The harvest of medieval theology: Gabriel Biel and late medieval nominalism v979v324z

Table of contents :
Frontmatter
INTRODUCTION (page 1)
Chapter One CURRICULUM VITAE GABRIELIS (page 9)
Chapter Two PROLEGOMENA (page 30)
Chapter Three FAITH AND UNDERSTANDING (page 57)
Chapter Four NATURAL LAW AS DIVINE ORDER (page 90)
Chapter Five MAN FALLEN AND REDEEMED (page 120)
Chapter Six THE PROCESS OF JUSTIFICATION (page 146)
Chapter Seven BETWEEN FEAR AND HOPE: THE RIDDLE OF PREDESTINATION (page 185)
Chapter Eight CHRIST AND THE EUCHARIST (page 249)
Chapter Nine MARIOLOGY (page 281)
Chapter Ten NOMINALISTIC MYSTICISM (page 323)
Chapter Eleven HOLY WRIT AND HOLY CHURCH (page 361)
Postscript: THE CATHOLICITY OF NOMINALISM (page 423)
BIBLIOGRAPHY (page 431)
A NOMINALISTIC GLOSSARY (page 459)
INDEX OF NAMES (page 479)
INDEX OF SUBJECTS (page 485)

Citation preview

THE HARVEST OF MEDIEVAL THEOLOGY Gabriel Biel and Late Medieval Nominalism

BLANK PAGE

Leesa =

os oe . a ae ie -

@« .oe — seoe hes a 2g

Pp-ri ab iaboluTf S 2 1c1eém di ’ ZF ees:1fe eee ee Inc rex1mu b° 1S

ee oe a —— oe—o oe me“% :|\ c non p abere faci omi ae Cris onga .Pas, acit dLfnum ae oe _% “s end te :plfiste a ees foes tus Oros Sam isti utu =o i fe heos See exracone rex uls sul conten transi 7ansitorii = ae ee OY as cee \ we ssi ente ur [1etrus oes oeoebe _2— EE Vi . is cont ato, ¥futur .-ee££ | )A i0n re, f suad a | Se ‘ eant menti acecan previ presenti a ' | cen E a oe a. Pe Be : ~ ab cul Cc '-a_2ce o—_ wg te ve 3=‘4 riel1 Bi OS et di€. ——_—— eee ermo per h a — | : 2 wis nes apore aber ye — 7 : “es oa eCc Tem go ose a a _ oN -F i ae \ _ Le Be ce a , 68E a a8 Coe _ Bene 7 oe oo = ae oe ee ge rs oe. e 2 — 6 - Ae es sdae a oo - ofpeeoo_ | _eeTe 2 oy *

a pentl ==. _ ent1Sevid = 7. ,:4: os CS i = eS _ A a Oquia . que oeSue\ \|a!we eeoF ae ee ss -: mal -phe eed oe a ;PeSPe4ai _B: erm WEES e oes Be i ~oe PRES el-f ae oe ee Be ine ee Pe ae cae oe pe oS - ‘

necom be@] aooe Be ee “O oe ae 734| di €1 Et Sa nila neas ' :: Ds @ aBaoe oe — 4aa :inh i 1 ; :pere _ Ss Ba4 eae Rr| meee ae ae4 Read cere ermo 1oequod omh, aoioe mee |oo qui illiu volueri a3aoe ae iSasi.ae : .;nt | ct |aciet C8. ,|:faci fe es ee .ES ey ee Be ;:|;: eCisquam Ss pot 7 | lo 7 : re -=ierit :_ eo .2 7ae.os :Bat ae :he 2_ eee es: Bene: er " ras . ae Pe ee . < 7 oper po i Tl oo ae a ] a €o test: plen ee oe oe ae 7 jim minm : oe ee | aerate ie a"ju; estate °el: ae Bee ee ue AES SSE oS ee r cog : ita L 7 a oEe ee ee see: fa ES Bee "| qu S = oS. Sab ee oa Aa oo 7”

utr et eodio $apie :cit oe ee . ee _ 7 = , um tam = Pa oo ee eS) ong a.mor en nt 3. ES Fd ae cee. ee eS nes es & = oo ihe 7 Ss i ean h ie Pa 8G 7 di om ot eee y q ° a e as} cece ee ety 7 ee | Bs : —er—E Lib di 4 a oe oe g nu aO ; _oo pe — ee 3ey aay 2a' cclesia 5 sit. | dee a — i stes, 8:1. _ oe ae oa = 4,‘|9: = : ee Ee ce oo oe 7 a ao 7 “ a 4 fe = \ io > (8g es a8. _ oe bee ia aecq

7Bs hie ~— [- aoe “ie! =:e:= aPo — @ a«4 ma eeacies : ,a i © | r : | :|oe — bee 8 | & : fs es a Ee : _ =a & : oF. al Pee, i' a ieewl 8 : -Co — SSooa oe —E| oy Pa@e ee jc. ec 7 Py hm ginae:Ce ; oe 7

Be ke Lee. ee -_— oe oe ae — '

%eep —— ilog aaeoo aoe ae ¢8sta Se eeeee vt P oA Se Bs |i- .. q :: Co oeae

i age — oo ae | sal "

ie ; a ; me i wt re een re = Bee mee. f By Pe i a git ose Se. r

oe : 3 ‘iemenee eee aes 3 aa | i 7eei. _foe.

ai eS _ es ee » Po r ::7on ie _ . Be . oe fo a ee N:aH; ava a a Se soe Perecrriyg oe. Thee ae od “a aa Byles 8 : . 44 " |ymu Vs oe ae ae ne Ba 7 a _Sal > Le | ee .4 , oe4 Fd’iDeath oe 2 yg oewe of aoo aes es. a.: oo Sy ag yal lery of i e . PL le — :aumuel Art and Se eoio Lo , as .HestON Mthe , D.C aaa|= a:& a.eas — ioF oe ca ne ashingt 1ser 4 .-|ee ;eo See 7| . Kr > mee be oe a a67-"— ring yon. C ee awe’ ) Peo:re Pee Ea eth ee cost ae i | ce /i: a a rae Aga Bae : oe : a a Ag i 2 ee eeee eis.“aged ee oo see aoe cees aei ee “| Re my ’ | . oe ae “ Be ee fe te ats Se ‘ cee

aon ere Peete erestia.eee-ae e‘e ;eeabies ae é AN, eees oeacaeeee eal oe shane = i Me _ mee

bie oy oe ge Oy cs Boog A Hi 7 “

THE HARVEST OF

MEDIEVAL THEOLOGY Gabriel Biel and Late Medieval Nominalism S@> 502500 50> 50> 50> 50> S02 S@> 5E> 50> Se S00 SG> 50> 50> 5E> 56> SG> S00 See

Heiko Augustinus Oberman

The Robert Troup Paine Prize- Treatise for the Year 1962

HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS Cambridge, Massachusetts

1963

© Copyright, 1963, by the President and Fellows of Harvard College All rights reserved Se»

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 63-9553

Printed in the United States of America See

Distributed in Great Britain by Oxford University Press, London

Praeceptori meo

MAARTEN VAN RHIJN in oratitudine dedicatus

BLANK PAGE

PREFACE The first pages of this book were written midway between Zwingli’s birthplace and Calvin’s Geneva; these last and prefatory sentences in Vatican City, at the time of the first session of Vaticanum II. Those inclined to allegorical exegesis may find herein, symbolically expressed, the original impetus for this study of late medieval thought. There should be little doubt that the contemporary dialogue between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism cannot start de novo, forgetting its sixteenth-century

past, nor that nominalistic thought—the predominant late medieval movement — deeply influenced the Reformation, the Counter Reformation, and—as future studies of the period may well establish — the religious climate of the Renaissance north of the Alps.

Since the state of contemporary scholarship indicates that only a beginning has been made in retracing, with precision and fidelity to the sources, the structure and texture of thought between the Western Schism and the Reformation, it can honestly be said that this book will fulfill its purpose if, by challenging its critics, it adds to the comparatively small band of students of this vital period in the history of Western thought.

In German translation this study is scheduled to be published in September 1963 by Zollikon Verlag, Zurich, as the first of three volumes under the general title “Scholastik und Reformation.” Technology in our time is ever broadening the operational radius of the research scholar through microfilm and photostatic processes; there-

fore there are a large number of university libraries, especially in the Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland, on whose services I relied heavily. I feel particularly privileged, however, to have had the combined resources of the Widener, Houghton, and Andover-Harvard libraries at

my disposal. I am much indebted to my colleague, Mr. James Tanis, Librarian of the Andover-Harvard Theological Library, for the interest he has taken in this study and for invaluable help in providing the necessary rare materials. I have also profited greatly from the continuous help of Mrs. Maria Grossmann, Associate Librarian.

Vil

PREFACE

Miss E. Jane Dempsey, Teaching Fellow in Church History, and Mr. Ralph Lazzaro, Lecturer on Church History, took on the formidable task of trying to adapt my English style to publication standards, and have assisted me in seeing this book through the press. With her penetrating comments Miss Dempsey has helped me to clarify a number of crucial passages, and I profited greatly from following closely her study of the thought of the fascinating theologian and preacher, Johann Geiler von Kaysersberg.

Mr. William Johnston, candidate at Harvard for the doctorate in the history and philosophy of religion, unselfishly assisted me in adding the final inserts to complete the manuscript. To Mr. Richard W. Wertz, in the same degree program, and to Miss Dorothy Corbett, Teaching Fellow in Ethics, I am much indebted for their dedication in drawing up the subject index.

A grant from the American Council of Learned Societies enabled me to visit European libraries and to acquire microfilm materials. Mr. and Mrs. H. W. Reesink, Savosa, Switzerland, provided me with a pied-a-terre and thus made it possible to make full use of this liberal grant. My valued relationship as a Corresponding Fellow of the Institut fiir Europaische Geschichte, Abteilung Religionsgeschichte, at Mainz, gave me the opportunity to discuss at an early stage the theses underlying this

study with its Director, Dr. Joseph Lortz, Emeritus Professor. His assistant, Mr. Peter Manns, kindly helped to locate rare German sources. In the series of this institute, the first volume of a four-volume critical edition of Gabriel Biel’s commentary on the Mass, Expositio Canonis Misse, of which Mr. William J. Courtenay and I are co-editors, will appear

shortly. For technical reasons it has not been possible to cite this new edition in my present book. Because of the public nature of a preface, I am necessarily restricted

in the choice of words with which to express the contribution and companionship of my wife, especially during these last five years in which she herself became a student of medieval thought. Heiko A. Oberman December 5, 1962

Vill

INTRODUCTION I Chapter One: CURRICULUM VITAE GABRIELIS 9 I. The Early Years 10 I]. Pastor and Frater 12 III. Professor and Prepositus 16 IV. Character of Biel’s Sermons 21 V. Internal Evidence on the Chronology of Biel’s Writings 24 VI. Biel’s Letter to the Church at Mainz under Interdict 26

Chapter Two: PROLEGOMENA 30 I. Potentia absoluta and potentia ordinata 30 1. Traditional interpretations 30 2. Relation of philosophy and theology 34 3. Biel’s definition of the two orders 36 II. The Theological Significance of the Dialectics of God’s Power: Its Significance for Man’s Intellectual Powers 38

1. Natural knowledge of God 40 2. Faith seeking understanding: ratio de congruo 41 3. Double truth excluded 42 lI. The Theological Significance of the Dialectics of God’s Power: Its Significance for Man’s Moral Powers 42 1. God’s love and the order de potentia ordinata 43 2. Reinterpretation of the misericordia det 44 3. Non-arbitrary character of the ordained order 44 4. The relation of misericordia and iustitia 45 5. The two eternal decrees of God 46

IV. The Meaning of the Expression ex puris naturalibus 47 1. The status of the viator 47 2. God’s preservation of creation 48

3, The state of pure nature 48 4. Nature and grace 49 5. Nominalism: naturalistic? 49 1X

CONTENTS V. The Philosophical Significance of the Dialectics of God’s “Two

Powers” 50 1. The nominalistic “razor” 50 2. Speculative theology 51 3. Nominalism: sceptical? 51 4. Knowledge and wisdom 52 5. The necessity of revelation 53 6. “Als/ob” theology 53

7. Conclusion 55

Chapter Three: FAITH AND UNDERSTANDING 57 I. Anthropology 57 1. Philosophical and theological anthropology 57 2. Nominalistic epistemology 60 3. The theology of the viator 62 4. Voluntarism and rationalism 63 5. Synderesis and conscience 65

6. The image of God 66 II. Faith: Acquired and Infused 68 1. Ecclesiastical positivism? 68 2. Revelation as information and exhortation 70

3. Fides ex auditu 71 , 4. Biblical theology 74 5. The inner core of faith 75 6. The possibility of apologetics 78 7. The middle road between rationalism and positivism 81 8. Implicit and explicit faith 83 9, The mystery of the Trinity 84 — OY. Conclusion 88

Chapter Four: NATURAL LAW AS DIVINE ORDER go I. The Question de odio dei go 1. The medieval tradition go 2. The position of Biel 93

II. God and Justice 96 1. God’s freedom from the law 96 2. The lawfulness of God’s action 98 3. The reliability of the moral order 100

II. Eternal Law and Natural Law 103 J. Natural law as manifestation of eternal law 103 2. The significance of the natural law for ethics 105 3. The Old Testament character of nominalistic ethics 108

4. An appropriate evaluation of the nominalistic posi-

tion III

Xx

CONTENTS IV. Moses and Christ: Law and Gospel 112 1. The fulfillment of the Old Law 112 2. The medieval tradition 113

Chapter Five: MAN FALLEN AND REDEEMED 120 I. Doctrine of Sin 120 I. The ecclesiological setting of the doctrine of justifica-

tion 120

2. Original sin in the medieval tradition 121 3. Biel as an historian of Christian thought 123 4. Indomitable concupiscence 126 5. Before and after the fall 128 If. The Proper Disposition for Justification 131 1. Inalienable freedom of the will — 131

2. The doctrine of the facere quod in se est 132 3. First and second justification of the sinner 134 4. Extra- and pre-sacramental grace 135

5. Nature and grace 139 6. The late medieval tradition 141

Chapter Six: THE PROCESS OF JUSTIFICATION 146 I. Attrition and Contrition 146 1. The glory and misery of fallen man 146 2. The medieval tradition 147 3. Biel’s critique of Scotus 150 4. Love of God for God’s sake 153 5. An evaluation of attrition 154 6. Penance as virtue and as sacrament 157

7. The psychological impact of the sacrament of penance 159 II. Habitus and Acceptatio 160 1. The Augustinian simile of horse and rider 160 2. The necessity of the habit of grace 166 3. A classification of merits 169

4. The two stages of justification and the two eternal decrees 172 5. The profile of Biel’s doctrine of justification 175 6. Bartholomaeus Arnoldi von Usingen on justification 178 7. Oscillation between “mercy” and “justice” 181

8. Conclusion 184

Chapter Seven: BETWEEN FEAR AND HOPE:

THE RIDDLE OF PREDESTINATION 185

I. Election and Reprobation 185 1. The systematic interrelation of predestination and justification 185 2. Two doctrines of predestination in Biel? 187 3. Predestination and foreknowledge 189

x1

CONTENTS 4. Occam and Biel 191 5. Biel’s single doctrine of predestination 192 6. Nomunalistic diversity: the position of Gregory of Ri-

mini 196

7. The view of Reinhold Seeberg 206 8. The view of Paul Vignaux 209 9. Scotus, d’Auriole, Occam: Biel’s contribution 212 10. Supralapsarianism rejected 215

Il. Spes and Fiducia 217 1. Certainty of grace and certainty of salvation 217 2. The rising tide of Donatism: the problem of the wicked

priest 220 3. Christ’s work of hope and justice 222

4, Fiducial certainty 224 5. The pro nobis theme: sola fide and sola gratia rejected 227 6. Theologia crucis in Gerson and Biel 231

II. Sola Fide and Sola Gratia in the Theology of Holcot 235 Il. Sola fide tenetur: Holcot’s scepticism 235 2. Sola gratia salvatur: Holcot’s predestinarianism 243

Chapter Eight: CHRIST AND THE EUCHARIST 249 I. Nominalism and Chalcedon 249 1. The state of scholarship on the question of nominalistic Christology 249 2. The development of medieval Christology: Lombard, Thomas, Henry of Ghent, Scotus 251 3. The intention of Occam’s asinus-Christology: rejection of the charge of Nestorianism 255 4. Biel evaluated in terms of the medieval christological

tradition 259 II. Christus Victor 261 1. Medieval understanding of the communicatio

idiomatum 261 2. Biel’s understanding of the Incarnation: kenosis and extracalvinisticum 264 3. Biel’s modification of Anselm: centrality of the life, not

the death of Christ 266 4, Imitation of the Christus Victor 268 II. The Two Offerings: The Cross and the Altar 271 1. The sacraments linking Christology and justification 271

2. The cross as testament; the sacrifice of the Mass as representation 271 3. Transubstantiation and the real presence of Christ 275 4. Communion as participation in the messianic meal: the problem of non-participation 277 5. Critical evaluation of Biel’s position 279 X11

CONTENTS

Chapter Nine: MARIOLOGY 281 THE VIRGIN MARY AND GOD 281

I. Introduction 281 1. Distinctive treatments in academic and homiletical

works 281 2. The Immaculate Conception in the medieval tradition 283

Il. The Mariology of Gregory of Rimini 286 1. Gregory between Scripture and tradition 286 2. Gregory’s criticism of Scotus 289 3. Immaculate Conception rejected 290 III. Biel’s Defense of the Immaculate Conception 292 1. The question of fact 292 2. The eternal predestination of Mary 294 3. Mariology and the authority of the Church — 295

4. Biel and Gregory 296 IV. Maria corredemptrix 298 1. The maternity of Mary 298 2. The Virgin’s merits and the Incarnation according to the Collectorium 299 3. Pelagian Mariology in the sermons 300 4. Cooperation in the passion of Christ 302 V. Mariological Rules 304 1. The superlative rule 304 2. The comparative rule 305 3. The rule of similitude 306 4. Merits and granted privileges 307 THE VIRGIN MARY AND MANKIND 308

J. Annunciation 308 1. The second sanctification 308 2. The Virgin as token of restoration 309 II. Bodily Assumption: Mediation 310 1, The Queen of Heaven 310 2. Mary’s intercessory task 310 3. Death and assumption 312 Il. Frduciain the Virgin Mary = 313 1. Greater fiducia in Mary than in Christ 313 2. Mary the hope of the world 314 3. Mariology graphically presented 315 4. Sophia speculations 317 5. Evaluation: Marta pro nobis 319

Chapter Ten: NOMINALISTIC MYSTICISM 323 I. Nominalism and Mysticism 323

1. The Great Schism as turning point of the Middle Ages 323 X111

CONTENTS 2. The common thesis: nominalism and mysticism mutually

exclusive 326 3. The problem of defining mysticism 327 II. Jean Gerson: Nominalist and Mystic 331 1. Gerson’s attitude toward Thomism and nominalism 331 2. Penitential mysticism versus transformation mysticism 335

III. The Mystical Elements in the Theology of Gabriel Biel 340 1. Biel in the footsteps of Gerson 340 2. Biel’s distinctive contribution: democratization of mys-

ticism 341 3. The spirit of the devotio moderna and of observantism 343 4. Mystical description of contrition 347 5. The birth of Christin the soul 349 6. “Christ-mysticism” as necessary for salvation 351 7. Denial of forensic justification 353 8. The aristocrats of the Spirit 356 9. Conclusion: the marriage of mysticism and nominalism 359

Chapter Eleven: HOLY WRIT AND HOLY CHURCH 361 I. Nominalism and Extrascriptural Tradition 361 1. Biblicism or ecclesiastical positivism: clashing interpretations 361 2. Theses of Paul de Vooght and George Tavard 363 II. Tradition I and Tradition IIT 365 1. Scripture and Tradition in the early Church — 365 2. The period of transition: Basil and Augustine 369 3. The problem of extrascriptural Tradition: Bradwardine, Wyclif, and Ambrosius of Speier 371 4. Both conciliarism and curialism uphold extrascriptural

Tradition 375 5. The position of Occam: two distinct sources 378 6. The position of Pierre d’Ailly: the law of Christ 382 7. The position of Gerson: the spirit-guided Church 385 8. The position of Breviscoxa: the second source 387 9. Tradition I and Tradition II: a fundamental principle of classification 390

III. Scripture, Tradition, and Church according to Biel 393 1. Biel’s adherence to Tradition II 393 2. Biel’s further contribution to the medieval dilemma 398 3. Striking absence of attack on canon lawyers 401 4, The hermeneutical problem and tradition 403 5. Biel asa forerunner of Trent 406 6. Acontrast: Wessel Gansfort as upholder of Tradition I 408

IV. The Pope Between Council and Emperor 412 1, The Pope as vicar of Christ 412 X1V

CONTENTS 2. Authority of Pope and Council: considerations 415 3. The middle way between papalism and anti-curialism 417

4. Corpus christianum 419

Postscript: THE CATHOLICITY OF NOMINALISM 423

BIBLIOGRAPHY 431 Abbreviations and Primary Sources 431

1. Periodicals 431 2. Collections, editions, and encyclopedias 431

3. Primary Sources—General 432 4. Primary Sources — Works of Gabriel Biel 435

Secondary Sources 436

A NOMINALISTIC GLOSSARY 459

INDEX OF NAMES 479

INDEX OF SUBJECTS 485

XV

BLANK PAGE

INTRODUCTION S@> S.Oe S@e 5G SGe S.Ge Se SOe Se Oe 5 Oe SOe S.Qe SO S@e SOe SOe S6e S@2 SOs Soe

It is a curious—and dangerous — coincidence that the late medieval period is one of the least known in the history of Christian thought and, at the same time, a period in the interpretation of which there are a great many vested interests. The former is primarily the result of the fact that — while one can no longer call late medieval thought terra incognita —

for too long a time it has been regarded solely as a part of the history of philosophy. Consequently its theological contributions have been

largely neglected. The latter is undoubtedly due to the fact that this period forms the frontier between the so-called high middle ages and the Reformation. This has certainly made it difficult for scholars to come to a reasonably unbiased evaluation of the place and function of the late medieval period in the history of Christian thought.

One can substantiate this observation by pointing to at least three significant schools of interpretation. Reformation scholars have been inclined to view the later middle ages merely as the “background of the Reformation” and have too often been guided in their evaluation by statements of the Reformers— especially Martin Luther — which by their very nature tend to be informed by a conscious departure from particular developments in the medieval tradition. There is a tendency in this school to stress contrasts between Luther and late medieval theologians and in general to assign Luther more to the tradition of St. Paul and St. Augustine than to that of William of Occam and Gabriel Biel. There is, secondly, what one may loosely call the Thomistic school of interpretation which holds that in the thought of Thomas Aquinas, the

middle ages reached its apex. It states that the thought of the succeeding period, beginning with Duns Scotus and culminating in nominalism —the work of Occam, Biel, and their disciples —is characterized by

the disintegration and rapid collapse of the Thomistic synthesis. The I

INTRODUCTION

idea that nominalism is an essentially anti- or at least a non-catholic movement leading up to the Reformation, and that, for example, Luther, however catholic in intention, became a heretic unwittingly because of his distorted, nominalistic training, is very often connected with this hypothesis. In this school late medieval thought is merely seen as the “aftermath of high scholasticism.”

Finally, there is a third school which can be called the Franciscan school of interpretation. This school is apt to stress the orthodoxy and theological contribution of “new” Franciscans such as Scotus and Occam. And since this is a relatively young, and, until recent years, a decidedly less vocal school of interpretation, it is not as yet clearly committed to one particular approach. There are, however, signs which indicate that this group is willing to defend the orthodoxy of nominalism; it explains the

theology of Luther as an erroneous interpretation of the theology of such a nominalist as Gabriel Biel, due to other elements in Luther’s thought unrelated to the nominalistic tradition. While the Thomistic school locates the break in the medieval catholic tradition somewhere between Aquinas and Scotus, this third school searches for the decisive rupture somewhere between Biel and Luther. It does not seem to be a far-fetched conclusion that the results of the study of the later middle ages have been too often determined by ulterior motives, especially those motives at stake in the controversy between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. Confronted with these conflicting and often emotionally or denominationally colored presuppositions, we have felt the need to investigate the theology of Gabriel Biel in such a way as to take with the utmost seriousness his position between ‘Thomas and Luther. Hopefully this will avoid treating late medieval thought, in

general, and the theology of Gabriel Biel, in particular, either as the “aftermath of high scholasticism” or merely as “the background of the Reformation.” Our aim is to view Gabriel Biel within the context of the tradition which he himself acknowledges to be authoritative, and thus to train our eyes to discern the emerging shape of a theological school of late medieval nominalism. This must be evaluated according to its own

intention and according to its own peculiar contribution to medieval thought. To succeed in this endeavor, we cannot restrict our analysis to either

the philosophical departures of nominalism from Thomism or to the 2

INTRODUCTION contrast between the nominalistic doctrine of justification and that of the succeeding Reformation theology, the two aspects usually treated. We shall not only analyze all those aspects of Biel’s thought which appear from his own viewpoint to be important, but we shall also investigate all the Biel sources that are available. Hitherto, selected passages of his Sentences and Exposition have been discussed, but there have not been more than a handful of quotations from his Sermons, which comprise almost half his total opus, in circulation. Of course, it is conceivable that there could have been a development in Biel’s thought from his early sermons to his late academic works; but as we have found no evidence for such a development, it is clear that the sermons must be taken seriously as documenting his thought. The discrepancies which we shall note between Biel’s homi-

letic and his academic works can be explained as due to the different audiences to which they were directed.

This volume is part of an over-all plan to come to a reassessment of the impact of nominalism on sixteenth-century thought, especially of the elusive relation — both negative and positive — between Gabriel Biel and Martin Luther. Precisely because of the sharply contrasting interpretations of this period in Christian thought indicated above, it seems mandatory to treat Biel and Luther in two separate volumes. This will make it possible to deal with Biel for his own sake, not merely as a point of departure for a description of the theology of Martin Luther. For this reason Luther will seldom appear on the following pages; we shall enter into a discussion with Luther scholars only insofar as they have dealt with Biel. The footnotes in this volume, again in view of the differing interpretations, are of particular importance. We have tried to provide such extensive documentation, by full-length quotations from Biel and elaborate cross references to the various works of Biel, that the reader is permitted

not only to follow the argumentation by reading over our shoulder, but also to come to an independent evaluation. We hope in this way to present a description of Biel’s thought which may perhaps have its own significance regardless of whether this interpretation finds general recognition. Because of the limited accessibility of the works of Biel, his sermons

in particular, we are preparing a third volume which will reproduce a selection of Biel’s most significant sermons in their entirety, along with representative examples of late medieval preaching. 3

INTRODUCTION In view of the limited use made of the sources to date, it is fair to say that the case of Gabriel Biel has been prejudged. This may also be true of William of Occam. Since, as we shall see time and again, the Sentences commentaries of Occam and Biel manifest parallel theological structures, we must at least consider whether Occam’s interests would not also prove to be more theologically oriented if we had pastoral literature by Occam of the same genre as Biel’s sermons and letters at our disposal. Although we shall stress that Biel must no longer be seen exclusively as a spokesman for Occam, future interpreters of Occam can profitably take into account the pastoral-theological potentialities inherent in the structure of Occam’s thought which were actualized by Biel. With respect to the question of the influence of Occam on the Reformation, we cannot ignore the form which Occam’s thought has received

in its restatement by Gabriel Biel, a form to which almost any other epithet better applies than the usual verdicts of “pure logic,” “scepticism,” and “disintegration.” Furthermore we should at least call attention to the problem of the relation of “Occamism” and “nominalism.” The present state of scholarship simply does not permit us to draw firm lines of rela-

tion or dependence within the period. Elsewhere* we have suggested that at least four “schools” within late medieval nominalism can be discerned. These are the Occam-Biel school, to which we add Pierre d’Ailly and Jean Charlier Gerson; the English left-wing school represented by Robert Holcot and Adam Woodham; the right-wing school centered around Gregory of Rimini; and a syncretistic school, particularly vocal at Paris, where the influence of Scotus and of Occam converge. In this study, which may be considered to be the first test of our hypothesis, there is further corroboration for an emphasis upon the essentially theolog-

ical cohesion of the various schools within nominalism that transcends the philosophical presuppositions which originally gave the movement its name. The analysis of the thought of Gabriel Biel necessarily leads us to investigate medieval thought as a whole. The indebtedness of Biel to Duns Scotus and Jean Gerson at the one hand, and the obedient discipleship of

Bartholomaeus von Usingen, professor at Erfurt—and in this function teacher of Luther —at the other, mark the time span of our more detailed investigation. *“Some Notes on the Theology of Nominalism with Attention to its Relation to the Renaissance,” HTR 53 (1960), 4776.

4

INTRODUCTION Chapters One to Five are primarily intended as descriptions of basic structures in Biel’s thought. Building on this foundation, the second half of the book represents an effort to interpret the major systematic issues of the post-Avignon period in the light of our analysis of the position of Gabriel Biel.

At certain points we believe we have brought new perspectives to the study of late medieval thought, not so much because we proclaim Biel to be a great innovator, but because in Biel we are provided with a strategic

vantage point. From here we see spread out before us, not the barren wastelands of sterile debates which we had been led to expect by traditional late medieval scholarship, but a richness of deep pastoral and searching theological concern. Through Biel’s eyes we see the Church threatened by a rising tide of Donatism and the costly rivalry between the theologians of the Dominican and Franciscan orders. With a profound

respect for the period before the rise of rival traditions growing out of thirteenth-century developments, Biel marks the spirit of late medieval nominalism in conscientiously probing all the great theological traditions, harvesting those fruits which seemed ripe enough to nourish the Christian faith in search of understanding, to heighten the quality of Christian life,

and to undergird the unity of the Church under Christ and his vicar. Deeply indebted as we are to Johan Huizinga’s The Waning of the Middle Ages, the image of “harvest” in our title is intentionally opposed to the connotation of “decline” carried by the French and English translations of the Dutch “Herfsttij,” which literally means “harvest-tide.” Biel’s vast knowledge of medieval theology in all its variety appears from the fact that apart from his great debt to Occam, he listens throughout his works most intently to the voices of other medieval theologians — among whom should be mentioned especially Bernard of Clairvaux, Peter Lombard, the old Franciscan school (Alexander of Hales and Bonaventura), Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, and Duns Scotus. We have been particularly impressed by the fact that Biel throughout his works acknowledges Gerson along with Occam as a great authority. This has led us to explore particular aspects of Gerson’s thought in order to establish the extent of Biel’s systematic dependence on him. It is most revealing to see that Biel does not find it necessary to sacrifice his allegiance to Occam while obviously respecting the judgment of Gerson, particularly

in respect to Mariology, the authority of the Church, and the mystical >

INTRODUCTION aspects of the Christian’s existence. This study has led us to place Gerson more squarely within the nominalistic tradition than has been customary.

To present the rich diversity of the nominalistic tradition, we have dedicated special sections to those two intriguing figures who stand farthest

apart, Gregory of Rimini, O.E.S.A. and Robert Holcot, O.P. Biel’s eloquent Marian piety has led us to include a chapter on late medieval Mariology. We found it most illuminating to see how this important flowering of medieval devotion and theology is systematically

| related to Christology and to the doctrine of justification. An examination of Biel’s mariological corollaries proved to be a natural test of the significance of the pro nobis theme in his Christology. We have also found it necessary to investigate the common claim that nominalistic

Christology manifests Nestorian debilities. In fact, the defense of the Chalcedonian interpretation of the relation between the two natures in Christ is not only genuine, but is explicitly directed against Nestorian interpretations.

Here again Biel reveals the nominalistic search for the catholic via media. One can only comment regretfully that in a striking parallel to the failure of the efforts of the Council of Pisa to reunite divided Christendom, resulting only in the formation of a third faction, nominalistic theology was unable to succeed in the mediating role which it envisioned for itself. Most surprising has been the discovery that Biel’s own understanding of the Christian faith incorporates both the essence of nominalistic theology

and traits which one cannot avoid classifying as mystical. The usual assumption that nominalism and mysticism are mutually exclusive would therefore seem no longer tenable. The analysis of the polemic regarding the relative authority of Scrip-

ture and Church has not only suggested that this problem is for Biel and his school one of the more crucial theological questions; it also appears

that new tools of interpretation are necessary in order to unravel the complexities of this problem in the later middle ages. The traditional contrast between sola scriptura and Tradition does not admit of sufficient subtlety to lay out sharply the issues underlying this polemic.

In fact two opposing currents of thought —the line from Thomas Bradwardine via John Huss to Wessel Gansfort over against the line from Occam via Gerson to Biel—are both concerned with the authority of Tradition, but Tradition conceived in two radically differing fashions. 6

INTRODUCTION Finally in the postscript which concludes this book, we have taken up explicitly the general claim that late medieval theology represents a period of disintegration and decay. This discussion is the natural context within which the hotly contested “catholicity of nominalism” can be assessed. Due to the highly controversial nature of the subject matter, we have felt ourselves obliged — all too often for our own liking —to take issue with respected scholars in the field. Since this impression does not by any means convey an awareness of our indebtedness, we wish to acknowledge

explicitly the meticulous and stimulating research of which we have readily availed ourselves. Although bibliographical indications in the footnotes will call attention to a wide range of scholars, we should like to mention especially our grate-

ful appreciation for the wisdom and the fresh insight brought to bear on the period by Otto Scheel and Paul Vignaux. In order to assist those who may wish to find their way into the field of late medieval scholarship, which is gradually taking shape as a field in its own right, we have appended a glossary of the most crucial technical terms of the period along with a bibliography which is meant to be representative of contemporary scholarship in the field.

7

BLANK PAGE

Chapter One

SOe SGe SQe Sgn 5 Ge Se SG S@e Sep 56 Sen S@e 560 5.Or S.@e Ge 5.@2 50> SGe S@= See

Our first step, before turning to an analysis of Gabriel Biel’s thought, will

be to examine the outer course of his life, and to survey his writings. This prefatory discussion cannot be extensive, however, for the historical sources yield but few scattered references to the “last of the scholastics.” Furthermore, many aspects of Biel’s biography have already been satisfactorily described." Hence, we shall simply outline the life of Gabriel “Among the more comprehensive biographies are: F. X. Linsenmann, “Gabriel Biel und die Anfange der Universitat zu Tubingen,” Theologische Quartalschrift 47 (1865), 195-226; H. Hermelink, Geschichte der Theologischen Fakultdt in Tibingen vor der Reformation 1477-1534 (Tubingen, 1906), pp. 204-207; C. Feckes, “Gabriel Biel, der erste grosse Dogmatiker der Universitat Tubingen in seiner wissenschaftlichen Bedeutung,” Theologische Quartalschrift 108 (1927), 50-76; J. Haller, Die Anfinge der Universitat Tubingen, 1477-1537, 1 (Stuttgart, 1927), 153172; II (Stuttgart, 1929), 54-64; M. Cappuyns, “Biel, Gabriel,” in Dictionnaire d’histotre et de géographie ecclésiastique, vol. VIII (Paris, 1935), cols. 1429-1430; W. M. Landeen, “Gabriel Biel and the Brethren of the Common Life,” CH 20 (1951), 23-36; “Gabriel Biel and the Devotio Moderna in Germany,” Research Studies, Washington State University 27 (1959), 135-176, 214-229; 28 (1960), 21-45, 61-78.

Studies dealing with particular aspects of Biel’s life include: G. Kratzinger, “Versuch einer Geschichte des Kugelhauses zu Butzbach,” Archiv fur hesstsche Geschichte und Altertumskunde 10 (1861), 48—93; G. Plitt, Gabriel Biel als Prediger

(Erlangen, 1879), pp. 1-19; O. Meyer, Die Briider des gemeinsamen Lebens in Wirttemberg 1477-1517 (Stuttgart, 1913), pp. 13-42; W. M. Landeen, “Das Briiderhaus St. Peter im Schonbuch auf dem Einsiedel,” Blatter fur Wtrttembergische Kirchengeschichte, 60-61 (1960-1961), 5-18. Studies dealing with Biel’s works include: K. Steiff, Der erste Buchdruck in Tibingen, 1498-1534 (Tubingen, 1881); C. Ruch, “Biel, Gabriel,” in DTAC, vol. I, cols. 814-816, 825; Hermelink, Geschichte der Theologischen Fakultat, pp. 88-91; F. W. E. Roth, “Ein Brief des Gabriel Biel, 1462,” Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft fiir altere deutsche Geschichtskunde 35 (1910), 582-585; Cappuyns, cols. 1430-1432, 1435; F. Stegmiller, “Literargeschichtliches zu Gabriel Biel,’ Theologie in Geschichte und

9

CURRICULUM VITAE GABRIELIS

Biel and dwell at length only on the points that are pertinent to the background and understanding of his inner development and thought. I. The Early Years Gabriel Biel was born at Speyer during the first quarter of the fifteenth century.” Sources impart no information concerning his family,? youth,

or primary education and only fragmentary information regarding his early manhood and university training. From these fragments the following outline of Biel’s early adult life can be constructed. At some unknown date, in or before 1432, Biel was ordained to the

priesthood, and while still serving as a matinal priest at the Chapel of the Ten Thousand Martyrs at St. Peter’s in Speyer, he entered the faculty of arts of the University of Heidelberg, July 13, 1432. There he received the baccalaureate degree on July 21, 1435,* and the master’s degree three years later on March 21, 1438, under Magister Conrad Gummeringen.® Remaining at the University of Heidelberg for at least three subsequent years, the young magister served as an instructor in the faculty of arts.® Thus, we see that his first nine years of university life were spent exclusively within the faculty of arts. In 1442 or 1443 Biel attended the University of Erfurt, but he apparently remained there only a short time. It was perhaps during this sojourn that Biel first met Eggeling Becker von Braunschweig, the famosissimus Gegenwart: Michael Schmaus zum sechzigsten Geburtstag (Munich, 1957), pp. 309316. This last article is particularly helpful for the dating of the four books of the Collectorium.

* Biel himself mentions Speyer in Lect. 89 P: “Et ego Gabriel ex Spira . . .” and again in the prologue to the Def.: “Ego Gabriel Biel de Spira.” His birth date is unknown. However, his ordination before 1432, his entry into the University of Heidelberg (1432), and his death at Schénbuch (1495), suggest a date in the early decades of the fifteenth century. It is Hieronymus Wigand Biel’s conjecture that Biel was born while the Council of Constance was in session. See De Gabriele Biel celeberrimo papista anti-papista (Wittenberg, 1719), p. 5. *Cappuyns suggests (col. 1429) that the Johannes Bihel cited by G. Topke, Die

Matrikel der Universitat Heidelberg, vol. 1: von 1386-1553 (Heidelberg, 1884), 1gt, was a brother of Gabriel. We have no documentary evidence to support this suggestion. “ Topke, I, 190 £. ° Topke, I, 384 f. ° Topke, I, 386.

IO

THE EARLY YEARS

magister to whom he felt himself so deeply indebted.’ Returning to the University of Erfurt in 1451, Biel probably matriculated in the faculty of theology.® In the spring of 1453 the wandering scholar was enrolled at yet a third university, the University of Cologne, there to study in its then famous faculty of theology.®

It should be noted that no document states explicitly that Biel studied in the faculty of theology at the University of Erfurt. Furthermore, the matriculation lists at the University of Erfurt give no graduation dates. Consequently we cannot be sure when or if Biel received a degree from Erfurt. At any rate, he must have received his licentiate before 1475, since in a letter dated December 3, 1474, from Pope Sixtus V addressed to Biel and the chapter of St. Mark’s in Butzbach, Biel is called Licentiatus in Theologia.*® It is possible, of course, that Biel received the licentiate of theology degree from the University of Cologne or Tubingen. One significant fact concerning Biel’s inner development and thought during the years 1442~1453 ought not to be overlooked, namely, his association in these early years with both the via moderna and the via antigua. Whereas Erfurt favored Occam to the exclusion of both Thomism and Scotism, Cologne granted a place of honor only to Thomas and Albert.

Already in his student years, then, Biel acquired not only an intimate knowledge of Occam’s thought, but also acquainted himself with the thought of Thomas and with the thought of others who, by the midfifteenth century, had come to represent the via antiqua. Hence, it is not

strange to find that Biel is both an articulate spokesman of the via

1902), p. 537 ff. |

"Lect. 89 P. Cf. A. Franz, Die Messe im deutschen Mittelalter (Freiburg i. Br.,

*J. C. H. Weissenborn, Akten der Erfurter Universitit (Halle, 1881), p. 224;

Plitt, p. 4 £.; Haller, II, 55. ° Cf. F. Benary, “Via antiqua und via moderna auf den deutschen Hochschulen des

Mittelalters mit besonderer Berticksichtigung der Universitat Erfurt,” Zur Geschichte der Stadt und der Universitat Erfurt am Ausgang des Mittelalters (Gotha, 1919), p. 35. H. Keussen, Die Matrikel der Universitat Kéln, vol. 1: 1389 bis 1559 (Bonn, 1928), 559-561.

* “Sixtus Episcopus servus servorum Dei dilectis filiis Gabrieli Biel preposito et capitulo ecclesie sancti Marci in Butzbach salutem et Apostolicam benedictionem. . . . Quare pro potestate sua, Preposite, qui Licentiatus in Theologia et Magister

in artibus existis...,” Johann Just Winckelmann, Grindliche und warhafte Beschreibung der Fiirstenthiimer Hessen- und Hersfeld (Bremen, 1711), fol. 189. We are indebted to Mrs. Harriet C. Jameson, Rare Book Librarian of the University Library of the University of Michigan, for photo-copies of this work.

Il

CURRICULUM VITAE GABRIELIS

moderna and a critic of narrow school rivalry, as well as a discerning user of the thought of the via antigua, most elaborately so of Duns Scotus and, in his sermons primarily, of Thomas."! The authority of Thomas is,

thus, by no means nullified or disregarded. But Biel, nevertheless, regards as one of the signs of progress in his time that Thomas can now be openly contradicted in the universities.’”

II. Pastor and Frater

If Biel’s early life centered in the university and was characterized by a diversified education, then the middle years of his life (c. 1460— 1484) found their locus in the Church and were remarkable because of their concern for the practical problems of church life. This concern was manifest in his three major activities during the middle years: in his position as cathedral preacher and vicar in Mainz, in his support of Adolph von Nassau in the latter’s struggle with Diether von Isenburg and in his association with the Brethren of the Common Life. Likewise this concern for the practical life of the Church was exhibited in his two major literary products of the period: the Mainz Sermones and the Defensorium obedi-

entie apostolice. It is certainly extraordinary that Biel did not pursue his academic career but became instead a priest and preacher. In order to understand more clearly this phase of Biel’s life, we shall examine each of these activities more closely.

During the early years of the sixties, Biel served as cathedral preacher and vicar in Mainz.’* The exact date of his appointment and the extent of his tenure in these offices is unknown. However, in his letter to a friend in Mainz dated 1462, Biel speaks with obvious familiarity about Mainz and its ecclesiastical problems. He also indicates that he is well known “ The association that Biel had with both Erfurt and Cologne was by no means an uncommon occurrence. Benary notes that, “. . . 400 Manner . . . zwischen 1392 und 1466 in Erfurt und Kéln studiert haben” (p. 35). * Though made up from the outset of representa-

tives of the via antiqua, the via moderna, and humanism, the faculty came clearly under the domination of representatives of the via antiqua during its early years. Biel’s association with the faculty of theology effected a profound reversal of this trend in two ways. First, he succeeded in bringing the vza moderna to a place of preeminence; *® and second, he gathered about himself a group of young, enthusiastic students, thus securing his accomplishments for the future. Best known of his followers is perhaps Wendelin Steinbach who was in later years a highly regarded professor of theology at Tiibingen. In 1485 and again in 1489 Biel was elected rector of the university. We know nothing of Biel’s association with the University of Tubingen after his last term as rector. Undoubtedly his retirement from academic life was dictated by his age, for in 1489 Biel may well have been more than 75, years old.*"

Apart from the doctrinal continuity between Biel and Bartholomaeus von Usingen, which we will discuss in the relevant chapters, a few more things should be said about Biel’s disciples. The brief poems at the beginning of the Tubingen and Hagenau editions of the Sermones dominicales are dedicated to Biel and his editor-disciple Wendelin Steinbach. They are not particularly beautiful, but for other reasons they are important enough to be mentioned here. Their author is Henry Bebel who had been teaching poetics and rhetoric since 1497 at the University of Tiibingen, an enthusiastic humanist with great admiration for Lorenzo Valla who furthered with all his power the study of classical antiquity and the purification of the Latin in current use.®? As the poeta laureatus of Ti* For a discussion of the history of the University of Tubingen and Biel’s relation to it, see Hermelink, Geschichte der Theologischen Fakultat, pp. 78 ff., 191 ff. *° Among the earlier exponents of the via moderna were Christian Wolmann and Elias Flick. See Hermelink, Geschichte der Theologischen Fakultat, p. 193. *" See Cappuyns, col. 1430.

® Hermelink, Geschichte der Theologischen Fakultat, pp. 81, 195 ff. ®K. Hagen, Deutschlands literarische und religiése Verhiltnisse im Reformations-

, 17

| CURRICULUM VITAE GABRIELIS bingen he made a lasting impression on Johannes Altenstaig whom we shall meet time and again as the author of the Vocabularius theologie, in which he surveys late medieval theological terminology.*° It is this theological dictionary which is one of the most important Witnesses to the great authority and central position of Biel in the ranks of late medieval theologians. Biel is not only quantitatively one of the most quoted — and most explicitly quoted — authorities, but also qualita-

tively for Altenstaig the most persuasive voice of tradition. It is clear from the selection of sources adduced that Altenstaig stands in the nominalistic tradition. Biel heads the list of theological authorities when Altenstaig surveys in a concluding section of his theological dictionary the cloud of witnesses to whom he had directed his questions.** Also included in this list is Johann Eck, who not only came from the same part of the country as Altenstaig and received at the same time his degree as magister arttum, but who was also a disciple of Bebel and member of the bursa modernorum in his Tiibingen student years.** It is no

mere coincidence or chauvinism on the part of Altenstaig that Eck is mentioned here together with Biel. Later professor at Ingolstadt and Luther’s principal opponent from the moment of the publication of his Obelisct (1518) and his participation in the Leipzig Debate (1519), Eck had started his academic career in Freiburg in the same year as Luther, 1509-1510. There is a further parallel with Luther in that Eck as sententiarius interpreted the Sentences of Lombard according to the commentaries of Occam and Biel. As late as 1539 Eck proudly states in a fer-

vent attack on Andreas Osiander that he can still vividly recall his teachers at Tubingen, among whom was Wendelin Steinbach. Thus, zeitalter, 1 (Erlangen, 1841), 381 ff. A selection of poems is published by Gustav Bebermeyer, Tibinger Dichterhumanisten: Bebel, Frischlin, Flayder (Tibingen, 1927), p. 17 ff. See further on Bebel: Haller, I, 212 ff.; II, 76 ff.

“We have used the first (Hagenau 1517) edition. For other editions and works of Altenstaig, see the helpful essay of Friedrich Zoepfl, Johannes Altenstaig: Ein Gelehrtenleben aus der Zeit des Humanismus und der Reformation (Minster i.W., 1918), p. 47 ff.

“« .. imitatus sum precipue auctores quos cum diligentia legi vel pro maiore parte Gabrielem Byel prepositum primum in Schonbach. .. ,” Vocabularius theologie, postscriptum. “@ “Videatur Eckius doctor germanus non incelebris, mihi notissimus et intimus

qui preter ceterorum theologorum morem, eloquentiam cum theologie sapientia coniunxit,” Altenstaig, fol. 218°. See also Zoepfl, p. 15.

18

PROFESSOR AND PREPOSITUS

there is abundant evidence for the contention that Biel had a profound influence on this important protagonist of the Counter-Reformation.* With respect to the question of the extent to which we may expect Johannes Staupitz, who studied from 1497 until 1500 in Tubingen, to be familiar with the works of Biel, it is important to note that Altenstaig dedicated —in a letter dated October 4, 1517 ** —his dictionary to Staupitz, in which Biel as in the Vocabularius itself is singled out as “noster illustri gratia theologus Gabriel Biel.” If one further considers the fact that another disciple of Bebel and friend of Altenstaig, Johann Brassican who came in 1489 to Ttibingen,*° was the teacher of Philip Melanchthon, we may well conclude that around

the turn of the century at Tiibingen nominalism and humanism were apparently more compatible than we have long been inclined to believe.

Whereas Augustin Renaudet has pointed to the great tensions at the “In 1538 Eck mentions in his Epzstola de ratione studiorum suorum: “. .. G. Ocham et Gabrielis commentaria prelegendo in Ianuario anni noni,” CC II, ed. Johann Metzler (Minster i. W., 1921), 45 f. “. . . ihm [Biel] folgten die Lehrer Ecks, deren Namen er noch 1540 [1539] mit Stolz nannte; und wie diese so hat auch der Schiller sich spater als “Occamist” bezeichnet, und seine Vorlesungen via moderna gehalten,” Joseph Schlecht, “Dr. Johann Ecks Anfange,” Historisches Jahrbuch 36 (1915), 3. He also observes that “Biel . . . auf Ecks Denkrichtung bestimmend eingewirkt hat.” Eck refers to Steinbach in Schutzred Kindtlicher unschuld wider

den Catechisten Andre Hosander ... Aichstet (1539) fol. LIII. On this discussion see W. Moller, Andreas Osiander (Elberfeld, 1870), p. 218 ff. On the relation between Eck and Bebel see J. Greving, Johann Eck als junger Gelehrter: Eine literarund dogmengeschichtliche Untersuchung tiber seinen Chrysopassus Praedestinationis

aus dem Jahre 1514 (Minster i. W., 1906), p. 12 f. For Eck as “Occamist” see Greving, p. 99. Erwin Iserloh, who does not mention Schlecht’s article in his important Die Eucharistie in der Darstellung des Johannes Eck: Ein Beitrag zur vortritdentinischen Kontroverstheologie tiber das Messopfer (Minster i. W., 1950), plans to compare Biel and Eck as regards the doctrine of the Eucharist (p. 344, n. 1). For a further understanding of the wide range of Biel’s impact it is important to note the words of the influential Jesuit theologian and participant at the Council of Trent, Jacob Lainez: “Haec ille quae Gabriel Biel lectione 3 supra canonem missae item clare et docte explicat,” Disputationes Tridentinae, ed. H. Grisar, S. J., I (Oeniponte, 1886), 137.

“ Altenstaig, fol. IV".

“Hermelink, Die Matrikeln der Universitat Tubingen, I, 76, 199. According to the author of “De Wesselo Groningensi,” Biel was for a number of years in close contact with Wessel Gansfort, as is pointed out by Maarten van Rhijn, Wessel Gansfort (The Hague, 1917), p. 73. Cf. “Aliquot annos etiam [erat?] cum Gabrieli Byel ab Urach, viro doctissimo, ut ejus monumenta testantur,” van Rhijn, appendix A, p. v. See also Zoepfl, p. 14 f.

Ig

CURRICULUM VITAE GABRIELIS

turn of the century between the Parisian humanists and the nominalistic circle centered around Johann Maior and later Jacob Almain, editor of Biel’s Collectortum, we find that Biel — who himself proves to be familiar

with the work of Pico della Mirandola—is intimate with Geiler von Kaysersberg and through him is in contact with a prestigious circle of German humanists.*®

After his retirement from the University of Tubingen, Biel served as provost of the new Brethren House, St. Peter’s at Einsiedel in Schén-

buch. Here under his leadership an unusual rule and institution was established wherein the three estates of the nobility, clergy, and burgesses

dwelled together according to the ideals of Brethren piety. All vowed upon admission to the house to take upon themselves the common life of the canons, yet there remained for each group certain privileges characteristic of that particular estate. Such an arrangement was to be found in no other Brethren House in Germany. By eliminating extremes in fasting and prayer Biel laid emphasis on the simple life and piety characteristic of the Devotio Moderna. From the few documents extant, it is clear that the house prospered spiritually and financially under his leadership until it was secularized in 1517. Gabriel Biel died at St. Peter’s on December 7, 1495.47 We can well * A. Renaudet, Préréforme et Humanisme a Paris pendant les premieres guerres a’Italie 1494-1517, 2 ed. (Paris, 1953), pp. 385; 404 ff.; 464 ff.; 594, n. 3; 658, n. 3; 659, n. 2. Apparently it has not yet been noted that Biel quotes Pico della Mirandola twice: III Sent. d 1 q 2 art. 1 A; and id. art. 2, ad 5. Biel cites Pico, Opera Omnia I (Basiliae, 1572), Apologia, p. 160. A searching discussion of Pico is found in Engelbert Monnerjahn, Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (Wiesbaden, 1960). Geiler expressed repeatedly his high regard for Biel. See Adolf Vonlanthen, “Geilers Seelenparadies im Verhaltnis zur Vorlage,” Archiv fiir elsassische Kirchengeschichte 6 (1931), 282 ff. Charles Schmidt reports two occasions on which Biel assisted Geiler with advice in his Hestotre littéraire de l’ Alsace a la fin du XVe et au commencement du XVIe siécle, 1 (Paris, 1879), 342, 357. For references to Peter Schott and Trithemius, see Haller, II, 60. *’ His obituary recorded in the Annals speaks in simple and appreciative terms of

Biel’s important contribution to the devotio moderna: “... septimo die mensis decembris (1495) obiit feliciter eximius et venerabilis magister Gabriel . . . et suppultus in Swevia in domo Schoenbuech; multum fideliter laboravit pro statu nostro” (fol. 20°). “Et multos labores pro statu nostro subiit habere merito memoria cuius perpetuo apud nos habetur” (zbid.). On the statutes of Schonbuch, drawn up by Biel, and the final dissolution of the Brethren House, see Landeen, “Das Briiderhaus St. Peter,” pp. 7 ff., 16 f.

20

CHARACTER OF BIEL’S SERMONS understand that Biel wished to spend the last years of his life among the Brethren who exemplified the piety he had preached and taught throughout his life, and whose good name he had so successfully propagated in central and south Germany. Thus, we have before us the main events of the life of Gabriel Biel. This image of a man actively engaged at once in the doctrinal and practical life of the Church will emerge time and again when in succeeding chapters we turn to analyze his thought. IV. Character of Biel’s Sermons

It is clear that in their published form the sermons are sermones predicabiles; *® a series of directions —of which at least part are from the hand of Biel—is provided to help other preachers make the best use of these homiletical examples.*”

At one place Biel criticizes three kinds of preachers: (1) those who incite disobedience and criticize their superiors; (2) those who are lazy in their preparation and try to preach without paying sufficient attention to the relevant authorities, especially the sayings of the Fathers; °° (2) those who show off with their knowledge, trying to impress their congregations by endless quotations from concordances.”™ Even a cursory glance indicates that Biel is not in danger of belonging to one of the first two groups. It would also be wrong to classify him with

“the vain quoters.” His extensive use of scholastic authorities, however, has led some scholars to the conclusion that his sermons were not aimed ad populum but ad clerum.*” There are, however, too often explicit exhortations meant for laymen

to be satisfied with this classification.°* Sometimes special groups are envisaged, such as widows who should not despair because of bereave* § II 1, intr. * “Si vero non placet . . . abbrevia eandem materiam succincte prout placet et

deinde sic procede,” S I 99 B. Compare S II 26 S; S II 36 J; S IV 30 E. : °° “Garriunt et effundunt quicquid in buccam venerit: ceci cecos alloquentes. . . ,” Lect. 77 R.

. «, . non deum sed se sed scientiam suam ostentare volentes. . . ,” Lect. 77 R. See Haller, Il, 56. “His [Biel’s] sermons were long, involved and probably intended for the cathedral clergy rather than for the public,” William M. Landeen, “Gabriel Biel and the Brethren of the Common Life in Germany,” CH 20 (1951), 24. "8 “Secundo . . . exhortatio et pastorum et populi elicietur,” 5S I 40 A.

21

CURRICULUM VITAE GABRIELIS ment,°* or women who are criticized for coming to confession all dressed up, painted, and with artificial curls.®° It is fair to say that notwithstanding the elaborate citation of scholastic authorities, the general content of Biel’s sermons is extremely simple. The refrain of almost all of them, so often repeated, can be summed up in two typical statements which are parallels

at that: “Arbor non faciens bonum fructum excidetur,” and “Si vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata.”

| The structure of the sermons manifests the usual order of text authorities, postilla, moral application, to which sometimes the sensus mysticus is added.” Before the postilla Biel almost always inserts “pro gratia, ave Maria.” On several occasions Biel speaks about the vital role of preaching in the life of the congregation. In his open letter of 1462 to the Christians at Mainz living under the interdict, he calls for abstention from all the sacraments except, in emergency, the sacrament of baptism, since the sacraments are administered by priests who opted for the cause of Diether and have therefore separated themselves from the Church.®® But the preaching of the Word is an act Biel wishes to continue under any circumstances. The wickedness of a priest as such is no obstacle for God working through the words of this priest.” This does not imply that the Word preached is for Biel the redemptive Word of God; rather it is a “consilium,” exhortation that prods the sinner onto the path of righteousness. The preached Word is the seed of Luke 8:4 ff., but man has to provide the proper disposition which will enable the seed to root and flourish.°° Nevertheless, this “consilium” is not so anthropocentrically understood that the moral standing of the preacher is the decisive factor. Moral guidance, even when coming from a wicked priest, has to be viewed as coming from God, the author of Holy Scripture.*!

# SII 25 L. * S I 26 K. On abstention from sexual intercourse before Communion see S II 23 E.

°° E.g. S164 F; S144 G [Matt. 19:18].

"Cf. S139 A. * Epist. 1; cf. pp. 26-20. * “Nolite ergo causari vos derelictos: dum etiam per mercenarios pascit vos deus, qui solus est pastor bonus. . . ,” SI 40G.

” § I 22 D. See also § I 21 D ff. and Oberman, “Preaching and the Word in the Reformation,” Theology Today 18 (1960) 16 ff.

“Nec tamen spernendum est consilium etiam eorum qui male sunt vite, dum

22

CHARACTER OF BIEL’S SERMONS

Twice Biel asks the question whether the Word of God is more important than the Body of Christ. His answer is most interesting. From a negative point of view there is no difference; one is as guilty when he does not pay proper attention to the preached Word of God as when he carelessly drops the Body of Christ.®? From a positive point of view, how-

ever, Biel feels that the preached Word is more important insofar as it can bring about conversion since faith is the beginning of salvation and faith is the fruit of preaching — fides ex auditu! The sermon can provide the foundation of the Christian life, while one receives in Holy Communion only an increase of the saving grace already granted to the sinner when he had proceeded from faith to sincere contrition.®* As we will see later in the context of the discussion of the process of justification, the very connection of the sermon with contrition is indicative of the importance for Biel of the preached Word as the new Law. non ex suis sed ex scriptura loquuntur quoniam talia non quasi sua sed quasi dei consilia scripturam inspirantis sunt imitanda,” S II 17 G. Compare S I 40 G and also

Mauritius of Leyden: “Praedicatio non est aliud quam verbi Dei conveniens et congrua dispensatio” (UB Basel, A VII, 45, 169") as quoted by D. Roth, Die mittelal-

terliche Predigttheorie und das Manuale Curatorum des Johann Ulrich Surgant (Basel, 1956) p. 120.

°