Benedictines

BENEDICTINES. – Under the generic name of Benedictines (B.) may be included all the numerous religious families that, over the centuries, have taken as their norm and foundation of life the Rule composed by the patriarch of Montecassino in the first half of the 6th century. The following notes, however, deal only with the principal branch, currently constituted by the so-called confederated Benedictines.

SUMMARY:

I. The constitution

II. Life through the centuries

III. Civilizing work

IV. Benedictine nuns

V. Oblates.

I. THE CONSTITUTION

In the case of the Benedictines (B.), perhaps more than in any other analogous case in the Latin Church, the word "Order" must still be understood, in part, according to its ancient meaning. Originally, this term indicated the totality of the monastic state. Later, it came to signify a particular way of life and a uniform observance, to which the idea of a unity of hierarchy and government was gradually added. In this latter sense, it is found among the Cluniacs and other monastic institutions of the 11th century, but it gained particular prominence among the Cistercians, for whom the ordo was something very similar to the more modern centralized forms. It was indeed the numerous Religious Orders that arose in the 13th century, especially the Franciscans and Dominicans, which gave the word its current meaning, completing its etymological evolution as a sign of the new conception of religious life. Only under the influence of these new forms, and above all due to the need to differentiate the disciples of St. Benedict, was the word "Order" also attributed to them. However, they always used it with some hesitation and never implied the concept of a centralized corporation with unity of hierarchy and government, in which authority is communicated from the supreme power to local superiors. Currently, the term, as commonly used, designates primarily the assembly of confederated monks who have a common representative in Rome, an abbot with the title of primate. In a broader sense, it often extends to other branches of Benedictine monasticism that are not part of this recent confederation. But in both cases, the concept of a Benedictine "Order" still excludes today that of "an association of religious scattered across multiple cities and kingdoms, governed by a central regime with a view to a special activity that constitutes the purpose of the corporation itself" (I. Schuster, La spiritualità benedettina, in Le scuole cattoliche di spiritualità, Milan 1944).

In reality, this was not the ideal of St. Benedict. He, who at first had distributed his monks in a rudimentarily organized body, in the Rule, which represents his definitive thought, deliberately renounced establishing any kind of bond between the various monasteries (cf. chaps. LV, LXXXII). This primitive experience thus formed, like that of eremitic life, a preliminary stage, eliminated by the subsequent developments of his thought.

Montecassino appears as a monastery complete in itself and autonomous. According to this model, each cenobium would be a family, limited and defined by the members who live united around a father. The monk has joined it for life through profession, so that his place will always be there, nor will he cease to belong even if he should temporarily leave the house. It follows that the term family for the Benedictines does not have the same broad, analogous, and figurative sense as in other Orders, e.g., "family of St. Francis, of St. Dominic," but rather the more proper sense of the natural family, to which the Benedictine cenobium is much closer in its inner organization. For the ordinary internal functioning of the monastery, therefore, the domestica potestas of the abbot was sufficient, while in cases of extraordinary necessity, recourse was made to the jurisdiction of the bishop. The monastery, in fact, inserted into the general framework of the ecclesiastical organization of the time, formed part of ordinary diocesan life until exemption—a measure of undeniable and superior utility—separated II. It was only over the centuries that groups formed among monasteries. These had various origins, according to the diversity of the motives that caused them: the need to face a common danger, bonds of filiation and dependence, authoritarian impositions of external wills. Thus arose the Congregations. The word, already used in the Rule to denote what the medievals called conventus and we call community, that is, the assembly of brothers, came to denote legal entities that, while preserving within variable limits the autonomy and original character of the monasteries, bound them in a kind of unity. These congregations assumed various forms, according to their origin, purpose, and especially the strength of the federative bonds, which sometimes achieved true centralization. Their diversity, notable in internal organization, was sometimes expressed in the form of the habit, which, as is known, St. Benedict did not determine either in color or quality, leaving it to local possibilities and the demands of poverty. Each Congregation is headed by an abbot, to whom current canon law recognizes (cann. 488, n. 8; 501, § 3; 510; 655; 1534, 4) some, but not all, of the attributions of the supreme moderators of a religious Order: each congregation depends directly on the Apostolic See (can. 1557, 2) and has the right to have its own procurator at the Roman Curia. Complete within the limits of their respective organizations, they felt no need for mutual legal bonds until almost our own times. It was Leo XIII who pushed them toward greater mutual understanding, as, in the climate of the new era, he had cherished the idea since 1887, along with that of reopening on broader foundations the ancient theological college of the Cassinese Congregation, dedicated to St. Anselm. And in 1895, a fraternal confederation was achieved, presided over by an abbot primate, while preserving the autonomy and rights of each congregation. Elected every twelve years by all the abbots of the confederation, the primate, who has his seat in Rome at the new college of St. Anselm on the Aventine, can be considered the bond of union among the various congregations and represents them all before the Holy See in common affairs. From this, it naturally follows that his attributions, determined by pontifical dispositions and the CIC, have a particular character, different from those of a general of an Order, who enjoys full and direct jurisdiction, which he communicates in part to subordinate authorities.

II. LIFE THROUGH THE CENTURIES

The spontaneous variety of Benedictine life, its breadth and depth of penetration—which from the 6th to the 12th century intimately united it with the life of the Church—make it difficult to describe in a rapid, organic synthesis.

1) The Spread of the Rule. — Of monasteries whose foundation can be traced with certainty to St. Benedict, the Gregorian account recalls only Montecassino, Terracina, and the pre-existing ones at Subiaco. The fame of St. Benedict would authorize us to consider the spread of the Rule elsewhere during his lifetime as probable, but the lack of reliable sources and the falsifications introduced into the related tradition impose necessary reservations and caution. Thus, the celebrated missions of Maurus to France and of Placidus to Sicily lack secure documentation, while on the other hand, the existence of other Benedictine monasteries, especially in Rome and from the earliest times, does not seem improbable. However, not many years had passed since the patriarch’s death when the event he had foreseen in sorrow and tears came to pass. A band of Lombards, led by Zotto, stormed the Arx by night and easily overpowered those unarmed cenobites. As St. Benedict had foretold, they all managed to escape. For the most part, they took refuge in Rome, under the shadow of the Lateran, bringing with them some of the dearest relics of their father, such as the autograph of the Rule, the weight of the bread, the measure of the wine, etc. The long desolation of the sacred place would have made possible the translation of the bodies of St. Benedict and St. Scholastica to France. The controversy that followed between Italians and French falls within the general framework of similar medieval disputes and cannot yet be considered authoritatively resolved. But the destruction of Montecassino was not an isolated episode. Annihilation and death spread widely over the regions trampled by the Lombards, destroying every trace of life there. Subiaco shared the common fate, and the refugees also took shelter in Rome (c. 601), where the surviving flame of Benedictine monasticism seemed to concentrate.

Yet this flame did not take long to revive. Through the accounts of his sons, the memory of Benedict was rekindled in the Urbe, captivating the thoughtful mind of Gregory, who consecrated his memory in his Dialogues. At the same time, the Rule began its triumphant journey: soon, "before the Regula sancta par excellence of the Roman Church, every other monastic legislation had to yield, and thus was prepared that practical unity of religious conception which laid the foundations of the new civilization" (I. Schuster). In this, too, Gregory’s work was preponderant, as he dedicated much of his care to the spread of that Rule. He himself founded monasteries on the Caelian Hill and in Sicily; he established them in Corsica and perhaps also in Ravenna. Above all, it was his initiative that opened new paths and broader horizons for monasticism, at the same time placing its fresh energies at the service of the Roman Church. It was he who sent Augustine, drawn from his monastery on the Caelian Hill, with forty companions to England. The result of their mission was such that it not only achieved the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons but also determined the characteristic monastic imprint of that Church, which for so many centuries remained so closely tied to Rome, and the extraordinary development of monastic life itself, which would later have a decisive influence on the entire institution.

In France, the Rule must have spread very early. However, setting aside the mission attributed to St. Maurus, the reliable testimonies date back to the first half of the 7th century. And if, at first, its observance—singularly favored by the Merovingian dynasty and the episcopate—was often combined in individual monasteries with that of St. Columbanus, by the end of the same century it had acquired an uncontested dominance, preferred over some twenty other rules.

In Belgium, it was introduced by its very own great apostle, St. Amandus.

The revival of monasticism in Italy was marked by the conversion of the Lombards. The former oppressors became its patrons to an extent never again surpassed. The extraordinary renaissance appeared sudden and universal, giving the peninsula—now devoid of political and juridical unity—that of Latin monasticism. Undoubtedly, such generosity was especially due to the piety of princes and peoples, but political motives were not absent: monasteries, particularly through their opportune geographical distribution, spread the influence of their founders and patrons and defended the security of the new political institutions. Among the innumerable abbeys that covered the Lombard Italy with a dense network, we mention only the most celebrated: Farfa, San Vincenzo al Volturno, Novalesa, Nonantola, Amiata.

Amid such fervor, the complete restoration of the birthplace of the Rule could not be lacking. Gregory II entrusted the Brescian Petronax with this task, and the success was so complete that Pope Zachary, returning the autograph codex of the legislator to the ancient Arx, recognized its dignity as the monastic capital. And from that center, where currents of religious life from the most distant regions converged, the movement of irradiation resumed vigorously. Under the shadow of the Cassinese cloister, the powerful and the humble, victors and vanquished, lived as brothers. Paul the Deacon, Sturmio (founder of Fulda), Anselm of Nonantola, Adalard of Corbie, Willibald of Eichstätt—all took up permanent or temporary residence there. Meanwhile, the monks Willibrord and Suitbert evangelized Frisia, Boniface evangelized Germany, and later Ansgar evangelized Scandinavia. Sent and supported by the Popes, they were the peaceful conquerors of the new Rome. With the Rule as a commentary on the Gospel, they planted their monastic colonies in the heart of the lands to be converted, offering the peoples an image of that City of God they intended to inaugurate among them, of Christian civilization. In this way, the new peoples were won for Christ, and the religious unity of Europe was formed. And when, as its natural completion, the new political unity was inserted into this, its most distinguished architect and representative, Charlemagne, rightly concerned himself with the spread and perfect efficiency of the Benedictine Rule. This is proven by the many capitularies issued on the matter and by the request made to Theodemar, abbot of Montecassino, for a faithful copy of the autograph codex, the measure of the bread and wine established by St. Benedict, the hymnal, and the description of Cassinese customs. His zeal for monastic unity and observance led him to ask the assembly of the great whether it was possible to admit other forms of cenobitic life outside the Benedictine. Undoubtedly, he was also moved by political aims, seeing in monasteries as many civilizing colonies, to which it was important to give unity of direction. It was, in fact, the reason of state that led him to derogate from and compromise the goodness of his own decisions, continuing the Merovingian system of distributing monasteries as appanages to his faithful. But his work contributed notably to the esteem of the Benedictine Rule.

2) The First Unitary Formations. — It fell to his son to complete his efforts. Ludovico il Pio found in Benedetto d'Aniane a collaborator who made the pursuit of monastic unity the purpose of his life. However, this unity was not juridical but one of observance. Their efforts were crowned by the famous capitulary issued in 817 at Aachen, which codified the common norms for the entire empire. Visitors oversaw its observance, and at Inde a model monastery was established, to which monks from every country were to be sent to receive proper formation according to the established norms. Though destined for failure, the project was not without results. When the disintegrating forces of feudalism prevailed over Carolingian unity, the monasteries also fell into ruin. Having become the property of lords who installed their families and courts there, they were adapted into private residences, while the monks, forced into precarious existence, abandoned observance. Other abbeys were destroyed, sometimes definitively, by invasions. Thus, the decline was so severe that in some regions monastic life was nearly extinguished.

Even in Italy, where the reform of Benedetto d'Aniane had arrived only in a limited way, conditions were not favorable. Its abbeys, which had often reached a high degree of prosperity during the Lombard and Carolingian periods, were partly destroyed by the Saracens. Thus, Montecassino, where Abbot St. Bertario was slaughtered along with many monks (883); San Vincenzo al Volturno, where 500 monks were killed (881); Farfa; and Subiaco. Other houses suffered the consequences of political turmoil and the anomalous conditions of the Apostolic See. However, ruin was not as complete as elsewhere, and the fervor of observance was not entirely extinguished.

A new and powerful surge of life came to the old trunk from Cluny, a remote corner of Burgundy, whose monastery, founded in 910, marked a new turning point in monastic history. Heir to Aniane in observance, the new abbey in some way transposed feudal juridical organization into monasticism. To defend monasteries from external intrusions, it gathered them around a center under the authority of a single head, the Cluniac abbot, subject—even in spiritual matters—only to the Roman Pontiff. The definitive formation of this Ordo cluniacensis was achieved gradually, and much was contributed by the exceptional value of its abbots, especially the four most celebrated: Odone, Maiolo, Odilone, and Ugo.

The influence of Cluny, which in some respects marked a notable deviation from the primitive Benedictine ideal, was immense and extended, "almost like a second Rome," throughout the Church. Though it cannot be considered the exclusive agent of the Church's reform in the 11th century, Cluny nonetheless prepared the times for it with its ideals and supplied many workers. Civil society also felt the beneficial effects of its examples of piety and purity, derived lasting utility from its evangelization and cultivation of the countryside, and saw developments in political and social life, as well as in the preparation for the Crusades. The Cluniac movement was indeed one of the signs and, at the same time, one of the factors of the movement that was preparing and operating within European civilization. In a certain relation with Cluny, though independent, were other movements of the same era, which, however, did not centralize monasteries into a single unit but limited themselves to an identity of observance. Thus, in Germany, Hirsau (1071); in Flanders, Brogne (919); in Lorraine, Gorze (933); in France, La Chaise-Dieu (1046) and Sauve-Majeure (1098), St-Vanne of Verdun (1004), and Saint-Bénigne of Dijon (990). In southern Italy, the Ordo cavensis spread widely at this time. Governed entirely by the magnus abbas of the Holy Trinity, it had strong analogies with Cluny. And in these new formations, the division between choir monks and conversi, dedicated to the material occupations of the house, became increasingly distinct.

Yet Cluny, in the greatness of its work, soon acquired an aspect of territorial and political power, which transformed and partly obscured its original and exclusively religious character. It thus provoked a reaction in turn. In the desire for stricter asceticism, with renunciation of all secular interests, some departed from tradition at certain points. Thus arose Camaldoli (1012), Vallombrosa (1037), Grand-Mont, Fontevrault (1100), Montevergine (1120), and the contemporary Pulsano, all with particular and significant characteristics in the development of monastic constitution, which in Cîteaux (1098) reached its most advanced form. It was Cîteaux that, breaking more decisively from tradition, took on the distinct aspect of a corporation, giving rise to the religious Order in the modern sense, thus foreshadowing the new forms of the 13th century. Another of the most notable Cistercian innovations was the General Chapter as an entity with true and supreme jurisdiction, an institution that was later universally adopted. Not only in its constitutional aspects but also in those of external observances and in its characteristic attitude toward poverty, the Mendicants had evident precursors in the monastic Congregations of the preceding century, for example, in Pulsano.

3) Congregationalist Systems and the Crisis of the Modern Age. — A grave crisis for the Benedictines was marked by the new times that were taking shape through the decline of the two great medieval universalisms. As with every great crisis, its causes were varied and complex, but monasticism, still too bound to the forms of the past—which it had largely shaped—paralyzed in its autonomous constitution by the continuous state of war and the abuses of lords, did not always possess sufficient strength to react. The Fourth Lateran Council (1215), seeking to improve its conditions, established triennial general chapters and apostolic visitors for each ecclesiastical province. This legislation, reinforced by Honorius III and Gregory IX, was completed by Benedict XII with the bull Summi Magistri (1336), which distributed all Benedictine monasteries into 36 provinces. However, political turmoil and later the Great Western Schism prevented its implementation in most countries. Added to this, particularly in Latin lands, was the disastrous system of the commendam, which led to the ruin of many monasteries. More effective than any legislation, because more in keeping with the nature and history of the monastic order, was the spontaneous reaction. This gave rise to new movements that, while developing certain traditional forms, sought to adapt the monastic order to recent ecclesiastical legislation and the demands of the new times. In this climate and with these aims arose the Silvestrines (1231), the Celestines (1264), and the Olivetans (1313). The foremost exponents of this reform movement, which spread across various regions and even among existing monasteries, were later the Congregations of St. Justina of Padua (1419), later called Cassinese (1504), and that of Bursfeld in Germany (1420). The former, bringing to completion the federative evolution among the Black Monks, gradually extended to all Italian monasteries it could rescue from the commendam. This movement, which fits into the broader framework of the Church’s reform in the 15th century and was one of its principal manifestations, exerted considerable influence, especially in Latin lands; in imitation of it arose the Congregations of Valladolid in Spain, of SS. Vito and Idulfo in Lorraine, from which later derived that of St. Maur in France, and of Chezal-Benoît, also in France. The Union of Bursfeld, in accordance with local conditions, maintained more faithfully the traditional autonomy. It, like all Germanic monasticism, suffered greatly from the Protestant religious revolution. In England, too, monks were persecuted and later expelled, though not without first writing noble pages.

The congregationalist system, as the most responsive to the conditions and needs of the times, was made obligatory for all monasteries by the Council of Trent (sess. XXV). Numerous and vital unions, which remained vigorous until the reformist measures of the Enlightenment and, even more, the revolutionary destructions, dealt severe blows to the old trunk at the end of the 18th century. Few monasteries were spared by the storm. In Italy, abbeys, especially in Lombardy, had already been reduced in number and lived amid various difficulties caused by timid jurisdictionalism and the reforms of princes, when the Napoleonic tempest swept them all away in a common suppression. Only those in Sicily, which remained outside French dominion, were spared. Montecassino, Cava, and Montevergine were allowed to subsist as Stabilimenti, with a reduced number of monks, dressed as secular priests, to safeguard their cultural heritage.

4) The Present Era. — The 19th century, however, witnessed a new and splendid revival. In this era of reconstruction, a preeminent place belongs to Dom Prosper Guéranger. From Solesmes, the ancient and deserted priory of the Maurists, where he reestablished the sons of St. Benedict in 1833, monks spread in swarms across France. No less successful were the efforts of the brothers Maurus and Placidus Wolter, who, from the monastery of St. Paul in Rome, where they professed, brought the Benedictine rule back to the land of St. Boniface (1863). And the monks also returned to England, which their fathers had won for Christ; they crossed the oceans, resuming their ancient mission of faith and civilization among peoples.

In Italy, too, a revival had begun when once again the axe of suppression fell upon the ancient oak (1866 and 1873), and adverse legislation proved particularly disastrous for the Benedictines, who, due to their autonomously familial constitution, can scarcely live in small and precarious groups. Life was thus confined to a few abbeys, which, though suppressed as religious communities, were able to continue existing because they were seats of ordinariates (abbeys nullius) or monuments of special historical importance. Over time, several others were added to these, and though depleted of men and means, these surviving abbeys kept the flame alive through the industriousness and sacrifices of their inhabitants. Thus, the works entrusted to them by a centuries-old tradition were preserved and adapted to new needs, such as dioceses, seminaries, archives and libraries, hospitality, printing presses—not only these, but also new endeavors, including colleges, new parishes, and meteorological observatories. The greatest effort, however, was directed everywhere toward the restoration of claustral observance, which recent events had partly shaken. This endeavor assumed an even more decisive rhythm in some monasteries, which eventually separated from the rest of the Congregation, still exclusively Italian, when they were joined by numerous foreign cenobites to form the Cassinese Congregation of the Primitive Observance, also called of Subiaco, after its most important monastery. Another undoubted sign of perennial vitality was the distinguished and numerous prelates whom the Church drew from Benedictine cloisters in this era. As it had found in them Pius VII, who during the Napoleonic storm had been their helmsman, and with him cardinals such as Michelangelo Luchi and Remigio Crescini, so in these times of new political directions it drew the cardinals Celesia of Palermo (d. 1904), Dusmet of Catania (d. 1894), and Sanfelice of Naples (d. 1897), in addition to the archbishops Bonazzi of Benevento and Lancia di Brolo of Monreale, and the bishops Gerbino of Trapani, Vaccari of Tropea, De Riso of Catanzaro, Gaetani of Sansevero, etc. Among them, Dusmet above all left such a broad reputation for active sanctity that the canonical processes for his recognition are well underway. With him, the humble monk of St. Paul in Rome, Placido Riccardi (d. 1915), advances on the path leading to the hoped-for honors of the altars. Thus, they join those thousands of Benedictine sons who, among the countless ranks of their confreres sanctified in every age through the heroic exercise of virtue, have obtained the Church’s official cult.

This movement of renewal, which had already begun at the turn of the century, received a decisive new impetus from the solemn celebrations of 1880. In that year, traditionally marking the fourteenth centenary of St. Benedict’s birth, nearly all Benedictine abbots gathered for the first time in history at Montecassino around Cardinal G. B. Pitra, formerly a monk of Solesmes, who, as pontifical legate, solemnly consecrated the remains of St. Benedict’s original monastery in the church. From that moment, the upward movement never ceased. Its beneficial effects were felt throughout the Church: from solid ecclesiastical scholarship in its various manifestations to the restoration of sacred chant, from the renewed intensity of Christian life linked to liturgical piety to the revival of purity and decorum in religious art, from missions and the care of territories annexed to nullus abbeys to the education of youth—in every field, the modern contribution of the Benedictines remains significant. The Holy See entrusted them with the work of revising the Vulgate, establishing for this purpose the abbey of San Girolamo in Rome.

Even the numbers from 1880 have quadrupled. From 2,765 Benedictines in that year, the total rose to 10,356 in 1935, of whom approximately 500 were in Italy. Though a temporary decline occurred in subsequent statistics—published by the Confederation—due to well-known causes, the numbers are once again increasing. With few exceptions, the monasteries belong to one of fifteen Congregations: 1) Cassinese; 2) English; 3) Hungarian; 4) Swiss; 5) Bavarian; 6) Brazilian; 7) French or Solesmes; 8) American-Cassinese; 9) Beuronese; 10) American-Swiss; 11) Cassinese of the Primitive Observance; 12) Austrian; 13) of Sankt Ottilien; 14) Belgian; 15) Bohemian. However, as mentioned, there are other sons of St. Benedict who do not belong to the Confederation and are not discussed here, as they are not commonly included under the generic term "Order of St. Benedict" (comprising approximately 5,360 monks in 160 houses).

Numerous parishes and schools are entrusted to the monks. Fourteen abbeys are nullus, some of them in African and Australian missions; in Italy, these include: Montecassino, with 62 dependent parishes; Subiaco with 25; Cava with 17; Montevergine with 7; San Paolo in Rome with 3; San Giustina in Padua; San Nicola and Sant’Andrea in Genoa, with a dependency in Pegli (San Martino); San Giorgio Maggiore in Venice; San Pietro in Modena; San Pietro in Perugia; Santa Maria di Praglia, with dependencies in Dalia and Sicciolo (Istria); Santa Maria del Monte near Cesena; San Giovanni Evangelista in Parma, with dependencies in Torrechiara (Parma) and Bismantova (Reggio Emilia); San Giacomo in Pontida; San Martino delle Scale near Palermo; Santa Maria di Farfa; San Pietro in Assisi; Santa Maria di Finalpia; Santa Maria di Noci (Bari); and Madonna dei Miracoli in the province of Chieti, still priories. Additionally, in Rome, there are the international college of Sant’Anselmo, the abbey of San Girolamo for the correction of the Vulgate and other works at the disposal of the Holy See, the house of Sant’Ambrogio, and the Greek College, entrusted to the Belgian Congregation under the jurisdiction of the Abbot Primate.

III. THE CIVILIZING WORK

That "the monastic Order is a great fact in the history of European civilization" (F. A. Gasquet) is undeniable, even in the rapid overview we have outlined. Thus, the assertion of Harnack is not exaggerated, especially with regard to the young peoples emerging at the frontiers of the Roman world to form the fabric of the new Europe: "The beginnings of all our civilization were nothing but a chapter taken from the history of monasticism" (A. Harnack, Il Monachesimo, Piacenza 1909, ch. 1). And in those monastic colonies, which were to carry the name and the word of the new Rome into regions where the eagles of the Caesars had not penetrated, one of the fundamental laws was that of labor. The Rule had valorized it and spread its esteem. "Thus, St. Benedict imprinted upon his institution that eminently social aspect which all historians delight in recognizing" (F. Schmitz). This laborious activity placed monks at the forefront of the agricultural, commercial, and industrial movement of the early Middle Ages, while the revenues from such conscientious and continuous work were largely employed for eminently social purposes, for works of charity and public utility.

Indeed, it is the work of monks that reclaimed the lands left uncultivated by the great Roman crisis and later devastated by barbarians and uprisings. The agricultural norms established by the first monks remained almost unchanged to guide fieldwork until the advent of more scientific modern systems. Around their farms, centers of production and exchange, hamlets, villages, and cities gradually formed. Thus, in Italy, vast areas were reclaimed at various periods of its history through the work of great monasteries such as Bobbio, Novalesa, Nonantola, Pomposa, Polirone, and many others that, though less known today, all contributed their share. In the South, the foremost centers of this activity were San Vincenzo al Volturno and Montecassino. Around the curità major of Cassino, surviving to this day in Cassino under the same name of corte, all dependencies, which later became flourishing towns, divided the task of reclamation, which in the 10th century Abbot Aligernus facilitated with his famous placiti livellarii. The dependencies detached in more distant regions acted as colonies, replicating the systems and directions of the mother house. Later, Cava was also to exert its beneficial influence over vast areas, especially in Cilento and Puglia.

A large part of the revenues also benefited the populations. After deducting the indispensable expenses for the sustenance of the community and those for the embellishment of buildings, the remainder was employed in works of charity. Among these, hospitals and hospices for pilgrims held a special place. Not only did the abbey have a well-established hospital, but so did the dependent houses and villages, just as the social function of hospitality was practiced, in the absence of inns, both by the monasteries themselves and by special buildings constructed at major crossroads or near the most important sanctuaries. And to provide work for the inhabitants of a vast area, an abbot of Montecassino, for example, would invite them to build roads, while another would arrange public works.

But there is another field in which the industrious activity of monks left indelible marks: the intellectual and artistic. Certainly, St. Benedict does not expressly mention, alongside the lectio divina, a special organization of studies, as his contemporary Cassiodorus does; but these are undoubtedly included by the necessity of claustral life and by the study of Scripture and the Fathers. One could not do without codices and thus without the art of scribes. In those true book workshops represented by the scriptoria, monks worked incessantly, reproducing works with rare skill. The office of copyist required serious and careful preparation, as well as real effort combined with a spirit of sacrifice. Indeed, if "tres digiti scribunt, totum corpus laborat," declared the Cassinese scribe, who also confessed, "sicut qui navigat desiderat portum, ita scriptor novissimum versum." But

to this labor of the Cassinese scriptorium, where that splendid script often indicated by its name was cultivated, we owe the preservation of many masterpieces, including Cicero's Pro Cluentio; Frontinus's De aquaeductibus; Apuleius's Metamorphoses; parts of Tacitus's Historiae; and the Peregrinatio ad loca sancta. Bobbio, too, in Italy, had a notably active scriptorium from the 7th century onward. So did Farfa, as did other monasteries. This production was destined primarily to supply the famous monastic libraries and was complemented by the accessory arts of bookmaking, especially illumination and binding.

Libraries and the art of bookmaking were the necessary prerequisites for the development of schools, another of the most important functions then performed by monasteries. Together with episcopal schools, they shared the task of providing education and formation to studious youth. Indeed, they were mostly open to external students as well, and those rigorously closed to such elements—which at times, with their liveliness, threatened to compromise the severe monastic tranquility—had no less influence, albeit indirect. Thus, Montecassino, where the tradition of the cursus was renewed.

BIBL.:
F. A. Gasquet, L'Ordre de S. Benoît et la civilisation en Europe, Paris 1909; F. Schmitz, Les Bénédictins, Paris 1889; A. Harnack, Il Monachesimo, trad. it., Piacenza 1909; G. Penco, Storia del monachesimo in Italia, Roma 1961; L. H. Cottineau, Répertoire topo-bibliographique des abbayes et prieurés, Mâcon 1935-1970; P. Lugano, I monasteri italiani nel Rinascimento, Firenze 1924; G. Falco, Montecassino nell'età longobarda, Napoli 1924; E. Gattico, Acta selecta Caesenatium sacri et profani argumenti, Roma 1778; Chronicon Farfense, ed. U. Balzani, Roma 1903; Chronicon Vulturnense, ed. V. FEDERICI, GIACOMO, Roma 1925-1940.

But the greatest contribution to intellectual development is represented by the chain of distinguished men formed in these schools or who lived in the cloisters. Limiting ourselves to the most celebrated personalities or those most closely connected to Italy, we recall, in addition to Gregory the Great, whose figure dominates unchallenged in the history of the Church, Bede the Venerable (d. 733), another of the "founders of the Middle Ages" and father of English history; Alcuin of York (d. 804), the right hand of Charlemagne in the intellectual organization of the empire; Anselm of Aosta (d. 1109), the gentle yet strong forerunner of the new intellectual orientations of Christendom; Rabanus Maurus (d. 856), the educator of Germany; Walafrid Strabo (d. 849), the author of the Glossa Ordinaria; Notker the Stammerer (d. 912), the glory of St. Gall; Autpertus (d. ca. 781), the abbot of San Vincenzo al Volturno, whose vast erudition made him "a true phenomenon" for his time; Paul the Deacon (d. 799), the historian of the Lombards; Bertarius, the martyred Cassinese abbot (d. 883); Sylvester II (d. 1003), considered almost a magician for his extraordinary scientific knowledge; Cardinal Alberic of Montecassino (d. 1088), theologian and man of letters; the other Alberic, also of Montecassino, author of the celebrated Vision; Peter Damian (d. 1072), the strong and learned champion of the Church's freedom; Alfanus (d. 1085), the "Cassinese Virgil," who, as archbishop of Salerno, would receive the dying Gregory VII in his arms—this other son of St. Benedict who, like so many of his predecessors and successors on the throne of St. Peter, had tempered his invincible spirit in the cloisters; his immediate successor Victor III (d. 1087), formerly Abbot Desiderius of Montecassino, who, as a writer of Dialogues himself, made his abbey a center of literary and artistic culture, "the fairest Christendom," and, like two other Cassinese popes, Stephen IX (or X, d. 1058) and Gelasius II (d. 1119), the renewer of the cursus, had to struggle and suffer greatly for the Church's freedom. From his time at Montecassino, in addition to his friend Alfanus and the aforementioned Alberics, we also recall Constantine the African (d. 1087), whose translations from Greek and Arabic exerted a notable influence on the thought of the 11th century, particularly in medicine—a science that had already found skilled practitioners at Montecassino, among them the aforementioned Bertarius and Alfanus; Leo Marsicanus, later cardinal bishop of Ostia (d. 1115), the unsurpassed medieval historian of Italy; Amatus, the historian of the Normans; Bruno (d. 1123), the abbot and bishop of Segni, who in the field of exegesis surpassed every other in Italy from the 7th to the 12th century. At Farfa, Abbot Hugh (d. 1039) and Gregory of Catino, and at San Vincenzo al Volturno, the monk John, join so many of their brethren in transmitting the historical heritage of the medieval centuries. From the end of the Middle Ages, we mention only Abbot Bernard Ayglerius of Montecassino (d. 1282), Erasmus (d. ca. 1240), Matthew of Paris (d. 1259), and Archbishop Nicholas Tedeschi of Palermo (d. 1443).

We must also recall, in more recent centuries, among the most distinguished scholars in various disciplines, the elite group of the Maurists, led by Jean Mabillon (d. 1707); other learned men who gathered around the University of Salzburg, founded in 1622; and still others, particularly Bernhard Pez (d. 1735), Augustin Calmet (d. 1757), Magnoald Ziegelbauer (d. 1750); Cardinals Celestino Sfondrati (d. 1696), Giuseppe d'Aguirre (d. 1699), G. B. Pitra (d. 1888), and Aidan Gasquet (d. 1929); Bishop Lorenzo Janssens (d. 1924); the monks and abbots Ursmer Berlière (d. 1932), G. B. Chapman (d. 1933), Cuthbert Butler (d. 1934), and André Wilmart (d. 1942). But above all, we cannot omit the memory of at least some of the distinguished men produced by the Cassinese Congregation in Italy's monasteries: Cardinals Gregorio Cortese (d. 1548), Angelo Maria Quirini (d. 1755), Fortunato Tamburini (d. 1761), and Michelangelo Luchi (d. 1802); archbishops and bishops Isidoro Clari (d. 1551), Onorato Fascitelli (d. 1564), Angelo della Noce (d. 1691), Pier Luigi Galletti (d. 1790), and Benedetto Bonazzi (d. 1915); abbots and monks Bernardo Castiglione, Benedetto Canofilo (d. ca. 1550), Teofilo (d. 1544) and G. B. Folengo (d. 1559), Vincenzo Borghini (d. 1580), Angelo De Faggis (d. 1593), Benedetto dell'Uva (d. late 16th century), Benedetto Castelli (d. 1644), Angelo Grillo (d. 1629), Costantino Caetani (d. 1650), Cornelio Margarini (d. 1681), Benedetto Bacchini (d. 1721), Mariano Armellini (d. 1737), Erasmo Gattola (d. 1784), Andrea Bina, who in 1751 invented the seismograph, the brothers Placido (d. 1785) and G. B. Federici (d. 1800), Gaetano Bernardi (d. 1805), Bernardo and Luigi de Rossi, Agostino Rabatta, and Serafino Serrati, who at the end of the 18th century were among the precursors of aeronautics; Luigi Tosti (d. 1897), Oderisio Piscicelli-Taeggi (d. 1917), and Ambrogio Amelli (d. 1934). We add among the writers of asceticism, Ludovico Barbo (d. 1443), García Jiménez de Cisneros (d. 1510), Johannes Trithemius (d. 1516), Louis de Blois (d. 1666), Pietro Vecchia (d. 1694), Maurus Wolter (d. 1890), John Cuthbert Hedley (d. 1915), Columba Marmion (d. 1923), Paul Delatte (d. 1937), and Anscar Vonier (d. 1938). Among the scholars of liturgy and sacred chant, continuators of the work of Gregory the Great and Guido of Arezzo (d. 1950), Prosper Guéranger (d. 1875), Suitbert Bäumer (d. 1894), Joseph Pothier (d. 1923), Paul Cagin (d. 1924), André Mocquereau (d. 1930), and Paolo Ferretti (d. 1938). Finally, among the apostles, heirs of the spirit of those who converted so many nations, gradually abolished slavery, instituted the Truce of God, sought the redemption of prisoners, we recall Guglielmo Bernardo Ullathorne (d. 1889), who collaborated with Pius IX to reestablish the Catholic hierarchy in England; Boniface Wimmer (d. 1887), founder of the first abbeys in America; John Bede Polding (d. 1877), who established the hierarchy in Australia, already enriched by the apostolic labors of Bishop Rudesindo Salvado (d. 1900), founder of the flourishing mission and abbey of New Norcia.

BIBL.:
A. M. Zimmermann, Kalendarium Benedictinum, Metten 1933-38; Dictionnaire d'histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques, Paris 1912 ss.; Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, Paris 1903 ss.; Enciclopedia Italiana, Roma 1929-39; Enciclopedia Cattolica, Città del Vaticano 1948-54; U. Berlière, Monasticum Belgicum, Maredsous 1890-97; Id., L'Ordre monastique des origines au XIIe siècle, Maredsous 1924; G. Morin, L'idéal monastique et la vie chrétienne des premiers jours, Paris 1914; P. Schmitz, Histoire de l'Ordre de Saint-Benoît, Maredsous 1942-56; B. Albers, Consuetudines monasticae, Montecassino 1900-12; M. Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, München 1911-31; A. Wilmart, Auteurs spirituels et textes dévots du moyen âge latin, Paris 1932; G. Penco, Storia del monachesimo in Italia, Roma 1961; C. Cipolla, Storia delle signorie italiane, Milano 1950; G. Falco, La Santa Romana Repubblica, Bari 1954; L. H. Cottineau, Répertoire topo-bibliographique des abbayes et prieurés, Mâcon 1935-39; A. M. Amelli, Spicilegium Casinense, Montecassino 1888-94; E. Gattola, Ad historiam abbatiae Cassinensis accessiones, Venezia 1734; L. Tosti, Storia della badia di Montecassino, Napoli 1842-43; A. Lentini, Montecassino, Montecassino 1959; G. B. Federici, Memorie trecentiste, Venezia 1785; G. Picasso, Monachesimo e rinnovamento spirituale nei secoli X-XII, Milano 1963; J. Leclercq, L'amour des lettres et le désir de Dieu, Paris 1957; Id., Études sur saint Anselme, Paris 1963; B. de Vregille, Hugues de Salins, Paris 1963; P. Cousin, Précis d'histoire monastique, Paris 1956; A. Dimier, Recueil de plans d'églises cisterciennes, Paris 1949; G. Penna, Il monachesimo cluniacense, Roma 1956; G. Miccoli, Chiesa gregoriana, Firenze 1966; C. Violante, La società milanese nell'età precomunale, Bari 1953; F. Lanzoni, Le diocesi d'Italia dalle origini al principio del secolo VII, Faenza 1927; G. B. Borino, L'avvento e la dimora di Gregorio VII a Salerno, Roma 1946; A. Fliche, La réforme grégorienne, Louvain 1924-37; H. X. Arquillière, Saint Anselme, Paris 1946; A. Hofmeister, Markgrafen und Markgrafschaften im italischen Königreich, Innsbruck 1907; G. B. Picotti, I vescovi italiani al concilio di Trento, Firenze 1946; G. Mollat, Les papes d'Avignon, Paris 1912; E. Amann, L'Église au pouvoir des laïques, Paris 1929; A. Hauck, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, Leipzig 1952-58; F. Baethgen, Deutschland und Italien im Zeitalter Friedrichs II, Berlin 1940; H. Grundmann, Geschichtsschreibung im Mittelalter, Göttingen 1965; G. Falco, La polemica sul medioevo, Bari 1933; A. Frugoni, Arnaldo da Brescia nelle fonti del secolo XII, Roma 1954; G. Tabacco, I liberi del re nell'Italia carolingia e postcarolingia, Spoleto 1966; C. Violante, La società milanese nell'età precomunale, Bari 1953; G. Fasoli, I re d'Italia, Firenze 1949; P. Brezzi, Roma e l'Impero medioevale, Bologna 1947; G. Arnaldi, Studi sui cronisti della Marca Trevigiana nell'età di Ezzelino da Romano, Roma 1963; G. Forchielli, Il monachesimo benedettino in Italia dalle origini alla fine del sec. XII, Roma 1929; G. Penco, Il monachesimo italiano nell'età comunale, Cesena 1961; A. Hessel, Geschichte der Stadt Bologna, Berlin 1910; G. Volpe, Movimenti religiosi e sette ereticali nella società medievale italiana, Firenze 1961; G. Falco, La Santa Romana Repubblica, Bari 1954; E. Dupré Theseider, Roma dal comune di popolo alla signoria pontificia, Bologna 1952; G. Mollat, Les papes d'Avignon, Paris 1912; E. Jordan, L'Allemagne et l'Italie aux XIIe et XIIIe siècles, Paris 1939; A. Fliche, La chrétienté romaine, Paris 1950; G. de Valous, Le monachisme clunisien des origines au XVe siècle, Paris 1935; J. Laurent, Cartulaires de l'abbaye de Molesme, Paris 1907-11; L. Halphen, Charlemagne et l'Empire carolingien, Paris 1947; F. Lot, Naissance de la France, Paris 1948; G. Tessier, Le baptême de Clovis, Paris 1964; A. Dumas, Saint Grégoire le Grand, Paris 1927; H. Bremond, Histoire littéraire du sentiment religieux en France, Paris 1916-33; A. Wilmart, Auteurs spirituels et textes dévots du moyen âge latin, Paris 1932; G. Schnürer, Kirche und Kultur im Mittelalter, Paderborn 1924-29; A. Hauck, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, Leipzig 1952-58; H. Grundmann, Religiöse Bewegungen im Mittelalter, Berlin 1935; G. Le Bras, Institutions ecclésiastiques de la chrétienté médiévale, Paris 1959-64; J. Leclercq, L'amour des lettres et le désir de Dieu, Paris 1957; Id., Études sur saint Bernard, Paris 1953; B. de Gaiffier, Hagiographie, Bruxelles 1953; A. Dimier, Recueil de plans d'églises cisterciennes, Paris 1949; G. Penna, Il monachesimo cluniacense, Roma 1956; G. Miccoli, Chiesa gregoriana, Firenze 1966; C. Violante, La società milanese nell'età precomunale, Bari 1953; F. Lanzoni, Le diocesi d'Italia dalle origini al principio del secolo VII, Faenza 1927; G. B. Borino, L'avvento e la dimora di Gregorio VII a Salerno, Roma 1946; A. Fliche, La réforme grégorienne, Louvain 1924-37; H. X. Arquillière, Saint Anselme, Paris 1946; A. Hofmeister, Markgrafen und Markgrafschaften im italischen Königreich, Innsbruck 1907; G. B. Picotti, I vescovi italiani al concilio di Trento, Firenze 1946; G. Mollat, Les papes d'Avignon, Paris 1912; E. Amann, L'Église au pouvoir des laïques, Paris 1929.

G. PENCO

IV. BENEDICTINE NUNS

The Rule of St. Benedict, written only for men, was soon adopted by virgins desiring to strive for Christian perfection. When this began cannot be stated with certainty. The Benedictine nuns, who have taken St. Scholastica, the sister of the patriarch, as their special patron—a model of a life consecrated to God from childhood—have led a life of retreat and seclusion that makes it difficult to trace their historical existence. In Italy, from the time of the Lombards, in addition to some monasteries that tradition (though unverifiable) would date to the time of the holy legislator himself, others of great renown and influence appear. Among these, we limit ourselves to recalling the monastery of the Senator or of St. Aurelian in Pavia (714), of St. Salvatore and St. Julia in Brescia (753), which already enjoyed exemption in 762, of St. Victor in Meda (8th century), of St. Mary in Valle in Cividale (8th century). Often, after having founded them, queens and princesses would enclose themselves there to live the monastic life. Though not excessively numerous, given their hidden way of life, there were nonetheless nuns who gained renown even outside the cloister. Thus St. Lioba (d. c. 779) and the other collaborators of St. Boniface, St. Elizabeth of Schönau (d. 1165), the poetess Hroswitha (d. late 10th century), St. Hildegard (d. 1179), the great mystic and counselor of popes and emperors, the virgins of Helfta, Mechthild of Magdeburg (d. 1282), Mechthild of Hackeborn (d. 1298), and Gertrude (d. 1302), distinguished heralds of devotion to the Sacred Heart; Giovanna Bonomo (d. 1670), the great Italian mystic, Angelica Baitelli (17th century), the learned and energetic abbess of St. Julia in Brescia, Marguerite d'Arbouze (d. 1626), Jeanne Dellelôe (d. 1660), Cecilia Baij (d. 1766), distinguished mystics. Even in more recent times, Italian monasteries have seen a splendid flourishing of souls of holy heroism, some of whom are advancing toward the glory of the altars, such as Angela M. Latini (d. 1804), Luisa Prosperi (d. 1847), Adeodata Pisani (d. 1885), and M. Fortunata Viti (d. 1922).

Benedictine nuns have also suffered greatly in recent centuries, especially in Italy, where they were scattered in small towns, preserving more than monks many of the ancient houses. For them, too, the restoration has been notable. Currently, in addition to the ancient nuns of solemn vows and strict enclosure, other sisters have been added, with simple vows and limited enclosure, in monasteries directly dependent on the Holy See or on the prelates of the Order; but the majority are under the jurisdiction of the ordinaries. Others are united in Congregations. Statistics, incomplete for this part, give the number of Benedictine nuns as approximately 16,000, with over 300 houses. To these must be added those belonging to the other branches of the great monastic tree: Camaldolese, Cistercians, Trappists, Vallombrosans, Silvestrines, Olivetans, and a single monastery of Celestines.

V. OBLATI

From the earliest times, even while the holy patriarch was still alive, there were those who, though living in the world, desired to follow the spiritual teachings of St. Benedict and maintain bonds of faithful brotherhood with his monks. The ties that, according to the characteristics of the Benedictine constitution, united them to individual monasteries varied over the centuries and in different places. Gaining ever greater precision, they gave rise to the present-day oblates. The majority of them live in the world—secular oblates—following the same statutes approved in 1904. Juridically, they are assimilated to the tertiaries of other religious Orders (CIC, can. 702 ff.). Other oblates live in monasteries or in particular communities of their own. Among these, the celebrated and still flourishing one is that of Tor de' Specchi in Rome, founded in 1433 by St. Francesca Romana (d. 1440), under the dependence of the Olivetan Congregation.

II. - In addition to the fundamental works, among which indispensable are: I. Mabillon, Annales O.S.B., Lucca 1739-45, and Acta SS. O. S. B., Paris 1668-1701, cf. U. Berlière, L'ordine monastico dalle origini al sec. XII, Italian trans., Bari 1928; S. Hilpisch, Geschichte des benediktinischen Mönchtums, Freiburg im Br. 1920; E. Cottineau, Répertoire topobibliographique des abbayes et prieurés, Mâcon 1936; Ph. Schmitz, Histoire de l'ordre de St Benoît, 4 vols., Maredsous 1942-48 (two further volumes forthcoming). - For Italy in particular, the collection of various studies edited by P. Lugano, L'Italia b., Rome 1929; S. Vismara, Storia b., bibliographical bulletin in Aevum, 5(1931); in addition to Rivista storica b., Rome 1906-1936.
III. - C. de Montalembert, The Monks of the West, Italian trans., Florence 1864-71; F. A. Gasquet, Saint Benedict and Civilization, Rome 1929; F. Schmitz, op. cit. - For the history of the Cassinese Congregation in Italy, the work of M. Armellini, Bibliotheca Benedictino-Cassiniensis, 4 vols., Assisi and Foligno 1731-35, remains fundamental, though incomplete for the most recent centuries.

IV. - Ph. Schmitz, Les bénédictines, in DHG, VII, cols. 1206-1937.

V. - Manual of the Benedictine Oblate, Badia di Cava 1933; The Book of the Benedictine Oblate, Rome 1934; P. Chauvin, St Benoît nous parle, Paris 1934; G. A. Simon, La règle de St Benoît commentée pour les oblats..., ibid. 1935; J. R. Riepenhoff, Frage des Ursprungs der Verbindlichkeit des Oblateninstituts, Münster in W. 1939. Tommaso Leccisotti

BIBL.:
In addition to the works already cited, see: for the general history of the Benedictines, the monumental Histoire de l'ordre de St Benoît by Ph. Schmitz, 7 vols., Maredsous 1942-56; for Italy in particular, the collection of studies edited by P. Lugano, L'Italia benedettina, Rome 1929; S. Vismara, Storia benedettina, bibliographical bulletin in Aevum, 5 (1931); besides the Rivista storica benedettina, Rome 1906-26.