St. Anselm: Adventurous in youth and adulthood
Archbishop of Canterbury, Doctor of the Church; born at Aosta a
Burgundian town on the confines of Lombardy, died 21 April, 1109.
His father, Gundulf, was a Lombard who had become a citizen of Aosta,
and his mother, Ermenberga, came of an old Burgundian family. Like many
other saints, Anselm learnt the first lessons of piety from his mother,
and at a very early age he was fired with the love of learning. In
after life he still cherished the memories of childhood, and his
biographer, Eadmer, has preserved some incidents which he had learnt
from the saint’s own lips. The child had heard his mother speak of God,
Who dwelt on high ruling all things.
Living in the mountains, he thought
that Heaven must be on their lofty summits. “And while he often
revolved these matters in his mind, it chanced that one night he saw in a
vision that he must go up to the summit of the mountain and hasten to
the court of God, the great King. But before he began to ascend the
mountain, he saw in the plain through which he had passed to its foot,
women, who were the King’s handmaidens, reaping the corn; but they were
doing this very negligently and slothfully. Then, grieving for their
sloth, and rebuking them, he bethought him that he would accuse them
before their Lord and King. Thereafter, having climbed the mountain he
entered the royal court. There he found the King with only his
cupbearer. For it seemed that, as it was now Autumn, the King had sent
his household to gather the harvest. As the boy entered he was called by
the Master, and drawing nigh he sat at his feet. Then with cheery
kindliness he was asked who and whence he was and what he was seeking.
To these questions he made answer as well as he knew. Then at the
Master’s command some moist white bread was brought him by the cupbearer
and he feasted thereon in his presence, wherefore when morning came and
he brought to mind the things he had seen, as a simpler and innocent
child he believed that he had truly been fed in heaven with the bread of
the Lord, and this he publicly affirmed in the presence of others “.
(Eadmer, Life of St. Anselm, I, i.) Eadmer adds that the boy was beloved
by all and made rapid progress in learning. Before he was fifteen he
sought admission to a monastery. But the abbot, fearing the father’s
displeasure, refused him. The boy then made a strange prayer. He asked
for an illness, thinking this would move the monks to yield to his
wishes. The illness came but his admission to the monastery was still
denied him. None the less he determined to gain his end at some future
date. But ere long he was drawn away by the pleasures of youth and lost
his first ardour and his love of learning. His love for his mother in
some measure restrained him. But on her death it seemed that his anchor
was lost, and he was at the mercy of the waves.
Death of St. Anselm’s Mother, photo by Thesupermat.
At this time his father treated him with great harshness; so much so
that he resolved to leave his home. Taking a single companion, he set
out on foot to cross Mont Cenis. At one time he was fainting with hunger
and was fain to refresh his strength with snow, when the servant found
that some bread was still left in the baggage, and Anselm regained
strength and continued the journey. After passing nearly three years in
Burgundy and France, he came into Normandy and tarried for a while at
Avranches before finding his home at the Abbey of Bec, then made
illustrious by Lanfranc’s learning. Anselm profited so well by the
lessons of this master that he became his most familiar disciple and
shared in the work of teaching. After spending some time in this labour,
he began to think that his toil would have more merit if he took the
monastic habit. But at first he felt some reluctance to enter the Abbey
of Bec, where he would be overshadowed by Lanfranc. After a time,
however, he saw that it would profit him to remain where he would be
surpassed by others. His father was now dead, having ended his days in
the monastic habit, and Anselm had some thought of living on his
patrimony and relieving the needy. The life of a hermit also presented
itself to him as a third alternative. Anxious to act with prudence he
first asked the advice of Lanfranc, who referred the matter to the
Archbishop of Rouen. This prelate decided in favour of the monastic
life, and Anselm became a monk in the Abbey of Bec. This was in 1060.
His life as a simple monk lasted for three years, for in 1063 Lanfranc
was appointed Abbot of Caen, and Anselm was elected to succeed him as
Prior. There is some doubt as to the date of this appointment. But Canon
Poree points out that Anselm, writing at the time of his election as
Archbishop (1093), says that he had then lived thirty three years in the
monastic habit, three years as a monk without preferment, fifteen as
prior, and fifteen as abbot (Letters of Anselm, III, vii). This is
confirmed by an entry in the chronicle of the Abbey of Bec, which was
compiled not later than 1136. Here it is recorded that Anselm died in
1109, in the forty-ninth year of his monastic life and the seventy sixth
of his age, having been three years a simple monk; fifteen, prior;
fifteen, abbot; and sixteen archbishop (Poree, Histoire de l’abbaye de
Bec, III, 173). At first his promotion to the office vacated by Lanfranc
gave offence to some of the other monks who considered they had a
better claim than the young stranger. But Anselm overcame their
opposition by gentleness, and ere long had won their affection and
obedience. To the duties of prior he added those of teacher. It was
likewise during this period that he composed some of his philosophical
and theological works, notably, the “Monologium” and the “Proslogium”.
Besides giving good counsel to the monks under his care, he found time
to comfort others by his letters. Remembering his attraction for the
solitude of a hermitage we can hardly wonder that he felt oppressed by
this busy life and longed to lay aside his office and give himself up to
the delights of contemplation. But the Archbishop of Rouen bade him
retain his office and prepare for yet greater burdens.
St. Anselm in the Monastery, photo by Thesupermat.
This advice was prophetic, for in 1078, on the death of Herluin,
founder and first Abbot of Bec Anselm was elected to succeed him. It was
with difficulty that the monks overcame his reluctance to accept the
office. His biographer, Eadmer, gives us a picture of a strange scene.
The Abbot-elect fell prostrate before the brethren and with tears
besought them not to lay this burden on him, while they prostrated
themselves and earnestly begged him to accept the office. His election
at once brought Anselm into relations with England, where the Norman
abbey had several possessions. In the first year of his office, he
visited Canterbury where he was welcomed by Lanfranc. “The converse of
Lanfranc and Anselm”, says Professor Freeman, “sets before us a
remarkable and memorable pair. The lawyer, the secular scholar, met the
divine and the philosopher; the ecclesiastical statesman stood face to
face with the saint. The wisdom, conscientious no doubt but still hard
and worldly, which could guide churches and kingdoms in troublous times
was met by the boundless love which took in all God’s creatures of
whatever race or species” (History of the Norman Conquest, IV, 442). It
is interesting to note that one of the matters discussed on this
occasion related to a Saxon archbishop, Elphage (lfheah), who had been
put to death by the Danes for refusing to pay a ransom which would
impoverish his people. Lanfranc doubted his claim to the honours of a
martyr since he did not die for the Faith. But Anselm solved the
difficulty by saying that he who died for this lesser reason would much
more be ready to die for the Faith. Moreover, Christ is truth and
justice and he who dies for truth and justice dies for Christ. It was on
this occasion that Anselm first met Eadmer, then a young monk of
Canterbury. At the same time the saint, who in his childhood was loved
by all who knew him, and who, as Prior of Bec, had won the affection of
those who resisted his authority, was already gaining the hearts of
Englishmen. His fame had spread far and wide, and many of the great men
of the age prized his friendship and sought his counsel. Among these was
William the Conqueror, who desired that Anselm might come to give him
consolation on his death-bed.
St. Anselm before the King, photo by Thesupermat.
When Lanfranc died, William Rufus kept the See of Canterbury vacant
for four years, seized its revenues, and kept the Church in England in a
state of anarchy. To many the Abbot of Bec seemed to be the man best
fitted for the archbishopric. The general desire was so evident that
Anselm felt a reluctance to visit England lest it should appear that he
was seeking the office. At length, however, he yielded to the entreaty
of Hugh, Earl of Chester and came to England in 1092. Arriving in
Canterbury on the eve of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, he was
hailed by the people as their future archbishop; but he hastened away
and would in no wise consent to remain for the festival. At a private
interview with the King, who received him kindly, he spoke freely on the
evils by which the land was made desolate. Anselm’s own affairs kept
him in England for some months, but when he wished to return to Bec the
King objected. Meanwhile the people made no secret of their desires.
With the King’s permission prayers were offered in all the churches that
God would move the King to deliver the Church of Canterbury by the
appointment of a pastor, and at the request of the bishops Anselm drew
up the form of prayer. The King fell ill early in the new year (1093),
and on his sick-bed he was moved to repentance. The prelates and barons
urged on him the necessity of electing an archbishop. Yielding to the
manifest desire of all he named Anselm, and all joyfully concurred in
the election. Anselm, however, firmly refused the honour, whereupon
another scene took place still more strange than that which occurred
when he was elected abbot. He
was dragged by force to the King’s bedside, and a pastoral staff was
thrust into his closed hand; he was borne thence to the altar where the
“Te Deum” was sung. There is no reason to suspect the sincerity of this
resistance.
Naturally drawn to contemplation, Anselm could have little
liking for such an office even in a period of peace; still less could he
desire it in those stormy days. He knew full well what awaited him. The
King’s repentance passed away with his sickness and Anselm soon saw
signs of trouble. His first offence was his refusal to consent to the
alienation of Church lands which the King had granted to his followers.
Another difficulty arose from the King’s need of money. Although his see
was impoverished by the royal rapacity, the Archbishop was expected to
make his majesty a free gift; and when he offered five hundred marks
they were scornfully refused as insufficient. As if these trials were
not enough Anselm had to bear the reproaches of some of the monks of Bec
who were loath to lose him; in his letters he is at pains to show that
he did not desire the office. He finally was consecrated Archbishop of
Canterbury 4 December, 1093. It now remained for him to go to Rome to
obtain the pallium. But here was a fresh occasion of trouble. The
Antipope Clement was disputing the authority of Urban II, who had been
recognized by France and Normandy. It does not appear that the English
King was a partisan of the Antipope, but he wished to strengthen his own
position by asserting his right to decide between the rival claimants.
Hence, when Anselm asked leave to go to the Pope, the King said that no
one in England should acknowledge either Pope till he, the King, had
decided the matter. The Archbishop insisted on going to Pope Urban,
whose authority he had already acknowledged, and, as he had told the
King, this was one of the conditions on which alone he would accept the
archbishopric. This grave question was referred to a council of the
realm held at Rockingham in March, 1095. Here Anselm boldly asserted the
authority of Urban. His speech is a memorable testimony to the doctrine
of papal supremacy. It is significant that not one of the bishops could
call it in question (Eadmer, Historia Novorum, lib. I). Regarding
Anselm’s belief on this point we may cite the frank words of Dean Hook:
“Anselm was simply a papist — He believed that St. Peter was the Prince
of the Apostles — that as such he was the source of all ecclesiastical
authority and power; that the pope was his successor; and that
consequently, to the pope was due, from the bishops and metropolitans as
well as from the rest of mankind, the obedience which a spiritual
suzerain has the right to expect from his vassals” [Lives of the
Archbishops of Canterbury (London, 18(i0-75), II, 183].
The
Meeting of the Countess Matilda and Anselm of Canterbury in the
Presence of Pope Urban II, painted by Giovanni Francesco Romanelli.
William now sent envoys to Rome to get the pallium. They found Urban
in possession and recognized him. Walter, Bishop of Albano, came back
with them as legate bearing the pallium. The King publicly acknowledged
the authority of Urban, and at first endeavoured to get Anselm deposed
by the legate. Eventually a reconciliation was occasioned by the royal
difficulties in Wales and in the north. The King and the Archbishop met
in peace. Anselm would not take the pallium from the King’s hand; but in
a solemn service at Canterbury on 10 June, 1095 it was laid on the
altar by the legate, whence Anselm took it. Fresh trouble arose in 1097.
On returning from his ineffectual Welsh campaign William brought a
charge against the Archbishop in regard to the contingent he had
furnished and required him to meet this charge in the King’s court.
Anselm declined and asked leave to go to Rome. This was refused, but
after a meeting at Winchester Anselm was told to be ready to sail in ten
days. On parting with the King, the Archbishop gave him his blessing,
which William received with bowed head. At St. Omer’s Anselm confirmed a
multitude of persons. Christmas was spent at Cluny, and the rest of the
winter at Lyons. In the spring he resumed his journey and crossed Mont
Cenis with two companions all travelling as simple monks. At the
monasteries on their way they were frequently asked for news of Anselm.
On his arrival in Rome he was treated with great honour by the Pope. His
case was considered and laid before the council, but nothing could be
done beyond sending a letter of remonstrance to William. During his stay
in Italy Anselm enjoyed the hospitality of the Abbot of Telese, and
passed the summer in a mountain village belonging to this monastery.
Here he finished his work, “Cur Deus Homo”, which he had begun in
England. In October, 1098, Urban held a council at Bari to deal with the
difficulties raised by the Greeks in regard to the procession of the
Holy Ghost. Here Anselm was called by the Pope to a place of honour and
bidden to take the chief part in the discussion. His arguments were
afterwards committed to writing in his treatise on this subject. His own
case was also brought before this council, which would have
excommunicated William but for Anselm’s intercession. Both he and his
companions now desired to return to Lyons, but were bidden to await the
action of another council to be held in the Lateran at Easter. Here
Anselm heard the canons passed against Investitures, and the decree of
excommunication against the offenders. This incident had a deep
influence on his career in England.
While
still staying in the neighbourhood of Lyons, Anselm heard of the tragic
death of William. Soon messages from the new king and chief men of the
land summoned him to England. Landing at Dover, he hastened to King
Henry at Salisbury. He was kindly received, but the question of
Investitures was at once raised in an acute form. Henry required the
Archbishop himself to receive a fresh investiture. Anselm alleged the
decrees of the recent Roman council and declared that he had no choice
in the matter. The difficulty was postponed, as the King decided to send
to Rome to ask for a special exemption. Meanwhile, Anselm was able to
render the King two signal services. He helped to remove the obstacle in
the way of his marriage with Edith, the heiress of the Saxon kings. The
daughter of St. Margaret had sought shelter in a convent, where she had
worn the veil, but had taken no vows. It was thought by some that this
was a bar to marriage, but Anselm had the case considered in a council
at Lambeth where the royal maiden’s liberty was fully established, and
the Archbishop himself gave his blessing to the marriage. Moreover, when
Robert landed at Portsmouth and many of the Norman nobles were wavering
in their allegiance, it was Anselm who turned the tide in favour of
Henry. In the meantime Pope Paschal had refused the King’s request for
an exemption from the Lateran decrees, yet Henry persisted in his
resolution to compel Anselm to accept investiture at his hands. The
revolt of Robert de Bellesme put off the threatened rupture. To gain
time the King sent another embassy to Rome. On its return, Anselm was
once more required to receive investiture. The Pope’s letter was not
made public, but it was reported to be of the same tenor as his previous
reply. The envoys now gave out that the Pope had orally consented to
the King’s request, but could not say so in writing for fear of
offending other sovereigns. Friends of Anselm who had been at Rome,
disputed this assertion. In this crisis it was agreed to send to Rome
again; meanwhile the King would continue to invest bishops and abbots,
but Anselm should not be required to consecrate them.
A
XII century French manuscript of St. Anselm of Canterbury’s De
Concordia Praescientiae et Praedestinationis et Gratiae Dei cum Libero
Arbitrio.
During this interval Anselm held a council at Westminster. Here
stringent canons were passed against the evils of the age. In spite of
the compromise about investiture, Anselm was required to consecrate
bishops invested by the King, but he firmly refused, and it soon became
evident that his firmness was taking effect. Bishops gave back the staff
they had received at the royal hands, or refused to be consecrated by
another in defiance of Anselm. When the Pope’s answer arrived,
repudiating the story of the envoys, the King asked Anselm to go to Rome
himself. Though he could not support the royal request he was willing
to lay the facts before the Pope. With this understanding he once more
betook himself to Rome. The request was again refused, but Henry was not
excommunicated. Understanding that Henry did not wish to receive him in
England, Anselm interrupted his homeward journey at Lyons. In this city
he received a letter from the Pope informing him of the excommunication
of the counsellors who had advised the King to insist on investitures,
but not decreeing anything about the King. Anselm resumed his journey,
and on the way he heard of the illness of Henry’s sister, Adela of
Blois. He turned aside to visit her and on her recovery informed her
that he was returning to England to excommunicate her brother. She at
once exerted herself to bring about a meeting between Anselm and Henry,
in July, 1105. But though a reconciliation was effected, and Anselm was
urged to return to England, the claim to invest was not relinquished,
and recourse had again to be made to Rome. A papal letter authorizing
Anselm to absolve from censures incurred by breaking the laws against
investitures healed past offences but made no provision for the future.
At length, in a council held in London in 1107, the question found a
solution. The King relinquished the claim to invest bishops and abbots,
while the Church allowed the prelates to do homage for their temporal
possessions. Lingard and other writers consider this a triumph for the
King, saying that he had the substance and abandoned a mere form. But it
was for no mere form that this long war had been waged. The rite used
in the investiture was the symbol of a real power claimed by the English
kings, and now at last abandoned. The victory rested with the
Archbishop, and as Schwane says (Kirchenlexicon, s. v.) it prepared the
way for the later solution of the same controversy in Germany. Anselm
was allowed to end his days in peace. In the two years that remained he
continued his pastoral labours and composed the last of his writings.
Eadmer, the faithful chronicler of these contentions, gives a pleasing
picture of his peaceful death. The dream of his childhood was come true;
he was to climb the mountain and taste the bread of Heaven.
Painting of S. Anselmo in Chiesa di S. Anselmo in Bomarzo, Italy, taken by G.Hagedorn.
His active work as a pastor and stalwart champion of the Church makes
Anselm one of the chief figures in religious history. The sweet
influence of his spiritual teaching was felt far and wide, and its
fruits were seen in many lands. His stand for the freedom of the Church
in a crisis of medieval history had far-reaching effects long after his
own time. As a writer and a thinker he may claim yet higher rank, and
his influence on the course of philosophy and Catholic theology was even
deeper and more enduring if he stands on the one hand with Gregory VII,
and Innocent III, and Thomas Becket; on the other he may claim a place
beside Athanasius, Augustine, and Thomas Aquinas. His merits in the
field of theology have received official recognition; he has been
declared a Doctor of the Church by Clement XI, 1720, and in the office
read on his feast day (21 April) it is said that his works are a pattern
for all theologians. Yet it may be doubted whether his position is
generally appreciated by students of divinity. In some degree his work
has been hidden by the fabric reared on his foundations. His books were
not adopted, like those of Peter Lombard and St. Thomas, as the usual
text of commentators and lecturers in theology, nor was he constantly
cited as an authority, like St. Augustine. This was natural enough,
since in the next century new methods came in with the rise of the
Arabic and Aristotelean philosophy; the “Books of Sentences” were in
some ways more fit for regular theological reading; Anselm was yet too
near to have the venerable authority of the early Fathers. For these
reasons it may be said that his writings were not properly appreciated
till time had brought in other changes in the schools, and men were led
to study the history of theology. But though his works are not cast in
the systematic form of the ” Summa ” of St. Thomas, they cover the whole
field of Catholic doctrine. There are few pages of our theology that
have not been illustrated by the labours of Anselm. His treatise on the
procession of the Holy Spirit has helped to guide scholastic
speculations on the Trinity, his “Cur Deus Homo” throws a flood of light
on the theology of the Atonement, and one of his works anticipates much
of the later controversies on Free Will and Predestination. In the
seventeenth century, a Spanish Benedictine, Cardinal d’Aguirre made the
writings of Anselm the groundwork of a course of theology, ” S. Anselmi
Theologia ” (Salamanca, 1678-81). Unfortunately the work never got
beyond the first three folio volumes, containing the commentaries on the
” Monologium “. In recent years Dom Anselm Öcsényi, O.S.B. has
accomplished the task on a more modest scale in a little Latin volume on
the theology of St. Anselm, “De Theologia S. Anselmi” (Brünn, 1884).
A
page from a manuscript of Anselm of Canterbury’s Cur Deus Homo coming
from Northern France and dating back to mid 12th century.
Besides being one of the fathers of scholastic theology, Anselm fills
an important place in the history of philosophic speculation. Coming in
the first phase of the controversy on Universals, he had to meet the
extreme Nominalism of Roscelin; partly from this fact, partly from his
native Platonism his Realism took what may be considered a somewhat
extreme form. It was too soon to find the golden mean of moderate
Realism, accepted by later philosophers. His position was a stage in the
process and it is significant that one of his biographers, John of
Salisbury, was among the first to find the true solution.
Death of St. Anselm, photo by Thesupermat.
Anselm’s chief achievement in philosophy was the ontological argument
for the existence of God put forth in his “Proslogium”. Starting from
the notion that God is “that than which nothing greater can be thought”,
he argues that what exists in reality is greater than that which is
only in the mind; wherefore, since “God is that than which nothing
greater can be thought”, He exists in reality. The validity of the
argument was disputed at the outset by a monk named Gaunilo, who wrote a
criticism on it to which Anselm replied. Eadmer tells a curious story
about St. Anselm’s anxiety while he was trying to work out this
argument. He could think of nothing else for days together. And when at
last he saw it clearly, he was filled with joy, and made haste to commit
it to writing. The waxen tablets were given in charge to one of the
monks but when they were wanted they were missing. Anselm managed to
recall the argument, it was written on fresh tablets and given into
safer keeping. But when it was wanted it was found that the wax was
broken to Pieces. Anselm with some difficulty put the fragments together
and had the whole copied on parchment for greater security. The story
sounds like an allegory of the fate which awaited this famous argument,
which was lost and found again, pulled to pieces and restored in the
course of controversy. Rejected by St. Thomas and his followers, it was
revived in another form by Descartes. After being assailed by Kant, it
was defended by Hegel, for whom it had a peculiar fascination — he
recurs to it in many parts of his writings. In one place he says that it
is generally used by later philosophers, “yet always along with the
other proofs, although it alone is the true one” (German Works, XII,
547). Assailants of this argument should remember that all minds are not
cast in one mould, and it is easy to understand how some can feel the
force of arguments that are not felt by others. But if this proof were
indeed, as some consider it, an absurd fallacy, how could it appeal to
such minds as those of Anselm, Descartes, and Hegel? It may be well to
add that the argument was not rejected by all the great Schoolmen. It
was accepted by Alexander of Hales (Summa, Pt. I, Q. iii, memb. 1, 2),
and supported by Scotus. (In I, Dist. ii, Q. ii.) In modern times it is
accepted by Mohler, who quotes Hegel’s defence with approval.
Illustrated parchment of the Meditations of St Anselm by a 12th-century painter.
It is not often that a Catholic saint wins the admiration of German
philosophers and English historians. But Anselm has this singular
distinction Hegel’s appreciation of his mental powers may be matched by
Freeman’s warm words of praise for the great Archbishop of Canterbury.
“Stranger as he was, he has won his place among the noblest worthies of
our island. It was something to be the model of all ecclesiastical
perfection; it was something to be the creator of the theology of
Christendom — but it was something higher still to be the very
embodiment of righteousness and mercy, to be handed down in the annals
of humanity as the man who saved the hunted hare and stood up for the
holiness of lfheah” (History of the Norman Conquest, IV, 444).
The Tomb of St. Anselm of Canterbury in Canterbury Cathedral, photo by Ealdgyth.
Collections of the works of St. Anselm were issued soon after the
invention of printing. Ocsenyi mentions nine earlier than the sixteenth
century. The first attempt at a critical edition was that of Th.
Raynaud, S.J. (Lyons, 1630), which rejects many spurious works, e. g.
the Commentaries on St. Paul. The best editions are those of Dom
Gerberon, O.S.B. (Paris, 1675, 1721; Venice 1744, Migne, 1845). Most of
the more important works have also been issued separately — thus the ”
Monologium” is included in Hurter’s ” Opuscula SS. Patrum ” and
published with the ” Proslogium ” by Haas (Tubingen). There are numerous
separate editions of the “Cur Deus Homo” and of Anselm’s “Prayers and
Meditations”; these last were done into English by Archbishop Laud
(1638), and there are French and German versions of the “meditationes”
and the “Monologium”. “Cur Deus Homo” has also been translated into
English and German — see also the translations by Deane (Chicago, 1903).
For Anselm’s views on education, see ABBEY OF BEC.
The chief sources for Anselm’s life are his own letters and
the two biographical works of his friend, disciple, and secretary,
Eadmer, monk of Canterbury, and Bishop-elect of St. Andrews. Eadmers’s Historia Nonorum may be called the “Life and Times of St. Anselm”; his Vita S. Anselmi
gives the inner life of the saint. Also, there is a brief account of
the miracles of St. Anselm which is also ascribed to Eadmer, but its
authorship is doubtful. Other early writers on Anselm, such as John of
Salisbury, add some new details, but their account of the Saint is
largely drawn from Eadmer.
W.H. KENT (Catholic Encyclopedia)
