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 ...
“the more it climbs, the more language falters, and when it has passed up and beyond the ascent it will turn silent completely.” 654 The point of apophasis is not to begin with silence, to never say anything about God at all, but rather to achieve or provoke silence after an effusion of speech. The same holds for Weigel, and we must look not just at what Weigel says but also how he says it. The modern editor’s notes on the Dionysian chapters in Weigel’s De vita beata, for instance, deprecate them as repetitive, but in the context of this discussion of Dionysius’ chains of affirmations and denials they take on an entirely different cast, functioning more as a devotional practice than as a set of arguments. 655 In the remainder of this section, I discuss a Weigel text that exemplifies this apophatic repetition, namely his Von der Seligmachenten Erkentnuß Gottes nach der Heiligen drey Einigkeit (1574), which is a meditation on the basic insight that God can be viewed from two perspectives: “für sich selbst absolute” (in God’s Oneness) and “respectu creaturarum...respective” (in God’s Multiplicity). 656 In asserting the necessity of these twin perspectives, Weigel assembles in the first chapter of this work a series of short pairs of affirmations and negations (“Alß absolute...Aber respective”). 657 In the second chapter, as one might by now expect, Weigel introduces the apophatic double negation, producing a series of affirmation/negations/double-negations: “ob gleich Gott, als dem ingenito gebüret, alle genita ist...so ist er doch der genitorum Keines...Item ob Gott gleich alle orter ist, wie denn dem infinito gebüret, so ist er doch der Orter Keines, weder Hie noch da, alßo 654 MT, 1033C. 655 Weigel, De vita beata, 57, n. 2. 656 To map Eckhart’s language onto Weigel’s, the absolute perspective would be the pre-creation Godhead and the creaturely one would be the God of creation. See chapter 2 of this dissertation on Eckhart’s distinction of God and ‘God’. 657 Weigel, Seligmachende Erkenntnis, 3. 238
leibet er illimitatus.” 658 Weigel sums up this understanding of how theological language works as “beydes wahr unnd erlogen, darnach man es Verstehet.” 659 Or, as he puts it elsewhere, God lets his creatures call him by every name not so that they can truly name him, but rather “auf daß er mit Uns Kindern lalle.” 660 Though Dionysius does not speak of apophatic theology as babbling as Weigel does, it is an apt metaphor for the apophatic breakdown of speech. 661 Weigel then begins to put this Dionysian insight to work for his own purposes, relativizing and minimizing the importance of the earthly church to attain salvation. A foolish theologian (“den einfeltigen Theologum”), he writes, might wonder why the nameless God allows all manner of names to be attributed to him, and why the One God would reveal himself under three names as Father, Son and Spirit. 662 A true Christian, however, finds none of this puzzling, because he sees very well that God’s omninameability is directed towards the salvation of sinners (“hiemit meine unsere rechtfertigung, unsere seeligkeit oder newgeburt”). 663 First, the idea that God is “all names and nameless” is the corollary of Dionysius’ idea that God is One, such that creation, while it is nothing in itself, cannot also be anything other than God. For Weigel, this means not only that God is his names (as discussed above), but also that these names are actually more properly predicated of God than of creatures, since it is from God that 658 Weigel, Seligmachende Erkenntnis, 6. 659 Ibid, 12. 660 Ibid, 19. 661 As discussed in Chapter 2, a soul that has achieved, by God’s influx of grace, a state of gelassenheit, falls into a deep silence beyond all words, what Weigel often refers to as a “silent Sabbath.” See also, amongst others, Der güldenee Griff, 30; Vom Leben Christi, 120-121 and 122-123; Gebetbuch, 120-121. 662 Weigel, Seligmachende Erkenntnis, 47. “Es möchte den einfeltigen Theologum verwundern, warumb ihme Gott, der doch nahmloß unnd glidloß ist laße zuschreiben mancherley nahmen und glidmaßen, so da nur in menschen seyndt, und warumb der einige Unwandelbahre Gott, sich offenbahre, alß ein Vatter, alß ein Sohn, und Heiliger Geist. Aber der da Verstehet, was Christus ist, und kennet Christum nach dem worte, krafft oder geist der wundert sich gar nichts.” 663 Ibid, 47. 239
- 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
- Page 215 and 216: animals, through plants and non-liv
- Page 217 and 218: of being.” 580 As we will see lat
- Page 219 and 220: (“God is a rock”) or even a neg
- Page 221 and 222: This is admittedly a nonsensical as
- Page 223 and 224: compositions, most likely dating to
- Page 225 and 226: Dionysius to show that, just as God
- Page 227 and 228: efer to Greek and Hebrew, the bibli
- Page 229 and 230: argues that there cannot be more th
- Page 231 and 232: dicitur una.” 616 The stress that
- Page 233 and 234: Weigel suggests will allow the soul
- Page 235 and 236: saving sacraments by means of which
- Page 237 and 238: Melanchthon’s Defence of the Augs
- Page 239 and 240: alternative—namely prayer. 643 We
- Page 241: Dionysius writes that the summit of
- Page 245 and 246: work, Weigel had written explicitly
- Page 247 and 248: Luther did not ever use the exact p
- Page 249 and 250: as opposed to an office-holder, an
- Page 251 and 252: writing. By calling his Layman der
- Page 253 and 254: Others are loyal to mere men (the P
- Page 255 and 256: zuerzeigen einen rechtschaffen vnd
- Page 257 and 258: and ceremonial ones at that. 694 Th
- Page 259 and 260: himself returning gloriously from H
- Page 261 and 262: all being. In relinquishing any cre
- Page 263 and 264: improve appearances but, because it
- Page 265 and 266: than resolve it, because the proble
- Page 267 and 268: parcels God, who by rights is supre
- Page 269 and 270: Appendix • The Works of Valentin
- Page 271 and 272: BIBLIOGRAPHY Abad, J. M. (1999). Th
- Page 273 and 274: Chenu O.P., M.-D. (1968). In M.-D.
- Page 275 and 276: Eckhart, M. (1993). Werke I (Vol. 1
- Page 277 and 278: Israel, A. (1888). M. Valentin Weig
- Page 279 and 280: MacCulloch, D. (2010). Christianity
- Page 281 and 282: Payne, R. J. (Ed.). (1981). Meister
- Page 283 and 284: Schindling, A., & Ziegler, W. (1990
- Page 285 and 286: Verkamp, B. J. (1975). The Limits u
leibet er illimit<strong>at</strong>us.” 658 Weigel sums up this understanding <strong>of</strong> how <strong>the</strong>ological language<br />
works as “beydes wahr unnd erlogen, darnach man es Verstehet.” 659 Or, as he puts it<br />
elsewhere, God lets his cre<strong>at</strong>ures call him by every name not so th<strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong>y can truly name<br />
him, but ra<strong>the</strong>r “auf daß er mit Uns Kindern lalle.” 660 Though Dionysius does not speak<br />
<strong>of</strong> apoph<strong>at</strong>ic <strong>the</strong>ology as babbling as Weigel does, it is an apt metaphor for <strong>the</strong> apoph<strong>at</strong>ic<br />
breakdown <strong>of</strong> speech. 661<br />
Weigel <strong>the</strong>n begins to put this Dionysian insight to work for his own purposes,<br />
rel<strong>at</strong>ivizing and minimizing <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> earthly church to <strong>at</strong>tain salv<strong>at</strong>ion. A<br />
foolish <strong>the</strong>ologian (“den einfeltigen Theologum”), he writes, might wonder why <strong>the</strong><br />
nameless God allows all manner <strong>of</strong> names to be <strong>at</strong>tributed to him, and why <strong>the</strong> One God<br />
would reveal himself under three names as Fa<strong>the</strong>r, Son and Spirit. 662 A true Christian,<br />
however, finds none <strong>of</strong> this puzzling, because he sees very well th<strong>at</strong> God’s omninameability<br />
is directed towards <strong>the</strong> salv<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> sinners (“hiemit meine unsere<br />
rechtfertigung, unsere seeligkeit oder newgeburt”). 663 First, <strong>the</strong> idea th<strong>at</strong> God is “all<br />
names and nameless” is <strong>the</strong> corollary <strong>of</strong> Dionysius’ idea th<strong>at</strong> God is One, such th<strong>at</strong><br />
cre<strong>at</strong>ion, while it is nothing in itself, cannot also be anything o<strong>the</strong>r than God. For Weigel,<br />
this means not only th<strong>at</strong> God is his names (as discussed above), but also th<strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong>se names<br />
are actually more properly predic<strong>at</strong>ed <strong>of</strong> God than <strong>of</strong> cre<strong>at</strong>ures, since it is from God th<strong>at</strong><br />
658 Weigel, Seligmachende Erkenntnis, 6.<br />
659 Ibid, 12.<br />
660 Ibid, 19.<br />
661 As discussed in Chapter 2, a soul th<strong>at</strong> has achieved, by God’s influx <strong>of</strong> grace, a st<strong>at</strong>e <strong>of</strong> gelassenheit,<br />
falls into a deep silence beyond all words, wh<strong>at</strong> Weigel <strong>of</strong>ten refers to as a “silent Sabb<strong>at</strong>h.” See also,<br />
amongst o<strong>the</strong>rs, Der güldenee Griff, 30; Vom Leben Christi, 120-121 and 122-123; Gebetbuch, 120-121.<br />
662 Weigel, Seligmachende Erkenntnis, 47. “Es möchte den einfeltigen Theologum verwundern, warumb<br />
ihme Gott, der doch nahmloß unnd glidloß ist laße zuschreiben mancherley nahmen und glidmaßen, so da<br />
nur in menschen seyndt, und warumb der einige Unwandelbahre Gott, sich <strong>of</strong>fenbahre, alß ein V<strong>at</strong>ter, alß<br />
ein Sohn, und Heiliger Geist. Aber der da Verstehet, was Christus ist, und kennet Christum nach dem worte,<br />
krafft oder geist der wundert sich gar nichts.”<br />
663 Ibid, 47.<br />
239
Change language