Introduction—Historical Background

The Man Behind the Rule

Benedict of Nursia, the “Patriarch of Western monks,”1 was born c.480ad at Nursia, in Umbria, near Spoleto.2 He thus grew up under the rule of the Ostrogoths.3 As a young man, he was sent to Rome to be educated. Before long, however, he left Rome out of disgust for the rampant immorality he saw. Around the age of fourteen Benedict began to live as a hermit,4 and sometime around his twentieth birthday (c.500), he founded a hermitage at Subiaco.5 He would eventually leave his hermit lifestyle to found twelve monastic communities in the regions surrounding Subiaco. Each of these monasteries was modelled after Jesus’ pattern, with twelve disciples committed for life, living together under one Abbot. 6

For reasons largely unknown to historians, Benedict came under great persecutions at the hand of a local priest, and was forced to leave that area.7 It was on account of this persecution that Benedict travelled to Monte Cassino, where he would found his world-renowned monastery on top of a pagan temple that he helped destroy in 529.8 The monastery he began still stands and functions even in the 21st century, nearly 1500 years later.

Benedict would write the Rule, which would become “the classic text for Western monks,” while at Monte Cassino, somewhere closer to the end of his life: probably between 530 and 540.9 Though the Rule bears his name, Benedict is likely not the originator of much of the material.10 It is suggested that Benedict borrowed “freely” from the Life of Antony, Pachomius, the Egyptian (Desert) fathers, Basil of Caesarea, Macarius, Caesarius of Arles, Leo the Great, Augustine and Jerome; but the primary source for much of his material was the Rule of the Master.11

A man of unwavering passion and convictions, Benedict came to hold much clout even in his own day. Eventually he became so well-known in his own time that the Ostrogoth king went to visit him at Monte Cassino. But when the king got there, “the monk had nothing but harsh words and dire prophecies for the man whom he considered a tyrant.”12 Benedict would hold fast to his God till the day of his death, when he would die praying, standing at the foot of the altar at Monte Cassino (c.543-550).13

Historical Significance of the Rule

Benedict lived his life in a time “when the church was joined to the Empire, and thus became the church of the powerful,” which meant that “there were many who found in monasticism a way to live out the total commitment that had been required in earlier times.”14 This sums up precisely the goal of the Rule of Saint Benedict, which would “determine the shape of monasticism for centuries.”15

The Rule was accepted slowly, as it spread, along with other Rules which were somewhat similar. As time progressed, however, the influence of the Rule would become enormous. Thus, Frend writes:

In Anglo-Saxon England Benedict was to prevail only after the Synod of Whitby. Six years later in 670 the synod of the Gallic church at Autun made the Benedictine Rule obligatory on all monasteries in the Merovingian Gaul. Once accepted there was no looking back. The Rule gradually became the standard for western and northern Europe until the great monastic upsurge that followed the Hildebrandine reforms. Thus Benedict takes his place as one of the founders of the European Middle Ages.16

The monasticism of Benedict was opposite “in nearly every respect” to Columbanus’, which had been prevalent up to that point in Western Europe. At once, the Rule “combined estrangement from the world with clear ideas about how secular life was to be replaced by a fixed by service to God.” The arbitrary harshness of the Columban Rule was also abandoned.17

When Pope Gregory sent Augustine the missionary to England, he took the Rule with him, which began the great spread of the Rule’s influence.18 By the ninth century, the Rule had made a “clean sweep” of Western monasticism19 and had “superseded all others…(forming) the basis of new orders, such as the Cluniacs and Cistercians.”20 In Schaff’s words, Benedict

gave to the Western monasticism a fixed and permanent form and thus carried it far above the Eastern with its imperfect attempts at organization, and made it exceedingly profitable to the practical, and, incidentally, also to the literary interests of the Catholic Church. He holds, therefore, the dignity of patriarch of the Western monks. He has furnished a remarkable instance of the incalculable influence which a simple but judicious moral rule of life may exercise on many centuries.21

The English Benedictines who would follow from this heritage “were noted for their intellectual life, which produced such great scholars as the Venerable Bede.” They would also be largely responsible for the preservation of much of literary culture through the middle ages.22 While many Roman Catholics have argued somewhat fatuously and anachronistically that Benedict had far-reaching plans for saving society for the future of Europe, in the preservation of art and literature, that goal does not seem to be within the purview of the Rule itself.23 Rather, it seems far more probable that Benedict just “humbly planted a seed, which Providence blessed a hundredfold.”24

The Object of This Paper

The object of this paper is to draw out the major elements of the spirituality of Saint Benedict of Nursia, as they may be discovered within his Rule. It will be seen that the spirituality of the Rule of Benedict is one that is remarkably biblio-centric, with great emphases on humility, discipline and community. Were it not for limitations of space, time could well be spent on examining how each of these elements of his spirituality were somewhat unique in contrast to the common monastic Rules of Benedict’s day.25 As it stands, however, each of these areas of the Rule’s spirituality will be examined with evidence from the Rule itself, and the character of the spirituality will be evaluated in the conclusion.

The Spirituality of the Rule of Saint Benedict

A Biblio-centric Spirituality

When examining the spirituality of Benedict of Nursia in his Rule, it is impossible to not begin by emphasizing the important role that the Bible played in his life. This is shown first and foremost by the overwhelming number of quotations of and allusions to Scripture in each and every chapter. In the Rule, which consists of only 73 short chapters (no more than a few paragraphs each), there are well over 280 allusions to or direct quotations from the Bible.26 All these quotations (presumably taken largely from memory, as all the monks had to memorize large portions) result from the high view of Scripture which Benedict clearly holds: “For what page or what utterance of the divinely inspired books of the Old and New Testaments is not a most exact rule of human life?”27

That Benedict’s spirituality was centred around the Scriptures is also seen clearly in the prevalence of the Bible within the daily routine of the monks living by his Rule. The Word of God is so central in the life of a monk that the Rule prescribes that each one living in the monastery should, at the very least, have all the Psalms and the Scripture lessons memorized. There is even time in the middle of the night devoted to this specific task.28 The point is also made clear by the sheer amount of Scripture which is to be recited and taught every day and every night. For example, during the “night office,” there was never to be a time, regardless of the season, when there were fewer than 14 psalms recited from memory.29 It is also demanded in the Rule that over the course of one week, the entire Psalter was to be recited in the various services.30

The emphasis placed on Scripture is also evinced by the fact that the Rule prescribed regular time for studying sacred texts, but none for the liberal arts. Moreover, “Pope Gregory’s description of him as ‘sagely ignorant and wisely uneducated’ indicates the low opinion he had of classical literature.”31 When put against the backdrop of how Benedict viewed literary study, his passion for the centrality of the study and knowledge of Scripture stands out all the more clearly in contrast.

A Spirituality of Humility

Out of his desire to be rooted firmly in the Scriptures came Benedict’s passion for humility. In his mind, there was no element of spirituality or of Christian living which could be unaffected by humility. The emphasis Benedict places on humility will first be examined from chapter VII in the Rule, titled “Of Humility.” It cannot be missed when reading the Rule that this chapter is far and away the longest in the book. While other chapters number anywhere from one to seven paragraphs, the chapter on humility is eighteen paragraphs long. The magnitude of this chapter cannot be missed, as Benedict lays the groundwork for what he feels is central to everything else in the Rule.

In this chapter, Benedict states that humility is the ladder which we must climb in order to attain to heaven. It is only “if the heart is humble” that it will be “by the Lord lifted up to heaven.”32 Furthermore, to whatever degree one is able to ascend the ladder of humility, to that same degree he attains to freedom from sin. This is true in his mind to the extent that he says, once one has ascended the twelve degrees of humility, God’s labourer “is now cleansed from vice and sin.”33 In other words, the root of all sin is pride, which is the antinomy of humility. If the Christian can root himself in humility in all his actions, then, he will be free from sin. Humility is the key to purity.

The twelve degrees of humility, according to Benedict, begin with the fear of the Lord. Whoever would be a servant of God must “always have the fear of God before his eyes,” being careful to obey his commands. The second degree of humility is the attitude a man should have, which is concerned only with God’s will and never with his own will or desires. The third degree is when a man willingly subjects himself in everything to his Superior, to be obedient in all things, in imitation of Christ.

The fourth degree is characterized by the willing acceptance and patient endurance of all types of hardship, disciplines and trials which come in this life. If a man is truly humble to the fourth degree, he is happy in all these circumstances. The fifth degree is when one freely confesses all the evil thoughts and sins which arise in his heart to his Abbot. True humility requires real openness and transparency before another Christian. The sixth degree is the ability to be contented with only the basest and meanest of everything in this world. The seventh degree is when a man truly believes with his soul, not just admits with his words, that he is the lowest and vilest of all men.

The eighth degree of humility that all good monks must seek is when he commits himself to do absolutely nothing except that which is sanctioned by the common Rule of his monastery. If one attains to the ninth degree of humility, he will never open his mouth to speak except when he is asked directly. The tenth degree is when a monk resolves to not be quickly moved to laughter or anything jovial, but maintains a spirit of reverence always. The eleventh degree means that he speaks only gently, humbly, with gravity, with few and sensible words, never in jest. The final degree of humility is reached when a monk models humility with dress and posture, so that regardless of what he is doing, his head is down and his eyes are fixed on the ground because he is always holding himself guilty for his sins and remembering that he must appear before the judgment throne of God. As it has been shown, only in this type of humility can a Christian expect to find true victory over sin.34

That Benedict’s spirituality found humility central is not only observed in the chapter on humility, but also as the topic of humility works itself into virtually every aspect of the monk’s life. For a monk to obey his Superiors as he ought, humility is required, since “the first step of humility is unhesitating obedience.”35 Indeed, no obedience rendered will be to the monk’s benefit when his heart is judged, unless the obedience is carried out without murmuring, in true humility.36 Just like obedience, silence (though required), or talking, is not to the monk’s benefit unless it is done “with all humility and submission.”37 Humility is at the heart of the commitment to live in a Benedictine monastery, since at that point in time it meant committing to live the rest of one’s live on a material level on par with the common Italian peasants of their day.

Humility is also seen as absolutely essential in prayer,38 it is a requirement “above all things” for the one who would be cellarer,39 it is required for the greeting of guests,40 and it needs to be present in an artist if he is to continue practicing his art.41 Humility is even demanded when a monk is commanded by his Superior to do something that is impossible!42 According to the Rule, humility is a primary requirement of all who come to the monastery—even just to visit—including priests43 and stranger monks, regardless of class or rank.44 To show the great weight placed on humility in the Benedictine Rule, it might be observed that lack of humility was a significant enough problem to warrant the deposal of a Dean.45

A Discipline-Oriented Spirituality

That the spirituality of Nursia is heavily based on the concept of discipline is evident from the very beginning of the Rule. In the prologue he states, “To thee, therefore, my speech is now directed, who, giving up thine own will, takest up the strong and most excellent arms of obedience, to do battle for Christ the Lord, the true King.”46 In other words, the whole Rule is addressed to those who would forsake pursuing their own desires and pleasures and live a most-disciplined life of obedience to Christ.

The men living in the monastery are to live holy lives, being constantly under the discipline of the Abbot, who is over them, and charged to mingle “gentleness with severity”, “sternly rebuke the undisciplined”, “rebuke and punish”, and “chastise the wicked and the hard of heart, and the proud and disobedient at the very first offence with stripes and other bodily punishments.”47

Instruments of good works listed demand great amounts of discipline: chastising the body, not seeking after pleasures, loving to fast, not giving way to anger, not being given to wine or great eating, not being drowsy or slothful, not murmuring or detracting, guarding the tongue against speaking loudly, in jest, or in boisterous talk, not fulfilling the desires of the flesh, not envying, etc.48 Monks are required to show their discipline in “obedience without delay” so that “as soon as anything hath been commanded by the Superior they permit not delay in the execution, as if the matter had been commanded by God himself.”49

Discipline is also necessary for the monk to properly subject himself to the Rule, as he is reminded, repeatedly.50 None in the monastery are to be without the discipline of being under the Rule. Even priests,51 Priors,52 and the Abbot himself53 find themselves subject to the Rule and all its demands for discipline and obedience. But the discipline required for obedience is more than just that required for obedience to Superiors. Rather, humility and discipline require obedience to be rendered to all who live in the monastery, regardless of rank. In all things, the monk is to “Go to God by the path of obedience” to the Rule, the Abbot and other monks; all of which requires great discipline.54

The discipline element of the spirituality of Benedictine monks is not only seen in obedience and subjection to all, but also in the daily routine, which is always structured. Time is to be handled in an absolutely rigid and disciplined manner, since “idleness is the enemy of the soul.”55 With the goal of never leaving any spare time which may give occasion for sin, the daily schedule is laid out for the monks and there is not a spare moment given. The schedule is even broken up into various seasons of the year, so as to allow for varying lengths of darkness at night.56 Frend sums up the winter-month schedule, depicting the rigidness of the time allotments as follows:

The average day would start at 2 a.m. when Vigils or the night office would be said. An hour’s meditation or reading of Scripture would follow. Lauds would be said at first light and Prime at sunrise around 6 a.m. There would be more meditation and reading until the time for Terce at 9. Between 9:15 and 4 p.m. there would be work in the fields broken at Sext which was said at noon. After work there would be Vespers at 4:30, the single (meatless) meal of the day at 5, and Compline at 5:45. The monks then would retire for rest and rise early to begin the new round at 2 a.m. the next morning.57

If the highly structured daily routine required discipline, so did the actual labour at which the monks were to toil. The difficult task of field labour, kitchen labour, maintenance of the monastery, etc. is acknowledged within the Rule itself, which affirms that “they are monks in truth” who live from the work of their hands; thus placing a high value of the discipline of manual labour.58 Thus it can clearly be seen that there is high value placed on discipline in the spirituality of the Benedictine Rule; both in submission to Superiors and the Rule, and also in carrying out the difficult day-to-day scheduled tasks. All this, however, is purposeful and was designed to create stability and consistency, which leads to the final major element of Benedict’s spirituality: community.

A Communal Spirituality

Prior to Benedict’s Rule, “many monastics had followed a common Eastern practice of wandering from monastery to monastery.”59 Because of his value on “stability in the community,”60 however, Benedict was “determined to abolish the practice.”61 To this end, Benedict would demand ultimate commitment from all of those who would live in his monasteries. The one who would desire to live as a monk in his order would have to go through a rigorous testing period, after which he would be asked to either stay or leave. If the man is still desirous of entrance into the monastery, he may be “received into the community, knowing that he is now placed under the law of the Rule, and that from that day forward it is no longer permitted to him to wrest his neck from under the yoke of the Rule.”62 He must make this life-long promise “in the oratory, in the presence of all, before God and His saints…in order that, if he should ever do otherwise, he may know that he will be condemned by God ‘Whom he mocketh.’”63 In other words, the commitment to become a part of a Benedictine community is a life-long vow to God; it is only by breaking that vow and mocking God that one may leave.

This commitment to community in Benedict’s spirituality is profound and prevalent in many places. He attempts to create genuine community not only by ensuring the commitment of all present, but also by making certain that all things will be done together, as a community. To this end he arranges a vast array of details, right down to the sleeping arrangements. For the encouragement of others and to ensure the exclusion and segregation of none, Benedict declares that younger monks must be intermingled with the older in the placement of beds in the sleeping hall.64 Not just sleeping arrangements, but also worship is designed with community in mind. Corporate worship is carried out eight times daily with communal recitations and hymns and various of the monks performing intonations, etc.65 The love for community is also maintained through the absolute denial of individual possessions66 and the great lengths to be taken to care for the sick.67

That community is valued highly in the spirituality of the Rule of Benedict may also be seen in the methods of disciplinary action prescribed. Firstly, it is noteworthy that it is viewed as a tremendous punishment to be separated from the community with regards to meals, and is only done as chastisement for sin.68 Moreover, the removal of a brother from fellowship (so that other monks may not speak with him) is to be met with utmost care and concern from the Abbot, so that the brother may quickly be restored to fellowship.69 Complete excommunication (the removal of a brother from the monastery for good) is conceived of only as an absolute last resort for the most hardened and unrepentant sinner;70 and even he should always be received back into fellowship again, if at all possible.71

According to the Rule, equality of all members of the community is to be maintained at all times. The older is not to be more valued than the younger when all monks are called to counsel for “weighty matters”72 and the monks are to never, in any “place whatever let age determine the order or be a disadvantage.”73 There is also to be no distinction between monks with regards to birth status: whether they are “free-born” or “freedmen” makes no difference to standing in the community.74

Likewise, when out of necessity, a Dean must be chosen, he must not be selected because of rank, but only because of merit.75 No one, regardless of rank, is to engage in leading worship of any kind unless it will be edifying to the whole community.76 With regards to wealthy versus poor children, all are to be accepted alike, without any distinction,77 and even priests are to be judged by and held to the same standards as all “lay” monks.78 This plainly visible emphasis on community in the spirituality of Benedict of Nursia is a profound and major theme throughout his Rule.

Conclusion—Evaluation

Meritorious Works?

At first glance there are several passages in the Rule of Saint Benedict which appear to imply that we must somehow accomplish good works in order to merit a place in heaven. This is great cause for concern, as it calls into question the very orthodoxy of the spirituality being discussed. Some such passages which seem potentially dangerous make statements like, “We cannot reach (his kingdom), unless we run thither by good works;”79 and “Therefore, having our loins girt with faith and the performance of good works, let us…be found worthy of seeing Him.”80 Again, after describing many instruments which may be used to do spiritual works, he says that “if they have been applied without ceasing, day and night and approved on judgment day, will merit for us from the Lord that reward which He hath promised.”81

While disturbing at first, these statements must be placed within the historical framework of a world where Christianity was the religion of choice, and some distinguishing mark was needed to make the true Christians stand out from the false professors.82One must also understand that the Rule is not written as a theological treatise on salvation, but is written with the assumption that the monks are already converted. With this understanding of the background, the reader may better comprehend the context of Benedict’s writings, which also insist plainly that it is in fact the Lord who saves sinners. Thus he says, “If the heart is humble, (our life in the present world) is by the Lord lifted up to heaven.”83 Nevertheless, though we are saved by grace, he rightly asserts that “as we advance in the religious life and faith, we shall run the way of God’s commandments with expanded hearts and unspeakable sweetness of love.”84 Moreover, the goal of a monk’s faith (and it should be the goal of any Christian’s faith), is obedience, “no longer from the fear of hell, but from the love of Christ, from the very habit of good and the pleasure in virtue.”85 The obedience resulting in works is not that type of obedience which works toward salvation and merit before God, but rather that which abounds out of a love for Christ and all that he loves.

Legalistic?

One commendation of the Rule that must be made is that it is not legalistic or overly rigid. While it certainly may appear that way to most modern 21st century, North American evangelical’s senses, the reality is that the Rule itself claims that it is just “written for a beginning.”86 It never claims to be the definitive or final word, but leaves that authority rightly with the word of God.87 Moreover, there is great flexibility within the Rule itself for the members of the various Benedictine communities to alter as they see fit.88

The Joy of the Lord?

One area where the Rule might rightly be corrected is that it nowhere allows for rejoicing in the Lord or in his salvation. Time and again it condemns levity, jesting, laughter, frivolity, etc.,89 which is understandable in the context of worship, but there must be a place for genuine expressions of joy in the life of the redeemed. In fact, one wonders how they could recite Psalm 126.2 week in and week out without being confronted with their own hypocrisy. One might ask them how one is to receive the word (Matt 13.20)? Or what to make of the reaction of the Magi (Matt 2.10)? Or the reaction of the women who found the empty tomb (Matt 28.8)? Or, for that matter what to do with the apostle who says, “Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice!” (Php 4.4)?

What to Learn?

Modern-day, fad-driven, 21st century comfortable Christianity can stand to learn much from the Rule of Saint Benedict and its spirituality. There is a great need for the Church to become as centred on the Bible as it was in Benedict’s time. There is profound need for true, genuine humility in the church which produces servants who obey without a thought for themselves. There is a deep vacuum in the church where there should be godly discipline and self-control—an indicator that there is not much of the Spirit’s fruit (Gal 5.23). Certainly, to all these things can be added that the lack of genuine community and concern for other Christians that Benedict felt so deeply. While the monasticism of Benedict may not be the most appropriate lifestyle choice for Christians today, all who have been saved by grace alone, through faith alone in Jesus alone can surely say with him: “As there is a harsh and evil zeal which separateth from God and leadeth to hell, so there is a virtuous zeal which separateth from vice and leadeth to God and life everlasting. … Let them fear God and … let them prefer nothing whatever to Christ, and may He lead us all together to life everlasting.”90

Works Referenced

Benedict, Saint. The Holy Rule of St. Benedict. 1949 ed., Rev. Boniface Verheyen, trans.

Available online at http://ccel.org/b/benedict/rule2/rule.html.

Benedict, Saint, Abbot of Monte Cassino. The Rule of Saint Benedict. New York:

Random House, 1998.

Bettenson, Henry, ed. Documents of the Christian Church, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford

University Press, 1967.

Brauer, Jerald C., ed. The Westminster Dictionary of Church History. Philadelphia:

Westminster Press, 1971.

Frend, W.H.C. The Rise of Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985.

González, Justo L. The Story of Christianity, v.1: The Early Church to the Dawn of the

Reformation. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1984.

McManners, John, ed. The Oxford Illustrated History of Christianity. New York: Oxford

University Press, 1992.

Mursell, Gordon, general ed. The Story of Christian Spirituality: Two thousand years,

from East to West. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001.

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church, v.1. From the “Eight volumes in three”

set available in the TBS library (call no. 250 S32 V1). I have been unable to

discover any of the publication details for this particular volume.

Footnotes

1 Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Eight Volumes in Three, ed. (see bibliography), v.3, 92.

2 Jerald C. Brauer, ed., The Westminster Dictionary of Church History (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971), 101.

3 Justo L. González, The Story of Christianity (San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1984), 238.

4 Schaff, v.3, 92.

5 Brauer, 101.

6 Ibid.

7 Schaff, v.3, 92.

8 Brauer, 101; cf. Schaff, v.3, 92.

9 Ibid.

10 W.H.C. Frend, The Rise of Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), 881.

11 Brauer, 101.

12 Gozález, 239.

13 Schaff, v.3, 92. Cf. Frend, 881, and John A. McGuckin, “The Early Church Fathers (1st to 6th Centuries)” in Gordon Mursell, ed., The Story of Christian Spirituality: Two thousand years, from East to West (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), 62-63.

14 Gozález, 238.

15 Ibid., 239.

16 Frend, 883.

17 Ibid., 881.

18 Gozález, 242.

19 Robert A. Markus, “From Rome to Barbarian Kingdoms (330-700)”, in John McManners, ed., The Oxford Illustrated History of Christianity (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 69.

20 Henry Bettenson, ed., Documents of the Christian Church, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1963), 116. Cf. Colin Morris “Christian Civilization (1050-1400)” in McManners, 203.

21 Schaff, v.3, 92.

22 Brauer, 102.

23 Most scholars argue vehemently against the case that Benedict ever had the preservation of Latin classical culture in mind with the development of his Rule. Frend, for example, states plainly that it was “far from Benedict’s intention,” 882. Gozález argues that Benedict himself did not put emphasis on study at all, but since the Rule required books, the monks of his order quickly made this type of study and copying one of their main occupations. In his view, it is somewhat accidental that Benedict had this type of influence (241). This is the most viable argument, to be sure—though it was a happy accident indeed.

24 Schaff, v.3, 95.

25 Cf. Frend, 881.

26 This number is drawn from this author’s own study of the Rule. The 1949 edition of the Rule translated by Rev. Boniface Verheyen, available online at http://ccel.org/b/benedict/rule2/rule.html was used. Unless otherwise noted, all quotations from the Rule will be taken from this version. Paragraph numbers are indicative of the quotation’s location in that version as well.

27 The Rule, LXXIII.2.

28 Ibid., VIII.1.

29 Cf. Ibid., IX.3; X.1.

30 Ibid., XVIII.5.

31 Frend, 882.

32 The Rule, VII.2.

33 Ibid., VII.18.

34 The twelve degrees are explicated in the Rule, VII.3-17.

35 Ibid., V.1, Translation by Timothy Fry in The Rule of Saint Benedict (New York: Random House, 1998).

36 Ibid., V.3.

37 Ibid., VI.2.

38 Ibid., XX.1.

39 Ibid., XXXI.3.

40 Ibid., LIII.2, 3.

41 Ibid., LVII.1.

42 Ibid., LXVIII.1.

43 Ibid., LX.2.

44 Ibid., LXI.1.

45 Ibid., XXI.1.

46 Ibid., Prolgue.2.

47 Ibid., II.5.

48 Ibid., IV.

49 Ibid., V.1.

50 See for example, ibid., III.1, 2; VII.13; XXXII.1; XLII.2; LIV.1; LVIII.3; LX.1; LXII.2, 4; LXIV.5; LXV.3; LXIX.1; LXX.2.

51 Ibid., LX.1; LXII.2.

52 Ibid., LXV.3.

53 Ibid., LXIV.5.

54 Ibid., LXXI.1.

55 Ibid., XLVIII.1.

56 See, for example, XLVIII.1-7.

57 Frend, 882. Cf. The Rule, XVI.1.

58 The Rule, XLVIII.2.

59 McGuckin in Mursell, 63.

60 The Rule, IV.2.

61 McGuckin in Mursell, 63.

62 The Rule, LVIII.3.

63 Ibid., LVIII.4.

64 Ibid., XXII.2.

65 Ibid., XVI.1.

66 Ibid., XXXIII.1.

67 Ibid., XXXVI.1.

68 Ibid., XXIV.1-2.

69 Ibid., XXVII.2.

70 Ibid., XVIII.3.

71 Ibid., XVIV.1.

72 Ibid., III.1.

73 Ibid., LXIII.2.

74 Ibid., II.4.

75 Ibid., XXI.1.

76 Ibid., XLVII.2.

77 Ibid., LIX.1-3.

78 Ibid., LXII.4.

79 Ibid., Prologue.7, emphasis added.

80 Ibid., Prologue.6, emphasis added.

81 Ibid., IV.2, emphasis added.

82 González, 238.

83 The Rule, VII.2.

84 Ibid., Prologue.11.

85 Ibid., VII.18.

86 Ibid., LXXIII.4.

87 Ibid., LXXVIII.2.

88 For example, see: XVIII.5; XXXV.1; XXXVII.1; XXXIX.1-4; XL.1-2; XLI.1.

89 See, for example, IV.1 (54, 55); VII.15-16; XLIX.2.

90 Ibid., LXXII.1, 3.