However, although St Bernard was undoubtedly a great influence, it cannot be considered that he was solely responsible for the desirability of the Cistercians. Historians have since suggested that there were many other contributing factors. Cistercian monasticism developed at a time of change within Europe, where populations increased and the economy was growing. For many people, this brought great uncertainty, and the Cistercian order offered ‘a clear, comprehensive rule of life’ that provided security and isolation from the changing society. This factor itself supplies an explanation that could account for the appeal of Cistercian monasticism. However, the rise in the Cistercian order also fell in line with the intellectual revival and recovery of the popularity of ‘pure’ monasticism, which further explains why it was so inviting. However, these factors alone do not explain what sparked the dramatic growth in the order.
Throughout the 10th and 11th centuries, other monastic orders, like that of Cluny had been very popular. However, the coming of the 12th century brought much discontent with these ‘old orders’, as they had been ‘drawn into the world of business and commerce’ and they were now ‘part of the economic fabric of society’. This change meant that the orders were no longer separated from the secular world, and it was believed that as a result the monks were no longer devoting themselves entirely to their calling. Due to this interaction with society, the orders gained wealth, so they obtained material items and prevented the monks living in the ideal state of poverty. Furthermore, houses under the rule of Cluny had added customs to the Opus Dei, such as extended liturgy, which many monks believed meant they were not following the Rule of St Benedict as it had been intended. Cluny had also started taking in large numbers of ‘unprepared monks’ and many believed that this was ‘diluting’ monasticism. This feeling of discontent with the old orders ultimately contributed to the appeal of Cistercian monasticism, as the Cistercians were able to offer a monasticism that appeared significantly more idealistic.
This ideal offered by the Cistercians ‘[returned] to the sources of monasticism’. It was to be a pure life where ‘a monk could find his way to God with no distractions’, achieved by simplicity and remaining isolated from the world. They did this by founding houses in remote areas that could be completely self-sufficient, and ‘[rejecting] manors and serfs, oblates and pensioners, parish duties and secular business’. The monks could then allow themselves to remain completely focused on their duties and ‘free from the temptations offered by materialism’. They also proposed to follow the Rule of St Benedict strictly, observing the three dedications of liturgy, prayer and manual work. There have been recent suggestions however, that observing the Rule of St Benedict was not initially specified under Cistercian order when the Exordium Cisterciensis Cenobii was written. Therefore it may not have had a great significance to the appeal of the movement at the time. Turk believes, that the observance of Benedict’s Rule was added to the Exordium Cisterciensis Cenobii at a later date, in order that the houses under Cluny could not criticise the Cistercians.
However, there was certainly still a reversion to original monasticism, and this made the Cistercian order very attractive to monks in the 12th century who had become discontented with the ‘old orders’. This in theory offered them a way of life that the ‘old orders’ no longer could provide. It was also believed in the 12th century, that the more fervent the order the more worthy it was, and this made Cistercian monasticism appealing as it was indeed fervent; the monks ‘venerated poverty’, had no personal property and a quote from The Life of Ailred demonstrates this: ‘I am tormented and crushed by the length of the vigils… the food cleaves to my mouth… the rough clothing cuts through my skin and flesh down to my very bones’. David Knowles suggested that moving from a house under the rule of Cluny to house under Cistercian rule, must have been ‘like passing from a state and heavy atmosphere into the fresh air’. Ideals similar to these had been sought by other orders, but had not been achieved or maintained on the whole. Therefore when they were actually achieved by the Cistercians, the order became a very powerful magnet.
The houses that the Cistercians founded were also appealing in themselves, as they combined eremitical and coenobitic life. They were ‘little islands apart from the world where monks could worship God in community and as individuals, undisturbed by the anxieties and passions of secular life’. Therefore, those people who neither wanted a completely isolated solitary life, or a communal life intertwined with secular activities, as found at Cluny, would have been drawn to Cistercian monasticism.
Another factor that must be recognised as contributing greatly to the appeal of Cistercian monasticism, was its organisation. Unlike any other order, the Cistercians had a constitution, the Carta Caritatis, which outlined administrative and spiritual guidelines in order that the Cistercian ideals could be maintained. It was revolutionary as no previous orders had followed a constitution and it also allowed a strict order to be maintained, as bishops of the diocese could not override decisions made by the abbots, which occurred under the old orders such as Cluny. This was because bishops had to agree to accept the Carta Caritatis before new daughter houses were built, giving the abbots complete authority over the houses. The constitution stated that every year general chapters were held at Citeaux, where all abbots from the daughter houses gathered to discuss policy. Visitations were also made every year by the abbot of the mother house to all daughter houses to ensure that ideals were being maintained, and to suggest changes for improvement or correction if they were required. This ensured that there was uniformity between all houses, and made it difficult to deviate away from the original beliefs. It also ‘safeguarded by legislation the principles of internal and external economy’, ensuring they did not become involved in secular affairs. The knowledge that it would be difficult for the Cistercians to stray from their ‘evangelical perfection’, gave the monks and those joining the order a confidence that it could not deviate like the Cluniac monasteries had. Its appeal can be seen in the fact that it actually influenced other orders, such as the Templars, to devise similar schemes.
The great appeal of the organisation again raises problems with those historians who held the belief that Bernard of Clairvaux was the central appeal to the Cistercian movement. This is because Cistercian monasticism was already organised and had a constitution before Bernard joined, and he therefore did not contribute to an area which is undoubtedly a unique aspect of the order that made it so attractive. There is some suggestion however, that the Carta Caritatis was updated after it was first written by Harding and that the manuscript always presumed to be the original, was in fact a composite version. St Bernard may therefore have influenced the composite version, but this does not alter the fact, that an organised structure was already in place when Bernard joined the Cistercians. Furthermore, it must be seen that without the organisation which Cistercian monasticism provided when Bernard arrived, he himself would not have been so influential, as he would not have had a platform to preach from.
Cistercian monasticism was also unique, especially when compared to old orders such as Cluny, in the fact that there was ‘absolute identity of treatment and occupation’ of all monks, including the lay brothers that belonged to the order. The Capitula stated ‘We take under our care laybrothers… who are members of our family and helpers with our work. We hold them to be our brothers and, equally with our monks, sharers of our goods both spiritual and temporal’. The acceptance of lay brothers (who were often illiterate) to Cistercian monasticism, was another appealing factor within itself, as it offered opportunities and a chance of new experience to people who had previously been excluded from monastic life. Furthermore, in a time of rising population, lay brotherhood presented an opportunity to enter work and to gain spiritual benefits, therefore creating a practical interest. Alongside this, the idea of lay brotherhood was appealing to those who were choir monks, as the lay brothers would spend the majority of their time performing manual work, thus allowing more time for the choir monks to concentrate on their duties of prayer and liturgy.
Finally, although St Bernard is most renown, the Cistercian order was considered to have ‘the best minds of the day’ following in the 12th century. These men, such as St Ailred of Rievaulx were very influential, as they ‘spoke passionately’ and with ‘burning conviction’ about their lives in the monasteries and the Cistercian order. This accounts further for the appeal of Cistercian monasticism, as others became interested in the order as a result of enthusiastic preaching.
Overall, it can be seen that many factors contributed to the appeal of the Cistercians, not just the influence of St Bernard as some historians had previously suggested. Bernard was certainly a huge contributing factor to the order’s appeal, due to his passionate preaching and writing, but the organisation of the movement was pioneering. This measure that allowed the Cistercians in theory to maintain their monastic ideals must have been very attractive to those who wanted to adopt an austere life. The combined issues of lay brotherhood, equality and reverting to original monasticism contribute to its interest. The success of Cistercian monasticism itself however, accounts for the appeal to some extent: people witnessed others joining, and realised its popularity, therefore joining themselves. David Knowles summarises the appeal of Cistercian monasticism well, saying: ‘the Cistercians offered a clear, uniform and comprehensive rule of life, a system of government of unrivalled excellence, and of the presence in their midst of a man who was the greatest spiritual force of his century’.
Bibliography
M. Barber, The Two Cities: Medieval Europe 1050 - 1320 (Routledge, 1992)
C. Brooke, Europe in the Central Middle Ages 962 – 1154, Third Edition (Longman, 2000)
C. Brooke, The Monastic World 1000 – 1300 (Paul Elek Ltd, 1974)
Janet Burton, Reform or Revolution? Monastic movements of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, Medieval History I, ii (1991), pp 23-36
Jean Leclercq, Bernard of Clairvaux and the Cistercian Spirit (Cistercian Publications, 1976)
Lekai, The Cistercians (Kent State University Press, 1977)
Dom David Knowles, Great Historical Enterprises (Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., 1963)
Dom David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England, Second Edition (Cambridge University Press, 1963)
long search
C. Brooke, Europe in the Central Middle Ages 962 – 1154, Third Edition (Longman 2000) pp. 371
Dom David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England, Second Edition (Cambridge University Press, 1963) pp. 208
C. Brooke, The Monastic World 1000 – 1300 (Paul Elek Ltd, 1974) pp. 139
C. Brooke, The Monastic World 1000 – 1300 (Paul Elek Ltd, 1974)
Jean Leclercq, Bernard of Clairvaux and the Cistercian Spirit (Cistercian Publications, 1976) pp. 16
Dom David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England, Second Edition (Cambridge University Press, 1963) pp. 218
Jean Leclercq, Bernard of Clairvaux and the Cistercian Spirit (Cistercian Publications, 1976) pp. 16
Dom David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England, Second edition (Cambridge University Press, 1963) pp. 223
Janet Burton, Reform or Revolution? Monastic movements of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, Medieval History I, ii (1991)
M. Barber, The Two Cities: Medieval Europe 1050 - 1320 (Routledge, 1992)
Jean Leclercq, Bernard of Clairvaux and the Cistercian Spirit (Cistercian Publications, 1976) pp. 13
C. Brooke, The Monastic World 1000 – 1300 (Paul Elek Ltd, 1974)
M. Barber, The Two Cities: Medieval Europe 1050 – 1320 (Routledge, 1992)
Dom David Knowles, Great Historical Enterprises (Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1963) pp. 217 - 222
C. Brooke, Ealter Daniels Life of Ailred in: Europe and the Central Middle Ages 962 – 1154, Third Edition (Longman, 2000) pp. 374
David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England, Second edition (Cambridge University Press, 1963) pp. 212
C. Brooke, Europe in the Central Middle Ages 962 – 1154, Third Edition (Longman, 2000) pp. 374
Dom David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England, Second Edition (Cambridge University Press, 1963) pp. 209
Dom David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England, Second Edition (Cambridge University Press, 1963) pp. 222
Janet Burton, The Cistercian Capitula in: Reform or Revolution? Monastic movements of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, Medieval History I, ii (1991) pp. 33
C. Brooke, The Monastic World 1000 – 1300 (Paul Elek Ltd, 1974)
C. Brooke, Europe in the Central Middle Ages 962 – 1154, Third Edition (Longman, 2000) pp. 365
Dom David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England, Second Edition (Cambridge University Press, 1963) pp. 220
Dom David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England, Second Edition (Cambridge University Press, 1963) pp. 223