Letter 7

Abelard to Heloise

This long letter is Abelard’s answer to Heloise’s first question about the origin of nuns. To us it seems prolix and not very logical in the arrangement of the many examples it gives of the specially favoured position of women among the followers of Christ and in the early Church. It also draws comparisons between Christian women and the heroines of the Old Testament and classical antiquity. (BR) A fuller summary than that supplied by Radice follows, including quotations from Abelard.1 (MTC)

‘Out of love, dearest sister, you and your spiritual daughters have sought to know about the origin of your profession and how the religion of nuns began. I will reply as succinctly and shortly as I can. The order of monks and also of nuns has taken the form of its religion most fully from our Lord Jesus Christ.’ Even before Christ, the germ of this idea already existed. The widow Anna, mentioned in St Luke’s Gospel,2 ‘equally with Simeon, was held worthy to receive the Lord in the temple and to be filled with the spirit of prophecy’. As the embodiment of justice and the fulfilment of all good things, Christ comes in the fullness of time to perfect what is incomplete and to manifest what is unknown. ‘As he came to call and redeem both sexes, he deigned to unite them in the true monkhood of his congregation, so that the authority of this profession is therefore granted to men and women alike and the perfection of the life he proposed is to be imitated by everybody.’ Along with the male apostles and disciples, we read in the gospels of ‘the convent of holy women who renounced the world and gave up all property so they might possess Christ only’. Scripture records ‘how devoutly these most blessed women and true nuns followed Christ, and with what gratitude and honour both Christ himself and the apostles after him showed their devotion to them’.

The principal examples are the sisters Martha who served Christ within the house and Mary who anointed his feet. ‘The Gospels record that it was only women who ministered to the Lord. They even devoted their own resources to his daily sustenance and provided the necessities of life especially for him.’ Who does not know that Mary Magdalene anointed the head of Christ with the oil spilling over from her alabaster box? ‘What, I ask, is this bounty of the Lord? What is this dignity of women, by which he should offer his head as well as his feet for anointing by none but women? What, I ask, is this privilege of the weaker sex by which a woman should anoint the supreme Christ, who was already anointed from conception with all the ointments of the Holy Spirit? As if by consecrating him as king and priest with bodily sacraments, she makes him “the Christ” meaning “the anointed one”.’ There are examples of anointing by patriarchs and priests in the Old Testament. But these show that ‘men imprint the sacraments by figures, whereas the woman (Mary Magdalene) worked on the very truth itself, as the Truth actually attests, saying: “She has wrought a good work on me.”’3 Thus Christ himself, who is the head, was anointed by a woman, whereas Christians now, who are the members, are anointed by men.

‘Consider therefore the dignity of this woman by whom the living Christ was twice anointed, on his feet and also on his head, and from whom he received the sacraments of kingship and priesthood.’ These anointings by a woman demonstrate the unique dignity of Christ’s kingship and priesthood. ‘Look at how he received the sacrament of kingship from a woman, although he refused to accept the kingdom offered to him by men and he fled from those who wanted to force him to be a king. The woman conferred the sacrament of a heavenly kingdom and not an earthly one, for he said later of himself: “My kingdom is not of this world.”’4

When bishops anoint kings and priests today, they strut around in gilded vestments, even though those whom they bless are often cursed by God. Yet it was a humble woman, with no special clothing or ceremonial, ‘who conferred these sacraments on Christ, not by the office of prelacy but by the merit of her devotion’. He held this action in such high esteem ‘that he decided it should be included in the Gospel itself, so that the praise of the woman who had done this should be preached everywhere where the Gospel is preached as a memorial of her.5 Nowhere else do we read of the services of any other persons whatsoever being commended and sanctioned by the Lord’s authority in this way. Likewise he preferred the alms of the poor widow to all the other offerings in the temple. This exactly demonstrates how acceptable the devotion of women is to him.’ Peter and his fellow apostles had the temerity to say that they gave up everything for Christ and many others too incurred great expenses, and yet they did not win the Lord’s commendation in the way the women did.

‘The outcome of the Lord’s life also clearly demonstrates how great indeed the devotion of the women towards him always was. For they stood fearless even when Peter, the prince of the apostles, denied him and John, the beloved of the Lord, fled with the rest of the runaway apostles. Nor could any fear or desperation separate the women from Christ, either in his passion or in his death.’ John tells how he returned and stood by the cross, even though he had previously fled. But, in telling this in his Gospel, ‘he puts the perseverence of the women in first place, as if he had been inspired and called back by their example, saying: “There stood by the cross of Jesus his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.”’6 This constancy of the holy women and the failure of the disciples had been prophesied long before by Job7 in the Old Testament.

‘By their faithfulness at the Lord’s death the women showed, by actions rather than words, how much they had loved him in life. By that same solicitude, which they had for his passion and death, they were the first to rejoice in his resurrection.’ It was they who received the angelic vision of the resurrection, they who first saw and held the Lord and they who told the apostles that Christ was risen. He appeared first of all to Mary Magdalene and said to her: ‘Go to my brethren and say to them: I ascend unto my father.’8 ‘From this we infer that these holy women were constituted as if they were female apostles superior to the male ones, since they were sent to the male apostles either by the Lord himself or by angels. These women announced the highest joy of the resurrection, which everybody awaited, so that the male apostles might first learn through women what they should preach thereafter to the whole world.’

After the Lord’s Ascension, ‘the Acts of the Apostles diligently describe the religious life of that sacred convent, not omitting the perseverence of the devotion of the holy women, when the text says: “These all continued with one accord in prayer, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus.”’9 The Acts of the Apostles also show concern both for the Jewish women converted during the life of Christ and for the Greeks converted subsequently. The ministries of Stephen, the first martyr, and of St Paul attest this. Paul ‘seems openly to declare: is it not permissible for us to have convents of holy women and to take them with us on our preaching, just as the rest of the apostles are ministered to in their preaching by the necessary support of women?’ Hence St Augustine says that faithful women accompanied the apostles and ministered to them from their substance, so that none of them might lack anything needed for the sustenance of life. He also says: ‘Is there anyone who does not think that what was done by the apostles was that women of holy life went around with them, wherever they preached the Gospel, following the example of the Lord himself?’10 For in the Gospel it is written: ‘And it came to pass that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and showing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God, and the twelve were with him, and certain women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary called Magdalene, and Joanna, the wife of Chuza the steward of Herod, and Susanna and many others, who ministered to him from their substance.’11 ‘From this it is clear that the Lord also in his preaching was sustained in bodily things by the ministry of women and they, equally with the apostles, stayed with him as inseparable companions …

‘Later on, in the very beginning of the nascent Church, the religious life of this profession multiplied among women equally with men, so that women – equally with men – possessed their own monasteries to live in.’ This is attested by Philo of Alexandria, Cassiodorus and St Jerome.12 ‘If we turn to the old histories, we find in them that women were not separated from men in the things that pertain to God or to any feature of religion whatsoever. Equally with men, they not only sang sacred chants but also composed them, as Holy Scripture attests.’ The canticle celebrating the liberation of the children of Israel from Egypt was sung by Miriam the prophetess; the Scripture makes no mention of Moses in this context. This woman’s song expresses mystically but accurately the form of spiritual chant in monastic congregations.13 We also have the hymns of Deborah and Hannah and Judith, and in the New Testament the ‘Magnificat’ of Mary the mother of God.

In the Old Testament it is clear that the daughters of Aaron belonged to the sanctuary and to the hereditary priestly office of the Levites equally with their brothers. ‘Hence it appears that the religion of women was not separated from the order of clerics (the Levites), as it is agreed that the women also were conjoined with them by name, since we speak of “deaconesses” as well as of “deacons”, as if in both we recognized the tribe of Levi and its female “Levitesses”.’14 Similarly in the consecration of the Nazarites, the Lord commanded Moses that women and men might equally be instituted into this order. The holy widow Anna mentioned by St Luke was like a Nazirite. Equally with Simeon, she was held worthy to receive the Lord in the temple and to be filled with the spirit of prophecy. She is praised for her public preaching of the promised birth of the Saviour, whereas St Luke does not mention anything about Simeon preaching to others.

Widowhood as a religious profession and vocation is honoured by St Paul and St Jerome, though they both distrusted young widows. In the choice of women for the ministry of the diaconate, Paul writes: ‘A widow should not be put on the roll under sixty years of age. She must have been faithful in marriage to one man.’15 And Jerome explains: ‘Beware in the ministry of the diaconate lest a bad example be furnished in place of a good’:16 that is, younger women should not be chosen, as they are more prone to temptation and are lighter by nature. Concerning this provision of St Paul on the election of deaconesses, Pope Gregory the Great prohibited youthful abbesses.

Those whom we now call abbesses they called deaconesses in former times, as if they were servants rather than mothers. For ‘deacon’ means ‘servant’ (or ‘minister’) in Greek and they considered that deaconesses should be named from their ministry rather than from their rank, just as Christ said: ‘The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister.’17 St Jerome argues that no one in monasteries should be called an abbot because the name ‘Abba’ means ‘Father’ and belongs only to God. Among the first deaconesses was Phebe of the church of Cenchrea, whom St Paul commends in his epistle to the Romans.18 In their commentaries on this, both Cassiodorus and Claudius describe her as a ‘deaconess’ of that church. Claudius adds that this passage teaches that women are duly constituted in the ministry of the Church by apostolic authority. ‘Not only in instituting deaconesses was the care of St Paul most watchful, but in general it is clear how concerned he was regarding widows of holy profession, so that he might cut off every occasion of temptation.’ He accorded them honour as well as necessities: ‘Honour widows,’ he says, ‘that are widows indeed.’19

The honour due to women from reverence for their holy profession is shown by the way they are addressed. St Paul writes: ‘Salute Rufus chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine.’20 St John writes: ‘Unto the elect lady and her children’, and he asks to be loved, adding: ‘And now I beseech thee, lady, that we love one another.’21 On this scriptural authority, when writing to the virgin Eustochium, St Jerome did not blush to address her as ‘my lady Eustochium’. He explained: ‘Surely I must address as “my lady” her who is the bride of my Lord.’ Virginity is a very special grace, as Jerome also shows. The consecration of virgins is reserved for the chief festivals of the Church. Speaking of the Church, the Psalmist says: ‘After her shall virgins be brought to the king; they shall be brought with gladness and rejoicing, they shall be brought into the temple of the king.’22 The apostles have left us in writing no authorized blessing for either clerics or monks. ‘Only the religion of women is distinguished by the name of sanctity, since they are called “sanctimoniales” (nuns) from the word “sanctimonia” meaning sanctity.’

Although women are the weaker sex, their virtue is more pleasing to God and more perfect.23 ‘Who could have said there was in anything such complete fulfilment – by the dispensation of divine grace – as in the very weakness of the female sex, which the fault (of Eve) as well as nature has made contemptible? Look at the range of status in this sex: not only are there virgins and widows and wives, there are also foul harlots. Then you will see that the grace of Christ is fuller in the female sex, for the Lord said: “The last shall be first and the first shall be last.”’24

We can see the benefits of divine grace and the honour shown to women from the very beginning of the world. ‘We immediately find the creation of woman surpasses that of man in dignity, as she was created in paradise whereas man was made outside.25 So women are advised to be specially aware that paradise is their native homeland and that it therefore becomes them all the more to follow the celibate life of paradise.’ St Ambrose notes the paradox that woman, the inferior sex, was made within paradise whereas man, the better part, was made outside.26 This priority of women is shown also in the way the Lord rectified the root of all evil, which Eve represented, through the birth of Mary before he put right Adam’s sin through the birth of Christ. Just as sin began with a woman (Eve), so did grace begin with a woman (Mary) and the privilege of virginity flowered again in her. In the persons of Anna and Mary the form of the holy profession (of nuns) was shown to widows and virgins before any models of monastic religion were set before men through the examples of John the Baptist and the apostles.

‘After Eve, we should look at the courage of Deborah, Judith and Esther.’27 By comparison with them we should be ashamed at the weakness of the ‘manly’ sex. When the men had failed, it was Deborah who set the Lord’s people free. Judith cut off the head of Holofernes and defeated the enemy entirely by herself. Esther, who was married to a Gentile king, reversed his decree to destroy her people. Great virtue is ascribed to David who overcame Goliath with a sling and a stone. But Judith went against a hostile army without either a sling or a stone, without indeed any arms at all, and Esther by speech alone liberated her people and caught her enemies in the trap which they had made. The memory of this famous deed is celebrated every year among the Jews to this day. No deeds of any man – however splendid – have merited a tribute like this.

‘Who does not marvel at the incomparable determination of the mother of seven sons whom, as the Book of Maccabees relates, the wicked king Antiochus tried in vain to force to eat pig meat in contravention of the Law?28 This woman endured the loss of everything, including her own life and that of her sons, rather than commit a single offence against the Law. What is this transgression, I ask, to which she was being driven? Was it to renounce God or to offer incense to idols? Nothing, I say, was demanded of her and her sons except that they eat the meat which the Law prohibited … O brothers and fellow monks, who so shamelessly crave meat day after day in contravention of the institution of the Rule and of your profession, what have you to say about the constancy of this woman? Are you so shameless that you are not even confounded with blushing when you hear this? The constancy of this woman should be much more of a reproach to you, because she did much greater things than you, and also because you are the more strictly bound to religion by the vow of your profession.’

In praise of heroic virgins who would not choose Jephtha’s daughter? What would she have done, I ask, if she had faced martyrdom? Would she have denied God? Would she, when asked about Christ, have replied like Peter the prince of the apostles: ‘I know him not.’29 By her death Jephtha’s daughter liberated her father from perjuring himself. The great fortitude of this girl is deservedly celebrated every year by the daughters of Israel with solemn hymns for the obsequies of virgins.

‘Let us pass over all the other instances and ask: What has been as necessary to our redemption and to the salvation of the whole world as the female sex, which brought forth for us the Saviour himself? … What glory can be compared to what this sex has achieved in the mother of the Lord? Our redeemer could, if he chose, have assumed his body through a man, just as he chose to form the first woman from the body of a man. Instead he transferred the singular grace of his humility to the honour of the weaker sex. He could similarly have been born of another and more worthy part of the female body than the rest of mankind are, who are born of that vilest member by which they are conceived. But, to the incomparable honour of the weaker body, the Lord has sanctified the female genitals by his birth more amply than he did the male sex by circumcision30 …

‘I will omit, for the present, the singular honour of virgins and turn my pen to the rest of women.’ Consider how great was the grace that Christ’s coming brought to Elizabeth the married woman and to Anna the widow. The gift of prophecy is more amply fulfilled in Elizabeth, who prophesied concerning Mary’s miraculous conception,31 than in John the Baptist, who announced Jesus long after he was born. ‘Therefore, just as we call Mary Magdalene the female apostle of the apostles, let us not hesitate to call Elizabeth the prophetess of the prophets, and the same applies to the holy widow Anna, who has been discussed more fully above.’

If we extend the gift of prophecy to the Gentiles as well, then the Sibyl should take centre stage32 and propound the revelations made to her about Christ. If we compare her with all the prophets, including even Isaiah, we will see that this woman far outstrips the men. St Augustine in the eighteenth book of The City of God (chapter 23) says that in some of the verses of the Erythraean Sibyl the initial letters of each line make an acrostic which reads: ‘Jesus Christ, Son of God, the Saviour’. Augustine also cites Lactantius’ account of the Sibylline prophecies concerning the suffering, crucifixion, descent into Hell and resurrection of Christ. This is the prophecy of the Sibyl which, if I am not mistaken, Virgil our greatest poet heard and used in the fourth book of his Eclogues. He foretold the miraculous birth, which would shortly happen under Augustus Caesar in the time of Pollio’s consulate,33 of a boy sent from heaven to earth who would take away the sins of the world and establish a new age on earth.

‘Look at every word of the Sibyl and see how completely and openly she embraces the totality of Christian belief concerning Christ. Neither in prophesying nor in writing does she overlook either his divinity or his humanity.’ She takes account of the first coming of Christ, when he was unjustly judged through the crucifixion, and equally of his second coming, when in majesty he will justly judge the world. She omits neither his descent into Hell nor the glory of his resurrection. In all this ‘she seems to surpass not only the prophets of the Old Testament but even the Evangelists, who wrote very little about the descent into Hell …

‘Is there anyone who does not marvel also at that familiar and profound conversation which Christ had all alone with a Gentile woman: that is, with the Samaritan whom he deigned to instruct so diligently? The apostles themselves were absolutely outraged at this.’ He asked her for drink, even though she was an infidel and guilty of having many husbands. ‘What is this grace, I ask, which he shows to the weaker sex? Why ask for water from this woman, when he has bestowed the water of life on everybody?’ What explanation can there be, I ask, except that he clearly demonstrates through this that the virtue of women is the more pleasing to him because their nature is weaker. He thirsts the more for their salvation because their virtue is known to be more admirable. When he asked for drink from a woman, he meant that he thirsted especially for the salvation of women. The Samaritan woman was filled with the spirit of prophecy, saying: ‘I know that the Messiah cometh, who is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.’34 With her, Christ’s preaching to the Gentiles is seen to have begun, as he won over not only her but many others through her. It is clear what great grace for the Gentiles this woman gained from Christ, as she ran to the city to announce his coming, said what she had heard and quickly won over many of her people.

‘If we turn over the pages of the Old Testament and the Gospels, we shall see that divine grace bestowed the highest gifts of the raising of the dead especially on women. These miracles were done either to them or for them.’ Sons were raised to life through the intercession of their mothers by Elijah and his disciple Elisha. Then the Lord himself bestowed the gift of this immense miracle particularly on women, as is shown by the raising of the widow’s son, of the daughter of the ruler of the synagogue and the bringing back to life of Lazarus at the request of his sisters. This is why St Paul, writing of Jewish history, says: ‘Women received back their dead raised to life.’ From all this it is clear how great is the grace which the Lord has always shown to women. He has raised them and their dear ones to life, and finally he has exalted them most greatly through his own resurrection, since he appeared to them first (as has already been pointed out).

‘This sex is also seen to have won merit because it was affected by its natural compassion towards the Lord, when he faced persecution from the people. This is why St Luke recalled that the women cried and wept when the men were taking Christ to be crucified.’ Similarly St Matthew notes that it was Pilate’s wife who told him to have nothing to do with this just man.35 We read also that once when Christ was preaching, a solitary woman raised her voice from the crowd in great praise of him, saying that the womb was blessed which bore him and the breasts that gave him suck. To which she was immediately privileged to hear the pious correction of her confession, when he replied: ‘Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God and keep it.’36 ‘Concerning the privilege of love, only John among Christ’s apostles obtained this, as he is called the beloved of the Lord. Nevertheless, John himself writes of how Christ loved Martha and Mary, saying: “Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus.”37 This apostle, who records that he alone was loved by the Lord, ascribed this privilege of love to none of the other apostles. It is only the women whom he distinguished with this privilege.’ It is true that he seems to associate their brother Lazarus with this honour; but John placed the women’s names before Lazarus’ because he believed that they took precedence in love.

Let us return now to the subject of faithful Christian women and marvel at the respect paid by God’s mercy even to the abjectness of public prostitutes. What could be more abject than the original state of life of Mary Magdalene or Mary the Egyptian?38 Yet divine grace raised them by honour or merit to sublime heights: ‘I say unto you that the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.’39 ‘Who does not know that women have embraced the exhortation of Christ and the counsel of the apostles with such great zeal for their chastity that they have offered themselves to God as a burnt sacrifice through martyrdom? Preserving equally the wholeness of the body and the mind, they triumph with a double crown. They strive to follow the Bridegroom of virgins, “the Lamb of God whithersoever he goeth”.40 We know that such perfection of virtue is rare in men but common in women.’ We even read that some women have not hesitated to lay hands on themselves, rather than lose the virtue which they had vowed to God, so that they might come as virgins to the virgin Bridegroom.

‘The Lord showed in what regard he held the devotion of holy virgins when a crowd of pagan people ran to the protection of St Agatha and spread out her veil against the terrible fire erupting from Mount Etna. The Lord saved them from the fire in both body and soul. We do not know of any monk’s cowl which has won the grace of so great a benefit. We read that at a touch of Elijah’s mantle the river Jordan parted, so that he and Elisha were able to cross over on dry land.41 By the veil of a virgin, on the other hand, an immense multitude of a still pagan people were saved in both body and soul, as the road to heaven was opened to them when they converted.’ Another thing which considerably commends the dignity of women is that when they are consecrated, they do so with these words: ‘With his ring he has espoused me’ and ‘I am betrothed to him.’ These are in fact the words of St Agnes, by which virgins who make their profession as nuns are betrothed to Christ.

If anyone wants to know about the form and dignity of women’s dedication to religion among the pagans, it is easy to show that some institution for this purpose already existed among them – with the exception of what pertains to the faith – just as it existed too among the Jews. The Church has collected together these precedents from both Jews and Gentiles and changed them for the better. ‘Who does not know that all the orders of clerics from doorkeeper to bishop, together with seasons of fasting, unleavened bread, the pomp of priests’ vestments and some dedications and other sacraments were taken over by the Church from the Synagogue? Is there anyone likewise who does not know that by a most beneficial arrangement the ranks of secular dignities among kings and princes were retained in the converted nations, together with some rules of law and the teachings of the discipline of philosophy?’ Likewise the Church took over from the pagans some of the grades of ecclesiastical dignities, along with the ideal of sexual continence and religious dedication to bodily purity. ‘It is well known too that bishops and archbishops now preside where once there were “flamens”42 and “archflamens”. What began as temples erected to demons were later consecrated to the Lord and dedicated to the memories of saints …

‘We know too that the privilege of virginity shone especially among the pagans, when the curse of their law forced the Jews into marriage. This virtue or purity of the flesh was valued so highly among the pagans that in their temples great convents of women dedicated themselves to the celibate life.’ St Jerome refers to the ‘uni-virae’ of Juno, the ‘uni-virgines’ of Vesta and the continent women dedicated to other pagan deities.43 By ‘uni-virae’ and ‘uni-virgines’ he means nuns, ‘monkesses’ as it were (‘monachae’ in Latin), who have either known only one man or have remained single as virgins. ‘Monachus’ meaning ‘monk’ comes from ‘monos’ in Greek: that is to say, ‘alone’ or ‘single’. St Jerome too in his book Against Jovinian gives many examples of the chastity or continence of pagan women. He shows how the Lord seems to have especially approved purity of the flesh among every people and he has exalted not a few pagans also, either by the conferring of merits or by the manifestation of miracles. ‘What am I to say,’ Jerome asks, ‘about the Erythraean Sibyl or the Cumaean one or about the other eight? For Varro asserts that there were ten in all. They were distinguished by their virginity and the reward of their virginity was the power of divination.’44 Jerome also mentions the Vestal Virgin, Claudia, who – in order to prove herself innocent of fornication – is said to have drawn along by her girdle a vessel which thousands of men had been unable to move. Similarly St Augustine in the twenty-second book of The City of God (chapter 11) cites Varro’s statement that an accused Vestal Virgin carried water from the Tiber in a sieve, without spilling any, in order to prove her innocence to her judges.

‘It is not surprising if in these and other instances God should have exalted the chastity of unbelievers, or if he should have allowed it to be exalted by the agency of demons, in order that the faithful now might be inspired all the more, when they learn that unbelievers also have been so greatly exalted.’ We know that grace was conferred on the prelacy of the high priest Caiphas and not on his person; likewise false apostles have sometimes been distinguished by miracles. So is it really to be wondered at if the Lord should have granted miraculous powers not to the persons of the unbelieving women themselves but to their virtue of continence, so that an innocent virgin should be set free and a false accusation of improbity be destroyed? ‘For it is clear that a love of continence is a good thing even among unbelievers, as is also respect for the pact of marriage, which is a gift of God among all peoples.’

Through his gifts God honours not the error of infidelity but the example of virtue. The pagan emperor Vespasian is said to have healed the sick and St Gregory prayed for the soul of the emperor Trajan.45 ‘God cannot be ignorant of his gifts being linked to infidelity and neither can he hate any of the things which he has made. The more brightly they shine as signs, the more strongly he demonstrates them to be his; they cannot be polluted by man’s depravity. He reveals himself to unbelievers so that believers may see where their hope lies.’ The greatness of the dignity in which the pagans held the purity of the women devoted to temples is shown by the penalties for violation. Juvenal in his fourth satire (8–9) against Crispinus speaks of a defiled priestess being buried beneath the ground while her blood was still warm. St Augustine confirms in the third book of The City of God (chapter 5) that the ancient Romans used to bury alive the priestesses of Vesta detected in fornication. He comments that, as the Romans did not kill adulterous women, this shows how much more highly they rated the divine marriage-bed than the human one.

‘This is also the case with us: the more the care of Christian princes provides for the protection of chastity, the more its holiness is not to be doubted.’ This is why the emperor Justinian legislated that anyone who even contemplates marriage with holy virgins incurs the death penalty. Pope Innocent I wrote to Vitricius, Bishop of Rouen, that women who marry Christ and are veiled by a priest, if they subsequently get publicly married or are corrupted in secret, are not to be reconciled by the doing of penance unless the man to whom they have joined themselves has departed this life. ‘There are those also who have not yet been clothed with the sacred veil, but who have always given the impression that they intended to remain in the virginal state even though they were not veiled.’ If these women marry, a penance for some period is required because their bridal vow was held by Christ. For if in secular life contracts made in good faith are not to be broken for any reason, how much the more can this promise to God not be dissolved without penalty? St Paul says that those who depart from the state of widowhood have condemned themselves ‘because they have cast off their first faith’.46 This is even more true of those virgins who have in no way preserved the good faith of their previous undertakings. The famous Pelagius declared that an adulteress against Christ is more guilty than one against a husband because she has violated her body which is sanctified to God.

‘If we wish to examine with what great care, diligence and love the holy Doctors, inspired by the examples of the Lord himself and the apostles, have shown to devout women, we shall find them to have embraced and cherished the devotion of these women with the utmost zeal and love. They constantly instructed them and augmented their religious life with frequent teaching and attentive exhortation. I will pass over the others and produce as evidence the principal Doctors of the Church, namely Origen, Ambrose and Jerome.’ The first of these is that greatest Christian philosopher, who embraced the religion of women with such zeal that he castrated himself (according to Eusebius’ History of the Christian Church) so that no suspicion might take him away from the instruction and exhortation of women.

‘Who can be ignorant of the great harvest of books of divinity, asked for by Paula and Eustochium, which St Jerome has left to the Church?’ We know that some of the greatest Doctors of the Church wrote to Jerome often asking for a few words from him, but they got nothing. St Augustine reports that Jerome said he had no time to reply to him. ‘Think of such a great man as Augustine47 having to wait so long for a short little answer and still not getting it!’ At these women’s request, on the other hand, we know that Jerome sweated over numerous great volumes produced either by copying or by dictation. He showed much more reverence for them than he did for Augustine, even though he was a bishop. Perhaps he embraced the virtue of these women with such great enthusiasm because he thought their nature was frailer, and neither could he bear to disappoint them. Often the zeal of his charity towards them is so great that he seems to go beyond the bounds of truth in his praise of them. At the very beginning of his life of St Paula, as if he wished to direct the reader’s attention towards himself, Jerome says: ‘If all the members of my body were turned into tongues and every joint sounded like a human voice, I could say nothing worthy of the virtues of the saintly and venerable Paula.’48 He had already written about the distinguished lives – shining with miracles – of many holy Fathers of the Church, in which far more marvellous things are reported than in Paula’s life. Yet he seems to have extolled no one with such praise as he does this widow.

He writes in a similar way to the virgin Demetrias, praising her so much at the start of the letter that he seems to fall into immoderate adulation. It had evidently been very precious to this holy man to apply whatever skill in words he had to inspiring a fragile nature to virtue. Nevertheless, the charity which Jerome cultivated towards pious women was so great that his boundless sanctity imprinted a blot on his own reputation. Concerning false friends and detractors, he wrote to Asella from Rome, saying: ‘There is no objection to me except my sex … Before I came to know the house of the holy Paula, my praises sounded throughout the city. In the opinion of almost everybody I was deemed worthy of the Supreme Pontificate. But once I began to venerate and tend her and to look after her – for the merit of her sanctity – my whole virtuous reputation deserted me.’49

We read of how the Lord himself showed such great familiarity to the blessed harlot (Mary Magdalene) that the Pharisee who was entertaining him said: ‘This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is who touches him.’50 Is it surprising then if the members of Christ’s Church, inspired by his example to gain such souls, are prepared to risk damage to their own reputations? For this cause Origen (as has been pointed out) sustained serious harm to his own body. The charity of the holy Fathers in the teaching and exhortation of women sometimes expressed itself so forcefully that their admirable compassion seems to promise things contrary to the faith. To console the sisters of the emperor Valentinian, St Ambrose implied that he was saved, even though he died as a catechumen.51 This view seems a long way from the Catholic faith and the truth of the Gospel.

Numerous virgins have followed the Mother of the Lord in the pursuit of virtue, whereas we know of few men who have won the grace to follow ‘the Lamb of God whithersoever he goeth’. Some women have killed themselves to preserve the integrity of the flesh which they had vowed to God. Not only is this not blameworthy, but these martyrs have merited many dedications of churches to them. ‘Virgins who are also betrothed, if they decide to choose the monastic life before they have had sexual intercourse, may repudiate the man and make God their husband. They have legal freedom to do this, whereas we do not read anywhere that such a licence is granted to men.’ Some women too have gone against the law by wearing male clothing in order to guard their chastity. These have excelled even among monks by such great virtues that they have merited to be made abbots. Thus we read of St Eugenia, who was actually ordered by her bishop St Helenus to put on male clothing. She was baptized by him and became a member of a community of monks.

‘Dearest sister in Christ, I think I have written enough in answer to the first of your most recent requests, concerning the authority of your order and – over and above that – in commendation of its special dignity, so that you may more warmly embrace the calling of your profession through better understanding of its excellence. Now let me have the support of your merits and your prayers so that, God willing, I may also fulfil the second request. Farewell.’