WILLIAM J. CALLAHAN
President of the
American Catholic Historical Association
1996

The Catholic Historical
Review
VOL. LXXXIIIAPRIL, 1997No. 2

REGALISM, LIBERALISM, AND GENERAL FRANCO
BY

William J. Callahan*

On July 15, 1976, the marqués de Mondejar, head of the royal house-

hold, arrived secretly at the Vatican where he was received immediately

by Pope Paul VI. The marqués carried a letter from King Juan Carlos, in-

staUed as head of state foUowing Francisco Franco's death the preceding November. The monarch informed the pope that he would refrain
from exercising the patronage rights over episcopal appointments
granted the Spanish state under the concordat of 1953. ' The royal decision broke a diplomatic logjam that had developed since 1970 between
the Franco regime and the papacy over the drafting of a new concordat.
On July 28, the first government of the monarchy and the papacy
reached a formal agreement (acuerdo) in which the Spanish state renounced its ecclesiastical patronage rights, whUe the Church abandoned certain juridical privileges contained in the concordat of 1953.2
The 1976 agreement combined with the separation of church and state
established in the democratic constitution of 1978 ended the confes-

sional identification of church and state that in one way or another had
existed for centuries except for the period of the Second Republic
(1931-1939).3

*Mr. Callahan is a professor of history in the University of Toronto and principal ofVictoria College. He read this paper as his presidential address at a luncheon held in the New

York Hilton Hotel on Saturday, January 4, 1997, during the seventy-seventh annual meet-

ing of the American Catholic Historical Association.
'Tomás García Berberena,"Nombramiento de obispos," in C. Corral and L. de Echevarría
(eds.),Los acuerdos entre la Iglesia y España (Madrid, 1980),p. 133.

2"Acuerdo entre la Santa Sede y el Estado Español de 28 de julio de 1976," ibid., pp.

778-781.

The constitution declared that "no confession will have a state character." Juan Maria
Laboa, Iglesia y religión en las constituciones españolas (Madrid, 1981), p. 100.
201

202REGAUSM, UBERAUSM, AND GENERAL GRANCO

The efforts of Spanish governments to control ecclesiastical patronage and finances took different institutional forms depending on the
poUtical organization of the state at any given moment. During the eighteenth century, the absolute monarchy of the Bourbons pushed the
Crown's historic claims to control the Church's temporal administration to new heights through the movement known as regaUsm, an
aggressively promoted poUcy of state intervention in ecclesiastical affairs.4 The concordat of 1753, wrested from a weak papacy, granted the
Crown the right of universal patronage over virtuaUy aU ecclesiastical
benefices, a right previously shared in tense relationship with the Holy
See. During the reign of Charles III (1759-1788), regaUsm reached its

ftiUest stage of development.5 In 1767, the king expeUed the Jesuits

from his dominions Ui spite of the Order's historic importance in the
Hispanic world. For aU practical purposes, the Crown appointed the
bishops and appropriated a significant proportion of ecclesiastical revenues. King Charles III, who was esteemed for his personal piety,
founded seminaries and regulated the affairs of the reUgious orders and

the secular clergy, guided by the regaUst theory that the monarch derived his authority from God and was responsible, therefore, for the
spiritual wen-being of his subjects, both clerical and lay.

Napoleon's invasion of Spam beginning in 1807 initiated a period of
upheaval that ended the absolute monarchy of the Old Regime. Between 1810 and 1813, the kingdom's first parUamentary assembly met
Ui the city of Cádiz, the only area of peninsular Spam free of French
domination. The liberal Cortes of Cádiz carried out a poUtical revolution which limited royal authority and dismantled the institutions of the
Bourbon monarchy. Liberal deputies broke new poUtical ground, but
they foUowed an ecclesiastical poUcy inspired by the regaUsm of the

past. The union of Throne and Altar was recast into an alliance of Constitution and Altar. The 1812 constitution declared unequivocaUy that
the reUgion of the nation "is and wUl be perpetuaUy the CathoUc, Apos-

Teófanes Egido has argued in a recent state-of-the-question essay on eighteenthcentury regalism that it was not confined to jurisdictional and diplomatic issues but
reached "every corner" of the "sacralized existence" of Old Regime society. Royal bureau-

crats felt no scruples about using "fear, the police, and espionage" to keep the clergy in
line. "El regalismo," in Emilio La Parra López and Jesús Pradells, /g/esta, sociedady Estado
en España, Francia e Italia (ss. XVIII al XX) (Alicante, 1991), pp. 21 1 , 216.
'During the reign of Charles III, regalism experienced "such a formidable impulse that

it can be said that it occupied the first place ... in the preoccupations of the enlightened
minority" who dominated the state bureaucracy. Antonio Luis Cortés Peña, La política religiosa de Carlos III (Granada, 1989), p. 25.

BY WILLIAM J. CALLAHAN203

toUc, Roman, the only true reUgion."6 But the constitution also asserted
that the kingdom would protect reUgion through "wise and just laws."
This apparently innocent phrase meant, as conservative deputies realized, that the new Uberal state intended to continue the regalist tradition of maintaining control over ecclesiastical affairs.7 In fact, the
changes imposed on the Church by the Cortes of Cádiz were modest,
save for the suppression of the Inquisition. But the rudiments of more
far-reaching reforms surfaced in parUamentary debate. Liberals wished
to rationaUze the Church's sprawling organization of dioceses and
parishes. They beUeved that the number of clergy should be reduced in
accord with the kingdom's pastoral needs. Further, they insisted on retaining the state's historic rights over episcopal appointments.
Liberalism did not achieve a final triumph over absolute monarchy

until 1834. It would maintain its dominance, save for the brief period of
the First Republic (1873-1874), until General Miguel Primo de Rivera
overthrew the constitutional regime in 1923- The history of Uberal
Spain was turbulent, a reflection of the often intense divisions among
the Uberal parties of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
Given the commitment of aU the Uberal factions to the regaUst tradition
whether in moderate or extreme versions, the question of the Church's
place within the new state was central to liberal poUtics. During the
first phase of Uberal rule, between 1835 and 1843, an extreme Uberal regalism emerged in full force. The Church saw the male reUgious orders
suppressed and their extensive landed property sold at public auction
to reduce the national debt. The property of the secular clergy suffered
the same fate beginning in 1841. The tithe, bedrock of church finances
for centuries, was aboUshed in favor of a system of clerical salaries paid
by the government, while ecclesiastical opposition was broken through
the arrest or exUe of bishops and priests who resisted official poUcy. But
even as the authorities dismantled a centuries-old ecclesiastical infra-

structure, the state remained officiaUy Catholic. Indeed, the author of
the legislation suppressing the regular clergy, Prime Minister Juan Alvarez Mendizábal, was a practicing CathoUc, as was the regent between
1840 and 1843, General Baldomero Espartero, who attempted an extreme administrative reorganization of the Church that would have dra6Laboa, op c#., p. 17.

7EmUiO La Parra López, Elprimer liberalismo españoly la Iglesia: las Cortes de Cádiz
(Alicante, 1985), p. 39- The liberal deputies understood that the religious clauses of the
constitution "guaranteed the reformist policy of regalism." "The announced protection of
religion with 'wise and just laws' is the key: the State promised to safeguard religion, but

by adjusting it to the new [political] order." Ibid., pp. 45-46.

204REGALISM, LIBERAUSM, AND GENERAL GRANCO

maticaUy diminished the number of dioceses and parishes, whUe reducing the influence of the pope over the Spanish Church to the purely
ceremonial.8

The radical phase of Uberal regaUsm ended Ui 1843 when more con-

servative Uberals gathered in the Moderate party took power foUownig

a revolution against Espartero, who was identified with the other great
party of mid-nineteenth-century Spam, the Progressives. The Moderates
by no means renounced regalism. They had no intention of abandoning
either the state's episcopal appointment rights or restoring sold ecclesiastical property. They also remained committed to the rationaUzing of
the Church's diocesan and parochial organization. But the Moderates
beUeved that the aggressive regalism of the Progressives had gone too

far and had contributed to the refusai of Popes Gregory XVI (18311846) and Pius LX (1846-1878) to recognize Queen Isabel II as the

country's legitimate sovereign. The Moderates also saw the Church as a
potential aUy in their efforts to create an oUgarchic poUtical system opposed to the vaguely popuUst character of the Progressive regime.

As a result, the Moderate governments in power since 1843 believed

it opportune and necessary to open negotiations with the Holy See for
a new concordat to replace the powerfuUy regalist, although unobserved, concordat of 1753. The negotiations proved long and difficult,
but they finally produced the concordat of 1851, the fundamental document governing civü-ecclesiastical relations until the proclamation of

the Second RepubUc in 1931, save for the revolutionary period 18681874.9 The concordat represented a compromise between the tem-

pered regaUsm of the Moderates and the Church.10 It reaffirmed the
confessionahty of the state in Article 1, which declared that CathoUcism
"to the exclusion of any other cult continues being the only religion of

the Spanish nation."11 The papacy accepted the sales of ecclesiastical

"William J. Callahan, Church, Politics and Society in Spain, 1750-1874 (Cambridge,
1984), pp. 158-177.
'Nancy Rosenblatt has discussed the general significance of the 1851 concordat. "The
Concordat of 1851 and Its Relation to Moderate Liberalism in Spain" Iberian Studies, no.
1(1978), pp. 30-39.

"The concordat signified for the Church "recognition of the facts consumated by the

religious reforms of the liberal revolution. The Church remained integrated in the new

regime." The Moderate state regularized its relations with the Holy See, while the Church
saw the concordat as "a worthy solution, the only one possible, since it could not think of
returning to the Old Regime." Manual Revuelta González, "La confesionalidad del estado
en España," in Iglesia, sociedad y Estado en Francia, España e Italia, p. 382.
"Federico Suárez, "Génesis del Concordato de 1851," lus Canonicum, III (1963),
233-234.

BY WILLIAM J. CALLAHAN205

property already carried out, endorsed the principle of parochial and
diocesan reorganization, and confirmed the state's episcopal patronage
rights, whUe the state accepted financial responsibiUty for supporting
the secular clergy and authorized a limited reintroduction of the male
reUgious orders.
The combination of concessions to the Church with regaUst restraints central to the concordat developed most fully during the period
of the Restoration (1874-1923). The architect of the Uberal constitu-

tional monarchy restored after the revolution of 1868 and the brief pe-

riod of the First RepubUc, Prime Minister Antonio Cánovas del Castillo,
wished to win clerical support for the restored Bourbon dynasty and
the Uberal poUtical system, particularly in view of the danger posed by
the CarUst movement that had risen in armed revolt against Uberal governments during the 1830's and early 1870's. But Cánovas recognized
that he could not afford to aUenate partisans of the 1869 constitution,
which had recognized reUgious Uberty for the first time m the nation's
history. The regime's stabihty depended, he beUeved, on the creation of
a broad consensus accepted by the principal Uberal factions gathered
in his own Liberal Conservative party and the Liberal party of Práxedes
Sagasta. Cánovas pursued an ecclesiastical poUcy, more or less foUowed
by Sagasta and Liberal party governments, based on limited concessions
to the Church within a regaUst framework.12 On the one hand, Cánovas
refused to re-establish the special legal code (fuero) that before the rev-

olution of 1868 aUowed clergy accused of criminal offenses to be tried

in special ecclesiastical courts. He felt no scruples about censoring the
confessional press when it attacked his poUcies. He insisted on a rationaUzation of the Church's parish and diocesan organization, and he
shamelessly used the state's patronage rights to appoint bishops who
were loyal to the reigning dynasty to the Vatican's intense irritation.13
On the other, he re-estabUshed the 1851 concordat and saw to it that
lzUpon taking office for the first time in 1881, Sagasta emphasized that he did not in-

tend to introduce radical changes in the government's ecclesiastical policy. Cristóbal Robles Muñoz, Insurrección o legalidad: los católicos y la Restauración (Madrid, 1988), p.
279.

"The procedures used in episcopal appointments have been described in detail by
José Manuel Cuenca Toribio, Sociología de una élite de poder de España e His-

panoamérica contemporáneas: la jerarquía eclesiástica, 1789-1965 (Córdoba, 1976),

pp. 262-271. Cánovas filled thirty-nine episcopal vacancies between 1875 and 1879.
María F.Núñez Muñoz, La Iglesiay la Restauración, 1875-1881 (Santa Cruz de Tenerife,
1976), pp. 94, 110, 142-144. An anonymous representation sent to the papal nuncio in
1880 argued that the Church must make every effort to reduce royal patronage over episcopal appointments to prevent the government from "using the powerful means, which

206REGAUSM, UBERALISM, AND GENERAL GRANCO

the constitution of 1876 recognized CathoUcism as the reUgion of the
state, although to placate supporters of reUgious Uberty, he inserted a
clause aUowing private observance by members of other churches. FinaUy, Canovas renounced a fundamental tenet of Uberal poUcy since the
1830's by aUowing the virtuaUy unlimited reintroduction of the reUgious orders.
The Restoration ecclesiastical settlement became a source of míense

controversy after the turn of the century when segments of the Liberal
party, alarmed by the massive growth of the reUgious orders, attempted
to control their expansion through the legislative device of a law of associations.14 These efforts came to little in the end as the essential terms

of the arrangements elaborated during the 1870's survived until the
constitutional regime's overthrow by Primo de Rivera. The dictatorship
(1923-1930) made concessions to the Church, especiaUy Ui the field of
education and the control of pubUc moraUty, but the general proved as
adept a regalist as any Uberal prime minister. This was particularly true
of his efforts to use the state's patronage rights to exclude native Catalans from appointment to the dioceses of Catalonia, thereby reversing
the practice of successive Restoration governments. The general was
implacably opposed to the movement seeking autonomy for Catalonia
and regarded the Catalan clergy as separatist. Because the government
wished to combat separatism, he informed the primate of the Spanish
church, Cardmal Enrique Reig of Toledo, in 1926, it intended to appoint
bishops for Catalonia who would not compromise "the unity of
Spain."15 For a regime that saw the "dangers of Catalanism on aU sides,"
the exercise of the Real Patronato provides, to increase the number of its supporters."

"Sobre cumplimiento del Concordato de 1851," in E Díaz de Cerio and M. E Nunez (eds.),

Instrucciones secretas a los nuncios de España en el siglo XLX, 1847-1907 (Rome, 1989),
p. 25 1 . The Vatican disliked the political motivation behind certain appointments, but the
best that it could do was to engage in wheeling and dealing with the civil authorities, hoping to secure the nomination of some candidates it wanted, while accepting others that it
did not. Antonio Vico,"Informe sobre el episcopado y los cabildos de España," 1890, in Vi-

cente Cárcel Ortí, León XIIIy los católicos españoles (Pamplona, 1988), pp. 222, 236.
14In I860, male religious numbered only 1,683. By 1900, their ranks had expanded to

12,142, while female religious increased from 18,819 to 42,296. The decision of Cánovas
in the late 1870's to allow the more or less free establishment of religious communities
initiated this massive expansion. The battle over legislative projects of Liberal party gov-

ernments to limit the growth of the religious orders has been described in detail by José
Andrés-Gallego, La política religiosa en España, 1889-1913 (Madrid, 1975), chapters
5-9.

"Quoted in Vicente Cárcel Ortí, "Iglesia y Estado durante la dictadura de Primo de

Rivera, 1923-1930," Revista Española de Derecho Canónico, XXV (1988), no. 124, pp.
234-235.

BY WILLIAM J, CALLAHAN207

even the appointment of so conservative and scarcely separatist a figure as the archdeacon of Tarragona, Isidro Goma y Tomás, later archbishop of Toledo during the CivU War, was judged unacceptable. The
general also pressured Francesc Vidal i Barraquer, archbishop of Tarragona, to accept a transfer to either Zaragoza or Burgos as a means of
removing a prelate who had dared to defend his clergy against the
regime's separatist accusations. Although as deeply conservative as any
bishop of the Spanish Church, Vidal i Barraquer expressed his resentment at official attempts to manipulate the Catalan clergy into its "hispanicizing or decatalanizing work."16
The proclamation of the Second RepubUc in 1931 dramaticaUy altered the pattern of civU-ecclesiastical relations prevailing since the
mid-nineteenth century. The 1931 constitution separated church and
state for the first time in the nation's history and ordered the elimination of the appropriation for clerical salaries estabUshed under the
terms of the 1851 concordat. The Second RepubUc did not attempt to
imitate, however, the intention of the First, which during its brief history planned to separate church and state on the basis of the formula of
a "free church in a free state," meaning that the Church would be allowed to function like any other civU association within Spanish society
subject only to general legislation governing such bodies. The RepubUc's poUticians remained as committed to a regaUst approach to
civil-ecclesiastical relations as any regime before them. They had no intention of aUowing the Church to operate free of official restraints in
spite of the separation of the civil and ecclesiastical powers. Niceto

Alcalá-Zamora, head of the provisional government between April

and June, 1931, and first president of the RepubUc, was a practicing
Catholic, a former member of the Liberal party and minister of the con-

stitutional monarchy. Although in the spring of 1931 he urged his

cabinet coUeagues to seek a "friendly, gradual, correct [and] decent separation of church and state," he argued that the government must retain
the right to enact "braking legislation" over ecclesiastical affairs. Indeed,
he justified his position by appealing to the historic precedent estab-

Ushed by eighteenth-century regalists and nineteenth-century hberals.17
To use the term "republican regaUsm" may seem a contradiction in
terms. In fact, the ecclesiastical poUcy of the RepubUc between 1931
and 1933 represented an extreme version of the regaUst poUcies pur16IbId., p. 235; quoted in Ramón Muntanyola, Vidaly Barraquer: el cardenal de la paz
(Barcelona, 1974), p. 178.
"Niceto Alcalá-Zamora,Los defectos de la constitución de 1931 (Madrid, 1981),p. 113.

208REGAUSM, LIBERALISM, AND GENERAL GRANCO

sued by earlier Uberal governments. The RepubUc imitated King Charles

III and the Uberal governments of 1820, 1836, 1854, and 1868 by sup-

pressing the Jesuits. Its most controversial piece of legislation affecting
the Church, the 1933 Law on Religious Confessions and Congregations,
which severely restricted the activities of the reUgious orders, was modeled on simnar legislation proposed by a Liberal party government m
1906. 18 The 1933 law made clear that the Church would not be aUowed

to function as an ordinary cMl association subject only to the common
law. "Religious freedom and liberty of conscience," the legislation declared, were "limited to the purely reUgious" and "by motives concerning the security of the state and pubUc order."19 Although Ui 1931 the
RepubUc had renounced any claim to exercise the state's ecclesiastical
patronage rights, the law gave the authorities the right to veto any
church appointment judged dangerous to pubUc security. The Law on
Religious Confessions and Congregations saw the historic regaUsm of
the Spanish state in full flood. The motives behind it were not very different from those that had inspired nineteenth-century UberaUsm to
maintain controls over the Church as a means of protection against the
danger of Carlism. Throughout the 1933 law, there ran a simnar preoccupation with defending the regime based on the assumption that the
Church must be kept from aiding and abetting the RepubUc's enemies.
The defeat of the republican-sociaUst coaUtion that had governed
since 1931 in the November, 1933, elections provided the Church with
an uneasy breathing space which ended abruptly with the election of
the Popular Front government Ui February, 1936. It quickly returned to
an aggressive ecclesiastical poUcy. After months of conspiratorial activity, the generals rose in revolt against the RepubUc on July 18. The rising
won the support of bishops and clergy who "sacraUzed" the CivU War
into a religious crusade directed toward saving reUgion from revolutionary assault. The identification of the Church with the Franco regime
produced the phenomenon known as National CathoUcism, which held

sway until it began to erode during the 1960's in the years foUowmg the
Second Vatican CouncU.

"Cardinal Francesc Vidal i Barraquer predicted in 1931 that when the already announced project for a law regulating the religious orders was realized it would resemble

the law of associations proposed by the Liberal government of General López Domínguez
in 1906. Vidal i Barraquer to Cardinal Pacelli, papal secretary of state, October 16, 1931, in
M. Battlori and V M. Arbeloa (eds.), Arxiu Vidal i Barraquer: Església y Estât durant la
Segona República Espanyola, 1931-1936 (4 vols.; Montserrat, 1971-1991), vol. l.part 3,
pp. 398-399.

""Preámbulo del proyecto del Gobierno," ibid.,vol. 3, part 3, pp. 1026- 1027.

BY WILLIAM J. CALLAHAN209

That the Church obtained substantial advantages from the Franco

regime is beyond dispute. The state again became confessional. It gave

the Church virtual control over primary and secondary education, reestablished the official subsidy for clerical salaries, provided generous
loans to rebuUd ecclesiastical buUdings destroyed in the repubUcan
zone during the CivU War, and used its authority to enforce CathoUc
moral standards. But recent research has shown that civü-ecclesiastical

relations, especiaUy between 1936 and 1942, were still haunted by the
regaUst ghosts of the past.

During the initial stages of the CivU War, the hierarchy lacked a clear
idea of the mihtary's plans for the country. Although the cardinal primate, Isidro Goma y Tomás, supported the rising of the generals, he

worried about the Church's place m a regime that had begun without a

weU-defined program. Given the differences among the right-wing
groups supporting the rebelUon, the cardinal beüeved that serious
problems would arise when the moment came to decide the precise
form of the regime and its relations with the Church. Gomá's early apprehension was not misplaced. The miUtary's initial proclamation said
nothing about defending church and reUgion. The statement of one of
the conspiracy's leaders, General Emilio Mola, on July 19, "we beUeve
that the church ought to be separated from the state for the good of
both institutions," troubled a hierarchy intent upon re-estabUsbing official confessionaUty.20 Even Francisco Franco, named head of the government on September 29, caused consternation Ui a radio address on
October 1, when he declared: "the state, without being confessional,
wfll seek agreement with the church." This apparent commitment to an
aconfessional regime, as weU as Franco's warning that he would not
permit clerical interference in "the direction of the specific affairs of

the state," deeply upset Cardmal Goma, who immediately protested to
the general.21

As the months passed, the cardinal's preoccupation lessened. He
came to admire Franco's personal piety and concluded that the general
"wfll be a great coUaborator Ui the Church's work from the lofty position that he occupies."22 The Church expected the regime to abrogate
20Quoted in Guy Hermet, Les catholiques dans l'Espagne franquiste (2 vols.; Paris,
1981),II,4l.
21Quoted in Antonio Marquina Barrio, La diplomacia vaticana y la España,

1936-1945 (Madrid, 1983), p. 47. The general quickly explained to Goma, however, that
he had not intended to question the desirability of re-establishing a confessional state.

""Informe acerca del levantamiento ... en julio de 1936," in María Luisa Rodríguez

210REGAUSM, UBERAUSM, AND GENERAL GRANCO

republican ecclesiastical legislation and restore the privUeges enjoyed
by the Church prior to the RepubUc but with an important condition,
the end of the state's episcopal patronage rights. This position was supported by the Vatican. It had always disliked what it regarded as a privilege, not a right, and believed Ui any event that the privUege was

extinguished in 1931 when the Republic renounced any claim to nom-

inate bishops. Franco restored a confessional state. But defining its
precise character m the Ught of the hierarchy's and the Vatican's expectations was another matter. In spite of assurances given by Franco to
Goma Ui December, 1936, that the regime would provide the Church
with "maximum guarantees with respect to its Uberty ... in the exercise of its functions," the new government looked to the regaUst past for

its model of civU-ecclesiastical relations, particularly to the 1851 concordat.23

The Vatican and Cardinal Goma seriously underestimated the regalism of Franco and his ministers.24 The regime insisted that it should

enjoy aU the powers conceded by the papacy to every government be-

fore it save those of the First and Second RepubUcs. Officials cited
precedents dating back to the 1753 concordat, which represented the
most sweeping triumph of regalism over the Holy See ever achieved in
the long history of Spanish civU-ecclesiastical relations.25 This effort to
restore the state's patronage rights reflected the regime's intention to
defend its jurisdictional claims, but its motives were also eminently
practical. The government was determined to exclude from episcopal
office candidates suspect because of separatist opinions or views
judged incompatible with the values of NationaUst Spain. In 1937, the
regime first bared its teeth on the issue. Pius XI, foUowing the precedent
of free papal appointment estabUshed during the Republic, named a

Vincentian priest, Carmelo BaUester, bishop of León without consulting

the authorities. BaUester was neither a separatist nor particularly objec-

Aisa, El Cardenal Goma y la guerra de España: aspectos de la gestión pública del Primado, 1936-1939 (Madrid, 1981), p. 375; quoted ibid.,p. 33.
""Escrito del Cardenal Goma al Cardenal Pacelli, Secretario de Estado, conteniendo los
puntos aprobados en su primera entrevista oficial con el General Franco,"January 1 , 1937,

in Rodríguez Aisa, op. cit. , ?. 402.The government's position was that with respect to civil-

ecclesiastical relations the situation existing prior to the proclamation of the Republic in
April, 1931, prevailed including the restoration of the 1851 concordat which recognized
the historic patronage rights of the state. Gonzalo Redondo, Historia de la Iglesia de España, 1931-1939 (2 vols.; Madrid, 1993), II, 508.

24Marquina Barrio, op. cit., p. 60.
*Ibid.,p.&7.

BY WILLIAM J. CALLAHAN211

tionable for his political views. By aU accounts, he possessed estimable

personal quaUties and administrative talent besides enjoying the friendship of Cardmal Goma.26 But the regime saw the appointment as a
provocation and protested vehemently to the Vatican. Thereafter, it re-

fused to accept papal nominations Ui a prolonged diplomatic battle that
prevented any new bishops from being appointed until 1942. The gov-

ernment felt no scruples about using its poUtical and financial muscle
to pressure the Vatican on the patronage issue. In 1938, the Spanish ambassador to the Vatican argued that the cabinet should refrain from
making further concessions to the Church untU negotiations for a new
concordat cordkming the state's patronage rights were concluded. He
urged the government to use financial support of the clergy as a bargaming lever to force the papacy's hand. The regime foUowed this strategy, a "carrot and stick" approach that yielded nothing to the regaUst
tactics of the past.27
Ecclesiastical frustration with the government's footdragging on the
patronage issue was also connected to clerical apprehensions about
the regime's ideological foundations. Franco never intended to create a
totaUtarian state on the fascist model, but he was shrewd enough to reaUze that his hold on power depended on his abiUty to deal with the
factious hosts of the Spanish right. He cleverly buUt what has been
caUed"his peculiar little system" by juggling the often competing interests of monarchists, Carlists, and the quasi-fascist Falange, which became the regime's only party.28 From the war's earUest days, Cardmal
Goma viewed the emergence of the Falange with a mixture of acceptance and suspicion. The party appeared committed to the "restoration
of the Spain of the CathoUc Kings," but there was the danger of a possible "deviation" Ui an antireUgious direction.29 As the regime's fascist
rhetoric resounded more loudly, the hierarchy's fears deepened. The
bishops saw a decree of 1938 creating a single syndicate of university
students under the Falange as a direct threat to Catholic student associ-

ations. Episcopal concern deepened upon the publication m 1937 of
Pius XI's encycUcal condemning the principles of Nazism.
*Ibid., pp. 67-73.

^Ibid., pp. 90-92. The regime did not formally annul what the Church saw as the single most offensive piece of republican legislation, the 1933 Law of Religious Confessions
and Congregations, until November 2 1 , 1939, because it wished to use derogation as a bar-

gaining tool to pressure the Vatican into accepting restoration of the 1851 concordat. Redondo, op. cit., II, 569.
""Stanley G.Payne, The Franco Regime, 1936-1975 (Madison, 1987), p. 192.
"'Rodríguez Aisa, op. cit., pp. 28, 33.

212REGAUSM, LIBERAUSM, AND GENERAL GRANCO

Cardinal Goma repeatedly expressed his reservations about the

Falange m private. But it was the redoubtable archbishop of SevUle,

Pedro Segura, who first pubUcly chaUenged the apparent drift of the
regime toward a fascist model. A resolute clerical conservative and
monarchist who was forced to resign his position as archbishop of
Toledo in 1931 after praising the recently deposed King Alfonso XIII, Se-

gura returned to Spam after the outbreak of the CivU War to direct the
SeviUe archdiocese. He had once thrown the gauntlet down before the

RepubUc. He was prepared to do the same before the NationaUst

regime. In 1938, he provoked its anger by prohibiting the saying of Mass
at a Falange demonstration on the grounds that such a service would be
a "profanation."50 Segura's clashes with government and party officials

were more than the picturesque jousts of a clerical eccentric. The
regime's 1938 decision to proceed with a reorganization of associa-

tional activity along corporatist Unes threatened the existence of a network of CathoUc groups, such as labor unions, agrarian syndicates,
student and professional associations that had been developing for
decades. In a pastoral letter of January, 1938, Segura pubUcly criticized

the suppression of CathoUc associations already underway Ui Seville.
Eleven bishops pubUshed his statement Ui their diocesan buUetins,

while the archbishop of Santiago defended the right of Catholic organizations to exist because "the state can never make a good CathoUc."31
Cardinal Goma was no less disUlusioned by the regime's corporatist
poUcy. In 1939, he dared to teU Franco that the government was an-

nulling "an unquestionable right of the Church" with measures unequaUed even "in the harshest times of the RepubUc."32 The cardinal's

disenchantment deepened foUowmg the CivU War's end Ui 1939. The
suppression of Catholic associations, especiaUy among university students, and the regime's continuing intransigence on the patronage issue

nearly reduced him to despair. In the agenda for the meeting of the

country's archbishops in 1939, the cardmal expressed a deep sense of

injury that many of the Church's demands were still unsatisfied. In re-

turn for placing "aU its weight Ui the service of the National Movement,"
the Church found that its generosity toward the regime had evoked "the
meanness of the government Ui different forms." As a result, "we find
ourselves in a difficult moment in the Ufe of the Spanish Church; an in3°Ramón Garriga, El Cardenal Segura y el Nacional-Catolicismo (Barcelona, 1977), p.

260.

"Quoted in Alfonso Alvarez Bollado, "Guerra civil y universo religioso," Miscelánea
Comillas, XLVIII (1990), 68-69.
"Quoted in Marquina Barrio, op. cit., p. 205.

BY WILLIAM J CALLAHAN213

vasion of the forces of the civU power threaten us." Goma hoped that
civU-ecclesiastical tensions would not lead to "open persecution of the
Church," but he expressed the fear that the regime desired a "gagged"
church designed to serve the interests of the state.33 In his first pastoral
letter after the war, Goma pubUcly criticized the idea of a state with absolute authority over society. This diplomaticaUy worded defense of the
Church's right to freedom of action caused the regime to do what no repubUcan government had ever attempted. The Ministry of Interior
(Gobernación) imposed a "total and rigorous" ban on publication of the
document. A deeply offended Goma wrote directly to Franco only to receive a further dressing down. The pastoral letter, said the general,
"filled many Spaniards with unease" because of "the doubts that it has
sown m various of its passages."34 Franco recounted the immense benefits the regime had bestowed on the Church, strongly implying that the
hierarchy was not suitably grateful for the advantages bestowed on the
Church.

In spite of the image of religious and poUtical unity projected to the
pubUc by church and state, relations continued to be tense behind the
scenes. In 1939, the regime removed one obstacle to smoother relations
by agreeing to restore the government appropriation for clerical
salaries. But the impasse between Madrid and the Vatican continued.
Pope Pius XII (1939-1958), aware of the suppression of CathoUc labor,
agricultural, and student associations, was Ui no hurry to conclude a
new concordat that would restore that state's ecclesiastical patronage
rights. Prolonged and difficult negotiations finaUy produced a limited
agreement (convenio) in 1941. Franco did not obtain the fuU concordat that he wanted, but the agreement re-estabUshed a modified version
of ecclesiastical patronage.35 The government agreed in turn that it
would not act unUateraUy on so-caUed "mixed" questions affecting civilecclesiastical relations without the prior consent of the Holy See. From
its perspective, the Vatican limited its compromise with the regime by
avoiding the total endorsement that a concordat UnpUed.36 Pius XII remained uneasy about Spam's poUtical organization and the government's pro-German poUcy
"Quoted ibid., p. 219.
"TWd., p. 205.
"The agreement provided that the papal nuncio in Madrid and representatives of the
government should prepare a list of six candidates for presentation to the pope who
would select three. This list would then be forwarded to Franco for the final selection.

56JoSe Manuel Cuenca Toribio, Relaciones Iglesia-Estado en la España contemporánea, 1833-1985 (Madrid, 1985), p. 97.

214REGAUSM, LIBERAUSM,AND GENERAL GRANCO

Official propaganda haUed the 1941 agreement as a brilliant example
of church-state harmony. But no new bishops were appointed untU November, 1942, for two reasons. First, the Vatican objected to the government's insistence that aU bishops should take an oath of loyalty. The
regime did not invent this idea. Here too it imitated the example of
nineteenth-century liberal regaüsts. Indeed, the revolutionary government in power m 1870 imposed just such a requirement on bishops
and clergy.37 The papacy disliked the idea then; it was no more enthusi-

astic in 1940. It objected to the requirement on principle and even

more to the wording devised by the regime, although in the end it accepted a compromise formula.38 The hierarchy stayed out of the battle
save for the ever trenchant Cardmal Segura, who told a British diplomat
that "the episcopal oath was nothing but flagrant Galhcanism and a
disgraceful humUiation for the Church.39 Second, the regime delayed
making new episcopal appointments, while a search for candidates
sympathetic to the Falange was carried out.40
CivU-ecclesiastical conflicts between 1936 and 1942 show that whUe
Franco was committed to a confessional state, he had no intention of al-

lowing either the hierarchy or the Vatican to interfere "too much" in the
construction of his "New" Spain.41 To be sure, the Nationalists identified
religion and state more thoroughly than any government since the days
of absolute monarchy. On balance, the Church saw its fortunes improve
substantiaUy, but as so often Ui the past, it found itself dependent on a
government whose view of civU-ecclesiastical relations contained
strong regaUst residues.

After 1945, church-state relations became smoother, in part because
Franco began to water down the fascist tinges characteristic of the
regime m its early history as a means of winning a measure of international respectabUity in postwar Europe.42 The general still hoped to conclude a concordat with a reluctant papacy aware of the disfavor with
which the Nationalist government was regarded in western Europe.
"The hierarchy and the clergy objected vigorously to the government's decision to
exact a loyalty oath, although in the end a face-saving compromise was reached with Pius
LX. The strident controversy over the oath has been discussed by Vicente Cárcel Ortí, Iglesia y revolución en España, 1868-1874 (Pamplona, 1979), pp. 412-437.
"Marquina Barrio, op. cit., pp. 297-305.
"Quoted in Michael E. Williams, St.Alban's CoUege, Valladolid (London and New York,

1986), p. 225.
"Marquina Barrio, op. cit. , pp. 292-293.
"Ibid.,p.60.
42The definitive study of civil-ecclesiastical relations during the late 1940's and 1950's
is Javier Tusell, Franco y los católicos: la política interior española entre 1945 y 195 7

BY WILLIAM J. CALLAHAN215

Negotiations were finaUy opened in 1950. They proved long and difficult. The Vatican was determined to reopen the patronage issue and
free the Church from the restrictions on CathoUc associational activity
stiU maintained by the regime.
The cabinet was far from agreed on the strategy that it wished to follow. Some members favored concessions in the area of patronage, al-

though the Spanish ambassador to the Holy See, Fernando Maria
CastieUa, took a tough line on this and another issue dear to the hierarchy and the Vatican, securing a greater degree of autonomy for the
Catholic Action movement similar to that enjoyed by its ItaUan counterpart. Franco remained a good regaUst. He adamantly opposed the
sUghtest concession on patronage. Indeed, he remarked that aUowing
the papacy to appoint bishops was like permitting the pope to name

provincial governors. In the end, the Vatican abandoned its hopes with
respect to patronage and reconfirmed the 1941 agreement.44
The concordat of 1953 marked the high point of the National
Catholicism that had emerged from the CivU War. Its underlying
premises were shattered during the foUowing decade after the Second
Vatican CouncU as an unprecedented wave of effervescence and unrest
swept through the ranks of the Spanish clergy. Clerical support for regional movements in Catalonia and the Basque Provinces, the participation of priests m demonstrations against social injustice, their support
for the separation of church and state, and even discreet criticism
from some bishops seriously eroded the regime's confidence m the
Church as a bulwark of the existing political order. Even Franco began
to consider the unthinkable. Ln 1968, Pope Paul VI wrote to the gen-

eral requesting the end of the state's patronage rights. Franco had no

intention of yielding without extracting substantial concessions. The
government's proposals for a new concordat showed that the regime
expected little from a church now regarded as either !independable or
hostile. The initial draft discussed Ui the cabinet caUed for the state to

renounce its patronage rights in return for the end of financial subsidies
for the Church, the elimination of obUgatory religious instruction in
pubUc schools, and the exemption from compulsory miUtary service
conceded to the clergy.
(Madrid, 1984). Conflicts did not entirely disappear during this period. There were periodic battles between the hierarchy and the Falange over education and the activities of
Catholic "apostolic" workers' associations operating within the Catholic Action organization.
AiIbid.,p.247.
"Ibid., p. 266.

216REGAUSM, UBERAUSM,AND GENERAL GRANCO

Nothing came of these and later negotiations, largely because neither

the hierarchy nor the Vatican wished to deal with "a power in bankruptcy."45 Tension between the Church and the regime deepened during the early 1970's to the point that by the time of Franco's death Ui
1975, the vast majority of bishops and priests were ready to embrace
the movement toward democracy already weU developed among large
segments of the population. The changes in civU-ecclesiastical relations

embodied in the agreement of 1976 and the constitution of 1978 finaUy

ended the long tradition of regaUst intervention in church affairs. It is
one of the ironies of modern Spanish history that General Franco was
the last head of state to represent the regaUsm associated with absolute
monarchy and nineteenth-century liberaUsm in the realm of ecclesiastical poUcy. In the end, even he recognized that regaUsm had at last run
its course.

"Cuenca Toribio, Relaciones Iglesia-Estado, p. 127'.

THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT
OF PIERRE DAILLYS CONCILIARISM
BY

Christopher M. Belutto*

The theologian and church statesman Pierre d'Ailly (1350-1420) has
been the subject of considerable scholarly attention, as befits one of
the foremost fathers of the Council of Constance (1414-1418). The
prominent role d'Ailly played as a conciliarist at Constance has, however, overshadowed the earlier development of his conciliar thought.
This tendency is reflected in modern studies of d'Ailly which have
correspondingly overlooked the important early stages of his career.1
D'Ailly's initial service to the University of Paris, the French crown, and
the Avignon papacy strongly influenced the evolution of his conciliarism. He seems to have embraced the via concilH in three steps from
the time he received his master's degree in theology in 1381 to his opposition in 1395 and 1396 to France's attempts to withdraw spiritual
and financial obedience from the Avignon papacy.2 He appears at first

to have been an enthusiastic supporter of conciliar principles, as seen

in his Epístola Diäboli Leviathan and the actions he took as rector of
*Mr. Bellitto is an assistant professor of ecclesiastical history at St. Joseph's Seminary,
Dunwoodie, Yonkers, New York. The author thanks Louis B. Pascoe, S.J., for comments and
suggestions on earlier drafts, and this journal's anonymous referees for professional criticism. Selections were read as the paper "University, Crown, and Papacy: Pierre d'Ailly and
the Politics of the Early Schism" at the 29th International Congress on Medieval Studies,
Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan, May 7, 1994.
'The definitive studies of d'Ailly focus on his later career. These include a study in political theory by Francis Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre d'Ailly. The Voluntarist
Tradition (New Haven, 1964); a biographical interpretation by Bernard Guenée, Between
Church and State, trans. Arthur Goldhammer (Chicago, 1991), pp. 102-258; and an older
account by Louis Salembier, Le Cardinal Pierre d'Ailly (Tourcoing, 1932). An exception
to this pattern is offered by Douglass Taber, who treats d'AUly's early career from about
1380 through 1394. See "The Theologian and the Schism: A Study of the Political Thought
of Jean Gerson (1363- 1429)" (Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1985), pp. 105-155.
The withdrawal of obedience, discussed for several years, was first implemented from

1398 to 1403. From late 1396 through May, 1403, d'Ailly largely withdrew himself from

this debate since the forces for withdrawal were too overwhelming.

217

218THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF PIERRE D'AILLY'S CONCILIARISM

the Collège de Navarre and university chancellor. Second, dismayed by
contentious debates among representatives of university, papacy, and
crown at the Councils of Paris about the via cessionis, d'Ailly's backing

of the via concilii grew cautious. The obstinacy of all involved appears

to have moderated his enthusiasm for a full-scale conciliar resolution

and moved an older, more circumspect d'Ailly to a third step: an oligarchic conciliarism, more properly characteristic of his ecclesiology,
that assigned a mediatory role to the College of Cardinals. Especially illustrative of the latter two steps are his three cedulae of 1395 and 1396
which have not been analyzed in detail though they indicate in important ways how his conciliarism developed.3
The Context

The development of d'Ailly's conciliar views cannot be understood
apart from the intertwined relations among the Church, crown, and university he served during the Great Schism." D'Ailly began the arts curriculum at the Collège de Navarre about 1364 and advanced through
theology. He came to royal and papal attention in 1379 when he was
delegated by the university to advise Charles V (1364-1380) of its support for a general council to resolve the schism. D'Ailly received the
master's degree and license in theology in 1381, but his rising career

stalled when Charles VI (1380-1422) banned university discussion of

the schism. D'Ailly retreated to his Noyon canonry, returning in 1384 as
rector of the Collège de Navarre. By 1389, he was royal chaplain. That
year, perhaps to curry the king's support and d'Ailly's friendship, Avi-

gnon's Clement VII (1378-1394) nominated d'Ailly as Paris chancellor.

In late 1394, after the election of Benedict XIII (1394-1417) as Clement's successor, Charles sent d'Ailly and others to convey greetings to
Benedict, who was quick to see in d'Ailly a man he preferred as friend
rather than as foe. D'Ailly resigned as chancellor when Benedict named
him bishop of Puy in 1 395; two years later, he was made bishop of Cambrai and, in 1411, cardinal.
'Cedulae, the medieval equivalent of modern-day position papers or memoranda, were
initial statements of the argument a proponent would follow in a particular debate.
4The present narrative of the Great Schism follows Noël Valois, La France et le Grand
Schisme d'Occident (4 vols.; Paris, 1896-1902), and Augustin Fliehe and Victor Martin

(eàs.),Histoire de l'Église depuis les originesjusqu'à nosjours,Vol. 1 4:L'Église au temps

du Grand Schisme et de la crise conciliare (1378- 1449), by E.Delaruelle.E.-R.LaBande,
and Paul Ourliac (Paris, 1962). For the details of d'Ailly's career which follow, see Guenée,
op. cit., pp. 1 12-176; Oakley, op. cit., pp. 9-14; and Salembier, op. cit.,pp. 53-1 12.

BY CHRISTOPHER M. BEIXITTO219

D'Ailly's career was marked by contentious attempts to resolve the
schism. There had been Valois support for the Avignon popes since the
schism's beginning in 1378 until 1392.5 When the schism wore on,
however, the French royal family did not wish to be labeled as schismatic. As the dukes of Berry and Burgundy won control over the unsta-

ble Charles VI, they began to move toward a unified papacy about 1392.

The University of Paris, meanwhile, did not formally accept Clement as
pope until 1383-6 Despite the royal ban on debating the schism, dissent

continued. In 1394, written opinions were gathered, revealing that the

university community supported three courses of action to resolve the
schism: a general council (via concilit), negotiation (via compromissi),
and abdication (via cessionis). These options were delineated in the famous letter of June 6, 1394, to Charles.7 The parallel efforts of crown
and university to resolve the schism merged during the Councils of
Paris, beginning in 1395.8 These gatherings brought together royal and
papal representatives along with French clerics and academics, especially from Paris.
D'Ailly used the Councils of Paris to present comprehensively his
views concerning the resolution of the schism. Within the context just
outlined, he had formulated—at first forcefully, then more cautiously

and moderately—aspects of the conciliar program he would advocate

after 1403.9 Themes which emerge in this conciliar evolution are his desire for a negotiated settlement, disdain for obstinacy among the com'Changes in Valois strategy are recounted by Howard Kaminsky Simon de Cramaud

and the Great Schism (New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1983), pp. 25-65.
Tor context, see Osmund Lewry,"Corporate Life in the University of Paris, 1249-1418,
and the Ending of Schism'fournal ofEcclesiastical History, 40 (1989), 511 -523; and Alan
E. Bernstein, "Magisterium and License: Corporate Autonomy Against Papal Authority in
the Medieval University of Paris," Viator, 9 (1978), 291-307. The narrative here follows R.
N. Swanson, Universities, Academics and the Great Schism (Cambridge, 1979), pp.
22-44.

The text is printed in H. Denifle and A. Châtelain (eds.), Chartularium Universitatis
Parisiensis (4 vols.;Paris, 1889-1897),III, 617-624.
The Councils of Paris have been the focus of uneven study. Part of the difficulty of
these meetings resides in their lack of uniformity. Historians even differ as to their numbering. It is not always clear in the narratives provided by Valois and Delaruelle, for instance, when a meeting was a formal council. For a full discussion, see Hélène MiUet,"Du

conseil au concile (1395-1408). Recherche sur la nature des assemblées du clergé en
France pendant le Grand Schisme d'Occident,"/0"»-««' des savants, 1985, pp. 137-159.
9A long authoritative work, the Tractatus de materia concilii generalis (1403), is
edited by Oakley, op. cit. ,pp. 244-342. For a concise statement from 1409, see the translation by Oakley, "The Propositiones utiles of Pierre d'Ailly: An Epitome of Conciliar Theory," Church History, 29 (I960), 398-403.

220THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF PIERRE D'AILLY'S CONCILIARISM

peting parties, fears of lasting schism, pleas for peace, an underlying re-

spect for corporate activity in which the members of a body exercise a
substantial function in decisions relating to their affairs, and the role of
the College of Cardinals.

D'Ailly's Initial Step: The Enthusiastic Conciliarist
The first step of d'Ailly's conciliar evolution may be seen throughout
the three academic exercises associated with reception of the master's
degree in theology which he offered in 138 1.10 Even though the king
opposed discussion of the schism at Paris, d'Ailly gathered together the
various viae for resolving the schism which were being discussed: the
use of force, a general council, negotiated compromise, and voluntary
abdication with a new election." D'Ailly did not take a stand on these
viae nor were they original to him, but bis codification was normative
for debates about the schism for a quarter-century.12 D'Ailly shortly
began to make his own opinions known more strongly.
Soon after this disputatio, royal pressure against Parisian debate
about the schism increased and d'Ailly made his tactical retreat to his
Noyon canonry for three years. There he developed his ideas about the
schism in his Epístola Diaboli Leviathan, a brief work written about
1381 in the clever style of a demonic agent's instructions to worldly

prelates on how to propagate the schism and thereby extend the devil's
grasp on the Church." The letter, written with a sarcastic bite, notes

"The master's degree in theology was conferred after the candidate, at the completion
of twelve years of study, successfully took part in three exercises: the vesperiae, a disputation offered during a particular evening, an áulica delivered the following morning in
the bishop's presence, and a resumpta, or lecture, given on the first day that classes resumed in the next term. These exercises entailed presenting a position on a matter of the
candidate's choosing, participating in a defense of that position against questions offered
by older masters acting as examiners, and resolving any points left undetermined. See P

Glorieux, "L'enseignement au Moyen Âge. Techniques et méthodes en usage à la Faculté
de Théologie de Paris, au XIIIe siècle," Archives d'histoire doctrinales et littéraire du

Moyen Age, 35 (1968), 141-147.
"The text is in Louis Ellíes Dupin (ed.),fohannis Gersonii . . . Opera omnia (4 vols.;
Antwerp, 1706), I, 646-662. A discussion of the via facti is provided by R. N. Swanson,

"The Way of Action: Pierre d'Ailly and the Military Solution to the Great Schism," Studies
in Church History, 20 (1983), 191-200.
"Swanson, Universities, pp. 46-49.
"The text may be found in P.Tschackert.itefer vonAilli (Gotha, 1877), Appendix V, pp.

BY CHRISTOPHER M. BELLITTO221

three solutions: a general council of the Church, a negotiated settlement
among the rival camps, and the abdication of both popes. These would
be the ways formally presented by the University of Paris in its letter of
June 6, 1394, to the French crown.
After reviewing the models of unity that characterized the Apostolic
Church, the demonic agent in the Epístola Diaboli Leviathan goes on
to disdain the "rats," presumably academics at Paris, who seek a resolution of the schism." Leviathan urges his prelates to keep the schism
alive and fight the forces for union, appealing to their desire for glory:
. . . [L] et your heart be made as hard as stone so that, filled with all savageness and brutality, you may rather prefer to see the entire world perish than
consent to yield your glory to another and permit your fame or distinction
to be sullied in anything or allow your pride and pomp to undergo the
slightest diminution.15

Twisting scripture, Leviathan sardonically commends prelates who prolong the schism.16
Modern scholars have debated the influence of the Epístola Diaboli
Leviathan,11 but it is noteworthy for two reasons. First, it marks the first
time that d'Ailly took a strong stand in support of the conciliar resolution of the schism, albeit anonymously. The letter indicates clearly that,
at least privately, d'Ailly at this very early moment in his career saw conciliar principles as an effective means to resolve the schism. A general
council would depose both rival popes, he writes,

15-21 The standard translation from this text is by Irving W Raymond,"D'Ailly's Epístola
Diaboli Leviathan," Church History, 22 (1953), 181-191.

"Raymond, op. cit., pp. 185-186.

"Ibid., p. 189.
"¦Leviathan, recalling his revolt against God in heaven, counsels his ministers:". . . [B]e
imitators of me , for I have given you an example, so that just as I myself have done, so shall
you also do" (Jn. 13:15). Raymond, op. cit. ,p. 189.
"Swanson says the work's impact was almost nil, dismissing the treatise as "no more
than an emotional outburst with no proper place in the conciliarist debates," Universities, p. 65. Bernstein senses d'Ailly's passion, believing that the letter "illustrates the righteousness he always attributed to his own convictions," Pierre d'Ailly and the Blanchard

Affair (Leiden, 1978), pp. 67-68. Salembier uses the letter to place d'Ailly at the front lines

of the battle against the schism from almost the very beginning of the rival papacies: Le

Grand Schisme d'Occident, 3d. ed. (Paris, 1902), pp. 91-94. Guenée, who chastises d'Ailly

for his absence from Paris during this time, nevertheless notes the force of this document:
op. cit., pp. 123-124.

222THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF PIERRE D'AILLY'S CONCILIARISM

and the choice [for a new, unified pope] will fall on a suitable person who
does not covet the honor but is chosen by God as Aaron was; in which case
the people will return to the one and only sanctuary, Jerusalem, which is
the city of unity and peace.18

Second, the tone of the letter indicates the personal exasperation
d'Ailly felt toward those who prevented a resolution, a frustration he
dared not reveal in public for fear of alienating himself from the powers
he hoped to influence to end the schism.
D'Ailly moved closer to a conciliar solution within a few years of his
return to Paris after the Noyon retreat. He found himself in the middle
of an exercise in delegated corporate authority that would later be-

come an important part of the conciliar program. In 1385 and 1386,

d'Ailly led university opposition against Clement's hand-picked chancellor, Jean Blanchard." In a pair of addresses he delivered at the Col-

lège de Navarre in February, 1386, d'Ailly charged that Blanchard

exceeded his authority and university regulations in collecting fees for
the granting of teaching licenses. To make his case, d'Ailly argued that
the university was a corporation of members that had the authority to
challenge the actions of its deputed head, the chancellor.20 D'Ailly did
not go on to apply this principle, directly or analogously, to a general
council of the Church and the pope, but he was clearly manifesting a
fundamental aspect of the conciliar program. This principle was that
the members of a corporatio had the power to oppose, and even depose, its head which ruled not by his own authority but only as an au-

thorized functionary dependent on the whole corporatio.21 Blanchard

was replaced as chancellor in 1386, but his successor continued his

abuses. Under strong Parisian pressure, Clement nominated d'Ailly as
chancellor in 138922

Although he owed his position to Clement's influence and royal
favor, d'Ailly continued to challenge the Avignon pope and the crown
"Raymond, op. cit., pp. 188-189.
"The definitive study is provided by Bernstein, Pierre d'Ailly, especially pp. 150-176.
20Bernstein included critical editions of these texts in Pierre d'Ailly:'Radix Omnium

Malorum est Cupiditas," pp. 197-236,and"Super Omnia Vincit Veritas"pp. 237-298. According to Bernstein, the archetypical statement of this corporation theory is in "Super
Omnia," p. 281, line 26-p. 282, line 15.
"Ibid., pp. 169-171 and 180-183. The authority of the members of a corporatio and
the implications for conciliarism are discussed by Brian Tierney, Foundations ofthe Conciliar Theory (Cambridge, 1955), pp. 106-131.
"Bernstein, Pierre d'Ailly, pp. 79-80.

BY CHRISTOPHER M. BELUTTO223

while moving closer to a conciliar resolution. In 1392, d'Ailly allowed
his protégé Jean Gerson (1363-1429) to discuss, in the exercises for
Gerson's master's degree in theology, the abdication of papal spiritual
authority and thereby to break the royal ban on university discussion of
the schism. Furthermore, in 1393, when Clement summoned d'Ailly and
other academics to his court to discuss the statements by some Parisian
scholars that stubborn popes blocking union could be stripped of their
titles, d'Ailly and the rest simply refused to go. In 1394, when the university increased its public calls for a resolution of the schism, d'Ailly as
chancellor led the vanguard. He was apparently behind the idea to solicit the written opinions of the university community in the winter of

1394.23 A box placed in the university precinct for those concerned to

offer their opinions on the schism and ways to resolve it was filled with
about 10,000 ballots. D'Ailly was then one of the academics who incor-

porated the responses into the letter ofJune 6, 1394, to Charles.24

The Second Step: A More Cautious Conciliarist
About this time, d'Ailly took a second, more cautious step in the development of his conciliar thought. Though a university leader, he maintained his independence when the university and French crown took a

more radical, less conciliatory turn in late 1394. Parisian scholars and

the Valois family began vociferously to support the idea that the only
way to end the schism was to force papal abdication by a withdrawal of
spiritual obedience and finances.25 Reacting against this position, d'Ailly
advocated a more cautious and nuanced program, thereby incurring the
wrath of his colleagues. The agenda d'Ailly proposed is clearly seen in
his prima cédula, delivered around the time of the initial Council of
Paris (February 2-18, 1395) and his secunda et tertia cedulae, drawn

up around the time of the next Council of Paris (August 16-September
15, 1396).26 The prima cédula is a basic statement of his position. Brief
2Taber,op.ctf.,pp. 125-129, 134, 154.

"Swanson, Universities, pp. 82-89"Delaruelle, op. cit. ,p. 84. For this change, see also Swanson, Universities, pp. 90-134,
and Kaminsky, op. cit., pp. 108-243.
26For the texts of these three cedulae, see Franz Ehrle,Martin deAlpartils Chronica ac-

titatorum temporibus domini Benedicti XIII, vol. 12 (Paderborn, 1906), pp. 471-474,
476-480, 482-489. The cedulae are reproduced in facsimile in Gilbert Ouy (ed.), Le recueil épistolaire autographe de Pierre d'Ailly et les notes d'Italie de Jean de Montreuil

(Amsterdam, 1966), 334'-336r, 339?-341?, and 336'-338v, respectively.

224THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF PIERRE D'AILLY'S CONCILIARISM

and general, the cédula stipulates that the French king should play an
important role in resolving the schism, but he should not force the Avignon pope's hand, as the dukes of Berry and Burgundy were trying to
do. The secunda cédula does not add new ideas to the prima cédula,
although it does spell out in a bit more detail how the withdrawal of
obedience increasingly supported by the crown and the university
would accomplish not peace but increased tension. The tertia cédula,
the longest, is a rigidly organized argument for the negotiated settlement abandoned by Parisian scholars and the Valois family.
D'Ailly's caution in the cedulae was disparaged by his academic colleagues who were becoming less compromising toward Benedict. This

led to a break between d'Ailly and the university community by the fall

of 139527 On February 1, 1395, the day before the first Council of Paris
began, d'Ailly preached in support of the Parisian scholars' originally
preferred method of voluntary abdication.28 But his remarks soon after
in the prima cédula that the via cessionis should be only one of three
viae considered by Benedict earned him the animosity of many at the
University of Paris, who felt that d'Ailly had abandoned their growing
support of a forced abdication to his own interests. These feelings grew
when Benedict, apparently in gratitude, named d'Ailly bishop of Puy in
April, 1395, just six weeks after the council adjourned. In reaction, the
University's Arts Faculty later that year censured d'Ailly and prohibited
him from participating in their assemblies which debated the unity of
the Church.29 D'Ailly, however, maintained his independent efforts to
end the schism by keeping all options open.
One of his goals was to advise the French king how best to participate in the resolution of the schism. D'Ailly states that Charles should
exhort Benedict to abdicate on his own for the good of the Church, but
the king should not force the pope to do so.30 The king should also beware not to become entangled in the question of favoritism toward the
Avignon papacy, according to d'Ailly, lest:
27Taber,op.czT.,p.201.
28M. L. Bellaguet, Chronique du religieux de St. Denys (Paris, 1839-1852), II, 224-225.

"Swanson, Universities, p. 104; Valois, op. cit., III, 170-171;Taber,qp.c«r.,pp. 196-199.
Though d'Ailly owed some of his prestige to the crown, it must be noted that here he
was not simply following the Valois desire to force papal abdication, by withdrawal of
obedience if necessary. Ehrle, op. cit., p. 472:". . . quod non apparet pro nunc expediens,
quod dominus papa exhortetur seu moneatur per regem ad viam cessionis simpliciter.
Ubi est advertendum, quod differenciam facio dicere, quod expediret, quod dominus
papa se offerret voluntarle et caritative ad viam cessionis pro bono pacis ecclesie; et
dicere, quod expédiât consulere régi, quod papam exhortetur ad viam predictam."

BY CHRISTOPHER M. BELLITTO225

... it may be said not only by adversaries, but even by other princes and

kings of our part, that, when the king had a pope of his nation and the Gallican tongue [Clement VII, the Frenchman Robert de Geneva] , he did not
exhort him to ceding the papacy, but now, when he has a pope of a foreign
kingdom [Benedict XIII, the Aragonese Pedro de Luna], he exhorts him to
this, so that he might have another of his own kingdom; this suspicion can
become an impediment against the good of the Church . . .31

Nor, counseled d'Ailly, should Charles act as obstinately as some prelates had, for in so doing he could be accused with them of prolonging
the schism. The French king was advised not to impose his views on
other kings or princes, because this would serve only to tie the question of schism up with national rivalries. Charles should work privately

and quietly toward union, refraining from insisting on his own agenda.32

A central theme throughout all three of d'Ailly's cedulae is peaceful
negotiation. For him, peace was a necessary prerequisite for coming up
with a resolution that would be recognized by all sides as lasting, legal,
and binding.33 D'Ailly, in the midst of a long, complex discussion of particulars about resolution, pauses to remind himself and his audience
that they must resolve to work toward agreement.34 Even here, each
competing camp will argue that its plan is better than the other's.35
D'Ailly had a great fear that animosity, already strong, would only be exacerbated by competition and threats, further dividing the Church and
"Ehrle, op. cit. ,pp. 472-473:". . . diceretur non solum ab adversaries, sed eciam ab aliis
regibus et principibus partis nostre, quod, quando rex habebat papam de genere suo et
lingua gallicana, non exhortabatur eum ad cedendum papatui, sed nunc, quando habet

papam de regno alieno, ad hoc eum exhortatur, ut alium de regno suo habere valeat; et ista
suspicio posset esse occasio impediendi bonum pacis. . . ." See also the secunda cédula
in Ehrle, p. 477: "Item forte dicerent iamque dixerunt aliqui eciam benivoli regis et regni:
cur contra Benedictum fieret talis novitas, que facta non fuit contra dementem; et hoc ascriberent, licet falso, affectioni patrie vel persone, quod esset novo scismati non mediocrem occasionem prestare."

"This theme is repeated throughout the secunda cédula: Ehrle, op. cit., pp. 476-478.
"Ibid., p. 480: "Eciam huiusmodi approbatio esset medium concordandi papam et

regem, cardinales et prelates in prosecucione huius negocii, que concordia, quam necessaria sit in proposito, satis manifestum est."

HIbid., p. 486:". . . tamen in tam diversa et adversa oppinionum varietate, Deo inspirante, habemus nunc novam quamdam unionem, qua scilicet omnes tam partes contendentes quam principes et prelati utriusque obediencie et partis neutre unanimiter
volunt intendere ad cedacionem dicti schismatis et ecclesie unitatem."

"Ibid., p. 485:"Patet, quia, si verus papa et eius collegium eligant unam viam, et pars ex
adverso contendens eligat aliam et obstínate seu proterve velint persistere, nullus eos potent cogère resilire, qui quelibet pars cum suis adherentibus dicet, quod via sua est bona
et melior quam altera. . . ."

226THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF PIERRE D'AILLY'S CONCILIARISM

prolonging the schism.36 Abdication, in particular, should be negotiated
amicably and done freely, else a charge may be made that the action was
taken in metu, as the cardinals in Anagni claimed in 1378 concerning
their election of Urban VI as pope months before,37 and the abdication

may be declared null and void.38 Despite d'Ailly's warnings in theprima

cédula against a forced abdication, a withdrawal of obedience intended
to produce this result was supported by the crown and the University
of Paris. This move was approved by a vote of 87-22 at the February,
1395, Council of Paris, but the action became a dead letter almost im-

mediately when Benedict refused to abdicate.3'

After the February, 1395, vote and into the next year, resentment
among French academics and clerics toward Benedict grew. Still, d'Ailly,

although clearly disappointed with Benedict's refusal, frequently men-

tioned in the secunda et tertia cedulae delivered in the summer of

1396 that stubbornness must be avoided by all sides. He surely saw that

the tide toward another vote for a withdrawal of obedience to force ab-

dication was soon to become strong enough to win compliance. This
threatened subtraction of obedience boded ill for d'Ailly. Writing in the
summer of 1396, he warned the French clergy that unless it discussed
matters with the pope,

. . . there is to be fear of a new schism between the Roman and Gallican

Church, and between the kingdom of France and certain other kingdoms,
even of this obedience, and above all of the confirmation of obstinacy on
the adverse part in this schism. Indeed it is to be feared, that the pope
[Benedict], reasonably provoked and irritated by this new kind of action,
will transfer his seat elsewhere, and that from this many other inconveniences will follow, which for now I omit to write.™

While the three cedulae demonstrate d'Ailly's typically moderate,

measured style in form and content, this passage indicates that he is not
"Bernstein notes that division arose at the University of Paris in the 1380's when Blanchard was forced onto the community as its chancellor. This time of discord must have exercised some influence on d'Ailly's attitude toward the dissension caused by the schism

(Pierre d'Ailly, pp. 45-53).

37A comprehensive chronicle of these events is provided by Walter Ulimann, The Origins of the Great Schism (London, 1948).
»Ehrle, op. eft., pp. 471 , 477.
"Delaruelle, op. cit., pp. 84-85.
*Ehrle, op. cit., p. 479: ". . . timendum est de novo scismate inter Romanam et Gallicanam ecclesiam, et inter regnum Francie et alique alia regna, eciam huius obediencie, et

insuper de connrmacione obstinacionis partis adverse in suo scismate. Timendum eciam,

ne papa, huiusmodo novitate permotus et racionabiliter irritatus, sedem suam alibi trans-

férât, et quod inde multa alia inconveniencia sequantur, que scribere pro nunc omitto."

BY CHRISTOPHER M. BELLITTO227

without his moments of frustration and irritation. Several times he dis-

cusses with distress the persistence of the schism and indicates his
greatest fear: prolonged schism.41 Midway through the tertia cédula, in
the most exhortatory passage of the three cedulae under consideration, d'Ailly issues a call to action to the contending parties. He chastises
them for bringing ruin to the Church by obstinately persisting in the
schism and harming the unity of the Church. Making reference to unnamed notorious schismatics, d'Ailly further charges that they support
secular power against church authority and that their actions should be
brought to light by legal proceedings so that their reluctance to restore
peace and unity to the Church may not be hidden.42 He issued vague,
ominous threats, warning that efforts against union would promote disorder. Additionally, d'Ailly noted that God would be angered, especially
by popes tainted with the scandal of schism, and that if one side opposed a way to peace supported by the other, notoriety fell upon the
party opposing that via.4i

The Third Step: The Oligarchic Conciliarist
D'Ailly now took a third step in his conciliar evolution, arriving by
way of his characteristic moderation to an oligarchic conciliarism. Near
the end of the tertia cédula, he declares that the Church should seriously consider how a conclave of cardinals might be required to choose
a unified pope before it turned to the last resort of a subtraction of obedience.44 His treatment of the matter is noteworthy since the relationship of the pope to his cardinals, and of the cardinals to the Church,
would become an important point in his later advocacy of a limited
conciliar theory of ecclesiastical government that ascribed to the College of Cardinals a mediatory role.45
4,See, for instance, Ehrle, op. cit., p. 485: "... et sic erit periculum evidens perpetuandi
scisma."

aIbid., p. 486:". . . si obstinate persistèrent in scismate et culpabiliter négligèrent seu
contempnerent prosequucionem unitatis ecclesie; et tunc quando hoc esset darum et notorium, non deberet queri vel expectari eorum concordia vel consensus, ymo ipsis spretis
et repulsis tanquam notorie scismaticis, auxiliante brachio seculari. . . ."
"7&id.,pp.479,472,489.

"Ibid., pp. 487-488.
45D'Ailly treated the subject of the cardinals several times in his career. See Oakley, Po-

litical Thought, pp. 1 18-129 and 346-347; and Louis B. Pascoe, S.J., "Theological Dimen-

sions of Pierre d'Ailly's Teaching on the Papal Plenitude of Power,"Annuarium Historiae
Conciliorum,\\ (1979), 357-366.

228THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF PIERRE D'AILLY'S CONCILIARISM

D'Ailly devoted almost all of the tertia cédula to the subject of the
cardinals. He laid out their role in resolving the schism first by review-

ing the circumstances in which they elect the pope. They hold this

right by virtue of the Church, or a general council, and canon law.46
Then he carefully reviewed the four ways by which the cardinals' right
to elect a pope may be abrogated: if all the cardinals are physically unable to come together because of exile, if they are heretics, if they
refuse to elect (a situation which causes schism because the Church

must have a pastor), or if the right to elect is withdrawn by the Church
or a general council.47
The question of a college's legitimacy raised a series of complications. If a schismatic or invalidly elected pope appoints his own college
of cardinals, this collège may not then elect his successor because it
does not have that legal authority. Doubtful cardinals, in other words,
participate in an invalid election of an illegal pope, who further clouds
matters by naming more cardinals.48 This conclusion enmeshed the via
cessionis in deeper difficulties. Abdication, even by both popes, did not
necessarily represent an easy solution for the Church for three reasons.
First, the chances of rival colleges of cardinals agreeing to persuade
their popes to abdicate simultaneously were slim. Second, the right to
elect a unified successor did not fall clearly on the shoulders of univer-

sally recognized electors. Third, years of rivalry would almost surely pre-

clude unity in choosing a candidate acceptable to both colleges of
cardinals, even if they could agree on a body of electors.49

By 1396, the terminal date of this study, d'Ailly must have been con-

founded. His support for a general council, developed to a great extent,

"D'Ailly must be referring here to the several decrees which granted the cardinals the
leading, and then exclusive, right to elect popes. Nicholas II (1059-1061) issued In
nomine Domini in 1059, which formalized the cardinals' right to elect a pope. See Georg

H. Pertz et al. (eds.), Monumenta Germaniae Histórica (Hanover, 1826--), Leges, IV,

1 :538-54l . Canon 1 , Licet de evitanda, of the Third Lateran Council (1 179) made this de-

cree more specific. The council stipulated that when two-thirds of the college agreed on

a candidate, this majority constituted the sanior pars of the college and the candidate
could be made pope validly. The incorporation of this canon in Gregory IX's Decretales

can be found in X.I.6.6. in Emil Friedberg (ed.), Corpus iuris canonici (2 vols.; Leipzig,
1879-1881), II, 51.

"Ehrle, op. cit., pp. 482-483.
wIbid.,p. 484:". . . dubitati cardinales per suam electionem non possum dare indubitatum ius pape noviter eligendo, seu de novo faceré indubitatum papam. Patet clare, quia si
dubitatur de potestate eligentium, per consequens dubitabitur de potestate per eos
electi."

49IbId., pp. 484-485.

BY CHRISTOPHER M. ???????229

was not wholehearted. He was by this year of the opinion that it remained to a general council of the Church to resolve the schism by
electing a unified papacy,50 but one searches in vain throughout his
cedulae for an unqualified or enthusiastic endorsement of a council.
More often, the way of a general council is one in a series of options.51
He had, for instance, mentioned a general council in the prima cédula
of 1395 more as secondary option than primary goal:
. . . [A]lthough the way of a general council may be seen by some as conforming more to common laws, nevertheless this is a more difficult and
longer course to follow; therefore at the present time it is not to be counseled as more expedient. It is not nevertheless to be rejected.52

It must be noted that even his call for a council did not represent a
desire for a general meeting of the universal Church. He sought instead
a limited gathering of those behind Avignon, a meeting which would
have the force of a general council,53 or separate meetings of the Avignon and Roman obediences.54 It is almost as if d'Ailly wished the other
two viae proposed by the University of Paris, negotiation and abdication, could have been accomplished. He had disproven the efficacy of

these viae himself, however, by pragmatic consideration of the circum-

stances at work at that time. Negotiation was blocked by the obstinacy
of Benedict and political considerations. Fears of the animosity a voluntary or forced abdication would cause, not to mention the complexity
of a subsequent election by rival colleges of cardinals, prevented that
KIbid., p. 484:"Ex quo evidenter sequitur, quod sola via cessionis utriusque de papatu
contendentis non esset simpliciter et per se sufficiens medium terminacionis presentís

scismatis. Patet, quia ipsa sola posita, adhuc remanet ecclesia acephala, id est sine papa, et
remanet maxima difficultas de provisione seu electione futura. Quod manifeste patet, quia
si diceretur, sicut ab aliquibus dictum est, quod ad cardinales non pertineret huiusmodi

electio propter aliquem de casibus predictis seu aliam culpam suam, tunc constat, quod
sic dicendo caderemus in abissum immensarum difncultatum, que non possent terminari
nisi per concilium generale."

"See, for just one example, ibid. , p. 486: "... possent et deberent prelati ecclesie ad dic-

tam cedacionem scismatis et novam electionem summi pontificis per concilium generale
seu aliam viam racionabilem procederé."
KIbid., p. 472:". . . [L]icet via concilii generalis videretur aliquibus iuri communi conformior, tamen ipsa est difficilior et ad prosequendum prolixior; ideo pro nunc non est
consulenda tanquam expediencior. Non est tamen reprobanda."
"Ibid. ,p. 480:". . . dominus papa exhortetur per regem et prelates regni sui de convocando omnium prelatorum huius obedience commune concilium, quod secundum
aliquos haberet vim concilii generalis."
wIbid., p. 485:". . . quod valde expediens esset laborare, et adhuc expediencius fuisset
cicius laborasse, quod dicte partes contendentes convenirent localiter pro tractando, ut
scilicet consentirent mentaliter in viam aliquam mutuam pro dicto scismate terminando."

230THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF PIERRE D'AILLY'S CONCILIARISM

route from being pursued. This pattern of emerging support for a general council would continue for more than a decade, until events led to

the unfortunate result of a third pope being elected at Pisa in 1409. This
must have been a grave disappointment for d'Ailly since his Propositiones utiles had been written to the cardinals just before Pisa to encourage their leading role in resolving the schism.55

Conclusions

From the documentary evidence, it seems clear that d'Ailly's personal
circumstances and modus procedendi had contributed significantly to
the incremental development of his conciliar thought as it stood in
1396. D'Ailly frequently had found himself ensnared in a precarious situation. Owing his positions and prestige to the University of Paris,
French crown, and Avignon papacy, D'Ailly stood on constantly shifting
ground. The crown had changed its position with regard to Avignon,
moving from support to opposition, and the university community,
never fully behind Avignon, became more strident in its opposition to
Clement and Benedict. D'Ailly had been forced to respond quickly and

carefully. His frequent maneuvering and characteristic caution and

moderation have made him a wise, honorable hero in the eyes of older
biographers, such as Louis Salembier,56 but an ambitious opportunist according to the more recent evaluations of Bernard Guenée and Howard
Kaminsky.57 It must be asked whether these opposing views comprehensively assess d'Ailly.
An interpretation midway between these poles seems to be in order
by way of two observations. First, while it is true that d'Ailly seems to
have acted at times to keep himself in favor with one sphere of influence or another, he was not alone in carefully reading the signs of the
times and responding accordingly. Anyone seeking to resolve the
schism while mamtaining positions of favor in royal, papal, and aca5The text, found in F. Martène and V Durand, Veterum Scriptorum et Monumentorum. . . amplissima collectio (Paris, 1733), VII, 909-911, is translated by Oakley, "Propo-

sitiones utiles:

^Salembier, a canon from the area which d'Ailly served as bishop, offers an uncritical,
almost fawning biography in Le Cardinal Pierre d'Ailly. In marked contrast, a more discerning analysis may be found throughout Oakley, Political Thought.

"Guenée, op. cit. ,passim; Kaminsky, op. cit. ,p. 126, n. 55.

BY CHRISTOPHER M. BELLLTTO231

demie circles was subject to a series of tactics that could be interpreted
either as self-interest or pragmatic strategy.58 The University of Paris,
long recognized as the parens scientiarum of Christendom, was the
scene of fierce competition among leading theologians and lawyers
fighting for favor and power in the papal and royal courts.59 To a considerable extent mixed motives characterized the discussions about the

resolution of schism, as academics acted out of both faith and personal
expedience to ensure a unified Church and an influential career.60 Maneuvering, in other words, was a necessity that should not preclude an
honest desire to see the schism resolved.

Second, acting in the same manner as his colleagues does not excuse
the self-interest d'Ailly admittedly exhibited, but reading d'Ailly's strategy as nothing other than personal expedience does not fully appreciate the discretion at the core of his modus procedendi. D'Ailly always
sought to incorporate all of the affected parties—including himself—in
an even-handed debate about resolving the schism; he wanted to avoid
the rancor and alienation that would only prolong the split. As chancellor, for instance, he advocated a broad participation of the university
community in the resolution of the schism. When the crown and university took a more severe approach that risked an estranged relationship with Avignon, d'Ailly sought a via media. To d'Ailly, the 1398-1403
withdrawal of obedience must have represented five years of wasted
opportunities for resolution, especially since the Church in 1403 stood
basically where it had stood in 1398, with the notable difference that
the Avignon papacy had grown even more stubborn and angered.
D'Ailly's concern for keeping himself in the mainstream of mediation

from 1381 through 1396 was, therefore, a wise strategy.

Moreover, the examples recounted in this study of his frequent will-

ingness, first, to challenge the university, crown, and Avignon patrons
who had advanced his career and, second, to go so far as to risk their
censure undermine the suggestion that d'Ailly's support was simply
purchased by his latest sponsor. Specifically, his breaking of the royal
"See Simon de Cramaud's social and political climbing in Howard Kaminsky, "The Early
Career of Simon de Cramaud," Speculum, 49 (1974), 499-534.
The most famous reference was in the letter sent by Gregory LX (1227-1241) to the
University of Paris in August, 1231. The text is in Denifle and Châtelain, Chartularium
Universitatis Parisiensis, 1, 137-139.

¦"Swanson points out that untangling the roles played by academics is often difficult:
"... [W] ith the increasing employment of university members on government business it

is often impossible to differentiate between royal and university attitudes or envoys"
(Universities, p. 93).

232THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF PIERRE D'AILLY'S CONCILIARISM

prohibition against discussion of the schism at Paris, his refusal to support Clement and Benedict unreservedly, and his rift with a stiff-necked
university community bear testimony to d'Ailly's conviction to remain
his own man as much as was reasonable, prudent, and possible throughout this complex, volatile period. D'Ailly's movement toward a general
council as the most viable forum for resolving the schism, therefore,

was strongly influenced by political circumstance and his moderate
personality. D'Ailly was more a pragmatist than a theoretician when it
came to church politics. He embraced the conciliar program in part because of his own fragile, often contradictory position as royal, papal,
and university client. Perhaps no other man of his age found himself so
tested by the challenge of serving so many masters. This portrait of
d'Ailly's development does not detract from his role as a leading conciliarist at Constance. It does indicate, however, that d'Ailly's support for
the conciliar program evolved carefully, even tentatively, in the first two
decades of the Great Schism.

AFTERVATICAN COUNCIL ?:
THE AMERICAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS

AND THE "SYLLABUS" FROM ROME, 1966-1968
Samuel J.Thomas*

For much of the world, the work of the Catholic bishops and periti

(experts) at the Second Vatican CouncU (1962-1965) coUectively sig-

naled the end of a four-hundred-year-old siege mentality, the beginnings
of a positive engagement with modernity, and a generaUy more tolerant,
open, and collégial church. In fact, it has become a truism that the CouncU Fathers generated documents strongly affirming Pope John XXIITs
caU for church renewal (aggiornamentd).

Yet, less than a year after the Council's final session, a Vatican initiative occurred that seemed at odds with the Church's new pubUc image.
At the very least, the intervention was a sign of Rome's growing concern over the nature, pace, and extent of renewal, and of its resolve to
tighten the reins and exercise more direct control. This episode began
when Alfredo Cardmal Ottaviani (1890- 1988), the conservative prefect
of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), sent a
secret circular letter dated July 24, 1966, to the heads of aU CathoUc
episcopal conferences.1 He reminded the world's bishops that they
must carefuUy monitor Church renewal so that errors in the interpreta*The author, who is a professor of history in Michigan State University, wishes to express his thanks to the Reverend George Michalek, Archivist and Vice Chancellor, Diocese
of Lansing, for organizing the Bishop Alexander Zaleski collection, opening it to historians, and for his generous and professional co-operation during the time spent researching

the topic of this essay. Sincere appreciation is also extended to Professors Patrick Carey of
Marquette University and Philip Gleason of the University of Notre Dame for their very
helpful comments and advice on an earlier version of this essay. The author, of course,
takes sole responsibility for any changes or errors made in the final draft.

1A copy of the letter, "Cum Oecumenicum," and related documents are in the Archives

of the Diocese of Lansing (hereafter ADL) among the papers of Alexander Zaleski, Bishop
of Lansing (1965-1975). See Zaleski Collection (hereafter ZC),"NCCB Committee on Doc-

trine, Bishops' Response to Cardinal Ottaviani's Letter, 1 966," ADL. For more biographical
information on Zaleski, see note 19 infra.

233

234AFTER VAnCAN COUNCIL II: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

tion of the CouncU's decrees could be prevented or stopped. The Sacred Congregation, Ui its role as the Vatican's official guardian of the
faith, would provide the oversight and guidelines for achieving those
ends.2 Ottaviani's letter was a significant expression of a concerted effort by the Vatican to ensure orthodoxy in the heady atmosphere of
freedom and change that characterized the immediate aftermath of the
CouncU.3

How did America's CathoUc bishops respond Ui that "heady atmosphere"? In order to answer this question, a more focused inquiry wUl
be necessary, one that probes the bishops' self-image after the CouncU:
more precisely, how soon and how earnestly did they act on the CouncU's rather resounding declarations of their coUegial relation to the
Holy See and to one another? One answer has already been given by Father Gerald Fogarty toward the end of his cogent analysis of the relations between The Vatican and the American Hierarchyfrom 1870 to
1965. After criticizing the bishops' relatively minimal involvement in
the Council's reconsideration of the doctrine of coUegiaUty, Fogarty
added this assessment of their behavior "in the years after the councU":
"Only graduaUy . . . did the . . . bishops begin to see what their prede2In October, 1965, during the final session of the Council, Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani,
Secretary of the Sacred Congregation which was then still called the Holy Office, answered an Italian journalist's inquiry about the changes which would occur in the Coun-

cil's wake:"I am an old policeman guarding the gold reserves. Do you think I would do my
duty if I started to sell out, if I left my post, if I just winked at these things? ... If you tell
an old policeman that the laws are going to change, he will realize that he is an old po-

liceman, and he will do everything possible to prevent them from changing. If the laws
change anyway, God will surely give him strength to defend the new treasure, in which he

believes. Once the new laws have become the Church's treasure, an enrichment of her
gold reserves, then there is still only one principle: loyalty in the Church's service. But this
service means loyalty to her laws, like a blind man. Like the blind man that I am." Quoted
in Mario von Galli, The Council and the Future (New York, 1966), p. 187. Ottaviani's atti-

tude notwithstanding, evidence of a changing American church abounded. In June, 1 966,

America published the first installment of its survey of diocesan postconciliar programs.

The scene depicted was one of wide-ranging reform and reorganization, both cosmetic
and substantive. "America's Survey of Diocesan Post-Conciliar Programs," America, 114
(June 11, 1966), 825-830.
'Both before and after Ottaviani sent his letter, Pope Paul VI issued several cautions to
a variety of audiences concerning the dangers of misinterpreting the conciliar decrees.
Some of these admonitions will be discussed later in this essay. Also, see Robert C. Doty,
"Pontiff Cautions Priests on Doubt: Warns Again that Council's Acts are Misinterpreted,"

New York Times, September 10, 1966, p. 32. Doty noted that this papal address to a group

of Italian priests was but the latest in a series of "calls to caution," and that Ottaviani's letter to the bishops and religious superiors focused on "similar problems."

BY SAMUEL J. THOMAS235

cessors had seen: that true loyalty to the Holy See might mean a respectful representation based on pastoral experience."4
It has not been possible, untU recently, to begin a systematic examination of Fogarty's hypothesis regarding the bishops' postconcUiar behavior, primarily because of the inaccessibUity of pertinent archival
collections dealing with Vatican-American hierarchical relations after

1965. In the late 1980's and early 1990's, however, in an act of unusual

openness and courage, valuable archival materials among the papers of

Alexander Zaleski, Bishop of Lansing (1965-1975), were opened to

scholarly inquiry. The foUowing study, based largely on those materials,
argues for a modification of Fogarty's assessment: It shows that in an
early and significant case of postconcUiar Roman intervention, that is,
the letter from Ottaviani, the American hierarchy displayed a willingness to test the strength of its authority and the persuasiveness of its
coUective "pastoral experience." More specificaUy, the thesis of this
essay is that the American bishops' reply to Ottaviani's letter, and the
leadership that 'was exercised in co-ordinating that reply, not only sustained a spirit of unity with the Holy See and incorporated a cautiously
optimistic attitude toward renewal, but also exemplified the more participatory mode of episcopal coUegiaUty that had emerged from the
Second Vatican CouncU.5

4Gerald P. Fogarty, S.J., The Vatican and the American Hierarchy from 1870 to 1965
("Päpste und Papsttum," Vol. 21 [Stuttgart, 1982]), pp. 399-400. It is worth noting that his

last two chapters examine the bishops' (and councilperitus John Courtney Murray's) role
in the Council's eventual adoption of "The Declaration on Religious Liberty." Fogarty recalls Murray's prediction that the Declaration would eventuate in a "great argument . . .
on the theological meaning of Christian freedom . . . within the Church" ... as well as

"within the world" (p. 401). The astuteness of that prediction is attested to in the context
of the episode discussed in this essay.
'The authoritative sources on episcopal collegiality are the relevant sections of "The

Dogmatic Constitution on the Church," paragraphs 22, 23, pp. 374-376, and paragraphs
1-4 of "The Explanatory Note" published as an appendix, pp. 424-426; and "The Decree
on the Pastoral Office of Bishops in the Church," paragraphs 1-6, pp. 564-566, in Austin
Flannery, O.P (ed.), Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and PostconcUiar Documents, re-

vised edition ("Vatican Collection," Vol. I [Grand Rapids, 1988]). A few key statements
from the former include: "Together with their head, the Supreme Pontiff, and never apart
from him, they [the bishops] have supreme and full authority over the universal Church."

"This college ... is the expression of the multifariousness and universality of the People

of God. . . ." "This same collegiate power can be exercised in union with the pope by the
bishops while living in different parts of the world, provided the head of the college sum-

mon them to collegiate action, or at least approve or freely admit the corporate action of
the unassembled bishops, so that a truly collegiate act may result" (paragraphs 22 and 23).
The American bishops' commentary on collegiality may be found in their first wholly doctrinal pastoral, "The Church in Our Day," in Hugh J. Nolan (ed.), Pastoral Letters of the

236AFTER VATICAN COUNCn. ?: THE AMERICAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS

To place this episode in a broader context, and more clearly to delineate the mUieu within which the American Catholic Church was beginning to take on its postconcUiar stripes, it is important to recognize at
the outset that both the letter and the bishops' reply occurred at a time
when numerous Vatican instructions, decrees, and pubUshed addresses
on church reform, authority, and dissent were directed toward a variety
of national and international audiences. Those documents coUectively
framed the period ecclesiologicaUy. That is, they gave a clearer picture
of Rome's understanding both of those "structures by which the
Church is constituted and those by which it is ordered."6 And not insignificantly, they also underscored the tension that existed between

Rome and the hierarchy on one hand, and between the hierarchy and
the theologians on the other.

One of the most important documents was Pope Paul VTs motu pro-

prio, Integrae Servandae (December 7, 1965). Here, the Pontiff an-

nounced plans to reform the Curia, beginning with the transformation
of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office (before 1908, the Sacred
Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition) into the Sacred
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The congregation (which
for so long had used fear and an iron hand to maintain orthodoxy) was
to be transformed. Its task of"safeguarding doctrine of faith and morals"
would hereafter be accompUshed chiefly through "promoting sound
United States Catholic Bishops, Vol. Ill: 1962-1974 (Washington D.C., 1983), pp.
136-150.See too, von Galli,qp.cft.,pp. 170-195.
6 Were space constraints not a consideration, this essay would have included a brief examination of the national context within which this episode in American Catholic history
occurred. For now, it will have to suffice to recall that the tensions and divisions within
the Church were not unlike those in the nation (and much of the free world) in the late

1960's: a challenging of long-held notions of loyalty, dissent, and authority, and their im-

plications for the resolution of questions and conflicts related not only to ecclesiology,
but to war, race, gender, sexuality, abortion, the economy, education, and ecology. The
Church in turn influenced the dialogue on these issues and in the process took on a more
independent American identity. This transformation can be corroborated in part by a casual glance at the kinds of articles listed in The Catholic Periodical Index, those related to
the American Catholic Church in the indexes of the New York Times, Time, Newsweek,
and the diversity of issues involving both the institutional church and its membership as
noted in the National Catholic Reporter, Commonweal, and the National Catholic Reg-

ister covering the years 1966-1968 and beyond. Brother Thomas Spalding, in his ac-

claimed work The Premier See:A History of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, 1978-1989
(Baltimore, 1989), p. 470, aptly described what the American Catholic Church was experiencing in the 1960's as "institutional disintegration, an almost precipitate dismantling of
the ghetto church." The definition of ecclesiology quoted above is from the pastoral of the

U.S. bishops,"The Church in Our Day" (January 21, 1967), in Nolan, op. cit. ,p. 117.

BY SAMUEL J. THOMAS237

doctrine." In the Pope's opinion, the world was now a place "in which
the faithful will foUow the lead of the Church more fully and lovingly if
they see the reason for laws and definitions." Condemnations would be
issued only after due process, that is, consultation with the local ordinary and an opportunity for the defendant to defend himself. With this
decree, the concUiar principles of coUegiaUty and subsidiarity had been
invoked and interlaced with the "modern" notion of due process.7
Aggiornamento continued in June, 1966, with the aboUtion (technicaUy by discontinuing publication) of the Index of Forbidden Books.

Then Ui late July, Ui what may have been partly an attempt at damage

control after the Index had been discontinued, Cardmal Ottaviani sent

his circular letter (the subject of this study) to the world's bishops. His

letter was foUowed Ui October by a papal address, Lihentissimo Sane
Animo, to the International Congress on the Theology of Vatican II.
Pope Paul VI stressed that theology held "a sort of midway position" between the faith of the Church and the Church's magisterium. Theologians were to help the magisterium "weld the Christian community into
a unified concert of thought and action. . . ." AUowing for reasonable
differences of opinion, theology would contribute to making "the magisterium . . . the enduring Ught and guiding norm of the Church—not
above God's word, of course, but serving it." This would be done, he
said, by examining the ways people Uved their faith, "in order to bring
them into harmony with the word of God and the doctrinal heritage" of

the Church. It would also be accompUshed by asking theologians to

"propose resolutions to questions which arise when this faith is compared with actual Ufe, with history and with human inquiry"8

Four months later, in February, 1 967, Ottaviani issued an "Instruction"

to the world's episcopal conferences urging those which still lacked a
committee on doctrine to form one as soon as possible. He then muted
his tone of coUegiaUty with a chord of ultramontanism, calling for bishops
to inform CDF of any serious doctrinal errors (along with "suggested"
remedies). To fiU the gap left by the aboUtion of the Index, the prefect

asked the bishops "to send in particular those pubUshed works which
they foresee wUl have a notable influence, either good or bad, regarding

CathoUc doctrine, along with accompanying pertinent opinions."9

7For a translation by Austin Vaughan of Integrae Servandae (December 7, 1965), see
The Pope Speaks, 11 (1966), 13-16.

"The official CDF statement virtually abolishing the Index may be found in "Index of
Forbidden Books," The Catholic Mind (October, 1966), p. 4. An English translation of
Libentissimo Sane Animo, by John Drury is in The Pope Speaks, 1 1 (1966), pp. 348-355.
'Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani,"Instructio" (February 3, 1967), 2 pp. ,ZC, NCCB Committee

238AFTER VATICAN COUNCIL II: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

By summer's end, August, 1967, themes of renewal and reform were

joined to reaffirmations of the importance of hierarchy and papal supremacy in the apostolic constitution, Regimini Ecclesiae Universae,
outlining the reorganization of the Curia to be implemented January 1,

1968. Emphasizing that the "renewal with which the Church is con-

cerned must not be thought of as a repudiation of the present Ufe of the
Church . . . ," the Pope seemed to invoke the spirit of the First Vatican
CouncU as he emphasized the necessity of keeping the Curia's "basic
structure and its relationship with the Roman Pontiff as the organic instrument that he uses in exercising the supreme power he holds over
the universal Church . . . according to Christ's institution of it."10
Three more documents will conclude this overview of the ecclesio-

logical context for the years 1966-1968. Two of them were addresses

by the Pope to a plenary assembly of the first worldwide Synod of Bish-

ops held in Rome during the faU of 1967. In the first, he emphasized

once again the need to safeguard the faith "through the present postconcUiar period," particularly Ui light of "the enormous dangers connected with the irreUgious outlook of this present era, and to those
insidious dangers cropping up within the Church itself." The Synod, he
hoped, would help "strengthen the faith," especiaUy of theologians
whose task it was to "assist Ui promoting the sacred sciences and Ui
maintaining the inviolable content of Catholic doctrine Ui aU its clarity
and richness."" In his second address to the body, Pope Paul reaffirmed
the limits of episcopal power by tactfuUy but paternaUy reminding the
bishops that, coUegiaUty notwithstanding, they had been "summoned"
to Rome in a "consultative" mode. Only "in certain instances," he conceded, "We shaU give deUberative force to your decisions."12
The final document was a July, 1968, "Instruction" from Franjo Cardinal Seper (Ottaviani's successor foUowing the latter's resignation Ui January, 1968) to the heads of aU episcopal conferences. Written as a

sequel to his predecessor's "Instruction" of February, 1967,it focused on

the functions of the various episcopal committees on doctrine. Specifion Doctrine, General Correspondence, November, 1966-April, 1967, ADL. Quotations are
from an English translation made for this author by Professor John Rauk, Department of
Romance and Classical Languages, Michigan State University, East Lansing.

I0Pope Paul VI, Regimini Ecclesiae Universae (August 15, 1967), translated by Austin
Vaughan in The Pope Speaks, 12 (1967), 393-420.
""Faith and Charity in Action" (September 29, 1967), English translation byJohn Drury
in The Pope Speaks, 12 (1967), 377-383.
""Several Roles for the Synod" (September 30, 1967), English translation byJohn Drury
in The Pope Speaks, 12 (1967), 383-389.

BY SAMUEL J. THOMAS239

caUy Seper counseled the nurturing of "mutual relations m a spirit of
coUaboration with theologians. . . ."And, Ui what sounded as though he
was describing a tree-branch relationship with the various episcopal
committees on doctrine, the prefect supported the "principle of subsidiarity" Ui cases not exceeding the territorial boundaries of a particular conference. But then he seemed to hedge his support when he
caUed for yearly reports of the committees' activities, including their
opinions of doctrinal tendencies and areas where CDF should inter-

vene.13

One way to view the above documents coUectively is as juxtapo-

sitions (Ui some instances, entanglements) of pre- and postconcUiar
mindsets or emphases: i.e., papal supremacy and coUegiaUty; hierarchy
and community; ultramontanism and subsidiarity; the expectation of
absolute public theological assent to the magisterium and greater toleration of theological pluraUsm; continuity and renewal; fiat and persuasion; absolute conformity to the way faith is taught and an experiential
approach to the way it is Uved; syUabus and analysis; fear of modernity
and dialogue with it; precipitate censure and due process.14

Ottaviani's circular of July 24, 1966, entangled a number of those

mindsets, but would be read by the American CathoUc hierarchy as
largely a continuation of the preconciUar mode. Addressed to the "Ven"Seper to Dearden, July 10, 1968, 2 pp., ZC, "General Correspondence, April-August
1968," ADL. Quotations from the English translation by Professor John Rauk, Michigan
State University.

14Three examples among many which tried to join continuity with renewal in the
American Church were: first, the U.S. bishops' pastoral,"The Church in Our Day" (Novem-

ber, 1967), printed in Nolan, op. cit. , pp. 98- 1 54. This first wholly doctrinal pastoral by the

American bishops, an interpretation ofVatican Council II's "Dogmatic Constitution on the

Church," was a candid, optimistic, and fairly open-minded statement on the problems

and challenges facing the American Church. A second example was the famous "Land
O'Lakes" statement prepared by a group of leading (chiefly North American) Catholic ed-

ucators (under the chairmanship of the president of the University of Notre Dame,
Theodore Hesburgh) in July, 1967. Its most quoted part: "... the Catholic university must
have true autonomy and academic freedom in the face of authority of whatever kind, lay
or clerical, external to the academic community itself." See "The Catholic University of
Today,"Jimence, 117 (August 13, 1967), 154- 156. Bishop Zaleski described the statement
as "somewhat ambiguous" and cited the need for a "clear statement" of the relationship between the magisterium and "academic freedom." "Report: Bishops' Committee on Doctrine, April-August, 1967," ZC, "NCCB Committee on Doctrine, General Correspondence,
April-November, 1967," ADL (copy). In his own diocese, in the meantime, and the third
example, Zaleski had launched an ambitious, progressive, and lauded five-year plan of renewal for priests, religious, and laity. See Clarence E. Rhodes, "The Lansing Renewal Pro-

gram,"America, 1 17 (August 26, 1967), 202-203.

240AFTER VATICAN COUNCIL II: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

érable Heads of the Episcopal Conferences," his letter reached the
American bishops through channels determined characteristically by
rank and traditional protocol: Egidio Vagnozzi, the ApostoUc Delegate
(and friend of Ottaviani), received it first, followed by Francis Cardinal
Spellman, Archbishop of New York and ranking cardmal member of
the Administrative Board of the National CathoUc Welfare Conference

(NCWC). Patrick A. O'Boyle, Archbishop of Washington and chairman
of the same Administrative Board, was the next recipient. O'Boyle, in

turn, released the letter to the nation's bishops early Ui August, 1966,

noting that a consideration of its contents would be an agenda item at
the forthcoming (November 14-18, 1966) meeting of the Conference.15
The three-page letter began by stressing the duty of the "whole people of God" to implement the decrees of the CouncU, and the bishops'

"right and duty" to direct the renewal m order to ensure that the Coun-

cU's decrees were correctly interpreted. Ottaviani then expressed his
Congregation's grief at hearing of many "strange and audacious opinions appearing here and there" that "seem ... to affect dogma itself and
the foundations of the faith."

His introduction prefaced, without attribution, a list of errors which,
in their vagueness and generaUty, were reminiscent of several proscribed in Lamentabili Sane Exitu, the 1907 decree against Modernism
issued by order of Pope Pius X through the Holy Office. Ottaviani's
syUabus of sorts (which was how many bishops, without labeling it
as such, later responded to it in their correspondence) included ten
propositions aUegmg inappropriate scriptural exegesis and dogmatic
theology, faUacies concerning the magisterium and the definition of
truth, a "creeping . . . Christological humanism," denial of the Real Presence and the primary sacrificial nature of the Mass, exaggerated emphasis on the social purpose of Penance, a minimaUst approach to the
doctrine of original sin, "situation ethics" especiaUy in sexual moraUty,
and "irenicism and indifferentism" in ecumenical activity. The prefect
then exhorted individual bishops to "endeavor to arrest ... or prevent"
the errors, to discuss them "in episcopal conferences . . . and duly report their opinions to the Holy See . . . before . . . Christmas." FinaUy, he
asked the bishops and aU with whom they might share the letter "to

"O'Boyle to Zaleski, August 5, 1966, ZC, "Ottaviani's Letter," ADL. Vagnozzi's friendship
with Ottaviani and his self-perception as a guardian of orthodoxy are briefly discussed by
Gerald E Fogarty, S.J.,"The Holy See, Apostolic Delegates, and the Question of Church-State
Relations in the United States," U.S. Catholic Historian, 12 (Spring, 1994), 87-89.

BY SAMUEL J. THOMAS241

maintain strict secrecy" ("sub stricto secreto") for "obvious reasons of
prudence."16
Within several weeks after Ottaviani sent his secret letter, it was

leaked to an independent CathoUc daUy Ui Bologna, Italy, and then to pa-

pers in Europe and America. By early faU 1966, the editors of the Vatican's Acta Apostolicae Sedis decided to publish it in its entirety to
minimize misrepresentations aUegedly made by various newspapers

that had printed only excerpts. In October, 1966, the National Catholic

Reporter reported those developments and, m the same article, included a somewhat loosely edited version of the CDF letter.17

A month later, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB),
the successor organization to the National CathoUc Welfare Conference
(NCWC), held its first meeting. Under the leadership of its newly
elected president, John Dearden (1907-1988), Archbishop of Detroit,
the body voted to entrust its Committee on Doctrine (hereafter CoD,
one of twenty-four ecclesiastical service committees OriginaUy estabUshed by the NCCB) with the responsibUity of composing a reply to Ottaviani. SpecificaUy, the committee was charged with drafting a letter

and presenting it at the Conference's April, 1967, meeting. The draft

would be used as the documentary basis of an official reply to Rome.18

l6Cum Oecumenicum, quoted in National Catholic Reporter, October 19, 1966, p. 7;
and from the translation of the original Latin in "Letter from the S. Congregation Pro Doctrina Fidei: on strange and audacious opinions," Christ to the World:International Review

ofApostolic Experiences, English Edition, XII (1967), 65-67, which is included as Appendix I at the end of this essay. As reported by John Cogley, Ottaviani sent a similar letter to

all religious superiors: "Ottaviani Lists Doctrine Abuses: Tells Bishops that Ten Errors
Arose After Council," New York Times, September 20, 1966, p. 18. Several of the American
bishops who later responded to Ottaviani's letter reacted to or commented on specific alleged errors, some referring to them point by point, others commenting on specific "numbers,""propositions,""points," or "abuses." Even those who summarily denied the presence
of the errors in their dioceses often used the phrase "no deviation" as a way of defending
their orthodoxy.
""Vatican publishes contents of Ottaviani letter on abuses," National Catholic Re-

porter, October 19, 1966, p. 7.
'"The reorganization of the NCWC actually resulted in the creation of two legally distinct bodies under virtually the same episcopal leadership: the NCCB, an ecclesial body
concerned with ecclesiastical affairs, and its national secretariat, the United States
Catholic Conference (USCC), charged with co-ordinating civil matters affecting American
Catholics. For details of the reorganization, see: ZC, "Minutes, Annual Meeting, NCCB, No-

vember 14-18, 1966"; and, "Annual Meeting of the Bishops of the United States," in ZC,
Agenda, National Meeting, NCCB, November 14-18, 1966,ADL. For the motion to refer the

Ottaviani letter to the CoD, see ZC,"Minutes, Annual Meeting. . . ," pp. 31-32, ADL.
For an in depth study of the NCCB/USCC see Thomas J. Reese, S.J.,4 Flock of Shepherds.The National Conference of Catholic Bishops (Kansas City, Missouri, 1992). While

242AFTER VATICAN COUNCIL ?: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

Early in December, 1966, notwithstanding the Christmas deadline set

by Ottaviani (which reportedly was met by most episcopal conferences), the CoD's first chairman, Bishop Zaleski, wrote to his feUow
bishops.19 He asked each of them to report to the committee "any deviations m the right interpretation of the documents of Vatican II," along

with any "new teachings" judged "contrary to the CathoUc faith." The

tone of Zaleski's letter, despite the potentiaUy volatUe nature of the request, seemed in accord with the spirit of coUegiaUty and with his committee's officiaUy stated function: to evaluate "specific questions and
problems" as weU as the methods of dealing with them. As later evidence revealed, Zaleski never saw his committee's role as "inquisitorial,"

or "to inhibit, m any sense, theological discussion."20 But for now, Zaleski

and his CoD were m the awkward position of having to carry out a
somewhat investigatory task while trying very hard to be as coUegial in
tone as possible.21
Reese's historical analysis is limited, he provides, among many other fine features, very

helpful biographical sketches of the conference presidents, a detailed look at the struc-

ture of the conference, changes in its rules, and its evolving (some might argue devolving)
relationship with Rome.
"Alexander M. Zaleski (1906-1975) was born in New York, ordained in Louvain in
1931, earned a licentiate's degree in Sacred Scripture from the Pontifical Biblical Institute
in 1935, and taught Scripture, church history, and the history of philosophy in the PolishAmerican seminary at Orchard Lake, Michigan, until 1937. Consecrated a bishop in 1950,

he served as auxiliary to the Archbishop of Detroit, Edward Cardinal Mooney, until 1964;
coadjutor to the Bishop of Lansing, 1964-1965, and then bishop until his death in 1975.

His election as chairman of the Committee on Doctrine was no doubt influenced by

Mooney's successor, John Dearden. In fact, Dearden's tenure as NCCB president (1966-

1971) was just a year longer than Zaleski's tenure as CoD chairman. See Felecian A. Foy
(ed.), 1990 Catholic Almanac (Huntington, Indiana, 1989), p. 483; and, Zaleski to Franjo

Cardinal Seper, ZC, "Report on the Establishment and Functioning of the Bishops' Committee on Doctrine of the Episcopal Conference of Bishops of the U.S.A.," August 28,
1969, 2 pp., ADL (copy). No archival and only one published source, Archbishop Pierre
Veuillot, was found claiming that most episcopal conferences did respond to Ottaviani before the Christmas deadline. See "The Church and the World," The Tablet, 220 (December

24, 1966), p. 1455.
20Form letter from Zaleski to individual bishops, December 5, 1966,ZC,"Ottaviani's Letter 1966," ADL (copies). For a retrospective disclaimer of his committee's inquisitorial

role, see "Committee on Doctrine Report, 1967," ZC,"NCCB Committee on Doctrine, General Correspondence, November, 1966-April, 1967," ADL (copy). In the same document,
the names of the original members of the Committee on Doctrine are listed. In addition
to Zaleski (who chaired the committee through 1970), they were John Wright (1909-

1979), Bishop of Pittsburgh; Timothy Manning (1909-1989), Auxiliary of Los Angeles;

John Fearns (1897-1977), Auxiliary of New York; and Thomas Riley (1900-1977), Auxiliary of Boston. For the official statement of the CoD's purpose, see "Annual Meeting," p. 29,

ZC, Agenda,National Meeting, NCCB, November 14-18, 1966,ADL.
21In the autumn of 1967, Zaleski answered a query regarding the character of the CoD

BY SAMUEL J. THOMAS243

Between December, 1966, and the end of February, 1967, Zaleski re-

ceived responses from sixty-three of the one hundred fifty chanceries
in the United States. In five instances, two bishops sent letters from the
same chancery, for a total of sixty-eight responses. Ranked hierarchicaUy, the total included letters from eleven archbishops, forty diocesan
bishops, one coadjutor, twelve auxinaries, two episcopal apostoUc ad-

ministrators, and two chancellors. The last two wrote on behalf of their

ordinaries. Among the twelve auxiUaries, one co-signed a letter with his
archbishop, and another declared that he was not speaking for his diocese. The remaining ten respondents neither affirmed nor denied that
they were writing on behalf of their dioceses. In 1966, there were thirty
archbishops and 217 bishops in the American church, which meant
that more than seventy percent of the hierarchy (including Zaleski, for
reasons not mentioned Ui his correspondence) faUed to respond to the
inquiry.22
Zaleski did not send a reminder to those who did not respond to his
first letter, and the archives contained no evidence that he or Dearden

was concerned by the large number of non-respondents. Simple inertia
may explain some of this number, whUe tüne constraints and a fear of
opening the proverbial can of worms may explain others. Then too,
many of the non-responding bishops may have felt very strongly that Ottaviani's letter infringed on their episcopal authority. The archives yielded
no direct evidence for this conclusion, but its probabUity may be inferred
in part from the nature of the responses that were received by Zaleski.
from one of the theologians selected as a liaison between the Catholic Theological Society of America (CTSA) and the NCCB. The committee, Zaleski explained, was "in no sense
an investigation body in the sense of an inquisition," but "a service committee to the Bishops in the area of doctrine, in order to determine what teaching is in accordance with
Catholic faith, what is contrary to it, and what constitutes free matter." Zaleski to Rev. Carl

Peter, October 3, 1967, ZC, "NCCB Committee on Doctrine, CTSA Correspondence," ADL
(copy).
"Three additional responses, including two unexceptional episcopal letters, were re-

ceived in early to mid-March, 1967, by which time the Committee on Doctrine's reply to

Ottaviani was already in draft form. The first was from Timothy Manning, Auxiliary of Los
Angeles (and another member of Zaleski's committee), apparently writing at the request

of his archbishop, Cardinal Mclntyre; the second was from Joseph P Hurley,Archbishop of

St. Augustine. The third (unsolicited) was a critical analysis of the Ottaviani letter by the
Reverend Paul McKeever, president of the Catholic Theological Society of America. All
pertinent correspondence to and from Zaleski are in three folders: ZC,"NCCB Committee

on Doctrine, Bishops' Response to Cardinal Ottaviani's Letter, 1966," a second folder with
the same title, dated 1967, and third, "Cardinal Ottaviani Letter Correspondence, 19661968," ADL. For an official count of the hierarchy, see the tables at the end of The Official
Catholic Directory (New York, 1966).

244AFTER VATICAN COUNCIL II: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

Those responses, which eventuaUy would form the documentary
basis of the reply to Ottaviani, included a mixture of pre- and postconcUiar thought patterns. There was nothing unusual or surprising about
this. What was interesting was the extent of diversity and individuaUty
in the responses. About two dozen of them could be described as
thoughtfuUy composed, although only about half of those gave evidence of having been written after consultation with diocesan priests
and theologians (several of whose comments were enclosed with the
letters). Within this group of two dozen, most of the remarks were generaUy cautious and conservative, but some were surprisingly progressive and, by 1966 standards, even bold.
On the very cautious and conservative side, there was the handwrit-

ten letter from James Cardmal Mclntyre (1886-1979), Archbishop of

Los Angeles, who "hesitated to dictate" a reply (no doubt for fear of
breaching secrecy, although one of his auxUiaries, Timothy Manning, later sent a typed reply m which he stated that there was "no
basic cause for concern ... on the ten points" Usted Ui Ottaviani's letter). Mclntyre caUed the "Catholic press" a "serious source of scandal," lamented the "profuse reporting of extreme viewpoints in the
NCWC News sheets," and blamed Uturgical "extravagances" on "visiting
priests . . . especially reUgious who have come to give retreats ... to
nuns."

Second, and in a moderately progressive position, were the remarks

of Lawrence Cardinal Shehan (1898-1984), Archbishop of Baltimore,

who attributed any abuses to "popularizers" of theological works and
warned that any Vatican intervention would only serve to provoke
the old anti-CathoUc charges of "censorship" and "repression." He then
cited his concurrence with one of his theologian-consultants who had
charged that Ottaviani's letter placed theological scholarship under a
cloud and Ui fact was not sufficiently deferential to Vatican CouncU IFs
"Constitution on Divine Revelation."

One of the more outspoken letters came from Ernest J. Pruneau
(1909-1989), Bishop of Manchester (New Hampshire). The "crisis of
faith" among the younger generation was due, he said, not to the spread
of heretical teachings but rather to "poor sermons and methods of religious education," bad example by parents and teachers, "secularism"
and humanism, "uncertainty and confusion Ui" the field of "ethics and
moral theology, and just plain uninspiring leadership m the Church. . . .
The young of today . . . seek not wisdom so much as action; not dogma
so much as meaningful, relevant poUcy. They understand sacrifice, mor-

BY SAMUEL J. THOMAS245

tification, humiUty, self-effacement, but they cannot perceive such qualities m the actions of many old men [bishops and the Curia?] who
refuse to give up the reins of authority in these days when stress is put
upon young leadership Ui . . . almost every field of human endeavor."23

These were just a noteworthy few of the diverse and individuaUstic

stances taken by a number of American bishops who, as a group, have
been often characterized (and caricatured) as marching in lockstep to
the beat of then: Roman drummer. About the only thing the sixty-eight
statements came close to having Ui common was that nearly seventy
percent of all the respondents reported that they were not aware of
any, or at least any serious, deviations Ui the implementation of the decrees of Vatican CouncU II in their respective dioceses. Also, several
bishops preferred to describe the situation in their dioceses or (more
often) Ui the Church nationaUy as one of"confusion,""uncertainty,""sensationahstic," "Unbalanced," and "exaggerated emphasis" rather than as
heterodox or a crisis of faith.24

Where deviations or excesses were perceived, either Ui the Church
nationaUy or in specific dioceses, the contributing factors most frequently cited were Uberal CathoUc papers and periodicals inaccurately
reporting the latest theological speculations and being read uncriticaUy
by inadequately trained or untrained laity, clergy, and reUgious. A number of respondents also hinted that the diminished respect for the
Church's Magisterium was due to the lack of clear and definitive statements (particularly on the issue of contraception) to the whole church
from that most important agent of the Magisterium, Pope Paul VI.25
"Mclntyre to Zaleski, December 10, 1966; Manning to Zaleski, March 7, 1967; Shehan to
Zaleski,January 9, 1967; Pruneau to Zaleski, December 13, 1966, in ZC,"NCCB Committee
on Doctrine, Bishops' Response to Cardinal Ottaviani's Letter, 1966," ADL; and "Cardinal
Ottaviani Letter Correspondence, 1966-1968," ADL. The most unusual letter on file was a
five-page Latin memorandum from William T. McCarty, C.SS.R. (1889-1972), Bishop of
Rapid City (South Dakota), addressed and sent directly to Ottaviani and in copy to Zaleski.
Ingratiating in style, McCarty (assisted by a theologian at the Catholic University of America, Francis J. Connell, C.SS.R.) acknowledged his "total agreement" with the spirit of Ottaviani's concerns. And while he asserted the orthodoxy of the vast majority of American
Catholics, he ran through a litany of errors by a minority "who speak more forcefully and
frequently than others." Such "pernicious errors," he concluded, "cannot be adequately
suppressed except by the authority of the Supreme Pontiff." McCarty to Zaleski, and Mc-

Carty to Ottaviani (copy), December 17, 1966, ZC, "Ottaviani's Letter 1966," ADL. A copy

of the Latin original to Ottaviani was translated for this author by Michael Smith of Lansing, Michigan.

24ZC,"Ottaviani's Letter, 1966," same, 1967, and "Letter Correspondence, 1966-68,"ADL.
»Ibid.

246AFTER VATICAN COUNCIL II: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

Whether they cited deviations or not, few of the respondents ex-

pressed any positive sentiment over the issuance of Ottaviani's circular.
Several bishops criticized its vagueness. In a letter that accompanied the
reply of John Carberry Bishop of Columbus,Charles Essman, chanceUor
of the diocese, complained that the errors cited could be used to condemn both heresy and imprudent remarks. Another critic, Edward
Fitzgerald, Bishop of Winona (Minnesota), candidly declared his "hope
that never again wUl we promote or encourage the pubUcation of a syllabus of errors similar to that issued after the First Vatican CouncU" [by
Pius X in 1907]. FinaUy, the principle of subsidiarity was invoked directly and indirectly Ui the remarks of many bishops who beUeved that
the American hierarchy could and should handle its own dioceses' prob-

lems. The vast majority of the bishops, then, were not enthusiastic over

CDF's approach to postconcUiar problems. Their stance would be articulated more expUcitly in the formal reply that soon would be sent to Ottaviani.26 Clearly, there were rumblings going on in a number of mitered
American minds in 1966-1967, and not aU of them intoned Romanità.

Late in February, 1967, a telephone caU from Archbishop Dearden

changed Zaleski's plan to report the results of his inquiry at the forthcoming AprU meeting of the NCCB. Dearden told Zaleski that Ottaviani
wanted an answer to his letter at once, not in the spring. Since a reply

from the NCCB had not yet been drafted, Dearden had been told by
Egidio Vagnozzi that Ottaviani requested "at once the repUes of the Or-

dinaries of New York [Francis Cardinal Spellman, 1889-1967], St. Louis
[Joseph Cardinal Ritter, 1892-1967], Detroit [Archbishop John Dear-

den, 1907-1988], PhUadelphia [John Cardinal Krol, 1912-1996, retired
1988], Chicago [John P. Cody, 1907-1982)], and Pittsburgh [John J.
Wright, 1909- 1979], and those of the Rectors of the CathoUc University

of America [Bishop WilUam J. McDonald, 1904-1989, resigned rectorship 1967] and the University of Notre Dame [Reverend Theodore Hesburgh, 1917-present, retired 1987] ."27

26Carberry to Zaleski, February 17, 1967; Essman to Carberry, November 7, 1966;
Fitzgerald to Zaleski, December 7, 1966, ZC, "Letter Correspondence, 1966-68,"ADL. The
individualistic stances of many of the respondents would seem to challenge, if only exceptionally, what Gerald Fogarty called the Vatican "policy of Romanization of the hierarchy" which intensified after the Americanist controversy of the 1890's. At the same time,

the more progressive responses would seem to support David O'Brien's comment,"Many
[of the bishops] were personally transformed by the [Second Vatican] Council, returning
different men, determined to build a more community-oriented, open and missioncentered church." Fogarty, Vatican and American Hierarchy, p. 18; and, David O'Brien,

Public Catholicism (New York, 1989), p. 235.

27Vagnozzi to Dearden, February 24, 1967. Zaleski to Dearden, March 3, 1967 (copy),

BY SAMUEL J. THOMAS247

One might surmise that Ottaviani was hoping to stack the cards to receive a confirmation of his suspicions (despite the somewhat puzzling
omission from his list of such important archdioceses as Los Angeles

under Mclntyre or Washington under O'Boyle). If so, he would have
been disappointed Ui the results. Of the eight men whose views he so-

licited, SpeUman (one of whose auxiUaries, John Fearns, was a member
of Zaleski's Committee), Ritter, Krol, and McDonald (who was shortly to
wrestle with a moral theologian, Charles Curran, over the latter's allegedly suspect teachings on human sexuaUty) were among those who

had never responded to Zaleski's letter. And Father Hesburgh had not

been asked for a response (Hesburgh's national stature and his impending role as leader of the summer conference at Land O'Lakes, Wisconsin, on the subject of academic freedom in the CathoUc university may
have prompted Ottaviani to include him on the Ust of eight).28
Dearden, through his chanceUor, Monsignor Arthur L. Valade, did

reply to Zaleski's inquiry, but not in a way that would have pleased Ot-

taviani. Valade consulted several "knowledgeable" individuals in the

archdiocese and discerned that there was no "real [that is, serious] de-

viation" from the teachings of Vatican CouncU II. He specificaUy cited
(attached) letters from two consultants to support his conclusion,
letters which took a developmental approach to teachings related to

contraception, the liturgy, ecumenism, and moral decision making. And

both consultants implied that the Pope's delay Ui issuing clear statements on these and related issues, especiaUy the issue of contraception,
was partly to blame for muddying the waters of CathoUc belief and
practice.29
The response of the Archdiocese of Chicago to Zaleski came not

from Cody (despite his earUer written pledge to do so), but from his

auxiUary and vicar-general, Cletus O'DonneU. He too consulted several

experts who were nearly unanimous in supporting his critical appraisal
of Ottaviani's letter:

It seemed to me that this particular questionnaire was prepared with a

spirit of indifference to the clarifications of Vatican II and to the advances
mentioned the late February telephone call and included a preliminary summary of the

responses Zaleski had received to date, ZC,"Letter Correspondence, 1966-1968," ADL.
^Dearden to Vagnozzi, February 28, 1967, ibid, (copy)
Malade to Zaleski, February 2, 1967, ibid. Included with Valade's letter are letters from
Monsignor Francis X. Canfield, rector of the archdiocesan seminary, and Monsignor
William Sherzer, secretary of the seminary and chairman of Dearden's liturgical commission.

248AFTER VATICAN COUNCIL ?: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

of present theological study. Moreover, it can leave the reader temporarily

confused because of inexactness and lack of precision in the statement of

the question and the overtones connoted. It would be my considered judgement that Bishops of an Episcopal Conference such as ours could not use
these propositions as outlined by Cardinal Ottaviani.30

Only John Wright of Pittsburgh, a member of Zaleski's Committee on
Doctrine, offered a response (an oblique one at that) which would have

reinforced Ottaviani's suspicions. SpecificaUy, Wright suggested that Za-

leski appoint experts to study the moral and doctrinal issues (related to
those mentioned by Ottaviani) that were raised Ui an article pubUshed
in Cross Currents during the faU of 1966. Penned by Francis Simons, the

Dutch-born Bishop of Indore, India, the article advocated a utilitarian or
consensus approach to ethical questions. A theologian at Georgetown

University, Germain Grisez, who had brought the article to Wright's attention, critiqued it and urged Wright to bring it to the attention of the
NCCB. Wright did so, and Zaleski subsequently asked both the members of his committee and the CathoUc Theological Society of America
to provide feedback that could be a basis for discussion at the planning
session for the next NCCB meeting.31
Of the eight repUes requested by Ottaviani, then, only three were
avaUable, and just one of them (Wright's) contained anything even resembling what the prefect probably expected. Moreover, the nature of

each of the three may be read as further evidence of the diverse and Ui-

dividuaUstic stances taken by members of the American hierarchy and,
UnpUcitly at least, as additional indications of the bishops' preference to
handle such matters themselves. At any rate, none of the three repUes
was sent to Ottaviani.

Instead, Zaleski and Dearden agreed that their answer to Ottaviani
would be based on the sixty-eight responses that were already in hand,
and that a draft could be ready in two weeks. Dearden transmitted the
detaUs of the plan to Vagnozzi, a plan which he justified to the Delegate

with the curious and (deUberately?) inaccurate explanation that of the

eight replies requested by Ottaviani, only he (through his chanceUor)
had ever responded to Zaleski's inquiry. MeanwhUe, Zaleski put his
committee to work. By mid-March, the CoD maUed a thrice revised draft
to Dearden, who made some minor changes and sent the finished copy
addressed to Ottaviani through Vagnozzi's office.32
'"Cody to Zaleski, December 7, 1966; O'Donnell to Zaleski,January 30, 1967, ibid.
"Wright to Zaleski, December 9, 1966, ibid.
3!Dearden to Vagnozzi, February 28, 1967 (copy); Zaleski to Dearden, March 3, 1967

BY SAMUEL J. THOMAS249

Zaleski later reported that the reply to Ottaviani had been weU received Ui Rome. Its official reception may, indeed, have been discreet,
but the letter could not have been completely satisfactory to the CDF.
First, it had been sent, not as a consensus of the NCCB, but as a committee report (the reason for this, Zaleski later complained, was "the urgency of the matter, recently communicated to us [from Ottaviani] "). In
addition, Dearden had not compUed with Ottaviani's request for the
written repUes of eight specific American CathoUc leaders. Instead, Ottaviani received a letter that was essentiaUy a distillation, with several
incisive comments but without attribution, of the sixty-eight responses
received by Zaleski. The nature of the reply must surely have raised the
prefect's ire.33
MaUed over Dearden s signature, the contents of the seven-page reply
to Ottaviani accurately reflected the basic hopes and concerns of the
bishops who had answered Zaleski's inquiry: theologians were to be encouraged "to continue their studies Ui order to deepen our understanding of the Faith"; the existence in the United States of some "confusion,
unrest and uncertainty" about the Magisterium was admitted, but the
presence of"overt heresy" was denied; those who refused to implement
the decrees of Vatican CouncU II were given as much responsibUity for
the Church's problems as those who were "using the CouncU to promote their own pet ideas"; the importance of distinguishing between
doctrine and discipline was emphasized; so too was the need for "clear
teaching" on marital morals, the Redemption, how CathoUcs witness
their faith, "the precise role of theologians as touched upon in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church," the development of dogma as distinct from then· exposition of dogma to the Faithful, and finaUy, on how
an "Ecumenical Council" relates "to the Magisterium."34

Four of the letter's remaining five pages summarized and commented

on the bishops' responses to Ottaviani's Ust of ten errors. Reflecting on
each point, the CoD reported no awareness of any "organized tendencies" toward "Sola Scriptura," support for the studies being made of the
"historical contexts" bebind "dogmatic formulations," and an acknowl(copy); and Dearden to Zaleski, March 10, 1967. Dearden to Ottaviani, March 17, 1967, includes the final draft (copy), ibid. All four drafts are in the archives.
"Dearden to Ottaviani, March 17, 1967, includes the "Memorandum of the Committee

on Doctrine in Response to the Letter 'Cum Oecumenicum' of His Eminence Cardinal Ottaviani, Dated July 24, 1966."ZC,"Letter Correspondence, 1966-1968,"ADL (copy). In the
same folder, see Thomas J. Riley to Zaleski, January 19, 1968, for a citation on the letter's
reception in Rome.

M"Memorandum . . . ,"pp. 1-2, ZC,"Letter Correspondence, 1966-68,"ADL.

250AFTER VAnCAN COUNCIL II: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

edgment of concern over the crisis of confidence Ui the Magisterium.
But in a telling comment that could be read as an expression of the

bishops' heightened awareness of their coUegial role m the teaching

mission of the Church, the Committee added: "For some tune people
have been conditioned to accept with equal theological qualification
every statement of those responsible in the area of ordinary magisterium as having absolutely the same binding force. We feel that there is
room for enUghtenment on this subject." The letter then went on to

"note attenuations m discussing" especiaUy questions of sexual moral-

ity; it denied any awareness of Christological humanism in the Church,
admitted to "unbalanced presentations" on the Real Presence, acknowl-

edged a decline in a "sense of sin" and the need for more balanced stud-

ies on Penance as reconcUiation with both God and Church, expressed

the difficulty of understanding the consequences of "just what the

CouncU of Trent actuaUy and precisely defined regarding the doctrine
of original sin," and agreed that ecumenical activity needed careful monitoring so as not to proceed rashly.35
In closing, the CoD acknowledged the bishops' "grave responsibiUty
to present to the people of God . . . pure and undefiled teaching ..."
reaffirmed the hierarchy's unity with and loyalty to the Pope, noted that

efforts were underway to improve seminary training, and caUed for
"competent theologians to speak out" and displace the "popularizers"
and "sensationalists." Then, in contrast with Ottaviani's tone of fear and
foreboding, the CoD expressed its edification at the progress made in
the priests' and peoples' understanding "of the teachings of Vatican II"

and confidently asserted that any problems could be handled locaUy by
individual bishops or by the national conference "in consultation with
competent scholars.' Even more significantly, the last twelve lines of the
letter may be interpreted as a criticism, both of the vague, negative character and preconcUiar (i.e., non-coUegial) tone of Ottaviani's letter and
of the indecisiveness of Pope Paul VI:

On those subjects on which the Holy See wUl feel it necessary to give

guidelines, we trust it wUl be done in the Ught of the insights of the Coun-

cil and with its pastoral voice. It is of great importance that authoritative

norms of orthodoxy be stated in precise and unambiguous terms. American
bishops, consistent with their historic adherence to the leadership of the

Holy See, earnestly and respectfully urge, in order to foster better understanding by their people, that on certain questions of discipline and doctrine, when deterioration seems to be setting in and where no voice in the
»Ibid., pp. 3-6.

BY SAMUELJ THOMAS251

Church can substitute for the voice of Peter, the Sovereign Pontiff speak
with maximum clarity.36

Archbishop Dearden's letter accompanying the CoD's reply to Ottaviani reviewed its evolution and how circumstances had prevented it
from getting the "specific endorsement" of the NCCB. He added, however, "that it is a faithful reflection of the situation." Then, in a gesture of
openness that was a hallmark of his tenure Ui the NCCB and Ui Detroit,
the archbishop expressed his intention to present it to aU the bishops at

their April, 1967, meeting."During our meeting . . . ,"he explained,". . . I

shall invite them, m the event that there is any dissent or qualification . . . , to feel free to write to Your Eminence and [each] express his
mind accordingly." Dearden foUowed through and what OriginaUy had
been written and sent as a CoD reply was subsequently endorsed by
the "entire" Conference, that is, most likely without open dissent.37
The NCCB's ex postfacto endorsement obviously demonstrated the
hierarchy's realization that it needed to support Zaleski and Dearden
and express unity as a conference. And, given the substance of the reply,
with its accentuation of the bishops' preference for subsidiarity, dis-

pleasure with Ottaviani's approach, and disappointment Ui the quaUty
of Pope Paul VTs leadership, the endorsement would also seem to sup-

*Ibid., pp. 6-7. In fall, 1968, the theologian Karl Rahner, in "Theology and the Magisterium after the Council," Theology Digest, Sesquicentennial Issue (February, 1968), pp.
4-16, provided a cogent and finely nuanced analysis of Ottaviani's letter.He characterized
it as "a general warning" and as suffering from a "vagueness which is in some ways un-

avoidable," due to the uncertain and confusing "intellectual situation," yet is still "not very

helpful" (p. 8). Praising the letter's "post-conciliar" exhortation that the bishops should
root out errors and"not just send reports to Rome,"Rahner also noted that while"the dangers and tendencies indicated in the letter" did exist, the letter did not show sufficient
awareness of the complexity of contemporary theological expression:"it is not easy as it
once was to oppose a real or presumed error with a positive new statement that is immune from every ambiguity" (pp. 10, 8).

"Dearden to Ottaviani, March 17, 1967, ZC, "Letter Correspondence, 1966-68," ADL

(copy). The conference minutes noted that Bishop Zaleski read aloud the CoD reply to
Ottaviani. Following his reading, and unlike the minutes covering other conference issues
and reports, there was no mention of any discussion. Instead, the minutes recorded that
"Bishop [John] Russell [of Richmond] moved that the memorandum as prepared be
given the endorsement of the body of bishops as expressive of the mind of the entire

Conference. Seconded by Bishop [John] Dougherty [Auxiliary of Newark and president
of Seton Hall University], the motion passed." ZC,Minutes ofthe Second General Meeting
ofthe National Conference of Catholic Bishops and the United States Catholic Conference,April 11-13, 1967,p. 21,ADL. See too Bishop Thomas J. Riley (Auxiliary of Boston) to
Zaleski,January 19, 1968, ZC,"Letter. . . ,"ADL, for mention of the letter's endorsement by
the "entire" NCCB. The nature of the minutes and the use of the word "entire" in both

sources strongly suggest, if not unanimity, at least a lack of open dissent.

252AFTER VAnCAN COUNCIL ?: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

port an earUer inference, namely, that the reason why many of the bishops never responded to Zaleski's inquiry was that they read Ottaviani's
letter as an infringement of their episcopal authority.
With the CoD's task brought to an apparently harmonious completion, Zaleski and his committee could now turn their energies to the
numerous other doctrinal issues that required attention, or so they
thought.38 Instead, the secretive way Ui which the reply to Ottaviani
had been handled threatened to undermine efforts being made at that
time by Dearden, Zaleski, and other bishops to estabUsh a stable and
coUaborative relationship between the American hierarchy and American CathoUc theologians. The Ottaviani letter and especiaUy the CoDs
reply to it lingered uitermittently for nearly a year in the correspondence of Zaleski, Dearden, and two successive presidents of the
CathoUc Theological Society of America (CTSA).39
The CTSA wanted a copy of the bishops' letter, but given the CDF insistence on secrecy, some maneuvering by Zaleski and Dearden was
necessary Ui order to circumvent without strictly violating the spirit of
confidentiaUty. InitiaUy, Zaleski had tried to reassure the CTSA president, the Reverend Paul McKeever (who had sent Zaleski an unsolicited

and critical analysis of Ottaviani's letter), that the CTSA's reservations
and misgivings were much the same as those noted in the CoD's reply.
McKeever was not reassured, however, especiaUy after the pubUcation
of the repUes of the French and Dutch bishops (the former with Ottaviani's permission). There was now added pressure on the American
bishops to breach its secrecy, and there were at least two requests from
the CTSA to Zaleski for a copy. The result, no doubt more satisfactory to
the hierarchy than to the theologians, was an agreement reached in Feb-

ruary, 1968, by the NCCB Administrative Board to present a written sum-

mary of the reply to the officers of the CTSA and to discuss it with them.40

"The CoD was involved in examining numerous issues; among them were liturgical
changes, confessional practices, celibacy and various other disciplinary practices, contraception, hospital ethics, religious textbooks, and Catholic pentecostals. There are several
folders in the ZC collection detailing the committee's work under Zaleski. See too, folders

in ZC,"NCCB Committee on Doctrine, General Correspondence," for 1966 and 1967,ADL.
"The correspondence between Zaleski and the CTSA are in ZC, "Committee on Doc-

trine, CTSA Correspondence, 1966-1968," ADL.

"Ibid. See especially, McKeever to Zaleski, March 15, 1967; Zaleski to McKeever, March

21, 1967 (copy); McKeever to Zaleski, May 7, 1967; and Zaleski to McKeever, May 10, 1967

(copy). The agreement to present a summary of the reply to Ottaviani is noted by Zaleski

in his "Report of the Committee on Doctrine, Nov. '67-Apr. '68," p. 2, in ZC, "Theological
Committee, NCCB, 1966-1968," ADL.A copy of the three-page summary presented to the
CTSA officers is in ZC, "Cardinal Ottaviani . . . Correspondence, 1966-1968," undated,

BY SAMUEL J. THOMAS253

It is understandable that the theologians wanted concrete assurance
that the CoD letter to Ottaviani did not contain evidence that they were
mistrusted or under suspicion. Timely assurance was particularly urgent because back Ui June, 1967, the CTSA and Zaleski had agreed to estabUsh a permanent Uaison staffed by a group of the organization's
theologians who would assist the CoD in its service to the hierarchy.

The bishops obviously reaUzed that their chances of forming and

sustaining a positive working relationship with the nation's leading
Catholic theologians required some gesture of trust from the hierarchy.
That the conflict was mitigated and the Uaison agreement salvaged was
certainly due Ui considerable measure to Dearden's and Zaleski's influence in the NCCB.41

There is also a broader significance to the tension underlying the
bishops' negotiations with the theologians, and especiaUy to the resolve
with which the NCCB leaders acted to aUeviate their predicament. The
solution engineered by Dearden and Zaleski may be taken as a coroUary
to the important status that the bishops gave to the principle of subsidiarity and to their coUegial role, a role that they knew would necessitate considerable reUance on the expertise of their country's best
CathoUc theologians.
ADL. It should also be noted that Zaleski polled his CoD (which now included the bishops of Erie,John E Whealon, and Brownsville, Humberto S. Medeiros) on whether the letter should be released to the CTSA: four members said yes, two gave qualified approval,

and one said no. Zaleski's January 16, 1968, letters to the CoD and the replies are in ZC,
"Committee on Doctrine, 1966-1968,CTSA Correspondence," ADL. Reference to the publication of the French bishops' reply to Ottaviani's letter is noted in "French Bishops Reply
Published in FuU," The Tablet, 221 (February 11, 1967), 164. The December 24, 1966, issue
of The Tablet (Vol. 220, p. 1455) had published a pre-permission summary.

"The process of developing a formal working relationship between the hierarchy and

the CTSA is summarized in the "Agenda Report, Documentation for the General Meeting
of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops and United States Catholic Conference,
November 13-17, 1967, Washington, D.C.," pp. 30-32, in ZC, "Agenda, NCCB National
Meeting, Nov. 13-Nov. 17, 1967," and in even more detail in "Report of the Bishops' Com-

mittee on Doctrine, April, 1967, to August, 1967," pp. 1-4, in ZC, "NCCB Committee on
Doctrine General Correspondence,Apr.-Nov. , 1 967,"ADL. Internationally, efforts began in
1967 to institutionalize collaboration between the hierarchy and the theologians. The result, implemented in 1969, was the International Theological Commission, composed of
thirty theologians (including two from the United States) selected on the basis of nominations by various national bishops' conferences and chaired by the prefect of CDF. Both

nationally and internationally, the goal was to re-establish the close working relationships
between bishops and theologians ("a rapprochement of scholarly reflection and pastoral
responsibility") that had often characterized the meetings of Vatican Council II. See
Michael Sharkey (ed.), International Theological Commission, Texts and Documents,
1969-1985 (San Francisco, 1989), pp. vii-x.

254AFTER VATICAN COUNCIL ?: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

The years that have passed since the Ottaviani affair have not been a
smooth continuum in the evolution ofAmerican church leadership, and
the abUities of the American bishops have not always been commensurate to the problems or opportunities that have arisen. A thorough assessment of the hierarchy during those years and a more complete
study of its relations with Rome during the years covered in this essay
must, of course, await further scholarly scrutiny and continuing access
to périment archival materials. Whatever spectrum of success and faU-

ure may eventuaUy emerge, the bishops' handling of the episode de-

scribed here should be marked a success. Evidence in the archives of

the Diocese of Lansing presents a strong case for the conclusion that,
overaU, the bishops' response to a potentiaUy volatUe Roman interven-

tion was carried out in unity with the Holy See, Ui the spirit of aggiornamento that sparked and sustained Vatican CouncU II, and Ui accord
with the enhanced appreciation of coUegiaUty that emanated from it. As
such, it should be accounted a memorable moment both in the history
of the American CathoUc episcopate and Ui the leadership of John
Dearden and Alexander Zaleski.42

APPENDIX

Letter from the Sacred Congregation Pro Doctrina Fidei

on "strange and audacious opinions"

Editor's Introduction

Confidential letter to the Episcopal Conferences

On July 24, 1966, the Sacred Congregation Pro Doctrina Fidei sent the pres-

idents of the episcopal conferences a very important letter "in connection with
growing abuses in the interpretation of the doctrine of the CouncU and with regards also to strange and audacious opinions that are appearing here and there,
which are greatly disturbing the minds of many faithful. . . . We are referring to
"Although Zaleski ended his tenure as chairman of the CoD at the end of 1970, as late
as 1973 the president of the CTSA gave the Lansing bishop much of the credit for what
was then described as a "closer and more open cooperation between bishops and the-

ologians." John Wright, S.J., to Zaleski, March 26, 1973, ZC, "NCCB Nominating Committee," ADL.

BY SAMUEL J. THOMAS255

many affirmations which, going beyond the limits of mere opinion or hypothesis, seem to be directed against dogma itself and the foundations of faith." So, the
letter says, "it is advisable to quote some of these errors, as an example."
The letter was a confidential one, but as a result of indiscretions, it was published in part by certain newspapers. For this reason it appeared in the Acta

Apostolicae Sedis on October 5, 1966. As wrong interpretations of the teachings of the CouncU have a negative repercussion on the evangeUzation of the
world, we think it useful to reproduce this letter here.1

Duty of the People of God
Since the Second Ecumenical Vatican CouncU, which has just reached its suc-

cessful conclusion, has promulgated very wise documents, both in matters of
doctrine and of discipline, to effectively promote the Ufe of the Church, the
grave duty is incumbent on the whole people of God to apply itsetf with aU its
might to bringing about the realization of all that which under the influence of
the Holy Spirit, was solemnly proposed and decreed in this vast assembly of
bishops under the precedence of the Sovereign Pontiff.

Responsibility of the Hierarchy
To the Hierarchy belong the right and the duty of watching over the movement of renewal begun by the Council, of directing and promoting it in such a
way that the documents and decrees of this CouncU be correctly interpreted
and brought into effect, with the most careful regard for their proper signification and spirit. This doctrine, in fact, must be protected by the bishops who,
under Peter as head, have the duty to teach with authority. Numerous pastors
have already undertaken, praiseworthüy to explain the doctrine of the Council
in the right way.

Misinterpretation
However, it is to be regretted that alarming news has come from various
quarters on the subject of growing abuses in the interpretation of the CouncU's
doctrine and with strange and audacious opinions appearing here and there
1In publishing the Latin text of this letter, the Acta A.S. prefaces it with the following
note: "We have been authorized to publish the present letter to make known its authentic
meaning for while because of its very nature it demands great discretion, certain daily
newspapers have not hesitated to publish certain parts of it, but without respecting the
true character of the document. Because of this, certain doubts were expressed on the
content of the letter and on the purpose of the Holy See."

256AFTER VATICAN COUNCIL H: THE AMERICAN CATHOUC BISHOPS

greatly upsetting the minds of many faithful. One must praise studies and efforts
made for a deeper knowledge of the truth, care being taken to distinguish between what is a matter of faith and what is of opinion; but from documents ex-

amined by the S. Congregation it foUows that numerous judgments, going

beyond the limits of mere opinion or hypothesis, seem in some manner to affect dogma itself and the foundations of the faith.

Some Errors

It is useful to point out by the way of example some of these judgments and
errors such as they are known from the reports of scholars and pubUshed writings.

1 . In the first place it concerns sacred Revelation. There are some people, in
fact, who have recourse to Holy Scripture, whUe deUberately leaving tradition
on one side; they reduce the extent and the force of biblical inspiration and inerrancy and they do not have a correct notion of the value of the historical
texts.

2.As regards the doctrine of the faith, dogmatic formulae are said to be subject

to historical evolution that even their objective meaning is subject to change.

3.The ordinary magisterium of the Church, especially that of the Roman Pontiff, is sometimes neglected or disdained to the extent of relegating it to the field
of mere opinion.

4.Some hardly recognize absolute, firm, and unchangeable objective truth;

they subject everything to a certain relativism, advancing as a reason that aU
truth must necessarily foUow the rhythm of the evolution of conscience and
history.
5.Even the adorable Person of Our Lord Jesus Christ is attacked when, in re-

thinking Christology concepts occur on his nature and His person that are hard

to reconcile with the dogmatic definitions. A certain Christological humanism
is creeping in, which reduces Christ to the simple condition of a man who had
Uttle by Uttle acquired the consciousness of His divine filiation. His virginal conception, His miracles, even His resurrection are granted in words, but are actuaUy reduced to the purely natural order.

6.Likewise, in the theological study of the Sacraments, certain elements are ei-

ther ignored or else not sufficiently considered, especiaUy where the Most Holy
Eucharist is concerned. With regard to the real presence of Christ under the
species of bread and wine, there are certain people who, in their dissertations,
favor an exaggerated symboUsm, as if the bread and the wine were not changed
by transubstantiation into the body and blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, but
were simply subject to a certain change of signification. There are some, too,

BY SAMUELJ THOMAS257

who on the subject of the Mass stress more than is right the idea of meal
(agape), to the detriment of the idea of sacrifice.

7.Certain people prefer to explain the Sacrament of penance as a means of
reconciUation with the Church, without expressing sufficiently the reconcUiation with God HimseU Who is offended. They also claim that, for the celebration
of this sacrament, the personal confession of suis is not necessary; they are content to set forth the social function of reconciUation with the Church.
8.There are also those who minimize the doctrine of the CouncU of Trent on

original sin or comment on it in such a way that Adam's original fault and the
transmission of his sin are at least obscured.

9.No less serious errors are spread in the field of moral theology. In fact, many
people dare to reject the objective reason of morality; others do not accept natural law and affirm the legitimacy of what they caU situation ethics. Pernicious

opinions are spread about moraUty and responsibiUty in the matter of sex and
marriage.

10.To all that, a note must be added on ecumenism. The ApostoUc See assuredly approves those who, in the spirit of the conciliar decree on ecumenism,
take initiatives to encourage charity with our separated brothers and draw
them to the unity of the Church. But the ApostoUc See deplores that there are

persons who interpret the concUiar decree in their own way, advocate an ecu-

menical action that offends the truth regarding the unity of the faith and of the
Church; Ui this way encouragement is given to a dangerous Uenicism and indtfferentism, which is completely foreign to the spirit of the Council.

Arrest These Errors and Dangers
These errors and these dangers, which are scattered here and there, are collected in the form of a brief synthesis in this letter to Ordinaries so that each
one, by reason of his function and of his office, may endeavor to arrest them or
prevent them. This sacred Congregation urgently asks the same Ordinaries,

gathered in Episcopal conferences, to deal with these matters and duly report
their opinions to the Holy See in an opportune manner before the feast of
Christmas this year. Ordinaries and those to whom they think it is their duty to
communicate the contents of this letter are asked to maintain strict secrecy,

since pubUcation is forbidden by obvious reasons of prudence. Rome,July 24th,
1966.

A. Cardinal Ottaviani

'Source: Christ to the World: International Review of Apostolic Experiences, XII
(1967), 65-67.

MISCELLANY

THE SEVENTY-SEVENTH ANNUAL MEETING
OF THE AMERICAN CATHOLIC HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION

Report of the Committee on Program

Ralph William Franklin of General Theological Seminary and Mary Elizabeth
Brown of Marymount Manhattan College made up the Committee on Program

for the 1997 meeting chaired by Jo Ann Kay McNamara. The committee sent
out calls for papers through the Association's journal and on the Internet via
various discussion lists used by the respective members. In addition, we each

pursued personal contacts and enjoyed the very energetic assistance ofWilliam
Callahan, the President of the Association.

In our calls for papers, we explicitly encouraged the submission of single
paper proposals as well as completed panels on the principle that many members are not sufficiently well integrated into scholarly networks to enter into a
complete panel without our assistance. This procedure also gave us the oppor-

tunity to fashion panels at our own initiative that otherwise might not have

emerged. Three panels were created in this manner with the committee supplying chairs and commentators.

We were able to put together a program of nine panels ranging broadly in in-

terest from female mystics in the Middle Ages to New York archbishops. Presenters came from every area of the United States, Canada, and Israel. A

particular high point was a panel in honor of the life and work of Louis Pascoe,
SJ. , a long-time member and officer of the Association.

All the sessions were held in the New York Hilton Hotel. There were a few

minor changes in some of the panels, but all went off smoothly.
January 3, morning: "Moving the Boundaries: Studying Religious Women in
the Cultures of Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe." Chairman: Michael
Goodich, University of Haifa. F.Thomas Luongo, University of Notre Dame:"Fam-

Uy Conflicts and Political Networks; Catherine of Siena and Her Disciples in the

War of the Eight Saints" (Since Dr. Luongo was ill, his paper was read by Carol
Lansing.); Elizabeth A. Lehfeldt, Cleveland State University: "A Place in the Tem-

poral World: The Response of Convents to Lay and Ecclesiastical Challenges in
Sixteenth-Century Spain"; Katherine L. French, State University of New York—

New Paltz: "Where, oh Where, Have the Lay Women Gone? Gendering Parochial
Involvement in Late Medieval England." Commentator: Carol L. Lansing, Univer-

258

MISCELLANY259

sity of California at Santa Barbara. The panel attracted more than fifty people,
some standing in the doorway throughout the session.
January 3, afternoon: "Medieval Reform and Renewal: Papers in Honor of
Louis B. Pascoe, SJ." Chairman: Lawrence F. Hundersmarck, Pace University.
Christopher M. Bellitto, St. Joseph's Seminary, Dunwoodie,Yonkers, New York:
"Nicholas de Clamange: Reformatio Personalis as the Foundation of Church

Reform during the Great Schism"; Elizabeth Lowe, Fordham University: "Her-

vaeus Natalis: Evangelical Models and the Reform of the Dominican Order";
Thomas Giangreco,Iona College: "Cola di Rienzo and the Renewal of the City of
Rome: Art, Politics, and the Revolution of 1347." Commentator: Thomas M.

Izbicki, Johns Hopkins University. The session was enhanced by a brief speech
of appreciation by Father Pascoe. About thirty-five persons attended.
January 3, afternoon: "In That 'Umble House': The 1894-1896 Holy Family

Sisters Journal of Sister Bernard Deggs." Chairman: Mary Grace Krieger, Maryknoll Mission Archives. Charles E. Nolan, Archives of the Archdiocese of New
Orleans and Notre Dame Seminary: "Introduction to the Deggs Journal and the
Louisiana CathoUc History Perspective";Virginia Meacham Gould, De KaIb College: "The Southern Women's Studies Perspective"; Cyprian Davis, O.S.B., St.
Meinrad Seminary CoUege: "Portrait of a Foundress: Henriette DeLiIIe"; Sylvia
Thibodaux, Holy FamUy Sisters: "The Holy FamUy Sisters' Perspective." This session attracted about twenty-five people to a very close and detailed subject.

January 4, morning: "Female Voices in Late-Medieval and Early-Modern Italian

Religious Literature." Chairman: Anne Jacobson Schutte, University ofVirginia.
Karen Scott, DePaul University: "Imagery of Conversion and Political Action:
Catherine of Siena in Early Modern Italian Religious Writing"; WUliam V Hudon,
Bloomsburg University:"The Voice of Camilla Battista daVarano in Early-Modern
Italian Devotional Literature"; Armando Maggi, University of Pennsylvania: "Stories and Histories in the Visions of Maria Maddalena de' Pazzi." Commentator:

Anne Jacobson Schutte. This session, unfortunately, had to compete with two
sessions of the American Historical Association on comparable topics (one devoted to the work of Caroline Bynum). Eighteen persons attended. The substi-

tution of a paper by Karen Scott for Darlene Pryds was announced in our
printed program but occurred too late to be included in our section of the
American Historical Association's program booklet.

January 4, morning:"NewYork Archbishops in a Changing World." Chairman:
Thomas J. SheUey, Fordham University. David J. O'Brien, College of the Holy
Cross: "John Hughes and the Formation of the Ante-BeUum American CathoUc
Church"; Robert Emmett Curran, SJ., Georgetown University: "Michael Corrigan

and New York CathoUcism in the GUded Age"; Gerald P Fogarty, SJ., University
of Virginia: "Francis Cardinal Spellman as a World Figure: His Wartime Trip to
Rome, 1943" Commentator: Robert Wister, Seton Hall University. The audience
at this session numbered forty and overflowed into the corridor; the discussion
was highly stimulating.

260MISCELLANY

January 4, midday: The Presidential Luncheon was held in the elegant Petit

Trianon and was attended by fifty persons. The first vice-president of the Asso-

ciation, Uta-Renate Blumenthal of the Catholic University of America, presided,
and the second vice-president, Francis J. Weber of the Archival Center of the
Archdiocese of Los Angeles, gave the invocation. The president, WiUiam J. CaUahan, delivered his paper, "Regalism, Liberalism, and General Franco." Both winners of the book prizes were present, and each made a brief response to the
presentation.

January 4, afternoon: "Catholicism and Hospital Care in the United States: Ide-

ology and Practice, 1850-1930." Chairman: Kathryn Walterscheid, St. Louis College of Pharmacy (taking the place of Helen Czosnyka, who was unable to be
present). Kathleen Joyce, Duke University: "StaffAppointments: Catholic Hospitals and the PoUtics of CathoUc PrivUege"; Bernadette McCauley Hunter Col-

lege, City University of NewYork:"Conflicting Legacies? The Gendered Origins

of Roman CathoUc Involvement in Health Care in Nineteenth-Century New
York City"; EUzabeth Müiiken, Seton HaU University: "'Depending upon Divine
Providence': The EstabUshment of St. Joseph's Hospital and the Sisters of St.
Joseph, Elmira, New York, 1908-1932." Commentator: Margaret Humphreys,
Duke University. Twenty-two persons were in attendance.
January 4, afternoon: "The PhUosophical Roots of Ecumenism before Vatican
CouncU II." Chairman: John A. Nichols, Slippery Rock University. James P. Jurich, S.J., Xavier Jesuit Community, New York: "Victor de Buck's Espousal of Ecumenism at the First Vatican CouncU"; John R. Griffin, University of Southern
Colorado: "Cardinal Newman and the 'PhUosophy of Byron'"; W Barry Smith,
D'Youville CoUege, "American Catholic Philosophy Confronts the Age of Modernism: WiUiam Turner, Bishop of Buffalo, as Philosophical Historian." Commentator: R. William Franklin, General Theological Seminary. Twenty-seven persons
attended. The discussion was very exciting, and Dr. Franklin feels that this
subject (which was created from single papers) warrants more attention in
future.

January 5 , early morning: Mass for the living and deceased members of the As-

sociation. The principal celebrant and homUist was Reverend Monsignor Francis J. Weber, second vice-president of the Association. About fifty persons
participated.

January 5, morning:"Toward a New History of Penance." Chairman: R. Emmet
McLaughlin, VUlanova University. AbigaU Anne Firey ViUanova University: "Sin
and Crime: Distinguishing in the Dark"; Karen T. Wagner, University of Toronto:
"Cum aliquis venerit ad sacerdotem: Liturgy and the Development of Penance
in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries"; Joseph Goering, University of Toronto:
"What Happened at the Fourth Lateran Council?" Commentator: R. Emmet
McLaughlin. Despite the early hour, this panel was a blockbuster. Forty-five peo-

ple attended, and after three exceptionally exciting papers, they could hardly
be evicted from the room in time for the final session.

MISCELLANY26 1

January 5, late morning: "Nineteenth-Century CathoUc Patronage and State
Funding: ReUgious Women Ln Service-provider Partnerships." Chairman: Regina
Bechtle, CoUege of Mount Saint Vincent. Jessica Sheetz, Marquette University:

"Catholic Progress in London: A PubUc-Private Partnership, the Poor Law

Guardians, and CathoUc Religious Congregations"; Florence Deacon, Cardinal
Stritch College: "School Choice Is Nothing New: Church-State Educational Partnerships in the Nineteenth-Century Midwest"; Grace Donovan, Stonehill Col-

lege: "Holy Union Sisters: Exile from France or Expansion of Ministry?"

Commentator-Judith Metz, Sisters of Charity of Cincinnati. This panel attracted
fifteen people.
The Sunday morning schedule—two panels starting at half past eight and at
eleven o'clock—is a big improvement over the American Historical Association's previous scheduling of panels in the afternoon. I think more people stay

to the end this way. They were very cooperative in scheduling the unusuaUy

large number of panels we offered this year. It would be helpful, however, if
next year's committee could achieve a better Uaison with the chair of the American Historical Association's Committee on Program than I was able to do. I
talked to Margaret Strobel once in an effort to get a jouit session, but the contact was not renewed, and I did not get a chance to co-ordinate our order of of-

ferings with hers. The conflict between our panel and the Bynum panel might
have been avoided. I would advise the next chair to try to co-ordinate better
than I did.

Jo Ann McNamara, Chair

Hunter CoUege of the City University of New York

Report of the Committee on Nominations
In this election 401 ballots were cast. The results are as foUows:

For First Vice-President (and President Ui the foUowing year):
David J. O'Brien, CoUege of the Holy Cross ........................ 284
Stafford Poole, CM., Vincentian Heritage ........................ 117
For Second Vice-President:

Grace E. Donovan, S.U.S.C, Stonehill College ....................... 199
Jo Ann McNamara, Hunter CoUege of the City University of NewYork . . . 184
For the Executive CouncU (three-year term, 1997, 1998, 1999):
Section I:

Constance Hoffman Berman, University of Iowa ..................... 256
Sharon K. Elkins, Wellesley CoUege .............................. 114

262miscellany
Section II:

Frederic J. Baumgartner, Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University, Blacksburg ............................... 130
Alan J. Reinerman, Boston CoUege ................................255
For the Committee on Nominations (three-year term, 1997, 1998, 1999):
Robert Emmett Curran, SJ., Georgetown University ..................231
Thomas J. Shelley, Fordham University ............................. 164
COMMITTFE ON NOMINATIONS

Thomas R. Greene, Chairman
Villanova University
Maureen C. Miller

HamUton CoUege
J. Dean O'Donnell

Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University, Blacksburg

Report of the Committee on the John Gilmary Shea Prize
The John Gilmary Shea Prize for 1996 is awarded to Dr. John T. McGreevy,

Dunwalke Associate Professor ofAmerican History in Harvard University, for his
book, Parish Boundaries: The Catholic Encounter with Race in the Twentieth

Century Urban North, which was pubUshed by the University of Chicago Press
late in 1995. This work is considered by the committee of judges to be the best
of the twenty-three books on the history of the CathoUc Church broadly understood which were entered in the competition this year.
Although "CathoUc racism" is an oxymoron, it often has been and is a reaUty.
It is easy to condemn it, easier stiU to explain it away as simply one aspect of a
broader conflict between "whites" and "blacks." McGreevy's Parish Boundaries
does not stop with such facUe dismissals. "A guiding principle of this study," McGreevy writes,"has been to understand CathoUc racism, not simply to catalogue
it." What emerges from his research is a story of tragic conflicts between often
weU-intentioned ideals and strategies, struggles between communities for
which no whining solutions could be found.
This research presumes that Catholic parishes were not part of some homogeneous American culture: even in the twentieth century, most of their members were stUl within two generations of immigration. Churching and
organizing immigrants was perhaps the major challenge faced by the Church.
Tremendous energy and resources were invested in the creation of national
parishes, ethnic enclaves that used Old World and New World traditions to ere-

miscellany263

ate elaborate inner-city churches, a whole range of tight, exclusive neighborhood institutions, and, ultimately, community identities.
African-American immigrants from the South were perplexed by these structures. Attempts to create parishes for them had some success. Yet many increasingly saw such ethnic parishes as tantamount to segregation, as a

hypocritical betrayal of the universal principles of the Church. Tensions became overwhelming after World War II, when African-American immigration on
a massive scale transformed the inner cities and overwhelmed older ethnic

communities. Dedicated CathoUcs, African-American and European-American,
responded sometimes heroicaUy, sometimes bitterly.
Yet the European ethnic CathoUc communities that yielded, not always with
good grace, to new demographic reaUties, may not have labored in vain. What
remains of their CathoUc school systems, stUl animated by the tight sense of
community that created them, offers hope to new generations of students;
study of the old blue-coUar immigrant communities suggests that the anomie of
inner-city Ufe may not be insurmountable.
McGreevy has written a very fine book on a complex and extremely Impor-

tant topic. He made extensive use not only of profuse secondary scholarship

but also of archival material from across the country. Not least impressive is the
wide variety of photographic evidence incorporated into the text. In a study
that gives pride of place to local housing and neighborhood issues, it is no smaU
achievement to maintain clear organization and a good narrative Une. There is
humor and understatement, sympathy for all, great sensitivity and sophistication. Of the many exceUent books presented this year for the John Gilmary Shea
Prize, Parish Boundaries is the most outstanding.
Frederic J. Baumgartner

Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University, Blacksburg
John Howe, Chairman
Texas Tech University, Lubbock
Mary J. Oates, CSJ.

Regis CoUege, Weston, Massachusetts

Report of the Committee on the Howard R. Marraro Prize
Century by century, preachers have articulated the goals of the CathoUc
Church. And so they did in the Counter-Reformation. Combining classical
rhetoric with "right thinking," numerous preachers at the papal court expressed
the reUgious goals and worldview of a triumphant church in the late sixteenth
century. In his book, Right Thinking: Sacred Oratory in Counter-Reformation
Rome, published by Princeton University Press in 1995, Frederick J. McGinness

264MISCELLANY

tells this story with insight, learning, and unusually thorough documentation.
We are pleased to award the 1996 Howard R. Marraro Prize to Frederick J.
McGinness of Mount Holyoke CoUege.
Alexander Grab

University of Maine
Paul F. Grendler, Chairman

University of Toronto
Alice Keukian

Brandeis University

Report of the Secretary and Treasurer
Those who attended last year's meeting Ln Atlanta will not soon forget it not
merely because of the exceUence of many of the papers and discussions but
also because some of us spent three more days in that city or at its airport than

we had planned, since the severe snowstorm necessitated the closing of many
airports to the north. This year we have returned to NewYork for the first time
since we held our seventy-first annual meeting here in Christmas week of 1990

at the Sheraton Centre Hotel and Towers. Our Committee on Program is presenting nine sessions, three more than the usual number, in the hope of serving
inteUectual nourishment for almost every taste. I wish to thank specificaUy the

chairman of the committee, Professor Jo Ann McNamara, not only for bringing

together such a broad variety of mature and younger scholars but also for fur-

nishing me in ample time aU the data that I needed for the printing of our pro-

gram in the preliminary section of the American Historical Association's
booklet (for which, incidentally, we were charged $635) and in our own folder.

Last March (22 and 23) we held our spring meeting at the University of St.

Thomas in Houston. Since the chairman of the organizing committee, the Reverend Richard J. Schiefen, C.S.B., has published a fuU report on it in the October
issue of the Catholic Historical Review, the only thing left for me to do is to repeat our sincere thanks to him, the other members of the committee, and the

administration of the university for their outstanding hospitaUty.

In spite of these highly creditable activities, in which some non-members par-

ticipated and are participating, the Association has declined in size during 1996.
Beginning with the losses, we must report that eighty-four former members
have failed to pay their annual dues, ten have resigned, and fifteen have died.
These numbers may be compared with the sixty-five who lapsed, fourteen who

resigned, and seven who died in 1995. The combined losses for the year just
ended, therefore, i.e., 109, exceed by twenty-five those incurred in the preceding year.

Among the deceased we mourn some eminent and ancient members:

MISCELLANY265

Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, Archbishop of Chicago, a member since 1966

Judge Genevieve Blatt, of Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, formerly of Harrisburg,
retired from the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, a member since
1984

The Most Reverend Joseph B. Brunini, retired Bishop of Jackson (originaUy of
Natchez-Jackson from 1967 to 1977), a member since 1976
The Most Reverend WiUiam G. Connare, retired Bishop of Greensburg (who
died in 1995), a member since I960
Sister Marie Leonore FeU, ofYonkers, NewYork, professor emérita of the CoUege
of Mount Saint Vincent, a member since 1941 and a member of the Executive
CouncU in 1943-1945

Mr. Daniel J. Kane of Cincinnati, Ohio, a member only since 1995
Cardinal John Krol, retired Archbishop of PhUadelphia, a Ufe member since
1964

Professor Stephan Kuttner, emeritus of the University of California at Berkeley,
a member since 1947 and president in 1958

The Reverend Lee J. Laige of the Archdiocese of Detroit (who died in 1993), a
member since 1927 and a life member since 1932

Dr. Dorothy Mulvey of DeForest, Wisconsin, a member since I968
Dr. Egidio Papa, retired from the Rochester Institute of Technology, a member
since 1969

Dr. Joseph J. Peden ofYorktown Heights, New York, a member since I960
Professor Timothy J. Sarbaugh of Gonzaga University, a member since 1985
Professor H. Kenneth Snipes, Jr., of Manhattan CoUege (who died in 1995), a
member since 1987

Reverend Monsignor Vincent Arthur Yzermans of the Diocese of St. Cloud, a
member since 1966

May their souls and the souls of aU the departed members of the American
Catholic Historical Association through the mercy of God rest in peace.
These losses, regrettably, have not been compensated for by our gains. We
have enroUed seventy new members, and five others who had let their membership lapse for a year or more renewed it. Subtracting the seventy-five added
to the rolls from the 109 removed, we are left with a net loss of thirty-four, and

subtracting that from the 1,146 members reported a year ago, we can now

claim only 1,112. Obviously, a new effort to increase the membership should be
made in this new year.

For the first time in many years no one has become a life member in 1996,

whUe two life members have died. Hence, there are now fifty-six individuals
and the fourteen undying institutions that comprise the seventy Ufe members.
Fifteen of the new members are students; there are now seventy-one student
members, five fewer than in 1995, and thirty-five retired members, three more
than in 1995.

Taking up our financial situation next, I should point out that in the past year
we began to pay twenty-eight instead of twenty-four doUars for each member's

266MISCELLANY

subscription to the Catholic Historical Review. Consequently, we have lost
three dollars on each student and retired member (for both of whom the fee is
twenty-five dollars per annum) and have had only seven doUars left out of the

thirty-five doUars that the 936 ordinary members pay. Our expenses ($53,318)
have exceeded our revenues from membership fees and several minor sources

($42,721) by nearly $10,600. This operational deficit has been suppUed by the
income from our investments, of which $2,450 should be transferred anyway
for the Ufe members (at thirty-five dollars each). Still we may ask ourselves
whether it is proper to use more than eight thousand doUars of our investment
income merely to cover our ordinary operating expenses.
Our investments, of course, have increased in value in the past year. The net
value of our portfolio held in street name by Alex. Brown & Sons (excluding the

John Tracy Ellis Memorial Fund) as of December 5, 1996, was $394,210.38, including $3,35927 in the Cash Reserve Fund, $387,466.63 in stocks, and
$3,384.48 in equity funds. This constitutes an increase over the net value of our
portfolio posted at the end of 1995, when it was $312,716.1 1. In addition, we
have several holdings apart from our portfoUo with Alex. Brown & Sons, the
current value of which is as foUows:

Columbia First Bank: certificates of deposit
(December 15, 1996) ..................................... 5,030.22
(October 12 1996) ....................................... 2,419.59
T. Rowe Price GNMA Fund: 3,309732 shares at

$9.52 per share (November 29) ........................... 31,508.65

Vanguard GNMA Portfolio: 3,336.601 shares at

$10.34 per share (November 29) .......................... 34,500.45

Vanguard GNMA Portfolio: 466.51 1 shares at

$10.34 per share (November 30) ........................... 4,823.72

Vanguard HighYield Bond PortfoUo: 847.767 shares at
$7.84 per share (November 30) ............................ 6,646.49
Vanguard Preferred Stock Fund: 1,159125 shares at

$9.34 per share (September 25) ........................... 10,826.23

Washington Mutual Investors Fund:

5,690.852 shares (less 132 shares held by Alex. Brown)
at $2392 per share (September 23) ....................... 132,967.74

To these should be added the portfolio held
by Alex. Brown & Sons ................................. 387.466.63
Hence, the Association's total invested assets were valued at ......616,18972

This figure represents an increase of $108,645.84 over 1995. The growth is due

partly to the reinvestment of the income from the Washington Mutual Investors
Fund, the first two GNMA portfolios Usted above, and the Vanguard Preferred
Stock Fund, but mainly to the appreciation of some of our stocks and shares in
the mutual funds.

The Committee on Investments, which had been depleted by the death of

Professor Alexander Woroniak and the departure of Mr. Richard Morris from the

MISCELLANY267

CathoUc University of America, has been reconstituted with two other members of the Department of Economics and Business, namely, Dr. Jamshed Y.
Uppal and Dr. Reza Saidi, both associate professors. I deeply appreciate the interest they have shown and the advice they have given. With the help of our
broker, Mr. E. Bruce WheUhan of Alex. Brown & Sons, we intend to restructure

our portfolio with a view to greater diversification.
As editor of the Catholic Historical Review I am pleased to call your attention to the length of the volume (LXXXII) published in 1996. It is 110 pages
longer than the preceding volume, consisting of 782 pages numbered in Arabic

numerals and fifty-six in Roman numerals. Our ordinary budget aUows for 608

pages plus the preliminary matter, title page, and index. That we were able to

add 174 pages was due to the generosity of supporters who contributed $7,653

for this purpose, besides the balance carried over from 1995. We now begin the

new volume with nearly $2,000 available for expansion. I am grateful to each of
the contributors.*

"Mr. Maurice Adelman,Jr. , Miss Charlotte Ames, Dr. R. Scott Appleby, Professor Walter L.
Arnstein, Reverend WiUiam A. Au, Dr. John J. Augenstein, Reverend Robert C. Ayers, Reverend Francis Azzopardi, O.EM.Cap., Professor William S. Babcock, Ms. Carla Bang, Professor Harry L. Bennett, Mr. Clifford J. Berschneider, Professor Thomas E. Bird, Professor
Maxwell Bloomfield, Ms. Susanne Böhr-Hirte, Reverend Monsignor Myles M. Bourke, Professor Henry W. Bowden, Professor Thomas A. Brady, Jr., Professor Robert Brentano, Sister
Mary Briant, Commander Michael O. Brown, CHC USN, Dr. David H. Burton, Professor Caroline W Bynum, Professor Joseph F. Byrnes, Professor William J. CaUahan, Reverend Robert
Carbonneau, CR, Reverend Daniel E. Carter, Mr. Aloysius Clarke, Professor Robert H. Connery, Reverend Austin Cooper, O.M.I. , Professor Jay Corrin, Reverend Robert Croken, S.J.,
Mr. Timothy P. Cross, Mr. L. Chris Curry, Miss Judythe B. Deutsch, Professor Thomas
Deutscher, Mr. R. A. Dowd, Reverend Monsignor Thomas M. Duffy, Reverend Monsignor
Walter J. Edyvean.Mr. Edward V Egan, Brother Patrick EUis.ES.C, Reverend Edward J. Enright, O.S.A., Reverend Dr. John Whitney Evans, Sister Janice Farnham, R.J.M., Reverend
Gerald P. Fogarty, S.J., Dr. MicheUe M. Fontaine, Reverend MonsignorJohn T. Foudy, Professor John B. Freed, Right Reverend Professor Astrik L. Gabriel, Mr. Richard C. Garvey, Most
Reverend Peter L. Gerety, Reverend Paul E. Gins, O.S.M., Professor Elisabeth G. Gleason,

Professor Philip Gleason, Reverend Leopold G. Glueckert, O.Carm., Alexander W. Gotta,
MD., Dr. Philip A. Grantjr., Professor Walter D. Gray, Reverend Peter N. Graziano, Ms. JuneAnn Greeley, Professor Paul E Grendler, Professor Hanns Gross, Dr. Richard E Gyug, Most
Reverend Daniel A. Hart, Professor Francis X. Hartigan, Professor Martin J. Havran, Reverend Lawrence R. Hennessey, ST., Reverend Bennett D. HiU, O.S.B., Reverend Monsignor
John V Horgan, Reverend Joseph G. Hubbert, CM., Reverend John Jay Hughes, Reverend
Monsignor Richard A. Hughes, Reverend Leon M. Hutton, Dr. Cathy J. Itnyre, Professor
James J. John, Dr. Karen Jolly, Dr. Christopher Kauffman, Reverend John P. Kavanaugh, Reverend Leonard J. Kempski, Mr. Michael J. Kennedy, Mr. David A. Kingma, Professor Zoltan J.
Kosztolnyik, Professor Peter J. Kountz, Reverend Robert Krieg, C.S.C, Reverend Raymond
J. Kupke, Reverend Professor Louis M. La Favia, Reverend Monsignor Andrew P Landi, Dr.
Charles E Lasher, Mrs. Joan M. Lenardon, Most Reverend Oscar H. Lipscomb, Mr. Richard A.
LoiseUe, Reverend Ambrose Macaulay, Dr. EUen A. Macek, Mr. Walter H. Maloney, Jr., Dr.
Raymond J. Maras, Dr. Dennis D. Martin, Professor Lawrence J. McCaffrey, Reverend John
R. McCarthy, Sister Mary Frances McDonald, O.P, Reverend Thomas C McGonigle, O.P.,

268

MISCELLANY

In our eighty-second volume we have pubUshed thirteen articles (including
the presidential address read at the last annual meeting), one bibUographical
essay, two review articles, and reviews of 223 other books, besides the reports
from the Association's last annual meeting and the other regular sections. In

1995 only 166 books were reviewed at least briefly. While I thank aU the authors

of articles and book reviewers, I give double thanks to those authors who have
procured the four cover Ulustrations free of charge.

Fifty manuscripts have been submitted in the past year, nine more than in
1995. Six of them were sent together, being papers read at the Symposium on
the History of Christianity in China held at Hong Kong in the first week of October. The distribution by fields and the tentative or final disposition of these
manuscripts are shown in the foUowing table:

Accepted

ConditionaUy
accepted Rejected

Pending

Withdrawn Total

General and

MisceUaneous
Ancient and
Medieval

10

Early modern
European

6

2

Late modern

European
American

9
13

Canadian

1

Latin American

1

Asian and
Pacific

8

Total

13

25

50

Sister Mary Nona McGreal, OP, Professor John T McGreevy, Dr. Mary M. McLaughlin, Reverend Robert O. McMain, Professor Jo Ann Kay McNamara, Reverend Robert E McNamara,
Dr. David C MiUer, Professor Samuel J. T. Miller, Reverend Wilson D. Miscamble, C.S.C, Professor John C Moore, Professor James Muldoon, Reverend Monsignor Robert R. Mulligan,
Reverend Francis J. Murphy, Reverend Benedict Neenan, O.S.B., Dr. Michael C Neri, Dr.
Louis J. Nigro, Professor Thomas E Noble, Honorable John T. Noonanjr., Professor Doyce
B. Nunis, Jr., Professor Francis Oakley, Professor David J. O'Brien, Professor Maurice R.
O'Connell, Reverend Fergus O'Donoghue, S.J., Most Reverend Gerald O'Keefe, Most Reverend Joseph T. O'Keefe, Professor Glenn Olsen, Mr. John R. Page, Mrs. Marie E. PalmerKamprath, Reverend Louis J. Pascoe, SJ. , Dr. and Mrs. Robert E. Paul, Professor Neal Pease,
Reverend Dr. John E Piperjr., Reverend Charles W. Polzer, SJ., Professor James M. PoweU,
Dr. Robert E. Quigley, Mr. John F. Quinn, Professor Alan J. Reinerman, Reverend James W
Reites, S.J., Mrs. Margherita Repetto-Alaia, Reverend John Kevin Ring, Professor John F.

MISCELLANY269

The fields in which we have most notably failed to attract sufficient articles are
Canadian and Latin American history.
It is not only a duty but also a pleasure each year to thank the four advisory
editors and the numerous but anonymous referees. I also thank Dr. Lawrence H.

Feldman for his thoroughness, accuracy, and speed in compUing once again the
general index.

According to the official statement of ownership prepared by the business
manager, Gordon A. Conner, which wiU be published in the January issue, the

paid circulation of the Review as of September 26, 1996, was 1,890; this figure

reflects the decline in membership, while the direct subscriptions, held mostíy

by libraries and other institutions, remain largely stable. In addition, 169 copies

were sent out free of charge each quarter, mostly in exchange for other journals. The total distribution was 2,059 for each issue during the preceding
twelve months on the average.
The second half of this year was a difficult time in the executive office of the
Association and the editorial office of the Review, because our trusted and es-

teemed secretary, Miss Maryann Urbanski, underwent surgery in August and
could not return to work for more than five weeks, and then for several more
weeks she could not remain for a full day. In her absence I engaged some tem-

porary and part-time help, but some tasks were unavoidably neglected, such as

acknowledging contributions for the expansion of the journal. I express my
gratitude to Miss Urbanski for doing the best that her physical condition permitted in this first semester. I also wish to note the valuable service rendered by

our work-study undergraduate assistants, Miss Christina Mary Sinck (who graduated in May) and Mr. Joseph Smith (who began in September).

Looking ahead, we expect another weU organized and weU attended spring
meeting, which wiU take place at the University ofVirginia at Charlottesville on
April 4 and 5 , under the direction of our past president, Father Gerald P Fogarty,

SJ. Then next January for the first time we wiU meet in Seattle, where we hope

the weather wiU be more clement than it has been in recent weeks. The chair-

Roche, Professor John D. Root, Professor Francis J. Ryan, Dr. James D. Ryan, Professor José
M. Sanchez, Reverend Monsignor Robert J. Samo, Dr. Daniel L. Schlafly, Dr. John F.
Schwaller, Reverend Monsignor Francis R. Seymour, Dr. William D. Sharpe, Professor Hiroaki Shiozaki, Dr. Albert Shumate, Reverend Joachim Smet, O.Carm., Professor John R.
Sommerfeldt, Mr. George T Spera, Professor James M. Stayer, Ms. Elizabeth M. Streitz, Dr.
Stephen J. Sweeny, Professor Leonard Swidler, Reverend Charles J. T. Talar, Mr. Daniel E Tanzone, Professor Leslie W. Tentler, Professor Samuel J. Thomas, Reverend Dr. Thomas W.
Tifft, Dr. John B. Tomaro, Professor James D. Tracy, Professor Thomas P Turley, Reverend
Edward R. Udovic, CM., Professor Nicholas Varga, Reverend Jeffrey von Arx, S.J., Captain
Andrew J. Walsh, Professor Morimichi Watanabe, Reverend Monsignor Edward V Wetterer,

Reverend Arthur Wheeler, C.S.C, Dr. Joseph M. White, ProfessorJoseph L. Wieczynski, Dr.

Alexandra Wilhelmsen, Reverend Norbert G. WbU, Dr. Richard J. Wolff, Reverend WiUiam
Wolkovich-Valkavicius, Dr. Eric J. Yonke, Reverend Dr. Martin A. Zielinski.

270MISCELLANY

man of the Committee on Program, Dean Arthur L. Fisher of Seattle University,
is still receiving proposals of sessions or papers. FinaUy, for the spring of 1998
the Executive CouncU has accepted the gracious invitation of Marian CoUege in

Indianapolis. Our meeting wiU be a part of the celebration of the centenary of
the transfer of the episcopal see that was erected at Vincennes in 1834 to Indianapolis in 1898; it was raised to metropolitan rank in 1944. The Executive
CouncU would welcome invitations from other coUeges or universities for
spring meetings in subsequent years.

As we approach the end of the second Christian miUennium, let us strive to
heighten the interest of our non-historian contemporaries in the history of
Christianity and be prepared to respond to the questions that this mUestone is
bound to provoke.
Robert Trisco

Secretary and Treasurer
Financial Statement
Fund Statement (as of December 15, 1996)
Cash:

Balance as of December 15, 1995 ...........
Increase (Decrease): see Exhibit A ...........

6,021.19
(10,596.30)

Transfer from investment income ...........

15.300.00

Balance as of December 15, 1996 ...........

10,724.89

Investments: see Exhibit B ..................................
Total Fund Resources ......................................

276.502.38
287,227.27

Statement ofRevenue and Expenses (ExhibitA)

(for the period December 15, 1995, through
December 15, 1996)
Revenue:

Membership fees (annual) .................
Annual meeting, 1995/96 ..................

39,632.00
2,014.00

Rental of mailing list ......................

150.00

Endowment Fund ........................

339-33

Dividends (cash) .........................
MisceUaneous ...........................
Expenses:
Office Expenses:

581.10
5JK)

Secretary ...............

Telephone ..............

Supplies, printing ........
Postage ................

12,462.88
30.75

734.18
3.472.1116,69992

Catholic Historical Review

Subscriptions .......................
Annual meeting, 1995/96 ..................
Annual meeting, 1996/97 ..................

31,150.00
2,777.46
1,681.00

42,721.43

271

MISCELLANY

John Gilmary Shea Prize ..................
Bank charges ............................

Discount on checks ......................
Dues to CIHEC ..........................
MisceUaneous ..........................

500.00
105.90
21.00
38.25
344.20

53.317.73

(10,596.30)

Operational surplus—Net gain (loss) .............
Investments (Exhibit B)
General Fund

Balance as of December 15, 1995 ................
Income from investments (dividends and interest):
Abbott Laboratories ......................
Alex. Brown Cash Reserve Fund ............

216,740.05
744.00

(145.88) (paid SF I)

American Electric Power Company ..........
DTE Energy Co..........................

480.00
201.88
1,200.00

First American Financial Corp...............
General Electric Company .................
ITT Hartford Group.lnc ...................

53.46
2,944.00

Edison International ......................

ITT Industries, Inc ........................

Johnson & Johnson ......................
Montana Power Company .................
Rayonier, Inc ............................
T. Rowe Price GNMA Fund, Inc ..............
Vanguard GNMA Portfolio .................
Vanguard High Yield Corp. PortfoUo .........
Vanguard Preferred Stock Fund .............
Van Kampen American Capital Bond Fund
Washington Mutual Investors Fund ..........
Capital gains:
Washington Mutual Investors Fund ..........

240.00
90.00

1,176.00
480.00
56.00

2,091.60
2,335.24
581.10

742.89
1,540.00
3.421.26
5.750.72

Total

Less dividends received as revenue (Exhibit A) .

5.750.72
23,982.27

(581.10)
23,401.17

Total income from investments .............
Less transfer to cash ......................

(15,300.00)

Balance as of December 15, 1996 ...........
Special Fund I—Howard R. Marraro Prize
Balance as of December 15, 1995:
Alex. Brown Cash Reserve Fund ............
Central & Southwest .....................

18,23155

224,841.82
.6,363.17
.7.966.47

14,329.64

.306.70
.696.00

1,002.70

Investment income:

Alex. Brown Cash Reserve Fund ............
Central & Southwest .....................
Prize and luncheon ...........................

(550.001

Balance as of December 15, 1996 ................
Special Fund II—Anne M. WolfFund
Balance as of December 15, 1995:

14,782.34

Columbia First Bank CDs ..................

7,502.33

Investment income ...........................

355.12

Balance as of December 15, 1996 ................

7,857.45

272MISCELLANY

Special Fund III—Expansion of the CHR
Balance as of December 15, 1995 .............................
Contributions ............................................
Expense .................................................
Balance as of December 15, 1996 .............................
Special Fund TV—Endowment
Balance as of December 15, 1995
Vanguard GNMA Portfolio ..............................

679.79
7,65300
(6.469.441
1,863.35
4,542.50

Investment income ........................................
Transferred to Exhibit A ....................................

339.33
(339.33)

Balance as of December 15, 1995 .............................
Special Fund V-J. T. Ellis Memorial Fund

4,542.50

Balance as of December 15, 1995 .............................

19,712.40

Contributions ............................................

2,470.00

Investment income

Signet Money Market Account ..............

350.76

Alex. Brown Cash Reserve Fund ............

2.83

Central & Southwest ......................

87.00440.59

Bank's external service charges ..............................
(8.07)
Balance as of December 15, 1996 ............................. 22,614.92
Total investments .............................................. 276,502.38

New Members

Mr. Roberto Ardon, 11520 SW 81 Road, Miami, FL 33156
Dr. Roy Barkley, Texas State Historical Association, SRH 2, 306, University Station, Austin, TX 787 1 2

Mr. John Leonard Berg, 308 Center Street, Decorah, IA 52101
Mr. Jeffrey B. Beshoner, Department of History, University of Notre Dame, Notre
Dame, IN 46556

Ms. A. Diane Boleyn, 4430 East 16th Street, Cheyenne, WY 82001-6440

Ms. Suzanne Brown-Fleming, 5128 North 25th Place, Arlington,VA 22207
Mr. Raymond A. Caboor, 5332 West Windsor Street, Unit IC, Chicago, IL 606303734

Mr. Joseph C. Castora, 96-01 24th Avenue, East Elmhurst.NY 11369
Rev. Peter R. Cebulka, 470 Ryders Lane, East Brunswick, NJ 08816
Mr. Mark L. Chance, 6625 Clemson Street, Houston, TX 77092-5707
Mr. Kevin Cloud, 265 Transit Street, Providence, RI 02906
Dr. Timothy J. Cook, 65 Carrington Avenue, Providence, RI 02906-1606

Mr. Stephen C. Cordova, 1610 MUvia Street, #2, Berkeley, CA 94709

Mr. L. Chris Curry, Department of History, 224 Himes HaU, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Mr. David Emmons, Department of History, University of Montana, Missoula, MT
59812

Dr. Michael C. Frassetto, 10 Watson Wynd, Sharpsburg, GA 30277
Mr. Matthew E. GaUegos, 2102 34th Street, #116, Lubbock, TX 79411

MISCELLANY273

Ms. Ramona Garcia, 215 Robin Lane, Fairfield, CT 06430-3941

Mr. Thomas C. Giangreco, 2 Carrie Place, Eastchester, NY 10709-1216

Sr. Madeleine Grace, CVI., 609 Crawford Street, Houston, TX 77002-3668
Mr. John H. Graham, 28 West Forest Street, LoweU, MA 0185 1-4818

Mr. Michael B. Gross, 215-1 1 48th Avenue, Apt. #2A, Bayside, NY 1 1364

Dr. Richard F. Gyug, Department of History, Fordham University, Bronx, NY
10458-5159

Mr. David Heisser, 22 Formosa Drive, Charleston, SC 29407
Rev. Thomas C. Hennessy, SJ., Loyola HaU, Fordham University, Bronx, NY 10458

Mr. Daniel La Corte, 1547 Kickapoo Court, Kalamazoo, MI 49006-5979

Ms. Kathryn A. Ladd, 11111 Pleasant Colony Drive, Apt. #731, Houston, TX
77065

Mr. Andrew J. Leet, 3500 Minikahda Court,#12,St. Louis Park, MN 55416-4751
Rev. Msgr. Paul A. Lenz, 2021 H Street, N.W, Washington, DC 20006
Ms. LesUe L. Liedel, 918 North Mantua, #4, Kent, OH 44240

Dr. Mary Anne Lindskog, 406 Administration BuUding, Emory University,Atlanta,
GA 30322

Dr. Thomas Luongo, Medieval Institute, 715 Hesburgh Library, University of
Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556

Rev. John F. Lyons, 3175 West 165th Street, Cleveland, OH 441 1 1

Rev. Michael P Lyons, 33 Mt. View Drive, Pleasant VaUey, NY 12569
Dr. Joseph G. Mannard, 909 Beason VaUey Road, Greensburg, PA 1 5601
Mr. Jeff D. Marlett, Department of Theological Studies, St. Louis University, St.
Louis, MO 63108
Dr. Timothy M. Matovina, Loyola Marymount University, 7900 Loyola Boulevard,
Los Angeles, CA 90045-8400
Mr. Steve McCarthy, Aquinas CoUege, 4210 Harding Road,NashviUe,TN 37205

Mr. Patrick J. McNamara, 6252 15th Place North, Arlington,VA 22205
Mr. Earl S. Mead, 1870 Central, Canon City, CO 81212
Sr. Judith Metz, S.C., 5018 ReUeum Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45238

Ms. Aurora MorciUo, 1 105 Princeton Drive, S.E., Albuquerque, NM 87106
Ms. Melody A. Moulton, 1676 South 200 West, Bountiful, UT 84010

Dr. Lucy E. Moye, Department of History, HLUsdale CoUege, HUlsdale, MI 49242
Mr. Sean Eisen Murphy, Medieval Studies, 259 Goldwin Smith HaU, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850

Mrs. CeciUa A. Mushenheim, 1131 Epworth Avenue, Dayton, OH 45410-2611

Mr. Robert Nadeau, 240 Mercer Street, #1002, NewYork, NY 10012

Rev. Benedict Neenan, O.S.B., Conception Abbey, Conception, MO 64433

Sr. M. Paulinus Oakes.R.S.M., 19 North HUl Parkway, #19-P, Jackson, MS 39206
Mr. Kevin M. O'Connor, 11210 Behr Drive, Saint Louis, MO 63123
Mr. Clay O'Dell, 818 CabeU Avenue, Apt. I, CharlottesvUle,VA 22903

Mr. Gregory S. Peters, 4232 East Highway 80, Apt. #2253, Mesquite, TX 75149

Ms. Peggy A. Rabkin, Four AnnabeUe Lane, Florham Park, NJ 07932
Dr. Alan W Reese, St. Thomas More College, 1437 CoUege Drive, Saskatoon,
Saskatchewan S7N OW6, Canada

274MISCELLANY

ReUgious Studies, HamUton College, Clinton, NY 13323

Dr. Rosalie G. Riegle, Saginaw VaUey State University, University Center, MI
48710

Prof. Anne C. Rose, Department of History, 108 Weaver Bunding, Perm State University, University Park, PA 16802
Mr. Barry Sargent, 5223 West Greenwood Terrace, Milwaukee, WI 53223
Mr. Own C. Schugsta, 1 28 Garden Road, Oreland, PA 19075
Ms. Jessica A. Sheetz,836 North 14th Street, #314, MUwaukee.Wl 53233
Mr. Julian D. Skolen, 21 Harwood Road, West Seneca, NY 14224

Ms. Mary E. Sommar, Kraepelin Strasse 63, 80804 Munich, Germany

Ms. Kathleen A. Sprows, Department of History, University of Notre Dame,
Notre Dame, IN 46556
Mr. Christopher Stokes, 6500 Main Street, #108, Houston, TX 77030

Mr. PhUUp M. Thompson, 507 East Morgan Avenue, Chesterton, IN 46304
Dr. Thomas A. Tweed, 1901 Pathway Drive, Chapel HiU, NC 27516

Dr. L.J. Andrew Villalon, 764 East MitcheU Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45229
Sr. Janet Welsh, O.P., 3026 Calwagner Street, Franklin Park, Il 60131-2612
Sr. Kathleen Wood, S.C.L., PO. Box 214, Meeker, CO 81641
Mr. Jeffrey T. Zalar, 3310 South 28th Street, #203, Alexandria,VA 22303

REWIRING THE CIRCUIT: CAMPIS REFORMATION
Review Article
by

Dermot Fenlon

Liturgy, Sanctity and History in Tridentine Italy:Pietro Maria Campi and the
Preservation ofthe Particular. By Simon Ditchfield. [Cambridge Studies in
ItaUan History and Culture.] (NewYork: Cambridge University Press. 1995.
Pp. xvi, 397. $79.95.)
Here is a book which throws singular new light on the CathoUc Reformation

and the cult of the saints in early modern Italy. FoUowing in the wake of schol-

ars like John d' Amico and Charles Stinger, Ditchfield examines the widespread
concern of humanists like Raffaele Maffei,at the beginning of the sixteenth century, with the "many and various detaUs in saints' lives and other commentaries
which are to be considered apocryphal." This concern was met Ui the work of
Cardinal Quiñones for the reform of the breviary. In the Quiñones breviary,
Scripture, hymnody, and hagiography were combined in a way that was de-

signed to supply a minimal basis of priestly formation. The principles underly-

ing its conception were adopted by Cardinal Carafa and the Theatines, and
passed in a straight Une into the reforms of the Council of Trent. Maffei's plea
for what Ditchfield caUs "a textuaUy chaste liturgy" thus found fruition in the

papal bull Quod a Nobis of 1568. Part One of Ditchfield's book explores the reception of this decree in the locaUties.

Between Rome and the Italian dioceses there immediately developed a process of feedback and arbitration, as bishops like Paleotti and Valier found themselves under pressure to retain local saints and traditions. How much, if
anything, might be conserved of local liturgies which lacked the two-hundredyear test appUed by Quod a Nobis? First Cardinal SMeto, then, after 1588 the
newly estabUshed Congregation of Rites, undertook the reconsideration of local
traditions. Thus the creation of the Congregation should be seen, according to
Ditchfield, as "a papal response to the demands of a frequently embattled episcopate" rather than "an interfering watchdog intent on imposing a . . . standardizing poUcy that did not take local needs and priorities into account."
Standardization occurred, but Ditchfield prefers the expression 'regularization.'
Just as in the study of secular government "simpUstic views of absolute monar-

275

276REWIRING THE CIRCUIT: CAMPI'S REFORMAnON

chy have long since been abandoned," so should they be in matters of ecclesiastical government. "Things were no different in the religious sphere." Ditchfield appUes this insight to a reconsideration of the theses about Rome and the
local churches advanced by scholars like Prodi and Alberigo in the past forty

years. The result is a compelling new assessment verified by Ditchfield's dis-

covery in the Ubrary of the Roman Oratory, of the complete documentation surrounding the revision of the Piacenzan Breviary of 1598. The ensuing story
affords a striking insight into the workings of local Uturgical reform at close
quarters. Here we have a unique case study of the CathoUc Reform in a seventeenth-century Barchester.

Pietro Maria Campi (1569-1649), a canon of Piacenza Cathedral, undertook

the revision of the local breviary at the request of his bishop. Campi's text, and
the bishop's endorsement of it in 1598, were questioned by the Canon Theologian of the Cathedral, Daniele Garatola. Garatola was the official responsible for
priestly spiritual formation in the diocese. His was the task of ensuring that the
clergy were suitably equipped for preaching and theological instruction. Garatola's objections to Campi's revised breviary were essentiaUy those of Raffaele
Maffei and Carafa at the beginning of the century: "many and various detaUs . . .
to be considered apocryphal." Garatola objected to Campi's account of Piacen-

za's patron saint, S. Antonino. Piacenza's supposed possession of the body of S.

Giustina lacked documentary substance. There were other objections. Should
such material, he asked,"be preached to the People or inserted between the offices of canonical hours by the bishop?" The essential issue, for Garatola, was

that such material should not be "reformed" locaUy,"for this is simply prohibited

by Pius Vs injunction at the front of the Roman Breviary."

Campi's breviary, in Garatola's estimate, marked a regression from the Tridentine reform. To ensure a breviary that would be a worthy basis of priestly formation, it was necessary to have recourse to Rome. Rome had begun that
reform; only Rome could 'save' it.
The matter was referred to the Congregation of Rites. The documentation
was then sifted at the Roman Oratory, and a revised set of readings suppUed and

in 1610 approved by the Congregation. Why the Roman Oratory? As Ditchfield

remarks, the historical work of Oratorians like Antonio Gallonio and the broth-

ers Antonio and Francesco Bozio, together with that of Baronio, can now be
seen in connection with the work of the Congregation of Rites. It was the Oratorians who supplied the requisite criteria for the verification and revision of
local liturgies, rewriting, if needs be, the Uves of the saints for inclusion in the
breviary. Their criteria were chronology, adequate documentation or, failing
that (which was often) continuity of cult. BeUarmine at the Holy Office, Baronio
at the Oratory, and the Congregation of Rites supervised, in minute detail, the
final versions. Their concern was not with "purely historical criteria."They were
not intent on excluding whatever was not historicaUy verifiable. To attempt
that, as BeUarmine recognized, would be to empty the breviary and the Roman

Martyrology. What they wanted was the elimination of whatever was unten-

BY DERMOT FENLON277

able. (The cult of St. Denis at Paris and St. James at ComposteUa were recognized as untenable but deemed poUticaUy and pastoraUy untouchable.) The
final criterion was, therefore, continuity of cult. Thus the breviary graduaUy attained a standard of liturgical decorum which, centuries later, as Ditchfield
recalls, was to impress John Henry Newman, who found its contents "so unexciting, grave and simple." Newman was discovering the Liturgical Reformation
of the sixteenth century. If Ditchfield's achievement were to have accompUshed no more than this we should be significantly m his debt. But there is
more.

Campi is remembered in Italian historiography as the author of a series of
Lives of the Saints of Piacenza. They began to appear in 1603. They were the direct result of his work on the breviary. He spent the last years of his Ufe trying
to get the Piacenzan Pope Gregory X canonized. He failed. Thereafter he devoted himseU to completing his history of the local church. The work appeared

posthumously in three volumes (1651-52). Parts two and three of Ditchfield's
book uncover a fresh context in which such work assumes new meaning.

Girolamo Tiraboschi, writing toward the end of the eighteenth century, remarked upon Campi's "very learned" contribution to the Ecclesiastical History
of Piacenza, "fiul of authentic and previously unpubUshed documents." At the
same time, he thought "an author of more rigorous critical skiUs would have
been able to distinguish the true from the false and to have drawn the conclusions therefrom." Ditchfield notes how Tiraboschi put his finger on "a feature of
seventeenth century local history that has continued to provoke comment
down to our own century," namely,"an impressive erudition" not matched by "a
correspondingly acute critical spirit." Tiraboschi recognized that Campi's work
belonged to a genre of studi sacri which, as he noted, began as a small stream
around the middle of the sixteenth century and developed into a mighty river
in the course of the seventeenth century—saints lives, local histories, regional
histories which, allowing for the attention which they have gained from scholars so acute as Sergio Bertelli, have nevertheless continued to be an occasion of
mud perplexity. Ditchfield has now found the Uturgical context that generated
and explains that literature. Not only that; he demonstrates how such material
provided the foundation of what must henceforward be regarded as a vast collaborative enterprise: —Ferdinando UgheUi's Italia Sacra, which appeared in
nine volumes at Rome between 1644 and 1662 and was subsequently revised
and expanded in the ten-volume Venetian edition of 1717-1722. UgheUi's narrative account of some 320 mainland Italian dioceses, arranged according to
episcopal succession, has long been recognized as the first comprehensive historical account of the ItaUan peninsula. UgheUi's work has 'foundational' value
for modern historical enquiry. But whereas 'modern' perspectives have tended
to see it as a 'beginning,' Ditchfield has found the long traU of local and provincial histories which leads to its remote origins in the implementation of the
CouncU ofTrent. It was a traU with many false signposts which UghelU had presumably to remove en route. Among these, as Garatola had insisted, was found
the documentation underlying Campi's Life of S. Antonino.

278REWIRING THE CIRCUIT: CAMPI'S REFORMATION

Yet within a year of the Congregation's negative judgment on this source, it

reappeared in Campi's published Life of 1603. It remained, unrevised, in

Campi's History of Piacenza. Someone, possibly Giovanni Battista Agucchi,
Campi's patron, supplied him with a Ust of Rules for arriving at historical
truth. These were, in effect, the criteria informing the historical work of the Oratorians and the Congregation of Rites. They involved due attention to chronology, and to the distinction of primary and secondary sources. Campi seems, at
least intermittently, to have taken the hint. His final work, the History of Piacenza, foUowed the chronological form adopted by Baronio for the Annales Ecclesiastici. He matured to the point of being able to use comparative sources
and notarial records to establish for the first time the Piacenzan episcopate of S.
Folco (1210).

Campi's oeuvre was typical of the newTridentinegewre of hagiography—the

provision of a local 'school of sanctity' for people who need look no further
than their own city for exemplars of holy Uving. There was St. Cortado, "The
Aristocratic Hermit" for those in search of models of aristocratic sanctity. There
was S. Franca, "The WeU Born Nun." S. Raimondo was "The Lady Helper of the

Urban Poor." There was Margarita Antoniazzi, who died in 1565, a poor girl, a vi-

sionary, and the foundress of a local community of nuns. Her Life by Campi was
in Ditchfield's words, "the least personal and most formulaic" of Campi's entire
output. Yet what seems formulaic to later generations may strike fire in the
hearts of those disposed to see the ways of God in humble forms. We must
needs tread carefully in such matters. We are, however, entitled to ask how
many, like Garatola, were dismayed by Campi's cavaUer confidence in documents which tended to support his causes? The answer is, surely, those most
qualified to judge. Campi's long struggle to get Gregory X canonized foundered,
among other obstacles, on his appeal to documentation deemed "non degna di
fede" by the Congregation. Too late, he appealed to continuity of cult. But Gregory's beatification had to await the eighteenth century.
True, Rome was unwilling by this time to overload the Calendar of Saints. But
the flood of local Vitae was now swoUen by an accumulating tide of local histories. Why?
Once again, because of the long-term effect of Tridentine legislation: not, this
time, the bull Quod a Nobis, but Carlo Borromeo's third Diocesan Synod of
1 574, requiring bishops to supply from their archives a credible Ust of their predecessors, reaching back, as far as possible, to earUest Christian times. Here
Ditchfield discovers the remote origins of UgheUi's Italia Sacra—a series of
local histories amalgamated into regional histories—Sicilia Sacra, Napoli
Sacra, aU in due course finding their way into a peninsular ecclesiastical historiography. This long process constituted, in Ditchfield's words, a "quiet revolution in historical method" anticipating by a century Arnaldo MomigUano's
detection of the same process in the classical antiquarians of the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries—enlisting for the first time non-Uterary sources, and
distinguishing primary from secondary material. In the long road leading to

BY DERMOT FENLON279

UgheUi, as Ditchfield continuaUy emphasizes, such novel methods subserved a
liturgical purpose. We are not dealing with the Hoch Kultur of the Erdightenment. We are not witnessing the emergence of "modern historical consciousness" (although Meinecke's definition of that might seem to leave a lot to be
desired; the phüological unearthing of the"ancient constitutions" stiU seems the
better candidate). The episcopal archivists, the "local Baronios" as Ditchfield describes them, were motivated, rather, by a very Borromean determination that
bishops everywhere should document their local privUeges against lay encroachment, and reinvigorate the grace of apostoUc succession by enhancing

their historical awareness of its continuity. That was the purpose of UgheUi's

Italia Sacra. It was the long-term result of S. Carlo's 1 574 legislation, and it is associated also with the work of Baronio and S. FUippo Neri.

Ditchfield's pages on the rediscovery of the catacombs—Roma Sottoterrena, a world of"hidden treasures," of martyrs' reücs long neglected—underline

the importance of S. FUippo as the instigator of a new epoch of historical stud-

ies and of Christian anthropology, issuing in an enthusiastic series of underground explorations, aU intent on awakening and developing a profound sense
of identity with the early Church. The saints were the athletae Christi (a
Pauline, not a Ciceronian reference). Ditchfield quotes Peter Brown's "characteristically vital metaphor" Ulustrating for modern minds St. Ambrose's earUer
initiative in orchestrating the cults of SS. Gervasio and Protasio:
His initiative had been firm and in many ways unusual: he had been prepared both to
move bodies and to link them decisively to the altar of a new church [S. Ambrogio],
he was like an electrician who rewires an antiquated wiring system; more power
could pass through stronger, better insulated wires toward the bishop as leader of
the community.

The metaphor is apt. Through the work of priests like Antonio Gallonio, the
chUdren of the Roman aristocracy learned to know and venerate the virgins and

martyrs of the early Church. That sense of identity rediscovered, of continuity
regained, was effected locally by the translation of reUcs from the catacombs,

and the development of new underground explorations and triumphal proces-

sions in cities like Rome, MUan, and Piacenza. It had nothing to do with disinterested scientific enquiry. It was, above aU, popular. People wanted to be in the
procession when the saints, as Ditchfield puts it Ui one of his inimitable sub-

headings (designed as though for a silent movie), went "marching in." And they
stayed in, shaping Uturgical attitudes (as Ditchfield so convincingly indicates following the observation of historians like Delhaye) for centuries to come. PhUip
Neri would have approved of that. As Ditchfield observes in his introduction,
"scholars of early modern CathoUcism ignore at their peril the . . . performance
of liturgy ... as a basis for a reformed priesthood," and, we may add, a reformed
Catholicism.

But are we to believe, as Ditchfield would have us beUeve, foUowing a recent
suggestion, that Baronio invented the story of PhUip's prodding him, initiaUy

280REWIRING THE CIRCUIT: CAMPI'S REFORMATION

against his wiU, into persevering in the study of church history? Surely not. Baronio was the soul of candor, incapable of invention. Philip prompted the work.
The resultant wave of enthusiasm for Christian origins is sufficient explanation,
and Ditchfield is to be congratulated for establishing the place of Borromeo and
the Roman Oratory in that great undertaking. From it was to emerge that stream
swelling into a flood which Tiraboschi was to recognize as without precedent

in any other century or country, and whose course is now given a secure historical explanation for the first time.

When in 1742 Benedict XTV instituted a Chair of Liturgy in Rome, he also instituted a Chair of History. Ditchfield's book is designed to "rehabilitate that insight." It triumphantly succeeds. In that story, Pietro Maria Campi, one of
UgheUi's correspondents, holds a distinctive place, now rendered fully and mag-

nificently intelUgible. For Campi "every brick of a Piacentine Church, every reUc

in its reUquaries, every etymology of its names, was redolent of a holy meaning.
To linger on the description or explication of such possessions was therefore
not empty rhetorical verbosity but a form of prayer." One could say the same of
Ditchfield's Liturgy—a work which constitutes a major contribution to Italian
historiography and, for this reviewer at least, a transforming experience.
The Oratory, Birmingham

BOOK REVIEWS

General and Miscellaneous

A History of Christianity. By Owen Chadwick. (London: George Weidenfeld

and Nicolson. 1995. NewYork: St. Martin's Press. 1995. Pp. 304. $35.00.)

Sir Owen Chadwick is a former Regius Professor of Modern History in Cambridge University and the author of several highly acclaimed books.The present
book has won the praises ofJaroslav Pelikan, the respected Sterling Professor of
History in Yale University, who has reviewed it for the History Book Club.This
reviewer has been reluctant to put himsetf at odds with two such distinguished
members of the scholarly community, but has been compeUed to find this
book seriously flawed.The author is obviously not addressing himseU to feUowhistorians or anyone else with a professional interest in the subject.There is no
annotation, little use of primary sources, and only a very brief bibUography No
scholar should be faulted for addressing the general reading pubUc, but, unfortunately, the needs of the general reader are not met very weU either.
Any attempt to present the history of Christianity Ui ca. 150 pages of text—

about one hatf of the space provided by the book's 304 pages is taken up by

photographs—is fraught with many difficulties. The book meets the chaUenge
weU in that it is weU organized, weU balanced, and free of bias. But it is, of
course, not a very complete account, as one can readUy see from the index.
Given the ambitious scope of the book and the severely limited space, it is not
surprising that many important aspects or events are mentioned only Ui passing
rather than considered in depth.
Many readers wUl be offended by the condescendingly simplistic, inappropriately coUoquial, and annoyingly careless style of the book.We find sentences
such as these: "The bishops liked government to shut the mouths of the mi-

norities on the committees" (p. 64) or "They [the bishops] were also more powerful because the people gave them more and more money and land" (p. 94).We
read about a "hubbub of faiths" (p. 20), people "going Christian" (p. 61), men

who wanted "to get away from the rat-race" (p. 72), other men "big in the
church" (p. 90), laws "in a mess" (p. 1 1 1), and Luther being "deep in the Bible" (p.
202). Grammatical errors abound: there are run-on sentences, would-be sentences without verbs, and dangling phrases.
Errors of substance, too, can be found. In the discussion of the Donation of

Constantine the dependency of that forged document on the Actus S. Silvestri
281

282BOOK REVIEWS

is not acknowledged; furthermore, it is mysteriously identified as "a document ... in the legal texts of France" and erroneously assigned to the first haU
of the ninth century rather than to the second haU of the eighth century (p. 58).

The question whether or not Athanasius wrote the Life of St. Antony has long

been laid to rest; it is therefore quite inappropriate to question Athanasius' authorship (p. 64).
Geography receives only rninimum attention; there are only two maps, one

showing the spread of Christianity Ui the tlurd century (p. 40), and the other

showing the distribution of reUgions in Europe in 1570 (p. 203)· Chronology,
too, is given insufficient attention; the Chronology at the end of the book (pp.

286-293) is only a partial compensation for this weakness.

The numerous illustrations—they are not numbered— , many in color, have

been selected with care and are of high quality. Unfortunately, readers wUl be
disturbed even in theU enjoyment of these beautiful illustrations by the captions, which often partake of the same weaknesses as the text.

In general, then, this book is a disappointment. Chadwick has underestimated
the intelUgence and educational level of those who might be interested in his
subject.Those who may be looking for a book simUar in purpose and scope but
more substantial and more pleasing in style should turn to The Oxford Illustrated

History of Christianity, edited by John McManners (Oxford University Press,
1990), to which, incidentaUy Chadwick has contributed a very fine chapter.

Hans A. Pohlsander

State University ofNew York at Albany

Asceticism. Edited by Vincent L. Wimbush and Richard Valantasis. (New York:

Oxford University Press. 1995. Pp. xxiii, 638. $125.00.)

This monumental collection of essays adds new weight to the evidence for a
surprisingly vigorous and growing interest in reUgious asceticism. Our age in
western culture, and particularly Ui North America, has seemed quite tone-deaf

to the ascetic. Yet these essays suggest not only a new and serious inteUectuaI

curiosity about ascetic phenomena in other times and places, but even the
emergence of individuals and smaU groups in diverse corners of our own society whose quest for focus and renewal of life is leading them to explore various
traditions of disciplined practice.
This is not to say that, as scholars or lay people, we know quite what to think
about asceticism. The participants in the international conference that produced these papers, held at Union Theological Seminary in New York City in
April, 1 993, did not attempt to agree on a definition of the term.The papers also
reveal considerable diversity not only in the specific subject matter described
but in method and approach and even in fundamental attitude toward ascetic
practice. KaUistos Ware, in the opening address, cites two Russian Orthodox

BOOK REVIEWS283

thinkers who celebrate respectively asceticism's power to Uberate the human
person and to produce "a beautiful personaUty" By contrast, Bruce Malina,
adopting a determinedly "modern" and "scientific" viewpoint, sees only "setfshrinkage.'The reactions of readers may osculate between these poles of horror
at the ascetic and fascination with it. Yet the obvious depth of knowledge and
the extraordinary ability of the contributors to convey their knowledge wiU
lead most readers to new appreciation for the power of the ascetic impulse as
well as to vastly increased understanding of the variety of its expressions.
The plan of the book generaUy foUows that of the conference. After a foreword by John Hick, an introduction by the editors, and two "General Challenges
and Reconsiderations" by KaUistos Ware and Edith Wyschogrod, twenty-four

short essays are presented in groups of three, each threesome followed by a re-

sponse. Elizabeth A. Clark then attempts the daunting task of responding to aU
of these in six pages. The papers are sorted under four headings: Origins and
Meanings of Asceticism, Hermeneutics of Asceticism, Aesthetics of Asceticism,
and PoUtics of Asceticism. Most of them could as easUy have been put into one
or sometimes two of the other categories, but that fact merely Ulustrates the interesting cross-currents that are at work. Even so, there are six additional contributions that were apparently not deemed quite to fit any of these topics.
These appear as "Ascética Miscellanea" in an appendix, which also records the
closing panel discussion on "Practices and Meanings of Asceticism in Contemporary ReUgious life and Culture."
This is obviously not a book to be read straight through.Yet it is an easy book
to read, not merely enticing because of exotic descriptions and narratives,
though those are not lacking, but deeply engaging because of the quality of
thought as its authors wrestle with the best way of understanding and learning
from phenomena that they know intimately and care about. It is, of course, impossible to summarize. EUzabeth Clark's response (pp. 505-512) is the closest
thing to a summary one could hope for, and not a bad place to begin reading.
Wimbush and Valantasis are to be commended for a remarkable accompUsh-

ment, both in staging a conference of such rich diversity and high quaUty and

for making its results avaUable in a handsomely edited book.

Wayne A. Meeks

Yale University

Studies on the History of the Church of Cyprus: 4th-20th Centuries. By Benedict Englezakis. Edited by Silouan and Misael Ioannou; translated by
Norman RusseU. (Brookfield, Vermont: Variorum, Ashgate PubUshing Com-

pany. 1995. Pp. xvi, 487. $100.00.)

This volume collects twenty essays, critical editions, and lectures of the
learned Cypriot Archimandrite, historian, and bibUcal scholar Benedict Engleza-

284BOOK REVIEWS

kis, who died in 1992. The original audiences for these pieces, arranged here
chronologicaUy, were quite varied. Disparate parts of the book wiU prove useful
and informative to scholars and lay readers.
Five chapters present overviews of important moments and extended periods in Cypriot church history. The fourth-century origins of Cyprus's autocephaUc archbishopric owe much to the charismatic and powerful figure of
Epiphanius of Salamis. A broad outline of the Church's development in the
Byzantine period (330-1191) illustrates a particular sensitivity to the diverse

social, poUtical, and economic forces which shaped not only the hierarchy

but Cypriot Christianity itsetf. Treatment of the survival of Orthodoxy under
the Roman CathoUc Franks draws attention to the cross-purposes of Lusignan
poUtical and ecclesiastical leaders and the resulting oppression of the indige-

nous population. Accounts of the Church both in the Late Ottoman period

(eighteenth and nineteenth centuries) and under British rule (1878-1955),
while somewhat more partisan, flesh out a fascinating story otherwise unavailable in EngUsh. Those with a general interest in Cypriot history wiU find that
these chapters benefit from sound historical research and methodology. One
wishes Englezakis had Uved to flesh out a complete history of the Church of
Cyprus.
Much of the book is devoted to Englezakis's significant work on St. Neophy-

tos the Recluse (1134-c. 1220), perhaps the most important Cypriot source

for the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries. In addition to pubUshing

editions of texts key to understanding the conquest of Cyprus by Richard Lion-

heart in 1191 and its aftermath, this book's most important scholarly contribution is a lengthy essay that employs the works of Neophytos to Uluminate
Cypriot reaction to both the Latin Church and the Frankish state. WhUe the

saint regarded Catholics as misguided on various points of practice, his opposition to them was not grounded in theological disputes over the Filioque. In

these early years of theThird Crusade, native Cypriots apparently did not regard
the church of the invaders as hopelessly schismatic, likely because contemporary Byzantine "high" theological writings were unavaUable on the island. Neophytos viewed the Frankish political regime in theodicean terms, however, as a
tyranny permitted by God to punish the Orthodox for their sins. In this way,
Neophytos prefigures Byzantine responses to the Fourth Crusade and the sack

of Constantinople in 1204. Englezakis offers an important contribution to our

understanding of the interaction between Latins and Greeks in the eastern
Mediterranean during the Crusades.

Additional writings on the Cypriot Church's involvement in the events of
1821 and the appointment of a Cypriot to the Orthodox see of Antioch at the

end of the nineteenth century wUl interest the student of modern Cyprus, but

do not give sufficient context for readers not already familiar with the broader
outlines of the period. Englezakis here as elsewhere in the volume shows a talent for an insightful debunking of ideas about the inevitabiUty of the course of

BOOK REVIEWS285

Cypriot history and an eye for reading lessons about Cyprus's current situation
out of the past.
Derek Krueger

The University ofNorth Carolina at Greensboro

A History of Canterbury Cathedral. Edited by Patrick Collinson, Nigel Ramsay,

and Margaret Sparks. (New York: Oxford University Press. 1995. Pp. xxxii,
602. $39.95.)

A Christian church has existed in the Roman town of Canterbury, later capital of the Jutish kingdom of Kent in southeast England, since the fourth century,
but the recorded history of Canterbury as an episcopal see began in 597 with
the arrival of the monk-missionary Augustine and King Ethelbert of Kent's grant
to him of Christ Church.The present cathedral serves as the spiritual center of
the English Church and of the world-wide AngUcan communion. Constructed
ca. 1070-1080 under Archbishop Lanfranc, rebuUt after a disastrous fire in
1174, and continually expanded and remodeUed between 1379 and 1503, the
magnificent late-Gothic building has attracted the attention of several architectural historians, most recently Francis Woodman, The Architectural History of

Canterbury Cathedral (1982; reviewed ante, LXX [January, 1984], 149-150).

The book under review purports to study the cathedral "as a community of
people" (p. v). In fact, the twelve authors of the various articles comprising the
volume apply a very traditional ecclesiological understanding and identify
"church" with administrators: the priors of the monastic community of Christ
Church, and the deans and canons who governed the cathedral. If some attention is perforce given to the cathedral as a pilgrimage center, the most efficacious prayerhouse in England, this work does not explore the beUefs and
attitudes of "the sUent majority," what historians have long called popular re-

ligion. Seven chapters treat the history of the cathedral from 602 to 1 994; the remaining five chapters discuss its archives and library; Uturgy and music;
medieval and post-Reformation monuments; and the cathedral school.

From the days ofAugustine to March 20, 1540, when the community was dissolved in an atmosphere of "squalid pathos," the Benedictine monks of Christ
Church constituted the cathedral staff. Since the monks carried out a Uturgy
which since the days of Lanfranc, if not Dunstan, had been elaborate and exhausting, conducted a school, and provided hospitaUty for thousands of visitors,
the judgment of one scholar that "normal monastic concerns of performing the

Uturgy, overseeing the revenues, and criticizing the archbishop" (p. 56) seems

harsh and refuted by the evidence.Very close ties with the monarchy—long the
community's greatest political asset, proved ultimately, under Henry VIII, its
greatest weakness.The shrine of the martyred Archbishop Thomas Becket drew
a steady stream of distinguished visitors: Louis VII in 1179, setting the French

286book reviews

monarchy's seal of approval on the cult; King John II of France in 1360;Aeneas
Silvius (later Pope Pius II) in 1436; and Emperor Charles V, whom HenryVIII entertained at Canterbury during the Pentecost season in 1520—these, in addition to the tens of thousands of noble and ordinary visitors.

In 1541, Canterbury became a secular, i.e., non-monastic foundation. Since

the Protestant Reformation attributed salvation to faith alone and denied the

value of good works, including art, what purpose should the cathedral serve?
It took more than a century of upheavals and destruction for this issue to be
resolved. In the Restoration atmosphere that stressed stabiUty and the reestablishment of the world that had been lost, ParUament determined that a
dean and twelve canons or prebendaries had responsibUity for the fabric, the

daUy worship, and hospitality. The authors evaluate the interests and contributions of aU the deans since 1661 .

In synthesizing recent revisionist research, this volume makes at least three
significant contributions to an understanding of the AngUcan Church between
the ancien régime and the twentieth century. First, in the eighteenth century
the church worked to create stabiUty and order, and, reflecting public opinion,
fought CathoUc Emancipation and what the church perceived as the destructive influence of UberaUsm. Secondly, theTractarian movement did not so much
react against enlightenment thought as it drew upon eighteenth-century Anglican ideas. Thirdly, the clergy developed for the first time into a professional
group, set apart by education, interests, status, and close marriage connections.
And, as in the days of Becket and Wolsey, so in those of Tait and Temple, the

cathedral clergy and the higher ranks of the Anglican hierarchy in general, were

not an aristocratic caste, but open to talents.

Although the long sections on nineteenth-century ecclesiastical poUtics, with
amusing detaU on eccentric prelates and clerical promotions, seem to transport
the reader back to the cozy world ofTroUope's Barehester Towers; although so
secularized had EngUsh IUe become by 1920 that the author of the section can
seriously raise the question, "What did prayer and aspiration have to do with
Canterbury Cathedral?"; and although we learn that more than two rnilUon
tourists flock to the cathedral annuaUy in the 1990's, bringing to the city £8.5
milUons in revenue, no attempt is made to respond to the charge that scarcely
5% of the English people regularly attend church services and that the church
itseU has become a splendid anachronism focused on the past; still, the serious
student of many facets of church Ufe and culture, not least ofpost-Vatican CouncU II ecumenism, wUl want to consult this beautifuUy iUustrated book. It is written with an appropriate dignity and becoming elegance.
Bennett Hill, O.S.B.

Georgetown University

book reviews287

The Catechism Yesterday and Today: The Evolution of a Genre. By Berard L.
Marthaler, O.F.M.Conv. (CoUegevUle, Minnesota:The Liturgical Press. 1995.

Pp. 176. $15.95.)

The pubUcation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church has generated

widespread interest in and has occasioned the plurification of books, articles,
commentaries, and studies on the catechism and catechisms.

Every age has its catechism. However, for the first 1 200 years the Church had
no catechism as we know it today. "Catechism" meant catechesis; that is, the
content of Christian teaching, handed down orally and calling for a response of
faith. It demanded a conversion, a turning over of one's Ufe and love to God. It
was a lifelong process centered around the Uturgy, the celebration of the seasons and feasts of the church year and memorized prayers such as the Creed,
the Our Father, and the Ten Commandments, and emphasizing the virtues of
faith, hope, and charity.
GraduaUy by the end of the Middle Ages and especiaUy after the Reformation
and after the invention of printing the Catechism came to mean a book, a short,
concise, accurate summary of the central truths of faith—smaU catechisms for
the instruction of chUdren and the uneducated and large ones for pastors and
preachers.
Father Berard Marthaler, the Warren-Blanding professor of reUgion in the

CathoUc University of America and editor of Living Light, has provided us a

clear study of catechisms used throughout the Ufe of the Church, an exceUent
history of the development of this genre, dividing the work into fifteen short
chapters from its first use as a tool for catechesis in the Middle Ages. He discusses Reformation catechisms, the Catechism of the CouncU of Trent, catechisms of the Counter-Reformation, English, Irish, Latin American, and American
catechisms prior to Vatican Council II, the Dutch, German, and French cate-

chisms, after Vatican Council II, the Catechetical DUectory and finaUy The Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Father Marthaler has devoted a Ufetime to the study and teaching of reUgious
education.This pubUcation is a distillation of years of research on the history of
catechisms.

It is fascinating how often in history the same issues keep coming up. Catechisms were seen as guardians of orthodoxy, a means of keeping the Christian
faithful on the straight and narrow path to salvation, and even used for political

purposes.Another frequent theme was the desirability of unUormity and a common language and at the same time the need to keep the distinction between

those teachings that are revealed by God and those that are theological opin-

ions or appUcations of those teachings.

One smaU point: I would have liked to see something in the study about that

special American type of catechism—the graded textbook series which is al-

288BOOK REVIEWS

most universaUy used in Catholic schools and religious education programs for
the instruction of chüdren and youth.
Marthaler stresses the monumental importance of the Catechism of the
CouncU ofTrent, which together with the Roman Missal did much to shape the
spirit and language and the theology of theTridentine Church. Perhaps today's
renewal of the Uturgy and the new Catechism of the Catholic Church wiU have
a simüar effect on the postconcUiar era.
Father Marthaler's book is in every way a helpful and readable analysis of the
"evolution of a genre."
Most Reverend Raymond A. Lucker

Bishop ofNew Ulm

America Pontificia, III. Documentipontifia nelTArchivio Segreto Vaticano ri-

guardanti l'evangelizzazione dell'America: 1592-1644. Edited by Josef
Metzler, with the coUaboration of Giuseppina RoselU. [CoUectanea Archivi
Vaticani, 38; Pontificio Comitato di Scienze Storiche, Atti e Documenti, 5.]

(Vatican City: Librería Editrice Vaticana. 1995. Pp. 861.)

The first two volumes of this series, America Pontificia, embracing the years
1493-1592, contain a valuable coUection of papal documents relating to the
evangelization of the New World. Drawn from the Secret Vatican Archive, they
are pubUshed in their Latin original and were reviewed by Stafford Poole, CM.,

ante, LXXVIII (October, 1992), 601-606 (see also LXXLX [July 19931,602-603).
This third volume, embracing the years 1592-1644, is structured dtfferently
however, as it comprises summaries in ItaUan of 1409 documents that are of
lesser value, as a survey wiU show. Only those of special importance are left in
their Latin original.The fonts which this volume touches are likewise found in
the Secret Vatican Archive and are representative of the various registers of
bulls (the Vatican and Lateran Registers) in that Archive. Other documentation
is drawn from the Archive of the Camera Apostólica and the Consistorial

Archive concerning the appointment of archbishops and bishops, the erection
of dioceses, and other pertinent activities.

As the Church moved into the seventeenth century, papal interest in the
evangelization of America moved forward despite the theological and political
problems that plagued Europe during that period. Weighty American issues
stemmed from the patronato and padroado systems enjoyed by the Spanish
and Portuguese Crowns and, in lesser degree, from tensions among the missionaries themselves concerning popular piety, new schools, seminaries, universities, and the progress and problems of reUgious IUe. The Papacy, however,
always looked upon the American Church as an integral part of the universal
Church and not just as an appendage.

BOOK REVIEWS289

To demonstrate Rome's concern about the overseas Church, the editor re-

views some of the problems that the four popes under consideration encountered, namely, Clement VIII (1592-1605), Paul V (1605-1621), Gregory XV
(1621-1623), and Urban VIII (1623-1644), the reign of Leo XI (April 1-27,

1605) having been too short for comment. Clement VHTs thorniest obstacle
was the opposition of the Iberian monarchs who guarded the evangelization of
their New World domains against interference from the Holy See by virtue of

the patronage that had been granted their predecessors by previous popes. Like
Pius V and Gregory XIII before him, he futUely endeavored to set up the Roman

Office of the Propagation of the Faith, aspiring thereby to separate, Ui this com-

plex problem, the Church's evangeUzation program from the Crowns' political

policies. His efforts came to naught, but missionary activity, thanks to the reUgious orders, made advances.

Under Paul V evangelization proceeded apace, the CarmeUtes and the Cap-

uchins, together with other Orders, doing outstanding work. Two CarmeUtes
were appointed superintendents of the missions by Paul, a substitute for the
long-desired Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith. Noteworthy was the
PontUf's vigilance over bishops, religious, and secular clergy in the New World
regarding their performance of duty and his condemnation of abuses among
the secular clergy and bishops who, assigned to New World missions, faUed to

assume their obügations at the time and place designated. Also noteworthy was

his forbidding of ecclesiastics, under pain of excommunication, to engage Ui
business.The matter of the alternativa also reared its head at this time, a divisive problem among the Spanish Franciscans, Doininicans, Augustinians, and
Mercedarians and their Creole counterparts regarding the election to office of
superiors of their convents and monasteries in the NewWorld.The solution was
the alternation of European and American superiors in the higher offices of the
Orders involved, but the issue remained acute throughout the seventeenth century, playing no smaU part in increasing Creole identity and a spirit of regionalism. The initiative leading to the evangeUzation of French Canada also had its
origin in the early reign of Paul V, culminating years later in the erection of the

diocese of Quebec in 1674 among other developments.

The reign of Gregory XV is particularly noted for the establishment of the

Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith in 1622, so long desired by the

papacy. Notable in this operation was Cardinal Francesco IngoU, the Congregation's first general secretary, who is likewise hailed for his interest in forming a
native clergy and for the valuable information he gathered about the Church's
world-wide missionary activities.
Urban VIII, like his predecessor, Paul III, condemned the enslavement of Indi-

ans under pain of excommunication, but the practice continued in many places

under various pretexts. He also established the CoUegio Urbano in Rome for the
training of native clergy, including native Indians, insisted on the strict obser-

vance of the rule in the New World convents of women, and also approved legislation regarding the election of NewWorld abbesses for a triennium only. like

290BOOK REVIEWS

his predecessors, he also promoted the development of New World educational
institutions. In terminating his introduction, the editor pays thoughtful tribute
to the lay people of the Americas for the part they played in the evangelization

process, a topic worthy of further research. Three appendices and an index of
incipits (opening words), places, and topics likewise add to the worth of this
volume.

FinaUy our heartiest congratulations to the editor, Father Josef Metzler,
O.M.I. , and his collaborator, Giuseppina RoselU, for their scholarly contribution

which, together with the companion volumes, belongs in every research library.

Charles E. Ronan, SJ.
John D. Baggarly, SJ.

Loyola University of Chicago

Church and State in the Modern Age. A Documentary History. Edited by J. J.
Maclear. (New York: Oxford University Press. 1995. Pp. xviii, 510. $65.00.)
This is a rich selection of documents, with succinct commentaries, ranging

from the 1682 GaUican Articles, the 1789 EnglishToleration Act and the 1721 religious regulations of Peter the Great to recent matufestos from Latin American
Catholic bishops and items arising out of the dissolution of East-bloc Communism. Excerpts are given from the 1773 brief destroying the Society ofJesus and
the 1814 buU restoring that same order worldwide.There is documentation on

English America beginning in Virginia Ui l606.The flawed Maryland Act ofTol-

eration of 1649 is there, coupled with commentary that early Maryland settlers
were "primarily Protestant," but without noting the preponderant political, economic, and social role of the Catholic minority in the early period when reU-

gious toleration was broader than that allowed by the 1649 act. Major

documents from other English American colonies are included, as are various
laws stemming from France's revolution. The European postrevolutionary experience is amply represented, with items from France, Italy the German states,
Sweden, Switzerland, and Britain. Conflict of the new Italy and the Papacy is represented by documents from the time of the Roman RepubUc,Vatican Council
I, and the victory at the Porta Pia. Prince Bismarck's Kulturkampf against the
Catholic Church and the more or less contemporary French school laws are
recorded, and there are excerpts from four of Pope Leo XIII's encyclical letters.
There is an ample section on reUgious effects of the Russian Revolution and
subsequent Soviet developments, and key documentation is provided on the interrelationship of church people and the Nazi and Fascist regimes. Church-state
cases in the United States since 1940, most of them dealing with reUgion and

education, religion and racial poUcy in the Union of South Africa, the Catholic

Medellin and Puebla conferences in Latin America, and the breakup in eastern
Europe round out the documents.The ¦whole is a carefuUy constructed and weU

BOOK REVIEWS291

organized compUation. It fits very well a course in the history of the modern reUgious bodies and their relationship to the state. A problem is the price. The
kind of course that can best utUize the material is bound to be a somewhat es-

oteric elective of the kind I taught before retirement. I'd love to have had it
avaUable.The students might have had other thoughts.
James Hennesey

Syracuse, New York

Paolo VIeIa collegialità episcopate: Colloquio Internazionale di Studio, Bres-

cia 25-26-27 setiembre 1992. [PubbUcazioni deU'Istituto Paolo VI, 15.]
(Brescia: Istituto Paolo VI; Rome: Edizioni Studium. 1995. Pp. xvi, 389. Lire
70,000 paperback.)

After devoting several international coUoquia to Pope PaulVTs activity before
and during the Second Vatican CouncU, the Istituto Paolo VI has begun to sponsor research and coUoquia on his work after the close of the CouncU.This work
presents the papers and discussions that were presented at the coUoquium
held in Brescia in 1992. Like earUer volumes in the series, this one is carefully
edited and handsomely produced.
Eight major papers are devoted to Paul VTs concept of coUegiaUty his motu
proprio "Sollicitudo omnium Ecctesiarum" on papal representatives, the development of the CoUege of Cardinals, his ideas of and participation in the
Synod of Bishops, and his views of episcopal conferences. Conspicuously absent is any consideration of the impUcations for the question of coUegiaUty of
the controversy provoked, including among some bishops and episcopal conferences, by the issuance of Humanae vitae.These essays dtffer more greatly in
scholarly quaUty than those in earlier volumes, in part perhaps because several

of them were written not by scholars but by curial and other participants Ui

postconcUiar events from which some of them found it dtfficult to achieve any
critical distance. On the other hand, the problem may lie, first, in the notorious
dUficulties of that strange genre,"contemporary history" and, second, in the fact
that the theme of the meeting included issues that remain highly disputed not
only theoreticaUy but also practicaUy

Thirteen shorter written interventions are also included, some on the same
topics, some on other specific questions.The volume also includes accounts of
the oral discussions that foUowed the major papers.The reader wUl not wish to
ignore these reports since they often introduce material, perspectives, and criticisms that not only Ulustrate how the meeting was truly a coUoquium but also
contribute to the clarification and development of the discussions.
One of the interpretative frameworks often involved in the course of the
meeting was the distinction between "effective" and "affective" coUegiaUty, a distinction whose vaUdity and whose basis Ui the thought of the CouncU and of

292BOOK reviews

Pope Paul VI, several people, including the reviewer, questioned. But the discussion provoked a quip from Roger Aubert: From the perspective of scholarship,
he said, the coUoquium was more successful affectively than effectively! That

said, this volume remains an important reference for students of the postconcUiar Church.

Joseph A. Komonchak

The Catholic University ofAmerica

Church and Society in the Modern Age. By AU Tergel. Translated by Craig
McKay. [Acta Universitatis UpsaUensis: Uppsala Studies in Social Ethics,Vol.
17.] (Uppsala University Press; distributed by Almqvist & WikseU International, Stockholm. 1995. Pp. 275.)
This work condenses into one volume Ui EngUsh the gist of the author's four
previous volumes in Swedish (dated 1981, 1983, 1987, and 1991).The subject is
the history of social Christianity, both Protestant and CathoUc, from the Industrial Revolution to the mid-1980's—more specificaUy Christian social thought
or ethics, rather than the practical social movements that have developed under
the aegis of the churches.The central issue is seen to be social justice, predominantly in economic terms, and hence in particular the assessments given and
the attitudes assumed by social Catholics and Protestants Ui regard to the two
dominant economic systems during this period, capitalism and sociaUsm.
One can wonder U this smgle-minded approach best serves the cause of historical understanding, especially since the author admits that "the choice between capitaUsm and Socialism or their intermediate forms became steadUy

less relevant for the Churches" (p. 268; cf. already pp. 60, 1 34).These alternatives

had been, all the same, prominent enough previously. Confronting them led repeatedly to the quest for a "third way" for a modern political economy; just as
regularly it gave rise to the notion that it was not the churches' mission to design an economic system, but to point to possibüities of greater justice to be
achieved in actual circumstances, pragmaticaUy.
For what readership is this book intended? It lacks aU documentation, referring the reader instead to the four preceding monographs, two of which do not
even seem to have been acquired by any Ubrary in the United States. It could
perhaps serve as a quick overview of modern social thought in the Christian
churches. There is admittedly no other single work that synthesizes its whole
territory.1 It is generaUy reüable in its assertions,2 in its judgments fair and evenhanded. However, the novice, for whom such an undocumented overview
'Within the range of the WCC, one can now have recourse to Ans van der Bent, Commitment to God's World: A Concise Critical Survey of Ecumenical Social Thought
(Geneva:WCC Publications, 1995).
2But Pope Leo XIII could accept strikes in certain circumstances^ace p. 75.

BOOK REVIEWS293

might be intended, would probably not be well served by the excessively cur-

taUed treatment of any particular school of Christian response described here.

Thus, for nineteenth-century CathoUcs, "Uberalism," not capitaUsm, was the social ideology to be opposed. Another example: private property, not further
qualified, is most often taken as the key distinguishing feature between capitalism and sociaUsm, in a rather simplistic procedure.
Certain generaUzations emerge by dint of repetition, e.g., some characteristic
differences between CathoUc and Protestant social ethics as well as some com-

mon characteristics.The two stories are related in paraUel and brought together
in two chapters about the inteUectuaI exchange which finaUy took place between the World CouncU of Churches and the Roman CathoUc communion for

two decades after Vatican Council II. Liberation and Third-World theology gets
its due here as weU as in the separate chapters devoted to postconcUiar Roman
CathoUcism and to the World CouncU of Churches. No reflection on the demise

of "reaUy existing" Soviet sociaUsm is attempted, beyond the note that "the
Churches are faced with a new economic ideological situation" (p. 272).
Paul Misner

Marquette University
Ancient

A Concise History of the Early Church. By Norbert Brox. Translated by John
Bowden. (New York: Continuum Publishing Company. 1995. Pp. viii, 184.
$18.95.)
This lucid and exceUently translated survey of the Early Church spans from
its beginning to the Council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.).The author, Norbert Brox,
professor of early church history and patrology in the University of Regensburg, says in his preface that he hopes to strike a balance between an easy-tofoUow survey and a sufficiently detaUed account. He has achieved this balance
remarkably well in his eight compact and very readable chapters. They range
from the earUest form of Christianity within Judaism to the missionary expan-

sion on through to the major developments before and after Constantine.
Brox's chapters on church Ufe and organization (TV) and on the first four Ecu-

menical CouncUs (VIIi) are particularly insightful. Other chapters deal with
conflicts, heresies and schisms, theological orientations, and the Uterature of the
Early Church. He includes a bibUography with each chapter, a "for further reading" section at the end, and an index of names and subjects.
Brox gives a very reaUstic picture of Constantine. He shows him not so much
as a pagan ruler who is converted from the worship of idols to the Christian
God, but rather as a head of state practicing the cult of Sol Invictus (the victorious sun god) who, by a spectacular shift of his own, changes that cult by identifying it with Christianity. "For him, the God of the Christians was identical with
the god whom he himseU worshipped" (p. 48).Adroit at reading the signs of the

294book reviews

times,"Constantine saw Christianity through Roman eyes as a cult reUgion (only
later did he come to understand the significance of the creed in Christianity)
with recognizable structures (a hierarchical organization, an ideal unity
throughout the empire, universaUsm, a capacity to establish itsetf in history)
which was admirably suited to contribute to the task of the state" (p. 49).
Brox's description of the trinitarian controversies and the whole ethos created in the East by the condemnation ofArius' subordinationism is as clear and
carefuUy nuanced as one could ever expect. He is truly a master in echoing the
tenor of those times.

In discussing the fifth-century christological controversies, Brox gives a very
fair treatment of Nestorius, pointing out that modern scholarship has been able

to show "that he did not advocate the heresy imputed to him, i.e., the division

or spUtting of Christ into two natures. He was orthodox—even according to the
criteria of his own time. Others certainly put forward a Nestorian christology,
but Nestorius was no 'Nestorian'" (p. 166).

A nice feature of readabiUty is the author's decision to document only where

necessary and then directly within the text itseU, thereby avoiding the multiple
footnotes we so often find in comparable texts.The book is clearly a high-level
student reader and surely wUl be cherished as such by students, especiaUy in a
paperback edition. There are a few typos that could be corrected in the next
printing (viz., pp. 95, 97, 164).
Ray R. Nou

University ofSan Francisco

Hippolytus and the Roman Church in the Third Century: Communities in
Tension before the Emergence ofa Monarch-Bishop. By AUen Brent. [Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae, formerly Philosophia Patrum.Texts and
Studies of Early Christian LUe and Language, Volume XXXI.] (Leiden: E. J.

BrUl. 1995. Pp. xiv, 61 1; 24 plates. $ 143.00.)

Hippolytus of Rome is one of the most elusive figures in the first three centuries of Christian history. A presbyter in Rome in the early third century and
the last Christian writer from Rome to write in Greek, Hippolytus became the
leader, it is reported by later ecclesiastical writers, of a "schismatic" community.

He was also a major thinker who wrote on many topics, bibUcal exegesis (the

first commentary on the book of Daniel), against heresy, on the date of Easter,
and on chronology, and he is considered the author of an early and important
church order, the Apostolic Tradition. His writings, however, have come down to
us in fragmentary form. Further, a statue discovered in Rome in 1551 with a Ust
of his writings and a paschal calendar is widely thought to be a statue of
Hippolytus.

BOOK REVIEWS295

In this large and diffuse book, Brent AUen attempts to sort out the archaeological and Uterary information concerning Hippolytus and to set forth a historical interpretation of the "schism" that divided the Roman Church in the early
third century. Because of the nature of the sources and the vast scholarly Uterature on the archaeological data, the argument is often dense and highly technical, and many of the points discussed at great length wiU be of interest only to
specialized readers. But Brent does have a thesis, and it has to do, as the subtitle
suggests, with the development of the monarchical episcopate and the organization of the Church in Rome in the third century. FoUowing the suggestion of
Peter Lampe in his study of the early Roman Church, Brent attempts to show
that the monarchical episcopate was late in developing in the city of Rome.
Lampe was concerned chiefly with the second century, but AUen argues that
even in the third century, i.e., in Hippolytus' time, the Roman Church was composed of several different communities simUar to phUosophical schools and
that it is within this social setting that Hippolytus is best understood. Put simply, the city of Rome did not have a single "bishop" in the early third century.The
statue is a "corporate icon" of the community that supported Hippolytus.
Brent is weU aware of the complexity of the issues surrounding Hippolytus
and the Roman Church in the third century, and an invaluable feature of the
book is the careful discussion of the scholarly Uterature. He is cognizant of conflicting opinions on many of the points he discusses and the arguments against
his interpretation. One of the most important counter-arguments is that the
ApostoUc Tradition, the Roman church order associated with the name of Hippolytus, makes a clear distinction between the office of presbyter and bishop.
The final long chapter of the book analyzes in detaU the Uterary, historical, and
theological problems within the ApostoUc Tradition. Much of the analysis is illuminating and convincing, but the argument requires that at each stage of the
discussion the reader accept AUen's dissection and reconstruction of the bits
and pieces that comprise the edifice as a whole.There are too many uncertainties to provide sure historical footing. Yet, Brent does make one look at the
make-up of the Church of Rome in the early third century with new eyes.This
is a learned and provocative work, an extraordinary mine of information, and an
indispensable bibUographical resource for aU future study of Hippolytus.
Robert L.Wilken

University of Virginia

Ambrose of Milan and the End of the Arian-Nicene Conflicts. By Daniel H.
WLUiams. [Oxford Early Christian Studies.] (NewYork: Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press. 1995. Pp. xU, 258. $59.00.)
WiUiams' book contributes one good piece to the redrawn map of the "Arian
controversy." Arianism is tisuaUy—and rightly—seen as a primarily eastern phenomenon; but WiUiams sketches one distinctively western manifestation of it,

296book reviews

properly caUed Homoianism. Further, whUe any IUe of Ambrose of Milan men-

tions that he succeeded the "Arian" bishop Auxentius in 374, and in 386 kept

Justina, the Arianizing mother ofValentinian, from taking over a basUica in MUan
for her cause, WUUams shows that Ambrose's engagement with the Homoians
involved far more than these two moments.

Western Arianism, from 360 on, is "Homoianism," which designates a set of beliefs accepted by the Synod of Ariminum in 360 and enshrined in a creed pro-

mulgated at Constantinople Ui 360, according to which the Son is "like the
Father, who begot him, according to the Scriptures," a phrase that was meant to

replace the troublesome homoousion of the Creed of Nicaea. A coda to the
creed aboUshed the word ousia and forbade the use of hypostasis in regard to
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. "The Son is like the Father" was to be the phrase accepted by aU.

WUUams undertakes to restudy the events in northern Italy from 360, when

the Homoian creed was enacted, to 387, when the discovery of the reUcs of

Gervasius and Protasius (386) and the invasion of Italy by Magnus Maximus

(387) effectively put an end to Homoianism in theWest.WUUams treats his topic
in a historical narrative. He begins with the CouncU ofAriminum, and then considers HUary of Poitiers and Eusebius ofVercelU, early defenders of Nicaea. Most
of the book is dedicated to a study ofAmbrose and his efforts to fight back Homoianism and spread Nicene Catholicism. WUUams deals with Ambrose's elec-

tion and his early years as bishop, his work De fide, and the important CouncU

of Aquileia (381). He also shows that Homoianism did not disappear from Italy
Ui 381, but perdured for another six years or so. As is the current style, Ambrose's halo is tarnished a bit and the heretics' horns are somewhat duUed.

WUUams' interest is history rather than theology. Perhaps there is not a great
deal of theology to talk about; but the theologian might wish that WUUams had
dealt a little more with the question of the Homoians' thought and its inner coherence. As a study of precisely western events in the later-fourth century,
WUUams' book takes these events out of the shadow of Greek and eastern the-

ologians and conflicts, and shows them for what they were—not world-shaking
events, but an important local conflict that involved several emperors and St.
Ambrose of Milan, and contributed to the distinctive shape of western theology
and poUtics.
Fordham University

Joseph T. Lienhard

Golden Mouth: The Story ofJohn Chrysostom—Ascetic, Preacher, Bishop. By
J. N. D. KeUy. (Ithaca, New York: CorneU University Press. 1995. Pp. x, 310.
$47.50.)
After writing an exceUent biography ofJerome, J. N. D. KeUy the distinguished
Oxford scholar of early Christian history and doctrine, has turned to the East

BOOK REVIEWS297

and performed a simUar service for John Chrysostom.With the possible exception of Chrysostom Baur, whose masterful study of John was written in German

and translated poorly into EngUsh, no other author has delved so deeply into

the Ufe and work of this complex, influential, and tragic figure of the fourth century and produced such a far-ranging but precise, soUdly researched, and eminently readable account.
The three words attached to John's name in the title sum up the three main
periods of his IUe. After chUdhood and early education John Uved for six years
outside his native Antioch in Syria, first as a monk, and then as a hermit in the
neighboring mountains.When his health faUed, he returned to Antioch and was
incorporated into its clergy. During twelve years as a skUled and popular
preacher he became an influential figure in the city. He was then brought to
Constantinople, where as bishop he played a leading role in the Ufe of both the
Christian Church and the recently Christianized Roman Empire, as these two

entities struggled to exist on their own and Ui an increasingly complex interre-

lationship.

John Uved during a critical period of Christian history. Arianism -was condemned at synods in Nicaea (325) and Constantinople (381), but Uved on both
within the Empire and outside, among the Goths and other so-caUed barbarian
tribes, supported intermittently by emperors and imperial officials. At Antioch
there was a lengthy schism, stemming from a dispute about episcopal succession, and there was further turmoU within orthodox circles as bishops sought
to consolidate local power and to widen the influence of their episcopal sees.
Chrysostom was involved in these developments, from his preaching at Antioch when the city feared it would be punished byTheodosius I for an insurrection, through his fluctuating relationship with the imperial family, especiaUy the
empress Eudoxia, at Constantinople, and ending with his confrontation with

TheophUus, bishop of Alexandria, that resulted in his deposition, exUe, and
death.

KeUy's analysis of the writings of Chrysostom and contemporary historians

enables him to draw sympathetic, but objective conclusions about John's fate.

His story had a tragic ending, but he was not simply a victim brought down by
his enemies. He always retained an ascetic bent, and this characteristic underlay
the vigor with which he attacked persons and activities he perceived as evil. He
expressed deep concern for social justice, but his unyielding sense of right
sometimes led him to speak and judge very harshly individuals and groups. He
is described as a popuUst preacher and bishop, loved by his people, but he was
often opposed by those whose Ufestyle he attacked or in whose affairs he med-

dled, including his own clergy, government officials, the imperial famUy and
bishops from other countries. TheophUus may indeed have acted iUegaUy but
KeUy shows that John did intervene in jurisdictions outside his own and strove

to spread the influence of Constantinople into areas of the East which deeply

resented such interference. Chrysostom emerges as a sympathetic and tragic
figure of great integrity, whose human failings contributed and perhaps led to

298BOOK REVIEWS

his downfall. This book is not just valuable as biography, for, unlike his prede-

cessors, KeUy has used a careful analysis of many of John's writings and sermons to present new insights and to confirm detaUs of Chrysostom's Ufe
previously considered doubtful; his comments and summaries stimulate one to
turn to the originals.Those who are interested in Chrysostom or in this historical period must read this book.
Gerard H. Ettunger, SJ.

St.John's University
Jamaica, New York
Medieval

Women and the Religious Life in Premodern Europe. By Patricia Ranft. (New
York: Saint Martin's Press. 1996. Pp. xvi, 159. $39.95.)
A hundred years ago, Lina Eckenstein pubUshed Women under Monasticism,
500-1500 (Cambridge University Press, 1896), which has remained the only
avaUable survey of medieval women's reUgious IUe in the Middle Ages in EngUsh. Patricia Ranft has now attempted a similar feat, adding two centuries on either end to her survey but reducing its content to a slender 150-page volume,
emphasizing repeatedly that this is a "selective" history. She announces a triple
purpose: (l)"to provide an accessible survey of the major events and places, interpretations and persons responsible for the various types of religious societies women have formed in the past"; (2) to make avaUable the results of
focused research in specific branches of the subject; (3) to remedy the deficit in
women's reUgious history relative to that of men.
Eight chapters in roughly chronological order are subdivided into brief essays of one to five pages.The principle of selection is not always clear: capsule
biographies dominate some chapters; others are geographicaUy distributed;
some feature varieties of reUgious Ufe.To Ulustrate, Chapter 4,"The Fruits of the
Monastic Revival," is subdivided into "New Orders" and "Other Options." "New
Orders" is further subdivided into Fontevrault, the Order of the Paraclete, Prémontré, GUbertines, Cistercians; "Other Options" consists of unlabeled paragraphs on the miUtary orders, HUdegard of Bingen, and EUsabeth of Schönau.
Chapter 5, "The Appeal of the Vita Apostólica',' is subdivided into Unorthodox
and Orthodox groups. The former contains a single subtitle, "Cathars and
Waldensians," whUe the latter includes The Poor Ladies: Second Order of St.
Francis, Dominicans, Béguines, Helfta, and Other Orthodox Groups (two paragraphs on hospital communities and penitents).
The book appears to have been written at breakneck speed, as though to
meet an unyielding deadline. Its extreme brevity eliminates any pretense at
making up the deficit with men's history: the standard surveys of the monastic
movement or of individual orders normally contain more information about reUgious women than can be found Ui this book. SimUarly the episodic nature of

BOOK REVIEWS299

the presentation disaUows any attempt to come to grip with the arguments of
modern scholars, which embrace a broader range of categories. The idiosyncratic apportionment of references between notes and bibUography obscures
their value in compUing a good Ust for future reading.There remains Ranft's initial aim of providing an accessible survey. Brevity and haste unfortunately lead
to confusion, such as attributing the "new orders" of the twelfth century to the
decision to mstitutionaUze eremitic groups that flourished principaUy m England.There also appears to be basic confusion between apostoUc and contem-

plative religion which ultimately produces the conclusion (p. 65): "Francis'

disciples drew the best of aU practices, virtues and ideals from the movement
into an institutional form of Ufe that was but the logical culmination of the
monastic reform movement begun at Cluny."This is, alas, the sort of statement
that will inevitably draw out students' highlighters and appear on their final examinations.

___

Jo Ann Kay McNamara

Hunter College and the Graduate Center
City University ofNew York

How the Irish Saved Civilization: The Untold Story of Ireland's Heroic Role
from the Fall ofRome to the Rise ofMedieval Europe. By Thomas CahiU.

(NewYork: Nan A.Talese/Doubleday. 1995. Pp. x, 246. $22.95.)

Why has this book been so popular? Why have readers been buying this book
rather than more scholarly and more accurate histories of early medieval Ireland? Mr. CahiU purposely distances his legend of the Irish past from more serious works which, he purports, focus on one historical period or another rather
than the transition between periods, and which tend to leave out aU that is

"Celtic and CathoUc" (p. 6).

CahUl's purpose is to explain how Patrick saved the Irish and the Irish then

saved classical culture. According to Cahill, catastrophe came with the faU of
Rome, when convulsive waves of barbarians (always "matted" to CahiU) sweUed
against the Roman frontiers much as non-Americans push our southwestern

borders today f. 16). It is an essentiaUy Gibbon-esque view of the shift to the

Middle Ages, as CahUl himself proudly admits, with aU the decay of poUte culture and good living that the paradigm LmpUes.We completely lost the complex
world of Augustine, a vibrant inteUect inspired by "the riotous blood of his

homeland" (p. 56), northern Africa. (Augustine, by the way, drew heavUy on St.
Paul, here referred to as a "wiry bald-headed Jew")

The waves of matted barbarians would have extinguished learning, except
that in a remote outpost of Europe, unholy Ireland, a vaUant and semi-Uterate figure brought the love of letters and the Christian god. CahiU uses the possibly
eighth-century epic, Táin Bo Cuailnge (copied in the twelfth century) to expUcate the way of Ufe found by Patrick when he arrived in Ireland: constant

300BOOK REVIEWS

warfare, unbridled sexuaUty, insensate drunkenness, shapeshifting battle god-

desses, headhunting and human sacrifice aU ran rampant. These were the customs of the wUd, brave Celts, who had dominated Europe before the Romans
and had spread, according to Mr. CahiU, as far afield as New Hampshire (to, pre-

sumably, the Stonehenge of America, one of my favorite spurious Celtic sites).
Patrick, himself only barely Roman in this book, persuaded the Celts to give up
their human sacrifices for the sacrifice of the one god's son which, according to
CahiU, was easy for the British missionary in simpático with his new people. In
fact, the Irish were so ready to convert that they also gave up slaves and warfare. (I am afraid CahiU has some explaining to do about the medieval Irish annals with their constant references to warfare, and the Irish legal tracts, which
mention quite a lot of slaves.) And they readUy took up the monastic and Latin
learning—they even learned Greek—gobbling up every manuscript that came
their way and copying it for others.
EventuaUy, the Irish tooktheir bounty of Christian learning back to the Continent in a great effort to reconvert the barbarian (stUl matted) masses. They
brought along everything that made their brand of Christianity unique and dynamic, including personal confession, prominent holy women, and a love of nature. Most important, though, they became "Europe's pubUsher" (p. 183),
returning to new Ubraries the books lost to heathen looting and burning. We
would have no Latin Uterature, and no vernacular Uterature, either, if it were not
for the Irish.

The conformist, humorless EngUsh might have thrown a spanner in the
works at Whitby, but it was the Vikings who destroyed the great Irish pubUshing
venture, ending their role of European cultural leadership. Never mind—according to CahiU, the indomitably chipper spirit of the Irish endured throughout Norman invasions.Tudor plantations, penal times, and famine to re-emerge
in Yeats and Joyce. And we can learn from the lesson of the Irish monks: for, as
Irish saints once saved Europe when the Romans had let it faU to the barbarians,
so America and the West wiU soon need protection from the rest of the world
expanding furiously on its borders, pushing rudely on its civiUzed frontiers. History has always been divided into Romans and CathoUcs, according to CahiU,
and it is the latter who wiU save us from our modern matted masses.

This is a rousing, colorful, passionate story, which is probably why it has sold
so many copies. I cannot begin here to list aU the misread texts, over-simplified
historical constructs, and biases of this book, but can only kindly suggest that it
is not meant to be history, but hagiography. It is, pure and simple, a traditional
legend of saints.
Lisa M. Bitel

University ofKansas

BOOK REVIEWS301

Medieval Ecclesiastical Studies in Honour of Dorothy M. Owen. Edited by
M. J. Franklin and Christopher Harper-Bill. [Studies in the History of Medieval Religion.VolumeVII.] (Rochester, NewYorkThe BoydeU Press. 1995.

Pp. xxi, 310. $71.00.)

This volume is a most appropriate tribute to its honorée, presenting sixteen
essays ranging from the Anglo-Saxon period to the sixteenth century, aU of
which pertain to the history of the Church in England and focus particularly on

the record sources from which that history has been written. Christopher

Harper-BUl suggests that Owen's "balance of universal and local concerns, as
weU as her indefatigable energy" mirror that of the subject of his essay, John of
Oxford (p. 83). One assumes that he refers to John's hard work as a diplomat,
judicial officer, and bishop in the late twelfth century, rather than the perjury
and dupUcity which may have attended his activity in the Becket controversies.
The range and scope of the essays is impressive, and indicative of Owen's
contributions over her career, itseU weU documented by Arthur Owen in the
bibUography of her works. Some pieces, such as PamelaTaylor's heavUy detaUed
discussion of the complexities of establishing Anglo-Saxon estate patterns, and
Sandra Raban's treatment of the 1279 hundred rolls, find themselves at the

perimeters of Owen's work. C. N. L. Brooke's history of the English Episcopal
Acta, and his emphasis on the importance of diplomatic in this project are,
however, right at the heart of Owen's endeavors.Three contributions stand out,
even in such a strong coUection as this. Harper-BiU's study is a marvelous example of biography that is much more than biography, expansive in its content and
a model of the use of the genre to understand the people who filled the posts
that make up much of administrative history Martin Brett's contribution, reflecting Owen's work in canon law, advances the thesis that local interest Ui
canon law, rather than its imposition from without, accounts for much of its
growth in the century before Gratian. F. Donald Logan presents a finding unique
in EngUsh records: addresses and sermons Ui the canon law faculty at Cambridge.This is perhaps the real gem of the book.Yet there is so much in the remaining pieces. Ralph Houlbrooke, too, presents a new find, a Norwich
manuscript that opens up Bishop Nykke's 1532 visitation of his diocese (the
last before the break with Rome), and P. N. R. Zutshi has discovered two new collective indulgences dUected to EngUsh beneficiaries. Episcopal officers are the
object of two essays: Brian Kemp assesses how archdeacons knew which
churches were within their purview, and suggests the existence of twelfthcentury scrutinia; David M. Smith concentrates upon the emergence of the 'official,' demonstrating that the use of the term in the Twelfth and thirteenth
centuries is, to say the least, ambiguous. Local studies are also present, in Mark
BaUey's treatment of the account roUs of an Ely manor, R. N. Swanson's case
study of the effect of the estabUshment of chapels within long-estabUshed
parish boundaries, and M. J. Franklin's discussion of the effect of episcopal acta
on Northampton monastic houses (unfortunately encumbered by distracting
emboldening for emphasis or reference). Criminous clerks are the object of two
essays: A. K. McHardy offers a view of the processes of managing such persons,

302BOOK REVIEWS

and R. L. Storey analyzes the relationship between anticlericaUsm and the maUcious indictment of clergy. Rosalind HUl offers a brief narrative on Bishop Sutton's estabUshment of a chantry.
The volume is handsome, weU bound and printed, but the too-frequent typographical errors tarnish the whole sUghtly and demonstrate a laxity Ui editorial
vigUance that contrasts with the quaUty of the contributions themselves. It is
unfortunate to find in Harper-BUl's very fine essay that Celestine II responded to
the appeal of the 'minks' of Norwich (p. 100). The coUection is prefaced by
three brief and informative reflections on Dorothy Owen's career and contributions at Lincoln, Lambeth, and Cambridge. These, together with the essays
and bibUography, constitute for the current academic community a fitting tribute to a respected archivist, scholar, and teacher, and for the new student an informative introduction to a Uvely area of research.
Timothy S. Haskett

University of Victoria

The New Cambridge Medieval History,Volume II: C. 700-c. 900. Edited by Rosamond McKitterick. (New York: Cambridge University Press. 1995. Pp. xxxi,
1082. $95.00.)

Constituting the middle one of three volumes that wUl eventuaUy replace Volumes II and III of the "old" CMH (published Ui 1913 and 1922), this massive
work represents the efforts of twenty-seven currently active scholars with academic attachments Ui ten dUferent countries (six from the United States). In her
prefatory remarks Rosamond McKitterick, the editor of the volume, makes it
clear that the work is intended to be "new" not only in chronological terms but
also conceptuaUy, methodologicaUy and substantively.This aspect of "newness"
wUl result from the distinctive features of the work: an interdisciplinary approach, a pan-European rather than nationaUst perspective, a reconfigured approach to the poUtical dimension of the human enterprise, and an emphasis on
social and cultural history. A proper review should assess how weU these objectives are realized, but the space avaUable here precludes such a pursuit. Only
a brief description of the volume's organization and content is possible, intended to serve as an invitation to readers.

Part I (14 chapters; 380 pages) is devoted to "PoUtical Developments."After an

opening chapter discussing the problems surrounding the sources and new approaches to their decoding, this segment of the book presents summaries of poUtical activities in the major "states" of eighth- and ninth-century Europe: the
British Isles (including separate sections on England, Ireland-Scotiand-Wales,
and England and the Continent); the Frankish kingdom (three chapters); Scandinavia; the Balkan Slavs and Bulgars; the Muslims Ui SicUy, south Italy, and Spain;

Christian Spam and the Basques; Lombard and Carolingian Italy; and Byzantine

BOOK REVIEWS303

Italy Interspersed are chapters on the Vikings in Francia and England, on the
Carolingianymes imperii, and on Byzantium and the West.
WhUe the diversity of approaches to poUtical affairs taken by the authors of

these chapters may confuse the average reader seeking the "new" way of understanding the poUtical order, these chapters provide a reliable, readable picture of what happened to all of Europe's poUtical entities between 700 and

900. Offsetting this bounty is a troublesome lack of cohesion. Readers wiU find
themselves asking whether there was a center around which political developments in the eighth and ninth centuries gravitated and, U so, where and/or what
it was. Perhaps there was none, but that admission raises a question about treating the two centuries from 700 to 900 as a discrete historical era. Some tradi-

tionalists may insist that a more coherent picture of Europe's poUtical
development during this period would have emerged had the discussion been

organized in a fashion that aUowed readers to move outward from a Frankish
"center" to the "peripheral" political entities whose histories are told so thoroughly. Perhaps such an approach could have been given new dimensions by
bringing to bear on political history told this way the new conceptual and

methodological approaches that Uluminate the way power was utilized and
how it affected people. One suspects that the main barrier to such an approach

was a predetermination to avoid "the emphasis of the old history ... on the creation and maintenance of imperial domination" (p. xviii).The avoidance of that
"preoccupation with empire" (p. xviii) very likely also led to what this reviewer
considers to be a serious flaw in the treatment of political developments:

the decision to treat Frankish history after 814 in terms of developments in the

kingdoms Ui the West on one hand and in the East and Middle kingdoms on the

other. Not only does this organizational pattern relegate poor Louis the Pious to
a position even less notable than the one from which he has only recently been

rescued, but it also mutes, even distorts, a dynamic dimension of Frankish poUtical development that played a crucial role in shaping political affairs through-

out the ninth century, that is, the effort to sustain a"Frankish"political presence
embodied Ui a unitary state ruled by a single dynasty.

Part II (6 chapters; 175 pages) deals with "Government and Institutions." One

chapter reviews the concept of kingship, the bases of political authority, and

the techniques of exercising power.Two chapters are devoted to economic history, one addressing the general features of the economic system, and the sec-

ond, money and coinage. Three chapters seek to delineate the social order
approached from three perspectives: the social order and its bonding forces
treated in general terms; the aristocracy; and an innovative in-depth look at four
dUferent rural communities (in Catalonia, Brittany, the Rhineland, and northern
Italy) in search of simUarities and dUferences marking the social order of the period. Perhaps many readers will find these chapters the most stimulating in the
volume, chiefly because of the abUity of their authors to apply fruitfully con-

cepts and methodological approaches derived from the broad realm of contemporary social history.

304BOOK REVIEWS

Part III (4 chapters; 115 pages) is devoted to "Church and Society," a theme addressed in terms of four topics: the papacy; the organization, law, and liturgy of
the Western Church; monasticism; and reUgion and lay society. In general, the
treatment of these topics is well informed and clear.The discussions of Carolingian monasticism and lay religion highlight new approaches to those topics
central to Carolingian religious history that deserve more scholarly attention.
However, some readers may find the overaU treatment of the Church disappointing. Whether by design or not, the space aUocated to this general theme
seems inadequate in the Ught of the role played by the Church and reUgion in

the eighth- and ninth-century world. This constraint is especiaUy true in the

chapter devoted to the ecclesiastical organization, law, and liturgy, where the
reader is provided excellent descriptions of these vital facets of institutional

Ufe but Uttle sense of how the Church actually operated as a decisive force in
society.

Part IV (6 chapters; 163 pages) surveys "Culture and Intellectual Develop-

ments."A preliminary chapter seeks to estabUsh the eighth-century foundations

of cultural renewal. Then foUow chapters on linguistic developments in the

early Middle Ages, education and Uterary culture, theology, book production,
and art and architecture (supported by thirty-six weU chosen plates).WhUe the
treatments of these themes do not always interconnect to create a holistic

grasp of the cultural activity, each provides ample evidence to disabuse readers

of stereotypes about the deadly uruformity, unimaginative imitativeness, and
substantive poverty of early medieval thought and expression. Rather these
studies, all of them given shape by their authors' awareness of new approaches
to cultural history, highlight the creative and diverse ways in which educational, inteUectuaI, reUgious, and artistic traditions were adapted to fit a new historical situation, a cultural feat which played a major role in determining the
inteUectuaI and artistic future of Europe.

A massive bibliography (172 pages), one part devoted to a general Ust of pri-

mary source materials for the entire period and another to secondary works relevant to each chapter, provides an invaluable adjunct to the volume. Although
one might raise an eyebrow about the discrepancies in the number of sec-

ondary works Usted for each chapter (for instance, one page for the chapter entitled "Frankish Gaul to 814" compared to twenty-two pages for the chapter on
"Slavs and Bulgars"), the bibUographies of secondary works seem to be current

and judiciously selected.The volume has a good selection of maps and a useful
set of genealogical tables for the ruling dynasties of the poUtical entities treated.

There are facets of the work about which any reviewer might carp.There are
questions of scale (does book production deserve the same amount of space as
papal history from 700 to 900 or Frankish history from 700 to 8l4?).There are
topics that could have been enriched by an effort to interrelate the treatments
afforded them more effectively (for instance, were there connections between
newly emerging linguistic patterns, literary and theological production, and lay

BOOK REVIEWS305

reUgiosity?). There appears to have been a constant temptation on the part of

authors, not always resisted, to abandon a European focus in favor of a Frankish

focus. But these all pale beside the greater accompUshment of this volume. It
succeeds in making clear how much is known about the period 700 to 900 and
provides innumerable clues as to what stUl needs to be discovered. Professor
McKitterick and her coUaborators have created a fitting monument to one of
the great scholarly accompUshments that have occurred since the pubUcation
three quarters of a century ago of the original volumes of the CMH dealing with
the early Middle Ages, namely, the successful effort to Uluminate and thus eliminate the last Dark Age.
Richard E. Sullivan

Michigan State University

Faith, Art, and Politics at Saint Riquier. The Symbolic Vision ofAngilbert. By
Susan A. Rabe. [Middle Ages Series.] (PhUadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 1995. Pp. xvii, 220. $36.95.)
At Easter in 800 Charlemagne and his court attended the dedication of the
Abbey of Saint-Riquier, one of the best-documented of major Carolingian buUdings.The abbot, AngUbert, was responsible for the rebuUding, and he left an account of the buUdings and their liturgical use. Two seventeenth-century
engravings reproduce a lost late eleventh-century drawing of Saint-Riquier,
showing the three churches dedicated to Richarius, Benedict, and Mary. The
main church had three great towers at each end and eleven major altars. Dr.
Rabe's study sees the buUding as a reflection of Carolingian theological debate,

in which "symboUsm based on the number three was present everywhere." She

provides superb translations of some of AngUbert's poems and accounts of his
involvement in the debates on Adoptionism and image worship to sustain her
argument, which is an important exploration of how Carolingian architecture
was viewed by its creators.
I am not clear how Dr. Rabe selects her evidence for AngUbert's thought, or
his patronage. She discusses the theology of the poem De Conversione Saxonum, but I am not persuaded by her arguments for attributing it to AngUbert
rather than to Paulinus ofAquileia, as D. SchaUer has proposed.AngUbert's prefatory poem for a presentation copy of the De Doctrina Christiana is carefuUy
analyzed, but its Trinitarian symboUsm relates to its summary of Augustine's
thought and need not represent AngUbert's thought. Other poems by AngUbert
about Charlemagne's court, which show his command of different genres and
his reading of Ovid, are not mentioned here. Dr. Rabe has found paraUels for her
sense of the symbolism of Saint-Riquier, but she teUs us more about Alcuin's theological disputes, which provide the context for that symboUsm, than about Alcuin's expUcit criticisms of AngUbert. Could AngUbert's love of the theater also
have affected his architectural program?

306BOOK REVIEWS

The library of Saint-Riquier is lost, but we have a CaroUngian catalogue.The Ubrary owned Alcuin on the Trinity, and Alcuin was AngUbert's friend, but there
is no discussion of Alcuin's Trinitarian symboUsm. A magnificent Gospel book
feG???ß given by Charlemagne) now in AbbevUle and a Psalter (B.N. Lat.
13159) were made during AngUbert's abbacy, but neither is mentioned here.Yet

the Gospel Book has importantTrinitarian symboUsm Ui its initials.

Dr. Rabe reproduces plans of the basiUca and the church of the Virgin from
the 1959-1989 excavations of Dr. Honoré Bernard, but there is no mention of

his 1993 Paris thesis "St-Riquier Archéologie et Historiographie." We should be
told if this was unavailable, or if Bernard and Rabe disagree about the reconstruction of the abbey. Here again Dr. Rabe leaves her readers regretting that she
was not able to write a fuUer study of such an important monument. Bernard
has found porphyry and serpentine columns,which may be reused materials reflecting the influence of buUdings we know too Uttle about.The discovery of an
atrium at the west end of the church, caUed "paradisus" in AngUbert's description, also suggests such imitation. But what is the symboUsm of "paradisus"?
Where so much is lost, the exploration of CaroUngian architectural symboUsm
requires speculation. This is a brave attempt at exploration, but whether

AngUbert's "visual and sensory mimetic structure" was the "consistent symbolic
vision" suggested here may be beyond what we can now know.

David Ganz

University ofNorth Carolina, Chapel Hill

The Martyrs of Córdoba: Community and Family Conflict in an Age ofMass
Conversion. By Jessica A. Coope. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

1995. Pp. xx, 113. $25.00.)

When Visigothlc Spain fell to Muslim invaders in 711, the Iberian Christian
population found itself absorbed into the Islamic empire as a subject community. Though protected from forced conversion, the Andalusian Christians were
expected to maintain a low profile religiously, sociaUy, and poUticaUy in the
newly and incompletely Islamized al-Andalus. Over the course of the eighth and
early ninth centuries, the numbers of Muslims in Spain increased due primarily
to immigration but also as a result of increased conversion. During the same period, al-Andalus benefited greatly from its economic and cultural ties with the
Muslim "heartland" in the eastern Mediterranean. In the face of the increas-

ing numbers of Muslims and the growing strength and self-consciousness of
Muslim culture in Spain, many Christians found themselves happUy participating in Andalusian society in ways that seemed, from the perspective of some
other Christians, to be compromising their cultural-reUgious identity as LatinChristians.The most famous historical result of these circumstances was the so-

caUed "Cordobán Martyrs' Movement" of the 850's, when forty-eight Christians
from Ui and around the capital city of Cordoba were executed either for de-

nouncing Islam in pubUc or—in the case of products of mixed marriages—for

BOOK REVIEWS307

refusing to renounce their Christianity and embrace Islam.VirtuaUy eveiythmg
that we know about the victims of these executions comes from the apologetic
treatises andpassiones that were written on behalf of the martyrs by Eulogius
and Paul Alvarus, who Uved in Cordoba at the time. Both wrote in response to
the lack of enthusiasm that the martyrs' actions eUcited from the more assimilated Christians of Cordoba.

Coope's book is by no means the first to treat the subject. The earUest and

most complete overview—in the anglophonic scholarly world, anyway—was
Edward P. Colbert's published dissertation, The Martyrs of Cordoba (850-

859):A Study ofthe Sources (CathoUc University ofAmerica Press, 1962). More

modern takes on the subject—which have insisted on scrutinizing the motives
of Eulogius and Alvarus before assessing the meaning of the movement itself—
began with James Waltz's article ("The Significance of the Voluntary Martyrs of
Ninth-Century Cordoba," Muslim World, 60 [1970]) and continued with my

own book (Christian Martyrs in Muslim Spain [Cambridge, 1988]). Though
Coope does not review the historiography of the subject in any detaU, it is clear

from her work that she has, for the most part, read and benefited from the work
of her predecessors.The end result is a balanced treatment of the avaUable evidence which attempts, first and foremost, to reconstruct the tensions within
Andalusian society that could account not only for the radical actions of the

martyrs but the virulence of their apologists' attacks on both Islam and the

Christians who Uved in harmony with it.As such, Coope's weU-written and very
readable book provides a useful overview of an important episode in the history of Christian-Muslim interaction. It does not, however, offer any new data
nor does it break new ground in terms of its approach.
Kenneth Baxter Wolf

Pomona College

Scholastic Humanism and the Unification of Europe, \o\. I: Foundations. By
R. W Southern. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: BlackweU. 1995. Pp. xxi, 330.
$44.95.)
This book is the first of a projected three volumes that may weU prove to be
the finest achievement of the most productive and perceptive of medievaUsts Ui
England. Just as St. Anselm:A Portrait in a Landscape revised and completed
Southern's work on Anselm and the late eleventh century, so the first of these
volumes further documents and synthesizes themes famUiar to readers of his
eadier books, namely, his revised understanding of the emergence of schools of
northern France and the place of Chartres and Paris, and his seminal notion of
scholastic humanism that links the Platonism of the early twelfth century with
the development of scholastic analysis, the recovery and assimUation of Aristotle, and the birth of the University of Paris. There is also much that is new
here, not only in detaU but in his persuasive argument that the teaching of law

308BOOK REVIEWS

at Bologna (as distinct from the practice of law) began only around 1 150, a gen-

eration later than the explosive expansion of the schools ofphüosophy and the-

ology at Paris. Southern's reinterpretation of Irnerius and Gratian as legal
practitioners, commentators, and compUers whose work led to rather than

grew out of the teaching of law wiU probably become the most important and
controversial new insight in this book.

Southern's main thesis is that an educational revolution took place in the first
haU of the twelfth century, buUt around a scholastic method of textual analysis
and quaestiones, that not only influenced almost every level of European society but helped effect a unity of culture that had not previously existed. If, in the
vision of Henri Pirenne, the Carolingian empire marked the First Europe, the
unification of that geographical area (thus the second part of Southern's title)
was forged only in the twelfth century through schools that were "international" in both students and masters, and by a common scholastic culture in
arts, theology, and law. In Southern's view—and here his observations paraUel
those of Jacques LeGoff in his work on medieval inteUectuals—scholastic culture was not allied with an elite court culture as was Italian humanism, but penetrated down to almost aU levels of society, and which created one unified

culture for Europe from Italy to Scotland, from central Germany to Brittany.This

may seem overstated when one considers the highly technical nature of the
scholastic training in arts and theology that university-trained clerics received,
which was far above the world of medieval peasants and even urban society.
But inasmuch as the scholastic method of analysis, as applied to Roman and
canon law, was used in law courts and was the way many in the clergy were
trained to approach the Bible, sermons, and the care or souls, then there is

hardly a community or social level in medieval society that was not touched by
scholasticism.

Scholastic culture, according to Southern, ceased to serve the needs of soci-

ety and even the academic enterprise in the early fourteenth century.That view,
which many, including this reviewer, may find less convincing, will presumably

be examined in detaU in the third volume of this work, whUe the second volume wUl give a more detaUed view of the lives of twelfth-century scholars.They
wUl probably be worth the wait, which it is hoped wUl not be long.This first volume is a masterpiece of interpretation and writing that should be read by every
serious medievalist.

University of Wisconsin-Madison

William J. Courtenay

BOOK REVIEWS309

The Humiliation ofSinners:Public Penance in Thirteenth-Century France. By
Mary C. Mansfield. (Ithaca, New York: CorneU University Press. 1995. Pp.
xvi, 343. $39.95.)
Mary Mansfield's The Humiliation of Sinners was completed as a doctoral
dissertation at Berkeley in the spring of 1989· She died Ui an automobUe accident the foUowing August at the age of 29. Her dissertation dUector, Gerard Caspary and her father, Harvey Mansfield, prepared the manuscript for pubUcation,
preserving it, they teU us, as she had left it.Thus the publication date of 1995 is
for a manuscript finished in 1989. It is the work of a formidable scholar whose
intensive research in a wide range of sources produced a bold reinterpretation
of the history of medieval penance.

The book has two principal, interrelated goals.The first is to reject the thesis

that medieval penance is the progenitor of the privacy, interiority and individualism that we believe are characteristic of modern western culture. That argument (waged throughout but most clearly summarized in the final chapter) is
inevitably speculative, and although it produces important reflections on this
problem, I found it beyond the reach of her evidence.The second goal is to "rehabiUtate" public penance by showing that historians have misunderstood its
longevity and vitality between about 1000 and 1350.That project is founded on
new, varied, and extremely interesting evidence.
The restoration of public penance to the prominence it enjoyed in medieval
Ufe and values rests first of all on a critique of the reigning paradigm in the history of penance. In the first three chapters, "Penance and Privacy," "The FaUure
of a Theology of Private Penance," and "The PubUcity of Private Penance," Mary
Mansfield undermines that history by insisting that historians (foUowing CyrUle
Vogel rather than the seventeenth-century Oratorian Jean Morin) have been
misled by the clarity of distinctions drawn by scholastic theologians and canonists.Where historians have seen a neat progression from canonical, to tariffed, to
private, sacramental, auricular confession, her reading of Lanfranc, Peter
Comestor, Alan of IiUe, Robert of Flamborough, and Thomas of Chobham
uncovers an awkward period of transition in which confusions—never successfully resolved—about public, private, and sacrament abound. Her examples of penitential practice that embarrass attempts to see in auricular
confession a preserve of what we caU "privacy" are not unfamUiar and not without counter-arguments: the pubUc site of confession, the recourse to "reputation" to uncover sinners to be disciplined, sins reserved to higher ecclesiastical
authorities, rigorous satisfactions specified by penitential canons that retained
their prestige, restitution as a condition of absolution, and excommunications,
especiaUy latae sententiae. Medieval society prized humiUation. "Behind aU the
praise of contrition lurks a longing for pubUc humiUation," she asserts, and describes a "general phenomenon of hauling secret sinners into the Ught of day"

(pp.46, 124).

Chapter four defines the terms and explains the procedures of pubUc
penance, with concrete examples of her thesis that pubUc penance was -widely

310BOOK REVIEWS

observed north of the Loire (unlike Italy and southern France). It punished ecclesiastical crimes such as clerical concubinage, violence against clerics, and de-

struction of church property, as weU as crimes shared with secular jurisdictions

such as adultery, usury, and blasphemy. Once again, therefore, certain features of
the received history of penance remain vaUd: "Solemn pubUc penance was for
criminals, not saints" (p. 100); nor, one might add, for routine sinners.
The analysis of ecclesiastical seasons and theU ritual (particularly penitential)

celebrations in chapter five, "CoUective Expiation, CoUective Rejoicing," discerns a "ritual logic" (p. 158) that prepares for an impressive textual history and

analysis of seventy-five French pontificals from 1150 to 1350 in chapters six
and seven. She plots pontifical genealogies, orders them in fifty-year periods,
and submits them to a meticulous reading. Her argument for the reliability of
her sources is persuasive. French scribes did not merely copy rites of public

penance from earlier models, they constantly revised them. In short, they experimented and thereby chronicled dramatic changes from the eleventh to the

fourteenth century. In the earUer period, the ritual was genuinely communal:
the expulsion and reconciUation of "scapegoats" were joyously received as a purification of the community. But in the thirteenth century, the rite became mechanical, paraUeling the debasement of contrition when the 1215 obligation of
confession turned penance into a legal and mechanical observance, "the sim-

plest possible faith for a mass market" (p. 52). By the end of the thirteenth cen-

tury, penitents ceased to enact the purification of the whole community. Lent
began with ashes distributed not to penitents but to the whole congregation.
She sees paraUels between these developments in penitential rites and religious
drama: audience and performers are separated Ui both, in a move "'from aUegory to mimesis,' from rite to game to theater" (pp. 237-238).
If it became mechanical, why didn't it die like the ordeal? In general, medieval
society favored humiUation because of its "lurking distrust of the secret world

of the soul" (p. 247). More concretely, it answered the needs of populous cities,

especiaUy from Paris northward. Chapter eight— "Penance in the Cities"—examines secular public penances in those urban settings imposed by bishops
with seigneurial authority, the king of France, and communal governments; but
she finds no evidence that authorities, penitents, and observers distinguished
between a secular and an ecclesiastical and sacramental pubUc rite f?.
277-278). "CommunaUy imposed pUgrimages flourished in the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries" from northern France to the southern Netherlands (p. 283),
where jurisdiction was unclear and class divisions were deep. Gt was also common Ui Alsace and Switzerland—areas outside of her purview.) Although the
objects of correction continue to be important men, disturbers in some way of
the peace of the city, she dismisses any suggestion that we deal here with ideal-

istic peacemaking: "These towns were not communities, and public penances

did not restore peace. Most often they underlined the defeat of one side, and

they held up the victims to the contempt and perhaps the laughter of theU so-

cial inferiors" f. 266). Her purpose was not to indict the ecclesiastical estabUshment. She reminds us twice in the course of this study that ecclesiastical

BOOK REVIEWS311

humiUation and its secular imitations eschewed the mutilation and hanging that

were part of secular justice. It destroyed "reputations," not "people" (pp. 127128, 266). "It could seal a diplomatic compromise, punish an armed insurrection, end a famUy feud, embarrass an adulterer, or avenge the violation of a sanctuary." And it "thrives" on the ambiguity between pubUc and private "in urban
poUtics as in contemporary Scholastic theology" (p. 287).

It is that connection, and the implications Mary Mansfield saw for the history
of privacy and social control in the West, that constitute the boldest and most
controversial conclusion of this book. We cannot know how the author would

have revised it.We cannot know how she would have responded to the debates
it would inevitably have inspired. But everyone interested in this indisputably
central issue in our cultural history wiU profit from reading this scholarly and
stimulating study.
Thomas Tentler

University ofMichigan

Westminster Abbey and the Plantagenets:Kingship and the Representation of
Power, 1200-1400. By Paul Binski. (New Haven: Yale University Press for

the Paul MeUon Centre for Studies Ui British Art. 1995.Pp. viii, 241. $60.00.)

This is a most original and inteUigent book, but one somewhat marred by
weaknesses of presentation. It is in part a conventional piece of architectural
history, in which the author draws on arguments from the fabric and on docu-

mentary sources to provide a definitive account of Westminster Abbey's evo-

lution and royal connections, from the abbey's new beginnings under Henry III
to its last medieval flourish under Richard II. In its early days, its development
owed almost everything to the king's patronage and preferences. But from Ed-

ward I's time royal interest declined, and Ui the fourteenth century monks and

master masons were more often the guiding influence behind its continuing
growth. Binski is mainly concerned with the first phase in the church's history,
under Henry III and to a lesser extent Edward I, for it was then that it stood
most clearly for what his subtitle caUs "the representation of power." To identify

this theme is in itseU to do nothing new. Henry's church has long been seen as
a kind of ideological statement, an advertisement for his kingship, a shrine for a

dynastic saint, Edward the Confessor, and, as royal foundation, bravura display of
wealth and splendor, and famUy mausoleum, a riposte to the Capetian cultivation of St. Denis, church and saint, though a riposte which paradoxicaUy borrowed the latest architectural fashions of northern France for the language of
its answer. Binski's central achievement is both to enlarge on and to amend this
view. He argues convincingly that in its function Henry's Westminster had no
close paraUel in France and, in its architecture and art, was a more eclectic creation than has generaUy been supposed.Westminster itseU comprised a seat of
government, royal residence, coronation church, and royal mausoleum: a con-

312BOOK REVIEWS

centration of roles which had no French counterpart. The models for the
church were certainly in large part French; and here Binski restores Reims to its
traditional place as exemplar, though with Louis LX's Sainte ChapeUe not far behind. But in its decoration and symboUsm it drew on a much wider range of influences, notably from the Rome of the Cosmati, whose mosaic work was
continued under Edward Fs patronage. At the same time it was the shrine of a
thoroughly insular saint, though Edward the Confessor's quaUties, transmuted
by hagiographical developments of the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries from kingly to chivalric virtues, were ones which belonged to European
culture. Some of Binski's best pages are given to Edward's cult, for which his
study has a value independent of the cult's architectural and artistic context.
The effect of Binski's work is to loosenWestminster from its French moorings
and to present it as an altogether odder and more individual artefact, reflecting

the outlook of kings who looked back to the EngUsh past and, in the case of Ed-

ward I, sideways to a British Imperium, as weU as overseas. Not all that he says
is convincing. He sees the Cosmati work, for example, as charged with a royal
ethic of respect for antiquity, imperial Rome, and (a very vague notion) the

world outlook of popes and emperors; and here, as elsewhere, he perhaps un-

duly elevates ideology over taste in determining aesthetic choices. Nor does the
art history always blend easUy with the overarching view ofWestminster as an
exercise in political theories.The compUcated study of the Westiriinster retable,
for instance, looks to one who is not an art historian to be a self-contained piece
of art history. More generaUy open to criticism is Binski's use of language. Longwinded, abstract, and often difficult to foUow, his work is interesting and clever
enough to have deserved the kind hand of a more severe editor. Fortunately, the
forebodings prompted by the preface, with its talk of"Local hermeneutics,""discursive practices," and "polysemous meaning," are rarely borne out by the text.
But the author's complex ideas could nevertheless have been expressed more
simply and lucidly, with more force and no loss of originaUty, to leave the reader
stUl more grateful.
J. R. Maddicott

Exeter College, Oxford

The Song ofthe CatharWars.A History ofthe Albigensian Crusade. ByWiUiam
of Tudela and an Anonymous Successor. Translated and edited by Janet
Shirley. (Brookfield, Vermont: Scolar Press, Ashgate Publishing Company.

1996. Pp. xiii, 210. $59-95.)

The Albigensian Crusade of the early thirteenth century witnessed the expansion of French power and the growth of papal influence. As with aU medieval crusades, the motives of the crusaders themselves were both religious
and material: for the French crown and the Holy See it was fortunate that the
French knights who led the crusading army against the Cathar heretics were

BOOK REVIEWS313

eager for their share of the free-for-aU land-grab that victory would bring; this
transfer of ownership from Cathars to true sons of the Church was also necessary to faciUtate the power structures (poUtical control and Uiquisition) that
could eradicate heresy.These two aspects—the temporal and the spiritual—are
clearly reflected by the two authors of The Song of the Cathar Wars.The first,

WUliam ofTudela (writing c. 1211-1213) supported the causes of both the pa-

pacy and the French crown: a loyal CathoUc, he recognized the need for external intervention to suppress the heretics. His anonymous successor (writing
1213-1219) held contrary views: whoUy opposed to political and military interference into the affairs of Occitania.he was nevertheless also a good CathoUc

who simply wished that Count Raymond of Toulouse had stamped out the
Cathar heresy by himseU.The Anonymous absolves Raymond of heretical leanings, and instead excoriates the crusade's leader, Simon de Montfort, as the vUlain of the piece.Another major difference is that whUe WilUam is a good writer,
the Anonymous is a great one; Shirley is honest enough to make clear that this
distinction is "aU but lost in translation."

As an historical document itseU, The Song is of great importance, not least because it offers an account from the losing side (proving that history is not always written by the victors). Furthermore, its two authors are more measured

Ui their judgments than that other, at times extreme, contemporary historian of
the crusade, Peter of Les Vaux de Cernay. Both are reUable: when they themselves are not eyewitnesses to events they use firsthand testimony; their record
accords weU with other evidence, including charters. As so often with sources

of this kind, many wiU deem its chief recommendation to be the reUgious and
linguistic insights it so patently offers; but its greatest value is for its miUtary detaUs: despite Auguste Molinier's criticisms a century ago that The Song's war
scenes are repetitive and monotonous, this is quite simply one of the best
sources of medieval warfare one could hope for.

Although this edition of The Song wiU not replace Henri Gougaud's OccitanFrench paraUel text of 1984, the aU-important fact that it is the first avaUable in

English (and faithfuUy translated by Janet SlUrley) wUl ensure its great utUity to
anglophonic scholars of this troubled period. It is highly recommended.

Sean McGlynn

London School ofEconomics and Political Science

Before Science: The Invention of the Friars' Natural Philosophy. By Roger
French and Andrew Cunningham. (Brookfield, Vermont: Scolar Press, Ash-

gate PubUshing Company. 1996. Pp. x, 298.)

French and Cunningham argue in this book that there was no medieval sci-

ence, but only medieval natural philosophy; and this natural phüosophy they as-

sure us, was radically dUferent from what we now caU "science":". . . there was
no scientific tradition (in the modern sense of the term 'scientific') of looking at

314book reviews

nature in the thirteenth century, only a reUgio-poUtical way of doing so" f.

273). What primarily differentiated medieval natural phUosophy from modern

science, they argue, was reUgion; for the medieval investigation of nature was
motivated and its conclusions shaped by reUgious interests.

As a reaction against the recent f?? now moribund) tendency to write the
history of medieval "science" as though reUgion did not exist, this is a salutary
conclusion. French and Cunningham do an exceUent job of demonstrating the

reUgious motivation, and thus the handmaiden status, of medieval natural philosophy.They are interested especiaUy in the natural plulosophies developed by

the mendicant orders in the thirteenth century: they connect the Christian Aristotelianism of the Dominicans closely and convincingly with the Church's campaign against the Cathar heresy, and they associate the Neoplatonizing
AristoteUanism of the Franciscans (the AristoteUan foundations of which they

somewhat beUigerently refuse to acknowledge) with the ideal of mystical con-

templation emanating from pseudo-Dionysius.They also offer interesting and
useful surveys of the idea of"nature" from antiquity through the thirteenth cen-

tury, of education within the mendicant orders and its relationship to the uni-

versities, of the natural phUosophical Uterature (including encyclopedic works)
produced by the mendicants, and more.

It should be clear, then, that this book has many merits. However, French and
Cunningham frequently weaken theU case by oversimplification and overstatement, black-and-white dichotomies, and bold claims unsupported by textual
evidence. They announce, for example, that Roger Bacon studied the multipUcation of species and related topics "because he was a Franciscan friar" (p. 238);
that Albert the Great was motivated by a Dominican agenda to introduce mathematics into his AristoteUan natural phUosophy f. 180); that WUUam of

Conches was motivated to study phUosophy for purely reUgious reasons f. 76);

that Franciscans undertook the investigation of nature because of their devotion to pseudo-Dionysius f. 218). No textual support for any of these claims is

provided; no uncertainty is expressed; no qualifications (mainly for reUgious
reasons; partly because they were Dominicans or Franciscans or devoted to
pseudo-Dionysius) are offered. French and Cunningham never acknowledge
that we reaUy have very Uttle knowledge of what went on in the irUnds of individual medieval scholars and are on shaky ground, therefore, whenever we

attempt to identify motivations.They frequently give the impression that phUosophical orientation was determined by membership in one of the mendicant

orders; there seems to be no room in the story for individual dUference or mul-

tiple influences, despite the fact that most of the leading characters received
their education, in whole or in part, before they joined the Dominican or Franciscan order.

The dichotomous, "black-and-white" character of the analysis traps French
and Cunningham into what can only be described as a broad attack on conti-

nuity in the history of medieval science. The authors appear to push the extreme claim that thirteenth-century natural philosophy was unlike anything

book reviews315

that went before or came after—sufficiently different, at least, to demand a dtfferent name.Thus they claim that there was no natural philosophy before the in-

vention of natural phUosophy in the thirteenth century f?. 6, 88). One must

wonder what it is that Aristotle offered in his libri naturales, if not natural phi-

losophy The branch of thirteenth-century natural phUosophy that French and

Cunningham deal with most fully, and on which much of theU case for discontinuity rests, is "optics" or "perspectiva." BeUeving (erroneously) that the works
of Euclid, Ptolemy, and Ibn al-Haytham were limited to the mathematical analysis of radiation, they discover radical discontinuity between thirteenth-century

perspectiva and aU that went before (pp. 248, 250).They faU to understand that,

although motivated by reUgious factors quite different from those present in
their ancient Greek and medieval Islamic predecessors, the thirteenth-century
perspectivists managed nonetheless to produce a comprehensive synthesis of
the content of their predecessors' works (as they themselves repeatedly proclaimed). If this does not count as continuity, then nothing Ui the history of
early science does.
These problems aside, French and Cunningham have made a powerful case
for the religious motivation of natural phUosophy within the Dominican and
Franciscan orders and within medieval culture more generaUy. I believe that a
reading of the Uterary products of medieval natural phUosophy (including that
of the mendicants) wUl discredit the suggestion that religion was the only motivating factor. But reUgion was there as an omnipresent element, an important
player in the game of natural phUosophy, as it would remain untU weU into the
nineteenth century.
David C. Lindberg

University ofWisconsin—Madison

Die Bettelorden in Mecklenburg: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Franzis-

kaner, Klarissen. Dominikaner und Augustiner-Eremiten im Mittelalter.

By Ingo Ulpts. [Saxonia Franciscana: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sächsi-

schen Franziskanerprovinz, Band 6.] (Werl: Dietrich-Coelde-Verlag. 1995.
Pp. xiv, 556.)

Die Franziskaner im mittelalterlichen Lüneburg. By Silke Logemann. [Saxonia

Franciscana, Band 7] (Werl: Dietrich-Coelde-Verlag. 1996. Pp. xü, 106. 8
black-and-white photographs.)

In response to Jacques Le Goff's 1968 charge in the Annales, both Ingo Ulpts

and Silke Logemann attempt to place the mendicants in their urban context.
They examine such issues as the foundation of the houses, the convents' topographic location, the social origins of the friars and nuns, relations with the
princes, municipal authorities, the burghers, and the secular clergy, the use of

the convent buUdings for pubUc ??f?ße», the Observant reform, and the disso-

lution of the convents during the Reformation.After the coUapse of the German

316BOOK REVIEWS

Democratic RepubUc, Ulpts obtained access to the relatively extensive latemedieval archives of Mecklenburg to write the first modern history of the men-

dicant orders in that German state. He ????f?p?eß many of these documents

directíy in his text and pubUshes seventy-nine documents for the first time in an
appendix. His monograph is divided into three major sections: the foundation
of the eleven houses, a third of aU the reUgious foundations in the medieval duchy;
the late-medieval accommodation -with urban society; and the Reformation.
Ulpts studies the foUowing houses (the dates in parentheses are the foundation dates): the Franciscans in Schwerin (around 1235-36); Rostock (around

1240); Parchim (around 1246); Wismar (1251-52); and Neubrandenburg

(around 1260); the Dominicans in Rostock (1256); Röbel (around 1286); and
Wismar (1292-93); the Clares in Ribnitz (1323-24); the Austin Friars in Sternberg (1500); and Franciscan Observants in Güstrow (1509). His findings do not
change appreciably my dating of the expansion of the Franciscans and Dominicans in the thirteenth century, but as a local historian Ulpts is better able to
place the foundations into their specific poUtical and social context, even
where direct evidence is lacking.The friars arrived in Mecklenburg only a generation after its effective Christianization, and thus, as I had already pointed out
about the East-Elbian lands in general, played a crucial role in the formation of

the new Christian and German society. AU of the houses were princely founda-

tions, and in varying degrees retained their ties to the ruling dynasty. For example, several non-regnant members of the family were buried in the church of
the Wismar Franciscans.

The friars became an integral part of late-medieval urban society.Although Ut-

tie is known about the social origins of the brothers in the thirteenth century,

the majority of the friars after 1300 were natives of the city where the convent
was located or came from the immediate vicinity. Not surprisingly, the Franciscans recruited more heavily among the artisan population than the Dominicans, many of whom came from Rat families. In exchange for the burghers'

material support, the friars were expected, especiaUy after 1 350, to help secure

their benefactors' salvation.The result was a weakening of the orders' commitment to poverty since even individual Franciscans acquired personal incomes,
though Ulpts emphasizes the modesty of the convents' endowments.The friars'
accommodation with the world is reflected in the popular designation of the
convents as monasteries and the brothers as monks. However, the friars avoided

partisan involvements in internal urban conflicts and maintained generafly
good relations with the secular clergy.
The Observant reform was imposed on the mendicants by the princes and
municipal authorities as part of their policies of obtaining greater control of the
Church. In the case of the Dominicans, the introduction of the Observants
changed the composition of the priories because friars from the Netherlands
replaced the natives. The Franciscans resisted reform until the sixteenth century, and the frustrated princes responded by establishing the Observant
houses in Sternberg and Güstrow. The orders reacted differently to Luther: the

BOOK REVIEWS317

Augustinians like their confreres m Saxony quickly disbanded; the Dominicans
became staunch opponents; whereas the Franciscans were divided in their loyalties.The dissolution of the individual houses took approximately thirty years
because the regnant princes, the brothers Henry V and Albrecht VII, were ambivalent in their attitude toward the new teaching. Ribnitz survived longest because its last two abbesses who remained CathoUcs were the sister and

daughter of Henry V. Ulpts has written an extremely detaUed study, and most
readers who are not students of Mecklenburg history are advised just to read
the introduction, the summaries of the individual sections, and the conclusion.
Logemann's monograph about the Franciscans is less satisfactory, in part because there is Uttle documentary evidence. She tries to make sense of the latemedieval legend that Duke Otto of Brunswick founded the house in 1235, but I
faU to see how the friary, whose foundation she places around 1250, could have
already been the site of a provincial chapter m 1230 (p. 17). More useful is her
discussion of the friars' Ubrary, much of which survives, and the introduction of
the Observant reform in 1489 by the Rat, with the backing of the duke and the
bishop. Most of the Franciscans left Lüneburg in 1530 after the Rat ordered
them to adhere to Luther, though three natives of the city remained Ui the convent buUding untU 1555.
John B. Freed

Illinois State University

The Register of Walter Bronescombe, Bishop of Exeter, 1258- 1280, Volume

One. Edited and translated by O. F. Robinson. [The Canterbury and York So-

ciety, Volume LXXXII.] (Rochester, New YorkThe BoydeU Press. 1995. Pp.
xlv, 161. $45.00;£25.00.)

Walter Bronescombe's episcopal register is the first in a remarkably complete
series of medieval bishops' registers from Exeter. As one of the earUest in Eng-

land, it deserves special scrutiny not only for what it teUs of a diocese in the

mid-thirteenth century but for what it represents in the formative stages of episcopal registers. Late in the last century, the Exeter antiquarian, F. C. HingestonRandolph, edited this register, along with every subsequent Exeter register to
1419.As impressive an archival task as that was, the editions were often imprecise and, accordingly, less valuable to the researcher.To say that O. F. Robinson
has provided a corrective to Hingeston-Randolph's work is to grant only partial
credit. This is as fine an edition of a medieval register as one can hope to see.
Each entry is meticulously transcribed with appropriate notes and crossreferences; there is the added advantage of facing-page translations, opening the
register to a larger reading audience. Although this present volume is but the
first in a three-volume edition.Volume III promises transcriptions of documents
pertinent to Bronescombe's administration of Exeter which, though not registered, were sewn into the manuscript at a later time.This latter volume also con-

318BOOK REVIEWS

tains three appendices and an index. In sum, the whole of the project is a complete presentation of the Bronescombe register and pertinent documents.The
register runs chronologicaUy rather than topicaUy, the commonplace business
of disposing ecclesiastical benefices standing alongside various other recorded
activities such as letters and memoranda, the appointment of commissions and
church dedications.WhUe there is a tendency in the earUer forms of registration
to lose some records (here, dispensations, ordinations, and visitations), the advantage of the chronological form is an appreciation of the daUy press and variety of business involved in diocesan administration. This volume begins with

Bronescombe's election and ends in 1263, barely a third of the way through his

pontificate, but aUeady we gain considerable insight into the bishop's administrative and pastoral priorities, the events which occurred in his early years as ordinary, and something of the style with which he governed his diocese. This
volume also contains a thorough introduction which places Bronescombe and
his register in the larger historical context of thirteenth-century Exeter. Dr.
Robinson's work is impressive and the result of many years' labor; it is a significant contribution to the ecclesiastical history of Exeter and the English thirteenth century.
William J. Dohar, C.S.C.

University ofNotre Dame

The Evangelical Rhetoric of Ramon Llull. Lay Learning and Piety in the

Christian West around 1300. By Mark D. Johnston. (NewYork: Oxford Uni-

versity Press. 1996. Pp. xiii, 274. $4995.)

Among Professor Mark D.Johnston's many earUer studies on Ramon LIuU, one
should cite particularly The Spiritual Logic ofRamon Llull (Oxford, 1987).The
present work proposes "to examine the theories of eloquence expounded in
[LluU's] works on rhetoric and preaching . . . understood Ui comparison to
other extant texts of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries." Johnston's command of recent scholarship on wide areas of medieval culture has enabled him
to carry out this dUficult task.

After a brief introduction, we have a chapter on LluU's Art offinding truth.

This is needed because in LIuU rhetoric and preaching, as "arts of language," depend on the acceptance of his Art. Johnston's discussion of the several hundred
model sermons that appear in dUferent LuUian coUections shows how closely
they are linked to it.
Johnston shows that LIuU interprets the world through his doctrine that all
things participate in and resemble their Creator. He continually urges preachers
to emphasize the importance of beauty, order, and propriety (the appropriate
use of words) Ui order to convey this central lesson. LluU's basic concern with
the evangelization of the only superficiaUy Christian world of his time is weU
brought out by Johnston. The conclusion to the book studies the transmission

BOOK REVIEWS319

of LluU's different works on preaching and of his Rethorica nova of 1301

(edited by Johnston, Davis, California, 1994).

Employing the whole range of LluU's many works, whether in Latin or Cata-

lan, Johnston shows how the LuUian system evolves, perhaps because of increasing contacts with scholastic learning.Among the many points made in the
book one may cite the comparison (p. 15) between LluU's use of "spiritual aUegory" (moraUzation) and that practised by groups such as the Joachimists of
southern France. Johnston's view f. 127) that LluU's sermons would probably
have satisfied the audience of leading ItaUan preachers of the day can be related
to the evidence in LluU's contemporary Vita of his remarkable success in
preaching the crusade in 1308 in Pisa and Genoa.
Given the hard work that has gone into this weU documented study, it may
seem invidious to make three specific criticisms. One concerns the lack of direct study of LIuU manuscripts as opposed to reliance on brief descriptions Ui
modern editions of the Latin works.The statement (p. 181) that the Liberpraedicationis contra Judaeos only survives Ui two late manuscripts—there are
five and one is fifteenth century—is an indication here.The tendency to undervalue LluU's originaUty is more serious. Johnston speaks f. 185) of the "overwhelmingly commonplace character of the doctrines expounded in the Great
Art."There seems to be a confusion between LluU's sources, which may often be
commonplace, and the unique use he made of them. Lastly, the statement (p.
viii) that "for EngUsh-speaking audiences, scholarly knowledge of Ramon LIuU
would remain very limited indeed" but for Oxford pubUcations, cannot be taken
seriously and is not really corrected by acknowledgments in later footnotes.
One has only to think of Frances Yates, Robert Pring-MUl, and, far from least, of
Anthony Bonner's invaluable two-volume Selected Works of Ramon Llull
(Princeton, New Jersey, 1985). Without the work of these scholars our knowledge of LIuU would be immeasurably poorer than it is.
J. N. HlUGARTH
Pontifical Institute ofMediaeval Studies

Violence and Miracle in the Fourteenth Century: Private Grief and Public
Suffering. By Michael E. Goodich. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

1995. Pp. xi, 220. $3995 clothbound; $14.95 paperback.)

Michael Goodich's latest book is a study of rescue miracles connected to 150
fourteenth-century saints' cults. Most of these stories come from canonization
trials. Clement Vs canonization of Pope Celestine V in 1312 was the first to requUe the performance of miracles to prove saUithood.The disasters of the fourteenth century—war, famine, disease, economic depression—prompted
Christians to ask the saints to intercede with God for reUef from pain, loss of
property, and anxiety; thus Huizinga's paradigm of "waning" provides the historiographical foundations of Goodich's study. Catastrophes like the Black Death,

320BOOK REVIEWS

Hundred Years'War, and periodic crop faUures—as well as other, less notorious
misfortunes—visited upon Christendom death and starvation, and also contributed to vUlage breakdown and troubled famiUes. Crime proliferated because
of the confusion. Faith in the courts' impartiaUty broke down. In the midst of
suffering, the saints protected their cUents from bands of mercenary soldiers,
sickness, raging spouses, the hangman's noose, or the accidental death of chUdren. In return for such protection, suppliants commonly promised a pUgrimage to a reUc or an offering of candles.Through the intercessions of the saints,
God consoled believers for whom peace, health, family, vUlage, and government
had aU but vanished. He barred the way for marauding warriors, removed the
scourge of disease, withered the arms of abusive husbands, and broke the
chains of the jaUer and the rope of the executioner.What lords, courts, and law

provided in earlier, more tranquU times, divine intervention provided in a more
tumultuous era, hence the fourteenth-century proliferation of rescue stories.

Students of late medieval reUgious history wiU find the sources presented
here useful and thought-provoking. Questions of interpretation and conceptuaUzation, however, remain. Recent works such as Eamon Duffy's The Stripping
of the Altars revise Huizinga's interpretation of late medieval reUgion more
than Goodich aUows.In summarizing the demographic contractions of the fourteenth century, Goodich relies on the Malthusian dilemma (p. 105), although
the researches of David Herlihy question its usefulness in the study of medieval
populations. Goodich attributes Catherine of Siena's mastery over nature (p.
106) to fears of storms and floods; yet such mastery had been beUeved about
saints since Francis ofAssist. At one point, Goodich seems to accept a divide between clerical and lay reUgious cultures, arguing that the learned sought to minimize divine intervention in daUy Ufe, but ordinary beUevers "remained attached
to a more fluid view of the universe, in which God's merciful grace would respond to the vow and suppUcations of the faithful" (p. 55). In other comments,
however, clergy and laity share a reUgious culture, since family happiness depends on God's blessing (p. 83), and aU estates within Christendom beg the in-

tercessions of the saints (p. 146). FinaUy, Goodich says that penitential floggings
were accepted in forms of reUgious expression (p. 48), despite episcopal efforts
against the Flagellants. In sum, this book's interpretation faUs to persuade.

Robert W Shaffern

University ofScranton

The Shaping of a Community: The Rise and Reformation of the English
Parish, c. 1400-1560. By Beat A. Kümin. [St. Andrews Studies in Reforma-

tion History.] (Brookneld.Vermont: Scolar Press. 1996. Pp. xiü, 362. $74.95.)

There has been a remarkable resurgence in recent years among EngUsh historians of studies of reUgion at the parochial level just before and during the Reformation. Seeking to escape the eariier concentration upon issues raised by

BOOK REVIEWS321

the hindsight of the Henrician and Elizabethan settlements and the rather partisan tone of those debates, and seeking also to avoid the fascination with LoIlardy or proto-Protestantism, more recent writers have concentrated upon the
vitaUty and continuity of popular reUgious practice during the period. Beat A.
Kümin's study of the parish as a community seeks to add a further dimension to
the new historiography by focusing attention upon the institution of the parish

from a social and financial rather than a doctrinal perspective.

This richly detaUed and exhaustively documented study rests most impor-

tantly upon close analysis of churchwardens' accounts. To date 234 surviving
sets of EngUsh accounts have been discovered (a helpful list is provided), most
beginning in the mid- to later fifteenth or early sixteenth century, and whUe
Kiimin draws upon them extensively, a set of ten parishes' records form the running analysis of trends throughout the book; these are from parishes ranging
widely in location and type, from vUlages and market towns to wealthy urban
places. The author's discussion of the nature and pitfaUs of this source may be
the single most useful treatment avaUable, and the basic quantitative analysis
provided is cautious.

Although the central Middle Ages had ¦witnessed the soUdification of pa-

rochial structure in England, the office of churchwarden developed only during
the thirteenth century.The importance and range of churchwardens' duties expanded in tandem with the practice of pious bequests and donations, whose lay
custodians they thus became. One of the most remarkable achievements of this
book is to demonstrate the sheer scale of resources and expenditures that
parishes came to command. Though parishes ranged from very rich to very
poor, most seem to have achieved a peak of revenues around the 1520's, resulting Ui "the extraordinary spending spree at the close of the Middle Ages" (p.
198).The extent of parochial resources is aU the more striking when compared
with secular taxation: in the sample of ten parishes, Kümin persuasively shows,
the amount of money a parish paid for the typical late-medieval lay subsidy—itseU only an intermittent imposition—might represent only a fraction of the ordinary annual income of the parish f?. 188-193).
Lest it seem from the foregoing that this is a relentlessly financial study, it
should be emphasized that the author engages throughout with current issues
of late-medieval reUgious history: while admitting that sketching the linkages is
dUficult, at every step inferences from parochial institutions to the quaUty of
parochial Ufe are engaged, in some instances staking out some distinctive positions: for instance, that "parochial substructure" —chantries, gUds, subparochial
chapels— "never fundamentally chaUenged" the vitality of the parish system (p.
179), or that (in line with much recent revisionism) despite increased lay involvement in the hiring of clergy this betokened no fundamental dissatisfaction. Indeed, the most important argument advanced here is that the later
Middle Ages constituted a distinctive phase in the history of the EngUsh parish,

one in which laity drawn broadly from the middling ranks of parish society
(from which churchwardens mostly came), buoyed by a period of favorable

322BOOK REVIEWS

economic conditions that placed considerable resources at their disposal, did
indeed form a "parish community" (p. 2), and were progressively more hemmed
in by supervision from above after 1570. Another noteworthy virtue of this
book is that the author includes extensive cross-referencing of the latest Uterature on simUar developments Ui the Continent, making this less parochial a
study than such work sometimes is in England.
L. R. Poos

The Catholic University ofAmerica

Die Erforschung des Konstanzer Konzils (1414-1418) in den letzten 100
Jahren. By Ansgar Frenken. [Annuarium Historiae Concüiorum, 25.
Jahrgang, Heft 1-2 (1993)] (Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöning. 1993.Pp. 512.
DM 154,- paperback.)
Frenken undertook a formidable task: to present in a monograph a history
and an analysis of the past century of research on the CouncU of Constance as
well as an evaluation of the current state of research on this councU. Not aU

readers may agree with some of his opinions, but there is a lot of fascinating history to be had and many leads for those who would want to go further in theU
reading. He begins with the story of Heinrich Finke, who fathered modern research on Constance a century ago, the director of numerous dissertations of
which thirty were on Constance. Finke's story was perhaps weU known to the
German world but a good part was new to me, e.g., his struggles to achieve a
university position as a professor of medieval history in the context where
Prussian and Protestant domination saw a conflict between objective scholarship and CathoUc convictions.This dispute would recur in the American scene
in this century. Once he had a position, Finke put out the prodigious Acta concilii Constanciensis and many other texts. Today scholars see a nineteenthcentury mentaUty Ui his work in that he cared more about getting texts out than
about analysis and critique of the texts as though they would speak of themselves. Certainly, he made medieval conciliar studies a new area and a 'school'
evolved from his many students who continued in his line of research, perhaps
a bit too uncriticaUy It is Uonic that at the end of his Ufe in 1937 after decades

of research and strong patriotism, aU his papers were seized by the Gestapo
right after his death and have vanished.

Frenken presents next a series of topics: research done on Constance in
France and in Spain, the pecuUar interests of each group, and a number of key
questions about the events connected with Constance. He looks at what happened before the councU, the disputes over who was the valid pope, the deposition dispute, and whether in each case there was a deposition or a resignation,
and the theories and explanations of modern scholars. He shows that after
Finke there was a hiatus Ui pubUcation until the event ofVatican CouncU II unleashed another flood of controversies and studies. One by one the critical is-

BOOK REVIEWS323

sues on Constance are reviewed: Causa fidei—Jean Petit, John Hus, the Teutonic Knights and Poland; Causa reformationis—was Constance a success in
achieving unity but a faUure on the reform issue; Vatican CouncU II and the
changing perspectives on Constance; Haec Sancta reveals a plethora of views
and interpretations.Throughout the book the major researchers, their contributions and ideas appear: HaUer,Valois, Buisson, Ulimann, CovüTe, Boockmann, Bartos, Heimpel, Fink, Loserth.Vöoght, Küng,Tierney, GUI, and Jedin to name but a
few. Finaüy Frenken discusses the ongoing work of BrandmüUer and the other
current scholars and the questions they are asking today.

This is a valuable overview and a compendious compUation of bibUography

on Constance. It is where one can start or refresh one's memory. It is not an easy
read but well worth the effort.The bibUography alone will ensure its reputation
and the desire to keep it handy.
Thomas E. Morrissey

State University ofNew York
College at Fredonia, New York

Beyond the Written Word: Preaching and Theology in the Florence of Archbishop Antoninus 1427-1459- By Peter Francis Howard. [Istituto Nazionale di Studi sul Rinascimento: Quaderni di Rinascimento,YoI. XXVLTL]

(Florence: Leo S. Olschki. 1995. Pp. xii, 300. Lire 60,000 paperback.)

Among Florentine contemporaries and historians of the Renaissance, An-

tonino Pierozzi stands apart as a major cleric who is widely admired.This new
study by Peter Francis Howard suppUes soUd evidence for that admiration. Antoninus emerges as a pastor genuinely concerned about the needs of his flock
and as a man of dialogue wUling to engage the broader culture of his day. The

shaping force in his ministry was a commitment to excel in preaching. His the-

ology stemmed from his activity in the pubUc squares of the city, not from en-

gagement in the academic debates of the university.

Florence afforded a skilled preacher frequent occasions to proffer his mes-

sage, and the Florentines considered Antoninus a skiUed practitioner of the art.
In the second part of his monograph, Howard examines the "preaching mentality" of Antoninus, using a coUection of model sermons that he dates to 1427, or

possibly 1432. Among classical rhetorical principles, three especiaUy seem to

govern Antoninus's approach. First, he saw sermons fundamentaUy as a deUberative type of speech: they should persuade his Usteners to virtue and dissuade
them from vice. Second, to enhance the effect of the sermon on the emotions,
Antoninus incorporated epideictic sections of praise and blame. FinaUy, and
most pervasively, Antoninus always preached with a strong sense of decorum:
he adapted the form and content to his audience and their circumstances, and

he shifted his theology from abstract concerns to the concrete issues facing
members of Florentine society.

324book reviews

The importance of preaching is evident in Antoninus's subsequent Summa
theologica. Written between 1440 and 1454, the work is a practical manual of
pastoral theology whose concerns were dictated by the needs of Antoninus's
flock. Despite disclaimers about his rudimentary education, Antoninus pro-

duced a Summa that is synthetic and original. The Summa looked to instruct

feUow preachers and supply sound guidance on issues of relevance to their
ministry.When citing previous authorities, Antoninus showed a consistent desire to dialogue with them. His major source wasThomas Aquinas, though I find
the references to Gregory the Great most telling. Gregory could weU have given
Antoninus his model for a ministry of preaching.
Given his preaching mentality and pastoral priorities for theology, Antoninus
felt justified in claiming that "the doctrine of the church, when preached, is entirely civic and in accordance with moral phUosophy" f. 197). As a popular
preacher,Antoninus chose to engage Ui a dialogue with the values promoted by
humanists in their civic orations.Though formed in a scholastic culture, Antoninus was not a rigorist. He found common ground between the civic concerns of
the humanists and the pastoral mission of the mendicants.They were united in
theU dedication to pubUc speaking and to promoting the common good.
This is a very competent piece of research, and my questions are few.The discussion of the appropriateness of studying pagan authors (pp. 121-123) seems
part of a long tradition of interpretation of Deuteronomy 21:10-13, the story of
the gentUe slave girl who could be taken as a Hebrew wUe once her hair was
shorn. I find the formulation on page 237 backwards: humanists valued rhetoric

because it underpinned education and because it prepared students for a role

in public IUe. Unlike Howard, I believe that the thematic sermon was a product
of the AristoteUan culture of the universities. It is a creative rhetorical form, I

grant, but one subordinated to the cardinal rules of Aristotelian logic: definition
and division.That said, I return to my original observation. Howard has written
a fine book on Antoninus because he has helped us to understand how this pas-

tor put the needs of his flock first and entered into constructive dialogue with

currents of contemporary culture beyond the bounds of his own theological
training.
John M. McManamon, SJ.

Loyola University Chicago

Religion and Society in Spain, c. 1492. By John Edwards. [Variorum CoUected
Studies Series: CS 520.] (Brookfield,Vermont:Variorum, Ashgate Publishing
Co. 1996. Pp. x, 351. $97.95.)

This collection of eighteen studies by John Edwards, professor of history in

the University of Birmingham (England), spans the past quarter-century and re-

flects his interests in the society of Isabelline Spain that began with and grew
out of a study of Cordoba, subsequently pubUshed as Christian Cordoba: The

book reviews325

City and Its Region in the Later Middle Ages (1982). In this volume, except for
three articles, the focus is upon conversos, Jews, and the Inquisition. Unlike

much of the vast literature on the subject, most recently by Benjamin Netanyahu and Norman Roth, these studies do not advance a singular thesis to ex-

plain the rise of the Inquisition or the persecution of Jews and conversos.
Instead, Edwards takes for granted the general narrative of events, which begins
with the anti-Jewish rioting of 1391, and focuses his attention upon local histo-

ries, set in Cordoba, Teruel, Segovia, and Granada. Inquisition records, which
Edwards stoutly defends as providing reliable information about human experiences, are the primary source for most of these studies.

If this coUection has a general theme, it is the immense difficulties of assimi-

lation created by the large-scale conversions from Judaism to Christianity, first

early in the fifteenth century and later as a consequence of the expulsion ordinance of 1492. He demonstrates the permeability of religious boundaries as
New Christians maintained ties of famUy and custom with their former coreligionists whUe at the same time trying to disguise their Jewish past and integrate

themselves into Christian society.The process of assimUation, despite the roadblocks posed by the Inquisition and by novel theories like limpieza de sangre,

was dramatic and painful, but not a total failure. Religious decisions were not
necessarily final, as seen by the effects of Jewish miUennial expectations upon
conversos or by the numbers of Jewish exiles who returned as Christians to

Spam after 1492. Religious heterodoxy, consequently, was a complicated phe-

nomenon. It was less a matter of opposed theologies than one of residual Jewish (or Muslim) practice and a broader skepticism or impiety that could be
found in many segments of society.The image of the Inquisition that emerges is
also multi-dimensional—a mixture of religious zealotry, royal ambition, legal formalism, and at times petty vendettas.WhUe resistance to the Inquisition was difficult, nonetheless overzealous inquisitors like Diego Rodriguez Lucero of
Cordoba would eventuaUy be removed. Turning to Granada, he argues that
Catholic theories of conversion required political domination for their success
because outward acquiescence and practice, not persuasion, were the ultimate
goals of public policy. Interestingly, he beUeves that the so-called conflict be-

tween Archbishop Talavera and Cardinal Cisneros over the strategy of conversion was more apparent than real.

When venturing outside the realm of religion, Edwards stresses the power
and influence of the aristocracy and of the urban oligarchy, and discusses their

influence over the local economy, their relations with the Crown and the Inqui-

sition, and ultimately their responsibility for the entire dynamic of development

within the region. In a brief article on political theory, he argues that CastiUan

society had come to accept a singular view of royal power that was unaffected
by religion, class, or education.
James W Brodman

University of Central Arkansas

326BOOK REVIEWS

Early Modern European

Das "Ärgernis"der Reformation: Begriffsgeschichtlicher Zugang zu einer bib-

lisch legitimierten politischen Ethik. By Beat Hodler. [Veröffentlichungen
des Instituts für europäische Geschichte Mainz. AbteUung Religionsgeschichte, Band 158.] (Mainz:Verlag PhUipp von Zabern. 1995. Pp. vü, 208.
DM 68.00.)

This is a revised doctoral dissertation directed by Peter BUckle at the Univer-

sity of Bern, Switzerland. It investigates the various uses of the term Ärgernis,

ranging from Martin Luther's Anfechtung to the generic "scandal" (from the
Greek "skandalon") or "discord" (from the Latin "discordia").

Part I analyzes the general uses of"scandal" as a bibUcal, sociological, and theological concept. Part II elaborates the phUological, poUtical, and theological

meaning ofÄrgernis in the Reformation, concentrating on Luther, non-Lutheran

movements, especiaUy the "radical Reformation," and on church discipline as
weU as polemics. Luther, for example, was viewed as scandal personified; and
the most radical reformer of the sixteenth century, Thomas Müntzer, regarded
the whole world as scandalous and thus in need of a radical redemption. Part III

deals with expUcit teachings grounded Ui Ärgernis in Germany, France, and

Italy. FinaUy, the use of the concept in the Reformation is compared with its use
in the mainstream of medieval (Thomism) and some post-Reformation theologians extending to the eighteenth century.

The findings of this detaUed study point to three kinds of"scandal doctrines"

in the Reformation: First, the phUological notion that something is changing for
the worse (derived from the German arg); here reformers use the image of the
bibUcal "stunning stone" (e.g., Rom. 9:32) as the hindrance to salvation, often
linked with the image of the spider sucking only poison from a rose. Then, the
ethical notion that many Roman Catholic requirements (e.g., fasting, indulgences) become a scandal for faith and morals. FinaUy, the theological notion
that scandal is an inevitable offense of human sin before God; thus the emer-

gence of scandal in the Christian life is a sure sign that one is on the way to salvation (e.g., Paul's view that the cross of Christ is a scandal, I Cor. 1 :23).
This is a useful study because of its meticulous analysis of a widely used concept in the Reformation. Moreover, the extensive bibliography and an index of
names and places enhance the value of this study. But the study faUs short in

achieving what its subtitle promises: to provide an access to a poUtical ethic

that is historically grounded and bibUcaUy legitimized.The extensive research it-

self shows how differentiated the use of Ärgernis is in the Reformation and

how difficult it is to derive a "political ethic" from such use. This difficulty becomes apparent in the author's conclusion that the problem Ergernis [sic] is
reflected in a whole series of teachings which describe the proper use of
Christian freedom in the field of tension between "love of neighbour" and

BOOK REVIEWS327

faith." The study stiU needs to show how central a "poUtical ethic" is in this field
of tension.
Eric W Gritsch

Baltimore, Maryland
Conflicting Visions of Reform: German Lay Propaganda Pamphlets, 15191530. By Miriam Usher Chrisman. [Studies in German Histories.] (Atlantic

Highlands, New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1996. Pp. xiü, 288. $60.00.)

More than 5,000 pamphlets were pubUshed in the Holy Roman Empire between 1519 and 1530; they have become avaUable, over the past two decades,
in several microfiche and printed editions for historians of the Reformation.
Close to half of aU pamphlets pubUshed represented the works of Martin
Luther; many more were penned by lesser reformers and their detractors; and

only 294 pamphlets clearly stemmed from lay provenance, as Chrisman's metic-

ulous examination of the material reveals.

Focusing on this substantial sample of lay pamphlets (which constitutes
nonetheless only 5.8% of aU Reformation pamphlets produced), Chrisman sets
out to "first place the lay pamphlets in the social and intellectual context m
which they were written, and second to demonstrate how the ideas of the Reformation were changed and adapted as they were transmitted to different ranks
m the social hierarchy" (p. 14). She succeeds better in her first aim than her second. Using a formalistic analysis, Chrisman classifies her database by the pamphleteers' social estate, grouping them into five categories: knights, patricians,
city secretaries and university graduates, minor civU servants and men with specialized skUls, and artisans. (The fact that fifty-four pamphlets of the 294 appeared anonymously poses an Uu^pretive problem for this formalistic analysis,
a difficulty that Chrisman does not resolve.) With each category of pamphlets,

Chrisman analyzes the rhetorical strategy, the citations, and the content Ui order

to estabUsh clear conceptual distinctions between them. Several results of this
laborious analysis are of great interest: direct quotations of Luther seldom show
up in the pamphlets, and pamphlets written by artisans manifest the highest
proportion of bibUcal references. Other conclusions seem more obvious: references to Roman and canon law come up most often in pamphlets composed by
university-trained professionals, whUe noble and patrician authors paid greater
attention to questions of Empire and Universal Church.
Chrisman is less successful in demonstrating how the Reformation message
was transmitted and interpreted differently beyond stating that each social
group assimUated the evangeUcal revolt according to its own social context and
interests.This is a rather mechanical view of the interaction between ideas and

social structure and reflects perhaps the rigid appUcation of a methodology of

classification and formal analysis better suited to other topics, such as the author's earlier study of book production in Strasbourg (Lay Culture, Learned

328BOOK REVIEWS

Culture: Books and Social Change in Strasbourg, 1480-1599 [New Haven,
1982]). Many of the styUstic and thematic dtfferences in the pamphlets, which
Chrisman interprets by reference to social stratification, can also be explained
by the contingent function of Reformation pamphlets: they represented propaganda, aimed to sway, inflame, and mobUize the reading public into action,
whether it be the justification of Sickingen's revolt or the barely concealed caU
to anticlerical riots. By privUeging a formalistic analysis over a more nuanced
contextual analysis (which would necessitate the use of different kinds of
sources), Conflicting Visions ofReform misses the exciting anarchy and possibilities that marked the early Reformation years.
R. Po-chia Hsia

New York University
Theatine Spirituality: Selected Writings. Translated, edited and with an introduction and notes by WiUiam V Hudon. [The Classics ofWestern Spkituality] (New York and Mahwah, New Jersey: PauUst Press. 1996. Pp. xx, 287.
$22.95 paperback.)
Students of sixteenth-century spirituaUty wiU be grateful for this volume be-

cause it provides a fine introduction and EngUsh translation of the major writ-

ings of three members of the Theatine order in the sixteenth and early
seventeenth centuries. The actual texts consist of the "Rule of Carafa" by Gian
Pietro Carafa (1476-1559), who was later elected Pope Paul IV; the Letters of

Gaetano daThiene (ca. 1480- 1 547), known as St. Cajetan after his canonization;
and Lorenzo ScupoU's (1530-1610) augmented edition of Spiritual Combat (Il

combattimento spirituale), which appeared shortly before his death.The translations are readable and the end notes are helpful.
The editor of these Theatine writings is WiUiam V Hudon, who is professor
and chairman of the Department of History at Bloomsburg University in Pennsylvania. In 1992 he pubUshed a book on Marcello Cervini and Ecclesiastical
Government in Tridentine Italy (DeKaIb: Northern Illinois University Press),
which received mixed reviews Ui The Sixteenth Century fournal. In addition
to editing the above works by Carafa, Gaetano, and ScupoU, Hudon translated
the ItaUan letters by Gaetano and the Italian text of Spiritual Combat by
Scupoli into English. Professor Bernard McGinn, the editor-in-chief of the "Classics of Western SpirituaUty" series, translated into English the Latin rule of
Carafa. Moreover, Hudon wrote both the introduction and the end notes that accompany these texts. In contrast to these contributions, I found the preface by
GigUola Fragnito, professor of history in the University of Parma, which was
translated by Hudon, to be seU-serving and misleading at times. Her comments
on the influence of Sister Paola Antonia Negri (1508-1555) on the Barnabite
order, which was founded by St. Antonio Maria Zacearía in 1534, are exaggerated when she observes:"she [Negri] wound up governing both the Barnabites
and the Angeliche [i.e., Angelic Sisters of St. Paul] with indisputable authority
for about fifteen years . . ." (p. xvi).The co-founder of the AngeUcs and principal

BOOK REVIEWS329

benefactor of the Barnabites was Ludovica ToreUi, the countess of GuastaUa,
who is ignored by Fragnito. Moreover, her reference to "regular clerics" should
be translated as "clerics regular" (cf. pp. xiii-xvii).
As I indicated in my opening remarks, I found the introduction by Hudon to
be a fine contribution, though I feel that the section titled "General Background" (pp. 1-7) could have been reduced by haU of its length without sacrificing anything. In addition, Hudon spends several pages trying to make a case

for the use of the term "Tridentine Reformation" in place of the older expression "Counter-Reformation" (pp. 7-17), but without persuading me. I prefer the

use of the term "Catholic Reformation," since reform in the sixteenth century
began with such Renaissance humanists as Sir Thomas More and Erasmus of
Rotterdam before the beginning of the Protestant Reformation or as a result of

the Council ofTrent (1545-1563). Clearly the best parts of the introduction are
on "The Theatine Order" f?. 16-29), "Gaetano's SpirituaUty" (pp. 33-42), and
"ScupoU's SpirituaUty" (pp. 48-62). I especiaUy liked Hudon's comparison ofTheatine spirituality with Jesuit praxis (pp. 264-271, notes 12, 37, 50, 58, and 74).
I would also like to point out a few defects:
(1)Hudon chides Ludwig von Pastor for referring to the Theatine Order as

a "seminary" for bishops because they had not estabUshed any "seminary at aU in

this period, not even an educational establishment for the formation and
priestly training of their own members" (p. 28).What Hudon faUs to teU us, however, is that during the first few decades of the Order's existence nearly aU of
their vocations came from the ranks of the clergy.Therefore, there was no need
for seminaries of formation. It was not untU after the decrees ofTrent thatThe-

atines actively promoted seminaries.

(2)Hudon suggests that Carafa's "Rule" was composed about 1525-26 (pp.

23-24), but there is no internal evidence to recommend it. Indeed, I would be
surprised U this text appeared before Gaetano's death in 1547 for the foUowing
reasons. First of aU, the "Rule" prohibits "association and conversation with

women, even very upright and holy ones" (p. 67), whereas Gaetano ministered

to women during his Hfetime. Secondly, the "Rule" recognizes a hierarchy of

ranks within the Theatine Order ("professed lay brothers or clerics or priests,"
p. 67) when such distinctions did not arise until later on Ui the Order's history.

(3)With regard to the arranging of the Letters of Gaetano daThiene, Hudon
places numbers 38 and 39 out of sequence and does not provide us with any
justification.
(4)The text of the introduction could have been correlated better with the
end notes. For example, Hudon could have given a cross reference to Paolo
Giustiniani that appears Ui the notes on page 257 (n. 31) when he referred to
Giustiniani for the first time on page 3 1 .
In spite of these nugae, Professor Hudon is to be commended for a fine contribution to western spirituaUty during the Reformation.
Richard L. DeMolen

Washington Theological Union

330BOOK REVIEWS

La Riforma protestante nell'Italia del Cinquecento. By Salvatore Caponetto.
(Turin: Claudiana. 1992. Pp. 526. Lire 54,000.)
This welcome survey of a subject that justifiably has received increasing critical attention in both Europe and America is the culmination of a lifetime of research and writing. HappUy, by no means is it the final contribution from the
distinguished scholar's prolific pen. It is hard to imagine a student of the Italian
Reformation better prepared than Salvatore Caponetto, an emeritus professor
of history in the University of Florence, to attempt its synthesis. Caponetto's career began auspiciously, in true David and GoUath fashion, when, as a neophyte
in the field, his first modestly presented investigations on the influential booklet, the Beneficio di Cristo, compeUed that giant of ItaUan culture, Benedetto
Croce, to retract in a printed letter to him a mistaken identification Croce had
made previously concerning its author. Since that time, more than half a century ago, Caponetto's contributions have ranged over and shed light on multiple aspects of the ItaUan Reformation. He has produced fuU-length studies of
such a key reformer as Aonio Paleario and edited one of his writings never pubUshed before; clarified the circumstances of the clandestine translations into

the ItaUan vernacular of key works by northern reformers; investigated the
progress of Reformation currents in his native SicUy and foUowed the fortunes
of the leading proselytizers and converts to Geneva and other transalpine cities
of refuge; discerned the appropriation of Lutheran and Erasmian concepts in
the thought of such Uterary figures as Francesco Berni and Ludovico Castelvetro; and produced a massive critical edition of the Beneficio, in a splendid volume containing aU its sixteenth-century versions and translations.
A lifetime of research is skillfully woven into the fabric of Caponetto's La Riforma protestante.The. account begins with the Italian situation on the eve of
the Reformation and the fertile ground into which Luther's message feU. Attention is paid to the spread of the new religious ideas through the book trade, the
influence of Juan de Valdés, and the preaching activity of early Italian champions of the new ideas. The Beneficio, the most celebrated booklet of the Italian
Reformation, comes in for its share of obUgatory attention. Various modern interpretations of this Uttle work, first pubUshed in 1543, have dubbed it, in turn,
the quintessential expression ofValdesian spirituaUty, a weaving together of passages from the writings of northern reformers, and finaUy an expression of
Benedictine-Pelagian spirituality.
Much emphasis is placed on the inroads made by Protestant currents in various ItaUan centers from the Véneto and the FriuU in the north to SicUy in the
south.The successes of Calvinism, among the Waldensians in Piedmont, at the
court of the French Duchess Renée at Ferrara, and in the RepubUc of Lucca,
which witnessed a mass exodus of its leading famUies to Geneva, receive separate chapters. So extensive is the diffusion that Caponetto, appropriating an old
term coined by Giorgio Spini, dubs the phenomenon "The Calvinism of the
Mediterranean," stretching from Geneva and Lyons through Genoa to Naples
and the martyred Waldensian colonies in Calabria and PugUa, to Sardinia and

BOOK REVIEWS331

SicUy.The great port city of Messina produced an entire "colony" of refugees to
Geneva.Among them was the future translator into ItaUan of Calvin's Institutes.
My criticisms are for what has been left unsaid.The book is without an introduction which might have explained choices and omissions.The discussion focusing on the principal ItaUan reformers—and generaUy it is only the leading
proselytizers and celebrated victims who receive the lion's share of attention—
suffers from the lack of a considered discussion of their dUemma: whether to

flee in the face of persecution or dissimulate their evangeUcal beUefs behind
the outward practice of Catholic ceremonies, the latter derided by Calvin as
"Nicodemism." Modern scholarship (which I do not see cited here) has devoted
considerable attention to these latter-day foUowers of the BibUcal Nicodemus,
much of it stimulated by (without necessarily agreeing with) Carlo Ginzburg's
1970 book, Il Nicodemismo, that suggested a cohesive inteUectual movement
rather than a practical, expedient response to persecution.
Granted, as the title of the volume itself states, the Reformation in Italy is the
subject. But to confine to a short chapter of twenty pages (moreover, one lacking the "Bibliographical Note" appended to all other chapters), in a book of over
five hundred pages, the notable theological and cultural contributions of the
Italian exUes in their northern and eastern European diaspora constitutes a notable omission. Long after any traces of the Reformation had been extinguished
in the peninsula proper (with the Waldensian exception), the achievements of
the ItaUan reUgious refugees in bringing to northern Europe the thought and
literature, the theological, philological, scientific, technological, juridical, and
economic advances of the ItaUan Renaissance continued to have an impact.
Theologically speaking alone, one needs only to think of the contributions to
Anglican Uturgy and polity made by Peter MartyrVermigU or to the Polish Minor
Church by Fausto Sozzini, who helped to found a movement bearing his name,
Socinianism, which would spread across the continent and traverse the ocean.
It is the European-wide dimensions of the ItaUan Reformation, not only its
heroic but ultimately faUed penetration in the peninsula alone, expertly delineated in Caponetto's volume, which gives significance to and explains the continuing strong appeal of this field of study. Within the limits that it has set for
itseU,I« Riforma protestante is an exemplary introduction to a fascinating, stUl
developing subject rewarding serious attention. The promised second edition
and EngUsh translation (which wiU undoubtedly correct a number of minor
slips, including some very doubtful identifications among the Ulustrations) are
eagerly awaited.
JohnTedeschi

The University ofWisconsin-Madison

332book reviews

Registres du Consistoire de Genève au temps de Calvin,Tome I (1542-1544).
Edited by Thomas A. Lambert and Isabella M. Watt under the direction
of Robert M. Kingdon, with assistance from Jeffrey R. Watt. [Travaux

d'Humanisme et Renaissance, No. CCCV] (Geneva: Droz. 1996. Pp. xU, 441 .)

Almost forty years ago, when I began studying the history of Calvin's Geneva,
the most valuable scholarly tool of recent vintage was the critical edition of the
oldest records of Geneva's Company of Pastors. Its joint editor was a young
American, Robert Kingdon. This project, long since "naturaUzed" by Genevans,
has now reached deeply into the seventeenth century. MeanwhUe, the indefatigable Kingdon has assembled an international team of assistants in order to
launch another ambitious and equaUy desirable scholarly project; he is now supervising the critical edition of the first twenty registers of Calvin's famous disciplinary institution, the Genevan Consistory.
The history of this peculiar institution, as the lengthy preface to this edition
demonstrates, has been bedeviled by two connected problems. The unusuaUy
poor handwriting of its first secretary has created a situation whereby for over
a century, scholars have studied its workings through a more legible but partial
transcript made by a nineteenth-century Genevan, Frédéric-Auguste Cramer.
However, Cramer's selections cover only about five percent of its operations,
and he deUberately selected only its most spectacular cases. A truly random
sample would have been less misleading in trying to grasp the achievements
and Umitations of the first Protestant institution devoted to that essential

desideratum of the Reformed or Calvinist tradition, ecclesiastical discipline.This
edition permits us, for the first time, to comprehend its earUest workings.
What happened to the unsuspecting Genevans in 1542, when this institution's records begin with its tenth weekly session, can be expressed in terms of
twentieth-century German scholarship.They believed they were getting something described by Walther Köhler's Zürcher Ehegericht und Genfer Konsistorium, a new form of Protestant marriage court to replace the local episcopal
court or Officialité. Indeed, the first ten cases heard by the new Genevan Consistory in February, 1542, au related in some way to marriages. But their new tribunal rapidly developed into something best defined by Ernst Zeeden's
Entstehung der Konfessionen: a forum before which Genevan residents were
hauled up and examined on their knowledge of Christian doctrine and the degree of their commitment to the "new law" of the Protestant Reformation.

Protestant confessionaUsm first began to be enforced on February 23, 1542. A

contractor and innkeeper named Jaques Emyn became the first Genevan to be
questioned about "what words he used" with his guests."He answered," says the
record—but it does not teU us what he said. We hear only the Consistory's orders to Emyn:"Sent back to learn his faith and beUef before he attends communion and that he repeat it here before he receives Communion. In three weeks.
Didn't know his Credo, ? beUeve in God the Father,' or the Lord's prayer" (p. 8).
The editors teU us that the Consistory had also added the requirement "that he
buy a Bible and have it read," but crossed it out. Henceforth, almost everyone

book reviews333

who appeared before the Consistory, regardless of the specific accusation, was
asked to demonstrate a sufficient knowledge of correct Christian doctrine, always Ui the vernacular.

The priorities of the new institution had emerged clearly by the end of 1542.

During November and December (pp. 1 34- 1 59), sixty-four people appeared before it. Only six of them were involved in matrimonial issues, whUe forty (twothirds of them women) were examined about doctrine and/or church

attendance. The remainder were admonished about such things as quarrelling
(six), blasphemy, gambling, or immoral songs (six), fornication (three), superstitious charms (two), or disobedience to parents. Vestiges of Köhler's agenda
remained, but Zeeden's had triumphed. Further volumes wiU trace the
Consistory's subsequent evolution from a doctrinal tribunal to a morals tribunal.
William Monter

Northwestern University

Seminary or University? The Genevan Academy and Reformed Higher Education, 1560-1620. By Karin Maag. [St Andrews Studies in Reformation
History] (Brookfield, Vermont: Scolar Press, Ashgate PubUshing Co. 1995.
Pp. x, 210.)
Back in 1900, Charles Borgeaud pubUshed a monumental history of Geneva's
Academy of Calvin, in a meticulously detaUed and sumptuously produced foUo
volume, the first of several in a general history of what was to become the University of Geneva. In this useful new book, Karin Maag has retold a part of
Borgeaud's story, but sets it in a much larger context.

Her book begins with three sharply defined chronological chapters, recount-

ing the history of the Geneva Academy, with special attention to its schola publica for advanced training on a professional level, from 1559 to 1572, from 1572

to 1586, and from 1586 to 1620. Much of this represents gleaning from

Borgeaud's work, updated where necessary by use of the considerable volume
of scholarly work on sixteenth-century Geneva in this century, checked in a
number of places by consultation of unpubUshed manuscripts in the Geneva
University library and State Archives.
Maag then presents four geographical chapters, connecting the Geneva Academy to Reformed communities in France, Zurich, Heidelberg, and Leiden. The
chapter on France details the continuing importance of Geneva to the Reformed Churches in France as the most important single source of education

for theU pastors.The other chapters compare the Geneva Academy to the Lec-

torium in Zurich and to the universities in Heidelberg and Leiden. The Zurich
Lectorium was exclusively for the training of local pastors, and Zurich thus felt
obUged to send many of its best students elsewhere to complete theU educa-

334book reviews

tion.The universities of Heidelberg and Leiden were autonomous institutions
that granted degrees and that devoted as much energy to training lawyers, bureaucrats, and physicians, as to training ministers for Reformed (Calvinist)
churches.There were significant exchanges of students and a few exchanges of
professors among the four institutions.
Geneva made occasional attempts to expand its Academy into a fuU university, notably by adding advanced instruction on law. But this instruction was frequendy interrupted; the Academy never granted degrees, and it never gained
independence from the local Company of Pastors and the city government. Its
most important function remained the training of Reformed pastors, particularly for France but also for other parts of Europe, supplying them with not only
necessary academic training but also with a degree of practical experience, aU
in a tightly disciplined and thoroughly orthodox setting.
Maag has drawn upon correspondence among ecclesiastical authorities and
by students to provide some striking detaUs about individuals working in these
institutions. I found particularly fresh and interesting information gathered
from unpublished letters returned to Zurich from students whom that city had
sent elsewhere. Altogether this book makes an important contribution to our
knowledge of higher education Ui Europe during the period of confessionalization.
Robert M. Kingdon

University ofWisconsin-Madison

A City in Conflict: Troyes during the French Wars of Religion. By Penny Roberts. (Manchester: Manchester University Press. Distributed by St. Martin's

Press, NewYork. 1996. Pp. xi, 228. $79.95.)

Penny Roberts has, in a series of articles pubUshed over the past half-dozen
years, estabUshed herself as a leading authority on the Reformation and confessional strife at Troyes in the eastern French province of Champagne. She now
weaves the rich materials into a major interpretative study. Her focus on Troyes,
an important urban center, directs scholarly attention to a region whose
Huguenot population has long been neglected. It also extends the range of
provincial studies, which have increasingly informed our understanding of
the Reformation experience at the local level. What, in short, were the geographic dimensions and broad social character of reUgious change throughout
sixteenth-century France? In this sense, Roberts' contribution is timely and instructive.

The study opens with a concise overview of Champagne and the city of
Troyes, and then moves directly to the formative years of the Protestant movement. Early scattered Lutheran activity gave way to a highly organized Reformed church by the 1 550's.A series of Calvinist pastors secretly ministered to

BOOK REVIEWS335

a growing congregation.The faithful, though never a majority atTroyes, were extremely active and, in some instances, quite aggressive. Many came, predictably
enough, from artisan ranks. The watershed for the Reformed Church ofTroyes
occurred in 1562 when armed conflict between Huguenots and CathoUcs
erupted in and around the city as it did in many French towns. The tide soon
turned against the Protestants and, over the next decade, their position deteriorated badly.The culmination took place in the autumn of 1572 as CathoUcs massacred the Huguenots in imitation of the August bloodbath at Paris. Afterwards,
the municipal debate atTroyes was no longer between Protestant and CathoUc.
Discussion now shifted to the rival claims of moderate and extreme Catholics.

The ultra-Catholic League even dominated Troyes for a time. Altogether, the developments related by Roberts foUow the classic pattern of the Reformation in
northern France: the gradual emergence of urban pockets of Protestantism, limited initial success, and ultimate failure in the face of resurgent CathoUcism.
The sources that Roberts brings in discussing these themes are among the
book's greatest strengths. Her close reading and imaginative appUcation of fragmentary surviving archival materials as weU as two valuable pubUshed Mémoires, one by the Huguenot Nicolas Pithou, the other by the CathoUc priest
Claude Haton, give the analysis a soUd foundation. The author's frequent comparison of the situation at Troyes with other French cities sets the context
nicely and lends the study substantial texture. The book also counterbalances
an enduring tendency to view the French Reformation largely from a Parisian
perspective. On the other hand, the book's heavy emphasis upon the Huguenot
experience tends to mask the dynamics of the CathoUc community. A more balanced approach would better aUow Roberts to explore the multifaceted nature
of municipal discord at Reformation Troyes.This objection, however, goes to issues of focus rather than substance. In the end, Roberts has produced an excellent case study of a community caught amid the intensely fractious reUgious
strife of the sixteenth century.
Raymond A. Mentzer

Montana State University

Plague? Jesuit Accounts of Epidemic Disease in the Sixteenth Century. ByA.
Lynn Martin. (KirksviUe, Missouri: Sixteenth Century Journal PubUshers.

1996. Pp. xiv, 268. $35.00.)

With this volume, Professor Martin continues and extends his explorations
into the early history of the Society of Jesus. He examines the voluminous correspondence between local superiors in their far-flung apostolates and the
higher superiors, letters predominantly addressed to the General of the order in
Rome, for indications of their experience dealing with the epidemic outbreaks
of disease in the sixteenth century.The result is a unique, tf highly focused contribution to the history of the Society. Martin remains close to his sources and

336book reviews

thus provides a window on one aspect of the vicissitudes of the young Jesuit
order in struggling to survive.This focus remains specificaUy aimed throughout
and does not open up onto broader historical vistas, not even of the nascent Society itseU, let alone the impact of these dUficulties for the Church or for religious Ufe in Europe of the time. But the emphasis fiUs a vacuum in historical

writing about the early Society—WiUiam V Bangert's (1986) otherwise comprehensive history pays Uttle or no attention to the plague issue.

Martin is appropriately cautious and skeptical about the nature of the epidemic manifestations. Diagnosis was far from accurate in the sixteenth century,
and what was recurrently referred to as "plague" (pesté) might have been influenza, typhus, pneumonia, or whatever, not necessarily bubonic. The descriptions, we must remember, were offered by educated laymen, not trained
medical observers, although even the doctors were not much better. However,

the accounts do offer a vivid impression of what Ufe was like in those plaguetorn times.

One aspect of the material that seems relatively unattended in Martin's discussion is the pervasive influence of Ignatius, founder of the order. Ignatius had
had his own brushes with "plague," especiaUy during his pilgrim years, foUowing his conversion, when he made a special point of working with the sick in
hospitals. TypicaUy he would spend the best part of the day begging for food
and alms in the streets, and then carry his gains to distribute them to the poor
patients in local hospitals—this was a pattern throughout the years in Alcalá,
Salamanca, and especiaUy the years in Barcelona. His devotion to the sick carried over as an ideal to his followers, much in the spUit of setf-sacrifice and the
desire of martyrdom so characteristic of the spirituaUty of the day.
Caring for the sick regardless of personal risk was a mark of great holiness,
and reflected the desire to abandon oneseU totaUy to the wiU of God. Such was

the spirit of the pUgrirn. But that spirit was to be tempered when the pilgrim be-

came the head of a newly founded reUgious order with responsibUity for the
wellbeing of members of that order. Ignatius died in 1556, so that much of the
material Martin reports was stiU cast in the shadow of the Ignatian ideal. But
even Ignatius had to modify his devotion to the sick as General. He distUled this
more pragmatic view into his directives for care of health of his foUowers in his
Constitutions. One paragraph is salient with respect to Martin's discussion of
the tension between tending to the needs of plague victims and the need to escape the ravages of the diseases on the work of the Society. Ignatius wrote:
Great care should be taken of the sick. Their illness should be reported to
the infirmarían, and if he judges it to be of moment he should inform the superior and a physician should be caUed. . . . Moreover, although our vocation is to travel through the world and to Uve Ui any part of it whatsoever
where there is hope of greater service to God and of help of souls, nevertheless, U it becomes apparent through experience that someone cannot
bear the circumstances of some region and continues in bad health there, it

BOOK REVIEWS337

wiU be the superior's part to consider whether the subject ought to be
transferred to another place where he may have better bodUy health and be
able to employ himseU more in the service of God our Lord. (Constitutions, 304)
It seems fair to say that the Jesuits dealt with confrontations with the plague
in terms close to this directive, balancing the Ignatian ideal of devoted service
of the sick with the prudent and pragmatic norms of the greater service of God.

It was this tension that came into play in la guerra di San Carlo and the dispute with the great Carlo Borromeo over tending to the needs of plague victims.The Jesuit compromise was to appoint one or two men to work with the

sick and transfer the rest to safer grounds. Needless to say, students of the early

Society and its role in the sixteenth century wiU find much of interest in these
pages.

W. W Meissner, SJ., M.D.

Boston College

Johann Sturm on Education: The Reformation and Humanist Learning. Introduced and translated by Lewis W. Spitz and Barbara Sher Tinsley (St.
Louis, Missouri: Concordia PubUshing House. 1995. Pp. 429.)
These are English translations of the most important Latin pedagogical works

of the Strasbourg educator, Johann Sturm (1507-1589). Sturm was a distinguished member of the host of Christian humanists who reformed the education of young people in Northern Europe just as reUgious institutions were
undergoing a general revolution. They hoped that a return ad fontes would
renew language and thus Ufe. Sturm himseU was swept into the Swiss/Rhenish
Reformation as his construal of that hope, and he was active both in theological
dialogue and controversy and in diplomatic maneuvers (not represented in this
coUection). His chief work, however, was to design and administer schools that
would profoundly shape young men by immersion in classical language and Uterature, in order to give them the poUtical virtue, grace, balance, and purity of

the ancients. The Gymnasium and Academy of Strasbourg were of his making,

and his ideas helped shape the education of eUte boys throughout Europe, including (at least Sturm thought) Jesuit schools. Several of the texts translated
here were widely read and potent.
These translations, however, are very uneven. Sturm wrote Latin with an elegance and nuance not reflected in these EngUsh texts. HappUy, several of his
most important works are translated competently U inelegantly. The EngUsh

title, "The Correct Opening of Elementary Schools of Letters," limps after
Sturm's "De Uterarum ludis recte aperiendis," but it makes sense enough. Here

Sturm offered a thoughtful, detaUed rationale for his curriculum, grade by grade.

"Let the control of speech and of Ufe be joined together (p. 74)" His discussion

338BOOK REVIEWS

of teaching method—chiefly what not to do—was pungent (p. 92). The other
most significant and influential texts offered here, "Lauingen School" and the
"Classical Letters," fiU out and develop the ideas Sturm had worked out in "Correct Opening."The translation of the "Classical Letters" profits from Jean Rott's
magisterial edition and French translation; Spitz andTinsley send their readers
to Rott's apparatus. In the "Classical Letters" Sturm offers concrete advice to his
teachers, carefuUy outlining curricular goals in the context of the overaU structure of the curriculum, making suggestions about suitable teaching techniques,
and sorting through the appropriate works for students to be studying.
In some cases, however, these translations are a 'work stiU in progress. The
very first text,"Advice on What Organization to Give to the Gymnasium in Strasbourg," contains some English sentences that require very careful reading if anything is to be gleaned from them. "Even though bringing sheep together is
useful, it is almost necessary for men to compare themselves to the multitude
and variety from which first, imitation is stimulated, and next, pleasure derived.
For by that which many or aU praise, and by which men customarUy catch fire
is the tedium of diverse studies removed." Such lapses, unfortunately, occur
throughout the translations.
The authors offer introductory essays on Johann Sturm himself, on his
"method of humanistic pedagogy," and a bibliographic essay at the end. There
are some significant inconsistencies between them: on page 15, Sturm's "Classical Letters" elicit the judgment, "What a horror he must have been," but on page

360, "they are models of charm, tact, and good wiU." Sturm's method does not in
fact emerge clearly from the introductory essay. This reviewer would have ap-

preciated serious attention to the relation between Sturm's reforms and the
major efforts made by Bucer and many others in catechetics. In sum, this book
needed keen editing that it did not receive. Even so, the texts remain a useful introduction to the dominant pedagogy of the Northern Renaissance.
William S. Stafford

Virginia Theological Seminary

Teresa ofAvila and the Politics ofSanctity. By GUUanT.W.Ahlgren. (Ithaca, New

York: CorneU University Press. 1996. Pp. xi, 188. $2995.)

The last twenty years have witnessed an explosion of scholarship on Teresa
of AvUa.Works byTeófanes Egido,Tomás Alvarez, Rosa Rossi,J.Mary Luti, Alison
Weber, Dominque de Courcelles, and Carole Slade, just to mention a few, have
taken Teresian studies weU beyond the confines of uncritical hagiography and
examined this fascinating writer, monastic reformer, mystic, and woman within
the context of her times. In Teresa ofAvila and the Politics of Sanctity GUUan
Ahlgren grapples with many of these same questions, trying to "situate

book reviews339

[Teresa's] works in their theological and ecclesiastical miUeu" (p. 1) and to understand her Ufe and sanctity within "the Counter-Reformation agenda" (p. 3).
In chapter 1 Ahlgren describes the weU-known history of repression of heterodoxy, censorship, and seU-censorship in sixteenth-century Spain, emphasizing the backlash against the Alumbrados, or "Enlightened Ones." She notes the
paradox of a society that witnessed the "proUferation of mystical Uterature in an
age that was not hospitable to it" (p. 8).
Chapter 2 examines how Teresa developed certain "textual survival strategies" (p. 66) when confronted with inquisitorial suspicion. Ahlgren provides
English translations of excerpts from Teresa's beatification and canonization
proceedings and other documents, making them accessible to non-speciaUsts.
She continues Ui the next two chapters, attempting to show howTeresa "forge [d]
a new definition of reUgious authority for women" (p. 68) and mounted a spirited "defense of women's right to mental prayer and spiritual authority" and of
her "teachings on visions and mystical union" (p. 85).
In Chapter 5 Ahlgren offers a sustained analysis of the debates between male
critics and supporters ofTeresa occasioned by the pubUcation of her works in
1588, six years after her death. Again, non-hispanists wiU appreciate the translation of materials published by Enrique Llamas in 1972 and used frequentiy by
speciaUsts.
In her final chapter and conclusion Ahlgren looks at some of the ways in
which Teresa was constructed as a saint, and attempts to demonstrate "how nar-

row the parameters for women's sanctity were" (p. 165).Teresa's canonization,

Ahlgren insists, came about only because a patriarchal church presented her as
"exceptional," a "singularity," and a "soUtary figure," and effectively "separated her
from other women" and "blocked other women's bid for autonomy and author-

ity within the Roman Catholic Church" (p. 166). She claims that afterTeresa "the

esoteric authority of women became, abstractly and concretely, an impossible

reaUty" (p. 168), yet acknowledges thatTeresa "gave birth to a new generation of
spiritual women, encouraging their literary expression of themselves and their

world" f. 171). In fact, for more than a century after her 1622 canonization re-

Ugious women and their male promoters in Catholic Europe and its American
colonies would vaUdate their charismatic spirituaUty, their vocations as writers,
and their apostolic activities precisely by using Teresa as a precedent.This suggests that "the Counter-Reformation agenda" teUs us as much about rhetoric and
aspirations as it does about Uved religious experience, especiaUy at the local
level.

Jodi Biunkoff

University ofNorth Carolina at Greensboro

340book reviews

Sexuality in the Confessional: A Sacrament Profaned. By Stephen Haliczer.
[Studies in the History of SexuaUty] (New York: Oxford University Press.

1996. Pp. vU, 267. $49.95.)

The use of the confessional as an instrument of seduction, largely of female
penitents, feU under the jurisdiction of the Spanish Inquisition between 1 530

and 1819. It investigated such cases with its customary efficiency down to the

most intimate sexual detaUs. This fascinating study of the Inquisition's determined campaign against priests who violated the sanctity of the confessional is
at one level an institutional study of the organization and procedures of the tribunal in solicitation cases. But it is also concerned with the sexual mores of

clergy and laity foUowing the efforts of the CouncU ofTrent to tighten Church
control over morality.The author maintains that from the mid-sixteenth century
increased attention was given to the abuse of the confessional as the relative
tolerance of irregular sexual conduct among the clergy found in the medieval
period gave way after Trent to stricter controls over clerical conduct.The postconcUiar Church also gave priority to defending the sanctity of the confessional
at a time when the sacrament of penance was subject to withering criticism by

Protestant reformers. The Council also exalted the sacrament's spiritual impor-

tance by stressing the need for more frequent confession and communion in
contrast to the once-a-year obligation common in medieval Europe. The author
argues that the disciplinary controls imposed on the clergy after Trent and the
increased frequency of confession aggravated the soUcitation problem among
priests no longer able to take advantage of the more lax arrangements of the
past as far as sexual conduct was concerned.
The study is based on 223 detailed case histories drawn from several regional
tribunals, although the author recognizes that these formed only a smaU part of
the total number of accusations because of the loss of inquisitorial records.
These micro-histories provide abundant examples of a wide range of sexual
practices among accused confessors. The individual cases studied say a good
deal about sexual attitudes within the increasingly puritanical moral world of
post-Tridentine Catholicism.The sexual pathology of priests functioning within
these more restrictive moral confines receives considerable attention. But for

the ecclesiastical historian, the author's discussion of the organizational and sociological causes of the phenomenon of solicitation is of greater interest. The
poor state of clerical education, at least untU the second half of the eighteenth
century, the practical appeal of a priestly career for many lacking a reUgious vocation, and inadequate means of supervision within a clerical estabUshment of
over one hundred thousand are properly considered as contributing factors. It
is interesting that the largest number of accused came from the ranks of the
mendicant orders, especiaUy the Franciscans, Ui which admission standards
were notoriously loose weU into the eighteenth century. In contrast, the more
selective Society of Jesus provided few cases for inquisitorial investigation.
This study offers a plausible and coherent explanation for the phenomenon
of soUcitation. It provides an abundance of rich detaU about the state of the

clergy and prevailing moral values for the period under study. But for the eccle-

book reviews341

siastical historian it also raises questions. It would be useful to know, tf only in
approximate terms, how many accusations were made beyond the limited number of cases studied. Within the sprawling and, in some respects, disorganized
organization of the Spanish Church in the early modern period, it was not surprising that cases of irregular sexual conduct occurred among the clergy. Although the author suggests that the problem was widespread, we do not have
reUable statistical information for the kingdom as a whole to indicate how great
or smaU the problem was in relation to the clergy's overall size. It also would be
useful to have a greater sense of change from one period to another. Although
solicitation accusations continued to be made through the eighteenth century,
for example, there is evidence from the records of episcopal pastoral visits that
the Spanish Church made substantial progress in improving the moral quality of
the clergy after 1750. Even the mendicant orders, the largest source of solicitation accusations, underwent sporadic reforming efforts during the century.
The author's emphasis on the increased frequency of confession as one
cause of the surge in soUcitation cases from the middle of the sixteenth century
onward also raises questions. Although there is some evidence that the Church
made headway in certain regions in its efforts to persuade the faithful to confess and receive communion more than once a year, there are no accurate figures for the kingdom as a whole to indicate whether the attempt to modify
historic entrenched attitudes was as successful as the book maintains. The

laments of pastoral experts in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries
as weU as local studies by social anthropologists suggest that the historic practice of annual confession and communion in rural Spain, even in areas known
for high levels of religious practice, persisted weU into the modern period. Indeed, as late as 1913 in one CastiUan vUlage, the confessional appeared only during Lent, to be stored away after Easter for another year.
These reservations aside, this is a richly detaUed and informative study of a
hitherto obscure aspect of the Spanish Church during the early modern period.
Although the conclusions appear at times too sweeping given the limited number of cases involved, the author has developed a weU-argued thesis which

makes an important contribution to our understanding of the problem of soUcitation in the early modern Spanish Church.

William J. Callahan

University of Toronto

Good Newes from Fraunce; French Anti-League Propaganda in Late Elizabethan England. By Lisa Ferraro Parmelee. (Rochester, New York: Univer-

sity of Rochester Press; BoydeU & Brewer, Inc. 1996. Pp. Lx, 204. $45.00.)

The influence of French poUtical writings on Stuart England has aheady been
treated by J. M. H. Salmon, the author's mentor, in his The French Religious Wars
in English Political Thought and more briefly by J. P. SomerviUe in his Politics

and Ideology in England, l603-1640.The author, whUe acknowledging the

342BOOK REVIEWS

help received from these two authors, concentrates on the influence of French
thought on England during the last dozen years of Queen Elizabeth's reign.
There were at least two things France and England had in common during
these two years.The first was a succession problem.Who would succeed to the
throne? The second was a reUgious problem. Each had an estabUshed church
along with a sizable religious minority.This is a thorough study not only of the
influence of French poUtical thought but also "the process by which that influence was effected."

This volume is weU organized. There is a good deal of useful material about
printing and translation in England. And there is an extensive treatment of the
calamity the French experienced and the EngUsh feared: civU war with reUgious
overtones. Of course, it came to England a generation later in what one EngUsh
historian has caUed "the last of the wars of religion."
One of the chief pro-League and revolutionary items on the origins of politi-

cal power had an EngUsh source. It was De Justa Reipublicae in Reges Impíos

et haereticos . . . Authoritate, published in Paris in 1590. It was signed G.G.R.A.
There was another edition pubUshed in ?????ef in 1592 signed G. GuUielmus
Rossaeus.The author is commonly thought to be WiUiam Rainold (Reynolds), an
Oxford man and seminary priest trained at Douay's seminary-in-exUe. Many of

his contemporaries thought that WiUiam Giffbrd, later archbishop of Rheims,

had a hand in it. It was not a particularly original work, but it does elaborate on
the traditional scholastic theories on popular sovereignty.The first edition had a
chapter on tyrannicide which was dropped in the second.

What is not generaUy appreciated is that large portions of one of the most in-

fluential books on political theory in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,
A Conference on the Next Succession to the Crowne of England (?????ef,

1594), borrowed heavUy in its first three chapters, which comprised the meat

of its poUtical theory, from Rossaeus.The Conference is generaUy attributed to
Robert Parsons, SJ. , though there is UtUe reason to think that he was the sole or
even the principal author.

In comparing religious minorities in England and France, the author seems to
be much more tolerant of the Huguenots in France than she is of the CathoUcs
in England. She dates the inauguration of the hard Une against CathoUcs in England from the promulgation of Pius Vs buU Regnans in Excelsis in 1570. But
Regnans was understandably given little pubUcity in England, and the vast majority of contemporary CathoUcs never heard of it.
There is a good deal of hand-wringing elsewhere in this volume about how
the efforts of Parsons and Cardinal AUen on the continent made conditions dif-

ficult for the CathoUcs in England, though AUen—if not Parsons—was revered

by most Englishmen true to the old faith. Even the appeUants, the subject of the

last chapter, dared not criticize him.

As for the anger aroused by the Conference, again there is Uttle evidence that

many CathoUcs Ui England had any firsthand acquaintance with it.The EngUsh

BOOK REVIEWS343

government saw to that.The further editions pubUshed in 1648 (2), 1655, and
1681 were not published under Catholic auspices.
The bibUography has a very useful Ust of primary sources, printed books
translated from the French and other items pertaining to poUtical controversy

plus a wide range of secondary sources. I spotted one error: on p. 144 for
Robert BlackweU read George BlackweU.
Jesuit Archives, New Orleans

Thomas Clancy, SJ.

John Donne and the Ancient Catholic Nobility. By Dennis Flynn. (Blooming-

ton: Indiana University Press. 1995. Pp. ix, 245. $35.00.)

In this fascinating study, Dennis Flynn, professor of EngUsh in Bentley College, Waltham (Massachusetts), explores issues generally considered unimportant by Donne scholars, specificaUy the persistent Catholicism of Donne's
family and the Elizabethan persecution of CathoUcs. Research into these areas,
Flynn contends, wiU recover the "missing years" of Donne's youth and wiU effect a re-evaluation of Donne's Latin epigrams currently rejected as spurious by
many scholars.
Donne's famUy had consistenüy resisted Tudor reUgious reforms. His maternal great-grandmother was Sir Thomas More's sister EUzabeth RasteU. One son,
WUUam RasteU, was Thomas More's pubUsher.Two RasteUs, John and Edward,
entered the Jesuits. A daughter, Joan, married John Heywood, an entertainer
and poet who served at the Tudor courts. At least two of their sons, Jasper and
EUis, entered the Society. When members of the RasteU and Heywood famiUes
went into religious exüe, Donne's father protected and managed their estates
through "some arcane legal maneuvers." The tactics employed by recusants to
prevent confiscation deserve further study. UntU it appears, we can only observe with Flynn: "Wise as ßefe??ß, müd as doves, the Heywoods and Donne
were thus able to make the most of a bad situation'^. 72).
In "Donne and the Ancient CathoUc NobiUty," Flynn examines relations between Donne's famUy and the ancient CathoUc houses of Percy, Earls of
Northumberland, Howard, Earls ofArundel, and Stanley, Earls of Derby.The catalyst was the arrival of Jasper Heywood, 'who, with his coUeague WUUam Holt,
entered England in 1581 atTynemouth with the connivance of CaptainWUUam
PuUen, the Earl of Northumberland's surrogate and later a secular priest. During
his years of freedom, Heywood estabUshed contact with and received financial
support from many CathoUc noble families whom he knew from his youth at
court. Captured in December of 1583, Heywood was exUed in January of 1 585.
A day before his deportation, the Earl of Derby departed for Paris to invest King
Henry III with the Order of the Garter. A young boy in his entourage was identified as "John Donnes" or'Jhon Downes."According to Flynn, this was the poet.

344BOOK REVIEWS

The "missing years" of Donne's youth were spent on the continent. From ref-

erences in Jasper Mayne's translation of Donne's Latin epigrams, a translation

pubUshed after the poet's death, Donne arguably was one of a group of English
CathoUc boys who visited the Prince of Parma's encampment outside Antwef

in May of 1 585.Another was probably Donne's friend Henry Percy, later 9th Earl

of Northumberland. Donne returned to England Ui late winter of 1 587 with

Henry Stanley, son of the Earl of Derby. Most likely the two traveled through
Spain and Italy together during their two years on the continent.

I know not how literary scholars will react to Flynn's arguments for the authenticity of Donne's Latin epigrams and for Jasper Heywood's influence on his

poetic style, but historians, and especiaUy those interested in recusancy, wUl
learn much from Flynn's analysis of Heywood's activities among the leading

CathoUc famiUes. The EngUsh Jesuit historian John Hungerford PoUen contended that Heywood's contribution has been undervalued. Because of his conflict with Robert Parsons, Heywood was deemed "out of step" with official
poUcy and was exiled to Naples. Flynn has rehabUitated him.
Thomas M. McCoog, SJ.

Jesuit Provincial Archives, London

Missio Moscovítica: The Role of the Jesuits in the Westernization of Russia,

1582-1689. By Jan Joseph Santich, O.S.B. [American University Studies, Series LX, History,Vol. 178.] (New York: Peter Lang PubUshing, Inc. 1995. Pp.
xi, 255. $41.95.)

In the late 1960's, Father Santich planned a dissertation without access to Soviet archives to determine whether there had been clandestine Jesuit missions

to Russia. His thorough search of the Roman archives made it clear that there

was none.

There were, however, pubUc missions which Santich describes Ui a detaUed
narrative history, from the Jesuits' first arrival in Poland in 1555 to 1620, when

the Russian autocracy recovered from the bitter civU war tangled with foreign
invasions known as the Time ofTroubles, and expeUed the Jesuits and aU other
Western influences. Russians took the Jesuit efforts at conversion and the PoUsh

mUitary-poUtical intervention in Russia to be inseparable parts of a single movement.That conclusion was correct, for the Jesuits' work and that of the PoUshLithuanian state were inseparably linked. Westernization failed with the faUure
of Poland to conquer. Santich concludes, however, that the Jesuits "caused a

ß??f Muscovite reaction against [the West]. . . . and "quickened the efforts of
the Muscovites to buUd up their own . . . capabiUties in order to keep Jesuits,

CathoUcs, and Poles out of Muscovy."These quickened efforts Santich finds evidence for "an active, though indUect, role [of Jesuits] in the Westernization of
Muscovy'^. 195).

BOOK REVIEWS345

The Muscovites' quickened efforts receive little attention. The narrative instead provides a richly documented account of the activities ofJesuits.The first

of the book's five chapters is an extraordinarily rich description of both the

Roman archives and the way Jesuits kept theU records. Almost anyone interested in any aspect of Jesuit history wiU find this chapter worth careful consultation. The foUowing chapters describe the Jesuits in Poland-Iithuania, the
Possevino mission, the Time ofTroubles (titled "The False Dmitri Episode"), and

the expulsion of 1620 and its consequences. Each of these chapters demon-

strates complete mastery of the secondary Uterature, the printed sources, and
the Roman archives. AU are clearly, even engagingly, written and doubtless provide the best short discussion of their topics in EngUsh, particularly on the work
of Possevino and Krizhanich.The bibUography is thorough and complete whUe
the notes include learned discussions that provide much more than information on the sources.

Given the rich documentation on which this book is based, and the great
learning with which it is presented, it may seem disappointing that the main
questions answered do not advance understanding of the significance of the Jesuits' role in Russia very far. Nonetheless, this book provides thorough, accurate
description of its topic and careful, learned presentation of the evidence, two
important strengths that merit high praise.
College of the Holy Cross

James T Flynn

P.Matthäus Rader SJ. Volume 1: 1595- 1612. Bearbeitet von Helmut Zäh und SUvia Strodel; eingeleitet und herausgegeben von Alois Schmid. [Bayerische
Gelehrten Korrespondenz.] (Munich: C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhand-

lung. 1995. Pp. Lxix, 659.)

This volume is a ??ß?ef?e?e of scholarship. It inaugurates auspiciously the
publication by the Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften of a projected

multi-volume series of the correspondence of early modern Bavarian scholars

and savants, many of whom were Jesuits.The project was initiated by Richard

van Dülmen, who in the mid-seventies first urged the pubUcation of the correspondence of the Munich Jesuits during the long reign of Duke and then Elec-

tor MaximUian I (1598-1651), and it must be seen as part of the long-range

effort to redress the imbalance between the study and appreciation of North
German Protestant culture and South German CathoUc culture which has

borne fruit in recent years.
The first volumes of this series are devoted to the Jesuit Matthäus Rader,
whom the editors consider to be "the most important representative of Late Hu-

manism in Upper Germany" f. xxix). Born in 1556 Ui Innichen Ui South Tyrol,

Rader entered the Jesuits in 1581. He taught humanities and rhetoric at the Jesuit coUege in Augsburg from 1591 to 1612, when at the request of Duke Maxi-

346BOOK REVIEWS

mUian he was transferred to the coUege in Munich, where he died in 1634. A
prolific author as weU as a teacher, Rader produced works of history and historiography, edited classical and Byzantine texts, and contributed several plays to
the growing body of Jesuit drama. Political obstacles prevented the pubUcation
of the three-volume court history of Bavaria, for the writing of which he was
originaUy summoned to Munich. His most famous work was his Bavariapia et

sancta (4 vols., Munich, 1615-1627), perhaps "the most characteristic pubUcation of the Bavarian Baroque" (p. xxvi), which in turn stimulated similar vol-

umes telling the story of the saints and blessed of other territories. Among his
other earfer pubUcations were the Acta of the eighth ecumenical councU of
Constantinople as weU as the Epigrams of Martial and works of Curtius Rufus.
Like many Jesuits, Rader participated in the epistolary culture of Late Humanism with an extensive, international correspondence, mostly with feUow

Jesuits but with many others too. The current volume contains 309 of the
roughly 2000 letters of his that have survived, nearly aU of them letters ad-

dressed to him since most of the letters he himself wrote have been lost. Most

of this correspondence is found today in the Bavarian Hauptstaatsarchiv and
Staatsbibliothek, and in the archives of the Upper German Province of the Society of Jesus, aU in Munich.Their content reveals much about the cultural and
intellectual Ufe of the times as weU as about Ufe within the Society of Jesus.
Striking is the mutual affection among the Jesuits that emerges from the letters,
though this does not rule out disagreements and misunderstandings. Two of
Rader's students were the dramatist Jacob Bidermann and the writer Jeremías
Drexel, and both, stiU young men, figure prominently in the correspondence.
Frequently the correspondents discuss manuscripts for plays, evaluate new
books that have come on the market, or exchange views on scholarly issues.
The next volume in this series will comprise the complete correspondence
of Rader with the Augsburg humanist and city official, Marcus Weiser, for which
the letters of Rader to Welser also survive. Subsequent volumes wiU complete
the correspondence of Rader, of which less survives for the later years.The editors have wisely chosen to publish the complete correspondence including
those letters which have been pubUshed elsewhere, and to pubUsh the letters
in their entirety without abbreviations.The letters are in the difficult Latin characteristic of late humanism. A brief summary in German precedes each letter.
The copious notes, also in German, are a marvelous source of information and
bibliography for early modern scholars.There is a helpful index for this ????p?e.
For the last volume a general index is planned of aU Rader's correspondence as
well as a bio-bibUography introducing the correspondents.
The editors of this volume deserve hearty congratulations as does the Bayerische Akademie der Wiss8nschaften for undertaking this valuable project at a
time when most institutions have been forced to cut back because of sagging finances.

Robert Bireley, SJ.

Loyola University Chicago

BOOK REVIEWS347

The Gunpowder Plot: Terror and Faith in 1605. By Antonia Fraser. (London:

Weidenfeld and Nicolson. 1996. Pp. xxxv, 347.Ä20.00.)

This is a handsome production, weU iUustrated and indexed, based on good
sources, and presented Ui a prose at once elegant and readable, which we
would expect by now from this author. It has been weU received by reviewers
generaUy m England who usuaUy reveal Uttle knowledge about the plot except
from what they read here. It is safe to prophesy that there wUl never be a last
word on what Joel Hurstfield once described as a "non-event"; but it is to be regretted that one cannot recommend this as an outstanding milestone on the
way. The book refers to a "no plot" faction, but no one denies a plot. The ques-

tion remains, whose was it and of what kind? Fraser reteUs the traditional story

of the plot as the concoction of a group of disaffected CathoUcs driven to desperation and despaU by persecution and seeing no other remedy.The dark hero
of the piece was dashing Robert Catesby, whose zeal inflamed and led the rest
to aU-time disaster for the Catholic cause. She foUows in essentials Mark

NichoUs's thesis as expounded in Investigating Gunpowder Plot (1991) and
also an unpublished manuscript by the late W. K. L.Webb, S.J.
It is extremely plausible that this was the way of it since we are aU too weU
aware of the terrorist answer to seemingly insoluble poUtical problems in our
own time. Nevertheless, closer inspection of the evidence, which is, admittedly,
often unsatisfactory and incomplete, must confirm many in the view that the
plot was Robert CecU's contrivance—one of quite a series which began with
the Lopez plot of 1594, which no one takes seriously, and the Squire plot of
1 598, aimed at the Jesuits, which nobody would take seriously U people knew
anything about it.The Main and Bye plots were rather better contrived but stiU
bear the falsifying imprint of the master.The gunpowder plot, "Cecil's holiday"
as it was described by contemporaries, was the last and best stage-managed of
them aU, so skillfuUy that it continues to deceive even those it was intended to
destroy down to our day. It is the great outcrop sticking up in our English sands
of time to hold back the sinister force of popish revisionism. CecU had two aims
in mind: first to bring the papists into everlasting hatred; second to discredit
those Catholics and their cause who, finding nothing worthwhUe for them to

do Ui his England, tried to find employment and honor abroad fighting for the

archdukes in Flanders.The oblique attack on the English regiment is an essential part of the story.The group which made its way to the last stand at Holbeach
on November 8 was the remnant of a contingent intended for Flanders. Guy

Fawkes, prototype of the faU-guy and the only professional soldier, was theU U-

aison man. The operation was infiltrated by four men working for CecU, viz.,
Thomas Percy, the principal mole, with Robert Catesby as his main contact in
the field, and WUUam Monteagle and Francis Tresham as assistants. Catesby,Tresham, and Monteagle had a death sentence hanging over them for their trea-

sonable part in the Essex affair of 1 600/1.They did as they were told to get off

the hook.This alternative thesis is nowhere taken into account in Fraser's book.

Admittedly, U it were, it would interrupt the flow of a good narrative.
Remaining evidence needs to be examined not only with a wide-angle lens,
taking into account facts and sources which standard historians find embar-

348BOOK REVIEWS

rassing, but also with a microscope which takes into account handwriting.This
is admittedly a minefield, but certain high probabüities, U not cast iron facts,
emerge, notably that the Monteagle letter was written Ui CecU's own hand, who
admitted it was in "a hand disguised." Letters Ui the Spanish papers Ui the Public
Record Office, London, and at Hatfield make it clear thatTresham was aUowed

to escape. His pious death in the Tower was a huge charade. Joan Cambridge, a
leading graphologist, examined the hands involved in both cases and concluded
there was at least a good probabiUty that they belonged to the gentlemen in
question.These are only a couple of clues to another ???efGe?????? of the data.
There are important respects in which Fraser departs from the standard
story; notably that there was no mine involved in the alleged operations under
Parliament (pp. 110- 112). After the fire in 1834, no trace was found of any such
tunnelling, and the whole story is on the face of it absurd. Fraser also exonerates
the priests, including Father Henry Garnet, SJ. Coke, working for CecU, tried to
make them the main organizers (Chap. xvi). When such standard items are
shown to be false the rest of the tale begins to unravel.
Two excellent features of the book are the genealogical details given of recusant famiUes having a connection with plotters (p. xiii) and with much in the
text. On the strength of this Cecil was able to harry many innocents after the
plot. Fraser has much to say on the women involved that is of interest. An instructive plan also gives us the location of the recusant houses and how they lay
on the "plotters'" sorry progress to Holbeach (p. xiv). There were never more
than eighty: hardly enough to rouse a nation to revolution! There is also a good
deal of incidental information which makes this book worth reading. We are
told that "under EngUsh law today, Father Garnet would be still be obliged to disclose the information he had received in the confessional." However, while

priests, doctors, and psychiatrists are aU so bound, "lawyers can claim privUege
in not revealing information received from their cUents" (pp. 258-259, n.).This
is a "must read" but to be read on the understanding it is not the whole truth.
Francis Edwards, S.J.
London

A Literary History of the English Jesuits: A Century of Books, 1615-1 714. By
Thomas H. Clancy. (Bethesda, Maryland: CathoUc Scholars Press. 1996. Pp.
x, 283. $69.95.)

This study buUds on the soUd foundations laid by Clancy in his English

Catholic Books, 1 641-1 700:A Bibliography (Chicago: Loyola University Press,
1974; revised edition pubUshed in 1996 by Scolar Press in Aldershot, England).

SimUar to Peter MUward's two volumes Religious Controversies of the Elizabethan Age and Religious Controversies of the Jacobean Age (Lincoln:
University of Nebraska Press, 1977 and 1978), Clancy traces predominant
characteristics and themes through primary printed material. Readers may wish
that certain works received greater attention. Clancy's decision to begin his ex-

BOOK REVIEWS349

amination in 1615 was not arbitrary: by that date not only had most prominent
Elizabethan Jesuit authors passed from the scene—Robert SouthweU, Henry

Garnet, Robert Parsons—but the issues had changed.The next generation ofJesuit theologians, arguably the most competent Ui the history of the mission, has
not received proper recognition. This reviewer hopes that Clancy's presentation will encourage future scholars to explore the theological works of Jesuit
theologians such as John Floyd and Matthew WUson.

Between 1615 and 1640, Jesuit writings were almost equaUy divided be-

tween spiritual and controversial works. Nearly 80% of the spiritual and devotional works, however, were translations or editions, whereas 85% of the
controversial works were written by EngUsh Jesuits. Controversial theology
was their strength—and a periodic source of trouble. In 1610 and 1614, French
outrage during the battle over tyrannicide forced the Jesuit General Claudio Acquaviva to forbid any treatment of the nature and origin of poUtical authority

without prior Roman approval. Later Pope Urban VIII issued the brief Britannia (I63I) to queU the storm surrounding the appointment of Richard Smith,
Bishop of Chalcedon, by forbidding under pain of excommunication any more
books on church order and the nature of ecclesiastical government.

The EngUsh province was at its zenith in the late 1630's and early 1640's with

nearly 200 members in England. FinanciaUy and numerically it declined
throughout the second haU of the century, a decline reflected in the pubUcations of its members. Nearly 240 Catholic books were pubUshed between 1615

and 1640; EngUsh Jesuits wrote, translated, or edited approximately 100 ofthat
total.The much longer period 1 64 1 - 1 684 saw the pubUcation of 1 30 books, and

Jesuits were responsible for approximately thirty-nine. Because of the accession

of the Catholic James II, there was a revival of Catholic pubUshing; eighty-three
books appeared between 1685 and 1689, twenty-three of which were written

by Jesuits. Unfortunately, Clancy did not provide statistics for his last segment:
we do not know what percentage of CathoUc writings were produced by Je-

suits between 1690 and 1714. Perhaps more important than the quantity was
the type of literature; by the end of the century most Jesuit controversial works

were directed at Jansenism instead of Protestantism. Does this aversion to controversial theology simply reflect changes in the reading habits of Catholics, or
is it further evidence of CathoUcs' withdrawal into their manor houses? Or, in-

deed, is it simply a natural consequence of the restrictions imposed by ecclesiastical authorities?

A new pubUsher willing to produce works such as this is to be welcomed.
One hopes that the careless appearance marked by marginal variations and an
inabiUty to produce accents and dashes, and the absence of an index, are technical problems that wiU be resolved.
Jesuit Provincial Archives, London

Thomas M. McCoog, S.J.

NOTES AND COMMENTS

The John Tracy Ellis Dissertation Award
The American CathoUc Historical Association announces inauguration of its
John Tracy ElUs Dissertation Award. The award, which carries a purse of $ 1 ,200,
memorializes the scholarship and teaching of MonsignorJohn Tracy EUis (19051992). Its purpose is to assist a graduate student working on some aspect of the
history of the CathoUc Church. It wUl be presented for the first time in 1998.
Eligibility.Those wishing to enter the competition for the award must be citizens or authorized residents (i.e., permanent residents or on student visas) of
the United States or Canada and must be enroUed in a doctoral program at a recognized institution of higher education.
Procedures: AppUcants must submit the foUowing materials: (1) a statement
from the chaUperson (or director of graduate studies) of the applicant's department certifying that he or she has completed aU degree requirements for
the doctorate except the dissertation and has received departmental approval
to undertake work on a dissertation topic dealing with some aspect of the history of the CathoUc Church; (Z) three copies of a statement written by the appUcant, not exceeding 1,000 words in length, describing the dissertation
project and how the award would be employed to further its completion; and
(3) two sealed letters of recommendation from scholars famiUar with the applicant's work, one of whom must be his or her dissertation director. These materials must be sent by September 30, 1997, to the Secretary, American CathoUc
Historical Association, The CathoUc University of America, Washington, D.C.

20064. The first winner of the John Tracy Ellis Dissertation Award wiU be an-

nounced at the Association's annual meeting in Seattle, Washington, in January,
1998.

Association News

At its meeting held in NewYork on January 2, 1997, the Executive CouncU of
the American CathoUc Historical Association resolved to accept with gratitude
the invitation of Marian CoUege in Indianapolis, extended by its president,
Daniel A. Felicetti, to hold the spring meeting there in 1998. The meeting wUl
mark the centenary of the transfer of the episcopal see from Vincennes, where
it was erected in 1834, to IndianapoUs. The Archbishop of IndianapoUs, the
350

NOTES AND COMMENTS351

Most Reverend Daniel M. Buechlein, O.S.B., wiU be the principal celebrant of
the Mass at the close of the meeting. The dates will be March 27 and 28. The

chairman of the planning committee wiU be James J. Divita of Marian CoUege;

the other members wUl be two of his coUeagues in the Department of History,
viz., WUUam J. Doherty and Sister Sue Bradshaw, O.S.E, C. Edward Balog, Academic Dean of Marian CoUege, the Reverend Jack W Porter, archivist/historian
of the archdiocese, and Joseph M. White, associate editor of U.S. Catholic Historian. Proposals of papers or (preferably) sessions should be submitted to Professor Divita in care of the Department of History, Marian CoUege, 3200 Cold

Spring Road, IndianapoUs, Indiana 46222-1997; telephone: 317-955-6228.
Meetings, Conferences, Congresses, and Lectures

A lecture series entitled "The American CathoUc Experience: New Historical
Perspectives" was sponsored by the Department of History in the CathoUc Uni-

versity ofAmerica between January 29 and February 26. The speakers and then-

topics are as foUows:John McGreevy of Harvard University, "Parish Boundaries:
American CathoUcism and Twentieth-Century Race Relations"; James Fisher of
St. Louis University, "The Second CathoUc President: Ngo Dinh Diem, John F.

Kennedy, and the Vietnam Lobby, 1954-1963"; CoUeen McDanneU of the Uni-

versity of Utah, "Material Culture and American CathoUc History"; Maureen
Fitzgerald of the University of Arizona, "The PoUtics of God and Charity: Irish
CathoUc Nuns in Nineteenth-Century New York City"; and Patrick AUitt of
Emory University,"CathoUc Converts: British and American InteUectuals Turn to
Rome."

The annual meeting of the Texas CathoUc Historical Society was to be held in

Austin on March 7. Patrick Foley, editor of Catholic Southwest:AJournal ofHis-

tory and Culture, was to read a paper entitled "Texas's First: The Diocese of
Galveston" in commemoration of the sesquicentennial of the erection of the
episcopal see (now caUed Galveston-Houston), and James Vanderholt, editor of
East Texas Catholic, was to read one on "The Diocese of Austin: FiftyYears." Lisa
May, archivist of the Diocese of Galveston-Houston, was to present a sUde show
on the two dioceses.

The Centro ItaUano di Studi suU'Alto Medioevo wiU present the forty-fifth
international study week in Spoleto on April 3-9, 1997. The theme wiU be
"Morfologie sociali e culturali in Europa fra Tarda Antichità e Alto Medioevo."
Among those reading papers wiU be Maria Giovanna Arcamone of the University of Pisa, "Il monachesimo"; Salvatore Pricocco of the University of Catania,
"L'agiografia"; Sofia Boesch Gajano of the Third University of Rome, "Persistenze pagane e cristianizzazione"; Yves-Marie Duval of the University of Paris
X-Nanterre, "Istituzioni ecclesiastiche"; Guglielmo CavaUo of the University of
Rome "La Sapienza,""Modi e tramiti deUa comunicazione col sacro"; and Herbert
Kessler of the Johns Hopkins University, "Morfologie artistiche: trasformazione
deU'immagine."

352NOTES AND COMMENTS

The complete program of the international conference on "The World of Innocent III" (announced ante, LXXXI [October, 1 995] , 65 1), which wUl mark the
eighth centenary of the election of Lotario dei Conti di Segni to the Chair of
Peter in 1 198 and which wUl take place at Hofstra University on May 1-3, 1997,
is now avaUable. The keynote address on the first afternoon wiU be deUvered by

Leonard Boyle, O.P., prefect of the Vatican Apostolic Library, under the title,"The

Lateran CouncU: Before and After." At the conference banquet Edward Peters of
the University of Pennsylvania will deUver an address entitled "Lotario dei Conti
di Segni Becomes Pope Innocent III: The Man and the Pope." In addition there
wiU be thirty-three papers arranged in thirteen panels. Copies of the program
may be obtained from the director of the conference, John C. Moore, in care of
the Department of History, 115 Hofstra University, Hempstead, NewYork 1 1 550-

1090; telephone: 516-463-5020; fax: 516463-4861; e-maU: HISJCM@VAXC.HOF-

STRA.EDU.
The annual conference of the Canadian CathoUc Historical Association wiU

be held, as usual, in conjuction with the Canadian Conference of Learned Societies—this year at the Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. Johns, on June

4-5. Papers wiU deal with the history of CathoUcism or CathoUcs in Canada, es-

peciaUy m Atlantic Canada.
To mark the 450th anniversary of the beginning of John Knox's Protestant
preaching career, which followed the assassination of Cardinal David Beaton,
ChanceUor of Scotland, and the occupation of the archiépiscopal castle at St.
Andrews by a group of reUgious fanatics and political gangsters, the University
of St. Andrews wiU sponsor an international conference from June 30 to July 3,
1997. Speaking on Knox's Ufe, his poUtical ideas, and his influence on the
processes of Protestant reform in both Scotland and England wiU be J. H. Burns,
emeritus of the University of London, Euan Cameron of the University of Newcastle, Patrick CoUinson of the University of Cambridge, Jane Dawson of the
University of Edinburgh, Carol Edington of the University of St. Andrews, James
Kirk of the University of Glasgow, Michael Lynch of the University of Edinburgh, Roger Mason of the University of St. Andrews, and Jenny Wormald of St.
HUda's CoUege, University of Oxford.
The fourteenth centenary of the arrival of St. Augustine in Kent will be commemorated at the Fourth International Medieval Congress, of which the special
theme wiU be "Conversion." The congress wiU take place at the University of
Leeds on July 14-17, 1997. FuU information may be requested of the director of
the International Medieval Institute, Axel E. W. MüUer, at Parkinson 103, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JX England.
On September 25-27, 1997, the Archdiocese of Ottawa wiU sponsor an historical conference to commemorate the sesquicentennial of erection of the
episcopal see. The conference will be co-sponsored by both the French and the
EngUsh sections of the Canadian CathoUc Historical Association. The papers
wUl deal with the transformation of the archdiocese and its peoples since the
1940's. Sessions m both EngUsh and French wiU focus on such issues as church

notes and comments353

government, the Marian Congress of 1947, the changing role of the laity, the
suburbanization of the Church, Catholic schools, catechetical education, the
diocesan synod, clerical formation, reUgious Ufe, bUingualism and multiculturalism in the Church, charismatic renewal, archdiocesan missions, and ecumenism.
The conference wiU also include round-table discussions on the "polyglot
Church," CathoUc post-secondary education, and Canadian CathoUc historiography. Further information may be obtained from Mark G. McGowan in care of
the University of St. Michael's CoUege, 91 St. Mary's Street, Toronto, Ontario M5S
1J4, Canada.
The twenty-fourth Saint Louis Conference on Manuscript Studies will take

place on October 10 and 11,1 997, at Saint Louis University. Scholars are invited
to present papers Ui such areas as codicology, paleography, papyrology, epigra-

phy, iUuminations, textual criticism, cataloguing formats, and computer appUcations. Papers are limited to twenty minutes. Those who wish to participate
should submit an abstract of the proposed paper not exceeding 200 words
in length. Inquiries concerning the conference should be addressed to the
Conference Committee, Manuscripta, Pius XII Memorial Library, Saint Louis
University, 3650 Lindell Boulevard, Samt Louis, Missouri 63108-3302; e-maU:
ERMATCJ@SLU.EDU.

Material History of American Religion Project
Located at Columbia Theological Seminary in Decatur, Georgia, and sup-

ported by the LiUy Endowment, Inc., the Material History of American ReUgion
Project is intended to focus on material objects and economic themes. It consists of nine scholars, among whom are CoUeen McDanneU of the University of
Utah and Robert Orsi of Indiana University, and an advisory committee comprised of R. Scott Appleby of the University of Notre Dame, E. Brooks Holifield
of Emory University, and Peter WiUiams of Miami University. The scholars wiU

investigate various aspects of the material and economic history of American
reUgion. Several senior scholars in the field wUl critique their work. A group of
reUgious leaders representative of the diversity of American reUgious institutions wiU help to make the investigations responsive to the needs of their communities. The Project wiU disseminate the results of its research through several
means. More information may be obtained directly from the Material History of

American Religion Project, Columbia Theological Seminary #325, Post Office
Box 520, Decatur, Georgia 3003 1 ; telephone: 404-687-4633; e-maU: reUgion@materialreUgion.org; www.materialreligion.org.

Prize

The American Historical Association's James Henry Breasted Prize, which is
given on a four-year chronological cycle for the best book in English in any field

354notes and comments

prior to A.D. 1000 and in 1996 was given for a book in European history, was
awarded on January 3, 1997, in New York to WUUam Klingshirn of the Catholic

University of America for his book Caesarius ofAries (Cambridge University
Press, 1994).
Library Grant
The Eden-Webster Library of St. Louis, Missouri, the joint Ubrary for Eden Theological Seminary and Webster University, has received from the Henry Luce
Foundation a grant of $96,000 to fund the cataloguing of more than six thousand rare books, mainly the James I. Good CoUection. From 1907 to 1924 Good
was Professor of Reformed Church History and Liturgies at Central Theological
Seminary; he made fifty-two trans-Atlantic crossings to purchase books in Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. His coUection became part of Eden
Theological Seminary when the Seminary was merged with Central Theological Seminary in 1934. The books range in date from the early sixteenth century
through 1924. The earUer volumes are important sources for the study of Reformation history, while those from the later sixteenth through the eighteenth
century contain Reformed theology, including early covenant thinking and Reformed orthodoxy. Among the imprints from the nineteenth and twentieth cen-

turies are many pamphlets that Dr. Good had bound together by subject. The

catalogue wUl become part of the OCLC. The Eden-Webster Library's online cat-

alog is accessible both via direct access dial-in lines (314-963-6080) and via the
mternet (http://Ubrary.websteruniv.edu).

Causes of Saints

On November 24, 1996, the Solemnity of Christ the King, in St. Peter's BasUica Pope John Paul II beatified three servants of God—two Austrian priests, martyrs of Nazi persecution, and a French lay woman who aided the poor and
persecuted at the time of the French Revolution. One of the priests, Blessed

Otto Neururer (1882-1940), came from a peasant famUy Ui the viUage of PUler

Ui the Tirol. He studied at the minor and major seminaries in Brixen (Bressanone), and after his ordination he was a curate and teacher of reUgion in many
places. Embracing the teaching of Rerum novarum,he joined the Christian Social Movement and thereby incurred the disfavor of his more conservative superiors. The difficulties that resulted caused Father Neurerer acute suffering
but never affected his great priestly zeal. When the Nazis occupied the Tirol in
1938, they sensed a strong ideological resistance on the part of the inhabitants.
Thousands of people were harassed, had their civU rights curtaUed, were subjected to interrogation by the Gestapo, and were thrown into prisons and concentration camps. Many priests were condemned to death or kUled. At that time
Neurerer was pastor in Götzens, a viUage near Innsbruck. He advised a young

NOTES AND comments355

woman not to marry a divorced man who was leading a notoriously dissolute

Ufe. She rejected the man, but he took revenge through his personal friend, the

Gauleiter. Father Neurerer was arrested on the charge of "slander to the detriment of German marriage" and interned first in the concentration camp at
Dachau and later in Buchenwald. He suffered atrocious tortures but stUl shared

his meager food rations with prisoners who were even weaker than he. In the

Buchenwald camp one of the prisoners asked him for baptism. Perhaps this

man was a secret agent; although Neurerer suspected a trap, he could not in
conscience refuse the request. Two days later he was transferred to the
"bunker," the place of extreme punishment, where he was hung upside down

untU he died on May 30, 1940. Neurerer was the first priest kiUed in a concen-

tration camp. For this reason his mortal remains were taken to a private crematorium, which placed his ashes in an urn and sent it to Götzens. Having been
verified as authentic through painstaking scientific investigations, the ashes are
now placed under the altar of the parish church in that vUlage.

The other Austrian priest, Blessed Jakob Gapp (1897- 1942), was also born in
a Tirolian viUage, Wattens. He was caUed to miUtary service in May, 1915, and
served on the Italian front, where he was wounded in 1916. On November 4,

1918, he was interned as a prisoner of war by the Italian Army; he was released

the foUowing August. Thereupon he entered the Marianist novitiate in Greisinghof, Upper Austria, where he made his first vows in 1921. For the next four
years he worked as a teacher and sacristan in the Marian Institute at Graz. He
made his profession of perpetual vows in 1925 and then entered the International Marianist Seminary in Fribourg, Switzerland. He was ordained in 1930
and returned to Austria. Until 1938 he worked as a teacher, director of religious
education, and chaplain in Marianist schools. During those years of severe unemployment he demonstrated his concern for the poor in manifold ways. By

studying the German and Austrian bishops' statements and the papal encyclical

Mit brennender Sorge, he formed a clear judgment about the incompatibUity of
Nazism and the Christian faith. In his teaching and preaching he emphasized

this truth fearlessly. When the German troops arrived in Austria after the Anschluss, he was obliged to leave Graz. EventuaUy his superiors sent him to his
home town, since they saw in his anti-Nazi preaching a threat to the very existence of their institutions. He had been an assistant pastor in BreitenwangReutte for only two months when the Gestapo, at the end of October, 1938,
forbade him to teach reUgion. In a sermon on December 1 !,nevertheless, he defended Pope Pius XI against the attacks of the Nazis and exhorted the faithful of

the parish to read Catholic literature rather than Nazi propaganda. Afterwards

Father Gapp was advised to leave the country. With the help of his religious superiors he escaped to Bordeaux, where he worked at the cradle of the Society
of Mary as a chaplain and Ubrarian. In May, 1939, he went to Spain and served in
the Marianist communities at San Sebastian, Cádiz, and Valencia. He was misunderstood in Spain because of his rejection of Nazism. The Gestapo had not lost
sight of hull and sent from Berlin two persons pretending to be Jews, who told
him of their fictitious experiences of flight from Nazi persecution. In Valencia

356NOTES AND COMMENTS

they asked him to instruct them in the CathoUc faith. After gaining his confidence, they invited him to take a trip and then abducted him across the border

into German-occupied France. He was arrested on November 9, 1942, in Hen-

daye and taken to Berlin. OnJuIy 2, 1943, he was condemned to death. Any pardon or even the transfer of his remains to his relatives for simple burial was
denied because he had "defended his conduct on expressly reUgious grounds."
Hence, he might have been considered a martyr for the faith, and his funeral
might have been used by the CathoUc population as an opportunity for a sUent
demonstration in support of a man already judged a traitor who was pretending
to die for his faith. On August 13, 1943, he was guUlotined in the Plötzensee
Prison, Berlin, and his remains were sent to the Anatomical-Biological Institute
of the University of Berlin for research.

The French woman was Blessed Catherine Jarrige (1754-1836), who was the
daughter of a tenant farmer in Doumis, situated in what is now the Diocese of
Saint-Flour. At Mauriac Catinon, as she was caUed in the local dialect, entered
the Third Order of St. Dorninic, becoming a menette (Uttle nun). The menettes
had no community Ufe but Uved in their own homes, in her case a garrett that

she shared with her sister. For sixty years she ministered to the poor, the sick,
and orphans. She spent part of the day begging for alms from the weU-to-do

families of Mauriac. In 1791 she became very concerned with the priests who
refused to accept the CivU Constitution of the Clergy. When the persecution
reached the region of Cantal in 1792, she found hiding places for the nonjuring

clergy and brought them not only food and clothing but also vestments, hosts,

and wine so that they could celebrate Mass. She even accompanied to the guU-

lotine a nonjuring priest who had defended the sanctity of marriage. For the

rest of the decade she devoted her charitable works to such priests. After the
persecution ended, she helped to rebuUd the Church. Having been known as
the ''menette of the poor," she -was now caUed the "menette of the priests."
The cause ofVenerable Mother Theodore Guérin (1798-1856), who founded

the Sisters of Providence of Saint Mary-of-the-Woods in 1 840, was advanced last

November when a panel of medical consultants in Rome granted unanimous
approval to documentation of the cure of a Sister of Providence, Mary Theodosia Mug (1860-1943), who had been suffering from cancer which suddenly
disappeared in 1908. The Congregation for the Causes of Saints is expected to

consider the request for Mother Theodore's beatification at a meeting in the
spring.

Meeting with the cardinals and other officials of the Congregation for the
Causes of Saints on December 17, 1996, Pope John Paul II approved a decree at-

testing that Pierre Toussaint (1766-1853) had Uved a Ufe of heroic virtues wor-

thy of imitation. This act terminates the investigations regarding the sanctity of
the former slave who was born in Haiti and brought by his master to NewYork
in 1787 and who with the money he was aUowed to save from working as a
hairdresser bought his own freedom and that ofJuUette Noël, whom he married
in 1 8 1 1 . He was renowned for his works of charity and his devotion to the Holy

NOTES AND COMMENTS357

Eucharist. His remains are entombed in the bishops' vault in Saint Patrick's
Cathedral; he is the only lay person so honored. He may now be caUed "Venerable" but no pubUc veneration may be paid him until, if ever, he is beatified.
During his forthcoming visit to Paris for World Youth Day on August 21-24,
1997, Pope John Paul II wiU beatify Frédéric Ozanam (1813-1853), lawyer, historian, and Uterary scholar, professor at the Sorbonne, and founder of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, which grew out of the Conférence de Charité that he
formed with feUow university students in Paris in 1833 to provide practical assistance to the poor. He was a significant figure in French CathoUc inteUectual
life, a strenuous opponent of economic UberaUsm and all forms of sociaUsm, and
a briUiant pioneer in CathoUc social doctrine. His cause for beatification was introduced in 1923· This wiU be the first such ceremony ever conducted in Paris.
American Catholicism and Gender

The Cushwa Center for the Study of American CathoUcism at the University
of Notre Dame is sponsoring three initiatives regarding gender. (I) It will publish and make avaUable at nominal cost a coUection of syUabi and bibUographies
for undergraduate and graduate courses that devote notable attention to the experiences of women or gender relations in American CathoUc history, the construction of Catholic memory about gender roles and relations, or expressions
of gender in American Catholic Uterature, art, theology, and spirituaUty. Those
who offer such courses are asked to send their syUabi and bibUographies to the
Cushwa Center by May 1 , 1997, along with comments about the courses, lists of
assigned readings, and information about the instructor's research and teaching
in the area. (2) The Cushwa Center wiU commission articles on gender roles
and relations in American CathoUc history that wiU be pubUshed in a volume
for use in advanced undergraduate and graduate courses. (3) The Cushwa Center wiU seek funding for a monograph series entitled "The History of CathoUc

Women in Twentieth-Century America." It wiU hold a manuscript competition

and wiU appoint an editorial board to select six works for pubUcation. Further
information may be obtained from the director of the Cushwa Center, R. Scott
Appleby, at 614 Hesburgh Library, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana 46556-5629.

Publications

The fifteenth centenary of the conversion and baptism of Clovis has inspired
the issue of the Mélanges de Science Religieuse for October-December, 1996
(Volume 53, Number 4). Under the heading "Christianisation en Gaule de Clovis
à Charlemagne" the following articles are pubUshed: Elisabeth Magnou-Nortier,
"La christianisation de la Gaule (VP-VlT siècles: Esquisse d'un bUan et orientation bibliographique" (pp. 5- 12); Bertrand Fauvarque, "Eschatologie, conversion

358NOTES AND COMMENTS

et mission à la fin de l'Empire Romain" (pp. 13-26); Jean Heuclin, "Le clergé
mérovingien et carolingien, instrument de christianisation?" (pp. 27-42); Sabine

Racinet, "Recherches archéologiques et textueUes sur les traces de la christian-

isation en Picardie" (pp. 43-60); and Eric VanneufviUe,"L'ÉgUse en Provence du
Ve au VIP siècles" (pp. 61-81).

"Les églises doubles et les fairiilles d'égUses"is the theme ofVolume 4 (1996)

of Antiquité tardive. The introduction is by Noël Duval and Jean-Pierre CaiUet:

"La recherche sur les égUses doubles depuis 1936: historique et problématique"

(pp. 22-37). It is foUowed by an "Adas des plans d'égUses doubles" (pp. 39-50).
Under the heading "La liturgie comme expUcation éventueUe: analyse des

sources" there are three articles: Pierre-Marie Gy, "ÉgUses doubles et groupes

d'égUses du point de vue de l'histoire de la Uturgie" (pp. 51-54); Paolo Piva,"La

'cattedrale doppia' e la storia deUa Uturgia" (pp. 55-60); and Gian Carlo Menis,
"La Uturgia battesimale ad AquUeia nel complesso episcopale del IV secólo"
(pp. 61-77). Under "Étude des monuments" are brief articles on double

churches in Gaul, Italy, Alps, Istria, Balkans, the Near East, and Africa. FinaUy, five
brief studies deal with medieval double churches in northern Italy, Provence,
the British Isles, the Low Countries, and Spain.
A coUoquium on "Le Protestantisme dans les pays de l'Adour (1787-1905)"
was held at Orthez on September 22-23, 1993, under the auspices of the Cen-

tre d'Étude du Protestantisme béarnais. The proceedings of the coUoquium

have now been gathered by Suzanne Tucoo-Chala and published in the issue of
the Bulletin de la Société de l'Histoire du Protestantisme Français for Octo-

ber, November, and December, 1996 (Volume 142). The foUowing communications are included: Michel Peronnet, "Protestantisme et Révolution: quelques
réflexions" (pp. 519-531); Laurent Gambarotto, "Les axes majeurs du débat

théologique interne au protestantisme français pendant le XLXe siècle" (pp.

533-546),André Encrevé,"Les Huguenots au XIXe siècle"(pp. 547-585); Thierry
Issartel, "Entre protestantisme et francmaçonnerie: le pasteur Louis-Victor

Gabriac (1759-1830)" (pp. 597-628); Pierre Hourmat, "Les rapports entre
catholiques et protestants dans les Basses-Pyrénées de la Révolution a la Restau-

ration" (pp. 629-651); Michèle Sacquin,"ReUgion d'État et Uberté des cultes: les
affrontements interconfessionels à Nérac souls la Restauration" (pp. 653-670);

and fifteen other brief papers.

The ninetieth volume (1966) of the Zeitschriftfür Schweizerische Kirchen-

geschichte contains the foUowing articles: Urs Altermatt, "Säkularisierung der
Kirchengeschichte—Notizen zur Biographie der ZSKG" (pp. 7-35); Alois
Steiner,"Von der Gründung 1907 bis in die dreissiger Jahre" (pp. 37-51);Markus

Reis, "Eduard Wymann (1870-1956)—Urner Staatsarchivar und Mitbegründer
der Zeitschrift" (pp. 52-65); Werner Vogler, "von den dreissiger Jahren bis zum
Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzil" (pp. 67-82); Marco Jorio, "Oskar VaseUa

(1904-1966)—ein bedeutender Reformationshistoriker" (pp. 83-99); Francis
Python, "Un renouveUement des perspectives 1976-1995" (pp. 101-117);
Frédéric Yerly, "Regard sur la production francophone" (pp. 119- 154); Alberto

NOTES AND COMMENTS359

Lepori, "Cinquant'anni di una rivista centenaria: U Monitore della diócesi di

Lugano (1897-1946)" (pp. 155-167); Fabrizio Panzera, "I contributi deUa

Svizzera itaUana" (pp. 169-181); Catherine Bosshart-Pfluger, "Frauengeschichts-

schreibung zwischen Tradition und Emanzipation?" (pp. 183-194); Urban Fink,

"Apologetik durch Kirchengeschichte?" (pp. 195-21 1); and Peter Hersche,"Ein
Streifzug durch die internationale kirchengeschichtUche Zeitschriftenlandschaft" (pp. 213-227).
The theme of the issue of U.S. Catholic Historian for faU, 1996 (Volume 14,

Number 4), is "Theology and History: Essays in Honor ofJames Hennesey SJ."AU

the contributors but one are his former students; aU wished in this way to pay

tribute to him on his seventieth birthday (October 6, 1966). The contents are as

foUows: Patricia Byrne, C.S.J., "Theology and History in the Work ofJames Hennesey, SJ." (pp. 1 -23);Terrence Murphy,"ReUgion, Conflict and Consensus in the
EngUsh-Speaking Colonies of British North America" (pp. 25-38); Charles E.
Hambrick-Stowe, "Charles G. Finney and EvangeUcal Anti-CathoUcism" (pp.
39-52); Margaret M. Reher, "Cardmal Dennis Dougherty and the IHM's: The

Church as the Juridic/Mystical Body"' (pp. 53-62); Gerald R Fogarty, S.J.,"The

Theology of Tradition in the American Church" (pp. 63-82); James M. O'Toole,
"'The Final Jewel in Mary's Crown': American Responses to the Definition of
the Assumption" (pp. 83-98); Patrick W Collins, "From Communication toward
Communion: Gustave Weigel's Ecumenism and Thomas Merton's InterreUgious
Dialogue" (pp. 99-124); Marie Ann Mayeski, "Theological Matchmaking: Connecting Theological Sources in the American Context" (pp. 125-139); WiUiam
L. Portier (not a former student),"'Cathokcs in the Promised Land of the Saints':
Cultural History and Its Irony" (pp. 141-154); and Clyde F. Crews,"A Church Polarized: Fault Lines in the History of American CathoUcism" (pp. 155-170).
A ten-page Ulustrated article by Erin Graffy de Garcia entitled "Santa Barbara's
Signature BuUding: The Old Mission" occupies the major portion of the issue of
La Gazeta delArchivo, the newsletter of the Santa Barbara Mission Archive Li-

brary, for faU-winter, 1996.

A special issue of Ethnohistory (Volume 43, Number 4 [FaU, 1996]) is devoted to "Native American Women's Responses to Christianity." FoUowing an in-

troduction by Michael Harkin and Sergei Kan (pp. 563-571) there are seven
articles: Kathleen Bragdon, "Gender as a Social Category in Native Southern
New England" (pp. 573-592); Diane M. Notarianni, "Making Mennonites: Hopi
Gender Roles and Christian Transformations" (pp. 593-611); Sergei Kan, "Clan
Mothers and Godmothers: TIingit Women and Russian Orthodox Christianity,

1840-1940" (pp. 613-641); Michael Harkin, "Engendering Discipline: Discourse
and Counterdiscourse in the Methodist-HeUtsuk Dialogue" (pp. 643-661); Jo-

Anne Fiske, "Pocahontas's Granddaughters: Spiritual Transition and Tradition of

Carrier Women of British Columbia" (pp. 663-681); Pauline Turner Strong,

"Feminist Theory and the 'Invasion of the Heart' m North America" (pp.

683-712); and Jennifer S. H. Brown, "Reading beyond the Missionaries, Dissect-

360NOTES AND COMMENTS

ing Responses" (pp. 713-719)· The conclusion is a comment by Clara Sue KidweU (pp. 721-725).

The Very Reverend James Walsh Richardson, CM. (1909-1996), who was Superior General of the Congregation of the Mission from 1968 to 1980, is the
subject of the second issue of Vincentian Heritage for 1996 (Volume 17). It
contains the foUowing articles after a Ust of biographical data:John Richardson,

C.M.,"Some Incidents in His Early life" (pp. 69-71); Robert P Maloney CM.,"An

Appreciation" (pp. 73-77); Richard McCuUen, CM., "An Appreciation" (pp.
79-82); Rafael Sainz, CM., "A Human Perspective" (pp. 83-85); WUUam W Sheldon, CM. ,"Remembering Father Richardson" (pp. 87-89); Hugh 0'DonneU,"Father Richardson and the Mission in Kenya" (pp. 91-93); and Miguel Pérez
Flores, CM., "Father Richardson and the Daughters of Charity" (pp. 95-104).
The fascicle is concluded with the transcript of an interview with Father

Richardson conducted by José-Oriol Baylach, CM., in 1980 (pp. 105-116), and

the address that he gave to the General Assembly of the Daughters of Charity on
December 8, 1979 (pp. 117-123).
In March, 1992, the Centre for the Study of Religion in Canada sponsored a
conference on the topic "Christianizing the Social Order: A Founding Vision of
the United Church of Canada." Many of the papers presented on that occasion

are published in a special issue of the TorontoJournal ofTheology for faU, 1996

(Volume 12, Number 2). The contents are as foUows:John Webster Grant,"From
Revelation to Revolution: Some Thoughts on the Background of the Social

Gospel" (pp. 159-168); PhyUis D. Airhart, "Christianizing the Social Order and
Founding Myths—Double Vision?" (pp. 169-178); Robert T. Handy, "Reflections

on the Federal CouncU of Churches, the United Church of Canada and the Social Gospel in the 1930s" (pp. 179-188);Brian J. Fraser,"Christianizing the Social
Order: T. B. KUpatrick's Theological Vision of the United Church of Canada" (pp.
189-200); Beth Profit, "Christianizing the Social Order: The Role of Women in
the Social Gospel Fiction of NeUie McClung"(pp. 201-212); Ian M. Manson,"ReUgious Revival and Social Transformation: George Pidgeon and the United
Church of Canada in the 1930's" (pp. 213-221); Mariana Valverde, "Moral Regu-

lation and the Formation of Ethical Subjects" (pp. 223-226); Roger Hutchinson,
"Christianizing the Social Order: A Three-Dimensional Task" (pp. 227-236); Ted

Reeve, "Advocating for the Welfare State in Canada: Institutional Responses of

the United Church of Canada in the Late 1930s" (pp. 237-249); Laurel Sefton
MacDoweU, "United Church Support for CoUective Bargaining in the 1940s"
(pp. 251-263); Ruth Compton Brouwer, "Margaret Wrong: Christian Literacy
Worker and Africanist,' 1929-1948"(pp. 265-273);C Douglas Jay,"Missiological
Implications of Christianizing the Social Order with Special Reference to the
United Church of Canada" (pp. 275-284); and Pamela Dickey Young, "Theme
and Variations: The Social Gospel in a New Key" (pp. 285-290).

NOTES AND COMMENTS361
Obituaries

Robert A. Graham, S.J.Journalist and historian ofVatican diplomacy, died Feh
ruary 11, 1997, at Sacred Heart Jesuit Center in Los Gatos, California. His health

had been failing since 1995 when he began experiencing blackouts caused by
a blood condition that led to kidney faUure, uremia, coma, and death at age 84.

Father Graham was born March 1 1 , 191 2, in Sacramento, California. His father
was a professional baseball player for the San Francisco Seals, a team he later

managed. But the young Bob enjoyed the company of sports writers more than

players. His journaUsm career started on the student newspaper at St. Ignatius

High School in San Francisco. He entered the California Province of the Society
of Jesus in 1929 and went through the normal course of studies and was ordained in 1941.

His Jesuit superiors wanted him to work with the famous Daniel A. Lord, S.J.,

but it soon became clear that Father Lord was a one-man show who was not in-

terested m the help others thought he needed. During this period of uncertainty, Father Graham was grabbed by John LaFarge, S.J., the editor ofAmerica,
the weekly pubUcation ofJesuits in the United States, and he began the writing
career that was to occupy him the rest of his Ufe.

When he joined the America staff in 1943, the tide was turning in Europe,
and he began to look toward the postwar world. He wrote about proposals for
an international peace organization elaborated at Dumbarton Oaks in 1944. In
1945, he covered the San Francisco Conference on International Organization
which produced the United Nations Charter, and in 1946 was in London for the
First General Assembly of the United Nations. He also traveled in Europe, reporting back on postwar conditions.
In 1948, he enroUed in the Graduate Institute of International Studies of the

University of Geneva, where he did his doctoral dissertation on papal diplomatic history. This work, revised and expanded, bore fruit in the pubUcation of
Vatican Diplomacy by Princeton University Press in 1959, which in I960 won
the John Gilmary Shea Prize of American CathoUc Historical Association. After
completing his studies, he returned to America in 1952, continuing to write on
international issues such as the United Nations, disarmament, and the situation
of the Church in Eastern Europe. He was a member of the American CathoUc
Historical Association from 1959 until his death.

Father Graham's scholarly interests led him to examine the role of the Holy

See during World War II, a topic of Uttle pubUc interest until "The Deputy," the

1963 play by RoU0 Hochhuth criticizing Pius XII for aUegedly doing nothing to

help the Jews during the war. Father Graham became and remained one of the

pope's staunchest defenders. "The charges against Pope Pius XII were false, dishonest, and artificial," he argued. "It's quite unfair what has been done to him."

From 1 966 to 1 98 1 , he was one of four editors responsible for producing Actes

et documents du Saint-Siège relatifs à la Seconde Guerre Mondiale, an elevenvolume coUection of 5,000 documents pubUshed by the Vatican Press.

362NOTES AND COMMENTS

Since Father Graham had the complete confidence of Vatican officials and
since he was such a strong defender of Pius XII, some did not trust his views.
But his knowledge of his specialty was encyclopedic. In any argument he could
overwhelm opposition with names, dates, and other facts. Every time he
thought his career as the semi-official defender of Pius XII had come to an end,
some new controversy would arise, and he would find himself in front of the
cameras and the press. "This is getting a little ridiculous,"he confessed to the Jesuit pubUcation Company in 1990. "The pope died in 1958 and the war's been
over for over 40 years." As late as November, 1996, an article of his made headlines around the world with its description ofVatican diplomatic efforts to find
out about and protest the deportation and kUling ofJews.
Father Graham visited libraries and archives all over Europe coUecting documents on the role of the Vatican in the war. He even used the Freedom of Infor-

mation Act to get documents on U.S. attempts to spy on the Vatican during the
war. His room in Rome was pUed high with papers and press cUppings. His papers, through the good efforts of the archivist Thomas Marshall, SJ. , are now in
the archives of the California Province of the Society ofJesus.
But Bob was most at home in the Vatican Archives, where he was allowed to
wander freely through documents that wUl not be released for decades. I once
asked him what was the point in going through documents that he could not
cite. He smiled and explained his secret methodology. He would discover the
facts in the archives and then go find an old newspaper that had either guessed
the truth or got it through a leak. He would then cite the newspaper as his
source in a footnote.

A complete bibUography of Father Graham's extensive pubUcations does not
yet exist. "I am an opinionated bastard," he told Company with a grin to explain
his prodigious output. He worked at America for twenty-three years, and from
Rome he wrote a monthly column for The Columbian, the Knights of Columbus magazine, for twenty-four years. He was also a regular contributor to La
Civiltà Cattolica, a bi-monthly published by ItaUan Jesuits, whose articles are reviewed by the Vatican Secretariat of State. Besides writing about the Vatican
during the war, he also wrote about the Vatican and Communism, about spies in
the Vatican, and numerous other topics. One of his last publications was The

Vatican and Communism during World War II (Ignatius Press, 1996). When he

died, with David Alvarez he was completing a book on Nazi espionage against
the Vatican.

In Rome Bob Uved frugaUy, trying to support himself with the money from

his Columbian column, although the California province gladly sent him
money whenever he needed it, especiaUy after he stopped publishing the column in 1992. He watched his lire, always taking the bus and never a taxi even
toward the end when his shuffling steps tripped over the cobblestones of
Rome. Although he Uved simply, he would happUy aUow a journalist with an expense account to take him out for dinner whUe he was interviewed. And inter-

NOTES AND COMMENTS363

viewed he was, by practicaUy every Vatican correspondent, visiting journalist,
and scholar interested in learning about any aspect of the Vatican.
Toward the end, Bob had few regrets. He enjoyed the life he led. "I hate to
think what kind of stick-in-the-mud I would have been if I hadn't gone to New
York" to work at America, he told Company. One regret he expressed to me

was his bad treatment of the Scripture scholar Raymond E. Brown, S.S., in his

Columbian column, because although Bob was conservative, he was not by nature mean-spirited. He was good-humored, witty, gracious, and self-deprecating.
During my nine months in Rome researching Inside the Vatican, I Uved with
Bob at VUIa Malta, where he had resided for years as the only non-ItaUan with
the staff of ¿a Civiltà Cattolica. With his introduction,! was welcomed there by
men who enjoyed his company. He was always kind and helpful to me, except

when he would laughingly say that since I had followed in his footsteps from
the California province to America, to studying the Vatican, I was destined to
take his place in Rome. No one can take Bob's place.
Thomas J. Reese, SJ.
Woodstock Theological Center
Georgetown University

Robert Bryan Eno, S.S., professor of theology and church history in the
CathoUc University ofAmerica, died on February 13, 1997, of a heart attack suffered in his study at Theological CoUege. He was born in Hartford, Connecticut,

on November 12, 1936, and studied at St. Thomas Seminary in Bloomfield, Connecticut from 1954 to 1956. Then he attended the CathoUc University of America as a BasseUn Scholar, earning the B.A. and M.A. degrees in phUosophy in
1958 and 1959 respectively. From the same university he received an S.T.L. de-

gree in 1 963; he was ordained to the priesthood for the Archdiocese of Hartford
on May 23, 1963. He became a member of the Society of St. Sulpice in 1965 and

was awarded an S.T.D. degree by the Institut Catholique de Paris in 1969- He
was appointed to the faculty of the School of Sacred Theology in the CathoUc

University of America m 1970 as an assistant professor; he was promoted to the

rank of associate professor in 1976 and to that of ordinary professor in 1989.

When the Department of Church History was estabUshed within the new
School of Religious Studies, he received a joint appointment in it and in the Department of Theology. He was chairman of the Department of Church History
from 1980 to 1985 and again from September, 1989 to December, 1991. Father
Eno's areas of speciaUzation were patristic theology and ancient church history.
In addition to numerous articles he pubUshed the foUowing books: Teaching
Authority in the Early Church (1984), The Rise of the Papacy (1990), and
translations of St. Augustine's newly discovered Letters (1989) and of selected
works of Fulgentius of Ruspe (in press). He served on the editorial boards for

the series "Studies in Christian Antiquity" and "Fathers of the Church," both pubUshed by the CathoUc University ofAmerica Press; he was also American editor
of the Bulletin de Saint-Sulpice. He held the Walter and Mary Tuohy Chair of In-

364NOTES AND COMMENTS

terreligious Studies at John CarroU University during the fall of 1987. Under the
auspices of the Committee on Ecumenical and InterreUgious Affairs of the National Conference of CathoUc Bishops he was a member of the National
Lutheran/Roman CathoUc Dialogue. He had been a member of the American
CathoUc Historical Association since 1973 and advisory editor for ancient
church history of the Catholic Historical Review since 1990. He was noted for
his Uvely sense of humor. The homiUst at the funeral Mass celebrated in the

crypt of the BasiUca of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, the

Very Reverend Howard B. Bleichner, S.S., rector of Theological CoUege, remarked:"He always retained the phUosopher's eyes for the odd, canted corners
of life where the edges never seem to meet. Yet his humor had not the faintest
trace of an edge . . . [He] had truly wonderful idiosyncrasies. He was not only
non-mechanical. He was anti-mechanical. He never learned to drive. He never

learned to use a computer." For about twenty years he ate no meat except hamburgers. "He knew the exact date of birth, episcopal ordination and appointment of aU bishops in the United States and [the birth dates of] aU Sulpicians
which he could recall with precision as if he were reading off a Ust constantly
before his eyes." He was also renowned for his preaching at Theological College; his homilies, in which he "displayed a shrewd practicaUty, a fair but wintry
estimate of human nature and gift for sound, practical advice," were erudite but
never encumbered, almost always witty, and demonstrative of his deep reUgious
sensitivity and piety. Father Bleichner caUed him "an old-style SupUcian" who
had long since made his own the motto of an earUer generation of Sulpicians,
"Gardez la résidence." After another funeral Mass held in Hartford, at which his

old friend the Reverend Richard McBrien of the University of Notre Dame was
the homiUst, Father Eno was interred in St. Mary's Cemetery in that city.

PERIODICAL LITERATURE

general and miscellaneous

Unity and Diversity, Rhetoric and ReaUty: Modeling "the Church." R. N. Swanson.

Journal ofReligious History, 20 (Dec, 1996), 156-174.

La storia deUa toUeranza e deU'intoUeranza cristiana come problema teológico.
Giuseppe Ruggieri. Cristianesimo nella Storia, XVH (Oct., 1996),
463-484.

Geschichte der christiichen Eheauffassung von den Anfangen bis zur Reforma-

tion. Martin Obst. Theologische Rundschau,6\ (4, 1996), 372-387.

Acta Romanorum Pontificum in Archivo Diputationis Valentiae asservata. M."

Luz Mandingorra Llavata. Hispania Sacra, XLVIII Quly-Dec, 1996),
593-635.

Per Ia storida deU'abito francescano. Servus Gieben, O.EM.Cap. Collectanea
Franciscana,^ (3-4, 1996), 431-478.

Catálogo de monjes profesos del monasterio de San Benito El Real de VaUadoUd
(1436-1831). Ernesto Zaragoza Pascual. Studia Monástica, 38 (1, 1996),
83-129.

Denunciation as a Tool of Ecclesiastical Control: The Case of Roman CathoUc

Modernism. Gary Lease. Journal of Modern History, 68 (Dec, 1996),
819-830.

The Vision and Legacy of Christopher Dawson. Christina Scott. Downside Review, CXIV (Oct., 1996), 283-293.

ANŒNT

Presbiteri e vescovi neUa chiesa del I e II secólo. ManUo Simonetti. Vetera Chris-

tianorum,33 (1, 1996), 115-132.
Euseb, HistEccl III, 14-20 und die Frage nach der Christenverfolgung unter
Domitian. Jörg Ulrich. Zeitschriftfür die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft,
87 (3-4, 1996), 269-289.
Kein zweiter Weg? Eine antiiropologische Erweiterung der Zweiwegelehre in
der ApostoUschen Kirchenordnung. Hüdegard König and Josef Lößl.

Zeitschriftfür Kirchengeschichte, 107 (3, 1996), 291-299.

365

366PERIODICAL LITERATURE

"Women's ReUgion" and Second-Century Christianity. Paul McKechnie./owrwa/

ofEcclesiastical History, 47 GuIy 1996), 409-431 .

Il mito soggetto di culto e mezzo di comunicazione sociale neUa iconografía paleocristiana dei secoU H-IV. Antonio QuacquarelU. Vetera Christianorum,
33 (1,1996), 5-24.
Un testo agiografico africano ad AquUeia: gU Acta di GaUonio e dei martiri di

Tímida Regia. Paolo Chiesa. Analecta Bollandiana, 114 (3-4, 1996),
241-268.

Constantin und die Christen. AdoU Martin Ritter. Zeitschriftfür die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, 87 (3-4, 1996), 251-268.
UUUa's Own Conversion. Hagith Sivan. Harvard Theological Review, 89 (Oct.,
1996), 373-386.
PostiUe in margine al complesso dei santi MarceUino e Pietro al III migUo deUa
via Labicana. Roberto Giordani. Latomus, 55 (Jan-Mar., 1996), 127-147.
Pope Siricius' "Simplicity" (Jerome, epist. 127, 9, 3). Neit Adkin. Vetera Christianorum, 33 (1, 1996), 25-28.
Die Cañones synodi Romanorum ad GaUos episcopos—die älteste Dekretale?

Detlev Jasper. Zeitschriftfür Kirchengeschichte, 107 (3, 1996), 319-326.

Theodosius and Ambrose: The Church Reconciled and Reconciling. Andrew
Harmlton. Pacifica, 9 (Oct., 1996), 271-287.
Baptistères paléochrétiens du Gebel Zäwiye (Syrie). Jean-Pascal Fourdrin.

Cahiers Archéologiques, 44 (1996), 5-12.

Pope Bontface I, the Pelagian Controversy and the Growth of Papal Authority.

Pearce Carefoote. Augustiniana, 46 (3-4, 1996), 261-289.

Evergetismo ecclesiastico e laico neUa Giordania bizantina ed ommayade nel
V-VIII secólo. Testimonianze epigrafiche. Basema Hamarneh. Vetera Christianorum, 33 (1, 1996), 57-75.
La grotta di S. Biagio a CasteUammare di Stabia (NapoU). Primi appunti per un

tentativo di recupero. Gioia BerteUi. Cahiers Archéologiques, 44 (1996),
49-75.

Saints, Ghosts, and the AfterUfe of the Roman VUIa. John Percival. L'Antiquité
Classique, LXV (1996), 161-175.
Der Christus medicus und die Sancti medici. Das wechselvoUe Verhältnis

zweier Grundmotive christUcher Frömmigkeit zwischen Spätantike und
Früher Neuzeit. Hubertus Lutterbach. Saeculum, 47 (2, 1996), 239-281 .
La società ecclesiastica neU'ItaUa del VI secólo: clericalis ordo e scrinia apostólica attraverso l'Epistolario di papa Gregorio Magno. SUvia Acerbi. His-

pania Sacra, XLVIII (July-Dec, 1996), 541-560.

PERIODICAL UTERATURE367

Die Königs- und Privaturkunden für die Reimser KUche bis gegen 900. Martina
Stratmann. Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 52 (1,
1996), 1-55.
La Vie de Saint Jean, higoumène de Scété au VIP siècle. Ugo Zanetti. Analecta
Bollandiana, 114 (3-4, 1996), 275-405.
The Bishop as Pastor and SoUtary: Bede and the Spiritual Authority of the Monk-

Bishop. Simon J. Co&tes.Journal ofEcclesiastical History, 47 (Oct., 1996),
601-619.

GU affreschi iconoclastici della chiesa di Chimera. Vicenzo Ruggieri, Franco

Giordano, and AntoneUo Furnari. Cahiers Archéologiques, 44 (1996),
33-48.

Der byzantinische BUderstreit. Hans George Thümmel. Theologische RundschauM (4, 1996), 355-371.
Seafarers and Stay-at-Homes: Anglo-Saxon Nuns and Mission. Catherine

Wybourne. Downside Review, CXTV (Oct., 1996), 246-266.

Eine Brief-Instruktion aus dem Hofkreis Karls des Großen an einen geistlichen
Missus. Rudotf Pokorny. Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 52 (1,1996), 57 -83.
Saint Olaf's "Cruelty": Violence by the Scandinavian King frh^preted over the

Centuries. Asko Timonen./owrwa/ of Medieval History, 22 (Sept., 1996),
285-296.

Prayer and Politics Ui Medieval Brittany: The Malting of Saint-Georges. Laura

MeUinger. American Benedictine Review, 47 (Dec, 1996), 433-444.
Sources of Reform in the Episcopate of Airard of Nantes, 1050-1054. WUUam
Ziezulewicz./owraa/ ofEcclesiastical History, 47 GuIy, 1996), 432-445.
Body Snatching and Episcopal Power: Archbishop Anno II of Cologne
(1056-75), Burials in St. Mary's ad gradus, and the Minority of King Henry
IV Jonathan Rotondo-McCord. Journal of Medieval History, 22 (Dec,
1996), 297-312.

La Chronica monasterii sancti Michaelis Clusini a confronto con altre

tradizioni micaeUche. Immacolata AuUsa. Vetera Christianorum, 33 (1,

1996), 29-56.
An Eleventh-Century Account of the Foundation Legend of Laurencekirk, and of
Queen Margaret's PUgrimage There. Alan Macquarrie. Innes Review, XLVII
(Autumn, 1996), 95-109.
Un ateUer cappadocien du XIe siècle à Maçan-Goreme. Nicole Thierry Cahiers

Archéologiques, 44 (1996), 117-140.

ApostoUc Embraces in Communion Scenes of Byzantine Macedonia. Sharon EJ.

Gerstel. CahiersArchéologiques, 44 (1996), 141-148.

368PERIODICAL LITERATURE

Der häretische Papst und seine Immunität im Mittelalter. Thomas Prügl. Münchener Theologische Zeitschrift, 47 (3, 1996), 197-215.

An Anglo-Norman Treatise on Female ReUgious. Tony Hunt. Medium Mvum,
LXTV (2, 1995), 205-231.

La dUfusione del culto micaelico in PugUa tra XI e XII secólo. SUvia Bettocchi.
Vetera Christianorum, 33 (1, 1996), 133-162.
De origine Hospitalariorum Hierosolymitanorum—Vom klösterlichen PUger-

hospital zur internationalen Organisation. Michael Matzke. Journal of

Medieval History, 22 (Mar., 1996), 1-23.

A propos des peintures de Berzé-la-VUle.Yves Christie. CahiersArchéologiques,
44 (1996), 77-84.

Anti-Hagiography: Embrico of Mainz's Vita Mahumeti. John Tolan. Journal of
Medieval History, 22 (Mar., 1996), 25-41.
Images, Jurisdiction, and the Treasury of Merit. Robert W Shaffern./owrwa/ of
Medieval History, 22 (Sept., 1996), 237-247.
Monastic Burials of Non-Patronal Lay Benefactors. David Postles./OMrw«Z ofEc-

clesiastical History, 47 (Oct., 1996), 620-637.

Einige Notizen zu den Anfängen des Doppelklosters Averbode im 12. Jahrhundert. Bernhard Benedixen. Analecta Praemonstratensia, LXXII (3-4,
1996), 171-199.

"Ohne Kommunikation würde Chaos herrschen." Zur Bedeutung von Informationsaustausch, Briefverkehr und Boten bei Bernhard von Clairvaux. Jürg

ZulUger. Archivfür Kulturgeschichte, 78 (2, 1 996), 25 1 -276.

La lettre d'Evervin de Steinfeld à Bernard de Clairvaux de 1143: un document

essentiel et méconnu. Anne Brenon. Heresis, No. 25 (T)ec., 1995), 7-28.

Tending the Lord's Vineyard: Cistercians, Rhetoric and Heresy, 1 143-1229. Part
I: Bernard of Clairvaux, the 1 143 sermons and the 1 145 preaching mission.
Beverly M. Kienzle. Heresis, No. 25 (Dec, 1995), 29-61.

Muerte, veneno y enfermedad, metáforas medievales de la herejía. EmUio Mitre
Fernández. Heresis, No. 25 G>ec, 1995), 63-84

Doctrine, PoUtics, and Purgation. The Vision of Tnúthgal and the Vision of

Owein at St. Patrick's Purgatory. Carl WatkUis. Journal of Medieval History, 22 (Sept., 1996), 225-236.
"Le plus subtU ouvrir du monde": Godefroy de Huy, orfèvre mosan. PhUippe
George. Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, 39 (Oct.-Dec, 1996), 321-338.

Peter of Blois and the Later Career of Reginald fitzjocelin. Lena Wahlgren. English Historical Review, CXI (Nov., 1996), 1202-1215.

Il Magister OspedaUero Ruggero Des Moulins neUa crisi finale del regno latino
di Gerusalemme (1182-1187). Giuseppe Ligato. Antonianum, LXXI GuIy-

Sept., 1996), 495-522.

PERIODICAL LITERATURE369

Sainte Lutgarde d'Aywières en son temps (1182-1246). Jean-Baptiste Lefèvre.
Collectanea Cisterciensia, 58 (4, 1996), 277-335.

El Venerable Arnaldo Amalarico (h. 1196-1225): idea y realidad de un cisterciense entre dos cruzadas. Martín Alvira Cabrer. Hispania Sacra, XLVin

Guly-Dec, 1996), 569-591.
Hugues de Digne et le Règle de 1216. BernardVoUot. Collectanea Franciscana,
66(3-4, 1996), 381-429.

European Clerical Envoys to the Mongols: Reports of Western Merchants in
Eastern Europe and Central Asia, 1231-1255. Gregory G. Guzman.Journal

ofMedieval History, 22 (Mar., 1996), 53-67.

Petites digressions sur le "Marteau des hérétiques." Michel Roquebert. Heresis,
No. 25 (Dec, 1995), 85-107.

Lame Margaret of Magdeburg: The Social Function of a Medieval Recluse.

Anneke B. Mulder-Bakker./owm«/ of Medieval History, 22 Gune, 1996),
155-169.

La perduta decorazione trecentesca neU'abside deUa chiesa inferiore del S.
Francesco ad Assisi. Elvio Lunghi. Collectanea Franciscana, 66 (3-4,
1996), 479-510.
The St. Francis Master in the Upper Church of S. Francesco/Assisi: Some Considerations Regarding His Origins. Frank Martin. Gesta, XXX (2, 1996),
177-191.

The Condemnation of Roger Bacon. Paul L. Sidelko. Journal of Medieval His-

tory,22 (Mar., 1996), 69-81.

The Monastic Rule of Patriarch Athanasios I.Thomas S. MUler and John Thomas.
Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 62 (2, 1996), 353-371 .
Atti di Abba Antonio. Osvaldo Raineri. Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 62 (2,
1996), 373-391.
Londoners and London Mendicants in the Late Middle Ages. Jens Röhrkasten.
Journal ofEcclesiastical History, 47 GuIy, 1996), 446-477.
Un registro especial de sùpUcas dirigidas a Clemente VII (1378-1394) en el

códice "Barb. lat. 2101" de la BibUoteca ApostóUcaVaticana. Javier Serra EsteUés. Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, 33 (1995), 7-39.
Guy de Roye, un évêque au temps du Grand Schisme. Vincent Tabbagh. Revue
Historique, CCXCVI, No. 599 Guly-Sept., 1996), 29-58.
Enrique III de CastUla y la promoción eclesiástica del clero: las inciativas poUticas y las súpUcas beneficíales (1390-1406). José Manuel Nieto Soria.

Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, 33 (1995), 41-89.

Le voeu de Charles VI. Essai sur la dévotion des rois de France aux XIIP et XIVe

siècles. Bernard Guenée.Journal des Savants, Gan.-June, 1996), 67-135.
The Inquisitor's Arguments against Resby, Ui 1408. Lawrence Moonon. Innés
/fewew, XLVII (Autumn, 1996), 127-135.

370PERIODICAL LITERATURE

Archivium Sacrœ Poenitentiariœ Apostolices in the Vatican Archives as a
Source for Scottish Historians. Janet P. Foggie. Innes Review, XLVII (Autumn, 1996), 110-126.

The WiU of Cardinal Giordano Orsini (ob. 1438). Christopher S. Celenza. Traditio, 51 (\996), 257-286.

"To Free Them from Binding": Women in the Late Medieval EngUsh Parish.
Katherine L. French.Journal ofInterdisciplinary History, XXVHI (Winter,
1997),387-412.
Savonarole dans la pensée du Cardinal Journet. Georges Cottier, O.R Nova &
Vetera, LXXI Guly-Sept., 1996), 21-34.

SLXTEENTH CENTURY

The Crisis of Obedience: God's Word and Henry's Reformation. Richard Rex.

Historicalfournal, 39 (Dec, 1996), 863-894.

The Posthumous Reputation of the Holy Maid of Kent. Diane Watt. Recusant

History, 23 (Oct., 1996), 148-158.

The First Jesuits as "Reformed Priests." Mark Lewis, SJ. Archivum Historicum
Societatis Iesu,TXN Gan.-June, 1996), 111-127.
"Procurfing] in the Common People These Better Behaviors": The Jesuits' Civi-

lizing Mission in Early Modern Naples 1550-1620. JennUer D. Sehfryn. Radical History Review, 67 (Winter, 1997), 4-34.

Exclusion Crises: Poverty, Migration and Parochial ResponsibUity in EngUsh

Rural Communities, c. 1560-1660. Steve Hindle. Rural History, 7 (Oct.,
1996), 125-149.

A Divine Apparition or Demonic Possession? Female Agency and Church Authority in Demonic Possession in Sixteenth-Century France. Moshe
Sluhovsky. Sixteenth CenturyJournal, XXVII (Winter, 1996), 1039-1055.
Gemalte Theologie in der Sixtinischen KapeUe. TeU III: Die SibyUen und
Propheten. Heinrich W PfeUfer, S.I. Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, 33
(1995), 91-1 16.
ReUgious Wars and the "Common Peace": AngUcan Anti-War Sentiment in EUzabethan England. Ben Lowe. Albion, 28 (TaU, 1996), 415-435.
Le marufeste retrouvé de Théodore de Bèze et de ses coUègues contre la formule de concorde (1578). Reinhard Bodenmann. Bulletin de la Société de
l'Histoire du Protestantisme Français, 142 Guly-Sept., 1996), 345-387.
Diego Merino de Unírmela, célebre escritor del siglo XVI, médico del Monasterio durante las obras de El Escorial (1582-1585). E. Maganto Pavón and E.

Sánchez Fernandez-VUlarán. La Ciudad de Dios, CCLX (May-Aug., 1996),
373-391.

PERIODICAL UTERATURE371

"Sedente Sisto V": arte e committenza a Roma Ui S. Spirito in Sassia. Antonella
Pampalone. Rassengna degli Archivi di Stato, LV (May-Dec, 1995),
268-303-

SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES

Los hospitales trinitarios de Argel y Túnez. Borufacio Poires Alonso. Hispania
Sacra, XLVIII Guly-Dec, 1996), 639-717.
Plague Imagery as Metaphor for Heresy in Rubens' The Miracles ofSaint Francis Xavier. Christine M. Boeckl. Sixteenth CenturyJournal, XXVII (Winter,
1996), 979-995.
A Lost Crucifixion by Rubens. Albert J. Loomie. Burlington Magazine, 138
(Nov., 1996), 734-739.
Jesuits and Jacobites: The cultus of St. Margaret. Mark DUworth. Innes Review,
XLVII (Autumn, 1996), 169-180.
The Glory of the "Third Time": John Eaton as Contra-Puritan. T. D. Bozeman.
Journal ofEcclesiastical History, 47 (Oct., 1996), 638-654.

La communauté protestante de Saint-Germain-des-Prés (1635-1640). Céline
Houzard. Bulletin de la Société de l'Histoire du Protestantisme Français,

142 Guly-Sept., 1996), 389-440.
Arminianism in the Lord's Assembly: Glasgow, 1638. David G. MuUan. Records of
the Scottish Church History Society,XXVl (1996), 1-30.
Anti-Jesuit Rioting by Knights of St. John during the Malta Carnival of 1639. D. F.
AUen. Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, LXV Gan.-June, 1996), 3-30.
Die Ordensreform des 17. Jahrhunderts im AUtag einer schwäbischen Reichsabtei. Die Consuetudines Minoraugienses. Ulrich G. Leinsle, O.Praem.
Analecta Praemonstratensia, LXXII (3-4, 1996), 200-234.

Das päpstUche Staatssekretariat unter Urban VIII: Verzeichnis der Minutanten
und ihrer Minuten. Andreas Kraus. Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, 33
(1995), 117-167.
Drei KoroUarien zum Breve "ZeIo Domus Dei" (26. November 1648): Editionstechnik, Nachdruckgeschichte, Vorgeschichte. Konrad Repgen. Archivum
Historiae Pontificiae, 33 (1995), 315-333CathoUcs, Quakers and ReUgious Persecution in Restoration Aberdeen. Gordon
DesBrisay. Innes Review, XLVII (Autumn, 1996), 136-168.
P. Angelo MoreUi. BrandegUo (Lucca) 1608-Chieti 1685. Osvaldo Tosti.
Archivum Scholarum Piarum,XX (No. 40, 1996), 23-93·
Was Isaac Newton an Arian? Thomas C. Pfaenmaier.Journal of the History of
Ideas, 58 (Jan., 1997), 57-80.

The Kongo Kingdom and the Papacy. Richard Gray. History Today, 41 (Jan.,
1997), 44-49.

372PERIODICAL LITERATURE

Les protestants de La Roque d'Antéron (1685-1790). Céline BoreUo. Bulletin
de la Société de l'Histoire du Protestantisme Français, 142 (July-Sept.,
1996), 441-474.

Visitatio GeneraUs et ApostoUca Provinciarum Ultramontanarum in Germania et
Polonia (1695). Osvaldo Tosti. Archivum Scholarum Piarum,XX (No. 40,
1996),95-149.

François Martin (1652-1722), Professeur à l'Université de Louvain. Lucien
Ceyssem. Augustiniana, 46 (3-4, 1996), 371-404.
Early EvangeUcal ReUgion in the Far North: A Kulturkampf. W R. Mackay.

Records of the Scottish Church History Society,XXVI (1996), 104-134.
Wer war AUons von liguori und was woUte er? Otto Weiss. Spicilegium Historicum CSs.R.,XUV (2, 1996), 395-418.

La spirituaUtà redentorista deUe origini. Santé Raponi. Spicilegium Historicum
C.SS.R, XLTV (2, 1996), 419-498.

De verkiezUig van Siardus Vanden Nieuweneijnde tot Abt van Tongerlo en de

Habsburgse kerkpoUtiek (1745/46). L. C. Van Dyck, O.Praem. Analecta

Praemonstratensia,LXXn (3-4, 1996), 235-254.

Die Kanonisationsfeier des hl. FideUs von Sigmaringen Ui St. Peter am 29. Juni
1746. Oktavian Schmucki. Collectanea Franciscana, 66 (3-4, 1996),
511-561.

1767: por qué los jesuítas. José Andrés-GaUego. Hispania Sacra, XLVIII GuIyDec, 1996), 491-512.

The Suppression of the Society ofJesus Ui Bohemia. Paul Shore. Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, LXV Gan.-June, 1996), 139-156.
"... quod non miserit prolem ad scholam." ReUgiöse BUdung, Schulalltag und
Kinderwelten im Spiegel von SendgerichtsprotokoUen des Fürstbistums

Münster. Andreas Holzem. Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, 78 (2, 1996),
325-362.

A Question of Culture: The Welsh Church and the Bishopric of St. Asaph,

1780-1820. Matthew Cragoe. Welsh History Review, 18 (Dec, 1996),

228-254.

Faire retraite au couvent dans le Paris des Lumières. Sophie Hasquenoph. Revue

Historique, CCXCV, No. 598 (Apr.-June, 1996), 353-367.
"Pierce the Dim Clouds": The Correspondence of Francis TurvUle with his
Chaplain, Thomas Potts, 1785-1789. WUUam Gibson. Recusant History, 23
(Oct., 1996), 166-177.

Andrew Hunter of Barjarg (1744-1809): EvangeUcal Divine in an Age of Improvement. David E Wright. Records of the Scottish Church History Soci-

ety, XXVI (1996), 135-168.

Auf dem Weg zum "Herrnhuter höherer Ordnung"? Schleiermacher und Herrn-

hut. Dorette Seibert. Evangelische Theologie, 56 (5, 1996), 395-414.

PERIODICAL LITERATURE373

Von der Freundschaft zur GeselUgkeit. Leitkonfigurationen der Theorieentwicklung des jungen Schleiermacher bis zu den "Reden." Bernd Oberdor-

fer. Evangelische Theologie, 56 (5, 1996), 415-434.
Die Österreichische Kirche am Ende des alten Reiches (1790-1806): Reflexionen zum "Josephinismus." EUsabeth Kovács. Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, 33 (1995), 335-349.
L'exode des émigrés français en HoUande en 1795: le Journal de l'abbé de la Sepouze, vicaire général de Tours. Hugues Marquis. Revue Historique,

CCXCV, No. 598 (Apr.-June, 1996), 407-427.

NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH CENTURIES

Reich, Nation und Kirche in der groß- und kleindeutschen Historiographie. Holger Th. Graf. HistorischesJahrbuch, 1 16 (2, 1996), 367-394.
Nation und Konfession. Varianten des poUtischen KathoUzismus Un Europa des

19. Jahrhunderts. AdoU M. Birke. Historisches Jahrbuch, 116 (2, 1996),

395-416.

John Lingard and TheAnglo-Saxon Church. Peter PhilUps. Recusant History, 23
(Oct., 1996), 178-189.

La Congregación de Asuntos Eclesiásticos Extraordinarios y España (18141913). Vicente Cárcel Ortí. Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, 33 (1995),
351-365.

Confessional PoUcy and the Limits of State Action: Frederick WUUam III and the

Prussian Church Union, 1817-1840. Christopher Clark. HistoricalJournal,
39 G>ec, 1996), 985-1004.

Congregación de Obispos y Regulares: votos de reUgiosas en Francia y otros
asuntos disciplinares (1829-1861). Fernando de Lasala, S.I. Archivum His-

toriae Pontificae, 33 (1995), 169-196.

"Our Brethren of the North": The Scottish Episcopal Church and the Oxford
Movement. Peter Nockles. Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 47 (Oct.,
1996), 655-682.

La Société Saint-Bertin de Saint-Omer,une société de prêtres voués à l'éducation

au XLX" siècle. Grandeur et déclin. Eric Poteau. Revue du Nord, LXXVHI
(July-Sept., 1996), 519-567.
Exclaustrados en Burgos (1835-1837). Alberto Pacho Polvorinos. Burgense, 37
(l,1996),329-358.
"To Be Aglow with Civic Ardors": The "Godly Commonwealth" in Glasgow,

1843-1914. CaUum G. Brown. Records of the Scottish Church History Society,XXVI (1996), 169-195.
The Case of the Reverend James Shore. Grayson Carter.Journal ofEcclesiastical History, 41 (July, 1996), 478-504.

374PERIODICAL UTERATURE

Il Conclave del 1846 e l'elezione di Papa Pio LX. Stefano Gizzi. Pio LX, XXV

(Sept.-Dec., 1996), 183-209-

John BuU and the Scarlet Woman: Charles Kingsley and Anti-CathoUcism Ui Vic-

torian Literature. Kevin L. Morris. Recusant History, 23 (Oct., 1996),
190-218.

La Guardia Palatina d'Onore. Una istituzione Piaña scomparsa. Niccolö Del Re.

Pio IX, XXV (Sept.-Dec, 1996), 221-242.

The "Big Rat" and the "Mad Priest of Turin"—Don Bosco's Relationship with
Prime Minister Rattazzi. Michael Ribotta. Journal of Salesian Studies, Wl
(FaU, 1996), 55-74.
The Catholic Readings: Writing for the Masses. Stephen Whelan. Journal of
Salesian Studies,Nll (TaU, 1996), 75-128.
High Churchmen and Anglo-CathoUcs: WUUam Gladstone and the Eucharistie

Controversy Ui the Scottish Episcopal Church, 1856-60. Rowan Strong.
Journal ofReligious History, 20 (T>ec, 1996), 175-184.

Pio LX: consigU e parole di conforto per Don Bosco, fedele servitore deUa
Chiesa. Arnaldo Pedrini. Pio IX, XXV (Sept.-Dec, 1996), 210-220.
A Culture of Denunciation: Peasant Labor Migration and Religious Anathemati-

zation in Rural Russia, 1860-1905. Jeffrey Burds. Journal of Modern History, 68 (Pec, 1996), 786-818.

Die Bevölkerung der Osterinsel und ihre Missionierung. Josefine Huppertz.

Neue Zeitschriftfür Missionswissenschaft, 52 (4, 1996), 269-294.

ConcUÎ provinciaU e "conventus episcoporum" da Pio LX a Leone XIII. Pietro

Caiazza. Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, 33 (1995), 197-245.

The Eirenics of John Henry Newman. Vincent Ferrer Blehl, SJ. Recusant His-

tory, 23 (Oct., 1996), 219-227.
Fray Félix María de Arrieta y Llano, 1864-1879 GD- José Chamizo de la Rubia.
Hispania Sacra, XLVIII (July-Dec, 1996), 443-488.

The Making of an Ethnic CoUectivity: Irish CathoUc Immigrants in NineteenthCentury Christchurch. Lyndon A. Fraser. Journal of Religious History, 20
(Dec, 1996), 210-227.
Controvertida reinstalación de los PP. Jesuítas en Tarragona (1876-1877). Luis

García Iglesias. Miscelánea Comillas, 54 (July-Dec, 1996), 431-438.

Qualche osservazione su alcune lettere di Carlo Maria Curci. Paolo Carusi.

Rassegna Storica del Risorgimento, LXXXIII (July-Sept., 1996), 339-376.

Kaiser Franz Joseph I. und Papst Leo XIII: Ihre Sorge um die kathoUsche Kirche
bei den Ost- und Südslawen. Petar Vrankic . Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, 33 (1995), 247-273.
A Grammar of Dissent: Flatland, Newman, and the Theology of ProbabiUty.
Jonathan Smith, Lawrence I. Berkove, and Gerald A. Baker. Victorian Studies, 39 (Winter, 1996), 129-150.

PERIODICAL LITERATURE375

The Disruptive Union, 1890-1900,in a Hebridean Presbytery. Douglas B. A.Ans-

deU. Records ofthe Scottish Church History Society,XXVl (1996), 55-103.

Il card. Atfredo Ildefonso Schuster. GU anni deUa sua formazione come uomo di

preghiera. Giandomenico Mucci, S.I. La Civiltà Cattolica, 147, IV (Nov. 16,
1996)338-350.

"A Monk in Court": An Example of ReUgious Intolerance in Late NineteenthCentury England. Rene KoUar, O.S.B. American Benedictine Review, 41
(Dec, 1996), 358-384.

U decadentismo spagnolo fra letteratura e crisi modernista. Luis de Llera. His-

pania Sacra, XLVIII (July-Dec, 1996), 413-442.

The Decline of Christianity in Twentieth-Century Britain. Thomas WiUiam

Heyck. Albion, 28 (FaU, 1996), 437-453.
Early Lutheran Schools UiVictoria.AustraUa. Charles Meyer. Concordia Institute
Historical Quarterly, 69 (TaU, 1996), 133-148.
Il cardinal Mercier. Un prelato d'avanguardia. Roger Aubert. Cristianesimo
nella Storia,XVll (Oct., 1996), 517-539.
Bourne, Norfolk, and the Irish ParUamentarians: Roman CathoUcs and the Edu-

cation BUl of 1906. V. Alan McCleUand. Recusant History, 23 (Oct., 1996),
228-256.

Benedetto XV e U nazionaUsmo. Roberto Morozzo deUa Rocca. Cristianesimo

nella Storia,XYl\ (Oct., 1996), 541-566.

Österreich-Ungarn aus der Sicht des Vatikans: Die Instruktion für den ApostoU-

schen Nuntius in Wien, Teodoro VaUré di Bonzo, vom Sommer 1916. EUsabeth Movies. Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, 33 (1995), 275-298.

Der Hl. Stuhl und der Vertrag von VersaiUes. Stefan Samerski. Zeitschrift für

Kirchengeschichte, 107 (3, 1996), 355-375.

Approcci aUa Uturgia in Francia tra le due guerre. Maria Paiano. Cristianesimo
nella Storia,XVlI (Oct., 1996), 567-610.
La mancata nomina cardinalizia del P. Tacchi Venturi. Relazione deU'interessato.

Giacomo Martina. Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, LXV (Jan.-June,
1996X101-109.
Il "ProtocoUo di Auschwitz" e U Vaticano nel 1944. Robert A. Graham, SJ. La
Civiltà Cattolica, 147, IV (Nov. 16, 1996), 330-337.

The Church PoUcy of the SED Regime in East Germany, 1949-89: The Fateful
DUemma. John A. Moses. Journal of Religious History, 20 (Dec, 1996),
228-245.

Algunas reflexiones eclesiológicas de la Conferencia Episcopal Española
(1966- 1990) como indicadores del camino de renovación postconcUiar de
la Iglesia de España. Fernando Chica AreUano. Revista Española de

Teok>gía,\N\ Guly-Sept., 1996), 361-403.

376PERIODICAL LITERATURE

La "Construcción de América"frente a Ia "Destrucción de las Indias." Isacio Pérez

Fernández, O.P Studium, XXXVI (2, 1996), 235-257.

Maryland Quakers in England, 1659-1720. Kenneth CarroU. Maryland Historical Magazine, 91 (Winter, 1996), 451-466.
James Davenport's Post-Bonfire Ministry, 1743-1757. Robert E. Cray, Jr. Historian, 59 (TaU, 1996), 59-73.

"AU Matters and Things Relating to ReUgion and MoraUty": The Virginia
Burgesses' Committee for ReUgion, 1769 to 1775. Paul K. Longmore./owr-

nal of Church and State, 38 (Autumn, 1996), 775-797.
"The Genuine Presbyterian Whine": Presbyterian Worship Ui the Eighteenth
Century. WUUam B. Bynum. American Presbyterians, 14 (TaU, 1996),
157-170.

Thomas Coombe, Loyalist. J. Walter High. Pennsylvania History, 62 (Summer,
1995), 276-292.

Jacob Duché: Whig-LoyaUst. Kevin J. DeUape. Pennsylvania History, 62 (Summer, 1995X293-305.

Lightfooted Sam McGiU and the Sanhédrin: The Indiantown Dancing Trial of
1831. J. W. Nelson Chandler. South Carolina Historical Magazine, 97
(Oct., 1996), 272-292.

The RespectabUity of Rebecca Reed: Genteel Womanhood and Sectarian Conflict in AntebeUum America. Daniel A. Cohen.Journal of the Early Republic, 16 (TaU, 1996), 419-461.

The Spiritual PUgrimage of Rachel Stearns, 1834-1837: Reinterpreting Women's

Religious and Social Experiences in the Methodist Revivals of Nineteenth-

Century America. Candy Günther. Church History, 65 (Dec, 1996),
577-595.

The Alleged Abduction of MUIy McPherson and CathoUc Recruitment of Pres-

byterian GUIs. C.Walker Gollar. Church History, 65 G>ec, 1996), 596-608.

Father Mathew's Disciples: American CathoUc Support for Temperance,

1840- 1920. John F. Quinn. Church History,65 (Dec, 1996), 624-640.

A Consistent Deist: Sherman and ReUgion. B. Anthony Gannon. Civil War His-

tory,XUl (Dec, 1996), 307-321.
The Meaning of Participation: White Protestant Women in AntebeUum Houston
Churches. Angela BosweU. Southwestern Historical Quarterly, 99 (July,
1995), 27-47.

Models of Migration: The Historiography of the Irish Pioneers in South Texas.

Graham Davis. Southwestern Historical Quarterly, 99 (Jan., 1996),
327-348.

PERIODICAL UTERATURE377

Interracial Cooperative Missions among Blacks by Alabama's Baptists,

1868-1882. Edward R. Crowther. Journal of Negro History, LXXX (Sum-

mer, 1995), 131-139.

The InfalUbiUty of the Papal Magisterium as Presented in the Pastoral Letters of
the Bishops of the United States after Vatican I. Paul K. Hennessy, CEC.

Horizons, 23 (Spring, 1996), 7-28.

The Protestant EnUghtenment Revisited: Daniel Coit Gilman and the Academic
Reforms of the Modern American University. D. G. Wart.Journal ofEcclesi-

astical History, 41 (Oct., 1996), 683-763.

Matilda AUison on the Anglo-Hispanic Frontier: Presbyterian Schooling in New

Mexico, 1880-1910. Jerry A. Davis. American Presbyterians, 74 (FaU,
1996), 171-182.

Some Scripture Is Inspired by God: Late-NUieteenth-Century Protestants and

the Demise of a Common Bible. Peter J. Thuesen. Church History, 65
(Dec, 1996), 609-623.

Messianism, Holiness, Charisma, and Community: The American-Swedish
Colony in Jerusalem, 1881 - 1933. Yaakov Ariel and Ruth Kark. Church His-

tory, 65 G>ec, 1996), 641-657.
The Founding and Early Expansion of the Salesian Work in the San Francisco
Area from Archival Documents. Arthur Lenti.Journal of Salesian Studies,
VII (TaU, 1996), 1-53.

German Presbyterians or Christian Americans? IntercoUegiate Sports and the
Identity Crisis at the University of Dubuque, 1902-1927. James R. Rohrer.

American Presbyterians,!4 (Vau, 1996), 183-194.

The Social Gospel and ReconcUiation: Henry Sloane Coffin at Madison Avenue
Presbyterian Church. Timothy Beach-Verhey. American Presbyterians, 14
(TaU, 1996), 195-207.
TravaU of a Broken FamUy: EvangeUcal Responses to PentecostaUsm in America,

1906-1916. Grant Wacker. Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 47 (July,

1996), 505-528.
"I wish to thank you for the confidence placed in me": Horace Duncan and the
Construction of the St. Bede Abbey Round Barn. H. Wayne Price and Keith
A. ScuUe. Illinois HistoricalJournal, 89 (Winter, 1996), 198-212.
Trends Ui the Missouri Synod as Reflected in the Lutheran Witness, 1914-1960.

Leland Stevens. Concordia Institute Historical Quarterly, 69 G'aU, 1996),
116-132.

The Monastic Legacy of Frowin Conrad: Founder and Abbot. Joel Rippinger,
O.S.B. American Benedictine Review, 41 (Dec, 1996), 385-413.
The Changing "Jesus Road" : Protestants Reappraise American Indian Missions in
the 1920s and 1930s. James B. LaGrand. Western Historical Quarterly,
XXVII (Winter, 1996), 479-504.

378PERIODICAL LITERATURE

Prophets of a New Social Order: Presbyterians and the FeUowship of Southern

Churchmen, 1934-1963. Don Donahue. American Presbyterians, 14 (Tall,

1996), 209-221.
A Baptist's DUemma: Christianity, Discrimination and the Desegregation of Mercer University. Alan Scot WUUs. Georgia Historical Quarterly, LXXXLX
(TaU, 1996), 595-615.
U.S.-Vatican Relations: Toward a Post-Cold War Convergence? Jo Renee Formi-

cola.Journal of Church and State, 38 (Autumn, 1996), 799-815.
LATIN AMERICAN

El proceso de canonización de Santa Rosa (nuevas luces sobre la identidad
crioUa en el Perú colonial). Teodoro Hampe Martínez. Hispania Sacra,
XLVIII (July-Dec, 1996), 719-740.

El deUto de soUcitación en el Santo Oficio de Lima. René MUlar Carvacho. His-

pania 5«cr«,XLVffl (July-Dec, 1996), 741-803A History of Christianity in BrazU. Antonio Gouveia Mendonça. International

Review ofMission, LXXXV (July, 1996), 367-387.

Jesuítas europeos e hispanoamericanos en Santo Domingo (1650-1767). José
Luis Sáez, SJ. Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, LXV (Jan.-June, 1996),
31-99.

Familial Religiosity and Images in the Home: Eighteenth-Century Puebla de Los
Angeles, Mexico. Rosalva Loreto López. Journal of Family History, 22
(Jan., 1997), 26-49.
Die Kirche in Spanisch-Amerika um 1800 nach den ReiseschÜderungen Alexanders von Humboldt. Johannes Meier. Cristianesimo nella Storia, XVII
(Oct., 1996),485-516.
Texas Governor Manuel Salcedo and the Court-Martial of Padre Miguel Hidalgo,

1810-1811. FeUx D. Almaráz. Southwestern Historical Quarterly, 99 (Apr.,
1996), 435-464.

The Mennonite Colonization of Chihuahua: Reflections of Competing Visions.
Martina E. WiU. The Americas, 53 (Jan., 1997), 353-378.
La Viceprovincia dependiente de Centroamérica de Ia Compañía de Jesús,

1938-1958. II: La labor de la Compañía en Guatemala. Francisco Javier
Gómez Diez. Miscelánea Comillas, 54 (July-Dec, 1996), 407-430.

Martirio en la Iglesia actual. Testigos de Cristo en El Salvador. José M." Tojeira.

Miscelánea Comillas, 54 (July-Dec, 1996), 339-374.

OTHER BOOKS RECEIVED

Abbott, Mary. Life Cycles in England, 1560- 1720: Cradle to Grave. (NewYork:
Routiedge. 1996. Pp. Lx, 310. $65.00 hardback; $1995 paperback.)
Aichele, George. Jesus Framed. [BibUcal Limits.] (New York: Routiedge. 1996.

Pp. x, 200. $55-00 hardback; $17.95 paperback.)
Bonner, Gerald. Church and Faith in Patristic Tradition. Augustine, Pelagianism, and Early Christian Northumbria. [CoUected Studies Series.]

GSrookfield,Vt. :Variorum, Ashgate Publishing Company. 1996. Pp. xiv, 316.
$89-95.) Contents: I. "Augustine's Conception of Deification"; II. "The Doc-

trine of Sacrifice:Augustine and the Latin Patristic Tradition"; HI. "How Pelagian was Pelagius? An Examination of the Contentions of Torgny Bohlin";
IV "The Significance of Augustine's De Gratia Novi Testamenti" ;\. "PeIagianism Reconsidered";VI. "Pelagianism and Augustine" ;\TI. "Augustine and
Pelagianism";VIH. Review: "Working the Earth ofthe Heart":TheMessalian
Controversy in History, Texts, and Language to AD 431- By Columba
Stewart, OSB; LX. "Saint Cuthbert—Soul Friend"; X. "The Christian life in
the Thought of the Venerable Bede"; XI. "Bede and Medieval CivUization";
XII. "Saint Bede in the Tradition ofWestern Apocalyptic Commentary"; XII.
Review: Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People, A Historical
Commentary. By J. M. WaUace-Hadrill. XIV "Bede and His Legacy"; XV:
"Anglo-Saxon Culture and SpirituaUty"; XVI. "Schism and Church Unity";
XVII. "The Extinction of Paganism and the Church Historian"; XVIII. Review: The End ofAncient Christianity. By R. A. Markus; XLX. "Christianity
and the Modern World View."

Bornstein, Daniel, and Roberto Rusconi Gïds.X Women and Religion in Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Translated by Margery J. Schneider. [Women

in Culture and Society] (Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1996. Pp. x,
334. $50.00 cloth; $16.95 paperback.) Contents: Daniel Bornstein,"Women

and ReUgion in Late Medieval Italy: History and Historiography" (pp. 1 -27);
Antonio Rigon, "A Community of Female Penitents in Thirteenth-Century
Padua" (pp. 28-38); Clara Gennaro,"Clare, Agnes, and Their EarUest Followers: From the Poor Ladies of San Damiano to the Poor Clares" (pp. 39-55);
Mario Sensi, "Anchoresses and Penitents m Thirteenth- and Fourteenth-

Century Umbría" (pp. 56-83); Anna Benvenuti Papi, "Mendicant Friars and

Female Pinzochere Ui Tuscany: From Social MarginaUty to Models of Sanctity" (pp. 84-103); Enrico Menestö,"The ApostoUc Canonization Proceedings of Clare of Montefalco, 1318-1319" (pp. 104-129); Chiara Frugoni,

"Female Mystics, Visions, and Iconography" (pp. 130-164); Fernanda
379

380OTHER BOOKS RECEIVED

SorelU, "Imitable Sanctity: The Legend of Maria ofVenice"(pp. 165-181);
Roberto Rusconi,"St. Bernardino of Siena, the Wife, and Possessions" (pp.
182-196);Anna Esposito,"St. Francesca and the Female ReUgious Communities of Fifteenth-Century Rome" (pp. 197-218); GabrieUa Zarri, "Living

Saints: A Typology of Female Sanctity Ui the Early Sixteenth Century" (pp.

219-303); Afterword: Roberto Rusconi,"Women ReUgious in Late Medieval

Italy: New Sources and DUections" (pp. 305-326).
Brackenjoseph ?., S.J., and Majorie Hewitt Suchocki (JEds.). Trinity in Process:
A Relational Theology of God. (New York: Continuum. 1997. Pp. xv, 236.
$34.95.)

Bredero, Adriaan H. Bernard of Clairvaux: Between Cult and History. (Grand

Rapids: William B. Eerdfnans PubUshing Company. 1996. Pp. xiv, 320.
$30.00.) Originally pubUshed Ui Dutch by Kok/Agora in Kampen, The
Netherlands, under the tide Bernard van Clairvaux: tussen cultus en historie, and reviewed by John R. Sommerfeldt ante, LXXX (April, 1994),
339-341.

Britt, Brian. Walter Benjamin and the Bible. (NewYork: Continuum. 1996. Pp.
156. $29.95.)

Carey, Patrick W The Roman Catholics in America. (Westport, Conn.: Praeger.

1996. Pp. xii, 192. $17.95 paperback.) The clothbound edition, entitled

simply The Roman Catholics and pubUshed in 1993 by Greenwood Press,
Westport, Connecticut, was reviewed by Christopher J. Kauffman ante,

LXXXII (April, 1996), 285. This editon is considerably shorter.

Clark, EUzabeth A., and Herbert Richardson (JEds.). Women and Religion: The
Original Sourcebook of Women in Christian Thought. New Revised and

Expanded Edition. (San Francisco: Harper. 1996. Pp. xiii, 386. $20.00 pa-

perback.) OriginaUy pubUshed in 1977.

Clogan, Paul Maurice G^d.). Medievalia et Humanística: Studies in Medieval
and Renaissance Culture. New Series: Number 23· (Janham, Md.: Row-

man & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. 1996. Pp. xi, 199. $65.00.)

Coppola, Gauro, and Casimira Grandi Gîds.). La "conta délie anime" Popolazioni e registri parrocchiali: questioni di método ed esperienze.

(Bologna: Società éditrice U Mulino. 1989. Pp. 336. 35.000 lire paperback.)

The first part,"Fonti e problemi di método," contains the foUowing articles:
Paolo Prodi, "Il ConcUio di Trento e i Ubri parrocchiali. La registrazione
corne strumento per un nuovo statuto deU'individuo e deUa famiglia neUo
Stato confessionale deUa prima età moderna" (pp. 13-20); Paola Carrucci
and Claudio Schiavoni,"Le scritture parrocchiaU in Italia tra XVI e XX secólo. Un patrimonio in bUico tra Stato e Chiesa in cerca di tutela e ordinamento" (pp. 21-33); Carlo A. Corsini,"Per Io studio deUa struttura e deUa

mobuità sociale deUa popolazione del passato" (pp. 35-49); Lamberto So-

Uani, Aldo AneUi, Enzo Lucchetti, and Enzo Siri, "SimUarità culturali e bio-

OTHER BOOKS RECEIVED381

logiche tra popolazioni attraverso i cognomi. Un esempio con 48 comuni
del Trentino-Alto Adige" (pp. 51-67); Oddo Bucci,"Tre UvelU di disciplina
degli archivi ecclesiastici d'intéressé storico" (pp. 69-83); Salvatore Palese,
"Conservazione e valorizzazione deUe fonti archivistiche ecclesiastiçhe.

Considerazioni e proposte" (pp. 85-101); GabrieUa De Longis Cristaloi,
"Rapporti deUe sovrintendenze con gU archivi ecclesiastici" (pp. 103-1 10).

The second part,"Esperienze a confronto," contains the foUowing articles:
Bruno Anatra,Anna Maria Gatti, and Giuseppe Puggioni,"I cinque Ubri neUa
Sardegna centro-meridionale" (pp. 113-133); Mario Spedicato, "La 'conta
deUe anime' neUa diócesi di Lecce in época moderna. Orientamenti pas-

torali e problemi demografici" (pp. 135-159); Giuseppe Plessi, "Censi-

mento dei Ubri canonici conservati neUe parrocchie deU'Emilia-Romagna"

(pp. 161-170); Süvio Tramontin, "Indicazioni deUe visite pastoraU per la
'conta deUe anime': U caso veneziano" (pp. 171-185); AnnaUsa Bruni,

"Un'esperienza demográfica d'ambito urbano: S. Salvador, parrocchia

veneziana tra XVI e XVn secólo" (pp. 187-208); Patrizia Bravetti,"Ricerche
socio-demografiche suUa presenza tedesca a Venezia aUa fine del Cinque-

cento" (pp. 209-216); Giovanna CappeUetto,"Prime indagini in un archivio
parrocchiale véneto: U Ubro deUe 'Genealogie deUe famiglie di CogoUo'"

(pp. 217-227); Ivana Pastori Bassetto,"Il processo di Unmigrazione come
appare dai registri parrocchiaU di Ala" (pp. 229-238); Giovanni Dal Piaz,
"L'archivio deUa Pieve di Torra" (pp. 239-250); Casimira Grandi," 'Curatore
d'anime deUo stato civUe': U párroco durante la seconda dominazione asburgica (1814-1918)" (pp. 251-273). The third part, "Una anaUsi regionale," contains the foUowing articles: Livio Sparapani,"I Ubri parrocchiaU
deUa diócesi di Trento" (pp. 277-319); Eugenio Sonnino,"La 'conta deUe

anime': conclusioni in forma di proposta" (pp. 321-336).
Crawford, Patricia. Women and Religion in England, 1500-1720. [Christianity
and Society in the Modern World.] (NewYork: Routiedge. 1996. Pp. x, 268.
$22.95 paperback.) OriginaUy pubUshed in 1993.

Csordas, Thomas J. Language, Charisma, and Creativity; The Ritual Life of a
Religious Movement. (Berkeley: University of CaUfornia Press. 1997. Pp.

xxii, 320. $40.00.)
Cunningham, Mary Rose,C.S.C. (Ed.). Calendar ofDocuments in the Archival
Center, Archdiocese ofLos Angeles, for His Eminence, James Francis Car-

dinal Mclntyre,Volume Three: 1921-1979. (Mission Hüls, CaUf.: Samt Francis Historical Society. 1996. Pp. xi, 91 ·)

Curran, Charles E. History and Contemporary Issues: Studies in Moral Theol-

ogy. (New York: Continuum. 1996. Pp. 275. $2995.) Part One: "Historical

Studies" comprises five previously pubUshed articles: "Overview and Historical Development of Moral Theology"; "The Historical Development of
CathoUc Medical Ethics"; "The Manual and Casuistry of Aloysius Sabetti";
"The Role of the Laity in the Thought of John Courtney Murray"; and
"CathoUc Moral Theology in the Past FortyYears."

382OTHER BOOKS RECEIVED

Day Dorothy. The Long Loneliness: The Autobiography of Dorothy Day. IUustrated by Fritz Eichenberg. (San Francisco: Harper. 1997. Pp. v, 288. $14.00
paperback.) OriginaUy pubUshed in 1952.
Di LeUa, Alexander. Daniel: A Book for Troubling Times. Spiritual Commen-

taries. (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press. 1997. Pp. 282. Paperback.)

Eden, Kathy Hermeneutics and the Rhetorical Tradition: Chapters in the Ancient Legacy and Its Humanistic Reception. [Yale Studies in Hermeneu-

tics.] (New Haven, Conn.:Yale University Press. 1997. Pp. vüi, 1 19. $20.00.)

Ekelund, Robert B, Jr., Robert F. Hébert, Robert D. ToUison, Gary M. Anderson,
and Audrey B. Davidson. Sacred Trust: The Medieval Church as an Eco-

nomic Firm. G^ew York: Oxford University Press. 1996. Pp. ix, 210.

$29-95.) The authors, who are macroeconomists, present their work as "a
microeconomic inquiry of the medieval Church utilizing a stylized economic model that accords with standard economic theory" (p. vii). They

claim an imperial right to judge what materials are fit to be employed in

order to substantiate their theory of "firm." The result is a faUure properly
to recognize historical facts and a judgment on historical decisions that is
totaUy incompetent. In the end, Sacred Trust in the tide reaUy amounts to
a satirical designation.
Flanagan, Thomas. Louis "David"Riel: "Prophet of the New World." Revised Edi-

tion. (Buffalo: University ofToronto Press. Pp. xiv, 240. $50.00 cloth; $ 1795

paper.) OriginaUy pubUshed in 1979.
Given-WUson, Chris. The English Nobility in the Late Middle Ages: The Four-

teenth-Century Polittcal Community. (New York: Routiedge. 1996. Pp.
xxii, 222. $18.95 paperback.) OriginaUy pubUshed in 1987.

Given-WUson, Chris CEd.). An Illustrated History of Late Medieval England.
GSTew York: Manchester University Press, distributed by St. Martin's Press.

1996. Pp. xi, 292. $40.00.)

Hilkert, Mary Catherine. Naming Grace:Preaching and the Sacramental Imagination. (NewYork: Continuum. 1997. Pp. 252. $2995.)
Hopkins, Dwight N., and SheUa Greeve Davaney (lids.). Changing Conversations: Religious Reflection and Cultural Analysis. (New York: Routiedge.

1996. Pp. vi, 262. $5995 hardback; $18.95 paperback.)

Jayawardene. S. A. The Scientific Revolution:An Annotated Bibliography. (West

CornwaU, Conn.: Locust HUl Press. 1996. Pp. xvii, 383. $60.00.)

Jönsson, Arne. St. Bridget's Revelations to the Popes:An Editon of the So-Called

Tractatus de summis pontificibus. [Studia Graeca et Latina Lundensia, 6.]
(Xund: Lund University Press. 1997. Pp. 69. Paperback.)

Le Poidevin, Robin. ArguingforAtheism:An Introduction to the Philosophy of

Religion. (New York: Routiedge. 1996. Pp. xxiii, 159. $5500 hardback;
$15.95 paperback.)
Loades, David. Power in Tudor England. [British Studies Series.] QSfewYork: St.
Martin's Press. 1997. Pp. vüi, 183. $4995 cloth; $18.95 paperback.)

OTHER BOOKS RECEIVED383

Magocsi, Paul Robert. A History of Ukraine. (Seattle: University of Washingotn

Press. 1996. Pp. xxvi, 784. $35.00 paperback.) Designed as a textbook for
courses Ui history, poUtical science, reUgious history, geography, and Slavic
and East European Studies, it is divided into ten sections arranged in
chronological order from the first miUennium before Christ to the declaration of Ukrainian independence in 1991. There are forty-two maps, runeteen tables, and sixty-six "text inserts" containing excerpts from documents
and contemporary descriptions. At the end is an introductory guide to "further reading."

McCarthy, Patrick. The Crisis of the Italian State: From the Origins of the Cold
War to the Fall of Berlusconi and Beyond. ÇSiew York: St. Martin's Press.
1997. Pp. xxiv, 279. $1395 paperback.) OriginaUy pubUshed in 1995.

Molnar, Thomas. Bernanos: His Political Thought and Prophecy. 0>iew
Brunswick, NJ. transaction PubUshers. 1997. Pp. xxxvü, 202. $21.95 paperback.) OriginaUy pubUshed in I960 by Sheed and Ward, Inc., and reviewed by Robert J. Hénault «wíe,XLVI Ganuary 1961), 515.

Nevin, Thomas. Ernst Jünger and Germany: Into the Abyss, 1914-1945.

G>urham, N.C.: Duke University Press. 1996. Pp. x, 284. $24.95.)

O'Donovan, OUver. The Desire of the Nations: Rediscovering the Roots ofPo-

litical Theology. (NewYork: Cambridge University Press. 1996. Pp. xü, 304.
$59.95.)

Pennington, M. BasU (Ed.). Bernard of Clairvaux:A Lover Teaching the Way of
Love. Selected Spiritual Writings. Giyde Park, N.Y.. New City Press. 1997.
Pp. 135. Paperback.)

Saint Augustine. The Confessions. Introduction, Translation and Notes by Maria
Boulding, O.S.B.; Edited by John E. RoteUe, O.S.A. [Augustine Heritage Institute: The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 2 1 st Century, Part
I—Books, Volume 1.] (Jlyde Park, N.Y: New City Press. 1997. Pp. 416. Paperback.)

Sawyer, Deborah F. Women and Religion in the First Christian Centuries. [Religion in the First Christian Centuries.] (NewYork: Routiedge. 1996. Pp. vü,
186. $65.00 hardback; $17.95 paperback.)

Schmitt, Carl. Roman Catholicism and Political Form. Translated and Anno-

tated by G. L. Ulmen. [Global Perspectives in History and PoUtics, Contributions in Political Science, No. 380.] (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.

1996. Pp. xii, 68. $39.95.)

Seymour, M. C. (Gen. Ed.). Authors of the Middle Ages: English Writers of the
Late Middle Ages, Volume HI, Nos. 7-11. (Hrookfield,Vt. :Variorum, Ashgate

PubUshing Company. 1996. Pp. vi, 256. $67.95.)

Smith, Richard Norton. Patriarch: George Washington and the New American

Nation. (New York: Houghton MUfUn Company. 1997. Pp. xxi, 424. $15.00
paperback.) OriginaUy published in 1993.

384OTHER BOOKS RECEIVED

Southgate, Beverley. History: What and Why?Ancient, Modern, and Postmodern Perspectives. (New York: Routiedge. 1996. Pp. xü, 167. $59-95 hard-

back; $16.95 paperback.)
Thornton, Bruce S. Eros: The Myth ofAncient Greek Sexuality. (Boulder, Co.:

Westview Press. 1997. Pp. xvU, 282. $28.00.)

VermigU, Peter Martyr. Philosophical Works: On the Relation ofPhilosophy to
Theology. Translated and Edited with Introduction and Notes by Joseph C.
McLeUand. [The Peter Martyr Library, Series One, Volume Four; Sixteenth
Century Essays & Studies,Volume XXXLX.] GCirksvUle,Mo.:The Thomas Jefferson University Press and Sixteenth Century Journal PubUshers, Inc.
1996. Pp. xUi, 353. $35.00.)
Whelan Frederick G. Edmund Burke and India: Political Morality and Em-

pire. (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. 1996. Pp. xv, 368. $4995.)

WUUams, David. Deformed Discourse: The Function of the Monster in Mediaeval Thought and Literature. Gvlontreal: McGUl-Queen's University Press.

1996.Pp. xiv, 392. $55.00.)

Young, Ed (Artist). Genesis. Adapted from the King James Version. (San Francisco: A Laura Geringer Book. An Imprint of Harper Collins PubUshers.
1997.Pp. 32. $16.95.)