This is not a typical study of medieval charity that focuses on institutions, such as hospitals or alms funds, dedicated to assisting the poor. The author instead labels his work a theological history that studies the idea and practice of caritas in the writings of Augustine of Hippo, Benedict of Nursia, Pope Gregory the Great, and Bernard of Clairvaux as well as in those of their modern commentators. Secondarily, this study seeks to discover in these writings a window into modern religious violence, its causes and solutions. The book is divided into two parts. The first expounds on the meaning of caritas in the various writings of St. Augustine. Part 2 traces the evolution of this notion of caritas in the works of Benedict, Gregory, and Bernard. An epilog addresses how the insights of these medieval authors can enhance our understanding of modern religious violence.
St. Augustine seeks to promote solidarity within a Christian community that he seeks to define. Who is in and who is out? He focuses on the importance of reading scripture as preparation for preaching about caritas. The role of the leader (presumably the bishop) is to promote solidarity which is achieved through the giving and receiving of alms. For individuals, solidarity implies submission to the correction of the Church and may involve a measure of coercion. Augustine believes works of mercy and alms-giving purify society. Along with fasting and prayer they bring about a unity with Christ. Augustine, however, warns that alms are not a financial transaction that guarantees salvation. Such alms are worthless unless accompanied by a spirit of reconciliation.
Part 2 opens with an examination of Benedict’s transformation of leadership to give Augustine’s spirituality and understanding of caritas an institutional base. Benedict’s Rule demonstrates how this understanding can support a social and political program. The author laments the contemporary obstacles to solidarity that give rise to racism, anti-Semitism, and right-wing political agendas. One response to this is the modern Benedict Project that calls upon Catholics to isolate themselves from the secular world. In Benedict’s age, the focus is on the abbot’s authority. This, in theory, is absolute but in fact was limited by his consultations with the brethren and Benedict’s admonishment that correction be suited to the needs of the monk being disciplined.
Pope Gregory, who had become both the spiritual and temporal ruler of Rome, had to balance affective or mystical caritas with material assistance given to the people of his city. He advocated a mixed life that blended contemplation with the active love of neighbor. Gregory applied income from the Patrimony of St. Peter in support of the poor, orphans, the sick, captives, and the clergy. This generosity forced Gregory to draw boundaries and decide whom to help. Jews, for example, were considered outsiders and were denied any assistance other than a bonus for converting. Schismatics and heretics, on the other hand, were viewed as wayward insiders, polluters to be subject to discipline or conversion. Pagans were not actively persecuted but were deprived of places to worship. Institutionally, Gregory’s Pastoral Rule provided a systematic but flexible guide for fellow bishops.
The twelfth century ushered a new age in which solidarity was no longer singular. The rise of new monastic orders like the Cistercians as well as the military, mendicant, and caritative orders ended the Benedictine monopoly of the religious life. So, instead of a singular understanding of caritas, there was a fragmentation of charity. Each of the new orders was defined by its own Rule and charism. Even the Rule of St. Augustine was adapted in support of multiple apostolates. The Rule itself became the primary source of authority, to which even a religious superior was subject. Bernard of Clairvaux epitomized this diversity with his service as abbot, papal advisor, preacher, and promoter of crusades. In the Church as a whole, the lines of distinction between bishop, priest, monk, nun, and laity became sharper. Interestingly, lay brothers were much ignored, even in orders that had them. Instead of one unity, there were now several: collective, conjugal, natural, moral, desire, and condescension. Teubner asks: how can plurality exist in unity and unity in plurality? For many religious, the notion of community was limited to their own congregations.
In his epilogue, the author proposes a path for the elimination of religious violence: the existence of a narrative of peace and a strong leader who can bring enemies together. He sees our society, with its degradation of migrants, suffering a crisis of solidarity. This path to solidarity begins with alms-giving, a practice the author ascribes to Augustine. This is promoted through prayer and preaching. Both the innocent and the guilty from all rungs of the social scale must practice the giving and receiving of forgiveness. While Augustine offered no advice on how to bring this about, we see more concrete exertions of authority by Benedict and Gregory. The meaning of community shifted from Augustine’s singular sense to the fragmentation of Bernard’s era.
In summary, the book is presented as a theological history that shows how certain conceptualizations brought coherence and purpose to religious practice, particularly a focus on what promotes solidarity. The author ends by posting a challenge to his readers to contest what he has to say. This is a densely written study and so that challenge is likely to be taken up by theologians.
