THEOLOGIA GERMANICA PDF

adminComment(0)

more of God and Christ, and man and all things that are.” It has since appealed to Christians of all persuasions. anonymous. Theologica Germanica. LibriVox recording of Theologia Germanica by Anonymous. (Translated by Susanna Winkworth.) Read in English by J A Carter. This short. Although the author of this work is unknown, it was discovered and published by Martin Luther in Upon his discovery, Luther declared, "Next to the Bible.


Theologia Germanica Pdf

Author:GILDA COOLIDGE
Language:English, French, Arabic
Country:Nepal
Genre:Personal Growth
Pages:508
Published (Last):09.12.2015
ISBN:900-6-80147-126-1
ePub File Size:17.68 MB
PDF File Size:20.29 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Register to download]
Downloads:23168
Uploaded by: LARAE

th Anniversary of the Reformation: Theologia Germanica— the second most influential book in Martin Luther's life. “Even when we think that we see farther. Theologia Germanica, also known as Theologia Deutsch or Teutsch, or as Der Franckforter, .. Print/export. Create a book · Download as PDF · Printable version. PDF version of Theologia Germanica edition and commentary regarding its inspiration to Emilie Cady.

THE ART OF THE BOOK

Everything in the world is made good, and all the goodness of Creation contains within itself a yearning, an eros, for the perfect goodness that is found only in God. But this is not just the yearning of Creation for God, it is also, and in fact it is first, the yearning of God for Creation. He is, as it were, beguiled by goodness, by love and by yearning and is enticed away from his dwelling place and comes to abide with all things, and he does so by virtue of his supernatural and ecstatic capacity to remain, nevertheless, within himself.

But it is precisely this Dionysian strain in his thought—this insistence that God presents self-abandonment to us as a pattern and indeed a duty, that will throw him into an unresolved tension between affirming a positive role for desire and insisting that we practice self-abandonment. I would argue that these two are not well-integrated in Dionysius, or at least in the late medieval form of Dionysianism we find in the Theologia.

And they are also not well-integrated in Lewis. And this in fact explains why we must completely deny ourselves—our desires—if we are to come to God and achieve union. In the beginning, when the soul of Christ was created, she fixed her right eye upon eternity and the Godhead, and remained in the full intuition and enjoyment of the divine Essence and Eternal Perfection. But with the left eye she beheld the creature and perceived all things therein.

In like manner His outward man, or soul with the left eye, was never hindered, disturbed or troubled by the inward eye in its contemplation of the outward things that belonged to it.

“Ticket to heaven”: C. S. Lewis’s debt to the Theologia Germanica on self-will, death, and heaven

But these two eyes of the soul of man cannot both perform their work at once; but if the soul shall see with the right eye into eternity, then the left eye must close itself and refrain from working, and be as though it were dead.

Note that although this was a common view in early Christian asceticism, it was not a universal view. One of the most prominent church fathers who wrote against this view—and probably the most-read father in the entire medieval monastic tradition—was Gregory the Great. Gregory taught that the active life can feed, improve, and complete the contemplative life.

In his better moments, so did Lewis. He regularly practiced such ascetic disciplines as fasting, meditation, and frequent prayer see, for example, in For All the Saints, Wallace A. Nonetheless, Lewis did react against this harsh dichotomy when he found it in the Theologia, as well as when he found it in the 20th-century thinker Anders Nygren, with his too-categorical insistence that agape and eros cannot coexist in us, and only agape is godly and good as I show in a section deleted from the speaking draft of this essay.

After all, he very famously taught that our natural desires—our yearning that is triggered by our experiences of what is good and beautiful in the world—in fact can lead us toward God. It can lead us to God, albeit sometimes by negative example and by suffering—by the sinfulness in ourselves that we stumble across as soon as we engage fully in that natural mode and world—as Gregory the Great had taught. From his first Oxford friend, A.

He kept this attitude until the end of his life. Through it God showed me that whole side of His beauty which is embodied in colour, sound, smell and size. This certainly sounds very much like the cataphatic, Affirmative, positive side of the Dionysian vision. This is eros in its most potent form, and would certainly seem a vote for continuity between nature and grace. And it is full of parallels to the Theologia. This is the pattern which man was made to imitate—which Paradisal man did imitate—and wherever the will conferred by the Creator is thus perfectly offered back in delighted and delighting obedience by the creature, there, most undoubtedly, is Heaven, and there the Holy Ghost proceeds.

That selfishness of the nursery sticks with us as adults, though it is better hidden, and it is no easy matter to deal with it.

But when the man is in neither of these two states he holdeth converse with the creature, and wavereth [41] hither and thither, and knoweth not what manner of man he is. Therefore he shall never forget either of them, but lay up the remembrance of them in his heart. The requirement of self-abandonment is, according to a later chapter, so absolute that we cannot even safely desire our own spiritual good.

The only safe desire is the glory of God for who and what he is. But to this end, all self-will must depart,. But if you asked almost any of the great Christians of old he would have replied, Love. You see what has happened? A negative term has been substituted for a positive, and this is of more than philological importance.

If there lurks in most modern minds the notion that to desire our own good and earnestly to hope for the enjoyment of it is a bad thing, I submit that this notion has crept in from Kant and the Stoics and is no part of the Christian faith. Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desires, not too strong, but too weak. The Theologia is an anonymous fourteenth-century German spiritual treatise counseling renunciation of self as the way to union with God.

Martin Luther had been deeply influenced by it, and had published a text of it in The most striking of these is a statement Lewis makes in The Problem of Pain.

It is in this sense that, as there may be pleasures in hell god shield us from them , there may be something not at all unlike pains in heaven God grant us soon to taste them.

“Ticket to heaven”: C. S. Lewis’s debt to the Theologia Germanica on self-will, death, and heaven

It is heaven! It is clear that Lewis got this idea from his reading of the Theologia. First, as we will see, just a few words after the quoted passage, Lewis concludes his point by quoting from the Theologia, which he had read just two years before Problem of Pain was published in In heaven there is no ownership; hence there are found content, true peace, and all blessedness.

But in hell every one will have self-will, therefore there is all manner of misery and wretchedness. But if there were one in hell who should get quit of his self-will and call nothing his own, he would come out of hell into heaven.

Its union with God is, almost by definition, a continual self-abandonment—an opening, an unveiling, a surrender, of itself. We need not suppose that the necessity for something analogous to self-conquest will ever be ended, or that eternal life will not also be eternal dying.

Theologia Germanica—the 14th century book that inspired Emilie Cady

For the Eternal Word also gives Himself in sacrifice; and that not only on Calvary. From before the foundation of the world He surrenders begotten Deity back to begetting Deity in obedience. I certainly did! Everything in the world is made good, and all the goodness of Creation contains within itself a yearning, an eros, for the perfect goodness that is found only in God. But this is not just the yearning of Creation for God, it is also, and in fact it is first, the yearning of God for Creation.

He is, as it were, beguiled by goodness, by love and by yearning and is enticed away from his dwelling place and comes to abide with all things, and he does so by virtue of his supernatural and ecstatic capacity to remain, nevertheless, within himself.

But it is precisely this Dionysian strain in his thought—this insistence that God presents self-abandonment to us as a pattern and indeed a duty, that will throw him into an unresolved tension between affirming a positive role for desire and insisting that we practice self-abandonment.

I would argue that these two are not well-integrated in Dionysius, or at least in the late medieval form of Dionysianism we find in the Theologia. And they are also not well-integrated in Lewis. And this in fact explains why we must completely deny ourselves—our desires—if we are to come to God and achieve union.

In the beginning, when the soul of Christ was created, she fixed her right eye upon eternity and the Godhead, and remained in the full intuition and enjoyment of the divine Essence and Eternal Perfection. But with the left eye she beheld the creature and perceived all things therein.

In like manner His outward man, or soul with the left eye, was never hindered, disturbed or troubled by the inward eye in its contemplation of the outward things that belonged to it.

But these two eyes of the soul of man cannot both perform their work at once; but if the soul shall see with the right eye into eternity, then the left eye must close itself and refrain from working, and be as though it were dead. Note that although this was a common view in early Christian asceticism, it was not a universal view. One of the most prominent church fathers who wrote against this view—and probably the most-read father in the entire medieval monastic tradition—was Gregory the Great.

Gregory taught that the active life can feed, improve, and complete the contemplative life. In his better moments, so did Lewis. He regularly practiced such ascetic disciplines as fasting, meditation, and frequent prayer see, for example, in For All the Saints, Wallace A.

Nonetheless, Lewis did react against this harsh dichotomy when he found it in the Theologia, as well as when he found it in the 20th-century thinker Anders Nygren, with his too-categorical insistence that agape and eros cannot coexist in us, and only agape is godly and good as I show in a section deleted from the speaking draft of this essay.

After all, he very famously taught that our natural desires—our yearning that is triggered by our experiences of what is good and beautiful in the world—in fact can lead us toward God. It can lead us to God, albeit sometimes by negative example and by suffering—by the sinfulness in ourselves that we stumble across as soon as we engage fully in that natural mode and world—as Gregory the Great had taught.

From his first Oxford friend, A. He kept this attitude until the end of his life. Through it God showed me that whole side of His beauty which is embodied in colour, sound, smell and size.The mystic Johann Arndt reedited an earlier printing based on Luther in ; this version was endorsed by Philipp Jakob Spener and had over sixty later printings.

For my own reading and personal study, I bought a modern English edition from Scriptoria Books, which I recommend to anyone who wants to dive deep into the text.

Now God will have it to be exercised and clothed in a form. It is in this sense that, as there may be pleasures in hell god shield us from them , there may be something not at all unlike pains in heaven God grant us soon to taste them. One thinks one has made some progress towards detachment. Nonetheless, Lewis did react against this harsh dichotomy when he found it in the Theologia, as well as when he found it in the 20th-century thinker Anders Nygren, with his too-categorical insistence that agape and eros cannot coexist in us, and only agape is godly and good as I show in a section deleted from the speaking draft of this essay.

In he produced a more complete edition on the basis of a new manuscript that had come to his attention. But if there were one in hell who should get quit of his self-will and call nothing his own, he would come out of hell into heaven. Now God will have it to be exercised and clothed in a form.