History of the religious house of Pluscardyn (1881) (14771369674)

Identifier: historyofreligio00macp (find matches)
Title: History of the religious house of Pluscardyn
Year: 1881 (1880s)
Authors: Macphail, S. R. (Simeon Ross)
Subjects:
Publisher: Edinburgh : Oliphant, Anderson & Ferrier
Contributing Library: Robarts - University of Toronto
Digitizing Sponsor: University of Toronto



Text Appearing Before Image:
by Stephen Harding, was more severe ! Rule of Benedict.* One or two points may here be noted to .ever, quite so strict as the Carthusians. t confined to their cells, but ate at a common table 111 t: : th( v were also permitted to go beyond their own walls when work required it. The same silence was not enjoined, though conversation ted to intercourse with the Abbot or Prior. The very much the farmers of the Church Orders, and were cele- Ir.itel in later times among their brethren for their avarice. At their toder received the valuable and substantial patronage of Eudo, the first Duke of Burgundy, and the property thus possessed tended to fashion their e now reached a point in the history of Monastic Orders which will enable us to proceed, with some intelligent appreciation of differences, to the which lie before us in this volume. The first Rule that ■iuds our attention ifl that of the Vol des Choux, whose history we briefly 1 in the last Section. * Fosbrokes Brit. Mon., pp. 69, 70.
Text Appearing After Image:
* *^ \ off .■• * S E C T I O N I V. djie §Luk, ;;rifeikg^, mtir ^jcforrm oi Ifallts (tzmlfctm. The previous Section has introduced the reader to the main features of therise and character of the Carthusian and Cistercian Orders. They were bothreforms in connection with Monasteries under the Benedictine Rule. Isolation ofthe strictest kind was the distinguishing feature of the Carthusians, the monksliving, eating, and working in silence and complete separation from eachother; the Cistercians being allowed some liberty of speech and to eat at acommon table in the Refectory. Their mass books were also considerablydifferent, while in dress the Cistercians, like the first Benedictines, wore a whiterobe and black scapular.* The dress of the Carthusian monks was of thecoarsest material, with haircloth next their skin. Then gown and scapularwere both ichite. In this latter they were distinguishable from the Cistercianswith their black scapulars. We have already seen that Gui or Guido or