Common section

Selected Latin Sermons

SERMON 1 (LW XXIV, 2)

Domus mea domus orationis est (Luke 19:46)

‘My house is a house of prayer.’

Put the words in the following order: the house of prayer is my house. ‘House’ means freedom from passions. First note how far passion ranks below the soul according to its nature, as has been said in the previous sermon on ‘Be merciful’ (Luke 6:36), and thus how shameful it is to be in its power. Secondly, note the stillness of the soul. The reason for this is that the Word in which and through which and through whose descent into the soul the Father acts, is ‘without sound’, according to Augustine,1 ‘while everything preserved a deep silence’, that is all that possesses being, life and knowledge (Wisd. 18:14–15). Therefore no hammer could be heard when the temple was being built (1 Kgs. 6:7).

‘Of prayer’. Observe that when we listen or read, God speaks to us. But when we pray, we speak to God. Note that in the opinion of the theologians the lower angels speak to the higher but do not illumine them. But when we look carefully, everyone who speaks is above those who listen in this respect and comes first. We can see therefore how far the soul must be raised up and exalted if she is to speak to God. Explain how this exaltation can only be achieved through humility. For in the projection of a sphere on to a flat surface, the pole and the central point coincide. Say how we should pray like the apostle ‘in spirit and mind’ (1 Cor. 14:15) in such a way that you cast yourself down, together with all the failings of the present world, at the feet of God and, secondly, that you offer yourself with all the merits and light of the Mother of God and all the saints and, thirdly, that you present yourself to God in the Word itself, in that purity, for only there are all things pleasing: ‘in you I am well pleased’ (Luke 3:22).

Take note of this: every departure from God means dissimilarity and thus conflict and impurity. See John 4:24: ‘In the spirit’, meaning ‘in the Holy Spirit’ and ‘in truth’, meaning ‘we should pray’ in the Son. ‘For even the father seeks such people’. Note that it says ‘seeks’. Whatever is sought is something higher, at least in principle. The soul must strip herself of all things therefore so that, made bare, she can seek God as he is bare in himself and not anything which is in him.

The second principal point to be noted is that according to John Damascene prayer is ‘the ascent of the intellect to God’.2 Therefore the intellect does not touch God unless it first rises up. Rising up means advancing to a higher state. Accordingly, the intellect must transcend not only the dimension of the imagination but also that of the intellect. Further, since the intellect refers everything to being, it must also transcend being. For being is not the cause of being, just as fire is not the cause of fire, but that is rather something far higher, to which it must ascend.

Moreover, the intellect receives God in the clothing of truth, and thus it must rise higher. Therefore it is said ‘to God’. But then the soul must also transcend God himself, in so far as he is concealed by this name, or by any name.

Thirdly, since the intellect, as its very name suggests, proceeds from externality to inferiority, unlike the will, and in accordance with its nature abstracts from all that comes to it from outside itself, therefore its ascent is its entrance into the primal root of the purity of all beings, which is in the Word. Observe therefore: ‘ascent of the intellect’. In the Book of Wisdom (1:5) it is said that ‘the Holy Spirit withdraws from all reflections that occur without the aid of the intellect’. Reflection means movement and running from one point to the next. Further, reflection without the intellect is imagination and is bound to corporal conditions, such as images and the like. ‘Ascent of the intellect’, for God properly dwells in the substance of the soul. But this is higher than the intellect. The greatest thing of all is to be capable of knowing God and of receiving him: ‘Israel, how great is the house of God’ (Baruch 3:24).

‘My house’. Note first that the house of God is the essence of the soul into which only God, in his naked being, can descend. Discuss the point here that he descends into the soul when the powers of the mind have first been purged of sense impressions. Avicenna has a different understanding of this, which you should discuss.

Secondly, note that it is the higher reason that is the house of God. That is why the ‘buyers and sellers’ are ejected from it (Matt. 21:12). In the first place, because the work of virtue and the work of love are not a matter of profit. Secondly, because peace and silence reign where the Father speaks the Word ‘soundlessly’. Temporal things, which are linked to movement, belong to the lower reason.

Note thirdly that the intellect grasps God more fully and in a truer and nobler manner than the whole of the natural world, and yet every creature lives and remains in being because it grasps something of him. It is precisely for this reason that every creature seeks to become like him. Show that this is particularly true of the heavens.3

Fourthly, note that according to Plato the soul is immortal since she can know Wisdom.4 How much more shall she be immortal if she can know God! Therefore every cognitive faculty from the family of the intellect is beyond suffering and is accordingly from and in itself immortal.

SERMON 2 (LW XXIX)

The Thirteenth Sunday after Trinity. On the Epistle Gal. 3:16–22.

Deus unus est

‘God is one’.5

‘God’. Anselm says: God is that being than which nothing better can be thought.6 In the eleventh chapter of the first book of On Christian Doctrine Augustine says: ‘we think of the highest God as that in comparison with which there is nothing better or higher’.7Later he adds: ‘we will find no one who holds God to be a being in comparison with which there can be anything better’.8 In the fifth book of On Contemplation Bernard asks: ‘What is God? That being in comparison with which nothing better can be conceived’,9 and Seneca in the prologue to his Questions on Natural Science asks: ‘What is God? All that you see and all that you cannot see. Thus the greatness attributed to him is such that nothing greater can be conceived.’10

God is infinite in his simplicity and simple in his infinity. Therefore he is everywhere and is everywhere complete. He is everywhere on account of his infinity, and is everywhere complete on account of his simplicity. Only God flows into all things, their very essences. Nothing else flows into something else. God is in the innermost part of each and every thing, only in its innermost part, and he alone is one.

It should be noted that every creature in God loves the One and loves God for the sake of the One and loves God because he is the One. In the first place, because all that is loves likeness to God and seeks it out. But likeness is a certain kind of unity or the unity of certain things.11

Secondly, in the One there is never any suffering, pain or grief, not even proneness to suffering or mortality.

Thirdly, all things are contained in the One, by virtue of the fact that it is one, for all multiplicity is one and is one thing and is in and through the One.

And fourthly, we would not love power, wisdom, goodness as such, not even being, if these were not one with us and we with them.

Fifthly, they who truly love can love only one thing. Accordingly, the phrase ‘God is one’ is followed by: ‘you should love the Lord your God with all your heart’ (Deut. 6:5). And, without doubt, no one who loves desires that the object of their love should be anything but one.

In the sixth place, lovers wish to be united with the beloved. This is impossible if the latter is not one. Furthermore, God unites things with himself only because he is one and only in so far as he is one. Indeed, he must unite all things, uniting them with and in himself on the grounds that he is himself one.

In the seventh place, the One is indistinct from all things. Therefore all things and the fullness of being are in the One by virtue of its indistinction and unity.

In the eighth place, note that the One in its most proper sense refers to perfection and to the whole, for which reason, again, it lacks nothing.

In the ninth place, note that the One, according to its own essence, refers to being itself or to essence – that is to a single essence. For even essence is always one, so that union and uniting are appropriate to it on the grounds of its unity.

Further, it should be noted that someone who truly loves God as the One and for the sake of the One and of oneness, is not at all concerned with his omnipotence or wisdom, for these things are multiple and refer to multiplicity. They are not even concerned with his goodness in general, since this refers to externality, to what is in things, and since goodness is a form of adhering, as we read in the Psalm: ‘For me it is good to cleave to God’ (Ps. 73:28).

In the tenth place, note that the One is higher, prior and simpler than goodness itself, that it is closer to being itself and to God or rather, according to its name, is one being with being.

In the eleventh place, God is overflowingly rich because he is one. He is the first and the highest because he is one. Therefore the One descends into everything and into each single thing, yet remaining the One that unites what is distinct. That is why six is not twice three but six times one.

‘Hear, O Israel, your God is one God’ (Deut. 6:4). Note that unity or oneness appears to be the distinguishing characteristic only of the intellect, since it is evident with regard to material things that they are both one and not one in that they possess dimensionality or are at least compounded of matter and form. Non-material or spiritual entities, on the other hand, are not one either because essence and being are not identical in them or perhaps even more because thought and being are not identical in them. They are compounded of being and essence or of being and thought. See the explanation of the final proposition in The Book of Causes. Therefore it is well said: ‘Your God is one God’, the God of Israel, the God who sees, the God of those who see, which means to say the God who understands and who can be grasped only by the intellect, and who is in himself all intellect.

‘God is one’. It should be noted that this can be understood in two different ways. Firstly as: God, the One, is. He possesses being precisely because he is one, which means that he is his own being, that he is pure being, and that he is the being of all things. Secondly in this way: Your God is one God, meaning that nothing else is truly one, since nothing created is pure being or is in itself wholly intellect. If it were, it would no longer be capable of being created. Moreover, I ask with respect to every thing whether or not it has intellect or thought in it. If not, then it is clear that this, which lacks intellect, is not God or the First Cause of all things which have so evidently been created to a particular end. But if there is intellect in it, then I ask whether there is being in it as well as thought. If not, then I instantly know that it is a simple One, and moreover that it cannot be created, but is the First Cause and so on, and is thus God. But if it possesses any being which is distinct from its thought, then it is compounded and is not simply one. It is evident therefore that God alone truly is and that he is intellect or thought and that he is thought alone to which no other being is added. Therefore only God calls things into being through the intellect for only in him are intellect and being identical. Further, it is clear that nothing besides him can be pure thought, but rather possesses a being which is distinct from thought. Otherwise such a thing would not be a creature, since thought cannot be created and since being is ‘the first of all created things’.12

On the basis of what has been said, observe that all that is a consequence of the One, or of oneness, such as identity, likeness, image, relation and the like, are properly to be found only in God or in divinity. Accordingly, Augustine says in the fifty-third chapter of On True Religion: ‘but true identity or likeness and true, primal unity are not seen with physical eyes or with the aid of another sense but are seen by the intellect’.13

The reason for this is firstly that identity and likeness and so forth are consequent upon oneness and this, as we have said, is a property peculiar to God.

Secondly, all these signify unity in multiplicity. But this can never occur anywhere but in the intellect and even here it is more thought than existent. Therefore where being is not thought, there can never be identity. But only in God are being and thought identical.

Thirdly, two entities which are similar or identical cannot be identity itself or similarity itself, and so on with the other qualities.

Fourthly, nowhere in the world can there be two wholly identical objects, nor indeed two that are alike in all respects. For then they would no longer be two objects nor would they be capable of comparison with each other.

Fifthly, outside the intellect we only ever find diversity, distinction and the like: ‘But you are always the same’ (Ps. 102:27). Identity is therefore oneness.

From what has been said we can see how it is that ‘whoever cleaves to God is one spirit with him’ (1 Cor. 6:17). The intellect is properly of God, and God is one. Something possesses God, the One and oneness with God therefore to the extent that it possesses intellect or the intellectual. For the one God is intellect, and intellect is the one God. Therefore God is never and nowhere God except in intellect. Augustine says in the fifteenth chapter of the tenth book of his Confessions: ‘where I found truth, there I found my God, who is truth itself’.14 To rise up to the intellect, subordinating ourselves to it, is to be united with God. To be united, to be one, is to be one with God. For God is one God, and all being besides or outside intellect is a creature, or is subject to creation, and is something other than God, is not God. For in God there is no other.

Act and potency are the ontological divisions in all created existence. But being is the first reality, and thus the first division. But in intellect, in God, there is no division. Thus Scripture always urges us to abandon the world, to abandon ourselves, to forget our house and the house of our birth, our land and our relations, in order that we may grow to be a great people in which all peoples are blessed (cf. Gen. 12:1–3). This is brought about most excellently in the domain of the intellect where, in so far as they are intellect and nothing else, all things are without doubt in all things.

SERMON 3 (XL, 3)

Quid vobis videtur de Christo? Cuius filius est? (Matt. 22:42)

‘What do you think of Christ? Whose son is he?’

Christ, anointed with grace, whose son is he? The answer is: ‘David’s son’. But Peter says: ‘the son of the living God’ (Matt. 16:16). Whose son therefore is the soul that has been anointed with grace? Certainly David’s son, either according to the promise – ‘one of the sons of your body I shall set upon the throne’ (Ps. 132:11) and similar passages – or according to the meaning of the name. David means ‘lovely to look upon’ (cf. 1 Sam. 17:42) or ‘with a strong hand’. Treat this theme. Secondly, the grace-filled soul is ‘the son of the living God’.

Take note: everything active has an effect which is as similar to itself as possible. Indeed, it actually works another self so that the birth of a female is against the intention of the one who reproduces.15 And if there were neither matter, nor time, nor space, then what works and what is wrought, what produces and what is produced would be one and the same. See therefore how great is the likeness between the soul and God, and how great her sonship in God when she is raised above time. Discuss all this and point to the example of the soul’s faculties in which the cognitive image of the object is produced, or indeed to the production of an echo.

We find a reference to this in the first part of the text: ‘you should love the Lord your God’ (Deut. 6:5). It is well said: ‘from the whole of your heart’. The heart is the principle of temporal and corporal life. God should be loved from out of the heart, which means from outside and above all that is temporal and corporal, but in the ‘whole of the soul’, which means in the innermost part of the whole soul. Alternatively ‘in the whole soul’ can mean: with respect to all the faculties of the soul which are linked to a physical organ, not only in so far as they are directed outwards towards bodies and actions but also in so far as they are directed within, towards the substance and being of the soul from which they emerged. Therefore there follows: ‘in the whole mind’. The image of God is in the mind.16 Further, the mind is of an intellectual nature and is above time. But it is said: ‘in the mind’ and not ‘from the mind’. This is because the soul must be altogether firm and enclosed so that the image of God can be produced in her like a mountain which produces an echo, so that she is not only a daughter but is herself fertile and attains a yet greater likeness to God.

SERMON 4 (LW XLVII, 2)

Hoc oro, ut caritas vestra magis ac magis abundet (Phil. 1)

‘I pray that your love shall overflow more and more.’

Note concerning prayer that there are nine things that we should bear in mind with respect to the words of prayer.17 Firstly, they have God as their object and receive their character from him. Secondly, they have been given us by God through Holy Scripture which was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and thus something divine has been stamped upon them. Thirdly, they express something of God and commend it to us, namely his mercy, his justice and so forth, his paternal nature and his love. Fourthly, the name of God is often uttered in prayer, which is sweet on the lips of those who love and is potent for those who are in need. Fifthly, prayer is a conversation with God, and lovers take great delight in converse that is intimate and secret. In the sixth place, the words of prayer often bring us to see our personal failings, as well as those of human nature, so that we are humbled in ourselves. In the seventh place, the vanity, falsity and inconstancy of the world are frequently considered and recalled, which creates in us a disdain for the world. In the eighth place, the misery of the damned or of sinners is sometimes brought to mind. In the ninth place, the blessedness of the saints is often evoked, thus awakening our desire.

ABBREVIATIONS

DP Quint, J., Meister Eckbart: deutscbe Predigten und Traktate (Munich, 1963).

DW German Works. Meister Eckhart: die deutscben und lateiniscben Werke (Stuttgart and Berlin, Kohlhammer Verlag, 1936–).

J Jostes, F. (ed.), Meister Eckbart und seine Jünger: ungedruckte zur Geschichte der deutscben Mystik (Freiburg, Switzerland, 1895; repr. De Gruyter, 1972).

LW Latin works. Meister Eckbart: die deutscben und lateiniscben Werke (Stuttgart and Berlin, Kohlhammer Verlag, 1936–).

PF Pfeiffer, F. (ed.), Meister Eckbart (Deutsche Mystiker des Mittelalters Bd. 2) (Leipzig, 1857; repr. Scientia Verlag, Aalen, 1962).

PL Migne, J. P. (ed.), Patrologia Latina (Paris, 1844–64).

W Walshe, M. O’C, Meister Eckhart: German Sermons and Treatises, 3 vols. (London and Dulverton, Element Books, 1979, 1981 and 1985).

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

This bibliography contains only the most important works on Eckhart. More complete bibliographies can be found in Degenhardt (1967), Schaller (1968 and 1969), O’Meara (1978), Fues (1981), Sturlese (1987) and Largier (1989).

Texts

Meister Eckhart: Die deutschen und lateinischen Werke, hrsg., im Auftrage der deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft (Stuttgart and Berlin, Kohlhammer Verlag, 1936– ).

Jostes, F. (ed.), Meister Eckhart und seine Jünger: ungedruckte zur Geschichte der deutschen Mystik (Freiburg, Switzerland, 1895; repr. De Gruyter, 1972).

Pfeiffer, F. (ed.), Meister Eckhart (Deutsche Mystiker des Mittelalters Bd. 2) (Leipzig, 1857; repr. Scientia Verlag, Aalen, 1962).

Historical Documents

Daniels, A. (ed.), ‘Eine lateinische Rechtfertigungsschrift des Meister Eckharts’ in Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters 23, 5 (Münster, 1923).

Kaepelli, Th. (ed.), ‘Kurze Mitteilungen über mittelalterliche Dominikanerschriftsteller’ in Archivum fratrum Praedicatorum 10 (1940), pp. 293–4.

Kaepelli, Th. (ed.), ‘Praedicator monoculus. Sermons parisiens de la fin du XIIIe siècle’ in Archivum fratrum Praedicatorum 27 (1957), pp. 120–67.

Kaepelli, Th. (ed.), ‘Eine Kölner Handschrift mit lateinischen Eckhart Exzerpten’ in Archivum fratrum Praedicatorum 31 (1961), pp. 204–12.

Laurent, M. H., ‘Autour du procès de Maître Eckhart: Les documents des Archives Vaticanes’ in Divus Thomas ser. III, 13 (1936), pp. 331–48, 430–47.

Pelster, F. (ed.), ‘Ein Gutachten aus dem Eckehart-Prozess in Avignon’ in Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters, suppl. vol. III, 2 (Münster, 1935), pp. 1099–1124 (Festschrift for M. Grabmann, vol. 2).

Théry, G. (ed.), ‘Edition critique des pièces relatives au procès d’Eckhart continues dans le manuscrit 33b de la bibliothèque de Soest’ in Archives d’histoire doctrinale et litteraire du moyen âge 1 (1926), pp. 129–268.

English Translations

Blakney, R. B., Meister Eckhart (New York, Harper & Row, 1941).

Clark, J. M., Meister Eckhart: an Introduction to the Study of his Works with an Anthology of his Sermons (Edinburgh, Nelson, 1957).

Clark, J. M., and Skinner, J. V., Treatises and Sermons of Meister Eckhart (New York, Harper & Row, 1958).

Colledge, E., and McGinn, B., Meister Eckhart: the Essential Sermons, Commentaries, Treatises and Defence (New York, Paulist Press, 1981).

Davies, O., The Rhineland Mystics: an anthology (London, SPCK, 1989; New York, Crossroad, 1990).

Evans, C. de B., Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer, 2 vols. (London, 1924 and 1931).

Fleming, U., Meister Eckhart: the Man from whom God nothing hid (London, Fount, 1988) (based on C. de B. Evans’s translation).

Fox, M., Breakthrough: Meister Eckhart’s Creation Spirituality in New Translation (New York, Image Books, 1980).

Maurer, A., Master Eckhart: Parisian Questions and Prologues (Toronto, Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1974).

McGinn, B., with Tobin, F., and Borgstadt, E., Meister Eckhart: Teacher and Preacher (Classics of Western Spirituality, London, SPCK; New York, Paulist Press, 1986).

Walshe, M. O’C., Meister Eckhart: German Sermons and Treatises, 3 vols. (London and Dulverton, Element Books, 1979, 1981 and 1985).

The most authoritative translation of the German sermons and treatises is that by M. O’C. Walshe, while A. Maurer and B. McGinn provide good translations of the Latin prologues, Parisian questions and biblical commentaries.

Secondary Literature

BOOKS

Albert, K., Meister Eckharts, These vont Sein: Untersuchungen zur Metapbysik des Opus Tripartitum (Saarbrücken, 1976).

Breton, S., Deux mystiques de l’excès (Paris, 1985).

Brunner, F., Maître Eckhart (Paris, 1969).

Caputo, J., The Mystical Element in Heidegger’s Thought (Ohio, 1978).

Cognet, L., Introduction aux mystiques rhéno-flamands (Paris, 1968).

Davies, O., God Within: The Mystical Tradition of Northern Europe (London, Darton, Longman and Todd; New York, Paulist Press, 1988).

Davies, O., Meister Eckhart: Mystical Theologian (London, SPCK, 1991).

Degenhardt, I., Studien zum Wandel des Eckhartbildes (Leiden, 1967).

Fischer, H., Meister Eckhart (Freiburg and Munich, Verlag Karl Alber, 1974).

Flasch, K. (ed.), Von Meister Dietrich zu Meister Eckhart (Hamburg, 1984).

Forman, R. K. C., Meister Eckhart: Mystic as Theologian (Massachusetts, Dorset, Element Books, 1991).

Fues, W. M., Mystik als Erkenntnis? Kritische Studien zur Meister Eckhart-Forschung (Bonn, 1981) (with thematic bibliography).

Haas, A. M., Sermo mysticus: Studien zu Theologie und Sprache der deutschen Mystik (Freiburg, Switzerland, 1979).

Haas, A. M., and Stirnimann, H., Das ‘Einig Ein’ (Freiburg, Switzerland, 1980).

Haas, A. M., Geistliches Mittelalter (Freiburg, Switzerland, 1984).

Haas, A. M., Gott leiden, Gott lieben (Frankfurt am Main, Insel Verlag, 1989a).

Haas, A. M., Deum mistice videre… in caligine coincidencie: Zum Verhältnis Nikolaus’ von Cues zur Mystik (Basel and Frankfurt am Main, 1989b).

Kelley, C. F., Meister Eckhart on Divine Knowledge (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1977).

Koch, J., Kleine Schriften I (Rome, 1973).

La mystique rhénane: colloque de Strasbourg (Paris, 1963).

Langer, O., Mystische Erfahrung und spirituelle Theologie (Munich, 1987).

Largier, N., Bibliographie zu Meister Eckhart (Freiburg, Switzerland, 1989).

Libera, A. de, Le problème de l’être chez Maître Eckhart: logique et métaphysique de l’analogie (Geneva—Lausanne—Neuchâtel, 1980).

Libera, A. de, Introduction à la mystique rhénane (Paris, O.E.I.L., 1984).

Lossky, V., Théologie négative et connaissance de Dieu chez Maître Eckhart (Paris, 1960).

McDonnell, E., The Beguines and Beghards in Medieval Culture (New York, 1969).

Mieth, D., Die Einheit von Vita activa und Vita contemplativa in den deutschen Predigten und Traktaten Meister Eckharts und bei Johannes Tauler (Regensburg, 1969).

Mojsisch, B., Meister Eckhart. Analogie, Univozität und Einheit (Hamburg, 1983).

Quint, J., Die Überlieferung der deutschen Predigten Meister Eckharts (Bonn, 1932).

Ruh, K. (ed.), Altdeutsche und altniederländische Mystik (Darmstadt, 1964).

Ruh, K., Meister Eckhart: Theologe, Prediger, Mystiker (Munich, 1985 (19892)).

Schürmann, R., Master Eckhart: Mystic and Philosopher (Bloomington and London, 1978).

Seppanen, L., Meister Eckeharts Konzeption der Sprachbedeutung (Tübingen, 1985).

Smith, C., Meister Eckhart: The Way of Paradox (London, Darton, Longman and Todd, 1988).

Soudek, E., Meister Eckhart (Stuttgart, Metzler, 1973).

Tobin, P., Meister Eckhart: Thought and Language (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1986).

Trusen, W., Der Prozess gegen Meister Eckhart (Paderborn, Schöningh, 1988).

Tugwell, S., Albert and Thomas: Selected Writings (New York, Paulist Press, 1988).

Woods, R., Eckhart’s Way (Delaware, Michael Glazier, 1982; London, Darton, Longman and Todd, 1987).

Zum Brunn, E., and Libera, A. de, Métaphysique du verbe et théologie négative (Paris, 1984).

ARTICLES

Albrecht, E., ‘Zur Herkunft Meister Eckharts’ in Amtsblatt der Evangeliscb-Lutheriscben Kirche in Thüringen Jg. 31, nr. 3, 10 (February 1978).

Brunner, F., ‘L’analogie chez Maître Eckhart’ in Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie 16 (1969), pp. 333–49.

Colledge, E., and Marler, J. C, ‘“Poverty of the will”: Ruusbroec, Eckhart and “The Mirror of Simple Souls”’ in Mommaers, P., and de Paepe, N. (eds.), Jan van Russbroec: the sources, content and sequels of his mysticism (Louvain, 1984), pp. 14–47.

Davies, O., ‘Why were Meister Eckhart’s propositions condemned?’ in New Blackfriars 71 (October 1990), pp. 433–45.

Davies, O., ‘Hildegard of Bingen, Mechthild of Magdeburg and the young Meister Eckhart’ in Mediävistik 4 (1991).

Flasch, K., ‘Die Intention Meister Eckharts’ in Röttges, Scheer and Simon (eds.), Festschrift für Bruno Liebrucks (Meisenheim, Glan, 1974), p. 292–318.

Flasch, K., ‘Kennt die mittelalterliche Philosophie die konstitutive Funktion des menschlichen Denkens?’ in Kant-Studien 63 (1972), pp. 182–206.

Haas, A. M., ‘Die Problematik von Sprache und Erfahrung in der deutschen Mystik’ in Grundfragen derMystik (Einsiedeln, 1974), pp. 73–104.

Haas, A. M., ‘Schools of Late Medieval Mysticism’ in Raitt, J. (ed.), Christian Spirituality: High Middle Ages and Reformation (London, Routledge, 1987), pp. 140–75.

Löser, F., ‘Als ich mê gesprochen hân’ in Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 115 (1986), pp. 206–27.

McGinn, B., ‘Meister Eckhart’s condemnation reconsidered’ in The Thomist 44 (1980), pp. 390–414.

McGinn, B., ‘Meister Eckhart on God as Absolute Unity’, in O’Meara, D. (ed.), Neoplatonism and Christian Thought (Albany, State University of New York Press, 1982), pp. 128–39.

O’Meara, Th. F. et al, ‘An Eckhart Bibliography’ in The Thomist 42 (1978), pp. 313–36.

Quint, J., ‘Die Sprache Meister Eckharts als Ausdruck seiner mystischen Geisteswelt’ in Deutsche Vierteljabrsscbrift für Literaturwissenscbaft und Geistesgescbicbte 6 (1928), pp. 671–701.

Schaller, T., ‘Die Meister-Eckhart Forschung von der Jahrhundert-wende bis zur Gegenwart’ in Freiburger Zeitscbrift für Philosophie und Theologie 15 (1968), pp. 262–316, 403–26.

Schaller, T., ‘Zur Eckhart-Deutung der letzten 30 Jahre’ in Freiburger Zeitscbrift für Philosophie und Theologie 16 (1969), pp. 22–39.

Steer, G., ‘Germanistische Scholastikforschung: ein Bericht’ in Theologie und Philosophie 45 (1970), pp. 204–26; 46 (1971), pp. 195–222 ; 48 (1973), pp. 65–106.

Steer, G., ‘Der Prozess Meister Eckharts und die Folgen’ in Literaturwissenschaftlicbes Jabrbuch 27 (1986), pp. 47–64.

Steer, G., ‘Meister Eckhart– Predigten in Handschriften des 14. Jahrhunderts’ in Honemann, V., and Palmer, N. (eds.), Deutsche Handschriften 1100–1400, Oxforder Colloquium 1985 (Tübingen, 1988), pp. 399–407.

Stötzel, G., ‘Zum Nominalstil Meister Eckharts’ in Wirkendes Wort 16 (1966), pp. 289–309.

Sturlese, L., ‘Recenti studi su Eckhart’ in Giornale critico della filosofa italiana an. LXVI, fasc. II (Florence, 1987), pp. 368–77.

Sturlese, L., ‘Mystik und Philosophie in der Bildlehre Meister Eckharts’ in Festschrift W. Haug und B. Wacbinger, vol. 1 (Tübingen, 1992, pp. 349–61.

A REGISTER OF THE GERMAN SERMONS

W

DW

DP

PF

B

FOX

EV

CS

CL

SCH

OD

1

 

57

1

1

           

2

 

58

2

2

         

24

3

   

3

3

           

4

 

59

4

4

17

       

25

5

65

 

5

             

6

1

1

6

13

32

   

i

 

12

7

76

35

7

 

23

     

p.131

 

8

2

2

8

24

20

   

ii

p.3

13

9

86

28

9

 

34

1,2

     

21

10

25

38

10

17

16

2,11

 

iii

   

11

26

49

11

         

p.55

 

12

27

50

12

 

22

         

13a

5a

           

xxii

 

19

13b

5b

6

13

5

14

         

14a

16a

               

20

14b

16b

 

14

       

iv

   

15

 

44

15

             

16

29

29

74

21

25

         

17

28

31

81

20

         

3

18

30

43

66

 

2

 

p.58

 

p.181

4

19

71

37

19

         

p.122

 

20

44

 

20

             

21

17

 

21

       

v

   

22

53

 

22

 

1

       

5

23

47

23

 

7

           

24a

13

           

xxiii

   

24b

13

                 

25

3

 

25

9

     

vi

   

24b

13a

 

24

             

25

3

 

25

9

     

vi

   

26

57

       

2,45

       

27

34

 

27

             

28

78

 

28

             

29

38

 

29

     

1,29 & 2,27

   

2

30

45

 

30

             

31

37

 

31

             

32a

20a

 

32

       

vii

   

32b

20b

                 

33

 

35

33

             

34

55

 

34

             

35

19

 

35

       

viii

   

36

18

 

36

       

ix

   

37

   

37

             

38

36a

 

38

             

39

36b

                 

40

4

4

40

19

29

   

x

   

41

70

53

41

             

42

69

40

42

15

     

xi

 

23

43

41

46

43

   

2,12

     

9

44

58

                 

45

60

45

45

 

27

       

6

46

54b

 

46

             

47

46

 

47

             

48

31

47

               

49

77

                 

50

14

           

xxv

   

51

15

     

11

   

xxi

   

52

32

30

 

14

           

53

22

23

88

       

xxiii

   

54

23

                 

55

62

48

55

             

56

 

26

56

27

3

   

xii

 

27

57

 

12

13

96

     

xx

 

16

58

26

27

58

   

2,13

       

59

39

25

59

 

33

 

p.53

   

10

60

48

34

60

           

70

61

   

61

             

62

82

54

62

             

63

40

 

63

           

11

64

81

 

64

 

26

         

65

6

7

65

18

     

xiii

   

66

10

11

83

       

xvi

 

15

67

9

10

84

       

xvii

   

68

11

12

90

12

     

xix

   

69

68

36

69

6

9

         

70

67

     

28

         

71

59

                 

72

7

8

72

 

31

   

xiv

   

73

73

33

73

             

74

74

 

86

             

75

   

75

             

76

61

       

2,50

       

77

63

                 

78

64

       

2,1

       

79

43

52

79

             

80

42

39

80

7

8

       

18

81

33

       

2,38

     

1

82

8

9

82

16

4

   

xv

 

14

83

51

24

102

11

           

84

84

       

2,42

       

85

85

     

19

2,43

     

26

86

56

       

2,32

       

87

52

32

87

28

15

     

p.214

22

88

75

 

85

 

5

         

89

49

89

 

24

2,14

         

90

   

103

             

91

79

41

91

10

10

         

92

24

 

94

 

6

         

93

50

 

95

           

8

94

80

55

97

             

95

72

56

98

             

96

83

42

99

 

12

       

28

97

21

22

100

 

13

   

xxi

 

17

If you find an error please notify us in the comments. Thank you!