A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance in the Eastern Netherlands

Bernard McGinn

It is only within the past decade that the existence of a sixteenth-century renaissance of mysticism in the Eastern Netherlands has begun to emerge as an important chapter in the history of Western spirituality.1 Considerable research has been devoted to the role of the Charterhouse of St. Barbara at Cologne in editing, translating, and publishing mystical texts, as well as the place of these Carthusians in the history of Catholic reform, but little had been written about the connection of the Carthusians with centers of mystical writing both by and for women in the Netherlands provinces of Brabant and Gelderland.2 What is now clear is that in the mid-sixteenth century the conversation between men and women that was a feature of much late medieval mysticism found a new home in the Low Countries, one in which the Carthusians at Cologne and the community of Augustinian canonesses at St. Agnes at Arnhem formed two important foci.3 As the historian Jean Dagens once put it, “La Chartreuse de Cologne n’est pas moins important pour l’histoire religieuse que la Fraternité obscure où Thomas a Kempis a médité les livres de l’Imitation.”4 This may seem exagger- ated, but when we look at the activities of the Cologne community in editing, translating, and printing late medieval theological and spiritual writings, it becomes less extreme. This publishing effort was part of a program of reform centered at Cologne, a distinctive German attempt at countering the split in

¶ Much of the material in this essay appeared in a slightly different form in Chapter 5, “A Mys- tical Renaissance in the Eastern Netherlands,” in Bernard McGinn, The Varieties of Vernacular Mysticism, 1350-1550 (New York: Crossroad-Herder, 2012), 141-75. 1 The term “mystical renaissance” was used by Kees Schepers, “Introduction,” to Mystical Sermons, in Rik Van Nieuwenhove, Robert Faesen, and Helen Rolfson, eds., Late Medieval Mysticism of the Low Countries (New York: Paulist Press, 2008), 350. 2 On the Cologne Carthusians, see Gérald Chaix, Réforme et contre-réforme catholique. Recherche sur la chartreuse de Cologne au XVI siècle, 3 vols. (Salzburg: Universität Salzburg, 1981). Chaix considers the relation of the Carthusians to the religious women of the Netherlands in Vol. 1:202-07. Also see Jean Dagens, Bérulle et les origins de la restauration catholique (1575-1611) (Bruges: Desclée, 1952), 79-87; and Sigrun Haude, “The Silent Monks Speak Up: The Changing Role of the Carthusians in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries,” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 86 (1995): 124-39. 3 On the Convent of St. Agnes, Kees Schepers, “Het verborgen leven van de zusters Agnieten. Mystieke cultuur te Arnhem in de zestiende eeuw,” Ons Geestelijk Erf 79 (2009): 285-316, as well as the essays in Hans Kienhorst and Jan Kuys, eds., Verborgen Leven. Arnhemse Mystiek in de Zestiende Eeuw (Arnhem: Historisch Museum Arnhem: Stichting Nijmeegse Kunsthistorische Studies, 2011). 4 Dagens, Bérulle et les origins, 79, see also 85.

Christendom prior to the conclusion of the Council of Trent in 1563, when the propagation of the official Roman response to the challenge of the Reformation cancelled out other options.5 The impact of these Carthusians was felt not only through their transmitting established mystical authors like Gertrude the Great, Mechthild of Hackeborn, Henry Suso, John Tauler, Jan van Ruusbroec, Denys the Carthusian, and Hendrik Herp, but also for their role in fostering contemporary mystics in the convents and beguinages of the Netherlands. The Cologne Charterhouse was distinguished by a succession of spiritual writers, translators, and editors perhaps unique in the history of Saint Bruno’s order. Peter Blommeveen (Petrus Blomevenna), also known as Peter of Leiden (1466-1536), was prior of the house from 1507-36, and a noted spiritual author.6 He was succeeded as prior by Gerard Kalkbrenner (1494-1566; prior 1536-66), also born in the Low Countries, who befriended and edited the beguine mystic Maria van Hout. Kalkbrenner continued Blommeveen’s edition of the works of Denys the Carthusian and encouraged translations by other members of the house.7 Among these other translators was the German John of Landsberg (1489-1539), who was born in Bavaria, studied theology at Cologne, and entered St. Barbara in 1509. He eventually left to become prior of the Charterhouse of Vogelsang.8 Another noteworthy figure was Dirk Loher (ca. 1490-1554), born near Eindhoven, who worked on the Denys the Carthusian edition and also produced the small version of The Evangelical Pearl in 1535 and the first edition of The Great Evangelical Pearl in 1537/39.9 The Hercules of the Carthusian translation program, however, was Laurentius Surius (ca. 1523-78).10 In a relatively brief time before he turned his attention to anti-Protestant polemics, Surius translated all of Ruusbroec, as well as numerous other mystical works, such as writings of Henry Suso and John Tauler. The Cologne Carthusians worked within a wider circle of clerics from the Dutch-German borderlands. Nicholas van Esch (1507-78), the chaplain of the beguine house at Diest, collaborated with the Carthusians in producing the editions of The Evangelical Pearl.11 Peter Canisius (1521-97), the leader

5 Chaix, Réforme et contre-réforme catholique, especially Vol. 1, Parts 3-4. 6 L. Verschueren, “Blomevenna (Pierre),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 1:1738-39. Blommeveen translated the works of his teacher Hendrik Herp, began the edition of the writings of Denys the Carthusian, and also wrote spiritual treatises, such as De bonitate divina. 7 On Kalkbrenner, Heinrich Rüthing, “Kalkbrenner (Chalcificis ou Hamontanus, Gérard),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 8:1653-57. 8 On Landsberg, Heribert Rossmann, “Lanspergius (Lansperge, Landsberg, Jean Juste),” Diction- naire de Spiritualité 9:230-38; and S. Autore, “Lansperge ou Landsberg,” Dictionnaire de théologie catholique 8:2606-09. Landsberg wrote polemical works against Luther, as well as a number of spiritual treatises. 9 Heinrich Rüthing, “Loher (Loerius; Dirk, Dietrich, Thierry),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 9:961-63. 10 For introductions, Augustine Devaux, “Surius (Sauer, Laurent),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 14:1325-29; and S. Autore, “Surius, Laurent,” Dictionnaire de théologie catholique 14:1325-29. 11 Albert Ampe, “Eschius (Esschius, van Esche, van Essche, van Es, Nicolas),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 4:1060-66. 30 Bernard McGinn of the early Jesuits in Germanic lands, was born at Nijmegen, studied at Cologne, and spent time with the Carthusians (1540-43) before joining the Society of Jesus.12 Though best known today as an educational reformer and controversialist, as well as being a Doctor of the Church, he is also believed to have edited Tauler’s sermons into German (1543).13 This Dutch-German commitment to translation and edition was based on the conviction that the mystical literature of the late Middle Ages could provide an antidote to the Reformers’ attack on traditional Catholicism. The major interest of the Cologne Carthusians was in the mystical literature of Northern Continental Europe of the fourteenth century, but the monks also encouraged contemporary mystics. The Augustinian convent of St. Agnes in Arnhem is an example of a female community that centered its life on striving for deeper contact with God and also left extensive records of the mystical devotion of its members. Its story extended over two centuries. Founded about 1420 under the inspiration of the devotio moderna, the community lived for some years under a Franciscan Rule, but by 1459 became Augustinian. The house had a distinguished history down to its dissolution in 1626.14 The nineteen surviving manuscripts from St. Agnes show that the nuns had access to a wide range of mystical literature, including Cassian, Bernard, Hadewijch, Mechthild of Hackeborn, Eckhart, Suso, Tauler, Ruusbroec, and Gerlach Peters.15 These codices include the only surviving manuscript witness to The Evangelical Pearl, showing that even if the text may not have been written at St. Agnes, it came from the same ambience and was of interest to the nuns. The major work that was certainly composed at St. Agnes is the sole manuscript of “The Arnhem Mystical Sermons,” a collection of one hundred and sixty-two sermons that shows similarity to The Evangelical Pearl, and even more to the other work of the anonymous author of The Pearl, the treatise entitled The Temple of Our Soul. The close ties of the St. Agnes sisters to the Carthusians, the distinctive form of mysticism found in the three works just mentioned, as well as the life and writings of the contemporary beguine Maria van Hout, allow us to speak of the second quarter of the sixteenth century as the time of a true mystical renaissance in the Eastern Netherlands.

12 On Peter Canisius, who was made a “Doctor of the Church” in 1925, see James Brodrick, Saint Peter Canisius, S. J. 1521-97 (Baltimore: Carroll Press, 1950). 13 Rob van de Schoor, a.o., argues against the attribution: “Canisius als Herausgeber. Die Aus- gaben von Tauler (1543), Kyrill (1546) und Leo dem Großen (1546),” Ons Geestelijk Erf 82 (2011), 161-186. 14 Schepers, “Het verborgen leven van de zusters Agnieten,” and the literature cited there. 15 For a brief account of the nineteen surviving manuscripts from St. Agnes, Schepers, “Het verborgen leven van de zusters Agnieten,” 309-12, and especially the two essays by Hans Kienhorst in Verborgen Leven, 89-120. The sisters had copies of the works of Cassian, Bernard of Clairvaux, Hadewijch, Gertrude of Helfta, Mechthild of Hackeborn, Eckhart, Suso, Tauler, the “Schwester Katrei” treatise, Ruusbroec (4 mss.), Jan van Schoonhoven, Hendrik Mande, Gerlach Peters, John of Kastl, the De imitatione Christi, and Hendrik Herp. A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance 31

The Evangelical Pearl16

In the preface to the 1542 volume entitled Dye grote evangelische peerle (The Great Evangelical Pearl) Nicholas van Esch updated the preface written by Dirk Loher to the first edition that had been published in 1537/1539. Loher had described the book and its author in general terms as “een notabel verlicht mensche nyet alleen van geslachte mer veel meer van deuchden edel, wyens name inden boec des levens gescreven…” (“…a famous enlightened person, noble not only from family, but much more from virtues, whose name is written in the book of life”).17 Van Esch added more information, describing the author as a woman, a virgin who had died on January 27, 1540, in her seventy-seventh year, therefore being born in either 1463 or 1464. He also informs us that she lived in her father’s house under a spiritual director and had taken a vow of obedience. This makes the author seem like a house beguine, and we know that Van Esch and the Cologne Charterhouse had contacts with such women. In Chapter 35 of Book III, however, the author speaks twice of her religious profession and she laments having broken the vows of chastity (in thought), voluntary poverty, and obedience that she had taken. She also confesses to “being recalcitrant like a hedgehog towards my superiors,” a phrase that suggests the life of an enclosed nun, a situation that also fits her emphasis on the liturgy of the hours.18 Despite this tantalizing information, the identity of the Pearl author has continued to resist the efforts of scholars to come up with a precise identification. Some have proposed Maria van Hout (d. 1547);19 others have suggested Reinalda van Eymeren, the great aunt of

16 This section of the essay uses material from Bernard McGinn, “A Forgotten Classic of Late Medieval Women’s Mysticism: The Evangelical Pearl,” Archa Verbi. Yearbook for the Study of Medieval Theology 5 (2008): 97-121. 17 Die grote evangelische peerle… (Antwerp: Henrick Petersen, 1537): “The book was made by a famous enlightened person, noble not only from family, but much more from virtues, whose name is written in the book of life….” Given that The Evangelical Pearl is a rare book in its Dutch and Latin forms, I will give the original text for any quotations. For the Dutch I use the 1537 edition in an electronic form based on the copy in the Plantin-Moretus Museum in Antwerp, kindly provided me by Dirk Boone. I will cite the Dutch according to book and chapter, also giving the line numbers (this passage is lines 87-90). The Latin will be cited according to text of Margarita evangelica, incomparabilis thesaurus divinae sapientiae, in IIII libros divisus, & iam secundo editus latine (Dillingen: Adamus Meltzer, 1610), which ascribes the book to Nicolao Eschio Presbytero. 18 Die grote evangelische peerle III.35: profession (ll. 12653, 12665); vow of chastity (12666); vow of voluntary poverty (12675-76); vow of obedience (12687). The passage quoted appears at 12700-01: “…ende mijnen oversten ongehoorsaem ende wederspannich geweest als een eghel.” References to her vows, as well as “rule, statutes, and ordinances” are also found in III.5 (ll.10905-08, 10942-45). A complaint about the decline of the religious life in III.57 (ll.14747-70) also hints that the writer was a nun. 19 Maria van Hout’s date of death does not fit that of the Pearl author. It is possible that the two women knew each other, since both lived in the same area and were sponsored by the Carthusians. A letter of spiritual advice written to Maria by an unnamed female religious and published in the 1531 collection of her writings has been thought to be by the Pearl author, at least by Wilhelm 32 Bernard McGinn

Peter Canisius, who became a nun at St. Agnes, but neither seems likely.20 The Pearl author remains a mystery.21 The Great Evangelical Pearl is the last masterpiece of medieval women’s mysticism.22 Neglect of The Pearl is a modern phenomenon. In the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries The Pearl was widely read, appearing in nineteen different printings not only in its two Dutch forms, but also in translations into Latin, French, and German.23 Many of the major figures of the Golden Age of French mysticism, such as Barbe Acarie, Pierre de Bérulle, Benet Canfield, and Francis de Sales, were familiar with it in the French version prepared by the Paris Carthusians. The Latin translation, made by Van Esch probably with the assistance of Laurentius Surius, first published at Cologne in 1545 and reprinted at Dillingen in 1609 and 1610, gave The Pearl a European-wide diffusion. The Latin form, rather different from the Dutch Great Evangelical Pearl, was the basis for the French and the later German versions, the first of which was prepared by the mystical poet, Angelus Silesius (d. 1677). Silesius was eloquent about the book in his preface: “Ja, ich erkühne mich zu sagen, es ist unter allen geistlichen Büchern die einzige kostbare Perle, um derentwillen man allen anderen solchen Bücher verkaufen und dieses allein kaufen sollte; da, wer auch nur allein die in ihm vorgeschriebenen Űbungen ins Werk setzt, aller anderen geistlichen Bücher – wie auch selbst dieses – nicht mehr bedürfen wird.”24 There were other channels of transmission. Excerpts

Oehl, Deutsche Mystikerbriefe, 1100-1500 (Munich: Georg Müller, 1931), 686-88 (discussion), and 717-19 (German translation). 20 On Reinalda van Eymeren as the possible author, Paul Begheyn, “Is Reinalda van Eymeren, zuster in het St. Agnietenklooster te Arnhem, en oudtante van Petrus Canisius, de schrijfster der Evangelische Peerle?,” Ons Geestelijk Erf 45 (1971): 339-75. Reinalda van Eymeren, however, was once married, while the Pearl author was a consecrated virgin. 21 On the authorship question, Albert Ampe, “Perle Évangélique (Die evangelische Peerle),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 4:1159-69 (at 1163-64); Thom Mertens, “Christus als weg. Twee hoofdstukken uit de Evangelische Peerle,” in Kathleen Meyers and Piet Nijs, eds., Minne is al. Pareltjes van Nederlandse en Rijnlandse Mystiek (Leuven: Peeters, 2006), 70-72; and most recently Kees Schepers, “Wat zeggen de vroegste edities over de auteur van Die evangelische peerle?” Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde, 130 (2013), 26-54. Literature on The Pearl is mostly in Dutch, but see Daniel Vidal, “Le coup terrible de néant,” introduction to La perle évangelique (1602) (Grenoble: Jerôme Millon, 1997), 9-170; and Kurt Ruh, Geschichte der abendländische Mystik; IV. Die niederländische Mystik des 14. bis 16. Jahrhunderts (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1999), Chapter 61 (290-312). Ruh’s account deals mostly with the short version of the text (299-312), and also provides an analysis of the author’s other major work, Vanden Tem- pel onser Sielen (293-98). 22 After two or more centuries of neglect The Pearl has begun to experience a comeback, as is evidenced by the reprint of the French translation, La perle évangélique (1602) (Grenoble: Jerome Millon, 1997), and the appearance of an English version of Part III of the long Dutch text by Helen Rolfson in Late Medieval Mysticism of the Low Countries, 215-322. 23 On the printings and diffusion of the book, P. J. Begheyn, “De verspreiding van de Evangelis- che Peerle,” Ons Geestelijk Erf 51 (1977): 391-421; “Nieuwe gegevens betreffende de ‘Evange- lische Peerle’,” Ons Geestelijk Erf 58 (1984): 30-40; and “‘Die Evangelische Peerle’. Nieuwe gegevens over auteur en invloed,” Ons Geestelijk Erf 63 (1989): 170-89. 24 Die Evangelische Perle. Das geistliche Begleitbuch einer flämischen Mystikerin des 16. Jahr- hundert in der Übersetzung des Angelus Silesius ausgewählt und bearbeitet von Klaus Dahme A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance 33 from The Pearl were included in the so-called Institutiones Taulerianae translated by Surius and published in 1548 as part his Latin rendering of Tauler. This work was translated into Spanish (1551), Italian (1568), and French (1587).25 The Protestant spiritual writer Pierre Poiret (1646-1719), who edited the works of Madame Guyon, was taken with The Pearl and used it extensively in his Théologie réelle of 1700. Through his influence the Pietist Gerhard Ter- steegen (d. 1769) became acquainted with the book and in 1767 published a German anthology drawn from it under the title Perlenschnur. The Evangelical Pearl had the widest diffusion of all the late medieval Dutch mystical texts. The exact form of The Evangelical Pearl is as much of a mystery as its author. The Pearl exists in four different versions (three in Middle Dutch and one in Latin) and there are variations even within copies of these.26 The single known manuscript originally from St. Agnes and now in the Royal Library at The Hague (ms. 71 H 51, ff. 1-129) contains excerpts from the text presented anonymously. The arrangement of this form (PM) appears closer to the Latin than the Dutch version. The first printed text was the short or small Pearl (p), containing one book of thirty-nine chapters published in 1535 at Utrecht. The Great Pearl (P), first published in 1537 and 1539 and reprinted with some new material in 1542, comprised three books of 169 chapters. The Latin version of 1545 (PL) is more than just a translation of P, but rearranges the order of the books, adding material and often dividing the chapters differently, so its total number of chapters is 186.27 Albert Ampe argued that both P and PL are har- monizations of a lost original and that all the surviving forms have authentic passages proper to each. This complicated situation explains why although the indefatigable Fr. Ampe was able to publish a critical edition of the other major mystical text of the anonymous author, the treatise Van den tempel onser sielen (The Temple of Our Soul),28 he was not able to complete the critical edition of The Pearl he had promised.29

(Salzburg: Otto Müller, 1990), 17-18. The Pearl was also known and used by the German Jesuit, Maximilian Sandaeus, whose 1640 work, Clavis pro theologia mystica, was one of Silesius’s sources. 25 Albert Ampe, “Een kritisch onderzoek van de ‘Institutiones Taulerianae’,” Ons Geestelijk Erf 40 (1966): 167-240. 26 For a description of the versions, Ampe, “Le Perle Évangélique,” col. 1160-63. 27 For a comparison: PL/PF I (56 chaps.) = P II (59 chaps.); PL/PF II (57 chaps.) = P III (57, or sometimes 58 chaps.); PL/PF III (73 chaps.) = P I (53 chaps.) [PF: French translation of the Pearl]. There has been discussion about whether the Latin version was prepared by Van Esch or Laurentius Surius; see J. P. Van Schoote, S.J., “Laurent Surius (ord. cart.) a-t-il traduit en Latin la ‘Perle Évangélique’?,” Ons Geestelijk Erf 35 (1961): 29-58; and Vidal, “Le coup terrible de néant,” 69-71. 28 Den Tempel onser Sielen door de Schrijfster der Evangelische Peerle, ed. Albert Ampe (Antwerp: Ruusbroecgenootschap, 1968). The original appeared in a single printing of 1543 and had a limited audience. Internal references suggest that the Temple treatise is posterior to The Pearl. Ampe’s “Introduction” contains a discussion of the author (19-30), as well as a useful account of her sources (74-98). There is now a translation of several chapters in Late Medieval Mysticism of the Low Countries, 323-48. 29 Useful comparisons of P, PL, and PF can be found in Van Schoote, “La Perle Évangélique,” 291-313, especially 309-13. 34 Bernard McGinn

Ampe’s judgment on the relation of the anonymous author’s two major works is worth citing: “The Pearl offers indeed a more capacious, more complete, and internally more broadly-founded panoramic view of all aspects of the author’s spirituality, but all the elements that are present in The Temple in one form or another are also found in The Pearl, either in elaborate depic- tion, or in summary.”30 The Temple taps into a long tradition going back to Paul’s claim in 1 Corinthians 3:16 that believers have become a temple of God, a claim that implies that what the Old and New Testaments have to say about the Jerusalem Temple can also be interpreted as pertaining to the soul’s relation to God. If seeing the temple as the soul is traditional, the working out of the motif is specifically medieval in the way in which the book reads the construction of the inner temple of the soul in light of the cycle of the liturgical year.31 After eight chapters introducing the notion of the temple of the soul, the major part of the treatise (Chaps. 9-53) is a mystical commentary on the liturgical year from the Feast of All Saints on November 1 through to Pentecost (Chap. 50-53). The Evangelical Pearl itself is compendious and often confusing, with themes emerging and re-emerging over the course of its three authentic books. (PL adds a fourth book of eighteen chapters put together by the translator that attempts to show the harmony between the teaching of The Pearl and that of recognized mystical authorities, such as Suso, Tauler, Ruusbroec, and Garcia de Cisneros.) The Pearl is a kind of reservoir into which run the streams of many traditions of late medieval mysticism, especially Ruusbroec’s Trinitarian mysticism, along with aspects of an Eckhartian mysticism of the ground, currents of erotic mysticism based on the Song of Songs, literal forms of identification with Christ through imitatio passionis, and mystical exercises based on sacramental and liturgical practice. What prevents The Pearl from being just a general text book is the author’s theological originality. The Evangelical Pearl’s teaching about both theological anthropology and mystagogy, i.e., the path to union, marks it out as one of the premier mystical writings of the late medieval-early modern periods. The book appealed to a broad audience because, although written for religious women, it was not limited in its attrac- tion to a single group or class. Rather, as we read in one passage, “Desen gront voorschreven is allen menschen nut ende van node in wat state oft graet si zijn.”32 The universalism of The Pearl helps explain why it was widely read by clergy, religious, and laity—Catholics and Protestants—between 1550 and 1800.

30 Ampe, Den Tempel onser Sielen, 98 (my thanks to Willemien Otten for help in translating this passage). 31 This form of liturgical-mystical approach is also found in the Arnhem sermons. 32 PL/PF II.9 (372-73) = P III.9 (ll. 11140-41): “This ground…is useful and necessary for all, no matter what their state or rank may be.” See also P III.9 (11196-97): “Daer om is desen gront ende oeffeninghe alle menschen van node.” A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance 35

Maria van Hout

The beguine Maria van Hout was born in northern Brabant well before 1500 and died in 1547.33 For most of her religious life Maria lived in a beguinage named Bethlehem in Oisterwijk, at least for a time as superior of the community. Despite her expressions of submission to the clerical authority of her unnamed confessor, Maria, like many late medieval female mystics, played a delicate game of gender politics in which she came to exercise a role as mystical teacher and intercessor for clerics who looked to her for spiritual wisdom. Many of these clerics were from St. Barbara. In 1530 Maria met Gerhard Kalckbrenner. He and other members of the Cologne Carthusians were fasci- nated by her teaching and sanctity, and he began corresponding with her and collecting her writings. In November of 1531 he saw to the publication of five of her treatises and fourteen letters in a collection entitled Der rechte wech zo der evangelischen volkomenheit, that is, the Right Way to Evangelical Perfec- tion (the title contains an implicit anti-Lutheran stance). This work is an anthology of Maria’s spiritual writings, although she is not named, as well as some related texts. Kalckbrenner added a dedication, a foreword, and some explanatory materials.34 Among the additions is the exchange of letters between Kalckbrenner and Arnold von Tongeren, a University of Cologne theologian, discussing the authority to be accorded to unlearned women, as long as their writings display orthodoxy and due humility.35 In 1532 a second brief work of Maria’s appeared under the title Dat paradijs der liefhavender sielen (The Paradise of Loving Souls). Through her spiritual friendship with the Carthusians Maria also came into contact with some of the early Jesuits of the area, including Peter Canisius, who referred to her as “our mother” (mater nostra). As a model of living sanctity and a spiritual guide, Maria was an exemplary figure in the critical early decades of the conflict between Catholics and Reformers in the Low Countries. In 1545 the Carthusians allowed her to move from Oisterwijk to establish herself in Cologne under their sponsorship, but she died not long after on September 30, 1547.

33 For introductions to Maria van Hout, Albert Ampe, “Marie d’Oisterwijk,” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 10:519-20; and Kurt Ruh, Geschichte IV:277-89. In English, Ulrike Wiethaus, “‘If I had an Iron Body’: Femininity and Religion in the Letters of Maria de Hout,” in Karen Cherewatuk and Ulrike Wiethaus, eds., Dear Sister. Medieval Women and the Epistolary Genre (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1993), 171-91; and “‘For This I Ask You, Punish Me’. Norms of Spiritual Orthopraxis in the Work of Maria van Hout (d. 1547),” Ons Geestelijk Erf 68 (1994): 253-70. See also Kirsten M. Christensen, “The Gender of Epistemology in Confessional Europe: The Reception of Maria van Hout’s ‘Ways of Knowing’,” in Anneke B. Mulder-Baker, ed., Seeing and Knowing. Women and Learning in Medieval Europe 1200-1550 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2004), 97-120. 34 On the relations between Maria and Kalckbrenner, Kirsten M. Christensen, “Maria van Hout and her Carthusian Editor,” Ons Geestelijk Erf 72 (1998): 105-21, especially 108-18, on Kalck- brenner’s editorial procedures. 35 See the discussion in Wiethaus, “‘For This I Ask You, Punish Me’,” 260-63. 36 Bernard McGinn

Maria’s writings are brief. The treatises have not yet received critical editions, but her fourteen letters in the Right Way to Evangelical Perfection were twice edited in the twentieth century.36 Written between January and November of 1531, these letters are part of an apparently extensive correspondence.37 The most important of Maria van Hout’s tracts from the Right Way is entitled A Treatise on Christ’s Five Wounds.38 This devotional work addressed to her fellow sisters is designed to cultivate sorrow for sin and compassion for Christ and his mother through physical and mental exercises. The work falls into two parts. The shorter first part (Exercise on the Five Wounds) contains a series of repetitions of the Our Father and Hail Mary with accompanying meditations and physical practices. The longer second part of the treatise also contains prayers and meditations on Jesus’s five wounds, this time including prayers of Maria’s own composition in a more contemplative tone. Both parts of the treatise had a wider diffusion through translations into Latin made by the Cologne Carthusians.39 Maria van Hout’s fourteen “fiery letters” (fuerige sendbrieff) are remarkable mystical documents. Kurt Ruh gave them high praise: “Marias van Hout Briefe sind ein einzigartiges Dokument der Frauenspiritualität und haben im Mittel alter kaum Vergleichbares. In ihnen öffnet sich un seine geistliche Frau rück- haltlos, aber beherrscht unde ohne alle Empfindsamkeit.”40 The letters are directed to different audiences. Five were written to other nuns (Letters 1-4 and 14), four to her Carthusian spiritual sons (5-7 and 12), and five to her unnamed confessor (8-11 and 13). Ulrike Wiethaus has shown how Maria took on different roles for different audiences: confidence and spontaneity in her letters to women; maternal concern and spiritual authority to the Carthusians; and humility and self-abnegation toward her confessor.41 Though the emphasis may differ depending on the audience, the letters reveal a single spiritual personality and a unity of message. One form of mysticism Maria emphasizes is her role as a spiritual mother bringing others to birth. Letter 6 addressed to Kalckbrenner as “the beloved

36 J. B. Kettenmeyer, “Uit de briefwisseling van eene brabantsche mystieke uit de 16e eeuw,” Ons Geestelijk Erf 1 (1927): 278-99 (study), and 370-95 (edition). The better edition is J. M. Willeumier-Schalij, De Brieven uit ‘der rechte wech’ van de Oisterwijske Begijn en Mystica Maria van Hout (d. Keulen, 1547) (Leuven: Peeters, 1993). A translation of Letters 12 and 13 by Robert Faesen can be found in Late Medieval Mysticism in the Low Countries, 365-69. 37 Oehl, Deutsche Mystikerbriefe, 682-720, translates Maria’s fourteen letters and several others about her or addressed to her. Willeumier-Schallij, De Brieven, 120-27, includes modern Dutch translations of two Latin letters about Maria. 38 My account is based on Christensen, “Maria van Hout’s Ways of Knowing,” 104-13. 39 In 1532 Kalckbrenner translated the whole of the Exercise of the Five Wounds and his compa- triot John Landsberg included a version of the second part in his popular devotional work, Pharetra divini amoris published in 1555-56. 40 Ruh, Geschichte IV:288: “Maria van Hout’s letters are a singular document of female spirituality and scarcely have an equal in the Middle Ages. In them a spiritual woman opens herself to us without reservation, but with mastery and without any sentimentality.” 41 Wiethaus, “‘If I Had an Iron Body’,” 175-88. A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance 37 son of her heart” contains the following account: “Aver up sent Peters dages des nachtz umbtrynt tzwey urenn, bis dat ich up stunde, byn ich so wunderlig begaefft van urent wegen, dat ich wail sagen mag wonder boven wonder, und gratie boven gratie, want got hait myr uch gegeven vur ein kynt, und ich sal uch halden vur myn son, want ir sydt myr an myn hertz gedruckt umb vur uch tzo bidden mit so groisser gratien dat myn hertz myr also wee dede,….”42 Although the description of bringing Kalckbrenner to birth in her heart is unique, Maria’s sense of being a mother to many sons and daughters is found in a number of letters.43 Toward the end of Letter 6 her relations with the Cologne Carthusians are expressed in an unusual way as she describes how Peter Blommeveen, the prior of the community, should take God the Father as his model, while Kalckbrenner is to imitate the Son in his obedience to Blom- meveen, and Maria herself will be like the Virgin Mary in following Christ in all things (6.3-4). Her spiritual identity as a mother includes suffering along with Jesus to redeem the world. This sense of acting as a co-redeemer is one of the characteristic features of Maria’s writings. In her words from Letter 7: “Und ich unwerdige creatuyr syen dat idt got also van mich beliefft dat ich mit dez son gotz moisz lyden und bidden vur alle mynschen. Und gelich he synen hemelschen vader badt vur syn apostelen, dat he die eyn mit im machen woilde gelich im, und dairna ander minschen ouch, also en weisz ich niet bessers tzo bidden und tzo roiffen nacht und dach vur uch allen, dan o heer o lieve heer, glich du und ich eyn syn, so wilt dyese mine soene die du mir gegeven hais, ouch ein mit dich machen, gelich du und ich ein syn.”44

The Arnhem Mystical Sermons

The Arnhem Mystical Sermons constitute the most exciting recent discovery in the history of late medieval and early modern mysticism. Much work remains to be done before we will have an adequate understanding of these sermons, though their connection with the works of the Pearl author already seems clear. The collection consists of one hundred and sixty-two sermons

42 L 6.1 (86): “On St. Peter’s day at night about two o’clock, as I got up, I was so wonderfully blessed for your sake that I may well speak of [it as] a miracle upon miracle, a grace upon grace, because God has given you to me as a child, and I shall consider you my son, for you were impressed into my heart so that I could pray for you with such a great grace that my heart ached.” 43 On Maria’s attitude towards her spiritual children, see L 5, L 7, and L 12.5. 44 L 7.1 (90): “And I, unworthy creature, see that God desires that I should suffer and pray for all people along with the Son of God. And just as he asked his heavenly Father for his apostles that he might make them one with him (Jn. 17:21), and other people as well, so I too do not know anything better to do than to pray and to cry out for you all night and day in this way—‘O Lord, O dear Lord, just as you and I are one, so may you make this my son [i.e., Kalkbrenner] whom you have given me, one with you, just as you and I are one.’” For other examples of Maria’s co-redeeming role in suffering and praying for the redemption of all, see L 1.4-6, L 8.2, possibly L 10.3, and L 12.1. 38 Bernard McGinn arranged according to the liturgical year, with one hundred and twenty-eight sermons devoted to the feasts of the temporal cycle (De Tempore) and thirty- four for the feasts of saints (De Sanctis).45 A reference to “Blessed Peter of Leiden” (S. 154), that is, Peter Blommeveen, who died in 1536, indicates that the sermons come from after that year, so a dating of perhaps 1540-60 is indicated. We have no idea who the author might have been. A chaplain for the community cannot be ruled out, but it seems more likely that the author was one of the nuns, especially given the close connection to The Evangelical Pearl.46 The homilies only rarely mention authorities by name,47 but it is obvi- ous that they are based on wide reading, especially in Ruusbroec,48 as well as in writers such as Tauler and Eckhart.49 Identifying the sources of the Arnhem Mystical Sermons is a task still awaiting investigation. The character of the collection, not unlike what we see in The Pearl, com- bines the Trinitarian love mysticism of Ruusbroec and his followers with apophatic themes of the mysticism of the ground from Meister Eckhart and others. But there is much more to the Arnhem sermons, especially in their pervasive strain of imitatio Christi and in the way in which they present their mystical message through allegorical interpretation of the texts of the liturgical year. The Arnhem preacher directs the audience to the inner meaning of each feast through a sophisticated reading of the lessons of the Mass. Eckhart’s sermons also aimed at mystical internalization of the meaning of liturgical texts, but the Dominican analyzed individual sentences of the pericopes and did not construct allegorizations of the narrative (historia) of the events of salvation history the way that many of the Arnhem sermons do. To illustrate this mystical reading of the Bible I will look at one example, Sermon 85 for Easter Sunday. This is not only one of the longer homilies, but it also displays many of the major themes of the collection’s teaching.50 The readings for the Easter liturgy are 1 Corinthians 5:7-8 for the Epistle and Mark 16:1-7 for the Gospel. The theme announced at the start of the

45 The cycle De Tempore begins with the S. 1 for the First Sunday of Advent and concludes with S. 128 for the Dedication of a Church, interpreting the church/temple as the soul, the same theme found in the treatise Van den Tempel Onser Sielen. 46 On the evidence for women writing sermons in the Low Countries (Franciscan and fifteenth century), see Thom Mertens, “Private Revelation and Public Relevance in the Middle Dutch Sermon Cycle Jhesus collacien,” Medieval Sermon Studies 53 (2009): 33-42 (my thanks to Carolyn Muessig for bringing this article to my attention). 47 Augustine is mentioned in S. 32 and S. 56, and Bernard of Clairvaux in S. 78. Sermon 154 references both Albert the Great and Peter of Leiden. 48 For example, much of S. 111 for the Seventh Sunday after Trinity treating the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit is taken from Ruusbroec’s Brulocht. 49 My preliminary study reveals a number of parallels to Eckhartian motifs and language, e.g., S. 12 to Eckhart’s Pr. 4, S. 85 to Pr. 83, S. 97 (use of the frequent Eckhartian term “One Single One”—een eenich een in Dutch), and S. 137 to Pr. 71. 50 S. 85 is found in ff. 172r-180v of the ms. I will cite by folio numbers and will make use of the preliminary version of the text and translation being prepared by K. Schepers, occasionally adjust- ing the English usage. A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance 39 sermon is taken from 1 Corinthians 5:7: “Christ, our Lamb, has been sacrificed for us.” The exposition, however, deals with the whole Easter narrative drawn from the New Testament and tradition, beginning with how the God- head raised Christ from the dead, proceeding through a consideration of the Blessed Virgin’s role in the Resurrection (not in scripture, but an important element of Christian piety), continuing on with an interpretation of the meaning of the other manifestations of the Risen Christ and an explanation of the five wounds borne on Christ’s glorified body, to conclude with the essential message of the feast, namely to “…prove to the world that we are truly risen in Jesus Christ and that our sinful life through his death is hidden and annihilated in God” (in gode verborgen ende te nyet is: f. 180rb). The goal of the sermon is personal appropriation, as announced at the beginning: “O, alle ynnige mensche, wert ontwaeckt ende verheft u ende verblijt u mit groeter, ynniger jubilatien, want ons paesschen is den geofferden Christum” (“O, all inner fervent people, wake up and lift yourself up, and rejoice with intense inner jubilation [Ps. 117:24, the Gradual text], for our sacrificial Lamb is the sacrificed Christ”: f. 172rab). The first section (172rb-173ra) deals with the Resurrection itself, inviting the reader to meditate and contemplate how “the glory of the Godhead” descends to the grave to take on the “humble, crucified humanity of Christ, his Son.” Thus, the Risen Christ in his full humanity (body, soul, and spirit) has now been given all authority and crowned with “the most shining tiara of his high divinity,” but with an important addition concerning the role of the continued marks of the Passion on Christ’s glorified body. The preacher says: “Ende die mynne der godheit vercoes te holden in dat glorioese licham Christi die vijf mynnen teiken sijnre ewiger mynnen, ende daer doer vloeyen mocht tot den mynnende, ende daer doer den mynnende in den gemynde sonder onderlaet trecken mocht, ende den, als sich selven, in mynnen gebrucken mocht.”51 Late medieval devotion to Christ’s wounds generally fixed on beholding the wounds in meditation on the Passion, but the author of the Arnhem sermons emphasizes the glorious wounds as the marks of love’s attrac- tion (ff. 172vb-173rb), which he understands as drawing even the multitude of the heavenly host to a new “supernatural transformation” (avernatuerlicke ver- wandelinge). The second section of the sermon (ff. 173va-175rb) deals with Mary’s role in the Resurrection and is perhaps the high point of the devotion to Mary found throughout the sermons. The basic argument is that Mary is present wherever Christ is, so that she was inwardly drawn into “the mirror of the Holy Trinity” (spiegel der heiliger drievoldicheit) in the Resurrection and was welcomed into and glorified in the Trinity itself.52 Just as Mary died with

51 “And the love of the Godhead chose to keep the five signs of his eternal love on his glorious body, so that he might flow through them to the lover, and incessantly pull the lover through them into the Beloved, and enjoy him, as himself, in love” (f. 172vb). 52 Mary’s heavenly union and glorification is expressed in strong terms: “…her spiritual substance and form passed completely into the divine brightness, and she became completely one 40 Bernard McGinn

Christ in witnessing his suffering on the cross, so too she has risen with him and has been assumed into the glory of the Trinity. The Risen Jesus’s visit to glorify Mary, however, was just the beginning. The sermon continues by recounting ten other Easter appearances (ff. 175rb- 176vb) in order to set the stage for how the audience themselves should prepare for Christ’s coming today. Jesus first visited “his friends in Paradise” to show them how he had saved them “with his precious blood and bitter death.” He then made nine earthly appearances to his followers, which the preacher briefly describes, drawing a present application from each visit.53 The final section of the sermon (ff. 176vb-180vb) consists in advice about how to make the Resur- rection real in the present. It begins: “Hierom laet ons doch nu all gelick paesschen holden ende haesten ons ons selven te ontsyncken ende aver te gaen alle geschapenheit mit een inkeren inder ewiger puerheit ende waerheit Christi Jhesu die onsen paesschen is, werpende van ons alle synnen ende synlicheit, op dat wij een nye deech, dats een nye mensche, in Christo moegen sijn.”54 Many of the essential themes of the Arnhem preacher are evident in what fol- lows. The first is turning inward into “our innermost ground” (sijnen binnen- sten gront). This involves a stripping away of all images taken in by the senses or produced by the imagination. Although such images can be useful at times, such as when we reflect on the solemnities of the church year with our outer and inner powers, there comes a point where the fervent inner soul, “…soe sal se die synnicheit verlaten ende gaen mit al hoeren crachten aver alle beeldingen in den ontbeeldelicken, onnaemelicken god, ende schrijden mit die voeten der mynlicker begeerten ende mynnen soe wijt aver alle geschapen, genaemden dingen, tot dat die ziel baven alle begripinge ende gemerck gegrepen wort.”55 Interiorization, the stripping away of images, the motivating power of love, and the divine initiative drawing the soul up to the unnameable God—common themes in much northern European mysticism—are all summarized here.

light with the light of the Godhead” (… “dat hoer geestige substantie ende form al te mael avergynck in die godlicke claerheit, end si wert te mael een licht mitten licht inden licht der godheit”: f. 174rb). The Pearl author also reflects on Mary’s union with divine light. 53 The nine earthly appearances are: (1) Mary Magdalene (Jn. 20:15); (2) Peter (Lk. 24:34); (3) the three Marys at the tomb (Mk. 16:1); (4) James (apocryphal); (5) Joseph of Arimathaea (apocryphal); (6) the Apostles in the upper room (Jn. 20:19); (7) the two disciples at Emmaus (Lk. 24:13-35); (8) the Apostles while fishing (Jn. 21:1-11); and (9) doubting Thomas (Jn. 20:24-29). Each incident is given a moral meaning for personal appropriation; e.g., Mary Magdalene’s sadness and going out to the tomb indicates that we should have sorrow over our sins and go out of ourselves so that Christ will appear to us. 54 “Therefore, let us now all celebrate Easter together and hurry to sink away from ourselves and transcend all createdness by turning inwards in the eternal purity and truth of Jesus Christ who is our Paschal Lamb, as we cast off all senses and sensuality, so that we may be a new dough, that is, a new person in Christ” (176vb-177ra, using 1 Cor. 5:8). 55 “…should leave all sensuousness behind and enter with all her faculties beyond all images into the imageless, unnameable God, and strive with the feet of loving desire and love far above all created named things, until the soul is seized above all understanding and thought” (f. 177vb). A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance 41

Sermon 85 concludes by reflecting on this mystical drawing-up, noting that only God can bring it about and that it can only be known by the person who has experienced it. Still, one can prepare for this divine work by anguish and suffering, as well as by imitating Christ’s life. Such a lifting up “…is the most particular work of God that may happen to a soul” (f. 178rb). Being so drawn by God into God is described in language reminiscent of Eckhart: “…ende wort van kennen kenneloes, van mynnen mynneloes ende van licht doncker, ende comet aver alle gedencken ende werkinge in een avernatuerlicke rust ende gebruckinge, welcks ongenaemtheit ende onbeeldelicheit god selven ist.”56 The preacher insists that what the spirit “experiences of God” (bevijndt van god) at such a moment cannot be described or understood, since it is the equivalent of what happened to Jesus and to Mary at the Resurrection. It is a transformation and deification that unites the soul with Jesus: Ende die glorioesheit onse heren averformt die substantie ende form der zielen in die gedaente ende form sijnre alre heilichster zielen, ende die almoegentheit der volmaechter eenheit der godheit ende der mensheit indruckt den gehelen mensche sijn moegentheit ende cracht ende maeckt hem eenformich sijns levens ende lij- dens…. [D]ie synnen noch dat vernuft des menschens dat niet begripen noch bekennen en connen, mer si ontfangent ende lijden mede dat doergaen des ewigen lichts, ende werden daer van verwandelt ende blijven mit gode vervult….57 This transformation always adheres to the model of Christ. The humanity of Jesus had to be crushed, crucified, and perish in order to be glorified, enlightened, and permanently brought into the eternal unity of God. So too: …moet dan onse sundige mensheit mit al die lusten sijnre synnen temortelt, gecruyst, gedoot, ya altemael doot begraven wesen in Christo, ende onse ziel mit al hoeren crachten ende bewegingen, leven, lijden ende strijdingen, in die cracht ende mynnen sijnre alre heilichster zielen te nyet ende een sijn, ende onse geest ende gemoede stadelick ontsoncken ende mit mynnen ingedruckt sijn sijnen godlicken geest…58

56 S. 85 (f. 178rb): “…she [the soul] becomes unknowing from knowing, loveless from loving, and darkness from light, and she attains beyond all thought and action a supernatural rest and joy, a namelessness and imagelessness which is God himself.” Compare this with a passage from Eckhart’s Pr. 83 (DW 3:448.5-8): “….wan minnestu got, als er got ist, als er geist ist, als er person ist und als er bilde ist,—es muos alles abe! ‘wie sol ich denne minnen?’ Du solt in minnen als ist Ein nit-got, Ein nit-geist, Ein nit-person, Ein nût bilde, Mer: al ser ein luter pur clar Ein ist….” 57 “And the glory of the Lord transforms the substance and form of the soul into the shape and form of his most holy soul, and the omnipotence of the perfect unity of the divinity and humanity impresses onto the whole person his might and strength, and makes him similar to his life and passion … [T]he senses and the rational capacity of a person cannot grasp or understand it, but they also receive and undergo the penetration of the eternal light and they become transformed by it and remain filled with God…. S. 85 (f. 178 vb-179ra). The verbs verwandelen and aver formen are frequently used for the deification process. 58 “…must our sinful humanity, with all the lusts of the senses, be crushed, killed, and be altogether dead and buried in Christ, and our soul, with all its faculties and emotions, love, passion 42 Bernard McGinn

What is more, if we are truly risen with Christ, we will also carry Christ’s five wounds as the signs of love. Here the five wounds are given spiritual interpretations: the wound in the right hand signifies zeal for the virtues; the left hand wound is steadfastness; the feet wounds are obedience and desire for God; while the side wound is “the spear of ardent love of God” which allows no hindrance (f. 180rab). We must also bear the banner of victory (i.e., the cross), showing that the world is a cross to us, and we must wear Christ’s red robe signifying that “…we are united in and attached to him in spirit, soul, and body, and live only for him” (f. 180va). While many medieval mystics taught the necessity of identifying with the suffering Christ on the cross, the Arnhem preacher is unusual in asking the audience to become fully one with the glorious Risen Lord of Easter. The Arnhem preacher dwells extensively on three major theological themes common to late medieval and early modern mystics: first, the unknowability of the divine nature; second, the role of humanity as made in God’s image and likeness; and third, the Christological character of the path to union. An adequate analysis of the theological depth of these sermons would demand attention to all three issues; here I will only make a few remarks on Christology. If the Arnhem sermons do not set forth a general itinerary of the stages on the mystical path to God,59 this is because the yearly cycle of the liturgy is the essential path to union. Following Jesus in the liturgical year is, of course, a form of imitatio Christi. This imitation of Christ is not the literal imitation often found in the late Middle Ages, but is rather a coming to share in the real- ity of Jesus as God and man through re-living the inner meaning of the events of his life, as we have seen in the case of the Easter sermon. Therefore, the Arnhem homilies give special prominence to the major feasts of Christmas, Good Friday, Easter, the Ascension, and Pentecost, while the other Sundays, the days of Lent, and the feasts of some saints, especially the seven sermons devoted to Marian feasts, provide opportunities to enrich the core message. Imitating the life of Christ is more than following after him in virtuous action; it implies becoming one with the God-man, especially through the birth of the Word in the soul. The late Middle Ages saw a rich development of the theme of the birth of Christ in the soul, beginning with Eckhart,60 carried on by Tauler and others, and also found in the writings of the Pearl author. One common expression of this motif was the distinction of three births of Christ tied to the three masses for Christmas (Night Mass, Dawn Mass, Day Mass).61 and discord, be annihilated and one in the might and love of his most holy soul, and our spirit and conscience be constantly sunk and impressed with love in his divine spirit….” (f. 179va-vb). 59 There are several small triple itineraries in the sermons. Among these are the three movements into the temple of the soul in S. 128 (exterior temple – interior temple – altar), the three divine births in SS. 9-12, and the three divine stillings or silences in S. 131. 60 On Eckhart, Bernard McGinn, The Mystical Thought of Meister Eckhart (New York: Cross- road, 2001), Chap. 4. “The Preacher in Action: Eckhart on the Eternal Birth” (53-70). 61 The theme of the three births of Christ (in eternity from the Father, in the past from Mary, in the present in our hearts) appears in Bernard of Clairvaux, In Vigilia Nativitatis 6.3-11 (Sancti A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance 43

The Arnhem sermons explore this theme in detail. Sermon 9, entitled “For the Night of the Nativity” (not a liturgical feast: ff. 13vb-17rb) introduces the birthing motif, discussing the eternal birth of the Word from the Father, noting the birth in time from Mary, and concluding with the three aspects of the inner birth in us: (1) the spirit (symbolized by Mary) sinking into the ground where the Father begets the Son and the Holy Spirit goes out from them both (f. 15vab); (2) the action of the divine light present in the ground flowing out through all the faculties of the soul, both higher and lower (f. 16ra-va); and (3) the divine power spilling over into the body (symbolized by Joseph) in order to make a person “wholly godlike” in practicing the virtues (f. 16va-17rb). Sermon 10 (ff. 17rb-20ra) begins the liturgical exposition of the birthing motif, considering the Midnight Mass and the Word’s birth in the ground of the soul and the three higher powers of memory, intellect, and will. Ser- mon 11 (ff. 20ra-22va) shows how the Dawn Mass reveals that the birth in the lower and exterior powers flows back into the spirit and its union with God, while Sermon 12 (ff. 22va-25va) treats the Day Mass and sums up the transformation of the person into Christ, who is born for us and in us.62 This cycle of sermons on birthing contains formulations of our identity with Christ that approach those of Meister Eckhart. A passage in S. 12, for example, says: “Die nu den vader kennen sal, moet inden soen een sijn, ya, die selve soen sijn, niet van natueren, mer die volmaectheit der doechden ende heili- cheit sijnre menschelicker natueren van gratien.”63 This is reminiscent of a passage in Eckhart’s German Sermon (Pr.) 6 condemned in article 22 of Pope John XXII’s bull against Eckhart, In agro dominico. 64 A full account of the interiorized imitatio Christi of the Arnhem Sermons would demand attention to many other texts, especially those for Good Friday and Ascension

Bernardi Opera 4:236-44). In a sermon ascribed to Tauler, but now known to be by Eckhart, the births are tied to the three Christmas masses (Tauler, Sermon 1; ed. Vetter, 7-8). This is further explored in The Evangelical Pearl, The Temple of Our Soul, and the Arnhem Mystical Sermons, and has been studied by Robert Faesen, “The Three Births of Christ and the Christmas Liturgy in The Temple of Our Soul, The Evangelical Pearl, and The Arnhem Mystical Sermons” Ons Geestelijk Erf 81 (2010), 121-37, with 127-37 on the Arnhem sermons. 62 This brief summary does not do justice to the richness and complexity of these sermons. Faesen, “The Three Births of Christ and the Christmas Liturgy,” 136-37, notes three shared features in the texts of The Pearl author and the Arnhem preacher: (1) situating the birth of the Son in the highest unity or pure ground of the soul; (2) the mutual indwelling of God and the human person; and (3) the overflow of the birth to the whole person, including the body. The birthing motif is found in other Arnhem sermons: e.g., SS. 1, 2, 20, 83, and 110. 63 S. 12 (22vb-23ra): “Whoever wants to know the Father must be one in the Son (Mt. 11:27), yes, he must be the same son, not by nature, but by the perfection of virtues and by the holiness of his human nature by grace.” 64 The expression “becoming the same son” (not just a son) was among the condemned propo- sitions of Eckhart (“In agro dominico,” art. 22, drawn from Pr. 6 [DW 1:109.7-8]). The Arnhem preacher’s qualification, “not by nature, but by grace,” may indicate knowledge of the condem- nation. 44 Bernard McGinn

Thursday.65 It would also be necessary to consider the role of the Eucharist as the food whose eating transforms us into Christ and enables us to live for him alone (S. 104, f. 231rb).66 The Arnhem Sermons’ teaching on imitatio Christi understood as mystical identification involves many of the other major motifs of late medieval mysticism, such as detachment, releasement, and annihilation of the created self. All these themes imply becoming one with God, that is, what we today call mystical union. Like the author of The Evangelical Pearl, the Arnhem preacher speaks about union with God often and in rather different ways. Two formulations stand out as especially controversial in the debates about uniting with God that were part of late medieval mysticism: union without distinction; and formless union with God. Ruusbroec’s language of “union without distinction” was attacked by Jean Gerson and defended by the Groenendaal community. Given the Ruusbroecian basis of the Arnhem preacher’s anthropology, we should not be surprised that some texts in the sermons speak of union without distinction. Sermon 45 talks about how the soul, like Moses ascending Sinai, reaches union without distinction: “…soe isse van god geroepen ende getagen doer alle duysternisse inden top des berchs, dats inden geest; daer spreeckt geest mit geest, daer vloeyt geest in geest, daer gebruckt die geest god ende god den geest, sonder alle onderscheit.”67 The Ruusbroecian flavor of this description is underlined by the following appeal to the distinction between “working being” (werckelicken wesens) and “enjoying being” (gebruckelicke wesen): “Want dat onderscheit sijns werckelicken wesens heeft die brandige mynne gods te mael versmolten ende dat gebruckelicke wesen te mael godlick in god gemaket” (f. 95va: “For the burning love of God has melted away completely the distinctness of his working being and has made his enjoying being divine in God”). Other strong expressions of union include passages that speak of being “changed entirely into God” (S. 12, f. 24va), or of “being God in God” (S. 32, f. 71vb), or becoming “totally godlike” (S. 154, f. 354vb: te mael godlick). Such phrases, to be sure, are found in many mystics and need to be put in context in order to see how in the deepest union the height of the soul both is and is not God. More controversial, however, are the places where the preacher speaks of taking on the “form of God.” The problem about saying that the soul can attain a formless union with God (S. 78), or in claiming that God takes on the form of the soul (S. 131), or that the soul becomes one form with God (S. 128), is that “formal identity with God,” that is, the notion that God is

65 Imitating Christ’s Passion occurs not just in the Good Friday sermon (S. 83), but in a number of other homilies; e.g., SS. 17, 82, 84A, 154, and 160. 66 S. 104 for Corpus Christi (ff. 230r-232v) is central for the Eucharistic element in the mysticism of the Arnhem sermons, but see also SS. 1, 13, 21, 26, 99, and 103. 67 S 45 (f. 95a): “[The soul] is called by God and lifted up through all darkness to the top of the mountain, which is in the spirit; there spirit speaks to spirit, there spirit flows into spirit, there the spirit enjoys God and God the spirit, without any distinction.” A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance 45 the form of the soul in a strict sense, was the teaching of Amalric of Bène condemned as heretical in the early thirteenth century.68 From this perspective, statements like the following could easily attract suspicion: “God takes up the form that they [advanced souls] leave behind as his own form (want die forme die si verlaten, neemt god als sijn eygen form aen sich) and works and suffers in it” (S. 99, f. 219ra). One can, however, doubt that the Arnhem preacher was thinking of “form” in the sense of the Schoolmen, the idea anathematized in the case of Amalric; rather, the sermons seem to understand “form” as a new source of divine action in and through the human subject. In the sermons attaining the highest states of union is spoken of concretely, even phenomenologically, as being “touched” by God,69 and as “experiencing” (bevynden) and “tasting” (smaken) God. All these terms were common to the tradition of Dutch-language mysticism and further study will be needed to determine how the Arnhem sermons compare with earlier authors. The preacher sometimes talks about two opposed modes of experiencing God in this life, that is, by delight and by darkness (e.g., SS. 68, 128). Although the sermons emphasize the traditional note that the way of darkness is the more secure,70 and a few sermons discuss the role of suffering, storms, and desolation in the mystical path (e.g., SS. 26, 32, 83), there is a generally positive tone to how the preacher encourages the audience to seek for a “divine experience” (godlicken bevynden: S. 128, f. 290ra). Also positive is the way the Arnhem preacher talks about deification.71 An ancient Christian adage declared that “God became man so that man might become God.” The Arnhem preacher not only cites this saying (e.g., SS. 12, 26, 104), but also puts deification, or “being transformed or changed into God,” at the center of many sermons (the verbs usually used are averformen and verwandelen). For example, Sermon 131 on the Feast of St. Nicholas, expands on the traditional axiom by interpreting the phrase from the Our Father, “Your will be done,” as: “Dijnen heiligen geest, die daer dijn vermoegende wijsen wil is, die maeckt my nu doer Christum Jhesum altijt godlick in allen dingen, als hi di, hoge god, om my gemaeckt heeft mensche.”72 The sermon also says that the created spirit is devoured and

68 Amalric of Bène was condemned at Paris in 1210 for asserting that God is the formal principle of all things. See G. C. Capelle, Autour du décret de 1210: III. Amaury de Bène. Étude sur son panthéisme formel (Paris: Vrin, 1932). The heresy was noted by many medieval theologians, e.g., Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae Ia, q. 3, a. 8. 69 The phenomenon of the divine “touch” (rueren/tasten) was important to Ruusbroec and other Dutch mystics. For appearances in the Arnhem sermons, e.g., SS. 31, and especially S. 111. 70 On the language of darkness and nothingness in the Arnhem sermons, Ineke Cornet, “Meta- phors of Transcendence and Transformation in the Arnhem Mystical Sermons (Royal Library, the Hague, ms. 133 H 13),” Ons Geestelijk Erf 79 (2008): 369-96. 71 Deification in the Arnhem sermons has been studied by Cornet, “’For which we are created’. The Image of God as the Fundament for Deification in the Arnhem Mystical Sermons,” Ons Geestelijk Erf 81 (2010): 101-20. Especially useful are the reflections on five characteristics of deification in the sermons presented in 118-19. 72 S. 131 (f. 294bisa): “Your Holy Spirit, that is, your mighty wise Will, now makes me divine always in all things through Jesus Christ, just as he made you, High God, man because of me.” 46 Bernard McGinn absorbed by God so that “…God altogether occupies this person and he has passed into God” (avergegaen in god). Sermon 56 distinguishes active and passive aspects of deification, saying: “Niet alleen in de gelickenisse der doechden ende der gueder werken, die wij weselick hebben moeten ende sonder arbeyt uut ons vlyeten moeten,…mer wij moeten baven alle gelickenisse in een onbewegelicke vrijheit ende onvermengede lutter bloetheit een godlicke, averweselicke, still enicheit gebrucken mit God….”73 The Arnhem Sermons provide one of the richest sources for deification language in late medieval mysticism. Although there is still much to learn about the Arnhem sermons, there can be no question that this collection is a major mystical text, one that, like The Evangelical Pearl, represents a creative retrieval of late medieval mysticism within the new context of a divided Christendom. Historical accidents (and also the activities of the Cologne Carthusians) gave one of these works a real impact on later European mystical traditions; the other remained unknown until the past decade. Both, however, are strong witnesses to the sixteenth-century mystical renaissance in the Eastern Low Countries.

Bibliography

Ampe, Albert, “Eschius (Esschius, van Esche, van Essche, van Es, Nicolas),” Diction- naire de Spiritualité, 4:1060-66. Ampe, Albert, “Perle Évangélique (Die evangelische Peerle),” Dictionnaire de Spiri- tualité, 4:1159-69. Ampe, Albert, “Een kritisch onderzoek van de ‘Institutiones Taulerianae’,” Ons geestelijk Erf 40 (1966): 167-240. Ampe, Albert, “Marie d’Oisterwijk,” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, 10:519-20. Autore, S., “Lansperge ou Landsberg,” Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, 8:2606-09. Autore, S., “Surius, Laurent,” Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, 14:1325-29. Begheyn, Paul, J. “Is Reinalda van Eymeren, zuster in het St. Agnietenklooster te Arnhem, en oudtante van Petrus Canisius, de schrijfster der Evangelische Peerle?,” Ons geestelijk Erf 45 (1971): 339-75. Begheyn, Paul, J., “’Die Evangelische Peerle’. Nieuwe gegevens over auteur en invloed,” Ons geestelijk Erf 63 (1989): 170-89. Begheyn, Paul, J., “De verspreiding van de Evangelische Peerle,” Ons geestelijk Erf 51 (1977): 391-421. Begheyn, Paul, J., “Nieuwe gegevens betreffende de ‘Evangelische Peerle’,” Ons geestelijk Erf 58 (1984): 30-40 Brodrick, James, Saint Peter Canisius, S. J. 1521-97 (Baltimore: Carroll Press, 1950).

73 S. 56 (f. 109vb): “[We should] not only [possess] the likeness [to God] in virtues and good works, which we have to possess essentially and which have to flow out of us without effort,… but we should also enjoy, above all likeness, in an immovable freedom and a single, pure naked- ness, a divine superexistential silent unity with God” (using the translation of Cornet, “‘For which we are created’,” 115). A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance 47

Capelle, G. C., Autour du décret de 1210: III. Amaury de Bène. Étude sur son pan- théisme formel (Paris: Vrin, 1932). Chaix, Gérald, Réforme et contre-réforme catholique. Recherche sur la chartreuse de Cologne au XVI siècle, 3 vols. (Salzburg: Universität Salzburg, 1981). Christensen, Kirsten M., “Maria van Hout and her Carthusian Editor,” Ons geestelijk Erf 72 (1998): 105-21. Christensen, Kirsten M., “The Gender of Epistemology in Confessional Europe: The Reception of Maria van Hout’s ‘Ways of Knowing’,” in Anneke B. Mulder- Baker, ed., Seeing and Knowing. Women and Learning in Medieval Europe 1200-1550 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2004), 97-120. Cornet, Ineke, “Metaphors of Transcendence and Transformation in the Arnhem Mystical Sermons (Royal Library, the Hague, ms. 133 H 13),” Ons geestelijk Erf 79 (2008): 369-96. Cornet, Ineke, “’For which we are created’. The Image of God as the Fundament for Deification in the Arnhem Mystical Sermons,” Ons geestelijk Erf 81 (2010): 101-20. Dagens, Jean, Bérulle et les origins de la restauration catholique (1575-1611) (Bruges: Desclée, 1952). Devaux, Augustine, “Surius (Sauer, Laurent),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, 14:1325-29. Die Evangelische Perle. Das geistliche Begleitbuch einer flämischen Mystikerin des 16. Jahrhundert in der Űbersetzung des Angelus Silesius ausgewählt und bearbeitet von Klaus Dahme (Salzburg: Otto Müller, 1990). Dictionnaire de spiritualité ascetique et mystique: doctrine et histoire. Paris: Beauch- esne, 1933-95, 17 vols. Faesen, Robert, “The Three Births of Christ and the Christmas Liturgy in The Temple of Our Soul, The Evangelical Pearl, and The Arnhem Mystical Sermons” Ons geestelijk Erf 81 (2010): 121-37. Haude, Sigrun, “The Silent Monks Speak Up: The Changing Role of the Carthusians in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries,” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 86 (1995): 124-39. Kettenmeyer, J. B., “Uit de briefwisseling van eene brabantsche mystieke uit de 16e eeuw,” Ons geestelijk Erf 1 (1927): 278-99 (study), and 370-95 (edition). Kienhorst, Hans and Kuys, Jan, eds., Een verborgen Leven. Arnhemse Mystiek in de Zestiende Eeuw (Arnhem: Historisch Museum Arnhem: 2011). McGinn, Bernard, The Mystical Thought of Meister Eckhart (New York: Crossroad, 2001). McGinn, Bernard, “A Forgotten Classic of Late Medieval Women’s Mysticism: The Evangelical Pearl,” Archa Verbi. Yearbook for the Study of Medieval Theology 5 (2008): 97-121. McGinn, Bernard, The Varieties of Vernacular Mysticism, 1350-1550 (New York: Crossroad-Herder, 2012). Mertens, Thom, “Christus als weg. Twee hoofdstukken uit de Evangelische Peerle,” in Kathleen Meyers and Piet Nijs, eds., Minne is al. Pareltjes van Nederlandse en Rijnlandse Mystiek (Leuven: Peeters, 2006), 70-72. Mertens, Thom, “Private Revelation and Public Relevance in the Middle Dutch Sermon Cycle Jhesus collacien,” Medieval Sermon Studies 53 (2009): 33-42. Oehl, Wilhelm, Deutsche Mystikerbriefe (Munich: Georg Müller, 1931). Rossmann, Heribert, “Lanspergius (Lansperge, Landsberg, Jean Juste),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, 9:230-38. 48 Bernard McGinn

Ruh, Kurt, Geschichte der abendländische Mystik; IV. Die niederländische Mystik des 14. bis 16. Jahrhunderts (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1999), Chapter 61 (290-312). Rüthing, Heinrich, “Kalkbrenner (Chalcificis ou Hamontanus, Gérard),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, 8:1653-57. Rüthing, Heinrich, “Loher (Loerius; Dirk, Dietrich, Thierry),” Dictionnaire de Spiri- tualité, 9:961-63. Sancti Bernardi opera, eds J. Leclercq, C.H. Talbot, H.M. Rochais, 8 vols. (Rome, Editiones Cistercienses, 1957-77). Schepers, Kees, “Het verborgen leven van de zusters Agnieten. Mystieke cultuur te Arnhem in de zestiende eeuw,” Ons geestelijk Erf 79 (2009): 285-316. Schepers, Kees, “Mystical Sermons,” in Rik Van Nieuwenhove, Robert Faesen, and Helen Rolfson, eds., Late Medieval Mysticism of the Low Countries (New York: Paulist Press, 2008), 349-53. Schepers, Kees, “Wat zeggen de vroegste edities over de auteur van Die evangelische peerle?,” Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde 130 (2013): 26-54. Schoor, Rob van de, “Canisius als Herausgeber. Die Ausgaben von Tauler (1543), Kyrill (1546) und Leo dem Großen (1546),” Ons geestelijk Erf 82 (2011): 161-186. Schoote, J. P. Van, S.J., “Laurent Surius (ord. cart.) a-t-il traduit en Latin la ‘Perle Évangélique’?,” Ons geestelijk Erf 35 (1961): 29-58. Verschueren, Lucidius, “Blomevenna (Pierre),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, 1:1738- 39. Vetter, Ferdinand, ed., Die Predigten Taulers. Aus der Engelberger und der Freiburger Handschrift, sowie aus Schmidts Abschriften der ehemaligen Strassburger Hand- schriften (Berlin: Weidmann, 1910). Vidal, Daniel, “Le coup terrible de néant,” Introduction to La perle évangelique (1602) (Grenoble: Jerôme Millon, 1997), 9-170. Den Tempel onser Sielen door de Schrijfster der Evangelische Peerle, ed. Albert Ampe (Antwerp: Uitgave van het Ruusbroecgenootschap, 1968). Wiethaus, Ulrike, “‘If I had an Iron Body’: Femininity and Religion in the Letters of Maria de Hout,” in Karen Cherewatuk and Ulrike Wiethaus, eds., Dear Sister. Medieval Women and the Epistolary Genre (Philadelphia: University of Penn- sylvania, 1993), 171-91. Wiethaus, Ulrike, “‘For This I Ask You, Punish Me’. Norms of Spiritual Orthopraxis in the Work of Maria van Hout (d. 1547),” Ons geestelijk Erf 68 (1994): 253-70. Willeumier-Schalij, J. M., De Brieven uit ‘Der rechte wech’ van de Oisterwijske Begijn en Mystica Maria van Hout († Keulen, 1547) (Leuven: Peeters, 1993).

Abstract

The mystical renaissance that took place in the Eastern Netherlands in the mid-sixteenth century has been unduly neglected until recent years in part because the Dutch texts were often difficult of access and almost unknown outside Dutch-speaking lands. This neglect has begun to be overcome in recent research. This important chapter in the history of mysticism is another example of the “conversation” between learned clerics and mystically-inclined women. As an aspect of Pre-Tridentine Catholic Reform, the Carthusians of St. Barbara at Cologne not only supported the publication and translation of many medieval mystical classics, but also encouraged the writing and printing of a number of vernacular works by women, such as the Beguine Maria van Hout, and the A Sixteenth-Century Mystical Renaissance 49 writings associated with the convent of Augustinian nuns at St. Agnes at Arnhem. Important among the writings of the Arnhem circle were the Dutch treatises known as “The Temple of the Soul” and “The Evangelical Pearl,” both written by an anonymous female. The collection of one hundred and sixty sermons known today as “The Arnhem Mystical Sermons” also testifies to the creativity of this chapter in the history of Western mysticism.

Address of the author: The University of Chicago Divinity School, 1025 East 58th Street, Swift Hall, Chicago, Illinois 60637, USA ([email protected])