Eckhart (Eckehart, Aychardus)

ECKHART (Eckehart, Aychardus). - Dominican scholastic and mystical preacher, b. at Hochheim near Gotha ca. 1260, d. between 22 Feb. 1327 and 27 March 1329.

A descendant of the nobles of Hochheim, a Dominican at Erfurt, E. studied at Strasbourg and Cologne. Between 1290 and 1298 prior and vicar in Thuringia, he wrote the Rede der Unterscheidung. At the University of Paris he obtained the mastership (Meister E.), taught, disputed and preached. First provincial of the province of Saxony in 1303, he was also appointed vicar of Bohemia by the general Chapter of 1307. Elected in 1310 provincial of Germany, but not confirmed, he was sent again to Paris to teach there (1311-1313). If E. devoted his best years to administration, he never neglected writing (Buch der göttlichen Trüstung for the queen of Hungary; Quaestiones, etc.) and preaching. This was his vocation. In 1313 he is at Strasbourg. Many are his sermons, handed down in «reportationes» by male and female listeners. The thought formed in the school poured forth in sermons of high worth before the clergy, the people, the orthodox beguines and above all before religious communities, especially Dominican ones, which had 7 monasteries in Strasbourg. He also traveled through other

German and Bavarian regions. Entrusted by the master general, he visited the monastery of Unterlinden in 1322, a probable sign that he was still at Strasbourg. Then he lived at Cologne. In 1325 the general Chapter of Venice admonishes certain German preachers to abstain from proposing themes that lend themselves to misunderstandings or errors. In 1326 a trial was brought by the opposing party against E. before the archbishop of Cologne. Two commissioners, among them a Franciscan, extracted 49 theses from writings and sermons of E., who on 26 Sept. 1326 presented a justification. After a second list of 59 propositions reproached to him, E. on 24 Jan. 1327 appealed to the Pope and on 13 Feb. under condition retracted in the church of the Preachers at Cologne, then betaking himself to Avignon, where a commission examined the theses extracted at Cologne (cotum Avenioneuse) and John XXII, although with regard for the person of E., condemned, in the bull In agro dominico of 27 March 1329, 28 propositions in the objective sense, declaring 17 of them tainted with heresy and 11 ill-sounding or suspect (Denz-U, 501-29).

The German works are: the Sermons (110), the Treatises (18, among them Rede d. Unterscheidung, Buch d. göttl. Trästung), the fragments (68 [69], Sprüche) edited by F. Pfeiffer (Leipzig 1857; reprint ibid. 1924), by H. Büttner (2 vols., Jena 1917), by W. Lehmann (2 vols., Göttingen 1919), by F. Schulze-Maizier (Leipzig 1936). There are then other editions of the Rede (Munich (1922), of the Buch (Berlin 1933), etc. In the edition of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, J. Quint has so far published a volume of sermons (Stuttgart-Berlin 1936). Cf. also Die deutschen v. lateinischen Werke, Untersuchungen, I, edited by J. Quint (ibid. 1940) and A. Faggin, M. E., pp. 65-68, 373-77.

The Latin works are the Collatio in libros Sententiarum, Tractatus super oratione dominica (ca. 1298), the questions Utrum in Deo sit idem esse et intelligere, Utrum laus Dei in patria sit nobilior eius dilectione in via. The Sermo die b. Augustini Parisiis habitus (ca. 1302-1304), the questions Utrum aliquum motum esse sine termino implicet contradictionem, Utrum in corpore Christi martentis in Cruce remanierint formae elementarum (ca. 1311-14), parts of the Opus tripartitum (ca. 1314-33), Responsio mag. Echardi ad Articulos sibi impositos (1326). The Opus tripartitum was to embrace the opus propositionum, of which the full exposition in the Prologues is known along with one developed thesis (Esse est Deus), the opus quaestionum of lectures and disputations, and the opus expositionum of passages of the biblical text and of materials for sermons (opus sermonum, ed. Benz, 1937). The opus expositionum consists of prologues, of explanations In Gen. 1 (I forma), In Eccli. XXIV, In Sap. (ed. G. Théry, 1928-29), In Gen. 1 (II forma), In Ex. (II forma), In Gen. 2 (Liber parabolarum Genesis), In Io. (edd. K. Christ and J. Koch 1936 ff.). Of the Latin writings (cf. Faggin, M. E., pp. 68-75, 377-79) studied from Denise onward, two recent editions treat, the one headed by G. Théry (Leipzig 1933, so far 3 fascicles), the other promoted by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft under the care of J. Koch, B. Geyer, K. Weiss, K. Christ, R. Benz, R. Seeberg (Stuttgart-Berlin 1936 ff., so far 10 fascicles).

E.'s thought revolves around 3 preferred problems: God, the origin of things from God, the return of spiritual creatures to God, bringing to their solution, besides Neoplatonic, Pseudo-Dionysian and other elements, the riches of the classical school of St. Thomas with the contribution of an original and bold mind.

« Esse est Deus », in the sense of absolute being, not in the sense of inherent, created being. The creature is non-being, relative, shadowy being; created being is nothing without the being of God. « Deus non habet esse » means that in God is the fullness, the perfection and the purity of being. Being and essence are really distinguished. Using the procedures and formulas of negative theology, E. preaches that God is without name, that God is not good, that is, according to created goodness. Being thus defined is for E. the Godhead, distinct from the triune God of Revelation. The Trinity is explained by means of a process of self-knowledge of the divine essence, while avoiding, however, the sense falsely attributed to it by J. W. Preger of a temporal succession from potency to act. God's eminent being E. preaches as a metaphysician and as a mystic. The same holds for his thinking and speaking of the divine attributes: unity, simplicity, spirituality, etc. God's creative act is eternal, not the creature. By his clear concept of creation E. is for many miles distant from pantheism (F. Pelster).

The more human thought becomes aware of God's sublimity, the less attainable the ultimate end, which is God, appears to it. And yet the mystic insists on the attainment of God. He appeals to psychology. The human soul is the image of God, immediately created by him. Forma cor-

of the body according to its essence and lower powers, the soul, according to its higher powers (intellect, will), lives in the world of the spirit. The ratio superior of the one and spiritual soul gives orientation toward God. E. sometimes speaks of the castle, spark, apex of the soul, the "seat" where the union of God and the soul is brought about according to the three strata of natural spirituality, of elevation to the supernatural order, and of mystical experience. While Neoplatonists and Beghards consider a natural aptitude sufficient for mystical union with God, E. admits the soul is "divinized" only through the infusion of Grace and the gift of God.

Asking himself the reason for good works, for worship, for the world, for the Incarnation, E. answers: so that God may be born in the soul and the soul in God. This "Gottesgeburt" is a central idea and fact of the world, linked to the birth of the Son from the Father in the bosom of the Most Holy Trinity. Transformation into the Son does not cause man to lose his existence, but his egoism; it does not lead to quietism, but to the interior fullness of works of charity and social assistance. The negative side of the birth of God in the soul is withdrawal, which nonetheless rises to a positive function: "nihil apponendo, sed subtrahendo, in anima invenitur Deus". The informing of God in us, the loss of the "form" of all that in us contrasts with the divine form, abandonment to God, the "passive" union with God, make the soul docile and pliable under the light and action of God; it listens and sees without images and works without fatigue. In leaving himself, man leaves all things and establishes in himself true freedom for God.

E. intended to serve life, demanding that man be a seeker of God at all times, strengthened by renunciation and the ceaseless reconquest of himself through the denial of non-being. A preacher of interiority against all Pharisaic formalism, E. urges the formation of man as a son of God. Propriety and purity of expression, clarity of syntax and loftiness of concept constitute the charm of his speech, enhanced by his attitude of felt and lived religiosity. He occupies in German literature the place that belongs to Alighieri in Italian letters. An eminent dialectician, E. loves paradoxes in thought and speech as means of profound effects; he is typically dynamic, indeed almost "existentialist". A man of high mind and generous ministry, E. was venerated by some, such as Tauler and the blessed Henry Suso who calls him the "holy master", and by others held suspect in doctrine, language and writings. When E., a devout son of the Church, not a formal heretic, seemed to approach too close to the precipice, the Church admonished both him and his contemporaries.

To Cardinal Cusanus we owe the most exact transcription of E.'s Latin works; German sermons were printed in the 15th century. Romantics, philosophers, theologians and Germanists of the 19th century disinterred him. C. Schmidt of Strasbourg makes him a pantheist, Martensen believes him an atheist, Lasson places him in contrast with the Church. While F. Pfeiffer (1857) edited the edition of the German E., J. W. Preger (1874) sought the historical person, H. Denifle shed great light (1886-89) on the figure and the Latin writings of E. For Deacroix (1907), H. Büttner (1917) and Ott (1937) E. is a precursor of Luther, for A. Rosenberg he is the great apostle of the Nordic West. While H. Denifle, H. v. Hornstein, G. Théry and J. Koch insist on E.'s Latin writings, O. Karrer and H. Piesch affirm his orthodoxy, and A. Dempf, while nonetheless giving priority to mystical inspiration and originality of thought, reconfirms his integral Catholicism. The critical edition of the works will facilitate the exegesis of E.'s authentic thought and effort.

Angelo Walz