Cap. XXIII
DE EXCOMMUNICATIONE CULPARUM

[Ms P, fol. 89r – Paulus Diaconus –
Ps.-Basil: Ms K¹, fol. 44v; Ms E¹, fol. 103r; Ms E², fol. 164r]

Ch. 23
ON EXCOMMUNICATION FOR FAULTS¹

Translated by: James Holt

Aptum ordinem tenuit B. Benedictus in eo quod prius dicit de custodia, nunc vero dicit De excommunicatione culparum. Quasi praevenit peccatum, cum prius de custodia dixit; post vero cum de excommunicatione dicit, medicinam peccati dixit, veluti medicus sapiens, qui prius quam incidat in languorem, consilium dat ad custodiendum se, ne quis incidat in languorem; cum vero inciderit in languorem, medicinam alteram tribuit, ut sanetur. [page 338]

Blessed Benedict adopted an appropriate order in talking first about vigilance before speaking here about excommunication for faults. Whereas in his earlier words on vigilance he was concerned with preventing sin, in speaking later on excommunication he addressed its treatment, like a wise doctor, who recommends vigilance to prevent anyone falling sick but once sickness occurs provides other medicine to effect a cure. [page 338]

Sequitur: ₁Si quis frater contumax aut inobediens aut superbus aut murmurans aut in aliquo contrarius existens sanctae regulae et praeceptis seniorum suorum contemptor repertus fuerit, ₂hic secundum Domini nostri praeceptum admoneatur semel et secundo secrete a senioribus suis. [cf. Mt 18:15-16] ₃Si non emendaverit, objurgetur publice coram omnibus, ₄si vero neque sic correxerit, si intelligit, qualis poena sit, excommunicationi subjaceat; ₅sin autem improbus est, vindictae corporali subdatur.

He continues: ₁If any brother is found to be contumacious, disobedient or proud, to mutter or in any respect to be in conflict with the holy Rule and in contempt of the orders of his seniors, ₂he should be warned twice privately in accordance with our Lord’s injunction. [cf. Mt 18:15-16] ₃If he does not reform, let him be rebuked publicly in the presence of all. ₄But if even then he does not reform, let him be subjected to excommunication, provided that he understands the nature of the punishment. ₅If however he lacks conscience² let him be subject to corporal punishment.

Quid est quod hic B. Benedictus superbum in specie ponit, cum scriptum sit: Initium omnis peccati superbia est? [Prv 10:15] Quibus respondendum est, quia initium omnis peccati superbia est, i.e. contumax aut inobediens, quantum ad cogitationem attinet, ex superbia procedit; sed tamen potest esse in specie superbus, ut non sit contumax, i. e. si jactans est, aut unam de illis quatuor generibus, quae superius in duodecimo gradu diximus, habuerit. [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 7.62-66]

Why is it that Blessed Benedict specifies pride, since it is written, pride is the source of all evil? [Prv 10:15] The answer is because pride is the source of all evil, in the sense that in mental terms contumacy or disobedience comes from pride yet it is possible to be classed as proud without being contumacious, namely if boastful or having one of those four kinds of pride of which we spoke earlier in relation to the twelfth stage. [Regula Benedicti, c. 7.62-66]

Sciendum est enim, quia non omnis inobediens contumax est, omnis vero contumax inobediens est, quia potest esse inobediens sine contumacia, contumax non potest esse sine inobedientia, eo quod ille est contumax, qui contemnit facere in prima fronte, quod imperatur; v. gr. cum dicitur illi: 'Fac hoc!' [et] ille contumax dicit: 'Non facio', eo quod contumax dictus est ab eo, quod contemnat. Nam inobediens in hoc loco est ille, qui cum dicitur illi: 'Fac hoc!' non dicit: 'Non facio', sicut contumax ille dicit, sed tamen quamvis non dicat: 'Non facio', tamen pro aliqua sua causa non implet jussionem imperantis, aut ex toto dimittit aut ex parte.

For it must be understood that not everyone who is disobedient is contumacious but everyone who is contumacious is disobedient, as it is possible to be disobedient without being contumacious but impossible to be contumacious without being disobedient, in that a person is contumacious who disdains outright to do what he is told, for example when told, ‘Do this’, the contumacious person says, ‘I will not do it.’ He is called contumacious because he shows contempt.³ On the other hand the disobedient person in this situation is one who, when told, ‘Do this’, does not say, ‘I will not do it’, as does the contumacious person, but despite not saying, ‘I will not do it’, for some reason of his own does not fulfill the instruction or disregards it in whole or in part.

Hoc vero loco intuendum est, quia istud capitulum de illa sententia Domini est tractum, in qua Dominus dicit: Si peccaverit frater tuus in te, vade, corripe illum inter te et illum solum [Mt 18:15] et rel.

Here it should be noticed that this chapter is drawn from the Lord’s words where he says, If your brother has sinned against you, go and reprove him between you and him alone etc. [Mt 18:5]

Quod Dominus dicit in evangelio: dic ecclesiae [Mt 18:17], hoc est, quod hic dicit: objurgetur publice coram omnibus.

Corresponding to the Lord’s words in the Gospel, tell it to the church [Mt 18:17], here he says let him be rebuked publicly in the presence of all.

Secretum est enim, si coram quatuor aut quinque fratribus corripueris fratrem tuum.

For it is on a private basis, if you rebuke your brother in the presence of four or five brothers.

Intuendum est enim in hoc loco, quia sunt talia peccata, quae vocantur spiritalia, i.e. quae ad animam referuntur, quamvis corpori subdantur, eo quod [page 339] anima non potest sine carne perpetrare aliquod peccatum, ut sunt ista omnia, quae in hoc capitulo referuntur: contumacia, inobedientia, superbia, murmuratio.

It should be noticed here that there are certain sins, called those of the spirit, which relate to the soul, although they involve the body, the sort that the [page 339] soul cannot commit without the flesh, as are all those with which this chapter is concerned, namely, contumacy, disobedience, pride and muttering.

Et hoc animadvertendum est, quia cum dicit excommunicationi, subaudiendum est: simplici tantum, i. e. illi excommunicationi subjaceat, quae a mensa separat monachum.

It should be recognized that when he refers to excommunication it should be understood as excommunication only in its simple sense, i.e. subjection to that form of excommunication which excludes a monk from table.

Et hoc, quod dicit vindictae corporali subdatur, duobus modis intelligitur, i. e. jejuniis nimiis aut certe flagellis, quae latius in tricesimo capitulo explanantur.

By the words let him be subject to corporal punishment are meant two methods, namely, severe fasting or, of course, the lash, as explained further in chapter thirty.

Et sunt iterum talia peccata, quae vocantur carnalia, quae ad carnem referuntur, quamvis caro non illa sola perpetret sine anima , v. gr. furtum, adulterium, ebrietas, fornicatio; et non solum fornicatio, quam masculus cum femina facit, sed etiam quocumque modo illa fiat, fornicatio dicitur, praeter in somnis, quia valde hoc peccatum detestabile est apud Deum, et non solum si aliquo modo fiat, verum etiam illa verba detestabilia sunt apud Deum.

Next are those sins, called carnal, which relate to the flesh, although the flesh does not commit them on its own without the participation of the soul, e.g. theft, adultery, drunkenness and fornication, and not only fornication between a man and a woman but also in whatever form that it may take, other than in dreams,⁴ as this sin is particularly odious to God and not only in any form of deed but also in word.

Si vero quislibet percusserit fratrem aut homicidium criminale fecerit aut perjurium, criminalia peccata dicuntur.

If, however, anyone strikes a brother or commits criminal homicide or perjury, these are called criminal sins.

Sciendum est enim, quia falsum testimonium et corporale est et spiritale; tunc est spiritale, quando ille, super quem dixit, spiritaliter condemnatur, et tunc est corporale, quando ille, super quem dixit, corporaliter condemnatur, sicut de locutione diximus.

For it must be understood that false witness is both a corporal and spiritual matter. It is spiritual when the person spoken against receives a spiritual sentence and corporal when he receives a corporal sentence, as we have discussed in relation to speech.⁵

Et hoc sciendum est, quia, quamvis istud capitulum de illa sententia Domini, ubi dicit: si peccaverit frater tuus in te, [Mt 18:15] fuisset tractum, tamen Dominus ibi de omnibus peccatis tam corporalibus quam spiritalibus dicit, ideo, quia in te, dicit, si peccaverit. Ista vero sententia S. Benedicti ideo de spiritalibus intelligitur fuisse dicta, quia non dicit: si peccavarit in te, sed de omnibus dicit, qui peccaverint, causa vitii emendandi.

It must also be understood that although this chapter was drawn from the Lord’s words If your brother has sinned against you, [Mt 18:15] yet the Lord is there speaking of all sins, those of the body as much as those of the spirit and on that account speaks of his having sinned against you. In contrast the words of Saint Benedict are meant to refer to sins of the spirit, as he does not say, If he has sinned against you but speaks of all sinners for the amendment of vice.

Plurimi nequaquam pleniter intelligentes judiciorum sententias in regula S. Patris nostri Benedicti, aliter quam praecipit, judicare solent. [The following section is drawn from Benedict of Aniane, De diversorum poenitentiarum modo] Sciendum itaque est, quatuor ibi contineri modos, quibus delinquentium error corrigatur.

Very many with a less than complete understanding of the matter are in the practice of applying the judicial sentences in the rule of our Holy Father Benedict other than as prescribed.⁶ It should be understood, therefore, that four methods are included there by which the error of those at fault can be corrected.

Primus namque est, quem idem Pater Benedictus proprio judicio determinavit, ut est qui per negligentias tempore constituto ad nocturnas non pulsaverit [page 340] signum, [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 48.12] unde digne in oratorio satisfieri jubet, et qui ad officium divinum tarde occurrerit, [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 43] et qui per negligentiam hora refectionis ad mensam, et si cui offertur aliquid a priore et accipere renuerit, et si quis, dum pronuntiat psalmum aut lectionem, fefellerit, [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 45] et qui pro aliqua arte extollitur. [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 57.1]

The first method is that which Father Benedict assigned to self-judgement, e.g., as for one who neglects to sound the signal [page 340] for night-office at the set time, [Regula Benedicti, c. 48.12] for which he prescribes due satisfaction to made in the oratory, arrives late for divine office, neglectfully misses mealtime at table, refuses to accept something offered by a superior, makes a mistake in the pronunciation of a psalm or reading [Regula Benedicti, c. 45] and is conceited about any skill. [Regula Benedicti, c. 57]

Secundus est de spiritalibus rebus, unde ipse dicit: Si quis frater contumax aut inobediens aut superbus aut murmurans aut in aliquo, i. e. spiritali tantum contrarius existens sanctae regulae, qui proficiendo usque ad septem gradus extenditur, occulte videlicet castigando, publice corripiendo, in levioribus culpis excommunicando, in jejuniis nimiis affligendo, verberibus coercendo, pro eodem inemendato ab omnibus orando, atque ad ultimum de monasterio expellendo.

The second method concerns spiritual matters, as indicated by his words, If a brother is found to be contumacious, disobedient or proud, to mutter or in any (i.e. spiritual) respect to be in conflict with the holy rule, and is spread over seven levels, namely, private reprimand, public reproof, excommunication for minor faults, infliction of severe fasting, coercion with the lash, communal prayer for the unreformed and, finally, expulsion from the monastery.

Quamvis hi gradus non in omnibus personis tenendi sint, sicuti sunt improbi et duri atque inobedientes, de quibus idem S. Benedictus in secundo capitulo loquitur hoc modo: Improbos autem et duros ac superbos vel inobedientes verberum vel corporis cartigatione in ipso initio peccati coerceat, sciens scriptum: Stultus verbis non corrigitur. [Prv 29:19] [Regula Benedicti, c. 2.28]

These levels, however, are not to be reached in the case of every person but such as are without conscience, obstinate and disobedient, of whom Saint Benedict speaks thus in his second chapter, But those who are without conscience, obstinate, proud or disobedient, he can coerce only by the lash or some other corporal punishment at the first sign of sin, knowing how it is written, ‘The fool cannot be corrected with words.’ [Prv 29:19] [Regula Benedicti, c. 2.28]

Sed qualiter hoc intelligatur, inferius dicemus, ubi de contumacia dixerimus. Tertius de rebus exterioribus, hoc est: si quis damnum per negligentiam aliquod intulerit monasterio. Quartus de criminalibus delictis.

But as to how this may be understood, we will speak later in our discussion of contumacy. The third method concerns external property, namely if anyone causes any loss to the monastery through negligence. The fourth method concerns criminal offences.

Denique per ordinem eosdem repetentes: de primo sciendum est, quod nullatenus aliter, nisi juxta quod regula jubet, fieri debent, h. e. non alienum, sed proprium est judicium ponendum.

Finally, reviewing these in turn, in relation to the first it should be understood that they should be treated in no other way than in accordance with the rule, i.e. by self-judgment not the judgment of others.

De secundo sollicite considerandum, quia non omnibus personis suprascripti gradus convenire poterunt, quia, aliter corrigendi sunt honesti, aliter improbi. Si contumax fuerit, de monasterio expellatur [Regula Benedicti, c. 71.9].

In relation to the second it should be carefully noted that the levels specified above will not be appropriate to everyone, as an honest person and one without conscience should be corrected in different ways. If anyone has been contumacious let him be expelled from the monastery.

Necesse est ergo ut justo moderamine utrumque discernatur, qualiter secundum regulam contumax secreto moneri possit et de monasterio expelli.

Each case, therefore, should be determined in accordance with just procedure, as according to the rule in the case of contumacy both private admonishment and expulsion from the monastery are permitted.

Ille namque secrete admonendus est, qui licet a priore aliquid imperatum refutans mox tamen increpatus emendationem promittens, qui et honestus jure dici poterit; et ille de monasterio expellendus est, qui contumax existit et nullo unquam pacto acquiescit suscipere disciplinam, quem [page 341] omnino contumacem regula vocat.

Private admonishment should be used for one who, though rejecting some order from a superior, following rebuke quickly promises to amend and who can rightfully be termed honest, whereas expulsion from the monastery should be used for someone who is contumacious and never accepts any form of discipline, one whom [page 341] the rule terms wholly contumacious.⁷.

Unde et merito improbus est dicendus, quamquam et improbum illum etiam vocat, qui licet frequenter corripiatur, disciplinae tamen regulari non contradicit, qui honestatem, quam prius [dum] se emendare profitens habere videbatur, relinquens ad improbam duramque mentem transit. [Benedict of Aniane, De diversarum modo poenitentiarum, CCM 1, pp. 571-576]

For this he is deservedly called without conscience, although this term is also used for someone who, though often reproved does not object to the discipline of the rule but fails to live up to the honesty implied by his earlier promises of amendment and becomes bereft of conscience and obstinate of mind. [Benedict of Aniane, De diversarum modo poenitentiarum, CCM 1, pp. 571-576]

Improbi enim ac duri atque inobedientes et superbi, [Regula Benedicti, c. 2.28] de quibus, sicut diximus, in secundo capitulo regula dicit, hi intelliguntur, qui, postquam per sex gradus fuerint examinati, emendationem non receperint, quos si voluerit abbas ejicere in suo arbitrio erit. Si vero noluerit eos abjicere sed adhuc in monasterio retinere, tunc hi tales,¹ si in ipsum peccatum, unde digni fuerant expelli, postea contigerit cadere, jam non per gradus sicut prius, sed statim, ut ipsum peccatum perpetraverint, verbere aut castigatione corporis, h. e. nimiis jejuniis [eosdem] coerceat.

For the conscienceless, obstinate, disobedient and proud, of whom, [Regula Benedicti, c. 2.28] as we have said, the rule speaks in chapter two, are understood to be those who having been tested in accordance with the six levels have undertaken no amendment. These the abbot, if he wishes, can expel from the monastery on his own authority. If, however, he has chosen not to cast them out but to keep them still in the monastery and they subsequently happen to commit the same sin for which they deserved to be expelled, he may immediately coerce them for that same sin with the lash or (other) corporal punishment, i.e. severe fasting, without going from one level to another as previously.

Ideo diximus ipsum peccatum, quia si aliud postmodum commiserint, per gradus sex ducendi sunt, eo quod de omnibus spiritalibus peccatis taliter cum eis agendum est.

We have spoken of the same sin, since if they have later committed another, they should be taken through the six levels, as applicable to them in relation to all sins of the spirit.

Unde ideo regula eos superbos inobedientes nominat, quia, sicut, dictum est, de omnibus peccatis spiritalibus improbi fiunt, cum per sex gradus ducti non se emendaverint. Duri autem sunt, qui sive admoneantur sive excommunicentur, non emendantur neque etiam erubescunt, sed obstinata mente non timentes verecundiam atque excommunicationem impetum sui cordis sequuntur.

Therefore the rule distinguishes the proud and disobedient since, it is said, in relation to all sins of the spirit, they become without conscience having failed to amend after being taken through the six levels. The obstinate, however, are those who, if admonished or excommunicated, neither amend nor even blush with shame but without fear of disgrace or excommunication determinedly follow the impulse of their own heart.

Quodsi eos rejecerit de monasterio, et postea reversi sive ipsum, pro quo rejecti sunt, sive aliud eos spiritale contigerit committere, per sex gradus superiores ducendi sunt, ac si noviter ad monasterium venissent.

But if those who have been expelled from the monastery and later return happen to commit the same offence for which they were expelled or another, they should be taken through the first six levels as if they had newly come to the monastery.

Verumtamen sciendum est, quia si illud peccatum, pro quo in aliquo gradu est, tarde revertatur, h. e. post annum aut forte post medium perpetraverit, quasi nunquam admiserit, ad primum gradum revertatur, h. e. ad secretam admonitionem, si secrete commissum fuerit.

However, it should be understood that if someone later reverts, after a year or perhaps six months, to a sin for which he has reached a certain level, he may go back to the first level, as if he had not previously committed it, i.e. to private admonishment, if it is committed in private.

[Inserted from Benedict of Aniane, De diversarum poenitentiarum modo] Neque enim, ut supra dictum est, omnibus personis omnes gradus convenire poterunt, quia videlicet diversae sunt [page 342] qualitates mentium, ut unde unus medetur, inde alter perimitur.

⁸Nor, as previously said, will all the levels be applicable to everyone, since clearly people have different [page 342] characters and what may cure one person may ruin another.

Quapropter quorundam verberibus sunt coercendae personae, minime vero quorundam, de quorum qualitatibus regula dicit: Secundum uniuscujusque qualitatem vel intelligentiam omnibus se conformet et aptet [Regula Benedicti 2.32]; itemque alibi: ut viderit cuique expedire, prudenter et cum caritate studeat amputare vitia. [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 64.14]

Accordingly there are some individuals who should be coerced by the lash and some very much not, in relation to which the rule says, he must accommodate and adapt himself to each one’s character and level of understanding [Regula Benedicti 2.32] and elsewhere, he should endeavor to cut away vices with prudence and love as he sees best for each individual. [Regula Benedicti, c. 64.14]

Et notandum est, tria inspicienda semper in judicio esse, personam videlicet, intentionem atque modum delicti: personam, utrum intellectu et modestia viget vel duritia et inquietudine mentis contradictor existat; intentionem, utrum studio an infirmitate deliquerit; modum, utrum graviter vel certe leviter erraverit, unde et regula dicit: secundum modum culpae excommunicationis vel disciplinae debet extendi mensura. [Regula Benedicti, c. 24.1]

It should be noted that there are always three things to be examined when forming a judgment, namely, the individual, the intention and the extent of the offence, in relation to the individual whether he is known for his understanding and modesty or is antagonistic due to obstinacy or mental instability, as to intention whether he offends willfully or out of weakness and as to extent whether the fault is of a graver or just a lighter kind, hence the wording in the rule, The degree of excommunication or discipline should correspond to the extent of the fault [Regula Benedicti, c. 24.1].

Igitur omnis spiritaliter delinquens tamdiu secrete moneri debet, donec se ipsum ipse improbum reddendo ab occulto transeat ad publicum; in qua publica correptione si non emendaverit, ad excommunicationem levium culparum transibit; ubi cum diu tentus nequierit corrigi, nimiorum jejuniorum maceratione affligatur, per quam non correptus, si persona extiterit talis, flagellorum coerceatur acredine. Sin vero personae non admiserit consideratio, communiter ab omnibus misericordia imploretur Omnipotentis. Quod si nec isto modo sanatus fuerit, praecidatur a corpore monasterii.

Accordingly anyone committing a sin of the spirit, so long as it occurs in private, should be admonished in private, until by showing his lack of conscience he passes from private to public discipline; if he has not amended following public reproof, he will pass to excommunication for lighter faults. If he has not managed to achieve correction after being kept for a lengthy period in this condition, let him suffer the discomfort of severe fasting and if not reproved⁹ by this, if he is that sort of person, let him be coerced by the sting of the lash. If, however, this would be inappropriate for the individual, let the mercy of the Almighty be sought by all in communal prayer. If even in this way he has not been healed, let him be cut away from the monastic body.

Et si contigerit, ut per negligentiam, dum aut in occulto aut in publico admonetur, aliquid damni monasterio intulerit, excommunicetur in levioribus culpis secundum modum culpae, et peracta poenitentia iterum revertatur ad id, ubi prius tenebatur, et non solum dum verbis monetur, verum etiam si aliquo ex supradictis gradu detinebatur.

If it happens that someone through negligence, in a case of private or public admonishment, has caused a loss to the monastery, let him be subject to excommunication for lighter faults in accordance with the extent of the fault and on completion of penance let him return to his previous post, and not only if subject to verbal admonishment but also to any of the disciplinary levels mentioned above.

Capitula quoque istius modi noscenda sunt, quibus ordinate intelligi valeant: Primum capitulum est vicesimum tertium, ubi omnes gradus inveniri valent; secundum vero capitulum est: De pueris minori aetate [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 30], qualiter corripiantur, tricesimum,² ubi facile patet, quod in vicesimo tertio scriptum est: sin autem improbus [page 343] est, vindictae corporali subdatur - in fine videlicet capituli tricesimi, ubi dicit: Hi tales, dum delinquunt, aut jejuniis nimiis affligantur aut acris verberibus coerceantur, ut sanentur. Hoc vero sequitur vicesimum octavum: De his, qui saepius correpti emendare noluerint, [Regula Benedicti, c. 28.1] ubi similiter septem praedicti gradus inserti sunt.

The relevant chapters here should be noted so as to be understood in order. The first is chapter twenty-three, where all the levels can be found. The second is chapter thirty, entitled On how boys of younger age are to be reproved [Regula Benedicti, c. 30]. From this it is readily apparent that in chapter twenty-three it is written, If however he lacks conscience [page 343] let him be subject to corporal punishment and at the very end of chapter thirty there are the words Whenever such as these offend, they should be subject to severe fasts or checked with sharp strokes so that they may be healed. This follows chapter twenty-eight, entitled, On those who refuse to amend after frequent reproofs [Regula Benedicti, c. 28.1] where the seven levels already mentioned are similarly included.

De tertia autem modo judiciorum, sicut supra dispositum est, de damno cujuslibet rei exterioris est intelligendum - ubi solummodo animadvertendum est: si negligentia interveniente damnum extiterit factum - tunc secundum modum delicti et personam et intentionem levioris culpae judicio subjacebit. Capitulum vero, ubi de culpa damni exterioris rei narratur, est quadragesimum tertium (?):³ De his qui in aliquibus rebus delinquunt. [Regula Benedicti, c. 46.t]

In relation to the third method of adjudication, as set out above, which is to be understood as relating to the loss of any external property, it should be simply recognized that if someone has caused loss by negligence, then, depending on the extent of the offence, the individual and the intention, he will be subject to excommunication for lighter faults. The Chapter treating the fault of causing loss of external property is forty-three (?), entitled On those who offend in any other respects [Regula Benedicti, c. 46.t].

Quo modo continetur, quidquid in regula invenitur: sive gravissimae vindictae subjaceat, sive graviori seu regulari, seu excommunicetur seu excommunicationi subjaceat, praeter hoc, quod in quibusdam locis invenitur: strictiori disciplinae subjaceat, quod quidam ita intelligi volunt, ut si occulte aut publice verbis moneatur , in eodem gradu acrius corripiatur.

The form of discipline applicable is whatever is found in the rule, whether subjected to the gravest punishment, or graver, or in accordance with the rule, or be excommunicated, subjected to excommunication and, in addition, as is found in certain places, be subject to stricter discipline, which some wish to understand as meaning, in relation to someone being verbally admonished in private or public, receiving a harsher reproof than otherwise at the same level.

Quartus quoque modus, ut praedictum est, de capitalibus criminibus constat, fornicatione videlicet, adulterio atque ebrietate assidua ceterisque, quae nullo modo nisi poenitentia corporali secundum auctoritatem canonicam purgantur. In quibus modis necnon et persona atque intentio semper inspicienda sunt, ubi pariter quoque sanctorum patrum institutio sollicite est perpendenda. [Benedict of Aniane, De diversarum poenitentiarum modo, CCM 1, pp. 577-582]

The fourth method, as previously said, concerns capital sins, namely fornication, adultery, persistent drunkenness etc., which can only be purged by corporal penance in accordance with canonical authority. Under these methods, too, the individual and the intention should always be assessed. Equally, careful consideration should also be given here to the teaching of the holy fathers. [Benedict of Aniane, De diversarum poenitentiarum modo]

Istius enim quarti modi capitulum est vicesimum quintum de gravioribus culpis. Primi autem modi, quem primitus jam diximus, sunt capitula ista, i. e. undecimus: Qualiter dominicis diebus vigiliae agantur [Regula Benedicti, c. 11.t], ubi Pater Benedictus ideo, quia non omnis negligentia est aequalis, de tarde pulsato signo [cf. Regula Benedicti, c. 11.13] et idcirco, quia digne satisfacere dicit, debet prior pensare intentionem pulsantis, i. e. si nubilum eum impedivit, an somnulentia aut pigritia aut infirmitas aut certe superflua [page 344] praeterita potatio, et cetera his similia, quae ad cognoscendam intentionem possunt subtilius pensari.

The chapter dealing with this fourth method is number twenty-five, concerning graver faults. Those related to the first method, however, of which we have already spoken initially, include chapter eleven, entitled, How Vigils are to be conducted on Sundays, [Regula Benedicti, c. 11.t] where, since not every form of negligence is equal, Father Benedict says in the case of late sounding of the signal for night-office, let him make due satisfaction in the oratory [Regula Benedicti, c. 11.13] and since he speaks of due satisfaction the superior should weigh the intention of the person sounding the signal, i.e. if his failure was due to the cloudiness of the night, somnolence, laziness, sickness or just excessive [page 344] drink and such like things, which can be finely weighed to determine intention.

Deinde pensanda est ipsa negligentia, quanta fuit, et ita secundum intentionem pulsantis et quantitatem, i. e. modum negligentiae reus judicari debet, si digne judicatur. Secundum capitulum quadragesimum tertium: De his, qui ad opus Dei vel ad mensam tarde occurrunt, [Regula Benedicti, c. 43.t] in quo capitulo continetur: Sed et si cui aliquid offertur a priore et accipere renuerit. [Regula Benedicti, c. 43.19]

Next the degree of negligence should be weighed. In this way the signaler’s guilt should be judged according to his intention and the amount, i.e. degree, of his negligence, if he is to receive due judgment. Secondly, there is chapter forty-three, entitled On those arriving late for the work of God or the table, [Regula Benedicti, c. 43.t] which contains the words, if anyone is offered something by a superior and refuses it. [Regula Benedicti, c. 43.19]

Sed hoc capitulum valde prudenter discutiendum est cum intentione negligentis atque quantitate culpae.

This chapter also requires judicious investigation of the intention behind the lapse and the amount of the fault.

Tertium capitulum est istius praefati primi modi quadragesimum quintum: De his, qui falluntur in oratorio, [Regula Benedicti, c. 45] et hoc pariter capitulum cum negligentiae magnitudine atque intentione peccantis valde prudenter investigandum est.

The third chapter relating to the aforesaid first method is chapter forty-five, entitled, On those who make mistakes in the oratory, [Regula Benedicti, c. 45] which similarly requires judicious investigation of the degree of negligence and the intention of the sinner.

Quartum istius jam dicti primi modi capitulum quinquagesimum septimum De artificibus monasterii. [Regula Benedicti, c. 57]

The fourth chapter relating to that first method mentioned is chapter fifty-seven, entitled, On monastery artisans. [Regula Benedicti, c. 57]

Igitur quia superius dictum est, secundum modum esse de spiritalibus rebus, dicenda sunt ipsa peccata, quae ad hunc modum attinere videntur, i. e. pro quibus monachus usque ad sex gradus protrahendus est, in septimo vero non emendatus de monasterio expellendus, h. e. occulte videlicet castigando, publice corripiendo, in levioribus culpis excommunicando, in jejuniis nimiis affligendo, verberibus coercendo, pro eodem inemendato ab omnibus orando, atque ad ultimum de monasterio expellendo.

Since, therefore, as stated above, the second method relates to spiritual matters, those sins should be mentioned which seem to relate to this method, i.e. for which a monk should be conducted right through the six grades and be expelled from the monastery in the seventh grade if not amended, specifically private reprimand, public reproof, excommunication for lighter faults, infliction of severe fasting, coercing with the lash, communal prayer for the unreformed and, finally, expulsion from the monastery.

Verum quia ipsa, spiritalia peccata, quae alio nomine levia dicuntur, non sunt aequali lance trutinanda, eo quod in eis alia inveniuntur levia, alia gravia, alia graviora; ideo non aequaliter pro omnibus monachus in unoquoque gradu est tenendus. Nam pro aliis tarde, pro aliis vero cito de uno ad alium gradum est ducendus.

Since, however, these sins of the spirit, otherwise called light, are not all to be given equal weight, in that some of them are light and others are of greater levels of gravity, so a monk should not be kept at any particular level on an equal basis in all cases. For progression from one level to another should be slow for some but fast for others.

Quantum enim culpa videtur esse levis, tantum diu in unoquoque gradu est morandus, quantum vero gravior, tantum cito ad alium gradum est transeundum, morem videlicet medici considerantes, qui quamvis diversa medicamina et diversas potiones infirmo tribuunt, non cito ad aliud medicamen dandum transeunt, quousque non cognoverint, primum medicamen non posse juvare, aut certe [page 345] ipsam infirmitatem periculosiorem esse cognoverint.

The lighter the fault appears to be, the longer he should remain at any one level but to the extent that it is more grave, transition to another level should be swift, bearing in mind the practice of doctors, who, though they provide a variety of medicines and potions to the sick do not quickly change the medicine to be given until they know that the first medicine cannot help or [page 345] that the sickness is simply more dangerous.

Levioris culpae reus est, qui otiosus esse dilexerit, qui ad collationes vel ad missam tardius venerit, qui in choro riserit, qui fabulis vacaverit, qui relicto officio vel opere extra necessitatis causam foris recesserit, qui torporem aut somnum amaverit, qui juraverit, qui multiloquus fuerit, qui ministerium cujuslibet operis injunctum sibi sine benedictione susceperit, qui peracto opere benedictionem minime postulaverit, qui opus injunctum negligenter vel tardius expleverit, qui codice negligenter usus fuerit, qui aliquibus ad momentum successerit,⁴ qui occulte ab aliquo literas vel quodlibet munus acceperit, qui epistolam suscipiens occultaverit aut sine consensu abbatis rescripserit, qui cum quolibet parentum saecularium aut non parentum sine jussione senioris locutus fuerit, qui seniori inobediens fuerit, qui contumaciter seniori responderit, qui erga seniorem linguam non represserit, qui lascivus in lingua fuerit, qui inhoneste incesserit, qui jocaverit, qui satis riserit, qui illusionem nocturnam patri spiritali non patefecerit, qui iracundus fuerit, qui altae et erectae cervicis fuerit, qui mente tumidus fuerit, qui jactanti incessu moderatus non fuerit,⁵ qui discors fuerit, qui discordiam seminaverit, qui detractor fuerit, qui susurro fuerit, qui invidus fuerit, qui per inobedientiam murmuraverit, qui rixari verbis amaverit, qui convitium fratri intulerit, qui contumaci animo seniorem despexerit, qui rancorem adversus fratrem tenuerit, qui alicubi extra consultum abbatis vel praepositi discesserit. [cf. Isidore of Seville, Regula, c. 17, ed. Campos Rocca, pp. 114-115]

Cases of lighter faults include fondness of leisure, coming late to mass or table, laughter in choir, engaging in idle chatter, forsaking office and work to stay outside the monastery unnecessarily, love of inactivity and sleep, swearing, talkativeness, undertaking the performance of any task without obtaining blessing, failure to seek blessing on a task’s completion, completing a task negligently or late, negligence in the use of a book, [coming up on people momentarily],¹⁰ secretly receiving letters or any kind of gift from anyone, hiding any letter received or replying without the abbot’s consent, speaking with either worldly parent or any other member of the laity without the authority of a senior, disobedience to a senior, replying contumaciously to a senior, lack of restraint when speaking to a senior, wantonness of speech, immodesty of gait, jesting, laughing to excess, failure to disclose nocturnal emissions¹¹ to a spiritual father, anger, holding one’s head up high, haughtiness, moving in a conceited manner, disagreeableness, provoking discord, disparaging, rumor mongering, envy, disobedient muttering, argumentativeness, insulting a brother, showing contumacious disrespect to a senior, holding a grudge against a brother and deviating in any respect from a decision of the abbot or prior. [cf. Isidore of Seville, Regula, c. 17]

Dicenda sunt similiter aliquanta peccata, quae regula graviores culpas nuncupat, quae ad quartum praefatum modum attinent. Sed necesse est prudenter pensare de his gravioribus culpis, quia quamvis omnes culpae graviores nomine gravioris nominentur, tamen si pondus pensaverimus, non omnes aequaliter inveniuntur graviores.

Similar reference should be made to various sins which the rule identifies as graver faults and which relate to the fourth method mentioned. But judicious examination is needed concerning these graver faults, as although they may all be classified as graver, yet in our assessment of their gravity not all are found to be equally grave.

Unde etiam pensanda est canonica auctoritas, quae prohibet illum, qui publicam [page 346] poenitentiam gessit, ad ordinem presbyteratus sive diaconatus venire, si vero ordinatus presbyter publicam egerit poenitentiam, a suo jubet recedere ministerio.

Consideration should then also be given to canonical authority which bars anyone who has performed public [page 346] penance from becoming ordained as a priest or deacon and requires any ordained priest who has performed public penance to leave his ministry.

Unde eum, qui excommunicandi habet ministerium, necesse est pensare personam et culpam, quia quamvis pro omnibus culpis gravioribus videatur regula praecipere extra ecclesiam et refectorium atque consortium fratrum poenitendum esse eum, qui gravioris culpae obnoxius fuerit, tamen discretus et prudens doctor discernere debet personam, cui officit publica poenitentia, ad sacrum ordinem ascendere, et cui non officit.

Anyone, therefore, with responsibility for excommunication must consider the individual and the fault, because although for all graver faults the rule appears to provide that anyone guilty thereof should perform penance through exclusion from the church, the refectory and fraternal company, yet a discerning and prudent abbot will distinguish on an individual basis whose advancement to holy orders is blocked by public penance and whose not.

Si vero talis ac tanta fuerit, gravior culpa, pro qua secundum canonicam auctoritatem ad ordinem clericatus non possit accedere, tunc omnis, sive literatus sive illiteratus, sive doctus sive indoctus fuerit, qui hujuscemodi culpae obnoxius est, in graviori culpa judicandus est.

But if a graver fault is of a kind and degree to make advancement to clerical rank impossible according to canonical authority, then anyone, lettered or unlettered, educated or uneducated, who is guilty of a fault of this kind should face the judgment for a graver fault.

Si autem ipsa culpa gravior talis fuerit, unde eum canones non prohibeant, ad ordinem clericatus accedere, et ipsa persona sive ordinatus sit sive adhuc non sit, et tamen potest provehi⁶ - iste talis pro hujuscemodi peccato non debet publice poenitere pro dicta canonica auctoritate - eo quod canonica auctoritas est, quia, qui publicam poenitentiam egit, nec presbyter nec diaconus esse potest, si vero in presbyteratu vel diaconatu constitutus publicam poenitentiam egerit, ab ordine removeri debet; publica⁷ poenitentia est, in qua monachus separatus ab ecclesia et a refectorio vel a consortio omnium fratrum solus in poenitentiae luctu consistit.

But if the graver fault is one for which the canons do not bar the offender from proceeding to clerical orders and the individual, whether already ordained or not, can nevertheless be promoted - in conformity with canonical authority such a person should not have to make public penance - there being no requirement under canon law for public penance for such a sin – for the reason that canonical authority provides that anyone who has performed public penance cannot be a priest or deacon and that anyone who has performed public penance whilst occupying the position of a priest or deacon should be removed from the order.  Public penance is where a monk is excluded from the church, the refectory and all fraternal company to remain alone in penitential sorrow.

Sed in minoris et levioris culpae, de qua in secundo modo diximus, judicio tenendus est, quamvis gravius, quam si minor culpa fuisset, ne, cum possit proficere, pro tali incauto judicio proficiendi in sancta ecclesia impediatur. Quodsi talis fuerit persona, sive illiterata sive alia, quae nullo modo potest ad ordinem clericatus venire, pro qualicunque graviori culpa in graviori judicio judicandus est.

But a person should be judged at the level of a minor or lighter fault, of which we spoke in relation to the second method, even though the fault was graver than if it were a minor fault, so as not to prevent someone capable thereof from advancement in the holy church as a result of an incautious ruling. But if the individual is such, whether unlettered or not, who in no way can reach the clerical order, he should be judged for any graver fault according to the graver form of judgment.

Gravioris culpae reus est, qui temulentus fuerit, qui feminarum [page 347] familiaris fuit, qui fraudator rei acceptae aut commissae sibi aut minus commissae fuerit, inter haec si de rebus secum allatis extulerit, qui furatus fuerit, qui personam innocentem falso crimine maculaverit, qui cum parvulo jocaverit, qui cum eo riserit, qui illum osculatus fuerit, qui cum altero in uno lecto jacuerit, qui extra communem mensam privatim vel furtim quidpiam sumpserit, qui, ut otiosus sit, falsitatem praetenderit. [cf. Isidore of Seville, Regula, c. 17, ed. Campos Rocca, pp. 115-116]

Someone is chargeable with a graver fault in the case of drunkenness, [page 347] associating with women, embezzlement of any item obtained in trust or otherwise, including taking things brought with him, theft, bringing stain on an innocent person by false accusation, jesting with a child, laughing with him or kissing him, lying in one bed with another, privately or furtively removing anything from the common table, making false excuses to avoid work. [cf. Isidore of Seville, Regula, c. 17]

Sed de his omnibus culpis, quas graviores dicimus, subtili investigatione pensandum est, quo animo aut qua intentione eas quilibet perpetraverit, ut secundum meritum judicari valeat. Nam et in ipsis gravioribus culpis non semper aequaliter graviores inveniuntur.

But concerning all these faults, which we have called graver, the spirit and intention with which anyone has committed them should be assessed through precise investigation so that it may be judged on its merits. For even with the graver faults, they are not found to be of equal gravity.