Logo DBNL
The Modern Devotion (1968)

The Modern Devotion

(1968)–R.R. Post–rechtenstatus Auteursrechtelijk beschermd

Confrontation with Reformation and Humanism


Vorige Volgende

D. Attitude towards the Mission

Geert Groote's spiritual care for these two groups could be exercised in person since he stayed either in the house of Florens Radewyns or in his own house, where the Sisters lodged. The piety which he recommended to various monastics was also to be the aim of these Brethren and Sisters and to some extent even of those who, converted by his sermons, strove after devotion, yet retained their position in the family and in the town. Are there letters or works which give a clearer description of the ideal of the Devotionalists? The fact that Groote calls his companions servitores, servants of God, does not in itself mean much. It is of more significance that they were called ‘spirituals.’

A letter to Salvarvilla, dated by Mulder in the year 1379,2 testifies to the fact that Groote moved in circles other than those of monastics, or Brethren and Sisters of the Common Life. This Salvarvilla was at that time a professor in Paris, a fighter for the unity of the Church and thus an opponent of the recent Schism, whereby the University, under pressure from the king, inclined towards the Avignon pope. Salvarvilla recognized the legality of Urban VI's election and fought to have

him universally recognized. Since this rendered his position in Paris difficult, he contemplated a journey to the Near East, to do missionary work. He informed his friend Geert Groote of this plan. The latter, however, vehemently counselled him against it in the letter which has become a treatise. This document characterizes Groote both as a man with a limited horizon and as an erudite lawyer who can find sufficient arguments to support his ideas, in this case, to dissuade his friend from leaving, and to persuade him to stay and preach in France. In short, to do roughly what Groote was doing himself at that moment or would do later. Groote's view of conditions prevailing at the University of Paris and his more or less critical attitude towards the sermons of his day and towards the manner in which learning was practised there, are often quoted as proof of Groote's unease with regard to late-medieval learning and his longing for renewal. One must remember, however, that disapproval of an existing programme does not necessarily imply the existence of an alternative, and furthermore that we are dealing here with the lawyer, the man who wishes to prevail upon his friend to work in Paris and surrounding districts since there is so much to be done there. Groote appears to be acquainted with the courses at the University, not only in the faculties of philosophy and theology, but also in the juridical faculty. He recognizes that there are two sorts of vocation; one whereby God draws someone against his will, as with Jeremiah, and the other whereby a person willingly makes himself available, as with Isaiah. Salvarvilla felt the call to preach among the Greeks and Slavs, but not, however, among the Arabs and Mahommedans. In Groote's opinion he would do better to stay closer to home. The apostles began in their native land; even Paul, the apostle of the pagans, testifies that he would do anything to sanctify some among his own people1. Moreover, the west has need of good preachers. Those of the present time seek self-righteousness, adopt an affected tone and their sermons, with introduction, division into sections and long quotations are learned, but not practical. The preachers are vain, and long for praise, but they do not touch the soul. They do not bring the heathen to repentance and a longing for heaven. Should Livy or Cicero or Seneca or Pliny be present at a sermon they would laugh at the cheap adornments, and the apostles too would laugh at what they now heard from the pulpit. This is where the need is, it is Paris he must help. The preachers are disturbers of piety and deceive the public. It is true that

they read the Scriptures, but what they read is not translated into pastoral care. They incite mockery of the Holy Scriptures by venturing into all sorts of questions in order to display their erudition, but any fourth year pupil of the city schools could raise well founded objections.

The jurists also stand in need of good preachers, for they no longer know epikie, piety, morality. They accept gifts and look for position and money and complicate matters unnecessarily. We must be on our guard against the Aristotelian hiding places. The jurists do not know the crafty Greeks to whom Augustine, Socrates and Plato referred. The poets too, whom they call seers, have plucked out the eyes of the wise. Seneca wishes not to pluck out the eyes, but to cut out the tongue of Aristotle among others, and even of Socrates who was steeped in the entire Ionic philosophy and was declared holy by the oracles.1 These philosophers taint theological truth by mingling their wisdom with that of the Holy Scriptures: ‘God, God, what a mixture comes forth from the rind and the pith of the Holy Scriptures, and the song of the sirens!’ Rejection of the truth which leads to heresy, has seized Europe, and philosophy, which according to Jerome is the mother of all heresies.2 Paul has already warned against it. The worst thing in the world is worldly learning which is no learning at all but merely its shadow. It is the source of all evil. The people in the gowns and the ignorant physicians do nothing to oppose this. It is for Salvarvilla to raise his voice in protest, ‘Preach the fall of the clergy and the decline of learning.’3 As much as the practitioners of learning err from the good, they lose the true. It is for this that Socrates, according to Cicero, called virtue learning.

Those living on the land, the simple people and the innocent, receive less from the theologians and their friends in the big cities such as Rome, Avignon and Paris, than in the smaller places.4 It is for this reason that the trumpet must be sounded in Paris and battle joined with all the enemies of God. With those who make of God's house, that is, the wisdom of God, a den of thieves, who do not enter by the door of the imitation of Christ's humanity in order to attempt to attain to the Godhead through contemplation, or, going away, try to find the pastures through the active life.5 At night he must retire to the mount of Olives, preach mainly in the villages but in the royal city on feast-

days in order to address the Pharisees and Scribes, Bishops and Princes. Groote considers this a digression in his letter, yet has none the less persevered for some say that Paris has preachers enough. In conclusion he sums up the reasons why Salvarvilla should not go to the schismatics.

 

1.You were brought up in the French way of learning and it is a thankless task to leave it.
2.The order of charity requires that the fatherland should come first; anyway there are no communications and you will receive no help from the home front.
3.You are a barbarian to them and they will not understand you.
4.There is only a very small group that will listen to you. There is no place for a sermon: it will become a private, acrimonious conversation.
5.You would achieve a better result by sending books from Paris.
6.You are alone among the schismatics, extremely isolated as a result of the corruption of books and ignorance of the language.
7.Consider how difficult it is to convert a philosopher, a garrulous lawyer or a student of profane learning to apostolic innocence or mystical theology.
8.Everyone is satisfied with his own opinion, everyone is happy in his own faculty.
9.The disputes in our own milieu prove how difficult it is to convince anyone by reasoning, and yet we have the same ideas, means of expression and arguments. This is also proved by the Academics and Stoics, not only Seneca. It is much more difficult among the schismatics who, moreover, feel irritated by our ways of reasoning.
10.They have their own language and call your translation corrupt. They laugh at the natural philosophy of Paris, at your sophistic subtleties and your dialectic trivialities. They quote books and translations of unknown doctors of theology.1
11.The disputes are reduced to interpretations and conundrums.
12.They too have their methods and it might well be that you would have to concede victory to them.
13.How can you leave your own bishop? The limb belongs with the head. It may be that the bishop will allow himself to be prevailed upon to grant your request, but I consider it not permissible to ask for leave.
14.If he should ask me for advice I would strongly advise him against giving permission. For he has also many sheep and needs your help to guide them, either by your activities or by your medical or surgical skills.
15.The fact that God no longer confers the gift of tongues, indicates that one must work more in one's own locality.
16.The example of Ezekiel: although he devoured the book of God and so obtained the Divine Word in his mouth, he was not sent to strange or far-away peoples.1

 

We may assume that such a list of arguments made an impression on Salvarvilla. He did not go to the East after all, but on leaving Paris obtained a function in the church of Liège. Besides fulfilling his task as archdeacon he also worked to settle the schism. It was a long time, a couple of years, before he succeeded in persuading Groote to struggle with him in this field. In his last letters to Groote he tells him that he would like to live and preach in a region where he understood the language of the population.2 He died in 1384/5.

Groote knew the peoples of Europe and Asia but scarcely mentions those of Africa. He is also familiar with Greek philosophy and its principal headings, the business of the University of Paris and the Latin authors: Livy, Seneca, Cicero and Pliny. This does not yet indicate the influence of Humanism, which had already blossomed in Italy. Although Groote refers to these writers as persons of authority this is not remarkable for a medieval scholar of any stature. Groote is ingenious in finding arguments for his purpose. This must be considered as a fruit of the dialectica and a consequence of his study and wide reading. The modern reader will be unable to agree with much of it, but Groote's ideal, preaching and practical activity interspersed with retirement and meditation, emerges clearly. There is a time for entering into the temple in order to attain to the divinitatem through contemplation, but there is also a time for going away to field work, per activam vitam.3

Salvarvilla remained Groote's faithful friend. He was his confidant until Groote's death. His Dutch friends were not of the same high standard. As we shall see, Groote kept Salvarvilla informed of the position in the struggle against the focarists. If he emerges from this letter as rather narrow-minded, it is that his judgment and advice in

matters of law are often somewhat harsh, especially in the question of simony. To my mind he displays the most likeable side of his character in his attitude towards young monastics, and towards priests troubled by difficulties. We have already seen this in part and it will become even clearer from the examples which follow.


Vorige Volgende