Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T23:21:12.727Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Jesus as Mother and Abbot as Mother: Some Themes in Twelfth-Century Cistercian Writing1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

Caroline Walker Bynum
Caroline Walker Bynum
Affiliation:
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A number of scholars in this century have noticed the image of God or Jesus as mother in the spiritual writings of the high Middle Ages. The image has in general been seen as part of a “feminine” or “affective” spirituality, and neither of these adjectives is incorrect. The idea of God as mother is part of a widespread use, in twelfth-century spiritual writing, of woman, mother, characteristics agreed to be “feminine,”and the sexual union of male and female as images to express spiritual truths; the most familiar manifestation of this interest in the “female” is the new emphasis on the Virgin in doctrinal discussions and especially spirituality. And the frequency of references to “mother Jesus” is also part of a new tendency in twelfth-century writing to use human relationships (friendship, fatherhood or motherhood, erotic love) in addition to metaphysical or psychological entities to explain doctrinal positions or exhort to spiritual growth.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 70 , Issue 3-4 , October 1977 , pp. 257 - 284
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Cabassut, André, “Une dévotion médiévale peu connue: la dévotion à ‘Jésus Notre Mère,’” Mélanges Marcel Viller, Revue d'ascétique et de mystique 25 (1949) 234–45Google Scholar; Constable, Giles, “Twelfth-Century Spirituality and the Late Middle Ages,” Medieval and Renaissance Studies 5, Proceedings of the Southern Institute of Medieval and Renaissance Studies, Summer, 1969 (1971) 45–47Google Scholar; Bugge, John, Virginitas: An Essay in the History of a Medieval Ideal (Archives Internationales d'Histoire des Idées, Series minor 17; The Hague, 1975) esp. pp. 100–105Google Scholar; McLaughlin, Eleanor C., “‘Christ My Mother’: Feminine Naming and Metaphor in Medieval Spirituality,” Nashota Review 15 (1975) 228–48.Google Scholar (See also Bradley, Ritamary, “The Motherhood Theme in Julian of Norwich,” Fourteenth-Century English Mystics Newsletter 2.4 [1976] 25–30Google Scholar, which came to my attention too late for use in this article.)

3 See Graef, Hilda, Mary: A History of Doctrine and Devotion (2 vols.; London and New York, 1963) 1, esp. pp. 210–64.Google Scholar

4 See Javelet, Robert, Image et ressemblance au douzième siècle de saint Anselme à Alain de Lille (2 vols.; Paris, 1967) esp. 1, 451–61Google Scholar; Jungmann, J. A., “The Defeat of Teutonic Arianism and the Revolution of Religious Culture in the Early Middle Ages,” Pastoral Liturgy (New York, 1962) 48–63.Google Scholar

5 Hildegard of Bingen is the only female writer from the twelfth century whom I have found to use maternal imagery (see references in n. 74), although the point needs further investigation; for the later period see Cabassut, “Une dévotion médiévale,” 239–45, and E. McLaughlin, “‘Christ My Mother,’”235–40. Bugge, Virginitas, 100–105, suggests without proof that male writers are more apt to use feminine imagery when writing to women. It is true that Aelred's De institutione inclusarum, which uses maternal imagery, was written for anchoresses (see nn. 43–46) and that Adam of Perseigne uses such imagery in writing to women (see Adam of Perseigne, Correspondance d'Adam, abbé de Perseigne[1188–1221], [ed. J. Bouvet; Archives historiques du Maine 13, fascicules 1–10; Le Mans, 1951–62], letters 45 and 55, 441–44 and 571–80; PL 211, cols. 623–24 and 659–64). But I find in the twelfth century no general pattern of using female imagery especially when addressing women.

6 On this point I differ from Cabassut who felt that Christ's death as a giving birth was the fundamental idea behind the “mother Jesus” theme wherever it occurred.

7 For the twelfth century, E. McLaughlin and Cabassut discuss only Bernard of Clairvaux.

8 This was Cabassut's conclusion, “Une dévotion médiévale,”239. The general influence of Anselm, particularly Anselm's prayers, on the Cistercians is well known: see Lewicki, J.. “Anselme et les doctrines des Cisterciens du XIIe siècle,” Analecta Anselmiana 2 (1970) 209–16Google Scholar; Rovighi, S. Vanni, “Notes sur l'influence de saint Anselme au XIIe siècle,” Cahiers de civilisation médiévale 8 (1965) 46–50.Google Scholar Of the texts studied here, Guerric of Igny's treatment of Peter and Paul (see n. 35) is so close to Anselm's (see n. 14) as to suggest that the similarity cannot be coincidental.

9 For example, God or Jesus as mother: Lacerta, Hugh, Liber de doctrina vel liber sententiarum seu rationum beati viri Stephani primi patris religionis Grandmontis (CChr: Continuatio mediaevalis 8; Turnhout, 1968) chap. 10, 14Google Scholar; Ancrene Riwle: The English Text of the Cotton Nero A.XlV (ed. Day, Mabel; Early English Text Society 225; London, 1952) 103.Google Scholar The bishop as mother: Gerhoh of Reichersberg, Liber de aedificio Dei, ed. Sackur, E., Libelli de lite imperatorum et pontificum saec. XI et XII conscripti (3 vols.; Monumenta Germaniae historica; Hanover, 1891–1897) 3, 201.Google Scholar

10 This article is thus not an argument that the theme “mother Jesus” is an exclusively or peculiarly “Cistercian” theme; the fact that it occurs in some form in Anselm, William of St. Thierry, and Stephen of Muret (see n. 9 above) would refute this argument. But in the twelfth century the theme occurs in its fullest elaboration in Cistercian authors and, as 1 suggest below, there are aspects of Cistercian life and spirituality that explain this fact.

11 Cabassut, “Une dévotion médiévale,” 235.

12 Anselm, , Monologion, chap. 42, Opera omnia (ed. Schmitt, Francis S.; Edinburgh, 1946) 1, 58.Google Scholar This view of the respective male and female contributions to reproduction was the common one in the Middle Ages; see Bullough, Vern L., “Medieval Medical and Scientific Views of Women,” Viator: Medieval and Renaissance Studies 4 (1973) 487–93.Google Scholar

13 See below nn. 34 and 54. Even in Helinand of Froidmont, who uses less “feminine” imagery, the hen-and-chicks reference occurs to describe both Christ's advent in the human heart and the parallel roles of Christ and abbot: see Helinand, sermons 6 and 14, PL 212, cols. 531D and 591–94.

14 Anselm, prayer 10 to St. Paul, , Opera omnia (ed. Schmitt, ; Edinburgh, 1946) 3, 33 and 39–41;Google Scholar see also Méditations et priéres de saint Anselme (trans. Castel, A., introduction by Wilmart, A.; Collection Pax 11; Paris and Maredsous, 1923) i–lxii and 48–61.Google Scholar

15 JESUS: Bernard of Clairvaux, letter 322, Epistolae, ed. J. Mabillon, PL 182, col. 527C; Bernard, , Sermones super Cantica Canticorum, S. Bernardi Opera 1 and 2 (ed. Leclercq, J., Talbot, C. H., Rochais, H. M.; Rome, 1957)Google Scholar I, sermon 9.5–10 and sermon 10.1–4, 45–50. MOSES: Super Cantica 1, sermon 12.4, 62–63. PETER: letter 238, PL 182, col. 429C-D. PAUL: Super Cantica 1, sermon 12.2, 61; ibid. 2, sermon 85.12, 315. PRELATES OR ABBOTS: Super Cantica 1, sermon 9.9, 47; sermon 10.2–3, 49–50; sermon 23.2 and 7–8,139–40 and 142–44; ibid. 2, sermon 41.5–6, 31–32. SELF: letter 1, PL 182, col. 76A-B; letter 71, col. 183B-184A; letter 110, col. 253; letter 146, col. 303B-C; letter 152, col. 312A; letter 201, col. 369B-C; letter 258, cols. 466B-67A; and Super Cantica 1, sermon 29.6, 207. See also Gammersbach, Suibert, “Das Abtsbild in Cluny und bei Bernhard von Clairvaux,” Cîteaux in de Nederlanden 7 (1956) 85–101Google Scholar, and Dumeige, Gervais, “Bernard de Clairvaux, ‘Père et Mère’ de ses moines,” Etudes 277 (1953) 304–20.Google Scholar Extensive discussions of CHARITY AS MOTHER are found in: letter 2, PL 182, cols. 79D-81A, and letter 7, cols. 93D-94C.

16 Passages in which Bernard sees “mothering” as “giving birth with pain”: letter 146, PL 182, col. 303B-C; Super Cantica 1, sermon 29.6, 207. In letter 144, col. 301A-B, Bernard refers to the pain of having children torn away before the proper time for weaning, but this is clearly a nursing image.

17 Super Cantica 1, sermon 12.4, 62–63; sermon 23.2, 139–40; sermon 26.6, 173; letter 258, PL 182, cols. 466A-67A; letter 300, cols. 502A-C.

18 Letter 1, PL 182, cols. 67–79; letter 238, cols. 427D-31A; Super Cantica 1, sermon 16.4–8, 91–94.

19 Letter 110, PL 182, col. 253; trans. James, Bruno Scott, The Letters of St. Bernard of Clairvaux (London and Chicago, 1953) letter 112, 169.Google Scholar

20 Letter 144, PL 182, cols. 300B and 301A.

21 Letter 201, PL 182, col. 369B-C.

22 Letter 1, PL 182, cols. 72 and 76A-C; trans. James, letter 1, 3 and 7, with my changes.

23 Letter 322, PL 182, col. 527.

24 Super Cantica 1, sermon 9.5–6, 45–46; trans. Walsh, Kiliam, The Works of Bernard of Clairvaux 2: On the Song of Songs 1 (Cistercian Fathers Series 4; Spencer, MA, 1971) 57–58.Google Scholar

25 Super Cantica 1, sermon 10.3, 49–50 trans. Walsh, Song 1, 62–63.

26 Super Cantica 1, sermon 23.2, 139–40; trans. Walsh, Song 2, 27.

27 Super Cantica 2, sermon 41.5–6, 31–32; trans. Walsh, Song 2, 208.

28 William of St. Thierry, Exposé sur le Cantique des Cantiques (ed. Déchanet, J.-M.; SC 82; Paris, 1962Google Scholar) chaps. 37–38,120–24; chaps. 44–46, 132–36; and chap. 52, 144 (cf. chap. 83 on the breasts of the bride, 200–202).

29 William, Sur le Cantique, chap. 38, 122–24; trans. Hart, Mother Columba, The Works of William of St. Thierry 2: Exposition on the Song of Songs (Cistercian Fathers Series 6; Spencer, MA, 1970) 30.Google Scholar

30 William, Sur le Cantique, chap. 52, 144, and see n. 91 below.

31 William, Meditativae Orationes, 4 and 5, PL 180, cols. 216A and C and 221C; see also William, , La contemplation de Dieu: l'oraison de Dom Guillaume (ed. Hourlier, J.; SC 61; Paris, 1959) chap. 3, 64Google Scholar; and William, Epistola ad fratres de Monte-Dei, 1.37, PL 184, col. 332B.

32 Meditativae Orationes, 10, PL 180, col. 236A; trans. Penelope, Sister, The Works of William of St. Thierry 1: On Contemplating God. … (Cistercian Fathers Series 3; Spencer, MA, 1971) 152–53.Google Scholar

33 Meditativae Orationes, 6, PL 180, cols. 225D-26A; trans. Sister Penelope, Works 1, 131. See n. 39 below.

34 Meditativae Orationes, 8, PL 180, col. 230C; trans. Sister Penelope, Works 1, 141.

35 Guerric of Igny, Sermons (ed. Morson, John and Costello, Hilary; 2 vols.; SC 166 and 202; Paris, 1970 and 1973)Google Scholar 1, third Christmas sermon, chaps. 4–5, 196–200; first Epiphany sermon, chap. 6, 250; 2, second sermon for Lent, chap. 2, 30; fourth sermon for Palm Sunday, chap. 5, 210–14; second sermon for SS. Peter and Paul, chaps. 1–6, 380–94; second sermon for the Nativity of Mary, chaps. 3–5, 490–96.

36 Sermons 1, third Christmas sermon, chaps. 4–5, 198; trans, by the monks of Mount St. Bernard abbey, in Guerric of Igny, Liturgical Sermons (2 vols.; Cistercian Fathers Series 8 and 32; Spencer, MA, 1970–1971) 1, 52.Google Scholar

37 Sermons 2, second sermon for the Annunciation, chap. 4, 140: “Haec est ad uterum cordis via spiritus concipiendi”; see also second and third sermons for the Annunciation, 126–62 passim.

38 Sermons 2, second sermon for Lent, chap. 2, 30; trans, by the monks of Mount St. Bernard abbey, Liturgical Sermons 1, 142.

39 Sermons 2, fourth sermon for Palm Sunday, 212–14; trans, by the monks of Mount St. Bernard abbey, Liturgical Sermons 2, 77–78. In psychoanalytic theory, “bowels” is a standard womb symbol; see Freud, Sigmund, “On the Sexual Theories of Children” (1908), The Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud (ed. Strachey, James and Freud, Anna, 9; London, 1959), 207–26, esp. p. 219.Google Scholar

40 Sermons 2, second sermon for Lent, 26–36.

41 Sermons 2, second sermon for SS. Peter and Paul, 380–94, and first sermon for the Assumption, 414–26.

42 Sermons 2, second sermon for SS. Peter and Paul, chap. 2, 384–86; trans, by the monks of Mount St. Bernard abbey, Liturgical Sermons 2, 155.

43 De Jesu puero duodenni, in Aelred of Rievaulx, Opera omnia 1: Opera ascetica(ed. Hoste, A. and Talbot, C. H.; CChr: Continuatio mediaevalis 1; Turnhout, 1971Google Scholar) chap. 3.31, 277–78 (cf. ibid., chap. 3.30, 276); and De institutione inclusarum, chap. 26, in Aelred, Opera 1, 658, and chap. 31, 1, 668–71.

44 De inslitutione, chap. 26, Opera 1, 658; trans. Mcpherson, M. P. in The Works of Aelred of Rievaulx 1: Treatises and Pastoral Prayer (Cistercian Fathers Series 2; Spencer, MA, 1971) 73Google Scholar

45 De institutione, chap. 31, Opera 1, 668.

46 Ibid., 671; trans. Mcpherson, Works 1, 90–91.

47 De Jesu puero, chap. 3.30, Opera 1, 276; trans. Berkeley, Works 1, 37.

48 Daniel, Walter, The Life of Ailred of Rievaulx (trans. Powicke, F. M.; Medieval Classics; New York, 1950) 58.Google Scholar

49 Adam of Perseigne, Correspondance, ed. Bouvet, letter 2, 20–22; letter 11, 77–78; letter 41, 410; letter 50, 519, and PL 211, col. 623.

50 Correspondance, letter 2, 20–22.

51 Correspondance, letter 35, 305–7, and PL 211, cols. 602–3; letter 45, 443, and PL 211, col. 624; letter 48, 471–74 and 477, and PL 211, cols. 635–36 and 638; letter 53, 541–43 and 545–46, and PL 211, cols. 604–5 and 607; letter 54; 553–55. See also letter 64, 629–30, and PL 211, col. 651, which refers to Christ at the Virgin's breast but says that we receive our milk from the Word itself.

52 Correspondance, letter 53, 542.

53 Correspondance, letter 2, 22; letter 4, 30.

54 Correspondance, letter 4, 30. In addition to the authors discussed above, Gilbert of Hoyland, Sermones in Canticum Salomonis, sermon 5, PL 184, col. 32C, sees Jesus as the nurse preparing pap for the child.

55 See E. McLaughlin, “‘Christ My Mother,’” 246–47.

56 Adam, Correspondance, letter 2, 20–22; Adam here associates woman with strength and fecundity. But in letter 30, 221–22, he gives the standard exegesis of Eve as the lower part of the soul, Adam the higher.

57 For the use of “woman” or “Eve” or the “feminine” as a symbol of spiritual weakness (although often combined with penitence) see n. 31 above. In William, Sur le Cantique, chap. 63, 162, mulier is related to molis, which seems to mean “weak”as well as “delicate.”

58 Helinand of Froidmont, sermon 20, PL 212, cols. 646–52; and Epistola ad Gallerum, col. 753B. (The etymology is borrowed from Varro.) See also sermon 27, col. 622B: “Ecce Deus homines mulieribus comparat; nec solum homines molles et fluxos, sed et fortes et robustos; nec mulieribus tantum, sed mulieribus menstruatis. Vae nobis omnibus a fragilitate corruptionis et corruptione fragilitatis, qui mulieres appellamur!” And see n. 68 below.

59 See n. 51 above.

60 See Cabassut, “Une dévotion médiévale,”236–37, and Trible, Phyllis, “God, Nature of, in the Old Testament,” IDBSup (Nashville, 1976) 368–69.Google Scholar

61 Mark 3:25, where Christ refers to any faithful follower as his mother or brother, is a very different use of “mother” as symbol.

62 Cabassut, “Une dévotion médiévale,” 237.

63 Pagels, Elaine H., “What Became of God the Mother? Conflicting Images of God in Early Christianity,” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 2.2 (1976) 293–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

64 Cabassut, “Une dévotion médiévale,” 235. For a Carolingian example of the abbot as mother, see Paschasius Radbertus, Vita sancti Adalhardi, chap. 71, PL 120, col. 1543D.

65 For example: John Chrysostom, In Matthaeum homiliae, 76.5, PG 58, col. 700, see Cabassut, “Une dévotion médiévale,” 237; Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, 3.24.1, PG 7, cols. 966–67; Ambrose, De virginibus, 1.5, PL 16, col. 205; Augustine, In lohannis Evangelium Tractatus CXXIV, chaps. 15.7, 16.2, 18.1, and 21.1 (CChr 36; Turnhout, 1954) 153, 165, 179, and 212. I am grateful to Karl Morrison of the University of Chicago for the Augustine references.

66 See Jungmann, Pastoral Liturgy, 48–63; see also Douglas, Mary, Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo (New York-Washington, 1966) 157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

67 Letter 87, PL 182, col. 217C-D; trans. James, letter 90, 135.

68 Super Cantica, 1, sermon 12.9, 66 (he compares monks to women who remain at home spinning while their husbands, i.e., bishops, go out to war). See also ibid., sermon 12.8,65–66, where Bernard calls himself a woman as an indication of his weakness and of his need for contemplation. For a discussion of inverted imagery used by women, see McNamara, Jo Ann, “Sexual Equality and the Cult of Virginity in Early Christian Thought,” Feminist Studies 3 (1976) 145–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

69 Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus, 1.6, in Clemens Alexandrinus 1 (ed. Stählin, O.; GCS 12; Leipzig, 1936) 104–21; see also Paedagogus, 1.5, 96–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

70 Origen, Commentarium in Canticum Canticorum, prologue and book 1, and Homilia in Canticum Canticorum, homilia prima, chap. 5, in Origenes Werke 8 (ed. Baehrens, W.; GCS 33; Leipzig, 1925) 61–70, 90–95, and 34–35.Google Scholar

71 McLaughlin, Mary M., “Survivors and Surrogates: Children and Parents from the Ninth to the Thirteenth Centuries,” The History of Childhood (ed. DeMause, L.; New York, 1974) 115–18Google Scholar; Goodich, Michael, “Bartholomaeus AngliGUS on Child-rearing,” History of Childhood Quarterly: The Journal of Psychohistory 3.1 (1975) 80.Google Scholar

72 Clement, Paedagogus, 1.6, ed. Stählin, 1, 104–21.

73 Dewez, Léon and Iterson, Albert van, “Le lactation de saint Bernard: Légende et iconographie,” Cîleaux in de Nederlanden 7 (1956) 165–89.Google Scholar We should also note in this connection the legend, found in a work attributed to John Chrysostom and repeated by Guerric, that the apostle Paul bled milk rather than blood when he was beheaded (see Guerric of Igny, Liturgical Sermons 2, 154, n. 7). Moreover, lactation as an act of filial piety (an adult female offering the breast to a parent or an adult in a desperate situation) was a solemn theme in the literature and religion of pagan antiquity (see Ceuleneer, Adolphe de, “La Charité romaine dans la littérature et dans l'art,” Annales de l'Académie Royale d'archéologie de Belgique 67 [Antwerp, 1919] 175–206).Google Scholar

74 Leclercq, Jean, “Le sacré-coeur dans la tradition bénédictine au moyen âge,” Cor Jesu; Commentationes in litteras encyclicas Pii PP. XII ‘Haurietis aquas,’ 2 (Rome, 1959) 3–28Google Scholar; see also Cyprien Vagaggini, “La dévotion au sacré-coeur chez sainte Mechtilde et sainte Gertrude,” ibid., 31–48.

75 M. McLaughlin, “Survivors and Surrogates,” 101–81 passim; Constable, “Twelfth-Century Spirituality,” 42 and 51; Pagels, “What Became of God the Mother?” 293–303. None of these arguments is incorrect as far as it goes, but only M. McLaughlin takes into account the ambivalence which a seemingly positive image may reflect. Anson, John, “The Female Transvestite in Early Monasticism: The Origin and Development of a Motif,” Viator: Medieval and Renaissance Studies 5 (1974) 1–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar, takes an approach to inverted sexual imagery somewhat similar to my own.

76 See McLaughlin, M., “Peter Abelard and the Dignity of Women: Twelfth-Century ‘Feminism’ in Theory and Practice,” Pierre Abélard, Pierre le Vénérable: Les courants … (Colloques internationaux du Centre national de la recherche scientifique 546; Paris, 1975) 287–333Google Scholar; John Benton, “Fraud, Fiction and Borrowing in the Correspondence of Abelard and Heloise,” ibid., 469–506; and McLaughlin, Eleanor, “Equality of Souls, Inequality of Sexes: Women in Medieval Theology,” in Ruether, Rosemary, ed., Religion and Sexism: Images of Women in the Jewish and Christian Traditions (New York, 1974) 213–66.Google Scholar

77 See the works cited in n. 82 below.

78 M. McLaughlin, “Survivors and Surrogates,” 124–39.

79 Ibid.; Hentsch, Alice A., De la littérature didactique du moyen âge s'adressant spécialement auxfemmes (Cahors, 1903)Google Scholar; Delhaye, Philippe, “Le dossier anti-matrimonial de l'Adversus Jovinianum et son influence sur quelques écrits latins du XIIe siècle,” Medieval Studies 13 (1951) 65–86Google Scholar; Bullough, “Medieval Medical and Scientific Views,” 485–501; Goodich, “Bartholomaeus Anglicus,” 80. See also Hildegard of Bingen, Hildegardis Causae et Curae, book 2 (ed. Kaiser, P.; Bibliotheca scriptorum graecorum et romanorum Teubneriana; Leipzig, 1903) 104–5 and 108–9.Google Scholar

80 See William of St. Thierry, De natura et dignitate amoris, PL 184, cols. 379–408 passim, esp. chap. 7, cols. 391A-C. The same view is expressed later by Bonaventure, , Commentarium in Ioannem 15.20, Opera omnia 6 (Quaracchi, 1893) 450.Google Scholar

81 See above, nn. 56–58 and 68.

82 For a summary, see Southern, R. W., Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages (The Pelican History of the Church 2; Harmondsworth, England, 1970) 309–31.Google Scholar See also Roisin, S., “L'efflorescence cistercienne et le courant féminin de piété au XIIe siècle,” RHE 39 (1943) 342–78,Google Scholar and Bolton, Brenda M., “Mulieres Sanctae, “Studies in Church History 10: Sanctity and Secularity: The Church and the World (1973) 77–95.Google Scholar

83 Letter 322, PL 182, col. 527C-D; trans. James, letter 378, 449, with my changes; see n. 23 above. See also letter 104, PL 182, col. 240A-C.

84 Isaac of Stella, Sermons (ed. Hoste, A. and Salet, Gaston; 2 vols. [3rd to appear]; SC 130 and 207; Paris, 1967 and 1974) 2Google Scholar, sermon 29, 172 (cols. 1785C-D).

85 Psychoanalysts note that a close relationship between mother and son is connected with hostility toward women; while it is hard to know how such theory would relate to individual medieval men about whose childhoods we know little, such a theory certainly suggests that a literary tradition of misogyny and a literary tradition of idealizing motherhood are not in any way inconsistent. See Horney, K., “The Dread of Women: Observations on a Specific Difference in the Dread Felt by Men and by Women Respectively for the Opposite Sex,” International Journal of Psychoanalysis 13 (1932) 348–60Google Scholar, and Douglas, Purity, 166–87.

86 David Herlihy has suggested that medieval religious movements are part of a general rebellion against the family: “Alienation in Medieval Culture and Society,” Alienation: Concept, Term, and Meanings (ed. Johnson, Frank; New York, 1973) 125–40Google Scholar; a similar approach is taken by Goodich, Michael, “Childhood and Adolescence among the Thirteenth-Century Saints,” History of Childhood Quarterly 1.3 (1974) 285–309.Google Scholar While the argument is attractive, it seems to me to somewhat oversimplify a complex phenomenon.

87 Gammersbach, “Das Abtsbild in Cluny,” 85–101.

88 Bernard describes himself as a father who delivers the scourges “of a friend” (letter 281, PL 182, col. 487C); elsewhere he contrasts father and judge (letter 65, cols. 170D-72D), rejects the term “father” in favor of “brother” (letter 72, col. 186D), or retains the term “father” while applying to it nursing imagery (see n. 22 above). Bernard also retains royal and even judgmental or angry images of God (Super Cantica, 1, sermon 16.4–8, 91–94).

89 We see this especially in letter 85, PL 182, cols. 206C-10A; letter 87, cols. 211–17; letter 258, cols. 466–67; and in letter 73, cols. 187–88, where Bernard says that loving ought to be difficult. Bernard's own ambivalence comes out clearly in letter 72, col. 186D, where he admits that he is the father but refuses fatherly authority because, he says, he and all the monks are brothers.

90 See above, nn. 30, 35, 36, 40, 41, 47, 48, 50, 53, and 54; and Isaac of Stella, Sermons 2, sermon 27, 150–52 (col. 1780D): “[Abbas] pater sit filii Dei in nobis et nutritor et paedagogus et tutor, quanto tempore parvulus est.…” But in the same passage Isaac also describes the abbot as executioner and flagellator.

91 William of St. Thierry, De natura et dignitate amoris, chap. 8, PL 184, cols. 393–95; Meditativae Orationes, 11, PL 180, cols. 237–42; and Sur le Cantique, chap. 52, 144.

92 Letter 87, PL 182, cols. 211–17, and letter 233, cols. 420–21; see also the citations from Super Cantica in nn. 17 and 24–27 above; and Super Cantica 2, sermons 52 and 53,90–102.

93 Compare Aelred's tolerant view of the demands of administration in De Jesu puero, chap. 3.31, Opera 1, 277–78, with his harsh description of it as a “dung heap” in his De institutione, chap. 28, Opera 1, 660–61.

94 Salmon, Pierre, The Abbot in Monastic Tradition: A Contribution to the History of the Office of Religious Superiors in the West (trans. Lavoie, Claire; Cistercian Studies Series 14; Washington, DC, 1972) 46–104, esp. pp. 95–99.Google Scholar

95 Ibid. See also Chamard, F., “Les abbés au moyen âge,” Revue des questions historiques 38 (1885) 71–108.Google Scholar

96 Dumont, C., “L'équilibre humain de la vie cistercienne d'après le bienheureux Aelred de Rievaulx,” Collectanea ordinis Cisterciensium Reformatorum 18 (1965) 177–89Google Scholar; Squire, A., “Aelred of Rievaulx and the Monastic Tradition Concerning Action and Contemplation,” The Downside Review 72 (1954) 289–303; Constable, “Twelfth-Century Spirituality,” 40–45.Google Scholar

97 I have discussed Cistercian conceptions of community and Cistercian ambivalence about love of neighbor in “The Cistercian Conception of Community: An Aspect of Twelfth-Century Spirituality,” HTR 68 (1975) 273–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

98 See M. McLaughlin, “Survivors and Surrogates,” 130–33.

99 Aelred, De speculo caritatis, 2.17, Opera 1, 86–91. (See Bouyer, Louis, The Cistercian Heritage [trans. Livingstone, E. A.; Westminster, MD, 1958], 139Google Scholar, and Squire, A., “The Composition of the Speculum caritatis,” Cîteaux: commentarii cistercienses 14 [1963] 229–30.) Adam of Perseigne, Correspondance, letter 24, 169–73. Bernard, Super Cantica 1, sermon 9.2, 43.Google Scholar

100 Aelred, De speculo, 3.37, Opera 1, 153–56.

101 I would explain the fact that these authors also use maternal imagery for bishops and other prelates as a reflection of this general concern and ambivalence about authority and about the active life, toward which some of them were drawn; see nn. 96 and 97 above.

102 Bultot, R., Christianisme et valeurs humaines. La doctrine du mépris du monde en Occident de saint Ambroise à Innocent III (Paris, 1963–1964)Google Scholar; Sumption, Jonathan, Pilgrimage: An Image of Mediaeval Religion (Totowa, NJ, 1975) esp. pp. 11–21.Google Scholar

103 Javelet, Image 1, 451–61; Southern, R. W., Medieval Humanism and Other Studies (New York, 1970) 29–60Google Scholar; see also Morris, Colin, The Discovery of the Individual, 1050–1200 (New York, 1972).Google Scholar

104 See Bernard, De diligendo Deo, 7.17, in Tractatus et Opuscula, S. Bernardi opera 3 (ed. Leclercq, J. and Rochais, H. M.; Rome, 1963) 134Google Scholar (lines 10–11), where Bernard gives as examples of love that does what it freely desires: a hungry man eating, a thirsty man drinking, and a mother nursing her child. See also the references cited in n. 17 above; letter 300 is addressed to a woman and discusses maternal affection literally.

105 The fact that the authors considered in this article were writing for those already in the cloister undoubtedly contributes to the tone of optimism.

106 See n. 51 above.

107 See Bouyer, Cistercian Heritage. On Adam of Perseigne, see Bouvet, J., “Biographie d'Adam de Perseigne,” Collectanea ordinis Cisterciensium Reformatorum 20 (1958) 16–26 and 145–52.Google Scholar

108 See Bynum, “The Cistercian Conception of Community,” 273–86.

109 Aelred, De institutione, chap. 28, Opera, 661: “Itaque totum mundum uno dilectionis sinu complectere, ibi simul omnes qui boni sunt considera et gratulare, ibi malos intuere et luge.” This example is all the more remarkable because it occurs in a work addressed to recluses, not to the cloistered.

110 See Sermons 1, sermon 2, 98–102 (cols. 1693D-94D); 1, sermon 14, 276–80 (cols. 1737A-38A); 1, sermon 15, 286–93 (cols. 1739B-40D); 2, sermon 18, 18–20 (cols. 1752A-B): 2, sermon 37,296–304 (cols. 1816A-17D); and sermon 50, PL 194, col. 1858B-62A, for Isaac's intense sense of renunciation of the world. See also Bliemetzrieder, F., “Isaak von Stella, Beiträge zur Lebensbeschreibung,” Jahrbuch für Philosophie und spekulative Theologie 18 (1904) 1–35.Google Scholar

111 See Sermons 1, sermon 11, 242–44 (cols. 1728B-D); sermon 42, PL 194, col. 1832B; sermon 45, PL 194, col. 1841C-D; sermon 51, PL 194, col. 1863A.

112 Sermons 2, sermon 29, 166–80 (cols. 1784B-87C); 2, sermon 34, 232–54, esp. p. 234 (col. 1801A-B); sermon 42, PL 194, col. 1829D; sermon 51, PL 194, cols. 1862–63A. We should note that 1, sermon 14, 270–80(cols. 1735B-38A)joins in the same discussion the “corps mystique” theme and almost frantic exhortation to renounce the world. It is no accident that Isaac sees sin, the loss which is the opposite of union (incorporation) with God, as fragmentation.

113 Aelred, De institutions chap. 26, Opera 1, 658–59.

114 See Helinand of Froidmont, Sermons. PL 212, cols. 481–720. The description of Helinand in Vandenbroucke, François, La morale monastique du XIe au XVIe siècle (Analecta Mediaevalia Namurcensia 20; Louvain and Lille, 1966) 165Google Scholar, which has become standard in reference works, seems to be based entirely on the first Christmas sermon: “Helinand … atteste un attachement en quelque sorte chevaleresque à Marie.” If all the sermons are considered together, a very different picture emerges.

115 Helinand, sermon 23, PL 212, cols. 670–71; sermon 25, cols. 685–87; sermon 26, cols. 693–97 (and cf. sermon 11, col. 580B-C); sermon 27, cols. 700–702; sermon 28, cols. 711–16. See Bauer, Gerhard, Claustrum Animae: Untersuchungen zur Geschichle der Metapher vom Herzen als Kloster 1 (Munich, 1973).Google Scholar Helinand is also fond of military imagery. Building and military images occur in his sermons for clergy, references to the Virgin in his sermons for monks.

116 In addition to its place in the history of devotion, which I have treated here, the theme of the “motherhood of God” has implications for the theology of the Atonement, the Incarnation, and the Trinity. I hope to deal in a later article with the role of the idea in the history of doctrine—a topic for which Clement of Alexandria, Anselm, and Julian of Norwich are more important than these twelfth-century Cistercians.