| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: St. Bernard of Clairvaux's Life of St. Malachy of Armagh
Author: Bernard, of Clairvaux, Saint, 1091?-1153
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "St. Bernard of Clairvaux's Life of St. Malachy of Armagh" ***
This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.
ST. MALACHY OF ARMAGH***
Transcriber's Note:
In the genealogical tree in Additional Note B, and a few other
locations in the text, dagger symbols have been replaced with +.
A character following a caret sign (^) is superscripted.
Translations of Christian Literature. Series V
Lives of the Celtic Saints
S^T BERNARD OF CLAIRVAUX'S
LIFE OF S^T MALACHY OF ARMAGH
by
H. J. LAWLOR, D.D., LITT.D.
Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
The Macmillan Company.
London
New York
1920
Printed in Great Britain by Richard Clay & Sons, Limited, Brunswick St.,
Stamford St., S.E. 1, and Bungay, Suffolk.
CONTENTS
PAGE
PRINCIPAL AUTHORITIES REFERRED TO vii
NAMES OF IRISH PERSONS AND PLACES x
INTRODUCTION xii
LIFE OF ST. MALACHY 1
LETTERS OF ST. BERNARD 131
SERMONS OF ST. BERNARD ON THE PASSING OF
MALACHY 141
ADDITIONAL NOTES:--
A.--ST. BERNARD'S DESCRIPTION OF THE STATE
OF THE IRISH CHURCH 161
B.--THE HEREDITARY SUCCESSION OF THE COARBS
OF PATRICK 164
C.--MALACHY'S CONTEST WITH NIALL 167
APPENDIX 171
INDEX 172
PRINCIPAL AUTHORITIES REFERRED TO
A. T.C.D. MS. F. 4, 6, containing the _Vita S. Malachiae_ and a portion
of _Sermo_ ii. imbedded therein. Cent. xiii.; copied from a much earlier
exemplar.
AA.SS. _Acta Sanctorum._
A.F.M. _Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland by the Four Masters_, ed. J.
O'Donovan, 1851.
A.I. Annals of Inisfallen, in O'Conor, _Rerum Hibernicarum Scriptores_,
1814-1826, vol. ii.
A.L.C. _Annals of Loch Cé_, ed. W. M. Hennessy (R.S.), 1871.
A.T. _Annals of Tigernach_ (so called: see J. MacNeill in _Eriu_, vii.
30), ed. W. Stokes, in _Revue Celtique_, xvi.-xviii.
A.U. _Annals of Ulster, otherwise Annals of Senat_, ed. W. M. Hennessy
and B. MacCarthy, 1887-1901.
Adamnan. The Life of St. Columba, written by Adamnan, ed. W. Reeves
(Irish Archæological and Celtic Society), 1857.
Archdall. M. Archdall, _Monasticon Hibernicum_, 1786: the earlier part
ed. by P. F. Moran, 1873.
C.M.A. _Chartularies of St. Mary's Abbey, Dublin_, ed. J. T. Gilbert
(R.S.), 1884.
_Cant._ S. Bernardi Sermones in Cantica, in _P.L._ clxxxiii. 779 ff.
(1879): English Translation by S. J. Eales, _The Life and Works of St.
Bernard_, vol. iv., 1896.
Colgan, _A.S.H._ J. Colgan, _Acta Sanctorum Hiberniae_, Lovanii, 1645,
tom. i.
D.A.I. The Dublin Annals of Inisfallen, Royal Irish Academy MS. 23, F.
9.
_De Cons._ S. Bernardi _De Consideratione Libri V._, in _P.L._ clxxxii.
727 ff. (1879): English Translation by G. Lewis, 1908.
_De Dil._ S. Bernardi _De Diligendo Deo_ in _P.L._ clxxxii. 973 ff.
(1879). English Translations by M. C. and C. Patmore, second ed., 1884,
and E. G. Gardner, 1916.
Dugdale. W. Dugdale, _Monasticon Anglicanum_, ed. J. Caley, H. Ellis and
B. Bandinel, 1817-30.
Eadmer. Eadmeri _Historia Novorum in Anglia_, ed. M. Rule (R.S.), 1884.
_Ep._ S. Bernardi Epistolæ in _P.L._ clxxxii. 67 ff. (1879): English
Translation in S. J. Eales, _The Life and Works of St. Bernard_, vols.
i.-iii. (1889-1896).
Giraldus, _Expug._; _Gest._; _Top._ _Giraldi Cambrensis Opera_, ed. J.
S. Brewer, J. F. Dimock and G. F. Warner (R.S.), 1861-1901. _Expugnatio
Hibernica_, vol. v. p. 207 ff.; _De Rebus a se Gestis_, vol. i. p. 1
ff.; _Topographia Hibernica_, vol. v. p. 1 ff.
Gorman. _The Martyrology of Gorman_, ed. W. Stokes (Henry Bradshaw
Society), 1895.
Gougaud. L. Gougaud, _Les Chrétientés Celtiques_, 1911.
Gwynn. The Book of Armagh, ed. J. Gwynn, 1913.
J.R.S.A.I. _Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland_:
references to volumes according to the consecutive numbering.
Jaffé. _Regesta Pontificum Romanorum_, ed. P. Jaffé, 1851.
John of Hexham. _Historia Johannis Prioris Hagustaldensis Ecclesiae_, in
_Symeonis Monachi Dunelmensis Opera Omnia_, ed. T. Arnold (R.S.), ii.
(1885), 284 ff.
K. Codex Kilkenniensis; Marsh's Library, Dublin, MS. Z. 1.5, containing
the _Vita S. Malachiae_. Cent. xv.
Keating. G. Keating, _History of Ireland_, ed. D. Comyn and P. S.
Dinneen (Irish Texts Society), 1902-1914.
L.A.J. _County Louth Archæological Journal._
L.B. Leabhar Breac, Royal Irish Academy MS. (Facsimile ed. 1876.)
Lanigan. J. Lanigan, _An Ecclesiastical History of Ireland ... to the
Beginning of the Thirteenth Century_, 1829.
M.G.H. _Monumenta Germaniae Historica._
Mansi. _Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima Collectio_, ed. J. D.
Mansi, 1759-1798.
O.C.C. _The Book of Obits and Martyrology of the Cathedral Church of the
Holy Trinity, commonly called Christ Church, Dublin_, ed. J. C.
Crosthwaite and J. H. Todd (Irish Archæological Society), 1844.
Oengus. _The Martyrology of Oengus the Culdee_, ed. W. Stokes (Henry
Bradshaw Society), 1905.
O'Hanlon. J. O'Hanlon, _The Life of Saint Malachy O'Morgair_, 1859.
O'Hanlon, _Saints_. J. O'Hanlon, _Lives of the Irish Saints_, vols.
i.-ix., 1875-1901.
P.L. _Patrologiæ Cursus Completus, Series Latina_, ed. J. P. Migne.
Petrie. G. Petrie, _The Ecclesiastical Architecture of Ireland ...
comprising an Essay on the Origin and Uses of the Round Towers of
Ireland_, 1845.
Plummer. _Vitae Sanctorum Hiberniae_, ed. C. Plummer, 1910.
Plummer, _Bede_. _Venerabilis Baedae Opera Historica_, ed. C. Plummer,
1896.
R.I.A. _Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy_, Archæology, Linguistic
and Literature. References to volumes according to the consecutive
numbering.
R.I.A. _Trans._ _Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy._
R.Q.H. _Revue des Questions Historiques._
R.T.A. _Register of the Abbey of St. Thomas, Dublin_, ed. J. T. Gilbert
(R.S.), 1889.
Reeves. W. Reeves, _Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Down, Connor and
Dromore_, 1847.
Reeves, _Churches_. W. Reeves, _Ancient Churches of Armagh_, 1860.
Richard of Hexham. _Historia Ricardi prioris Haugustaldensis_, in
_Chronicles of Stephen_, etc., ed. Howlett (R.S.), iii. (1886), 137 ff.
Theiner. A. Theiner, _Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum,
1216-1547_, Romae, 1864.
Todd. J. H. Todd, _St. Patrick Apostle of Ireland_, 1864.
_Trias._ J. Colgan, _Triadis Thaumaturgae seu divorum Patricii, Columbae
et Brigidae Acta_, Lovanii, 1647 (vol. ii. of his _Acta Sanctorum
Hiberniae_).
_Trip._ W. Stokes, _The Tripartite Life of Patrick with other Documents
relating to that Saint_, ed. W. Stokes (R.S.), 1887.
Tundale. _Visio Tnugdali lateinisch und altdeutsch_, ed. A. Wagner,
1882.
Ussher. J. Ussher, _Veterum Epistolarum Hibernicarum Sylloge_, in Works,
ed. C. R. Elrington, 1847-1864, vol. iv., pp. 383 ff.
V.P. _S. Bernardi Vita Prima_, in _P.L._ clxxxv., 225 ff.
Vacandard. _Vie de Saint Bernard Abbé de Clairvaux_ par l'Abbé E.
Vacandard, 4e édition, 1910.
NAMES OF IRISH PERSONS AND PLACES
Form used in this Form used by
volume. St. Bernard. Irish Form.
Antrim Oenthreb Oentreb
Armagh Ardmacha Ard Macha
Bangor Benchor Bennchor
Cashel Caselensis Caisel
Catholicus Catholicus Catlac
Cellach Celsus Cellach
Christian Christianus Gilla Crist
Coleraine Culratim Cúl Rathin
Columbanus Columbanus Columbán
Comgall Congellus Comgall
Connor Connereth Coindire
Conor Conchobar
Cork Corcagia Corcach
Dermot Diarmicius Diarmait
Derry Daire
Desmond Mumonia australis Desmuma
Donnell Domnall
Donough {Donnchad
{Donngus
Down Dunum Dún dá Lethglas
Edan Edanus Aedh
Faughart Fochart Fochart
Gelasius Gelasius Gilla meic Liag
Gilbert Gillebertus Gilla espuig
Imar Imaru Imar
Inispatrick Inis Pátraic
Iveragh Ibracensis Ui Ráthach
Leinster Laginia Laigin
Limerick Luimneach
Lismore Lesmore Lis Mór
Lugadh Luanus {Lugaid
{Molua
MacCarthy Mac (meic) Carthaig
Maelisa } Malchus Mael Ísa
Malchus }
Malachy Malachias Máel Máedóc
Moriarty Ua Muirchertaig
Munster Mumonia Muma
Murrough Murchadh
Murtough Mauricius Muirchertach
Nehemiah Nehemias Gilla na Naem
Niall Nigellus Niall
O'Boyle Ua Baigill
O'Brien Ua Briain
O'Carroll Ua Cerbaill
O'Conor Ua Conchobair
O'Hagan Ua hAedacain
O'Hanratty Ua hIndrechtaig
O'Hanley Ua hAingli
O'Kelly Ua Cellaig
O'Loughlin Ua Lochlainn
Oriel Oirgialla
O'Rorke Ua Ruarc
Patrick Patricius Pátraic
Rory Ruaidhri
Saul {Saballum } Sabal Phátraic
{Saballinum}
Shalvey Ua Selbaig
Teague Tadhg
Thomond Tuathmuma
Turlough Toirdelbach
Ulaid Ulydia Ulaid
Usnagh Uisnech
Waterford Port Láirge
INTRODUCTION
The main purpose of this Introduction is to give an account of a
movement which changed the whole face of the Irish Church, and to the
advancement of which St. Malachy devoted his life. In default of a
better word we may call the movement a Reformation, though it might
perhaps be more accurately described as an ecclesiastical revolution.
Without some knowledge of its aims and progress it is impossible to
assign to Malachy his true place in the history of his native country.
That such a movement actually took place in the twelfth century is
beyond doubt. From about the year 1200 on it is certain that the
organization of the Church of Ireland was similar to that of the other
Churches of western Christendom. The country was divided into dioceses;
and each diocese had a bishop as its ruler, and a Cathedral Church in
which the bishop's stool was placed. The Cathedral Church, moreover, had
a chapter of clergy, regular or secular, who performed important
functions in the diocese. But up to the end of the eleventh century all
these things were unknown among the Irish. The constitution of the
Church was then of an entirely different type, one that had no exact
parallel elsewhere. The passage from the older to the newer organization
must have taken place in the twelfth century. During that century,
therefore, there was a Reformation in the Irish Church, however little
we may know of its causes or its process. But this Reformation was no
mere re-modelling of the hierarchy. It can be shown that it imposed on
the members of the Church a new standard of sexual morality; if we
believe contemporary writers, it restored to their proper place such
rites as Confession, Confirmation and Matrimony; it substituted for the
offices of divine service previously in use those of the Roman Church;
it introduced the custom of paying tithes; it established in Ireland the
monastic orders of Latin Christendom[1]; and it may have produced
changes in other directions.[2] But I propose to confine myself to the
change in the constitution of the Church, which was its most striking
feature. The subject, even thus narrowed, will give us more than can be
satisfactorily treated in a few pages.
First, I must emphasize the assertion made a moment ago that the
constitution of the Irish Church in the eleventh century was _sui
generis_. Let us begin by reminding ourselves what it was from the sixth
to the eighth century. It was then essentially monastic in character.
The rulers of the Church were the abbots of the monasteries, commonly
known as the coarbs or successors of their founders. These abbots were
sometimes bishops; but whether they were bishops or of lower rank in the
ministry, their authority was inherent in their office of coarb. At this
period bishops were numerous--more numerous than in later medieval or
modern times; and certain functions were reserved for bishops, for
example, ordination. No ecclesiastic, of whatever status, could perform
such functions, unless he was of the episcopal order. But no bishop, as
such, had jurisdiction. The bishops were often subordinate officers in
monasteries, reverenced because of their office, but executing their
special functions at the command of the abbots. Sometimes a bishop was
attached to a single tribe. Sometimes a group of bishops--often seven in
number--dwelt together in one place. But in no case, I repeat, had they
jurisdiction. Thus ecclesiastical authority was vested in the abbots.
The episcopate was bestowed on certain individuals as a personal
distinction. Thus the bishops, if they were not also abbots, had only
such influence on the affairs of the Church as their sanctity, or their
learning, might give them.
It may surprise some that so anomalous a system of government should
have persisted as late as the eleventh century, in other words for a
period of over 500 years. But we must take account of the Danish--or as
we should rather call it, the Norse--invasion of Ireland. Danish ships
first appeared off the Irish coasts about the year 800. From that time
for two centuries Ireland was to a large extent cut off from intercourse
with the rest of Europe. The aim of the northern hordes, as it seems,
was not mere pillage, but the extinction of Christianity. Ecclesiastical
institutions were everywhere attacked, and often destroyed. And these
institutions were centres of scholarship. Heretofore Ireland had been
the special home of learning, and had attracted to itself large numbers
of foreign students. But in those disastrous centuries its culture was
reduced to the lowest point. In such circumstances it was not possible
that the organization of the Church should be developed or strengthened.
The Danish domination of the country must have tended to stereotype the
old hierarchical system. It might, indeed, suffer from deterioration: it
probably did. But it could not be assimilated to the system which then
prevailed on the Continent. We should expect that the constitution of
the Church in the eleventh century, whatever abuses may have crept into
its administration, would in principle be identical with that of the
pre-Danish period.
There can in fact be no doubt that it was. We have in our hands writings
of Lanfranc, Anselm, St. Bernard and Giraldus Cambrensis which picture
the state of the Irish Church at that time. They speak of it in terms
which are by no means complimentary. But when they come to details we
discover that the irregularities in its hierarchical arrangement which
shocked them most went back to the days of St. Columba. Quotations
cannot be given here. But the reader will probably find in the Life
printed below, and the authorities referred to in the notes, sufficient
proof that the constitution of the Irish Church in 1100 was in the main
a following, though perhaps a corrupt following, of that of the sixth
century.[3]
There was indeed one abuse in the Irish Church of the tenth and eleventh
centuries of which few traces are found before the Danish invasion. We
learn from St. Bernard that the abbots of Armagh were the
representatives of a single family, and held office, as of right, by
hereditary succession.[4] There is reason to believe that this evil
custom was not peculiar to Armagh.[5] According to St. Bernard, it was
the gravest departure from Catholic tradition of which the Irish Church
was guilty, and the parent of many evils. We shall hear more of it in
the sequel. For the moment it is sufficient to note that it existed.
I.--The Beginnings of the Movement
But before the eleventh century ended forces were at work in Ireland
which prepared the way for the introduction of a new order. They were
set free by the conversion of the Norsemen to Christianity, and by their
final defeat at the battle of Clontarf. The date of the conversion
cannot be fixed: it was probably a gradual process. And we do not know
from what source the Danes derived their Christianity. The victory of
Clontarf was won on Good Friday, 1014.
Now a study of the Annals reveals the fact that in the seventh and
eighth centuries there was a goodly, and on the whole an increasing,
body of scholars in Ireland. Under the Norse domination, as we might
expect, the number was greatly diminished. But already in the tenth
century there was a notable increase: in the eleventh century the number
was doubled. In the tenth century, moreover, and still more in the
eleventh, scholars began to congregate at special centres, which became
permanent homes of learning, the most prominent of these schools being
at Armagh and Clonmacnoise. And during the same period we find frequent
mention of an official, unknown before the arrival of the Norsemen, who
is styled _fer légind_ or professor. Between 925 and 1000 the obits of
twenty-three professors are recorded; in the eleventh century of more
than fifty. In the greater number of cases the _fer légind_ is
associated with one of those seats of learning which is known to have
been most prolific of scholars.
Thus it appears that gradually, as the onslaughts of the Danes became
less frequent, Irish men of learning tended more and more to become
teachers rather than mere students, and to gravitate towards a few great
centres of study. The climax of this movement towards organization and
the eminence of special places was reached about the middle of the
eleventh century (1030-1063), when mention is made of thirty-three
persons who held the office of _fer légind_, and when the principal
schools seem to have been those of Clonmacnoise, Armagh, Kildare and
Kells.[6]
The Reformation of the twelfth century, like that of the sixteenth, was
prepared for by a revival of learning.
But further, the defeat of the Danes removed the barrier which had
hindered communication between Ireland and the rest of Europe. Students
once more came to Ireland from other lands to pursue their studies. The
most remarkable of these was perhaps Sulien, the future bishop of St.
David's. Sulien the Wise was born shortly before the date of the battle
of Clontarf in the district of Cardigan. In early youth he displayed
much aptitude for learning, and in middle life, about 1058, "stirred by
the example of the fathers," he paid a visit to the Irish schools in
order to perfect his studies. He spent thirteen years in that country,
and then established a famous school at Llanbadarn Fawr in Wales. In the
library of Trinity College, Dublin, there is a precious relic of the
work of this school. It is a beautiful manuscript of St. Jerome's Latin
version of the Psalter according to the Hebrew, once the property of
Bishop Bedell.[7] The manuscript was written by a member of the school,
a Welshman named Ithael. It is adorned with excellent illuminations by
John, one of Sulien's sons, and was presented to Ricemarch, another son
of Sulien. A valuable copy of the Hieronymian Martyrology prefixed to it
gives sundry indications that it was transcribed from an Irish
exemplar. At the end of the volume are some verses composed by
Ricemarch, and perhaps written there by his own hand. They display
considerable Biblical and patristic learning. Another relic of the
school is a copy of St. Augustine's _De Trinitate_ in Corpus Christi
College, Cambridge.[8] It was written and illuminated by John, and
contains excellent Latin verses from his pen. In the British Museum
there is also a poem of Ricemarch describing the horrors of the Norman
invasion of Wales.[9] And finally we have a _Life of St. David_, by the
same author. It relates many incidents culled from the lives of Irish
saints who had in one way or another been brought into contact with
David; all of them reminiscent of Sulien's studies in the Irish
Schools.[10]
I have dwelt on these things because they illustrate in a striking way
the revival of Irish learning in the eleventh century. But just at the
time when Sulien, and doubtless many other foreigners, were coming to
Ireland to study, Irish scholars were beginning to renew their ancient
habit of travelling to other countries. By way of example I may mention
two, both of whom were known by the same name, Marianus Scotus. One of
these, a native of the north of Ireland, whose real name was Muiredach
Mac Robartaich, founded the monastery of St. Peter at Ratisbon about
1070; and he was succeeded there by six abbots of north Irish birth. He
wrote a commentary on the Pauline Epistles, which is still preserved in
the Imperial Library at Vienna. The other, Mael Brigte by name, left
Ireland in 1056, and after some wanderings established himself at Mainz
in 1069. He compiled a chronicle, which is of considerable value.[11]
Hereafter I shall have to mention other Irish men of travel; and it will
be seen that from some of them, who returned home, came the main impulse
to the reform of the Irish Church.
The battle of Clontarf broke the power of the Danes in Ireland; but it
did not secure their departure from the country. Those that remained
were mainly settled in the four cities of Dublin, Wexford, Waterford and
Limerick. In due time these four Danish colonies adopted the Christian
Faith, and before long they became organized churches, each presided
over by a bishop. In Dublin this took place a quarter of a century after
the battle of Clontarf, the first bishop being Dunan, in whose
episcopate the Danish king, Sitric, founded the Cathedral of the Holy
Trinity about 1040. Of the early ecclesiastical history of Wexford
practically nothing is known; but the first bishop of Waterford was
consecrated in 1096,[12] and the first bishop of Limerick eight or ten
years later.[13] These were the first churches in Ireland ruled by
bishops who were not abbots; and it seems that each of the bishops had a
defined diocese. The dioceses of Dublin, Waterford, and perhaps Wexford,
were very small, extending only a little way, if at all, beyond the
walls of the Cathedral city. The diocese of Limerick, on the other hand,
was extensive; rather larger than the present diocese of the same name.
But whether large or small each of these dioceses presented to the eyes
of the Irish a model of Church government similar to that in vogue on
the Continent, and utterly different from that to which they were
accustomed.
This might prove a potent factor in the Reformation, once a tendency
developed among the Irish to bring their ecclesiastical machinery into
conformity with that of the rest of the world. But it is manifest that
by itself it would not induce them to re-model their hierarchy. It was
not to be expected that they would cast aside the tradition of
centuries, moved merely by a desire to imitate their late enemies. If,
as is commonly held, the Danish dioceses, without exception, held
themselves aloof from, or were hostile to, Irish Christianity, such a
result could hardly have been attained, at any rate until the coming of
the Anglo-Normans. These later invaders would doubtless have forced
diocesan episcopacy on the Irish Church. But that it was established in
Ireland before the country came, even in part, under English rule, is
certain. So we must ask the question: What was the connecting link which
bound the Church of the Danish colonists to that of Celtic Ireland? By
way of answer I point to the remarkable fact, often overlooked, that all
the earliest bishops of the Danish dioceses were of Irish birth. Why
Danish Christians should have elected Irishmen as their bishops I do not
attempt to explain. But the evidence for the fact is clear.
The first two bishops of Dublin, Dunan and Patrick (Gilla Pátraic), had
unmistakably Irish names. So too had their immediate successors Donough
O'Hanley and his nephew Samuel O'Hanley; and of these two the latter is
stated by the English chronicler Eadmer[14] to have been "natione
Hibernensis." The next bishop, Gregory--the first archbishop of
Dublin--was likewise "natione Hibernensis" according to the continuator
of Florence of Worcester.[15] He was followed by St. Laurence O'Toole,
of whose nationality it is unnecessary to give proof.
Malchus, the earliest bishop of Waterford, was an Irishman;[16] so also
was Gilbert, the first bishop of Limerick. And when Gilbert resigned his
see, after an episcopate of thirty-five years, he was succeeded by
Patrick, whose name tells its own tale.[17]
Most of the Irish rulers of Danish dioceses whom I have mentioned were
men of travel. Patrick of Dublin, to whose learning Lanfranc bears
testimony, "was nourished in monastic institutions from his
boyhood,"[18] and certainly not, in an Irish religious house. Donough
O'Hanley, before his consecration, was a monk of Canterbury; Samuel
O'Hanley was a monk of St. Albans;[19] Malchus was called to Waterford
from Walkelin's monastery at Winchester;[20] Gilbert of Limerick had
visited Normandy,[21] and at a later date we find him assisting at the
consecration of a bishop in Westminster Abbey.[22] Such men had had
training which familiarized them with Roman methods of Church
Government. They were well fitted to organize and rule their dioceses.
And if they desired to imbue the Celtic Church with the principles which
they had learnt, and on which they acted, their nationality gave them a
ground of appeal which no Dane could have had. It is of course not to be
assumed that all of them were so disposed. The Danish Christians of
Dublin not only stood aside from the Celtic Church; for reasons which
will appear later they were inimical to it, and it to them. Their
bishops, with the possible exception of the first, made profession of
canonical obedience to the English Primates. Not only so: they gloried
in their subjection to Canterbury. "We have always been willing subjects
of your predecessors," wrote the burgesses and clergy of Dublin to
Ralph, archbishop of Canterbury, when the see was vacant in 1121. And
then, after a reference to the great jealousy of Cellach of Armagh
against them, they proceed to declare, "We will not obey his command,
but desire to be always under your rule. Therefore we beseech you to
promote Gregory to the episcopate if you wish to retain any longer the
parish which we have kept for you so long."[23] It was clearly
impossible that this diocese could directly influence the Irish in the
direction of reform. But no such obstacle barred the path of the first
bishops of Limerick and Waterford. Gilbert owed no allegiance to
Canterbury; Malchus was consecrated at Canterbury, but he soon escaped
his profession of obedience to Anselm.[24] Both became leaders of the
romanizing movement in Ireland.
But the influence of the Danish dioceses on the Irish Church was not
limited to the personal action of their bishops. Indirectly all of them,
including Dublin, had a share in promoting the Reformation. Archbishop
Lanfranc, as early as 1072, claimed that his primacy included Ireland as
well as England.[25] The claim, curiously enough, was based on Bede's
_History_, in which there is not a single word which supports it. But
the arrival two years later of Patrick, elect of Dublin, seeking
consecration at his hands, gave him his opportunity to enforce it. When
Patrick returned to take possession of his see he carried with him two
letters from Lanfranc. One was addressed to Gothric, the Manx prince who
for the moment was king of Dublin. Lanfranc, with tactful exaggeration,
dubs him "glorious king of Ireland," and tells him that in consecrating
Patrick he had followed the custom of his predecessors in the chair of
St. Augustine. The other letter was more important. It was directed to
Turlough O'Brien, grandson of Brian Boroimhe, who is also styled,
inconsistently, and not altogether truly, "magnificent king of Ireland":
he was doubtless king of Ireland in hope, but in fact he never extended
his sway beyond the southern half of the island. Turlough's attention is
called to the irregularities of the Irish Church. He is urged to call a
council of bishops and religious men for the extirpation of those evil
customs, and to be present at it in person. This letter evidently
produced an impression, and not only on Turlough O'Brien. For a few
years later Lanfranc wrote another letter, this time to a bishop named
Donnell and others, who had sought his advice on a difficult question
concerning the sacrament of baptism.[26]
Anselm followed in the footsteps of Lanfranc. Not long after his
consecration (1093) he wrote to Donnell, Donough O'Hanley and the rest
of the bishops of Ireland, begging the aid of their prayers, and urging
them to consult him in all cases of difficulty. Almost immediately
afterwards came the election of Malchus, bishop of Waterford, in 1096.
Among those who signed the petition for his consecration were Bishop
Donnell, Samuel O'Hanley, whom Anselm had consecrated for Dublin earlier
in the same year, and O'Dunan, bishop of Meath (_Idunan episcopus
Midiae_), whose name we shall do well to remember. But most notable of
all were Murtough O'Brien, son of Turlough, then the strongest of Irish
kings, soon to be _ardrí_, and his brother Dermot O'Brien.[27] It is
clear that Lanfranc had won the O'Briens to the Romanizing side; and
Anselm was determined to hold them fast. Within the next few years there
was a fairly regular correspondence between him and Murtough, of which
some letters have been preserved.[28] The relation between the two men
was evidently most friendly. And the archbishop fully exploited his
opportunity. Again and again he reminded the king of his duty to repress
abuses, the most important of which in his eyes were lax sexual
morality, and the consecration of bishops by single bishops, without
fixed sees or defined dioceses.
So Lanfranc and Anselm schooled the O'Briens in the principles of Rome.
And from one point of view their efforts were completely successful. The
O'Briens became staunch friends of the Reform movement in Ireland. But
from another point of view they failed. We must remember that their aim
was not only to purify the Irish Church, but to bring it into subjection
to Canterbury. That they did not succeed in doing. The Reformation,
which they taught the O'Briens to support, meant, in the end, a
repudiation of the pretensions of the English primates.
I have mentioned among those who were concerned in the election of
Malchus of Waterford, O'Dunan, bishop of Meath. He is unquestionably
Máel Muire Ua Dunáin, whom the annalists describe as "learned bishop of
the Goidhil, and head of the clergy of Ireland, and steward of the
almsdeeds of the world," and who died on Christmas Eve, 1117, at the age
of seventy-six. He is mentioned in a charter in the Book of Kells, the
date of which is apparently about 1100, as Senior of Leath Chuinn
(_i.e._ the north of Ireland).[29] He was fifty-five when Malchus was
elected, and had probably already attained the eminence throughout
Ireland which is attested by the high-flown phrases of the Annals. That
he was then bishop of Meath in the modern sense is impossible; the title
at that period would mean no more than that he was a bishop who lived
within the borders of the Kingdom of Meath. But the _Annals of
Tigernach_ tell us that he died at Clonard, from which it may perhaps be
inferred that his see was at that place. His importance for us just now
is that he is the only adherent of the Reform movement whom we have yet
discovered in the north of Ireland.
II.--The First Stage
Before proceeding further in our investigation of the origin and course
of the Reformation, it may be well to recall how far we have already
advanced. We started from the fact that a Reformation of the Irish
Church was actually accomplished in the twelfth century, and we
proceeded to look for the causes which may have brought it about. We
have found that the first of these was the revival of learning
consequent on the cessation of the ravages of the Norsemen. We have
noted also the restoration at the same period of communication between
Ireland and the rest of Europe--the coming of students to the Irish
schools, and the wanderings of Irish scholars in other lands. We have
seen that the establishment of the Danish dioceses gave to the Irish a
model of diocesan episcopacy, and that among the Irish-born bishops of
those dioceses there were men capable of leading a Reform movement. And
we have learned that Lanfranc and Anselm, through their relation with
the Danish dioceses, found means to induce the more conspicuous civil
and religious leaders of the Celtic population to undertake the work of
reconstituting the Church. Finally, we have been able to name some
persons who might be expected to take a prominent place in the early
stages of the Reformation. They are Gilbert of Limerick, Malchus of
Waterford, O'Dunan of Meath, and the princes of the O'Brien family. The
best proof that we have rightly conceived the origin of the movement
will come before us when we study the share which these persons
severally had in promoting it.
We must now trace, as far as it can be done, the first steps in the
process by which, under the influences which I have indicated, the
Church of Ireland passed from its older to its later hierarchical
system.
The earliest attempt to give concrete form to the principles of the
Reformers seems to have been made in the Kingdom of Meath, about the
year 1100. But the primary evidence for the fact is of much later date.
There are extant some constitutions of Simon Rochfort, bishop of Meath,
put forth at a synod of his diocese held at the monastery of SS. Peter
and Paul at Newtown, near Trim, in 1216. The first of them recites an
ordinance of the papal legate, Cardinal John Paparo, at the Council of
Kells in 1152, which is of great importance.
Paparo ordered that as the bishops of the weaker sees died off,
arch-priests, or, as we call them, rural deans, should succeed to their
place, and take charge of the clergy and people within their
borders.[30]
The inference which this enactment suggests is that the weaker sees to
which it refers were the centres of small dioceses, which Paparo desired
to be converted into rural deaneries. In accordance with the ordinance
of Paparo, Rochfort's synod enjoined that rural deans should be placed
in the five sees of Trim, Kells, Slane, Skreen and Dunshaughlin, each of
whom should supervise the churches in his own deanery. These, with
Clonard, which had long been the see of Rochfort's diocese, are six of
the twelve rural deaneries into which the present diocese of Meath is
divided.[31] I conclude that they, and probably the remaining six,
coincided more or less closely with dioceses ruled by bishops in the
first half of the twelfth century.[32]
Let us now call to our aid a much earlier witness. The annalists inform
us that in the year 1111 there was an assembly at Usnagh in Meath. It
decreed that "the parishes[33] of Meath" should be equally divided
between the bishops of Clonmacnoise and Clonard. We may infer that
Clonmacnoise and Clonard, two of the present rural deaneries, were then
dioceses. It is not likely that the dioceses of Meath would have been
formed into two groups, each to constitute the diocese of a bishop who
had already no diocese of his own. But however that may be, we have here
proof that before 1111 Meath had been parted into a number of small
dioceses ruled by bishops.
If the question be asked, By whose authority or influence this division
of Meath into dioceses was made? I can suggest no one more likely than
Máel Muire Ua Dunáin, the "bishop of Meath" to whom reference has
already been made.[34] He was a Meath man, and probably bishop of
Clonard: he was an ecclesiastic of great repute, especially in the
north; and he was a devoted adherent of the Reform movement. His action,
if indeed it was his, was premature and ill-advised. As we shall see,
his work had to be slowly undone. But it is remarkable, as the first
attempt known to us to establish diocesan episcopacy among the Irish. I
shall have more to say about it hereafter; but now I must follow the
main stream of events.
Gilbert,[35] the first bishop of Limerick, as has already been noted,
was an Irishman. Indeed, we may venture to describe him as one of the
most remarkable Irishmen of his time, in spite of the fact that the
Annals pass him by in almost complete silence. He was at any rate a
staunch supporter, or, as we should rather say, the leader of the
Reformation movement in its earliest course. In a letter written in 1107
Anselm exhorted him, in virtue of their mutual friendship, to make good
use of his episcopal office by correcting that which was amiss, and
planting and sowing good customs, calling to aid him in the work his
king (Murtough O'Brien), the other Irish bishops, and all whom he could
persuade.[36] That, assuredly, Gilbert was forward to do.
No sooner had he taken possession of his see than he began to organize a
diocese. Its boundaries seem to have been fixed with care. It was
exactly co-extensive with the modern diocese of Limerick, except on the
north, where it stretched across the Shannon and included part of the
present diocese of Killaloe.[37] Moreover he made the Church of St. Mary
his Cathedral Church; indeed it is not unlikely that he built it to
serve that purpose.
A few years later he was appointed Legate of the Holy See. It is
manifest that his new office gave him a unique opportunity of moulding
the fortunes of the Irish Church. In Ireland Gilbert was now virtually
the chief prelate and head of the Church. He was the representative and
embodiment of the authority of the Holy See. The whole Romanizing party
would naturally circle round him as their leader, and many waverers
would be attracted to the new movement in the Irish Church, by the claim
which he could make to speak in the name of the head of the Church
Catholic.
It was after he became legate, and no doubt in virtue of his legatine
commission, that he issued a treatise which may be regarded as the
programme of the Reformation. It is entitled _De Statu Ecclesiae_. Of
this a fragment, including its earlier chapters, is still in our
hands.[38]
Before giving a slight summary of its contents I must mention that it is
addressed "to the bishops and presbyters of the whole of Ireland," and
that Gilbert declares that he wrote it at the urgent request of many of
them. In this statement there may lurk an element of exaggeration. But
behind it there lies at least so much truth as this. A considerable body
of the clergy had approached the newly made legate, and requested his
instruction regarding the proper constitution of the Church--for such is
the subject of his tract; and that implies that the Romanizing movement
was no longer in its infancy. There were many bishops and presbyters who
had become dissatisfied with the old Irish method of Church government.
They desired to bring it into conformity with that of the Roman Church.
But they were in some uncertainty as to the nature of the changes that
should be made, and so they asked Gilbert to give them authoritative
counsel.
In reply to their petition, with the aid of an elaborate diagram, he
sketched as follows the organization of a properly ordered Church.
The bishops, he tells us, and others of higher rank in the ministry
belong to the general Church, as distinct from particular churches. The
priest is the highest officer in a particular church. It is the primary
duty of every priest to serve and obey his bishop with all humility. For
by the bishops particular churches are ruled. To each bishop are subject
all the churches within his jurisdiction. And this applies as well to
monastic establishments as to parishes. The head of each parish is a
priest, the head of each monastery is an abbot, who is himself a priest.
The bishop has a pontifical church, in which is his see (_sedes_), and
of which he is the head. From it he governs the inferior churches. A
bishop can perform all the offices of a priest, but he has seven
functions peculiar to himself: to confirm, to bless, to absolve, to hold
synods, to dedicate churches and altars, to consecrate the ornaments of
churches, to ordain abbots and abbesses and the secular clergy.
Gilbert's diagram represented the bishop as ruling two churches; but he
explains that this is to be interpreted figuratively. A bishop may have
as many as a thousand churches within his jurisdiction: he must have at
least ten.
A bishop is himself subject to authority. His immediate superior is the
archbishop. An archbishop has a sphere of immediate jurisdiction, like
any other bishop, but he also rules a number of subject bishops. Of
these there must be at least three; but an archbishop is not permitted
to have more than twenty subject bishops--an important point, as we
shall see. Above the archbishop is the primate. It is the special
privilege of the primate to ordain and crown the king. He too has his
sphere of immediate jurisdiction, and he must have at least one subject
archbishop, but not more than six.
Primates and archbishops must be consecrated at Rome by the Pope, or at
least must receive the pall[39] from him. Without the pall they are not
raised above their fellow-bishops.
Finally, the primates are subject to the Pope, and the Pope to Christ.
The higher members of the hierarchy have their analogues in the civil
order. The Pope corresponds to the emperor, the primate to the king, an
archbishop to a duke, a bishop to an earl, a priest to a knight. But all
these are merely grades of the order of priests. There are but seven
orders of the ministry--priests, deacons, sub-deacons, acolytes,
exorcists, readers and door-keepers. Of the laity Gilbert says little.
They are of two classes; husbandmen and soldiers. Their duties are to
attend church, to pay first-fruits, tithes and oblations, to avoid evil
and do good, and to obey their pastors.
There is nothing original in all this; and some parts of it must have
been very puzzling to stay-at-home Irishmen. For example, what were they
to make of Gilbert's comparison of primates, archbishops, bishops and
priests to kings, dukes, earls and knights? They knew as little of dukes
and earls in the civil order as they did of primates and archbishops in
the ecclesiastical; and they had far more kings than suited Gilbert's
scheme. But the tract is important, both as a summary of the teaching
which Gilbert had no doubt been inculcating far and wide for years, and
as a permanent record, for future use, of the aims of the Reformers.
However unintelligible the treatise may have been in parts, it brought
out with startling clearness one or two essential points. First the
Church must be ruled by bishops. Even the monasteries are subject to
them. How amazing such a statement must have sounded to men who had
inherited the tradition, many centuries old, that the abbots of
monasteries were the true ecclesiastical rulers, bishops their
subordinate officials.
Moreover, bishoprics and dioceses could not be set up at random. The
number of bishops and by consequence the size of dioceses must be
carefully considered. The puny bishoprics of Meath, for example, could
form no part of a scheme such as Gilbert adumbrated.
It was manifest that if his guidance were to be followed, no mere
modification of existing arrangements would suffice. The old hierarchy
must be torn up by the roots, and a new hierarchy planted in its place.
We shall meet Gilbert again in the course of our story. But we may now
turn aside from him to make the acquaintance of a new actor in the
drama of the Reformation. Like O'Dunan he was a Northern.
Cellach was born in 1080. He was an Armagh man, sprung from the family
which for centuries past had provided abbots for the monastery of that
city, the grandson of a former abbot. He first appears on the scene in
1105, when on the death of Abbot Donnell he became coarb of Patrick and
abbot of Armagh. He was elected, we may assume, in the customary way. He
was then under twenty-six years of age, and was apparently still a
layman. But his subsequent action shows that he was already a convinced
disciple of the new movement. Doubtless he had fallen under the spell of
Gilbert of Limerick. Six weeks after his election he abandoned the
tradition of a century and a half, and received holy orders. But in
other respects he trod in the footsteps of his predecessors. In the
following year he went on a circuit of the Cenél Eoghain, and "took away
his full demand: namely, a cow for every six, or an in-calf heifer for
every three, or a half ounce of silver for every four, besides many
donations also." Next he proceeded to Munster, with similar results. But
his circuit of Munster is important for other reasons. There he had
opportunities of intercourse with his Munster friends, Gilbert of
Limerick and Malchus of Waterford. And with that circuit we may connect
two incidents of the highest significance. In 1106, apparently in the
latter part of the year, Caincomrac Ua Baigill, bishop of Armagh, died.
The news of his death probably reached Cellach while he was in the
south. Certainly in Munster Cellach was consecrated bishop. It is
impossible not to connect the latter event with the former. He was
consecrated to fill the vacancy created by the death of O'Boyle. Thus he
was now bishop of Armagh as well as coarb of Patrick. In his own person
he united the two lines of coarbial and episcopal succession, which had
parted asunder in 957, when the first of a series of lay coarbs had been
elected, and the first of the six contemporary bishops had been
consecrated.[40] This was a great gain for the Reformers. The old
anomaly of a ruler of the Church who was not a bishop had, so far as
Armagh was concerned, disappeared for the time. And Armagh was the
principal ecclesiastical centre in Ireland. Cellach might now call
himself archbishop of Armagh, though he had not fulfilled the condition
laid down by Gilbert, that an archbishop must receive the pall at the
hands of the Pope. The title was actually accorded to him by so rigid a
papalist as St. Bernard.[41]
But there was more to come. In the year 1101 there had been held at
Cashel a great assembly of the clergy and people of Ireland. Bishop
O'Dunan, whom we already know, was at their head. To it came also
Murtough O'Brien, who earlier in the year, after an expedition in force
through Connaught and Ulster, had entered Tara as _ardrí_ of
Ireland.[42] In the presence of the assembly he surrendered Cashel, the
royal city of the kings of Munster, to the Church, as an offering to God
and St. Patrick.[43] When we consider the persons who were concerned in
this transaction we find good ground for the suspicion that the gift was
intended in some way to benefit the movement for reform. Now St. Bernard
informs us that Cellach created a second archiepiscopal see in Ireland
in subordination to Armagh.[44] After his manner he does not tell us
where it was situated. It is certain, however, that it was at Cashel,
which was the seat of an archbishop in 1110.[45] It was probably
surrendered for this very purpose by O'Brien. And if it be asked when
Cellach erected it into an archbishopric the answer is scarcely
doubtful. Only once, so far as we know, did Cellach enter Munster before
1110. It was on the occasion of his circuit. In the year of the circuit,
therefore, 1106, the archbishopric of Cashel was founded. In that same
year, or shortly afterwards, Malchus of Waterford was translated to the
new see, and became its first archbishop. There is no evidence that a
new bishop was consecrated for Waterford in succession to Malchus: this
indeed is unlikely. But it should be noted that by his acceptance of an
archbishopric subject to Armagh, Malchus was released from the
profession of obedience which he had made to Anselm ten years earlier.
He was now a bishop of the Church of Ireland, with undivided allegiance.
The reason for the creation of a second archbishopric is not difficult
to guess. By this time the plans of the Reformers must have been in some
degree matured: before long, as we shall see, they were set forth in
minute detail. Already Cellach was archbishop of Armagh. His suffragan
sees, indeed, apart from those formed by O'Dunan, if their bishops
acknowledged themselves as his suffragans, were _in nubibus_. But
suffragan sees he must have, according to the theory of Gilbert, each
with a diocese attached to it. They must be at least three in number,
but _not more than twenty_. Now it was a foregone conclusion that if the
Reformers had their way there would be more than twenty dioceses in
Ireland. Hence, by Gilbert's rule, there must be a second archbishop.
Moreover, by making the archbishopric of Cashel subject to Armagh,
Cellach secured for himself and his successors a title yet more imposing
than that of archbishop. He was now Primate of Ireland; for it sufficed,
if Gilbert spoke truly, that a primate should have one subject
archbishop. As coarb of Patrick Cellach's authority ranged over the
whole country; as primate his sway would be no less extensive. He
actually claimed the title, if not then, at least a few years later.[46]
We may now for a while leave Gilbert and Cellach and Malchus and
O'Dunan. With Gilbert as legate, and Cellach and Malchus as archbishops;
with dioceses already formed at Limerick and Waterford and in Meath,
probably also at Armagh and Cashel and Wexford; with the great extension
of the movement, and its spread from Munster to Meath and Ulster, all
was ready for the meeting of the Synod whose ordinances should give
definite shape to the policy to be pursued in the future.
III.--The Synod of Rathbreasail
Geoffrey Keating quotes from the lost _Annals of Clonenagh_ an account
of a national Synod or Council held at Rathbreasail in the year
1110.[47] The existing Annals record that a national Council met at
Fiadh meic Oengusa in 1111. With the exception of the _Annals of
Inisfallen_, none of them mention Rathbreasail; but the Inisfallen
annalist tells us that it is another name for Fiadh meic Oengusa.[48] I
shall assume therefore that there were not two national Synods in
successive years, but one; and, following the _Annals of Clonenagh_, I
shall call it the Synod of Rathbreasail, and date it in 1110.
The Synod of Rathbreasail marks the beginning of the second stage of the
Reformation movement. It was convened by the papal legate; its purpose
was the Romanizing of the Irish Church, and, in particular, the
establishment in it of diocesan episcopacy. Fortunately Keating's
excerpts from its Acts give us ample information concerning the canons
which dealt with this matter.
The annalists, as I have said, describe the council as a national
assembly. But we can hardly claim so much for it. It is much more
probable that it was in reality a meeting of the Reforming party. The
first signature appended to its canons was that of Gilbert, who presided
as legate of the Holy See. He was followed by Cellach, "coarb of Patrick
and Primate of Ireland," and Malchus, "archbishop of Cashel," whom we
have known as bishop of Waterford. The signatures of many bishops
followed, but they have not been preserved. We know, however, that
Bishop O'Dunan was present, as was also Murtough O'Brien, king of
Ireland. These were all leaders of the Reforming party; and it is
evident that they guided the deliberations of the Council. Moreover
there were no representatives of the provinces of Connaught and
Leinster, in which as yet, it appears, the Reform movement had not
established itself. That is made clear by notes appended to canons which
specially concerned those provinces. One of them begins thus: "If the
Connaught clergy agree to this ... we desire it, and if they do not"--in
that case they may do as they please, with certain limitations. The
clergy of Leinster are accorded a similar liberty. It is obvious that if
among the members of the Council there had been men who could speak with
authority for the provinces mentioned such notes need not, and
therefore could not, have been written. The Council represented Munster,
Ulster and Meath. It was national, not because it could speak for all
Ireland, but because it made laws for all Ireland.
I must now give an account of those laws, so far as they relate to the
organization of the Church. I follow the _Annals of Clonenagh_, as
reported by Keating: but in two or three places I have been obliged to
amend his text.[49]
The fathers began by appealing to English precedent. "Just as twelve
bishops were fixed under Canterbury in the south of England, and twelve
bishops in the north under the city of York," so it was ordained that
there should be twelve bishops in the south of Ireland, and twelve in
the north. The constitution of the Irish Church was henceforth, it would
seem, to be a copy of that of the English Church. But, as it happens,
neither in 1110 nor in any other year of its history, had the Church of
England twelve sees under Canterbury and twelve under York. How then can
we explain the statement of the Synod? The answer is simple. Bede[50]
preserves a letter of Pope Gregory the Great, written in 601, in which
St. Augustine of Canterbury was directed to consecrate twelve bishops as
his own suffragans. He was also ordered to consecrate a bishop for York,
who, if his mission proved successful, was likewise to consecrate twelve
suffragans, and to be promoted to the dignity of a metropolitan. It is
clear that the Synod found its precedent in this letter, not observing
that Pope Gregory's ordinance was never carried into effect. But they
made another mistake. For Gregory intended that there should be twelve
bishops in the north of England, and twelve in the south, exclusive of
the archbishops, twenty-six in all; while it is evident that the Council
of Rathbreasail intended that there should be twelve bishops in the
north of Ireland, and twelve in the south, including the archbishops,
twenty-four in all. Some one whose lead the Synod followed--probably the
papal legate--had read his Bede with little care. But that is not
surprising. Lanfranc had misread Bede, when on his authority he claimed
to be Primate of Ireland; why should not Gilbert have gone astray in
like fashion? The point to be noticed and emphasized is that the first
act of the Synod was to fix the number of the Irish sees, on the curious
principle that what the wisdom of Pope Gregory held to be good for
England would suit Ireland also.
Apparently the next step in the procedure was to determine the
distribution of the dioceses among the provinces, and to fix the see of
each prospective diocese. Ireland was divided into two portions by a
line running, approximately, from Dublin to Galway. The part to the
north of that line was known as Leath Chuinn, the part to the south as
Leath Mogha. In Leath Chuinn were the provinces of Ulster and Connaught
and the kingdom of Meath; in Leath Mogha were the provinces of Munster
and Leinster. The Synod decreed that there should be five sees in
Ulster, five in Connaught, and two in Meath, making twelve bishoprics
for Leath Chuinn; there were to be seven in Munster and five in
Leinster--twelve bishoprics for Leath Mogha. The names of all these sees
were given in the Acts of the Synod.
Finally the Synod defined the boundaries of the dioceses to which the
sees severally belonged. It is not my purpose to give a minute
description of these boundaries. That would involve an excursus on Irish
topography, which would be, to say the least, out of place. It will
suffice to indicate roughly those of the five dioceses of Ulster. To the
west was what was called the "parish" (_fairche_)[51] of Derry or
Raphoe. It was nearly identical with our diocese of Raphoe. The only
important difference is that it included Inishowen, the district between
Lough Swilly and Lough Foyle, which now belongs to the diocese of Derry.
Next to the parish of Derry or Raphoe the Synod placed the parish of
Ardstraw.[52] Ardstraw never became the see, and the diocese was
subsequently known as "of Derry." It extended eastward to the
Carntougher Mountains, and coincides pretty closely with the present
diocese. It subsequently gained Inishowen from its western neighbour,
and the strip between the Carntougher Mountains and the Bann from its
eastern neighbour. But otherwise it remains much as the Synod of
Rathbreasail determined. Next to it was to be the parish of Connor or
Down. When the portion of it to the west of the Bann was transferred to
Derry, it coincided almost exactly with the modern Down, Connor and
Dromore. On the other hand the parish of Armagh seems originally to have
included the modern county of Monaghan: it has shrunk to little more
than half its size. The parish of Clogher, at first very small, has
extended east and west, and is three times as large as it was intended
to be. On the whole the work of the Synod has stood well the test of
many centuries of history.
It is indeed wonderful that it should have done so. For the method of
the Synod--fixing the number of the dioceses before their boundaries
were discussed--was unstatesmanlike. Always, and necessarily,
ecclesiastical divisions have coincided with civil divisions. We may
find the germ of the rule in the Acts of the Apostles.[53] If this was
inevitable in other lands it was even more inevitable in Ireland in
pre-Norman days. The Irish people was a collection of clans, having, it
is true, certain common institutions, but bound together by no sort of
national constitution, and often at war with each other. If
ecclesiastical divisions were to be permanent in Ireland, they must take
account of the tribal divisions of the country. The primary
ecclesiastical unit must be the territory of a tribe, just as it was the
primary civil unit.[54] But to base the limits of dioceses, consistently
and in every case, on tribal boundaries was impossible when the number
of dioceses was arbitrarily fixed beforehand. It could not be that
exactly the same number of dioceses would suit Ulster as suited Leinster
and Connaught. In one province the tribes would be more or less
numerous, and more or less mutually antagonistic, than in another. By
reason of its method, therefore, the Synod was doomed to fall short of
complete success in its work.
We have instances in Ulster of the soundness of the principle that I
have stated. Take the diocese of Raphoe. It was designed to include
Inishowen. But from a tribal point of view Inishowen (Inis Eoghain)
belonged to the next diocese, which included the tribeland of Tír
Eoghain. Its inhabitants were of the same stock as the Cenél Eoghain,
and were known as the Cenél Eoghain of the Island. So the natural result
followed. Inishowen broke off from the diocese of Raphoe and became part
of the diocese of Derry. When this happened the diocese of Raphoe was
stabilized. It consisted of the land of a single tribe, the Cenél
Conaill; and so henceforth its limits were never altered.
We can easily understand, therefore, that the disregard of tribal
boundaries, forced on it in many cases by its method, was an element of
weakness in the Rathbreasail scheme. And yet it was natural that special
stress should be laid on the arbitrary limitation of sees which was its
main cause. Ireland was overrun with bishops. It is said that over fifty
of them attended the Synod of Rathbreasail; and they represented only
part of the country. But Gilbert had laid down the rule that an
archbishop could not have more than twenty suffragans. On this
principle, if all the existing bishops had been provided with dioceses,
or all the larger tribes had been given bishops, Ireland would have had
not two, but six or seven archbishops: and this would have been a
travesty of Catholic Church order, as it was then understood. It was
essential that the number should be ruthlessly cut down.
But the legislators of Rathbreasail did not entirely ignore tribal
boundaries. On the contrary, so far as the numerical basis of their
scheme permitted, they took them into account. And here we find that the
Synod was confronted with another difficulty. The territories of tribes
were fluctuating quantities. Hence, even if a diocese was the district
of a single tribe, with very definite boundaries, no one could be sure
that in the course of years its limits would not change. Again I take an
example from Ulster. The Synod selected the Carntougher Mountains as the
boundary between the dioceses of Derry and Connor. And wisely. For
between those mountains and the Bann there dwelt a sept--the Fir
Li--whose affinities were altogether with the people to the east of the
river. But only a few years after the Synod that territory was overrun
by the O'Kanes of the Roe Valley, and the Fir Li retreated across the
Bann, never to return. The result followed which might have been
expected. Their territory was transferred from Connor to Derry, and the
Bann to this day is the boundary of the two dioceses.[55]
It may be well, before I pass to another subject, to call attention to
some special features of the Rathbreasail canons.
First, let us note the prominence which is given to Limerick, the
diocese of Gilbert, the president of the Synod. Usually a diocese is
somewhat vaguely defined by four places on its borders. But here no less
than thirteen are named. So full are the indications that a fairly exact
map of the diocese could be drawn. Further, in this diocese alone
mention is made of a Cathedral Church: "The Church of Mary in Limerick
is its principal church."[56] Note the present tense: "The Church of
Mary _is_"--not shall be--"its principal church." We remember that
Gilbert insisted in the _De Statu Ecclesiae_ that a diocese should have
a "pontifical church." Again, the boundaries of this one diocese are
protected by a clause which has no parallel elsewhere: "Whosoever shall
go against these boundaries goes against the Lord, and against Peter the
Apostle, and St. Patrick and his coarb and the Christian Church." Who
but the legate of the Pope would have thus invoked St. Peter?
Surely this portion of the ordinances of the Synod must have been
penned by Gilbert himself. And the whole passage--by the minuteness of
its description of the diocese, by the strength of the terms in which it
is expressed, by the reference to the Cathedral Church as already
existing--suggests that the diocese was formed and organized before the
Synod met, as I have already assumed. We may even suspect that an
attempt had been made to invade it, which Gilbert stoutly resisted,
relying on his legatine authority.
In the list of dioceses there is an omission which demands explanation.
No mention whatever is made of Dublin, the oldest diocese in Ireland.
Not only so; the northern limit of the diocese of Glendalough is marked
by Lambay Island and Greenogue, which lies due west of it in the County
Meath. Thus the diocese of Glendalough, as contemplated by the
Synod--and, it may be added, as it was in fact forty years
later[57]--included the whole of the actually existing diocese of
Dublin. The Danish Christians of Dublin and their Irish bishop are
treated as interlopers; they are absolutely ignored. It may be said that
this was due to the mutual hostility which divided the diocese of Dublin
from the native Church, and to the fact that the bishops of Dublin had
always been subject to Canterbury. But it is not enough to say this; for
the estrangement of Dublin from the Irish is the very thing that has to
be accounted for.
It had its root in the growing prosperity of the Danish city. The Irish
had no towns. Town life was introduced among them by the Norsemen. And
of their towns Dublin was always the chief. By this time it had become
so important that it had good right to be called the metropolis of the
country. And its citizens were thoroughly aware of this. As early as
1074 the burgesses of Dublin and their bishop, Patrick, claimed for it
that title.[58] Now in all reason a metropolis should have a
metropolitan as its bishop; and no doubt the bishops of Dublin thought
themselves _de facto_, if not _de jure_, superior to the other bishops
of Ireland. In fact we find one of them playing the archbishop. We have
two interesting letters of Anselm, written apparently about 1100. One of
them is addressed to Malchus, bishop of Waterford, directing him to
rebuke Samuel O'Hanley, bishop of Dublin, for various irregularities, in
particular for having his cross carried before him like an archbishop;
the other is addressed to Samuel himself, and complains of the same
actions.[59] These proceedings are not likely to have been brought to an
end by Anselm's letters; and we may assume that they were continued as
long as Samuel held the see of Dublin. It was but natural that Cellach
should strongly resent them, for they were disrespectful both to himself
and to the archbishop of Cashel. We are not surprised, therefore, to
find that on the death of Samuel in 1121, eleven years after
Rathbreasail, Cellach tried to get possession of the Church of
Dublin,[60] most probably with the intention of bringing it under the
jurisdiction of the bishop of Glendalough. Nor are we surprised that the
men of Dublin at once replied by electing another bishop and bidding
Ralph of Canterbury to consecrate him if he desired to retain the
suffragan see which they had so long preserved for him.[61] We shall see
hereafter how the bishops of Dublin were at length induced to look with
favour on the Irish Church. Meanwhile we learn that they were not very
obedient suffragans of Canterbury; and we cease to wonder that they were
ignored in the Rathbreasail decrees.
Another feature of the canons of the Synod is worth noting. In several
instances the see of a diocese was not absolutely fixed. Two places were
named, and it was apparently left to the bishop of the future to select
that one of the two which he preferred to be his city. Thus we have a
diocese of Derry or Raphoe, a diocese of Connor or Down, another of
Wexford or Ferns, and so forth. The meaning of this is best seen by
taking a single example. To one of the dioceses of Munster was assigned
the area now occupied by the two dioceses of Waterford and Lismore. It
consisted of the original Danish diocese of Waterford, together with a
much more extensive non-Danish area. Alternative sees were named; it was
described as the parish of Lismore or Waterford. Now Lismore was the
most sacred spot in the enlarged diocese. It was the site of a monastery
founded by St. Mochuta. It was an ideal place for a bishop's see. But it
was doubtless ruled at the moment by an abbot, the coarb of Mochuta.
Unless he was prevailed on to accept episcopal orders, or was deprived
of his authority, a diocesan bishop could not be established there. On
the other hand, Waterford had no sacred traditions; but it was already
the see of a diocese. In default of Lismore it would be a convenient
place for the see. Between Lismore and Waterford the circumstances of
the future must decide. Ultimately, it appears, Malchus retired from the
archbishopric of Cashel, and became bishop of his older diocese, now so
much greater than it had been. He placed his stool, however, not at
Waterford but at Lismore.[62] A similar, but not always identical
course was followed in other such cases.
What the Synod of Rathbreasail actually accomplished was this. It gave
to Ireland a paper constitution of the approved Roman and Catholic type.
But by doing this it had not achieved the purpose of its existence. In
the years that followed, its enactments had to be carried into effect.
And here was the real crux. Before the Church came to be ruled by
diocesan bishops, the existing rulers--the coarbs of church
founders--must be dispossessed of their authority; the numerous bishops
of the old Irish type must be got rid of; the jurisdiction of the new
bishops must be fixed by common consent, or enforced without it; and
revenues must be provided for them. A mere synodal decree could not
accomplish all this. The diocesan system could become a fact throughout
the whole Church, and the last vestiges of the ancient constitution be
made to disappear, only after determined effort, and probably bitter
contention. And when all was done it would certainly be found that the
scheme of dioceses arranged at Rathbreasail had been largely departed
from.
I can best illustrate the nature of the difficulties which had to be
encountered, and the length of time which might be required to overcome
them, by giving a short outline of the history of the forming of the
dioceses of the kingdom of Meath.
In Meath, as we have seen, there were dioceses ruled by bishops before
Rathbreasail. But these dioceses were of small size. It may be doubted
whether most of them fulfilled the condition laid down by Gilbert, that
a bishop should have not less than ten churches within his jurisdiction.
They had therefore to be grouped under a smaller number of prelates.
What had to be accomplished in this case was not so much the clipping of
the wings of the abbots, as the extirpation of the more recently
appointed diocesan bishops. The Synod determined that the kingdom should
be divided into two dioceses, one in the west, the other in the east.
The western see was to be at Clonard, at the moment, as it seems, the
see of O'Dunan, and famed as the site of the great monastery of St.
Finnian, founded in the sixth century; the eastern see was to be at
Duleek, near Drogheda. Now a few months after the Synod of Rathbreasail
there was held at Usnagh a local synod of the men of Meath, at which the
king and many notable persons were present.[63] This synod ordained that
the parishes of Meath should be equally divided between the bishops of
Clonmacnoise and Clonard. It will be observed that the principle of the
Rathbreasail decree was accepted, that there should be two, and only
two, dioceses in Meath. But the change made in the sees is significant.
The Synod of Rathbreasail intended that Clonard should be the see of the
western diocese, which would include Clonmacnoise. The Synod of Usnagh
demanded that Clonmacnoise, founded by one of the most noted of Irish
saints, St. Ciaran, should be one of the surviving sees, and that
Clonard should be the see, not of the western, but of the eastern half
of the kingdom. Thus the Synod of Rathbreasail was at once met with
strenuous and, as it proved, successful opposition in Meath.
And here I may mention another fact. A few years after the Synod we have
proof of the existence of a diocese in the north of the kingdom, which
has not hitherto been mentioned, and which is not named in the
Rathbreasail canons. We know it as the diocese of Kilmore.[64] It may
have been one of O'Dunan's dioceses, or it may have been founded later.
One thing is certain. The diocese formed the territory of a strong
tribe. Consequently it had in it the element of stability. It was never
suppressed: it exists to this day. So far as it was concerned the canons
of Rathbreasail were a dead letter from the beginning.
But let us return to Clonard. It was the business of its successive
bishops, in accordance with the decrees of Usnagh, to annex the small
neighbouring bishoprics of east Meath. They had considerable success. We
possess a list of churches granted by Eugenius, the last Irish bishop of
Clonard, to the monastery of St. Thomas the Martyr, Dublin.[65] They are
scattered over the three deaneries of Dunshaughlin, Skreen and Trim.
Thus Eugenius had absorbed into his diocese the bishoprics of those
three places. Another document tells us that this same Eugenius
consecrated the church of Duleek;[66] which implies that the diocese of
Duleek was also suppressed. Thus by 1191, the year of Eugenius's
death--within eighty years of the Synod of Rathbreasail, and before the
Anglo-Normans had captured the ecclesiastical domination of Meath--the
diocese of Clonard had expanded to four times its original size. Its
bishop ruled the whole area of the modern county of Meath which lies
south of the Boyne and Blackwater.
Simon Rochfort, the first English bishop, stretched his arm further. We
have a charter of his, which may be dated before 1202, confirming to St.
Thomas's Abbey a number of churches in his diocese.[67] It includes
most, if not all, of the churches granted by his predecessor, but adds
others. Among these are some in the deanery of Slane. The bishopric of
Slane had been absorbed.
The rapid extension of his diocese towards the north suggested to
Rochfort the desirability of having for his headquarters a more central
place than Clonard. So in 1202 he translated the see to Newtown, near
Trim,[68] and began to call himself Bishop of Meath. Ten years later, as
we know, this "impudent bishop" captured the diocese of Kells.[69] The
bishop of Meath (no longer of Clonard) from his see at Newtown had the
oversight of nearly the whole of the modern county. Within the confines
of his diocese were the seven older dioceses of Clonard, Dunshaughlin,
Skreen, Trim, Duleek, Slane and Kells. This was probably the whole of
the eastern diocese as designed by the Synod of Usnagh.
But the policy of annexation still went forward apace. Another document
enables us to measure the progress of half a century. It is a concordat
concerning metropolitical visitations, between the archbishop of Armagh
and Rochfort's third successor, Hugh de Tachmon. It is dated 9th April,
1265.[70] The tenor of the concordat does not concern us: it is
important for our purpose because it proves that in 1265 there were
eleven rural deaneries in the diocese of Meath. Four more petty dioceses
had been suppressed, Mullingar, Loxewdy, Ardnurcher and Fore. The
diocese was co-extensive with that of the present day, except that the
diocese of Clonmacnoise--as small in 1265 as it had been in 1100--was
not yet brought in.
Clonmacnoise preserved its independence three centuries longer. It was
incorporated with Meath in 1569. Thus at length the dream of the fathers
of Rathbreasail was fulfilled. There were two dioceses in the ancient
kingdom of Meath--Meath and Kilmore. But neither Duleek nor Clonard nor
Clonmacnoise was a see. From that day to this, in fact, the diocese of
Meath has had no see. And the boundary which parts Meath from Kilmore is
very different from the line which the fathers of Rathbreasail drew
between the dioceses of Clonard and Duleek, or that which the assembly
of Usnagh drew between Clonmacnoise and Clonard.
IV.--St. Malachy's Part in The Reformation
It is not possible, within the limits of this Introduction, to follow
the later stages of the Reformation movement in detail. In the present
section I confine myself to the part which St. Malachy played in its
development.
Malachy was born at Armagh in 1095. He was therefore a mere boy when the
Synod of Rathbreasail met. At the dawn of his manhood he became the
disciple of the recluse Imar O'Hagan. Imar was in sympathy with the aims
of the reformers, and it was probably through his influence that Malachy
became imbued with their principles. He soon attracted the notice of
Cellach, and was by him ordained deacon. He was advanced to the
priesthood about 1119. Shortly afterwards Cellach made the young priest
his vicar. For the next year or two it was Malachy's duty to administer
the diocese of Armagh; and he did so in the most effective--indeed
revolutionary--fashion. He evidently let no man despise his youth. His
purpose, as his biographer tells us, was "to root out barbarous rites,
to plant the rites of the Church." "He established in all the churches
the apostolic sanctions and the decrees of the holy fathers, and
especially the customs of the Holy Roman Church." He introduced the
Roman method of chanting the services of the canonical hours. "He
instituted anew Confession, Confirmation, the Marriage contract, of all
of which those over whom he was placed were either ignorant or
negligent." In a word, Malachy showed himself an ardent reformer.[71]
One wonders how, even with the assistance of Cellach and Imar, a young
man who had never left Armagh could have already become sufficiently
acquainted with the usages of other churches to carry out these sweeping
measures. Perhaps his zeal was not always according to knowledge. But he
soon became aware of his limitations, and determined to seek
instruction. With the consent of Cellach and Imar he betook himself to
Malchus, who had by this time retired from the archbishopric of Cashel
and was settled at Lismore. There Malachy spent three years. During that
period he doubtless increased his knowledge of Roman customs and
principles. But he did more. Cormac MacCarthy, son of the king of
Desmond, was then a refugee in the monastery of Malchus. Between Cormac
and Malachy there grew up a friendship, which proved in later years of
much advantage to the reforming cause.[72]
But at length Malachy's presence was urgently needed in the north, and
he was recalled by Cellach and Imar. What had happened was this. The
coarb of St. Comgall at Bangor, the principal religious site in the
north-east of Ireland, had lately died. Since he ended his days at
Lismore, it may be assumed that he was a friend of Malchus, and of the
movement with which he was identified. At any rate his successor, who
was Malachy's uncle, expressed his willingness to surrender his office
and the site of the monastery to his nephew.[73] Here was an opportunity
to carry into effect one of the canons of Rathbreasail, which had
hitherto been a dead letter, by establishing the diocese of Connor.
Cellach, duly elected coarb of Patrick, and consecrated bishop, had no
doubt been able to organize the diocese of Armagh in accordance with the
Rathbreasail scheme. In like manner such a man as Malachy, enjoying the
prestige which belonged to the coarb of Comgall, if consecrated bishop,
would probably succeed in organizing the diocese of Connor. So in 1124
Malachy journeyed to Bangor, was installed as abbot, and was made bishop
by Cellach.[74] He administered his diocese with the same vigour which
had already characterized his work at Armagh. But it is interesting to
observe how closely he conformed to the old Irish type of bishop, in
spite of his Roman proclivities. At heart he was far less bishop of
Connor than coarb of Comgall, abbot of Bangor. Indeed, in strictness, he
had no right to the title "bishop of Connor"; for Connor was not his
see. He made Bangor his headquarters.[75] Doubtless Malachy preferred
Bangor to the nominal see, because it was consecrated by centuries of
sacred memories, and because as yet he could not place the office of
bishop above that of abbot. He ruled his great newly formed diocese, or
as much of it as he succeeded in ruling, from its remotest corner on the
sea shore, as Aidan ruled Northumbria from Holy Island. There he lived
among his brethren, of whom he gathered a great company. There was no
provision for his mensa, for he was "a lover of poverty." He practised
austere asceticism. Yet he was an active missionary. He travelled
incessantly through the diocese, but always on foot, visiting the towns,
and roaming about the country parts, surrounded by his disciples. He
preached to the people whom he met on his way.[76] Nothing could be
more unlike a medieval bishop of the ordinary kind. At every point we
are reminded of the labours of Aidan and Ceadd and Cedd as they are
described by Bede. But we may be sure that it was precisely because
Malachy was coarb of Bangor, because he lived according to the ancient
Irish ideal of sainthood, that he secured the obedience of the people of
his diocese.
In such work as I have mentioned Malachy was engaged from 1124 to 1127.
In the latter year he was driven out of Bangor by Conor O'Loughlin, king
of the north of Ireland, and a second time betook himself to Lismore.
There he again met Cormac MacCarthy, for that unfortunate prince was
once more taking sanctuary with Malchus. He had succeeded a little while
before to the throne of Desmond, but had been driven out by Turlough
O'Conor, who made his brother king in his stead. But after a few months,
persuaded by the entreaties of Malchus and Malachy, and aided by the
arms of Conor O'Brien, king of Thomond, a nephew of Murtough, Anselm's
correspondent, he made a successful attempt to regain his kingdom.[77]
Then Malachy moved on to Iveragh in the County Kerry, and there, under
Cormac's patronage, he founded a new monastery for his community.[78]
Once again Cormac has friendly intercourse with Malachy, and another
O'Brien is on good terms with the reformers.
It was at Iveragh, two years later, that Malachy received news of the
death of Archbishop Cellach.[79] It was an announcement which must have
caused great anxiety to him and his friends. Who was to succeed to the
primacy?
The importance of the question will become manifest if we recall the
progress which had already been made at Armagh, and what still remained
to be done. When Cellach was elected abbot in 1105, and in the following
year was consecrated bishop, a great point had been gained. For the
first time for 150 years the church of Armagh had a bishop as its ruler.
We may suppose that Cellach soon organized the diocese, the limits of
which were fixed at Rathbreasail. But whatever Gilbert or Malchus might
hold as to the source of his authority, we cannot imagine that the
members of the Church in the diocese based their allegiance to him on
any other ground than the fact that he was their abbot and the coarb of
Patrick. That he was a bishop added nothing, in their view, to his
claims. Moreover Cellach belonged to the family which had long supplied
Armagh with abbots. The abuse of hereditary succession had not
disappeared with his appointment.[80] If his successor was chosen in the
time-honoured way, a member of the coarbial family would certainly be
selected, and in all probability he would be a layman, who would not
accept episcopal orders. In a word, all that had been achieved by the
reformers at the most important ecclesiastical centre in Ireland would
be undone.
Cellach had foreseen this, and accordingly he determined to nominate
Malachy as his successor. "With the authority of Patrick" he laid upon
the nobles, and especially upon "the two kings of Munster," the
obligation of securing that his wish should be carried into effect. The
two kings who were thus charged with a difficult duty were Conor
O'Brien, king of Thomond, the principal representative of the O'Briens,
and Cormac MacCarthy, king of Desmond, Malachy's friend.
From Cellach's point of view the choice of a successor which he had made
was a wise one. Malachy was as zealous a reformer as himself. He was a
man of unusual ability and force of character. Besides, he was
possessed of a personal charm which might in time disarm opposition. He
was already a bishop; therefore, if he were once seated in the chair of
Patrick, the question whether the new coarb should be consecrated would
not arise. More important still, he was not of the coarbial stock; with
his entry into the see the scandal of hereditary succession would come
to an end.
But it was not to be expected that the appointment would be accepted
without strong protest; and at the moment there seemed little prospect
that the scheme of Cellach would attain fruition. There is no need to
enter into the details of the fierce struggle that ensued. It is dealt
with elsewhere.[81] Suffice it to say that by 1137, with the aid of
O'Brien and MacCarthy, and apparently with assistance also from Donough
O'Carroll, king of Oriel, he was undisputed coarb of Patrick and
archbishop of Armagh. The victory was won, and an immense stride had
been made in the Reformation movement.
But Malachy had no mind to spend the rest of his life at Armagh. Five
years before, as the condition of his entry into the fray, he had
stipulated that as soon as he had been accepted as archbishop he should
resign the see and return to his beloved Bangor. So in 1137 he nominated
and consecrated Gelasius as his successor in the primacy, and "returned
to his former parish, but not to Connor." Let me explain this
enigmatical statement. Malachy had had some years' experience of the
people of the diocese of Connor, whom St. Bernard gently describes as
"not men but beasts." He had doubtless discovered that the district
which it included could not be ruled by a single bishop. In fact it
consisted of two tribal territories, Dál Araide in the north, and Ulaid
in the south; and the two tribes which inhabited them were usually
engaged in mutual war. He decided that it should be divided into two
dioceses. He consecrated a bishop for Dál Araide, with his see at
Connor, and himself resumed the oversight of Ulaid, with his see at
Bangor.[82] Thus originated the present dioceses of Down and Connor. In
Malachy's time the boundary between them seems to have run west from
Larne. In the course of centuries it has shifted further south.
This division was a direct violation of the letter of the ordinance of
Rathbreasail; but it did not contravene its spirit. In the letter, which
ignored the civil divisions of the country, the ordinance could not be
obeyed. Malachy adopted a scheme which secured the permanent rule of
diocesan bishops in the district.
Malachy was now, and continued to be till his death, bishop of Down, or
more strictly of Bangor; in the current Irish phrase bishop of Ulaid.
But his activities already extended beyond his diocese. Within the next
two years he succeeded in establishing in actual fact another diocese
which till now had existed only on paper. It was that which the Synod of
Rathbreasail had called the diocese of Clogher, and which we know by the
same name; but which for sixty years or more bore the name of the
diocese of Oriel.
That we may understand his action let us return for a moment to the five
Ulster dioceses as planned at Rathbreasail. In four of them regard was
paid to tribal boundaries. The diocese of Raphoe corresponded to Tír
Conaill, Derry to Tír Eoghain, Armagh to Oriel, while Connor
comprehended the two territories of Dál Araide and Ulaid. The diocese of
Clogher was of necessity the remainder of the province. If it coincided
with a tribal district, that could only happen by chance. In fact it did
not. It was much smaller than the other dioceses. It embraced only the
present barony of Clogher in the county of Tyrone, and the portion of
Fermanagh lying between it and the Erne waterway. It had within it no
element of cohesion. It was most unlikely that it could ever constitute
an ecclesiastical unit, governed by a bishop.
Nevertheless an attempt seems to have been made to consolidate it as a
diocese a few years after Rathbreasail; as might have been expected,
without success. A bishop of Clogher, who apparently had no diocese,
died in 1135. He was succeeded by Christian O'Morgair, brother of
Malachy. He was probably nominated and consecrated by his brother, who
was then titular archbishop of Armagh. Now about this time Donough
O'Carroll, king of Oriel, joined the ranks of the reformers, as we may
suppose under the influence of Malachy. His kingdom included the little
diocese of Clogher; but the main part of it consisted of the present
counties of Monaghan and Louth. Accordingly a bold stroke of policy was
conceived and carried out. The diocese of Clogher was enlarged so as to
cover the greater part of O'Carroll's kingdom. For this purpose the
archbishop of Armagh surrendered a large part of his diocese--the whole
of Monaghan and Louth. Then Christian moved his see from Clogher to the
spot now occupied by the village of Louth. Thus there was constituted a
new diocese, which included the Rathbreasail diocese of Clogher, but was
four times its size, and had its see at Louth. It was known as the
diocese of Oriel. In all this we see plainly the hand of Malachy. Not
long after the removal of the see Christian died, and Malachy selected
and consecrated his successor, one Edan O'Kelly. O'Kelly had a long
episcopate, from 1139 to 1182; and with the help of O'Carroll he
organized his diocese, and gave it a cathedral at Louth with a chapter
of Augustinian canons.[83] Once again Malachy was the maker of a
diocese; and once again, in the interest of stability, he transgressed
the letter of the Rathbreasail canons, while fulfilling their spirit. It
was not till after the coming of the Anglo-Normans that the see was
brought back to Clogher. Subsequently the county of Louth reverted to
Armagh, and the diocese extended to the west. About the year 1250 its
boundaries came to be what they now are.[84]
In 1139, after settling the affairs of the diocese of Oriel, Malachy
left Ireland on an important mission. It will be remembered that Gilbert
had declared that no archbishop could exercise his functions till the
Pope had sent him the pall. That was the current doctrine of the age.
Now neither Cellach, nor Malachy, nor Gelasius, nor Malchus, nor his
successor at Cashel, had received that ornament. They had therefore, in
the strict sense, no right to the title of archbishop. Malachy resolved
to make request to the Pope in person for palls for the two Irish
metropolitans. So he set out from Bangor for Rome.[85] Of his journey it
is unnecessary to say anything here.[86]
At Rome Malachy was received by Pope Innocent II. with great honour. He
confirmed the erection of the metropolitan see of Cashel. But he
politely declined to grant the palls. They must be demanded, he said, by
a council of the bishops, clergy and magnates; and then they would be
given.
But if the Pope refused Malachy's request, he bestowed on him an office,
the securing of which we may conjecture to have been one of the purposes
of his visit to Rome, though St. Bernard does not say so. Gilbert, now
old and infirm, had resigned the see of Limerick, and with it his
legatine commission. Innocent made Malachy papal legate in his
stead.[87]
Thus Malachy returned to Ireland, still bishop of Down indeed, but
virtually chief prelate of the Irish Church. For the following eight
years he laboured with zeal and vigour. St. Bernard unfortunately gives
little information concerning the details of his administrative work as
legate. But he relates one incident which suggests that in this period
Malachy was instrumental in founding another diocese. He nominated and
consecrated the first known bishop of Cork,[88] not improbably with the
intention that he should unite in his own person the two offices of
coarb of Barre, founder of Cork, and diocesan bishop.
And in this connexion it is worth noticing that he was evidently on
friendly terms with Nehemiah, the first known bishop of the neighbouring
diocese of Cloyne.[89] If that diocese was also founded by him he once
again violated the letter of the Rathbreasail canons, for by them Cloyne
was included in the diocese of Emly.
In 1148 Malachy convened a synod at Inispatrick, an island opposite
Skerries, Co. Dublin. This synod demanded the palls in due form, and
sent Malachy to obtain them. But he got no further on his journey than
Clairvaux. There, after celebrating Mass on St. Luke's Day, he was taken
ill of a fever; and there a fortnight later he died in the arms of St.
Bernard, on All Souls' Day, 2nd November, 1148.[90]
Nevertheless the palls came. They were brought to Ireland by a legate
specially commissioned by Pope Eugenius III., John Paparo, cardinal
priest of St. Laurence. A synod was held at Kells to receive them in
March 1152,[91] of which the joint presidents were Paparo, as _legatus a
latere_, and Christian, first abbot of Mellifont, and now bishop of
Lismore, who had lately succeeded Malachy as _legatus natus_.
Of this synod Keating gives a short account, abridged from the _Annals
of Clonenagh_,[92] from which he had also derived his knowledge of the
proceedings at Rathbreasail. He preserves a list of the bishops who
attended. It includes twenty-two names, if we count two vicars who
represented absent bishops. There were besides, as Keating informs us,
five bishops-elect. And there was certainly one bishop of a diocese who
was neither present nor represented, Edan O'Kelly, bishop of Oriel. So
it appears that in 1152 there were at least twenty-eight dioceses in
Ireland--a number considerably larger than was contemplated at
Rathbreasail. The increase in number is partly accounted for by the
presence of the bishop of the recently formed diocese of Kilmore, the
division of the diocese of Connor into Connor and Down, and, a most
striking addition, the inclusion of Gregory, bishop of Dublin, among the
assembled prelates. It is remarkable that the bishop of Kells is not
mentioned, though the synod was held in his own city. How was the bishop
of Dublin induced to throw in his lot with the Irish Church? We shall
see in a moment.
Much business was transacted at this Synod. But that which concerns us
most nearly is the giving of the palls. Cardinal Paparo brought the
Irish bishops more than they had asked for; more indeed than they
desired. He presented, not two palls but four, Dublin and Tuam, as well
as Armagh and Cashel, being recognized as archiepiscopal sees. This
excessive generosity caused much displeasure among the Irish bishops.
"For Ireland," says Keating, apparently paraphrasing the _Annals of
Clonenagh_, "thought it enough to have a pall in the church of Armagh
and a pall in Cashel; and particularly it was in spite of the church of
Armagh and the church of Down that the other palls were given." The
cause of this discontent is not far to seek. The chief gravamen no doubt
was that Dublin was included among the four. The constant friction which
had subsisted for many years between the diocese of Dublin and the Irish
Church sufficiently explains the indignation of the archbishop of
Armagh, aggravated by the fact that the creation of new archbishops
imposed a limit upon his authority. It also enables us to understand why
his displeasure was shared by the Irish generally. That a see whose
bishops had behaved so haughtily in the past should, at the very moment
of its entrance into the Irish Church, receive so signal an honour, long
denied to Armagh and Cashel, and that in the person of its bishop it
should be given jurisdiction over bishops whom till now it had treated
with contempt, could not but be regarded as unreasonable, or even
insulting. But on the other hand, recalling the early history of the
Church in Dublin, we can comprehend why, in spite of all this, special
favour was bestowed upon it. Dublin, as we have seen, was a not too
submissive suffragan of Canterbury. Its ambition was that its bishop
should have the status of a metropolitan. The opportunity had come for
gratifying its desire, and at the same time bringing it under the Irish
ecclesiastical régime. The pall at once separated it from Canterbury and
united it with Ireland. It was the price paid for its submission to the
Primacy of Armagh. Gregory therefore became archbishop of Dublin, and
had the right--which his predecessor had long before illegally
assumed--to have the cross carried before him. With the gift of the pall
Paparo bestowed upon him "the principal part of the bishopric of
Glendalough as his diocese," promising him the remainder on the death of
the bishop who then ruled it. All this was done, we are told, because it
was fitting that the place "in which from ancient time had been the
royal seat and head of Ireland," should be made a metropolitan see.[93]
There was at last one Church in Ireland, which embraced within it not
only the Celtic parts of the island, but all the Danish dioceses as
well. And the whole Church was ruled by the bishops. The Reformation may
not have been complete in every detail--there was indeed much left for
the Anglo-Normans to do--but the Synod of Kells had set the crown on the
work of the Irish reformers. And this consummation was mainly due to the
wisdom and the untiring zeal of St. Malachy of Armagh.
* * * * *
A few words more will suffice to complete this too lengthy
introduction. The _Life of Malachy_ was certainly written before the
Synod of Kells met in March 1152; for Christian, who attended the Synod
as bishop of Lismore, is spoken of in the _Life_ as abbot of
Mellifont.[94] Its earliest possible date is a couple of months after
Malachy's death. The ignorance displayed in § 69[95] of the movements of
the Pope in 1148 is so inexplicable on the assumption of a later date
that it may be assigned to January 1149.[96] In the following
translation the text printed by de Backer[97] is used, with the
exception of a few sentences which have been emended. It does not differ
to any great extent from that of Mabillon.[98] Following de Backer I
have divided the text into chapters, in accordance with the MSS.; but
Mabillon's sections have been retained, as more convenient for
reference, the numbers of de Backer's sections being added within
brackets.
By way of illustration four letters of St. Bernard and his two sermons
on St. Malachy have been added. They are translated from Mabillon's
edition,[99] with some corrections. The dates of these documents are
discussed below.[100]
St. Bernard's numerous quotations from the Bible and other sources are
printed in italics, so far as I have recognized them. The scriptural
allusions are given as nearly as possible in the words of the Authorized
(in the Apocryphal books the Revised) Version, though at times they do
not agree with the Vulgate Latin. Where it has been found necessary to
depart from their renderings, the symbol "vg." follows the references in
the footnotes.
I desire to make grateful acknowledgement of help received from my
friends, of whom I must specially mention Dr. L. C. Purser, Senior
Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, Mr. R. I. Best, the Rev. J. E. L.
Oulton, the Rev. Dr. J. M. Harden and the Rev. Canon C. P. Price. My
wife assisted me in the preparation of the index.
_St. Patrick's Day, 1920._
FOOTNOTES:
[1] See _Life_, §§ 6 (end), 7, 16, 17, 39 with notes, and Additional
Note A.
[2] _E.g._ in the doctrine of the Eucharist and of Baptism. See
_Life_, § 57, and Lanfranc's letter to Donnell in Ussher, 495; _P.L._
cl. 532.
[3] See p. 46, note 1, and Additional Note B.
[4] _Life_, § 19.
[5] R. King, _Memoir Introductory to the Early History of the Primacy
of Armagh_, 1854, p. 22.
[6] See Lawlor, _Psalter and Martyrology of Ricemarch_, vol. i., pp.
ix-xii.
[7] MS. A. 4. 20.
[8] MS. 199.
[9] Cotton MS. Faustina, C. 1, f. 66.
[10] Lawlor, _op. cit._, pp. xii.-xvii.
[11] Lanigan, vol. iii. p. 446; vol. iv. pp. 2-8; Reeves, _On Marianus
Scotus_, extracted from the _Natural History Review and Quarterly
Journal of Science_, July, 1860. B. MacCarthy, _The Codex
Palatino-Vaticanus, No. 830_, 1892, pp. 4 ff.
[12] Below, p. 18, note 6.
[13] See below, p. 47, note 3.
[14] p. 73.
[15] _Chronicle of John of Worcester_, ed. J. R. H. Weaver, 1908, p.
16.
[16] p. 18, note 6.
[17] p. 47, note 3, p. 73, note 1. I can name only three bishops of
Danish sees who were apparently of Danish extraction; and they all
lived at a time when the Reformation was far advanced. They are Erolbh
(Erulf?), bishop of Limerick, who died in 1151, and Tostius of
Waterford and Turgesius of Limerick, who were in office in 1152.
_A.F.M._ 1151, and _Annals of Clonenagh_ quoted in Keating, iii. 317.
[18] Ussher, 491.
[19] Ware, _Bishops_, ed. Harris, p. 309; Eadmer, p. 73.
[20] Ussher, 518; and below, _Life_, § 8.
[21] See p. 47, note 3.
[22] 1115. Eadmer, p. 236. Gougaud (p. 358) infers from this passage
that Limerick was at that time a suffragan see of Canterbury. But this
seems impossible in view of Gilbert's share in the proceedings of the
Synod of Rathbreasail five years earlier. Eadmer is not a very good
witness in such matters, and his language is hardly decisive for two
reasons. (1) It is not clear that he includes Gilbert among the
suffragans who co-operated in the consecration: "Huic consecrationi
interfuerunt et cooperatores extiterunt suffraganei ecclesiae
Cantuariensis, episcopi videlicet hi, Willelmus Wintoniensis, Robertus
Lincoliensis, Rogerus Serberiensis, Johannes Bathoniensis, Urbanus
Glamorgatensis, Gislebertus Lumniensis de Hibernia." (2) The word
"suffragan" is often used as meaning merely an assistant bishop. Thus
in the fifteenth century several bishops of Dromore were "suffragans"
of the archbishop of York; but Dromore was certainly not regarded as
one of his suffragan sees.
[23] Ussher, 532.
[24] See p. xxxvi.
[25] Ussher, 567; _Beati Lanfranci Opera_, ed. J. A. Giles, Oxon.,
1844, vol. i. p. 24.
[26] See Ussher, 490-497; _P.L._ cl. 532, 535, 536. This Donnell was
probably Donnell O'Heney (Ua hEnna), a Munster bishop who died in 1098
(_A. U._).
[27] Ussher, 515-519. The letter to Donnell is also in _P.L._ clix.
262.
[28] Ussher, 520-527; _P.L._ clix. 173, 178, 243.
[29] _Miscellany of Irish Archælogical Society_, vol. i. (1846), p.
136.
[30] Wilkins, _Concilia_, i. 547. In the form in which Rochfort quotes
it the ordinance applies to the whole of Ireland. But we have no
evidence of the transformation of dioceses into deaneries outside
Meath; and it is quite probable that a synod held in Meath would have
in view, in such a decree, only the conditions which prevailed in that
district.
[31] The deanery of Dunshaughlin is now named Ratoath. The deanery of
Kells has been divided into Upper and Lower Kells.
[32] The cogency of this argument is enhanced when we observe that
there is strong independent evidence for the existence in the twelfth
century of one of the six dioceses--the diocese of Kells. (_a_) Up to
the latter part of the sixteenth century (1583) there was an
archdeacon of Kells, as well as an archdeacon of Meath; the
jurisdiction of an archdeacon (at any rate in Ireland) seems to have
been always originally co-extensive with a diocese. The first known
archdeacon of Kells was Adam Petit who was in office in 1230 (_R.T.A._
279; _C.M.A._ i. 101); but it is unlikely that he had no predecessors.
(_b_) Among the prelates who greeted Henry II. at Dublin in 1171 was
Thaddaeus, bishop of Kells (Benedict of Peterborough (R. S.), i. 26).
(_c_) In the time of Innocent III. (1198-1216) the question was raised
in the papal curia whether the bishop of Kells was subject to the
archbishop of Armagh or the archbishop of Tuam (Theiner, p. 2). (_d_)
The bishop of Kells is mentioned in a document of the year 1202 (_Cal.
of Docts. Ireland_, i. 168). (_e_) A contemporary note records the
suppression of the bishopric: "When a Cistercian monk ... had been
elected and consecrated bishop of Kells by the common consent of the
clergy and people, and had been confirmed by the Pope, the impudent
bishop of Meath cast him out with violence and dared to [add] his
bishopric to his own" (_C.M.A._ ii. 22). This statement implies that
the dispossessed bishop ruled over a diocese. Moreover, when we
remember that the see was certainly suppressed before Rochfort's Synod
of 1216, that Rochfort was the first person who assumed the title
"bishop of Meath" in the modern sense, and that a bishop of Kells died
in 1211 (_A.L.C._), we need not hesitate to conclude that the
"impudent bishop" was Rochfort himself, and that the suppression was
accomplished about 1213.
[33] _I.e._ dioceses. This synod is mentioned in _A.T._, _A.I._ and
the _Annals of Boyle_. Particulars of its Acts and of the persons
present at it are given in _C.S._ and _D.A.I._ _C.S._ has "parish" in
the singular. But this does not seem to yield good sense; for the
whole extent of the kingdom of Meath could scarcely have been called a
"parish" in the twelfth century. I therefore read "parishes." The
singular may have been substituted for the plural at a later time,
when the kingdom (or the greater part of it) included only the
dioceses of Meath and Clonmacnoise, and their earlier history was
forgotten. Cp. the unhistorical statement of St. Bernard about Down
and Connor in _Life_, § 31. _D.A.I._ have an anomalous form
(_faircheadh_), which may have come from either the singular
(_fairche_) or the plural (_faircheadha_) in the exemplar, but more
probably from the latter.
[34] p. xxiv. f.
[35] See p. 47, note 3.
[36] Ussher, 513.
[37] A small portion of the present diocese of Limerick lies north of
the Shannon.
[38] Ussher, 501 ff.; _P.L._ clix. 995.
[39] See p. 65, note 1.
[40] See Additional Note B, pp. 164, 166. The events of Cellach's life
are gathered from _A. U._
[41] _Life_, § 19.
[42] See MacCarthy's Note in _A. U._ 1101.
[43] _A.F.M._, Keating, iii. 297. Keating seems to confuse the events
of 1101 with those of 1106.
[44] _Life_, § 33.
[45] See p. 18, note 6.
[46] See next page.
[47] Keating, iii. 299 ff. The date is there misprinted 1100.
[48] I formerly disputed this identification, on the ground that the
archbishop of Cashel who was present at Fiadh meic Oengusa was O'Dunan
(G. T. Stokes, _Ireland and the Celtic Church_, ed. 6, 1907, p. 372).
I am now convinced that he was archbishop of Cashel. I was not then
aware that all MSS. of Keating date the Synod of Rathbreasail in 1110.
[49] On p. 298 read _no_ (_or_) for _is_ (_and_) before _Dun dá
Leathghlas_; and on p. 306 _chathar_ for _chuigear ar fhichid_ (i.e.
_twenty-four_ for _twenty-five_). On p. 306 a portion of the note on
the Leinster diocese has evidently dropped out, which should be
restored to bring it into conformity with the corresponding passage on
p. 302.
[50] _H.E._ i. 29.
[51] _I.e._ diocese.
[52] The parish (using the word in its modern sense) in which is
Newtown Stewart, co. Derry.
[53] Ramsay, _Paul the Traveller_ (1907), p. 173.
[54] Some changes of phraseology might have been made here and
elsewhere if Professor MacNeill's _Phases of Irish History_ (1919) had
come into my hands before this volume went to press. But they would
not have affected the argument.
[55] See _Irish Church Quarterly_, vol. x. p. 234.
[56] Agus is é teampull Muire i Luimneach a príomheaglais.
[57] When Cardinal Paparo came to Ireland in 1151 he found "a see
constituted at Dublin in the diocese of Glendalough."--_Crede Mihi_
(ed. Gilbert), p. 11.
[58] Ussher, 488 (_P.L._ cl. 534), 564.
[59] _Ibid._ 528, 530; _P.L._ clix. 109, 216.
[60] See p. 20, note 3.
[61] See p. xxii.
[62] See p. 18, note 6.
[63] See above, p. xxviii.
[64] There was a bishop of Breifne (_i.e._ Kilmore) in 1136 (_A.T._).
[65] _R.T.A._ p. 269.
[66] _Ibid._ p. 259.
[67] _Ibid._ p. 241.
[68] _Cal. of Papal Letters_, v. 75. For date see _Cal. of Documents,
Ireland_, i. 168.
[69] See p. xxviii, note 1.
[70] _R.T.A._ p. 71.
[71] _Life_, §§ 4-7.
[72] _Life_, §§ 8 f., and p. 21, note 1.
[73] See _Life_, § 12, and p. 27, note 1.
[74] See _Life_, § 16, and notes.
[75] p. 33, note 1.
[76] _Life_, §§ 16, 17.
[77] See _Life_, § 9, and notes.
[78] _Life_, § 18.
[79] _Ibid._ § 19.
[80] See p. xv, and Additional Note B.
[81] _Life_, §§ 20-31, with notes, and Additional Note C.
[82] §§ 31, 32.
[83] See _Life_, § 34 and notes.
[84] For a fuller account of the beginnings of the diocese of Clogher
see _L.A.J._ vol. iv. pp. 129-159. To the reasons there given for
believing that Christian transferred the see from Clogher to Louth
should be added the fact that in Tundale (p. 54) he is called
_Lugdunensis episcopus_.
[85] _Life_, §§ 33, 34.
[86] _Ibid._ §§ 35-41. The reader may be reminded, however, that the
two visits of Malachy to Clairvaux, in the course of this journey,
produced the friendship between him and St. Bernard, which had its
twofold issue in the composition of the important documents included
in this volume, and the introduction of the Cistercian Order into
Ireland.
[87] _Life_, § 38.
[88] § 51.
[89] § 47.
[90] _Life_, §§ 67-75.
[91] There was no unnecessary delay on the part of the Pope in sending
the palls. After the death of Malachy a deputation was sent from
Ireland to Rome to demand them. Paparo set out to confer them, and
reached England in 1150; but King Stephen would not allow him to
proceed to Ireland except on terms which he could not accept. (John of
Hexham, p. 326; _Historia Pontificalis_ in _M.G.H._ xx. 539 f.)
[92] Vol. iii. p. 313 ff.
[93] See Letter of Pope Innocent III. to Henry of London, 6 Oct. 1216,
in _Crede Mihi_ (ed. Gilbert), p. 11.
[94] §§ 14, 52.
[95] See p. 122, note 1.
[96] Cp. _R.I.A._ xxxv. 258 ff. This conclusion is corroborated by
Tundale's Vision, which seems to have been written early in 1149 (see
Friedel and Meyer, _La Vision de Tondale_, 1907, pp. vi-xii; _Rev.
Celt._ xxviii. 411). The writer speaks of the _Life of Malachy_ as
already written, and in course of transcription (Tundale, p. 5, 'cuius
uitam ... Bernhardus ... transscribit'). He may have derived his
erroneous statement (_ibid._) that Pope Eugenius went _to Rome_ in the
year of Malachy's death from St. Bernard: see p. 122, note 1.
[97] _AA.SS._, Nov., xii. 1., 143-146.
[98] _Sancti Bernardi Abbatis Claræ-vallensis Opera Omnia_, ed. J.
Mabillon, 1839, vol. i. 2, cols. 1465-1524. Reprinted _P.L._ clxxxii.
1073-1118.
[99] _Op. cit._ i. 2, 2221-2231; i. 1, 341, 356, 357, 374; reprinted
in _P.L._ clxxxiii. 481-490; clxxxii. 545 f., 558 f., 579 f.
[100] See notes on pp. 131, 133 f., 137, 141, 157.
THE LIFE OF ST. MALACHY
PREFACE
1. It is indeed always worth while to portray the illustrious lives of
the saints, that they may serve as a mirror and an example, and give, as
it were, a relish to the life of men on earth. For by this means in some
sort they _live_ among us, even _after death_,[101] and many of those
who _are dead while they live_[102] are challenged and recalled by them
to true life. But now especially is there need for it because holiness
is rare, and it is plain that our age is lacking in men. So greatly, in
truth, do we perceive that lack to have increased in our day that none
can doubt that we are smitten by that saying, _Because iniquity shall
abound the love of many shall wax cold_;[103] and, as I suppose, he has
come or is at hand of whom it is written, _Want shall go before his
face_.[104] If I mistake not, Antichrist is he whom famine and sterility
of all good both precedes and accompanies. Whether therefore it is the
herald of one now present or the harbinger of one who shall come
immediately, the _want_ is evident. I speak not of the crowd, I speak
not of the vile multitude of _the children of this world_:[105] I would
have you lift up your eyes upon the very _pillars_[106] of the Church.
Whom can you show me, even of the number of those who seem to be _given
for a light to the Gentiles_,[107] that in his lofty station is not
rather a smoking wick than a blazing lamp? And, says One, _if the light
that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness_![108] Unless
perchance, which I do not believe, you will say that they shine who
_suppose that gain is godliness_;[109] who in the Lord's inheritance
_seek not the things which are_ the Lord's, but rather _their own_.[110]
Why do I say _their own_? He would be perfect and holy, even while he
seeks his own and retains his own, who should restrain his heart and
hands from the things of others. But let him remember, who seems to
himself to have advanced perhaps thus far, that the same degree of
holiness is demanded even of a gentile.[111] Are not _soldiers_ bidden
to _be content with their wages_ that they may be saved?[112] But it is
a great thing for a doctor of the Church if he be as one of the
soldiers; or, _if_, in truth (as the prophet speaks to their reproach),
_it be as with the people so with the priest_.[113] Hideous! Is it so
indeed? Is he rightly to be esteemed highest who, falling from the
highest rank can scarce cleave to the lowest, that he be not engulfed in
the abyss? Yet how rare is even such a man among the clergy! Whom,
likewise, do you give me who is content with necessaries, who despises
superfluities? Yet the law has been enjoined beforehand by the Apostles
on the successors of the Apostles, _Having_ food _and_ raiment, _let us
be therewith content_.[114] Where is this rule? We see it in books, but
not in men. But you have [the saying] about the righteous man, that _the
law of his God is in his heart_,[115] not in a codex. Nor is that the
standard of perfection. The perfect man is ready to forgo even
necessaries. But that is beside the mark.[116] Would that some limit
were set on superfluous things! Would that our desires were not
infinite! But what? Perhaps you might find one who can achieve this. It
would indeed be difficult; but [if we find him] see what we have done.
We were seeking for a very good man, a deliverer of many; and lo, we
have labour to discover one who can save himself. The very good man
to-day is one who is not utterly bad.
2. Wherefore, _since the godly man has ceased_[117] from the earth, it
seems to me that I do not employ myself to no purpose when I recall to
our midst, from among those _who were redeemed from the earth_,[118]
Bishop Malachy, a man truly holy, and a man, too, of our own time, of
singular wisdom and virtue. _He was a burning and a shining light_;[119]
and it has not been quenched, but only removed. Who would with good
right be angry with me if I move it back again? Yes indeed, neither the
men of my own age, nor any succeeding generation should be wanting in
gratitude to me if by my pen I recall one whom the course of nature has
borne away; if I restore to the world one _of whom the world was not
worthy_;[120] if I preserve for the memory of men one _whose memory may
be blessed_[121] to all who shall deign to read; if while I rouse my
sleeping friend, _the voice of the turtle be heard in our land_[122]
saying, _Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world_.[123]
Then again, he was buried among us;[124] this duty is eminently ours.
Nay, is it not mine, inasmuch as that holy man included me among his
special friends, and in such regard that I may believe that I was second
to none _in that respect of glory_?[125] Nor do I find that intercourse
with holiness so eminent misses its reward; I have already received the
first-fruits. He was near the end; nay, rather, near the beginning,
according to the saying, _when a man hath finished then is he but at the
beginning_.[126] I ran to him that _the blessing of him that was ready
to_ die might _come upon me_.[127] Already he could not move his other
limbs; but, mighty to give blessing, he raised his hands upon my head
and blessed me.[128] I have _inherited the blessing_;[129] how then can
I be silent about him? Finally, you enjoin me to undertake this task,
Abbot Congan,[130] my reverend brother and sweet friend, and with you
also (as you write from Ireland) _all_ that _Church of the saints_[131]
to which you belong.[132] I obey with a will, the more so because you
ask not panegyric but narrative. I shall endeavour that it may be
chaste and clear, informing the devout, and not wearying the fastidious.
At any rate the truth of my narrative is assured, since it has been
communicated by you;[133] and beyond doubt you assert nothing but things
of which you have most certain information.
_Here ends the Prologue._
FOOTNOTES:
[101] Ecclus. xlviii. 12 (vg.).
[102] 1 Tim. v. 6. Cp. Rev. iii. 1.
[103] Matt. xxiv. 12.
[104] Job xli. 22 (vg.).
[105] Luke xvi. 8.
[106] Gal. ii. 9.
[107] Isa. xlix. 6.
[108] Matt. vi. 23.
[109] 1 Tim. vi. 5.
[110] Phil. ii. 21; 1 Cor. xiii. 5.
[111] Cp. Matt. v. 47.
[112] Luke iii. 14.
[113] Isa. xxiv. 2; Hos. iv. 9 (inexact quotation).
[114] 1 Tim. vi. 8 (inexact quotation).
[115] Ps. xxxvii. 31.
[116] _Gratis._
[117] Ps. xii. 1.
[118] Rev. xiv. 3.
[119] John v. 35.
[120] Heb. xi. 38.
[121] Ecclus. xlv. 1.
[122] Cant. ii. 12. For the meaning compare Cant. lix. 3: The voice of
the turtle "is a sign that winter is past, proclaiming nevertheless
that the time of pruning has come.... The voice, more like one who
groans than one who sings, admonishes us of our pilgrimage." After
Eugenius III. had visited Clairvaux St. Bernard wrote, "The voice of
the turtle has been heard in our chapter. We had great joy and
delight." (_Ep. 273._)
[123] Matt. xxviii. 20.
[124] That is, at Clairvaux. See § 75.
[125] Apparently a confused reference to 2 Cor. iii. 10; xi. 17 (vg.).
[126] Ecclus. xviii. 7 (inexact quotation).
[127] Job xxix. 13.
[128] See § 73, end.
[129] 1 Pet. iii. 9.
[130] This abbot, to whom the _Life_ is dedicated, belonged to the
Cistercian Order, as the words "reverend brother" imply. He may
therefore be identified with Congan, abbot of the Cistercian monastery
of the Suir, mentioned in § 64. That he was personally known to St.
Bernard is clear; and it is probable that he was one of the Irishmen
who by Malachy's desire were instructed at Clairvaux (§ 39). Thady
Dowling (_Annals_, _s.a._ 1147) identifies him with "Cogganus," abbot
of Killeshin, near Carlow, stating on the authority of Nicholas
Maguire that he wrote the _gesta_ of Malachy and Bernard. Though this
statement is probably not accurate, it is possible that our Congan was
abbot of Killeshin before he became a Cistercian.
[131] Ecclus. xxxi. 11 (vg.).
[132] _Vestra illa omnis ecclesia sanctorum._ We should perhaps
render, "the whole church of holy persons over which you preside,"
_i.e._ Congan's convent. Elsewhere in the _Life_, _ecclesia_ is used
for a local community, such as the church of Armagh (§ 20, etc). But
see Serm. i. § 3. Vacandard understands the phrase to mean "the
Cistercian communities of Ireland" (_R.Q.H._ lii. 48).
[133] _Vobis_ (pl.); _i.e._ Congan and others in Ireland.
_Here begins the life of Malachy the Bishop_
CHAPTER I
_The early life of Malachy. Having been admitted to Holy Orders he
associates with Malchus_
[Sidenote: 1095.]
1. Our Malachy, born in Ireland,[134] of a barbarous people, was brought
up there, and there received his education. But from the barbarism of
his birth he contracted no taint, any more than the fishes of the sea
from their native salt. But how delightful to reflect, that uncultured
barbarism should have produced for us so worthy[135] _a fellow-citizen
with the saints and member of the household of God_.[136] He who brings
_honey out of the rock and oil out of the flinty rock_[137] Himself did
this. His parents,[138] however, were great both by descent and in
power, _like unto the name of the great men that are in the earth_.[139]
Moreover his mother,[140] more noble in mind than in blood, took pains,
_in the very beginning of his ways_,[141] _to show_ to her child _the
ways of life_,[142] esteeming this knowledge of more value to him than
the empty knowledge of the learning of this world. For both, however, he
had aptitude in proportion to his age. In the schools _he was taught_
learning, at home _the fear of the Lord_,[143] and by daily progress he
duly responded to both teacher and mother.[144] For indeed he was
endowed from the first with a _good spirit_,[145] in virtue of which he
was a docile boy and very lovable, wonderfully gracious to all in all
things. But he was [now] drinking, instead of milk from the breast of a
mother, _the waters of saving wisdom_,[146] and day by day he was
increasing in discretion. In discretion, shall I say, or in holiness? If
I say both, I shall not regret it, _for I should say the truth_.[147] He
behaved as an old man, a boy in years without a boy's playfulness. And
when because of this he was regarded with reverence and astonishment by
all, he was not found on that account, as commonly happens, more
arrogant, but rather quiet and subdued in _all meekness_.[148] Not
impatient of rule, not shunning discipline, not averse from reading,
not, therefore, eager for games--so especially dear to the heart of boys
of that age. _And he advanced beyond all of his own age_[149] in that
learning, at least, which suited his years. For in discipline of morals
and advance in virtues in a short time he even outshone _all his
instructors_.[150] His _unction_,[151] however, rather than his mother,
was his teacher. Urged by it he exercised himself not slothfully also in
divine things, to seek solitude, _to anticipate vigils_,[152] to
_meditate in the law_,[153] to eat sparingly, to pray frequently, and
(because on account of his studies he had not leisure to frequent the
church, and from modesty would not) to _lift up holy hands
everywhere_[154] to heaven; but only where it could be done
secretly--for already he was careful to avoid vainglory, that poison of
virtues.[155]
2. There is a hamlet near the city in which the boy studied,[156]
whither his teacher was wont to go often, accompanied by him alone. When
they were going there both together, as he related afterwards, he would
_step back, stop a moment_,[157] and standing behind his teacher, when
he was not aware of it, _spread forth his hands toward heaven_,[158] and
quickly send forth a prayer, as if it were a dart; and, thus
dissembling, once more would follow the teacher. By such a pious trick
the boy often deceived him who was his companion as well as teacher. It
is not possible to mention all the qualities which adorned his earlier
years with the hue of a good natural disposition; we must hasten to
greater and more useful matters. One further incident, however, I
relate because, in my judgement, it yielded a sign, not only of good,
but also of great hope in the boy. Roused once on a time by the
reputation of a certain teacher, famous in the studies which are called
liberal, he went to him desiring to learn. For indeed he was now
grasping after the last opportunities of boyhood, and was longing
eagerly for such learning. But when he went into the house he saw the
man playing with an awl, and with rapid strokes making furrows in the
wall in some strange fashion. And shocked at the bare sight, because it
smacked of levity, the serious boy dashed away from him, and did not
care even to see him from that time forward. Thus, though an avid
student of letters, as a lover of virtue he esteemed them lightly in
comparison with that which was becoming. By such preliminary exercises
the boy was being prepared for the conflict which awaited him in more
advanced[159] age; and already in his own person he was challenging the
adversary. Such, then, was the boyhood of Malachy. Moreover he passed
through his adolescence with like simplicity and purity; except that as
_years_ increased, there _increased_ also for him _wisdom and favour
with God and man_.[160]
3. From this time, that is, from his early adolescence, _what was in the
man_[161] began to appear more plainly, and it came to be seen that _the
grace of God which was in him was not in vain_.[162] For the
_industrious young man_,[163] seeing how _the world lieth in
wickedness_,[164] and considering what sort of spirit _he had received_,
said within himself, "It is _not the spirit of this world_.[165] What
have the two in common?[166] One has no _communion_ with the other any
more than _light with darkness_.[167] But my spirit _is of God_, and _I
know the things that are freely given me_[168] in it. From it I have
innocence of life till now, from it the ornament of continence, from it
hunger for _righteousness_,[169] from it also that _glory of mine_, by
so much more secure because it is more secret, _the testimony of my
conscience_.[170] None of these is safe for me under _the prince of this
world_.[171] Then, _I have this treasure in an earthen vessel_.[172] I
must take heed lest it should strike against something and be broken,
and the _oil of gladness_[173] which I carry be poured out. And in truth
it is most difficult not to strike _against something amid_ the stones
and rocks _of this_ crooked and winding _way and life_.[174] Must I thus
in a moment lose together all _the blessings of goodness with which_ I
have been _prevented_[175] from the beginning? Rather do I resign them,
and myself with them, to Him from whom they come. Yea, and I am His. I
_lose my_ very _soul_[176] for a time that I may not lose it for ever.
And what I am and all that I have, where can they be as safe as in the
hand of their Author? Who so concerned to preserve, so powerful to hold,
so faithful to restore? He will preserve in safety. He will restore in
good time. Without hesitation I give myself to serve Him by His gifts. I
cannot lose aught of all that I spend on my labour of piety. Perchance I
may even hope for some greater boon. He who gives freely is wont to
repay with usury. So it is. He will even heap up and _increase virtue in
my soul_."[177]
So he thought--and did; _knowing that_ apart from deeds _the thoughts of
man are vanity_.[178]
[Sidenote: c. 1112.]
4. (3) There was a man in the city of Armagh,[179] where Malachy was
brought up--a holy man and of great austerity of life, a pitiless
_castigator of his body_,[180] who had a cell near the church.[181] In
it he abode, _serving God with fastings and prayers day and night_.[182]
To this man Malachy betook himself to receive a rule[183] of life from
him, who had condemned himself while alive to such sepulture. And note
his humility. From his earliest age he had had God as his teacher--there
is no doubt of it--in the art of holiness; and behold, he became once
more the disciple of a man, himself a man _meek and lowly in
heart_.[184] If we did not know it, by this one deed he himself gave us
proof of it. Let them read this who attempt to teach what they have not
learned, _heaping to themselves_ disciples,[185] though they have never
been disciples, _blind leaders of the blind_.[186] Malachy, _taught of
God_,[187] none the less sought a man to be his teacher, and that
carefully and wisely. By what better method, I ask, could he both give
and receive a proof of his progress? If the example of Malachy _is_ for
them _a very small thing_,[188] let them consider the action of Paul.
Did not he judge that his _Gospel_, though he had _not received it of
man but_ from _Christ_,[189] _should be discussed_ with men, _lest by
any means he was running or had run in vain_?[190] Where he was not
confident, neither am I. If any one be thus confident[191] let him take
heed lest it be not so much confidence as rashness. But these matters
belong to another time.
5. Now, however, the rumour of what had happened went through the city,
and it was universally stirred by this new and unexpected event. All
were amazed, and wondered at his virtue, all the more because it was
unusual in a rude people. You would see that then _thoughts were being
revealed out of the hearts of many_.[192] The majority, considering the
act from a human standpoint, were lamenting and grieving that a youth
who was an object of love and delight to all had given himself up to
such severe labours. Others, suspecting lightness on account of his
age, doubted whether he would persevere, and feared a fall. Some,
accusing him of rashness, were in fact highly indignant with him because
he had undertaken a difficult task, beyond his age and strength, without
consulting them. But without counsel he did nothing; for he had counsel
from the prophet who says, _It is good for a man that he bear the yoke
in his youth_, and adds, _He sitteth alone and keepeth silence because
he hath borne it upon him._[193] The youth sat at the feet of Imar (for
that was the man's name) and either _learned obedience_[194] or showed
that he had learnt it. He sat as one that was at rest, as meek, as
humble. _He sat and kept silence_,[195] knowing, as the prophet says,
that _silence is the ornament of righteousness_.[196] _He sat_ as one
that perseveres, _he was silent_ as one that is modest, except that by
that silence of his he was speaking, with holy David, in the ears of
God: _I am a youth and despised, yet do not I forget thy precepts._[197]
And for a time _he sat alone_, because he had neither companion nor
example; for who before Malachy even thought of attempting the most
severe discipline inculcated by the man? It was held by all indeed to be
wonderful, but not imitable. Malachy showed that it was imitable by the
mere act of sitting and keeping silence. In a few days he had imitators
not a few, stirred by his example. So he who at first _sat alone_[198]
and the only son of his father, became now one of many, from being _the
only-begotten_[199] became _the firstborn among many brethren_.[200] And
as he was before them in conversion,[201] so was he more sublime than
they in conversation; and he who came before all, in the judgement of
all was eminent above all in virtue. And he seemed both to his
bishop[202] and to his teacher,[203] worthy to be promoted to the degree
of deacon. _And they constrained him._[204]
[Sidenote: 1119(?)]
[Sidenote: 1120.]
6. (4) From this time onwards the Levite[205] of the Lord publicly
girded himself to every work of piety, but more especially to those
things in which there seemed some indignity. In fact it was his greatest
care to attend to the burial of the dead poor,[206] because that
savoured not less of humility than of humanity. Nor did _temptation_
fail to test our modern Tobit,[207] and, as in the old story, it came
from a woman,[208] or rather from the serpent through a woman.[209] His
sister,[210] abhorring the indignity (as it seemed to her) of his
office, said: "What are you doing, madman? _Let the dead bury their
dead._"[211] And she attacked him daily with this _reproach_.[212] But
he _answered the foolish_ woman _according to her folly_,[213] "Wretched
woman, you preserve the sound of the _pure word_,[214] but you are
ignorant of its force." So he maintained with devotion, and exercised
unweariedly the ministry which he had undertaken under compulsion. For
that reason also they[215] deemed that the office of the priesthood
should be conferred upon him. And this was done. But when he was
ordained priest he was about twenty-five years old.[216] And if in both
his ordinations the rule of the Canons seems to have been somewhat
disregarded--as indeed does seem to have been the case, for he received
the Levitical ministry before his twenty-fifth, and the dignity of the
priesthood before his thirtieth year[217]--it may well be ascribed to
the zeal of the ordainer and the merits of him who was ordained.[218]
But for my part, I consider that such irregularity should neither be
condemned in the case of a saint, nor deliberately claimed by him who is
not a saint. Not content with this the bishop also committed to him his
own authority[219] _to sow the_ holy _seed_[220] in a _nation_ which was
not _holy_,[221] and to give to a people rude and living _without
law_,[222] the law of life and of discipline. He received the command
with all alacrity, even as he was _fervent in spirit_,[223] not
hoarding up his talents, but eager for profit from them.[224] And
behold he began to _root out_ with the hoe of the tongue, _to destroy_,
_to scatter_,[225] day by day making _the crooked straight and the rough
places plain_.[226] _He rejoiced as a giant to run_ everywhere.[227] You
might call him a consuming _fire_ burning _the briers_ of crimes.[228]
You might call him _an axe_ or _a mattock casting down_[229] evil
plantings.[230] He extirpated barbaric rites, he planted those of the
Church. All out-worn superstitions (for not a few of them were
discovered) he abolished, and, wheresoever he found it, every sort of
malign influence _sent by evil angels_.[231]
7. In fine whatsoever came to his notice which was irregular or
unbecoming or perverse his _eye did not spare_;[232] but as the hail
scatters the _untimely figs_ from _the fig-trees_,[233] and as _the wind
the dust from the face of the earth_,[234] so did he strive with all his
might to drive out before his face and destroy entirely such things from
his people. And in place of all these the most excellent legislator
delivered the heavenly laws. He made regulations full of righteousness,
full of moderation and integrity. Moreover in all churches he ordained
the apostolic sanctions and the decrees of the holy fathers, and
especially the customs of the holy Roman Church.[235] Hence it is that
to this day there is chanting and psalmody in them at the canonical
hours after the fashion of the whole world. For there was no such thing
before, not even in the city.[236] He, however, had learnt singing in
his youth, and soon he introduced song into his monastery,[237] while as
yet none in the city, nor in the whole bishopric, could or would sing.
Then Malachy instituted anew[238] the most wholesome usage of
Confession,[239] the Sacrament of Confirmation, the Marriage
contract--of all of which they were either ignorant or negligent.[240]
And let these serve as an example of the rest, for [here] and through
the whole course of the history we omit much for the sake of brevity.
8. (5). Since he had a desire and a very great zeal for the honouring of
the divine offices and the veneration of the sacraments, lest by chance
he might ordain or teach anything concerning these matters otherwise
than that which was in accordance with the rite of the universal Church,
it came into his mind to visit Bishop Malchus,[241] that he might give
him fuller information on all points. He was _an old man, full of
days_[242] and virtues, and _the wisdom of God was in him_.[243] He was
of Irish nationality, but had lived in England in the habit and rule of
a monk in the monastery of Winchester, from which he was promoted to be
bishop in Lismore,[244] a city of Munster, and one of the noblest of the
cities of that kingdom. There so great grace was bestowed upon him from
above that he was illustrious, not only for life and doctrine, but also
for signs. Of these I set down two as examples, that it may be known to
all what sort of preceptor Malachy had in the knowledge of holy things.
He healed a boy, who was troubled with a mental disorder, one of those
who are called lunatics, in the act of confirming him with the holy
unction. This was so well known and certain that he soon made him porter
of his house, and the boy lived in good health in that office till he
reached manhood. He restored hearing to one who was deaf; in which
miracle the deaf person acknowledged a wonderful fact, that when the
saint put his fingers into his ears on either side he perceived that
two things like little pigs came out of them. For these and other such
deeds, his fame increased and he won a great name; so that Scots[245]
and Irish flowed together to him and he was reverenced by all as the one
father of all.
[Sidenote: 1121]
When therefore Malachy, having received the blessing of Father Imar, and
having been sent by the bishop,[246] came to him, after a prosperous
journey, he was kindly received by the old man; and he remained with him
for some years,[247] in order that by staying so long he might draw
fuller draughts from his aged breast, knowing that which is written,
_With the ancient is wisdom._[248] But I suppose that another cause of
his long sojourn was that the great Foreseer of all things would have
His servant Malachy become known to all in a place to which so many
resorted, since he was to be useful to all. For he could not but be dear
to those who knew him. In fact one thing happened in that period, by
which in some measure he made manifest to men what had been known to
God as being in him.
[Sidenote: 1127]
9. A conflict having taken place between the king of South
Munster[249]--which is the southern part of Ireland--and his
brother,[250] and the brother being victorious, the king, driven from
his kingdom, sought refuge with Bishop Malchus.[251] It was not,
however, in order that with his help he should recover the kingdom; but
rather the devout prince _gave place unto wrath_[252] and made a virtue
of necessity,[253] choosing to lead a private life. And when the bishop
was preparing to receive the king with due honour, he declined it,
saying that he preferred to be as one of those poor brothers who
consorted with him, to lay aside his royal state, and to be content with
the common poverty, rather to await the will of God than to get back his
kingdom by force; and that he would not for his earthly honour _shed
man's blood_,[254] since it would _cry unto_ God against him _from the
ground_.[255] When he heard this the bishop rejoiced greatly, and with
admiration for his devotion satisfied his desire. Why more? The king is
given a poor house for his dwelling, Malachy for his teacher, bread with
salt and water for his food. Moreover for dainties, the presence of
Malachy, his life and doctrine, were sufficient for the king; so that he
might say to him, _How sweet are thy words unto my taste, yea, sweeter
than honey to my mouth._[256] Besides, _every night he watered his couch
with his tears_,[257] and also with a daily bath of cold water he
quenched the burning lust for evil in his flesh. And the king prayed in
the words of another king, _Look upon my affliction and my pain; and
forgive all my sins._[258] And _God did not turn away his prayer nor His
mercy from him_.[259] _And his supplication was heard_,[260] although
otherwise than he had desired. For he was troubled about his soul; but
God, the avenger of innocence, willing to show men _that there is a
remainder for the man of peace_,[261] was preparing meanwhile _to
execute a judgement for the oppressed_,[262] which was utterly beyond
his hope. And God _stirred up the spirit_ of a neighbouring _king_:[263]
for Ireland is not one kingdom, but is divided into many. This king
therefore seeing what had been done, was filled with wrath; and
indignant, on the one hand, at the freedom of the raiders and the
insolence of the proud, and on the other, pitying the desolation of the
kingdom and the downfall of the king, he went down to the cell of the
poor man; urged him to return, but did not succeed in persuading him. He
was instant, nevertheless, pledged himself to help him, assured him that
he need not doubt the result, promised that God would be with him, _whom
all his adversaries would not be able to resist_.[264] He laid before
him also the oppression of the poor and the devastation of his country;
yet he prevailed not.
10. But when to these arguments were added the command of the
bishop[265] and the advice of Malachy--the two men on whom he wholly
depended--at length, with difficulty, he consented. A king followed a
king, and according to the word of the king,[266] _as was the will in
heaven_,[267] the marauders were driven out with absolute ease, and the
man was led back to his own, with great rejoicing of his people, and was
restored to his kingdom. From that time the king loved and always
reverenced Malachy; so much the more because he had learned more fully
in the holy man the things that were worthy of reverence and affection.
For he could not be ignorant of the holiness of him with whom he had
enjoyed so much intimacy in his adversity. Therefore he honoured him the
more in his prosperity with constant acts of friendship, and faithful
services, _and he heard him gladly, and when he heard him did many
things_.[268] But enough of this. Nevertheless I suppose it was not
without purpose that the Lord so magnified him then _before kings_,[269]
but _he was a chosen vessel unto Him_, about _to bear His name before
kings_ and princes.[270]
FOOTNOTES:
[134] Malachy was born in 1095, before November. See below, p. 130. n.
2.
[135] _Urbanum_, citizen-like.
[136] Eph. ii. 19.
[137] Deut. xxxii. 13.
[138] _A.T._ make the curious statement that "Mael Maedoc o Mongair
and his father Mughron" died in 1102. This is perhaps sufficient
evidence that Malachy's father was Mughron Ua Morgair, who according
to _A.U._ was _ard fer légind_ (chief professor) at Armagh, and died
at Mungret, Co. Limerick, on October 5, 1102. Malachy was then only
seven or eight years of age. Thus we may account for the large part
taken by his mother in his early education. But a poem attributed to
Malachy (_L.B._ 88) calls his father Dermot. The form of the surname
varies. It is usually written Ua Morgair; but _A.T._, _A.I._ (Ua
Mongain), _L.B._ (_l.c._), and the Yellow Book of Lecan (T.C.D. MS. H.
2. 16, p. 327 c), have Ua Mongair. The form Ua Morgair is certainly
right, for it appears in the contemporary Book of Leinster (_R.I.A._
xxxv. 355-360); and Ua Mongair obviously arose out of it through
confusion of the similar letters _r_ and _n_. The name must have been
unfamiliar, if it had not died out, when the mistake was made.
Therefore we may accept Colgan's statement that the family was known
as O'Dogherty in his day (_Trias_, p. 299). If so, they had probably
only resumed an earlier surname: for according to MacFirbis (Royal
Irish Academy MS. 23 P. 1, p. 698) Malachy was of the same stock as
St. Mael Brigte, son of Tornan. The latter, as well as the
O'Doghertys, were of the race of Conall Gulban (Adamnan, Genealogy
opp. p. 342).
[139] 2 Sam. vii. 9.
[140] It is interesting to note the emphasis laid by St. Bernard on
the influence of Malachy's mother on his life. How much he himself
owed to his mother Aleth is well known. See _V.P._ i. 1, 2, 9, 10.
Malachy's mother was probably a member of the family of O'Hanratty.
See below, p. 27, n. 2.
[141] Prov. viii. 22.
[142] Ps. xvi. 11.
[143] Ps. xxxiv. 11.
[144] The description of Malachy's boyhood by St. Bernard may be
compared with that given of his own boyhood in _V.P._ i. 3. It was
written before the _Life of Malachy_.
[145] Neh. ix. 20; Ps. cxliii. 10.
[146] Ecclus. xv. 2, 3 (vg.).
[147] 2 Cor. xii. 6.
[148] Eph. iv. 2.
[149] Gal. i. 14.
[150] Ps. cxix. 99.
[151] 1 John ii. 20.
[152] Ps. lxxvii. 4 (vg.).
[153] Ps. i. 2.
[154] 1 Tim. ii. 8.
[155] _Virus uirtutum._
[156] Armagh. See § 4.
[157] Cp. Virg. _Aen._ vi. 465.
[158] 1 Kings viii. 22, 54.
[159] _Fortiori._
[160] Luke ii. 40, 52.
[161] John ii. 25.
[162] 1 Cor. xv. 10.
[163] 1 Kings xi. 28.
[164] 1 John v. 19.
[165] 1 Cor. ii. 12.
[166] Cp. John ii. 4 (vg.).
[167] 2 Cor. vi. 14.
[168] 1 Cor. ii. 12.
[169] Cp. Matt. v. 6.
[170] 2 Cor. i. 12 (vg.).
[171] John xiv. 30, etc.
[172] 2 Cor. iv. 7.
[173] Ps. xlv. 7.
[174] Collect of Mass for Travellers.
[175] Ps. xxi. 3.
[176] Matt. x. 39.
[177] Ps. cxxxviii. 3 (vg.).
[178] Ps. xciv. 11.
[179] His name was Imar (§ 5). He was no doubt Imar O'Hagan, who
founded the monastery of St. Paul and St. Peter at Armagh, and built a
stone church for it which was consecrated on October 21, 1126. It was
placed, either at its foundation or subsequently, under the rule of
the regular canons of St. Augustine. Imar died on pilgrimage at Rome
in 1134, and is commemorated in Gorman on August 13, and in Usuard on
November 12. He was at this time evidently leading the life of an
anchoret. Reeves (_Churches_, p. 28) inferred from his Christian name
that he had some Danish blood in his veins. There is no certain
indication of Malachy's age when he became his disciple. But he had
reached adolescence (§ 3), and was old enough to choose his own
teachers (§ 2). In 1112 he was seventeen years of age. We shall see
that he long acknowledged Imar as his master: §§ 5, 6, 8, 12, 14, 16.
[180] 1 Cor. ix. 27 (vg.).
[181] That is, apparently, the great stone church (_daimliac mór_), on
which Cellach put a shingle roof in 1125. According to Reeves
(_Churches_, pp. 14, 28) it was probably on the site of the present
Cathedral, from which the Abbey of St. Paul and St. Peter was distant
130 yards to the north. It was the principal church of Armagh till
1268. For an account of the life of such recluses as Imar the reader
may be referred to B. MacCarthy, _Codex Palatino-Vaticanus No. 830_,
p. 5 f.
[182] Luke ii. 37.
[183] _Formam._ The word, as used by St. Bernard, seems to include the
two notions of rule and example. It would seem that Malachy received
some sort of monastic rule from Imar. Cp. § 7, "his monastery," and
the reference to "the first day of his conversion" in § 43. Both
passages imply that he belonged to a religious order. So in § 5 he is
said to have been before the other disciples of Imar "in conversion."
On later occasions he was subject to Imar's "command" (§§ 14, 16). It
is not improbable that the disciples who gathered round Imar were the
nucleus of the community which he founded at Armagh (note 1). If so,
the inference is reasonable that Malachy became a regular canon of St.
Augustine.
[184] Matt. xi. 29.
[185] Cp. 2 Tim. iv. 3.
[186] Matt. xv. 14.
[187] Isa. liv. 13; John vi. 45.
[188] 1 Cor. iv. 3.
[189] Gal. i. 11, 12.
[190] Gal. ii. 2.
[191] Printed text, _hoc scit_. I read _sit_ with K (_hec sit_), and
two of de Backer's MSS.
[192] Luke ii. 35.
[193] Lam. iii. 27, 28 (inexact quotation).
[194] Heb. v. 8.
[195] The rule of silence was very strictly observed by the
Cistercians. This explains the stress laid by St. Bernard, here and
elsewhere, on Malachy's practice. Cp. the Preface of Philip of
Clairvaux to _V.P._ vi.: "In truth I have learned nothing that can
more effectively deserve the riches of the grace of the Lord than to
sit and be silent, and always to condescend to men of low estate."
[196] Isa. xxxii. 17 (vg.).
[197] Ps. cxix. 141 (vg.).
[198] Lam. iii. 28.
[199] John i. 14, 18.
[200] Rom. viii. 29.
[201] The technical word for entry into a religious order.
[202] Cellach, archbishop of Armagh (§ 19), son of Aedh, and grandson
of Maelisa, who was abbot of Armagh 1064-1091. He was born early in
1080. Of his childhood and youth we know nothing, for the statement of
Meredith Hanmer (_Chron. of Ireland_ (1633), p. 101) that he is said
to have been "brought up at Oxford" is probably as inaccurate as other
assertions which he makes about him. Cellach was elected abbot of
Armagh in August, 1105, and in the following month (September 23) he
received Holy Orders. In 1106, while engaged on a visitation of
Munster, he was consecrated bishop. Thus he departed from the
precedent set by his eight predecessors, who were without orders (§
19). He was one of the leaders of the Romanizing party in Ireland, and
attended the Synod of Rathbreasail in 1110 (Keating, iii. 307). He
died in his fiftieth year, at Ardpatrick, in co. Limerick, on April 1,
1129, and was buried on April 4 at Lismore. These facts are mainly
gathered from the Annals. For more about Cellach, see p. xxxiv.
[203] Imar. See above p. 11, n. 1.
[204] Luke xxiv. 29.--Malachy can hardly have been more, he was
probably less, than twenty-three years of age at this time. See p. 16,
n. 2.
[205] _I.e._ deacon.
[206] It does not appear that deacons as such were specially concerned
with the burial of the dead. The present passage, indeed, implies the
contrary. Malachy was made deacon against his will; his care for the
dead poor is mentioned as a work of piety, voluntarily superadded to
the duties of his office. His sister (see below) would have been
unlikely to ask him to abandon a practice which he could not decline.
But there was ancient precedent for a deacon engaging in such work, of
which Malachy may have been aware. At Alexandria throughout the
persecution of Valerian, one of the deacons, Eusebius by name, not
without danger to himself, prepared for burial the bodies of "the
perfect and blessed martyrs" (Eus., _H.E._ vii. 11. 24).
[207] _Tobiae._ The Greek of the Book of Tobit, followed by the
English versions, calls the father Tobit, and the son Tobias; the
Vulgate calls both Tobias. The text of chap. ii. is longer in the
Vulgate than in the Greek and English, and neither of the verses
(Vulg. 12, 23) from which St. Bernard here borrows words is
represented in the latter.
[208] Tobit ii. 12 (vg.).
[209] Cp. Gen. iii. 12 f.
[210] She is mentioned again in § 11.
[211] Matt. viii. 22.
[212] Tobit ii. 23 (vg.).
[213] Prov. xxvi. 5.
[214] Ps. xii. 6.
[215] Cellach and Imar.
[216] Malachy completed his twenty-fifth year in 1120. See p. 130, n.
2. For the date of his ordination to the priesthood see p. 16, n. 2.
[217] For the canons of councils which regulated the minimum age of
deacons and priests reference may be made to the article "Orders,
Holy," by the late Dr. Edwin Hatch in the _Dictionary of Christian
Antiquities_, vol. ii. p. 1482 f. From a very early date they were
respectively twenty-five and thirty years, in accordance with the
statement of the text, though there were some exceptions in remote
places. The eighth-century Irish Canons, known as the _Hibernensis_,
prescribe the same minimum ages for the diaconate and presbyterate,
and add a clause, the gist of which seems to be that a bishop at the
time of his consecration must be thirty or forty years of age
(Wasserschleben, _Irische Kanonesammlung_, 1885, p. 8). As late as the
year 1089, at the Council of Melfi, presided over by Pope Urban II.,
it was decreed (can. 5, Mansi, xx. 723) that none should be admitted
deacon under twenty-four or twenty-five years of age, or priest under
thirty. But at the Council of Ravenna, 1315 (can. 2, _ibid._ xxv.
537), the ages were lowered to twenty and twenty-five respectively.
[218] Cellach would hardly have understood the need for this apology.
It is more than probable that he was ignorant of the canons referred
to. He himself was ordained, apparently to the priesthood, in 1105,
when he was under twenty-six, and consecrated bishop in 1106, when he
was under twenty-seven years of age. St. Bernard himself seems to have
been ordained priest when he was about twenty-five years old
(Vacandard, i. 67).
[219] In other words he made him his vicar. This may well have been in
1120; for the Annals record that in that year Cellach made a
visitation of Munster. It was quite natural that during a prolonged
absence from his see he should leave its administration in the hands
of one who had proved himself so capable as Malachy. And we shall see
that this date harmonizes with other chronological data. If, then, we
place the beginning of Malachy's vicariate in 1120, his ordination as
priest, which appears to have been not much earlier, may be dated in
1119, when he was "about twenty-five years of age," _i.e._ probably
soon after his twenty-fourth birthday. His admission to the diaconate
may be placed at least a year earlier, _i.e._ in 1118. Indeed, if we
could be sure that in Ireland the normal interval between admission to
the diaconate and to the priesthood was at all as long as in other
countries we might put it further back.
[220] Luke viii. 5.
[221] 1 Pet. ii. 9.
[222] Rom. ii. 12.
[223] Rom. xii. 11.
[224] Cp. Matt. xxv. 24 ff.
[225] Jer. i. 10 (vg.).
[226] Isa. xl. 4.
[227] Ps. xix. 5.
[228] Cp. Isa. x. 17.
[229] Ps. lxxiv. 6 (vg.).
[230] Cp. Ignatius, _Trall._ 11.
[231] Ps. lxxviii. 49 (vg.: inexact quotation).
[232] Ezek. v. 11, etc.
[233] Cp. Rev. vi. 13.
[234] Ps. i. 4 (vg.).
[235] Malachy acted in accordance with the aims of Gilbert, bishop of
Limerick, who about the year 1108, wrote these words (_De Usu
Ecclesiastico_, in Ussher, 500): "I have endeavoured to describe the
canonical custom in saying the hours and performing the office of the
whole ecclesiastical order ... to the end that the various and
schismatical orders, with which almost the whole of Ireland has been
deluded, may give place to the one Catholic and Roman office."
[236] Armagh.
[237] This was probably the monastery of SS. Peter and Paul. See p.
11, n. 5. J. de Backer's suggestion (_AA.SS._, Nov. ii. 1, p. 147),
that "his monastery" was Bangor is negatived by the whole context,
which refers only to Armagh.
[238] The word "anew" (_de nouo_) seems to indicate St. Bernard's
belief that it was only in comparatively recent times that the usages
to which he refers had fallen into desuetude.
[239] It is interesting to observe that Confession is here not ranked
as a sacrament.
[240] For the statements in this section see Additional Note A.
[241] Mael Isa Ua hAinmire, who is always called Malchus in Latin
documents, though a native of Ireland, had been a monk of Winchester,
as we are here told. He was elected first bishop of the Danish colony
of Waterford in 1096, and was consecrated by Anselm, assisted by the
bishops of Chichester and Rochester, at Canterbury on December 28,
having previously made his profession of obedience to the archbishop
as one of his suffragans (Eadmer, p. 76 f.; Ussher, pp. 518, 565). He
signed the Acts of the Synod of Rathbreasail in 1110 as archbishop of
Cashel (Keating, iii. 307). He had probably been translated to that
see shortly after its foundation in 1106 (see below, p. 65, n. 4). The
Synod of Rathbreasail enlarged the Danish diocese of Waterford by
adding to it an extensive non-Danish area, which included the ancient
religious site of Lismore, on which St. Carthach or Mochuta had
founded a community in the early part of the seventh century (Lanigan,
ii. 353). The Synod decreed that the see of this diocese should be
either at Lismore or at Waterford, apparently giving preference to the
former (see p. xlvii). It would seem that after organizing the diocese
of Cashel Malchus retired to his former "parish," just as at a later
date Malachy retired from Armagh to Down (§ 31), placing his see at
Lismore. There, at any rate, he was established when Malachy visited
him, and there he died in 1135 "after the 88th year of his pilgrimage"
(_A.F.M._). An attempt has been made to distinguish Mael Isa Ua
hAinmire from the Malchus of the text (Lanigan, iv. 74), but without
success. It is interesting to observe that both _A.F.M._ and _A.T._
style him bishop of Waterford in the record of his death.
[242] Gen. xxxv. 29; 1 Chron. xxiii. 1; Job xlii. 16.--Malchus was in
his 75th year when Malachy visited him in 1121. See preceding note,
and p. 20, n. 3.
[243] 1 Kings iii. 28.
[244] An error for Waterford. It is explained by, and confirms, the
suggestion that Malchus transferred the see to Lismore.
[245] Throughout the _Life_, _Scotia_ is used, in its later sense, for
the country now called Scotland; and here the Scots are evidently its
inhabitants. But traces of earlier usage remain in § 14, "a Scotic
(_i.e._ Irish) work," § 61 "We are Scots," and § 72 where Ireland is
called "further Scotland" (_ulterior Scotia_).
[246] Cellach. Note Imar's share in the matter, and cp. p. 11, n. 1.
[247] Malachy must have been the archbishop's vicar for a considerable
time if the account of his labours in that capacity (§ 7) is not
grossly exaggerated. Hence, if his vicariate began in 1119 or 1120 his
departure for Lismore can hardly have been earlier than 1121; and as
he spent "some years" there before he was raised to the episcopate
(1124; see § 16), it cannot have been later. Samuel O'Hanley, bishop
of Dublin, died on July 4, 1121, and Cellach at once made an attempt,
which proved unsuccessful, to take possession of the vacant see.
Samuel's successor, Gregory, was duly elected, and was consecrated at
Lambeth on October 2. (_O.C.C._ p. 31; _A.U._ 1121; John of Worcester,
ed. J. H. R. Weaver, 1908, p. 16; Ussher, 532). It may have been in
August or September, on the return of Cellach from Dublin, that
Malachy was released from his office and went to Lismore.
[248] Job xii. 12.
[249] I read _rex australis Mumoniae_, for _rex Mumoniae_ in the
printed text, restoring the word _australis_ from two of de Backer's
MSS. The king is said in § 18 to have been Cormac, _i.e._ Cormac Mac
Carthy, son of Teague Mac Carthy, who succeeded his father as king of
Desmond (South Munster) in 1124. He was never king of the whole of
Munster. That he went to Lismore in 1121 is very probable. For the
Annals tell us that in that year Turlough O'Conor, king of Connaught,
invaded Desmond, and "arrived at the termon of Lismore" (_A.I._ say
that he destroyed Lismore, which can hardly be true). What more likely
than that one of the sons of Teague, the reigning monarch of Desmond,
should fly before that formidable warrior to the sanctuary of Mochuta?
But St. Bernard errs in supposing that he was then king of Desmond. On
Cormac, see also p. 43, n. 5.
[250] Donough Mac Carthy. See next note. There is a brief notice of
him in Tundale, p. 42.
[251] That the narrative of this and the following section is
historical, but that St. Bernard has misplaced it, is proved by the
following extract from _A.T._ under the year 1127: "A hosting by
Toirdelbach, king of Ireland [really of Connaught], till he reached
Corcach, he himself on land and his fleet at sea going round to
Corcach, ravaging Munster by sea and by land so that he drove Cormac
mac meic Carthaig into Lismore in pilgrimage. And Toirdelbach divided
Munster into two parts, the southern half [Desmond] to Donnchad mac
meic Carthaig; and the northern half [Thomond] to Conchobar o
Briain.... Cormac mac meic Carthaig came from his pilgrimage, and made
an alliance with Conchobar o Briain and with all the men of Muma, save
those of Tuathmuma. Donnchad mac meic Carthaig came from them--for he
was not in the alliance--with 2000 men."
The other Annals have notices to the same effect. These events
occurred in 1127, three years after Malachy returned from his long
stay at Lismore, and was made bishop of Connor (§ 16). If he had the
part which is ascribed to him in the restoration of Cormac, he must
therefore have paid two visits to Lismore, which St. Bernard has
confounded. That he was in the south of Ireland for a considerable
time prior to 1129 will appear later (p. 40, n. 2).
[252] Rom. xii. 19.
[253] _Necessitatem in uirtutem conuertit._ Apparently a proverbial
expression. Cp. Quintilian _Declam._ iv. 10: "Faciamus potius de fine
remedium, de necessitate solatium"; Jer. _Adv. Rufin._ iii. 2: "Habeo
gratiam quod facis de necessitate uirtutem"; _Ep._ 54. 6 (Hilberg):
"Arripe, quaeso, occasionem et fac de necessitate uirtutem." Chaucer's
"To maken vertu of necessitee" is well known (_Knightes Tale_, 3042,
_Squieres Tale_, 593, _Troilus and Criseyde_, iv. 1586).
[254] Gen. ix. 6.
[255] Gen. iv. 10.
[256] Ps. cxix. 103.
[257] Ps. vi. 6 (vg.).
[258] Ps. xxiv. 18.
[259] Ps. lxvi. 20.
[260] Ecclus. li. 11.
[261] Ps. xxxvii. 37 (vg.).
[262] Ps. cxlvi. 7.
[263] 2 Chron. xxxvi. 22.--Conor O'Brien. See p. 21, n. 3. It appears
from the last sentence of the passage there quoted that Donough
MacCarthy, to whom Turlough O'Conor had given the kingdom of Desmond,
had driven out O'Brien from Thomond. This explains the anxiety of the
latter to make alliance with Cormac. His action was less disinterested
than St. Bernard represents it.
[264] Luke xxi. 15.
[265] Malchus.
[266] Judas Maccabæus.
[267] 1 Macc. iii. 60.
[268] Mark vi. 20.
[269] Ps. cxix. 46.
[270] Acts ix. 15.
CHAPTER II
_Malachy's pity for his deceased sister. He restores the Monastery of
Bangor. His first Miracles._
11. (6). Meanwhile Malachy's sister, whom we mentioned before,[271]
died: and we must not pass over the visions which he saw about her. For
the saint indeed abhorred her carnal life, and with such intensity that
he vowed he would never see her alive in the flesh. But now that her
flesh was destroyed his vow was also destroyed, and he began to see in
spirit her whom in the body he would not see. One night he heard in a
dream the voice of one saying to him that his sister was standing
outside in the court, and that for thirty entire days she had tasted
nothing; and when he awoke he soon understood the sort of food for want
of which she was pining away. And when he had diligently considered the
number of days which he had heard, he discovered that it went back to
the time when he had ceased to offer the _living bread from heaven_[272]
for her. Then, since he hated not the soul of his sister but her sin, he
began again the good practice which he had abandoned. And not in vain.
Not long after she was seen by him to have come to the threshold of the
church, but to be not yet able to enter; she appeared also in dark
raiment. And when he persevered, taking care that on no single day she
should be disappointed of the accustomed gift, he saw her a second time
in whitish raiment, admitted indeed within the church, but not allowed
to approach the altar. At last she was seen, a third time, gathered in
the company of the white-robed, and _in bright clothing_.[273] You see,
reader, how much _the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man
availeth_.[274] Truly _the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence and the
violent take it by force_.[275] Does not the prayer of Malachy seem to
you to have played the part as it were of a housebreaker to the heavenly
gates, when a sinful woman obtained by the weapons of a brother what was
denied to her own merits? This _violence_, good Jesus, Thou who
_sufferest_ dost exercise, strong and merciful _to save_,[276] _showing_
mercy and _strength with thine arm_,[277] and preserving it in thy
sacrament for _the saints which are in the earth_,[278] _unto the end of
the world_.[279] Truly this sacrament is strong to _consume_ sins,[280]
to defeat opposing powers, to bring into heaven those who are returning
from the earth.
12. (7). The Lord, indeed, was so preparing His beloved Malachy in the
district of Lismore for the glory of His name. But those who had sent
him,[281] tolerating his absence no longer, recalled him by letters.
When he was restored to his people,[282] now better instructed in all
that was necessary, behold _a work prepared_ and kept by _God_[283] for
Malachy. A rich and powerful man, who held the place of Bangor and its
possessions, by inspiration of God immediately placed in his hand all
that he had and himself as well.[284] And he was his mother's
brother.[285] But kinship of spirit was of more value to Malachy than
kinship of the flesh. The actual place also of Bangor, from which he
received his name,[286] the prince[287] made over to him, that there he
might build, or rather rebuild, a monastery. For indeed there had been
formerly a very celebrated one under the first father, Comgall,[288]
which produced many thousands of monks, and was the head of many
monasteries. A truly holy place it was and prolific of saints, _bringing
forth_ most abundant _fruit to God_,[289] so that one of the sons of
that holy community, Lugaid[290] by name, is said to have been the
founder--himself alone--of a hundred monasteries. I mention this in
order that the reader may infer from this one instance what an immense
number of others there were. In fine, to such an extent did its shoots
fill Ireland and Scotland[291] that those verses of David seem to have
sung beforehand especially of these times, _Thou visitest the earth and
blessest it; thou makest it very plenteous. The river of God is full of
water: thou preparest their corn, for so thou providest for the earth,
blessing its rivers, multiplying its shoots. With its drops of rain
shall it rejoice while it germinates_;[292] and in like manner the
verses that follow. Nor was it only into the regions just mentioned, but
also into foreign lands that those swarms of saints poured forth as
though a _flood had risen_;[293] of whom one, St. Columbanus, came up to
our Gallican parts, and built the monastery of Luxovium, and was _made
there a great people_.[294] So great a people was it, they say, that
the choirs succeeding one another in turn, the solemnities of the divine
offices went on continuously, so that not a moment day or night was
empty of praises.[295]
13. (8) Enough has been said about the ancient glory of the monastery of
Bangor. This, long ago destroyed by pirates,[296] Malachy eagerly
cherished on account of its remarkable and long-standing prestige, as
though he were about to _replant a paradise_,[297] and because _many
bodies of the saints slept_ there.[298] For, not to speak of those which
were _buried in peace_,[299] it is said that nine hundred persons were
slain together in one day by pirates.[300] Vast, indeed, were the
possessions of that place;[301] but Malachy, content with the holy place
alone, resigned all the possessions and lands to another. For indeed
from the time when the monastery was destroyed there was always someone
to hold it with its possessions. For they were both appointed by
election and were even called abbots, preserving in name but not in fact
what had once been.[302] And though many urged him not to alienate the
possessions, but to retain the whole together for himself, this lover of
poverty did not consent, but caused one to be elected, according to
custom, to hold them; the place, as we have said, being retained for
Malachy and his followers. And perhaps, as afterwards appeared,[303] he
would have been wiser to have kept it all; only he looked more to
humility than to peace.
14. So, then, by the command of Father Imar, taking with him about ten
brethren, he came to the place and began to build. And there, one day,
when he himself was cutting with an axe, by chance one of the workmen,
while he was brandishing the axe in the air, carelessly got into the
place at which the blow was aimed, and it fell on his spine with as much
force as Malachy could strike. He fell, and all ran to him supposing
that he had received a death-wound or was dead. And indeed his tunic was
_rent from the top to the bottom_,[304] but the man himself was found
unhurt, the skin so very slightly grazed that scarcely a trace appeared
on the surface. The man whom the axe had laid low, stood unharmed while
the bystanders beheld him with amazement. Hence they became more eager,
and were found readier for the work. And _this was the beginning of the
miracles_[305] of Malachy. Moreover the oratory was finished in a few
days, made of smoothed planks indeed, but closely and strongly fastened
together--a Scotic work,[306] not devoid of beauty.[307] And
thenceforward God was served in it as in the ancient days; that is,
with similar devotion, though not with like numbers. Malachy presided
over that place for some time,[308] by the ordinance of Father
Imar,[309] being at once the ruler and the rule of the brethren. They
read in his life how they should behave themselves, and he was their
leader _in righteousness and holiness before God_;[310] save that
besides the things appointed for the whole community he did many things
of an exceptional kind, in which he still more was the leader of all,
and none of the others was able to follow him to such difficult
practices.
At that time and place a certain man was sick, and the devil stood by
him and suggested in plain speech that he should never heed the
admonitions of Malachy, but if he should enter his house, he should
attack and kill him with a knife. And when this became known, those who
ministered to him, the sick man himself informing them, brought word to
Malachy and warned him. But he, seizing his accustomed weapons of
prayer, boldly attacked his enemy, and put to flight both disease and
demon. _But the_ man's _name was Malchus_.[311] He is brother according
to the flesh of our Christian, abbot of Mellifont.[312] For both are
still alive, now brothers yet more, in spirit.[313] For when he was
delivered, immediately he was not ungrateful, but in the same place,
having _turned[314] to the Lord_,[315] he changed both his habit and his
mind. And the brethren knew that the evil one was envious of their
prosperity; and they were edified and made more careful henceforth.
15. (9). At the same place he healed a cleric, named Michael, who was
suffering from dysentery and despaired of, by sending him something from
his table. A second time, when the same person was smitten with a very
grave disorder, he cured him both in body and mind. And from that moment
_he clave to_ God[316] and to Malachy His servant, fearing _lest a worse
thing should come unto him_,[317] if once more he should be found
ungrateful for so great a benefit and miracle. And at present, as we
have heard, he presides over a monastery in the parts of Scotland; and
this was the latest of all Malachy's foundations.[318] Through such
deeds of Malachy both his reputation and his community increased daily,
and his name became great both within and without the monastery, though
not greater than the fact. For indeed he dwelt[319] there even after he
was made bishop, for the place was near the city.[320]
FOOTNOTES:
[271] See § 6. Malachy's sister is here said to have died while he was
at Lismore; but whether during his earlier or later visit to that
place cannot be determined.
[272] John vi. 51.
[273] Acts x. 30.
[274] Jas. v. 16.
[275] Matt. xi. 12.
[276] Cp. Isa. lxiii. 1.
[277] Luke i. 51.
[278] Ps. xvi. 3.
[279] Matt. xxviii. 20.
[280] Ps vii. 9 (vg.).
[281] Cellach and Imar (§ 8).
[282] That is to Armagh. But see p. 36, n. 5.
[283] Eph. ii. 10 (vg.).
[284] This person was apparently the coarb of Comgall, the founder of
Bangor. It would seem that he had been but a short time in office, for
Oengus O'Gorman, coarb of Comgall, died at Lismore in 1123 (_A.U._),
probably during Malachy's sojourn there. It is not impossible that the
unnamed coarb, mentioned in the text, was Murtough O'Hanratty, who
died at Armagh in 1131 (_A.F.M._). The statement that he gave
"himself" to Malachy seems to mean that he placed himself under his
rule in the new community.
[285] If the identification suggested in the preceding note is
correct, Malachy's mother belonged to the family of O'Hanratty, which
in the eleventh and twelfth centuries held the chieftaincy of Ui Méith
Macha or Ui Méith Tíre, now the barony of Monaghan, in the county of
the same name.
[286] _Cognominabatur._ This verb occurs seventeen times in the
Vulgate, and almost always indicates a new or alternative name. In the
present passage it certainly applies, not to Malachy's baptismal name,
but to its Latin equivalent, Malachias, which he probably assumed when
he became abbot of Bangor, or bishop of Down. The remark that he
received it from Bangor is to be explained thus. A legend, which has a
place in Jocelin's _Life of St. Patrick_ (§ 98) and is therefore at
least as old as the twelfth century, relates that Patrick, viewing the
valley in which the monastery of Comgall was afterwards constructed,
perceived that it was "filled with a multitude of the heavenly host."
From this story, no doubt, came the name "Valley of Angels (_Vallis
Angelorum_)," by which it was known in the early seventeenth century,
and probably long before (Reeves, p. 199). If this name, or the legend
on which it was based, was known to Malachy it is quite conceivable
that on account of his connexion with Bangor, he adopted, as the Latin
alternative of Máel Máedóc, a name which is only the Hebrew for _my
angel_ with a Latin termination. That St. Bernard was aware of the
significance of the name, and liked to dwell upon it, is clear from
Sermon ii. § 5. It may be added that the legend just mentioned is
connected with a folk-etymology of the word Bangor (_Bennchor_) which
explained it as "white choir." For the true etymology see Kuno Meyer,
"Zur Keltischen Wortkunde," § 66 (_Preuss. Akad. Sitz._, 1913).
[287] _Princeps._ This word does not necessarily imply that the donor
of Bangor was a secular chieftain. St. Bernard is somewhat arbitrary
in his use of such titles; and _princeps_ occurs very frequently in
_A.U._ up to the tenth century as an equivalent of _abbot_.
[288] Comgall, who was a Pict of Dál Araide (Adamnan, i. 49), was born
at Magheramorne, near Larne, co. Antrim (Reeves, p. 269), between 516
and 520. He founded the monastery of Bangor when he was about forty
years old, probably in 559, and presided over it till his death in 602
(_A.U._). According to his Latin Life (§ 13, Plummer, ii. 7), so great
a number of monks came to him there that there was not room for them;
"he therefore founded very many cells and many monasteries, not only
in the district of Ulaid, but throughout the other provinces of
Ireland." There were as many as 3000 monks under his rule. On the last
leaf of an ancient service book of the monastery, known as the
Antiphonary of Bangor (Facsimile edition by F. E. Warren, 1893, vol.
ii. p. 33), there is a hymn which gives a complete list of the
abbots--fifteen in number--from Comgall to Cronan (+691), in whose
period of office it was written. The site of St. Comgall's monastery
is beside the Rectory of the parish of Bangor, co. Down, about
half-a-mile from Bangor Bay, near the entrance to Belfast Lough.
[289] Rom. vii. 4.
[290] _Luanus._ This is probably Lugaid, or Molua, the founder of
Lismore in Scotland, who died in 592 (_A.U._) and is commemorated on
June 25 (Oengus, Gorman). He was a Pict and of the same tribe as St.
Comgall, both being descended from Fiacha Araide (_L.B._ 15 c, e); and
in later times was the patron saint of the diocese of Argyll (Adamnan,
p. 371). He may be the Bishop Lugidus who ordained St. Comgall, and
afterwards restrained him from leaving Ireland (Plummer, i. p. lix.;
ii. pp. 6, 7). But there is no evidence, apart from the statement of
St. Bernard, that either this bishop or Lugaid of Lismore was a member
of the community at Bangor. There is a Life of Lugaid of Lismore in
the Breviary of Aberdeen (Prop. Sanct. pro temp, aest. ff. 5 _v._ 7;
summarized in Forbes, _Kalendars of Scottish Saints_, p. 410). His
principal foundation after Lismore was Rosemarkie in Ross. Mr. A. B.
Scott (_Pictish Nation_, 1918, p. 347 f.) mentions also Mortlach
(Banffshire) and Clova (Aberdeenshire); and Bishop Forbes (_l.c._)
adds other sites with which his name is connected.
[291] St. Comgall himself is said to have been minded in his earlier
days to go on pilgrimage to "Britain," and to have been dissuaded
therefrom by Lugaid (Latin Life, § 13, Plummer, ii. 7). Seven years
after the foundation of Bangor he went to Britain to visit "certain
saints" (_ibid._ § 22, p. 11). It was probably on this occasion that
he spent some time on the island of Hinba (Eilean-na-naomh?) in the
company of SS. Columba, Canice and others (Adamnan, iii. 17). It was
somewhat later, apparently, that St. Columba went with some companions
on a mission to Brude, king of the Picts (_ibid._ ii. 35); and we need
not question the statement that Comgall and Canice were among those
who went with him, though there is reason to doubt that Comgall was
the leader of the band, as his Life implies (§ 51, p. 18), and though
the _Life of St. Canice_, which frequently refers to his visit, or
visits, to Scotland (§§ 17, 19, 21, 23, Plummer, i. 158), never
mentions the incident. It is probable, therefore, that the founder of
Bangor took part in the evangelization of Scotland; but the memory of
very few monasteries founded by him in that country, besides the
community in the island of Tiree (_Life_, § 22, p. 11; see Scott, _op.
cit._ p. 239), has been preserved to later ages. Mr. Scott credits
members of the community of Bangor with the foundation of Paisley,
Kingarth and Applecross (_ibid._ p. 337 ff.). See also previous note.
[292] Ps. lxv. 9, 10 (vg., inexact quotation).
[293] Luke vi. 48.
[294] Gen. xii. 2.--St. Columbanus was the greatest of the Irish
missionaries on the Continent of Europe. Born in Leinster, according
to Bruno Krusch (_Ionae Vitae Sanctorum_, p. 22) in 530, or as others
hold in 543, he entered the community of Bangor not long after its
foundation, and after spending "many cycles of years" there, he sailed
for France about 590. His principal monasteries were Luxeuil
(Luxovium) in the department of Haute Saône, and Bobbio in Lombardy.
At the latter place he died, November 23, 615. His Life was written by
Jonas, about 640. It was critically edited by Krusch in _M.G.H._
(Script. rerum Merovingic., vol. iv. 1-152) and subsequently as a
separate volume (_Ionae Vitae Sanctorum Columbani, Vedastis,
Iohannis_, 1905). The story of his labours has been told by G. T.
Stokes in his _Celtic Church in Ireland_, Lect. vii., and by many
other modern writers. See also the collection of documents in Patrick
Fleming's _Collectanea_ (Lovanii, 1667). Luxeuil is about eighty miles
from Clairvaux, and less than seventy from St. Bernard's early home at
Dijon. Fifty years after the death of St. Columbanus it adopted the
rule of St. Benedict. It was a well-known establishment in St.
Bernard's day, though by that time its glory had declined. It was
suppressed in 1789 (M. Stokes, _Three Months in the Forests of
France_, p. 67).
[295] The Acoemetae, founded about the middle of the fifth century,
were the first to practise the _laus perennis_, from which they
derived their name (_Dict. of Christian Antiquities_, s.v.). It was
adopted in the early years of the following century at the monastery
of St. Maurice in the Valois, from which it spread to many other
religious establishments (_AA.SS._, Nov., i. 548 ff.).
[296] _A.U._ 823 (_recte_ 824): "The plundering of Bangor in the Ards
by Foreigners [_i.e._ Norsemen], and the spoiling of its oratory; and
the relics of Comgall were shaken out of their shrine." _A.I._ add,
"and its learned men and bishops were slain with the sword."
[297] Gen. ii. 8.
[298] Matt. xxvii. 52.
[299] Ecclus. xliv. 14.
[300] This obviously exaggerated statement may refer to the event
mentioned in note 2, or to a later occasion (958), when "Tanaidhe, son
of Odhar, coarb of Bangor, was killed by Foreigners" (_A.U._).
[301] "Even at the Dissolution [1539] it was found to be possessed of
the temporalities and spiritualities of thirty-four townlands,
together with the tithes of nine rectories or chapels" (Reeves, p.
94). The lands included the entire parish of Bangor, together with
part of the adjoining parish of Holywood, and eight outlying townlands
(Archdall, ed. Moran, i. 235).
[302] This remark is interesting as showing that the title "abbot of
Bangor" was in use in the twelfth century. The last person to whom it
is given in the _A.U._ is Indrechtach, who died in 906. From that time
onwards "coarb of Comgall" (or in one instance, "coarb of Bangor") is
substituted for it. St. Bernard is supported by the Annals when he
asserts that so-called abbots were elected down to Malachy's time.
_A.U._ preserve the names of twenty abbots or coarbs between 824 and
1123. But St. Bernard leaves the impression that the religious
community of Bangor ceased to exist on its destruction by the Norse
pirates, and that subsequently the "abbots" merely held the lands that
had belonged to it, and exercised no spiritual discipline. There are
good reasons, however, for the contrary opinion. Thus Abbot Moengal,
who died in 871, was a "pilgrim." Abbot Moenach (died 921) was "the
head of the learning of the island of Ireland." Ceile, coarb of
Comgall, went on pilgrimage to Rome in 928, and died there in 929: he
was a scribe and anchoret, apostolic doctor of all Ireland, and (if
_C.S._ can be trusted) a bishop. Dubhinnsi, bishop of Bangor, died in
953. Finally, Diarmait Ua Maeltelcha, coarb of Comgall, whom _C.S._
calls a bishop, died in 1016. It was probably not till after that
date, as Reeves (p. 154) assures us, that the monastery began to
decline.
[303] See §§ 61, 62.
[304] Matt. xxvii. 51.
[305] John ii. 11.
[306] "Scotic" is obviously to be understood here in its earlier
meaning as equivalent to "Irish." From this departure from his
ordinary usage (see p. 20, note 1) we may infer that St. Bernard is
quoting the words of his authority. The habit of constructing churches
of wood prevailed in early times among the Celtic and Saxon tribes in
the British Isles, the introduction of stone building for such
purposes being due to Roman influence (Plummer, _Bede_, ii. 101). The
older custom lingered longer in Ireland than elsewhere; and by the
time of Bede it had come to be regarded as characteristically Irish,
though wooden churches must still have been numerous in England (Bede,
_H.E._, iii. 25). In a document of much later date, the Life of the
Irish Saint Monenna (quoted in Adamnan, p. 177 f.), we read of "a
church constructed of smoothed planks according to the custom of the
Scottish races"; and the writer adds that "the Scots are not in the
habit of building walls, or causing them to be built." Petrie (pp.
138-151) maintained that stone churches were not unusual in early
Ireland; but he admits (pp. 341-344) that one type of church--the
oratory (in Irish _dairtheach_, _i.e._ house of oak)--was very rarely
constructed of stone. The only two passages which he cites (p. 345) as
mentioning stone oratories (he says he might have produced others) are
not to his purpose. The first is a notice in _A.U._ 788, of a man
being killed at the door of a "stone oratory": but another, and
apparently better, reading substitutes _lapide_ for _lapidei_, thus
altering the entry to a statement that the man was killed "by a stone
at the door of the oratory." The second is Colgan's rendering
(_Trias_, p. 162) of a sentence in _Trip._ iii. 74, p. 232, in which
there is in reality no mention of any ecclesiastical edifice. So far
as I am aware, there is no indisputable reference in Irish literature
to a stone oratory earlier than the one mentioned below, § 61.
[307] Cp. the quatrain of Rummun on an oratory which was in course of
construction at Rathen (_Otia Merseiana_, ii. 79):
"O my Lord! what shall I do About these great materials? When will
these ten hundred planks Be a structure of compact beauty?"
[308] Evidently until he became bishop. The next sentence implies that
the time spent at Bangor was of considerable length, as does also the
remark at the end of § 15. St. Bernard, however, seems to have been
mistaken in supposing that Malachy resigned the abbacy on his
consecration. See p. 36, note 5; p. 40, note 1; p. 80, note 1; p. 104,
note 3; p. 112, note 5; p. 113, note 1.
[309] Cp. p. 11, note 1.
[310] Luke i. 75.
[311] John xviii. 10.
[312] For Christian and Mellifont Abbey, see § 39. This Malchus is
mentioned again in § 52.
[313] This is not a mere conventional phrase. In a passionate outburst
of grief St. Bernard says of his brother Gerard, who had recently
died, "He was my brother by blood, yet more my brother in religion"
(_Cant._ xxvi. 4).
[314] _Conversus._ Cp. p. 14, note 1. The meaning is that after his
recovery Malchus entered the community of Bangor.
[315] Acts ix. 35.
[316] 2 Kings xviii. 6.
[317] John v. 14.
[318] The abbey founded by Malachy at Soulseat. See § 68.
[319] _Demorabatur_, literally, _lingered_, or _tarried_. The fact
seems to be that Bangor was Malachy's headquarters for the rest of his
life, except the ten years which intervened between his expulsion from
it (§ 18), and his resignation of the see of Armagh (§ 31). See p. 33,
note 1. St. Bernard was apparently puzzled by the fact that Malachy
continued to live at Bangor after his consecration, instead of going
to the see-city; and he makes a not very satisfactory apology for it.
[320] The city is evidently Connor; but it is not near Bangor. The
two places are twenty-five miles apart, and Belfast Lough lies between
them. In Malachy's day they were in different tribal territories.
CHAPTER III
_St. Malachy becomes Bishop of Connor; he builds the Monastery of
Iveragh._
16. (10). At that time an episcopal see was vacant,[321] and had long
been vacant, because Malachy would not assent: for they had elected him
to it.[322] But they persisted, and at length he yielded when their
entreaties were enforced by the command of his teacher,[323] together
with that of the metropolitan.[324] It was when he was just entering the
thirtieth year of his age,[325] that he was consecrated bishop and
brought to Connor; for that was the name of the city through ignorance
of Irish ecclesiastical affairs St. Bernard misunderstood the
information supplied to him, and thus separated Malachy's tenure of the
abbacy of Bangor from his episcopate, though the two were in reality
conterminous. For the significance of Malachy's recall to the North, see
Introduction, p. liii. f.; and for a fuller discussion, _R.I.A._, xxxv.
250-254..
[Sidenote: 1124]
But when he began to administer his office, the man of God understood
that he had been sent not to men but to beasts. Never before had he
known the like, in whatever depth of barbarism; never had he found men
so shameless in regard of morals, so dead in regard of rites, so impious
in regard of faith, so barbarous in regard of laws, so stubborn in
regard of discipline, so unclean in regard of life. They were Christians
in name, in fact pagans.[326] There was no giving of tithes or
first-fruits; no entry into lawful marriages, no making of confessions:
nowhere could be found any who would either seek penance or impose it.
Ministers of the altar were exceeding few. But indeed what need was
there of more when even the few were almost in idleness and ease among
the laity? There was no fruit which they could bring forth from their
offices among a people so vile. For in the churches there was not heard
the voice either of preacher or singer.[327] What was _the athlete of
the Lord_[328] to do? He must either yield with shame or with danger
fight. But he who recognized that he was _a shepherd and not a
hireling_, elected to stand rather than to _flee_, prepared to _give his
life for the sheep_ if need be.[329] And although all were wolves and
there were no sheep, the intrepid shepherd stood in the midst of the
wolves, rich in all means by which he might make sheep out of
wolves[330]--admonishing in public, arguing in secret, weeping with one
and another; accosting men now roughly, now gently, according as he saw
it to be expedient for each. And in cases where these expedients failed
he offered for them a _broken and a contrite heart_.[331] How often did
he spend entire nights in vigil, holding out his hands in prayer! And
when they would not come to the church he went to meet the unwilling
ones _in the streets and in the broad ways_, and _going round about the
city_, he eagerly _sought_[332] whom he might gain for Christ.
17. (11). But further afield also, none the less, he very frequently
traversed country parts and towns with that holy band of disciples, who
never left his side. He went and bestowed even on _the unthankful[333]
their portion of_ the heavenly _meat_.[334] Nor did he ride on a horse,
but went afoot, in this also proving himself an apostolic man. Good
Jesus, _how great things_ thy warrior _suffered for Thy name's
sake_[335] from _crime-stained children_.[336] How great things he
endured for Thee from those very men to whom, and on whose behalf, he
spoke good things. Who can worthily express with how great vexations he
was harassed, with what insults he was assailed, with what unrighteous
acts provoked,[337] how often he was faint with hunger, how often
afflicted _with cold and nakedness_?[338] Yet _with them that hated
peace he was a peacemaker,[339] instant_, nevertheless, _in season, out
of season_.[340] _Being defamed he intreated_;[341] when he was dealt
with unrighteously he defended himself with the shield of patience and
_overcame evil with good_.[342] Why should he not overcome? _He
continued knocking_,[343] and according to the promise, at length,
sometimes, _to him that knocked it was opened_.[344] How could that not
follow which _the Truth_[345] had declared beforehand should follow?
_The right hand of the Lord brought mighty things to pass_,[346] because
the _mouth of the Lord spoke_[347] the truth. Hardness vanished,
barbarity ceased; the _rebellious house_[348] began gradually to be
appeased, gradually to admit reproof, _to receive discipline_.[349]
Barbarous laws disappear, Roman laws are introduced; everywhere the
ecclesiastical customs are received, their opposites are rejected;
churches[350] are rebuilt, a clergy is appointed in them; the
solemnities of the sacraments are duly celebrated; confessions are made;
congregations[351] come to the church; the celebration of marriage
graces those who live together.[352] In fine, all things are so changed
for the better that to-day the word which the Lord speaks by the prophet
is applicable to that nation; _those who_ before _were not my people are
now my people_.[353]
[Sidenote: 1127]
18. (12). It happened after some years that the city[354] was destroyed
by the king of the northern part of Ireland;[355] for _out of the north_
all _evil breaks forth_.[356] And perhaps that evil was good for those
who used it well. For who knows that God did not wish to destroy by such
a scourge the ancient evils of His people? By a necessity so dire
Malachy was compelled, and he retired with a crowd of his disciples. Nor
was his retirement spent in idleness. It gave opportunity for building
the monastery of Iveragh,[357] Malachy going there with his brothers,
in number one hundred and twenty.[358] There King Cormac met him. He it
was who at a former time driven out of his kingdom, under the care of
Malachy by the mercy of God received consolation;[359] and that place
was in his kingdom. The king rejoiced to see Malachy, placing at the
disposal of him and those who were with him himself and all that he
had--as one who was neither ungrateful nor unmindful of a benefit. Many
beasts were immediately brought for the use of the brothers; much gold
and silver was also supplied, with regal munificence, for the expense of
the buildings. He himself also _was coming in and going out with
them_,[360] busy and ready to serve--in attire a king, but in mind a
disciple of Malachy. And the Lord _blessed_ that place _for_ Malachy's
_sake_,[361] and in a short time he was made great in goods, possessions
and persons. And there, as it were beginning anew, the burden of law and
discipline which he laid on others he bore with greater zeal himself,
their bishop and teacher. Himself, _in the order of his course_,[362]
did duty as cook, himself served the brothers while they sat at
meat.[363] Among the brothers who succeeded one another in singing or
reading in church he did not suffer himself to be passed over, but
strenuously fulfilled the office in his place as one of them. He not
only shared but took the lead in [the life] of holy poverty, being
especially zealous for it _more abundantly than they all_.[364]
FOOTNOTES:
[321] Connor: see below. It is clear that after Malachy's consecration
it was the see of a diocese which included Bangor (§ 15) and Down, the
present Downpatrick (§ 31). The inference is highly probable that it
included the whole district which constituted the "parish [_i.e._
diocese] of Connor," according to the decree of the Synod of
Rathbreasail in 1110 (Keating, iii. 303: see above p. xli), that is to
say, roughly, the present united dioceses of Down, Connor and Dromore.
It would seem that Malachy was its first bishop.
[322] Here, again, St. Bernard implies that a long period elapsed
between Malachy's return from Lismore and his consecration; for the
reason given in § 12 for his recall is inconsistent with the
supposition that he had already been elected to a bishopric which
Cellach and Imar wished him to accept. They desired to have him with
them at Armagh. He must have been "elected" either while he was at
Armagh or after he went to Bangor.
[323] Imar.
[324] Cellach. See § 19, where Cellach and his predecessors are called
metropolitans.
[325] _Tricesimo ferme aetatis suae anno._ _A.F.M._ record under the
year 1124 that "Mael Maedoc Ua Morgair sat in the bishopric of
Connor." This agrees with the date of his consecration as given here.
See p. 128, note 1. He was consecrated bishop by Cellach (§ 19).
We have seen (p. 20, note 3) that Malachy probably went to Lismore
late in 1121. He spent several years there, and, according to St.
Bernard, another long period at Armagh and Bangor before his
consecration in 1124. This must be pronounced impossible. The most
probable solution of the chronological difficulty is that through
ignorance of Irish ecclesiastical affairs St. Bernard misunderstood
the information supplied to him, and thus separated Malachy's tenure
of the abbacy of Bangor from his episcopate, though the two were in
reality conterminous. For the significance of Malachy's recall to the
North, see Introduction, p. liii. f.; and for a fuller discussion,
_R.I.A._, xxxv. 250-254.
[326] Cp. Giraldus, _Top._ iii. 19: "It is wonderful that this nation
should remain to this day so ignorant of the rudiments of
Christianity. For it is a most filthy race, a race sunk in vice, a
race more ignorant than all other nations of the rudiments of the
faith."
[327] For the statements in the preceding sentences, see Additional
Note A.
[328] St. Aug., _De Civ. Dei_, xiv. 9. 2. Cp. Ignatius, _Pol._ 2;
_Hero_ 1. It may be noted that most of the MSS. of the Latin version
of the Ignatian Epistles are Burgundian, and that among them is a
Clairvaux MS. of the 12th century. Lightfoot, _Ign. and Pol._, i. 119.
[329] John x. 11-13.
[330] Compare St. Bernard's words to Pope Eugenius III. about his
Roman subjects (_De Cons._, iv. 6): "I know where thou dwellest,
unbelievers and subverters are with thee. They are wolves, not sheep;
of such, however, thou art shepherd. Consideration is good, if by it
thou mayest perhaps discover means, if it can be done, to convert
them, lest they subvert thee. Why do we doubt that they can be turned
again into sheep, who were once sheep and could be turned into
wolves?"
[331] Ps. li. 17.
[332] Cant. iii. 2; cp. Ps. lix. 6, 14; Luke xiv. 21.
[333] Luke vi. 35.
[334] Luke xii. 42.
[335] Acts ix. 16.
[336] Isa. i. 4 (vg.).
[337] Cp. 2 Pet. ii. 7 f.
[338] 2 Cor xi. 27.
[339] Ps. cxx. 6, 7 (vg.).
[340] 2 Tim. iv. 2.
[341] 1 Cor. iv. 13.
[342] Rom. xii. 21.
[343] Acts xii. 16.
[344] Matt. vii. 8; Luke xi. 10.
[345] John xiv. 6.
[346] Ps. cxviii. 15, 16.
[347] Isa. i. 20.
[348] Ezek. ii. 5, etc.
[349] Lev. xxvi. 23 (vg.).
[350] _Basilicae._
[351] _Plebes._
[352] See Additional Note A.
[353] 1 Pet. ii. 10, combined with Hos. ii. 24.
[354] The city was Bangor, though St. Bernard may have taken it to be
Connor. The word city (_civitas_), which he no doubt found in his
authority, might be applied, like its Irish equivalent, _cathair_, to
either place: but to St. Bernard it would naturally suggest an
episcopal see. Connor was within the suzerainty of the king of the
northern part of Ireland, Bangor was outside it. See next note.
[355] Conor O'Loughlin, who is called king of the north of Ireland in
the Annals (s.a. 1136). He succeeded his father Donnell as king of
Ailech (Grenan Ely, co. Donegal, the residence of the kings of the
northern Ui Neill) in 1121, and the next year he invaded the northern
part of Ulaid, the district in which Bangor is situated. He invaded
Magh Cobha (Iveagh, co. Down) and Bregha (Meath), with the help of the
Dal Araide (the district round Connor, co. Antrim) in 1128. He finally
subdued Ulaid in 1130, and "plundered the country as far as the east
of Ard [_i.e._ the baronies of the Ards, in which lies Bangor], both
lay and ecclesiastical property." He was murdered on May 25, 1136
(_A.U._, _A.L.C._). It has been supposed that the expedition of 1130
was the occasion of the destruction of Bangor mentioned in the text.
But St. Bernard places it, and the consequent departure of Malachy to
the south, before the death of Cellach in 1129 (§ 19), and we have
found reason to believe that Malachy was at Lismore in 1127 (p. 21, n.
3). Though no raid by Conor in that year is referred to in the Annals,
that fact cannot be regarded as proof that none took place.
[356] Jer. i. 14.
[357] _Ibracense._ That this monastery was in Iveragh, a barony in the
county of Kerry, north of the estuary of the Kenmare River, and in
Cormac Mac Carthy's kingdom of Desmond, was apparently first suggested
by Lanigan (iv. 92). The identification is almost certainly correct.
It is more difficult to determine the part of the barony in which the
monastery was situated. O'Hanlon suggested Church Island, near
Cahirciveen, where there are some ecclesiastical remains,
traditionally known half a century ago as "the monastery" (_R.I.A._
xv. 107). But these appear to be of much earlier date than the twelfth
century. More plausible is the conjecture of the Rev. Denis
O'Donoghue, that the site is on another Church Island, in Lough
Currane, near Waterville. On it are the ruins of a church which, in
the opinion of Mr. P. J. Lynch, was built in the twelfth century
(_J.R.S.A.I._ xxx. 159 f.). Malachy seems to have spent some time at
Lismore before going to Iveragh.
[358] This sentence seems to imply that Malachy brought with him the
Bangor community, or the greater part of it, and made a new home for
it in Iveragh. If so the inference is obvious that up to 1127 Malachy
resided at Bangor, and was still abbot.
[359] See §§ 9, 10.
[360] Acts ix. 28 (inexact quotation).
[361] Gen. xxx. 27.
[362] Luke i. 8.
[363] Cp. Luke xii. 37; xxii. 27.
[364] Cp. 1 Cor. xv. 10; 2 Cor. xi. 23.
CHAPTER IV.
_Being made Archbishop of Armagh, he suffers many troubles. Peace being
made, from being Archbishop of Armagh he becomes Bishop of Down._
[Sidenote: 1129]
19. (12). Meanwhile[365] it happened that Archbishop Cellach[366] fell
sick: he it was who ordained Malachy deacon, presbyter and bishop: and
knowing that he was dying he made a sort of testament[367] to the effect
that Malachy ought to succeed him,[368] because none seemed worthier to
be bishop of the first see. This he gave in charge to those who were
present, this he commanded to the absent, this to the two kings of
Munster[369] and to the magnates of the land he specially enjoined by
the authority of St. Patrick.[370] For from reverence and honour for
him, as the apostle of that nation, who had converted the whole country
to the faith, that see where he presided in life and rests in death[371]
has been held in so great veneration by all from the beginning, that not
merely bishops and priests, and those who are of the clergy, but also
all kings and princes are subject to the metropolitan[372] in all
obedience, and he himself alone presides over all. But a very evil
custom had developed, by the devilish ambition of certain powerful
persons, that the holy see[373] should be held by hereditary succession.
For they suffered none to be bishops but those who were of their own
tribe and family. And for no short time had the execrable succession
lasted, for fifteen generations (as I may call them)[374] had already
passed in this wickedness. And to such a point had _an evil and
adulterous[375] generation_[376] established for itself this distorted
right, rather this unrighteousness worthy of punishment by any sort of
death, that although at times clerics failed of that blood, yet bishops
never. In a word there had been already eight before Cellach, married
men, and without orders, albeit men of letters.[377] Hence, throughout
the whole of Ireland, all that subversion of ecclesiastical discipline,
that weakening of censure, that abandonment of religion of which we
have spoken already; hence everywhere that substitution of raging
barbarism for Christian meekness--yea, a sort of paganism brought in
under the name of Christianity. For--a thing unheard of from the very
beginning of the Christian faith--bishops were transferred and
multiplied, without order or reason, at the will of the metropolitan, so
that one bishopric was not content with one bishop, but nearly every
single church had its bishop.[378] No wonder; for how could the members
of so diseased a head be sound?
[Sidenote: 1132]
20. Cellach, greatly grieving for these and other like evils of his
people--for he was a good and devout man--took all care to have Malachy
as his successor, because he believed that by him this evilly rooted
succession might be torn up,[379] since he was dear to all, and one whom
all were zealous to imitate, _and the Lord was with him_.[380] Nor was
he deceived of his hope; for when he died Malachy was put into
occupation in his room. But not soon nor easily. For behold there is one
of the evil seed to seize the place--Murtough by name.[381] For five
years, relying on the secular power,[382] this man fastened himself
upon the church, not a bishop but a tyrant. For the wishes of the devout
had rather supported the claim of Malachy. At last they urged him to
undertake the burden according to the ordinance of Cellach. But he, who
shunned every high office as nothing else than his downfall,[383]
thought that he had found good ground of excuse, because at that time it
was impossible that he should have a peaceful entry. All were eager for
so holy a work and pressed him; especially the two bishops, Malchus[384]
and Gilbert,[385] of whom the former was the elder[386] of Lismore
mentioned above, the second he who is said to have been the first to
exercise the office of legate of the Apostolic See throughout the whole
of Ireland. These, when three years had now passed in this presumption
of Murtough and dissimulation of Malachy,[387] tolerating no longer the
adultery of the church and the dishonour of Christ, called together the
bishops and princes of the land,[388] and came, in one spirit, to
Malachy, prepared to use force. But he refused at first; pleading the
difficulty of the project, the numbers, strength and ambition of that
noble stock, urging that it was a great venture for him, a poor man and
of no account, to oppose himself to men so many, so great, of such sort,
so deeply rooted, who now for well-nigh two hundred years had _held_ as
_by hereditary right the sanctuary of God_,[389] and now also had taken
possession of it before him; that they could not be rooted out, not even
at the cost of human life; that it was not to his advantage that _man's
blood should be shed_[390] on his account; and lastly, that he was
joined to another spouse[391] whom _it was_ not _lawful for him to put
away_.[392]
21. (14). But when they persisted eagerly in the contrary opinion, and
cried out that the _word had come forth from the Lord_,[393] and
moreover ordered him with all authority to undertake the burden, and
threatened him with an anathema, he said, "You are leading me to death,
but I obey in the hope of martyrdom; yet on this condition, that if, as
you expect, the enterprise has good success, and God frees his
_heritage_ from _those that are destroying_ it,[394] all being then at
length completed, and the church[395] at peace, it may be lawful for me
to return to my former spouse and friend, poverty,[396] from which I am
carried off, and to put in my place there another, if then one is found
fit for it." Note, reader, the courage of the man and the purity of his
purpose who, for Christ's name, neither sought honour nor dreaded death.
What could be purer or what braver than this purpose, that after
exposing himself to peril and labour he should yield to another the
fruit--peace and security itself in the place of authority? And this he
does, retaining for himself according to agreement a free return to
poverty when peace and freedom are restored to the church. When they
gave the pledge, at length he assented to their will; or rather to the
will of God, who, he remembered, had long foreshown to him this
occurrence, at the fulfilment of which he was now grieved. For indeed
when Cellach was already ailing there appeared to Malachy--far away and
ignorant [of Cellach's condition]--a woman of great stature and reverend
mien. When he inquired who she was, the answer was given that she was
the wife of Cellach.[397] And she gave him a pastoral staff which she
held in her hand, and then disappeared. A few days later, Cellach, when
he was dying, sent his staff to Malachy, indicating that he should
succeed him: and when he saw it he recognized that it was the same which
he had seen [in vision]. It was the remembrance of this vision which
specially put Malachy in fear, lest if he still refused he might seem to
_resist_ the Divine _will_, which he had ignored long enough.[398] But
he did not enter the city as long as that intruder lived, lest by such
act it should happen that any one of those should die to whom he came
rather to minister life. Thus for two years (for so long the other
survived), living outside the town, he strenuously performed the
episcopal office throughout the whole province.[399]
[Sidenote: 1134, Sept. 17]
22. (15). When that person, then, had been removed by sudden death,[400]
again one Niall [_Nigellus_] (in truth _nigerrimus_, very black)[401]
quickly took possession of the see. And in appointing him as his
successor, Murtough, while he was still alive, _made provision for his
life_:[402] he was going forth to be damned, but in the person of Niall
he would go on adding to the works of damnation.[403] For he also was
of the damned race, a relative of Murtough.[404] But the king[405] and
the bishops and faithful of the land nevertheless came together that
they might bring in Malachy. And lo, there was an _assembly of the
wicked_[406] to oppose them.[407] A certain man of the sons of Belial,
ready for _mischief, mighty in iniquity_,[408] who _knew the place_
where they had decided _to come together_,[409] gathered many with him
and secretly seized a neighbouring high hill opposite to it, intending,
when they were engaged with other things, suddenly to rush upon them
unawares and _murder the innocent_.[410] For they had agreed to butcher
the king also with the bishop, that there might be none to _avenge the
righteous blood_.[411] The plan became known to Malachy, and he entered
the church, which was close by, and lifted up his hands in prayer to
the Lord. Lo, there came _clouds and darkness_,[412] yea also _dark
waters and thick clouds of the skies[413] changed the day into
night_,[414] _lightnings and thunderings_[415] and _an horrible spirit
of tempests_[416] presaged the last day, _and all_ the elements
_threatened_ speedy _death_.[417]
23. But that you may know, reader, that it was the prayer of Malachy
that roused the elements, the tempest fell upon those _who sought his
life_,[418] the _dark whirlwind_[419] enveloped only those who had made
ready _the works of darkness_.[420] Finally, he who was the leader of so
great wickedness was struck by a thunderbolt and perished with three
others, companions in death as they had been partners in crime; and the
next day their bodies were found half-burnt and putrid, clinging to the
branches of trees, each where the wind[421] _had lifted him up and cast
him down_.[422] Three others also were found half dead; the rest were
all scattered in every direction. But, as for those who were with
Malachy, though they were close to the place, the storm _touched them
not at all, neither troubled them_.[423] In that fact we find fresh
proof of the truth of that saying, _The prayer of the righteous pierceth
the heavens._[424] It is also a new example of the ancient miracle, by
which in former times, when all Egypt was in darkness, Israel alone
remained in light, as the Scripture says, _Wheresoever Israel was there
was light._[425] In this connexion occurs to me also what holy Elijah
did, at one time bringing clouds and rain from the ends of the
earth,[426] at another, calling down fire from heaven on the
revilers.[427] And now in like manner _God is glorified in_[428] His
servant Malachy.
24. (16). In the thirty-eighth year of his age,[429] the usurper having
been driven out, the poor man, Malachy, entered Armagh, pontiff and
metropolitan of all Ireland. But when the king and the others who had
brought him in returned home,[430] he remained _in the hand of
God_;[431] and there remained for him _without fightings, within
fears_.[432] For, lo, the viperous brood, raging and crying out that it
was disinherited, aroused itself in full strength, within and without,
_against the Lord and against His Anointed_.[433] Moreover, Niall,
seeing that flight was inevitable,[434] took with him certain insignia
of that see, to wit, the copy of the Gospels, which had belonged to
blessed Patrick,[435] and the staff covered with gold and adorned with
most costly gems, which they call "the staff of Jesus," because the Lord
himself (as report affirms) held it in His hands and fashioned it;[436]
which are deemed of the highest honour and sanctity in that nation. They
are, in fact, very well known and celebrated among the tribes, and so
revered by all, that he who is once seen to have them is held by the
_foolish and unwise people_[437] to be their bishop. That man--a
vagabond[438] and another _Satan_--_went to and fro in the land and
walked up and down in it_,[439] bearing round the holy insignia; and,
displaying them everywhere, he was for their sake everywhere received,
by them winning the minds of all to himself, and withdrawing as many as
he could from Malachy. These things did he.
25. But there was a certain prince, of the more powerful of the
unrighteous race,[440] whom the king before he left the city, had
compelled to swear that he would maintain peace with the bishop, taking
from him, moreover, many hostages. Notwithstanding this, when the king
left he entered the city, and took _counsel_ with his kinsmen and
friends _how they might take_ the holy man _by subtlety and kill him;
but they feared the people_;[441] and having conspired to slay
Malachy[442] they fixed a place and day, and a traitor _gave them a
sign_.[443] On that very day, when the prelate was now celebrating the
solemnity of Vespers in the church with the whole of the clergy and a
multitude of the people, that worthless man sent him a message in _words
of peace with subtlety_,[444] asking him that he would deign to come
down to him, so that he might make peace. The bystanders answered that
he should rather come to the bishop, and that the church was a more
suitable place for establishing peace; for they foresaw guile. The
messengers replied that this was not safe for the prince; that he
feared for his head, and that he did not trust himself to the crowds
who, some days before, had nearly killed him for the bishop's sake. As
they were contending in this way, these saying that he should go, those
that he should not go, the bishop, desiring peace and not afraid to die,
said, "Brethren, let me imitate my Master.[445] I am a Christian to no
purpose if I do not _follow_ Christ.[446] Perhaps by humility I shall
bend the tyrant; if not, yet I shall conquer by rendering, a shepherd to
a sheep, a priest to a layman, that duty which he owed to me. You also,
as far as in me lies, I shall edify not a little by such an example. For
what if I should chance to be killed? _I refuse not to die_,[447] in
order that from me you may have an example of life. It behoves a bishop,
as the prince of bishops says, not _to be lord over the clergy, but to
become an example to the flock_[448]--no other example[449] truly than
that which we have received from Him _who humbled himself and became
obedient unto death_.[450] Who will give me [the opportunity] to leave
this [example] to [my] sons, sealed with my blood? Try, at any rate,
whether your priest has worthily learnt from Christ not to fear death
for Christ." And he arose and went his way, all weeping, and praying
that he would not so greatly desire to die for Christ that he should
leave desolate so great a flock of Christ.
26. (17). But as for him, _setting his whole hope_ in the Lord,[451] he
went with all speed accompanied only by three disciples who were _ready
to die with him_.[452] _When he crossed the threshold_[453] of the house
and suddenly came into the midst of the armed men--himself protected by
the _shield of faith_[454]--the _countenances_ of them all _fell_,[455]
for _dread fell upon them_,[456] so that the bishop could say, _Mine
enemies which trouble me became weak and fell._[457] This _word is
true_.[458] You might see the victim standing, the slaughterers
surrounding him on all sides, with weapons in their hands; and there was
none to sacrifice him. You might suppose their arms were benumbed; for
there was none to stretch out a hand. For even that one also, who seemed
to be the head of the evil, rose up, not to assail him but to show him
reverence. Where is the sign, O man, which you had given for the death
of the pontiff? This is a sign rather of honour than death; this
postpones, it does not hasten death. Wonderful result! They offer peace
who had prepared slaughter. He cannot refuse it who had sought it at the
risk of life. Therefore peace was made--a peace so firm that from that
day the priest found his foe not merely appeased, but obedient,
devoted.[459] When they heard this, all the faithful rejoiced, not only
because _the innocent blood was saved in that day_,[460] but because by
the merits of Malachy the souls of many wrongdoers escaped to salvation.
And fear took hold on all that were round about when they heard how God
had laid low, with sudden power, those two of His enemies who seemed
most ferocious and powerful _in their generation_:[461] I refer to him
with whom we are now concerned, and the other of whom I spoke
above.[462] For in a wonderful manner He _took them_ both--one terribly
punished in the body,[463] the other mercifully changed in
heart[464]--_in the devices that they had imagined_.[465]
[Sidenote: 1135, July(?)]
27. These matters so accomplished, the bishop now began to dispose and
order in the city all things pertaining to his ministry with entire
freedom, but not without constant risk of his life. For though there was
no one now who would harm him openly, yet the bishop had no place that
was safe from plotters, and no time when he could be at ease; and armed
men were appointed to guard him day and night, though he rather _trusted
in the Lord_.[466] But his purpose was to take action against the
schismatic already mentioned, forasmuch as he was seducing many by means
of the insignia which he carried about, persuading all that he ought to
be bishop, and so stirring up the congregations[467] against Malachy and
the unity of the church.[468] And thus he did; and without difficulty in
a short time he so _hedged up_ all _his ways[469] through the grace
given unto him by the Lord_,[470] and which he had toward all, that that
evil one was compelled to surrender, to return the insignia,[471] and
henceforth to be quiet in _all subjection_.[472] Thus Malachy, albeit
through many perils and labours, prospered day by day and was
strengthened, _abounding_ more and more _in hope and the power of the
Holy Ghost_.[473]
28. (18). And God swept away, not only those who did evil to Malachy,
but also those who disparaged him. A certain man, for example, who was
in favour with the princes and magnates, and even with the king
himself,[474] because he was a flatterer and garrulous and _mighty in
tongue_,[475] befriended Malachy's opponents in all things, and
impudently maintained their contention. On the other hand, when the
saint was present, he _withstood him to the face_,[476] and when he was
absent he disparaged him. Moreover he accosted him rudely everywhere,
and especially when he knew that he was engaged in the more frequented
assemblies. But he was soon visited with a suitable reward of his
impudent tongue. The evil-speaking tongue swelled, and _became putrid
and worms swarmed_ from it[477] and filled the whole blasphemous mouth.
He vomited them forth incessantly for well-nigh seven days, and at
length with them spued out his wretched soul.
29. Once when Malachy was speaking before the people and exhorting
them, a certain unhappy woman dared to interrupt his discourse with evil
cries, showing no respect to the priest _and the Spirit which
spake_.[478] Now she was of the impious race; and having _breath in her
nostrils_[479] she vomited out blasphemies and insults against the
saint, saying that he was a hypocrite, and an invader of the inheritance
of another, and even reproaching him for his baldness. But he, modest
and gentle as he was, _answered_ her _nothing_;[480] but the Lord
answered for him. The woman became insane by the judgement of the Lord,
and crying out many times that she was being suffocated by Malachy, at
length by a horrible death she expiated the sin of blasphemy. So this
wretched woman, taking up against Malachy the reproach that had been
made against Elisha,[481] found to her cost that he was indeed another
Elisha.
30. Further, because on account of a certain pestilence which arose in
the city, he had solemnly led out a multitude of the clergy and people
with the memorial of the saints,[482] neither is this to be passed over,
that when Malachy prayed the pestilence immediately ceased.
Thenceforward there was none to murmur against him, for those who were
of the _seed of Canaan[483] said, Let us flee from the face of_ Malachy,
_for the Lord fighteth for him_.[484] But it was too late, for the
wrath of the Lord, coming everywhere upon them, pursued them _even unto
destruction_.[485] How, in a few days, _is their memorial perished with
resounding noise;[486] how are they brought into desolation, they are
consumed in a moment, they are punished for their iniquity_.[487] A
great miracle to-day is the extinction of that generation, so quickly
wrought, especially for those who knew their pride and power.[488] And
_many other signs truly_[489] were there by which God glorified His name
and strengthened His servant amidst labours and dangers. Who can
worthily recount them? Yet we do not omit them all, though we have not
ability to describe all. But that the sequence of the narrative may not
be interrupted we reserve to the end some that we propose to mention.
[Sidenote: 1137]
31. (19). So then Malachy, when within three years[490] _a reward was
rendered to the proud_[491] and liberty restored to the church,
barbarism driven out and the customs of the Christian religion
everywhere instituted anew, seeing that all things were at peace, began
to think also of his own peace. And mindful of his design he appointed
in his own place Gelasius,[492] a good man, and worthy of so great an
honour, the clergy and people tacitly assenting, or rather supporting
him because of the agreement.[493] For apart from that it seemed
altogether cruel. And when he had been consecrated and earnestly
commended to the kings and princes, Malachy himself, renowned for
miracles and triumphs, returned to his parish;[494] but not to Connor.
Hear the cause, which is worth relating. It is said that that diocese in
ancient times had two episcopal sees, and that there were two
bishoprics; an arrangement which seemed to Malachy preferable to the
existing one. Hence those bishoprics which ambition had welded into
one,[495] Malachy divided again into two, yielding one part to another
bishop and retaining the other for himself. And for this reason he did
not come to Connor, because he had already ordained a bishop in it;[496]
but he betook himself to Down, separating the parishes _as in the days
of old_.[497] O pure heart! O dove-like eye![498] He handed over to the
new bishop the place which seemed better organized, which was held to be
more important, the place in which he himself had sat. Where are they
that fight about boundaries, carrying on perpetual hostilities against
one another for a single village? I know not if there is any class of
men whom that ancient prophecy touches more than those: _They have
ripped up the women with child of Gilead that they might enlarge their
border._[499] But this at another place.[500]
32. When Malachy was made bishop of Down, immediately according to his
custom he was at pains to take to himself from his sons, for his
comfort, a convent of regular clerics.[501] And lo, again he girds
himself, as though a new recruit of Christ, for the spiritual conflict;
again he puts on the _weapons_ that are _mighty through God_,[502] the
humility of holy poverty, the rigour of monastic discipline, the
quietness of contemplation, continuance in prayer. But all these things
for a long time he was able to maintain rather in will than in deed. For
all men came to him; not only obscure persons, but also nobles and
magnates, hastened to commit themselves to his wisdom and holiness for
instruction and correction. And he himself meanwhile went about; _he
went out to sow his seed_,[503] disposing and decreeing with all
authority concerning ecclesiastical affairs, like one of the Apostles.
And none _said unto him, By what authority doest thou these
things_?[504] inasmuch as all _saw the miracles_ and wonders _which_ he
did,[505] and because _where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is
liberty_.[506]
FOOTNOTES:
[365] That is, while Malachy was in Iveragh.
[366] Cellach is here mentioned by name for the first time. See p. 14,
n. 2.
[367] Harris (_Ware's Works_, ii., "Writers," p. 69) identifies this
testament with the _Testamentum ad ecclesias_, a tract attributed to
Cellach, which is apparently no longer extant. But it may be doubted
whether the testament mentioned in the text was committed to writing.
[368] The designation by a coarb of his successor seems to have been
unusual. But in 1124 Malachy had in this way been appointed abbot of
Bangor (§ 12); and in 1134 Murtough designated Niall as his successor
in the abbacy of Armagh (§ 22).
[369] Conor O'Brien, king of Thomond, and Cormac Mac Carthy, king of
Desmond. See § 9, and p. 21, notes 1-3. Murtough O'Brien, king of
Munster, fell into ill-health in 1114, and his brother Dermot
attempted, evidently with some success, to seize the throne. Dermot
died in 1118 and Murtough early in the following year. Turlough
O'Conor, the powerful king of Connaught, promptly invaded Munster, and
divided it into two vassal kingdoms, Thomond and Desmond. The former
he gave to the sons of Dermot, of whom Conor was one, the latter to
Teague Mac Carthy. Apparently Conor O'Brien soon established himself
as sole king of Thomond, and Cormac Mac Carthy became king of Desmond
on the death of his father, Teague, in 1124. We have seen that both of
them were deposed in 1127, and quickly restored (§ 9 f.: see p. 21, n.
3; p. 23, n. 2). From that time Conor and Cormac were allies. Cormac
married Conor's niece (_A.T._ 1138). Together in 1133 they invaded
Connaught (_A.F.M._), and the next year they made another successful
expedition through Connaught into Ulster (then ruled by Conor
O'Loughlin; see p. 40, n. 2), in the course of which they burned the
church of Rathluraigh, now Maghera, co. Derry, near the border of the
diocese of Armagh (_D.A.I._). This expedition must be referred to
hereafter (p. 51, n. 2). But Conor evidently aspired to be _ardrí_ of
Ireland, and he found it desirable to remove a possible rival.
Accordingly Cormac was murdered by his father-in-law, Conor's brother,
in 1138, and Conor became king of all Munster. He was now the most
powerful prince in Ireland; but he died, after a lingering illness
(Tundale, p. 42), in 1142, without attaining his ambition.
It is clear from the present passage that Conor O'Brien followed in
the footsteps of his predecessors in the same family as a supporter of
the new movement in the Irish Church. Cormac, as we know, was the
friend and disciple of Malachy: his devotion to the Church is
witnessed to by the beautiful edifice built by him at Cashel, still
known as "Cormac's Chapel," which was consecrated in 1134; and by his
title of "Bishop-King," which has been the subject of so much
discussion. See Petrie, pp. 283-307; and for the crozier found in
Cormac's supposed tomb, G. Coffey, _Guide to the Celtic Antiquities of
the Christian Period in the National Museum, Dublin_, p. 64. But it
must be added that the contemporary Vision of Tundale, which
apparently emanated from Cormac's kingdom of Desmond, while bearing
emphatic testimony to his generosity to "Christ's poor and pilgrims,"
charges him with heinous crimes strangely inconsistent with St.
Bernard's sketch of his character (Tundale, p. 44 f.).
[370] It seems that the successor (coarb) of the founder of a church
was supposed to speak with his authority. Cp. the Epistle of Cummian
in Ussher, p. 442.
[371] Cp. § 65. It is generally believed that St. Patrick was buried
at Downpatrick (see Reeves, p. 223 ff.); but Olden contended (not
convincingly) that the statement made here by St. Bernard is correct
(_R.I.A._ xviii, 655 ff.), while Bury (_Life of St. Patrick_, p. 211)
has "little hesitation in deciding that the obscure grave was at
Saul."
[372] This word cannot have been in St. Bernard's document, for it is
unknown in early Irish ecclesiastical terminology, and in Irish
hierarchical arrangements it would have no meaning. The context proves
that the persons to whom it is here applied are the abbots of Armagh,
of whom Cellach was one. It probably represents a Latin rendering of
"coarb (successor) of Patrick," a title commonly given to the abbots
of this period. The document portrayed the coarbs as rulers of the
church of Armagh. St. Bernard would naturally infer that they were
bishops. When he found that their authority extended beyond Armagh he
would no less naturally style them archbishops or metropolitans. Cp.
Serm. i, § 6, where the story of §§ 19-31 is briefly summarized.
[373] Armagh.
[374] _Quasi generationibus quindecim._ The "quasi-generations" are
apparently the periods of office of successive coarbs. St. Bernard
seems to have written "fifteen" in mistake for "twelve." See
Additional Note B, p. 165.
[375] Adulterous, because it took possession of the church, which
should have been married to true bishops. Cp. § 20, "the adultery of
the church," Malachy "being joined to another spouse;" § 21, Malachy's
"former spouse," and the vision of Cellach's wife.
[376] Matt. xii. 39; xvi. 4.
[377] On the statements in these sentences, see Additional Note B.
[378] That bishops were numerous in Ireland at this period is
indubitable. Fifty attended the Synod of Fiadh meic Oengusa (_A.U._
1111), and probably all of them came from the provinces of Ulster and
Munster (above, p. xxxviii). But this cannot have been due to the
irregularities at Armagh of which St. Bernard complains. There were
many bishops in Ireland in its earliest Christian period. See Reeves,
123-136; Todd, 27 ff.
[379] Malachy was not of the Clann Sinaich, to which at this period
the coarbs of Patrick belonged. See p. 6, n. 5, and Additional Note B,
p. 165.
[380] 1 Sam. iii. 19, etc.
[381] Cellach died on April 1, 1129, and was buried at Lismore on
April 4. On April 5, the day after his funeral, Murtough was appointed
coarb (_A.U._).
[382] He was probably supported by Conor O'Loughlin, who was king of
Oriel, the district in which Armagh was situated (_A.F.M._ 1136). On
him see p. 40, n. 2. The "five years" are the period from Murtough's
election to his death, September 17, 1134 (_A.F.M._)--nearly five
years and a half.
[383] Geoffrey, St. Bernard's secretary, recalls a saying of his about
"one of the saints," which actually appears in the first antiphon at
Mattins in the office of St. Malachy, and which Geoffrey applies to
St. Bernard himself: "Blessed is he who loved the law, but did not
desire the chair [of dignity]." (_V.P._ iii. 8).
[384] On Malchus see p. 18, n. 6. He was now about eighty-five years
of age.
[385] Gillebertus (as St. Bernard writes the name) is a latinized form
of the Irish _Gilla espuig_ (servant of the bishop), which is
anglicized Gillespie. With that Irish name he subscribed the Acts of
the Synod of Rathbreasail (Keating, iii. 306); and we may therefore
affirm with confidence that he was an Irishman. Gilbert was a friend
of the famous thinker and ecclesiastical statesman, Anselm, who was
archbishop of Canterbury from 1093 to 1109. The two men met each other
for the first time at Rouen, probably in 1087, when Anselm was called
thither to the deathbed of William the Conqueror. Twenty years later,
Gilbert, then bishop of Limerick, wrote a letter of congratulation to
Anselm on his victory over Henry I. in the controversy concerning
investiture (August 1107). In his reply Anselm intimates that the long
interval had not blurred his recollection of their former
companionship, from which we may infer that Gilbert's personality had
made a considerable impression upon him. Anselm also states that he
had learned (probably from the superscription of his friend's letter)
that he was now a bishop. It would seem, therefore, that Gilbert had
been consecrated recently, and not, like the contemporary bishops of
Danish sees in Ireland, by the English Primate (see the letters in
Ussher, 511, 512). He probably became bishop of Limerick about 1105.
Shortly after his correspondence with Anselm, and perhaps by his
influence, he was appointed papal legate for Ireland, the first, as
St. Bernard tells us, who had held that office. He was legate when in
1108 or 1109 he wrote his tract _De Statu Ecclesiæ_ (see above, p.
xxx. ff.); and in 1110, as legate, he presided over the Synod of
Rathbreasail. In 1139 or 1140, being old and infirm, he resigned his
legatine commission and his see (§ 38 and p. 73, note 1). He died in
1145. Gilbert was evidently a strong man, who had much influence on
the affairs of the Irish Church. It is therefore surprising that the
only reference to him in the native Annals is the notice of his death
in the _Chronicon Scotorum_.
[386] _Senior._ This is almost a technical word for the head of a
religious community. Malchus is called _ard senóir Gaoidheal_ (high
senior of the Irish) in _A.F.M._ 1135.
[387] His dissimulation was his disregard of the divine call in the
vision described in § 21.
[388] Cp. _A.F.M._ 1132: "Mael Maedoc Ua Morgair sat in the coarbate
of Patrick _by the request of the clerics of Ireland_."
[389] Ps. lxxxiii. 12 (vg.).--See Additional Note B, p. 165.
[390] Gen. ix. 6.
[391] The diocese of Connor.
[392] Matt. xix. 2; Mark x. 2.
[393] Ezek. xxxiii. 30.
[394] Jer. l. 11.
[395] The church of Armagh.
[396] The "spouse" is primarily the diocese of Connor. His voluntary
poverty is especially associated with his episcopate there in Serm. i.
§ 6.
[397] It can hardly be doubted that this means the diocese of Armagh
(cp. p. 45, n. 4). Both § 19 and the title "son of purity" (_A.U._
1129) imply that Cellach was not married.
[398] Rom. ix. 19.
[399] That Malachy was in 1132 recognized by many as coarb of Patrick
is confirmed by the Annals (see p. 48, n. 3). But that he exercised
his episcopal office "throughout the entire province" is inconsistent
with the fact that in 1133 Murtough "made a visitation of Tír Eoghain
[counties of Derry and Tyrone] and received his tribute of cows and
imparted his blessing" (_A.F.M._).
[400] September 17, 1134 (_A.F.M._). Sudden death is not suggested by
the Annals.
[401] St. Bernard puns on the Latin name by which he represents Niall.
It is a diminutive of _niger_, black.
[402] Josh. ix. 24 (vg.).
[403] The meaning of this somewhat difficult sentence is made clear by
the reference to the Gibeonites (Josh. ix). By their stratagem they
"made provision for their lives," that is, that they should continue
to live instead of being exterminated with the rest of the Canaanites.
In like manner Murtough provided that he should, as it were, live on
and pursue his evil course, in the person of Niall.
[404] He was Murtough's cousin, and Cellach's brother. See the table,
Additional Note B, p. 164.
[405] That the king was either Conor O'Brien or Cormac Mac Carthy is
highly probable. To them Cellach had confided the duty of seeing that
Malachy should be his successor (§ 19), and in this very year they
reached the border of the diocese of Armagh (p. 43, n. 5). See p. 53,
n. 5.
[406] Ps. xxii. 16.
[407] The narrative of this and the next section is illustrated by the
Annals under the year 1134. _A.F.M._, after recording the obit of
Murtough, proceed: "Niall, son of Aedh, was installed in the coarbate
of Patrick. A change of abbots in Armagh, _i.e._ Mael Maedoc Ua
Morgair in place of Niall." In _A.T._ we have the statement, "Mael
Maedog o Mongair ascended Patrick's chair. The Cinel Eoghain of Tulach
Óg conspired against Mael Maedoc, and a flash of lightning consumed
twelve men of them on the spot where they conspired against him." Thus
it seems that the conspirators came from the place now known as
Tullaghoge, in the county of Tyrone, then, as now, in the diocese of
Armagh. It was the district inhabited by the sept of the O'Hagans, and
in it was the _lía na rígh_, the inauguration chair of the O'Neills,
kings of Ulster. The confirmation which St. Bernard's story receives
from _A.T._ is the more important, because the two narratives are so
far different that they must have come from independent sources.
[408] Ps. lii. 1 (vg.).
[409] Cp. John xviii. 2 (vg.).
[410] Ps. x. 8.
[411] Matt. xxiii. 35, combined with Rev. vi. 10; xix. 2.
[412] Ps. xcvii. 2.
[413] Ps. xviii. 11.
[414] Amos v. 8 (vg.).
[415] Rev. iv. 5.
[416] Ps. xi. 6, _horribilis spiritus procellarum_: apparently a
conflation of the vg. with another rendering. A.V. has _an horrible
tempest_.
[417] Virg., _Aen._ i. 91.
[418] Exod. iv. 19; Matt. ii. 20, etc.
[419] Job iii. 6 (vg.).
[420] Rom. xiii. 12.
[421] _Spiritus._ Cp. the "spirit of tempests" in § 22 (end).
[422] Ps. cii. 10.
[423] _Song of Three Children_, 27.
[424] Ecclus. xxxv. 16 (inexact quotation).
[425] Exod. x. 23 (inexact quotation).
[426] 2 Kings xviii. 41 ff.; Jas. v. 18.
[427] 2 Kings i. 9-12.
[428] John xiii. 31.
[429] This date is incorrect. The entry into the city of Armagh cannot
have taken place before October 1134, when Malachy was in his fortieth
(possibly thirty-ninth) year. His entry into the province (§ 21) was
probably made in his thirty-eighth year. This was no doubt the cause
of St. Bernard's error; for one of his documents may, like _A.F.M._
(p. 48, n. 3), have used words which seemed to imply that he entered
Armagh on that earlier occasion.
[430] If "the king" was Cormac Mac Carthy (p. 51, n. 2), the statement
that he returned home shortly after Malachy obtained possession of the
see, is confirmed by _A.F.M._ For they record, under 1134, the
consecration of Cormac's Chapel on the rock of Cashel.
[431] Wisd. iii. 1.
[432] 2 Cor. vii. 5.
[433] Ps. ii. 2; Acts iv. 26.
[434] The flight of Niall seems clearly to imply that he was in the
city of Armagh. The natural inference is that "having been driven out"
he was afterwards reinstated. This may have happened while Malachy was
absent on a visitation of Munster, mentioned in _A.F.M._, but
apparently unknown to St. Bernard. The statement of the latter, that
Malachy "remained" in Armagh, ignores it. See further, Additional Note
C, p. 168 f.
[435] The _Book of Armagh_, now in the Library of Trinity College,
Dublin. The manuscript was written at Armagh early in the ninth
century by a scribe named Ferdomnach; but at an early date it came to
be supposed that it was the work of St. Patrick himself. From this
belief, perhaps, arose the name by which it was known for many
centuries, and which can be traced back to the year 936--the Canon of
Patrick. It is strange that it should be called here a "copy of the
Gospels"; for in addition to the complete text of the New Testament it
contains two lives of St. Patrick, his _Confession_ and other
historical documents. But the word _Gospel_ was very loosely used in
Ireland (see _R.I.A._ xxxiii. 327 f.). Misled by this description, de
Backer (n. _ad loc._) identifies the book mentioned by St. Bernard
with the so-called "Gospels of St. Patrick," found in the shrine known
as the Domnach Airgid, about 1830, which have no connexion with Armagh
or St. Patrick (_R.I.A. Trans._ xviii., "Antiquities," pp. 14 ff.;
xxx. 303 ff.; _R.I.A._ xxxiv. 108 ff.). For further information about
the _Book of Armagh_ the reader may consult Gwynn, especially pp.
ci.-cxvi.
[436] The staff of Jesus was a wooden crozier (Giraldus, _Top._ iii.
34), richly adorned. The story of its presentation by Christ to St.
Patrick is found in the tenth-century _Trip._ (p. 30), no doubt taken
from an earlier source. The staff was much older than the _Book of
Armagh_; for we find that it was "profaned" in 789, and it was then
apparently regarded as the principal relic of St. Patrick (_A.U._
788). It seems that there was a still more ancient tradition, that St.
Patrick gave it to St. Mac Cairthinn (_R.I.A._ xxxiv. 114), from which
it may be inferred that it once belonged to the church of Clogher. It
was removed from Armagh to Dublin in 1180, and deposited in Christ
Church. It was burnt in 1538 (_A.L.C._). Apparently St. Bernard is the
only authority for the statement that it was "fashioned" by Christ. It
appears that the staff of Jesus, in the twelfth century, was regarded
as a much more important relic than the _Book of Armagh_, and was more
closely associated with the person and office of the coarb of Patrick.
It is frequently mentioned in such a way as to suggest that it was one
of the insignia of his authority (_A.U._ 1015, 1073, 1101, 1113, 1157,
1166, 1167; _A.F.M._ 1135, 1139, 1143, 1148, 1152). Similar references
to the _Book of Armagh_ do not occur till near the close of the
twelfth century, immediately after the removal of the staff from
Armagh (_A.U._ 1179, 1196; Gwynn, p. civ.). A very full account of the
later history of the staff may be read in _O.C.C._ pp. viii-xx.
[437] Deut. xxxii. 6.
[438] _Gyrovagus._ The word is commonly used of a monk who leaves his
proper monastery, and wanders about from one cell to another (see,
_e.g._, St. Bernard, _Ep._ 68, § 4), or to a priest who deserts his
parish (Du Cange, _s.v._).
[439] Job i. 6, 7; ii. 2.
[440] King (_Primacy of Armagh_, p. 97) thought that this was Conor
O'Loughlin. But he could hardly be described as "of the unrighteous
race," or as a "prince," which would indicate a petty chieftain.
Probably the conspirator was a local magnate.
[441] Matt. xxvi. 4, combined with Luke xxii. 2.
[442] Cp. Acts xxiii. 12 f.
[443] Matt. xxvi. 48.
[444] 1 Macc. i. 30.
[445] Cp. 1 Cor. xi. 1.
[446] Matt. x. 38, etc.
[447] Acts xxv. 11.
[448] 1 Pet. v. 3 (vg., inexact quotation).
[449] _Formam._ The word occurs in the verse just quoted, and in the
context of that which follows (Phil. ii. 7).
[450] Phil. ii. 8.
[451] Ps. lxxviii. 7.
[452] Acts xxi. 13; John xi. 16.
[453] Cp. Apuleius, _Metamorph._ xi. 23.
[454] Eph. vi. 16.
[455] Gen. iv. 6.
[456] Exod. xv. 16.
[457] Ps. xxvii. 2 (vg.).
[458] John iv. 37.
[459] While accepting the facts here narrated, so far as they were
capable of being observed, one cannot ignore the probability that they
were misinterpreted. It is quite possible that the offer of peace was
made in good faith, and that Malachy and his friends were unduly
suspicious when they "foresaw guile." The prince may have surrounded
himself with armed men as a mere matter of prudence.
[460] Susanna, 62.
[461] Luke xvi. 8.
[462] § 23.
[463] _Mulctatum in corpore._
[464] _Mutatum in corde._
[465] Ps. x. 2.
[466] Jer. xvii. 7, etc.
[467] _Plebes._
[468] That is, the church of Armagh.
[469] Hos. ii. 6.
[470] Rom. xii. 3; xv. 15, etc.
[471] This statement can hardly be regarded as accurate. Flann Ua
Sinaich, keeper of the staff of Jesus, having died, Malachy purchased
it on July 7, 1135; or, in other words, as we may suppose, bribed the
new keeper to hand it over to him (_A.F.M._). Niall himself may have
subsequently surrendered the _Book of Armagh_.
[472] 1 Tim. ii. 11.
[473] Rom. xv. 13 (vg.).--The success of Malachy in establishing peace
in the latter years of his rule at Armagh may be attributed in part to
the influence of a prince who is not mentioned in the text. Donough
O'Carroll first appears in the Annals as chieftain of the men of
Fearnmaigh (now represented by the barony of Farney, co. Monaghan),
whom he led in an expedition against Fingal (the district north of
Dublin) in 1133. He seems to have succeeded to the kingdom or lordship
of Oriel (which included the present counties of Armagh, Monaghan and
Louth) on the death of Conor O'Loughlin (May 1136); for in 1138, "with
the Oirgialla," he took part in an invasion of Meath. His career was
prosperous till 1152, when he assaulted the coarb of Patrick
(Gelasius). In consequence he was attacked by the Cenél Eoghain, and
expelled from Oriel. In 1155 he was imprisoned by Tighernan O'Rorke in
Lough Sheelan, for six weeks; but he escaped and recovered his
kingdom, and was present at the consecration of the Church of
Mellifont Abbey in 1157. He was murdered in 1168. For his support of
Malachy see Additional Note C, p. 170.
[474] This is obviously not the king mentioned in §§ 22, 24, 25. The
reference may be to Conor O'Loughlin, who was king of Oriel till he
was murdered in May 1136 (p. 40, note 2), or his successor, Donough
O'Carroll.
[475] Ecclus. xxi. 7.
[476] Gal. ii. 11.
[477] Exod. xvi. 20 (vg., inexact quotation).
[478] Acts vi. 10 (vg.).
[479] Isa. ii. 22; cf. Job xxvii. 3; Wisd. ii. 2.--The words might be
rendered "a spirit (_spiritus_) in her nostrils." The meaning is not
clear. In the biblical passages in which the phrase occurs it
indicates mortality. On the other hand, by the previous sentence St.
Bernard suggests that, in contrast to Malachy, the woman spoke under
the influence of an evil spirit.
[480] Mark xiv. 61.
[481] 2 Kings ii. 23.
[482] _Memoria sanctorum._ Probably a reliquary. A reliquary preserved
at Clogher in 1300 was known as the _membra_, which, according to one
explanation, was the equivalent of _memoriale scrinium_, memorial
shrine. See _L.A.J._ iv. 245. Cp. Oengus, p. 345 (_s.v._ Memrae);
Lightfoot, _Clement of Rome_, vol. i. p. 91.
[483] Susanna, 56.
[484] Exod. xiv. 25.
[485] Deut. vii. 2 (vg.).
[486] Ps. ix. 6 (vg.).
[487] Ps. lxxiii. 19.
[488] See Additional Note B, p. 166.
[489] John xx. 30.
[490] This date is vague. But the period of three years must be
reckoned from the death of Murtough (September 17, 1134), or from the
subsequent ejection of Niall. Since stress is laid on the shortness,
rather than the length of the period, we may therefore conclude that
peace was established not long before October 1137, or, at any rate,
after the beginning of that year. And as St. Bernard believed that the
inauguration of Gelasius "immediately" followed the resignation of
Malachy, we may gather that both these events took place in 1137.
_A.F.M._ date Malachy's resignation in 1136; but the chronology of St.
Bernard is to be preferred. See Additional Note C, pp. 168, 169.
[491] Ps. xciv. 2.
[492] Gelasius--in Irish Gilla meic Liag, the servant of the son of
the poet--was born about 1087. His father was apparently the poet of a
Tyrone sept, named Dermot (O'Hanlon, _Saints_, iii. 965). About 1121
he was appointed abbot of Derry, and held that office till he became
archbishop of Armagh in 1137. He had a long episcopate and seems to
have been a vigorous prelate. His age and infirmity (says Giraldus)
prevented him from attending the Synod of Cashel in 1172. But he
subsequently visited Henry II. in Dublin. Thither he brought the white
cow, whose milk was his only food (Giraldus, _Expug._ i. 35). He died
March 27, 1174, in his eighty-seventh year. For a Life of Gelasius,
see Colgan, _A.S.H._ p. 772.
[493] See § 21.
[494] _I.e._ diocese.
[495] The two episcopal sees are evidently Connor and Down. But in
early time there were many more sees than two in that district (see
Reeves, p. 138), and there is no evidence that any one of them was the
seat of a diocesan bishop. But, even if it were so, St. Bernard's
statement that the two supposed dioceses were "welded into one" by
some ambitious prelate prior to Malachy is unhistorical. A bishop of
Connor and a bishop of Down both died in 1117, just seven years before
Malachy became bishop of the diocese which included these two places;
and there is no trace of a bishop in either of them in the interval.
The fact seems to be that the diocese of Connor or Down was
constituted for the first time at the Synod of Rathbreasail in 1110.
It remained on paper until Malachy was appointed its first bishop. For
the probable reason of Malachy's division of the diocese, see p. lvii.
f.
[496] This cannot be the true reason for Malachy's choice of Down
rather than Connor. If he had wished to go to Connor on his retirement
from Armagh he could have consecrated a bishop for Down. It is more
probable that his preference was due to his love for Bangor, where he
resided during his first episcopate, and where he probably resided
also when he was bishop of Down. But, however that may be, Bangor was
necessarily under his jurisdiction as bishop of Down; his connexion
with it would have been severed if he had assumed the oversight of the
new diocese of Connor.
[497] Isa. li. 9; Amos ix. 11.
[498] Cp. Cant. i. 15; iv. i.; v. 12.--St. Bernard himself is said to
have had "dove-like eyes" (_V.P._ v. 12); and the meaning of the
phrase is explained thus: "In his eyes there shone a certain angelic
_purity_ and a dove-like _simplicity_ (single-mindedness)" (_ibid._
iii. 1).
[499] Amos i. 13.
[500] Cp. § 44, p. 83.
[501] It has been commonly assumed that the house of this
convent--which obviously consisted of Augustinian canons (the only
order of regular clerics recognized at this period by the Roman
Church: see Conc. Lat. 1139, can. 9, Mansi xxi. 528)--was in
Downpatrick. It has accordingly been identified with a monastery which
in the Terrier of 1615 is described as "the monastery of the Irish,
hard by the Cathedral," and called "the church of the channons"
(Reeves, 43, 231). But it is not stated in the text to have been in
Down. It seems more likely to have been the monastery of Bangor, which
was destroyed in 1127 (§ 18), and must have been reconstituted about
this time. There is no indication in the _Life_ that Malachy resided
in Down, while there are several hints that Bangor was his
headquarters and that he was abbot of the community there as long as
he lived. (See p. 33, n. 1.) In other words Bangor was, in fact if not
in name, the see of the diocese of Ulaid, or Down. For this curious
anomaly we have a parallel in the diocese of Tír Eoghain, the see of
which for a long period was at Maghera, the bishop, the while, being
often styled bishop of Derry (_Irish Church Quarterly_, x. 225 ff.);
and for the bishop of a diocese serving as abbot of his cathedral
chapter of regular canons we may point to Carlisle (_Trans. of
Scottish Ecclesiological Society_, iii. 267 ff.), Louth (_L.A.J._ iv.
143 ff.) and Christ Church, Dublin (_ibid._ 145). That the canons of
Bangor were at an early period the bishop's chapter we have
independent evidence. For in 1244 the Pope gave judgement in a cause
which had been pending for some time between the prior and monks of
Down and the abbot and canons of Bangor, each of whom claimed that
their church was cathedral (Theiner, p. 42). This claim on behalf of
Bangor is easily explained if it was reckoned as the bishop's see in
the time of Malachy.
[502] 2 Cor. x. 4.
[503] Luke viii. 5.
[504] Matt. xxi. 23; Mark xi. 28.
[505] Acts viii. 6; John ii. 23.
[506] 2 Cor. iii. 17.
CHAPTER V
_The Roman Pilgrimage: the Miracles which were wrought in it._
[Sidenote: 1139]
33. (20). It seemed to him, however, that one could not go on doing
these things with sufficient security without the authority of the
Apostolic See; and for that reason he determined to set out for Rome,
and most of all because the metropolitan see still lacked, and from the
beginning had lacked, the use of the pall, which is the fullness of
honour.[507] And it _seemed good in his eyes_[508] that the church for
which he had laboured so much[509] should acquire, by his zeal and
labour, that privilege which hitherto it had not had. There was also
another metropolitan see, which Cellach had constituted anew, though
subject to the first see and to its archbishop as primate.[510] For it
also Malachy no less desired the pall, and that the prerogative which it
had attained by the gift of Cellach should be confirmed by the authority
of the Apostolic See. When his purpose became known it displeased both
the brothers and the magnates and people of the country; because all
judged that they could not endure so long an absence of the loving
father of them all, and because they feared he might die.
[Sidenote: 1139, June 12]
[Sidenote: 1140, January]
34. It happened meanwhile that his brother, Christian by name,
died,[511] _a good man, full of grace and_ power.[512] He was a bishop
second to Malachy in reputation, but in holiness of life and zeal for
righteousness perhaps his equal. His departure made all the more afraid,
and rendered a parting from Malachy more grievous. They said, in fact,
that they would in no wise assent to the pilgrimage of their only
protector, since _the whole land_ would _be made desolate_[513] if in
one moment it was bereaved of two such _pillars_.[514] Therefore all,
with one voice, opposed him, and would have used force but that he
threatened them with divine vengeance. They refused to desist, however,
till the will of God on this matter should be asked by the casting of a
lot. He forbade it: nevertheless they cast the lot, but thrice it was
found to give an answer in favour of Malachy. For they were not content
with one trial, so eager were they to retain him. Yielding at length
they let him go, but not without _lamentation and weeping and great
mourning_.[515] But that he should leave nothing imperfect he began to
take measures by which he might _raise up the seed of his_ dead
_brother_.[516] And three of his disciples having been summoned to him
he deliberated anxiously which should seem more worthy, or, in other
words, more useful, for this work. And when he had scrutinized them one
by one, he said, "Do you, Edan" (that was the name of one of them),
"undertake the burden."[517] And when he hesitated and wept, he
proceeded, "Do not fear; for you have been designated to me by the Lord;
for just now I saw in anticipation the gold ring with which you are to
be espoused on your finger."[518] He assented, and when he had been
consecrated Malachy set out on his journey.
35. And when he had left Scotland[519] and reached York, a priest,
named Sycarus,[520] _steadfastly beholding him_[521] recognized him. For
though he had not seen his face before, because he _had the spirit of
prophecy_[522] he had received a revelation concerning him long ago. And
now without hesitation he pointed him out with his finger to those who
stood round him, saying, "_This is he of whom I had said_ that from
Ireland _there shall come_[523] a holy bishop who _knoweth the thoughts
of man_."[524] So the _lamp_ could not be hid _under a bushel_, for the
Holy Spirit who _lighted_ it[525] brought it forth by the mouth of
Sycarus. For also many secret things concerning the affairs of him and
his companions were told him by Sycarus, all of which he acknowledged to
be or to have been. But when the companions of Malachy went on to
inquire about their return, Sycarus immediately replied--and _the event
afterwards proved the truth of the saying_[526]--that evidently very few
of their number would return with the bishop. When they heard that they
imagined that he apprehended death: but God fulfilled it in another way;
for on his way back from the City he left some with us, and some in
other places, to learn the rule of life;[527] and so, _according to the
word_ of Sycarus,[528] he returned to his own country with very few
companions. So much concerning Sycarus.
36. In the same city of York he was visited by a man of noble rank
according to the standard of the world, Waltheof[529] by name, then
prior of the regular brothers at Kirkham,[530] but now a monk, and
father of the monks at Melrose, a monastery of our Order,[531] who
devoutly commended himself with humility to Malachy's prayers. And when
he noticed that the bishop had many companions and few horses--for
besides ministers[532] and other clerks he had with him five presbyters,
and only three horses--he offered him his own, on which he rode, saying
that he regretted only one thing, that it was a pack-horse[533] and a
rough animal to ride. And he added, "I would have given it more
willingly if it had been better; but, if you think it worth while, take
it with you, such as it is." "And I," replied the bishop, "accept it the
more willingly the more valueless you proclaim it, because nothing can
be of no value to me which so precious a will offers;" and, turning to
his companions, "Saddle this horse for me, for it is suitable for me,
and will suffice for a long time." This done, he mounts. And at first he
considered it rough, as it was, but afterwards, by a wonderful change,
he found that it suited him well and ambled pleasantly. And that there
might not _fall_ on _the ground_ any part of the word which he had
spoken,[534] till the ninth year, the year in which he died,[535] it did
not fail him, and became an excellent and very valuable palfrey.
And--that which made the miracle more evident to those that saw--from
being nearly black it began to grow white, and after no long time[536]
there was scarcely a whiter horse to be found than it.
[Sidenote: 1140, March]
37. (21). To me also it was granted to see the man on that journey,[537]
and by the sight of him and by his word I was refreshed, and _I
rejoiced as in all riches_;[538] and I, in turn, though a sinner, _found
grace in his sight_[539] then, and from that time up to his death, as I
said in the Preface.[540] He also, deigning to turn aside to
Clairvaux,[541] when he saw the brothers was deeply moved; and they
were not a little edified by his presence and his speech. So accepting
the place and us, and gathering us into his inmost heart, he bade us
farewell and departed. And crossing the Alps he came to Ivrea,[542] a
city of Italy, where he immediately healed the little son of his host
who _was sick and ready to die_.[543]
[Sidenote: 1140, May]
38. Pope Innocent II., of happy memory, was then in the Apostolic
See.[544] He received him courteously, and displayed kindly pity for him
on account of his long pilgrimage. And Malachy in the first place asked
with many tears for that which he had fixed most deeply in his heart,
that he might be allowed to live and die at Clairvaux, with the
permission and blessing of the chief Pontiff. He sought this, not
forgetful of the purpose for which he had come, but influenced by the
longing for Clairvaux which he had brought with him.[545] But he did not
obtain his request, because the apostolic man decided that he should be
employed to more profitable advantage. He was not, however, wholly
disappointed of _his heart's desire_,[546] since it was granted him if
not to live, at least to die there. He spent a whole month in the City,
visiting the holy places and resorting to them for prayer. During that
time the chief Pontiff made frequent and careful inquiry of him and
those who were with him concerning the affairs of their country, the
morals of the people, the state of the churches, and the great things
that God had wrought by him in the land. And when he was already
preparing to return home the Pope committed his own authority to him,
appointing him legate throughout the whole of Ireland. For Bishop
Gilbert, who, as we have mentioned above, was then legate, had intimated
to him that by reason of age and infirmity of body _he could no longer
discharge the duties of the office_.[547] After this Malachy prayed that
the constitution of the new metropolis[548] should be confirmed, and
that palls should be given him for both sees. The privilege of
confirmation he soon received; "but regarding the palls," said the chief
Pontiff, "more formal action must be taken. You must call together the
bishops and clerks and the magnates of the land and hold a general
council; and so with the assent and common desire of all ye shall demand
the pall by persons of honest repute, and it shall be given you." Then
he took his mitre from his own head, and placed it on Malachy's
head,[549] and more, he gave him the stole and maniple which he was
accustomed to use in the offering; and saluting him with the kiss of
peace he dismissed him, strengthened with the apostolic blessing and
authority.
[Sidenote: 1140, July-August]
[Sidenote: 1142]
39. And returning by Clairvaux he bestowed on us _a second_
benediction.[550] And sighing deeply that it was not allowed him to
remain as he longed to do, he said, "Meanwhile I pray you to keep these
men for me, that they may learn from you what they may afterwards teach
us." And he added, "They will be to us for a seed, _and in_ this _seed
shall the nations be blessed_,[551] even those nations which from
ancient days have heard the name of monk, but have not seen a
monk."[552] And leaving four of his most intimate companions[553] he
departed: and they, when they were proved and found worthy, were made
monks. After a time, when the saint was now in his own country, he sent
others,[554] and they were dealt with in like manner. And when they had
been instructed for some time _and had applied their hearts unto
wisdom_,[555] the holy brother Christian,[556] who was one of
themselves, was given to them to be their father, and we sent them out,
adding from our own a sufficient number for an abbey.[557] And this
abbey _conceived and bare_ five _daughters_,[558] and the seed being
thus multiplied[559] the number of monks increases from day to day
according to the desire and prophecy of Malachy. Now let us return to
the order of the narrative.
40. (22). Malachy having set out from us had a prosperous journey
through Scotland. And he found King David,[560] who is still alive
to-day, in one of his castles;[561] and his son _was sick nigh unto
death_.[562] And when Malachy entered the king's house he was honourably
received by him and prevailed upon by humble entreaty _that he would
heal his son_.[563] He sprinkled the youth with water which he had
blessed, and _fastening his eyes upon him_ said,[564] "Trust me, my son;
you shall not die this time." He said this, and on the next day,
according to his word, there followed the cure, and after the cure the
joy of the father and the shouting and noise of the whole exulting
family. The _rumour went forth_[565] to all, for what happened in the
royal house and to the king's son _could not be hid_.[566] And lo,
everywhere there resounded _thanksgiving and the voice of praise_,[567]
both for the salvation of their lord, and for the novelty of the
miracle. This is Henry;[568] for he still lives, the only son of his
father, a brave and prudent knight, taking after his father as they say,
in _following after righteousness_[569] and love of the truth. And both
loved Malachy, as long as he lived, because he had recalled him from
death. They asked him to remain some days; but he, shunning renown, was
impatient of delay, and in the morning went on his way.
As he passed, therefore, through the village called Cruggleton,[570] a
dumb girl met him. While he prayed _the string of her tongue was loosed
and she spake plain_.[571]
Then he entered the village which they call St. Michael's Church,[572]
and before all the people cured a woman who was brought to him, mad and
bound with cords; and when he had sent her away restored he went on.
But when he came to Portus Lapasperi,[573] he waited there for a passage
some days; but the time of delay did not pass idly. In the interval an
oratory is constructed of twigs woven into a hedge, he both giving
directions and himself working. When it was finished he surrounded it
with a wall, and blessed the enclosed space for a cemetery. The merits
of him who blessed, the miracles, which are said to be wrought there
frequently to this day, sufficiently declare.
41. Hence it came that they were in the habit of carrying thither from
the neighbouring places those _that were_ infirm and _diseased_, and
_many_ were healed.[574] A woman paralysed in all her limbs, brought
thither on a waggon, returned home on foot, having waited only one night
in the holy place, not in vain, for the mercy of the Lord.[575]
* * * * *
Let these incidents--a few out of many--suffice with reference to that
place; for now we must proceed with what remains.
FOOTNOTES:
[507] The pall is a sort of collar, made of lamb's wool, which every
metropolitan is required to obtain from the Pope, and without which he
cannot exercise his functions. From the end of the eleventh century it
has been described in papal bulls as the symbol of "the fullness of
the pontifical office" (_Catholic Encyclopedia_, xi. 428). For the
date of Malachy's decision to go to Rome, see p. 72, n. 3.
[508] 1 Sam. xiv. 36, 40 (vg.).
[509] Armagh.
[510] Cashel, the seat of the kings of Munster. It was certainly the
see of an archbishop in 1110, when Malchus subscribed the Acts of
Rathbreasail as archbishop of Cashel. For the date of its foundation
see p. xxxv. f.
[511] Christian, bishop of Clogher, was probably appointed bishop of
that diocese in succession to Cinaeth Ua Baigill, who died in 1135
(_A.T._). He seems to have transferred the see of the diocese to
Louth, a large part of the diocese of Armagh (in which Louth was
situated) being placed under his jurisdiction. This arrangement was no
doubt made by Malachy with the support of Donough O'Carroll. See the
document quoted in Additional Note C, p. 170, _L.A.J._ iv. 133 ff. and
above, p. lix. Christian is commemorated in the contemporary
Martyrology of Gorman on June 12. The year of his death is stated
(_A.F.M._) to have been 1138. St. Bernard obviously supposed it to
have taken place in 1139 (p. 70, n. 2), and he appears to be right.
For the work described in § 32 demands a longer period than can be
allowed for it on the supposition that he divulged his scheme of
visiting Rome before June 12, 1138. Moreover by that time he cannot
have known that the papal schism had come to an end; for the Anti-pope
did not submit till May 29. Cp. p. 72, n. 3, and _R.I.A._ xxxv. 245
ff. For another notice of Christian, see p. 89, n. 1.
[512] Acts vi. 8 (vg.), combined with Acts xi. 24.
[513] Jer. xii. 11.
[514] Gal. ii. 9.
[515] Matt. ii. 18.
[516] Deut. xxv. 5 (vg.).
[517] Edan O'Kelly was bishop of Louth till his death in 1182
(_A.L.C._). He organized the diocese of Oriel, with its see at
Louth--corresponding to the present diocese of Clogher--by the help of
Donough O'Carroll. In conjunction with him he founded the monastery of
SS. Peter and Paul for Augustinian canons at Knock, by Louth,
consecrated by Malachy in 1148 (_A.F.M._; _L.A.J._ iv. 239, and
document quoted, p. 170). Close to it he also founded the Augustinian
monastery of St. Mary, the church of which was the cathedral church of
the diocese. On the early history of this diocese see _L.A.J._ iv. 129
ff.
[518] This simple story was much developed in later times. Thus in a
medieval register of Clogher we read that when Edan had anointed
Christian on his deathbed "Malachy saw the ring which Christian wore
leap to Edan's finger, and therefore he consecrated him bishop"
(_L.A.J._ iv. 239).
[519] No particulars are given of the passage through Scotland. But
Malachy probably sailed from Bangor to Cairngarroch (§ 40, p. 78, n.
4), and travelled thence by the shortest route through Carlisle to
York. The kingdom of Scotland then extended southwards to the river
Ribble at Gisburn (§ 69) and eastwards to the Tees (William of
Newburgh, in _Chron. of Stephen_ (R.S.), i. 70). For a full discussion
of his journeys, the results of which are here assumed, see _R.I.A._
xxxv. 238-243.
[520] This probably represents the Saxon name Sighere. Jocelin, who
tells this story (_Vita S. Waltheni_ in _AA.SS._, Aug., i. 255), says
that Sycarus (or as the MSS. of his tract call him, Figarus) was a
priest _de Neubato_ (v.l. _Neuvelt_). _i.e._, I suppose, of Newbald, a
parish near Market Weighton, and about twenty-three miles from York.
[521] Acts xiv. 9.
[522] Rev. xix. 10.
[523] John i. 30.
[524] Ps. xciv. 11.
[525] Matt. v. 15; Mark iv. 21; Luke xi. 33.
[526] Gen. xli. 13 (vg.).
[527] Cp. § 39.
[528] 2 Kings vi. 18, etc.
[529] Printed text, _Wallenus_, obviously an error for _Walleuus_
(_Wallevus_), which is the reading of A. The name occurs also in the
form Waldeve. St. Waltheof was the younger son of Simon de St. Liz,
earl of Northampton, by his wife Matilda, daughter of Waltheof, earl
of Northumberland. After Simon's death Matilda married David,
afterwards (1124) king of Scots. That Waltheof was the stepson of
David I. is a fact not unimportant for readers of the _Life of St.
Malachy_. After living for some time in Scotland Waltheof retired to
the Augustinian priory of St. Oswald, Nostal. Subsequently, but at
what date seems to be unknown, he was appointed prior of Kirkham. But,
desirous of a more austere life, he resigned the priory, and entered a
Cistercian house at Wardon, Bedfordshire. From it he soon migrated to
Rievaulx in Yorkshire, and took the vows of the Order. On the
deposition of Richard, first abbot of Melrose, he was elected as his
successor in 1148. He died August 3, 1159. (Life by Jocelin in
_AA.SS._, Aug, i. 248). His visit to Malachy proves that the fame of
the latter had come to his ears--probably through the Scots who knew
him at Lismore (§ 8). It indicates also that Malachy stayed at York
long enough to allow the news of his arrival to be sent to Kirkham.
[530] The ruins of Kirkham Abbey remain in the parish of Weston, about
sixteen miles north-east of York. This house of Augustinian canons was
founded in 1121 by Walter Espec and his wife Adeline. The first prior
was William, rector of Garton, uncle of Espec. Dugdale (vol. vi. 1.
pp. 207-209), overlooking Waltheof, mentions no other before 1190.
[531] The first Cistercian monastery in Scotland, founded in 1136 by
David I. It was a daughter of Rievaulx, from which, as we have seen,
Waltheof was called to be its abbot. Its church of St. Mary was
consecrated July 28, 1146. It is on the bank of the Tweed, not far
from Old Melrose, the site of a community founded in the seventh
century, of which St. Cuthbert was a member. See James A. Wade,
_History of Melrose_.
[532] Deacons.
[533] _Runcinus_, the Old English _rouncy_ (Chaucer, _Prol._ 390).
From this incident the inference is clear that during the whole
journey to Rome and back most of Malachy's companions were always on
foot, and that the party went at a walking pace.
[534] 1 Sam. iii. 19. Cp. Matt. x. 29.
[535] An important date. Since Malachy died on November 2, 1148, he
must have reached York not earlier than November 1139. For reasons for
putting the visit somewhat later see _R.I.A._, xxxv. 247 f.
[536] "Within a few days," says Jocelin in his version of the story!
See _AA.SS._ l.c.
[537] After leaving York Malachy no doubt followed approximately the
line of the Roman road known as Erming Street to London and
Canterbury. Thanks to the preservation of the Itinerary of Archbishop
Sigeric on his journey from Rome to Canterbury in 990 (Stubbs,
_Memorials of St. Dunstan_ (R.S.), pp. 391-395), to our knowledge of
the routes of travellers contemporary with Malachy, and to the rare
mention in the _Life_ of places through which he passed, we can follow
him almost step by step from Canterbury to Rome and back. He probably
sailed from Dover, and landed on the French coast at or near Wissant.
Thence he went by Arras, Rheims, Châlons-sur-Marne, Bar-sur-Aube,
Lausanne, Martigny, and over the Great St. Bernard to Ivrea. Then he
followed the beaten tract through Vercelli, Pavia, Piacenza,
Pontremoli, Lucca and Viterbo to Rome. On the whole journey, from
Bangor to Rome and back, the company traversed about 3000 miles on
land, besides crossing the sea four times. Allowing for stoppages at
Rome, Clairvaux and elsewhere, and for a weekly rest on Sunday,
Malachy must have been absent from Ireland about nine months. For
details see _R.I.A._ xxxv. 238 ff. The marginal dates are based on
that investigation, and are to be regarded merely as approximations.
[538] Ps. cxix. 14.
[539] Gen. xxxiii. 10, etc.
[540] Pref. § 2.
[541] Malachy probably "turned aside" from the main road at
Bar-sur-Aube, from which Clairvaux is distant eight miles. A few words
may be said about this famous monastery and its first abbot. Bernard,
the son of a nobleman named Tescelin and his saintly wife Aleth, whose
memory exercised a powerful influence on the lives of her children,
was born at Fontaines, a mile or two from Dijon, in 1090. In Oct. 1111
he persuaded his brothers and many of his friends to embrace the
religious life. Early in the following year the whole band, thirty in
number, entered the austere and now declining community which had been
established in 1098 at Citeaux, twelve miles from Dijon. Their arrival
was the beginning of the prosperity of the great Cistercian Order. In
1115 Bernard was sent out, with some brothers, by the abbot, Stephen
Harding, to found a daughter house on the river Aube, in a valley
which had once been known, from its desolation, as the Valley of
Wormwood. After incredible hardships a monastery was built, and the
place was so transformed by the labours of the monks that henceforth
it deserved its newer name of Clara Vallis, or Clairvaux. The
community rapidly increased in numbers; and in 1133, in spite of the
opposition of the abbot when the proposal was first made, the building
of a large monastery on a different site was begun. It was probably
far advanced when Malachy arrived in 1140 (Vacandard, i. 413, 423). It
was just completed when he came again in 1148 (see p. 143, n. 5). St.
Bernard died on August 20, 1153. At this time he was the most powerful
ecclesiastic in Europe, not excepting his nominee Pope Innocent II.
(see p. 72, n. 3). Doubtless the main purpose of Malachy's visit to
Clairvaux was to secure St. Bernard's support of the petition which he
was about to present to the Pope. For further information about St.
Bernard the reader may consult _V.P._, Vacandard, J. Cotter Morison,
_The Life and Times of St. Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux_ (1868), and
Richard S. Storrs, _Bernard of Clairvaux, the Times, the Man, and his
Work_ (1892).
[542] _Yporia._ Its ancient name was Eporedia. From it there are two
routes across the Alps, by the Great St. Bernard and the Little St.
Bernard respectively.
[543] Luke vii. 2.
[544] On the death of Pope Honorius II. (February 14, 1130) two Popes
were elected by different groups of cardinals, Innocent II. and
Anacletus II. St. Bernard espoused the cause of the former, and by his
untiring efforts almost all the sovereigns of Europe were enlisted on
his side (see Vacandard, chaps. x.-xiii., xviii.; Storrs, pp. 523-540;
Morison, pp. 149-165, 209-213). But the schism lasted for eight years.
At length Anacletus died (January 7, 1138), and the surrender of his
successor, Victor IV., on May 29, 1138 (_Ep._ 317), left Innocent in
undisputed occupation of the papal chair. The news of the pacification
was not announced in Scotland till the end of September (Richard of
Hexham, 170). It probably reached Ireland a little later. It must have
been after he was assured of the end of the schism that Malachy
proposed his journey to Rome, _i.e._ at the end of 1138 or in 1139.
[545] _Quo uenerat._
[546] Ps. xxi. 2.
[547] Luke xvi. 2 (vg.).--For Gilbert see p. 47, n. 3. Patrick,
successor of Gilbert in the see of Limerick, was consecrated by
Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury, who was himself consecrated on
January 8, 1139 (W. Stubbs, _Reg. Sac. Angl._, p. 45). His profession
of obedience (Ussher, p. 565) appears in the roll of professions at
Canterbury immediately before that of Uhtred of Llandaff, who was
consecrated in 1140 (Stubbs, _l.c._). If we assume that Gilbert
resigned his see and his legatine commission at the same time, this
gives 1139-40 as the date of Malachy's journey, in agreement with the
hint of St. Bernard in § 36. It is possible that Gilbert's resignation
of his office as legate was sent to Rome by Malachy.
[548] Cashel. See p. 65, note 4.
[549] Fleming in 1623 saw a mitre of Malachy at Clairvaux, which was
supposed to have been the one placed on his head by Innocent at
Orbiers, ten leagues away, his wooden drinking cup was preserved: it
was in a leathern case, adorned with Irish interlacings (_Irish
Ecclesiastical Record_, vii. 63).
[550] Cp. 2 Cor. i. 15.
[551] Gen. xxii. 18; xxvi. 4.
[552] Compare the passage concerning a brother who had been sent from
Clairvaux to Sweden in 1143, and had founded a daughter monastery
there: "The lord [St. Bernard] sent to his faithful servant learned
and discreet persons from the parts of Germany and England, by whom
the discipline of monastic religion founded in that kingdom increased
and bore worthy fruit among peoples who had indeed heard the name of
monk, but had never before seen a monk" (_V.P._ vii. 54). It was
literally true that no monastic communities had previously existed in
Sweden (C. H. Robinson, _Conversion of Europe_, p. 482 f. Cp.
Vacandard, ii. 416). But the passage before us cannot be construed as
an assertion that Ireland was in like case; for in § 12 mention is
made of the "monks" of Bangor in the time of Congall. St. Bernard (or
Malachy, if the words are really his) must be taken to mean simply
that the so-called monks of the decadent contemporary Church of
Ireland were not monks in the true sense of the word. (Cp. Lett. iii.
§ 2). There is nothing to be said for the explanation suggested by
Lanigan (iv. 114) that the "nations" are nations other than the Irish,
who had no monks. For where were those nations to whom the Irish might
send colonies of monks? The fact is that the Latin word for "nations"
(_gentes_) may quite well mean here what it certainly means in § 42,
the Irish tribes.
[553] He left others in other Cistercian houses (§ 35).
[554] Cp. Letter i. § 1.
[555] Ps. xc. 12.
[556] Gilla Críst Ua Condoirche was probably a native of the district
of Bangor (§ 14). He seems to have been one of the four who were left
by Malachy at Clairvaux; and, as is here stated, he was the first
abbot of Mellifont. He seems, however, to have proved not well suited
for the office, for he was sent back to Clairvaux for further
instruction (Letter iii. § 3). Some of the Clairvaux brothers (if not
all of them) refused to remain in Ireland, and it is perhaps hinted
that the cause of their return was dissatisfaction with his
administration (_ib._ § 2). About 1150 he was promoted to the
bishopric of Lismore, and at the Synod of Kells in 1152 he appeared as
papal legate (Keating, iii. 317). He was present at the consecration
of the church of Mellifont Abbey in 1157 (_A.U._) As legate he also
presided at the Synod of Cashel in 1172 (Giraldus, _Expug._ i. 34). He
died in 1186 (_A.L.C._). Felix, bishop of Lismore, attended the
Lateran Council of 1179 (Mansi, xxii. 217). Christian must therefore
have resigned his see before that date.
[557] Mellifont Abbey, the ruins of which still remain in a secluded
valley, beside the stream known as the Mattock, about two miles from
the Boyne, and five miles west of Drogheda. Some time after Malachy
returned to Ireland he wrote to St. Bernard, asking him to send two of
the four brothers who had been left at Clairvaux to select a site for
the abbey. This request was declined (Lett. i. § 1), and the
site--doubtless the gift of Donough O'Carroll (see the document quoted
p. 170)--was apparently chosen by Malachy himself. In 1142 (_C.M.A._
ii. 262, _Clyn's Annals_, _Annals of Boyle_), the four brothers,
together with a contingent of monks from Clairvaux, arrived, and the
monastery was founded, with Christian as its first abbot (Lett. ii.).
Considerable progress was made with the buildings, and endowments
poured in. But after a while it became necessary to send Christian
back to France for further instruction, and the Clairvaux monks went
with him, never to return. In due time Christian resumed his office as
abbot, and with him came one Robert, to assist him in the work of
building and organization (Lett. iii). The Abbey Church was not
consecrated till 1157, nine years after Malachy's death (_A.U._).
Mellifont remained the principal Cistercian house in Ireland up to the
Reformation. After the dissolution (1539) it was granted, with its
possessions, to Sir Edward Moore, ancestor of the earls of Drogheda.
The only portions of the monastery which remain in a fair state of
preservation are the Chapter House and the Lavabo. The latter belongs
to the original building. Excavations made about twenty years ago
revealed the ground plan of the entire monastery, most of which was of
later date than Malachy. Traces were discovered of the foundation of
the eastern portion of the original church, about forty feet west of
the east wall of the structure which later took its place. It had six
chapels at the east end, four of which were apsidal (_71st Report of
Commissioners of Public Works, Ireland_, p. 11).
[558] 1 Sam. ii. 21.--The five daughters were apparently Bective (de
Beatitudine) founded in 1147, Boyle, 1147-8, Monasternenagh, 1148,
Baltinglas (de Valle Salutis), 1148, and Inislounaght (Janauschek,
_Origines Cistercienses_, Vindoboniæ, 1877, pp. 70, 92, 113). The
last-named seems to have been in existence in 1148 (see § 64), and it
may have been an off-shoot of Mellifont, though at an early date it
was subject to Monasternenagh (_ibid._ 131). Gougaud (_Les Chrétientés
Celtiques_, 1911, p. 364) gives Shrule (de Benedictione Dei) the fifth
place; but it appears to have been founded (1150?) after the _Life_
was written (Janauschek, p. 114).
[559] Cp. Gen. xxii. 17; xxvi. 4.
[560] David I. of Scotland, son of Malcolm Canmore and St. Margaret,
the sister of Edgar the Atheling. He was born in 1084. His sister
Matilda was the wife of Henry I. of England; and thus he was uncle of
Matilda, the empress, for whom he fought against Stephen, though
Stephen's wife, Queen Matilda, was also his niece. In 1113 David
married Matilda, the widow of Simon de St. Liz, earl of Northampton
(cp. p. 69, n. 1). He succeeded Alexander I. in 1124 and died in 1153.
As the founder of several Scottish dioceses and as having introduced
the Cistercian Order into his kingdom he had much in common with St.
Malachy.
[561] This is probably an error. There is no record that David I. had
any castles in Galloway; and the chronicles seem to show that at this
period his principal residences were at Roxburgh and Carlisle. The
narrative suggests that the castle referred to was in the immediate
neighbourhood of Cruggleton (p. 78, n. 1), and it was probably the
predecessor of that of which the scanty ruins--believed to be of
thirteenth-century date--remain on the coast not far from the village.
They are on a peninsula of such natural strength that we may suppose
it was in very early times the site of a fortress (_Fourth Report of
Commission on Ancient Monuments in Scotland_, vol. i. p. 144).
Possibly, as has been suggested, David was there as the guest of
Fergus, lord of Galloway (1124-1161), to whom, subsequently to the
Battle of the Standard (August 22, 1138), and probably not long before
this visit of Malachy, he had been reconciled after a long
estrangement (Agnew, _Hereditary Sheriffs of Galloway_, 1893. vol. i.
p. 58).
[562] Phil. ii. 27 (inexact quotation).
[563] 2 John iv. 47.
[564] Acts iii. 4.
[565] Luke vii. 17.
[566] Mark vii. 24.
[567] Isa. li. 3 (vg.).
[568] The only son of David: "a man gentle and pious, a man of sweet
nature and of pure heart, and worthy in all things to be born of such
a father" (Ailred of Rievaulx, in A. O. Anderson, _Scottish Annals
from English Chroniclers_, p. 156). He died before his father, in May
or June 1152 (John of Hexham). Two of his sons became kings of Scots,
Malcolm IV. and William I.
[569] Rom. ix. 30, etc.
[570] _Crugeldum._ Cruggleton is on the west coast of Wigtown Bay, in
the parish of Sorby, Wigtownshire. In passing through this village
Malachy made a détour, probably in order to visit King David, which
considerably lengthened his journey.
[571] Mark vii. 35.
[572] The parish church of Mochrum, Wigtownshire, as Sir Herbert
Maxwell informs me, was anciently dedicated to St. Michael. Thus the
village called St. Michael's Church is undoubtedly Kirk Mochrum, which
clusters round the church, and through which every traveller from
Cruggleton to Cairngarroch (see next note) must pass. It is twelve
miles from Cruggleton.
[573] _Lapasperi_ is obviously the gen. of _Lapasper_, a corruption of
_Lapis asper_ (rough stone). This seems to be a Latin rendering of
Cairngarroch (= _Carn garbh_), a name which occurs three times on the
shores of Wigtownshire. One of the places so called, on the west coast
of Luce Bay, may be set aside. The other two are seven or eight miles
apart, within sight of the Bangor coast, and nearly equidistant from
it; one in the parish of Stoneykirk, the other (now known as Rough
Cairn) in the parish of Geswalt. The late Sir Andrew Agnew (_op. cit._
p. 59) regarded the latter as the place referred to in the text on
grounds which do not seem conclusive. Cairngarroch in Stoneykirk is to
be preferred for two reasons: it is more easily approached from inland
than its rival; and it has impressed its name on the actual
coast-line, which the other has not done; "Cairngarroch Bay" is
equivalent to _Port Cairn garbh_, and that to the _Portus Lapasperi_
of the text. This identification was first proposed by O'Hanlon (p.
81); and its probability is increased now that the position of St.
Michael's Church has been fixed (see preceding note). But one of his
arguments in favour of it, based on the name of the parish, is
fallacious; for "Stoneykirk" has nothing to do with stones: it is a
late corruption of Steiniekirk = St. Stephen's Church.
[574] Mark i. 32, 34.
[575] For the passage here omitted see Appendix, p. 171.
CHAPTER VI
_St. Malachy's Apostolic Labours, Praises and Miracles._
[Sidenote: 1140, October]
42. (23). Malachy embarked in a ship, and after a prosperous voyage
landed at his monastery of Bangor,[576] so that his first sons might
receive the first _benefit_.[577] In what state of mind do you suppose
they were when they received their father--and such a father--in good
health from so long a journey? No wonder if their whole heart gave
itself over to joy at his return, when swift rumour soon brought
incredible gladness even to the tribes[578] outside round about them. In
fine, from the cities and castles and hamlets they ran to meet him, and
wherever he turned he was received with _the joy of the whole
land_.[579] But honour is not to his taste. He exercises his office as
legate; many assemblies are held in many places, so that no region, or
part of a region, may be defrauded of the fruit and advantage of his
legation. He _sows beside all waters_;[580] there is not one who can
escape from his sedulous care. Neither sex, nor age, nor condition, nor
[religious] profession is held in account.[581] Everywhere the saving
seed is scattered, everywhere the heavenly trumpet sounds. He scours
every place, everywhere he breaks in, with _the sword_ of his tongue
unsheathed _to execute vengeance upon the nations and punishments upon
the peoples_.[582] The terror of him is _on them that do evil_.[583] He
cries _unto the unrighteous, deal not unrighteously, and to the wicked,
lift not up the horn_.[584] Religion is planted everywhere, is
propagated, is tended. His _eyes are upon_ them,[585] his care is for
their necessities. In councils, which are everywhere held, the ancient
traditions are revived, which, though their excellence was undisputed,
had fallen into disuse by the negligence of the priests. And not only
are the old restored, new customs are also devised; and whatsoever
things he promulgated are accepted as though issued from heaven, are
held fast, are committed to writing for a memorial to posterity. Why
should we not believe those things were sent from heaven which so many
heavenly miracles confirm? And that I may make what has been said
credible, let me touch on some of these miracles in a few words. For who
can enumerate all? Though I confess I had rather dwell on those things
which can be imitated than on those which can only excite wonder.
43. (24). And in my judgement the first and greatest miracle that he
exhibited was himself.[586] For to say nothing of his _inner man_,[587]
the beauty and strength and purity of which his habits and life
sufficiently attested, he so bore himself even outwardly in a uniform
and consistent manner, and that the most modest and becoming, that
absolutely nothing appeared in him which could offend the beholders.
And, indeed, _he who offends not in word, the same is a perfect
man_.[588] But yet in Malachy, who, though he observed with unusual
care, ever detected, I will not say an _idle word_,[589] but an idle
nod? Who ever knew his hand or his foot to move without purpose? Yea,
what was there that was not edifying in his gait, his mien, his bearing,
his countenance? In fine, neither did sadness darken nor laughter turn
to levity the joyousness of his countenance.[590] Everything in him was
under _discipline_, everything a mark _of virtue_, _a rule_[591] of
perfection. Always he was grave, but not austere. Relaxing at times, but
never careless; neglecting nothing, though for a time ignoring many
things. Quiet often, but by no means at any time idle.[592] From the
first day of his conversion to the last of his life, he lived without
personal possessions.[593] He had neither _menservants_ nor
_maidservants_,[594] nor villages nor hamlets, nor in fact any revenues,
ecclesiastical or secular, even when he was a bishop. There was nothing
whatever ordained or assigned for his episcopal mensa, by which the
bishop might live; for he had not even a house of his own. But he was
almost always going about all the parishes[595] serving the Gospel,[596]
and _living of the Gospel_,[597] as the Lord appointed for him when he
said, _The labourer is worthy of his hire._[598] Except that more
frequently, _making the Gospel_ itself _without charge_,[599] as a
result of the labours of himself and his companions, he brought with
him that by which he might sustain himself and _those who laboured with
him in the work of the ministry_.[600] Further, if at times he had to
rest he did so in the holy places which he himself had scattered through
the whole of Ireland; but he conformed to the customs and observances of
those with whom it pleased him to tarry, content with the common life
and the common table. There was nought in his food, nought in his
clothing, by which Malachy could be distinguished from the rest of the
brethren; to such a degree, though he was _greatest_, did he _humble
himself in all things_.[601]
44. Then, when he went out to preach, he was accompanied by others
on foot, and on foot went he himself, the bishop and legate. That was
the apostolic rule; and it is the more to be admired in Malachy
because it is too rare in others. The true successor of the Apostles
assuredly is he who does such things. But it is to be observed how he
_divides the inheritance with his brothers_,[602] equally descendants
of the Apostles. They _lord it among the clergy_;[603] he, _though he
was free from all men, made himself the servant of all_.[604] They
either do not preach the Gospel and yet eat, or preach the Gospel in
order that they may eat; Malachy, imitating Paul, eats that he may
preach the Gospel.[605] They _suppose that_ arrogance and _gain are
godliness_;[606] Malachy claims for himself by inheritance labour and
a load.[607] They believe themselves happy if they _enlarge their
borders_;[608] Malachy glories in enlarging charity.[609] They _gather
into barns_[610] and fill the wine-jars, that they may load their
tables; Malachy collects [men] into deserts and solitudes that he may
fill the heavens. They, though they receive tithes and first-fruits
and oblations, besides customs and tributes by the gift of Cæsar and
countless other revenues, nevertheless _take thought what they shall
eat or what they shall drink_;[611] Malachy _having nothing_ of such
things, yet _makes many rich_[612] out of the store-house of faith. Of
their desire and anxiety there is no end; Malachy, desiring nothing,
knows not how to think about the morrow.[613] They exact from the poor
that which they may give to the rich; Malachy implores the rich to
provide for the poor. They empty the purses of their subjects; he for
their sins _heaps altars_[614] with vows and _peace-offerings_.[615]
They build lofty palaces, raise up towers and ramparts to the
heavens.[616] Malachy, _not having where to lay his head,[617] does
the work of an evangelist_.[618] They _ride on horses_[619] with a
crowd of men, who _eat bread for nought_, and that not _their
own_;[620] Malachy, hedged round with a college of holy brothers, goes
about on foot, bearing _the bread of angels_,[621] with which to
_satisfy the hungry souls_.[622] They do not even know the
congregations;[623] he instructs them. They honour powerful men and
tyrants; he punishes them. O, apostolic man, whom so many and so
striking _signs of his apostleship_[624] ennoble! What wonder, then,
if he has wrought wondrous things when he himself is so wonderful? Yet
truly not he but God in him.[625] Moreover, it is said, _Thou art the
God that doest wonders._[626]
45. (25). There was a woman in the city of Coleraine[627] who had a
demon. Malachy was called; he prayed for the possessed; he commanded the
invader and he went out. But his iniquity was not yet fully satisfied,
and he entered into an unhappy woman who happened to be standing by. And
Malachy said, "I did not release that woman from your grasp in order
that you might enter this one; go out of her also." He obeyed, but went
back to the former woman; and driven forth from her once more, he again
went into the second. So for some time he vexed them alternately,
fleeing to and fro. Then the saint, indignant that he was mocked by a
demon, summoned up his spirit, and shouted; and when he had made an
attack on the adversary with all the forces of faith, he drove the demon
away from both, no less vexed than those whom he had vexed. But do not
suppose, reader, that the delay which he caused the saint was due to his
own strength: it was permitted by the divine dispensation, evidently in
order that by this as well the power of the evil one as the victory of
Malachy might be made more manifest.
Hear now what he did elsewhere, but not by reason of his presence.
Assuredly what he had power to accomplish when absent, he could do also
when present.
46. In a district of the northern part of Ireland a sick man lay in his
house. His sickness was beyond doubt due to the evil influence of
demons. For one night he heard them talking; and one said to another,
"See that this wretched man does not touch the bed or bedding of that
hypocrite, and so escape from our hands." The man perceived that they
were speaking of Malachy, who, as he remembered, had not long before
passed a night in that house. And the bedding was still in its place;
and taking courage, with his utmost effort he began to crawl, weak in
body but strong in faith. And lo, in the air there was clamour and
shouting: "Stop him, stop him, hold him, hold him; we are losing our
prey." But, carried on by faith and the desire to escape, the more they
shouted the more he hastened to the remedy, straining with knees and
hands. And when he reached the couch, and went up on it, he rolled
himself in the bed-clothes, and heard the wailing of them that lamented,
"Alas, alas, we have betrayed ourselves, we have been deceived, he has
escaped."[628] And quicker than a word, there left him the terror of the
demons and the horror which he suffered, and with them all his sickness.
In the city of Lismore a man vexed by a demon was delivered by Malachy.
Also once, when he was passing through Leinster, an infant was brought
to him who had a demon, and he was brought back whole.
In the same region he ordered a mad woman,[629] bound with cords, to be
loosed and to be bathed in water which he blessed. She washed and was
healed.
Another woman also in Saul,[630] a region of Ulaid,[631] who was tearing
her own limbs with her teeth, he cured by praying and touching her.
There was a madman, who predicted many things to come. His friends and
neighbours brought him to the man of God, bound strongly with cords,
because his very madness had made him strong to do hurt and exceeding
terrible. Malachy prayed, and immediately the sick man was healed and
released. This was done in a certain place, the name of which we omit
because it has a very barbarous sound, as also have many others.[632]
At another time in the above-mentioned city of Lismore,[633] the parents
of a dumb girl[634] brought her to him in the midst of the street as he
passed, asking him with much entreaty that he would deign to help her.
Malachy stood and prayed; and he _touched her tongue_ with his finger
and _spat_[635] upon her mouth, and sent her away speaking.
47. (26). Going out of a certain church he met a man with his wife, and
she could not speak. And when he was asked to have mercy on her, he
stood in the gate, the people surrounding him; and he gave a blessing
upon her, and bade her say the Lord's Prayer. She said it, and the
people blessed the Lord.
In a city called Antrim[636] a certain man lying on a bed, now deprived
for twelve days of the use of his tongue, at the bidding of the saint,
who visited him, recovered his speech and received the Eucharist; and so
fortified he breathed his last breath in _a good confession_.[637] O,
_fruitful olive tree in the house of God_![638] O, _oil_ of
gladness,[639] giving both anointing and light! By the splendour of the
miracle he gave light to those who were whole, by the graciousness of
the favour he anointed the sick man, and obtained for him, soon about to
die, the saving power of confession and communion.[640]
One of the nobles came in to him, _having somewhat to say to him_;[641]
and while they were speaking, _full of faith_[642] piously stole three
rushes from the couch on which Malachy sat, and took them with him: and
God wrought many things as a result of the pious theft, by that man's
faith and the sanctity of the prelate.
By chance he had come to a city called Cloyne.[643] And when he was
sitting at table a nobleman of that city came in and humbly prayed him
for his wife, who was pregnant, and had passed the appointed time of
parturition, so that all wondered, and there was none who did not
believe that her life was in danger. With him also Nehemiah,[644] the
bishop of that city, who was sitting next to him, made request to
Malachy, and others also as many as were present reclining together.
Then he said, "I pity her, for she is a good and modest woman." And
offering the man a cup which he had blessed, he said, "Go, give her to
drink, and know that when she has taken the draught of blessing[645] she
will bring forth without delay, and without danger." It was done as he
commanded, and that very night there followed that which he promised.
He was sitting in a plain with the count of Ulaid, dealing with certain
matters, _and a great multitude_[646] was about them. There came a woman
who had long been with child. She declared that contrary to all the laws
of nature she had already been pregnant for fifteen months and twenty
days. Malachy having pity for this new and unheard-of trouble, prayed,
and the woman was delivered. Those who were present rejoiced and
wondered. For all saw with what ease and rapidity she brought forth in
the same place, and the sad portent of birth denied was changed to a
happier marvel.
48. (27). There happened in the same place an event with a similar
miracle but a different issue. He saw a man who was reported to be
consorting publicly with his brother's concubine; and he was a knight, a
servant of the count. And publicly accosting the incestuous man he
displayed himself to him as another John, saying, _It is not lawful for
thee to have thy brother's_ concubine.[647] But he, nevertheless, in
his turn displaying himself to Malachy as another Herod, not only did
not hearken to him, but even answered him haughtily, and before them all
swore that he would never put her away. Then Malachy, much agitated, for
he was vehemently zealous for righteousness, said, "Then God shall
separate you from her against your will." Paying little heed the man
went away at once in a rage. And meeting the woman not far from the
crowd which was in the place, he treated her evilly and with violence,
as though he wholly belonged to _Satan_ to whom he had a little before
been _delivered_.[648] Nor was the crime hidden. The damsel who
accompanied the lady ran back to the house (for it was not far from the
place), and, breathless, announced the wickedness that had taken place.
At the word her brothers, who were at home, enraged at the dishonour
done to their sister, rushed thither with all haste and slew the enemy
of virtue, _taken in the very_ place and _act_[649] of crime, piercing
him with many wounds. The assembly was not yet dismissed when, lo! his
armour-bearer proclaimed what had happened. And all wondered that the
sentence of Malachy had taken such speedy effect. When this word was
heard all evil-doers (for there were many in the land) feared and, being
terrified, purified themselves, _washing their hands in the blood of the
ungodly_.[650]
49. (28). Dermot the count,[651] who had now for a long time lain on his
bed, he sprinkled with blessed water, and caused him to rise up without
delay, and so strong that he mounted his horse on the spot, surpassing
assuredly the hope of himself and of his friends--rebuking him severely
at the same time because he was a bad man _serving his belly_[652] and
his appetite immoderately.
In the town of Cashel a man came before him with his paralysed son,
asking that he should be healed.[653] And Malachy, praying briefly,
said, "_Go thy way; thy son_ shall be made whole."[654] He went, and on
the morrow he returned with his son, who was nevertheless by no means
whole. Then Malachy rose and standing over him prayed at greater length,
and he was made whole. And turning to the father he said, "Offer him to
God." The man assented, but did not keep his promise; and after some
years his son, now a young man, relapsed into the same state, no doubt
because of his father's disobedience and his violation of the pledge.
Another man came from a long distance, when Malachy was in the borders
of Munster, bringing to him his son, who was entirely deprived of the
use of his feet. When he inquired how this had happened to him, he said,
"As I suspect, by the malignity of demons"; adding, "It was they, if I
mistake not, who, when he was playing in a field, _caused a sleep to
fall_ upon him,[655] and when the child awoke he found himself so."
Saying this, he poured forth his petition with tears, and earnestly
sought help. Malachy pitying him prayed, bidding the sick boy in the
meantime to sleep there upon the ground. He slept, and he arose whole.
Because he had _come from far_[656] he kept him some time in his
company, and he used to walk with him.
50. In the monastery of Bangor a certain poor man was maintained by the
alms of the brothers; and he received a small sum every day, for
performing some office in the mill. He had been lame for twelve years,
creeping on the ground with his hands, and dragging his dead feet after
him. Him Malachy found one day before his cell, sad and sorrowful, and
asked him the cause. And he said, "You see how for a long time I am
miserably troubled and _the hand of the Lord is upon me_;[657] and lo,
to increase my distress, men who ought to have had pity, rather laugh at
me and cast my wretchedness in my teeth." And when he heard him, moved
with compassion, he _looked up to heaven_,[658] at the same time raising
his hands. Having said a short prayer he entered his cell, and the other
rose up. And standing upon his feet he wondered if it was true,
suspecting that he was in a dream.[659] But he began to move with slow
steps, for he did not altogether believe that he could walk. At length,
_as it were waking out of a deep sleep_,[660] he recognized the mercy of
the Lord upon him; he walked firmly, and returned to the mill _leaping_
and exulting _and praising God_. When those saw him who had before seen
and _known him_ they _were filled with wonder and amazement,[661]
supposing it to be a spirit_.[662]
Malachy likewise healed a dropsical man by praying, who remained there
in the monastery and was appointed shepherd.
51. A city of Ireland called Cork was without a bishop. They proceeded
to an election; but the various parties did not agree, each, as is
usual, wishing to appoint their own bishop, not God's.[663] Malachy
came to the place when he heard of the disagreement. Calling together
the clergy and people he took pains to unite the hearts and desires of
the opposing parties. And when they had been persuaded that the whole
business ought to be entrusted to him, on whom in a very special manner
lay _the care of_ that as also of the other _churches_[664] throughout
Ireland,[665] immediately he named to them, not any of the nobles of the
land,[666] but rather a certain poor man whom he knew to be holy and
learned; _and he was a stranger_.[667] He was sought; and it was
announced that he was lying in bed, and so weak that he could in no
wise go out unless carried in the hands of those who ministered to him.
"Let him rise," said Malachy; "in the name of the Lord I command it;
obedience will save him." What was he to do? He wished to obey, but he
thought himself unfitted; for though it should be possible for him to
go, he dreaded to be a bishop. So with the will to be obedient twin
enemies were contending, the load of weakness and the fear of the
burden. But the first conquered, the hope of salvation being given him
as an aid. Therefore he made the attempt, he moved, tested his power,
discovered that he was stronger than usual. Faith increased along with
power, and again faith made stronger gave in its turn increase of power.
Now he was able to rise unassisted, now to walk somewhat better, now not
even to perceive weariness in walking; at length, to come to Malachy
without difficulty and quickly, unaided by man. He promoted him, and put
him into the chair, with the applause of clergy and people. This was
done without question, because neither did they dare to oppose the will
of Malachy in any way, seeing the sign which he had wrought; nor did he
hesitate to obey, being made surer, by so evident a proof, of the will
of God.
52. (29). A certain _woman was diseased with an issue of blood_;[668]
and she was of noble birth and very dear to Malachy, though by reason of
the nobility rather of her character than of her descent. When she was
entirely failing, her strength no doubt being exhausted with her blood,
and was now near the end, she sent to the man of God, in order that--the
only thing that remained to be done--he might help her soul who should
see her no more in the body. When Malachy heard it he was troubled,
because she was a woman of virtue, and her life fruitful in work and
example. And perceiving that he could not reach her in time he called
Malchus, for he was young and active (he is that brother of Abbot
Christian whom we mentioned above),[669] and said, "Haste, take her
these three apples on which I have invoked the name of the Lord; I am
assured of this, that when she tastes these she _shall not taste of
death_ before _she sees_ us,[670] though we shall follow somewhat more
slowly." Malchus hastened as he was commanded, and when he came he went
in to the dying woman, showing himself another servant of Elisha, except
that his work was more efficacious.[671] He bade her take that which
Malachy had blessed and sent to her, and to taste it if by any means she
could. But she was so refreshed when she heard Malachy's name, that she
was able to obey, and indicated by a nod (for she could not speak) that
she wished to be raised up for a little while. She was raised up, she
tasted; she was strengthened by what she tasted, she spoke, and gave
thanks. _And the Lord caused a deep sleep to fall upon_ her,[672] and
she rested most sweetly in it, having long ceased to enjoy the benefit
of sleep, or to partake of food. Meanwhile _her blood was
staunched_[673] and awaking after a while she found herself whole,[674]
but she was still weak from long fasting and loss of blood. If in any
degree the cure was not complete,[675] on the following day the
wished-for presence and appearance of Malachy made it perfect.
53. (30). A nobleman lived in the neighbourhood of the monastery of
Bangor, whose wife was _sick nigh unto death_.[676] Malachy, being asked
to _come down ere she died_,[677] to _anoint the sick_ woman _with
oil_,[678] came down and went in to her; and when she saw him she
rejoiced greatly, animated by the hope of salvation. And when he was
preparing to anoint her, it seemed to all that it ought rather to be
postponed to the morning; for it was evening. Malachy assented, and when
he had given a blessing over the sick woman, he went out with those who
were with him. But shortly afterwards, suddenly _there was a cry
made_,[679] lamentation and great wailing through the whole house, for
it was reported that she had died. Malachy ran up when he heard the
tumult, and his disciples followed him. And coming to the bed, when he
had assured himself that she had breathed her last, he was greatly
troubled in mind, blaming himself that she had died without the grace of
the sacrament. And lifting up his hands to heaven he said, "_I beseech
thee_, Lord, _I have done very foolishly_. I, even _I, have
sinned_,[680] who postponed, not she who desired it." Saying this he
protested in the hearing of all that _he_ would not _be comforted_,[681]
that he would give _no rest to his spirit_,[682] unless he should be
allowed to restore the grace which he had taken away. And standing over
her, all night _he laboured in his groaning_; and, instead of the holy
oil, flooding the dead woman with a great rain of _tears_,[683] he
bestowed on her such a substitute for the unction as he could. Thus did
he; but to his companions he said, "_Watch and pray._"[684] So they in
psalms, he in tears, passed a night of vigil. And when the morning came
the Lord heard His saint, for the _Spirit_ of the Lord was _making
intercession for him_, who _maketh intercession for_ the saints _with
groanings that cannot be uttered_.[685] Why more? She who had been dead
_opened her eyes_,[686] and, as those do who wake from a deep sleep,
rubbing her forehead and temples with her hands, she rose upon the bed,
and recognizing Malachy, devoutly saluted him with bowed head. And
mourning being _turned into joy_,[687] amazement took hold of all, both
those who saw and those who heard. And Malachy also gave thanks and
blessed the Lord. And he anointed her, nevertheless, knowing that in
that sacrament _sins are forgiven_, and that _the prayer of faith saves
the sick_.[688] After this he went away, and she recovered, and after
living for some time in good health, _that the_ glory _of God should be
made manifest in her_,[689] she accomplished the penance which Malachy
had enjoined upon her, and again _fell asleep_[690] in a _good
confession_,[691] and passed to the Lord.
54. (3). There was also a woman whom _a spirit of_ anger and _fury_[692]
dominated to such an extent that not only her neighbours and relatives
fled from her society, but even her own sons could scarcely endure to
live with her. Shouting, rancour and _a mighty tempest_[693] wherever
she was. Violent, fiery, hasty, terrible with tongue and hand,
intolerable to all, and hated. Her sons, grieving both for her and for
themselves, dragged her into the presence of Malachy, setting forth
their lamentable complaint with tears. But the holy man, pitying both
the sickness of the mother and the trouble of her sons, called her
aside, and made urgent inquiry whether she had ever confessed her sins.
She replied, "Never." "Confess," said he. She obeyed; and he enjoined
penance on her when she made confession, and prayed over her that
Almighty God might give her _the spirit of meekness_,[694] and in the
name of the Lord Jesus bade her to be angry no more. Such meekness
followed that it was plain to all that it was nothing else than a
marvellous _change effected by the right hand of the Most High_.[695] It
is said that she is still living to-day, and is so patient and gentle
that, though she used to exasperate all, now she cannot be exasperated
by any injuries or insults or afflictions. If it be allowed me, as the
Apostle says, _to be fully persuaded in my own mind_,[696] let each
accept it as he will; for me, I give it as my opinion that this miracle
should be regarded as superior to that of raising the dead woman,
mentioned above, inasmuch as there the outward, but here the _inner
man_[697] was restored to life. And now let us hasten to what remains.
55. A man who as regards the world was honourable, as regards God
devout, came to Malachy and complained to him concerning _the barrenness
of his soul_,[698] praying that he would obtain for him from Almighty
God the grace of tears. And Malachy, smiling because he was pleased that
there should be spiritual desire from a man of the world, laid his cheek
on the cheek of the other as though caressing him, and said, "_Be it
done unto you as you have asked_."[699] From that time _rivers of waters
ran down his eyes_[700] so great and so nearly incessant that the phrase
of Scripture might seem applicable to him: "_A fountain of gardens, a
well of living waters_."[701]
There is an island of the sea in Ireland, from of old fruitful of
fishes;[702] and the sea there abounds in fish. By the sins of the
inhabitants, as it is believed, the wonted supply was taken away, and
_she that had many children was waxed feeble_,[703] and her own great
usefulness utterly dwindled away. While the natives were grieving, and
the peoples taking ill the great loss, it was revealed to a certain
woman that a remedy might be effected by the prayers of Malachy; and
that became known to all, for she herself proclaimed it. By the will of
God it happened that Malachy arrived. For while he was going round and
filling the region with the Gospel, he turned aside thither that to them
also he might impart the same grace.[704] But _the barbarous
people_,[705] who cared more for the fishes,[706] demanded with all
vehemence that he would deign to regard rather the sterility of their
island. And when he answered that it was not for that he had come, but
that he desired to catch men rather than fish,[707] yet seeing their
faith[708] he _kneeled down on the shore and prayed_[709] to the Lord
that, though they were unworthy of it, he would not deny them the
benefit granted long before, since they sought it again with so great
faith. _The prayer went up_,[710] there came up also _a multitude of
fishes_,[711] and perhaps more fruitful than in ancient days; and the
people of the land continue to enjoy that abundance to this day. What
wonder if _the prayer of a righteous man_ which _penetrates the
heavens_,[712] penetrated _the abysses_,[713] and called forth from the
depth of the sea so great supplies of fish?
56. There came, on one occasion, three bishops into the village of
Faughart,[714] which they say was the birthplace of Brigit the
virgin;[715] and Malachy was a fourth. And the presbyter who had
received them with hospitality, said to him, "What shall I do, for I
have no fish?" And when he answered that he should seek them from the
fishermen, he said, "For the last two years no fish have been found in
the river;[716] and for that reason the fishermen also are all scattered
and have even abandoned their art." And Malachy replied "Command them to
_let down the nets_[717] in the name of the Lord." It was done, and
twelve salmon were caught. They lowered them a second time, and catching
as many more they brought to the tables both an unlooked-for dish and an
unlooked-for miracle. And that it might be clear that this was granted
to the merits of Malachy, the same sterility nevertheless continued also
for the following two years.
FOOTNOTES:
[576] Of which, it appears from this and other passages (see p. 33, n.
1), he was still abbot.
[577] 2 Cor. i. 15.
[578] _Gentibus._
[579] Ps. xlviii. 2.
[580] Isa. xxxii. 20.
[581] Cp. Serm. ii. § 3. Perhaps here, as in that passage, we should
read _person_ (_persona_) for _profession_ (_professio_).
[582] Ps. cxlix. 6, 7.
[583] Ps. xxxiv. 16; 1 Pet. iii. 12.
[584] Ps. lxxv. 4 (vg.).
[585] Ps. xxxiv. 15; 1 Pet. iii. 12.
[586] St. Bernard's secretary, Geoffrey, recalls this sentence (_V.P._
iii. 1). He mentions the saint's many miracles and then proceeds,
"But, as he himself says, in commendation of St. Malachy, the first
and greatest miracle that he displayed was himself." About half of the
present section is embodied by Gerlatus in his description of the
character of Godscalcus (_M.G.H._, Scr. xvii. 700).
[587] Eph. iii. 16.
[588] Jas. iii. 2.
[589] Matt. xii. 36.
[590] Cp. Serm. ii. § 4.
[591] Cp. Consecratio in Ordering of Deacons (Gregorian Sacramentary).
[592] Cp. Serm. ii. § 4.
[593] This statement must be accepted with some reserve. Malachy must
have had personal property while he was coarb of Patrick. And
accordingly Serm. i. § 6, connects his voluntary poverty with his
episcopate in Down, and above (§ 21) his departure from Armagh is
represented as a return to poverty. The context shows that St. Bernard
is here thinking of the period when he was legate.
[594] Gen. xxxii. 5, etc.
[595] _I.e._ dioceses.
[596] Cp. Rom. i. 9.
[597] 1 Cor. ix. 14.
[598] Luke x. 7.
[599] 1 Cor. ix. 18; cp. Serm. ii. § 1.
[600] Phil. iv. 3 combined with Eph. iv 12; cp. Acts xx. 34.
[601] Matt. xviii. 4, combined with Ecclus. iii. 20.
[602] Luke xii. 13.
[603] 1 Pet. v. 3 (vg.).
[604] 1 Cor. ix. 19.
[605] Cp. _De Dil._ 17: "Paul did not preach the Gospel that he might
eat, but ate that he might preach the Gospel; for he loved not food
but the Gospel." The reference is of course to 1 Cor. ix.
[606] 1 Tim. vi. 5.
[607] _Opus et onus._
[608] Amos i. 13.
[609] Cp. 2 Cor. vi. 11.
[610] Matt. vi. 26.
[611] Matt. vi. 25, 31.
[612] 2 Cor. vi. 10.
[613] Cp. Matt. vi. 34.
[614] Secret of Mass for Nativity of St. John Baptist, etc.
[615] Exod. xxxii. 6, etc.
[616] Cp. Gen. xi. 4.
[617] Matt. viii. 20; Luke ix. 58.
[618] 2 Tim. iv. 5.
[619] Jer. vi. 23, etc.
[620] 2 Thess. iii. 8, 12.
[621] Ps. lxxviii. 25.
[622] Ps. cvii. 9.
[623] _Plebes._
[624] 2 Cor. xii. 12 (vg.).
[625] Cp. 1 Cor. xv. 10.
[626] Ps. lxxvii. 14.--The following narratives of Malachy's miracles
are not in chronological order. They are arranged according to their
character. Thus the first four (§§ 45, 46) are instances of his power
over demons.
[627] Coleraine is said to have been founded by St. Patrick; and it
was certainly a religious establishment at least as early as the sixth
century (Adamnan, i. 50). One of its erenachs died in 1122 (_A.F.M._).
The word "city" implies that the community was still in existence.
[628] Compare the story of St. Gall listening to the conversation of
the demon of the mountain and the demon of the waters, told in
Stokes's _Celtic Church in Ireland_, p. 145, from the Life of St. Gall
in _M.G.H._, Scr. i. 7.
[629] The first of three miracles of healing the insane.
[630] In Lecale, co. Down, near Downpatrick. There St. Patrick made
his first convert, and there he died. It is not easy to explain why
St. Bernard calls it a "region." See further, p. 113, n. 3.
[631] Ulaid was a district which included the greater part of the
present county of Down, and the southern part of Antrim.
[632] For a similar avowal by Jocelin, who wrote in the same century
as St. Bernard, and other illustrative passages, see Adamnan, p. 4.
[633] See § 8, and above in this section.
[634] The first of three healings of dumb persons.
[635] Mark vii. 33.
[636] The word "city" implies that there was a religious community at
Antrim. That this was the case is proved by the round tower which
still remains, and other evidence (Reeves, p. 63). But apparently the
_Annals_ do not refer to any monastery or church at that place. See,
however, _U.A._ and _A.F.M._ at 1096 for a possible exception.
[637] 1 Tim. vi. 13.
[638] Ps. lii. 8 (vg.).
[639] Ps. xlv. 7.
[640] Cp. Serm. ii. § 8.
[641] Luke vii. 40.
[642] Acts vi. 5.
[643] Printed text, _Conuama_, no MS. variants being recorded in the
margin: perhaps a misprint for _Clonuama_. Mabillon has _Duevania_ and
K _Duenuania_. A seems to read _Clueuuania_. All these variants point
to _Cluain uama_ (the meadow of the cave), the Irish name for Cloyne,
which is undoubtedly the place referred to (see next note). The next
two miracles are concerned with childbirth. The first of them may have
been related to St. Bernard by Marcus, the author of Tundale's Vision
(see Friedel and Meyer, _La Vision de Tondale_, p. iv., and above p.
lxv. n. 3).
[644] Nehemiah Moriarty, who died in 1149 (_A.F.M._), being then, it
is said, 95 years old (Tundale, p. 5). In Tundale (p. 53 f.) he is one
of four bishops who were with St. Patrick in Paradise, the others
being Cellach, Malachy and Christian O'Morgair. He is there (pp. 5,
54) called bishop of Cloyne (_Cluanensis_).
[645] Cp. 1 Cor. x. 16.
[646] Luke vi. 17.
[647] Mark vi. 18.
[648] 1 Cor. v. 5; 1 Tim. i. 20.
[649] John viii. 4.
[650] Ps. lviii. 10 (vg.).
[651] Probably Dermot MacMurrough, who became king of Leinster in
1126, and died in 1171. He was driven out of his kingdom in 1166, and
then invited the Anglo-Normans to come to his aid. The result was the
conquest of Ireland. His character merits the description which St.
Bernard gives of it.
[652] Rom. xvi. 18.
[653] The first of three healings of paralysis.
[654] John iv. 50.
[655] Gen. ii. 21.
[656] Mark viii. 3.
[657] Acts xiii. 11, etc.
[658] Mark vii. 34.
[659] Cp. Acts xii. 9.
[660] Gen. xlv. 26 (vg.).
[661] Acts iii. 8-10.
[662] Mark vi. 49.
[663] This implies that the diocese of Cork had already been founded.
But we cannot be sure that St. Bernard is correct when he says that
the clergy and people met to elect a bishop, in view of his inability
elsewhere (§ 19) to distinguish bishops from abbots. It is at least
possible that there was strife between different septs concerning the
appointment of a coarb of Barre, founder of the church of Cork.
Malachy may have taken advantage of the strife to nominate a ruler who
belonged to no sept in the district and who would allow himself to be
consecrated bishop. The vacancy may have been made by the death of
Donnell Shalvey, erenach of Cork, in 1140 (_A.F.M._). The word
_erenach_ is sometimes used at this period where we might have
expected to find _abbot_ (cp. _A.F.M._ 1137, quoted in Additional Note
C, p. 167).
[664] 2 Cor. xi. 28.
[665] Evidently Malachy was now papal legate. The date of the incident
is therefore not earlier than 1140.
[666] It would seem that it was taken for granted that one of the
leading men of a sept would be appointed, according to prevalent
custom, exemplified in the case of Armagh. This suggests that the
vacant office was that of abbot. There would be nothing surprising in
the selection of a "poor man," who was not a local magnate, as
diocesan bishop.
[667] Luke xvii. 16, 18.--This was probably Gilla Aedha Ua Muidhin,
who attended the Synod of Kells in 1152 as bishop of Cork (Keating,
iii. 317), and died in 1172 (_A.U._). Since he attained "a good old
age" there is no reason why he should not have been consecrated as
early as 1140 or 1141. He had been a monk of Errew in Lough Con, co.
Mayo (_A.T._ 1172), and was therefore "a stranger," _i.e._ not a
native of Munster. He is called a "poor man," no doubt, for the same
reason as Malachy himself (§ 24), because he had embraced the life of
voluntary poverty. He had a reputation for piety and learning, for the
Annals describe him as "full of the grace of God" (_A.U._), and "the
tower of devotion and wisdom and virginity of Ireland" (_A.T._). And
if the tradition is trustworthy that he was abbot of St. John the
Evangelist at Cork, founded by Cormac Mac Carthy "for pilgrims from
Connaught" (see the charter of Dermot Mac Carthy printed in Gibson's
_History of Cork_, ii. 348), and that it received its later name of
Gill Abbey from him, we can explain how he came to be near at hand
when the election was taking place.
[668] Matt. ix. 20.--In this and the next two sections we have three
miracles wrought on women; one at the point of death, another dead,
and the third spiritually dead.
[669] See § 14.
[670] Matt. xvi. 28; Mark ix. 1; Luke ix. 27.
[671] See 2 Kings iv. 29 ff.
[672] Gen. ii. 21.
[673] Luke viii. 44.
[674] Cp. Mark v. 29.
[675] _Si quominus._ The text seems to be corrupt. A friend suggests
the emendation _sed quominus deficeret_.
[676] Phil. ii. 27 (inexact quotation).--The story told in this
section was a favourite of St. Charles Borromeo (Alban Butler, _Lives
of Saints_, ed. Husenbeth, ii. 607).
[677] John iv. 49.
[678] Cp. Mark vi. 13; Jas. v. 14.
[679] Matt. xxv. 6.
[680] 1 Chron. xxi. 8, 17.
[681] Gen. xxxvii. 35.
[682] 2 Cor. ii. 13; cp. Jer. xlv. 3.
[683] Ps. vi. 6 (vg.); Jer. xlv. 3.
[684] Matt. xxvi. 41, etc.
[685] Rom. viii. 26.
[686] Acts ix. 40.
[687] John xvi. 20.
[688] Jas. v. 15.
[689] John ix. 3.
[690] Acts vii. 60.
[691] 1 Tim. vi. 13.
[692] Exod. xv. 8 (vg.).
[693] Ps. l. 3 (vg.).
[694] 1 Cor. iv. 21.
[695] Ps. lxxvii. 10 (vg.).
[696] Rom. xiv. 5.
[697] Eph. iii. 16; cp. 2 Cor. iv. 16.
[698] Ps. xxxv. 12 (vg.).
[699] Matt. viii. 13, combined with John xv. 7.
[700] Ps. cxix. 136.
[701] Cant. iv. 15.
[702] Here and in § 56 we have two miraculous draughts of fish.
[703] 1 Sam. ii. 5.
[704] Cp. Rom. i. 11.
[705] Acts xxviii. 2.
[706] Cp. 1 Cor. ix. 9.
[707] Cp. Luke v. 10.
[708] Cp. Mark ii. 5; Luke v. 20.
[709] Acts xxi. 5.
[710] Acts x. 4.
[711] Luke v. 6; John xxi. 6.
[712] Ecclus. xxxv. 21 (inexact quotation).
[713] Cp. Ps. cvii. 26 (vg.).
[714] Faughart is a parish north of Dundalk.
[715] Apparently the only authority earlier than St. Bernard which
makes Faughart the birthplace of St. Brigit is her fourth _Life_ (i.
6, _Trias_, 547).
[716] The Kilcurry River.
[717] Luke v. 4.
CHAPTER VII
_He does battle for the faith; he restores peace among those who were at
variance; he takes in hand to build a stone church._
57. (32). There was a certain clerk in Lismore whose life, as it is
said, was good, but his faith not so. He was a man of some knowledge in
his own eyes, and dared to say that in the Eucharist there is only a
sacrament and not the fact[718] of the sacrament, that is, mere
sanctification and not the truth of the Body. On this subject he was
often addressed by Malachy in secret, but in vain; and finally he was
called before a public assembly, the laity however being excluded, in
order that if it were possible, he should be healed and not put to
confusion.[719] So in a gathering of clerics the man was given
opportunity to answer for his opinion. And when with all his powers of
ingenuity, in which he had no slight skill, he attempted to assert and
defend his error, Malachy disputing against him and convicting him, in
the judgement of all, he was worsted; and he retired, put to confusion
by the unanimity though not sentenced to punishment.[720] But he said
that he was not overcome by reason, but crushed by the authority of the
bishop. "And you, Malachy," said he, "have put me to confusion this day
without good reason, speaking assuredly against the truth and contrary
to your own conscience." Malachy, sad for a man so hardened, but
grieving more for the injury that was done to the faith, and fearing
dangerous developments, called the church together,[721] publicly
censured the erring one, publicly admonished him to repent, the bishops
and the whole clergy urging him to the same effect. When he did not
submit, they pronounced an anathema upon him as contumacious and
proclaimed him a heretic. But not aroused from sleep by this he said,
"You all favour the man, not the truth; I do not accept persons so that
I should _forsake the truth_."[722] To this word the saint made answer
with some heat, "The Lord make you confess the truth even of necessity;"
and when he replied "Amen" the assembly was dissolved. Burnt with such a
branding-iron he meditated flight, for he could not bear to be of ill
repute and dishonoured. And forthwith he departed, carrying his
belongings; when lo, seized with sudden weakness, he stood still, and
his strength failing he threw himself on the ground in the same spot,
panting and weary. A vagabond madman, arriving by chance at that place,
came upon the man and asked him what he did there. He replied that he
was suffering from great weakness and unable either to advance or to go
back. And the other said, "This weakness is nothing else than death
itself." _But this he spake not of himself, but_[723] God fitly rebuked
by means of a madman him who would not submit to the sane counsels of
men of understanding. And he said, "Return home, I will help you."
Finally with his guidance he went back into the city: he returned to his
right mind and to the mercy of the Lord. In the same hour the bishop was
summoned, the truth was acknowledged, error was renounced. He confessed
his guilt and was absolved. He asked for the viaticum, and
reconciliation was granted; and almost in the same moment his perfidy
was renounced by his mouth and dissolved by his death. So, to the wonder
of all, with all speed was fulfilled the word of Malachy, and with it
that of the Scripture which says, "_Trouble gives understanding to the
hearing._"[724]
58. (33). Between the peoples of certain regions there once arose
grievous discord.[725] Malachy was importuned to make peace between
them, and because he was hindered by other business he committed this
matter to one of the bishops. He made excuse and refused, saying that
Malachy, not he, had been sought for, that he would be despised, that he
was unwilling to take trouble to no purpose. "_Go_," said Malachy, "_and
the Lord be with you_."[726] He replied, "I assent, but if they will not
hear me, know that I will appeal to your Fatherhood." Smiling, Malachy
said, "Be it so." Then the bishop, having called the parties together,
dictated terms of peace; they assented and were reconciled to one
another, security was given on both sides, and peace was established;
and so he dismissed them. But one party, seeing that their enemies had
become careless and were unprepared, because peace having been made they
suspected no harm, _said_ among themselves, each man _to his
neighbour_,[727] "What are we minded to do? Victory and vengeance on
our foes is in our grasp"; and they began to attack them. What was
happening became known to the bishop, and hastening up he charged their
chief with wickedness and guile, but he treated him with contempt. He
invoked the name of Malachy against him, and he paid no attention to it.
Laughing at the bishop he said, "Do you suppose that for you we ought to
let those go who did evil to us, whom _God hath delivered into our
hands_?"[728] And the bishop, remembering the conversation which he had
had with Malachy, _weeping and wailing_,[729] turned his face towards
Malachy's monastery[730] and said, "Where art thou, man of God, where
art thou? Is not this, my father, what I told thee of? Alas, alas, I
came here that I might do good and not evil; and behold, through me all
are perishing, these in the body, those in the soul." Many things in
this manner said he as he _mourned_ and _lamented_,[731] and he urged
and addressed Malachy, as though he were present, against the wicked.
But meanwhile the impious men did not cease to attack those with whom
they had made peace, so as to destroy them; and behold there was _a
lying spirit in the mouth of_ certain men to _deceive_ them.[732] And
these men met them in the way announcing that a raid had been made into
their lands by their adversaries, that all things were being consumed
_with the edge of the sword_,[733] and that their goods were being laid
waste, and their wives and children taken and led away. When they heard
this they returned in haste. The hindmost followed the first, _not
knowing whither they went_[734] or what had happened; for they had not
all heard the men who spoke. And when they came and found none of those
things which had been told them they were confounded, taken in their own
wickedness;[735] and they _knew_ that they had been given up to _the
spirit of error_,[736] on account of the messenger of Malachy whom they
deceived and his _name_ which _they despised_.[737] Further, the bishop,
when he heard that the traitors were foiled in the iniquity which they
had devised, returned with joy to Malachy and told him all things in
order which had happened to him.
59. Malachy, knowing that by such an event the peace was disturbed,
taking suitable opportunity was at pains in his own person to restore
peace once more between them, and to confirm it when restored by the
giving and receiving of security and an oath on both sides. But those
who before had suffered from the violation of peace, mindful of the
injury, and ignoring the agreement and the command of Malachy, took in
hand to make reprisals. And all coming together, they set out to take
their enemies unprepared and to return upon their own head the evil
which they had thought to do to them.[738] And when they had very easily
forded a great river which lay between them, they were stopped by a
rivulet to which they came, not far from it. For indeed now it was not a
rivulet, but appeared clearly to be a huge river, denying passage in
every part of it to those who desired to cross it. All wondered that it
was now so great, knowing how small it had been before, and they said
among themselves, "What has caused this inundation? The air is clear,
there are no rains, and we do not remember that there have been any
lately; and even if there had been much rain, which of us remembers
that, to however great a flood it swelled, it ever before covered the
land, spreading over sown ground and meadow? _This is the finger of
God_,[739] and the Lord _is hedging up our ways_,[740] on account of
Malachy, His saint, whose _covenant we have transgressed_[741] and
disobeyed his commandment."[742] So these also, without accomplishing
their purpose, returned to their own territory, likewise confounded. The
report was spread _throughout all the region_;[743] and they blessed
God, who _took the wise in their own craftiness_,[744] _and cutting off
the horns of the wicked_,[745] _exalted the horn of His anointed_.[746]
60. One of the nobles hostile to the king[747] was reconciled by means
of Malachy. For he did not trust the king sufficiently to make peace
with him except by the mediation of Malachy, or of one for whom the king
had equal reverence. His distrust was not unfounded, as afterwards
appeared. For when he had become careless, and was no longer taking
precautions, the king captured him and put him in bonds, more truly
himself captured by ancient hate. His own friends demanded him by _the
hand of the mediator_;[748] for neither did they expect anything but
his death. What should Malachy do? There was nothing to be done except
to recur to that one accustomed refuge of his. Gathering an exceeding
mighty army, a great crowd of his own disciples, he went to the king,
and demanded him who was bound; he was refused. But Malachy said, "You
act unrighteously against the Lord, and against me, and against
yourself, _transgressing the covenant_;[749] if you disregard it, yet
shall not I. A man has entrusted himself to my guarantee; if he should
die, I have betrayed him. I am guilty of his blood. Why has it seemed
good to you to make me a traitor, yourself a transgressor? Know that _I
will eat nothing until_[750] he is liberated; no, nor these
either."[751] Having said this he entered the church. He called upon
Almighty God with anxious groanings, his own and those of his disciples,
that He would deign to _deliver out of the hand of the transgressor and
cruel man_[752] him who was unjustly sentenced. And that day and the
following night they persisted in fasting and prayer. Word was brought
to the king of that which was being done; and his _heart was_ the more
_hardened_[753] by that by which it ought to have been softened. The
carnal man took to flight, fearing lest if he remained near at hand he
might not be able to withstand the power of prayer; as though, forsooth,
if he was hidden it could not find him, nor would penetrate to a remote
place. Do you put bounds, wretched man, to _the prayers of saints_?[754]
Is prayer an arrow that has been shot, that you may _flee from the face
of the bow_?[755] _Whither wilt thou go from the Spirit of God_, who
carries it, _or whither wilt thou flee from His presence_?[756] At last
Malachy pursues the fugitive, he finds him who lies hidden. "_You shall
be blind and not seeing_,[757] that you may see better, and may
understand that _it is hard for you to kick against the pricks._[758]
Nay, perceive even now that _sharp arrows of the mighty_[759] have come
to you, which, although they have rebounded from your heart, because it
is of stone, have not rebounded from your eyes. Would that even through
the windows of the eyes they might reach to the heart, and _trouble give
understanding_[760] to blindness." It could be seen that _Saul_ again
was _led by the hand_[761] and brought to Ananias, a wolf to a sheep,
that he might disgorge his prey. He disgorged it and _received
sight_,[762] for to such a degree was Malachy like a sheep, if, for
example, it were to take pity even on the wolf. Note carefully from
this, reader, with whom Malachy had his dwelling, what sort of princes
they were, what sort of peoples. How is it that he also was not _a
brother to dragons, and a companion to owls_?[763] And therefore the
Lord _gave him power to tread upon serpents and scorpions_,[764] _to
bind their kings with chains and their nobles with fetters of
iron_.[765] Hear now what follows.
61. (34). He to whom Malachy had yielded the possessions of the
monastery of Bangor,[766] ungrateful for the benefit, from that time
forward behaved himself always most arrogantly against him and his
followers, hostile to them in all things, plotting everywhere, and
disparaging his deeds. But not without punishment. He had an only son,
who, imitating his father and daring himself to act in opposition to
Malachy, died the same year. And thus he died. It seemed good to
Malachy that a stone oratory should be erected at Bangor like those
which he had seen constructed in other regions.[767] And when he began
to lay the foundations the natives wondered, because in that land no
such buildings were yet to be found.[768] But that worthless fellow,
presumptuous and arrogant as he was, not only wondered but was
indignant. And from that indignation _he conceived grief and brought
forth iniquity_.[769] And he became a _talebearer among the
peoples_,[770] now _disparaging secretly_,[771] now speaking evil
openly; drawing attention to Malachy's frivolity, shuddering at the
novelty, exaggerating the expense. With such poisonous words as these he
was urging and inducing many to put a stop to it: "Follow me, and what
ought not to be done by any but ourselves let us not permit to be done
against our will." Then with many whom he was able to persuade--_himself
the_ first _leader in speech_[772] as well as the origin of the
evil--he went down to the place, and finding the man of God accosted
him: "Good sir, why have you thought good to introduce this novelty into
our regions? We are Scots, not Gauls. What is this frivolity? What need
was there for a work so superfluous, so proud? Where will you, _a poor
and needy man_,[773] find _the means to finish it_?[774] Who will see it
finished? What sort of presumption is this, to begin, I say not what you
cannot finish, but what you cannot even see finished? Though indeed it
is the act of a maniac rather than of a presumptuous man to attempt what
is beyond his measure, what exceeds his strength, what baffles his
abilities. Cease, cease, desist from this madness. If not, we shall not
permit it, we shall not tolerate it." This he said, proclaiming what he
would do, but not considering what it was within his power to do. For
some of those on whom he counted and whom he had brought with him, when
they saw the man[775] changed their minds and went no more with
him.[776]
62. And to him the holy man spoke quite freely: "Wretched man, the work
which you see begun, and on which you look askance, shall undoubtedly be
finished: many shall see it finished. But you, because you do not wish
it, will not see it;[777] and that which you wish not shall be yours--to
die: take heed that you do not _die in your sins_."[778] So it happened:
he died, and the work was finished; but he saw it not, for, as we have
said already, he died the same year. Meanwhile the father, who soon
heard what the holy man had foretold concerning his son, and knew that
his word was _quick and powerful_,[779] said, "He _has slain my
son_."[780] And by the instigation of the devil he burned with such
rage against him that he was not afraid, before the duke and magnates of
Ulaid, to accuse of falsehood and lying him who was most truthful and a
disciple and lover of the Truth; and he used violent language against
him, calling him an ape.[781] And Malachy, who had been taught not to
_render railing for railing,[782] was dumb, and opened not his
mouth[783] while the wicked was before him_.[784] But the Lord was not
forgetful of His word which He had spoken, _Vengeance is mine, I will
repay_.[785] The same day when the man returned home he expiated the
rashness of his unbridled tongue, the avenger being the very one at
whose instigation he had let it loose. The demon seized him and cast him
into the fire, but he was soon pulled out by those that stood by; yet
with his body partly burnt, and deprived of reason. And while he was
raving Malachy was called, and when he came he found the accursed man,
his foaming mouth contorted, terrifying all things with horrible sounds
and movements, his whole body writhing, and scarcely to be kept in
restraint by many men. And when he prayed for his enemy the man of all
perfection was heard, but only in part. For in a moment, while the saint
was praying, he opened his eyes, and recovered his understanding. But
_an evil spirit of the Lord_[786] was left to him _to buffet him,[787]
that he might learn not to blaspheme_.[788] We believe that he still
lives, and up to this time is expiating the great sin which he sinned
against the saint; but they say that at certain times he is a lunatic.
Further, the aforesaid possessions, since he could no longer hold them
by reason of his helplessness and uselessness, returned in peace to the
place to which they had belonged. Nor did Malachy refuse them, when the
prospect of peace was held out at length after so much trouble.
63. But now our narrative must return to the work of the building which
Malachy had undertaken. And though Malachy had not the means, I do not
say to finish it, but to do any part of it, yet _his heart trusted in
the Lord_.[789] The Lord, in fact, provided that, though he _set not his
hope on treasures of money_,[790] money should not be lacking. For who
else caused a treasure to be stored in that place, and being stored, not
to be found till the time and work of Malachy? The servant of God found
in God's purse what was not in his own. Deservedly, indeed. For what
more just than that he who for God's sake possessed nothing should enter
into partnership with God, and that they should both _have one
purse_.[791] For the man who believes, the whole world is a treasury of
riches; and what is it but a kind of purse of God? Indeed He says, _The
world is mine, and the fulness thereof_.[792] Hence it was that when
many pieces of silver were found Malachy did not put them back in their
place, but took them out of their place; for he bade the whole gift of
God to be spent on the work of God.[793] He considered not his own
necessities nor those of his companions, but _cast his_ thought upon
_the Lord_,[794] to whom he did not doubt that he ought to resort as
often as need required. And there is no doubt that that was the work of
God, because Malachy had foreseen it by God's revelation. He had first
consulted with the brothers concerning that work; and many on account
of their lack of means were unwilling to assent to it. Anxious therefore
and doubtful what he should do, he began to inquire earnestly in prayer
what was the will of God. And one day coming back from a journey,[795]
when he drew near to the place he viewed it some way off; and lo, there
appeared a great oratory, of stone and very beautiful. And paying
careful attention to its position, form and construction, he took up the
work with confidence, having first however related the vision to a few
of the elder brothers. Indeed so carefully did he adhere to all his
attentive observations regarding place and manner and quality that when
the work was finished that which was made appeared closely similar to
that which he had seen, as if he also as well as Moses had heard the
saying, _Look_ that _thou make all things according to the pattern
shewed to thee in the mount_.[796] By the same kind of vision there was
shown to him before it was built, not only the oratory, but also the
whole monastery, which is situated at Saul.[797]
64. (35). As he was passing through a certain city and a great multitude
was running together to him, by chance he saw a young man among the rest
eager _to see_ him.[798] He had _climbed up_ on a stone, and standing on
tip-toes, with outstretched neck, contemplating him with eyes and mind,
showed himself to him as a kind of new Zacchaeus.[799] And it was not
hid from Malachy (for the Holy Spirit revealed it) that he had truly
come _in the spirit and power of_ Zacchaeus.[800] He took no notice,
however, at the time, and passed on in silence. But in the hospice that
night he told the brothers how he had seen him and what he had foreseen
concerning him. But on the third day behold he came with a certain
nobleman, his lord, who disclosed the wish and desire of the young man,
and asked that he would deign to receive him on his commendation, and
have him henceforth among his companions. And Malachy recognizing him
said, "There is no need that man should commend him _whom_ already _God
has commended_."[801] And taking him by the hand he delivered him over
to our abbot Congan[802] and he to the brothers. But that young
man--still living if I mistake not--the first lay conversus of the
monastery of the Suir,[803] has testimony from all that he lives a holy
life among the brothers, according to the Cistercian Order. And the
disciples recognized also in this incident that Malachy had _the spirit
of prophecy_,[804] and not in this only, but in that which we shall add.
65. When he was offering the sacraments,[805] and the deacon had
approached him to do something belonging to his office, the priest
beholding him groaned because he had perceived that something was hidden
in him that was not meet. When the sacrifice was over, having been
probed privately concerning his conscience _he confessed and denied
not_[806] that he had been _mocked_[807] in a dream that night. And
Malachy enjoined penance upon him and said, "It was your duty not to
have ministered to-day, but reverently to withdraw from sacred things
and to show respect to so great and divine mysteries, that purified by
this humiliation you might in future minister more worthily."
Likewise on another occasion,[808] when he was sacrificing and praying
at the hour of sacrifice with his accustomed sanctity and purity of
heart, the deacon standing by him, a dove was seen to enter through the
window in great glory. And with that glory the priest was completely
flooded, and the whole of the gloomy basilica became suffused with
light. But the dove, after flitting about for a while, at length settled
down on the cross before the face of the priest. The deacon was amazed;
and trembling on account of the novelty both of the light and of the
bird, for that is a rare bird in the land, fell upon his face, and
palpitating, scarcely dared to rise even when the necessity of his
office required it. After Mass Malachy spoke to him privately and bade
him, as he valued his life, on no account to divulge the mystery which
he had seen, as long as he himself was alive.
Once, when he was at Armagh with one of his fellow-bishops, he rose in
the night and began to go round the memorials of the saints, of which
there are many in the cemetery of St. Patrick,[809] with prayer. And lo,
they saw one of the altars suddenly take fire. For both saw this great
vision, and both wondered. And Malachy, understanding that it was a sign
of the great merit of him, or those, whose bodies rested under that
altar, ran and plunged into the midst of the flames with outstretched
arms and embraced the sacred altar. What he did there, or what he
perceived, none knows; but that from that fire he went forth ablaze more
than his wont with heavenly fire, I suppose there is none of the
brothers who were with him then that does not know.
66. These things have been mentioned, a few out of many, but many for
this time. For these are not times of signs, as it is written, _We see
not signs; there is no more any prophet._[810] Whence it appears
sufficiently how great in merits was my Malachy, who was so rich in
signs, rare as they now are. For in what kind of _ancient miracles_[811]
was not Malachy conspicuous? If we consider well those few that have
been mentioned, he lacked not prophecy,[812] nor revelation,[813] nor
vengeance upon the impious,[814] nor _the grace of healings_,[815] nor
transformation of minds,[816] nor lastly raising the dead.[817] By all
these things God was blessed who so loved and adorned him, who also
magnified him _before kings_,[818] and gave him _the crown of
glory_.[819] That he was loved is proved in his merits, that he was
adorned, in his signs, that he was magnified, in his vengeance on
enemies, that he had glory, in recompense of rewards. You have in
Malachy, diligent reader, something to wonder at, you have also
something to imitate. Now carefully note what you may hope for as the
result of these things. For _the end of these things is a precious
death_.[820]
FOOTNOTES:
[718] _Rem._ This may have been a follower of Berengarius, who in his
recantation in 1059 anathematized the heresy that the bread and wine
"after consecration are merely a sacrament and not the true Body and
Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Mansi, xix. 900).
[719] Compare St. Bernard's method with Abélard, _V.P._ iii. 13;
and for his dealing with a brother who did not believe in
transubstantiation, _ibid._ vii. 8, 9.
[720] I follow the printed text: _de consensu confusus quidem exiit,
sed non correptus_. But Mabillon, supported by A, has "he retired from
the assembly confounded, but not brought to the right opinion" (_de
conuentu ... non correctus_). K reads _de conuentu ... non correptus_.
[721] It would seem from this that Malachy was acting as legate. The
date is therefore after 1140.
[722] Prov. xxviii. 21 (vg.).
[723] John xi. 51.
[724] Isa. xxviii. 19 (vg.).
[725] In §§ 58-62 we have three stories in which Malachy appears as a
peacemaker.
[726] 1 Sam. xvii. 37, combined with 1 Chron. xxii. 16.
[727] Gen. xi. 3 (vg.).
[728] Judg. xvi. 24.
[729] Mark v. 38.
[730] This expression indicates that Malachy had a special relation to
one monastery. It can hardly have been any other than Bangor.
[731] Matt. xi. 17.
[732] 1 Kings xxii. 22; 2 Chron. xviii. 21.
[733] Josh. vi. 21; Judg. iv. 15, etc.
[734] Heb. xi. 8.
[735] Cp. Ps. x. 2.
[736] 1 John iv. 6.
[737] Cp. Mal. i. 6.
[738] Cp. Ps. vii. 16.
[739] Exod. viii. 19.
[740] Hos. ii. 6.
[741] Josh. vii. 15, etc.
[742] In Serm. ii. § 2, where this story is again briefly told, the
miracle is more directly ascribed to Malachy, and the stream is said
to have swelled suddenly.
[743] Cp. Luke iv. 14, etc.
[744] Job v. 13, combined with 1 Cor. iii. 19.
[745] Ps. lxxv. 10.
[746] 1 Sam. ii. 10.
[747] Probably Turlough O'Conor, who is said by the annalists to have
imprisoned illegally several persons of high position, viz. (1) his
own son Rory O'Conor, together with Donnell O'Flaherty and Cathal
O'Conor, in 1143, (2) Murrough Ua Maelsechlainn, king of Meath, in
1143, and (3) Teague O'Brien, in 1148. Release was obtained, in the
first instance, in 1144 by the clergy of Ireland and the "coarb of
Patrick," who fasted at Rathbrennan. The coarb may have been Malachy.
In the second instance, it was secured through the influence of
certain "sureties"; and in the third, "at the intercession of the
bishops of Ireland with the coarb of Patrick, Mael Maedoc Ua Morgair"
(_A.F.M._, _A.T._). The Annals, however, know nothing of the blinding
of O'Conor. The incident in the text is mentioned in Serm. ii. § 2.
[748] Gal iii. 19.
[749] Josh. vii. 15, etc.
[750] Acts xxiii. 14.
[751] An example of the well-known Irish custom of "fasting on" a
person with a view to his discomfiture (cp. p. 106, n. 9).
[752] Ps. lxxi. 4 (inexact quotation).
[753] Exod. viii. 19.
[754] Rev. v. 8.
[755] Isa. xxi. 15 (vg.).
[756] Ps. cxxxix. 7.
[757] Acts xiii. 11.
[758] Acts xxvi. 14.
[759] Ps. cxx. 4.
[760] Isa. xxviii. 19.
[761] Acts ix. 8.
[762] Acts ix. 18.
[763] Job xxx. 29.
[764] Luke x. 19 (quotation not exact).
[765] Ps. cxlix.
[766] See § 13.
[767] This remark proves that the building of the oratory was begun
after Malachy's return from France. The same conclusion follows from
the words "We are Scots, _not Gauls_," lower down.
[768] St. Bernard is speaking, not of stone churches in general, as
has sometimes been assumed, but of stone oratories, which may have
been unknown in "that land," _i.e._ the district about Bangor (see p.
32, n. 3). The innovation would naturally cause dissatisfaction among
a conservative people. Indignation may also have been excited by the
unusual size of the building; for it was "a great oratory" (§ 63). But
on the other hand, its ornate style cannot have contributed to the
opposition which the project aroused; for it commenced when the
foundations were being laid. Indeed, however "beautiful" it may have
been (§ 63), it was probably, like the churches of the Cistercians, of
simple design and devoid of ornament. See St. Bernard's _Apologia ad
Guillelmum_, § 28 ff. (_P.L._ clxxxii. 914 f.). The only relic of the
medieval monastery of Bangor is a rudely built wall, once pierced by a
door and a window, now built up. It seems to be later than the twelfth
century. About 120 yards to the south-west of it is "The Abbey
Church," still used for worship. The main part of this structure dates
from the seventeenth century. But the core of the tower appears to be
much earlier, and may be on the site of St. Malachy's oratory.
[769] Job xv. 35 (vg.); Ps. vii. 14 (vg.).
[770] Lev. xix. 16.
[771] Ps. ci. 5.
[772] Acts xiv. 12.
[773] Ps. lxxiv. 21.
[774] Luke xiv. 28.
[775] _Viro_, _i.e._ Malachy.
[776] Cp. John vi. 66.
[777] _Quia non uis non uidebis._
[778] John viii. 21.
[779] Heb. iv. 12.
[780] 1 Kings xvii. 18.
[781] Perhaps because he imitated the customs of the Gauls.
[782] 1 Pet. iii. 9.
[783] Isa. liii. 7.
[784] Ps. xxxix. 1.
[785] Rom. xii. 19.
[786] 1 Sam. xvi. 14; xix. 9 (vg.).
[787] 2 Cor. xii. 7
[788] 1 Tim. i. 20.
[789] Susanna, 35.
[790] Ecclus. xxxi. 8 (vg.: with variant).
[791] Prov. i. 14.
[792] Ps. l. 12.
[793] Malachy disposed of the treasure according to his will. That
fact, together with his relation to the brothers, revealed by the next
few sentences, makes it exceedingly probable that he was still their
abbot.
[794] Ps. lv. 23 (vg.).
[795] Bangor was apparently his headquarters.
[796] Heb. viii. 5.
[797] Jocelin, writing towards the end of the twelfth century,
declares that St. Patrick founded a monastery at Saul (_Vita S.
Patricii_, cap. 32). But, apparently, neither in the Annals nor in any
other authority earlier than Jocelin, is mention made of a monastery
there before St. Malachy's time. The text seems to imply that there
were no monastic buildings on the site when he founded (or re-founded)
it. Malachy placed in his new monastery a convent of regular canons of
St. Augustine (_A.U._ 1170); but it never became an important
establishment, though it was still in existence in the sixteenth
century. See Reeves, pp. 40, 220 ff.
[798] This and the next story (§ 65) illustrate Malachy's power of
reading the hearts of men.
[799] Luke xix. 1-4.
[800] Luke i. 17.
[801] 2 Cor. x. 18.
[802] See p. 4, n. 7.
[803] _Suriensis monasterii._ The monastery of Inislounaght, close to
the River Suir, a mile or two to the west of Clonmel, co. Tipperary,
is commonly known as _De Surio_. The present passage seems to show
that it was founded before 1148. For information about it see an
article by the late Dr. Bagwell, in _J.R.S.A.I._ xxxix. 267 f. and
Janauschek, _Orig. Cist._ p. 131. This incident must have been
considerably later than the foundation of Mellifont (see p. 75, n. 4).
It may therefore be dated between 1143 and 1147.
[804] Rev. xix. 10.
[805] This word is constantly used in the plural of the Eucharist,
each of the elements being regarded as a "sacrament."
[806] John i. 20.
[807] Gen. xxxix. 17.
[808] This story is suggested by the last because the incident
occurred during the celebration of Mass.
[809] Evidently the cemetery in which, according to local tradition,
St. Patrick was buried (see § 19). It was probably the _Ferta
Martair_, the site of St. Patrick's earlier settlement at Armagh
(Reeves, _Churches_, p. 5; _R.I.A._ xviii. 660). It seems to be hinted
that St. Malachy received a revelation of the position of his grave.
[810] Ps. lxxiv. 9.
[811] Secret of Mass for Kings, etc.
[812] A fresh classification of Malachy's miracles. For prophecy see
§§ 36, 48, 52, 57, 62, 64 f.
[813] §§ 11, 63, 64, 65.
[814] §§ 22 f., 48, 57, 60, 62.
[815] 1 Cor. xii. 9 (vg.).--§§ 14, 15, 40, 45-47, 49-52, 60, 62.
[816] §§ 26, 54, 57, 61.
[817] § 53.
[818] Ps. cxix. 46.--§§ 10, 40, 60.
[819] 1 Pet. v. 4.
[820] Rom. vi. 21, combined with Ps. cxvi. 15.
CHAPTER VIII
_Departure from Ireland. Death and Burial at Clairvaux._
[Sidenote: 1148, May (?)]
67. (30). Being asked once, in what place, if a choice were given him,
he would prefer to spend his last day--for on this subject the brothers
used to ask one another what place each would select for himself--he
hesitated, and made no reply. But when they insisted, he said, "If I
take my departure hence[821] I shall do so nowhere more gladly than
whence I may rise together with our Apostle"[822]--he referred to St.
Patrick; "but if it behoves me to make a pilgrimage, and if God so
permits, I have selected Clairvaux." When asked also about the time, [he
named in reply] the festival of all the dead.[823] If it is regarded as
a mere wish, it was fulfilled, if as a prophecy, not _a jot passed_ from
it.[824] _As we have heard so have we seen_[825] alike concerning place
and day. Let us relate briefly in what order and by what occasion it
came to pass. Malachy took it amiss that Ireland was still without a
pall; for he was zealous for the sacraments, and would not that his
nation should be wholly deprived of any one of them.[826] And
remembering that it had been promised to him by Pope Innocent,[827] he
was the more sad that while he was still alive it had not been sent for.
And taking advantage of the fact that Pope Eugenius[828] held the chief
rule and was reported to have gone at that time to France,[829] he
rejoiced that he had found opportunity for claiming it. He took for
granted that, the Pope being such a man as he was, and having been
promoted from such a religious profession--and the more because he had
been a special son of his own Clairvaux--he need not fear that he should
have any difficulty with him. Therefore the bishops were summoned; a
council assembled.[830] Matters which were of immediate importance at
the time were discussed for three days, and on the fourth the scheme of
obtaining the pall was broached. Assent was given, but on condition that
it should be obtained by another. However, since the journey was a
comparatively short one, and on that account the pilgrimage seemed more
easy to be endured, none presumed to oppose his counsel and will. And
when the council was dissolved Malachy started on his way.[831] Such
brothers as had come together followed him to the shore; but not many,
for he doubtless restrained them. One of them, Catholicus by name, with
tearful voice and face, said to him, "Alas! you are going away; and in
how great, almost daily, trouble you leave me you are not ignorant, and
yet you do not, of your pity, give me help. If I deserve to suffer, what
sin have the brothers committed that they are scarcely allowed to have
any day or night free from the labour of caring for and guarding me?" By
these words and tears of his son (for he wept) the father's _heart was_
troubled,[832] and he embraced him with caresses, and making the sign of
the cross on his breast said, "Be assured that you will have no such
suffering till I return." Now he was an epileptic, and fell often;
insomuch that at times he suffered not once but many times a day. He had
been a victim to this horrible disease for six years; but at the word of
Malachy he made a perfect recovery. From that hour he has suffered no
such thing; no such thing, as we believe, will he suffer henceforth, for
henceforth Malachy will not return.
68. When he was just about to embark there _came unto him_ two of those
who _clave unto him_[833] more closely, boldly _desiring a certain thing
of him_. And he said to them, _"What would ye?"_[834] And they answered,
"We will not say, except you promise that you will give it." He pledged
himself. And they said, "We would have you certainly promise of your
condescension, that you will return in good health to Ireland." All the
others also insisted upon it. Then he deliberated for a while, repenting
at first that he had bound himself, and not finding any way of escape.
He was _straitened on every side_,[835] while no way of safety presented
itself from both dangers--of forfeiting his wish and of breaking his
promise. It seemed at length that he should rather choose that which
influenced him more strongly at the moment, and leave the rest to higher
guidance. He assented, sadly it is true; but he was more unwilling that
they should be made sad; and pledging himself as they wished, he went on
board the ship. And when they had completed nearly half the voyage
suddenly a contrary wind drove the ship back and brought it to the land
of Ireland again. Leaving the ship he passed the night in the port
itself in one of his churches. And he joyfully gave thanks for the
resourcefulness of the divine providence, by which it came about that he
had now satisfied his promise. But in the morning, he went on board, and
the same day, after a prosperous crossing, came into Scotland. On the
third day[836] he reached a place which is called Viride Stagnum;[837]
which he had caused to be prepared that he might found an abbey there.
And leaving there some of his sons, our brothers, as a convent of monks
and abbot[838] (for he had brought them with him for that purpose) he
bade them farewell and set out.
69. And as he passed on, King David met him, by whom he was received
with joy and was detained as his guest for some days.[839] And having
done many things pleasing to God he resumed the journey that he had
begun. And passing through Scotland, at the very border of England he
went aside to the Church of Gisburn, where there dwell religious men
leading a canonical life,[840] familiar to him of old for their
religious conversation and honourable character. At that place a woman
was brought to him, suffering from a disease horrible to see, which is
commonly called cancer; and he healed her. For when water which he
blessed was sprinkled on the sores she ceased to feel pain. On the next
day scarcely a sore was to be seen.
Departing thence he came to the sea, but was refused passage. The
reason, if I am not mistaken, was that some difference had arisen
between the chief pontiff and the king of England: for the king
suspected in that good man I know not what evil, if he should cross the
sea;[841] for neither did he allow other bishops to cross.[842] That
obstacle, though contrary to the will of Malachy, was not contrary to
the object of his wish. He grieved that the attainment of his desire
should be postponed, not knowing that by this it would be the rather
fulfilled. For if he had immediately passed over the sea he would have
been obliged to pass by Clairvaux in order to follow the chief Pontiff.
For by that time he had left it and was at or near Rome.[843] But now
through this delay it was brought about that he crossed later, and so,
as was fitting, he came to the place of his most holy death, and at the
hour of its approach.
[Sidenote: 1148, Oct. 13 or 14]
[Sidenote: 1148, Oct. 18]
70. (37). And he was received by us, though he came from the west, as
the true _day-spring[844] from on high visiting us_.[845] O, how greatly
did that radiant sun fill our Clairvaux with added glory! How pleasant
was the festal day that dawned upon us at his coming! _This was the day
which the Lord had made, we rejoiced and were glad in it._[846] As for
me, with what rapid and bounding step, though trembling and weak,[847]
did I soon _run_ to meet him! With what joy I _kissed him_! With what
joyful arms I _embraced_[848] this grace sent to me from heaven! With
what eager face and mind, my father, _I brought thee into my mother's
house and into the chamber of her that conceived me_![849] What festive
days I spent with thee then, though few! But how did he in his turn
greet us? In truth our pilgrim showed himself cheerful and kindly to
all, to all incredibly gracious. _How good and how pleasant_[850] a part
he played among us as our guest, whom, forsooth, _he had come from the
uttermost parts of the earth_ to see, not that he should _hear_, but
that he should show us, a _Solomon_! In fact we _heard_ his
_wisdom_,[851] we had his presence, and we have it still. Already four
or five days of this our festival had passed, when lo, on the feast day
of Blessed Luke the Evangelist,[852] when he had celebrated Mass in the
convent[853] with that holy devotion of his, he was taken with a fever
and lay down in his bed: and all of us were [sick] with him. _The end of
our mirth is sorrow_,[854] but moderate sorrow, because for a time the
fever seemed to be slight. You should see the brothers running about,
eager to give, or to receive. To whom was it not sweet to see him? To
whom was it not sweeter to minister to him? Both were pleasant and both
salutary. It was an act of kindness to do him service, and it was repaid
also to each one of them, by the gift of grace. All assisted, all were
busied _with much serving_,[855] searching for medicines, applying
poultices, urging him often to eat. But he said to them, "These things
are without avail, yet for love of you I do whatever you bid me." For he
knew that _the time_ of his departure was at hand.[856]
71. And when the brothers who had come with him[857] urged him more
boldly, saying that it behoved him not to despair of life, for that no
signs of death appeared in him,[858] he said, "It behoves Malachy to
leave the body this year."[859] And he added, "See, the day is drawing
near which, as you very well know, I have always desired to be the day
of _my dissolution_.[860] _I know whom I have believed and am
persuaded_;[861] I shall _not be disappointed of_ the rest of _my
desire_,[862] since I already have part of it. He who by his mercy has
led me to the place which I sought, will not deny me the time for which
I wished no less. As regards this mean body, _here is my rest_;[863] as
regards my soul, the Lord will provide, _who saveth them that put their
trust in Him_.[864] And _there is_ no small hope _laid up for me at that
day_[865] in which so great benefits are bestowed by the living on the
dead."[866] Not far away was that day when he spoke thus. Meanwhile he
ordered that he should be anointed with the sacred oil. When the convent
of brothers was going out that it might be done solemnly,[867] he would
not permit them to come up to him; he went down to them. For he was
lying in the balcony[868] of the upper house. He was anointed; and when
he had received the viaticum, he commended himself to the prayers of the
brothers, and the brothers to God,[869] and went back to bed. He went
down from the high balcony[870] on his feet, and again, as if that were
not enough, he went up on his feet; yet he said that death _was at the
doors_.[871] Who should believe that this man was dying? Himself alone
and God could know it. His face did not seem to have become pallid or
wasted. His brow was not wrinkled, his eyes were not sunken, his
nostrils were not thin, his lips were not contracted, his teeth were not
brown, his neck was not gaunt and lean, his shoulders were not bowed,
the flesh on the rest of his body had not failed. Such was the grace of
his body, and such the _glory of his countenance which was_ not _to be
done away_,[872] even in death. As he appeared in life so was he also in
death, more like to one alive.
72. (38). Hitherto our story has run a rapid course; but now it stays
because Malachy _has finished his course_.[873] He is still, and with
him we are still. Moreover, who would willingly hasten to [tell of]
death? Especially thy death, holy father, who could describe it? Who
would wish to hear the story? Yet we loved _in life, in death we shall
not be divided_.[874] Brothers, let us not forsake in death him with
whom we companied in life. From further Scotland[875] he ran hither to
death; _let us also go and die with him_.[876] I must, I must tell that
which of necessity I saw. The celebration, everywhere renowned, of All
Saints[877] comes, and according to the ancient saying, _Music in
mourning is an unseasonable discourse_.[878] We come, we sing, even
against our will. We weep while we sing and we sing while we weep.
Malachy, though he sings not, yet does not lament. For why should he
lament, who is drawing near to joy? For _us who remain_,[879] mourning
remains. Malachy alone keeps festival. For what he cannot do with his
body he does with his mind, as it is written, _The thought of man shall
confess to thee, and the residue of thought shall keep the day of
festival to thee._[880] When the instrument of the body fails him, and
the organ of the mouth is silent, and the office of the voice ceases, it
remains that with songs in his heart he keeps festival. Why should not
the saint keep festival, who is being brought to the festival of the
saints?[881] He presents to them what will soon be due to himself. _Yet
a little while_[882] and he will be one of them.
73. Towards the dusk of night, when now somehow the celebration of the
day had been finished by us, Malachy had drawn near, not to dusk but to
dawn. Was it not dawn to him[883] for whom _the night is far spent and
the day is at hand_?[884] So, the fever increasing, a burning sweat from
within him began to break out over his whole body, that, as it were
_going through fire and through water, he might be brought into a
wealthy place_.[885] Now his life was despaired of, now each one
condemned his own judgement, now none doubted that Malachy's word[886]
was prevailing. We were called; we came. And lifting up his eyes on
those who stood round him, he said, "_With desire I have desired to eat
this passover_ with _you_;[887] I give thanks to the divine compassion,
I have _not been disappointed of my desire_."[888] Do you see the man
free from care in death, and, not yet dead, already certain of life? No
wonder. Seeing that the night was come to which he had looked forward,
and that in it the day was dawning for him, so to speak triumphing over
the night, he seemed to scoff at the darkness and as it were to cry, "_I
shall_ not _say, surely the darkness shall cover me_, because this
_night shall be light about me in my pleasure_."[889] And tenderly
consoling us he said, "Take care of me; if it be allowed me I shall not
forget you. And it shall be allowed. _I have believed in God_,[890] and
_all things are possible to him that believeth_.[891] I have loved God;
I have loved you, and _charity never faileth_."[892] _And looking up to
heaven_[893] he said, "O God, _keep them in Thy name_;[894] _and not
these_ only _but_ all them _also who through_ my _word_[895] and
ministry have given themselves to thy service." Then, laying his hands
on each one severally and blessing all,[896] he bade them go to rest,
_because his hour was not yet come_.[897]
[Sidenote: 1148, November 2]
74. We went. We returned about midnight, for at that hour it was
announced that _the light shineth in darkness_.[898] The house filled,
the whole community was present, many abbots also who had assembled.
_With psalms and hymns and spiritual songs_[899] we followed our
friend as he returned to his own country.[900] In the fifty-fourth
year of his age,[901] at the place and time which he had chosen
beforehand and predicted, Malachy, the bishop and legate of the holy
Apostolic See, taken up _by the angels_,[902] as it were from our
hands, happily _fell asleep in the Lord_.[903] And indeed he slept.
His placid face was the sign of a placid departure. And verily _the
eyes of all were_ fixed _upon him_;[904] but none could perceive when
he departed. When dead he was thought to be alive, when alive, dead;
so true was it that there was no difference which might distinguish
death from life. The same vivacity of face, the same serenity, as
commonly appears in one who sleeps. You might say that death robbed
him of none of these things, but rather very greatly increased them.
He was not changed; but he changed us all. In wondrous fashion the
sorrow and groaning of all suddenly sank to rest, _sadness_ was
changed _into joy_,[905] singing banished lamentation.[906] He is
borne forth, voices are borne to heaven, he is borne into the oratory
on the shoulders of the abbots. _Faith has conquered_,[907] affection
triumphs, things assume their normal course. All things are carried
out in order, all proceed in the way of reason.
75. And in truth what reason is there to lament Malachy immoderately, as
though his _death_ was not _precious_,[908] as though it was not rather
sleep than death, as though it was not the port of death and the portal
of life?[909] _Our friend_ Malachy _sleepeth_;[910] and I, must I mourn?
such mourning is based on custom, not on reason. If the Lord _hath given
His beloved one sleep_, and such sleep, in which there is _an heritage
of the Lord_, even _children, and the reward, the fruit of the
womb_,[911] which of these things seems to call for weeping? Must I weep
for him who has escaped from weeping? He rejoices, he triumphs, he has
been brought _into the joy of his Lord_,[912] and I, must I lament for
him? I desire these things for myself, I do not grudge them to him.
Meanwhile the obsequies are prepared, the sacrifice is offered for
him,[913] all is performed according to custom with the greatest
devotion. There stood some way off a boy whose arm hung by his side
dead, rather burdensome to him than useful. When I discovered him I
signed to him to come near, and taking his withered hand I laid it on
the hand of the bishop, and it restored it to life. For in truth _the
grace of healings_[914] lived in the dead; and his hand was to the dead
hand what Elisha was to the dead man.[915] The boy _had come from
far_[916] and the hand which he brought hanging down, he carried back
whole to his own country. Now, all things having been duly accomplished
in the very oratory of Saint Mary, Mother of God, _in which he was well
pleased_,[917] Malachy is carried to his burial[918] in the eleven
hundred and forty-eighth year from the Incarnation of the Lord, on the
fourth of the Nones of November.[919] Thine, good Jesus, is _the
deposit_ which has been committed to us,[920] Thine is the treasure
which is laid up with us.[921] We _keep_ it[922] to be given back at the
time when Thou shalt see fit to recall it; only that he may not go forth
without his comrades, but that him whom we have had as our guest we may
have also as our leader, when we _shall reign_ with Thee, and with him
also, _for ever and ever_.[923] Amen.
FOOTNOTES:
[821] _I.e._ "If I die in Ireland."
[822] In Armagh. See §§ 19, 65.
[823] All Souls' Day, November 2.
[824] Matt. v. 18.
[825] Ps. xlviii. 8.
[826] Note that the pall is called a sacrament.
[827] See § 38.
[828] Bernard Paganelli, a monk of Clairvaux, was sent to Rome by St.
Bernard at the request of Innocent II. and was appointed abbot of the
monastery of St. Anastasius. On the death of Lucius II. he was elected
Pope, February 15, 1144, and assumed the title of Eugenius III. (H. K.
Mann, _Lives of the Popes_, ix. 131 ff.)
[829] Eugenius left Viterbo at the beginning of 1147. He was at Lyons
in March, and at Troyes on April 10 (Jaffé, p. 624 ff.; Mann, ix.
185).
[830] In accordance with the instructions of Innocent II. (§ 38): "A
Synod was convened at Inis Patraic by Mael Maedoc, coarb of Patrick,
at which were present fifteen bishops and two hundred priests, to
establish rules and morals for all, both laity and clergy; and Mael
Maedoc Ua Morgair, by the advice of the Synod, went a second time to
Rome (_sic_) to confer with the comarb of Peter" (_A.F.M._ 1148).
Inispatrick is a small island off Skerries, co. Dublin. For the date
see _R.A.I._ xxxv. 249 f. In the same year Malachy had consecrated the
monastery of Knock (_A.F.M._ See p. 67, n. 3).
[831] St. Bernard seems to have thought that St. Malachy set sail
immediately after the Synod, and from a port not far from the place
where it met. But this is impossible, for one day's sail brought him
to Scotland (§ 68). He seems to have embarked at Bangor, which is
about a hundred miles north of Inispatrick.
[832] Cp. Lam. ii. 11.
[833] Ruth i. 14.
[834] Matt. xx. 20, combined with Mark x. 35, 36.
[835] Susanna, 22.
[836] That is, the first day after his landing in Scotland.
[837] The Green Lake. It is now Soulseat, about eight miles from
Cairngarroch. At this place Fergus, lord of Galloway (p. 76, n. 4),
founded a famous monastery of Premonstratensian canons (Grub, _Eccl.
Hist. of Scotland_, i. 269), which must not be confused with Malachy's
more humble community.
[838] The abbot was Michael, who had belonged to the community at
Bangor (§ 15). As this new community is called "a convent of monks" we
may infer that it was of the Cistercian Order.
[839] Note the leisureliness of the journey in its earlier stages.
Later on Malachy encountered difficulties, which no doubt involved
further delay (Serm. i. § 1).
[840] Gisburn is a village in the West Riding of Yorkshire on the
river Ribble, not far from the border of Lancashire. It is clear that
on this occasion Malachy followed the line of Watling Street, which
ran through Ribchester, on the Ribble, about fourteen miles from
Gisburn. His road probably passed within three miles of that place
between Settle and Chetburn. He seems to have avoided entering England
as long as possible--supposing no doubt, and with good reason, that he
was safer in the dominions of David than in those of Stephen. For
details of the journey see _R.I.A._ xxxv. 239 ff., 249. The monastery
of Gisburn, of which the ruins remain to the south of the parish
church, was founded for Augustinian canons, in 1129, by Robert de Brus
(Dugdale, vi. 1, 265 ff.).
[841] Malachy was probably suspected (not without cause) of being an
emissary of the supporters of the Empress Matilda. He had just spent
some days with David I., and with him and his stepson Waltheof he was
on terms of intimate friendship (§§ 36, 40). King David invaded
England in the following year.
[842] The reference is apparently to King Stephen's attempt to prevent
Theobald of Canterbury and other bishops from attending the Council of
Rheims in March 1148. But Malachy does not seem to have been summoned
to the Council, and he did not reach the Channel till long after it
was over (see next note).
[843] Eugenius left Clairvaux on April 27, and Lausanne on May 20
(Jaffé, p. 634). At this rate he might have been expected to reach
Rome by the end of July. About that time, therefore, we may conjecture
that Malachy was on the coast of Kent. Actually, the Pope was not near
Rome till he reached Viterbo on November 30 (_ibid._ 636). St.
Bernard, therefore, when he wrote this passage, was ignorant of his
movements for a considerable time before Malachy's death.
[844] _Oriens_: literally, "east."
[845] Luke i. 78.
[846] Ps. cxviii. 24.
[847] St. Bernard's life-long and ever-increasing frailty is
constantly alluded to by his biographers. It was largely due to his
extreme austerity. In this incident we have an example of the way in
which, on many occasions, the strength of his mind conquered the
weakness of his body (_V. P._ v. 4).
[848] Gen. xxix. 13.
[849] Cant. iii. 4.
[850] Ps. cxxxiii. 1.
[851] Matt. xii. 42; Luke xi. 31.
[852] October 18. Malachy had therefore reached Clairvaux on October
13 or 14. In the interval he met St. Gilbert of Sempringham and
presented him with a pastoral staff (Dugdale, vi. 2, p. xii.). In
France Malachy travelled alone--having been parted from his companions
in England--and probably on horseback (§ 36). He may, therefore, have
left England about September 30, and traversed the 270 miles from
Wissant to Clairvaux by October 14. He apparently intended to start
for Rome on St. Luke's Day (Serm. i. § 1).
[853] That is, in the presence of the community.
[854] Prov. xiv. 13 (inexact quotation).
[855] Luke x. 40.
[856] Cp. 2 Tim. iv. 6, in which the phraseology of the vg. differs
entirely from that of the text.
[857] Not strictly accurate. Malachy reached Clairvaux before his
companions. See p. 123, n. 3.
[858] The physicians said the same (Serm. i. § 2).
[859] This saying is quoted in a slightly different form in Serm. i. §
2.
[860] 2 Tim. iv. 6.
[861] 2 Tim. i. 12.
[862] Ps. lxxviii. 30 (vg.).
[863] Ps. cxxxii. 14 (inexact quotation).
[864] Ps. xvii. 7.
[865] 2 Tim. iv. 8.
[866] All Souls' Day.
[867] For the Cistercian method of administering unction see _Usus
antiquiores ordinis Cisterciensis_, iii. 94 (_P.L._ clxvi. 1471).
[868] _Solario._
[869] Cp. Letter iv. § 2, where it is added that he commended the
Irish brothers to the care of St. Bernard.
[870] _Solio._
[871] Matt. xxiv. 33.
[872] 2 Cor. iii. 7.
[873] Tim. iv. 7.
[874] 2 Sam. i. 23 (inaccurate quotation).--Contrast St. Bernard's
lament for his brother Gerard (_Cant._ xxvi. 4): "We loved in life,
how have we been divided in death? Most bitter separation!"
[875] Ireland.
[876] John xi. 16.
[877] November 1. For the translation of relics which took place,
apparently on that day, see Serm. i. § 2.
[878] Ecclus. xxii. 6.
[879] 1 Thess. iv. 17.
[880] Ps. lxxvi. 10 (vg.).
[881] _Sanctorum ... sollemnitatem._ Not the Festival of All Saints,
for that had already come, but, as the next sentence shows, the
festival assembly of the saints in heaven. Compare Ps. lxxiv. 4, where
_congregations_ represents _solemnitatis_ in the Vulgate.
[882] John xiv. 19, etc.
[883] Cp. _Cant._ xxvi. 11, "For thee, brother, even at midnight the
day dawned."
[884] Rom. xiii. 12.
[885] Ps. lxvi. 12.
[886] See § 71.
[887] Luke xxii. 51.--This saying is quoted in Serm. i. § 5.
[888] Ps. lxxviii. 30 (vg.).
[889] Ps. cxxxix. 11 (vg.).--Cp. _Cant._ xxvi. 11: "Already for thee,
my brother, even at midnight the day was dawning, and _the night was
shining as the day_; straightway _that night was light about thee in
thy pleasure_. I was summoned to that miracle, to see a man exulting
in death and mocking death."
[890] John xiv. 1.
[891] Mark ix. 23.
[892] 1 Cor. xiii. 8.
[893] Mark vii. 34.
[894] John xvii. 11.
[895] John xvii. 20.
[896] Cp. Praef. 2.
[897] John vii. 30.
[898] John i. 5.
[899] Eph. v. 19; Col. iii. 16.
[900] The meaning of the phrase is explained in _De Cons._ v. 2: "This
will be a returning to our own country, when we leave the country of
our bodies and reach the realm of spirits--I mean our God, the Mighty
Spirit, the great abiding place of the spirits of the blest" (Lewis's
translation, slightly altered). Cp. Serm. ii., § 6.
[901] _A.F.M._ say, "after the fifty-fourth year of his age." St.
Bernard appears to be right. For Malachy was made bishop of Connor
when he was just entering his thirtieth year (§ 16), _i.e._ about his
twenty-ninth birthday. _A.F.M._ give the date as 1124. But if he was
over fifty-four on November 2, 1148 (§ 75), his twenty-ninth birthday
would have been before November 1123. If he was under fifty-four on
that day it may have been in 1124.
[902] Luke xvi. 22.
[903] Acts vii. 60 (vg.).
[904] Luke iv. 20.
[905] Esth. xiii. 17 (vg.); xvi. 21 (vg.); cp. John xvi. 20, etc.
[906] Cp. Amos viii. 10.
[907] 1 John v. 5.
[908] Ps. cxvi. 15.
[909] Cp. Serm. ii. § 8.
[910] John xi. 11.
[911] Ps. cxxvii. 2, 3 (vg.).
[912] Matt. xxv. 21, 23.
[913] St. Bernard himself celebrated Mass, and by divine inspiration,
"when the sacrifice was finished, changed the order of the prayer and
introduced the collect for the commemoration of saints who were
bishops instead of that which was used for the commendation of the
dead," anticipating, as we may suppose, Malachy's canonization. He
then devoutly kissed his feet (_V.P._ iv. 21).
[914] 1 Cor. xii. 9 (vg.).
[915] 2 Kings xiii. 21.
[916] Mark viii. 3.
[917] Matt. iii. 17.
[918] Malachy was buried on the north side of the Oratory, vested in
St. Bernard's habit. Five years later St. Bernard was buried before
the Altar of Saint Mary, clad in the habit in which Malachy died, and
which he had worn ever since his death when he celebrated Mass (_V.P._
v. 15, 23, 24). For further particulars of St. Malachy's burial and
the disposal of his relics see _R.Q.H._ lii. 43 f.
[919] November 2. From this statement (see p. 128, n. 1) we may infer
that Malachy was born in 1095, before November.
[920] 2 Tim. i. 12.
[921] The biographers of St. Bernard give no detailed account of any
of Malachy's visits to Clairvaux. But one of them--Geoffrey, St.
Bernard's secretary--wrote a prayer for the Bright Valley, in which he
placed Malachy on a par with the great Cistercian, thereby revealing
to us the extraordinary impression which he made on the community
(_V.P._ v. 25). I owe the following translation of it to a friend:
"Grant, O Lord, thy never-failing bounty to the spiritual harvest of
the Valley, which thou didst deem worthy to illumine with two stars of
such surpassing brightness, so making it brighter in very truth even
than in name. Do thou guard the house wherein this twofold treasure is
laid up and guarded for thee. Be it also unto us according to thy
word, that as thy treasure is there so may thy heart be also; there
too thy grace and mercy: and may the favour of thy compassion for ever
rest on all who are gathered together in the self-same place in thy
Name, which is above every name, even as thou art over all, God
blessed for ever.--Amen."
[922] 2 Tim. i. 12.
[923] Rev. xxii. 5.
LETTERS OF ST. BERNARD
I
To Malachy. 1141.[924]
(Epistle 341.)
To the venerable lord and most blessed father, Malachy, by the grace of
God archbishop of the Irish, legate of the Apostolic See, Brother
Bernard called to be abbot of Clairvaux, [desiring] to find grace with
the Lord.
1. Amid the manifold _anxieties_ and _cares_ of my _heart_,[925] by the
multitude of which _my soul is sore vexed_,[926] the brothers _coming
from a far country_[927] that they may serve the Lord,[928] _thy_
letter, _and thy staff, they comfort me_:[929] the letter, as a proof of
good will; the staff, to support my weak body; the brothers, because
they serve the Lord _in a humble spirit_.[930] We have received them
all, we are pleased with all, _all_ alike _work together for good_.[931]
But as to the wish that you have expressed that two of the
brothers[932] should be sent to look out a place for you beforehand,
having taken counsel with the brothers, we have not thought it meet that
they should be _separated one from another[933] until Christ be more
fully formed in them_,[934] until they are wholly instructed in _the
battles of the Lord_.[935] When therefore they have been taught in the
school of the Holy Spirit, when they have been _endued with power from
on high_,[936] then at length the sons shall return to their father that
they may _sing the Lord's song_, not now _in a strange land_,[937] but
in their own.
2. But do you yourselves in the mean time, according to _the wisdom
given you_[938] by the Lord, look out beforehand and _prepare_
beforehand _a place for them_,[939] like the places which you have seen
here, apart from the commotions of the world. _For the time is at
hand_[940] when, by the operation of the grace of God, we shall bring
forth for you _new men_ out of the _old_.[941] _Blessed be the Name of
the Lord for ever,[942] of whose only gift it cometh that_[943] I have
sons in common with you, whom your preaching _planted_ and our
exhortation _watered_, but _God gave the increase_.[944] We beseech your
holiness to _preach the word of the Lord_[945] so that you may _give
knowledge of salvation unto His people_.[946] _For_ a double _necessity
is laid upon you_,[947] both from your office as legate and your duty as
bishop. Finally, since _in many things we offend all_,[948] and, being
often thrown among the men of this age, we are much besmirched with the
dust of the world, I commend myself to your prayers and to those of your
companions, that in His fountain of mercy Jesus Christ, himself the
fountain of pity, may deign to wash and cleanse us, who said to Peter,
_If I wash thee not, thou shalt have no part with me._[949] And, indeed,
I not only earnestly entreat this of you, but also require it as in some
sense the payment of a debt, since I cry to the Lord for you, if the
prayer of a sinner can do anything. Farewell in the Lord.
II
To Malachy. 1141 _or_ 1142.[950]
(Epistle 356.)
To Malachy, by the grace of God bishop, legate of the Apostolic See,
Brother Bernard, called to be abbot of Clairvaux, if the prayer of a
sinner can do anything, and if the devotion of a poor man is of any
advantage.
We have done what your holiness commanded, not perhaps as it was worthy
to be done, yet as well as was possible considering the time in which we
live. So great evil everywhere struts about among us that it was
scarcely possible to do the little that has been done. We have sent only
a few grains of seed,[951] as you see, to sow at least a small part of
that _field_ into which the true _Isaac_ once went out _to meditate_,
when _Rebekah_ was first brought to him by Abraham's _servant_, to be
happily joined to him in everlasting marriage.[952] And the seed is not
to be despised concerning which we find that word fulfilled at this time
in your regions,[953] _Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we
had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha._[954] _I_,
therefore, have sown, do you _water_, and _God shall give the
increase_.[955] All the saints who are with you we salute through you,
humbly commending ourselves to their holy prayers and yours. Farewell.
III
To Malachy. 1143 _or_ 1144.[956]
(Epistle 357.)
To our most loving father and most revered lord, Malachy, by the grace
of God bishop, legate of the Holy and Apostolic See, the servant of his
holiness, Brother Bernard, called to be abbot of Clairvaux, health and
our prayers, of whatever value they may be.
1. _How sweet are thy words unto my taste_,[957] my lord and father. How
pleasant is _the remembrance of thy holiness_.[958] If there is any
love, any devotedness, any good will in us, without doubt the charity of
your belovedness claims it all as its due. There is no need for a
multitude of words where affection blossoms abundantly. For I am
confident that _the Spirit which_ you have _from God_[959] bears
_witness with your spirit that[960] what we are_,[961] however small it
be, _is yours_.[962] You also, most loving and most longed-for father,
_deliver not_ to forgetfulness _the soul of the poor man_, which cleaves
_to thee_ with the bonds of charity, _and forget not the soul of thy
poor man for ever_.[963] For neither, as it were anew, _do we commend
ourselves unto you_[964] when now for a long time we _glory in the
Lord_[965] that our littleness has been worthy _to find grace in the
sight of_ your holiness;[966] but we pray that our affection, no longer
new, may advance with new accessions day by day. We commend to you our
sons, yea also yours, and the more earnestly because they are so far
removed from us. You know that, after God, all our trust was in you, in
sending them, because it seemed to us wrong not to fulfil the prayers of
your holiness. See, as becomes you, that with your whole heart of love
you embrace them and cherish them. In no wise for any cause let your
earnest care for them grow cold, nor let that perish _which thy right
hand hath planted_.[967]
2. We have now indeed learned both from your letter and from the report
of our brothers[968] that the house is making good progress, [and] is
being enriched both in temporal and spiritual possessions.[969]
Wherefore we rejoice greatly with you and give thanks with our whole
heart to God and to your fatherly care. And because there is still need
of great watchfulness, because the place is new, and the land
unaccustomed to the monastic life, yea, without any experience of it,
_we beseech you in the Lord,[970] that you slack not your hand_,[971]
but perfectly accomplish that which you have well begun. Concerning our
brothers who have returned from that place,[972] it had pleased us well
if they had remained. But perhaps the brothers[973] of your country,
whose characters are less disciplined and who have lent a less ready ear
to advice in those observances, which were new to them, have been in
some measure the reason for their return.
3. We have sent back to you Christian, our very dear son, and yours. We
have instructed him more fully, as far as we could, in the things which
belong to the [Cistercian] Order, and henceforth, as we hope, he will be
more careful concerning its obligations.[974] Do not be surprised that
we have not sent any other brothers with him; for we did not find
competent brothers who were ready to assent to our wishes, and it was
not our plan to compel the unwilling. Our much-loved brother,
Robert,[975] assented on this occasion also to our prayers, _as an
obedient son_.[976] It will be your part to assist him that your house
may now be set forward, both in buildings and in other necessaries. This
also we suggest to your fatherhood, that you persuade religious men and
those who, you hope, will be useful to the monastery, to come into their
Order, for this will be of the greatest advantage to the house, and to
you they will pay the greater heed. May your holiness have good health,
being always mindful of us in Christ.
IV
To the Brothers in Ireland. November 1148.[977]
(Epistle 374.)
To the religious brothers who are in Ireland, and especially to those
communities which Malachy the bishop, of blessed memory, founded,
Brother Bernard, called to be abbot of Clairvaux, [wishing them] _the
consolation of the Comforter_.[978]
1. If _here we had a continuing city_ we should rightly mourn with most
abundant tears that we had lost such a fellow-citizen. But if _we_
rather _seek one to come_,[979] as befits us, it is nevertheless no
small cause of grief that we are bereaved of a guide so indispensable.
We ought, however, to regulate passion with knowledge and to mitigate
grief with the _confidence of hope_.[980] Nor does it become any one to
wonder if love compels groaning, if desolation draws forth tears: yet we
must set a limit to these things, nay in no small measure be consoled
while we gaze _not at the things which are seen, but at the things which
are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things
which are not seen are eternal_.[981] First, indeed, we ought to rejoice
with the holy soul, lest he accuse us of want of charity, saying also
himself what the Lord said to the apostles, "_If ye loved me ye would
rejoice because I go unto the Father._"[982] The spirit of our father
has gone before us to _the Father of spirits_,[983] and we are
convicted, not only as wanting in charity, but even as guilty of
ingratitude for all the benefits which came to us through him, if we do
not rejoice with him who has _departed_ from labour to rest, from danger
to safety, from _the world unto the Father_.[984] Therefore, if it is an
act of filial piety to weep for Malachy who is dead, yet more is it an
act of piety to rejoice with Malachy who is alive. Is he not alive?
Assuredly he is, and in bliss. _In the eyes of the foolish he seemed to
have died; but he is in peace._[985]
2. Hence even the thought of our own advantage provides us with another
motive for great joy and gladness, because so powerful a patron, so
faithful an advocate has gone before us to the heavenly court.[986] For
his most fervent charity cannot forget his sons, and his approved
holiness must secure _favour with God_.[987] For who would dare to
suppose that this holy Malachy can now be less profitable [than before]
or less loving to his own? Assuredly, if he was loved aforetime, now he
receives from God surer proofs of His love, and _having loved his own,
he loved them unto the end_.[988] Far be it from us, holy soul, to
esteem thy prayer now less effectual, for now thou canst make
supplication with more vigour in the presence of _the Majesty_[989] and
thou no longer _walkest in faith_, but reignest _in the sight_ of
Him.[990] Far be it from us to count that laborious charity of thine as
diminished, not to say made void, now that thou prostratest thyself at
the very fountain of eternal charity, quaffing full draughts of that for
the very drops of which thou didst thirst before. Charity, _strong as
death_,[991] yea even stronger than death itself, could not yield to
death. For even at the moment of his departure he was not unmindful of
you, with exceptional affection commending you to God, and with his
accustomed _meekness and lowliness_[992] praying our insignificance also
that we should not _forget you for ever_.[993] Wherefore also we thought
good to write to you that you may know that we are ready to bestow upon
you all consolation with entire devotion, whether in spiritual things,
if in them our insignificance can ever do anything by the merits of this
our blessed father, or in temporal, if ever perchance opportunity should
be given us.
3. And now also, dearly beloved, we are filled with heartfelt pity for
this grievous bereavement of the Irish Church.[994] And we unite
ourselves the more with you in suffering because we know that by this
very thing we have become the more your debtors. For the _Lord did great
things for us_[995] when He deigned to honour this place of ours by
making it the scene of his blessed death, and to enrich it with the most
costly treasure of his body.[996] But do not take it ill that he is
buried among us; for God so ordered, _according to the multitude of His
mercies_,[997] that you should possess him in life, and that it might
be allowed to us to possess him, if only in death. And to us, indeed, in
common with you, he was, and still is, father. _For_ even _in_ his
_death_ this _testament was confirmed_ to us.[998] Wherefore as, for the
sake of so great a father, we embrace you all as our true brothers, with
the unstinted yearning of charity, so also concerning yourselves,
spiritual kinship persuades us that you are like-minded.
4. But we exhort you, brothers, that you be always careful to _walk in
the steps of_ this _our_ blessed _father_,[999] by so much the more
zealously as by daily proofs his _holy conversation_[1000] was more
certainly known to you. For in this you shall prove yourselves to be his
true sons, if you manfully maintain the father's ordinances, and if, as
you have seen in him, and heard _from him how you ought to walk, you so
walk that you may abound more and more_:[1001] for the glory of a father
is the wisdom of his sons.[1002] For even for us the example of so great
perfection in our midst has begun in no slight degree both to expel our
sloth and impel us to reverence. And would that he may in such wise
_draw us after him_ that he may draw us to the goal, _running_ more
eagerly and more quickly in _the fragrance_ which his virtues have left
so fresh behind them.[1003] May Christ guard all of you _while you pray
for us_.[1004]
FOOTNOTES:
[924] When this letter was written certain brothers, sent by Malachy
after his return from Rome (October 1140), had arrived at Clairvaux,
and had spent some time there (see notes 5, 7); and the brothers left
there on his return journey had had a considerable amount of
instruction (n. 7). The date is therefore not earlier than 1141. But
it is evidently earlier than that of Letter ii.
[925] Cp. Hor., _Sat._ i. 2. 110.
[926] Ps. vi. 3.
[927] Josh. ix. 6.
[928] These were some of the brothers sent from Ireland (_Life_, §
39).
[929] Ps. xxiii. 4.
[930] Song of Three Children, 16.--They had evidently been a good
while under St. Bernard's eye.
[931] Rom. viii. 28.
[932] No doubt the four brothers who had been left at Clairvaux
(_Life_, § 39).
[933] Matt. xxv. 32.
[934] Gal. iv. 19.
[935] 1 Sam. xxv. 28.
[936] Luke xxiv. 49.
[937] Ps. cxxxvii. 4.
[938] 2 Pet. iii. 15.
[939] John xiv. 2.
[940] Rev. i. 3; xxii. 10.
[941] Cp. Rom. vi. 6; Eph. ii. 15; iv. 22, 24.
[942] Dan. ii. 20, etc.
[943] Coll. for 13th Sunday after Pentecost.
[944] 1 Cor. iii. 6.
[945] Acts xv. 36.
[946] Luke i. 77.
[947] 1 Cor. ix. 16.
[948] Jas. iii. 2.
[949] John xiii. 8 (inexact quotation).
[950] Mellifont was probably founded immediately after the brothers
mentioned in the letter reached Ireland. The date is therefore in or
before 1142. They would hardly have been sent till news had reached
St. Bernard that the site had been chosen (Lett. i, § 2). Cp. p. 75,
n. 4.
[951] The brothers sent from Clairvaux "sufficient in number for an
abbey" (_Life_, § 39).
[952] Gen. xxiv. 63 ff.--Cp. _De Cons._ ii. 13, where the same passage
of Genesis is referred to. It is there (§ 12) explained that the field
is the world, which has been placed in charge of the Pope.
[953] Printed text _patribus_. I read _partibus_.
[954] Rom. ix. 29 (inexact quotation).
[955] 1 Cor. iii. 6.
[956] Mellifont had been founded a good while before the letter was
written. Christian had returned to Clairvaux; and now after further
instruction he was sent back, apparently as the bearer of the letter.
The house had made good progress, but the buildings were still far
from complete (§§ 2, 3).
[957] Ps. cxix. 103.
[958] Ps. xxx. 4.
[959] 1 Cor. ii. 12.
[960] Rom. viii. 16.
[961] 1 Cor xv. 10.
[962] 1 Cor. iii. 22.
[963] Ps. lxxiv. 19 (vg.); Jer. xx. 13.
[964] 2 Cor. v. 12.
[965] 2 Cor. x. 17; 1 Cor. i. 31.
[966] 1 Sam. i. 18, etc.
[967] Ps. lxxx. 15.
[968] Apparently the returned brothers mentioned below.
[969] Cp. the passage quoted p. 170.
[970] 1 Thess. iv. 1.
[971] Josh. x. 6.
[972] The monks of Clairvaux seem to have been reluctant to undertake
work elsewhere, when St. Bernard desired them to do so (_V.P._ vii. 52
f.); and we have one instance of an abbot of a daughter house--Humbert
of Igny--who resigned his office and returned to Clairvaux against St.
Bernard's will (_Ep._ 141).
[973] Printed text, _fratrum_. Read _fratres_.
[974] Evidently Christian did not prove a satisfactory abbot. This may
in part account for the return of the monks who went with him to
Ireland.
[975] Of this Robert, apparently the architect of Mellifont, we know
nothing; for suggestions that he should be identified with one or
other of the monks of Clairvaux who bore the same name are mere
guesses.
[976] 1 Pet. i. 14 (vg., inexact quotation).
[977] Clearly this letter must have been penned a few days after
Malachy's death.
[978] Acts ix. 31, combined with John xiv. 26, etc.
[979] Heb. xiii. 14.
[980] Cp. Heb. iii. 6.
[981] 2 Cor. iv. 18.
[982] John xiv. 28.
[983] Heb. xii. 9.
[984] John xiii. 1.--Cp. Serm. i. § 4 f., "It is the end of labours
... and the entrance to perfect safety. Let us rejoice therefore ...
with our father"; § 8, "Threefold is the rejoicing of the man, since
he is delivered from all sin and from labour and from danger"; and
words ascribed to St. Bernard in _V.P._ vii. 49, "Believe, my son, for
now thou art about to pass from death to life, from temporal labour to
eternal rest."
[985] Communio for All Saints' Day (from Wisd. iii. 2, 3).--For the
last four sentences of the section cp. Serm. i. § 5, where an
identical passage immediately follows the first parallel quoted in n.
3.
[986] Serm. i. § 1 (end) is somewhat similar in expression, and § 8
(end) in thought. There is a closer, but not very striking, parallel
in Serm. ii. § 5 (end).
[987] Luke ii. 52.
[988] John xiii. 1 (inexact quotation).
[989] Heb. i. 3.
[990] 2 Cor. v. 7 (inexact quotation).
[991] Cant. viii. 6.
[992] Cp. Eph. iv. 2.
[993] Ps. lxxiv, 19.
[994] Cp. Serm. i. § 3 (beginning).
[995] Ps. cxxvi. 3.
[996] Cp. Serm. i. § 2, "Therefore we render thanks," etc.
[997] Ps. cvi. 45.
[998] Heb. ix. 17 (vg., inexact quotation).
[999] Rom. iv. 12.
[1000] 2 Pet. iii. 11.
[1001] 1 Thess. iv. 1 (vg.).
[1002] Cp. Prov. x. 1.
[1003] Cant. i. 3, 4.--Cp. Serm. i. § 8 (end).
[1004] Col. iv. 3.
SERMONS OF ST. BERNARD ON THE PASSING OF MALACHY
Sermon I
(November 2, 1148.)[1005]
1. A certain abundant blessing, dearly beloved, has been sent by the
counsel of heaven to you this day; and if it were not faithfully
divided, you would suffer loss, and I, to whom of a surety this office
seems to have been committed, would incur danger. I fear therefore your
loss, I fear my own damnation,[1006] if perchance it be said, _The young
children ask bread, and no man offereth it unto them_.[1007] For I know
how necessary for you is the consolation which comes from heaven, since
it is certain that you have manfully renounced carnal delights and
worldly pleasures. None can reasonably doubt that it was by the good
gift of heaven, and _determined by_ divine _purpose_,[1008] that Bishop
Malachy should fall asleep among you to-day, and among you have his
place of burial, as he desired. For if not even a leaf of a tree _falls_
to _the ground without_ the will of God,[1009] who is so dull as not to
see plainly in the coming of this blessed man, and his passing, a truly
great purpose of the divine compassion?[1010] _From the uttermost parts
of the earth he came_[1011] to leave his earth here. He was hastening,
it is true, on another errand; but we know that by reason of his special
love for us he desired that most of all.[1012] He suffered many
hindrances in the journey itself, and he was refused permission to cross
the sea till the time of his consummation was drawing near,[1013] and
the goal which could not be passed. And when, with many labours, he came
to us _we received him as an angel of God_[1014] out of reverence for
his holiness; but he, out of his very deeply rooted _meekness and
lowliness_,[1015] far beyond our merits, received us with devoted love.
Then he spent a few days with us in his usual health: for he was waiting
for his companions, who had been scattered in England, when the baseless
distrust of the king was hindering the man of God. And when they had all
assembled to him, he was preparing to set out to the Roman Court, on his
way to which he had come hither;[1016] when suddenly he was overtaken by
sickness, and he immediately perceived that he was being summoned rather
to the heavenly palace, _God having provided some better thing for us_,
lest going out from _us he should be made perfect_ elsewhere.[1017]
2. There appeared to the physicians no sign in him, I say not of death,
but even of serious illness; but he, gladdened in spirit, said that in
every way it was befitting that this year Malachy should depart from
this life.[1018] We laboured to prevent it, both by earnest prayers to
God, and by whatever other means we could; but his merits prevailed,
that _his heart's desire should be given him and_ that _the request of
his lips_ should _not be withholden_.[1019] For so all things happened
to him in accordance with his wishes; that by the inspiration of the
divine goodness he had chosen this place above all others, and that he
had long desired that he should have as the day of his burial this day
on which the general memory of all the faithful is celebrated.[1020]
Moreover, these joys of ours were worthily increased by the circumstance
that we had selected that same day, by God's will, for bringing hither
from the former cemetery for their second burial the bones of our
brothers.[1021] And when we were bringing them, and singing psalms in
the accustomed manner, the same holy man said that he was very greatly
delighted with that chanting. And not long after, he himself also
followed, having sunk into a most sweet and blessed sleep. Therefore we
render thanks to God for all the things that He has disposed, because He
willed to honour us, unworthy as we are, by his blessed death among us,
to enrich His poor with the most costly treasure of his body, and to
strengthen us, who are weak, by so great a _pillar_[1022] of His church.
For one or other of two _signs_ proves that it was _wrought for us for
good_,[1023] either that this place is pleasing to God, or that it is
His will to make it pleasing to Him, since He led to it _from the
uttermost parts of the earth_[1024] so holy a man to die and to be
buried there.
3. But our very love for this blessed father compels us to sorrow with
that people from our heart, and to shudder exceedingly at the cruelty of
him, even Death, who has not spared to inflict this terrible wound on
the Church, now so much to be pitied. Terrible and unpitying surely is
death, which has punished so great a multitude of men by smiting one;
blind and without foresight, which has tied the tongue of Malachy,
arrested his steps, relaxed his hands, closed his eyes. Those devout
eyes, I say, which were wont to restore divine grace to sinners, by most
tender tears; those most holy _hands_, which had always loved to be
occupied in laborious and humble deeds, which so often _offered for_
sinners _the saving sacrifice_[1025] of the Lord's body, and were
_lifted up_ to heaven in prayer _without wrath and doubting_,[1026]
which are known to have bestowed many benefits on the sick and to have
been resplendent with manifold signs; those _beautiful_ steps also of
_him that preached the Gospel of peace and brought glad tidings of good
things_; those _feet_,[1027] which were so often wearied with eagerness
to show pity; those footprints which were always worthy to merit devout
kisses;[1028] finally, those holy _lips of the priest_, which _kept
knowledge_,[1029] _the mouth of the righteous_, which _spoke wisdom,
and his tongue_ which, _talking of judgement_,[1030] yea _and of
mercy_,[1031] was wont to heal so great wounds of souls. And it is no
wonder, brothers, that _death_ is iniquitous, since iniquity _brought_
it _forth_,[1032] that it is heedless, since it is known to have been
born of _seduction_.[1033] It is nothing wonderful, I say, if it strikes
without distinction, since it came from _the transgression_;[1034] if it
is cruel and mad, since it was produced by the subtlety of _the old
serpent_[1035] and the folly of the woman. But why do we charge against
it that it dared to assail Malachy, a faithful _member_, it is true, _of
Christ_,[1036] when it also rushed madly upon the very _head_ of[1037]
Malachy and of all the elect as well? It rushed, assuredly, upon One
whom it could not hurt; but it did not rush away unhurt. Death hurled
itself against life, and life shut up death within itself, and _death_
was _swallowed up of life_.[1038] Gulping down the hook to its hurt, it
began to be held by Him whom it seemed to have held.[1039]
4. But perhaps some one may say, How does it appear that death has been
overcome by the Head, if it still rages with so great liberty against
the members? If death is dead, how did it kill Malachy? If it is
conquered how has it still power over all, and _there is no man that
liveth and shall not see death_?[1040] Death is clearly conquered--_the
work of the devil_[1041] and the penalty of sin: sin is conquered, the
cause of death; and _the wicked one_ himself is _conquered_,[1042] the
author both of sin and death. And not only are these things conquered,
they are, moreover, already judged and condemned. The sentence is
determined, but not yet published. In fact, _the fire is prepared for
the devil_,[1043] though he is not yet cast into the fire, though still
for _a short time_[1044] he is allowed to work wickedness. He is become,
as it were, the hammer of the Heavenly Workman, _the hammer of the whole
earth_.[1045] He crushes the elect _for_ their _profit_,[1046] he
crushes to powder the reprobate for their damnation. As is the _master
of the house_, so are _they of his household_,[1047] that is, sin and
death. For _sin_, though it is not to be doubted that it was _nailed_
with Christ _to His cross_,[1048] was yet allowed still for a time,
_not_ indeed to _reign_,[1049] but to dwell even in the Apostle himself
while he lived. I lie if he does not himself say, _It is no more I that
do it, but sin dwelleth in me._[1050] So also death itself is by no
means, indeed, yet compelled not to be present, but it is compelled not
to be present to men's hurt. But there will come a time when it is said,
_O death, where is thy victory?_[1051] For death also is _the last
enemy that shall be destroyed_.[1052] But now, since He rules _who has
the power_ of life and _death_[1053] and confines the very sea within
the fixed limits of its shores, death itself to the beloved of the Lord
is a sleep of refreshment. The prophet bears witness who says, _When he
giveth his beloved sleep, behold the heritage of the Lord._[1054] _The
death of the wicked is indeed most evil_,[1055] since their birth is
evil and their life more evil; but _precious is the death of the
saints_.[1056] Precious clearly, for it is the end of labours, the
consummation of victory, the gate of life, and the entrance to perfect
safety.
5. Let us rejoice therefore, brothers, let us rejoice as is meet, with
our father, for if it is an act of filial piety to mourn for Malachy who
is dead, yet more is it an act of piety to rejoice with Malachy who is
alive. Is he not alive? He is, and in bliss. Certainly, _in the eyes of
the foolish he seemed to have died; but he is in peace_.[1057] In fine,
_now a fellow-citizen with the saints, and of the household of
God_,[1058] he at once sings and gives thanks, saying, _We went through
fire and water; but thou broughtest us out into a wealthy place._[1059]
He _went_, clearly, in manly fashion, and he _went through_[1060]
happily. The true Hebrew celebrated the Passover in spirit, and as he
went, he said to us, "_With desire I have desired to eat this Passover
with you._"[1061] _He went through fire and water_,[1062] whom neither
experiences of sadness could crush, nor pleasures hold back. For there
is below us a place which fire wholly claims as its own, so that the
wretched Dives could not have there even the least drop of _water_ from
the _finger_ of _Lazarus_.[1063] There is also above _the city of God_
which _the streams of the river make glad_,[1064] _a torrent of
pleasure_,[1065] _a cup which inebriates, how goodly_![1066] Here, _in
the midst_, truly is found _the knowledge of good and evil_,[1067] and
in this place we may receive the _trial_ of pleasure and _of
affliction_.[1068] Unhappy Eve brought us into these alternations. Here
clearly is day and night; for in the lower world there is only night,
and in heaven only day.[1069] Blessed is the soul which passes through
both, neither ensnared by pleasure nor _fainting at tribulation_.[1070]
6. I think it right to relate to you, briefly, a specimen of the many
splendid deeds of this man, in which he is known to have _gone_, with no
little vigour, _through fire and water_.[1071] A tyrannous race laid
claim to the metropolitan see of Patrick, the great apostle of the
Irish, creating archbishops in regular succession, and _possessing the
sanctuary of God by hereditary right_.[1072] Our Malachy was therefore
asked by the faithful to combat such great evils; and _putting his life
in his hand_[1073] he advanced to the attack with vigour, he undertook
the archbishopric, exposing himself to evident danger, that he might put
an end to so great a crime. Surrounded by perils he ruled the church;
when the perils were passed, immediately he canonically ordained another
as his successor. For he had undertaken the office on this condition,
that when the fury of persecution had ceased and it thus became possible
that another should safely be appointed, he should be allowed to return
to his own see.[1074] And there, without ecclesiastical or secular
revenues he lived in the religious communities which he himself had
formed, dwelling among them up to this time as one of themselves, and
abjuring all personal property.[1075] So the fire of _affliction
tried_[1076] the man of God, but did not consume[1077] him; for he was
gold. So neither did pleasure hold him captive or destroy him, nor did
he stand a curious spectator on the way, forgetful of his own
pilgrimage.
7. Which of you, brothers, would not earnestly desire to imitate his
holiness, if he dared even to hope for such an attainment? I believe,
therefore, you will gladly hear, if I perchance can tell it, what made
Malachy holy. But lest our testimony should seem not easy to be
received, hear what the Scripture says: _He made him holy in his faith
and meekness._[1078] By faith he trampled on the world, as John bears
witness when he says, _This is the victory that overcometh the world,
even our faith._[1079] For _in the spirit of meekness_[1080] he endured
all things whatsoever that were hard and contrary with _good
cheer_.[1081] On the one hand, indeed, after the example of Christ, by
faith he trampled on the seas,[1082] lest he should be entangled in
pleasures; on the other, _in his patience he possessed his soul_,[1083]
lest he should be crushed by troubles. For concerning these two things
you have the saying in the Psalm, _A thousand shall fall at thy side,
and ten thousand at thy right hand_;[1084] for many more are cast down
by the deceitfulness of prosperity than by the lashes of adversity.
Therefore, dearly beloved, let none of us, allured by the level surface
of the easier way, suppose that road of the sea to be more convenient
for himself. This plain[1085] has great mountains, invisible indeed, but
for that very reason more dangerous. That way perhaps seems more
laborious which passes through the steeps of the hills and the
ruggedness of rocks; but to them that have tried it, it is found far
safer and more to be desired. But on both sides there is labour, on both
sides danger, as he knew who said, _By the armour of righteousness on
the right hand and on the left_;[1086] so that we may rightly rejoice
with those that _went through fire and water and have been brought into
a wealthy place_.[1087] Do you wish to hear something about the _wealthy
place_? Would that another might speak to you of it. For as for me, that
which I have not tasted I cannot indite.
8. But I seem to hear Malachy saying to me to-day about this _wealthy
place_, _Return unto thy rest, O my soul; for the Lord hath dealt
bountifully with thee: for he hath delivered my soul from death, [mine
eyes from tears, and my feet from falling]._[1088] And what I understand
to be expressed in those words hear in a few sentences; _for the day is
far spent_,[1089] and I have spoken at greater length than I intended,
because I am unwilling to tear myself away from the sweetness of the
father's name, and my tongue, dreading to be silent about Malachy, fears
to cease. The death of the soul,[1090] my brothers, is sin; unless you
have overlooked that which you have read in the prophet: _The soul that
sinneth, it shall die._[1091] Threefold, then, is the rejoicing of the
man, since he is delivered from all sin, and from labour, and from
danger. For from this time neither is _sin_ said to _dwell in
him_,[1092] nor is the sorrow of penitence enjoined, nor from henceforth
is he warned to guard himself _from_ any _falling_.[1093] _Elijah_[1094]
has laid aside his _mantle_;[1095] it was not that he feared, it was not
that he was afraid that it should be touched, still less _retained_, by
an adulteress.[1096] He went up into the _chariot_;[1097] he is not now
in terror of falling; he mounts delightfully; he labours not to fly by
his own power, but sits in a swift vehicle. To this _wealthy place_,
dearly beloved, _let us run_ with all eagerness of spirit, in _the
fragrance of the ointments_ of this our blessed father, who this day has
been seen to have stirred up our torpor to most fervent desire. Let us
run after him, I say, crying to him again and again, "_Draw us after
thee_";[1098] and, with earnest heart and advancing holiness of life,
returning devout thanks to the Almighty Pity, that He has willed that
His unworthy servants, who are without merits of their own, should at
least not be without the prayers of another.
Sermon II
(November 2, 1149)[1099]
1. It is clear, dearly beloved, _that whilst we are_ detained _in the
body we are absent from the Lord_.[1100] And throughout this wretched
time of detention banishment and conscience of faults enjoins upon us
sorrow rather than joy. But because by the mouth of the apostle we are
exhorted to _rejoice with them that do rejoice_,[1101] the time and the
occasion require that we should be stirred up to all gladness. For if it
is true, as the prophet perceived, that _the righteous rejoice before
God_,[1102] without doubt Malachy rejoices, who _in his days[1103]
pleased God_[1104] and _was found righteous_.[1105] Malachy ministered
in _holiness and righteousness before Him_:[1106]the ministry pleased
Him; the minister also pleased Him. Why should he not please Him? He
_made the Gospel without charge_,[1107] he filled the country with the
Gospel, he tamed the deathly barbarism of his Irishmen, with the _sword
of the spirit_[1108] he subdued foreign nations to the _light yoke_ of
Christ,[1109] _restoring His inheritance to Him[1110] even unto the ends
of the earth_.[1111] O, fruitful ministry! O, faithful minister! Is not
the promise of the Father to the Son fulfilled through him? Did not the
Father behold him long ago when He said to the Son, _I shall give thee
the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth
for thy possession_.[1112] How willingly the Saviour received what He
had _bought_,[1113] and had _bought with the price_[1114] of _His own
blood_,[1115] with the shame of the Cross, with the horror of the
Passion. How willingly from the hands of Malachy, because he ministered
_freely_.[1116] So in the minister the freely executed office was
acceptable,[1117] and in the ministry the conversion of sinners was
pleasing. Acceptable and pleasing, I say, in the minister was the
_singleness of eye_,[1118] but in the ministry _the salvation of the
people_.[1119]
2. However, even though a less effective result of the ministry
followed, He would nevertheless justly have had regard to Malachy and
his works, He to whom purity is a friend and single-mindedness one of
his household, to whose righteousness it belongs to weigh the work in
accordance with its purpose, from the character of _the eye_ to measure
the state of _the whole body_.[1120] But now _the works of the Lord are
great, sought out according to all_ the _desires_[1121] and efforts of
Malachy; they are great and many and _very good_,[1122] though better in
proportion to the good origin of the pure purpose. What work of piety
escaped the attention of Malachy? He was poor as regards himself, but
rich to the poor. He was a _father of the fatherless_, a husband _of the
widows_,[1123] a protector of the oppressed. _A cheerful giver_,[1124]
seldom making petitions, modest in receiving gifts. He was specially
solicitous, and had much success, in restoring peace between those who
were at variance. Who was as tender as he in sharing the sufferings of
others? who as ready to help? who as free in rebuke? For he was zealous,
and yet not wanting in knowledge, the restrainer of zeal. And, indeed,
_to the weak_ he was _weak_,[1125] but none the less strong to the
strong: he _resisted the proud_,[1126] he lashed the tyrants, a teacher
of kings and princes. It was he who by prayer deprived a king of sight
when he worked wickedness, and restored it when he was humbled.[1127] It
was he, when certain men broke a peace which he had made, who gave them
up to _the spirit of error_,[1128] and foiled them in the evil which
they devised to do; and who compelled them to accept peace a second
time, confounded and stunned by that which had happened to them. It was
he[1129] to whom a river most opportunely lent its aid against the
others, who were equally _transgressors of a covenant_.[1130] In
wonderful fashion, by throwing itself before them, it made void the
efforts of the ungodly. There had been no rains, no floods of waters, no
gathering of clouds, no melting of snows, when suddenly the mere rivulet
was converted into a great river; and it rushed along[1131] and swelling
up overflowed the banks, and utterly denied passage to those who wished
to do wickedly.[1132]
3. What things we have heard and known of the wrath of the man and his
vengeance on his enemies, while yet he was _sweet and gentle and
plenteous in mercy unto all_[1133] that suffered need! For he lived for
all as though he were the one parent of all.[1134] _As a hen her
chickens_,[1135] so he cherished all and _protected them under the
covert of his wings_.[1136] He made no distinction of sex or age, of
condition or person;[1137] he failed none, his loving heart embraced
all. In whatsoever affliction men cried to him he counted it his own:
even more than that, for in regard to his own afflictions he was
patient, in regard to those of others he was compassionate, very often
even passionate. For indeed sometimes, filled with wrath, he was stirred
to take the part of one against another, that by _delivering the poor_
and restraining the _strong_[1138] he might take thought in equal
measure for the salvation of all. Therefore he was angry; but it was in
order that he might not sin by not being angry, according to the words
of the Psalm, _Be ye angry and sin not._[1139] Anger did not rule him,
but he himself _ruled his spirit_.[1140] He had power over himself.
Assuredly he who had the victory over himself could not be _mastered by
anger_.[1141] His anger was kept in hand. When it was summoned it came,
going forth, not bursting forth; it was brought into action by his will,
not by impulse. He was not set on fire by it, but used it.[1142] As well
in this as in ruling and restraining all the motions both of his inner
and his outer man[1143] his judgement was careful, his caution great.
For he did not give so much attention to all, as to leave himself alone
out of account, as, in his universal solicitude, to disregard only
himself. He was careful of himself also. He _guarded himself_.[1144] In
fact, he was so wholly his own, so wholly also belonged to all, that his
love seemed in no degree to hinder or delay him from his guardianship of
himself, nor his concern for his own person from the common good.[1145]
If you saw the man busied in the midst of crowds, involved in cares, you
would say he was born for his country, _not for himself_.[1146] If you
saw the man alone and dwelling by himself, you would suppose that he
lived for God alone and for himself.
4. Without tumult he went about among tumults; without ease he spent the
time which he gave to ease. How could he be taking his ease[1147] when
he _was occupied in the statutes of the Lord_?[1148] For though he had
time free from the necessities of the peoples, yet had he none
unoccupied by holy meditations, by the work of prayer, by the ease
itself of contemplation. In the time of ease he spoke gravely or not at
all. His mien was either courteous, or humble and self-restrained.
Assuredly--a trait which is counted worthy of much praise among the
wise--_his eye was in his head_,[1149] never flying forth except when it
was obedient to power. His laughter displayed love, or provoked it: but
even so it was rare. Sometimes indeed, it came forth, but it was never
forced, intimating the gladness of his heart in such a way that his
mouth did not lose but gained in grace.[1150] So modest was it that it
could not be suspected of levity; so gentle,[1151] however, that it
sufficed to free his joyous countenance from every trace and shadow of
sadness.[1152] O perfect gift! O _rich burnt sacrifice_![1153] O
pleasing service in mind and hand! How _sweet unto God is the
savour_[1154] of him who employs his leisure in prayers, how sweet unto
men of him who is occupied in fatiguing labours.
5. Because he was such an one, then, _beloved of God_[1155] and men, not
undeservedly was Malachy received this day into the company of angels,
having attained in fact what his name denoted.[1156] And indeed, already
he was an angel not less in purity than in name. But now more happily is
the significance of his glorious name fulfilled in him, since he is glad
with a glory and happiness equal to that of the angels.[1157] Let us
also, dearly beloved, be glad because our _angel ascended_[1158] to his
fellow-citizens, acting as an ambassador for _the children of the
captivity_,[1159] winning for us the favour of the blessed ones,
declaring to them the desires of the wretched. Let us _be glad_, I say,
_and rejoice_,[1160] because in that heavenly court[1161] there is one
who went forth from us to take care of us,[1162] to protect us by his
merits,[1163] whom he instructed[1164] by his example and
strengthened[1165] by his miracles.
6. The holy pontiff, who _in a humble spirit_[1166] often brought
peace-offerings to the heavens, to-day in his own person has _gone unto
the altar of God_,[1167] himself the victim and the priest. With the
departure of the priest the rite of sacrifice is changed into a better
thing. The _fountain of tears_[1168] is dried up, every burnt sacrifice
is made _with gladness and rejoicing_.[1169] _Blessed be the Lord God
of_ Malachy, who by the ministry of so great a pontiff _hath visited his
people_,[1170] and now, _taking him up into the holy city_,[1171]
ceaseth not, by the remembrance of so great sweetness to _comfort our
captivity_.[1172] Let _the spirit of_ Malachy _rejoice in the
Lord_,[1173] because he is freed from the heavy load of the body, and is
no longer hindered, by the weight of impure and earthly matter, from
passing with all eagerness and fullness of life, through the whole
creation, corporeal and incorporeal, that he may enter entirely into
God, and _joined to_ Him may with Him _be one spirit_[1174] for
ever.[1175]
7. _Holiness becometh_ that _house_[1176] in _which the remembrance of_
so great _holiness_[1177] is celebrated. Holy Malachy, preserve it _in
holiness and righteousness_[1178] pitying us who in the midst of so many
and great miseries _utter the memory of thine abundant goodness_.[1179]
Great is the dispensation of the mercy of God upon thee, who made thee
_little in thine own sight_,[1180] great in His; who _did_ great things
by thee, in saving thy country, _great things to thee_,[1181] in
bringing thee into His glory. May thy festival, which is deservedly
devoted to thy virtues, have a saving efficacy for us by thy merits and
prayers. _May the glory of thy holiness_,[1182] which is celebrated by
us, be continued by angels: so shall it meetly be pleasant for us, if it
be also fruitful. While thou departest be it allowed to us, who are met
together to-day in thy so delicious feast, to preserve some remnants of
the fruits of the Spirit, loaded with which thou ascendest.
8. Be to us, we beseech thee, holy Malachy, another Moses, or another
Elijah, like them imparting _of thy spirit_[1183] to us, for thou hast
come _in_ their _spirit and power_.[1184] Thy life was _a law of life
and knowledge_,[1185] thy death the port of death and the portal of
life,[1186] thy memory the delight of sweetness and grace, thy
presence _a crown of glory in the hand of the Lord_[1187] thy God. O
_fruitful olive tree in the house of God_![1188] O _oil of
gladness_,[1189] giving both anointing and light, cherishing with
favours, _resplendent with miracles_,[1190] make us partakers of that
light and graciousness which thou enjoyest.[1191] O sweet-smelling
_lily, blossoming and budding_ evermore before the Lord, and spreading
everywhere a _sweet_ and life-giving _savour_,[1192] _whose memorial
is blessed_[1193] with us, whose presence is in honour with those who
are above, grant to those who sing of thee that they may not be
deprived of their share in so great _an assembly_.[1194] O _great
luminary_[1195] and _light_ that _shinest in darkness_,[1196]
illuminating the prison, _making glad the city_[1197] by the rays of
thy signs and merits, by the lustre of virtues put to flight from our
hearts the darkness of vices. O _morning star_,[1198] more brilliant
than the rest because thou art nearer the day, more like to the sun,
deign to go before us, that we also may _walk in the light as children
of light_, and _not_ children _of darkness_.[1199] O thou who art the
dawn breaking into day upon the earth, but _the noon light_[1200]
illumining the higher regions of heaven, receive us in the fellowship
of light, by which illuminated thou sheddest light far without, and
sweetly burnest within, by the gift of our Lord Jesus Christ, who with
the Father and the Holy Spirit reigneth One God, world without
end.--Amen.
FOOTNOTES:
[1005] The evidence that this discourse was delivered on the day of
Malachy's death is cumulative. (1) The opening words of § 1, and the
closing sentences of § 8 (note "this day"). (2) The statement in § 5,
"He said _to us_, 'With desire I have desired,'" etc., implies that
those who tended Malachy in his sickness were present (see _Life_, §
73). The first person plural in § 2 suggests the same conclusion. (3)
In § 6, "dwelling among them _up to this time_" implies that his death
was not long past. (4) The striking parallels with Letter iv.; for
which see the notes on it. (5) The tone of the sermon--in marked
contrast to that of Sermon ii.--indicates that the community was
crushed with sorrow for a recent bereavement. See _R.I.A._ xxxv. 255
ff.
[1006] _damnum uestrum ... damnationem meam._
[1007] Lam. iv. 4 (inexact quotation).
[1008] Acts ii. 23.
[1009] Cp. Matt. x. 29.
[1010] Cp. St. Bernard, _De Laud. Virg._ i. 1 (_P.L._ clxxxiii. 56):
"For if neither a leaf from a tree falls on the earth without cause,
nor one of the sparrows without the heavenly Father, am I to suppose
that a superfluous word flows from the mouth of the holy evangelist?"
[1011] Matt. xii. 42.
[1012] See _Life_, § 67.
[1013] See _Life_, § 69.
[1014] Gal. iv. 14 (inexact quotation).
[1015] Cp. Eph. iv. 2.
[1016] He was evidently in haste to resume his journey. And no wonder,
for the winter was drawing near, and the sooner the passage of the
Alps was made the better for his comfort and safety. Cp. _R.I.A._
xxxv. 248. "Alpine passes ... become impassable usually about the
commencement or middle of October, and remain closed until May"
(Sennett, _Great St. Bernard_, p. 369).
[1017] Heb. xi. 40.
[1018] See _Life_, § 71.
[1019] Ps. xxi. 2.
[1020] See _Life_, §§ 67, 71.
[1021] The translation is supposed by Henriquez, _Fasciculus Sanctorum
Ordinis Cisterciensis_, ii. 41. 6 (_P.L._ lxxxv. 1559) to have been
made on All Saints' Day, the bones being reburied on All Souls' Day.
But Vacandard (_R.Q.H._ lii. 41 f.) thinks that the date of the
translation was Saturday, October 30. This event probably marked the
end of the construction of the new monastery of Clairvaux, which began
before Malachy's first visit. See p. 71, n. 4.
[1022] Gal. ii. 9.
[1023] Ps. lxxxvi. 17 (vg.).
[1024] Matt. xii. 42.
[1025] 2 Macc. iii. 32 (vg.).
[1026] 1 Tim. ii. 8.
[1027] Rom. x. 15.
[1028] Cp. Luke vii. 38.--Perhaps a reference to St. Bernard's own
action just before this sermon was preached. See p. 129, n. 6.
[1029] Mal. ii. 7.
[1030] Ps. xxxvii. 30.
[1031] Ps. ci. 1.
[1032] Jas. i. 15.
[1033] Cp. 2 Cor. xi. 3; 1 Tim. ii. 14.--See J. H. Bernard on 2 Cor.
xi. 3 (_Expositor's Greek Testament_).
[1034] 1 Tim. ii. 14.
[1035] Rev. xii. 9; xx. 2.
[1036] 1 Cor. vi. 15, etc.
[1037] Eph. iv. 15, etc.
[1038] 1 Cor. xv. 54, combined with 2 Cor. v. 4.
[1039] Cp. _Cant._ xxvi. 11: "Thou art dead, O death, and pierced by
the hook thou hast imprudently swallowed, which saith in the words of
the prophet, 'O death, I will be thy death! O hell, I will be thy
bite.' Pierced, I say, by that hook, to the faithful who go through
the midst of thee thou offerest a broad and pleasant path-way into
life" (Morison's translation). A very old metaphor. It is thus
explained by Rufinus (A.D. 400) in his Commentary on the Apostles'
Creed (§ 16, Heurtley's translation): "The object of that mystery of
the Incarnation ... was that the divine virtue of the Son of God, as
though it were a hook concealed beneath the form and fashion of human
flesh, ... might lure on the prince of this world to a conflict, to
whom offering His flesh as a bait, His divinity underneath might
secure him, caught with a hook by the shedding of His immaculate
blood.... As, if a fish seizes a baited hook, it not only does not
take the bait off the hook, but is drawn out of the water to be itself
food for others, so he who had the power of death seized the body of
Jesus in death, not being aware of the hook of divinity enclosed
within it, but, having swallowed it, he was caught forthwith, and the
bars of hell being burst asunder, he was drawn forth as it were from
the abyss to become food for others."
[1040] Ps. lxxxix. 48 (vg.).
[1041] 1 John iii. 8.
[1042] 1 John ii. 13, 14.
[1043] Matt. xxv. 41.
[1044] Rev. xii. 12.
[1045] Jer. l. 23.
[1046] 1 Cor. xii. 7 (vg.).
[1047] Matt. x. 25.
[1048] Col. ii. 14.
[1049] Rom. vi. 12.
[1050] Rom. vii. 17.
[1051] 1 Cor. xv. 55 (vg.).
[1052] 1 Cor. xv. 26.
[1053] Heb. ii. 14; Tobit ii. 8.
[1054] Ps. cxxvii. 2, 3 (vg.).
[1055] Ps. xxxiv. 21 (vg.).
[1056] Ps. cxvi. 15.
[1057] Communio for All Saints (Wisd. iii. 2, 3).
[1058] Eph. ii. 19 (with variant).
[1059] Ps. lxvi. 12.
[1060] Hos. x. 15 (vg.: xi. 1).
[1061] Luke xxii. 15.--See _Life_, § 73, where for "he said to us" we
have "lifting up his eyes on _those who stood round him_, he said."
[1062] Ps. lxvi. 12.
[1063] Luke xvi. 24, 25.
[1064] Ps. xlvi. 4.
[1065] Ps. xxxvi. 8 (vg.).
[1066] Ps. xxiii. 5 (vg.).
[1067] Gen. ii. 9.
[1068] 2 Cor. viii. 2.
[1069] Rev. xxi. 25; xxii. 5.
[1070] Eph. iii. 13.
[1071] Ps. lxvi. 12.
[1072] Ps. lxxxiii 12 (vg.).
[1073] 1 Sam. xix. 5.
[1074] See _Life_, §§ 19-31.
[1075] See p. 82, n. 5.
[1076] Ps. lxvi. 10, 11.
[1077] _Examinauit, non exinaniuit._
[1078] Ecclus. xlv. 4 (vg.).
[1079] 1 John v. 4.
[1080] Gal. vi. 1.
[1081] 1 Kings xxi. 7 (vg.).
[1082] Cp. Matt. xiv. 25; John vi. 19.
[1083] Luke xxi. 19.
[1084] Ps. xci. 7.
[1085] That is, the sea. The details of the imagery are not clear. But
evidently the sea represents the pleasures, and the hills and rocks
the adversities, of life.
[1086] 2 Cor. vi. 7.
[1087] Ps. lxvi. 12.
[1088] Ps. cxvi. 7, 8 (vg.).--The printed text has, in place of the
bracketed words, "and so forth." The threefold deliverance obviously
corresponds to the threefold rejoicing mentioned below, sin being
substituted for death in the description of it, because "the death of
the soul is sin."
[1089] Luke xxiv. 29.
[1090] Cp. Ps. cxvi. 8.
[1091] Ezek. xviii. 4.
[1092] Rom. vii. 17, 20.
[1093] Ps. cxvi. 8.
[1094] For other comparisons of Malachy with Elijah, see _Life_, § 23;
Serm. ii. § 8.
[1095] 2 Kings ii. 13.
[1096] Gen. xxxix. 12, 15 (vg.).
[1097] 2 Kings ii. 11.
[1098] Cant. i. 3, 4.
[1099] It is plain from § 7 that this sermon was preached on an
anniversary of Malachy's death, _i.e._ on November 2, in a year later
than 1148. I put it in 1149 because of its striking coincidences with
the _Life_, which was written early in that year (see p. lxv). There
is also a possible echo (§ 3) of _De Cons._ i. which belongs to the
same year (_P.L._ clxxxii. 723). These, together with two coincidences
of phrase with other writings of St. Bernard, are pointed out in the
notes. See _R.I.A._ xxxv. 260 ff.
[1100] 2 Cor. v. 6.
[1101] Rom. xii. 15.
[1102] Ps. lxviii. 3.
[1103] Ecclus. xliv. 7.
[1104] Ecclus. xliv. 16 (vg.).
[1105] Ecclus. xliv. 17.
[1106] Luke i. 75.
[1107] 1 Cor. ix. 18.--Cp. _Life_, § 43 (p. 84).
[1108] Eph. vi. 17.
[1109] Matt. xi. 30.
[1110] Ps. xvi. 5 (vg.).
[1111] Isa. xlviii. 20; Jer. xxv. 31.
[1112] Ps. ii. 8.
[1113] 2 Pet. ii. 1.
[1114] 1 Cor. vi. 20.
[1115] Acts xx. 28.
[1116] 2 Cor. xi. 7.
[1117] _Gratum erat munus gratuitum._
[1118] Matt. vi. 22; Luke xi. 34.
[1119] Hab. iii. 13.
[1120] Matt. vi. 22, 23; Luke xi. 34, 35.
[1121] Ps. cxi. 2 (vg.).
[1122] Gen. i. 31.
[1123] Ps. lxviii. 5.
[1124] 2 Cor. ix. 7.
[1125] 1 Cor. ix. 22.
[1126] Jas. iv. 6; 1 Pet. v. 5.
[1127] See _Life_, § 60.
[1128] 1 John iv. 6.
[1129] Printed text, _Ipse enim est._ With A I omit _enim_.
[1130] Josh. vii. 15, etc.
[1131] So A: _cicius_ (= _citius_) _ibat_ for _riuus ibat_ of the
printed text.
[1132] The story is told much more fully in _Life_, §§ 58, 59; where
there are many similarities in phraseology to the present passage. In
both places it is connected with the miraculous blinding of the king,
immediately preceding it here, immediately following it there.
[1133] Ps. lxxxvi. 5 (vg.).
[1134] Cp. the description of Malchus, _Life_, § 8: "He was reverenced
by all, as the one father of all"; and of Malachy, § 33: "the loving
father of all."
[1135] Matt. xxiii. 37.
[1136] Ps. lxi. 4 (vg.).
[1137] Cp. _Life_, § 42: "Neither sex nor age, nor condition nor
profession, is held in account."
[1138] Ps. xxxv. 10
[1139] Ps. iv. 4 (vg.).
[1140] Prov. xvi. 32.
[1141] Job xxxvi. 18 (vg.).
[1142] _Non urebatur illa, sed utebatur._
[1143] _Utriusque hominis sui._
[1144] 1 Tim. v. 22.
[1145] Cp. _De Cons._ i. 6: "If you desire wholly to belong to all ...
I praise your humility, but only if it is complete. But how can it be
complete if you exclude yourself? And you are a man. Then, that your
humanity also may be complete, let the bosom which receives all gather
you also within itself ... wherefore, where all possess you let you
yourself also be one of those who possess."
[1146] Lucan, _Phars._ ii. 383.
[1147] Cp. _De Cons._ iv. 12, "In ease not taking ease;" _Life_, § 43,
"Quiet often, but by no means at any time taking ease."
[1148] Ps. cxix. 23.
[1149] Eccles. ii. 14 (inexact quotation).
[1150] Cp. Luke iv. 22.
[1151] _Tantillus._ The text seems to be corrupt. Read _tam laetus?_
[1152] Cp. _Life_, § 43: "Yea, what was there that was not edifying,"
etc.
[1153] Ps. xx. 3 (vg.).
[1154] 2 Cor. ii. 15.
[1155] 1 Thess. i. 4 (vg.); 2 Thess. ii. 13.
[1156] That is, Malachias, the Hebrew for _my angel_, with a Latin
termination. For its origin see _Life_, § 12.
[1157] At this point, with A, I omit a passage which is identical with
the first half of Serm. i. § 5, and interrupts the argument. With A,
also, in the following sentence I read _Laetemur et nos dilectissimi
quod_ for _Laetemur quod_ of the printed text. See _R.I.A._ xxxv.
260-262.
[1158] Judg. xiii. 20.
[1159] Dan. vi. 13; Ezra iv. 1.
[1160] Ps. ix. 2.
[1161] _Curia._
[1162] _Cui sit cura nostri._
[1163] Cp. Lett. iv. § 2.
[1164] _Informauit._
[1165] _Confirmauit._
[1166] Song of Three Children, 16.
[1167] Ps. xliii. 4.
[1168] Jer. ix. 1.
[1169] Ps. xlv. 15.
[1170] Luke i. 68.
[1171] Matt. iv. 5.
[1172] Ps. cxxvi. 1, 4 (vg.).
[1173] Luke i. 47.
[1174] 1 Cor. vi. 17.
[1175] See _De Cons._ v. 2, quoted p. 127, n. 13, and the sermon on
the Marriage of the Soul with the Word (_Cant._ lxxxiii. 6), in which
St. Bernard, quoting 1 Cor. vi. 17, says, "Love ... joins the two in
one spirit, makes them no longer two but one." Cp. also _Cant._ xxvi.
5: "He that is joined to God is one spirit, and is wholly changed into
a certain divine feeling, and cannot think of or mind anything but
God, and that which God thinks and minds, being full of God." For the
last phrase see Ignatius, _Magn._ 14.
[1176] Ps. xciii. 5.
[1177] Ps. xxx. 4.
[1178] Luke i. 75.
[1179] Ps. cxlv. 7 (vg.).
[1180] 1 Sam. xv. 17 (inexact quotation).
[1181] Luke i. 49.
[1182] Ps. cxlv. 5 (vg.).
[1183] Num. xi. 25; 2 Kings ii. 9, 15.
[1184] Luke i. 17.--See p. 151, n. 3.
[1185] Ecclus. xlv. 5.
[1186] The same phrase occurs in _Life_, § 75, similarly applied.
[1187] Isa. lxii. 3.
[1188] Ps. lii. 8 (vg.).
[1189] Ps. xlv. 7 (vg.).
[1190] Epiphany Collect.
[1191] Cp. _Life_, § 47 (p. 88).
[1192] Isa. xxvii. 6, combined with Hos. xiv. 5, and Ecclus. xxxix.
14.
[1193] Ecclus. xlv. 1.
[1194] Ecclus. xxiv. 2, 12 (vg.). The clauses containing the word
assembly (_plenitudo_) are omitted in R.V.
[1195] Ps. cxxxvi. 7.
[1196] John i. 4.
[1197] Ps. xlvi. 4.
[1198] Ecclus. l. 6.
[1199] 1 John i. 7, combined with 1 Thess. v. 5.
[1200] Isa. xviii. 4 (vg.).
ADDITIONAL NOTES
A.--St. Bernard's Description of the State of the Irish Church.
_Life_, §§ 7, 16, 17.
In two passages of the _Life_ serious charges are made against the Irish
Church of the early years of the twelfth century. These charges refer
primarily to the dioceses of Armagh and Connor; but it is probable that
those dioceses were typical of many other districts throughout the
country. If St. Bernard's statements are true of them, they may be
applied with little reserve to the greater part of Ireland. Indeed he
himself gives us more than a hint that the abuses which he condemns were
by no means confined to eastern Ulster (§ 19). It may be well,
therefore, to bring them together and to discuss them.
1. There was no such thing as chanting at the canonical hours. In the
whole bishopric of Armagh "there was none who could or would sing" (§
7). "In the churches [of Connor] there was not heard the voice either of
preacher or singer" (§ 16). We may suspect that there is some
exaggeration here; for if church song was absolutely unknown, how could
Malachy have "learnt singing in his youth" (§ 7)? But that St. Bernard's
remarks are substantially correct need not be questioned. He is not
speaking of the Irish Church as it was in its earlier period, but of its
state at the time when it had probably fallen to its lowest depth. His
assertion, therefore, is not disposed of by references to the chanting
at the funerals of Brian Boroimhe in 1014 and Maelsechlainn in 1022
(O'Hanlon, p. 34). Indeed in the notices of those events in _A.F.M._
there is no express mention of ecclesiastical song.
2. At Armagh Confession was not practised (§ 7); in the diocese of
Connor "nowhere could be found any who would either seek penance or
impose it" (§ 16). It may be true that Confession had been much
neglected among some classes of the people: Malachy on one occasion met
a woman who had never confessed (§ 54), and the very fact that he put
the question to her "whether she had ever confessed her sins" suggests
that she was not singular in this respect. But it is remarkable that the
_anmchara_ (soul-friend), or Confessor, is frequently mentioned in Irish
literature. The obits of several persons to whom that title is given are
recorded in the Annals in the twelfth century. And penance is often
alluded to in the obituary notices of distinguished persons, clerical
and lay. In his sweeping statement St. Bernard may have had in mind some
differences of method in penitential discipline between the Roman and
Irish Churches.
3. The sacrament of Confirmation was not celebrated, at any rate in
Armagh (§ 7). This rite has always been used in the Irish Church, though
possibly neglected locally at some periods. St. Patrick tells us that he
"confirmed in Christ" those whom he had "begotten to God" (_Epistle_, 2;
cp. _Confession_, 38, 51)--thus giving us one of the earliest instances
in literature of the application to the rite of its present familiar
name. But in his practice (_Epistle_, § 3), as in the Stowe Missal,
about A.D. 800 (ed. Sir G. F. Warner, vol. ii. p. 31), it seems to have
consisted of an anointing with chrism without laying on, or raising, of
hand, or a direct prayer for the Holy Spirit. According to the Stowe
Missal it was administered by a presbyter. It is improbable that St.
Bernard or his romanizing friends would recognize the rite so performed
as true Confirmation.
4. One of the things which was neglected at Armagh was "the marriage
contract" (§ 7). In the diocese of Connor there was "no entry into
lawful marriages" (§ 16). By the labours of Malachy this abuse
disappeared. In Armagh he "instituted anew" the marriage contract; in
Connor it came to pass that "the celebration of marriage" was revived (§
17). Putting these statements together we may conclude that St.
Bernard's meaning is that marriages had ceased to be celebrated in the
face of the Church, and that in consequence the vow of a life-long union
was often evaded. Now contemporary writers charge the Irish of this
period with loose sexual morality, especially in regard of arbitrary
divorce, matrimony within the prohibited degrees, exchange of wives, and
other breaches of the law of marriage. Such accusations are made, for
example, by Pope Gregory VII. (Haddan and Stubbs, _Eccl. Docs._ ii.
160), Lanfranc (Ussher, 490; _P.L._ cl. 535, 536), Anselm (Ussher 521,
523; _P.L._ clix. 173, 178) and Giraldus Cambrensis (_Gest._ ii. 14;
_Top._ iii. 19). Their evidence is the more worthy of credence because
the usages to which they refer were characteristic of the Irish at an
earlier period (_Encycl. of Religion and Ethics_, v. 456, 460), and
might be expected to recur in an age of spiritual decline. But both
Lanfranc and Anselm testify to the existence of marriage as an
institution among the Irish. The former speaks of the divorce of a wife
"lawfully joined to her husband," and the latter uses terms of similar
import. So also does St. Bernard himself. His praise of Malachy's mother
(_Life_, § 1) is inconceivable if she did not live in wedlock; and he
expressly states that eight "metropolitans" of Armagh were "married men"
(§ 19). But if there was nevertheless a revival among large sections of
the people of pagan ideas of marriage, which tolerated polygamy,
concubinage, incest and easy termination of unions, it can be understood
that marriage in the face of the Church, which included a vow absolutely
prohibitive of all these things, would be commonly avoided. Malachy's
anxiety to restore the marriage ceremony was no doubt due to a desire
to purge the nation of immoral customs of which St. Bernard makes no
express mention. But, however that may be, we have contemporary native
evidence that the rite of marriage had fallen into desuetude, and that
Malachy was successful in his effort to restore it. For in the document
quoted on p. 170, we are told that in a district which was part of the
diocese of Armagh when he was Cellach's vicar (_L.A.J._ iv. 37), and
under the rule of his patron, Donough O'Carroll, "marriage was assented
to."
5. "There was no giving of tithes or firstfruits," writes St. Bernard (§
16). He is speaking of the diocese of Connor. But there is no doubt that
the remark might have been made of other districts. There was no such
custom as the payment of tithes in Ireland before the twelfth century.
They are first mentioned by Gilbert of Limerick, about 1108, in his _De
Statu Ecclesiae_ (Ussher, 507); and they were enjoined at the Synods of
Kells in 1152 (Keating, iii. 315) and Cashel in 1172 (Can. 3, Giraldus,
_Expug._, i. 35). From the document quoted above we learn that in Oriel,
under Donough O'Carroll, "tithes were received"--evidently a new impost.
6. "Ministers of the altar were exceeding few" in the diocese of Connor
(§ 16); and accordingly it is observed that Malachy provided his new
churches with clergy (§ 17). This is not proved, nor is it in any great
degree corroborated by the statement of _A.F.M._ (1148) that Malachy
"ordained bishops and priests and men of every order"; but the parallel
is perhaps worth noting.
7. The voice of the preacher was not heard in the churches (§ 16). This
statement cannot, so far as I know, be checked.
8. The same remark must be made about the statements that the people
would not come to church (§ 16), and that Malachy's exertions at length
induced them to do so (§ 17), though they are sufficiently probable.
9. That "churches were rebuilt" (§ 17) cannot be questioned. No doubt
the monasteries of Bangor and Saul would be counted among the number. We
have explicit and independent evidence of the fact. The foundation of
churches and re-edifying of monasteries were a conspicuous feature of
the reign of Donough O'Carroll (see p. 170). And _A.F.M._ (1148) lay
great stress on Malachy's activities in this direction. He "consecrated
many churches and cemeteries," and "founded churches and monasteries,
for by him was repaired every church in Ireland which had been consigned
to decay and neglect, and they had been neglected from time remote."
On the whole it appears that St. Bernard's strictures are at least not
without foundation in fact, in so far as they can be tested. But he can
scarcely be acquitted of some measure of exaggeration in the rhetorical
passages in which they occur.
B.--The Hereditary Succession of the Coarbs Of Patrick.
_Life_, §§ 19. 20, 30.
The assertions of St. Bernard in _Life_, § 19, concerning the coarbs of
Patrick are controlled by _A.U._ The ninth predecessor of Cellach,
Cathasach II. (+957) is described in them (_s.a._ 956) as
"coarb of Patrick, learned bishop of the Goidhil." None of the following
eight is said to have been a bishop, though all are called coarbs of
Patrick. Moreover Cellach himself was appointed abbot before he
"received holy orders," and the record of his ordination on St.
Adamnan's Day (September 23) 1105, several weeks after his
"institution," seems to indicate that it was unusual for the abbots to
be ordained. All this corroborates the statement that his eight
predecessors were "without orders." It is true, indeed, that according
to _A.F.M._ Amalgaid, one of the eight, anointed Maelsechlainn king of
Ireland, on his deathbed in 1022. But it does not follow from this that
he was a priest. In early times, as is well known, unction was
administered to the sick by laymen; and there appears to be no evidence
that this office was confined to the priesthood till well on in the
ninth century (_Dict. of Christ. Antiquities_, ii. 2004). It is at least
possible that the older usage lingered on in Ireland to a much later
date than on the Continent. But the statement of _A.F.M._ as to the
anointing of Maelsechlainn is not confirmed by the more reliable
authority of _A.U._
That at least five of the eight were, as St. Bernard says, "married men"
is shown by the following table, compiled from _A.U._ and MacFirbis
(_R.I.A._, MS. 23 P. 1, p. 308). The persons whose names are printed in
italics were coarbs of Patrick.
Cellach
|-------------|
| |
Eochaid _Dubdalethe II_ +998
|
_Mael Muire_ +1020
|
|--------------------------------------------------|
| | |
_Amalgaid_ +1049 _Dubdalethe III_ +1064 Aed +1042
| |
| Aed +1108
|
|----------------------------------------------------------|
| | | |
_Mael Isa_ +1091 _Domnall_ +1105 Dubesa +1078 Eochaid(?) +1038
| |
|-------------| _Muirchertach_ (§ 20) +1134
| |
Aed +1095 Flannacan +1113
|
|----------------------|
| |
_Cellach_ +1129 _Niall_ (§ 22) +1139
This table also confirms the statement that the abbots all belonged to
the same family, and so obtained office by a sort of hereditary right.
St. Bernard gives no hint which would enable us to identify this family.
But the genealogy given by MacFirbis enumerates the ancestors of Cellach
in a direct line up to Fiachrach, son of Colla fo Crich, and is headed
"Genealogy of Ui Sinaich, _i.e._ the coarbs of Patrick." The Bodleian
MS., Rawl. B. 502,[1201] has the same genealogy, and entitles it
"Genealogy of Clann Sinaich." The family then from which the abbots of
Armagh were taken was the principal branch of that sept. From the
genealogy it appears that the sept was derived from Sinach, from whom
the fifth in descent was the Cellach whose name appears at the head of
foregoing table.
St. Bernard represents Malachy to have said in 1132, when he was induced
to oppose Murtough, that the system of hereditary succession had already
lasted nearly two centuries (§ 20). This statement is in accord with
known facts. The genealogical table gives sufficient evidence that it
began not earlier than the accession of Dubdalethe II. (965), and
continued to the accession of Murtough. If there is no evidence that the
three predecessors of Dubdalethe were of the Clann Sinaich, neither is
there anything to disprove it. But their immediate predecessor, Joseph,
was certainly not of that sept; for _A.U._ (MS. A, 935) tells us that he
was of the Clann Gairb-gaela, and the list of coarbs in the Book of
Leinster notes in addition that he came from Dalriada (_R.I.A._ xxxv.
327, 359). Thus the succession cannot have been established before the
death of Joseph (936). Hence it lasted for a period of between 167 and
196 years. A period of 167 years, or a period of 196 years, might be
described as "well-nigh two hundred years" (_annos ferme ducentos_),
though the latter suits St. Bernard's language better than the former.
But how can this be harmonized with the statement that "fifteen
quasi-generations had passed in this wickedness" (§ 19)? Obviously a
"quasi-generation" is not a generation of human life: apart from the
facts just mentioned, the very word _quasi_ forbids the supposition.
Colgan (_Trias_, p. 301) suggested that the word indicates the period of
office of a coarb; and this is very probable. The figure of generations,
so applied, is in line with St. Bernard's conception of a bishop as "the
seed" of his predecessor (§ 34). But the first of a series of coarbs, of
which Murtough was the fifteenth, was Maelcoba, the second predecessor
of Joseph. So that, even on Colgan's hypothesis, St. Bernard's two
statements are irreconcilable. Yet it is difficult to believe that an
error so manifest was in his source. I suggest that he wrote "fifteen"
in error for "twelve": in other words his document had _xii_, and he
misread it _xu_. The confusion of _u_ with _ii_ is very common in
manuscripts. If this explanation is accepted, St. Bernard's authority
implied that the hereditary succession was upheld without interruption
from the death of Joseph to the accession of Murtough, which is
"well-nigh two hundred years."
This investigation may convince us that St. Bernard depended on an
excellent document for his knowledge of the history of Armagh. But he
certainly went astray in the interpretation of the document when he
styled the predecessors of Cellach metropolitans (see p. 45, n. 1). And
he goes further when he asserts that none were allowed to be bishops who
were not of their family (§ 19); thus leaving the impression that under
the rule of the eight lay abbots--that is, for a century and a
half--Armagh was deprived of episcopal ministrations. But this is wholly
unhistorical. The Ulster Annals mention six bishops of Armagh,
contemporary with the lay abbots. They seem to have followed one another
in regular succession, and there is no indication that any one of them
belonged to the Clann Sinaich. They were no doubt monastic bishops, such
as are found in the Irish Church from the sixth century onwards, who
exercised the functions of their order at the bidding of the abbots.
They were probably not referred to in St. Bernard's document; and if
they were, one who had been trained in an entirely different
ecclesiastical system would have been at a loss to understand their
position.
Thus we conclude that St. Bernard, in the passage which we are
considering, used good material with conscientious care, but that he was
misled by lack of knowledge of Irish ecclesiastical methods. This result
is important because it may apparently be applied to the whole of his
memoir of St. Malachy. His statements, as a rule, stand well the test of
comparison with the native records; and when he is at fault we can
usually explain his errors as misunderstandings, due to ignorance of
conditions of which he had no experience.
St. Bernard has been charged with gross exaggeration in another passage.
"A great miracle to-day," he writes (§ 30), "is the extinction of that
generation, so quickly wrought, especially for those who knew their
pride and power." It is an extravagant hyperbole to say that either the
O'Neills, or the great tribe of the Oirgialla, represented to this day
by the Maguires, the O'Hanlons and the MacMahons, was blotted out when
the _Life of St. Malachy_ was written. So argued some in the time of
Colgan (_Trias_, p. 302). But they misrepresented St. Bernard. The word
"generation" obviously means in the sentence before us what it meant in
§ 19 ("adulterous generation")--not an extensive tribe, nor even the
Clann Sinaich as a whole, but the branch of that sept which provided
abbots for Armagh. The speedy extinction of a single family is not a
thing incredible. And it is worthy of remark that neither the Clann
Sinaich, nor any person described as ua Sinaich or mac Sinaich is
mentioned in the Annals after 1135 (see p. 58, n. 9).
For a more detailed treatment of the subjects discussed in this note
reference may be made to _R.I.A._ xxxv. 232-238, 340-353.
C.--Malachy's Contest with Niall.
_Life_, §§ 22-31.
The narrative of the series of events between the death of Murtough and
the consecration of Gelasius, both in St. Bernard's _Life_ and in
_A.F.M._, is obscure, and our two main authorities contradict each other
in some particulars. In this note, I propose to attempt a reconstruction
of the story.
1. Among the native authorities _A.F.M._ stand alone in giving what
approximates to a full account of the struggle between the rival abbots.
_A.T._ record only three incidents; the _Chronicon Scotorum_ also
records three incidents belonging to the year 1134, and then breaks off,
to be resumed in 1142; in _A.U._ and _A.I._ there are hiatus which cover
the whole period; the other Annals ignore the events with which we are
concerned. The information supplied by _A.F.M._ runs as follows:
[Sidenote: 1134.]
(1) Malachy O'Morgair made a visitation of Munster and obtained his
tribute.
* * * * *
(2) A chapel, which was erected by Cormac Mac Carthy, king of Cashel,
was consecrated by a synod of clergy assembled at that place.
(3) Murtough died 17 September.
(4) Niall was installed in the coarbate of Patrick.
(5) A change of abbots at Armagh, _i.e._ Malachy O'Morgair in place of
Niall.
(6) Malachy afterwards made a visitation of Munster and received his
tribute.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1135.]
(7) Flann Ua Sinaich, keeper of the Staff of Jesus, died after good
penance.
* * * * *
(8) Malachy O'Morgair purchased the Staff of Jesus, and took it from its
cave 7 July.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1136.]
(9) A visitation of Munster was made by Malachy O'Morgair, coarb of
Patrick.
(10) A change of abbots at Armagh, _i.e._ Niall in place of Malachy.
* * * * *
(11) Malachy O'Morgair resigned the coarbate of Patrick for the sake of
God.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1137.]
(12) A change of abbots at Armagh, _i.e._ the erenach (_recte_ abbot) of
Derry in place of Niall.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1138.]
(13) Christian O'Morgair died.
_A.T._ record the second and fifth of the above events, and subjoin to
the latter notice the passage quoted p. 51, n. 4. The _Chronicon
Scotorum_ records, the second, third and fifth.
There is obvious confusion in the narrative of the Masters. They put the
death of Christian O'Morgair under 1138, which is a year too early (see
p. 66, n. 1), and they credit Malachy with having made three visitations
of Munster within three years, which he is very unlikely to have done.
But it is to be observed that the notices of the visitations are not
mere repetitions, for they differ from each other verbally. Thus we may
suspect that the Masters copied those entries from three different
sources, and that they refer to the same visitation, which, in at least
one of the sources, appeared under the wrong year. Now the consecutive
sentences 9, 10 are probably connected with each other: the absence of
Malachy in Munster would give his opponents opportunity to reinstate his
rival. In like manner entries 1, 2 (not consecutive) may be connected.
It would not be surprising if Malachy, even at some risk to the security
of his tenure of the abbacy at Armagh, took part in the consecration of
his patron's church at Cashel. And it may be added that he would not
improbably make this visit to the south the occasion of a circuit in
Munster. The visitation, on that hypothesis, must have taken place in
1134 or early in 1135. Again, the note of time in entry 6 implies that
it was made not very long after the appointment of Malachy, recorded in
the immediately preceding entry 5. Finally, entry 8 mentions an event
which must have greatly strengthened his hands. Having possessed himself
of the more important and revered of the abbatial insignia he was at
length more than a match for his antagonist. Probably, therefore, the
restoration of Niall (10) should be placed rather before than after it.
For these reasons we seem to be justified in placing the recorded
incidents in the following order. When Malachy secured possession of the
see (5) he remained long enough in Armagh to establish himself in the
abbacy. During this time may have occurred the abortive conspiracy
against him related in _A.T._, but not alluded to in _A.F.M._ He then
went to Cashel for the consecration of the Chapel (2), and held his
visitation of Munster (1, 6, 9). When he returned he found that Niall
had once more entered Armagh (10). By July 1135 the power of his rival
had considerably decreased, and Malachy got possession of the Staff of
Jesus (8). Finally he resigned his office (11) and Gelasius was
appointed to it (12). If this is a true account of the course of events,
one statement of the Annals needs correction. They tell us that Gelasius
succeeded Niall; on our hypothesis he succeeded Malachy. But that the
Masters should have substituted the former for the latter was to be
expected; for according to their previous (as I believe misplaced)
statement Niall, not Malachy, was in possession in the latter part of
1136.
2. We now turn to St. Bernard's narrative of these transactions.
Sections 22 and 23 present no difficulty. They are simply an
amplification, with differences in detail, of what we learn from _A.T._
In the early part of § 24 it is stated that Malachy remained in Armagh
after the king, with whose aid he had "ascended the chair of Patrick,"
had returned home; and in the succeeding narrative it is implied that he
never left it till he went to Down. That is to say, the visitation of
Munster is ignored. This need cause no surprise. It is quite possible
that St. Bernard had never heard of it. Again, there is no explicit
mention of the reinstatement of Niall. But it seems to be implied in §
24 (see p. 53, n. 9). The whole story becomes more intelligible if we
assume that Niall was in possession for a short time, and then fled, but
continued to exercise his functions outside the city, as Malachy himself
had done in a previous period (§ 21). If we suppose that the visit to
Munster took place shortly after the episode of § 23 we can explain the
only difficulty in the narrative, the return of Niall after he had been
driven out. The latter part of § 24 seems to intimate a lessening of
opposition to Malachy's rule. The whole passage, §§ 24-27, with the
exception of the last two sentences of § 27, must relate to the period
before July 1135, inasmuch as Niall is represented as carrying about
with him the Staff of Jesus as well as the Book of Armagh.
Up to this point St. Bernard's narrative harmonizes admirably with the
story as it has been reconstructed above from the Annals. But we must
carry our comparison of the two accounts a little further. They agree in
giving 1137 as the date of the appointment of Gelasius as coarb of
Patrick; but while St. Bernard puts the resignation of Malachy in the
same year the Masters record it under 1136 (p. 61, n. 7). Now their
phrase (11), that he "resigned for the sake of God," in its present
context (10) can have only one meaning. Malachy, seeing that his contest
with Niall was hopeless, determined to retire rather than continue the
strife, and left Niall in possession. But apart from entry 10, which
seems to have been misplaced, the words have no such implication, and
are in harmony with the reason given by St. Bernard for Malachy's return
to his former diocese (§§ 20, 21). Since the dates of the Masters for
this period are already suspect we need not hesitate to follow St.
Bernard's guidance here. But we may go further. The annalists were
compelled, if they would be consistent, to suppose that there was a
considerable interval between the retirement of Malachy and the
accession of Gelasius. How was it possible that when Niall had finally
routed his formidable rival, who was in possession of the Staff of
Jesus, another should at once step in and, apparently without any
difficulty, deprive him of the fruits of his victory? The difficulty is
increased if we accept the statement of St. Bernard--not contradicted by
the Annals, and not easy to dispute--that Gelasius was nominated by
Malachy himself, and was therefore presumably favourable to his cause.
Thus we perceive that there was good reason that the annalists should
separate the two events as far as possible, by antedating Malachy's
resignation, and by connecting it rather with Niall's restoration than
with the appointment of Gelasius.
3. In weighing the respective claims of St. Bernard and the annalists to
credence in this part of Malachy's life it is well to remember that of
it St. Bernard may be assumed to have had full and first-hand
information. The main facts were probably communicated to him by
Malachy himself, though some particulars were no doubt added by other
Irish informants. It is true, we must also allow for bias on St.
Bernard's part in favour of his friend. Such bias in fact displays
itself in §§ 25, 26. But bias, apart from sheer dishonesty, could not
distort the whole narrative, as it certainly must have been distorted in
the _Life_, if the narrative of _A.F.M._ is to be accepted as it stands.
4. It is important to observe that in the earlier stages of Malachy's
conflict with Niall the lord of Oriel was Conor O'Loughlin, who was
apparently not friendly to the reformers of the Irish Church (cp. §§ 18,
20, p. 40, n. 2, and p. 46, n. 5). No doubt his defeat by O'Brien and
Mac Carthy in 1134 (p. 43, n. 5) made him a less ardent supporter of
Niall than he had been of Murtough; but it is not likely that he
entirely discouraged his attempts to seize the abbacy. The ultimate
success of Malachy was in fact probably due to O'Loughlin's murder at
the end of May 1136 and the rise to power of Donough O'Carroll (see p.
58, n. 11), his successor in the kingdom of Oriel. St. Bernard never
mentions O'Carroll by name, though he possibly alludes to him in one
passage (§ 28: see note there). But we may infer from other sources that
he was a zealous friend and helper of Malachy. The most important of
these is a contemporary document, part of which has been copied on a
blank page of a fourteenth-century Antiphonary of Armagh (T.C.D. ms. B.
1. 1.) opposite the first page of the Calendar. Unfortunately the scribe
laid down his pen at the end of a line and in the middle of a sentence.
The document was first published by Petrie (p. 389) with a translation.
As it is referred to several times in the notes to the _Life_ it may be
well to print here, with a few slight alterations, Dr. Whitley Stokes'
revised rendering (Gorman, p. xx.).
"_Kalend. Januar. v feria, lun. x. Anno Domini mclxx._ A prayer for
Donnchad Ua Cerbhaill, supreme King of Oirgialla, by whom were made the
book of Cnoc na nApstal at Louth and the chief books of the order of the
year, and the chief books of the Mass. It is this illustrious king who
founded the entire monastery both [as to] stone and wood, and gave
territory and land to it for the prosperity of his soul in honour of
Paul and Peter. By him the church throughout the land of Oirgialla was
reformed, and a regular bishopric was made, and the church was placed
under the jurisdiction of the bishop. In his time tithes were received
and marriage was assented to, and churches were founded and temples and
bell-houses [round towers] were made, and monasteries of monks and
canons and nuns were re-edified, and _nemheds_ were made. These are
especially the works which he performed for the prosperity [of his soul]
and reign in the land of Oirgialla, namely, the monastery of monks on
the banks of the Boyne [as to] stone and wood, implements and books, and
territory and land, in which there are one hundred monks and three
hundred conventuals, and the monastery of canons of Termann Feichin, and
the monastery of nuns, and the great church of Termann Feichin, and the
church of Lepadh Feichin, and the church of...."
O'Carroll, then, was an ardent supporter of Malachy. Is it likely that
after his long struggle to secure the Chair of Patrick, and when he was
in actual possession of it, Malachy should voluntarily surrender his
claim to Niall at the very moment when the new king of Oriel had come to
his aid? Yet, unless we are prepared to place his resignation before
June 1136, that is the assumption we must make if we adhere to the
statements of _A.F.M._
5. There are other documents of high authority which must be taken into
account: the contemporary record of the succession of coarbs of Patrick
in the Book of Leinster, and the copy of a similar record in the Yellow
Book of Lecan. The former of these seems to have been written by a
partizan of Malachy, since it ignores Murtough. The latter assigns to
that abbot a rule of three years, in agreement with St. Bernard (§§ 20,
21). But neither of them so much as mentions Niall; and both make
Gelasius the successor of Malachy. Thus they contradict _A.F.M._ and
corroborate the narrative of St. Bernard. See _R.I.A._ xxxv. 355 f.
FOOTNOTES:
[1201] See Kuno Meyer's Facsimile edition, p. 146, e. The genealogy
there begins with Amalgaid, not with Cellach.
APPENDIX.
The Portion of § 41 of the Life omitted in Translation.
Alia quaedam ibidem _pernoctabat in oratione_,[1202] quam forte
reperiens solam homo barbarus, accensus libidine et sui minime compos,
irruit rabiosus in eam. Conuersa illa et tremefacta, suspiciens aduertit
hominem plenum diabolico spiritu. "Heu," inquit, "miser, quid agis?
Considera ubi es, reuerere haec sancta, defer Deo, defer seruo eius
Malachiæ, parce et tibi ipsi." Non destitit ille, furiis agitatus
iniquis.[1203] Et ecce (quod horribile dictu est) uenenatum et tumidum
animal quod bufonem uocant uisum est reptans exire de inter femora
mulieris. Quid plura? Terrefactus resiliit homo, et datis saltibus
festinus oratorio exsilit. Ille confusus abscessit, et illa intacta
remansit, magno quidem et Dei miraculo et merito Malachiae. Et pulchre
operi foedo et abominando foedum interuenit et abominabile monstrum. Non
prorsus aliter decuit bestialem extingui libidinem quam per
frigidissimum uermem, nec aliter temerarium frenari ausum frustrari
conatum quam per uilem inutilemque bestiolam.
FOOTNOTES:
[1202] Luke vi. 12.
[1203] In hexameter rhythm. Cp. Virg., _Aen._ iii. 331; Ov., _Art.
Am._ ii. 27.
INDEX
Abélard, 101
Acoemetae, 30
Adeline, 69
Age for ordination, 15 f.
Agnew, Sir Andrew, 78
Aidan, St., liv
Ailech, 40
Aleth, mother of St. Bernard, 7, 71
Alexander I., King of Scots, 76
Alps, 72
passes of, when closed, 142
Alternative sees, xlvii, 19
Amalgaid, coarb of Patrick, 164, 165
Anacletus II., anti-pope, 72
Anastasius, St., monastery of, at Rome, 118
_Anmchara_, 161
Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, xv, xxii, xxiv, xxvi, xxxvi, 47, 162
letters of, xxiv, xxix, xlvi, 47
Antiphonary of Armagh, 170
---- of Bangor, 28
Antrim, 88
Applecross, 29
Arch-priests, xxvii
Ardnurcher, diocese of, li
Ardpatrick, 14
Ards, The, 40
Ardstraw, diocese of, xli
Argyll, diocese of, 28
Armagh, xvi, xvii, lvii, 8, 11, 26, 36
abbots of, 164:
_see also_ Amalgaid, Cathasach, Donnell, Dubdalethe, Joseph,
Mael Brigte, Maelcoba, Maelisa, Murtough, Niall
antiphonary of, 170
archbishops of: _see_ Cellach, Gelasius, Malachy
bishops of, xxxiv, xxxv, 164, 166
Book of, 53 f., 58, 169
cemetery of St. Patrick at, 115
diocese of, xli, lvi, lviii, 161-163
insignia of abbots of, 53-5, 58, 168, 169
monastery of SS. Paul and Peter at, 11, 18
pestilence at, 60
Aube, river, 71
Augustine, St., archbishop of Canterbury, xxxix
Augustinian canons, lx, 11, 63, 64, 67, 69, 113, 121
Baltinglas, 76
Bangor, liii, liv, lv, lvii, lviii, lx, 26, 27, 36, 67, 80, 118
abbey church at, 109
abbots of, liv, 28, 31:
_see also_ Tanaidhe
ancient glory of, 27-30, 74
antiphonary of, 28
called _Vallis Angelorum_, 27
community of, lv, 41
convent of regular clerics at, 63 f.
etymology of, 27
headquarters of St. Malachy, liv, lviii, 33, 35, 64, 113
monastery of, 28, 91 f., 96, 104, 163
canons of, formed the bishop's chapter, 64
destroyed, 30, 40
oratory of, 30, 32, 109-113
possessions of, 26, 30 f., 108, 111
remains of, 109
site of, 28
Bann, river, xli, xliv
Bar-sur-Aube, 71
Barre, St., lxi, 92
Barrenness of soul, 98
Beatitudine, De, 76
Bective, 76
Bede's _History_, xxiii, xxxix f.
Bedell, Bishop William, xvii
Benedictione Dei, De, 76
Berengarius, 101
Bernard, St., xv, xxxv, lx, lxii, lxv, 7, 16, 71, 72, 117
at St. Malachy's funeral, 129
bias of, 170
errors of, 19, 31, 35, 36 f., 40, 45, 46, 50, 53, 62, 63, 76, 92, 118,
122, 124, 165, 166, 169
frailty of, 122
kisses St. Malachy's feet, 129, 144
omissions of, 53, 87, 169, 170
used good materials, 166
Bernard, Great St., mountain, 71, 72
---- Little St., mountain, 72
Bishop of a diocese abbot of regular canons, 64
"Bishop-King," 44
Bishops in Ireland, number of, xliii, lxii, 46
status of, xiii f., xxxiii, 166
Bobbio, 29
Book of Armagh, 53 f., 58, 169
Book of Kells, xxv
Book of Leinster, 171
Borromeo, St. Charles, favourite story of, 96
Boyle, 76
Boyne river, 75, 170
Bregha, 40
Breifne, xlix
Brian Boroimhe, xxiii, 161
Brigit, St., 100
Brothers left at Clairvaux by St. Malachy, 4, 68, 74, 132
---- sent from Ireland to Clairvaux, 75, 131
---- sent from Clairvaux to Ireland, 75, 133, 135
Brude, king of the Picts, 29
Brus, Robert de, 121
Burial of the poor, 14
Cairngarroch, 67, 78
Canice, St., 29
Canon of Patrick, 54
Canonical hours, chanting of, 17 f., 37, 161
Canterbury, xxxix, 70
archbishops of: _see_ Anselm, Augustine, Lanfranc, Ralph, Sigeric,
Theobald
suffragans of, xxi, xxii, xxxvi, xlv, lxiv
Carlisle, 64, 67, 76
Carntougher mountains, xli, xliii
Carthach, St., 19
Cashel, 65, 91
archbishop of: _see_ Malchus
archbishopric of, xxxv f., xlvii, lxi, lxiii, 65, 73
assembly at, xxxv
synod of, 62, 75, 163
_Cathair_, 40
Cathasach, abbot and bishop of Armagh, 164
Catholicus, a brother, 119
Ceadd, lv
Cedd, lv
Cellach, archbishop of Armagh, xxii, xxxiv-xxxvii, xxxviii, xlvi, lii,
lv, lvi, lvii, lx, 14, 15, 16, 20, 26, 36, 40, 43, 45, 46, 49, 65,
89, 164
not married, 49
"wife" of, 49
will of, lvi, 43, 47
Cenél Conaill, xliii
Cenél Eoghain, xliii, 59
of the Island, xliii
Christian (Gilla Crist Ua Condoirche), abbot of Mellifont, bishop of
Lismore, papal legate, lxii, lxv, 34, 75, 95, 134, 136
---- bishop of Clogher; _see_ O'Morgair
Church of Ireland, constitution of, xiii-xv
Church Island, 40 f.
Churches founded, 170
Ciaran, St., xlix
Cistercian Order, lx, 4, 69, 71, 76, 114, 120, 136
churches of, 109
Citeaux, 71
"City," 35, 37, 40, 85, 88
Clairvaux, lx, lxii, 71, 73, 74, 75, 118
brothers left at, by St. Malachy, 4, 68, 74, 132
brothers of, return to, 75, 135, 136
brothers sent to, from Ireland, 75, 131
brothers sent from, to Ireland, 75, 133, 135
monks of, unwilling to leave it, 136
oratory at, 128, 129
St. Malachy's wish to die at, 72, 117, 121, 124, 128, 143
second monastery of, 71, 143
Clann Gairb-gaela, 165
---- Sinaich, 46, 165, 166
Clergy, dearth of, 37, 39, 163
Clogher, diocese of, lviii, lx
barony of, lix
bishops of: _see_ O'Boyle, O'Morgair
church of, 54
Clonard, bishops of: _see_ Eugenius, O'Dunan, Rochfort
diocese and see of, xxv, xxvii, xxix, xlix, l
Clonenagh, annals of, xxxvii f., lxii, lxiii
Clonmacnoise, xvi
diocese of, xxviii, xxix, xlix, li
Clontarf, battle of, xvi, xix
Clova, 28
Cloyne, 88
diocese of, lxi
_Cluain uama_, 88
Coarb, meaning of, xiii
authority of, derived from founder of his church, 44
Coarbs of Patrick, 106, 164-6:
_see also_ Armagh, abbots, archbishops
married and without orders, 45, 164
Coleraine, 85
Columba, St., 29
Columbanus, St., 29
Comgall, St., 28, 29, 74
coarb of, 27: _see also_ O'Gorman, O'Hanratty
relics of, 30
Communities founded by St. Malachy, 31, 75, 83, 113, 137
Conall Gulban, 7
Confession, 18, 37, 39, 88, 98, 161
Confessors, 161
Confirmation, 18, 19, 162
Congan, abbot of Inislounaght, 4, 114
Connaught, 44, 93
Connor, 35, 37, 40, 62, 63
diocese of, xli, lvii, lviii, lxii
Connor or Down, diocese of, xli, xliv, xlvii, liv, lvii, lviii, lxii,
36, 48, 49, 62 f., 161-3
division of, lvii f., 62 f.
see of, liv, 35
_Conuama_, 88
Conversion, 11, 82
_Conversus_, 34
Cork, 21, 92
abbey of St. John Evangelist at, 93
bishop of: _see_ Ua Muidhin
diocese of, lxi, 92
election of bishop of, 92-4
Cormac: _see_ Mac Carthy
Cormac's chapel, 44, 53, 167, 168
Cruggleton, 76 f., 78
Cuthbert, St., 69
Daimliac mór at Armagh, 11
_Dairtheach_, 32
Dál Araide, lvii f., 40
Dalriada, 165
Danes in Ireland, xiv ff.
Danish colonies in Ireland, xix
---- dioceses, xxvi, lxiv
ruled by Irish bishops, xx, xxi
Dates discussed:
appointment of St. Malachy as vicar of Cellach, 16
birth of St. Malachy, 130
building of stone oratory at Bangor, 109
composition of _Life of St. Malachy_, lxv
condemnation of heretic at Lismore, 102
death of Christian O'Morgair, 66
departure of St. Malachy from England (1148), 123
election of bishop of Cork, 93
foundation of Inislounaght, 114
journeys of St. Malachy, 71, 73
letters of St. Bernard, 131, 133, 134, 137
ordination of St. Malachy, 16
proposal of St. Malachy to visit Rome, 72
resignation of Gilbert, bishop of Limerick, 73
resignation of see of Armagh by St. Malachy, 61, 169
St. Malachy's instruction under Imar, 11
St. Malachy's visits to Lismore, 20 f.
sermons of St. Bernard, 141, 152
visit of St. Malachy to York, 70
visitation of Munster by St. Malachy, 168
David I., king of Scots, 76 f., 120, 121
Dermot, the count: _see_ Mac Murrough
---- father of Gelasius, 62
---- father of St. Malachy, 6
Derry, diocese of, xli, xliv, lviii
Erenach (abbot) of: _see_ Gelasius
---- or Raphoe, diocese of, xli, xlvii
Desmond, 21, 43; _see also_ Mac Carthy
_De Statu Ecclesiae_, xxx-xxxiii
Dijon, 30, 71
Dioceses of Scotland, 76
Domnach Airgid, 54
Donnell, abbot of Armagh, xxxiv
---- bishop, xxiii, xxiv
Dove enters church, 115
Dove-like eyes, 63
Dover, 70
Down, diocese of, xli, lviii, lxii
see of, lviii, 64
Downpatrick (Down), 36, 44, 62, 63
dispute between prior and monks of, and abbot and canons of Bangor, 64
monastery of Irish at, 63
Dromore, diocese of, xxii, xli
Dubdalethe, II., coarb of Patrick, 164, 165
Dublin, xix, xlvi
archbishopric of, lxiii f.
archbishops of: _see_ Gregory, O'Toole
bishops of, xx, xxiii: _see also_ Dunan, Gregory, O'Hanley, Patrick
burgesses of, xxii, xlvi
church of Holy Trinity (Christ Church) in, xix, 54, 64
diocese of xix, xlv
hostility of, to Irish Church, xxii, xlv f., lxiii f.
king of: _see_ Gothric, Sitric
_Duevania_, 88
Duleek, xlix
diocese of, l
Dunan, bishop of Dublin, xix, xx
Dunshaughlin, diocese of, xxvii, l
_Ecclesia_, 4
Edgar the Atheling, 76
Emly, diocese of, lxi
Eporedia, 72
Erming Street, 70
Erne waterway, lix
Erolbh, bishop of Limerick, xxi
Errew, 93
Espec, Walter, 69
Eucharist called "sacraments," 114
heresy concerning, 101-3
Eugenius III., Pope, lxii, lxv, 3, 38, 117 f., 122
---- bishop of Clonard, l
Eusebius, a deacon, 14
Family of coarbs of Patrick, 165
extinction of, 61, 166
"Fasting on," 106, 107
Faughart, 100
Fearnmaigh (Farney), 59
Felix, bishop of Lismore, 75
Ferdomnach, 53
Fergus, lord of Galloway, 77, 120
_Fer légind_, xvi
Fermanagh, lix
_Ferta martair_, 115
Fiachrach, son of Colla fo Crich, 165
Fiadh meic Oengusa, council of, xxxvii, 46
Fingal, 59
Finnian, St., xlix
Fir Li, xliv
Fontaines, 71
Fore, diocese of, li
_Forma_, 11, 56
Four Masters, confusion of, 168
Gall, St., 86
Gelasius, archbishop of Armagh, lvii, lx, lxiii, 59, 62, 167, 168,
169, 171
"Generation," 45, 166
_Gentes_, 74, 80
Geoffrey, St. Bernard's secretary, 47, 81
prayer of, 130
Gerlatus, 81
Geswalt, 78
Gibeonites, 50
Gilbert, bishop of Limerick, papal legate, xxi, xxii, xxvi, xxix-xxxiii,
xxxiv, xxxv, xxxvi, xxxvii, xxxviii, xliii, xliv f., xlviii, lvi,
lx, lxi, 17, 47 f., 73, 163;
not a suffragan of Canterbury, xxi f., 47
----, St., of Sempringham, 123
Gill Abbey, Cork, 93
Giraldus Cambrensis, xv, 162
Gisburn, 67, 121
monastery of, 120 f.
Glendalough, bishop of, xlvi, lxiv
diocese of, xlv, lxiv
Godscalcus, 81
Gothric, king of Dublin, xxiii
Gougaud, Dom L., xxi, 76
Gregory, archbishop of Dublin, xx, xxii, lxiii, 20
---- I., Pope, xxxix, xl
---- VII., Pope, 162
Greenogue, xlv
Grenan Ely, 40
_Gyrovagus_, 55
Harding, Stephen, 71
Henry I., king of England, 47
---- II., king of England, 62
----, son of David I., king of Scots, 77
Hereditary succession of abbots, xv, lvi f., 45 f., 48, 148, 165
Heresy regarding the Eucharist, 101-103
Hinba, 29
Holy Island, liv
---- Trinity, church of: _see_ Dublin
Honorius II., Pope, 72
Hook, simile of a, applied to Death of Christ, 145
Horse presented to St. Malachy, 69 f.
Humbert of Igny, 136
Ignatius, St., epistles of, 37
Igny, Humbert of, 136
Imar: _see_ O'Hagan
Indrechtach, abbot of Bangor, 31
Inishowen, xli, xlii f.
Inislounaght, 76, 114
Inispatrick, synod of, lxi, 118
Innocent II., Pope, lx f., 71, 72 f., 117, 118
Irish Church, state of, described, 16-18, 37 f., 45 f., 161-3
Isaac, 133 f.
Ithael, xvii
Iveagh, 40
Iveragh, lv, 40, 43
site of S. Malachy's monastery in, 40 f.
Ivrea, 71, 72
John Evangelist, St., Abbey of, at Cork, 93
----, son of Sulien, xvii
manuscript written by, xviii
verses, of, xviii
Jonas, 30
Joseph, coarb of Patrick, 165 f.
Judas Maccabæus, 23
Kells, xvii
archdeacon of: _see_ Petit
archdeaconry of, xxviii
bishop of, xxviii, lxiii
Book of, xxv
diocese of, xxvii, xxviii, li
synod of, xxvii, lxii-lxiv, 75, 93, 163
Kilcurry River, 100
Kildare, xvii
Killeshin, 4
Kilmore, diocese of, xlix, li, lxii
Kingarth, 29
Kirkham Abbey, 69
Kirk Mochrum, 78
Knock, monastery of SS. Paul and Peter at, 67, 118, 170
Krusch, Bruno, 30
Lambay Island, xlv
Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, xv, xxi, xxiii, xxiv, xxvi, 162;
letters of, xxiii
Lapasperi, Portus, 78 f.
Larne, lviii
Laurence, St.: _see_ O'Toole
Learning in Ireland, xiv, xvi-xviii, xxvi
Leath Chuinn, xxv, xl
---- Mogha, xl
Lecan, Yellow Book of, 171
Leinster, xxxviii, xl, 86
Book of, 171
Lepadh Feichin, 170
_Lía na rígh_, 51
Limerick, bishops of: _see_ Erolbh, Gilbert, Patrick, Turgesius
church of St. Mary in, xxx, xliv
diocese of, xix, xxi, xxx, xliv
Lismore, xlvii, liii, lv, 19, 36, 46, 69, 86, 87, 101
assemblies at, 101 f.
bishops of: _see_ Christian, Felix, Malchus
---- or Waterford, diocese of, xlvii
---- in Scotland, 28
Llanbadarn Fawr, school of, xvii
London, 70
Louth, see of diocese of Oriel, lix, 66
county of, lix f.
diocese of, lix, 64
bishops of: _see_ O'Kelly, O'Morgair
monastery of St. Mary at, 67
Loxewdy, diocese of, li
Lucius II., Pope, 118
Lugaid, 28, 29
Lugidus, 28
Luxeuil (Luxovium) 29 f.
Mabillon, J., lxv
Mac Cairthinn, St., 54
Mac Carthy, Cormac, king of Desmond, liii, lvi f., 43 f., 51, 53, 93,
167, 170
assists St. Malachy at Iveragh, lv, 40, 41
called Bishop-King, 44
character of, 22, 23 f., 44
crozier of, 44
expelled from kingdom and restored, lv, 21-4, 41, 43
Mac Carthy, Dermot, 93
Mac Carthy, Donough, lv, 21, 23
Mac Carthy, Teague, king of Desmond, 21, 43
Mac Firbis, 7, 164, 165
Mac Mahon, 166
Mac Murrough, Dermot, king of Leinster, 90
Mac Sinaich, 166
Mael Brigte (Marianus Scotus), xviii
---- ----, son of Tornan, coarb of Patrick, 7
Maelcoba, coarb of Patrick, 165
Maelisa, abbot of Armagh, 14
Maelsechlainn, king of Ireland, 161, 164
Magh Cobha, 40
Maghera, 44, 64
Magheramorne, 28
Mainz, xviii
Malachy, St., early life of, lii, 6-18
part taken by, in Reformation, lii-lxiv
vicar of Cellach, lii, 16-18, 20, 163
at Lismore, liii, lv, 18-26, 40, 86, 87, 101-3
bishop of Connor, liv, 36-9, 128
abbot of Bangor, 27, 41, 43, 80, 112
at Iveragh, lv, 40-2
archbishop of Armagh, lvi f., lix, 53-61
bishop of Down, lvii f., lxi, 62 ff., 82
journey of, to Rome, lx f., 64-80
at Clairvaux, lx, 70-2, 74, 122-30
at Rome, 72-4
papal legate, lxi, 73, 80 f., 93, 102, 132
last journey of, lxi f., 118-22, 142
death of, lxii, 4, 117, 122, 123-8, 139, 141, 143
burial of, 3, 128-30, 139, 142, 144
a canon of St. Augustine, 11
age of, 128
called an ape, 111
character of, 3, 7-10, 47, 81-4, 153-7
coarb of Patrick, 82, 106
compared to Ananias of Damascus, 108
to Elijah, 52, 151, 159
to Elisha, 60, 95, 129
to Moses, 159
to St. John Baptist, 89
consecrated bishop, 36, 43
conspiracy against, by men of Tullaghoge, 51, 57, 168
contest of, for the abbacy of Armagh, 46-61, 167-71
convent of regular clerics founded by, 63 f.
father of, 6
in Paradise, 89
last sayings of, 123, 124, 126, 127, 143, 147
letters of, to St. Bernard, 131, 135
made deacon, 14, 15, 16, 43
meaning of name of, 27, 157
miracles of, 32, 34, 52, 72, 77, 78, 79, 81, 85-108, 111, 116, 119,
121, 129, 154, 158, 171
monastery of, 18, 104
mother of, 7, 8, 27, 162
not allowed to cross channel, 121, 142
ordained priest, 15, 16, 43
parents of, 6
plot against, by a prince at Armagh, 55-7
reason of retirement of, from archbishopric, 169
rebuilds churches, 39, 163
reforms of, 17 f., 39, 58, 61, 81, 163
relics of, 73, 130
sister of, 14, 15, 25 f.
uncle of, 27
visions of, 25, 49, 113
voluntary poverty of, 49, 82, 149
where buried, 130
Malchus (Mael Isa Ua hAinmire), bishop of Waterford, archbishop of
Cashel, xxi, xxii, xxiv, xxv, xxvi, xxxiv, xxxvi, xxxviii, xlvi,
xlvii, liii, lv, lx, 18 f., 21, 23, 47 f., 65;
miracles of, 19 f.
----, brother of Christian, abbot of Mellifont, 33 f., 95
Malcolm IV., king of Scots, 77
---- Canmore, king of Scots, 76
Marcus, author of _Tundale's Vision_, 88
Margaret, St., 76
Marianus Scotus: _see_ Mael Brigte, Muiredach.
Marriage, 18, 37, 39, 162, 170
Married abbots of Armagh, 45, 164
Mary, St., church of, at Clairvaux, 128, 129, 130
at Limerick, xxx, xliv
at Mellifont, 75 f.
at Melrose, 69
monastery of, at Louth, 67
Matilda, empress, 76, 121
----, wife of David I., 69, 76
----, wife of Henry I., 76
----, wife of Stephen, 76
Mattock, stream, 75
Maurice, St., in Valois, 30
Maxwell, Sir Herbert, 78
Meath, xl, 40
bishops of: _see_ O'Dunan, Rochfort, Tachmon
deaneries of, xxvii, li
dioceses of, xxvii-xxix, xxxiii, xlviii-lii
Mellifont Abbey, 75, 170
choice of site of, 75, 132
consecration of church of, 59, 75
daughters of, 76
progress of, 75, 135
Melrose, 69
_Membra_ (_memrae_), 60
_Memoria Sanctorum_, 60
"Metropolitan," 36, 45, 166
Michael, abbot at Soulseat, 34, 120
Michael's Church, St., 78
Mitre of St. Malachy, 73
Mochrum, 78
Mochuta, St., xlvii, 19
Molua, 28
Monaghan, county of, xli, lix
Monasteries rebuilt, 170
Monasternenagh, 76
Monenna, St., Life of, 32
Monk, nations which have not seen a, 74
Moore, Sir Edward, 75 f.
Moriarty, Nehemiah, bishop of Cloyne, lxi, 89
Mortlach, 28
Muiredach Mac Robartaigh (Marianus Scotus), xviii
Mullingar, diocese of, li
Mungret, 6
Munster, xl, 46, 91
visitations of, xxxiv, xxxvi, 14, 16, 53, 167, 168, 169
Murtough, coarb of Patrick, 43, 46, 50, 51, 164, 165 f., 167, 170
"Nations," 74
Nehemiah, bishop of Cloyne, lxi, 89
_Nemheds_, 170
Newbald, 68
Newtown,
near Trim, xxvii, li
synod at, xxvii, xxviii
Newtown Stewart, xli
Niall, coarb of Patrick, 43, 50, 53, 58, 167, 168, 170, 171
Nostal, priory of St. Oswald at, 69
O'Boyle, Caincomrac, bishop of Armagh, xxxiv
Cinaeth, bishop of Clogher, lix, 66
O'Brien, xxvi
Conor, king of Thomond, lv, lvi f., 21, 23, 43 f., 51, 170
Dermot, xxiv, 43
Murtough, king of Munster, xxiv, xxx, xxxv, xxxviii, lv, 43
Teague, 106
Turlough, xxiii, xxiv
O'Carroll, Donough, king of Oriel, lvii, lix, 58 f., 66, 67, 75,
163, 170 f.
O'Conor, Cathal, 106
Rory, 106
Turlough, king of Connaught, lv, 21, 23, 43, 106
O'Dunan, Mael Muire, "bishop of Meath," bishop of Clonard (?), xxiv,
xxv, xxvi, xxix, xxxv, xxxvii, xxxviii, xlix
O'Flaherty, Donnell, 106
O'Gormon, Oengus, coarb of Comgall, 27
O'Hagan, sept of, 51 f.
Imar, abbot of SS. Paul and Peter, Armagh, lii, liii, 11, 13, 15,
20, 26, 31, 33, 36
O'Hanley, Donough, bishop of Dublin, xx, xxi, xxiv
Samuel, bishop of Dublin, xx, xxi, xxiv, xlvi, 20
O'Hanlon, sept of, 166
Rev. J., 78
O'Hanratty, family of, 7, 27
Murtough, coarb of Comgall, 27
O'Heney, Donnell, xxiii, xxiv
Oirgialla, the, 59, 166
O'Kane, xliv
O'Kelly, Edan, bishop of Louth, lix f., lxii, 66
Old Melrose, 69
O'Loughlin, Conor, king of north of Ireland, lv, 40, 46, 55, 59, 170
Donnell, 40
O'Morgair, sometimes written O'Mongair, 6
family of, known as O'Dogherty, 7
Christian, bishop of Clogher and Louth, lix, 66, 67, 89, 167
Dermot, 6
Mughron, _fer légind_ at Armagh, 6
_See also_ Malachy, St.
O'Neills, 51, 166
Oratories, materials of, 32 f., 109
Oratory at Bangor, 30, 32, 109-113
at Cairngarroch, 79, 171
at Clairvaux, 128, 129
at Saul, 113
Oriel, lviii, 59, 163, 170
cathedral of, 67
diocese of, lviii-lx, 67, 170
kings of: _see_ O'Carroll, O'Loughlin
see of, lix f.
O'Rorke, Tighernan, 59
Oswald, St., priory of, 69
O'Toole, St. Laurence, archbishop of Dublin, xxi
Paisley, 29
Pall, xxxii, lx f., lxii-lxiv, 65, 73, 117, 118
Papal schism, 66, 72
Paparo, John, cardinal priest of St. Laurence, xxvii, xlv, lxii-lxiv
"Parish," meaning of, xxviii
Pastoral staves, 44, 49, 50, 123
Patrick, St., 27, 89, 117, 148, 162
authority of coarbs of, 44
burial place of, 44, 115, 117
canon of, 54
coarbs of: _see_ Armagh, abbots of, archbishops of
gospels of, 53, 54
Patrick, bishop of Dublin, xx, xxi, xxiii, xlvi
----, bishop of Limerick, xxi, 73
Paul and Peter, SS., monastery of, at Armagh, 11, 18
at Knock, 67, 118, 170
Penance, 37, 97, 98, 115, 161, 167
Peter, St., coarb of, 118
Petit, Adam, archdeacon of Kells, xxviii
Petrie on stone churches, 32
Philip of Clairvaux, 13
Pilgrims from Connaught, 93
"Poor man," 93
Popes: _see_ Eugenius, Gregory, Honorius, Innocent, Lucius
Portus Lapasperi, 78 f.
Primate of Ireland, xxxvii f.
_Princeps_, 27
"Quasi-generations," 45, 65
Ralph, archbishop of Canterbury, xxii, xlvi
Raphoe, diocese of, xli, xlii, lviii
Rathbreasail, synod of, xxxvii-lii, lvi, lviii, lix, 14, 18, 36, 47,
62, 65;
canons of, violated, lii, lviii, lx, lxi, lxii
Rathbrennan, 106
Rathluraigh, 44
Ratisbon, monastery of St. Peter at, xviii
Rebekah, 133 f.
Reformation of Irish Church, took place in twelfth century, xii
causes of, xvi-xx, xxvi
scope of, xiii
"Returning to his own country," 127
Rheims, council of, 121
Ribble, river, 67, 121
Ribchester, 121
Ricemarch, son of Sulien, life of St. David by, xviii
psalter of, xvii f.
verses of, xviii
Richard, abbot of Melrose, 69
Rievaulx, 69
Rivulet becomes a river, 105 f., 154
Robert, architect of Mellifont, 75, 136
Rochfort, Simon, bishop of Meath, xxvii, xxviii, l
Roe Valley, xliv
Rosemarkie, 28
Rouen, 47
"Rouncy," 69
Round Towers, 170
Route of St. Malachy's journeys, 67, 70, 121
Roxburgh, 76
Rufinus, 145
Rummun, 33
_Runcinus_, 69
Sacraments, 18, 25 f., 39, 96, 97, 101, 114, 117
"Sacraments" meaning the Eucharist, 114
St. Liz, Simon de, Earl of Northampton, 69, 76
Saul, 44, 87
monastery of, 113, 163
_Scotia_, 20
Scotic, 32
Scotland, 34, 67, 69, 72, 76, 120
boundaries of, 67
Scotland, Further, 125
Scots, 20, 69, 110
"Seed" of a bishop, 67, 165
Senior, xxv, 48
Sexual morality, xxiv, 162 f.
Shalvey, Donnell, erenach of Cork, 93
Sheelan, Lough, 59
Shrule, 76
Sigeric, archbishop of Canterbury, 70
Sighere, 68
Silence, rule of, 13
Sinach, 165
Singing, 17 f., 37, 125, 127, 143, 161
Sitric, king of Dublin, xix
Skerries, lxi, 118
Skreen, diocese of, xxvii, l
_Sollemnitas_, 126
Song, Church, 17 f., 37, 125, 127, 143, 161
Soulseat, monastery founded at, by St. Malachy, 34, 120
Premonstratensian monastery at, 120
Slane, diocese of, xxvii, l
Staff of Jesus, 53 f., 58, 167, 168, 169
keeper of, 58, 167
Staff sent by St. Malachy to St. Bernard, 131
Standard, Battle of the, 77
State of Continental Church described, 1-3
State of the Irish Church described, 16-18, 37 f., 45 f., 161-3
Stephen, king of England, lxii, 121, 142
Stone churches, 11, 32 f., 109
Stoneykirk, 78
Stowe Missal, 162
Students, in Irish schools, xiv, xvii f., xxvi
Suffragan, meaning of, xxii
Sulien the Wise, bishop of St. David's, xvii, xviii
Surio, De (Suir, monastery of the; Suriense monasterium), 4, 76, 114
Sweden, 74
Sycarus (Sighere), 68
Tachmon, Hugh de, bishop of Meath, li
Tanaidhe, coarb of Comgall, 30
Tees, River, 67
Termann Feichin, 170
Tescelin, father of St. Bernard, 71
Thaddaeus, bishop of Kells, xxviii
Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury, 73, 121
Thomas, St., monastery of, in Dublin, l
Thomond, kingdom of, 43
Tír Conaill, lviii
Tiree, island of, 29
Tír Eoghain, lviii
diocese of, 64
visitation of, xxxiv, 50
Tithes, xxxiii, 37, 84, 163, 170
Tobit, 15
Tostius, bishop of Waterford, xxi
Translation of bodies to new cemetery at Clairvaux, 125, 143
Travellers from Ireland, xviii f., xxi, xxvi
Treasure found, 112
Tribal territories, xlii-xliv
Trim, diocese of, xxvii, l
Tuam, archbishopric of, lxiii
Tullaghoge, 51, 167 f., 169
Turgesius, bishop of Limerick, xxi
Ua Condoirche: _see_ Christian
Ua hAinmire: _see_ Malchus
Ua Maelsechlainn Murrough, king of Meath, 106
Ua Muidhin, Gilla Aedha, bishop of Cork, lxi, 93
Ua Sinaich, 166
Flann, 58, 167
Uhtred, bishop of Llandaff, 73
Ui Méith, 27
Ui Neill, 40
Ui Sinaich, 165
Ulaid, lviii, 28, 40, 87
count of, 89
diocese of, lviii, 64
duke and magnates of, 111
Ulster, xl f., xlii, lviii, 46
Unction of sick, 88, 96 f., 124
not confined to priests, 164
Usnagh, synod of, xxviii, xlix, l f.
Valerian, persecution of, 14
Valle Salutis, De, 76
_Vallis Angelorum_, 27
Victor IV., anti-pope, 72
Viride Stagnum, 120
Voice of the turtle, 3
Waltheof (Waldeve, Wallenus, Wallevus), St., abbot of Melrose, 69, 121
----, Earl of Northumberland, 69
Wardon, 69
Waterford, xix
bishops of: _see_ Malchus, Tostius
diocese of, xix, xlvi
Watling Street, 121
Wexford, xix
----, diocese of, xix
---- or Ferns, diocese of, xlvii
William the Conqueror, 47
---- I., king of Scots, 77
----, prior of Kirkham, 69
Winchester, 18, 19
Wissant, 70, 123
Wooden churches, 32 f.
Wormwood, Valley of, 71
Yellow Book of Lecan, 171
York, xxii, xxxix, 67, 68, 70
Zacchaeus, 14
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "St. Bernard of Clairvaux's Life of St. Malachy of Armagh" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.