the mystical theology of valentin weigel - DataSpace at Princeton ...
the mystical theology of valentin weigel - DataSpace at Princeton ... the mystical theology of valentin weigel - DataSpace at Princeton ...
delegate of Emperor Michael the Stammerer. 423 Louis then gave the manuscript to the Abbey bearing the author’s name, commissioning a translation from Hilduin, then the Abbot of St. Denis. 424 However, Hilduin did more than simply translate Dionysius’ works; realizing that the relics his church already possessed might be rendered even more valuable by a connection to the Apostles themselves, 425 he also created several other works to strengthen the historical record linking Dionysius and Denis. 426 In this new composite narrative, Dionysius converted to Christianity in Athens, where, as Bishop, he composed his theological treatises, then travelled to Gaul as Denis the missionary, where he was martyred. Before Dionysius’ texts arrived at the Abbey, Denis’ grave was already an important place of worship, and already enjoyed the support, financial and otherwise, of many high-ranking patrons (beginning with Hilduin and Geneviève). The discovery that Denis was also a great theologian greatly enhanced his reputation, but did not create it. 427 What the attribution of the Corpus Dionysiacum to the patron saint of France did do was 423 It is still unclear who made the first leap in identifying the two Dionysius’. Luscombe suggests that the link was suggested (but not explicitly made) in 825 by Frankish bishops when discussing idolatry at a council in Paris. In their written dispatches from the event, according to Luscombe, the bishops are not careful about distinguishing between Dionysius of Athens and Denis of Paris. One of these dispatches was sent to Constantinople, where the Greek church had opted for iconoclasm at that time. According to Luscombe, this is perhaps the seed that prompted the idea of sending a codex of Dionysius’ writing (in Greek) to France as a gift in the first place. Luscombe, 136. 424 Grover Zinn, "Hilduin," in Medieval France: An Encyclopedia, 860 (New York: Garland Publishing, 1995), 860. 425 Luscombe has Hilduin resorting to a bit of forgery for the “enhancement of his own position among the prelates of France and in respect of France’s links with Rome and with Constantinople.” Luscombe, 140. 426 Hilduin would already have had the letters composed by the Frankish bishops that begin to make the link, as well as a version of Denis’ passion composed shortly thereafter that retells the story in light of this suggestion. He did, however, fabricate a ‘History by an imagined Aristarchus’, as well as a hymn to the saint, and finally a work entitled the ‘Revelation of Stephen’. The Stephen of the last piece is Pope Stephen (3 rd century), who in Hilduin’s fiction leaves a pallium and keys (symbols of ‘apostolic dignity’) on the altar of St. Denis. Ibid, 139. 427 Dionysius arrived in the west already with impeccable references, so to speak. Two reputable and orthodox Byzantine theologians, John of Scythopolis and Maximus the Confessor had added glosses and scholia to Dionysius’ writings, which “claimed the Areopagite’s corpus for orthodoxy.” Paul Rorem, Pseudo-Dionysius: A Commentary on the Texts and an Introduction to their Influence (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 15. 160
to make the interpretation of these works a high-stakes activity, and effectively to discourage much subsequent questioning about whether there were three Dionysius’ or one. 428 Might a man in Athens really have seen the miraculous eclipse that is supposed to have occurred in Jerusalem during Christ’s crucifixion (as Dionysius claims in one of his letters)? Why did Jerome and the other early church fathers never mention the name of such a great authority? Could the liturgy Dionysius describes really have been so elaborate already in the first century? 429 Thanks to Hilduin’s literary efforts, Dionysius’ writings came to enjoy ecclesiastical (as one of the earliest witnesses to proclaim the power of the Church) and political (as the patron saint of France) protection against critics 430 —and also brought the Dionysian writings into wide circulation. In the centuries 428 Massaut notes that French scholars resisted the philological arguments against Dionysius’ authenticity the longest for that reason—even into the 19 th century when the techniques of modern historians had definitively identified them as belonging to a later era. Jean-Pierre Massaut, Critique et tradition à la veille de la Réforme en France (Paris: J. Vrin, 1974), 187. 429 These are all key questions addressed by various commentators in the many centuries that followed Hilduin’s historical sleight of hand. The question about the eclipse (noted in Matthew, Mark and Luke, and related again in Dionysius’ seventh letter, to give authenticating period detail) was posed by the Italian Humanist Valla in his notes on the New Testament, written in 1457 (his Adnotations). This work was not published during Valla’s lifetime, but Erasmus found the manuscript and published it in 1505. Laurentius Valla, Laurentii Vallensis viri tam graecae quam latinae linguae peritissimi in Latinam Noui testamenti interpretationem ex collatione Graecorum exemplarium Adnotationes apprime utiles, in Vol. 1, Opera Omnia (Torino: Bottega d'Erasmo, 1962), 852. Erasmus was convinced by Valla’s criticisms, and incorporated them into his own Annotations on the New Testament (first published in 1516 but later revised). Erasmus adds the last two objections, noting that it corresponded more closely to the liturgy practiced several centuries after Apostolic times, and also that Jerome and Origen never cite Dionysius. Desiderius Erasmus, Erasmus' Annotations on the New Testament: Acts, Romans, I and II Corinthians (New York, Leiden: Brill, 1989). 430 One of the few to voice doubts about this rather dubious story during the Middle Ages was Peter Abelard, who was at St. Denis recovering from his calamitates. However, Abelard was only skeptical about the identification of Dionysius and Denis, not about whether Dionysius was actually the figure named in the Bible. This second “unmasking” did not take place until the 15 th century, with Valla and Erasmus. Paul Rorem, Pseudo-Dionysius: A Commentary on the Texts and an Introduction to their Influence (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 16. Rorem’s reading of John Scotus Eriugena’s commentary on the Celestial Hierarchy (mid 9 th century) adds another opinion to this group of Dionysius skeptics. Rorem suggests that Eriugena would have had to pick his words carefully to avoid disappointing the royal dedicatee of his work (King Charles, who was particularly dedicated to the patron saint of his kingdom). The poem that prefaces the commentary depicts Dionysius following in his teacher Paul’s footsteps not to Paris but rapt up to the third heaven where he gathered his insights on the ranks of the angels. By making Dionysius’ rapture the entry to the commentary, rather than Denis’ journey to France, Eriugena could thereby avoid having to weigh in on whether or not Dionysius went to Paris after he was released from his rapture. It was the “elequence of silence in the face of royal expectations.” (14) Paul Rorem, Eriugena's 161
- Page 113 and 114: Gelassenheit, das ist, das er nicht
- Page 115 and 116: (necessarily inferior) knowledge pr
- Page 117 and 118: context is that he picks up on Eckh
- Page 119 and 120: he begins to steer the discussion a
- Page 121 and 122: further proof for Weigel’s theory
- Page 123 and 124: understood that the mind cannot pos
- Page 125 and 126: wait in stiller Gelassenheit, recei
- Page 127 and 128: truth as an educated theologian or
- Page 129 and 130: ungewisser”) and finds that his f
- Page 131 and 132: die Blinden an ein ander gehetzett,
- Page 133 and 134: gesagett das ist er selber und ist
- Page 135 and 136: Gelassenheit for the Bible, which i
- Page 137 and 138: that the kind of Gelassenheit Weige
- Page 139 and 140: indifference that allows Weigel to
- Page 141 and 142: teacher. 366 However, the turning p
- Page 143 and 144: Weigel gives the passage an unexpec
- Page 145 and 146: Murren”)—and they do this “in
- Page 147 and 148: and all the more so since he saw li
- Page 149 and 150: the strength of the intellectual re
- Page 151 and 152: CHAPTER 3 • DIONYSIUS, WHOEVER HE
- Page 153 and 154: demonstrated for Eckhart, I will de
- Page 155 and 156: destroyer that Dionysius is most of
- Page 157 and 158: ears good news to the church.” 39
- Page 159 and 160: points out, with a purification, a
- Page 161 and 162: served as cornerstones in defences
- Page 163: (Acts 17: 15-34), one of the skepti
- Page 167 and 168: Outside the universities, Dionysius
- Page 169 and 170: defiled the “sacred things” by
- Page 171 and 172: other leaders of the Protestant Ref
- Page 173 and 174: valorization of hierarchy per se in
- Page 175 and 176: as well as the with the arguments u
- Page 177 and 178: freedom, but rather obedience. 468
- Page 179 and 180: The primary piece in the compilatio
- Page 181 and 182: It is hardly surprising that Cochla
- Page 183 and 184: it does during the Council of Trent
- Page 185 and 186: for a hierarchical church, seizing
- Page 187 and 188: the ancient teaching”) that “be
- Page 189 and 190: Dionysiacum. For Lefèvre d’Étap
- Page 191 and 192: Aristotle would have been glad to h
- Page 193 and 194: enlightens all great thinkers in ev
- Page 195 and 196: offered Dionysius to the Gelehrtenr
- Page 197 and 198: nine distinct editions of Dionysius
- Page 199 and 200: editions of Greek and Latin classic
- Page 201 and 202: (Turin), and is a reprint of Lefèv
- Page 203 and 204: presses in Spain (his first publica
- Page 205 and 206: growing body of evidence suggesting
- Page 207 and 208: Weigel concludes that, precisely be
- Page 209 and 210: apart, he suggested that true Chris
- Page 211 and 212: and so did not dwell on the fact th
- Page 213 and 214: Names, as the title suggests, is ba
to make <strong>the</strong> interpret<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se works a high-stakes activity, and effectively to<br />
discourage much subsequent questioning about whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>re were three Dionysius’ or<br />
one. 428 Might a man in A<strong>the</strong>ns really have seen <strong>the</strong> miraculous eclipse th<strong>at</strong> is supposed to<br />
have occurred in Jerusalem during Christ’s crucifixion (as Dionysius claims in one <strong>of</strong> his<br />
letters)? Why did Jerome and <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r early church fa<strong>the</strong>rs never mention <strong>the</strong> name <strong>of</strong><br />
such a gre<strong>at</strong> authority? Could <strong>the</strong> liturgy Dionysius describes really have been so<br />
elabor<strong>at</strong>e already in <strong>the</strong> first century? 429 Thanks to Hilduin’s literary efforts, Dionysius’<br />
writings came to enjoy ecclesiastical (as one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> earliest witnesses to proclaim <strong>the</strong><br />
power <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Church) and political (as <strong>the</strong> p<strong>at</strong>ron saint <strong>of</strong> France) protection against<br />
critics 430 —and also brought <strong>the</strong> Dionysian writings into wide circul<strong>at</strong>ion. In <strong>the</strong> centuries<br />
428 Massaut notes th<strong>at</strong> French scholars resisted <strong>the</strong> philological arguments against Dionysius’ au<strong>the</strong>nticity<br />
<strong>the</strong> longest for th<strong>at</strong> reason—even into <strong>the</strong> 19 th century when <strong>the</strong> techniques <strong>of</strong> modern historians had<br />
definitively identified <strong>the</strong>m as belonging to a l<strong>at</strong>er era. Jean-Pierre Massaut, Critique et tradition à la veille<br />
de la Réforme en France (Paris: J. Vrin, 1974), 187.<br />
429 These are all key questions addressed by various comment<strong>at</strong>ors in <strong>the</strong> many centuries th<strong>at</strong> followed<br />
Hilduin’s historical sleight <strong>of</strong> hand. The question about <strong>the</strong> eclipse (noted in M<strong>at</strong><strong>the</strong>w, Mark and Luke, and<br />
rel<strong>at</strong>ed again in Dionysius’ seventh letter, to give au<strong>the</strong>ntic<strong>at</strong>ing period detail) was posed by <strong>the</strong> Italian<br />
Humanist Valla in his notes on <strong>the</strong> New Testament, written in 1457 (his Adnot<strong>at</strong>ions). This work was not<br />
published during Valla’s lifetime, but Erasmus found <strong>the</strong> manuscript and published it in 1505. Laurentius<br />
Valla, Laurentii Vallensis viri tam graecae quam l<strong>at</strong>inae linguae peritissimi in L<strong>at</strong>inam Noui testamenti<br />
interpret<strong>at</strong>ionem ex coll<strong>at</strong>ione Graecorum exemplarium Adnot<strong>at</strong>iones apprime utiles, in Vol. 1, Opera<br />
Omnia (Torino: Bottega d'Erasmo, 1962), 852. Erasmus was convinced by Valla’s criticisms, and<br />
incorpor<strong>at</strong>ed <strong>the</strong>m into his own Annot<strong>at</strong>ions on <strong>the</strong> New Testament (first published in 1516 but l<strong>at</strong>er<br />
revised). Erasmus adds <strong>the</strong> last two objections, noting th<strong>at</strong> it corresponded more closely to <strong>the</strong> liturgy<br />
practiced several centuries after Apostolic times, and also th<strong>at</strong> Jerome and Origen never cite Dionysius.<br />
Desiderius Erasmus, Erasmus' Annot<strong>at</strong>ions on <strong>the</strong> New Testament: Acts, Romans, I and II Corinthians<br />
(New York, Leiden: Brill, 1989).<br />
430 One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> few to voice doubts about this ra<strong>the</strong>r dubious story during <strong>the</strong> Middle Ages was Peter<br />
Abelard, who was <strong>at</strong> St. Denis recovering from his calamit<strong>at</strong>es. However, Abelard was only skeptical about<br />
<strong>the</strong> identific<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> Dionysius and Denis, not about whe<strong>the</strong>r Dionysius was actually <strong>the</strong> figure named in<br />
<strong>the</strong> Bible. This second “unmasking” did not take place until <strong>the</strong> 15 th century, with Valla and Erasmus. Paul<br />
Rorem, Pseudo-Dionysius: A Commentary on <strong>the</strong> Texts and an Introduction to <strong>the</strong>ir Influence (New York:<br />
Oxford University Press, 1993), 16. Rorem’s reading <strong>of</strong> John Scotus Eriugena’s commentary on <strong>the</strong><br />
Celestial Hierarchy (mid 9 th century) adds ano<strong>the</strong>r opinion to this group <strong>of</strong> Dionysius skeptics. Rorem<br />
suggests th<strong>at</strong> Eriugena would have had to pick his words carefully to avoid disappointing <strong>the</strong> royal<br />
dedic<strong>at</strong>ee <strong>of</strong> his work (King Charles, who was particularly dedic<strong>at</strong>ed to <strong>the</strong> p<strong>at</strong>ron saint <strong>of</strong> his kingdom).<br />
The poem th<strong>at</strong> prefaces <strong>the</strong> commentary depicts Dionysius following in his teacher Paul’s footsteps not to<br />
Paris but rapt up to <strong>the</strong> third heaven where he ga<strong>the</strong>red his insights on <strong>the</strong> ranks <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> angels. By making<br />
Dionysius’ rapture <strong>the</strong> entry to <strong>the</strong> commentary, ra<strong>the</strong>r than Denis’ journey to France, Eriugena could<br />
<strong>the</strong>reby avoid having to weigh in on whe<strong>the</strong>r or not Dionysius went to Paris after he was released from his<br />
rapture. It was <strong>the</strong> “elequence <strong>of</strong> silence in <strong>the</strong> face <strong>of</strong> royal expect<strong>at</strong>ions.” (14) Paul Rorem, Eriugena's<br />
161