Migne, 66, col. 859.
To all bishops and other ecclesiastics and to all Christian men: Know ye that I have given permission to this our brother (name), to live according to the rule wherever he shall desire, believing it to be for the advantage of the monastery and the good of his soul.
264. Letter of Dismissal.
Migne, 66, col. 859.
This our brother (name), has desired to dwell in another monastery where it seems to him he can best serve the Lord and save his own soul. Know ye, therefore, that we have given him permission by this letter of dismissal to betake himself thither.
265. The Regular Clergy. Prologue of the Rule of St. Chrodegang, Bishop of Metz, for His Clergy, ca. 744.
Holstenius Codex Regularum, etc., II, p. 96.
We give here only a part of the rule of St. Chrodegang, bishop of Metz, because it makes clear the purpose for which the rule was composed. It was for the clergy and not for the monks. The rule itself consists of a number of paragraphs prescribing in detail the life of the clergy who were to live together with their bishop. This action of St. Chrodegang was not altogether new. St. Augustine, bishop of Hippo in Africa, it is said, had all the clergy of his city live with him in a common house very much after the fashion of monks in a monastery. His example may have had some influence, but it was not generally imitated. The immediate purpose of St. Chrodegang in compelling the clergy of his diocese to live with him was to reform them. They differed little in life and morals from the laymen and were no doubt sadly in need of a reform. They were now deprived of much of their independence. They ate at a common table, slept in a common dormitory, observed common hours of prayer and work, and in general lived a "common life." They were clergymen, not monks, although they lived in nearly all respects as monks, and their house, or canonry, was conducted quite like a monastery. They were called by various names, such as regular clergy, canons regular, regular canons, etc. Other bishops imitated St. Chrodegang and in time it came to be regarded as the only proper way for the clergy to live. The Cluniac reforming party supported the idea with all its power and the regular clergy was soon organized into orders, chief of which was that of the Premonstratensians, which was established about 1120.
There were of course many priests whose parishes and churches were so far from the cathedral that they could not live with their bishop and continue to perform their parish duties. They lived in the world and hence were called the "secular clergy." The orders of regular canons despised them and heaped abuse on them, chiefly because they did not live according to a rule. The orders of regular canons soon became rich, and tended to indolence and luxury. They were beset by the same temptations as the monks, and their history does not differ materially from that of the monkish orders.
If the authority of the 318 holy fathers [the council of Nicæa, 325] and of the canons were observed, and the bishops and their clergy were living in the proper way, it would be quite unnecessary for anyone so humble and unimportant as we to attempt to say anything about this matter [that is, the way in which the clergy should live], which has been so well treated by the holy fathers, or to add anything new to what they have said. But since the negligence of the bishops as well as of their clergy is rapidly increasing, a further duty seems incumbent on us. And we are certainly in great danger unless we do, if not all we should, at least all we can, to bring our clergy back to the proper way of living.