Little is known about Bernard’s education at Chatillon prior to his becoming a monk at Citeaux. William of Saint-Thierry would later recall that he gained his most important insights not from reading or from teachers, but rather from the experience of solitude, gained from meditating ‘‘in woodland or field’’ (Vita prima 4, PL 185, 240CD). Monasticism provided a creative framework by which Bernard could channel his literary and spiritual energies, as well as formulate his own form of philosophical reflection, framed in terms of interior reflection rather than of academic enquiry.
Bernard was always interested in the need for authenticity in the religious life, and the importance of consideratio, or sustained reflection (Michel 1993). In an early work (1118/1119; Holdsworth 1994), the De gradibus humilitatis et superbiae, he builds on Benedict’s relatively impersonal reflection on the stages of humility to reflect on the example presented by Christ in humbling himself to death. By overcoming personal obstacles, ‘‘they may cross over through contemplation to the third level of truth’’ (De gradibus 19; SBO 3:30). He was critical of monks who pursued vainglory rather than interior wisdom.
His observations about false monasticism provide some of his most poignant insights, and help explain his continuing popularity down through the centuries in an ascetic milieu.
In another early treatise addressed to William of Saint-Thierry, the De gratia et libero arbitrio, Bernard addresses a doctrinal issue, that of grace and free will, drawing firmly on the teaching of Augustine and the intellectual traditions of the school of Laon. He analyzes the nature of the free will or judgment that defines our humanity. This capacity for freedom is what defines us, as made in the image of God. He considers the various pressures acting against free will, and the need for active consent to a good will. Everything good comes from divine grace, but cannot be received without active choice on our part.
Bernard acquired perhaps the most distinctive aspect of his thought, his fascination with the Song of Songs as an account of the desire of the soul for the Word of God, through his encounter with the commentary on that work of Origen, preserved in the Latin translation of Rufinus. Origen’s writings had been little studied prior to the late eleventh century, having been officially condemned (apart from those approved by Jerome) in the fifth century. Bernard’s discovery of Origen’s commentary provided a new impetus for his reflection on the Song of Songs as a medium for reflecting on love and spiritual transformation. In the prologue to that commentary (In Cant. Prol. 2), Origen had spoken of the interest of the Greeks in composing many dialogues de amoris natura, but sought to correct deficiencies by framing his reflection in terms of the Song of Songs - a treatise that he considered to focus on the contemplation of divinity, the ultimate focus of ‘‘true philosophy.” Origen’s commentary, in which amor was used interchangeably with dilectio and caritas (even though Origen recognized that in scripture, the term amor was often replaced by dilectio and caritas) helped Bernard interpret the Song of Songs as the springboard for his own reflection on the spiritual life, in which he placed new attention on the role of experience. William of Saint-Thierry recalled the intimacy of the moment, when they were both convalescing at Clairvaux and debating the spiritual nature of the soul and the remedies offered by virtues against the vices (Vita prima 12, PL 185, 259B; dated to 1128 by Verdeyen 1992:570, but perhaps earlier, following Holdsworth 1994). Bernard began to speak about the Song of Songs, very likely inspired by their reading of Origen, whose writings were preserved at Clairvaux.
Bernard was interested in the Song ofSongs for what it had to say about the transformation ofthe soul in its desire for God. In his De diligendo Deo, composed probably in the early 1130s, he makes the first attempt in Christian tradition to write a treatise about loving God. While God should be loved for his own sake, he acknowledges that initially human beings love themselves for their own sake. Man must come acknowledge the supreme dignity that they have been accorded as creatures of free will made in the image of God. Self-knowledge is the most important path of any inquiry. Even those who did not know Christ were able to recognize that God should be loved for his own sake, although this could not be achieved by their own effort (De diligendo Deo 6; SBO 3:123). He is acutely aware of the selfishness of human nature unredeemed by grace. This greed has to be subject to reason, in order to be transcended. Rather than urge the study of philosophy, he argues that the transformation takes place through loving God. Whereas William of Saint-Thierry had emphasized the gulf between carnal and spiritual love, Bernard focuses on the evolving stages of different kinds of love, beginning with love of self, evolving to love of neighbor, initially for one’s own sake, but subsequently for the sake of God. Man loves God initially for one’s own sake, then for God’s sake, and then only finally does man love himself for the sake of God.
Bernard started to compose his sermons on the Song of Songs during the mid-1130s, continuing to work on them over the next 2 decades. He sought to provide not a formal exegesis of its text, but a reflection on the core themes of desire for God, and the visiting of the soul by the Word of God. Because he was addressing monks rather than students of philosophy, he had no need to acknowledge formal sources of inspiration other than scripture. Nonetheless, his commentary was profoundly shaped by Origen’s recasting of Platonist philosophy within the framework of the Song of Songs. In particular, he was excited by the bride’s opening exclamation, Osculetur me osculo oris sui (Cant. 1:1) as a way of understanding scripture as a whole. The first kiss was the desire of those who longed for Christ, the second was that of Jesus as man, the third the anticipated mystery of the incarnation, and the fourth the incarnation itself (super Cantica 2; SBO 1:8-13). In a late sermon (super Cantica 74.3; SBO 2:241), he speaks of his having been frequently received visited by the Word, as a moment of mystical understanding that helped him understand scripture and Christian tradition. While Abelard emphasized the role of reason and the need to understand words in understanding God as supreme good, and Hugh of Saint-Victor the value of physical sacramenta as manifesting God’s grace, Bernard highlighted the role of personal experience in this process. Although not the first monastic author to do so, his use of the language of experience, of which he had great literary command, was of enormous influence within a monastic environment in creating an image of the self as alienated from its true goal (Pranger 1994). While more educated monks in the twelfth century would continue to study systematic works of philosophy and theology within a monastic context, his writings helped shape a more interior, devotional spirituality, employing the literary artifice of the devotional prayers and meditations of St Anselm.
Bernard’s fame as a preacher led him to be increasingly involved in public affairs. In Lent 1140, William of Saint-Thierry - alarmed by reports of Abelard’s influence within the Church - composed a detailed analysis of his theological errors to Bernard, who responded by addressing to Pope Innocent II a treatise of his own (Epist. 190; SBO 8:17-40) on the various errors of Peter Abelard, in large part derived from the writing of William of Saint-ThierryAnd a summary of texts, excerpted by an aide, very likely Thomas of Morigny. The final list of 19 heresies imputed to Abelard, agreed to by a meeting of these authors, was circulated by Bernard at the end of his Epist. 190 (Mews 1985). Whereas in the Degradibus humilitatis et superbiae he had inveighed against the spirit of curiositas in other monks, he now turned his rhetorical skills to caricature Abelard as embodying intellectual arrogance. He accused Abelard of undermining divine omnipotence and minimizing the significance of the redemption brought about by Christ’s death. Misunderstanding Abelard’s emphasis on the goodness of the Holy Spirit and reserve toward the doctrine of original sin, he painted his adversary as an arrogant philosopher, unwilling to submit himself to the discipline of the Christian faith.
In sermon 36 on the Song of Songs, written around the time of his confrontation with Abelard, Bernard defends himself against charges of anti-intellectualism:
He insists that his criticism is reserved only for those who misuse science by seeking self-aggrandizement or curiositas, or seeking knowledge for its own sake, and fail to pursue the only true scientia, that of self-knowledge, ‘‘because this is what reason, usefulness, and order, demand’’ (super Cantica 36.5; SBO 2:7).
Bernard composed his last major work, De consideratione, between 1148 and his death in 1153, as a treatise addressed to Pope Eugenius III, urging him to turn from public affairs and engage in consideratio, mature reflection ‘‘that purifies the mind... confers knowledge of human and divine affairs... hunts down truth, scrutinizes what seems to be true, and explores lies and deceit’’ (De consideratione 1.8; SBO 3:403). In particular, he reflects in relation to the four virtues, that consideratio guides the mind into conformity with virtue (De consideratione 1.10; SBO 3:405). While he addresses Eugenius, reminding him that he is still a man, even though he has been elected Pope, the treatise can be read as a reflection on his own struggle to free himself from the trials of public life. The final end of consideration has to be oneself (De consideratione 2.6; SBO 3:414). After reflecting on the corruption, wealth and legalism that has crept into the Church, and the curia in particular, he devotes a long final book to reflecting on the third kind of consideration, namely that which goes beyond its first and second kinds, namely practical (dispensativa) and reflective (aestimativa) to that which is speculative (speculativa) and frees itself for contemplation (De consideratione 5.4; SBO 3:469). He concludes the work by laying out his understanding of God, employing the formula of St Anselm, ‘‘that than which nothing better can be thought’’ (De consideratione 5.15-16; SBO 3:479). What Abelard had presented as theologia, Bernard refers to as consideratio, his considered reflection on how God may be transcribed, what Origen had described as the goal of true philosophy. His response to the question ‘‘What is God?’’ offers reflection on divine simplicity. Speaking of God’s charity, majesty, and wisdom, he observes ‘‘It is not disputation but sanctity that comprehends them, if, however, what is incomprehensible can in any way be comprehended” (De consideratione 5.30; SBO 3:492). This leads him to reflect on contemplation, as distinct from consideration, namely admiration of divine majesty, observation of the judgments of God, the recollection of divine blessings, and the expectation of what is to come.
Bernard never called himself a philosopher, and stood in an ambiguous relationship to those who pursued philosophical enquiry. His public criticism of both Peter Abelard and Gilbert of Poitiers led to him being considered as an anti-intellectual by his critics. Yet, there was much that was philosophical about his reflection on the role of experience and the limits of reason (Brague 1993).
See also: > Augustine > Church Fathers > Gilbert of Poitiers > Hugh of St. Victor > Peter Abelard > William of Champeaux