the mystical theology of valentin weigel - DataSpace at Princeton ...

Regardless of Luther’s intentions in the first half of the sixteenth century, the
ecclesiastical apparatus of the Lutheran church became progressively more entrenched in
the latter half of the century, with priests given a new formal training at the universities
and slotted into the growing bureaucracy of the Lutheran states. This new Lutheran
clergy was not without its critics—Weigel included, as we have seen. Within the
priesthood of all believers, Weigel defines the layperson negatively, through two
different exclusions: laymen are excluded from learning and education, and are excluded
from ecclesiastical power. 671 Weigel thus gives his layperson three names in the Dialogus;
he is a Laie, an idiota and a Zuhörer, corresponding to these exclusions. I will return to
the idea of the layperson as listener (Zuhörer) momentarily, but first examine the first
two names for Weigel’s layperson.
The first term, idiota, refers to the Layman’s unlearnedness (suggested by the
modern English word idiot). Etymologically, the Greek word idiota/idios refers to a
person who represents his own interests rather than official or public interests—a citizen
671 Weigel is not the first to use the form of the debate to address anxieties about learnedness and authority.
In the so-called Sister Katherine treatise (14 th century), the idiota is an unlearned woman, and the narrative
tension results from power struggle between her and her father confessor. Her “unlearned learnedness” or
“wise foolishness” proves superior to both the book learning and institutional legitimation of the
Beichtvater. He initially accuses her of disobedience (“Du wilt übel...das du nitt rautes wilt folgen. Wissest,
das gehorsami ein tugent ist!”), but she replies, much as Weigel does, that she is obedient to her true master:
“Ich wil gehorsam sin bis an minen tott...Christo und dem himelschen vatter, dem Iohannes gehorsam was
in der wüste, und Maria Magdalena und Maria von Egipten und Maria Salome.” (60) She in turn accuses
him of hindering her salvation, rather than showing her the way (“ir hand mich gehindrett meiner ewigen
selikeit”) and regrets having followed human advice at the expense of the Holy Spirit’s (“Mir ist von
herczen leide das ich menschen ratt ie als lang gevolget und dem ratte des heilgen geistes widerstanden
han”). The dialogue concludes with the confessor asking for both her blessing and her instruction (“Glopt si
gott, das er dich ie gemachet zuo einem menschen, wan du hest mich gewiset zuo miner ewigen sälikeit”
[90]). Ann Marie Rasmussen, Ladies, Whores, and Holy Women (Kalamazoo, MI: Medieval Institute
Publications, 2010). A second such dialogue is the Idiota de Sapientia by Nicholas of Cusa (1450),
featuring a poor but wise layman and wealthy orator (we discover later that the layman lives in an
underground dwelling making his living carving spoons). The layman criticises the orator for relying too
heavily on books, which are not the best source of wisdom. The debate in Cusa’s dialogue is not over
ecclesiastical authority, but rather over the value of secular learning, philosophy and rhetoric in particular.
Nicholas of Cusa, "Idiota de sapientia," in Complete Philosophical and theological treatises of Nicholas of
Cusa (Minneapolis: A. J. Banning Press, 2001).
244