to the king a kindly letter of sympathy on his bereavements. He then added that he regretted the disunion which existed between him and the king of Germany, and offered himself as mediator. He also urged him to chastise the Greeks for their ill-treatment of pilgrims to the Holy Land. Peter the Venerable was the last man of celebrity among the abbots of Cluny. The Reform fell into obscurity, and was supplanted by the Cistercian Reform, which inherited its popularity and, in time, its laxity.
