The life of Poggio Bracciolini

by William Shepherd

Andrew of Constantinople, in quality of moderator, replies to Lusco, and points out the distinction which the latter had artfully confounded, between a desire of the good things of life, and Avarice. This desire, says he, if moderate, is virtuous; if immoderate, it degenerates into covetousness, and becomes a vice. He then proceeds to answer the arguments of Lusco in regular order. In the course of his harangue he takes occasion to stigmatize the avaricious disposition of sovereign princes, and of the clergy; and in conclusion he supports his opinion by various quotations from the fathers and the ancient classic authors. The remarks of Andrew meeting the approbation of his auditors, the conference is closed.[162]

In the sentiments of disapprobation with which the good taste of Poggio led him to regard the harangues of the popular preachers of his time, he is supported by the weighty suffrage of Tiraboschi. “Some of the sacred orators of the fifteenth century,” says that judicious critic, “are mentioned with praise, not merely by vulgar and unpolished, but also by the most cultivated writers.—On the other hand, we have an opportunity of inspecting the discourses of these famed orators; and generally speaking, we cannot see in them the shadow of that eloquence for which they are so highly commended. Let any one read the sermons of S. Bernardino da Siena, Fra Roberto da Lecce, B. Alberto da Sarteano, Fra Michele da Carcano, and of many others, who, as the writers of that age inform us, attracted whole cities and provinces to hear them: and then judge whether they deserve the character of eloquent orations. They are generally nothing more than dry treatises on scholastic points, or on matters of theological morality, full of quotations of sacred and profane authors, where we see coupled together St. Augustine and Virgil, Chrysostom and Juvenal. The force of their eloquence consists in some exclamations, to which is sometimes joined a description of the vices of the times, which would now excite the most immoderate laughter, but which then caused the audience to melt into tears.”[163]

The friars whom Poggio satirizes with such severity in his dialogue on Avarice, were a branch of the order of Franciscans, who, on account of the extraordinary strictness with which they professed to exercise their conventual discipline, were distinguished by the title of Fratres Observantiæ. The founder of this new subdivision of the ecclesiastical order was the above-mentioned Bernardino, of Siena, who appears by the testimony of Poggio to have been a man of great virtue and of considerable talents. Several of his disciples, however, who were not endued either with his good principles or his abilities, emulous of the reputation which he had acquired by preaching, began also to harangue the people from the pulpit.

Of these self-constituted instructors Poggio has drawn the following striking picture. “Inflated by the pretended inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they expound the sacred scriptures to the populace with such gross ignorance, that nothing can exceed their folly. I have often gone to hear them for the sake of amusement; for they were in the habit of saying things, which would move to laughter the gravest and most phlegmatic man on the face of the earth. You might see them throwing themselves about as if they were ready to leap out of the pulpit; now raising their voices to the highest pitch of fury—now sinking into a conciliatory whisper—sometimes they beat the desk with their hands—sometimes they laughed, and in the course of their babbling they assumed as many forms as Proteus. Indeed they are more like monkeys than preachers, and have no qualification for their profession, except an unwearied pair of lungs.”[164]

Though the impudence of these men, which was equal to their folly, disgusted people of good sense, they had numerous partizans and admirers among the populace. Elated by their success, they arrogated to themselves considerable consequence. Some of them, in the pride of their hearts, scorned to hold inferior stations in the convents in which they were established, and solicited the erection of new monasteries, of which their ambition prompted them to expect to become the superiors. Scandalized by these irregularities, the assertors of discipline summoned an assembly of the brothers of the Franciscan order from every province of Italy, for the purpose of remedying these evils, which were likely to bring disgrace upon their fraternity. This assembly, which consisted of eighty members, decreed, that a general chapter of their order should be held on the ensuing feast of Pentecost—that in the interim, six only of the friars should be allowed to preach—and that no new convent should be erected for the accommodation of the Franciscans, till the pleasure of the above-mentioned general chapter should be known. The task of drawing up these decrees was assigned to Poggio—a task which it may be presumed he undertook with pleasure, and executed with fidelity. The mortified preachers and their partizans, imagining that Poggio was not only the registrer, but the author of these unwelcome restrictions, inveighed against his conduct with great bitterness. Soon after the publication of the above-mentioned decree, Carlo Ricascolo, a devout citizen of Florence, presented to the Fratres Observantiæ a small estate pleasantly situated in the neighbourhood of Arezzo. On this estate the friars immediately began, in defiance of the prohibition so lately issued by the heads of their order, to lay the foundation of a new monastery. Poggio thought it his duty to represent this act of contumacy to the pontiff, who immediately issued orders to the bishop of Fiesole to put a stop to the prosecution of the building. This circumstance still farther excited against Poggio the animosity of the indignant ecclesiastics, who industriously vilified his character, representing him as an enemy of the Christian faith, and a malignant persecutor of the true believers. Niccolo Niccoli, with his usual impetuosity, gave credit to these accusations, and wrote to Poggio a letter of remonstrance. To this letter Poggio replied, first simply stating the facts of the case, and then protesting that he was no enemy either to religion or its professors—“on the contrary,” says he, “I make a point of behaving with the utmost reverence to those ecclesiastics who adorn their religion with virtuous conduct. But,” proceeded he, “I have been so often deceived, so frequently disappointed in the good opinion which I had conceived of men, that I know not whom or what to believe. There are so many wicked people, who conceal their vices by the sanctity of their looks, and the humility of their apparel, that confidence is in a manner destroyed. In the pontifical court we have too many opportunities of becoming acquainted with iniquitous transactions, of which people in general are ignorant. I am not however surprised,” says he in the conclusion of his letter, “that these friars should complain of their being prevented from establishing themselves in such a pleasant district. The excellence of our wine is a powerful allurement, both to strangers and to our own countrymen. Plato, who was no Christian, chose for the scite of his academy an unhealthy spot, in order that the mind might gain strength by the infirmity of the body. But these pretended followers of Christ act upon a different system. They select pleasant and voluptuous places—they seek not solitude, but society—they do not wish to promote the cultivation of the mind, but the pampering of the corporeal appetites.”

These sarcasms were communicated by Niccolo to Alberto da Sarteano,[165] a brother of the Franciscan order, who was so much displeased by them, that he expostulated with Poggio on the alleged impropriety of his conduct, in a long letter, to which the latter replied in a grave strain of irony, defending and confirming the remarks which had been so copious a subject of animadversion. Towards the conclusion of his letter, he bestowed upon his correspondent the following seasonable advice. “Do you apply yourself to your preaching, and attend to your peculiar province. Leave the building of religious houses to others, and be assured, that wheresoever you are, there you may acceptably serve and worship God.”

This letter to Alberto, Poggio enclosed in another, which he addressed to Ambrogio Traversari. To the learned monk of Camaldoli he could venture to write, even upon this delicate subject, with all the freedom of jocularity. “I cannot help thinking,” says he, “that the benevolence of many persons is too great, who prefer the public good to their private interest; and who, through their anxiety for the salvation of others, lose their own souls. I could wish that these men would retire to woods and deserts, where they might attain to the perfection of holy living, rather than settle in such pleasant places, in which they run such risk of falling into temptation. Your favourite St. Jerome says, that it is better and safer to be in a situation where it is impossible to err, than even to escape from imminent danger. I am afraid some people have too much confidence in their own fortitude. But I have done.—Let every one bear his own burden.—Farewell, and pray that your friend Poggio may amend his ways.”[166]

The lenient influence of time did not abate the dislike and contempt which Poggio entertained for those ecclesiastics who adopted the religious habit as a convenient cloak for the concealment of indolence or luxury; and who, by the mere appearance of extraordinary sanctity, endeavoured to attain those worldly honours which they affected to despise. When he was declined into the vale of years, he attacked those pests of society in a dialogue on Hypocrisy, a composition which abounds in the keen sarcasms of polished wit, and in acute observations on the human character. It is no doubt on account of the boldness with which he inveighs against the evil practices of pretenders to uncommon strictness in the observance of religious duties, that the editors of his works have suppressed this dialogue, which has been preserved and circulated by the industrious zeal of protestantism.[167] The freedom with which he therein speaks of the vices, not merely of individuals, but of whole classes of religious hypocrites, is truly astonishing. The following remonstrance against the folly and wickedness of the monastic life savours more of the eighteenth, than of the fifteenth century, and is drawn up in the spirit of a Gallic œconomiste, rather than in the style of a secretary to the sovereign pontiff. “I do not wish to scrutinize into the secret life of these cœnobites, which is known only to God. I will not inquire whether they are sober or otherwise; whether they are chaste or unchaste; whether they employ their time in study, or waste it in idleness; whether they are the prey of envy; and whether they are continually hunting after preferment. It is not sufficient that they keep within doors, oppressed with a load of garments, and do no public and open mischief. Let me ask, of what utility are they to the faith, and what advantage do they confer on the public? I cannot find that they do any thing but sing like grasshoppers, and I cannot help thinking they are too liberally paid for the mere exercise of their lungs. But they extol their labours as a kind of Herculean task, because they rise in the night to chant the praises of God. This is no doubt an extraordinary proof of merit, that they sit up to exercise themselves in psalmody. What would they say if they rose to go to the plough, like farmers, exposed to the wind and rain, with bare feet, and with their bodies thinly clad? In such a case no doubt the Deity could not possibly requite them for their toil and sufferings. But it may be said, there are many worthy men amongst them. I acknowledge it. It would be a lamentable thing indeed, should there be no good men in so vast a multitude. But the majority of them are idle, hypocritical, and destitute of virtue. How many do you think enter upon the religious life through a desire to amend their morals? You can recount very few who do not assume the habit on account of some extraneous cause. They dedicate, not their minds, but their bodies to devotional exercises. Many adopt the monastic garb on account of the imbecility of their spirits, which prevents them from exerting themselves to gain an honest livelihood. Some, when they have spent their property in extravagance, enter into religious houses, because they think that they shall there find a rich pasture; others are induced to hide in these abodes the infamy which they have contracted by their ignorance, and by their dissolute and abandoned course of life.”