Page 115

Page 115

115 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA IN= of Deutz Rupert ficatione sanette trinitatis et processu Spiritus Sandi, quickly followed by the De meditatione mortis. In the latter he holds that the word of God which for bade Adam to eat of the tree of life was a word of the highest grace, in that through the death of the body man is freed from the death of the soul in the death of Christ. About 1130 Rupert also wrote his In librum Ecclesiastes commentarius, the method of exegesis being the same as in his other works. Rupert likewise wrote a De glorioso rege David, which is no longer extant. The De gloriftcatione, however, was his last important work, and in his later years the infirmities of age seem to have pre vented him from continuing his literary labors. Essentially an allegorical exegete and a poet, Rupert of Deutz can scarcely be said to possess a formal dogmatic system. Dogmatic problems, in deed, are touched on only in the course of his exe gesis, and receive varying answers, in consequence of the varying context; and thus it s. Rupert's became possible for the most divergent Theological views to be held concerning his actual System. position. On the other hand, he ap pealed constantly to the Bible, and to it alone, so that his view of the universe and his concepts of God and of the world must be drawn from his exegesis. He regarded the Bible in all three senses: literal, allegorical, and moral. In each point of his interpretation the Scriptures were present to his vision as a whole, forming for him a single sentence of many clauses, each word, each syllable, each letter of and for the one thought. The whole system of his interpretation centers about Christology. At the creation the incarnation was already provided for, and the divine command that man should multiply was designed to fill the city of God. In his Christology, moreover, Rupert strongly insisted on the perfect blending of the human and divine natures in Christ; and from his Christology his views concerning the means of grace, especially the Eucharist, become plain. Of the Eucharist he writes (De divinis ofciis, II., 11) : " The body of Christ, which before the passion was the body of the Word alone, so increased through the passion, was so spread abroad, so filled all the world, that by the new diffusion of this sacrament it makes into one Church all the elect that have been from the beginning of the world, or that shall be to the last one chosen at the end of the ages," that the Re deemer may say, when he gives the Church to God, " This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh." At the same time, there has been much question whether the eucharistic doctrine of Rupert was orthodox or not, his editor, J. Cochheus, fol lowed by the Maurists, affirming it, while Bellar mine denied it. In the first place, since he regarded the Church as essentially the mystery of the body of Christ, little room was left for the Eucharist. His views on the problem can scarcely be reduced on a definite formula, and passages may be cited from his writings which seem, at first blush, to im ply that he taught that the elements merely repre sented the body and blood of Christ. It is clear, however, that, as a matter of fact, he postulated the reality of the presence, and it is equally evident that he held the doctrine of transubstantiation.

The truth is that Rupert, impelled by his general point of view, was involuntarily led to phrases and similes which exposed him to suspicion. Again, while some passages would imply that he taught that unbelievers received only the outward signs of the Eucharist, there is too little evidence on this score to assert positively that such was his doctrine. Thirdly, it would seem that he would have inclined toward the doctrine of impanation, had this been sanctioned by the Church. There is, however, nothing to prove, as is sometimes alleged, that Rupert taught not only consubstantial impanation, but also hypostatic impanation, holding that Christ was united with the bread and wine in the same sense that his divine and human natures were hypostatically united.

The deviations and the inconsistencies of Rupert were those of his age, nor can he be judged by a norm suited neither to him nor his period. It is far more important to know that he was, in his teach ings, a mirror of the Church of the twelfth century. In philosophy he was a Platonizing mystic, a fol lower of Augustine, Johannes Scotus Erigena, Ber nard of Chartres, and Odo of Cambray. He was, therefore, essentially opposed to Aristotelianism. By his side in Germany were Gerhoh and Arno of Reichersberg and Honorius of Autun (qq.v.), all Platonizing mystics, in their opposition to Nestorian ism almost approximating Eutychianism in their Christology. (R. ROCHOLLt.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Frequent editions of the Opera were issued from Cologne-by Cochlaeus in 1526, 1527, 1528, by Melchior Novesianus in 1539, 1540, 1542, 1577, 1602; an enlarged ed. was put forth by Hermann Mylius at Mainz, 1631; Chastelain's ed. was issued at Paris, 1638; the Benedictine ed. appeared in 1751, and they are in MPL, elxvii.-clxx. Parts of the De incendio and of the De gloria ed honore Pilii hominis are in MGH, Script., xii (1856).

Consult; R. Rocholl, Rupert von Deutz, Giiteraloh, 1886; idem, in ZBG. xxiv. 1 (1903); ASM, vol. v.; Jaffe, BRG, vol. v.; Hist. littbraire de la France, xi. 422-587; J. Bach, Dogmengeschichte des Mittelalters. vol. ii., Vienna, 1875; F. W. E. Roth, in Die katholische Bewegung in unseren Tagen, Col. xx., parts 16-18, Wamburg, 1887· J. Mtiller, Ueber Rupert von Deutz and dessen Vita S. Heriberti, Cologne, 1888; Wattenbach. DGQ, ii (1886), 123, 136, 137, 237, 347, ii (1894), 137. 150-152, 194, 382. Schaff, Christian Church, v. 1, pp. 714, 719; Neander, Christian Church, iv. 79, 337-338, 411; Hauck, %D. iv. 319-320; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, face. xxxv., Col. 1272.

RUPERT, ril'pert, SAINT: The apostle of the Bavarians; d. at Salzburg early in the eighth century. His biography exists in three recensions: the oldest (between 790 and 800), the Gesta sancti Hrodberti corfessoris (ed. F. M. Mayer, Archiv fur tisterreichische Geschichte, 1xiii. 606 aqq., Vienna, 1882); the Vita primigenia, the first part of the ninth century De conversiane Bagoariorum et Caranfanorum (hfGH, Script., xi. 1854, 4-5) ; and the version in ASB, Mar., iii. 702 sqq. According to the Gesfa, he was a kinsman of the Merovingians and in the second year of Childebert 111. (695-711) was bishop of Worms. His fame led to his invitation to Bavaria by Duke Theodo lI., and he accordingly went to Regensburg. Urged by his patron to select a see city, Rupert visited Lorch, but did not remain there; and later founded St. Peter's on the Wallersee (Seekirchen in Upper Austria). There he heard of the Roman ruins at Salzach, and re.