study, or for the purpose of a long journey, change or hide their habits without anybody's permission and without any rebuke. For there is not the same obligation to linen vestments that there is to other things. For formerly these Canons were not monks; but now they occupy an equivocal position: they are monks among those who favor them, but are not in face of hatred. But it is a terrible crime, forsooth, if any Dominican or Franciscan lay off his habit; for the Dominican habit protects and prospers the whole household of the wealthy; and if worn by boys for a certain number of years according to their mothers' vow, will save them from disease and awful accidents. The Franciscan frock, thrown over even a dead man, will free him from hell. But, as a matter of fact, the Sovereign Pontiff admonishes certain monks who had settled on divers habits, that they should all use one and the same habit, to avoid giving scandal; but the pontifical decree does not attack those who for honorable reasons lay aside the habit, but only those who do it so that they may do with the worldly what the worldly do. Also, as a matter of fact, the linen scapulary is not properly monastic, but episcopal, and was probably once a part of the dress of the regular clergy. Augustine in his rules does not prescribe any form of habit; rather does he condemn singularity of apparel, admonishing them lest the habit be noticeable, and that they should please rather by their moral lives than by their garments. Now it is evident enough that this rule was made for women, not for men; but I am now concerned with those who think it was written for men. Finally, this is the especial dress for the Pope when he is wont to be clothed in full pontifical state. Florentius knew these things, yet that he might do everything properly, by the advice of his friends, he easily obtained from the Sovereign Pontiff permission to wear any mark of his Order on any part of his person that he wished. When at length he was called to his benefactors, whom he held to be neither unlearned nor of low rank, he put on the French dress, which, with the exception of the pendent linen scapulary, differs in nothing from that of a secular priest (for by this disrespectful name are now styled the lawful ministers of the Church, instituted by Christ and his Apostles). Nor did he do this without the advice of thoughtful But when he wore this costume in public, he was admonished by his best friends that such a dress simply would not be tolerated in that country; let him conceal the linen scapulary. You will say that he could have worn the full habit of his native country. But there is no dress so troublesome, where one has to wear a flowing train, with an awkward hood of many folds to be held back. For there this is considered magnificent, and after the style of cardinals. Then business affairs compelled him to change his country, and to become a polyp in dress; for the apparel that is respected in one country is considered monstrous in another. He was a guest, and was in company daily with magnates, who are not pleased with peculiar forms of apparel. So at last it seemed best to his sincerest friends that, as long as his conscience was clear and any scruple of

men.

B

doubt removed by the authority of the Sovereign Pontiff, he should have freedom in the matter, lest by so often changing his habit he might be the cause of scandal to wicked tongues. Let me add that this kind of life into which the youth was thrust is so free that it is very little different from the freedom of the laity. Nor do I here speak of stolen freedom, but of that which is granted by those who are our responsible authorities. I warn you that the Popes are wont to be more easy in relaxing the laws in such cases than when it is a question of leaving the Seraphic, Carthusian, or Brigidian Orders. For these do not accept the authority of the Pontiff, although they regard his authority as sacrosanct when he is bestowing on them immense privileges and prerogatives, and almost esteem it higher than that of Christ. I will not here dispute about monastic vows, the importance of which they exaggerate a great deal, since such a kind of obligation (I almost said slavery) is found in neither the New nor the Old Testament. Moreover, since the Sabbath by Christ's authority was instituted for man, and not man for the Sabbath, much more should institutions of this kind give way, as often as they injure a man's health, especially that of the soul, although here God is speaking of the body; for it was a question of hunger and curing a man on the Sabbath day. And they are really Pharisees who draw out of the pit their ox and their ass on the Sabbath, yet permit every man to perish on account of that same Sabbath. I will not here allege how great a swarm of monasteries exists in which no pious discipline flourishes; so much so that brothels are chaster and more modest; nor how many there are in which, beyond ceremonies and ritual observances, there is nothing of religion. These latter are almost worse than the former because they lack the spirit of Christ; yet on account of these pharisaical ceremonies it is incredible how filled up with pride they are, deeming all piety to consist in external acts and, for the performance of these, daily thrusting boys on to their destruction. They themselves, however, are fearfully bored with these ceremonies; nor would they perform them at all, only they expect them to impress the people wonderfully. Then, too, how few monasteries there are in which the inmates live sincerely according to their rule; and even in these, if you uncover the Silenus, if you regard more closely, if you search to the very bottom, you will find exceedingly few who are truly pious. How cunning are the arts of Satan! How devious is the heart of man! With what skill in dissimulation, and with what craft, are even men of mature experience imposed upon! And yet they require that a boy shall understand these things in a few months? and this they call a profession. Suppose we grant that he has found a community where everything is agreeable, what will happen when the physical constitution of him who has made his profession is changed? when in place of a good prior there comes a stupid, drunken, or tyrannical one? or when his fellow-monks who are good are changed for wicked ones?

* See Plato, Symposium, sect. xxxii.

"Let

him change either his monastery or his Order," they will say. It is difficult to be dismissed to a new monastery, and even more difficult to be received into one, since they think there must be something radically wrong somewhere when a brother leaves his former community; and if he should offend anyone even so much as by the lifting of an eyebrow, forthwith he is greeted with "Why do you not go back to where you came from?" Then, too, how troublesome is the argument: which is the strict, and which the relaxed, community? For each wants his own to seem strict. And that is a fine opportunity, forsooth, to change either monastery or Order, when it is simply the cast of the dice whether the poor wretch may not find himself in worse slavery. And moreover, since they allure many by deception, they train these deluded ones not to spiritual piety but to hypocrisy, and force such a personal servitude that many of them repent having joined the Order. And fearing that these novices may publicly speak of the orgies which they witness, they keep them in check with flagellations, penances, the secular power, walls, gratings, and even death. If I am not mistaken, Cardinal Matthew of Sion, at a banquet where many were present, named the place, the people, and the monastery in which the Dominicans had buried a young man alive, because his father, a knight, had demanded with threats the release of his son, who had been secretly taken away by force. So too, in Poland, a certain noble who had drunk too much and fallen asleep in a church saw two Franciscans buried alive after nocturns. Here the pontifical authority has weight with them, in that perchance it conceded this power to them without danger of their incurring irregularity; but when the same authority frees one from his habit, the pontifical decree is torn up, and the one who procured it is thrown into prison. And after this they boast of the founders of their Orders, Benedict, Basil, Jerome, Augustine, Dominic, Francis, Bruno; but let them examine the lives of these men, let them see whether any such proceeding was ever ordained or performed by them, and they will find a far different state of affairs. They worked entirely by good example, by sane doctrine, by friendly admonitions, and by fraternal reproof. He who was not cured by these methods was dismissed from the community, if he did not depart of his own accord, so far were they from seeking to retain anyone who desired to go. I will not speak of the many human regulations, the many forms of habits, the many prayers and ceremonies, in which what is of the least moment, that is, the dress, becomes with them of the greatest importance. He who in his habit indulges in daily intoxication, who caters to his palate and appetites, who associates secretly and openly with lewd women (not to speak too plainly), who wastes the revenues of the Church in luxury, who has recourse to fortune telling and other malign arts, he is an upright monk, and is promoted to an abbotship; but him who from any cause has laid aside his habit they execrate as an apostate, a name which in ancient times was deservedly a term of abomina

tion given to those who fell away from Christ into Judaism or Paganism. Nay, if you wish to go further, the man given over to the delights of the world, its pomps, its riches, and its other delectations which he abjured at baptism, is an apostate; and not less but more so, whenever disorder is caused by envy of his vice. So, also, monks who live wickedly, as here and there they do, are doubly apostates; first because they have fallen away from that most sacred profession wherein they gave their word to Christ, and secondly because they have departed from that plan of life to which they had pledged themselves. Against such as those, I say, should the accursed name of apostate be hurled, even though they were each wrapped in ten cowls.

Since these things are so, friend Lambert, what a crime it is forcibly, or by deception, to drive any innocent lad into such a net! If these men are openly wicked, as many of them are, what else is this but driving boys to their destruction? If they are neither warm nor cold themselves, into what a miserable servitude do they entangle these lads? If they are commendable for at least the appearance of uprightness, yet since there is such a variety of bodies and minds, and pretense is carried to such an extent, since boyhood is so ingenuous, and the vow irrevocable, as they desire it to be, to what danger of both soul and body do they not expose the young! "But puberty," they say, "gives the power of discriminating between good and evil.” All bodies do not mature at the same age, much less minds. It matters not that perchance puberty has rendered them mature for marriage; they may not be mature enough to enter a religious life; for many indeed have entered therein, men of about thirty years of age otherwise well experienced in the ways of the world, who have withdrawn before their profession, saying "I had not thought." Formerly men of thirty were with difficulty given permission to become priests; and do they think that boys of fifteen are suitable for the monastic life? And meanwhile they falsely impose upon the unwary by specious phrases; they speak of the world as if they themselves were unworldly; of obedience, when the Scriptures command obedience to God rather than to men; of irrevocable vows, when they have not yet been able to define the difference between a revocable and an irrevocable vow, if we except the comment of Duns Scotus that a monastic vow cannot be recalled, because it was made to God through the agency of man. For that made directly to God can easily be revoked. And, since the existence of each of these Orders depends on the authority of the Roman Pontiffs, why do they strenuously defy this authority as often as they see fit? Since the Pope frees many from the monastic state, none without good reason, if he has the power to do these things, why do they here set his authority at naught? If they deny that he has this power, do they not hurl at him an atrocious accusation? So, likewise, when the matter is of advantage to themselves, the Vicar of Christ cannot err; but when it seems otherwise, he is doing wrong,

But I do not intend to attack these Orders: providing this or that kind of life is suitable to this or that man, or even necessary, let the vow be irrevocable; but the holier and more exacting the life, then the more circumspectly, the more slowly, and the more seriously ought it to be embraced, and sufficiently early if just previous to forty. Other vows are not binding, unless it is evident there is a sound mind, clear intelligence, and an absence of fear or apprehension. And is this the state of affairs when a lad is pushed, objecting loudly, into the trap by allurements, threats, deceit, or any other means of terrifying him? It is not here a question of the fear that influences a strong man; but it is a question of deceiving and intimidating a simple and unsophisticated boy; and many there are in whom dwells an inborn simplicity, both of age and of personal character. If the signs of virility are present, it makes no difference; the vow holds, and it holds to that extent that the wife at the very altar must be abandoned. Oh, what laws!

In this way Florentius, the victim of so many machinations, was forced into the religious state, ever struggling and loudly protesting against it still; but his conscience was free; and it seems to me that he is no more held by his vow than if he were to give his word to pirates threatening him with death. Nor do I doubt but that, with his usual sense of justice, the Sovereign Pontiff will be as indignant with these kidnappers as he will be favorably inclined towards the case of their victim. You will say that the Pontiff can restore him to liberty as far as the world is concerned, provided that he have a clear conscience in the matter; but even the Pope cannot control the tongues of men. But since Christ, the supreme ruler of the Church, and Paul, his not unworthy disciple, decree that no one shall be judged, especially in such matters as these, which of themselves make neither piety nor impiety, then surely the authority of the Supreme Pontiff ought to have sufficient weight to turn into good opinion the suspicions of men, where to suspect wrongly would be a crime. But what will become of humanity if we perpetually yield to the silly opinions and the scurrilous disparagements of such men? To infirmity or invincible conviction Paul wishes us to be gentle for the time being; but to yield to stupid and malicious opinions, what is that other than to destroy the vigor of Christian piety? Christ so far yielded to Cæsar that he rendered him the drachma, and to the Jews that he abstained from the foods forbidden by the law; but in healing the crippled woman, in giving sight to the blind man, in curing the lame man, in plucking the ears of corn, he openly disregarded them, nay, he even provoked the scandal of the Scribes and Pharisees. And had not St. Paul done the same thing, where now would Christianity be? What is the charge that these stupid men bring against Florentius? He laid aside his habit. Who knows that he does not wear it underneath? And if he has laid it aside, how do they know the causes that made him do so? How do they know by whose author