I am attempting to compile a bibliography of materials on the role of books and reading in the Reformation period. Rather than provide such a cumbersome list here on the blog, I have decided to play with WorldCat’s lists feature because of its simple “Citations” view for easy import into Zotero. Any you with a preference for either WorldCat or some other discovery tool like Primo please comment on which you prefer and why.

You may view the still-in-progress bibliography here: http://www.worldcat.org/profiles/paul.commonplaces/lists/2906205

Popularity: 9% [?]

For those of you who might be interested, I am speaking at an upcoming mini-conference being held at Southern Seminary, November 2, 2011. I will be speaking on Pierre Viret from a much-expanded form of a paper I delivered at the Refo500 Research Consortium (RefoRC) in Zürich last June, and will be drawing connections between his ecclesiology, his political writings, and his piety in a way that I hope will be helpful.

The conference is being hosted by The Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. Many, many, thanks to Dr. Michael A. G. Haykin for the invitation and opportunity.

La Réforme: Celebrating the French Reformation on the Quincentennial of Pierre Viret (1511–71), November 2, 2011 9am – 12pm, Heritage Hall, Southern Seminary.

Schedule: [Online]

• 9:00 am – An Introduction to the French Reformation
  Michael Haykin, Professor of Church History, SBTS,
  and the Director of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies
• 9:15 am – Pierre Viret and the Politics of Piety
  Paul Roberts, Director of Patron Services,
  James P. Boyce Centennial Library
• 10:15 am – Break
• 10:35 am – Calvin and his Prayers
  Dustin Benge, SBTS Student
• 10:50 am – The Pastoral Vision of Theodore Beza (1519-1605)
  Shawn Wright, Professor of Church History, SBTS
• 11:50 am – Concluding Words

Popularity: 10% [?]

Attention students of the Reformation: I just learned that Zwingli’s Werke (Works) and Briefe (Letters) are now available online, fully searchable, for free, thanks to the Institut für Schweizerische Reformationsgeschichte (IRG) at the Universität Zürich. They are both linked via this announcement from the IRG. I presented a paper there at a conference back in June (2011) and remain impressed, challenged, and grateful for their work.

• Huldrych Zwingli Werke: Digitale Texte:
  Volltexte von Huldreich Zwinglis sämtliche Werke, Bd. 1-6.5 (Corpus Reformatorum 88-93.5)
• Huldrych Zwingli Briefe: Digitale Texte:
  Volltexte von Huldreich Zwinglis sämtliche Werke, Bd. 7-9 (Corpus Reformatorum 94-96)

Popularity: 11% [?]

Popularity: 13% [?]

This is the first of a series of posts on Cardinal Reginald Pole, the theologically schizophrenic Catholic theologian during the 16th Century Reformation. He was initially sympathetic with the Reformational perspective of justification by faith alone, and was placed in a difficult position when the Pope called on him to convene the Council of Trent. The subsequent Tridentine decrees regarding justification forced him to choose between his soteriological positions and his loyalty to Rome. He chose the latter and eventually became Archbishop of Canterbury under Bloody Mary. He never wanted to have to clarify his views, and never wanted the spotlight or a position of leadership. These things were thrust upon him, and the result was a broken man. If only his soteriology had trumped his ecclesiology instead…

An uneasy and unsatisfied curiosity remains to the historians of Reginald Pole. At once resolute and timid, confident and diffident, deliberate and painfully reticent, Pole’s bewildering sojourn exhibits the complexity of themes, theologies, and personal pilgrimages that so plagued his conscience. These very inconsistencies, however, are what make Reginald Pole such an appealing subject for dissection. His life, career, and theology beg for a unity which so far has proven elusive to modern attempts at identifying a consistent unifying theme. One recent proposal is that Pole was a man of loyalty.(1) This is certainly true. But where did his loyalties lie and how did he reconcile opposing loyalties? And, perhaps most importantly, why? Pole was clearly a man of opposing loyalties. The crux of contemporary scholarship lies in the reasons for his choosing one loyalty over another. Indeed, this has become the foremost point of debate and the central theme for biographers.

Identifying Pole’s theology of justification in particular is a microcosm for the difficulty in understanding Pole in general. He was quite obviously reticent to express his views in written form, and did so only after much pressure from his superiors. The Tridentine statements on justification were overwhelmingly burdensome for the Cardinal, and both he and the Council grew increasingly unable to accept his nuanced positions. Neither side was satisfied with Pole and his constant reluctance to be assertive and unwavering. Eleven years after Pole’s death, a document entitled A Treatise of Justification (1568) and was attributed as having been “Founde among the writinges of Cardinal Pole.” The title page, nor anywhere else in the treatie, does not directly attribute the work to Pole’s authorship, but it clearly gives just such an impression.

The Treatie was unashamedly the offspring of Trent is its expression of the doctrine of justification. The title page indicates that the writings of Pole in which this work was found were actually “remaining in the custodie” of M. Henrie Pyning, the lately deceased secretary to the Cardinal. The clear implication is that it was intended to be received by the readership as a work of Pole, and to promote his deference to the Church of Rome over his former, and now condemned, views of justification.

Recent scholarship, however, has rightly questioned whether A Treatie of Justification was indeed authored by Pole. There would appear to be much circumstantial and critical evidence for this conclusion, the most obvious of which is that the work is not actually and directly attributed to him. Moreover, the form of the treatise is not typical for Pole in that it is overtly scholastic in its presentation as well as in its methodology.(2). It was more typical for Pole as a matter of both presentation and method, to be exegetical and to derive his argument primarily from the Scriptures. There are, however, several departures from the Tridentine theology of justification which, though not explicated at any length in the work itself, indicate some measure of uncomfortable discord with the Tridentine conclusions. It can reasonably be asserted, therefore, that although Pole possessed the work, it may not be directly attributable to his authorship with complete confidence.(3) However, attributing the authorship to Pole lends veracity to the notion that his ecclesiology did indeed trump his soteriology.

The work may be an expression of his fidelity to Rome, and therefore an explication of the aspects of the Tridentine theology of justification with which he agreed. One would not expect him to expound his now condemned perspectives on justification since his purpose may have been to illustrate his submission to Rome and not just an avoidance of the Inquisition. Incidentally, no reasonable theories have been proffered by those who tend toward the denial of the veracity of Pole’s authorship.

Be this as it may, the Treatie of Justification has not been adequately summarized and criticized in its relation to the Tridentine decrees, at least not in modern scholarship. This essay then, shall endeavor to provide a written comparison of the Treatie to the Tridentine soteriology, the question of authorship not withstanding. Though the various historians of Pole and Trent have their respective, and probably justified, conclusions on the dubious authorship of the Treatie, no significant work is in print which examines the content of the Treatie as its primary focus, even though such a comparison is not an overly burdensome task. This paper endeavors to meet that void.

1. Dermot Fenlon, Heresy and Obedience in Tridentine Italy: Cardinal Pole and the Counter Reformation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 283 “. . . loyalty, in the end, was his most signal virtue.”

2. This reason is most persuasive according to both Fenlon, op. cit., 198, and also to J. Fischer, “Essai Historique sur les Idees Reformatrices Des Cardinaux Jean Pierre Carafa (1476–1559) et Reginald Pole (1500–58),” Ph. D. Diss. (Paris: University of Paris, 1957), 364 n53. Although Fischer rejects Pole’s authorship of the work, he does argue that his views of justification were in reality not different from those of the Council. Fenlon disagrees quite strongly with Fischer at this point.

3. Fenlon rightly argues that for this reason the Treatie on Justification is not directly helpful in elucidating Pole’s theology of justification. Fenlon then turns his attention to “certain positive indications that Pole [did alter] his ideas on justification, so as to bring them into line with the decision of the Council.” Clearly, by 1554 he had indeed adopted the Tridentine soteriological decrees.

Popularity: 45% [?]

Speaking of the Reformation, here’s a new book that just came through our library. John Spurr, The Post-Reformation: Religion, Politics and Society in Britain 1603-1714 (Harlow, England: Pearson, 2006). Publisher’s blurb:

Spurr provides a substantial account of English, Scottish and Irish history from 1603 to 1714, and a unique portrait of the century’s religious life. The Civil Wars and Revolutions of the seventeenth century are brought to life with vivid quotations and a compelling narrative. Accessibly written and presented, this book is an essential starting point for undergraduates studying seventeenth-century Britain and church history.

On a different note, you’ve read Mortimer Adler’s How to Read a Book, now read Terry Eagleton’s How to Read a Poem (Malden, MA / Oxford: Blackwell, 2007). The publisher’s blurb:

Lucid, entertaining and full of insight, How To Read A Poem is designed to banish the intimidation that too often attends the subject of poetry, and in doing so to bring it into the personal possession of the students and the general reader.

• Offers a detailed examination of poetic form and its relation to content.
• Takes a wide range of poems from the Renaissance to the present day and submits them to brilliantly illuminating closes analysis.
• Discusses the work of major poets, including John Milton, Alexander Pope, John Keats, Christina Rossetti, Emily Dickinson, W.B. Yeats, Robert Frost, W.H.Auden, Seamus Heaney, Derek Mahon, and many more.
• Includes a helpful glossary of poetic terms.

Popularity: 22% [?]

On the heels of my previous post, I thought it appropriate to now introduce you to another Reformation era man whom I respect greatly. Peter Martyr Vermigli (PMV) was an Italian priest whose theology of justification was influenced greatly by the Spaniard Juan de Valdes (coffee, anyone?). While the ecclesiastical allegiances of Contarini and Pole ultimately trumped their soteriologies, PMV chose to adhere to his Reformed theology and fled Italy. He spent time in Geneva, became a Regius Professor of Divinity at Oxford University in England, and fled back to the Continent when Queen Mary ran him out of town. He was a man of great influence, though one of humility and character. He was a good man worthy of emulation. I am edified when I consider him and read his writings. Luther, for example, I can’t read because of too frequently vitriolic tone.

The title of my blog is common enough (pun), but I chose it in reference to PMV’s Commonplaces in particular. My first post included the title page from that work. So I am joyed when others join me in my appreciation for Peter Martyr.

I frequently read a very thoughtful blog by Cynthia Nielson, a very intelligent graduate student and adjunct philosophy instructor at, well, I don’t know, but I heartily recommend her analysis of PMV and Turretin (PMV was in Geneva and knew the Turretin clan) on free will none-the-less. As of Feb 9, 2007, it is in seven parts and still growing. Read the first part here.

By the way, is it just me or is there a remarkable resemblance?

Popularity: 15% [?]

This video on Martin Luther was produced by the ELCA and is freely available on Google Video. I found it on The Conventicle (an excellent and thoughtful site – well worth your time); so it comes to you via the ELCA, some Scottish Puritan buffs, and a Baptist librarian. Enjoy.

By the way – if any of you know how to embed a video from Google Video into a WordPress blog, please let me know. I’ve tried everything I know. The embedding code supplied by google doesn’t seem to work in WP.

For now, just follow the link.

Popularity: 10% [?]

“The Consistory is for fornicators, and I am no fornicator,” replied the Purse-Maker and former Anabaptist Jane Pignier to a direct question from Consistory member John Calvin in December, 1544 (1). Perhaps she was not, but the Consistory took note of her frequent association with Benoite Jacon, wife of Pierre Amyaux, who admitted adultery to the Consistory exactly one week previous. Benoite claimed that givine charity to one’s Christian brothers included “living with all men and that they are all her husbands,” and that she received by direct revelation from the Holy Spirit himself that fornication is not wrong.(2) When the Consistory summoned Jane Pignier, formerly imprisoned and subsequently banished from Geneva for Anabaptism, to inquire whether she now intends to “live according to the consent and union of the church of Geneva,” they could not pass up the opportunity to question her relationship with the promiscuous Madame Benoite Jacon. Such was their mandate.

The Consistory was the most important institution in Geneva for preservign the family. Prior to the Reformation in Geneva, the lifestyle of merchants resulted in an organized guild of prostitutes whose solicitation, though supervised by the city government, was encouraged.(3) Though Geneva was in decline, its prosperity was largely due to four annual trade fairs which brought merchants from as far away as Northern Italy.(4) Though these visiting merchants fueled the prostitution industry in Geneva, eventually some Saxon merchants began bringing Lutheran pamphlets and other literature which stirred feeling of Reformation and tilled the Genevan soil even before the arrival of William Farel from Bern. With the arrival of the Reformation in Geneva, the only approved lifestyle was the nuclear family: husband, wife, children, and some domestic servants if they could be afforded. Men and women were both strongly encouraged to marry once of appropriate age.(5)

The Consistory oversaw a vast array of cases. In the early years, however, it was primarily concerned with religious practices.(6) It was not until after the Reformation had gained a solid footing in Geneva that the Consistory turned its fullest attention to other matters. Among those important matters was their fervent desire to uphold the institutions of marriage and family. In its attempt to preserve the family and bring reconciliation between husband and wife, reconciliation which was often forced on the couple, the Consistory worked diligently and occasionally used the harshest means at is disposal to emphasize the importance of the family. The Consistory, however, had no power to punish beyond that of excommunication, so it often referred unrepentant cases to the city courts for trial and sentencing if blatant immorality was judged by the Consistory to be the cause of the rift. The Consistory, however, saw its purpose as corrective, not punitive. If punishment was needed, the Council took jurisdiction.(7)

All issues of a sexual nature were particularly important to the Consistory becuase they were all viewed as threats to the family. Fornication, homosexuality, and adultery were especially threatening.(8) Sexual offenses which threatened the institutions of marriage and family were treated quite harshly, sometimes even punished by death.(9) In spite of these harsh responses, the motive was to preserve and nurture the family. In cases where children were involved, the Consistory showed surprising care and compassion for the children, and also for unwed mothers.

[footnotes to follow]

More to come…

Popularity: 32% [?]

The Tridentine response to the traditional Protestant understanding of justification by faith was firm and certain, as evidenced by the 1547 Decree on Justification, and left no room for further dialogue such as had occurred in previous years at Worms (November, 1540) and Regensburg (April-May, 1541). The firmly anti-Protestant codification of justification at Trent does not, however, offer an accurate picture of the various positions held by Catholic theologians, even a few of those at the Council of Trent, who were open to forms of justification sola fide. It is tempting to read into pre-Trent time a post-Trent position. Prior to Trent, however, the doctrine of justification had not received much codifying treatment, and so many Roman Catholics prior to Trent were apparently free to hold views of justification which were largely in line with the Lutheran position.

Protestants who held to a doctrine of justification sola fide were accused by Catholics of the “Trent persuasion” of developing a fictitious concept of justification, of “suggesting that the believer lives in a sort of Walter Mitty world in which he is treated as righteous when he actually nothing of the sort.” The same accusation could have been leveled against some from among their own Catholic ranks, especially against many in the Italian spirituali movement. In fact, the Catholic Reformation was largely stimulated by such thinkers prior to Trent. Similarly, the Counter-Reformation was seemingly not just in response to the Protestants, but also in response to some of Catholicism’s very own curia who held quasi-Lutheran views of justification.

As evidence of this reform movement within Roman Catholicism prior to the Council of Trent, this post will focus on the Consilium de Emendanda Ecclesia of 1537. This report on church reform was issued by a reform commission which was appointed by Pope Paul III during the previous year, and is a “surprising attack on the venality and other abuses associated with the curial system.” The commission was presided over by the Venetian diplomat Cardinal Gasparo Contarini, who would also later be appointed papal legate to the Diet of Regensburg in 1541.

Interestingly, other signers of this document include Cardinal Reginald Pole, who would later become Archbishop of Canterbury under the Tudor Queen Mary, and Gian Peitro Carafa who would later become Pope Paul IV in 1555. The signers of this document include many whose names are now synonymous with the spirituali movement. In would seem, then, that even though the spirituali largely held to justification sola fide, that when these theological “Walter Mittys” were given the opportunity to address the Pontiff on issues of reform they voiced their desire for the matters of institutional reform for which the non-spirituali Catholic reformers were calling.

(more…)

Popularity: 10% [?]