Susan K. Roll Hildegard of Bingen: a Doctor of the Church On October 7, 2012, I was privileged to be present at the outdoor papal Mass at the Vatican in which Hildegard of Bingen 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 Catholic Church 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, Catherine of Siena 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 Catholic theology 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 saint 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 Ambrose of Milan, Augustine, Jerome 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, John Chrysostom, 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 Reformation 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 Mainz. 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 Martyrology 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, Thomas Aquinas and Bonaventure 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 state 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.