Gerhoh of Reichersberg

GERHOH, g�r'h� (Gerohus), OF REICHERSBERG: Writer on church discipline; b. at Polling (30 m. s.w. of Munich), Bavaria, 1093; d. at Reiohersberg (on the Inn, 40 an. s.w. of Linz), Upper Austria, June 27, 1189. He was educated in Moaeburg, Freising, and Hiklesheim and became canon and teacher at the cathedral school in Augsburg. Offended by the neglect of church discipline and canonical rules he retired into the monastery of Raitenbuch, but was recalled to Augsburg by Bishop Hermann. Again, however, he was offended by the worldliness in the bishop's surroundings and reentered Rsitenbuch. Bishop Conrad of Salzburg commissioned him twice to go to Rome and discuss with Honorius II. the discipline of the clergy. In his own monastery (Raitenbuch) his discipline was opposed, and so Cuno, the new bishop of Regensburg, called him into his district. In 1132 after Cuno's death Conrad of Salzburg appointed him prior of the monastery of Rsichersberg on the Inn, and here Gerhoh was active until the end of him life.

This activity was twofold, pertaining to both ecclesiastical polity and dogmatics. His work and attitude toward the former was conditioned by the circumstances of the time. The disputes concerning Investiture (q.v.) had not yet been settled; the system of Hildebrand made progress, attacking married priests and simony in every form. Pope Gregory VII., the promoter of strict discipline, became Gerhoh's Weal. It was neoesaary to put an end to the abuses practised in the dispmal of church property and to form the life of the clergy according to fixed rules, and Gerboh fought with angry seal for these ideals. He initiated his warfare about 1130 with his De adifwio Doi, then followed a treatise on the difference between secular and regular clergy. But his most important work is his Inbestxgatio (1182). The first book of this work is historical, then follow discussions on theology and discipline. Gerhoh cenmlres fearlessly the barter of ecclesiastical offices and the avarice of Rome, the abuse of exemptions, the self-enrichment of nuncios and legatee and the papal schism. Against the arrogance of the popes in usurping worldly government he maintained that popedom and empire, the two great lights, the pillars of the temple, should stand side by side without any confusion of their respective powers. This position led him to the ideal demand that the Church should be satisfied with tithes and free gifts and renounce all worldly and princely power. With growing age Gerhoh's ideals were somewhat subdued. Although he stood altogether alone in his ideals at his time, they may be regarded as a significant prophecy pointing to later times in which the separation of spiritual and worldly power has become a necessity.

Gerhoh's dogmatic activity was carried on at the time of the reaction against the French dialecticians such as Roseeliin, AbeLud and Gilbert of Poitiers, who in Christologiml questions were not only nominalists, but often almost Nestorians by separating the natures of Christ and approaching very closely adoptionism. Representatives of this view were also in Germany, among them Bishop Eberhard of Bamberg and Provost Folmar of Triefenstein. In 1158 a conference took place in Bamberg at which Gerhoh was accused of leresy. In the first chapter of his book De gloria d honors jilii dei he defends his Christologicsl position against the attacks of Folmar. He calls the man Jesus also the natural and only son of God since he entered the glory of the Father. In his eternal birth he has no mother, in his temporal no father. It is on account of the danger of Nestorianism that Gerhoh clings so firmly to the glorification of the human nature in Christ. Then he refutes the objections against the unity of the divine and human nature in Christ, appealing to the Fathers, especially Hilary, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine. In his Contra duos harem he combated the view that heretical priests could successfully bring about the transformation of the body of Christ in the mass. He held' that Christ is not locally circumscribed, that he is everywhere. The body of Christ has grown in such a way that it fills the whole universe. The bishop of Bamberg accused Gerhoh of heresy because he taught that in the Eucharist the divinity is at the same time the whole humanity. The bishop held that Christ after ascension is still a creature as man, and his reproach of Gerhoh was not without justice.

Gerhoh's path of life was troubled. At synods and diets he was an authority on ecclesiastical law and polity and well known at the courts of popes and emperors; but as a dogmatician he clung so tenaciously to his position that his opponents, Abelard, Gilbert of Poitiers, and Peter Lombard, had to quit the field. In later years he had to encounter another storm. When the emperor tried to put an end to the schism by enforcing the acknowladgment of Alexander's opponent as pope, Archbishop Conrad did not yield and war broke out at Salzburg. Gerhoh's monastery was burned and pillaged.

(R. Rocholl.)

Bibliography: His works sae in ArPL, Casiii.-=dir.; 8d" bibdti, ed. E. Sseknr, an in HGH, Lib. de Use, ii (1897). 131-,625. For his life oonmle H. F. A. Nobbe, Gerhoh son ReWwrebov, fedpeie, 1881; W. Ribbeck, in Forschungen zur deutschen Geschicte, xxiii (1883), 3 sqq., uv (1885). 668 sqq.; HL, v. 378-M1; Neander, Christuan Curch, Vol. iv passim (uses mach of Gerhoh's material); Moeller, Christian Church, pp. 265, 307, 318-319, 379.