Susan K. Roll

Hildegard of Bingen: a Doctor of the

On October 7, 2012, I was privileged to be present at the outdoor papal Mass at the Vatican in which was officially declared a Doctor of the Church. On October 26 I was even more privileged to be invited to give the opening address at the First International Conference of the Scivias Institut.

As a member of the Scivias Institut from the beginning, I was pleased that this conference took place less than three weeks after Hildegard (finally!) received public recognition of her genius and of her contribution both to the Roman and to human creativity and knowledge, both scientific and mystical. In this article I will give some of the background and significance of the title “Doctor of the Church,” then briefly sketch the steps involved in Hildegard’s case. We will mention briefly the loose ends that remain in ascertaining the exact motive. Finally, to expand the context somewhat, we will take a glance at a sampling of contemporary commentaries that illustrates the rather odd situation today in which a medieval nun seems to have become, if not “all things to all people,” then certainly many very different things to various groups of people who want nothing to do with each other.

The first point to note is that “Doctor of the Church” is conferred as an honorary title. It is not based on original research nor on the formal academic achievements equivalent to those of a person who holds a university Doctor title today. For example, among the four women Doctors of the Church, was illiterate. Teresa of Avila was probably marginally literate in Latin -- her genius lay in combining profound mystical knowledge with a very homey, practical sort of wisdom. Therese of Lisieux was educated to early secondary school level and entered the Carmelites with special papal permission at age 15. And Hildegard composed prodigious works in her head and dictated them to her secretary, since apparently she could read Latin but not write well in Latin. In each case the woman proved herself amazingly gifted in surmounting the disadvantage of a low level of formal education. In fact women were not permitted to study Roman in universities before the 1950’s. Women were prohibited from earning a doctoral degree in theology until in the 1960’s – simply because they were female, not for any other reason.

The primary criterion for being named a Doctor of the Church, whether by a Pope or by an ecumenical Council, is that the writings of the particular must be exceptionally valuable to the Church, and that the person has shown eminent learning and great personal sanctity. The first four Doctors of the Church, proclaimed in the year 1298, were of Milan, Augustine, and Gregory the Great, all of whom lived in the late period of the ancient Church in the West. Four more were proclaimed in 1568, and these came from the fourth- and fifth-century Church in the East: Basil the Great, , Gregory Nazianzen and Athanasius. In total today there are 35 Doctors of the Church, 26 from the West and nine from the East. Half of them were bishops and one-third lived in the fourth century.

The more precise criteria for designating an eminent Saint as a Doctor of the Church have shifted several times in history. Originally the emphasis was on the theological importance of the person's writings and transcribed sermons. In the 16th century more emphasis was laid on those whose writings and life work involved fighting against movements defined by the Roman Church as “heresies.” This is logical because the dates to the first quarter of the 16th century, and the Counter-Reformation to the middle of this century. In 1741 Benedict XIV allowed the inclusion of sanctity of life along with the authority and orthodoxy of the person’s teaching.

However, the change that made it possible for women to be named Doctors of the Church took place only in 1970, five years after Vatican II, when mystical knowledge was added to the existing criteria as a form of recognized teaching authority. The first two women Doctors of the Church, Teresa of Avila and Catherine of Siena, were proclaimed in that year, and in 1997 Therese of Lisieux received the same honor.

Hildegard was chronologically older than these three women, so what delayed her recognition as a Doctor? Simply, the fact that she had never officially been proclaimed a Saint. Today the primary criterion for recognition depends upon the individual’s reputation for holiness of life and for heroism on behalf of their Christian belief. But for a formal and official declaration of sainthood for the worldwide Church, the criteria for first beatification (which gives the person the title “Blessed”) and secondly canonization to sainthood also depend on medically attested healing miracles that took place for individuals who had prayed to the saint for intercession with God so that they might be healed. In this sense a Saint considered by the Vatican as someone of exceptional spiritual virtue who, in addition, after their death is able to intercede to obtain favors for those on earth who call upon them in prayer for help. The criteria for final recognition as a Saint are fairly strict. For example, an individual who reports a miraculous healing from cancer after praying to a particular possible future Saint must remain cancer-free for at least ten years. However, exceptionally the Pope can grant an exemption from this requirement of a second miracle for canonization.

In the twelfth century the criteria were both more flexible and more local in nature. Shortly after Hildegard’s death Theodoric, her biographer, called her a Saint and reported that many miracles had occurred through her intercession. A prayer to Hildegard has been found in a Cistercian nuns’ prayerbook from the year 1300, and several investigations into her sanctity of life and the orthodoxy of her writings were begun under successive popes in the same period. There are several theories as to why the process never succeeded. One was that in this period the prerogative of declaring an individual a Saint was being transferred from the local Bishops to the Pope, and this eliminated the influential role that could have been played by the Bishop of . Another very plausible explanation is very simple and appallingly contemporary: somebody lost the paperwork. In other words, the documentation disappeared on its way from Mainz to Rome in 1243, and as a result the case for her canonization died. Nonetheless, Hildegard’s name appears on the Roman and her feast day, September 17th, was celebrated in the dioceses of Mainz, Trier, Speyer and Limburg.

The great theologians of the 13th and 14th centuries such as Albert the Great, and seem to know nothing of Hildegard. This may be partly due to the fact that the site of learning and theologizing had moved from relatively self-contained monasteries (where the women had the chance to learn to read) to urban universities where only male clerics could study and dispute with one another.1 The method used was also important: at the universities theologians applied the philosophical categories of Aristotle to try to make sense of the mysteries of the Christian faith, women’s ways of knowing, such as mystical experience and visions, fell into disrepute. Still, Hildegard seems to have been little remembered among later women mystics as well.

Popular interest in Hildegard grew up in Germany, particularly in the Rheingau, during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, particularly in the period after the secularization. Already in 1814 her writings including the Scivias had been transferred from Eibingen to the library in Wiesbaden where they were available to scholars who could use new methods of historical- critical scholarship to study them and publish critical editions of her work. Her relics which had been moved when Rupertsberg was destroyed in 1632 were returned and officially recognized by the Bishop of Limburg, then placed in a specially-built altar just as the relics of an official saint would be. In the 1930’s several academic studies of her visions were published.

So why now, in the early 21st century, is Hildegard both canonized and declared a Doctor? Not primarily because of her advanced scientific knowledge for her time, nor her visions, nor her music, nor for her knowledge of what we now call alternative medicine, although some of these traits were named in the formal Vatican ceremonies to fill out the total picture of Hildegard. The Vatican does not usually give reasons. The answer must be sought in the relevance, one might even say the utility, of Hildegard as a model in view of the particular challenges to the Christian faith, and/or to the Roman Catholic Church, today. In official acts of the Catholic Church one must read every news release and public discourse on at least two levels: the level of surface statements and official explanations, but also at the subterranean level,

1 Hans-Joachim Schmidt, “Geschichte und Prophetie: Rezeption der Texte Hildegards von Bingen im 13. Jahrhundert,“ in Hildegard von Bingen in ihrem historischen Unfeld ed. A. Haverkamp (Mainz: Verlag Phillipp von Zabern, 200) 489-517, as cited in Teresa Berger, Gender Differences and the Making of Liturgical History. Lifting a Veil on Liturgy’s Past (Farnham, Surrey and Burlington VT: Ashgate, 2012): 9-10. The thesis is that within decades after her death Hildegard was seen primarily as an oracle who predicted the future because of the shift from monasteries (male and female) to all-male universities. reading to find what is lying under the surface – perceived dangers, priorities, strategies and expected outcomes. Usually the intention is to set certain models before the laity, to influence the laity to hold certain ideas, to change certain other ideas, and to think and behave in certain ways. Often the intention seems to be to consolidate clerical power over the laity, or to project a good appearance to the media and the world at large in order to gain respect. One can discern what motivations may be driving certain initiatives by looking at the larger context of the times and simply by using one’s common sense.

The process, and especially the speed, owes much to Pope Benedict XVI but explicit evidence for his interest in Hildegard is sketchy and difficult to document. Ratzinger himself makes no reference to Hildegard anywhere in his bibliography pre-2005, the year he was elected to the papacy. The background research for his 1957 Habilitation dissertation, on the theology of St. Bonaventure, touched on medieval sources that came close to Hildegard and dealt with theology and , but he does not name her. An anonymous author claims in Wikipedia that Ratzinger studied the life and works of Hildegard intensely during his time as a professor in Bonn (1959-1963) but gives no references.2 Helmut Waldmann in a 2001 lecture points to a similarity between the concept of the church found in Hildegard’s Scivias and the declaration “Dominus Iesus” issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Ratzinger in 2000.3

In 1979 on the 800th anniversary of Hildegard’s death, the German bishops together with both German Catholic women’s organizations, the kfb (Katholische Frauengemeinschaft Deutschlands) and the kdfb (Katholische Deutsche Frauenbund), called for Hildegard to be declared a Doctor of the Church. The qualifications they named included not only her personal sanctity but also her outstanding achievements in theology, natural sciences and music. (The formal criteria for recognition as a Doctor of the Church do not include the latter two fields.) Although Rome’s reply was that this was not possible since Hildegard had never been canonized, during the celebrations Pope John Paul II referred to her as a “Saint.” At celebrations marking the 900th anniversary of her birth in 1998 Trier Bishop H. J. Spital called Hildegard one of the most important persons in the history of thought.

Interestingly, in a 1994 greeting address to an international symposium meeting in Wiesbaden, then-Cardinal Ratzinger claimed that the figure of Hildegard had fascinated him from the time of his youth.4 A few years into his pontificate, Benedict began to speak openly

2 http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hildegard_von_Bingen, accessed 22/01/2013.

3 “Die Erklärung Dominus Iesus und das darin ausgeprochene Verhältnis der katholischen Kirche zu den anderen Religionsgemeinschaften,“ in Hallesche Beiträge zur Orientalistik (HBO), 34, 2002, 347-357.

4 “Tiefe des Gotteswissens—Schönheit der Sprachgestalt bei Hildegard von Bingen. Internationales Symposium in der katholischen Akademie Rabanus Maurus, Wiesbaden-Naurod vom 9.12.September 1994, herausgegeben von about Hildegard’s achievements and virtues in the context of homilies and reflections given at the Vatican. In a 2006 interview he cited Hildegard as an example of a woman playing an appropriate role (curiously) by energetically denouncing the bishops and Pope of her day.5 In a series of talks about women’s contributions to the Church in 2010, he dedicated two addresses to Hildegard. The content of these talks suggests two possible motives drawn from the contemporary challenges facing the church for her quick elevation: that he is a worthy model for Catholics because of her great love for Christ and the Church, and because, although she denounced corruption in the church of her own time, she “reproached demands to subvert the very nature of the church” by calling for a sincere spirit of repentance, not structural change.

In 2010 the and the community at Eibingen renewed their call for Hildegard to be declared a Doctor. By then Benedict was actively promoting her cause. As of December 2011 rumors were reported in the press that Hildegard would soon be named a Doctor of the Church even though she was not yet canonized. In fact the Vatican had commissioned a working group of scholars, including three sisters of Eiblingen and three external researchers who spent a year developing the background and content of her case for canonization. Then events moved quickly partly because Pope Benedict, Joseph Ratzinger, made her case exempt from the requirement of a documented miraculous healing. Hildegard was officially canonized on 10 May 2012. The decree of canonization stated that her teaching and her daily life were in complete harmony, and her virtues were fully rooted in Scripture, the liturgy and the Fathers of the Church. Her intellectual gifts were deployed with constant obedience, simplicity, love and hospitality. Her visions and her abundant writings amount to a form of .

On 27 May () came the announcement that she would be declared a Doctor of the Church on October 7th along with the lesser-known John of Avila. Curiously, in the announcement Benedict called her “a true teacher of theology and a profound scholar of natural sciences and music.” To be designated a Doctor of the Church only the first of these three characteristics is significant.

The timing was not a coincidence: that Sunday marked the opening of a worldwide Synod of Bishops on the subject of the “New Evangelization,” a campaign to reintroduce Christianity into secularized Europe and to strengthen the adherence of the laity to the Catholic faith during the ongoing “Year of Faith.” October 2012 also marked the fiftieth anniversary of the start of the Second Vatican Council which led to the thorough renewal of many outdated aspects of Catholic Church life and worship, a renewal that has become more controversial in

Margot Schmidt. Cited in Hildegard Strickerschmidt, Geerdete Spiritualität bei Hildegard von Bingen: Neue Zugänge zu ihrer Heilkunde. Münster: LIT-Verlag, 2008: 4-5.

5 “Ich bin mir true geblieben,” interview August 5, 2006 in Castelgandolfo, http://www.papstbenedictxvi.ch/?m=22&s=O, accessed January 9, 2013. recent years because of differing interpretations about the original intentions of the Church hierarchy who participated in the Council.

What Benedict, actually said about Hildegard in his homily at the Mass in St. Peter’s Square on October 7th was the following: “Saint Hildegard of Bingen, an important female figure of the twelfth century, offered her precious contribution to the growth of the Church of her time, employing the gifts received from God and showing herself to be a woman of brilliant intelligence, deep sensitivity and recognized spiritual authority. The Lord granted her a prophetic spirit and fervent capacity to discern the signs of the times. Hildegard nurtured an evident love of creation, and was learned in medicine, poetry and music. Above all, she maintained a great and faithful love for Christ and his Church. This summary of the ideal in Christian life, expressed in the call to holiness, draws us to look with humility at the fragility, even sin, of many Christians, as individuals and as communities, which is a great obstacle to evangelization … Thus, we cannot speak of the new evangelization without a sincere desire for conversion.”6

At the end of that Mass, in his greeting to German pilgrims, he said, “Hildegard is a patron of good counsel. She committed her great knowledge to help people to live more harmoniously with God, our Creator and Saviour.”

All of these statements are appropriate, true and applicable. They avoid hyperbole and exuberant praise. But they also lack a certain specificity because most of them do not pertain to the formal criteria for the decision on the part of the Vatican, and the Pope in particular, to raise an individual to the unique dignity of a Doctor of the Church. These statements are not explanations of why Hildegard was proclaimed a Doctor of the Church, and why at this moment in history.

Perspectives and interpretations of Hildegard’s elevation to Doctor of the Church indicate a wide and often conflicting range of ideas, including the question of whether she represents a model of obedience and loyalty, or a model of prophetic denunciation of evil. Let us look briefly at a range of reactions on the part of different groups of Catholics to Hildegard’s new status. High praise comes from different directions with some very different interpretations of why Hildegard is significant and relevant today. Starting with what we could group together as representative of progressive, left or left-center, the Canadian “Catholic Network for Women’s Equality,” in a press release, point out, “She was a respected leader in the medieval church who did not hesitate to call both emperors and popes to account. ... her example of faith and courage serve as a role model for Catholic women everywhere who work for equality and justice.”7

6 http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2012/documents.hf_ben-xvi, accessed October 9, 2012.

7 Press release, Catholic Network for Women’s Equality (CNWE, www.cnwe.org/news/hildegard-of-bingen-named- doctor-of-the-church/ , accessed October 18, 2012. Other organizations promoting women’s equality in the Roman Church say much the same thing. Theologian Matthew Fox notes that there is no hint in the “vacuous Vatican announcement” as to the motives, considering that, as he says, “few of her perspectives parallel those of the misogynist Vatican today... Principal among her gifts is bringing back the Divine Feminine ... She not only immersed herself in the science of her time ... wrote the first opera ever in the West and composed 72 songs of rich musical originality, painted 36 paintings, a number of them mandalas, but she was also a healer and the author of ten books. And she critiqued the patriarchal powers of her day ... She preached in churches and monasteries all over Germany and Switzerland (today’s Pope forbids women to preach at all.)” Matthew Fox ends by asking, “Is Hildegard a Trojan Horse entering the gates of the Vatican?”8

Robert McClory, a veteran correspondent on Church affairs, writes in the U.S. National Catholic Reporter, “At a time when two ecumenical councils were dissolving the marriages of all priests and cutting adrift their wives and children, Hildegard was proclaiming the special dignity of women in her speeches, books and music. She was, in fact, so far ahead of her time that she was neither understood nor taken seriously by the hierarchy, thereby avoiding for most of her life sanction or investigation.” He cites a number of examples, including her belief “in opposition to church belief at the time, menstruation does not render a woman unclean, but the shedding of blood in war certainly renders a soldier unclean.” He concludes by saying, “In a speech he gave in 2010 Pope Benedict praised Hildegard, calling her a worthy role model for Catholics today. I hope many will follow his recommendation.”9

And a striking article appeared in the July-August 2012 issue of “Frau und Mutter,” the magazine of the Catholic German Women’s League, the “kdb.” (Germans here might be surprised that I include this with the center-left faction but in fact by North American standards, both German Catholic women’s organizations take quite progressive positions.) Author Nikola Hollmann writes of Hildegard’s cosmological theology and her very modern understanding of the human person as a unity of mind, soul and body. Similarly, Hildegard understood in a modern way that every human action influences the cosmos, and can tip the world’s balance: her last shows Caritas, Love, in the form of a woman sitting at the axis of the world and holding it in balance. Yet Hollmann writes of Hildegard’s strong denunciation of clerical greed in the cathedral chapter in Cologne, saying “if anyone spoke this way today to the Pope or the bishops, he – more properly she – would certainly be declared insane.”10

8 Matthew Fox, “Celebrating Hildegard of Bingen, Doctor of the Church, Herald of the Divine Feminine,” www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-fox/hildegard-of-bingen-doctor-of-the-church.html, accessed October 18, 2012.

9 Robert McClory, “Hildegard of Bingen: No Ordinary Saint,” http://ncronline.org/print/blogs/ncr-today/hildegard- bingen-no-ordinary-saint accessed May 24, 2012

10 “In der Mitte der Mensch,” in Frau und Mutter nr 07.08/2012, pp 4-5. Praise tempered with backhanded sideswipes characterizes more conservative or right- wing commentaries. The periodical “First Things” claims that Benedict “might wish us to learn from St. Hildegard” to denounce heresy, because she was “a religious also sincerely loyal to the institutional, hierarchical Church, opposing the Gnostic Cathar heretics as well as would-be popemaker Frederick Barbarossa, the Holy Roman Emperor. Benedict praised her for this ... saying that ‘the seal of an authentic experience of the Holy Spirit, the source of every charism’ such as St. Hildegard received shows above all ‘complete obedience to the ecclesial authority.’” Author Leroy Huizenga adds, “Although an implacable enemy of heresy, St. Hildegard was also behind and ahead of her times regarding the punishment of heretics. Although the burning of heretics occurred in her own time and place...” she pleaded, “’do not burn them, for they are in God’s image.’” Further, Huizenga writes, “Hildegard’s vision of the cosmos and man’s place therein is integral, seeing man as microcosm of the macrocosm ... in this she is an antecedent of Pope Benedict’s repeated call for an ‘ecology of man’ that seeks to understand and promote the location of the human person in his rightful place within the ecology of nature, from which modern man is so severely estranged.”11

A writer identified only as Tess at the site “thefemininegift.org” gives a good general introduction to Hildegard, noting that “She received many visions from childhood on, and as she wrote them down, she explained them with biblical exegesis – of all her accomplishments this especially made her a remarkable woman in her time. Unfortunately, St. Hildegard has been adopted by feminists and new age devotees alike. If you are interested in learning more about this remarkable woman, choose your sources very carefully.” Tess then adds a hotlink to the 1910 Catholic Encyclopedia.12

The Catholic Culture site elaborates on that warning, ending its account of Hildegard by adding in italics, “Please note that some care must be taken in selecting books about St. Hildegard, or even editions of her writings, because she has attracted unfortunate attention in our own day from those who are devoted to the New Age or Wicca, owing to her great interest in nature and natural remedies. The wayward Dominican Matthew Fox ... is a case in point. Such editions frequently distort St. Hildegard’s spiritual teachings, viewing her through eyes closed to her profoundly Catholic message of redemption and .”13

11 Leroy Huizenga, “St. Hildegard of Bingen, doctor of the Church,” http://www.firstthings.com/print/onthesquare/2012/10/st-hildegard-of-bingen-doctor-of-the-church.html, accessed October 18, 2012.

12 http://www.thefemininegift.org/2012/10/st-hildegard-of-bingen-doctor-of-the-church.html The reason why the reference to the 1910 Catholic Encyclopedia is ironic is because some of the text was altered before it was put online. This source itself is untrustworthy.

13 http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=1015 accessed October 18, 2012. Interestingly a commentary in “Christ in der Gegenwart” considers the conferring of the title Doctor of the Church to be a challenge and raises some interesting questions. Was she basically ignored until the current Pope because she was a woman, or because her visions were difficult to grasp, or because previous Popes could not recognize how the “teaching” of this medieval seer in its content could be made fruitful for the Church in a completely different, modern world? She was locked into her own medieval worldview – it could not have been otherwise. But that means that the new Teacher does not bring a new teaching. Why doesn’t the Church find the courage to name as Doctors men and women from the recent past or the present, who have sought to find answers to burning spiritual and existential questions of today?14

Several commentators drew parallels with the widespread of clergy sexual abuse of children in the recent past and today. Benedict drew out certain threads of Hildegard’s life and actions in the face of corruption of the clergy in her own time to match the Vatican’s official response to calls for reform in response to the scandal and horror in many countries at the numerous instances of molestation of children by priests they and their families trusted. In his weekly general audience in the Vatican on 8 September 2010 he called Hildegard “a great nun” who used her gifts to “work for the renewal of the church.” Benedict said that in her time there were calls for radical reform of the church to fight the problems of various kinds of abuses on the part of the clergy. He says, she “bitterly reproached demands to subvert the very nature of the church” because “a true renewal of the ecclesial community is not achieved so much with a change in the structures as much as with a sincere spirit of penitence” and conversion. This reflects clearly the Vatican position that no examination of clerical culture or reform of church structures is necessary to deal with the international abuse scandals. The individual priest must repent and do penance.

To conclude, let us remind ourselves of what makes the figure of Hildegard shine today. She was indeed a gifted genius who, in spite of often incapacitating sickness left abundant gifts of insight and understanding to those who lived after her. She was, and remains, the only woman of her time to be accorded recognition as an authoritative interpreter of , as well as an original theologian. Everyone who participated in the First International Conference of the Scivias-Institut, and those who will read what we write and hear what we present, can find tremendous richness, depth and strength in whichever aspects we choose to highlight of the many-sided Hildegard whose authority we trust, and celebrate.

14 CIG-Redaktion, “Kommentar: Kirchenlehrer(in),” Christ in der Gegenwart 64 (October 2012), 1.