Cap. LXII
DE SACERDOTIBUS MONASTERII

[Ms. P, fol. 152v - Paulus Diaconus]

Ch. 62
CONCERNING THE PRIESTS OF THE MONASTERY

Translated by: Matthew Mattingly

₁Si quis abbas sibi presbyterum vel diaconem ordinari petierit, de suis eligat, qui dignus sit sacerdotio fungi. ₂Ordinatus autem caveat elationem aut superbiam ₃nec quidquam praesumat, nisi quod ei ab abbate praecipitur, sciens se multo magis disciplinae regulari subditum, ₄nec occasione sacerdotii obliviscatur regulae obedientiam et disciplinam, sed magis ac magis in Deum proficiat.

₁If any abbot petitions to have a priest or deacon ordained for himself, let him select one of his own who is worthy to function in the priesthood. ₂Let the one ordained beware of arrogance or pride, ₃and may he not presume anything except what the abbot enjoins on him, knowing that he is all the more subject to the discipline of the Rule. ₄On the occasion of his priesthood may he not forget the obedience and discipline of the Rule, but rather more and more make progress in God.

Rectum ordinem tenuit S. Benedictes in hoc loco, cum de sacerdotibus monasterii dicit. Superius enim dixerat de [page 568] illis laicis, qui majoris et legitimae aetatis veniunt ad monasterium, qualiter suscipiantur, et subjunxit postmodum de pueris minori aetate, qualiter et ipsi suscipiantur; dicit etiam de sacerdotibus illis, qui de saeculo veniunt, et de monachis peregrinis. [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 58-61]

St. Benedict maintains the correct arrangement in this passage as he speaks about the priests of the monastery. For previously he had spoken about [page 568] how those laymen who have come to the monastery as adults and of a legitimate age are to be received [into the community], and thereafter added how boys who are underage likewise are to be received. He also spoke about those priests who come from the world, and about visiting monks. [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 58-61]

Deinde cum fecit mentionem de sacerdotibus illis, qui de saeculo veniunt, rectum fuit, ut diceret etiam de sacerdotibus, qui in monasterio ordinantur, qualiter et quo ordine ad sacerdotium promoveantur.

It follows that since he made mention of those priests who come from the world, it is correct that he should speak also about how and by what arrangement those priests who are ordained in the monastery should be promoted to the priesthood.

Dicit enim: Si quis abbas sibi sacerdotem vel diaconum ordinari petierit, de suis eligat, qui dignus sit sacerdotio fungi.

For he says: If any abbot petitions to have a priest or deacon ordained for himself, let him select one of his own who is worthy to function in the priesthood.

Istud quod dicit sibi, intelligitur: ad suam et sui monasterii utilitatem.

The fact that he says for himself, is understood to mean for his own service and for the service of the monastery.

Bene dicit eligat, quia, ubi electio fit, non de qualicunque dicit, sed de meliore et optimo intelligitur.

Well does he say, let him select [eligat], for when a selection [electio] takes place it is not implied that it should be just anyone, but rather we should understand one who is better or best.

Ac per hoc, cum dicit eligat de suis, qui dignus sit, non dedit potestatem abbati, ut ad suam voluntatem faciat presbyterum, qualemcunque voluerit, sed per electionem, et qui dignus invenitur; hoc autem qui dignus invenitur, est, quod Paulus apostolus dicit: Si quis sine crimine est. [1 Tim 3:10; Ti 1:6]

And because of this, when [Benedict] says, let him select one of his own who is worthy, he does not give power to the abbot to make a priest according to his own will in whatever way he wishes, but through a proper selection [electionem] the one who is found worthy. In this context, one who is found worthy, means the same as what the Apostle Paul says: he who is without serious sin [crimine] [1 Tm 3:10; Ti 1:6].¹

Quod vero sit sine crimine, B. Augustinus docet in evangelio, ubi de verbis Domini dicitur: Si ergo filius vos liberavit, vere liberi eritis. (...) Prima ergo libertas est carere criminibus; ideo etiam apostolus Paulus, quando elegit ordinandos vel presbyteros vel diaconos, et quicunque ordinandus est ad praeposituram ecclesiae, non ait: Si quis sine peccato est; [Io 8:7] hoc enim si diceret, omnis homo reprobaretur, nullus ordinaretur, sed ait: "si quis sine crimine est", sicuti est homicidium, adulterium, aliqua immunditia fornicationis, furtum, vel fraus, sacrilegium et cetera hujusmodi. [Augustine, Tractatus in Evangelium Ioannis 41, c. 9/10, CCSL 36, p. 363]

Now because he should be without serious sin, Blessed Augustine, discussing the words of the Lord in the Gospel, teaches: Consequently if the son has freed you then you are truly free. Therefore the first liberty is to be free from serious sin. On that account the Apostle Paul, when he selected those who were to be ordained priests or deacons, or anyone who was to be ordained for the leadership of the church, did not say, ‘If anyone is without sin [peccato],’ [Io 8:7]—for if he had said this, then every man would be rejected, and no one would be ordained—but he said, ‘if anyone is without serious sin [crimine],’ for instance, manslaughter, adultery, any impurity of fornication, theft, fraud, blasphemy, and other such things. [Augustine, Tractatus in Evangelium Ioannis 41, c. 9/10]

Item ibi superius: Est autem crimen peccatum grave, accusatione et damnatione dignissimum. [ibid., c. 9]

He says again in the same place: Now a serious sin [crimen] is a mortal sin [peccatum grave] especially worthy of reproach and damnation. [ibid., c. 9]

Videndum est nunc, pro quibus peccatis non possit quilibet ad honorem sacerdotii pervenire. De his enim dicit Gelasius papa in suis decretis hoc modo cap. 2. epist. 9. ut ubi nulla perurget necessitas, constituta patrum inviolata serventur, vel, cum defuerint clerici, de [page 569] monachis eligantur.

Let us see now for which sins one cannot attain the honor of the priesthood. For Pope Gelasius spoke about these in his decrees (chapter 2, epistle 9) in this fashion, that unless necessity demands otherwise the institutes of the Fathers are to be kept inviolate, or, when clerics are lacking, [page 569] they are to be chosen from among the monks.

Priscis igitur pro sui reverentia manentibus constitutis [omitted in ed. Mittermüller, inserted from PL, quae ubi nulla vel rerum, vel temporum perurget angustia, regulariter convenit custodiri, eatenus Ecclesiis, quae vel cunctis sunt privatae ministris, vel sufficientibus usque adeo dispoliatae servitiis, ut plebibus ad se pertinentibus divina munera supplere non valeant, tam instituendi, quam promovendi clericalis officii sic spatia dispensanda concedimus, ut si quis etiam de religioso proposito, et disciplinis monasterialibus eruditus ad clericale munus accedat, imprimis ejus vita praeteritis acta temporibus inquiratur, vel si nullo gravi facinore probatur infectus, si secundam non habuit fortassis uxorem, nec a marito relictam sortitus ostenditur, si poenitentiam publicam fortassis non gessit, nec ulla corporis parte vitiatus apparet, si servili, aut originariae non est conditioni obnoxius, si curiae jam probatur nexibus absolutus, si assecutus est litteras, sine quibus vix fortassis ostiarii possit implere ministerium, ut si his omnibus, quae sunt praedicta, fulcitur, continuo lector, vel notarius, aut certe defensor effectus post tres menses existat acolythus, maxime si huic aetas etiam suffragatur, sexto mense subdiaconi nomen accipiat, ac si modestae conversationis, honestaeque voluntatis existit, nono mense sit diaconus, completoque anno sit presbyter, cui tamen quod annorum fuerant interstitia collatura, sancti propositi sponte suscepta doceatur] praestitisse devotio. [Gelasius, Ep. 9, PL 67, col. 302C-303B]

Therefore, having kept the ancient customs out of reverence for them, which have been agreed to be preserved under normal circumstances when no distress from any matters or conditions demands otherwise, we have thus conceded up till now to the Churches which have been deprived of all ministers, or even so far as to have been despoiled of sufficient servants so that they are unable to supply the divine services to the people pertaining to them, opportunities both for instituting and promoting to the clerical office.  If anyone comes to the clerical position either from a religious background or having been brought up under the monastic discipline, first let his life be examined with reference to the actions of his past, that it might be proved that he is not tainted by a serious crime, that he has not perhaps had a second wife or is shown to have obtained by lot the divorced wife of a priest, that he has not perhaps failed to complete a public penance, that he does not appear to have corrupted any part of his body, that he is not a slave nor disobedient to his original condition, that he is proven to be absolved from any connections with the court, and that he has obtained literacy, without which he could scarcely even fulfill the ministry of porter. If his case is supported by all these aforementioned things, having already been made either a lector, a notary, or at least a defender, then after three months let him become an acolyte, especially if his age already recommends him for this. After six months let him receive the name subdeacon, and if he shows himself to live modestly and possess an honest will, then in the ninth month he may become a deacon, and finally, having completed a full year, he may become a priest. Nevertheless, because the intervals of years have been shortened for him, let the devotion of his holy intention, received freely, be shown to have been granted. [Gelasius, Ep. 9, PL 67, col. 302C-303B]

Insuper et ipse magister Hildemarus scripsit etiam hoc de eo,¹ quod qui homicidium quolibet tempore fecerit, quamvis ejus vita probabilis sit vel alicujus doctrinae, nequaquam promoveri potest; de eo, quod, qui cum uxore alterius vel cum sanctimoniali peccaverit, promoveri non potest; si vero in juvenili aetate cum virgine vel vidua peccaverit et ipsius vita postmodum probabilis atque imitanda per omnia fuerit, si necessitas tanta fuerit, ut desint, qui administrare possint, hic cum pavore promovendus est.    

Moreover, the teacher himself, Hildemar, has also written about this², that anyone who at any time has committed a homicide, though his life be commendable or his teaching sound, by no means should be promoted, nor may anyone who has sinned with the wife of another or with a nun be promoted. But if in his youth he has sinned with a virgin or a widow, and his life afterwards is commendable and worthy of imitation in all things, then if such necessity arises because those who would minister are lacking, then with great hesitation he may be promoted.

De eo, quod, qui in pueritia vel in adolescentia tactu nefando inquinantur diuque in hac coinquinatione permanent, si contigerit, ut divina inspiratione tacti ad portum munditiae confugerint immunditiaeque malum horrendo in sanctitate et puritate nutrierint, hi cum pavore promovendi sunt, ita tamen, si desint, qui ecclesiasticum officium nobilius peragere possint.

He also wrote that if anyone who in his boyhood or adolescence has been defiled by an immoral touch and remained long in this pollution, should happen to be moved by divine inspiration and flee to the harbor of purity, and while dreading the evil of this impurity should preserve himself in sanctity and wholesomeness, these too may be promoted with hesitation, provided that those who would be able to carry out the ecclesiastical office more nobly are lacking.

Ceterum si sodomitico more peccaverint, nec cum pavore accedere debent. De eo, quod, qui furtum in majoribus, maxime in ecclesiasticis Deoque consecratis rebus fecerit, nequaquam promovendus est. Si vero in minoribus et maxime pro necessitate fecerit, cum pavore promoveri potest.

Likewise, if anyone has sinned by practicing sodomy, he must not be accepted, even with hesitation. Further, that anyone who has committed a theft as an adult, especially against an officer of the church or those consecrated to God, by no means are they to be promoted. But if anyone as a youth or particularly out of necessity has done this, then he may be promoted with hesitation.

De eo, quod, qui infirma aetate causa levitatis aliquid alteri juraverit et hoc ipsum violaverit, cum pavore promovendus est. Si vero in perfecta aetate perjuraverit, nec cum pavore promovendus est, et maxime, si cupiditate juraverit.

Again, that anyone who because of the weakness of his age has sworn something lightly to another and in doing so has dishonored him, he may be promoted with hesitation. But if he should swear falsely as a mature adult, let him not be promoted, even with hesitation, especially if he swore out of desire for gain.

De eo, quod, qui falsum dixerit testimonium in hujuscemodi causa, ut ille non puniatur vel proscribatur, adversus quem prolatum est testimonium, et ejus vita in omnibus fuerit pura atque imitanda, cum pavore promoveri potest.

Once more, that anyone who has given false testimony under circumstances of such a kind so that the one for whom the testimony is offered avoids punishment or proscription, may be promoted provided his life is pure and worthy of being imitated.

Ceterum si vel punitus vel proscriptus aliquis fuerit ejus falso testimonio, nequaquam promovendus est.

But certainly if someone has been punished or proscribed because of his false testimony then he must not be promoted.

Verumtamen sciendum est, quia, si ita docuerit monachos [page 570], sicut dixi superius, sub illa custodia, non dubitat de eo fratre, qui ita custoditus fuerit, ut non possit fieri presbyter vel diaconus.

Notwithstanding, be it known that if he has instructed monks [page 570] placed under his care, just as I have said above, he will have no doubt whether a brother who was under his care can become a priest or a deacon.

Si autem alter est frater, qui non fuerit sub tali custodia nutritus, tunc debet pro hoc sermonem facere ad ejus confessorem et debet ab illo consilium petere. Ille alter debet dicere: ‘Nescio adhuc, tamen sine me ire ad illum, et interrogabo illum et postea dicam vobis.’ Nam debet illum presbyterum interrogare, cui ipse confessus fuit, qui vocatur ad honorem, et interroget illum utrum dignus sit talis frater, qui vobis confessus est, presbyter fieri.

But if the other is a brother who was not under his care as a boy, then he ought to have a word with his confessor on his behalf and should seek his advice. The other ought to say, ‘As yet I do not know, but allow me to go and question him, and afterwards I will tell you.’ For he ought to question that priest, to whom the one called to the [priestly] honor has confessed, and ask him whether such a brother who has confessed to you [sic] is worthy to become a priest.

Tunc ille presbyter non debet ille peccatum fratris dicere, sed dicere debet: ‘Nescio ejus voluntatem, utrum velit annon.’

The priest should not say what that brother’s sin was, but rather should say, ‘I do not know his wish, whether he wants this or not.’

Deinde debet ire ad fratrem et dicere: ‘Domnus abbas te vult promovere ad presbyteratus honorem; tu quid dicis?’ Si dixerit: ‘Nolo, tunc debet abbati dicere, quia non vult; si autem, quod absit, dicit: quia volo’, tunc debet ille presbyter dicere: ‘Quia contrarium est tibi tale peccatum, et ideo non debes.’

Then he ought to go to the brother and say, ‘The lord abbot wishes to promote you to the priestly honor; what do you say?’ If he should say, ‘I do not wish this,’ then he ought to say to the abbot that he does not wish this; but if—heaven forbid—he says that he does wish this, then the priest ought to say, ‘Since such a sin is hurtful to you, for that reason you ought not.’

Si autem ille frater dixerit: ‘quia omnino volo’, tunc debet ille presbyter dicere abbati: ‘Nescio, quid vobis dicam; ego nec hortor nec dehortor.’

But if the brother says, ‘I wholly wish it,’ then the priest ought to say to the abbot, ‘I do not know what to say to you; for I neither encouraged him nor discouraged him.’

Tunc ille abbas, cum ita audierit, non debet eum promovere, nec debet manifestare peccatum sive ita discendo, sive ita presbyter dixerit: 'Ego nec hortor nec dehortor; sed debet praetendere aliquam occasionem tantum, ut non fiat.'

Then the abbot, having heard this, should not promote him, nor should he make known the sin, whether by disclosing it himself or the priest saying, ‘I neither encouraged him nor discouraged him,’ but instead he ought to produce an occasion of such a kind that prevents it from happening.

Tunc debet abbas pro illo fratre dicere sermonem ad fratres: 'Ego volo cum Dei adjutorio facere talem fratrem presbyterum, unde rogo dilectionem vestram, ut tam pro amore Dei et salvationem nostram² et animae suae, qui sapit aliquid de isto fratre, per auctoritatem nostram dicat. Et de hoc mihi quidem de illo jam nunciatum est, sed nolo dicere et manifestare, sed per vos scire; nam in processu temporis majori vos conjuratione constringam, si hoc non manifestaveritis.'

Then, on behalf of that brother, the abbot ought make a speech to the other brothers: ‘I wish, with God’s assistance, to make such a brother a priest. Therefore I beg your love, that on our authority the one who knows something about this brother might thus speak up, out of love for God and the salvation of our soul and of his own. Concerning this, it has already been made known to me, but I do not wish to say what it is or make it known, but rather to know of it from you; for in the progress of time I will bind you by an even greater oath, if this is not made known.’

Hoc dicto debet dare inducias per octo dies. Deinde debet venire in capitulum, si aliquis non dixerit neque indicaverit illi de illo fratre, et conjurare [page 571] omnes isto modo: 'Adjuro vos et conjuro per communionem corporis et sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi et per sauctum baptismum et remunerationem coelestis gaudii et professionem nostram, quam professi sumus, ut quicunque cognovit illum in tali peccato detentum, quod illum prohibet ad oblationem sacrificii,³ nuntiet mihi atque manifestet, quatenus ego praevaricator hujus praecepti non existam.'

Having given this speech, he ought to hold hearings for eight days. Then, if no one has said or indicated to him anything about the brother, he should come into the chapter and bind all together by an oath [page 571] in this way: ‘I adjure you and I swear through the communion of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and through holy baptism, and the reward of heavenly joy, and our profession which I have professed, that whoever knows him to be detained by a sin such that prohibits him from offering the sacrifice, should announce it and make it known to me lest I appear as a transgressor of this precept.’

Deinde si aliquis cognoverit, veniat et nuntiet; si autem non venerit, tunc debet specialiter unumquemque vocare et interrogare de motu et incessu illius.

Then, if anyone does know, let him come forth and announce it; but if no one comes, then he ought to summon each one individually and question him concerning the brother’s manner and movement.

Deinde si non poterit cognoscere indignum, tunc offerre debet ad ordinandum. Si autem cognoverit indignum esse, non debet offerre , i. e. si major pars dixerit illi sive male sive bene, et spirituales fuerint, qui dixerint, tunc credendum est illi majori parti.

At that point if he cannot be found to be unworthy, then he ought to be offered for ordination. But if he is found to be unworthy, then he should not be offered. This is to say, that if elders have spoken to him, whether it is bad or good, and these are spiritual men, then the elders are to be believed.

In hoc enim loco, quo dicit ₃sciens se multo magis disciplinae regulari subditum, intelligunt alii, ut debeat duci per septem gradus, i. e. ut etiam flagelletur, et hoc comprobant per hoc, quod inferius dicit: ₄nec occasione sacerdotii obliviscatur regulae obedientiam et disciplinam.

For in this passage, in which [St. Benedict] says ₃knowing that he is much more subject to the discipline of the Rule, some understand that he ought to be led through the seven degrees—i.e., he even ought to be whipped—and they prove this from that earlier passage where he says, ₄lest on the occasion of his priesthood he forget obedience to the Rule and discipline. 

Obedientia attinet ad exercitium operis, disciplina, vero attinet ad septem gradus, quia in hac regula, ubi de judiciis dicit, disciplinam appellat, quamquam etiam aliis modis disciplinam dicat, sicut est illud: de disciplina psallendi et suscipiendorum fratrum.

Obedience here refers to the exercise of work, but discipline refers to the seven degrees, since in this Rule when [St. Benedict] speaks about judgment, he calls it discipline, although he refers to discipline in other ways, such as the discipline of the psalmody and the discipline of receiving brothers.

Et hoc notandum est, si talis est sacerdos, i. e. senior aut forte durus et sapiens, qui cognoscitur pejor fieri per flagellum, sicut jam diximus de monachis, non est flagellandus.

And be it known that if such a one is a priest, i.e., a senior or someone hardy, vigorous, and wise, who is known to become worse through whipping, just as we have already said regarding monks, then he is not to be whipped.

Si autem juvenis est, qui noluerit emendare alio modo, flagellandus est; necnon etiam illud, in quo dicitur ₈non sacerdos, sed rebellio judicetur, - quasi diceret: non sicut sacerdos sed ut rebellio, hoc est, sicut superbus judicetur.

But if he is young and does not wish to be corrected in any other way, then he must be whipped; likewise also that passage in which it is said, ₈he should be judged not a priest but a rebel—it is as if he had said, not as a priest but as a rebel, that is, he should be judged to be arrogant.

Necnon et illud maxime, in quo dicitur ₁₁obedire aut subdi regulae noluerit, datur intelligi: aut suscipiat judicium regulae, aut certe, si noluerit, de monasterio expellatur.

Likewise that passage in which it is said, ₁₁he wishes neither to obey nor to submit to the Rule, is especially given to be understood: either he should accept the judgment of the Rule, or, should he not wish to, at least be expelled from the monastery.

Obedire attinet ad obedientiam, subdi vero ad suscipiendam disciplinam.

To obey pertains to obedience, but to submit to receiving discipline.

Et hoc [page 572] notandum est, quod ad hoc attinet illud, quod dicitur ₉et saepe admonitus, si non correxerit, etiam episcopus adhibeatur in testimonium.

And [page 572] make note also, that this pertains to that passage where it is said, ₉and if, having been frequently admonished, he does not reform, even a bishop should be brought in as a witness. 

Saepe admonitus, i. e. per septem gradus ductus.

Frequently admonished, is the same as to say, led through the seven degrees.

Istud judicetur duobus modis intelligitur, i. e. pro ‘condemnetur’ uno modo, et altero modo pro ‘aestimetur’. Et ideo varie intelligunt sapientes istum locum.

He is to be judged may be understood in two ways, that is, one the one hand, ‘he is to be condemned,’ on the other, ‘he is to be considered as.’ Because of this even learned men interpret this passage in various ways.

Sed illi, qui intelligunt pro ‘aestimetur’, ut sacerdos non flagelletur aut excommunicetur, sed credatur, pro reverentia canonica hoc intelligunt, et pro hoc, quod S. Benedictus dicit: ₉et saepe admonitus si non correxerit, adhibeatur episcopus in testimonium.

But those who interpret it as ‘he is to be considered as,’ in order that a priest might not be whipped or excommunicated but instead [his character] assessed, do so out of respect for canon law, and because of what Saint Benedict says: ₉and if, having been frequently admonished, he does not reform, even a bishop should be brought in as a witness.

Si vero depositus fuerit, tunc postea potest flagellari aut excommunicari. Sed videndum est, quid agendum in eo, quod intelligitur judicetur, i. e. aestimetur, putetur et credatur, i. e. si debet ille sacerdos missam cantare, quamdiu aestimatus fuerit rebellio. Si enim tanta est ejusdem sacerdotis contumacia, ut subdi nolit, sicut regula dicit, et ipsa contumacia non fuerit subitanea, quamdiu aestimatus fuerit rebellio, non debet missam cantare.

But if he has been deposed, then afterwards he may be whipped or excommunicated. It still remains to be seen what must be done when he is to be judged is interpreted as ‘he is to be considered as,’ ‘to be numbered among,’ ‘to be assessed,’ which is to say: should that priest say mass although he is considered a rebel? For if the contempt of this priest is such that he will not submit, just as the Rule says he should, and this contempt is not spur of the moment, then for as long as he is considered a rebel he should not say Mass.

Forte dicit aliquis: ‘Quare?’ Cui respondendum est: Si regula dicit de eo, qui pro scientia suae artis extollitur, ut ipsam artem non faciat, nisi humiliaverit se, multo magis iste sacerdos non debet missam cantare, cum officium missae summam humilitatem quaerit.

Perhaps someone will ask why this is. To him we must respond: if the Rule says that anyone who becomes puffed up on account of his knowledge of an art must not practice that art until he becomes humble, how much more ought such a priest not say Mass when the duty of the Mass demands the greatest humility.

Et hoc sciendum est: quamquam varie intelligunt istum locum, in quo dicit judicetur, tamen in monasteriis Francorum ita flagellatur presbyter, veluti monachus.⁴ Alii sunt, qui intelligunt propter istud judicetur, ut non debeat excommunicari vel flagellari aut per septem gradus duci sacerdos, sed solummodo judicetur, i. e. aestimetur, ac si diceret: si peccaverit sacerdos, non debet sicut alius monachus excommunicari vel flagellari, sed solummodo debet aestimari rebellio, i. e. superbus et non sacerdos, et illud, quod dicit regulae obedientiam et disciplinam, non ad excommunicationem et flagellum attinet, sed ad obedientiam et regularem eruditionem.

May this be known as well: although they interpret the passage, he is to be judged, in various ways, nevertheless, in the Frankish monasteries a priest is to be whipped just as a monk is. But there are others who understand that, because of this passage, he is to be judged, the priest must neither be excommunicated nor whipped, nor led through the seven degrees, but is only is to be judged, which is to say, considered as. And if one should say: if the priest has sinned, he should not be excommunicated or whipped just as any other monk, but he should only be considered a rebel, i.e., pompous but not a priest, and that because [Benedict] says, obedience to the Rule and discipline, this pertains not to excommunication and whipping but to obedience and erudition of the Rule.

Unde quamquam ista sint verba in hoc loco ita conjuncta, ut facile [page 573] possit quis intelligere, quod dicat, tamen sanior est sensus, ut, sicut diximus de monachis, si talis est persona, cui non competit, flagellum nullo modo debet illi adhibere, si talis est, quam adjuvet flagellum et non noceat, adhibeatur flagellum.

Therefore, although the words in this passage might be connected in such a way that [page 573] anyone can easily understand what he means, nevertheless, the sounder sense is the same as we have said regarding the monks, that if he is the sort of person for whom it is not appropriate, then by no means should the whip be applied to him, but if he is such that the whip would help and not harm him, then let the whip be applied.

Notandum est, quia pro illis sacerdotibus, qui sacerdotes veniunt in monasterium, non dicit regula adhiberi episcopum in testimonium, sed solummodo pro illis sacerdotibus, qui in monasterio consecrantur; ideo pro illis sacerdotibus, qui sacerdotes veniunt in monasterium, eo quod illi in alio titulo fuerunt consecrati, non est opus episcopum adhiberi in testimonium. Illi autem sacerdotes, quia in illo titulo fuerunt consecrati, ideo necesse est, ut adhibeatur episcopus in testimonium.

Note also that for those priests who come to the monastery already in the priesthood, the Rule does not say that the bishop is to be offered as a witness, but only for those priests who are consecrated in the monastery. On that account, for those priests who come as priests to the monastery, because they have been consecrated under another title, there is no need for the bishop to be offered as a witness. But those priests, since they have been consecrated under that title, it is therefore necessary that the bishop be offered as a witness.

Sequitur: ₅Locum vero illum semper attendat, quo ingressus est in monasterium ₆praeter officium altaris, aut si forte electio congregationis et voluntas abbatis pro vitae merito cum promovere voluerit. ₇Qui tamen regulam a decanis vel praepositis constitutam sibi servare sciat. ₈Quod si aliter praesumpserit, non sacerdos sed rebellio judicetur; ₉et saepe admonitus, si non emendaverit, etiam episcopus adhibeatur in testimonium. ₁₀Quod si nec sic emendaverit, clarescentibus culpis projiciatur de monasterio, ₁₁si tamen talis fuerit ejus contumacia, ut subdi aut obedire regulae nolit.  

The Rule continues: ₅Let him always take that place corresponding to when he entered the monastery, ₆apart from his duties at the altar, unless by chance the community decides and the abbot wishes to promote him on account of the merit of his life. ₇Nevertheless, he must know that he is to keep the rule established by the deans and priors. ₈But if he presumes otherwise, let him be judged not a priest but a rebel; ₉and if, having been frequently admonished, he does not reform, even a bishop should be brought in as a witness. ₁₀If he still does not reform and his faults become well know, then let him be cast out of the monastery, ₁₁but only if his contempt is such that he refuses to submit to or obey the Rule. 

Quod vero dicit locum vero illum attendat, quo ingressus est in monasterium praeter officium altaris - ac si diceret: illum locum debet tenere, quo ingressus est, praeter officium altaris, hoc est, praeter quando officium altaris agit.

Now because he says, Let him take that place corresponding to when he entered the monastery, apart from his duties at the altar, it is as if he were saying: he ought to hold that place corresponding to when he entered, apart from his duties at the altar, that is, apart from when he is to perform his duties at the altar.

Quod autem dicit: si forte electio congregationis et voluntas abbatis pro vitae merito cum promovere voluerit, qui tamen regulam a decanis et praepositis sibi constitutam servare sciat; - ac si diceret: si eum promovere voluerit electio congregationis et voluntas abbatis, non debet pro hoc superbire, sed quod a decanis et praepositis sibi imperatum fuerit, custodiat, et hoc est, quod subjunxit: et saepe admonitus - ac si diceret: non per gradus ducatur, sed admoneatur.

But when he says, unless by chance the community decides and the abbot wishes to promote him on account of the merit of his life. Nevertheless, he must know that he is to keep the rule established by the deans and priors—it is as if he were saying: if the community decides and the abbot wishes to promote him, he ought not to become proud because of this. Because he is to uphold what the deans and priors demand of him, that is, what [Benedict] has enjoined: and having been frequently admonished—it is as if he were saying: he is not to be led through the degrees, but admonished.

Quod vero dicit: quod si nec sic emendaverit, clarescentibus culpis projiciatur de monasterio, si talis fuerit ipsius contumacia, ut subdi [page 574] aut obedire regulae nolit, manifestatur, quod iste sacerdos per octo gradus duci debet, non per septem, sicut alius monachus non sacerdos,⁵ i. e. primus gradus est secreta admonitio, secundus publica correptio, tertius gradus est excommunicatio simplex, quartus est nimiis jejuniis, quintus gradus est, si dignus est, flagellum, sextus gradus est oratio, septimus episcopus, deinde expulsio.

But because he says: If he still does not reform and his faults become well known, then let him be cast out of the monastery, but only if his contempt is such that he refuses to submit to [page 574] or obey the Rule, it is clear that such a priest ought to be led through eight degrees, not seven, just as any other monk who is not a priest. This is to say, the first degree is a secret admonition, the second a public correction, the third a simple excommunication, the fourth a severe fast, the fifth, if he deserves it, a whipping, the sixth is prayer, the seventh is the bishop, and finally, at last, excommunication.

Hoc autem quod dicit si subdi aut obedire nolit - quasi diceret: si contumax fuerit. Quod enim dicit non sacerdos, sed rebellis judicetur; - rebellis enim ipsam malitiam proprie significat, rebellis vero dicitur superbus; nam in hoc loco rebellis pro superbo ponitur, sive, ut Servio placet, rebellis dicitur homo, ipsa vero res rebellio, non rebellatio.

But because he says here, if refuses to submit to or obey, it is as if he were saying: if he is insolent. For he says, let him be judged not a priest but a rebel—for rebellis properly speaking signifies wickedness itself, but here it means proud; for in this passage rebel is used in place of proud, or, as Servius would have it, a man is called a rebel (rebellis), but the matter itself a rebellio [rebellion], not a rebellatio [also a rebellion].

Superbia attinet ad illud, si plus petit, quam dignus est, elatio autem ad inflationem attinet, i. e. si pro bonis suis alios despicit.

Pride (superbia) pertains to rebellion if one seeks more than he deserves, but arrogance (elatio) pertains rather to being puffed up, i.e., if he despises others for the sake of his own well-being.