Table of Contents REFORMATION CONFERENCE ADDRESS: Europe in the Age of Reformations: The Modern State and Confessionalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Paolo Prodi 1 ARTICLES : What Was the Catholic Reformation? Marian Piety and the Universalization of Divine Love . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damien Tricoire 20 A “Spiritual War of Words”: Lorenzo da Brindisi and Capuchin Polemical Preaching in Early-Modern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrew J. G. Drenas 50 To Destroy Popery and Everything Appertinent Thereto”: William Chaney, the Jesuit John Bapst, and the Know-Nothings in Mid-Nineteenth-Century Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . David Dzurec 73 Bernardino da Feltre’s Vision of Social and Economic Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Michael F. Cusato, O.F.M. 224 Crossing Cultures: The Mental World and Social Subversion of St. John Baptist de La Salle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Richard M. Tristano 246 Pietro Tamburini’s Jansenist Legacy at the Irish College in Rome and His Influence on the Irish Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Christopher Korten 271 Ignatian Radicalism: The Influence of Jesuit Spirituality on Dorothy Day . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Benjamin T. Peters 297 Public Authority and Private Constraints: Eugenius III and the Council of Reims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kathleen Walkowiak 409 The Roman Inquisition Revisited: The Maltese Tribunal in the Eighteenth Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frans Ciappara 437 Law and Catholicism in Colonial Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scott D. Gerber 465 The Catholic Faith of John Stuart Mill’s Stepdaughter: A Note on the Diary and Devotional Life of the Feminist Activist Helen Taylor (1831–1907) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Timothy Larsen 491 The Council on Campus: The Experience of Vatican II at Boston College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . James M. O’Toole 508 The History of the 1980 Anglican Pastoral Provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D. Paul Sullins 529 A Church United in Itself: Hernando de Talavera and the Religious Culture of Fifteenth-Century Castile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Carolyn Salomons 639 Tracking António Vieira’s Clavis Prophetarum: The St. Bonaventure, “Franciscan Collection,” Manuscript 28 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ana T. Valdez 663 Albert Leo Schlageter: First Soldier of the Third Reich or Catholic War Hero? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jeremy Stephen Roethler 698 “People are Suffering: People are Christ; and We Are Responsible”: Sister Mary Emil Penet’s Crusade for Social-Justice Education in the 1950s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Darra D. Mulderry 725 Meryem Ana Evi, Marian Devotion, and the Making of Nostra aetate 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rita George-Tvrtković 755 FORUM ESSAY: The Jesuits and Italian Universities, 1548–1773. (Paul F. Grendler) Kathleen M. Comerford; Gian Paolo Brizzi; John Patrick Donnelly, S.J.; Simona Negruzzo; Maurizio Sangalli; and Paul F. Grendler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 782 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: Books of Martyrs: Example and Imitation in Europe and Japan, 1597–1650 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Liam Matthew Brockey 207 iii BOOK REVIEWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99, 321, 559, 795 BRIEF NOTICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 REPORT OF THE EDITOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nelson H. Minnich 171 NOTES AND COMMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173, 379, 619, 823 PERIODICAL LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191, 385, 624, 831 OTHER BOOKS RECEIVED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204, 403, 636, 845 iv GENERAL INDEX Volume 103 (2017) Compiled by Orysia Mack Abbreviations: biog.: biography b.n.: brief notice men.: mentioned obit.: obituary rev.: review Abelard, Peter men., 431, 433–34 Abell, Aaron I. men., 732 Abraham (Patriarch) men., 755, 757, 767–68, 776–77 Abraham, Heather men., 757, 773 Accademia Ambrosiana Classe di Slavistica conference on “La Riforma Protestante nei Paesi Slavi,” 380-81 Sponsors conference “Schiavitù del corpo e schiavitù dell’anima. Chiesa, potere politico, e schiavitù tra Atlantico e Mediterraneo (sec. XVI–XVIII),” 824 Acosta, José de men., 43 Acri, Angelo (Luca Falcone), Blessed Pope Francis obtains consent for canonization, 379 Canonized as saint, 824 Act Concerning Religion of 1649 men., 474–75, 478 Act of Supremacy men., 13 Act of Toleration, 1689 men., 531 Adam of Petit-Pont men., 433 Aers, David Beyond Reformation? An Essay on William Langland’s Piers Plowman and the End of Constantinian Christianity, rev., 127–28 Afonso Henriques, Duke of Portugal men., 418 Al-Kurtubi men., 771 Albertinus, Aegidius men., 33–34 Alcalá, Pedro de men., 650 Alexander of Hales men., 225, 243–44 Alexander VIII, Pope men., 682-83, 685, 687 Alfonso VII, King of León-Castile men., 412, 417–19 Alfonso X, King of León-Castile biog., 576–77 Alinsky, Saul men., 749 Allitt, Patrick Rev. of B. J. Birzer, 163–64 Alpruni, Francesco men., 281 Alvarez, Balthasar men., 313 Alveld, Augustinus von men., 61 Amadori, Saverio men., 227, 239 Amberley, Lady men., 503–04 Amerbach brothers men., 261 America magazine men., 517, 725, 729 American Academy in Rome Latin paleography and codicology course, 380 American Catholic colleges men., 508-28 v vi GENERAL INDEX American Catholic Historical Association 2017 Spring meeting, 173 2018 Spring Meeting announced, 823 2018 Annual meeting announced, 619, 823 American Church Union (ACU) men., 538-39, 542-44, 548, 557 American Society of Church History Joint Spring meeting with ACHA, 173 Amery, Carl men., 702 Ames, Christine Caldwell men., 646 Amidon, Philip R., SJ, trans. Rufinus of Aquileia: History of the Church, rev., 569–70 Amsler, Nadine men., 43 Anabaptists men., 805-06 Anacletus II, Antipope men., 422 Anawati, Georges, O.P., men., 758, 766–67, 770, 778–79 Anbinder, Tyler men., 74, 75, 84 Ancien Régime men., 259, 263, 269–70 Ancona, Giuliana men., 450 Anderson, Margaret Lavinia men., 700 Andover-Newton Theological School men., 526–27 Andreoni, Giovanni, S.J. men., 664, 672 Andrew of St. Victor men., 335–37 Andrews, Charles M. men., 473–74, 476, 478, 482 Andrews, Matthew Page men., 467, 471 Angelidi, Christine Rev. of A. Kadellis and I. Polemis, trans., 114-15 Angenendt, Arnold Ehe, Liebe und Sexualität im Christentum: Von den Anfängen bis heute, rev., 796– 97 Anglican Church of North America (ACNA) men., 539–40, 557 Anglican Pastoral Provision men., 529–58 Anglican Use parishes men., 553, 555–56 Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) men., 534–35, 557 Anglicans United men., 543–44 Anglo-Catholics men., 532–33, 535, 537–40, 542–44 Anglo-Norman England men., 797-98, 798-99 Annales du Midi Publishes “Regards Japonnais sur le Midi médiéval,” 180 Anne, Queen of England men., 482 Annio da Viterbo men., 233, 242 Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum Publishes papers from 2014 conference on conciliar history in Vienna, 382 Anthony Abbot, Saint men., 261–62 Anthony of Padua, Saint men., 233 Anti-Catholicism men., 73–98 Anti-Modernism men., 819–20 Antonino da Firenze men., 233 Anuario de Historia de la Iglesia Publishes articles Fernando el Católico de Aragón, 622 Publishes articles on historiography the Church in Latin America, 181 Apostasy men., 207-23 Aquaviva, Claudio men., 316 Aquinas, Thomas, Saint men., 305, 310–11, 575–76, 769 Aram, Bethany men., 660 Arbeitsbericht mittlere und neuere Kirchengeschichte der Universität Freiburg Conference “Glaube(n) im Disput: Altgläubige Kontroversisten des Reformationszeitalters in neuerer Forschung,” 380 Archetto men., 274–76, 286 Archives of Maryland Online (AOMOL) men., 465–90 Archives of the Inquisition, Malta (AIM) men., 437–64 GENERAL INDEX Archivio della Congregazione per la Dottrina della Fede (ACDF) men., 438, 457, 461 Ardusso, Franco men., 271, 275 Argentina men., 168–69 Aristotle men., 681–82 Armentrout, Don S. men., 542, 547 Arnaud, Joseph men., 250 Arnold of Brescia men., 431 Arnold, Kathleen R. Rev. of L. J. McAndrews, 164–65 Art History Special issue on “Art and Religious Reform in Early Modern Europe,” 383 Asceticism men., 246–70 Ashley, J. Matthew men., 319 Assisi men., 338–39 Aston, Nigel Rev. of U. L. Lehner, 355–57 Attwood, Peter men., 485-86 Augsburg Interim men., 4 Augustine of Hippo, Saint men., 261–63 Augustinianism men., 246–70, 275, 277, 294 Augustinians men., 211, 215, 220 Aureli, Cesare men., 246-47 Avalon (Newfoundland) men., 466, 469-70, 476 Ávila men., 653-55 Azcona, Tarsicio de men., 648 Azevedo, J. Lúcio de men., 666-67, 674 Azzopardi, John men., 438 Baán, Izsák Zsolt, O.S.B. Rev. of J. Kalvesmaki and R. D. Young, eds., 567-68 Bach, Johann Sebastian men., 358-60 vii Badaliya society men., 764–66 Bagchi, David men., 62 Bagge, Sverre men., 415 Bahr, Hermann men., 700 Baillargeon, Anatole men., 77, 84, 88, 89, 91, 95 Baily, Gauvin Alexander men., 36 Baird, J.W. men., 699-700, 707-09, 711, 722–23 Bakhmetyeva, Tatyana V. Mother of the Church: Sofia Svechina, Salon, and the Politics of Catholicism in Nineteenth-Century Russia and France, rev., 598–99 Balde, Jacob men., 32 Balderic men., 413, 416–17, 422 Baldick, Julian men., 767 Balmer, Randall Rev. of D. O’Connell, 374–76 Balthasar, Hans Urs von, S.J. men., 318 Balzamo, Nicolas, Olivier Christin, and Fabrice Flückinger, eds. L’Atlas Marianus de Wilhelm Gumppenberg, rev., 142–43 Balzan, Don Giovanni men., 447 Banchoff, Thomas and José Casanova, eds. The Jesuits and Globalization: Historical Legacies and Contemporary Challenges, rev., 325–27 Bapst, John, S.J. men., 73–98 Barber, Marian Elected ACHA Executive Council member 2017–20, 823 Barberini, Francesco, Cardinal men., 445, 449, 454–55, 457, 459, 461, 463 Barker, John men., 541–47, 551, 554 Baron, H.-M. men., 46 Baroque piety men., 20–49 Barros, André de men., 665 Bartlett, Robert men., 209 viii GENERAL INDEX Barton, Simon Conquerors, Brides, and Concubines: Relations and Social Power in Medieval Iberia, rev., 111–12 Barton, Xaveria, I.H.M. men., 727, 730, 733 Bataillon, Marcel men., 47 Bauerschmidt, Frederick Christian men., 305 Baumgarten, Jens men., 40–41 Bax, Ernest Balford men., 506 Baxter, Michael men., 302 Bayona Aznar, Bernardo men., 647 Bea, Augustin, Cardinal men., 522, 778 Beales, Derek men., 278 Beane, Marjorie Noterman men., 726, 737, 753 Bebbington, David Rev. of J. D. Green, 795–96 Becker, Matthew Rev. of Z. Purvis, 360–61 Bédel, Henri men., 255 Begg, Christopher Rev. of A. J. Hauser and D. F. Watson, eds., 811–12 Beinart, Haim men., 645 Bejczy, István men., 643 Bell, Richard Rev. of M. Hébert, auth.; C.J.T. Talar, ed.; C.J.T. Talar and E. Emery, trans., 599–600 Bellarmine, Robert men., 40 Bellinzaga, Isabella men., 316 Belmonte Díaz, José men., 653 Benedict XV, Pope men., 146–47 Benedict XVI, Pope men., 556, 756 Benedictines men., 45, 810-11 Benítez, Carmen Rev. of P. L. Pepin, 340–41 Benito Ruano, Eloy men., 645, 651-2 Beretta, Francesco men., 454, 456, 458 Berka, Zbyněk, Archbishop of Prague men., 54 Bernard of Clairvaux, Saint men., 409–36 Bernard, Brother, F.S.C. men., 252, 265, 268 Bernardino da Busti men., 228, 230 Bernardino da Siena men., 225, 229, 232–33, 235, 242 Bernat Tort of Tarragona, Archbishop men., 412 Berndt, Rainer, S.J. Rev. of F. van Liere and F. T. Harkins, eds., 335-37 Berns, Andrew Receives 2016 Howard R. Marraro Book Prize for The Bible and Natural Philosophy in Renaissance Italy, 174 Bernuzzi, Marco men., 294 Bertora, G. men., 462 Bertram, Adolf, Cardinal men., 700 Bérulle, Pierre de, Cardinal men., 249, 316 Beylard, Hugues men., 21 Bianchini, Janna Rev. of S. R. Doubleday, 576–77 Bible men., 153-55 Biblioteca Ambrosiana Hosts conference “Schiavitù del corpo e schiavitù dell’anima. Chiesa, potere politico, e schiavitù tra Atlantico e Mediterraneo (sec. XVI–XVIII),” 824 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Latin paleography course, 380 Biet, Christian men., 209 Bilder, Mary Sarah men., 468 Bill of Rights men., 13, 16, 18 Billet, Charles men., 78, 86 Binasco, Matteo Rev. of T. O’Connor, 351–52 Binczewski, Jennifer Receives 2016 John Tracy Ellis Dissertation Award, 175 GENERAL INDEX Binet, Étienne men., 32, 35 Bireley, Robert, S.J. men., 42, 44 Rev. of P. Foresta, 585–87 Birzer, Bradley J. Russell Kirk: American Conservative, rev., 163–64 Bivins, Jason Rev. of K. G. Lum, 156–57 Black Elk biog., 377–78 Black, Christopher men., 437, 439, 441, 455, 457 Black, Hugo, Justice men., 490 Blackbourn, David men., 700 Blain, Jean-Baptiste men., 248-53, 256-58, 260, 263, 265–70 Blondel, Maurice men., 317 Blood Libel men., 654 Bodin, Per-Arne Rev. of C. Caridi, 323–24 Boer, Wietse de men., 444 Boethius men., 428–29 Bohemia, Kingdom of men., 25, 26, 50–72 Bohun, Humphrey de men., 125–26 Boldovinetti, Antonino men., 280 Bolgeni, Giovanni Vincenzo men., 278 Bolgia, Claudia Rev. of D. Cooper and J. Robson, 338–39 Boniface VIII, Pope biog., 124–25 Bonnici, Alexander men., 462 Bonucci, Antonio men., 663–89 Book of Common Prayer men., 482, 541, 546 Boon, Jessica A. and Ronald E. Surtz, eds.; Ronald E. Surtz and Nora Weinerth, trans. Mother Juana de la Cruz, 1481–1534: Visionary Sermons, rev., 582–83 Borelli, John men., 779 Borromeo, Agostino men., 450, 457 ix Borromeo, Charles, Saint men., 9, 29, 261–63, 449 Bossy, John men., 27, 41, 47 Boston College men., 97, 508–28 Boston Theological Institute men., 527 Botovasoa, Luciano, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes martyrdom, 379 Bottari, Giovanni Gaetano men., 274 Bouthillon, Fabrice and Marie Levant, eds. Pie XI: Un Pape contre le Nazisme? L’encyclique Mit brennender Sorge (14 mars 1937), rev., 365–66 Bowen, Henry men., 546 Boxer, C. R. men., 210 Boyd, Malcolm men., 519 Bradley, Ritamary, C.H.M. men., 727, 737 Brambilla, Elena men., 437–38, 444, 460 Brandmüller, Walter men., 45 Brandt, Rolf men., 707 Braudel, Fernand men., 259 Bray, Thomas, Archbishop men., 294 Brazeau, Brian Rev. of M. Dunn, trans., 366–68 Brazilian Indians men., 663–89 Breidenbach, Michael D. men., 487 Bremond, Henri men., 313–14, 316 Brett, Martin men., 421 Brian, Isabelle men., 39 Bridoul, Toussaint men., 35 Brindisi, Lorenzo da men., 50-72 Brizzi, Gian Paolo P. F. Grendler Forum Essay, 784-86 Broadley, John and Peter Phillips, eds. The Ministry of the Printed Word: Scholar-Priests of the Twentieth Century, rev., 327–29 x GENERAL INDEX Brockey, Liam Matthew Books of Martyrs: Example and Imitation in Europe and Japan, 1597– 1650, Presidential Address, 207-23 Rev. of N. Golvers, ed., 590–91 Rev. of V. Lavenia and S. Pavone, eds., 807-08 Brogini, Anne men., 461 Brooke, Christopher men., 433 Brooke, Robert men., 485–86 Brothers of the Christian Schools men., 246–70 Brown, Carys Rev. of F. Young, ed., 349–50 Brown, Robert McAfee men., 522 Brown, William Turner St. John men., 543–46, 554 Browne, William Hand men., 470 Brugger, Robert J. men., 487 Brüning, Heinrich men., 700 Brunner, Otto men., 10 Bruno Maës men., 29 Bruno, Giordano men., 5, 13 Bruno, Saint men., 261–63 Bubendey, Freidrich men., 706 Buck, Dorothy men., 765 Buckley, Michael, S.J. men., 314–15 Budde, Michael men., 302 Buggeln, Gretchen The Suburban Church: Modernism and Community in Post-War America, rev., 161–63 Bujanda, Jesús Martínez de El Índice de libros prohibidos y expurgados de la Inquisición española (1551–1819), rev., 806–07 Bulletin de Littérature Ecclésiastique Issue on theme, “Démarche scientifique et universités catholiques,” 622 Bulman, William J. and Robert G. Ingram, eds. God in the Enlightenment, rev., 353–55 Burgaleta, Claudio men., 43 Burgess, John men., 522 Burnett, Amy Nelson, Kathleen M. Comerford, and Karin Maag, eds. Politics, Gender, and Belief: The Long-Term Impact of the Reformation. Essays in Memory of Robert Kingdon, rev., 129–30 Burns, Charles men., 417 Burns, Gene men., 737 Burns, Jeffrey M. Recieves 2017 ACHA Distinguished Teaching Award, 176 Elected ACHA Executive Council member 2017–20, 823 Burrell, David men., 770 Burrows, Simon men., 75 Burschel, Peter men., 29 Burton, Janet and Karen Stöber, eds. Women in the Medieval Monastic World, rev., 802–03 Bussell, Donna Alfano Rev. of C. M. Waters, 577-78 Butler, Edward (Odoardo) men., 285–88 Butler, James, II, Archbishop men., 278–84, 289, 294 Byrne, Patricia men., 737 Caetani, Antonio men., 66 Caetani, Benedetto men., 124–25 Cain, Andrew The Greek Historia Monachorum in Aegypto: Hagiography in the Late Fourth Century, rev., 331–33 Calasanctius Institute of the Daughter of the Divine Shepherdess men., 379, 824 Calcutt, Alfred, F.S.C. men., 250, 255–56 Callahan, William J Rev. of J. M. de Bujanda, 806–07 Callot, Jacques men., 218 Calvert, Cecilius, Lord Baltimore men., 465–90 Calvert, Charles (third Lord Baltimore) men., 481 GENERAL INDEX Calvert, Charles (fifth Lord Baltimore) men., 482 Calvert, Frederick (sixth Lord Baltimore) men., 486 Calvert, George, Lord Baltimore men., 465–90 Calvert, Leonard men., 470, 474, 477 Calvin, John men., 251, 261, 587–88 Calvinism men., 21, 24, 27–28, 53, 54, 56, 59, 60, 64 Campanella, Tommaso men., 13 Campion, Edmund biog., 136–38 men., 55 Campos, Miguel, F.S.C. men., 247 Canadian Catholic Historical Association Annual confererence, 381 Articles in Historical Studies, 825 Canisius, Peter, Saint men., 51, 585–87 Cappellari, Mauro men., 278 Capuchin nuns men., 823 Capuchins men., 45, 50–72, 379, 823–24 Caracciolo, Alberto men., 275 Caravale, Giorgio, auth.; Frank Gordon, trans. Preaching and Inquisition in Renaissance Italy. Words on Trial, rev., 584–85 Carboni, Edvige, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 379 Cardullo, Phyllis men., 725 Carena, Cesare men., 447, 451, 453–54 Cargnoni, Costanzo men., 40, 50, 58–59, 62 Caridi, Cathy Making Martyrs East & West: Canonization in the Catholic and Russian Orthodox Churches, rev., 323–24 Carlsmith, Christopher men., 50 Carlyle, Thomas men., 494 Carmagnani, Marcello men., 643 xi Carmignano di Brenta, Arturo da men., 51, 52, 55, 57 Carmelites men., 37 Carney, J. J. Rwanda before the Genocide: Catholic Politics and Ethnic Discourse in the Late Colonial Era, rev., 609–11 Carolingians men., 110–11 Carpenter, Mary men., 503 Carr, Lois Green men., 468, 472, 481 Carroll, Charles, of Carrollton men., 482, 487–89 Carroll, Kenneth L. men., 481 Cartagena, Alonso de men., 647 Cartellverband der katholischen deutschen Studentenverbindungen (CV) men., 698–724 Cary, Noel D. men., 700 Rev. of A. Linsenmann and M. Raasch, eds., 814–18 Casalini, Cristiano and Claude Pavur, S.J., eds. Jesuit Pedagogy, 1540–1616: A Reader, rev., 346–47 Casanatense Library, Rome men., 663–97 Casas, Bartolomé de las men., 680 Casey, Solanus (Bernard Francis), O.F.M. Cap., Venerable Servant of God Pope Francis authorizes decree acknowledging miracle, 379 Beatified, 824 Casnedi, Carlo, S.J. men., 663–89 Caspar, Robert, M.Afr. men., 758, 766–67, 778–79 Castile men., 639–62 “Cast Iron Band” men., 73-74, 88–97 Castro Martínez, Teresa de men., 655–56 Casuistry men., 42 Catalina de Maria (Josefa Saturnina Rodriguez), Venerable Servant of God Pope Francis authorizes decree acknowledging miracle, 379 xii GENERAL INDEX Cathars men., 646 Cathedral of Saint-Michel of Sherbrooke Construction of cathedral and the history of archdiocese, Exhibition, 619 Catholic Action men., 725–754 Catholic Center Party men., 700, 712, 722, 814–18 Catholic Higher Education men., 725–754 Catholic Historical Review men., 99–100 Catholic Reformation men., 9, 20–49, 207–23 Catholic Worker men., 297, 299–300, 303, 306–08, 313 Catholic Worker (movement) men., 297–320 Catto, Jeremy Rev. of J. P. Hornbeck II and M. Van Dussen, eds., 801–02 Caussade, Jean Pierre de, S.J. men., 297, 313–14, 316 Cavanaugh, Stephen E. men., 548 Cavanaugh, William men., 302 Cave of the Seven Sleepers men., 774 Celestine, Peter, Saint, (Pope Celestine V) men., 261–63 Cell, Gillian T. men., 469–70 Center of Renewal Studies of the School of Divinity of Regent University To host conference, “The Holy Spirit and the Reformation Legacy,” 621 Centro Interuniversitario di Studi Francescani, Università degli Studi di Perugia Co-sponsors conference, “Identità Francescane agli inizi del Cinquecento,” 620–21 Certeau, Michel de men., 317 Champagne, Marie Therese Rev. of R. Rist, 334–35 Chaney, William H. men., 73-98 Channing, William Ellery men., 496 Charles I, King of England men., 470-73, 480 Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor men., 4 Charter of Maryland men., 465–90 Châtellier, Louis men., 35-36 Chautauqua men., 747 Checcoli, Ippolita men., 227 Chenault, Robert R. Rev. of N. Lenski, 330–31 Chevallier, Pierre men., 48 Chiapparini, Giuliano Il divino senza veli: La dottrina gnostica della ‘Lettera valentiniana’ di Epifanio, Panarion 31 5–6. Testo, traduzione e commento storico-religioso, rev., 105–06 Chigi, Fabio men., 440, 457, 459, 461 “Child Martyrs of Tlaxcala,” Cristóbal, Antonio, and Juan, Blessed Pope Francis obtains consent for canonization, 379 Canonized as saints, 824 Chmielewski, Laura M. Rev. of S. J. Juster, 820–22 Chojnacki, Ruth J. Rev. of J. D. Early, 616–17 Choudhury, Mita The Wanton Jesuit and the Wayward Saint: A Tale of Sex, Religion, and Politics in Eighteenth-Century France, rev., 143–44 Chrissidis, Nikolaos A. An Academy at the Court of the Tsars: Greek Scholars and Jesuit Education in Early Modern Russia, rev., 352–53 Christian II, Elector Duke of Saxony men., 64–65, 69–70 Christian-Muslim relations men., 755–781 Christian-Muslim shrines men., 772, 774 Church History & Religious Culture Publishes articles on Erasmus, 382–83 Church of England men., 13, 600–01 Church unity men., 179 men., 651–52 Church, William F. men., 43 Ciappara, Frans The Roman Inquisition Revisited: The Maltese Tribunal in the Eighteenth Century, 437–64 GENERAL INDEX Cidade, Hernâni men., 674, 681 Cisneros, Francisco Jiménez de, Cardinal men., 657 Cistercians men., 45, 415, 422–24, 430, 432 Clancy, Thomas men., 293–94 Clark, Marilyn men., 59 Clark, Mark The Making of the Historia Scholastica, 1150–1200, rev., 120–21 Clark, Michael P. Rev. of K. N. Gray, 611–13 Claudio da Solesino men., 56 Clavis Prophetarum men., 663–97 Clément affair men., 257–60 Clement VII, Pope men., 472 Clement VIII, Pope men., 51, 54, 316 Clement XI, Pope men., 248 Clement XIII, Pope men., 275 Clement XIV, Pope men., 6, 276, 279–80 Cline, Ruth Harwood Rev. of M. Lauwers, 108–09 Clooney, Francis X., S.J. men., 769–70 Cochrane, Eric men., 274 Codex juris canonici men., 6 Codignola, Ernesto men., 271–72, 276 Codignola, Luca men., 470 Coen, Martin men., 285, 295 Coggan, Donald, Archbishop of Canterbury men., 535 Cognet, Louis men., 46, 313, 316 Cohen Suarez, Ananda Heaven, Hell, and Everything in Between. Murals of the Colonial Andes, rev., 167– 68 Cohen, Joshua P. men., 725 xiii Colbert, Stephen men., 100–01 Cold War men., 606–08, 608–09 Coleman, David men., 643-44, 656 Colish, Marcia L. Rev. of N. H. Minnich, ed., 99–100 College of the Holy Cross men., 95, 97 Colombo, Emmanuele men., 672 Columbanus (pen name) men., 288, 290, 295 Columbanus, Saint men., 288 Comerford, Kathleen M. P. F. Grendler Forum Essay Introduction, 782–84 Comestor, Peter men., 120–21, 335–37 Comini, Mariano men., 271, 279 Communism men., 8, 17, 702, 707–08, 710, 731–32, 742–43, 747, 758, 760, 763–64 Conciliar history men., 382 Confessio Augustana men., 4, 12 Confessionalization men., 1–19, 20-49 Congar, Yves men., 753 Congregation of Clergy men., 647 Congregation of the Franciscan Sister Servants of the Cross men., 823 Congregation of the Handmaids of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus men., 379 Congregation of the Holy Family of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph men., 823 Congregation of the Servant Sisters of the Poor men., 379 Congregation of the Sisters of Charity of Saint Vincent men., 823 Congregation of the Ursuline Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Mary men., 379 Congress of St. Louis men., 537–40, 544 xiv GENERAL INDEX Connell, Francis, C.Ss.R. men., 304, 318 Connell, James men., 283–84, 289 Connor, Joseph J. men., 303–04, 307 Conrad III, King of Germany men., 412, 418–19 Conscientious objectors men., 303, 307–08, 320 Constable, Giles men., 419 Constantine, Emperor men., 330–31, 566–67 Continuing Anglican Churches men., 539, 543 Conversion men., 639–62 Conway, John S. Rev. of F. Bouthillon and M. Levant, eds., 365–66 Conway, Moncure D. men., 495 Coode, John men., 481 Cooper, Donal and Janet Robson The Making of Assisi: The Pope, the Franciscans, and the Painting of the Basilica, rev., 338–39 Copley, Lionel men., 482–83 Coppa, Frank men., 760 Corbon, Jean men., 778 Corcoran, Timothy men., 273, 293 Corish, Patrick J. men., 293 Cornbise, Alfred E. men., 708 Cornelison, Sally J., Nirit Ben-Aryeh Debby, and Peter Howard, eds. Mendicant Cultures in the Medieval and Early Modern World: Word, Deed, and Image, rev., 800–01 Cornides, Elisabeth men., 417–18 Correia, Pedro Lage Reis men., 43 Corrie, Rebecca W. Rev. of A. Welch, 123–24 Corrin, Jay P. Catholic Progressives in England After Vatican II, rev., 147–48 Corsini, Neri, Cardinal men., 274 Corsini, Paolo men., 271–72, 275–76, 285, 290, 294 Coster, François men., 41 Cottret, Monique men., 46 Coughlin, Charles men., 740, 742 Council of Reims men., 409-36 Council of Trent men., 4, 9, 12, 15, 17, 20–49, 56, 58, 257, 347–48 Counter-Reformation men., 20–49 Courcier, Pierre men., 35 Cousins, Ewert men., 319 Cracraft, James Rev. of N. A. Chrissidis, 352–53 Creeds men., 1-19 Crouzet, Denis men., 26, 28 Crowder, C. M. D. men., 647 Cuccagni, Luigi men., 272, 278, 288–90, 292, 295 Cucchiara, Martina Rev. of R. Weikart, 602–03 Cunha, D. Nuno da, Cardinal men., 672 Cuno, Wilhelm men., 700, 708–11, 714 Cuoq, Joseph men., 778 Curran, Charles men., 301–02 Curran, Francis X. men., 475, 483–84 Curry, Thomas J. men., 468 Curtis, Patrick men., 291 Cusack, Thomasine, O.P. men., 735–36 Cusato, Michael F., O.F.M. Bernardino da Feltre’s Vision of Social and Economic Justice, 224–45 Cushing, Richard, Cardinal men., 508, 510 Cusmano, Vincenzina, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 379 GENERAL INDEX Cuthbert, Father men., 51 Czacka, Elžbieta Róža, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 823 D’Agen, Boyer men., 773 Daileader, Philip Saint Vincent Ferrer, His World and Life: Religion and Society in Late Medieval Europe, rev., 580–82 Dalla Costa, Elia, Cardinal, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 379 Daly, Mary men., 523–24 Dammig, Enrico men., 272, 275, 278–79 Danielou, Jean men., 522 Danker, Ryan Nicholas Wesley and the Anglicans: Political Division in Early Evangelicalism, rev., 595–96 Darnall, John men., 486 Daughters of Charity men., 752, 772 Daughters of Mary Immaculate men., 379 David W. Jordan men., 478, 481–82 Davidson, Nicholas S. men., 50, 450, 462 Davies, Brian Rev. of P. Porro, auth.; J. G. Trabbic and R. W. Nutt, trans., 575–76 Davis, David Brion men., 75 Dawson, Jane E. A. John Knox, rev., 134–35 Day, Dorothy men., 297-320 D’Costa, Gavin men., 767–69, 778–80 De Bérulle, Pierre men., 39 Debby, Nirit Ben-Aryeh men., 232 De Besse, Ludovic men., 227–28, 230, 232–33, 236–37, 240–42 De Buset, Ignazio Gaetano men., 593–95 Decock, Wim Rev. of M. T. D’Emic, 133–34 xv DeConick, April D. The Gnostic New Age: How a Countercultural Spirituality Revolutionized Religion from Antiquity to Today, rev., 321–23 De Dreuzy, Agnes The Holy See and the Emergence of the Modern Middle East: Benedict XV’s Diplomacy in Greater Syria (1914– 1922), rev., 146–47 De La Salle, John Baptist, Saint men., 246–70 D’Elci, Raniero men., 445, 451, 455–57 Del Col, Andrea men., 437, 441, 444, 448, 457 Delcorno, Pietro men., 233, 243 Dell’Asta, Lucia Rev. of P. Herde, 124–25 Delumeau, Jean men., 26–27, 47 D’Emic, Michael Thomas Justice in the Marketplace in Early Modern Spain: Saravia, Villalón, and the Religious Origins of Economic Analysis, rev., 133–34 Den Hartog, Jonathan J. Patriotism & Piety: Federalist Politics and Religious Struggle in the New American Nation, rev., 613–14 De Nobili, Roberto men., 43 De’ Pazzi, Maria Magdalena biog., 809 Derichsweiler, Albert men., 713 Derichsweiler, Peter men., 699, 712–14, 719 De Roover, Raymond men., 233 D’Errico, Gian Luca men., 450, 455, 457, 462 Derry, George Hermann men., 739, 743–48, 750–51 Descuffi, Joseph, C.M., Archbishop men., 755–56, 768, 771, 773–80 Deslyons, Jean men., 32, 35 De Sousa, António men., 223 Destremau, Christian men., 764-65 Deutscher Hochschulring (DHR) men., 702–04 Deutsche Studentenschaft (DSt) men., 716 xvi GENERAL INDEX Devaney, Thomas men., 651 De Vecchi, Fabio men., 272, 284–85 Deveze, Pierre men., 33 Deville, Raymond men., 316 Deza, Diego men., 660 Dialog Mass men., 517–18 Dickens, A.G. men., 530–31 Dietenberger, Johannes men., 61 Dieter Albrecht men., 44, 48 Dillon, Anne Rev. of G. Kilroy, 136–38 Di Mauro, Nicola men., 233 Diocese of the Holy Trinity (DHT) men., 544–45, 557 Di Simplicio, Oscar men., 452, 455–56 Ditchfield, Simon men., 28, 36, 38, 43, 58, 216 Obit. of P. Prodi, 186-90 Dives and Lazarus men., 242–43 Dollen, Charles men., 737 Domenico, Roy Rev. of P. Prodi, 150–51 Dominicans men., 45, 208, 211, 215, 220, 233, 242, 645–47, 672, 681, 685, 778 Donnelly, John Patrick, S.J. P. F. Grendler Forum Essay, 786-87 Rev. of C. Casalini and C. Pavur, S.J., eds., 346–47 Donohue, Domitilla men., 743 Donovan, Charles F. men., 511, 513, 519 Doran, John men., 421–22 Dossetti, Giuseppe men., 150–51 Doubleday, Simon R. The Wise King: A Christian Prince, Muslim Spain, and the Birth of the Renaissance, rev., 576–77 Douglas, Mary men., 266 Dowe, Christopher men., 701, 818 Downey, Jack men., 299, 306 Downs, David J. Alms: Charity, Reward, and Atonement in Early Christianity, rev., 104–05 Doyle, William men., 305 Drake, H.A. Rev. of M. Kulikowski, 566–67 Dreisbach, Daniel L. Rev. of M. A. Noll, 153–55 Drenas, Andrew J. G. A “Spiritual War of Words”: Lorenzo da Brindisi and Capuchin Polemical Preaching in Early-Modern Prague, 50–72 Drexelius, Hieremius men., 32 Drolet, Jean-Claude men., 305 Dru, Alexander men., 317 Drummond, Henry men., 501 DuBois, Albert Julius, Canon men., 542–48 Dueñas-Vargas, Guiomar Rev. of O. F. Pardo, 166–67 Duffy, Eamon men., 531 Duggan, Anne J. men., 409–10, 416–17, 421 Duggan, Lawrence G. Armsbearing and the Clergy in the History and Canon Law of Western Christianity, rev., 559–61 Dulles, Avery, S.J., Cardinal men., 311–13, 318 Dumons, Bruno, Vincent Petit, and Christian Sorrel, eds. Liturgie et société. Gouverner et réformer l’Église XIXe–XXe siècle, rev., 564–66 Dunigan, David R. men., 515 Dunn, Mary, trans. From Mother to Son: The Selected Letters of Marie de l’Incarnation to Claude Martin, rev., 366–68 Duns Scotus, John men., 677 Dupront, Alphonse men., 26–27, 29, 42, 47 Dura-Europos, Syria men., 329-30 GENERAL INDEX Duran, Angelica, ed. The King James Bible: Across Borders and Centuries, rev., 101–03 Durand, Yves men., 39 Durini, Carlo Francesco men., 451, 456 Durosko, Joyce, I.H.M. men., 747, 749 Du Val, Guillaume men., 35 Duzina, Pietro men., 439, 463 Dzurec, David “To Destroy Popery and Everything Appertinent Thereto”: William Chaney, the Jesuit John Bapst, and the Know-Nothings in Mid-Nineteenth-Century Maine, 73–98 Early Modern Conversions project Conference on “Ideal und Praxis: Bischöfe und Bischofsamt im Heiligen Römischen Reich, 1570–1620,” 381 Early modern period men., 207–23 Early-modern polemical preaching men., 50–72 Early, John D. Maya and Catholic Cultures in Crisis, rev., 616–17 East India Company men., 469 Eberhard, Winfried men., 54 Ebest, Sally Barr Rev. of E. P. Sullivan, 370–71 Echter von Mespelbrunn, Julius men., 381 École française de Rome Sponsors colloquy, “In partibus fidelium: Missions du Levant et connaissance de l’Orient chrétien (XIXe–XXIe),” 381 Economics men., 224–45 Ecumenism men., 520–24, 529–58 Edict of Nantes men., 250 Edwards, John men., 646, 651, 660–61 Edwards, Jonathan men., 155–56 Edwards, Mark men., 61 xvii Efthymiadis, Stephanos Rev. of A. Cain, 331–33 Eire, Carlos M. N. Reformations: The Early Modern World, rev., 344–45 Eitches, Edward men., 490 El-Zein, Amira men., 764–65 Eleanor of Aquitaine men., 425–26, 428 Eleanor of Blois men., 424–25 Elias, Norbert men., 267, 269 Eliot, John men., 611-13 Elison, George men., 210, 221 Elisonas, J.S.A. men., 212 Elizabeth I, Queen of England men., 348–49, 588–89 Ellacuría, Ignacio men., 319–20 Ellis, John Tracy men., 511 Ellis, Katharine Rev. of B. Dumons, V. Petit, and C. Sorrel, eds., 564–66 Ellsberg, Robert men., 298, 308 Ellul, Jacques men., 15 Emmerick, Anna Katharina men., 771–73 Endō, Shusaku men., 208 Endres, David U.S. Catholic Historian articles on Catholics and racial justice, 383–84 English Catholicism men., 147–48, 327–29, 348-49, 349–50 English Historical Documents series Published by Routledge, 177 English Reformation men., 529–532, 552 Enlightenment men., 4, 18, 353–55, 355–57, 357–58, 811–12 Eon d’Etoile men., 413, 418 Epiphanius men., 105-06 Erasmus, Desiderius men., 13, 47, 382–83 xviii GENERAL INDEX Erismann, Christophe men., 429 Espírito Santo, Arnaldo do men., 664, 666, 668, 670, 673, 675 Eucharistic piety men., 39 Eugenius III, Pope men., 409–36 Eurich, Alvin C. men., 726, 728 European historiography men., 1–19 Evagrius of Pontus men., 567–68 Evangelical and Catholic Mission (ECM) men., 540, 542-43, 551, 553, 557 Evans, A. P. men., 445–46 Evans, Lovell Ellen men., 700 Evans, R. J. W. men., 54–56, 722 Everett curriculum men., 725–754 Eymerich, Nicholas men., 442–43, 446, 450, 453 Faber, Frederick men., 305 Faggioli, Massimo Rev. of M. Maraviglia, 605–06 Faley, Andrew men., 536 Fannin, Jordan Rowan Rev. of D. Moran, 371–73 Fantazzi, Charles Rev. of E. García Hernán, 342–43 Fantini, Antonella men., 272, 274, 276–77, 279, 285–86 Far Eastern religions men., 17 Farrelly, Maura Jane men., 467, 475–76, 478, 482, 485 Fassbender, Hermann men., 712, 718 Fassini, Vincenzo men., 280 Fatima men., 379 Fatima, daughter of Muhammad men., 763, 766, 769–71 Faulhaber, Michael von, Cardinal men., 700, 704 Feeney, Leonard, S.J. men., 520 Fehleison, Jill men., 51 Fehrenbach, Konstantin men., 700 Fejérdy, András, ed. The Vatican «Ostpolitik», 1958–1978. Responsibility and Witness during John XXIII and Paul VI, rev., 151–53 Fellowship of Concerned Churchmen (FCC) men., 538–39, 544, 557 Feltre, Bernardino da men., 224–45 Fénelon, François men., 316–17 Fenicki, Franciszek men., 34–35 Fenning, Hugh men., 275, 288–89, 291, 294 Fenton, Joseph Clifford men., 304, 318 Ferdinand II See Fernando II, King of Aragon Fernández de Madrid, Alonso men., 641 Fernández de Madrigal, Alonso (Alonso Tostado) men., 647 Fernández de Oviedo, Gonzalo men., 680 Fernández de San Salvador, D. Agustín Pomposo men., 677–78 Fernández Ubiña, José, Alberto J. Quiroga Puertas, and Purificación Ubric Rabaneda, eds. La Iglesia como sistema de dominación en la Antigüedad Tardía, rev., 570–71 Fernando II, King of Aragon men., 622, 641, 644, 652, 654, 657, 660–61, 680-81 Ferreira, Cristóvão men., 207–23 Ferrer, Vincent, Saint men., 580–82 Ferro, Ambrogio Francesco, Blessed Pope Francis obtains consent for canonization, 379 Canonized as saint, 824 Fey, Clara, Venerable Servant of God Pope Francis authorizes decree acknowledging miracle, 379 Fifth Empire men., 663–64, 668–69, 672 Filippo da Soragna men., 57–58 Fine, Benjamin men., 728 GENERAL INDEX Finkelman, Paul men., 476 Finn, Richard, O.P. Rev. of D. J. Downs, 104–05 Finochiaro, Maurice A., ed. and trans. The Trial of Galileo: Essential Documents, rev., 138–39 Response to Letter to Editor, 827-30 First Vatican Council men., 312 Fischer von Erlach men., 31 Fischer, Elisabeth Rev. of M. Plattig and E. Klueting, eds., 809 Fisher, James T. men., 298–300, 302, 304 Fiske, John men., 470 Fita, Fidel men., 654 Fitzpatrick, W. J. men., 272–73, 280–81, 284, 293–94 Five Martyrs of Morocco men., 208 Flandrin, Jean-Louis men., 256 Flannery, John men., 779 Flood, David men., 229 Flüchter, Antje men., 43–44 Foletier, François de Vaux de men., 258 Fontana, Gregory men., 281 Fontani, Francesco men., 280 Food men., 246–70 Ford Foundation men., 725–28, 731-32, 747 Fordham University men., 368–69 Foresta, Patricio “Wie ein Apostel Deutschlands.” Apostolat, Obrigkeit und jesuitisches Selbstverständnis am Beispiel des Petrus Canisius (1543–1570), rev., 585–87 Foreville, Raymonde men., 416–17 Formisano, Ronald men., 74, 75 Forster, Marc R. men., 24 xix Rev. of C. Maurer and C. Vincent, eds., 562–64 Foss, Clive men., 774 Fouilloux, Etienne men., 768 Fourth Lateran Council men., 179–80, 442 Fox, W. J. men., 495–96 Foxe, John men., 209–10, 217, 221 Fragonard, Marie-Madeleine men., 209 Francesco da Feltre men., 228, 230 Francis de Sales, Saint men., 42, 51, 56, 305, 316 Francis of Assisi, Saint men., 243, 261 Francis, Pope men., 207, 320, 364–65, 379, 755–56, 823–24 Franciscans men., 38, 123–24, 208, 211–12, 215–16, 218, 224–45, 338–39, 379, 620–21, 678, 681, 823 Françoise du Saint Esprit (Caroline Baron), Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 823 Frank, Karl Suso men., 39 Franke, Manfred men., 706–07, 709, 722–24 Frederick Barbarossa men., 414–15 Freeland, Richard M. men., 511 Freiburg University men., 706–07, 712 Freikorps men., 699, 706–708, 718–19, 721–23 French Historical Studies Publishes forum on “Communities and Religious Identities in the Early Modern Francophone World, 1550– 1700,” 825 Frenicle, Nicolas men., 32 Frenz, Matthias men., 38 Freund, Scarlett men., 645 Friedman, Debby men., 50 xx GENERAL INDEX Fubini, Riccardo men., 239 Fudge, Thomas A. Rev. of P. N. Haberkern, 583–84 Fuhrmeister, Christian men., 700, 724 Fulk of Anjou men., 417 Fulton, Elaine men., 55 Furfey, Paul Hanly men., 299, 303 Gaberot, Louis men., 32 Gagliardi, Achille men., 316 Gaillardetz, Richard men., 302 Galen, Clemens August Graf von, Cardinal men., 149–50 Galileo men., 138–39 Gallagher, Charles Robert, S.J. men., 698 Gallagher, Michael men., 741–42 Gandhi, Mahatma men., 364–65 Ganshof, François Louis men., 442 Ganss, George E., S.J. men., 511–12 García Hernán, Enrique Vives y Moro. La amistad en tiempos difíciles, rev., 342–43 García Oro, José men., 647 Garlaschi, Innocente men., 271, 276, 284, 286, Garrigou-Lagrange, Reginald, O.P. men., 304, 318 Gascoigne, Thomas men., 357-58 Gasper, Giles E. M. and Svein H. Gullbekk, eds. Money and the Church in Medieval Europe, 1000–1200: Practice, Morality, and Thought, rev., 115–17 Gavin, Thomas F., S.J. men., 741 Gebarowski-Shafer, Ellie Rev. of A. Duran, ed., 101–03 Geddes, John, auth.; Michael Briody, comp. The Scots College, Spain, 1767–1780: Memoirs of the Translation of the Scotch College from Madrid to Valladolid, rev., 596–98 Geoffrey of Auxerre men., 433–34 Georgetown University Announces conference, “1517–2017: Lutherans and Catholics, Then and Now,” 620 George-Tvrtković, Rita Meryem Ana, Evi, Marian Devotion, and the Making of Nostra aetate 3, 755–81 Gerber, Scott D. Law and Catholicism in Colonial Maryland, 465–90 Gerhard, Hubert men., 30 Gerhoch of Reichersberg men., 431 German Catholic fraternities men., 698–724 German Christian Faith Movement men., 603–04 German Historical Institute in Paris To sponsor conference, “Nationalstaatsbildung und Reformationsgedenken: Deutungen und Instrumentalisierung von Reformation und katholischer Reform im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert,” 621 German nationalist anti-Catholicism men., 703–05 German political Catholicism men., 814–18 Gesellschaft zur Herausgabe des Corpus Catholicorum e.V. Conference “Glaube(n) im Disput: Altgläubige Kontroversisten des Reformationszeitalters in neuerer Forschung,” 380 Conference on “Ideal und Praxis: Bischöfe und Bischofsamt im Heilgen Römischen Reich, 1570–1620,” 381 Lecture by V. Leppin, 620 Gibieuf, Guillaume men., 32 Gilbert of Poitiers men., 409–36 Giles, Geoffrey J. men., 715 Gillis, Matthew Bryan Rev. of O. M. Phelan, 110–11 Gitlitz, David M. men., 646 Gleason, Philip men., 310, 728, 741 GENERAL INDEX Glenmary Home Missioners men., 823 Glisky, Joan, I.H.M men., 725, 748, Glombowski, Friedrich men., 723 Glorious Revolution men., 481 Gnosticism men., 105-06, 321-23 Godescalc, Abbot men., 433 Goldhagen, Daniel J. men., 702 Goldish, Matt men., 661 Golvers, Noël, ed. Letters of a Peking Jesuit: The Correspondence of Ferdinand Verbiest, SJ (1623– 1688), rev., 590–91 Gonsalves, Peter Gandhi and the Popes: From Pius XI to Francis, rev., 364–65 González de Mendoza, Pedro, Cardinal men., 642, 644, 646 González, Tirso men., 668–69, 671 Gordon, Rona Johnston Rev. of R. Svoboda, 812–14 Goto, João de men., 212, 219 Gousset, Thomas men., 420–21 Graham, Billy men., 522–23 Graham, Michael F. Rev. of J. E. A. Dawson, 134–35 Granada, forced conversion of Muslims men., 639–62 Granado, Diego men., 683, 685 Grandi, Carolus men., 665 Graney, Chris Letter to Editor, 826–27 Gratian, Theologian men., 337–38 Gravina, Francesco Paolo, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 823 Gray, Kathryn N. John Eliot and the Praying Indians of Massachusetts Bay: Communities and Connections in Puritan New England, rev., 611–13 Great Depression men., 725, 731, 738–42 xxi Great Schism men., 647 Green, Jay D. Christian Historiography: Five Rival Versions, rev., 795–96 Gregory of Rimini men., 261 Gregory VIII, Pope men., 212 Gregory XIII, Pope men., 439 Gregory, Brad S. men., 209 Grendler, Paul F. The Jesuits and Italian Universities, 1548– 1773, Forum Essay, 782–94 men., 447 P. F. Grendler Forum Essay Response, 792–794 Recieves Paul Oskar Kristeller Lifetime Achievement Award, 382 Rev. of G. Caravale, auth.; F. Gordon, trans., 584–85 Griffey, Erin On Display: Henrietta Maria and the Materials of Magnificence at the Stuart Court, rev., 141–42 Griffith, Sidney men., 767 Gritsch, Eric men., 65 Gröber, Adolf men., 700, 817 Gross, Michael men., 700 Grote, Simon Rev. of W. J. Bulman and R. G. Ingram, eds., 353–55 Grou, Jean-Nicolas, S.J. men., 313–14 Gualtieri, Ludovico men., 443, 451–52, 462 Guasti, Niccolò men., 276 Gude, Mary Louise men., 764 Guerrini, Paolo men., 271–72, 275–76, 285–87, 290 Gumppenberg, Wilhelm men., 37, 142–43 Gura, David T. Latin paleography and codicology course, 380 Guslino, Bernardino men., 226–28, 230 xxii GENERAL INDEX Gutierrez, Bartolomé men., 220 Guy, John Rev. of A. Pleysier, 805–06 Guzmán, Diego Ramírez de men., 660 Guzmán, Fernando Rev. of A. Cohen Suarez, 167–68 Haberkern, Phillip N. Patron Saint and Prophet: Jan Hus in the Bohemian and German Reformations, rev., 583–84 men., 53 Habsburg Empire men., 277, 281, 287, 290 Habsburgs men., 37, 48, 54–55, 66 Haddad, Yvonne men., 757 Hadrian, Emperor men., 566–67 Hagen, Hermann men., 704–05, 716, 719, 721–22 Hagiography men., 331–33 Haliczer, Stephen men., 447 Hallaj, Mansur almen., 766 Halsey, William M. men., 310 Hamer, Jean-Jérôme, Archbishop men., 546 Hamilton, Daniel S. men., 555 Hamm, Bernd men., 26-28, 30 Hanley, Thomas O’Brien men., 473-74 Hansen, João Adolfo men., 684 Hanska, Jussi men., 236, 243 Harcourt, Felix Rev. of M. P. Richard, 159–60 Häring, Nikolaus men., 412–13, 428-34 Harlin, John men., 278 Harris, A. Katie men., 644 Hastings, Derek men., 699, 702 Hatton, Thomas men., 478–79 Hauenstein, Karl Guido Oskar (“Heinz”) men., 708, 721–24 Hauser, Alan J and Duane F. Watson, eds. The Enlightenment Through the Nineteenth Century. A History of Biblical Interpretation, Vol. 3, rev., 811–12 Hayek, F. A. men., 492 Heal, Bridget men., 22, 45 Hébert, Marcel, auth.; C.J.T. Talar, ed.; C.J.T. Talar and Elizabeth Emery, trans. Religious Experience in the Work of Richard Wagner, rev., 599–600 Hefèle, Karl Joseph men., 421 Henery, Charles R. Yankee Bishops: Apostles in the New Republic, 1783 to 1873, rev., 614–16 Henningsen, Gustav men., 441, 447 Henrietta Maria, Queen men., 141–42, 471 Henry of Mainz, Archbishop men., 412 Henry of York, Archbishop men., 424 Henry VIII, King of England men., 13, 805–06 Herde, Peter Bonifaz VIII (1294–1303). Erster Halbband: Benedikt Caetani, rev., 124–25 Hermits of Saint Augustine men., 45 Herrera, Francisco men., 661 Herrero del Collado, Tarsicio men., 640, 660 Hertling, Georg von men., 700 Herz, Rachel men., 265 Herzog, Jonathon men., 760 Hesselink, Reinier H. men., 210–11 Heyer, Kristen men., 302 Hieronymite order men., 644-45 Hildesheimer, Françoise men., 42 GENERAL INDEX Hillgarth, J. N. men., 647-48, 657-59 Hillman, Jennifer men., 42 Hindenburg, Paul von men., 719 Historia scholastica men., 120-21 Historiography men., 795–96 Hitler, Adolf men., 602–03, 699, 702–05, 715, 718–24 Hitze, Franz men., 700 Hochschulring deutscher Art (HdA) men., 702–03 Hoey, Robert F., S.J. men., 518–20 Hoffman, Ronald men., 487, 489 Hofmann, Siegfried men., 37, 44 Hojeda, Alonso de men., 645–46 Hollander, J. H. men., 479–480 Holscher, Kathleen Elected 2018 Vice-President and 2019 President of ACHA, 823 Holt, Michael F. men., 75 Holzapfel, Heribert men., 239 Holzem, Andreas men., 45 Holzmeister, Clemens men., 713 Honigmann, Ernest men., 774 Hooper, J. Leon, S.J. men., 298–300, 302–04 Höpfl, Harro men., 43 Hoppe, Stephan men., 40–41 Horn, Michael men., 412–13, 421, 425 Hornbeck, J. Patrick II and Michael Van Dussen, eds. Europe after Wyclif, rev., 801–02 Hospital of the Incurables, Naples men., 823 Howard, Jane Mary, I.H.M. men., 749 Howley, William men., 284-85, 293 Hsia, R. Po-Chia men., 28, 38, 40, 43, 44, 654 Hudon, William V. Rev. of C. M. N. Eire, 344–45 Hugh of Auxerre men., 434 Hugh of Chamfleury men., 433 Hugh of Molise, Count men., 426–28 Hugh of St. Victor men., 335–37 Hugo, John, S.J. men., 297–320 Hunt, Thomas C. men., 85 Hus, Jan men., 60–61, 583–84 Hussite Revolution men., 26, 53 Hussites men., 53, 59, 65, 66, 801–02 Huxley, Aldous men., 314–15 Hyer, Marjorie men., 551, 554 Iannuzzi, Isabella men., 641, 645, 647, 653–55, 661 Iberian studies men., 111–12 Ibn Hazm men., 771 Ibn Taymiyya men., 757 Ignatian spirituality men., 297–320 Ignatius of Loyola, Saint men., 300, 308–15, 317–20 Imhammet men., 448, 461 Immaculate Conception men., 20, 30-31, 39, 46 Immaculate Heart of Mary Sisters men., 725–754 Immigration men., 164–65 Imperium Christianum men., 110–11 Ingolstadt men., 36–37, 44 Innes Review Issue on “Biography and James VI’s Scotland,” 383 xxiii xxiv GENERAL INDEX Innocent II, Pope men., 421–25 Innocent III, Pope men., 237, 442, 446, 449 Innocent X, Pope men., 298 Innocent XII, Pope men., 316, 463 Inquisition men., 13, 351–52, 437–64, 584–85 Institute of the Sisters of the Poor Jesus men., 379 International Congress on Medieval Studies Session on medieval liturgy, 824 International Journal for the Study of the Christian Church Articles to mark 500th Anniversary of the Reformation, 622 International Theological Commission (ITC) men., 779-80 Invincible Ignorance of God men., 663–89 Irish American Catholicism men., 159–60, 370–71 Irish Catholicism men., 351–52 Irish College, Rome men., 271–96 Isabel I, Queen of Castile men., 641, 644-46, 652, 654, 659–60 Ishikawa, Chiyo men., 641 Islam men., 16–19, 755–781 Israeli state men., 16 Issel, William Recieves 2017 ACHA Distinguished Scholar Award, 175–76 Rev. of A. J. Watt, 160–61 Istituto Storico Italo-Germanico men., 4, 10, 11 Italian Jansenism men., 271–96 Ivo of Chartres men., 433 Izbicki, Thomas M. Rev. of L. Schmugge, ed., 804–05 Jablonski, Thomas J. men., 512 Jackson, Joe Black Elk: The Life of an American Visionary, rev., 377–78 Jacob of Edessa men., 768 Jacobe, Stephanie Elected Chair of ACHA Election Board, 823 Jacobs, Jo Ellen men., 493, 495, 500 Jadot, Jean, Archbishop men., 541 James I, King of England men., 5, 468, 473 James of the Marches men., 228 Jansen, Cornelius men., 261, 277 Jansen, Katherine L. Rev. of L. K. Little, 561–62 Jansenism men., 42, 46, 246–70, 297–305, 316–17, 320 Jantzen, Kyle Rev. of M. M. Solberg, ed., trans., and introd., 603–04 Japan men., 207–23 Jarausch, Konrad H. men., 707 Jeanne, Jacques men., 32 Jedin, Hubert men., 2, 4, 8–9 Jemolo, Arturo men., 271 Jesuit missions men., 681, 687 Jesuit plantations men., 477, 482 Jews men., 224–45 Jogues, Isaac, Saint men., 315 John IV of Portugal men., 663 John of Paris men., 579–80 John of Salisbury men., 409–36 John of the Cross, Saint men., 305, 316 John Paul I, Pope men., 547 John Paul II, Pope men., 438, 547–49, 756 John XXIII, Pope men., 52, 151–53, 759, 775 GENERAL INDEX Johnson, Anna Marie Rev. of T. Kauffman, 822 Johnson, Bradley T. men., 466 Johnson, Trevor men., 25 Johnston, Mark D. men., 656 Jones, Chris, ed. John of Paris: Beyond Royal and Papal Power, rev., 579–80 Joseph II, Holy Roman Emperor (Josephinism) men., 277, 281, 287, 290, 812–14 Journal of African American History Publishes issue on Black Catholics in the United States, 181 Journal of Early Modern History Publishes articles on “Missionary Encounters in the Atlantic World,” 383 Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies Publishes articles on “Unintended Reformations,” 180 Journal of World History Publishes issue on “Preaching the Civilizing Mission and Modern Cultural Encounters,” 180–81 Juan de Lucena men., 642 Juan de Santa Maria men., 212 Juana de la Cruz men., 582–83 Juana of Castile (Juana la Loca) men., 660 Judaizing men., 639–62 Julius II, Pope men., 639 Julius III, Pope men., 454 Jünger, Ernst men., 706 Juster, Susan Sacred Violence in Early America, rev., 820–22 Kadellis, Anthony and Ioannis Polemis, trans. Psellos and the Patriarchs: Letters and Funeral Orations for Keroullarios, Leichoudes, and Xiphilinos, rev., 114–15 Kahil, Mary men., 764 xxv Kaizer, Ted Rev. of M. Peppard, 329–30 Kalvesmaki, Joel and Robin Darling Young, eds. Evagrius and His Legacy, rev., 567–68 Kamen, Henry men., 642, 654 Kane, Paula M. men., 759 Kapp Putsch men., 707–08, 724 Karkov, Catherine E. Rev. of J. Munns, 798-99 Kartell-Verband der katholischen Studentenvereine Deutchlands (KV) men., 700–01, 703, 706–07, 716, 720 Kaszuba, Serafin (Alojzy Kazimierz), Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 823 Kater, Michael H. men., 707 Katholische Akademie in Freiburg im Breisgau Conference “Glaube(n) im Disput: Altgläubige Kontroversisten des Reformationszeitalters in neuerer Forschung,” 380 Kauffman, Thomas A Short Life of Martin Luther, b.n., 822 Kaye, Joel Rev. of G. E. M. Gasper and S. H. Gullbekk, eds., 115–17 Keeler, William, Cardinal men., 781 Kelly, Bernard W. men., 498 Kelly, Ellin M. obit., 182-83 Kelly, H. Ansgar men., 442, 446 Kelly, James E. Rev. of L. Lux-Sterritt, 810–11 Kelly, M. Rosalita men., 743 Kelly, Timothy men., 509 Kelly, William E. Rev. of J. D. Koehler, 606–08 Kennedy, Augustin men., 78 Kennedy, Emmet Abbé Sicard’s Deaf Education: Empowering the Mute, 1785–1820, rev., 144–46 Kennedy, Thomas men., 490 xxvi GENERAL INDEX Kent, Peter C. Rev. of P. H. Kosicki, ed., 608–09 Kerr, Fergus men., 304 Kibe Kasui, Pedro men., 216 Kiessling, Nicolas K. Receives Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals’ History Group’s Essay Award for 2017 for his article “James Molloy and Sales of Recusant Books to the United States,” 621 Kilroy, Gerard Edmund Campion: A Scholarly Life, rev., 136–38 men., 55 Kim, Young Richard Rev. of G. Chiapparini, 105–06 King James Bible men., 83–88, 101–03 Kingdon, Robert men., 129-30 Kirby, James Historians and the Church of England: Religion and Historical Scholarship, 1870–1920, rev., 600–01 Kirchliche Zeitschrift Publishes issue on “Resistance revisited and requestioned: Church and society in Scandinavia and Europe,” 181 Kirk, Russell biog., 163–64 Kisai, Diogo men., 212, 219, 222 Kleinman, Ruth men., 51 Klimó, Árpád von Rev. of A. Fejérdy, ed., 151–53 Klingshirn, William E. Rev. of J. Fernández Ubiña, A. J. Quiroga Puertas, and P. Ubric Rabaneda, eds., 570–71 Know-Nothings men., 73–98 Knox, John biog., 134–35 Koehler, John D. Spies in the Vatican: The Soviet Union’s Cold War Against the Catholic Church, rev., 606–08 Koehlinger, Amy L. men., 737–38 Kölnische Volkszeitung men., 711, 716 Komonchak, Joseph men., 303 Koopmans, Rachel Rev. of R. M. Thomson and M. Winterbottom, eds. and trans., 118– 20 Korten, Christopher Pietro Tamburini’s Jansenist Legacy at the Irish College in Rome and His Influence on the Irish Church, 271–96 Kosicki, Piotr H., ed. Vatican II behind the Iron Curtain, rev., 608–09 Kramer, Heinrich men., 449 Kramer, Susan R. Rev. of R. N. Swanson, ed., 117–18 Krieg, Robert A. men., 719 Kroess, Alois men., 55 Krokus, Christian men., 764, 766 Krugler, John D. men., 467, 469, 473, 476, 486 Rev. of A. Sutto, 157–58 Krumenacker, Yves men., 39, 42 Ku Klux Klan men., 159–60 Kulikowski, Michael The Triumph of Empire: The Roman World from Hadrian to Constantine, rev., 566–67 Küng, Hans men., 522 Kuropka, Joachim Galen: Wege und Irrwege der Forschung, rev., 149–50 Kuzniewski, Anthony J., S.J. obit., 183–86 men., 516 Kyra Belán men., 31 Labini, Vincenzo, Bishop men., 438 Lachance, Paul men., 229 Lacouture, Onesimus, S.J. men., 297–320 Ladero Quesada, Miguel Ángel men., 641, 643 Lafitau, Joseph François men., 43 La Guardia, Holy Child of men., 654 GENERAL INDEX Lahey, R. J. men., 466, 470 Lake, Peter and Isaac Stephens Scandal and Religious Identity in Early Stuart England: A Northamptonshire Maid’s Tragedy, rev., 139–41 Lake, Peter Bad Queen Bess? Libels, Secret Histories, and the Politics of Publicity in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth I, rev., 588–89 Lallemant, Louis men., 297–320 Lampadaridi, Anna, ed. and trans. La conversion de Gaza au christianisme: Vie de S. Porphyre de Gaza par Marc le Diacre (BHG 1570), rev., 333–34 Land, Aubrey C. men., 470, 487 Lanfry, Jean men., 778 Lang, Rat men., 706 Langholm, Odd men., 224–25 Langland, William men., 127–28 Lanigan, John men., 271–96 L’Archevesque, Nicolas men., 32 Larousse, William men., 643 Larsen, Timothy The Catholic Faith of John Stuart Mill’s Stepdaughter: A Note on the Diary and Devotional Life of the Feminist Activist Helen Taylor (1831–1907), 491–507 Larson, Atria A. Rev. of A. Angenendt, 796–97 Lasallian studies men., 246–47 Lateran Councils men., 419–20 Lateranum Symposium papers commemorating Fourth Lateran Council, 179–80 Laubacher, Mary men., 749 Lauraire, Léon, F.S.C. men., 254–55 Lauwers, Michel Monastères et espace social: Genèse et transformation d’un système de lieux dans l’Occident médiéval, rev., 108–09 xxvii Lavenia, Vincenzo and Sabina Pavone, eds. Missioni, saperi e adattamento tra Europa e imperi non cristiani, rev., 807–08 Lavenia, Vincenzo men., 42, 438, 446, 460 Law, Bernard, Bishop men., 529–58 Law men., 465–90 Lawrance, Jeremy men., 681 Lazarists men., 772–73 Lea, Henry Charles men., 447, 452, 660 League of Nations men., 708 Le Bras, Gabriel men., 3, 9 Leclercq, Jean men., 410, 431–32 Le Gall, Jean-Marie men., 39 Lehfeldt, Elizabeth Rev. of J. A. Boon and R. E. Surtz, eds.; R. E. Surtz and N. Weinerth, trans., 582–83 Lehner, Ulrich L. The Catholic Enlightenment: The Forgotten History of a Global Movement, rev., 355–57 Lenski, Noel Constantine and the Cities: Imperial Authority and Civic Politics, rev., 330–31 Leo IX, Pope men., 417 Leo X, Pope (Giovanni de’ Medici) men., 804–05 Leo XIII, Pope men., 52, 533, 731, 740, 756, 773 Leon, Sharon M. Rev. of D. K. Williams, 376-77 Leonard, William, S.J. men., 517, 526 Leonius of Paris men., 335-37 Lepanto, Battle of, (“Our Lady of Victory”) men., 758, 761, 773, 780 Leppin, Volker Lecture titled “Von der Kontroverse zur Historisierung. Das Corpus Catholicorum und die katholische Reformationsforschung im 20. Jahrhundert,” 620 xxviii GENERAL INDEX Le Roy, Alard men., 33 Lessard, Raymond men., 542, 558 Levenson, Jon men., 757, 768 Levine, Philippa men., 491–92 Levsen, Sonja men., 701 Levy, Evonne men., 40–41 Lewis, H. H. Walker men., 489 Lewis, Mark A., S.J. Rev. of J. W. O’Malley, S. J., 324–25 Lewis, William men., 477–78 Lewy, Guenter men., 702, 719 Leyser the Elder, Polykarp men., 50–72 Liberation theology men., 319 Lieber, Ernst men., 700 Liere, Frans van and Franklin T. Harkins, eds. Interpretation of Scripture: Practice. A Selection of Works of Hugh, Andrew, and Richard of St. Victor, Peter Comestor, Robert of Melun, Maurice of Sully, and Leonius of Paris, rev., 335– 37 Lindeman, Katherine Rev. of P. Daileader, 580–82 Linden, Ian Rev. of J. J. Carney, 609–11 Lindvall, Terry God Mocks: A History of Religious Satire from the Hebrew Prophets to Stephen Colbert, rev., 100–01 Linehan, Peter men., 412, 425 Linsenmann, Andreas and Markus Raasch, eds. Die Zentrumspartei im Kaiserreich: Bilanz und Perspektiven, rev., 814–18 Lipkes, Jeff men., 505 Liss, Peggy K. men., 641, 646 Little, Lester K. Indispensable Immigrants: The Wine Porters of Northern Italy and their Saint, 1200–1800, rev., 561–62 Liturgical reform men., 508–28 Łobżyński, Jan Dionizy men., 35 Lock, Alexander Catholicism, Identity and Politics in the Age of Enlightenment: The Life and Career of Sir Thomas Gascoigne, 1745–1810, rev., 357–58 Locke, John men., 465, 490 Lombard, Peter men., 433 Lonergan, Bernard, S.J. men., 311 Long, Huey men., 740, 742 Longo, Maria Lorenza Requenses de, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 823 Longpré, Anselme men., 305 Lope de Vega men., 215 López de Toro, José men., 653 López-Menéndez, Marisol Miguel Pro: Martyrdom, Politics, and Society in Twentieth-Century Mexico, rev., 617–18 Lopez, Pasquale men., 444 Lord, Daniel A. men., 740–41 Lossing, Larry men., 541 Louis VII, King of France men., 418, 425–26 Louis XIII, King of France men., 48 Louis XIV, King of France men., 247, 250, 254, 258 Louis XV, King of France men., 258 Lours, Matthieu men., 40 Louthan, Howard men., 25, 53, 55 Lowell, Charles men., 80, 82, 89–90 Loyer, Kenneth M. Rev. of R. N. Danker, 595–96 Lubac, Henri de men., 317-19 Lubac, Henri de men., 753 GENERAL INDEX Lucena, João de men., 213 Lucero, Diego Rodríguez men., 659–60 Ludovisi, Ludovico, Cardinal men., 289 Lukens, Michael men., 702 Lum, Kathryn Gin Damned Nation: Hell in America from Revolution to Reconstruction, rev., 156– 57 Lumbrozo, Jacob men., 479–480 Luther, Martin biog., 822 men., 2, 8, 19, 22, 27–28, 56, 61, 62, 68, 177–78, 178–79, 251, 261 Lutheranism men., 50–72 Lutz, Gerhard men., 41 Lux-Sterritt, Laurence English Benedictine Nuns in Exile in the Seventeenth Century: Living Spiritually, rev., 810–11 Maag, Karin Lifting Hearts to the Lord: Worship with John Calvin in Sixteenth-Century Geneva, rev., 587–88 MacCartney, Donald men., 293 Mackay, Angus men., 651 Macy, Gary men., 41 Magni, Valeriano men., 55 Maillefer, François-Elie men., 252, 265, 268 Maillefer, Jean-François men., 248, 252 Makowski, Szymon Stanisław men., 32 Malcolm, Noel Agents of Empire: Knights, Corsairs, Jesuits and Spies in the Sixteenth-Century Mediterranean World, rev., 130–31 Mâle, Emile men., 31–32 Malta men., 437–64 Maltese Tribunal men., 437–64 Mandat-Grancey, Marie de men., 771–73 xxix Mangan, Mary, S.L. men., 730 Mantese, Giovanni men., 271, 276–77 Maraviglia, Mariangela David Maria Turoldo. La vita, la testimonianza (1916–1992), rev., 605–06 Marcantonio de Dominis men., 5 Marco di Matteo Strozzi men., 241 Marco di Montegallo men., 241–42 Marebon, John men., 429 Marefoschi, Mario, Cardinal men., 274–75, 277–80, 282, 285, 288, 290 María de Molina, Queen of Castile men., 340–41 Marian columns men., 30–31 Marian cults men., 38–39 Marian devotion men., 20–49, 103–04, 118–20, 142–43 Marian iconography men., 20–49 Marian pilgrimages men., 37 Marian sodalities men., 35–36, 44 Marie de l’Incarnation, Saint men., 366–68 Marillac College men., 752 Marini, Giambattista men., 279, 285, 290 Mariology men., 755–781 Marotti, Arthur F. Rev. of P. Lake, 588–89 Márquez Villanueva, Francisco men., 641, 644, 648 Marquilhas, Rita men., 670, 672, 679 Married priests men., 529-58 Marrone, Debra Caruso Response to Letter to Editor, 623 Rev. of T. J. Shelley, 368-69 Marshner, William Defending the Faith: An Anti-Modernist Anthology, rev., 819–20 Martin, Claude men., 366–68 xxx GENERAL INDEX Martin, John men., 444 Martin, Patrick H. Elizabethan Espionage: Plotters and Spies in the Struggle between Catholicism and the Crown, rev., 348–49 Martin, Ruth men., 437–38, 441 Martínez Medina, Francisco Javier men., 641, 643 Marto, Francisco de Jesus and Jacinta de Jesus Canonized as saints, 379 Martyrdom men., 207–23 Maruzzo, Tullio (Marcello), OFM, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes martyrdom, 823 Marx, Wilhelm men., 700 Marygrove College men., 725, 738–39, 743–44, 746 Maryks, Robert A. men., 42 Maryland Historical Society men., 466 Maryland, colonial men., 157–58, 465–90 Masini, Eliseo men., 443, 447, 450, 456 Massignon, Louis men., 755-781 Mastrilli, Marcello men., 220-21 Matus, Zachary Rev. of E. Tealdi, ed., 126–27 Maunder, Chris Rev. of S. J. Shoemaker, 103-04 Maurer, Catherine and Catherine Vincent, eds. La coexistence confessionelle en France et en Europe germanique et orientale. Du Moyen Âge à nos jours, rev., 562–64 Maurice of Sully men., 335–37 Maurin, Peter men., 297–98, 302 Mauriello, Matthew Rocco men., 760 Mausbach, Joseph men., 700 Maximilian I of Bavaria men., 48 Maya men., 616-17 Mayer, H.E. men., 419 Mayer, Thomas F. men., 437–38, 443, 446 Maynooth College men., 273, 293–94 Mazza, Roberto Rev. of A. de Dreuzy, 146–47 Mazzetti, Roberto men., 271–72, 281, 286–87 McAndrews, Lawrence J. Refuge in the Lord: Catholics, Presidents, & the Politics of Immigration, 1981– 2013, rev., 164–65 McCarraher, Eugene men., 299 McCarthy era men., 733 McCarthy, Florence men., 285, 292 McCartin, James P. men., 509 McCluskey, Neil, S.J. men., 725–26, 729–31 McConnell, Michael men., 476 McGivney, Theresa men., 751 McGowan, Mark G. Rev. of A. N. Vachon, 373–74 McGrath, Alister E. men., 261 McGreevy, John T. Keynote address at CCHA annual conference, “American Jesuits and the World: How an Embattled Religious Order Made Modern Catholicism,” 381 men., 75, 76, 77, 78, 87, 89, 95, 97, 98 McKendrick, Melveena men., 643 McKevitt, Gerald men., 512 McLaughlin, T. P. men., 235 McMichael, Steven J., O.F.M. Conv. Rev. of S. J. Cornelison, N. B.-A. Debby, and P. Howard, eds., 800–01 McNeil, Betty Ann, D.C. Obit. of E. M.Kelly, 182–83 Meagher, Claude men., 291, 294 Medved, Marko Rev. of E. Orbanić, ed., 593–95 Melammed, Renee Levine men., 645 Melchiorre, Matteo men., 227, 236 GENERAL INDEX Melkite Catholic Church men., 764 Melville, Gert, auth.; James D. Mixson, trans. The World of Medieval Monasticism: Its History and Forms of Life, rev., 572–73 Mendes, Margarida Vieira men., 664, 670, 672, 679, 685 Mendicant orders men., 800–01 Mendoça, Francisco men., 34 Meneghin, Vittorino men., 227, 241 Meneghini, Giovanna, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 379 Mengel, David C. and Lisa Wolverton, eds. Christianity and Culture in the Middle Ages. Essays to Honor John Van Engen, rev., 107–08 Menke, Martin men., 698 Mennell, Stephen men., 266, 268 Mentzer, Raymond A. Rev. of A. N. Burnett, K. M. Comerford, and K. Maag, eds., 129–30 Mereu, Italo men., 453 Merrick, Jeffrey men., 257 Merriman, Brigid O’Shea, O.S.F. men., 306 Meryem Ana Evi, Ephesus men., 755–781 Messerano, Giacinto men., 444 Mews, Constant J. men., 415, 428, 431 Rev. of M. Clark, 120–21 Mexican Revolution men., 617–18 Meyerson, Mark D. men., 657 Michael the Archangel, Saint men., 39 Michele da Carcano men., 241 Michelson, Emily men., 50, 58 Míguez de González, Faustino, Blessed Pope Francis obtains consent for canonization, 379 Canonized as saint, 824 xxxi Miki, Paulo men., 212 Mikulec, Jiři men., 36 Milbank, John men., 302 Mill, John Stuart men., 491-507 Millar, Alan men., 496 Miller, Amata, I.H.M. men., 739, 751 Miller, Florence Fenwick men., 506 Miller, Randall M. Rev. of W. F. Quigley, Jr., 369–70 Miller, Samuel J. men., 275, 284, 287 Miller, William men., 308 Milo of Thérouanne men., 434 Miner, Bonaventure, F.S.C. men., 254 Minnich, Nelson H., ed. Journeys in Church History: Essays from the Catholic Historical Review, rev., 99– 100 men., 50, 239, 287 Report of the Editor, 171–72 Misner, Paul men., 732 Missionaries of Africa order (White Fathers) men., 778 Missions men., 37–38, 73–98, 180–81, 207–23, 381, 383, 611–13, 616–17 Mitchell, Nathan men., 760 Mitré Fernández, Emilio men., 645 Modernity men., 1–19 Molina, Luis de men., 42 Molinism men., 251, 275, 277, 281, 290 Molino, Giovanni, Cardinal men., 276 Monagle, Clare men., 414, 430, 433 Monasteries men., 108–09 Monasticism men., 572–73 xxxii GENERAL INDEX Moncelon, Jean men., 764–65 Montanari, Daniele men., 271–72, 275–76, 285, 290, 294 Montanari, Massimo men., 264 Montesquieu, Charles de men., 8, 465 Monti di Pietà men., 226–28, 231, 233–34, 236, 239–41 Monti, James men., 417 Moody, D. L. men., 501 Moore, R. I. men., 646 Moote, Lloyd A. men., 48 Moran, Daniel Creating Flannery O’Connor: Her Critics, Her Publishers, Her Readers, rev., 371– 73 More, Thomas, Saint men., 13, 60–61, 342–43 Moreira, Mateus, and twenty-seven companions, Blesseds Pope Francis obtains consent for canonization, 379 Canonized as saints, 824 Morello, Gustavo, S.J. The Catholic Church and Argentina’s Dirty War, rev., 168–69 Morera y Feixas, Magin, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 823 Morley, John men., 504 Mormando, Francesco men., 232 Mortification men., 246–70 Mosse, George L. men., 699 Mote, James men., 539, 544 Mother Mary of the Immaculate Conception (Adèle de Batz de Trenquelléon), Venerable Servant of God Pope Francis authorizes decree acknowledging miracle, 379 Motsch, Andreas men., 43 Mourad, Suleiman men., 757 Mousnier, Roland men., 255 Muckenhirn, M. Charles Borromeo men., 753 Muhana, Adma men., 667, 672 Mulderry, Darra D. “People are Suffering: People are Christ; and We Are Responsible”: Sister Mary Emil Penet’s Crusade for Social-Justice Education in the 1950s, 725–54 Mullett, Michael A. men., 28, 46 Munns, John Cross and Culture in Anglo-Norman England: Theology, Imagery, Devotion, rev., 798–99 Murray, John Courtney, S.J. men., 303–04 Muzzarelli, Maria Giuseppina men., 226, 230–31, 234, 236, 239–41 Nagasaki men., 210–11, 213, 216, 218, 221–23 Napoleon men., 4 Natali, Martino men., 281 National Catholic Educational Association (NCEA) men., 726, 736 National identities men., 621 National Socialism See Nazism Nationalsozialistischer Deutscher Studentenbund (NSDStB) men., 713, 715–16 Natural law men., 684, 738–39, 743–44, 747, 750– 51, 753 Navarro, Luis Obdulio Arroyo, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes martyrdom, 823 Nazism men., 8, 181, 365–66, 698–724 Neal, Marie Augusta, S.N.D.deN. men., 737–38 Nederman, Cary J. men., 414–15 Negruzzo, Simona P. F. Grendler Forum Essay, 787–89 Neiman, David men., 523–24 Nelson, William E. men., 468, 477, 482 Neo-Thomism men., 305, 312, 317–18 GENERAL INDEX Neri, Philip men., 42 Neubauer, Andreas men., 55, 64 Newberry Library of Chicago Announces fellowships, 619 Launches website project on French Renaissance paleography, 380 “Religious Change, 1450–1700,” Exhibition, 824 New College Conference on Medieval and Renaissance Studies Call for papers, 381, 621 New Deal men., 739, 743 New England Company men., 469 Newman, John Henry men., 530–32 Nicholas of Cusa men., 768 Nicholas V, Pope men., 651 Nicholson, Francis, Governor of Maryland men., 482–83 Nicklas, Thomas men., 65 Nieliski, Jan men., 31-32 Nobili, Giuliana men., 10 Nóbrega, Manuel da, S.J. men., 684 Nold, Patrick Rev. of C. Jones, ed., 579–80 Noll, Mark A. In the Beginning was the Word: The Bible in American Public Life, 1492–1783, rev., 153–55 Noonan, John T. men., 235, 425 Noone, Timothy men., 677 Noreen, Kirstin men., 36 Norman, Corrie men., 52 Norton, Charles Eliot men., 505 Nostra aetate men., 755–781 Nottegar, Alessandro, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 379 Nunez Muley, Francisco men., 643 xxxiii Oath Against Modernism men., 532 Oath of Supremacy men., 473, 531 O’Boyle, James men., 272, 277 Ó Briain, Felim men., 293 O’Brien, T. C. men., 310 O’Brien, David men., 301-02 O’Connell, David God Wills It: Presidents and the Political Use of Religion, rev., 374–76 O’Connell, Letitia, I.H.M men., 746, 750 O’Connell, Patricia men., 291-92 O’Connor, Charles men., 271-96 O’Connor, Flannery men., 371-73 O’Connor, Thomas Irish Voices from the Spanish Inquisition: Migrants, Converts and Brokers in Early Modern Iberia, rev., 351–52 O’Connor, Thomas men., 286, 291, 296 O’Dea, Thomas F. men., 511 Odymalski, Wincenty men., 31–32 Ohlidal, Anna men., 37 Öktem, Emre men., 775 Olds, Katrina B. Receives 2016 John Gilmary Shea Prize for Forging the Past: Invented Histories in Counter-Reformation Spain, 173 Ollivry-Dumairieh, Florence men., 771 Olmedo, Félix G. men., 641, 643 O’Mahony, Anthony men., 764–65, 779 O’Malley, John W., S. J. The Jesuits and the Popes: A Historical Sketch of Their Relationship, rev., 324–25 men., 23, 257, 306, 312, 316 Receives Ganss Award from Institute for Advanced Jesuit Studies of Boston College, 825 To receive 2015 Philip Schaff Prize from American Society of Church History, 825 xxxiv GENERAL INDEX O’Neill, A. C. men., 682 Onuf, Peter S. men., 488 Opus Dei men., 379 Oratorians, French men., 39 Oratory men., 42, 45 Orbanić, Elvis, ed. Ignazio Gaetano de Buset. Visita Spirituale del 1788 in Istria, rev., 593–95 Ordinance of 1639 men., 473–75, 477 O’Riordan, Michael men., 272, 279, 289–90 Oropesa, Alonso de men., 647 Orschel, Vera men., 285 Ortiz de Landázuri y Fernández de Heredia, Maria Guadalupe, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 379 Osswald, Maria Christina men., 213 O’Toole, James M. The Council on Campus: The Experience of Vatican II at Boston College, 508–28 Otthoboni, Pietro, Cardinal men., 443, 445–46, 448, 451, 456 Otto of Freising men., 413–15, 430, 435 Our Lady of Sinj men., 780 Our Lady of the Rosary men., 761, 780 Oxford Movement men., 529, 532, 540, 552, Oxx, Katie men., 75 Pagden, Anthony men., 681 Paiva, José Pedro men., 667, 672 Palencia, Alfonso de men., 653 Paleotti, Gabriele men., 9 Panaga Kapulu men., 755-781 Pannellini, Gori men., 445, 455, 461-62 Papacy men., 409–36 Papal monarchy men., 9–10 Papal-Jewish relations men., 334–35 Papenfuse, Edward C. men., 472, 476 Pardo, Osvaldo F. Honor and Personhood in Early Modern Mexico, rev., 166–67 Parker, James, SSC men., 538, 540–42, 544–45, 547, 549, 552, 554, 556 Parlopiano, Brandon Rev. of J. C. Wei, 337–38 Passerin d’Entrèves, Ettore men., 274–75, 281 Passionei, Domenico, Cardinal men., 275 Passionei, Paolo men., 446, 454, 462, Pastor, Ludwig von men., 22 Pastore, Stefania men., 641–42 Paton, Rose men., 50 Patzold, Steffen Gefälschtes Recht aus dem Frühmittelalter: Untersuchungen zur Herstellung und Überlieferung der pseudoisidorischen Dekretalen, rev., 112–14 Paul VI, Pope men., 151–53, 534–35, 547, 756, 766, 769, 775 Paul, Eugen men., 51 Paulinus of Nola, Saint men., 261–63 Pavia, University of men., 273, 281–82, 286 Peck, Linda Levy men., 248 Pelikan, Jaroslav men., 522 Pellegrino, Nicholas John men., 465, 467, 487–88 Peloso, Silvano men., 669–70 Penal Period (Maryland) men., 482 Penet, Mary Emil, I.H.M. men., 725-754 Pénicaud, Manoël men., 773-75, 778 Penn, William men., 481 GENERAL INDEX Pennington, Kenneth Rev. of L. G. Duggan, 559–61 Penz, Helga men., 45 Pepin, Paulette Lynn María de Molina, Queen and Regent: Life and Rule in Castile-León, rev., 340–41 Peppard, Michael The World’s Oldest Church: Bible, Art, and Ritual at Dura-Europos, Syria, rev., 329–30 Pereda, Felipe men., 649, 656 Pérennès, Jean-Jacques men., 765 Pérez de Guzman, Fernán men., 645, 651 Pérez, Joseph men., 646 Permanent Deaconate men., 534 Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter in North America men., 555–56 Personal Prelature of the Holy Cross men., 379 Peter Leopold, Grand Duke of Tuscany men., 284, 287 Peter Martyr (Peter of Verona) men., 208 Peter of Celles men., 414 Peter of John Olivi men., 225, 235, 242 Peters, Benjamin T. Ignatian Radicalism: The Influence of Jesuit Spirituality on Dorothy Day, 297–320 Peters, Edward men., 646 Peters, F. E. men., 768 Phayer, Michael men., 702 Phelan, Owen M. The Formation of Christian Europe: The Carolingians, Baptism, and the Imperium Christianum, rev., 110–11 Philip of Tours, Bishop men., 422–24 Philips, Christopher men., 553, 555 Phillip of Burgundy men., 660 Phillips, Jonathan men., 419 xxxv Piar, Daniel men., 85 Piarists men., 379 Pierre, Benoist men., 39 Pinto, Ana Fernandes, C.M. men., 211 Pistoia, Synod of men., 271, 273, 283–85, 287, 290–92, 294-95 Pistorius, Johann men., 55-56 Pius V, Pope men., 444, 761 Pius VI, Pope men., 276, 279–80, 288, 294 Pius VII, Pope men., 4 Pius X, Pope men., 361–64, 532, 731, 756 Pius XI, Pope men., 364–65, 365–66, 709, 731–32, 740 Pius XII, Pope men., 517, 730, 756, 760–61, 774–75, 777, 780 Plattig, Michael and Edeltraud Klueting, eds. “Kommt, um die Liebe zu liebe.” Maria Magdalena von Pazzi, rev., 809 Pleysier, Albert Henry VIII and the Anabaptists, rev., 805–06 Plumey, Yves-Joseph-Marie, O.M.I., Archbishop men., 756, 775–80 Pohlig, Matthias men., 29, 30 Poiré, François men., 20–21, 29, 32 Polecritti, Cynthia L. men., 232 Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC) men., 539, 544, 557 Polish National Library men., 31 Pontifical Committee of Historical Sciences Conference on Luther at the Vatican, 177–78 Conference on Luther in Washington, D. C., 178 Pontifical Lateran University men., 179–80 Poole, Henry Ward men., 677–79 xxxvi GENERAL INDEX Poole, Kevin R., ed. and trans. The Chronicle of Pseudo-Turpin: Book IV of the Liber Sancti Jacobi (Codex Calixtinus), rev., 573–75 Pope, Clarence men., 542 Pope, Peter E. men., 470 Popular piety men., 755–781 Populism men., 73–98 Porphyry, Bishop of Gaza men., 333–34 Porro, Pasquale, auth.; Joseph G. Trabbic and Roger W. Nutt, trans. Thomas Aquinas: A Historical and Philosophical Profile, rev., 575–76 Porsch, Felix men., 700 Porterfield, Amanda Rev. of J. J. Den Hartog, 613–14 Portier, William men., 313, 317 Portuguese Inquisition men., 663–89 Positive law men., 10, 15 Posset, Franz Receives 2016 Harry C. Koenig Prize for Catholic Biography for Johann Reuchlin, 1455–1522. A Theological Biography, 173–74 Poulin, Eugène men., 773 Poutet, Yves men., 259–60 Power, Edward J. men., 511 Prayer, Mario Rev. of P. Gonsalves, 364–65 Predestination men., 21 Premonstratensians men., 45 Prichard, Robert W. Rev. of C. R. Henery, 614–16 Pro, Miguel, S. J. men., 617–18 Probabilism men., 42–43 Pro-Diocese of St. Augustine of Canterbury (PDSAC) men., 529, 540, 545, 547, 551, 553, 554, 557 Prodi, Paolo Europe in the Age of Reformations: The Modern State and Confessionalization, Reformation Conference Address, 1–19 Giuseppe Dossetti e le Officine bolognesi, rev., 150–51 men., 239 obit., 186–90 Conference in memory of, 380 Pro-Life movement men., 376–77 Prosperi, Adriano men., 437–38, 444, 447 Protestant Revolution in Maryland men., 481 Psellos, Michael men., 114–15 Pseudo-Isidore men., 112–14 Pseudo-Turpin men., 573–75 Pucci, Francesco men., 13 Pulgar, Fernando del men., 641–42 Pullan, Brian men., 437–38, 447, 453 Pungier, Jean men., 254 Puritanism men., 13-14 Puritans men., 611-13 Purvis, Zachary Theology and the University in NineteenthCentury Germany, rev., 360–61 Pym, Horace N. men., 502 Quakers men., 481, 489 Quarré, Bartholomy men., 39 Quesnel, Pasquier men., 248, 316–17 Quevedo, Juan de men., 680 Quietist controversy men., 316–17 Quigley, William F., Jr. Pure Heart: The Faith of a Father and Son in the War for a More Perfect Union, rev., 369–70 Quinn, John, Archbishop men., 548, 550–51, 555, 557 GENERAL INDEX Quinonez, Lora Ann, C.N.P. men., 737-38 Qur’an men., 757–58, 762, 766–67, 771, 775–76 Rabe, Stephen G. Rev. of G. Morello, S.J., 168–69 Radek, Karl men., 710 Radical Christianity men., 13 Radziwiłł, Albrycht Stanisław men., 32 Raeder, Linda C. men., 496, 504 Rahner, Karl, S.J. men., 318, 524 Raimundo of Toledo, Archbishop men., 412 Ralph of Vermandois men., 409–36 Ramsey, Michael, Archbishop of Canterbury men., 534–35 Ranson, Angela Rev. of P. H. Martin, 348–49 Ratcliffe, S. K. men., 495 Rathenau, Walter men., 708 Rathey, Markus Bach’s Major Vocal Works: Music, Drama, Liturgy, rev., 358–60 Ravelet, Armand men., 258–60 Rawls, John men., 15 Ray, Roger men., 414, 433 Redinger, Matthew A. Rev. of M. López-Menéndez, 617–18 Reeves, Thomas C. men., 763 Reformation men., 1–19, 127-28, 129–30, 131–33, 180, 207–23, 257, 261, 344-45, 380– 81, 383, 583-84, 620-22 Regina Pacis Community men., 379 Regnier, Jean men., 32 Regoli, Roberto, ed. San Pio X: Papa riformatore di fronte alle sfide del nuovo secolo. Atti della Giornata di Studi in occasione del centenario della morte di San Pio X (1914–2014), Città del Vaticano, 12 giugno 2014, rev., 361-64 xxxvii Reinhard, Wolfgang men., 11, 24 Reinhardt, Nicole Rev. of P. Walter and G. Wassilowsky, eds., 347–48 Religious Toleration men., 465–90 Remarque, Erich Maria men., 706 Remensnyder, Amy men., 758 Renaissance Society of America Awards Paul Oskar Kristeller Lifetime Achievement Award to P. F. Grendler, 382 Republican Party men., 94 Resch, Claudia Rev. of E. C. Tingle and J. Willis, eds., 131–33 Reuchlin, Johann men., 173–74 Revue des Sciences Religieuses Publishes articles on topic “Regards médiévaux sur l’Islam,” 180 Rex, Richard men., 60 Reynolds, Gabriel Said men., 757, 762 Ricci, Matteo men., 43 Ricci, Scipio men., 273, 283–84, 286–87, 291 Richard, Mark Paul Not a Catholic Nation: The Ku Klux Klan Confronts New England in the 1920s, rev., 159–60 Richard of St. Victor men., 335–37 Richelieu, Armand du Plessis de, Cardinal men., 42 Riedel, Christopher Receives 2016 Peter Guilday Prize for “Praising God Together: Monastic Reformers and Laypeople in TenthCentury Winchester,” 174 Riegle, Rosalie men., 298 Rigoleuc, Jean, S.J. men., 313 Rigorists men., 45 Riley, Kathleen men., 763–64 Riley-Smith, Jonathan men., 419 xxxviii GENERAL INDEX Riordan, Timothy B. men., 480 Rist, Rebecca Popes and Jews, 1095–1291, rev., 334–35 Robert de Bosco men., 434 Robert of Melun men., 335-37, 433 Roberts, Edward Rev. of K. Ubl and D. Ziemann, eds., 112–14 Rev. of S. Patzold, 112–14 Robinson, I.S. men., 419 Robinson, Neal men., 767 Rocha, João da men., 670 Rochini, Marco Rev. of N. Malcolm, 130–31 Rodrigues de Souza, José Antônio de Camargo men., 647 Rodrigues, Francisco men., 664, 668–69, 672 Rodríguez, Alonso, S.J. men., 312, 315 Roe v. Wade men., 376-77 Roethler, Jeremy Stephen Albert Leo Schlageter: First Soldier of the Third Reich or Catholic War Hero?, 698–724 Rogers, Carole Garibaldi men., 738 Roman empire men., 566–67 Roman Inquisition men., 437–64, 663-89 Romeo, Giovanni men., 442, 450 Rookwood Family men., 349–50 Roosevelt, Franklin D. men., 740, 742, 749 Rorabaugh, W. J. men., 75 Rosa, Mario men., 274-76, 281, 287 Rose, E. M. men., 654 Rösgen, Hans Jürgen men., 701, 703, 720 Rosmini-Serbati, Antonio men., 4, 6 Rota, Ettore men., 272 Roth, Norman men., 641, 645 Rother, Stanley Francis Beatified and recognized as martyr, 823 men., 207–08 Rotroux of Évreux men., 433 Rousseau men., 8 Roussel, Charles men., 33 Rubin, Miri men., 26–27, 37–38, 47 Rev. of D. C. Mengel and L. Wolverton, eds., 107–08 Rudolf II, Emperor men., 50, 54, 59, 65 Ruffo, Antonio men., 440, 446, 452, 454, 457–58, 460 Ruffo, Giovanni men., 661 Rufinus of Aquileia men., 569–70 Ruggieri, Giuseppe Assembles issue of Cristianesimo nella storia on topic of Christian unity, 179 Ruiz, Teofilo F. men., 645 Ruiz-de-Medina, Juan G., S.J. men., 211, 220 Rupescissa, Giovanni di men., 126–27 Russell, Bertrand men., 503–04 Russian Orthodox Church men., 323–24 Russo, Jean B. and J. Elliott men., 468 Rwandan Catholicism men., 609–11 Sack, James J. men., 294–95 Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (SCDF) men., 535, 545–49, 551, 553, 557 Saint-Simon, Duke of men., 248-49, 260 Salamanca men., 271–96, 644, 672, 680–81 Salm, Luke, F.S.C. men., 248-49 Salomon, Ernst von men., 723-24 GENERAL INDEX Salomons, Carolyn A Church United in Itself: Hernando de Talavera and the Religious Culture of Fifteenth-Century Castile, 639–62 Salviati, Gregorio men., 279–81, 289, 447–48 Sandeus, Maximilianus men., 32, 35 Sandler, Lucy Freeman Illuminators and Patrons in FourteenthCentury England: The Psalter & Hours of Humphrey de Bohun and the Manuscripts of the Bohun Family, rev., 125–26 Sangalli, Maurizio P. F. Grendler Forum Essay, 790–92 Santa Maria Maggiore men., 36 Sardella, Louis-Pierre Rev. of W. Marshner, 819-20 Sassier, Yves men., 425 Saurette, Marc Rev. of G. Melville, auth.; J. D. Mixson, trans., 572–73 Sauvage, Michel, F.S.C. men., 247 Savonarola, Girolamo men., 26, 242 Sawyer, Jeffrey K. men., 485 Scandinavia men., 181 Scarabelli, Giovanni men., 272, 275–76, 279, 281 Schachleiter, Alban men., 702 Schäfer, Gerhard men., 715 Schaffgotsch, Johann Prokop biog., 812–14 Schall, James V., S.J. Rev. of J. Broadley and P. Phillips, eds., 327–29 Scharf, James J. men., 488 Schatkin, Margaret men., 524 Scheck, Thomas P. Rev. of P. R. Amidon, S.J., trans., 569–70 Schein, Sylvia men., 420 Schiera, Pier Angelo men., 10 xxxix Schilling, Heinz men., 11, 24, 25 Schindler, David men., 302 Schlafly, Daniel L. Rev. of T. V. Bakhmetyeva, 598–99 Schlageter, Albert Leo men., 698–724 Schleifer, Aliah men., 757, 771 Schlund, Erhard, OFM men., 706, 717 Schmeling, Gaylin men., 64 Schmitt, Jean-Claude men., 458 Schmugge, Ludwig, ed. Repertorium Poenitentiariae Germanicum, X: Verzeichnis der in den Supplikenregistern der Pönitentiarie Leos X. vorkommenden Personen, Kirchen und Orte des Deutschen Reiches (1513–1521), rev., 804–05 Schoenig, Steven, S.J. men., 409 Scholasticism men., 428–31 Schönauer, Tobias men., 36 Schroth, Raymond men., 77, 78, 98 Schulte, Carl G. men., 772 Schutte, Yolande, F.C.S.P. men., 730 Schwartz, Bernard men., 487, 489 Schwarz, Jūrgen men., 715 Scorsese, Martin Silence, Film rev., 169–70 men., 208 Scottish Catholic history men., 383 Scottish Catholicism men., 121–22, 596–98 Second Crusade men., 418-19, 426 Second Lateran Council men., 421 Second Scholasticism men., 10 Second Vatican Council men., 8, 12–19, 147–48, 508-28, 529–30, 533–34, 541, 552, 557, 608–09, 725, 737–38, 754, 755–781 xl GENERAL INDEX Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity (SPCU) men., 541 Secularization men., 1–19 See, Scott men., 75, 95 Selge, Karl-Heinz men., 39 Sell, Alan P. F. men., 496–97, 504 Séminare de Saint-Sulpice Hosts “De l’idéal mystique, à l’entreprise seigneuriale,” Exhibition, 619 Sensus fidelium men., 760, 778-81 Separation of Church and State men., 490 Seper, Franjo, Cardinal men., 545, 547–48 Seven Sleepers of Ephesus men., 765–66, 774, 777 Sexuality men., 796–97 Seymour, John, Governor of Maryland men., 483 Sfair, Pietro, Maronite Archbishop men., 756, 768, 776, 778–80 Sferella, Josephine, I.H.M. men., 749 Shea, William R. Rev. of M. A. Finnochiaro, ed. and trans., 138–39 Shead, Norman F., ed. Scottish Episcopal Acta, Volume 1: The Twelfth Century, rev., 121–22 Sheen, Fulton, Bishop men., 758–59, 762–64, 770–71, 777–78, 780 Shelley, Thomas J. Fordham: A History of the Jesuit University of New York: 1841–2003, rev., 368–69 Letter to Editor, 622–23 Shepherd, Stephen Rev. of K. R. Poole, ed. and trans., 573–75 Sherman, Caroline R. Rev. of P. Sonnino, 591–92 Shoemaker, Stephen J. Mary in Early Christian Faith and Devotion, rev., 103–04 Sicard, Roch-Ambroise men., 144–46 Siddiqui, Mona men., 781 Sigüenza, José de men., 659 Silleras-Fernández, Núria Rev. of S. Barton, 111–12 Silsby, Herbert men., 94 Silvestro da Valsanzibio men., 58–59 Simeon Stylites, Saint men., 500 Simoni, Bartolomeo men., 230 Sister Formation Conference (SFC) men., 725–754 Sixteenth Century Society Conference to commemorate Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses, 178–79 Sixtus IV, Pope men., 228, 646 Skrakówski, Jacynt men., 32 Smidt, Andrea J. men., 291–92, 295 Smith, Al men., 749 Smith, Damian J. men., 409, 418–19, 421–22 Smith, Helmut Walser men., 700 Smith, Jane men., 757 Smith, Janet men., 493, 506 Smith, John Holland men., 647 Smith, Joseph H. men., 474 Smith, Katherine Allen Rev. of J. Thibodeaux, 797–98 Smuts, R. Malcolm Rev. of E. Griffey, 141–42 Social discipline (Sozialdisciplinierung) men., 10–11 Social justice men., 224–45, 725–754 Social subversion men., 246–70 Società Internazionale di Studi Francescani Co-sponsors conference, “Identità Francescane agli inizi del Cinquecento,” 620–21 Société canadienne d’histoire de l’Église catholique Contribution of religious women’s communities to 375-year history of Montréal, Exhibition, 619 GENERAL INDEX Annual Congress on theme, “Les univers religieux de Montréal: 375 ans d’histoire,” 620 Society of Jesus men., 6, 20–21, 29, 36–38, 39, 42, 44– 45, 51, 52, 53, 55, 73–98, 130–31, 143–44, 207-23, 274–79, 281–82, 292, 295, 297–320, 324–25, 325–27, 346–47, 352–53, 368–69, 381, 471, 477-78, 482-86, 508–28, 585–87, 590–91, 617–18, 663–89, 703, 738, 740, 744, 751, 782–94, 825 Society of the Holy Cross men., 529, 538, 540–42, 544–45, 547, 551, 553, 557 Solberg, Mary M., ed., trans., and introd. A Church Undone: Documents from the German Christian Faith Movement, 1932–1940, rev., 603–04 Somerville, Robert men., 421 Sommer, Wolfgang men., 64 Sonnino, Paul The Search for the Man in the Iron Mask: A Historical Detective Story, rev., 591– 92 Soto, Domingo de men., 680 Soveral, Andrea, Blessed Pope Francis obtains consent for canonization, 379 Canonized as saint, 824 Soviet Union men., 606–08 Spadaro, Antonio, S.J. men., 320 Spanish Inquisition men., 639–62, 806–07 Spaulding, Wallace men., 540, 547 Spicer, Kevin P., C.S.C. Rev. of J. Kuropka, 149–50 Spinola, Fabio Ambrosio men., 215 Spong, John men., 551 St. Bonaventure University men., 663–89 St. Hilaire, Alice, S.P. men., 754 St. Louis University Collaborates with Newberry Library website on French Renaissance paleography, 380 men., 725, 739, 751 Stanford, Peter men., 535 Rev. of J. P. Corrin, 147–48 Stanton, Anne Rudloff Rev. of L. F. Sandler, 125–26 Starowolski, Szymon men., 32, 35 Starr-LeBeau, Gretchen men., 644 Stauff, Derek Rev. of M. Rathey, 358–60 Stegerwald, Adam men., 722 Steinberg, Michael Stephen men., 715 Stella, Pietro men., 272, 276 Steltenkamp, Michael F., S.J. Rev. of J. Jackson, 377–78 Stephen, King of England men., 412 Stephen, Leslie men., 505 Stetson, William men., 541, 545 Stevenson, Janet H., ed. The Register of Edward Story, Bishop of Chichester, 1478–1503, rev., 341–42 Stinnett, Timothy S. men., 733–34 Stitz, Peter men., 702, 704, 712, 716–19 Stoner, James R. men., 487 Stonestreet, Charles, S.J. men., 78, 84 Stoppani, Giovanni Francesco men., 445, 452 Story, Edward, Bishop men., 341–42 Stracota, Joseph men., 761 Strangeman, Christopher Rev. of A. Lock, 357–58 Stransky, Thomas, CSP men., 779 Strasser, Ulrike men., 44 Strauss, Charles Obit. of A. J.Kuzniewski, 183–86 Strayer, Brian E. men., 46, 248–49 Student religious practice men., 508–28 Suárez, Francisco men., 680, 683, 685 xli xlii GENERAL INDEX Suger, Abbot of St. Denis men., 424, 433–35 Sullins, D. Paul The History of the 1980 Anglican Pastoral Provision, 529–58 Sullivan, Eileen P. The Shamrock and the Cross: Irish American Novelists Shape American Catholicism, rev., 370–71 Sullivan, Karen men., 208 Surin, Jean-Joseph, S.J. men., 297, 313-14, 320 Sutto, Antoinette Loyal Protestants and Dangerous Papists: Maryland and the Politics of Religion in the English Atlantic, 1630–1690, rev., 157–58 men., 468 Svechina, Sofia men., 598–99 Svoboda, Rudolf Johann Prokop Schaffgotsch: das Leben eines böhmischen Prälaten in der Zeit des Josephinismus, rev., 812-14 Swanson, R. N., ed. The Routledge History of Medieval Christianity: 1050–1500, rev., 117–18 Rev. of J. H. Stevenson, ed., 341–42 Swing, William men., 551 Székesfehérvár, Battle of men., 52-53 Tackett, Timothy Rev. of E. Kennedy, 144–46 Talar, C.J.T. men., 316-17 Talavera, Hernando de men., 639-62 Tamburini, Michelangelo men., 664, 672 Tamburini, Pietro men., 271-96 Tanner, Mary men., 536 Tapsell, Grant Rev. of R. Weil, 592-93 Tavares de Lima, Donizetti, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 823 Taveneaux, René men., 39, 40, 42 Tavira, Antonio, Archbishop men., 291 Taylor, Algernon men., 493, 497–98, 500–02, 505 Taylor, Alice Rev. of N. F. Shead, ed., 121–22 Taylor, Christopher men., 757, 770 Taylor, Helen men., 491–507 Taylor, Larissa men., 58 Tazbir, Janusz men., 46 Tealdi, Eleana, ed. Giovanni di Rupescissa: Vade mecum in tribulatione, rev., 126–27 Tedeschi, John men., 437–38, 441, 447, 452–53 Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre, S.J. men., 318, 524 Tello de Guzmán, Francisco men., 211 Tentler, Leslie Woodcock men., 509, 741–43, 747 Teresa of Avila, Saint men., 316 The Fund for the Advancement of Education (TFAE) men., 726–28, 732 Theatines men., 29 Theobald IV, Count of Blois men., 425 Theobald of Canterbury, Archbishop men., 412, 424 Theology faculty and curriculum men., 508–28 Theotokos men., 756, 774 Thibodeaux, Jennifer The Manly Priest: Clerical Celibacy, Masculinity, and Reform in England and Normandy, 1066–1300, rev., 797– 98 Thieron, Rob men., 703 Thiessen, Hillard von men., 45 Third Order of Saint Francis of Montpellier men., 823 Thirty Years’ War men., 30, 48, 53 Thom, Paul men., 429 Thomas à Kempis men., 500, 503, 505 Thomas Albert (Corbett), O.P., Sister men., 735–36 GENERAL INDEX Thomas, Keith men., 458 Thompson, William men., 316 Thomson, R. M. and M. Winterbottom, eds. and trans. William of Malmesbury: The Miracles of the Blessed Virgin Mary, rev., 118–20 Thuân, François-Xavier Nguyên Van, Cardinal, Servant of God Pope Francis recognizes heroic virtue, 379 Tierney, Mark men., 278, 283 Tillich, Paul men., 524 Tingle, Elizabeth C. and Jonathan Willis, eds. Dying, Death, Burial and Commemoration in Reformation Europe, rev., 131–33 Tinti, Giacomo men., 457 Tipton, Susan men., 31 Tissot, Samuel August men., 286 Todeschini, Giacomo men., 225, 234, 236 Tolan, John men., 772 Toledo men., 651, 653–54 Toleration men., 639–62 Tomkiewicz, Władysław men., 41 Tomko, Helena M. Rev. of T. Lindvall, 100–01 Tomonaga, Jacobo men., 220 Torcaso v. Watkins men., 489–90 Torgerson, Mark A. Rev. of G. Buggeln, 161–63 Torquemada, Juan de men., 647 Torquemada, Tomás de men., 646, 654 Torture men., 437–64 Touw, Mia men., 417-18 Traglia, Luigi, Cardinal men., 761 Trakulhun, Sven men., 43 xliii Travassos Valdez, Maria Ana men., 669 Tricoire, Damien Rev. of N. Balzamo, O. Christin, and F. Flückinger, eds., 142–43 What Was the Catholic Reformation? Marian Piety and the Universalization of Divine Love, 20–49 Trisco, Robert, Monsignor Receives Founders’ Award of the Alumni Association of the Pontifical North American College, 621 Tristano, Richard M. Crossing Cultures: The Mental World and Social Subversion of St. John Baptist de La Salle, 246–70 Tronu, Carla men., 213 Troy, John, Archbishop men., 284, 289, 291, 294–95 Truman, Harry men., 749 Türk, Oskar men., 712, 714, 718–19 Türkmen, Füsun men., 775 Turner, Mary Daniel, S.N.D.deN. men., 737–38 Turoldo, David Maria biog., 605–06 Turville-Petre, Thorlac Rev. of D. Aers, 127–28 Twomey, Carolyn Elected ACHA Graduate Student Representative 2017–19, 823 Twomey, L.J. men., 731 Tyacke, Nicholas Rev. of P. Lake and I. Stephens, 139–41 Ubl, Karl and Daniel Ziemann, eds. Fälschung als Mittel der Politik? Pseudoisidor im Licht der neuen Forschung: Gedenkschrift für Klaus Zechiel-Eckes, rev., 112–14 Ultramontanes men., 278 Unitarians men., 491, 495–96 Università degli Studi di Milano Hosts conference “Dorsale cattolica e dorsale alpine nel lungo Cinquecento, tra poteri politici e Controriforma,” 380 Universität Würzburg Co-sponsors with the Würzburger Diözesangeschichtsverein Conference xliv GENERAL INDEX on “Ideal und Praxis: Bischöfe und Bischofsamt im Heiligen Römischen Reich, 1570–1620,” 381 University of Notre Dame Rome Gateway Collaborates with American Academy in Rome on Latin paleography course, 380 University of Toronto Collaborates with Newberry Library website on French Renaissance paleography, 380 Unsworth, Andrew men., 766–69, 778–79 Urban II, Pope men., 417 Uricchio, Michele men., 286 Ursulines men., 44–45 U.S. Catholic Historian Articles on Catholics and racial justice in winter issue, 383–84 U.S. Civil War men., 369–70 U.S. National Park Service Receive 2017 ACHA Distinguished Service Award, 176–77 Usury men., 234–39 U.S. Women Religious men., 725–754 Utraquists men., 53 Vachon, Alexandre men., 373–74 Vachon, André N. Alexandre Vachon: the Scholars’ Cleric and the Clerics’ Scholar, rev., 373–74 Valdés Leal, Juan de men., 642 Valdez, Ana T. Tracking António Vieira’s Clavis Prophetarum: The St. Bonaventure, “Franciscan Collection,” Manuscript 28, 663–97 Valentinian Christianity men., 105-06 Valignano, Alessandro men., 43 Van Dam, Raymond Rev. of A. Lampadaridi, ed. and trans., 333–34 Van der Meulen, Nicolaj men., 35, 37 Van Engen, John men., 107–08 Van Kley, Dale men., 275, 277, 279, 287, 290 Varischi da Milano, Carlo men., 229, 231, 242–43 Vauchez, André men., 208 Vaussard, Maurice men., 280 Vélez, Karin Rev. of T. Banchoff and J. Casanova, eds., 325–27 Venarde, Bruce L. Rev. of J. Burton and K. Stöber, eds., 802–03 Verband der wissenschaftlichen katholischen Studentenvereine Unitas (Unitas) men., 700–01, 703, 706, 716–17, 720 Verbiest, Ferdinand, S.J. men., 590–91 Versailles peace settlements men., 699, 708, 721 Verzella, Emanuela men., 272 Vian, Giovanni Rev. of R. Regoli, ed., 361–64 Victorian Britain men., 491–507 Vieira, António, S.J. men., 663–97 Vieira, Sebastião men., 217, 221 Vincentians men., 773 Virgin of Guadalupe men., 37–38 Virginia Company men., 469, 473 Visitation Sisters men., 44 Vitoria, Francisco de men., 672, 680–81 Vives, Juan Luis men., 342–43 Voltaire men., 14 Voss-Hubbard, Mark men., 75 Waardenberg, Jacques men., 766 Wagner, Richard men., 599–600 Waite, Robert G. L. men., 699, 708, 711 Waldensians men., 646 GENERAL INDEX Walkowiak, Kathleen Public Authority and Private Constraints: Eugenius III and the Council of Reims, 409–36 Walsh, Michael P. men., 511, 514–16, 522–23 Walter, Peter and Günther Wassilowsky, eds. Das Konzil von Trient und die katholische Konfessionskultur (1563–2013). Wissenschaftliches Symposium aus Anlass des 450. Jahrestages des Abschlusses des Konzils von Trient, Freiburg i. Br. 18.–21. September 2013, rev., 347–48 Wandel, Lee Palmer Rev. of K. Maag, 587–88 Ward, Haruko Nawata Rev. of M. Scorsese, 169–70 Ward, Mary men., 44 Ward, W. G. men., 499 Waters, Charles men., 278 Waters, Claire M. Translating Clergie: Status, Education, and Salvation in Thirteenth-Century Vernacular Texts, rev., 577–78 Watt, Alan J. Farm Workers and the Churches: The Movement in California and Texas, rev., 160–61 Watt, Jeffrey R. men., 450–51 Watts, John Rev. of J. Geddes, auth.; M. Briody, comp., 596–98 Weber, Max men., 8, 15 Wei, John C. Gratian the Theologian, rev., 337–38 Weigel, George men., 301-02 Weikart, Richard Hitler’s Religion. The Twisted Beliefs That Drove the Third Reich, rev., 602–03 Weil, Rachel A Plague of Informers: Conspiracy and Political Trust in William III’s England, rev., 592-93 Weimar Germany men., 698-724 Welch, Anna Liturgy, Books, and Franciscan Identity in Medieval Umbria, rev., 123–24 xlv Wellings, Martin Rev. of J. Kirby, 600–01 Wendebourg, Dorothea men., 29 Wesley, Donna men., 725 Wesley, John men., 595-96 Weston Jesuit School of Theology men., 527 Westphalia, Peace of men., 4 Whitmore, Allan R. men., 79, 80, 81, 88, 89, 94, 97 Whitney, Donald S. Finding God in Solitude: The Personal Piety of Jonathan Edwards (1703– 1758) and Its Influence on His Pastoral Ministry, rev., 155–56 William III, King of England men., 482, 592–93 William of Malmesbury men., 118–20 William of Newburgh men., 420 William of Tripoli men., 768 Williams, Daniel K. Defenders of the Unborn: The Pro-Life Movement before Roe v. Wade, rev., 376–77 Williams, Michael A. Rev. of A. D. DeConick, 321–23 Wilson, James men., 465 Windthorst, Ludwig men., 700 Winter, Timothy men., 757 Wolf, Gerhard men., 36 Wolf, Kenneth Baxter men., 656 Wolff, Philippe men., 645 Wollstonecraft, Mary men., 495 Women’s Rights men., 491–507 Woodward, Kenneth men., 550–51 Worcester, Thomas, S.J. Rev. of M. Choudhury, 143–44 World War I men., 698, 702, 705–07, 715 xlvi GENERAL INDEX World War II men., 301, 303–04, 307, 701, 773 Wright, Anthony D. men., 42, 46 Wright, Rosemary Muir men., 32 Wyclif, John men., 801–02 Xavier, Francis, Saint men., 213-14, 217, 219-20 Yeager, Jonathan M. Rev. of D. S. Whitney, 155–56 Young, Alfred men., 75 Young, Francis, ed. Rookwood Family Papers, 1606–1761, rev., 349–50 Yovel, Yirmiyahu men., 645 Zahn, Gordon men., 702 Zechiel-Eckes, Klaus men., 112–14 Ziegler, Walter men., 45 Zilio, Paolino men., 50 Zimorowic, Józef Bartłomiej men., 35 Zola, Giuseppe men., 280–81, 286, 290, 294 Zweite Reformation men., 9 Zwicker, Lisa Fetheringill men., 701 Zwicker, Stefan men., 702, 724 THE CATHOLIC HISTORICAL REVIEW VOL. 103 AUTUMN 2017 NO. 4 A Church United in Itself: Hernando de Talavera and the Religious Culture of Fifteenth-Century Castile CAROLYN SALOMONS* Fifteenth-century Castile was a time of significant religious change. The issue of conversion and variance in religious praxis engendered the establishment of the Spanish Inquisition, an institution deeply opposed by some, including Hernando de Talavera, the first Archbishop of Granada. Rather than interpret this opposition as a sign of toleration for religious minorities, a close look at his writings and actions show a man reacting to the ever-shifting social, religious, and political milieu in which he lived. Keywords: conversion, Spain, toleration, Inquisition, church doctrine O n November 20, 1506, Pope Julius II issued a papal bull regarding accusations of heresy that had been brought against the Archbishop of Granada, Hernando de Talavera. In the bull, Julius praised his “venerable brother,” extolling Talavera’s faith and his dedication to the Church: . . . he has always carried Christ our Redeemer in his heart, to such an extent that through Him and the Catholic faith, he has not only renounced himself according to the Gospel, but also, through his observance of the Catholic religion, he has taught us the whole of its doctrine. He has expressed this through his blameless life, as much in word as in deed, so admirably that because of him, a large number of unbelievers have been converted to the faith of Christ by his life and his teachings, *Carolyn Salomons is an Assistant Professor of History at St. Mary’s University, Calgary, email: carolyn.salomons@stmu.ca. 639 640 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF and none of these [new] Christians have since reneged, but have remained constant. . . .1 Despite his exemplary life, the seventy-eight-year-old Talavera had been arrested by officials of the Holy Office of the Spanish Inquisition the previous year; however, as an archbishop of the Church, the matter necessitated judgment before the papal courts. Pope Julius discounted the charges, calling them the work of “jealous” men, who, “returning evil for good” were attempting to “stain . . . [Talavera’s] holy and incorruptible life with false testimony and slander, accusing him, under the guise of piety, of heresy and apostasy.”2 Unable to prove any of the malicious accusations against Talavera, they instead “imprisoned his own sister, already quite elderly, and his nephews and servants . . . [and] although they are Christians, they have been tortured with such diverse torments . . . such that no one, no matter how strong they are, could resist confessing the crimes of which they were accused.”3 Julius’ bull ensured the release of Talavera’s household from the jail cells of the Inquisition, and in April of 1507, he himself was acquitted of all charges of heresy. However, the letter acquitting him arrived too late; after walking bareheaded and barefooted through the streets of Granada in the Ascension Day processions, Talavera caught a violent fever, to which he succumbed on May 14, 1507. 1. The Latin text of the bull, and its Castilian translation, from which I quote, are appended to Tarsicio Herrero del Collado, “El proceso inquisitorial por delito de herejía contra Hernando de Talavera,” Anuario de historia del derecho español, no. 39 (1969), 671–706, here 704–05: “Hace poco nos hizo nuestro venerable hermano Fernando, Arzobispo de Granada, que, aunque él con su edad venerable llevó siempre en su corazón a Cristo nuestro Redentor hasta tal punto que por El y por la fe católica no sólo se ha renunciado a sí mismo según el Evangelio, sino también que, observante de la religión ha enseñado toda la doctrina católica de modo que su santa vida tanto de palabra como en obras la ha vivido de modo tan admirable que un gran número de infieles se han convertido a la fe de Cristo por su vida y por sus enseñanzas, y que ninguno de los cristianos ha renegado de ella sino que fueron confirmados como consta ante todos más claro que la luz del mediodía. . . .” 2. Ibid., 705. “Algunas envidiosos de sus buenas obras, tratando de devolverle mal por bien, han querido manchar de varias maneras su santa e incorruptible vida con falso testimonies y calumnias, acusándole, bajo capa de piedad, de herejía y apostasía de la fe. . . .” 3. Ibid. “[Y] como no han podido encontrar nada malo de qué acusarlo ante Nos, han encarcelado su propia hermana, ya bastante anciana y a sus sobrinos carnales y a algunos otros servidores y oficiales del mismo Arzobispo Fernando, aunque cristianos y los han torturado con tales y tan variados tormentos y con un género tan cruel de vida, que nadie lo pueda soportar por resistente y fuerte que sea, para poder hacerles confesar el crimen de que ellos le culpan.” CAROLYN SALOMONS 641 The details surrounding the latter years of this prominent fifteenthcentury Castilian churchman are well known.4 Talaveran historiography generally dismisses his encounter with the Inquisition in a manner similar to Julius’ summation of the case: as the work of those envious of the man, his office, and his close relationship with Isabel I of Castile and Fernando II of Aragon. Similarly, historians have assumed that the Inquisition’s interest in Talavera stemmed from a frustration with his lenient policies towards the Muslims of Granada after he took up his position as its first archbishop following that city’s conquest by the armies of Castile and Aragon in 1492.5 While both of these concerns may have informed the case against Talavera, there is also no doubt that he opposed the Inquisition from the outset, believing that it would ultimately be divisive and only serve to foster both religious and social disruption. In a time of increased social mobility and religious variance, Talavera believed that the Church should be the ultimate authority over all aspects of life, civic as well as religious—and the Inquisition, Talavera thought, undermined that authority. It was not toleration that informed Talavera’s position; he was an orthodox man, who was instead reacting to the climate of “fear and denunciation” that was a by-product of the Inquisition’s activities.6 His writings throughout his life demonstrate a keen awareness of the shifting political and religious milieu of his era, and offer a glimpse as to what it may have been to live through this time of turbulent uncertainty. Talavera was not the only one to advocate for conversion through persuasion rather than by force, nor was he the only one with misgivings about the efficacy of the Inquisition. Court secretary and chronicler, Fernando 4. The earliest biography of Talavera was published in 1530; the modern edition is Alonso Fernández de Madrid, Vida de fray Fernando de Talavera: primer arzobispo de Granada, ed. Félix G. Olmedo (1931), ed. Francisco Javier Martínez Medina (1992) (Granada, 1931; repr. Granada, 1992). See also Isabella Iannuzzi, El poder de la palabra en el siglo XV: fray Hernando de Talavera (Valladolid, 2009); Francisco Márquez Villanueva, “Estudio preliminar,” Católica impugnación (Córdoba, 1961), pp. xlix–xcv; F.J. Martínez Medina and M. Biersack, Fray Hernando de Talavera, primer arzobispo de Granada, hombre de Iglesia, Estado y letras (Granada, 2011); Stefania Pastore, “Presentación,” Católica impugnación (Córdoba, Almurzara, 2012), pp. xix–xlviii. For a summary of recent scholarship on Talavera, see Miguel Ángel Ladero Quesada, “Fray Hernando de Talavera en 1492: de la corte a la misión,” Chronica Nova, 34 (2008), 249–75. 5. Chiyo Ishikawa, “Hernando de Talavera and Isabelline Imagery,” in Queen Isabel I of Castile: Power, Patronage, Persona, ed. Barbara F. Weissberger (Woodbridge, 2008), 71–82, here 81; Peggy K. Liss, Isabel the Queen: Life and Times (Philadelphia, 2004), p. 406; Norman Roth, Conversos, Inquisition, and the Expulsion of the Jews from Spain (Madison, 2002), pp. 153–54. 6. Pastore, “Presentación,” xlvi. 642 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF FIGURE 1. Painting of Fray Hernando de Talavera (1428-1507) by Spanish painter Juan de Valdés Leal, circa 1656-57. Public domain work retrieved via Wikimedia Commons. (https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hernando_de_Talavera#/media/File: Valdes_leal-fray_fernando_de_talavera.jpg) del Pulgar, criticized the Inquisition in a letter to the then Archbishop of Seville, Pedro González de Mendoza, stating that inquisitors “will not make such good Christians with their fire as [others] will with water. . . .”7 Juan de Lucena, another royal counsellor, also opposed the methods of the Inquisition, stating that conversos “ought to be convinced with reasons and inducements, not with coercion and punishments.”8 Despite these examples, scholars tend to single Talavera out as an advocate for a “kinder, gen7. Fernando del Pulgar, Letras, ed. J. Domínguez Bordona (Madrid, 1958), cited in F. Cantera Burgos, “Fernando de Pulgar y los conversos,” Sefarad, 4 (1944), 295–348, here 297. 8. Cited in Henry Kamen, The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision (New Haven, 2014), p. 78. See also Stefania Pastore, Una herejía española: conversos, alumbrados e Inquisición (1449–1559) (Madrid, 2010), pp. 85–111. CAROLYN SALOMONS 643 tler” Spanish Catholicism in this period, in the midst of a surge of rigid orthodoxy. This advocacy has been explained by Talavera’s ancestry: although not conclusively proved, historical consensus is that he came from a converso family.9 A converso background would serve to explain Talavera’s religious position, a unique blend of “Christian orthodoxy without cracks” combined with a “special sensitivity towards those of [converso] origins.”10 This special sensitivity seemingly was evinced by Talavera’s aforementioned policies regarding the conversion of Muslims in Granada during his tenure there, policies which emphasized the importance of education in Catholic doctrine for Muslims, including translating the Latin Mass into Arabic.11 He also did not (at first) believe certain aspects of Muslim culture were an impediment to conversion, and thus (for example) allowed the incorporation of the traditional zambra dance into Granada’s first Corpus Christi celebration.12 These documented behaviors have been interpreted by scholars as evidence of religious tolerance on the part of Talavera.13 William Larousse, for example, stated that Talavera “favored” tolerance; Marcello Carmagnani echoed that sentiment when he claimed that Talavera “advocated tolerance and openness toward Muslim culture and religion.”14 Malveena McKendrick described Talavera as “naturally tolerant and gentle.”15 David Coleman thought Talavera was a “defender of the ideals of religious liberty 9. David Coleman, Creating Christian Granada: Society and Religious Culture in an Old-World Frontier City, 1492–1600 (Ithaca, 2003), p. 83. The claim to Talavera’s ancestry rests on the fact that when accused by the Inquisition of secretly practicing Jewish rites, he offered no proof of old Christian (i.e., non-converso) lineage. 10. Ladero Quesada, “Fray Hernando de Talavera,” 253–54. 11. Francisco Javier Martínez Medina, “Estudio preliminar,” in Vida de Fray Fernando de Talavera, Primer arzobispo de Granada, ed. Félix G. Olmedo (Granada, 1530; repr. Granada, 1992), pp. ix-lxxi, here pp. lviii–lix. 12. Francisco Nunez Muley, Memorandum for the President of the Royal Audience and Chancery Court of the City and Kingdom of Granada, ed. and trans. Vincent Barletta (Chicago, 2010), p. 79. 13. A discussion of what exactly is meant by “tolerance” in a fifteenth century context is beyond the scope of this paper; suffice to say that pre-Enlightenment understandings of tolerance were not rooted in acceptance of difference and plurality of truth. Rather, late medieval tolerance understood the necessity of allowing the unorthodox to endure, as eradicating it might entail a greater evil. For a more detailed overview of this concept, see István Bejczy, “Tolerantia: A Medieval Concept,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 58, no. 3 (1997), 365–84. 14. William Larousse, A Local Church Living for Dialogue: Muslim-Christian Relations in Mindanao-Sulu, Philippines: 1965–2000 (Rome, 2001), p. 261; Marcello Carmagnani, The Other West: Latin America from Invasion to Globalization (Berkeley, 2011), p. 24. 15. Melveena McKendrick, Ferdinand and Isabella (New York, 1968), p. 124. 644 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF and toleration.”16 Even Francicso Márquez Villanueva, in a formative essay included in recent editions of Talavera’s Catolica impugnacion, hints at modern notions of tolerance. Commenting on the enforced baptisms of Muslims in Granada, which Talavera was unable to prevent, he wrote “the noble dream that the Spanish tradition of convivencia, of people of diverse religions living together under legal regulations, could continue into modern times, was forever destroyed.”17 While he clearly displayed a certain level of tolerance towards Muslim cultural practices upon his arrival in Granada, however, it is rather a leap to suggest that this is evidence of tolerance towards non-Christian religions. As A. Katie Harris explained, Talavera was not tolerant towards the Muslim religion per se, but rather towards Muslim cultural practices.18 Perhaps his actions in Granada signaled something else: a last ditch effort to bolster the authority of the Church in the face of the increasing influence of the Inquisition, which was supported by both the king and queen. While his ancestry may well have informed his theology, the sociopolitical religious environment in which he found himself may well have solidified his deep resistance to the Inquisition. Above all, Talavera’s writings from key moments in this time period demonstrate his view that it was the Church that was the ultimate authority, and would foster unity among the Castilian people, thereby maintaining social order. Talavera was likely born in Talavera de la Reina, around the year 1430. He began studying at the University of Salamanca at the age of fifteen, and graduated three years later with a Bachelor of Arts. He remained at the university, continuing his studies in theology and law, and eventually taking a position teaching Moral Philosophy. In 1460, he left the university and was ordained as a priest. Six years later he joined the Hieronymite order at the monastery San Leonardo, in Alba de Tormes, just south of Salamanca.19 In 1470 he was appointed prior of the monastery Nuestra Señora de Prado in Valladolid and shortly thereafter, he first met Isabel and Fernando. We do not know in what circumstances this meeting took place; some have speculated that Pedro González de Mendoza, then bishop of Sigüenza, made the 16. Coleman, Creating Christian Granada, p. 84. 17. Márquez Villanueva, “Estudio preliminar,” lxi. 18. A. Katie Harris, From Muslim to Christian Granada: Inventing a City’s Past in Early Modern Spain (Baltimore, 2007), p. 10. 19. It is significant that Talavera chose to join the Hieronymite order, which was not only known for the large number of conversos in its ranks, but also at times—especially in the mid-fifteenth-century—suspected of harboring judaizers. See Gretchen Starr-LeBeau, In the Shadow of the Virgin: Inquisitors, Friars, and Conversos in Guadalupe, Spain (Princeton, 2003), esp. pp. 113–14. CAROLYN SALOMONS 645 introduction.20 He soon became a trusted advisor of the monarchs and Isabel appointed him her personal confessor in 1475. In 1477, while visiting Seville, Isabel met with an impassioned Dominican friar, Alonso de Hojeda, who was adamant that Seville was home to a dangerous group of heretical conversos and demanded that the queen take action before the Church was contaminated. The conversos were those descended from Jews forcibly converted to Catholicism during a series of riots in 1391.21 For some, the lack of education in Catholic doctrine led to a hybridized religious praxis, containing some elements of both Catholicism and Judaism.22 Writing in 1450, chronicler Fernán Pérez de Guzman predicted that although the first generation of converts might not be such good Christians, “. . . the second and third generations will be Catholics and firm in their faith.”23 Clearly, this was perceived not to have happened. A converso might attend Mass, especially on the important feast days, and might also make their confession every Lenten season. But she might also avoid eating pork, continue to bathe every Friday, and refuse to have images of Christ or the Virgin in her house. It was these latter activities which started to draw the suspicions of friars like Alonso de Hojeda, who saw them as judaizing—attempting to persuade others to “backslide” and return to the Jewish faith.24 20. Iannuzzi, El poder, p. 144–45. Iannuzzi suggests that the close relationship between the monarchy and the Hieronymite order might also have played a role in fostering a relationship between Isabel and Talavera. 21. For more on this event and its consequences, see Emilio Mitré Fernández, Los judíos de Castilla en tiempo de Enrique III: el pogrom de 1391 (Valladolid, 1994); Scarlett Freund and Teofilo F. Ruiz, “Jews, Conversos, and the Inquisition in Spain, 1391–1492: The Ambiguities of History,” in Jewish-Christian Encounters over the Centuries: Symbiosis, Prejudice, Holocaust, Dialogue, ed. Marvin Perry (New York, 1999), pp. 169–95; Philippe Wolff, “The 1391 Pogrom in Spain. Social Crisis or Not?” Past & Present, no. 50 (1971), 4–18. 22. The issue of the conversos and their religiosity is one which scholars have contested for centuries. See Haim Beinart, Conversos on Trial: The Inquisition in Ciudad Real (Jerusalem, 1981); Eloy Benito Ruano, Los orígenes del problema converso (Madrid, 2001); Renee Levine Melammed, A Question of Identity: Iberian Conversos in Historical Perspective (Oxford, 2004). There were also non-religious reasons for anti-converso sentiment, as many had taken advantage of their new status as Christians and become both financially and politically powerful. For a succinct overview, see Roth, Conversos, pp. 88–116. 23. “Puesto que los primeros no sean tan buenos cristianos, pero a la segunda e tercera generación serán católicos e firmes en la fe.” Cited in Benito Ruano, Los orígenes, p. 203. 24. On suspicion regarding converso maintenance of Jewish customs, see Yirmiyahu Yovel, The Other Within: The Marranos: Split Identity and Emerging Modernity (Princeton, 2009), pp. 57–58, 231–39. 646 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF This is not to say that there were no overt attempts to promote the Jewish faith on the part of some conversos. Some of the forced converts were understandably reluctant to abandon their former faith, and continued to practice Judaism in the privacy of their own home, a practice known as crypto-Judaism.25 The real question for the Catholic Church—and the monarchy—was how best to address the issue? Should these conversos be treated as heretics, and cast out from the spiritual body of Christ? Or should more efforts be made on their behalf, the better to educate them in the doctrine of the Catholic Church? Hojeda and fellow Dominican Tomás de Torquemada argued for inquisition; others, including Talavera, argued for proper education.26 Isabel settled for a middle way. Though she wrote to Pope Sixtus IV and requested the right to establish an inquisition in Castile (a right which Sixtus granted on November 1, 1478, with the bull Exigit sincerae devotionis), she also insisted on first attempting a campaign of education—spearheaded by Talavera himself—which was allowed to proceed for the next two years.27 When that campaign seemed to have made little progress in extirpating Jewish rites from converso religious praxis, Isabel agreed to institute the investigations of the Spanish Inquisition, appointing the first six inquisitors in 1480. Isabel’s endorsement of an educational campaign before turning to the institution of the Inquisition reflects a longstanding debate over the merits of persuasion versus coercion when dealing with heretics. Already an issue of concern in the twelfth century when the Church first instituted inquisitions to deal with the Cathars and the Waldensians, this debate showed no signs of resolution by the fifteenth century.28 Indeed, Talavera’s frustration 25. David M. Gitlitz, Secrecy and Deceit: The Religion of the Crypto-Jews (Philadelphia, 1996), pp. xi–xii. 26. For example. Pedro Gonzalez de Mendoza, then Archbishop of Seville, wrote a pastoral letter to the conversos in his archbishopric, in an attempt to aid them in better understanding Catholic doctrine. The letter, now lost, is referenced by John Edwards, The Spain of the Catholic Monarchs 1474–1520 (Hoboken, 2001), p. 84 and Peggy Liss, “Pedro González de Mendoza,” in Medieval Iberia: An Encyclopedia, ed. E. Michael Gerli (New York, 2013), p. 365. 27. Joseph Pérez, The Spanish Inquisition (New Haven, 2006), p. 19. 28. Edward Peters argues that the medieval inquisition gradually shifted from persuasion to coercion over the eleventh and twelfth centuries; see Edward Peters, Inquisition (Berkeley, 1989), pp. 44–52; see also R. I. Moore, The Formation of a Persecuting Society: Authority and Deviance in Western Europe 950–1250, (Malden, 2007). For a nuanced explication concerning these matters on the part of the Dominican order (from which most of the medieval and early modern inquisitors originated), see Christine Caldwell Ames, Righteous CAROLYN SALOMONS 647 with the methods of the Spanish Inquisition are rooted in this same debate. An understanding of those frustrations, and his view of what would best benefit the Catholic Church, is found in explicating several of his works, beginning with Católica impugnación, written in response to a crypto-Jew’s treatise circulating in Seville at that time. Católica impugnación was more than simply a response to the issue of judaizing; it was also served to affirm a reformed Catholic doctrine.29 The text of this treatise has been lost; however, we can determine the author’s position and ideas from Talavera’s responses. It must be noted that in all likelihood, Talavera was not simply responding to one person’s criticism of Catholic doctrine, but more broadly, to the socio-religious context of late fifteenth century Castile. That is to say, the crypto-Jew to whom Talavera is purportedly responding is more symbolic than real. Indeed, Talavera’s intended audience was precisely those conversos uncertain of correct Catholic praxis and to that end, he wrote in Spanish rather than Latin.30 On a wider stage, the Church at this time was struggling to reassert itself after the debacle of the Great Schism in the previous century. The papacy knew full well that reform was sorely needed.31 Spanish clerics such as Alonso Fernández de Madrigal (known as Alonso Tostado) had been active throughout the earlier part of the fifteenth century to reform the Persecution: Inquisition, Dominicans, and Christianity in the Middle Ages (Philadelphia, 2013), pp. 138–41. 29. A concurrent event was the Congregation of Clergy, which also took place in Seville in the summer of 1478. Convened by the crown, its purpose was to address longstanding abuses of clerical offices, such as absenteeism, fornication, and simony. Talavera was indubitably a strong supporter of the monarchs’ position, and, as Isabel Iannuzzi asserts, saw the writing of Católica impugnación as a vehicle to affirm a strong doctrinal position against heresy—his “manifesto,” as it were. Iannuzzi, El poder, pp. 158–62; 339. On reform movements in Castile and Aragon, see José García Oro, La reforma de los religiosos españoles en tiempo de los Reyes Católicos (Valladolid, 1969). 30. As Iannuzzi points out, other contemporaneous authors defending conversos wrote to convince other clerics, and thus wrote in Latin—for example, see Alonso de Cartagena, Alonso de Oropesa, and Juan de Torquemada. Iannuzzi, El poder, p. 340. 31. On the Great Schism and its aftermath, see C. M. D. Crowder, Unity, Heresy, and Reform, 1378–1460: The Conciliar Response to the Great Schism (New York, 1977); José Antônio de Camargo Rodrigues de Souza and Bernardo Bayona Aznar, eds., Doctrinas y relaciones de poder en el Cisma de Occidente y en la época conciliar (1378–1449) (Zaragoza, 2013); John Holland Smith, The Great Schism, 1378 (New York, 1970). For an overview of the state of the Spanish church in the fifteenth-century, see J. N. Hillgarth, The Spanish Kingdoms, 1250–1516, vol. 2 (Oxford, 1976), pp. 88–125. 648 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF Spanish Church.32 Talavera, aware that there was more to do, took advantage of this opportunity to lay out his vision of a reformed and united (old and new Christian) Spanish Catholic Church. The main argument of the crypto-Jew’s treatise centers on the following points: Jesus was a Jew who obeyed Jewish law; he participated in Jewish rites; and he did not create new law. Therefore, Judaism trumps Christianity, which should be practiced as an addendum to Judaism. Talavera refutes these arguments in two ways. Firstly, he disputes the idea that Jesus was a Jew as his lineage was not through Mary; nor indeed could he be considered Jew or Gentile, or any “other human lineage.” Rather, since he was conceived by the Holy Spirit, he was divine and the Son of God from the moment of conception and thus was never Jewish.33 Secondly. although Jesus participated in Jewish rites, he also created new laws which supersede Jewish law; therefore, Talavera argued, Jewish rites and laws are unnecessary within Catholicism. Talavera here drew upon the Pauline doctrine that the New Testament and Christ have fulfilled and thus rendered obsolete the Old Testament and its law.34 He proposed to demonstrate in his writing the very great excellence which . . . the law of grace and truth given by our Redeemer, Jesus Christ, God and true Man, has over the old law . . . given by Moses to the Jewish people; and how the commandments, ceremonies, observances and law of that [faith] ceased with the coming of our lord, Jesus Christ.35 In this understanding, doctrine has matured: Mosaic law belonged to humanity’s childhood, but Catholic law, the law of grace and truth, belongs to its coming of age. Talavera saw Jews and conversos as immature in their 32. Tarsicio de Azcona, La eleccion y reforma del episcopado espanol en tiempo de los Reyes catolicos. (Madrid, 1960), pp. 230–35; Hillgarth, The Spanish Kingdoms, 2, pp. 94–95. 33. Hernando de Talavera, Católica impugnación, ed. Francisco Márquez Villanueva (Córdoba, 2012), pp. 28–29. “. . . Jesucristo nuestro Señor no fue judío ni gentil, ni de otro linaje humano, según la carne, porque el linaje comúnmente se trae del padre y Jesucristo no le tuvo cuanto a la humanidad, más fue concebido del Espíritu Santo; así que, cuanto a la humanidad, se podría llamar hijo de Dios y divino. . . .” 34. For more on Talavera’s use of Pauline doctrine, see Márquez Villanueva, “Estudio preliminar,” lxxxi; Márquez Villanueva, Investigaciones sobre Juan Álvarez Gato: contribución al conocimiento de la literatura castellana del siglo XV (Madrid, 1960), pp. 123–24. 35. Talavera, Católica impugnación, p. 12. “[La] muy grande excelencia que . . . [la] ley de gracia y de verdad dada por Nuestro Redentor Jesucristo, Dios y Hombre verdadero, tiene sobre la ley vieja; . . . dada por Moisén al pueblo judiego; como los mandamientos, ceremonias y observancias y juicios de aquella cesaron por la venida de Nuestro Señor Jesucristo.” CAROLYN SALOMONS 649 understanding, and in need of instruction in the fulfilled or mature faith of Catholicism. The analogy used time and again is that of children and parents: just as the relationship between Jesus Christ and his people is like father and child, rather than master and slave, so too must the Old Christians treat converts as younger members of the Christian family.36 Jews and uneducated conversos were like unenlightened youths, and rather than punish them for that, they must be taught. Talavera saw his role as an educator; it was not the convert’s fault that she clung to childish rituals, but now the time had come to be educated and a true convert must let go of those childish ways. For Talavera, conversion was something that must be rooted in practice, and therefore he outlined how conversos can begin to change the rites to which they were accustomed. He suggested that to aid conversos in transitioning from religious observance on Saturdays to Sundays, they might attend Mass for the Virgin Mary on Saturday, being sure not to shirk from their necessary labor, lest they be accused of keeping the Sabbath.37 He also admonished conversos to ensure they were not observing any other customs related to Jewish holy days; there was no need to bake unleavened bread, for example, for Passover, but rather spend time reflecting on the passion and death of Christ during Easter.38 Talavera also stipulated that keeping images of Christ and the Virgin Mary, and any additional saints as desired, in converso homes—indeed, in the homes of all the “faithful Christians”—would ensure allegiance to their new religion, as these images would serve to “provoke” and “awaken” devotion.39 This was not idolatry, as had been claimed in the crypto-Jew’s trea- 36. Ibid., p. 35. “[P]or eso nos enseñó que Dios es Padre nuestro y que le llamemos y reguemos como hijos a Padre. . . .” 37. Ibid., p. 108. “Verdad es que pro reverencia de Nuestra Señora la Virgen María . . . en aquel día has la Iglesia cristiana alguna solemnidad y fiesta en aquel día septeno, llamado sábado . . . cantando devotamente la misa que a loor de la dicha Señora nuestra es ordenando. Mas aquello hecho, no debemos ni deben cesar los fieles cristianos de las obras serviles y corporales, por trabajosas que sean en aquel día; y especialmente se deben en ellas ocupar los nuevos cristianos convertidos del judaísmo, porque no se puede sospechar que guardan el sábado.” 38. Ibid., p. 109. “Pues, como sea muy mayor beneficio ser sacados y redemidos . . . de la captividad de los pecados por Jesucristo, nuestro Redentor y mediante su sagrada muerte y pasión. . . .” 39. Ibid., p. 126–28. “. . . ordenamos que cada fiel cristiano tenga en la casa de su morada alguna imagen pintada de la cruz, en que nuestro Señor Jesucristo padeció, y algunas imágenes pintadas de nuestra Señora o de algunos santos o santas, que provoquen y despierten a los que allí moran a haber devoción.” For more on Talavera’s position on images, see Felipe Pereda, Las imágenes de la discordia: política y poética de la imagen sagrada en la España del cuatrocientos (Madrid, 2007), pp. 254–87. 650 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF FIGURE 2. Woodcut of Archbishop Hernando de Talavera receiving an ArabicSpanish dictionary from Pedro de Alcalá, ca. 1505. The woodcut appears on the verso of the title page of Pedro de Alcalá, Vocabulista arauigo en letra castellana, (Granada: Juan Varela de Salamanca, 1505). [Original conserved in the Biblioteca Histórica de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid.] The captions read, “Omne datum optimum et omne donum perfectum de sursum est, descendens a patre luminum [James 1:17] Domino nostro Iesu Christo” (at top), and “Non michi, Domine, sed nomini tuo sit gloria” [Psalm 113:1] (bottom). The text at the bottom of the archbishop’s feet reads “Benedictio Domini super vos.” tise, for having a shrine in one’s own home allowed the convert to forget the corporeal world and better focus their devotion on Christ.40 Once such practices were implemented, the convert would be naturally integrated into Christian body, “which is one law, one flock and one people 40. Talavera, Católica impugnación, pp. 132–35. “. . . pero quiere y escoge algunos lugares especiales, en los cuales le place oír las suplicaciones y oraciones de los que devotamente allí le llaman, más que en otros lugares, porque en esta manera sean sus fieles más provocados a le servir y suplicar con devoción.” CAROLYN SALOMONS 651 of our Lord, and he is the shepherd. . . .”41 At the same time, “old” Christians, for their part, needed to accept and trust that conversos were indeed, “ex-Jews” and no longer an enemy. To that end, Talavera urged them to embrace the conversos and not treat them with hatred and dislike but with “peace and good love.”42 Throughout the work, Talavera returned to the theme of unity: as seen in the example above, he often suggested that all Christians, not only conversos, undertake the suggested devotional practices. Above all, Talavera sought a Church “united in itself, made from both a Catholic church and a new nation, through one faith, through one baptism, through its sacraments and ceremonies and judgments of the holy law of the gospel.”43 In order to foster this unity, the Church needed to protect new Christians while they were learning the tenets of the Catholic faith. They were moving from the “tyranny” of the Jewish republic to the “most perfect of policies and republics,” that is, the Christian republic.44 Talavera believed that through the Church, a new kingdom could be created, a territory united not only geographically but also a homogenous society united in its beliefs and faith. Anti-converso sentiments not only intensified differences, but were also dangerous in that they created divisions in what should be a homogenous society.45 Punishing conversos for their 41. Ibid., p. 171. “. . . en que es una ley, una grey y un pueblo de nuestra Señor, y Él es un pastor. . . .” 42. Ibid., p. 90. “. . . algunos cristianos los denuestran y maltratan y les tenien odio y malquerencia . . . no son de culpar los buenos, que teinen paz y buen amore con ellos.” 43. Ibid., p. 163. “. . . haya unido en sí mismo y hecho de ambos una Iglesia católica y un nuevo pueblo, por una fe, por un bautismo, por unos sacramentos y unas ceremonias y unos juicios de su santa ley evangélica.” 44. Ibid., p. 47. “. . . la república cristiana es como Reino, que es la más perfecto de las policías y repúblicas.” 45. One of the most famous incidences of anti-converso violence in fifteenth century Castile was the riot in Toledo, in 1449, which saw a portion of that city’s judería burnt and looted. Fernán Pérez de Guzmán, Crónica del señor rey don Juan II (Valencia, 1779), pp. 536– 37. This was not, however, an isolated incident; outbursts of anti-converso violence erupted sporadically in various places throughout the century. See Thomas Devaney, Enemies in the Plaza: Urban Spectacle and the End of Spanish Frontier Culture, 1460–1492 (Philadelphia, 2015), pp. 107–36; John Edwards, “The Judeoconversos in the Urban Life of Córdoba, 1450-1520,” in Villes et sociétés urbaines au Moyen âge: hommage à M. le professeur Jacques Heers (Paris, 1994), 287–98; Angus Mackay, “Factions and Civil Strife in Late Medieval Castilian Towns,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 72, no. 3, (1990), 119–31. In direct response to the 1449 riots, Pope Nicholas V issued the bull Humani generis inimicus, in which he decreed that discrimination against converts, particularly from Judaism, was heretical. Talavera was not forging new ground with his ideas regarding unity; he was following church doctrine. The bull is reprinted in Eloy Benito Ruano, Toledo en el siglo XV: Vida política (Madrid, 1961), pp. 198–201. 652 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF errors, or attempting to frighten them into practicing Catholicism would backfire, as he wrote, “that which is done in fear or by force rather than by one’s own will is not lasting; in order to endure it must be done with love and with charity.”46 This was the way in which the Church had to respond to its newest members, not with arrests, accusations, suspicion, and fear. Above all, Talavera emphasized a shared, lived faith amongst all Christians, old and new. The Inquisition, Talavera contended, only served to hamper such integration. In addition to its divisiveness, the Inquisition was also not under clerical authority, and therefore, in Talavera’s mind, undermined the Church. In the dedicatory letter of Católica impugnación, addressed to Isabel and Fernando, he staked his claim on the matter quite clearly: “the inquisition of this detestable crime [referring to the treatise written by the crypto-Jew] . . . falls under ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and is prohibited and forbidden to the secular. . . .”47 For Talavera, all matters relating to conversos and heresy fell under the purview of the Church, not the monarchy. Rather than aiding in creating his desired Christian republic, the Inquisition did just the opposite; it was the source of divisions within society, fostering suspicion amongst neighbors. For example, referring to conversos as marranos (literally, pigs) and accusing them of all kinds of heresies was a “grand offense” against Christ and the Church, for, he wrote, “those who have converted to his holy faith, according to the saints and even according to civil law, must be honored and treated humanely.”48 It is telling that Talavera invoked civil law, highlighting that discrimination of conversos was not simply a doctrinal matter. This again shows his disapproval of the Inquisition: inquisitors were upholding neither clerical nor civil law in persecuting conversos. This is not to say that Talavera believed there were no “evil” heretics who were in fact endangering the Catholic Church; on the contrary, he freely admitted that there were some new converts, such as the one who wrote the treatise to which he was responding, who were false converts and “in some cases, they ought to die as long decreed by both canon and civil 46. Talavera, Católica impugnación, p. 48. “. . . lo que se hace por miedo y como por fuerza más que por voluntad, no puede mucho durar, como dura y es perpétuo lo que se hace por amor y por caridad.” 47. Ibid., p. 11. “. . . la inquisición de este crimen detestable . . . fue reservada a la jurisdicción eclesiástica, prohibida y vedada a la seglar.” 48. Ibid., p. 26. “Lo cual es grande ofensa de nuestro Señor Jesucristo, porque los que a su santa fe se convierten . . . han de ser honrados y muy humanamente tratados.” Talavera here was upholding a decree from the cortes of Soria, which decreed punishment for those who used the term marrano. See Benito Ruano, Los orígenes, p. 182. CAROLYN SALOMONS 653 law. . . .”49 Yet these false converts only proved the error of forcible conversion, and the forced baptisms of the past had made a mockery of that sacrament, which, to Talavera, was the most basic and essential for Christianity. From his perspective, forcing people to accept baptism undermined its credibility, and in turn, undermined the authority of the Church.50 Though never voiced overtly, we can nevertheless see glimpses of Talavera’s disquiet regarding the Inquisition throughout Católica impugnación. His unease seems to have grown through the course of his career, becoming more pronounced once he took up his position as Archbishop of Granada in 1492. An event which took place shortly before that, while he was Bishop of Ávila, quite possibly may have deepened his resistance to that institution. Although a primarily peaceable city through much of the fifteenth century (there is no record of anti-converso violence there, as seen in other cities such as Toledo), Ávila witnessed a rise in tensions after the cortes of Toledo met in 1480.51 One of the key edicts promulgated by that cortes was that the Jews of all Castilian cities had to live separately from Christians.52 This edict, a reiteration of other edicts that had been instituted since 1412, was intended to prevent inter-religious mingling which would protect conversos from the “contamination” of the cultural and religious practices of their former co-religionists. However, Ávila had essentially ignored the edict, and for much of the fifteenth century, Jews lived scattered throughout the city. This changed once the Jewish community was forced to move to an inhospitable quarter at the bottom of the walled city, close to the local tanneries. Letters flew from Jewish leaders to the court, complaining that the allotted area was too small, the smell was terrible, and the ink from the cloth dyers was running through the streets and into people’s homes.53 49. Talavera, Católica impugnación, p. 26. “. . . que en algunos casos deben morir como largamente lo dispone el derecho canónico y también el derecho civil. . . .” 50. Iannuzzi, El poder, p. 344. 51. On Ávila in the fifteenth-century, see José Belmonte Díaz, Judíos e inquisición en Ávila (Ávila, 1989), 69–120. 52. Alfonso de Palencia and José López de Toro, Cuarta década de Alonso de Palencia (Madrid, 1970), 2, p. 201. The cortes was a type of proto-parliament; a meeting of the monarchs and representatives of principal cities and towns of the kingdom. 53. Archivo General de Simancas (hereafter AGS) Registro del Sello de Corte, legajo 148603, 89. “. . . e dis que aun con los dichos dos barrios estauan en grande estrechura. . .”; Archivo Histórico de la Provincia de Ávila (AHPAv), sección Ayuntamiento, legajo 1, número 55. “la gentes non peuden conportar los malos olores e el danno que las casas e calles resciben porque dis que entran por los aluannares e cortdunbre e tinteria en la dicha judería dentro en sus casas. . . .” 654 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF Throughout the 1480s, we see evidence of increased friction between the Abulense Christian and Jewish communities.54 These tensions were exacerbated in the early 1490s by the trial of the conversos and Jews accused of murdering a child from La Guardia, near Toledo.55 On November 16, 1491, this trial culminated with a highly visible auto da fe. Six conversos and two Jews, all of whom had been imprisoned, questioned, and tortured for a year and a half, were sentenced to death for the ritual murder of the child known as el Santo Niño de la Guardia, or the Holy Child of La Guardia, a child whose very existence is doubtful. The auto da fe was attended by prominent Abulense dignitaries: the inquisitors who had tried the men, other officials from the Inquisition, clerics, local officials such as the corregidor Don Alvaro de San Esteban, and members of the concejo (town council).56 The accused were found guilty, “relaxed” over to the secular authorities, and then publicly executed by burning at the stake. The sentence was so important that copies were immediately dispatched to the major cities of Castile. Locally, the results of the sentence, and the effect of the public execution, were both immediate and tragic: anti-Jewish violence whipped through Ávila, culminating in the murder of a Jewish citizen by the rampaging crowds.57 Many scholars have posited it was this trial in particular that persuaded Isabel and Ferdinand to expel the Jews in the following year.58 According to Isabella Iannuzzi, the entire trial was purposefully done—quite likely at the behest of Torquemada—in order to bolster the 54. See Serafín de Tapia Sánchez, “Los judíos de Ávila en vísperas de la expulsión,” Sefarad, 57, no. 1 (1997), 135–78. 55. Part of the trial record is transcribed in Fidel Fita, “La verdad sobre el martirio del santo niño de la guardia, ó sea el proceso y quema (16 Noviembre 1491) del judío Jucé Franco en Ávila,” Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 11 (1887), 7–134. For a succinct summary of the trial, see Iannuzzi, El poder, pp. 287–97. This crime was ostensibly a “blood libel” or ritual murder. The accused were thought to have tortured and murdered the child in an attempt to cause the downfall of Christianity. For more on ritual murders, see R. Po-chia Hsia, Trent 1475: Stories of a Ritual Murder Trial (New Haven, 1996); E. M. Rose, The Murder of William of Norwich: The Origins of the Blood Libel in Medieval Europe (Oxford, 2015). 56. Fita, “La verdad,” 96, 113. 57. AHPAv, caja 1, legajo 74. “Sepades que por parte del aljama de judios de la cibdad de Auila nos fue fecha relaçion por su peticion que a nuestros en el nuestro consejo fue presentada disiendo que por cierta esecuçion de justicia que se hizo por la ynquisiçion de la cibdad de auila de ciertos erejes e de dos judios vezinos de la Guardia diz que se escandalo el pueblo de tal manera que apedrearon un judio de la dicha cibdad. . . .” 58. Fidel Fita, “La verdad,” p. 131; Henry Kamen, The Spanish Inquisition, p. 22. CAROLYN SALOMONS 655 position of the Inquisition and discredit the “pastoral” approach of Talavera.59 This is rather conjectural, but it is important to note Talavera’s silence in the face of this infamous trial. Even as an absentee bishop, attached to the court, he would have been well aware of what was taking place in Ávila. Perhaps his silence speaks to his growing realization that the crown would not be dissuaded from their belief in the necessity of the Inquisition. Despite his lack of comment on the events in Ávila, Talavera’s unease with the Inquisition seems to have strengthened by the time he arrived in Granada, where he continued to focus on persuasion and example as a method of conversion. It must be reiterated, though, that Talavera’s concern for converts to Christianity did not equate with tolerance of minority religions. A treatise he wrote and published in Valladolid, in 1477 speaks to this.60 The piece, though primarily concerned with sumptuary laws, included a lengthy passage which speaks directly to Talavera’s thinking regarding the religious minorities of Castile. He explicated the story of the Flood, describing how Noah brought together predators and prey in the enclosed space of the Ark without any bloodbath, as God subdued the natural desires of certain animals for meat, and ensured that “dried fruit” would satisfy all animal appetites.61 In a like manner, the Catholic Church would also subdue the natural enmity between Christians and Jews, and would have a similar effect on interfaith relationships: The peace and harmony and unity of the sacraments, which nourish the souls, was prophesied by Isaiah when he said that when the Messiah came, the wolf would dwell with the lamb and the leopard with the young goat, the lion and the sheep and the calf, and that a little child would govern them. . . . Though this has not yet been precisely fulfilled . . . yet we see it being fulfilled every day, within the spiritual intelligence 59. Iannuzzi, El poder, pp. 291–92. 60. The entire treatise can be found in Teresa de Castro Martínez, “El tratado sobre el vestir, calzar y comer del arzobispo Hernando de Talavera,” Espacio, tiempo y forma. Serie III, Historia medieval, no. 14 (2001), pp. 11–92. 61. Ibid., p. 37. “En esse mesmo tiempo del Diluvio, que fue tiempo de affliction y de grave penitencia, ordenó Nuestro Señor que aun las aves y bestias que viven de rapiña y no saben comer sino carne hiciesen abstinencia. Ca puestas en la arca con el patriarca Noé les dio por vianda frutas secas solamente y les suspendió y ató el deseo natural que tenían de las carnes, y les quitó toda enemistad, por manera que estauan juntos el agor y la perdiz, el neblí y la garga, el galgo y la liebre, el podenco y el conejo, el lobo y el cordero, el gato y el perro, y todos tenían paz y comían de vna vianda a como si fueran todos de una ralea, de una especie y deuna casta.” 656 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF of the united Christian community of gentiles and Jews, who were at first contrary as cats and dogs and as wolves and sheep.62 As Mark D. Johnston explained, Noah’s Ark represents a “moment of providential history” which Talavera offered as an “archetype for convivencia [coexistence] in the new nation of the Catholic Monarchs.”63 Such an archetype for Talavera meant former religious adversaries, no longer contrary as “cats and dogs” but united under the auspices of the Catholic Church. Talavera reprinted the treatise in Granada, in 1496, though the specific details regarding sumptuary laws were irrelevant; quite probably the text was meant to assert clerical authority regarding norms of behavior.64 As Talavera himself wrote: “. . . each laborer and each official, each squire, each citizen, and each caballero . . . manifestly exceeds not only that which is natural but also that which is permitted and tolerated to each one according to his status.”65 In a time of great social instability, the Church needed to assert its dominance.66 His insistence on clerical authority over social norms was reiterated in a letter written to the residents of the Albaicín (the Muslim quarter) outlining the Christian practices to which they must adhere. The letter is 62. Ibid., p. 38. “Al que la paz y concordia y vnidad de sacramentos, que son mantenimientos de las almas, fue profetizada por Ysaias quando dixo que venido el Messias morarían en vno el lobo y el cordero, y la onça y el cabrito, el león y la oueja y el bezerro, y que los guardarla e regiría vn moyuelo pequeñuelo. . . . Lo qual assi a la letra nunca se cumplió nin complira, mas veemoslo complido e complir de cada día quanto a la spiritual intelligencia en el pueblo christiano de gentiles e judíos ayuntado, que eran primero contrarios como gatos e perros, e como lobos e corderos.” 63. Mark D. Johnston, “Gluttony and Convivencia: Hernando de Talavera’s Warning to the Muslims of Granada in 1496,” eHumanista, 25, (2013), 107–26, here 122. Convivencia is the term coined by Américo Castro in España en su historia: cristianos, moros, y judíos (Buenos Aires, 1948). He used the term to articulate the controversial thesis that modern Spanish identity was borne from an intercultural amalgamation of all three religious groups. The term and its relative usefulness in understanding Spanish history has been hotly debated. See Kenneth Baxter Wolf, “Convivencia in Medieval Spain: A Brief History of an Idea,” Religion Compass, 3, no. 1 (2009), 72–85 for an excellent summary of these historiographical debates. 64. Pereda, Las imágenes, p. 275; Castro Martínez, “El tratado,” p. 15. 65. Castro Martínez, “El tratado,” p. 42. “. . . cada labrador e cada official, cada escudero, y cada cibdadano y cada cauallero . . . excede manifiestamente no de lo natural solamente, mas avn de lo que es permisso e tolerado a cada vno segun su estado.” 66. David Coleman’s explains that Granada can be viewed as a “frontier” society in the first decades after the Christian conquest, a “fluid and dynamic” society distinct from other Iberian cities, which offered unique opportunities for social and economic advancement. Coleman, Creating Christian Granada, p. 3 and chapter 1. CAROLYN SALOMONS 657 FIGURE 3. Oil painting on canvas of Cardinal Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros, reproduced from the original by Eugenio Cajés (1604), and kept in the Complutense University of Madrid. undated, but as Talavera noted he was responding a request for better information regarding what “good Christians are obliged to know and do,” it must have been written after Cardinal Jimenez de Cisneros had arrived in Granada and embarked on his campaign of forced conversions in 14991500.67 Cisneros began by forcing the reconversion of the elches (Christians who had converted to Islam) and their children, both of which were direct violations of the treaty brokered in 1492, which allowed some latitude regarding both religious and cultural practices. There was violent resistance to Cisneros and while Fernando was at first irate with Cisneros, the king and queen quickly saw that with this rebellion, the Muslims of Granada had forfeited the right to the treaty. As a stipulation for pardon, they had to agree to conversion.68 67. AGS, Cámara de Castilla, Diversos, 8, 114. “Vimos vuestra petición y plugonos mucho ver le buen cuydado que teneys de saber y fazer lo que los buenos christianos son obligados.” 68. Hillgarth, The Spanish Kingdoms, 2, pp. 473–74; Mark D. Meyerson, The Muslims of Valencia in the Age of Fernando and Isabel: Between Coexistence and Crusade (Berkeley, 1991), pp. 54–55. 658 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF This would not have sat well with Talavera, but by this point, it is likely that he realized there was little he could do except attempt to mitigate the situation by ensuring that these new Christians would be properly educated in Catholic doctrine. A full break with Muslim culture would be best, and to that end, he exhorted the new converts to “forget all the ceremonies and Morisco things in your prayers, in fasting, in holidays, and in parties and births and in weddings and funerals and in all other things.”69 He then elucidated exactly how this was to happen. Morisco men should ensure that their wives and children had been baptized, and that infants were baptized within eight days of their birth. Further, all members of the family must be able to recite the Lord’s Prayer, the Ave Maria, and the Credo, and ought to “adore our Lord during Mass, and offer reverence to the holy cross and to the [holy] images as is due them.”70 All must make confession and take communion regularly, and when sick, allow the priest to attend them so that he may administer the sacraments of penitence and last rites, when required. Weddings were to be performed in a church “by the hand of your priest;” all Moriscos were to ensure a Christian burial for all family members, in a consecrated cemetery “according to the way done by Christians of the nation.”71 In adhering to such rites, these new converts will not only serve God, but also “safeguard our holy Catholic faith.72 Safeguarding the holy Catholic faith meant proving their allegiance to the Church, not just to the archbishop or local clergy. Moriscos must also prove these things to their new fellow co-religionists. By acting in a more Christian manner, old Christians would believe that these new Christians were also part of the “good and honest” community. Baptism was now not enough. Neither was openly asserting one’s acceptance of Christian doctrine. It was now in quotidian actions that Moriscos could evince their conversion. Their food, their clothing, and the way they spoke: these were now the visible manifestations of their faith. As Talavera told them in his concluding remarks: “[s]o that your conversations will not scandalize old 69. AGS, CCA, DIV, 8, 114. “. . . que olvideys toda ceremonia y toda cosa morisca en oraciones, en ayunos, en pasquas, y en fiestas y en nascimientos de criraturas y en bodas y en baños, en mortuorios y en todas las otras coas.” Morisco was the term used to denote a Catholic of Muslim decent. 70. Ibid. “. . . y decir paternóster y avemaría y credo, y adorar allí a Nuestro Señor en la Santa misa y adorar la santa cruz y fazer a las imajenes la reverencia que les es devida.” 71. Ibid. “Que sean desposados por mano de sus clérigos y quando se casaren reciban las bendiciones en la yglesia . . . que sean y seays sepultados en cementarios bedezidos, cerca de vuestra yglesias, segund que lo fazen los christianos de nación.” 72. Ibid. “Todo esto susodicho perence al servicio de Dios Nuestro Señor y la buena guarda de nuestra santa fee católica.” CAROLYN SALOMONS 659 Christians, and they will not think that you still have Mohammed in your heart, you must show that you conform . . . in dress and footwear and eating and what you put on the table . . . and when you speak, forget the Arabic language as much as you can.”73 Talavera thought the Inquisition a dangerous and harmful institution, partly because, as stated previously, he saw it fostering division and suspicion among the laity. More importantly, Talavera believed the Inquisition impinged on clerical authority and above all else, he sought to maintain that authority. The authority of the Church was everything to Talavera, and that, more than any tolerant leanings, affected his attitudes towards conversion and minorities. There is a famous anecdote about his first meeting with Isabel, in his role as confessor. He categorically refused to kneel alongside his queen, instead insisting that as God’s representative, and while she was present at “the tribunal of God,” she owed him respect and would kneel while he sat. Isabel’s response? “[T]his is the confessor I have been looking for.”74 For Talavera the Church was an authority above even his monarch. The problem was that his queen seemed to have changed her feelings regarding his authority. J. N. Hillgarth mentioned the “deep depression” Talavera experienced in 1500, likely stemming from the realization that his influence at court was at an end.75 His weakened position may well have allowed the Inquisition to move against him. Granada, until 1526, was under the jurisdiction of the Inquisition’s tribunal at Córdoba, and Talavera’s policies in the 1490s had created clashes with the inquisitors there, specifically with Diego Rodríguez Lucero, known for his incredible ruthlessness in prosecuting supposed 73. Ibid. “Mas para que vuestra conversación sea sin escandalo a los cristianos, de nación y no piensen que aun tenéis la seta de Mahoma en el corazón es menester que vos conforméis . . . en vestir y calzar y afeitar y en comer y en mesas y viandas guisadas como comúnmente las guisan y en vuestro andar y en vuestro dar y tomar y mucho y más que mucho en vuestro hablar olvidando cuanto pudieres la lengua arábiga y haciéndola olvidar y que nunca se hable en vuestras casas.” 74. José de Sigüenza, Historia de La Orden de San Jerónimo, vol. 2 (Madrid, 1907), p. 295. “La primera vez que confesso a la Reyna passó una cosa digna de saberse. Acostumbraua a estar ella y el confessor puestos de rodillas arrimados a un sitial o banquillo; llego fray Hernando, y sentose en el banquillo para oyrla de confession; dixole la Reyna: Entrambos hemos de estar de rodillas. Respondio el nueuo confessor: No señora, sino yo he de estar sentado y vuestra alteza de rodillas, porque este es el tribunal de Dios, y hago aquí sus vezes. Calló la Reina y passó por ello como santa, y dizen que sixo después: este es el confessor que yo buscaua.” 75. Hillgarth, The Spanish Kingdoms, 2, p. 479. 660 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF judaizers in that city. Henry Charles Lea, one of the few scholars to have examined Lucero’s career, intimated that Fernando was not ill disposed towards Lucero, and indeed, protected him, despite his heavy handed tactics, as he brought in a lot of money for the Crown.76 This may also help explain why Lucero was permitted to be as aggressive as he was. By 1501, the civil authorities in Córdoba were incredibly unhappy with Lucero; however, since he had the backing of the court, he grew bolder and began arresting nobles, hidalgos (gentlemen), and church officials. Tensions had not improved by 1505, but there was little the city could do. After Isabel died, the Cordobán town council tried again to oust Lucero, this time appealing to the Inquisitor General, Diego Deza. He stone-walled the city officials, and they instead turned to their new queen, Juana, and her husband, Phillip of Burgundy. As Juana was already viewed unfit to rule, Phillip was delighted to act on her behalf, and assert his authority in Castile; he issued a decree suspending the actions of the tribunal until the two could travel to Córdoba and investigate in person.77 Deza and Lucero ignored this, and Phillip thus began a campaign to convince the pope to replace Deza as Inquisitor General with Diego Ramírez de Guzmán. Phillip’s sudden death in 1506 abruptly ended this plan, however, and Deza was not replaced.78 While tensions continued to rise in Córdoba, Lucero had begun investigating Talavera. The accusation levied against him was that he had established a synagogue in his palace, and that together with members of his family and other clerics, not only held Jewish ceremonies there, but planned to preach Jewish millennialism throughout the peninsula.79 Talav- 76. Henry Charles Lea, “Lucero the Inquisitor,” The American Historical Review 2, no. 4 (July 1897), 611–26, here 612. 77. Juana’s sobriquet is “the Mad” (Spanish. “Juana la Loca”). She is traditionally thought to have suffered from the same mental illnesses as her grandmother, Juana of Portugal, and though she inherited both the thrones of Castile and later Aragon, she was never allowed to rule in her own right. For more, see Bethany Aram, Juana the Mad: Sovereignty and Dynasty in Renaissance Europe (Baltimore, 2005). 78. John Edwards, “Trial of an Inquisitor: The Dismissal of Diego Rodríguez Lucero, Inquisitor of Córdoba, in 1508,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 37, no. 2 (1986), 240–57, here 246. 79. Lea, “Lucero,” 617. Lea asserts that Lucero was acting on vengeful motives, and that he tortured a local conversa in order to elicit “proof” that Talavera and his family were judaizers. He cites a document in the Archivo Catedral de Córdoba, cajon J, no. 297 for this information, a document I have not been able to access. See Tarsicio Herrero del Collado, “El CAROLYN SALOMONS 661 era’s sister, his nephew Francisco Herrera (who was the dean of Granada’s cathedral), his nieces, and household servants were all arrested. However, Talavera himself was not, as the Holy Office had no jurisdiction over bishops without monarchal approval. This Fernando gave, in June 1506. Talavera immediately wrote to Fernando in protest; as the case progressed against him, he wrote again in January 1507, to no avail.80 The case was brought before the papal nuncio Giovanni Ruffo, who sent the documents detailing the evidence against Talavera and his family to the pope for a decision, which, as we have seen, was vehemently in favor of Talavera. It is true that Hernando de Talavera was a man of deep spiritual convictions who maintained those convictions his entire life. It is tempting to ascribe the attributes of tolerance to this man who did much to promote the efficacy of education for converts and knew that gradual conversion through persuasion would result in genuine belief. Yet what he evinces is not modern tolerance, which would have allowed the Jews and Muslims to remain adherents of their own faiths; Talavera’s goal was always the conversion of both minority religious groups. What we see instead is a man struggling with the changing religious milieu of his time, and experiencing firsthand the impact the Inquisition would have on Castilian society. Rather than an exemplar of tolerance, Talavera’s life offers us a glimpse of a personal reaction to the imposition of the Inquisition, which in turn provides insight into the first years of that institution’s life. Those who lived through those years did not know what that institution would become, nor how history would judge it. They reacted only to what they saw the Inquisition doing before them. For Talavera, this was an encroachment on the supreme authority of the Church, an authority he had subscribed to, upheld, and defended during his entire life. proceso inquisitorial por delito de herejia contra Hernando de Talavera,” Anuario de historia del derecho español, 39 (1969), 671–706, here 690. On millenarianism in fifteenth century Spain, see John Edwards, “Elijah and the Inquisition: Messianic Prophecy Among ‘Conversos’ in Spain, c1500,” Nottingham Medieval Studies, 28 (1984), 79–94; Matt Goldish, “Patterns in Converso Messianism,” in Millenarianism and Messianism in Early Modern European Culture. Protestants, Catholics, Heretics: Jewish Messianism in the Early Modern World, ed. Richard Henry Popkin and Matt Goldish, vol. 1, (Dordrecht, 2001), pp. 41–63. 80. In the second letter, Talavera surmised that Fernando had treated him with negligence, because he cannot believe that it could be based in malice: “. . . [d]igo por negligencia, porque no puedo acabar conmigo que por malicia. . . .” Quoted in Iannuzzi, El poder, pp. 473–75. 662 A CHURCH UNITED IN ITSELF This leaves us with a man who was the product of his education and experience. The Church was Talavera’s life, and from an early age we see its importance to him, and his absolute belief in its authority. This belief never wavered, and his insistence on unity in belief and praxis was paramount. Whether “old Christian,” conversos, or Muslims just learning the tenets of Catholicism; all needed to be trained and taught in the same way. Tracking António Vieira’s Clavis Prophetarum: The St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, Manuscript 28 ANA T. VALDEZ* The Clavis Prophetarum or De Regno Christi in Terris Consummato written by António Vieira, S.J. (1608–97) should be considered by scholars as one of the most important works of the seventeenth century. In it, Vieira introduces the reader to his interpretation of the theological concept of “Fifth Empire,” one that illustrates his imperial ideology, and consequently, a vision that might have influenced Portuguese imperial ideology during the reign of John IV of Portugal (r. 1640–56). This article introduces the recently discovered partial manuscript of the Clavis Prophetarum found at St. Bonaventure University in the “Franciscan” Collection, ms. 28 and compares it with the two main existing manuscripts: Biblioteca Casanatense ms. 706 and Arquivo Nacional da Torre do Tombo (ANTT), Conselho Geral do Santo Ofício, ms. 122. This study will analyze more deeply how Vieira understood the concept of “invincible ignorance of God,” taking into consideration the differences in content in the St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 compared to the other two manuscripts. Keywords: Clavis Prophetarum, António Vieira, Jesuits, invincible ignorance of God, Brazilian Indians, St. Bonaventure, Casanatense, Antonio Bonucci, Carlo Casnedi I n 1714, the Italian Jesuit Carlo Antonio Casnedi was charged by the Portuguese Inquisition with examining and organizing the Clavis *Ana T. Valdez is IF Researcher, a researcher at CIDEHUS, University of Évora and CH, University of Lisbon, email: manavaldez@gmail.com. The research for this paper and, in particular, the research trip to the archives of St. Bonaventure University to analyze and authenticate this partial manuscript of the Clavis Prophetarum, were made possible by a grant from the Hertog Global Strategy Initiative, Columbia University, during the summer of 2012. In addition, it received support with a postdoctoral scholarship from Fundação Para a Ciência e Tecnologia (ref. SFRH/BPD/43815/2008), and currently from CIDEHUS— UID/HIS/00057/2013 (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007702) and an IF-FCT Research Grant (IF/00928/2014). 663 664 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM Prophetarum, a text written by one of the Society of Jesus’ most renowned brethren, António Vieira. The Portuguese Jesuit, António Vieira, died in Brazil in 1697 at eighty-nine years old without completing his magnum opus. Following his death, his papers were catalogued by Giovanni Andreoni, S.J., and locked in a trunk with two keys: one given to the rector of the College of Bahia and the other to the Jesuit Provincial of Brazil.1 Later, in 1714, the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, Michelangelo Tamburini, ordered Vieira’s papers to be shipped to Rome. On its way to Rome, the ship made a routine stop in Lisbon during which two officials of the Portuguese Inquisition sequestered Vieira’s trunk. The trunk contained a lengthy manuscript treatise of Vieira’s magnum opus, the summation of a lifetime of eschatological expectations and theological thought. The Clavis Prophetarum immediately raised eyebrows due to its potentially controversial content—on the Fifth Empire—and because it had been written by António Vieira. The Portuguese Holy Office had judged and condemned Vieira for his controversial exegesis in his letter known as “The Hopes of Portugal” in December of 1667. Hence, it is fair to consider that members of the Inquisition might have thought that the Clavis was the missing piece of evidence that would finally prove the wisdom of Vieira’s original condemnation. António Vieira’s Clavis Prophetarum, or De Regno Christi in Terris Consummato, is a theological treatise in Latin in which the author analyzes the development of the concept of Fifth Empire over the centuries, offering his own interpretation of how time would evolve toward the end of days. The book shows particular interest in describing the path between Vieira’s time and the time of the establishment of the divine kingdom on earth, explaining in detail the importance of the evangelization of the Americas in the process of reaching universal evangelization. Despite the endorsement of the censor of the Portuguese Inquisition, the book never received the imprimatur of the Roman Inquisition, and consequently was not published until very recently.2 1. Francisco Rodrigues, “O P. Antônio Vieira: Contradições e aplausos (À luz de Documentação Inédita),” Revista de História XI (1922), 81–115, here 113; Arnaldo do Espírito Santo, “Apresentação da Clavis Prophetarum: Transmissão Manuscrita, Estrutura e Aspectos do Pensamento do Padre António Vieira,” Oceanos 30–31 (1997), 156–172, here 157. 2. In the year 2000, a partial edition of the Clavis Prophetarum was published in Lisbon. See António Vieira, Clavis Prophetarum = Chave dos Profetas, ed. Arnaldo do Espírito Santo and Margarida Vieira Mendes (Lisbon, 2000). Later, in 2013, a new translation of volumes I, II, and III of the Clavis into Portuguese was printed. Although I am aware of its potential contribution to unveiling the mysteries of the Clavis, I have chosen not to cite it here in this ANA T. VALDEZ 665 FIGURE 1. Engraved illustration signed Carolus Grandi sculp., of Antonio Vieira preaching to the natives, from Andrć de Barros, Vida do apostolico Padre Antonio Vieyra da Companhia de Jesus, chamado por antonomasia o Grande : acclamado no mundo por principe dos oradores evangelicos, prégador incomparavel dos augustissimos reys de Portugal, varaõ esclarecido em virtudes, e letras divinas, e humanas : restaurador das missões do Maranhaõ, e Pará (Lisboa, na nova officina Sylviana, 1746). Image courtesy of the Oliveira Lima Library, The Catholic University of America. Carlo Antonio Casnedi, S.J., the censor charged with the evaluation of the Clavis, was enthusiastic in his praise of the manuscript and its author, writing to the Portuguese inquisitors: “The author of the book, the incomparable Fr. António Vieira, has unlimited intellectual capacities, work because I agree neither with the translation, nor with the fact that the translator uses different manuscripts without informing the reader, and reorganizes the order of the chapters without any previous explanation. The complete reference is as follows: A Chave dos Profetas, ed. José Eduardo Franco and Pedro Calafate, trans. António Guimarães Pinto, [Obra Completa Padre António Vieira, II/III] (Lisboa, 2013). 666 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM which overtake to a great extent the limitations of human intellect.”3 The text was unknown to those outside of Vieira’s intimate circle, and only communicated in selected sections over the years to those select few. Casnedi held in his hands the key to the prophecies to which Vieira had given glimpses over the course of decades. In Casnedi’s summation, the Clavis Prophetarum was the product of “thirty years” of continuous thought. It was a guide for understanding the obscure language of the biblical prophets, “what they prophesized in regard to the kingdom of Christ, with the words, the symbols, or the images, paying attention to the many fulfilled prophecies, to the many unfulfilled, to those presented in a literal fashion, and to those that, because of their obscurity, were neglected or interpreted in their moral or mystical senses, when in truth they spoke of the triumphant church.”4 For the censor, Vieira’s purpose in this massive book was straightforward: “He occupied himself with all of this with the goal to expose in a literal fashion all these prophecies, and to connect them to the kingdom of Christ that will arise on earth, that is, to the militant church.”5 However, as noted above, Vieira died before the text was finished, leaving it in fragments that Casnedi and Vieira’s last private secretary, Antonio Bonucci, S.J., tried to organize. Their assemblage represented only an educated guess, one easily influenced by the Society of Jesus and/or the Roman and Portuguese Inquisitions. Scholars from Lúcio de Azevedo to Arnaldo do Espírito Santo have debated how Vieira planned to organize the different booklets of the Clavis on various occasions. This is a question that continues to require further analysis, not only because the manuscripts in Rome and Lisbon do not agree in number of volumes, but above all because Vieira mentioned several times that he was working on a book with four volumes. That structure seems much more in accordance with what a narrative of the description of the approach of the end of days would imply. This article examines both old and new information. Its first goal is to offer a short review of the history and circulation of the manuscript(s) of the Clavis Prophetarum, describing the work’s content and noting some of the existing variations, while listing the known manuscripts. Its second 3. Simone Celani, ed., Carlo Antonio Casnedi e a Clavis Prophetarum de Antonio Vieira: edição e tradução de Sententia [Università di Roma “La Sapienza,” Instituto Camões/Portugal, Cattedra “P. Antonio Vieira,” Serie Strumenti, 6] (Viterbo, 2007), p. 63. 4. Ibid., p. 64. 5. Ibid. ANA T. VALDEZ 667 objective is to introduce a copy of the Clavis Prophetarum recently discovered—St. Bonaventure University, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28.6 Regarding the latter, this study will address questions concerning provenance, date, origin, and circulation. Originally from Mexico, St. Bonaventure University, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 differs in form and content from the manuscripts Casanatense ms. 706 from the Casanatense Library in Rome, and the Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122 from the Portuguese national Archive of Torre do Tombo [hereafter AnTT], as will be detailed later.7 In addition, it proposes to analyze Vieira’s discussion of man’s invincible ignorance of God—a chapter included in St. Bonaventure University, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28—and examine the significance of this topic for Vieira and his work.8 The Clavis Prophetarum: History and Conundrums The Clavis Prophetarum is the culmination of António Vieira’s intellectual work, and it is also his major piece of eschatological work. The existing manuscripts of the Clavis present scholars with several problems, namely the fact that it is an unfinished work, whose present form does not correspond entirely to the descriptions given by António Vieira and his last private secretary, Antonio Maria Bonucci, S.J. (1651–1729).9 Most of what is known today about the history of the writing of the Clavis was found in Vieira’s correspondence of 1672 and 1679, and in his defense before the Portuguese Inquisition in 1666.10 Based on these references, we know that initially Vieira was not describing a physical book, but instead referring to an eschatological project that was occupying his mind and that would follow him to his grave. From these letters we also know 6. António Vieira, “Clavis Prophetarum—De Regno Christi in Terris Consummato,” in St. Bonaventure University, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28. 7. “Clavis Prophetarum or De Regno Christi in Terris Consummato,” in Casanatense Ms. 706 (Roma, Casanatense) and “Clavis Prophetarum,” in AnTT Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, Ms. 122. 8. All the manuscripts of the Clavis include a chapter on “the Barbarians.” The St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 has been shown to not be a simple copy from any of the other manuscripts, as we will address later. 9. J. Lúcio de Azevedo, História de António Vieira, 2 ed., 2 vols. (Lisboa, 1931), passim. 10. For a summarized history of Vieira’s trial, see José Pedro Paiva, “Revisitar o Processo Inquisitorial do Padre António Vieira,” Lusitania Sacra 2ª série, no. XXIII (2011), 151– 68. To access the documents of the Inquisitorial process, see Adma Muhana, Os Autos do Processo de Vieira na Inquisição : 1660–1668, 2nd rev. exp. ed. (São Paulo, SP, 2008). 668 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM that he was working on a book in Latin, divided into four volumes, which he considered to be his greatest theological work. Vieira attributes the delay in finishing the book to the urgency of writing his sermons, as commanded by the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, Tirso Gonzàlez (1624–1705).11 Some of the details shared by Vieira in his correspondence concerning the Clavis require further analysis. First, there is the indication—explicit in Vieira’s own hand—that the text consisted of four volumes, instead of the three found in the manuscripts of the Clavis identified as of the present time. As Vieira wrote in the first tome of his collected sermons: “I will only feel that this [time] escapes me to put the last touches into the four Latin Books of the Regno Christi in Terris Consummato, by another name, Clavis Prophetarum, in which a new avenue opens to the easy understanding of the prophets, & which has been the major use of my studies.”12 Furthermore, in 1697, Antonio Bonucci confirms that Vieira’s work encompassed four volumes, thus emphasizing the necessity of addressing the question of the internal organization of this work in a detailed and systematic fashion.13 A second difficulty concerns the title of the work. We know through the reading of Vieira’s correspondence that the author used several different titles to refer to this project over the years, including Fifth Empire and Clavis Prophetarum, found in a letter he wrote to Rome in 1672, in addition to De Regno Christi Consummato or Clavis Prophetica, found in his correspondence after 1679.14 Such a range of titles may raise some doubts about the nature and identity of Vieira’s project. In fact—and to this day—some continue to use the range of titles to challenge the originality of this book, while others use it to distinguish the Clavis from the author’s previous works, in partic11. We learn about Oliva’s command to publish the sermons from Vieira in his introduction to the first volume of his Sermons published in 1679. António Vieira, Sermoens do P. Antonio Vieira, ed. Officina de Ioam da Costa, vol. 1 (Lisboa: Officina de Ioam da Costa, 1679). 12. “Só sentirei que este me falte para pór a ultima maõ aos quatro Livros Latinos de Regno Christi in terries consummato, por outro nome, Clavis prophetarum, em que se abre nova Estrada á facil intelligencia dos Profetas, & tem sido o mayor emprego de meus estudos.” Ibid., p. 16. 13. Archivum Romanum Societatis Iesu [hereafter ARSI], Bras. 4,32, a letter from Bahia by Antonio Bonucci on July 9, 1699 (in Rodrigues, “O P. Antônio Vieira,” p. 112). 14. Espírito Santo, “Apresentação da Clavis Prophetarum,” 157. ANA T. VALDEZ 669 ular, from the História do Futuro (History of the Future), another unfinished work that most scholars agree was begun in the 1650s.15 Most of these titles were, furthermore, used by Vieira to refer to the History of the Future along with a letter he wrote in 1659, usually known as: “Esperanças de Portugal, Quinto Império do Mundo” (Hopes of Portugal, Fifth Empire of the World), simply because they share a similar topic. The assortment of titles, however, is understandable given the multiple references in his correspondence over a long period of time regarding a larger theological project that would ultimately result in the writing of the Clavis Prophetarum. The many title variations could correspond merely to moments that the author was reshaping the project in his mind.16 Vieira died in 1697, and in a letter dated of July 9, 1698, Tirso Gonzàlez, the Superior General of the Society of Jesus at the time, ordered Fr. Bonucci to finish the Clavis and send a copy to the headquarters of the Society in Rome. It took Bonucci almost a year to organize Vieira’s materials, due to the fact that he spent most of that time working in the hinterlands of Brazil as a missionary without access to Vieira’s papers and a proper library. When Bonucci finally sent the copy to Rome in 1699, he stated again that the book was unfinished.17 As mentioned above, Vieira’s papers were locked after his death in a trunk kept at the Jesuit house of Quinta do Tanque, outside Salvador da Bahia, which contained a list of the manuscripts inside. A later annotation stated that the author was contemplating a fourth volume: et quartum meditabatur.18 So how can we now explain that the same Bonucci sent a “shorter” copy of the manuscript to Rome in 1699 of only three volumes?19 Was the manuscript incomplete, or did Vieira die before he had time to divide his notebooks into four volumes? The easiest explanation is that Bonucci merely collected the different notebooks as they had been left by Vieira, not daring to collate a fourth volume for which the author had not 15. For further information on this debate, see Silvano Peloso, Antonio Vieira e l’Impero Universale: La Clavis Prophetarum e i Documenti Inquisitoriali, nuovo Mondo; 4 (Viterbo, 2005). 16. Regarding Vieira’s theorization of Fifth Empire, see Maria Ana Travassos Valdez, Historical Interpretations of the “Fifth Empire”: The Dynamics of Periodization from Daniel to António Vieira, S.J, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions, (Leiden; Boston, 2011). 17. ARSI, Bras. pp. 4,48; 50–51. 18. António Vieira and Silvano Peloso, La Clavis Prophetarum di Antonio Vieira: Storia, Documentazione e Ricostruzione del Testo Sulla Base del Ms. 706 della Biblioteca Casanatense di Roma, 1st ª ed. (Rome/Viterbo, 2009), pp. 56–57. 19. ARSI, Bras. pp. 4,18. See Rodrigues, “O P. Antônio Vieira.” 670 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM written a preface or given precise instructions.20 nonetheless, it is fair to assume that Vieira was working on a fourth volume, content of which was probably included by Bonucci in the third volume, or even the second, depending on the manuscript under scrutiny, as described later in this text. This fourth volume most certainly dealt with the kingdom of Christ fulfilled on earth, similarly to what was described in the last chapters of the Book of Revelation with the account of the marriage of the lamb and the new Jerusalem, which corresponds to the description of the work provided by Antonio Bonucci in the letter of July 7, 1697, cited earlier.21 The original text of the Clavis Prophetarum—the archetype—is lost, and today what we have are seventeen manuscripts archived in different libraries around the world. João da Rocha, the rector of the Jesuit College of Bahia, sent Bonucci’s 1699 copy to the rector of the Jesuit college of Genoa. Later, this same copy found its way to the Casanatense Library in Rome, the former library of the Dominican Monastery of Santa Maria sopra Minerva, where it became known as the Casanatense ms. 706. Despite the unquestionable differences between Vieira’s physical description of the Clavis and the reality of the surviving manuscripts,22 we should consider that Casanatense ms. 706 represents the closest version to the original manuscript at the moment of Vieira’s death.23 not only did Vieira fail to finish dictating his work, but he also never had the time to complete the organization of its notebooks, leaving Bonucci with a puzzling pile of notes. Thus, the copy sent by Bonucci to Rome was also disorganized and unfinished, and contained no additions made by Bonucci to Vieira’s original work.24 20. See Arnaldo do Espírito Santo, “a Clavis Prophetarum à luz das Referências cronológicas intratextuais,” in Padre António Vieira—Colóquio, ed. by José Cândido de Oliveira Martins, (Braga, 2009), 35–49, here 39. 21. ARSI, Bras. 4, 32. 22. It is necessary to note at this point that the Clavis Prophetarum archetype, the original text, is not known. Consequently, the existing manuscripts of the Clavis are known and described by their archive name and number. For further light on this matter, see Margarida Vieira Mendes and Rita Marquilhas, “A Quarta Mão: Um Manuscrito de Clavis Prophetarum do Padre António Vieira,” Confluência. Revista do Instituto de Língua Portuguesa 9 (1995), 13– 21, here 21. 23. Espírito Santo, “A Clavis Prophetarum à Luz das Referências Cronológicas Intratextuais,” 7. 24. I disagree with S. Peloso’s affirmation that Bonucci had kept for himself all of the materials dictated by (but not organized by) Vieira during the final months of his life, rather than adding them to the copy of the Clavis he sent to Rome, as a means of explaining the unfinished status of the Clavis Prophetarum. See Peloso, chapter VI, passim; and Vieira and Peloso. ANA T. VALDEZ 671 Antonio Bonucci supervised the production of several copies of the Clavis Prophetarum at the request of Tirso Gonzàlez in 1698. A few were known to be circulating at the beginning of the eighteenth century. It is, however, impossible to know exactly how many copies Bonucci produced, how many other copies were made from Bonucci’s copies, and how many still exist. To date, the existence of seventeen manuscripts is known: seven manuscripts in Lisbon (Torre do Tombo, the national Library, and the Ajuda Palace Library), five manuscripts in Rome (Casanatense and Gregoriana), one in Loyola (Spain), one in Madrid (the national Library), one in Rio de Janeiro (Real Gabinete Português de Leitura), one in Mexico City (the national Library), and another in Allegany, new York (St. Bonaventure University), the St. Bonaventure version.25 Of these, it is noteworthy that the final two manuscripts with connections to Mexico are incomplete. Both consist of only Volume III, while the manuscript at the Real Gabinete de Leitura in Rio de Janeiro appears to be a more recent copy—although it is not in a good state of preservation.26 Each one of these two manuscripts is essential to our knowledge of the history of the Clavis Prophetarum. The Casanatense ms. 706 because it is the copy sent by Bonucci to Tirso Gonzàlez to Rome in 1699, and the AnTT Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122, the Lisbon copy, because it combines a copy made by Bonucci with Vieira’s original manuscript, a manuscript now lost.27 The Organization of the Book and Carlo Casnedi According to longstanding scholarly belief, the Clavis Prophetarum, in the version organized by Bonucci and sent to Rome in 1699, appeared to have met with great resistance from the Roman inquisitors and was never approved for printing, despite Carlo Antonio Casnedi’s favorable 25. For further information regarding the location of the manuscripts (with the exception of the St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28), please see the introduction of Vieira, Clavis Prophetarum = Chave dos Profetas. 26. There is reference to another copy held at the Biblioteca Palafoxiana in Puebla, Mexico. However, since I have not yet seen it, and cannot find it in any available catalog, I will refrain from including it in our list of known manuscripts until I have the opportunity of seeing and analyzing it. The existence of this manuscript would consequently change our knowledge regarding the Clavis, not only on the number of available copies, but also regarding the types of copies existing in Mexico. This raises the question of whether this is a complete copy of the Clavis, or also a partial copy like that of the other two Mexican manuscripts. 27. From this moment forward, the discussion will follow the other authors who have written on AnTT Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122, and this manuscript will be cited with a shorter notation: ANTT ms. 122. 672 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM report.28 Among the possible reasons for such a decision was the condemnation of Vieira in 1667 by the Portuguese Inquisition because of the propositions described in the letter known as “Hopes of Portugal, Fifth Empire of the World.”29 In addition, the Clavis promised to discuss sensitive topics such as whether the Jews should be allowed to resume sacrifices at the temple in Jerusalem because they were the people of the Old Covenant with God and because the sacrifices were a part of a divine command. Likewise, it discussed at length the particularly controversial topic of man’s invincible ignorance of God, resuming a discussion concerning the nature of the indigenous people of the Americas earlier initiated by the School of Salamanca in the person of the Dominican Francisco de Vitoria (1483–1546), and pursued further by the Jesuits. Vieira’s last secretary, Antonio Bonucci, returned to Europe at the beginning of the eighteenth century. It was in Rome in 1712 that he promised to the Portuguese ambassador, the Marquis of Fontes, Rodrigo Almeida e Meneses (1676–1733), a copy of the Clavis and of several other texts written by Vieira.30 The private secretary’s willingness to provide copies of Vieira’s work allows us to consider it possible that other copies might have been circulating in Europe in the early eighteenth century. Moreover, it is also necessary to remember that one more copy was made at the request of Giovanni Andreoni (1649–1716), the Provincial Superior of Brazil, to be kept in the Province. By 1714, there is evidence of the existence of three copies made by Bonucci (or supervised by him) made at the request of members the Society of Jesus. Despite the existence of multiple copies of the Clavis in circulation in Europe by the beginning of the eighteenth century, the new Superior General of the Jesuits, Michelangelo Tamburini (1648–1730), ordered Vieira’s chest of papers to be sent from Bahia to Rome. This was how the original version of the Clavis traveled from Brazil to Europe: the trunk was shipped in 1714 to Rome via Lisbon, where the Portuguese Inquisition seized it. This was when, according to Francisco Rodrigues, Cardinal D. nuno da Cunha (1664–1750), the general inquisitor of the Portuguese Inquisition, ordered Carlo Casnedi, S.J., to examine the Clavis and decide upon its orthodoxy.31 28. Celani, Carlo Antonio Casnedi, pp. 9–63. 29. For further information regarding Vieira and the Portuguese Inquisition, see Adma Muhana, Os Autos do Processo de Vieira na Inquisição : 1660–1668. For a summary of Vieira’s trial, see José Pedro Paiva, “Revisitar o Processo Inquisitorial do Padre António Vieira.” 30. Mendes and Marquilhas, “A Quarta Mão,” p. 20. 31. Rodrigues, “O P. Antônio Vieira,” p. 113. For a complete biography of Carlo Casnedi, and an analysis of his theological work, see Emanuele Colombo, Un Gesuita Inquieto: Carlo Antonio Casnedi (1643–1725) e il suo tempo (Soveria Mannelli, 2006). ANA T. VALDEZ 673 The evaluation of the manuscript in 1715 completed by Casnedi drifted between praise of the author and an awareness of potential controversy.32 He praised Vieira as an incomparable author, gifted with a brilliant mind, able to spread light everywhere and on any issue, and described him as the owner of a remarkable memory that allowed him to quote from every text that he had ever read. Additionally, Casnedi continued, Vieira could understand, analyze, and explain the content of some of the most complex biblical prophetical revelations by making what appeared to be a new argument, though in fact it had been derived from ancient knowledge which, disguised in the sacred text, had not been seen or understood before.33 Therefore, Casnedi argued, Vieira should not be accused of any unorthodoxy in this particular book. On the other hand, Casnedi wrote: “I do not speak of moral imperfection, because I will demonstrate that it does not exist, but of the physical imperfection of the work, as it is in my hands; because I do not know if the work, as others have it, is physically imperfect.”34 This was Casnedi’s argument to support his own reorganization of the Clavis, a process one can follow in detail through the description of the text contained in his report. The version of the Clavis Prophetarum organized by Casnedi is what we know today as AnTT ms. 122, which is kept in Lisbon.35 Apparently, Casnedi found no physical problems in Volume I, because all its chapters and paragraphs were numbered, but the same was not true of volumes II and III. In Volume II there was only the indication of a first chapter; the second chapter was missing, and the others only had titles and treatise names. In contrast, Volume III did not even have a clear indication that it was in fact “Volume III,” it only had a note saying: “First chapter.” It is interesting to note that Casnedi was not completely sure regarding the placement and the order of the treatises in the text of the Clavis, and he wrote that all of them could be allocated to both volumes II and III because they shared a common theme, which is a clear example of the extreme difficulty involved in deciding upon the internal organization of this book.36 Since we do not have the original of the Clavis, and, therefore, do not know with precision how the manuscript was originally organized, a description of the Clavis Prophetarum in accordance with Casnedi’s 32. Celani, Carlo Antonio Casnedi, pp. 64–66. 33. Ibid., p. 64. 34. Ibid., pp. 66–67. 35. Espírito Santo, “Apresentação da Clavis Prophetarum: Transmissão Manuscrita, Estrutura e Aspectos do Pensamento do Padre António Vieira,” p. 160. 36. Celanii, Carlo Antonio Casnedi, p. 67. 674 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM account is necessary. The first book of the Clavis discusses the nature and quality of the kingdom of Christ on earth. Such a kingdom, according to Vieira, is simultaneously spiritual, through the dignity of the priesthood, and temporal, because it holds dominion and absolute power over all the other earthly kingdoms. Furthermore, Vieira adds, this kingdom would succeed the four empires described in the book of Daniel (Daniel 2). According to Casnedi’s notes, Volume I contained eleven notebooks that were divided into twelve chapters, and was easy to organize because all of the chapters were numbered. The second volume discusses the consummation of the kingdom of Christ on earth. This volume was, according to Casnedi, imperfect and incomplete, only containing an indication concerning the first chapter. Furthermore, of the seven sections it was supposed to contain, the second was lost. Unable to discern which chapters and sections should follow Chapter II, Casnedi chose to organize the rest of Volume II by themes. Therefore, Casnedi organized Volume II into the following treatises: (1) the treatise on the temple of Ezekiel and its literal interpretation; (2) the treatise on the sanctity of the last stage of the Church, and whether all men of this time would be righteous and saved; (3) the treatise on the peace of the Messiah; and (4) the treatise on the universal preaching of the Gospel toward the last stage of the Church before the consummation of the kingdom of Christ. Until this point in the Clavis, the only major difference in content found among the existing manuscripts and Casnedi’s description of the original concerns the placement of the treatise on the universal preaching of the gospel. Its most common placement by modern scholars has been Volume III, Chapter III, and not at the end of Volume II as Casnedi suggested. Likewise, recent scholars such as Hernâni Cidade and Lúcio de Azevedo chose to include it in the third volume, a choice followed by the editors of the critical edition of Volume III in 2000.37 Such a decision greatly influenced the tone of this particular volume, shifting the main topic of the work to the question of universal evangelization, rather than about the description of the kingdom of Christ on earth. The result has a paradoxical effect: on the one hand, if the main subject of the volume is the kingdom of Christ on earth as a reality, then one cannot foresee the inclusion of the theme of universal evangelization at the middle of the volume because such a process is one that must necessarily happen immediately before the kingdom arises, but never after. On the other hand, if we under- 37. Vieira, Clavis Prophetarum = Chave dos Profetas. ANA T. VALDEZ 675 stand the topic of the consummation of the kingdom of Christ as the description of a process toward that goal, then universal evangelization has, in fact, an essential role to play at this precise point of the book. Such a paradox is most probably one of the reasons behind the different opinions regarding the location of this particular treatise in the Clavis. Again, we should keep in mind how Casnedi described the manuscript he received as a set of loose volumes or notebooks, impossible to organize according to what Vieira had described the Clavis to be in his correspondence.38 In addition, such difficulty in organization helps to explain why different copyists inserted this treatise in different places in the Clavis. Casanatense ms. 706 and ANTT, Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122 The Clavis’ unfinished character and what Casnedi described as its “lack of physical organization” only adds further difficulties to those interested in thoroughly understanding the scope of Vieira’s eschatological work. One of the main complexities of this work derives precisely from the physical differences found among manuscripts. Consider a brief description of two of the most important manuscripts from which most of the other copies were drawn: Biblioteca Casanatense ms. 706 and AnTT ms. 122. Regardless of the physical differences and scholarly opinions that AnTT ms. 122 includes sections directly copied from Vieira’s original manuscript, Casanatense ms. 706 appears to be the closest to the original manuscript of the Clavis Prophetarum—though one should disregard the later intervention of the Roman Inquisition in this manuscript.39 Casanatense ms. 706 was the first copy of the Clavis made by Bonucci upon the request of the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, and was sent to Rome in 1699. It is therefore not plausible that this copy would exhibit too many differences with respect to the original dictated by Vieira to Bonucci—despite the loss of the 65 pages erased by the Roman Inquisition, the content of which can only be inferred from a comparison of this manuscript with the Gregoriana ms. 359.40 Casanatense ms. 706 has a total of 562 folios divided into three volumes. Volume II includes the treatises: (1) De Templo Ezechielis, et ejus interpreta38. Celani, Carlo Antonio Casnedi, p. 67. 39. Espírito Santo, “Apresentação da Clavis Prophetarum: Transmissão Manuscrita, Estrutura e Aspectos do Pensamento do Padre António Vieira,” pp. 159–60. 40. Ibid., p. 160. 676 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM tione literali (folio 308r); (2) De sanctitate ultimi status Ecclesiae (folio 354r); and (3) De pace Messiae (folio 400r). In this manuscript, Volume III includes the treatise on De universali Evangelii praedicatione ad ultimum Ecclesiae statum et Regni Christi consummationem praevia (folio 455v). ANTT ms. 122, kept at the Portuguese National Archive of Torre do Tombo in Lisbon, shows some important structural differences in relation to Casanatense ms. 706. For example, the above-mentioned treatises included in Volume II appear in this manuscript at the end of Volume III, underlining again the importance of readdressing at a later moment the internal organization of Casanatense ms. 706, while reconsidering how the Clavis as a whole was imagined by Vieira. This is an important question, especially if we agree that ANTT ms. 122 was based on Casanatense ms. 706, and that Casnedi replaced the existing lacunae in this copy with text from Vieira’s original manuscript. Can this be read as a sign that Vieira, when he dictated these treatises to Bonucci, intended to place them at the end of the Clavis Prophetarum? It is very probable, but it cannot be proven. Without questioning more deeply the internal organization of the Clavis, it is possible to believe that Vieira’s plan for its structure followed closely the traditional eschatological path toward the end of time and the establishment of the divine kingdom of God on earth as described in the Bible, i.e., as patterned in the books of Daniel and Revelation. Thus, it makes perfect sense that the treatises on the final events before the end of time and those concerning the time of the newly established divine kingdom would be placed at the end of Volume III or even in a Volume IV, especially if one considers that they represent the highlight of the Clavis Prophetarum. Notwithstanding the structural differences between Casanatense ms. 706 and ANTT ms. 122, most known manuscripts of the Clavis Prophetarum comprise the following structure: Volume I includes twelve chapters, Volume II includes fourteen chapters, and finally, Volume III includes nine chapters. In the case of ANTT ms. 122, Volume II has eleven chapters, and Volume III has twelve chapters. This can be explained by the fact that the scribe placed the treatises at the end of Volume III.41 St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 The most recent copy of the Clavis Prophetarum to be discovered is a partial manuscript. It contains only Volume III, and it is kept in the archives of St. Bonaventure University, a Franciscan institution in upstate New York. 41. Vieira, “Clavis Prophetarum.” ANA T. VALDEZ 677 FIGURE 2—St. Bonaventure University, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28. Known as St. Bonaventure University, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28, this text was strangely discovered among the papers of John Duns Scotus (1265– 1308) in the summer of 2012.42 A thorough examination of this manuscript establishes that it is without question a copy of António Vieira’s magnum opus. Furthermore, from an analysis of the manuscript it can be determined that: (1) it came from the library of D. Agustín Fernández Pomposo de San Salvador (1756–1842), a Mexican lawyer who was the dean of the school of law at Mexico City; (2) it was bought by Henry Ward Poole (1825–1890), the famous American antiquarian, who also signed the copy (see Fig. 1); and (3) paleographic examination of the manuscript allow us to conclude that it 42. Timothy noone, a scholar of Scotus at the Catholic University of America, found this intriguing manuscript at St. Bonaventure and later shared the information with Thomas M. Cohen and myself. I am very grateful to him for sharing this important discovery and for allowing me to confirm that it was indeed part of António Vieira’s magnum opus the Clavis Prophetarum. 678 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM was written c. 1730–40 (the existing watermarks are too common, and cannot be used to date the manuscript with precision). This retrieved information indicates that this copy of the Clavis Prophetarum was compiled in the mid-eighteenth century in South America. Two immediate questions should be raised. First, where did D. Agustín obtain this copy? And second, how did it end up at a Franciscan archive in the United States? It is nearly impossible to answer the first question. Regarding the second, a lack of documentation prevents us from understanding completely the trajectory of this manuscript between the time it belonged to Poole and the moment it was deposited in the archive at St. Bonaventure. Most probably Poole sold the book either to the Franciscans or to a benefactor of the library. It is necessary to note, however, that although the copy has Poole’s autograph on the first page, no reference to this work was found among the lists of books he sold. Whether Poole bought the manuscript for himself or to sell is unclear. Likewise, it is not possible to discover how this copy reached the hands of D. Agustín. Altogether, the discovery of this copy of the Clavis Prophetarum raises more questions than it answers. St. Bonaventure ms. 28 vs. Casanatense ms. 706 and ANTT, ms. 122 The copy kept at St. Bonaventure is partial. It includes only what we know today as Volume III, and is in a good state of preservation. The handwriting is clear, and there are neither major lacunae nor erasures to account for. The manuscript, however, comprises only 251 pages and, contrary to what is common in most manuscripts of Volume III of the Clavis, has only eight chapters instead of the traditional nine (or twelve as in AnTT ms. 122), as shown in the Appendix.43 When comparing the structure of this manuscript with that of Casanatense ms. 706 and of AnTT ms. 122, it appears clear that it contains sections from both manuscripts. The final product of this hybrid of Casanatense ms. 706 and AnTT ms. 122 is a very interesting Volume III in which the copyist elevates some sections of the text to the category of independent chapters in a fashion not observed in any of the other sixteen known manuscripts of the Clavis, and includes chapters not present in Casanatense ms. 706, though present in AnTT ms. 122. 43. An appendix with the list of chapters of Volume III of the three manuscripts is included at the end. The transcriptions of these manuscripts include spellling and grammatical errors of the original scribes. ANA T. VALDEZ 679 FIGURE 3. St. Bonaventure University, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28—H. Poole’s signature. The discovery of this manuscript supports the conclusion that the past scholarly opinion that some of the existing manuscripts of the Clavis should be regarded as main copies, a sort of “bible,” later used independently as the model for more copies, cannot continue to be supported.44 St. Bonaventure ms. 28 reproduces at the same time Casanatense ms. 706 and AnTT ms. 122, which, as we have already seen, do not agree entirely— producing, therefore, a unique version of Volume III of the Clavis. Furthermore, St. Bonaventure ms. 28 does not, as we have seen, include the treatises in Volume III of the Clavis. If it did include them, the most compelling conclusion would be that the St Bonaventure ms. 28 copyist was referring to the AnTT ms. 122—but he does not. Likewise, the St. Bonaventure ms. 28 instead incorporates the discussions of “barbarian” invincible ignorance of God and universal salvation normally ascribed to chapters IV and V of Volume III. If it had not incorporated these dis44. Mendes and Marquilhas, “A Quarta Mão.” 680 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM cussions, the most likely conclusion would be that St. Bonaventure ms. 28 drew upon Casanatense ms. 706—but it does. Therefore, the most likely conclusion is that St Bonaventure ms. 28 does, in fact, represent a copy of the Clavis that is per se original, and not merely a derivation of better known existing Clavis manuscripts. Should these differences lead us to question the reasons that led the copyist to interweave the content of the two manuscripts? Or even to entertain the possibility that it may be a counterfeit manuscript of the Clavis? Should these differences compel us to consider that in doing so the copyist influenced the way in which this particular copy of the Clavis was read or addressed a particular audience? Likewise, should we question the impact that such a manuscript might have had on a community of readers? One thing, however, must be stated clearly: although the copyist included sections from different manuscripts to “build” this copy, its entire text belongs unquestionably to the Clavis. What happened—and this is the reason why this manuscript appears physically different from the others— is that in this copy, the copyist decided to add some sentences only present in one of the manuscripts to the corpus he was copying from another manuscript. The immediate result was that some sections appear now slightly longer than in either Casanatense ms. 706 or ANTT ms. 122. Such additions, however, must be analyzed individually, given their importance for the understanding of the impact and influence of the Clavis in a given period, or even within specific geographical zones such as Mexico. Invincible Ignorance of God In 1504, Ferdinand II, king of Aragon, called the first junta of civil lawyers, theologians, and canonists to decide upon the legitimacy of Spanish occupation in the Americas. This was the beginning of a period of intense debate about the legitimacy of the pope to decide upon the sovereignty of lands outside the borders of the ancient Roman Empire, and whether indigenous people of the Americas should be considered natural slaves in light of the Aristotelian view and understanding of society. This debate, ultimately influenced by figures of the School of Salamanca, such as Francisco Vitoria, Domingo de Soto, and Francisco Suàrez, was initiated by well-known men such as Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo, Juan de Quevedo, and Bartolomé de Las Casas. Two main issues were at stake: (1) could the Spanish monarch subjugate the peoples of the Americas since the region was not part of the old Roman Empire, and therefore, lacked any apparent legal basis for papal jurisdiction?; (2) was it acceptable to classify indigenous Americans as barbaroi, and therefore, natural slaves suitable to ANA T. VALDEZ 681 be enslaved by the Spaniards?45 These are, as one can easily understand, very complex questions that had the power to call into question the legitimacy of European overseas expansion, and in particular, the conquests of the Portuguese and Spanish.46 Consequently, the debate took on different contours during the almost two centuries that separated the meeting of the first junta in Burgos called by Ferdinand and the writings of the Jesuit António Vieira, emphasizing in different combinations religious, political, social, anthropological, and racial aspects. The work of the School of Salamanca was influential also in the debate between Jesuits, Dominicans, and Franciscans on the question of the enslavement of indigenous Americans, the system of encomiendas, and the development of Jesuit missions, and even led to an academic debate with the School of Coimbra. nevertheless, it is important to emphasize that when António Vieira introduced the topic of the nature of indigenous Americans in the Clavis Prophetarum, he did not question the Portuguese conquest of Brazil. The question of the nature of the indigenous Brazilians was a fundamental piece in Vieira’s eschatological argumentation, and he deals with it as such—making impossible any comparisons between his opinion and those issued by members of the schools of Salamanca and Coimbra. According to Vieira, the indigenous people, the barbarians, were to be raised to a status similar to that of the Lost Tribes of Israel, making impermissible any enslavement and requiring instead the emphasis on their immediate evangelization under Jesuit guidance.47 It is clear that one cannot say that Vieira was not influenced by this debate or even by the ongoing debate within the Society of Jesus regarding the nature of indigenous Americans, but it is necessary to exercise caution and keep in mind that his goal was the creation and development of a Fifth Imperialist theory, and not the discussion of the legitimacy of conquest. 45. Such social classifications, and consequent division of society into two distinct groups, follow closely the description of society made by Aristotle in Book I of his Politics. 46. The available bibliography on this topic is almost endless and ranges from critical editions in modern languages of the treatises written at the time to monographs on specific questions and/or authors. Of particular interest, because it offers a thorough review of the topic, see Anthony Pagden, The Fall of Natural Man: The American Indian and the Origins of Comparative Ethnology [Cambridge Iberian and Latin American Studies] (Cambridge, Cambridgeshire; new York, 1982) and his Lords of All the World Ideologies of Empire in Spain, Britain and France c.1500–c.1800 (new Haven, Conn., 1995). See also the fundamental work by Francisco de Vitoria in Political Writings, Anthony Pagden and Jeremy Lawrance, eds., [Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought] (Cambridge, England; new York, 1991), and Aristotle’s Politics. 47. See António Vieira and Hernâni Cidade, Defesa Perante o Tribunal do Santo Oficio, vol. 2 (Bahia, 1957), pp. 114–16, 40. 682 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM In chapters IV and V of the Clavis Prophetarum, Vieira undertook a thorough discussion on the nature of the indigenous Brazilians, which is on particular display in the St. Bonaventure copy. Following the principles of a theological discussion, António Vieira started his analysis by emphasizing the reasons why the indigenous people were not tainted by original sin and should be included in a special category by refusing to incorporate them into the general description of “gentiles.” This division of humankind into several different categories that go beyond the traditional binary gentile-infidel of the congregatio fidelium was a novel device introduced by Vieira in the Clavis to justify different types and times of conversion and relationships with God. This is one of the most important sections of the Clavis, and probably one of the sections that captured the attention of the Roman Inquisition because of the special role attributed to the indigenous Brazilians by the Jesuit. Succinctly, in this chapter Vieira described the reasons why one should accept that the “barbarians” in general,48 and the indigenous Brazilians in particular, possessed an invincible ignorance of God. Since this was still a problematic topic during Vieira’s lifetime, he clearly identified those who could be placed in this category as “those who have not believed in the gospel, because they had not listened to it before,” speaking clearly of the indigenous Brazilians, shifting an initially Aristotelian interpretation of the composition of society into the frame of Catholicism.49 The distinction between theological and philosophical sin was controversial in the seventeenth century. While theological sin was commonly described as “a transgression of the eternal law,” philosophical sin was defined as “a morally bad act which violates the natural order of reason, not the Divine law.”50 Thus, those who believed in God, when abiding by such a distinction, considered it possible that a sinner could be ignorant of the existence of God, or might not have taken God into consideration when committing a morally bad act. In August of 1690, Pope Alexander VIII considered the doctrine of philosophical sin as “scandalous, temerarious, and erroneous,” condemning the following proposition: “Philosophical or mortal sin is a human act not in agreement with rational nature and right 48. This concept of “barbarians” used in Vieira, originally crafted by Aristotle, is used by the author to refer solely to American indigenous populations, particularly to those in Brazil. 49. Vieira, Clavis Prophetarum = Chave dos Profetas, p. 314. 50. A. C. O’neill, “Sin,” in The Catholic Encyclopedia, ed. Charles G Herbermann, et al. (new York, 1912), 7. ANA T. VALDEZ 683 reason, theological and mortal sin is a free transgression of the divine law.”51 The pope expressed concern with the lack of distinction between vincible and invincible ignorance of God, and especially with how common the invincible ignorance of God could be supposed to exist among mankind. Hence, invincible ignorance of God should only be considered as a metaphysical possibility, as there was no morally bad act that did not include a transgression of divine law. And even if some accepted the “possibility of philosophical sin in those who are inculpably ignorant of God,” they also agreed that according to God’s providence, there could not exist any sort of invincible ignorance of God.52 The inclusion of this topic in the Clavis Prophetarum by António Vieira has to be one of the main reasons that prompted the Roman Inquisition to give this text close scrutiny. There are, however, at least, two questions that need to be raised at this point: (1) when did Vieira write this section, before or after the decree of Alexander VIII; and (2) how broadly did Vieira understand the concept of man’s invincible ignorance of God? Was it limited to the indigenous Brazilians, and limited in time? As always, Vieira appeared to be aware of the controversy. To support his interpretation, he analyzed arguments previously used by the Jesuits Francisco Suàrez and Diego Granado on this topic that had not generated controversy. Vieira’s text begins with a discussion of the commonly accepted assessment that when God had sent the apostles to preach, he had divided the world between believers and unbelievers. The problem, however, concerned the classification of those who had not yet heard the gospel because it had not yet been offered to them. Following Aquinas in his commentary on Romans 10, Vieira agreed that those who had not heard the gospel could not be considered unfaithful to God, although they could later be blamed for wrongful conduct. Of course, Vieira added, two issues must necessarily be discussed: (1) the quality of the condemnation, and (2) God’s providence toward these people, the barbarians.53 After revisiting some of the most important authors’ arguments on this topic, Vieira’s conclusion was clear: no sin committed by a man who did not know God was mortal and so it could not be punished for eternity, a position in accordance, as he understood it, with the orthodoxy of the Catholic Church. Further, those who had sinned by infinite ignorance also had not committed a mortal sin and could not be tainted by that for eter- 51. Ibid. 52. See Cardinal de Lugo, De incarnate., disp. 5, lect. 3, in ibid. 53. Vieira, Clavis Prophetarum = Chave dos Profetas, p. 318. 684 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM nity.54 Thus, no mortal sin could be attributed to those who had not known God, since they had never before moved away from him. They simply did not know him, as was the case of the different indigenous groups found in Brazil.55 Such an interpretation meant that these indigenous people could not be tainted by original sin before they had been instructed in the true faith. The implication of such declarations was clear to Vieira: the barbarians who lived in the jungle had never before known God and thus were exempted from all mortal guilt and eternal punishment.56 To ameliorate this situation, it was necessary to introduce the barbarians to God—exactly what Vieira described as the role of the Jesuits in the Americas. The issue was apparently simple, except for particular details discussed by some doctors of the Church. Some authors wrote that man’s invincible ignorance of God was altogether impossible. Consequently, they argued that even if people had never heard the gospel, natural law and reason had always existed in their lives and minds. Thus, God could be worshipped as such without the need of intermediaries, since he was also known through reason. The argument excluded the possibility of finding the invincible ignorance of God among human beings, as already referenced.57 Vieira was against such a proposition, and maintained that invincible ignorance of God could certainly be found among certain peoples. He detailed a long list of reasons explaining why the Brasis, the indigenous peoples of Brazil, should be considered as having invincible ignorance of God. Among the reasons cited was their alleged brutality and lack of intelligence, their extreme moral corruption, and a number of vices that “suffocated” reason and natural principles.58 In a way, these characteristics justified Vieira’s determination of the special character of the indigenous Brazilian, while underlining the importance of continuing the process of evangelization started earlier by the Jesuits. Such affirmations in the text were certainly influenced by Vieira’s long quest to have more missionaries sent to Brazil by the Portuguese monarch, and to have the members of the Society of Jesus 54. Ibid., p. 322. 55. Ibid., p. 324. 56. Ibid., p. 326. 57. Ibid., p. 334. 58. Ibid., p. 346. Furthermore, regarding the description of the alleged vices of the indigenous Brazilians, it is noteworthy to mention the work of Manuel da nóbrega, S.J. (1517–1570), Diálogo sobre a Conversão do Gentio (Dialogue on the Conversion of the Heathen), in which the author describes the humanity of the Indians through the description of the nature of their soul, since he said their vices were far too visible and abundant. For a review of this topic, see João Adolfo Hansen, Manuel da Nóbrega (Recife, 2010). ANA T. VALDEZ 685 regain their privileged position not simply by serving as intermediaries between the natives and the colonizers, but to further the process of Christianization of the indigenous Brazilians. When Vieira testified to the brutality of the indigenous people, he was emphasizing the difficult task ahead for the Jesuits, instead of reverting to earlier discussions of the natural slavery of peoples who were less fit than Europeans—an argument that had played an influential role in Spanish America. Therefore, it was absolutely necessary that the crown and the Church recognized the specificities of the Brazilian native peoples. Vieira, aware of the fact the Fathers of the Church considered that man’s invincible ignorance of God was only a metaphysical possibility, was most certainly conscious of the impact that his words may have had in Rome. The way in which he constructed his argument, and in particular, how he supported it by using arguments previously used by men of indisputable reputation such as Suàrez and Granado, allows us to consider the probability that when he wrote this section, he knew of the ongoing controversy in Rome between Jesuits and Dominicans on the topic, and that he probably even wrote this section before Alexander VIII’s decree of 1690. At the same time, Vieira explicitly limited his definition of those who held invincible ignorance of God only to the indigenous Brazilians, clearly stating that such a condition would end when the Jesuits mustered the necessary resources—manpower and the support of both the papacy and of the Portuguese crown—and were able to conduct in full their missionary work in the American lands.59 Means to Reach Salvation Following this demonstration of the existence of peoples who had an invincible ignorance of God and to whom it was necessary to introduce to the true faith, Vieira opened Chapter V with the purpose of discussing whether God had given every human being all possible ways of reaching salvation. He started by arguing how children had not, in fact, received an autonomous way of reaching salvation: they had sinned in Adam and they could not choose to be baptized; they depended on their parents or family in that regard. So how was it possible that an unborn child could suffer from not having received baptism? How could those children lost in the 59. Vieira’s ideas on the relationship between the Jesuits and the Indians—especially as regards the conversion of the latter—are the core of The Sermon of St. Anthony to the Fish, see António Vieira, Sermao de Sto. António (Aos Peixes); and Sermão da Sexagesima do Pe. António Vieira, ed. Margarida Vieira Mendes [Colecção Textos Literários, 2] (Lisboa,1978). 686 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM middle of Amazonia have received baptism if their parents had no knowledge of its existence?60 Pursuing the idea that God, the redeemer of children, denied them the means to reach salvation on their own, Vieira wondered if that could not be true also when it came to adults, especially those who lived in faraway lands where no apostle had ever set foot.61 Once again, the Jesuit was laying the basis for an argument that would give these particular “barbarians” a special place among God’s people. At this point, Vieira discussed the type of preachers sent by divine providence to teach in the Americas. He recalled the Apostle Thomas who, according to the legend, had been rejected and expelled by the natives after forbidding polygamy in the first century A.D., and the Portuguese and Spanish missionaries who came later, in the sixteenth century.62 Given the hiatus of 1,400 years, during which these people’s existence had been forgotten, Vieira questioned the intervention of divine providence, introducing the idea that God had provided for the indigenous Americans by not providing, that is, that it was God’s will that these people remained ignorant of Him.63 Furthermore, by not knowing God, they would not be sinning whenever they committed any of the iniquities commonly attributed to them, and thus could not be condemned. In fact, as Vieira argued, the indigenous people, by not having heard the word of God, would be saved by Christ and in Christ.64 By forbidding the apostles to preach to them, Christ had saved them from eternal condemnation, said the Jesuit. Vieira then explained that salvation was, in fact, double: a first salvation of the infidels through conversion, and a second salvation, though imperfect, through man’s invincible ignorance.65 Those who held an invincible ignorance of God were identified over the centuries with (a) the gentiles by Dionysius the Carthusian; (b) as irrational beings by St. Jerome; and (c) as those condemned to damnation by Cardinal Hugh of Saint-Cher. However, this group was most commonly identified with animals, as in Psalm 36:6.66 Vieira argued that the people to whom he referred were, in fact, gentile, irrational, and condemned because of their ignorance of God.67 60. Vieira, Clavis Prophetarum = Chave Dos Profetas, p. 436. 61. Ibid., p. 438. 62. Ibid., pp. 456–58. 63. Ibid., p. 462. 64. Ibid., pp. 474–80. 65. Ibid., p. 476. 66. Ibid., p. 478. 67. Ibid. ANA T. VALDEZ 687 Nevertheless, they should be saved through education in the true faith, and placed on an intermediary level, between the chosen and the condemned, through divine mercy.68 Vieira concluded the chapter, and also strengthened his argument in favor of the existence of an invincible ignorance of God among the indigenous Brazilians, by reminding the reader of how the Apostle Paul had been warned: “Hurry and get out of Jerusalem quickly, because they will not accept your testimony about me” (Acts 22:18). Paul was being sent away from Jerusalem so that its inhabitants could continue in their ignorance of God. They would thus only suffer temporal punishment, instead of eternal punishment. As Vieira explained, sometimes God decided in favor of ignorance because that was the only way of reducing the severity of the punishment received by an entire people. Therefore, ignorance of God was justified, and fell into the category of “providence, through the lack of providence” earlier employed by Vieira.69 Concluding Remarks If we now consider these two chapters of the Clavis together, and how Vieira brilliantly developed an argument in which the “barbarians,” the indigenous Brazilians, were not tainted by original sin and were to be granted a special place within the people of God, it is possible to understand why the topic of the Clavis could have been seen as problematic by the Inquisition, Roman and Portuguese, and the Portuguese crown—but cherished among Jesuits engaged in South American conversion. As noted previously, we cannot forget how Pope Alexander VIII censured the existence of philosophical sin. By remembering that, it is easier to understand why Vieira’s argumentation on this subject could have been considered dangerous not just to himself, but also to the entire Society of Jesus, and even to the Portuguese crown. Vieira’s argument was clear: by not allowing His word to be spread among the peoples of Brazil for 1,400 years, God was, in fact, showing His mercy and giving them yet another chance to reach salvation.70 now, and following Vieira’s line of thought, it was necessary to continue to expand the Jesuit missions and make sure that knowledge of God was universal. In addition, according to Vieira, those who were best positioned to engage in such a mission were the members of the Society of Jesus, which should thus be allowed by the Portuguese crown to continue their work in the Amazonian jungle without being hindered by 68. Ibid., p. 480. 69. Ibid. 70. Ibid., pp. 482–88. 688 TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM the Portuguese settlers, as was happening at the time Vieira was writing. Given how this claim has always been present in António Vieira’s sermons and letters about the conversion of the Indians, it is paramount to the understanding of his work. Moreover, in these two sections, chapters IV and V of Volume III of the Clavis, Vieira engages in a highly technical theological discourse, and, at the same time, engages in a disguised but ferocious defense of the role of the Society within the Portuguese empire, and in particular, Brazil. The Clavis, a theological treatise, was also a strident political manifesto in which the Jesuit expressed his fiercest opinions concerning the nature of the indigenous Brazilians, while underlining the role of the members of the Society in the process of evangelization and in support of the king of Portugal and of the pope as leaders of humanity and vicars of Christ as the end times approached. In these two small chapters, a section that could have easily changed the direction of the discourse of the Clavis, Vieira clearly established the foundations for what he would later describe as the two moments of return to the true faith before the end of time: the first, for gentiles and barbarians, and a second, for the Jews, the other chosen people of God, in opposition to the traditional view that required a conversion to Catholicism.71 The St. Bonaventure ms. 28, by reaffirming what AnTT ms. 122 had so clearly stated regarding the invincible ignorance of God of the “barbarians,” helps us to understand the influence and importance that such arguments had not only within South America but also within the broader territory of the Portuguese empire. At the same time, the fact that these chapters were not included in Casanatense ms. 706 should make us reconsider the reason why Bonucci did not include them in the first copy sent to Rome. Could Vieira have written this section before Alexander’s VIII decree, and Bonucci—aware of the condemnation—decided to remove from that particular copy a potentially controversial section? It is quite possible. St. Bonaventure ms. 28, in particular, also expresses more emphatically the underlying aspirations of the Jesuits engaged in spreading the word of the gospel in the Amazon: the need not only for more time but also for mankind to understand the specific circumstances inherent to the indigenous Brazilians, who were part of God’s people, but who had also been kept from the knowledge of God through divine intervention—thus reaffirming the accuracy of Vieira’s argument that God had provided by not providing. 71. Ibid., Chapter IX of Book III. ANA T. VALDEZ 689 A comparison of the different manuscripts of the Clavis allows scholars to question further how local conditions may have influenced the copyists, particularly regarding whether Bonucci might have chosen to include some sections of Vieira’s original manuscript that were not part of the manuscript sent to Rome in 1699. It is necessary, however, to underline that Vieira’s inclusion of the defense of the indigenous Brazilians is not unusual or out of place in the larger context of the Clavis, and even less if one considers the Clavis as Vieira’s lifelong eschatological project. Furthermore, this defense of the indigenous people cannot be considered a later addition to the manuscript of the Clavis. It is exactly the opposite: Vieira was well aware of the importance of continuing the process of evangelization in Portuguese America, and he knew that its achievement would have a positive impact in uplifting the weakened Portuguese empire. Vieira, the statesman, knew exactly how crucial it was to make his Roman peers understand that universal evangelization was not yet achieved, although it was about to be fulfilled through the work of the Jesuit missionaries in the Portuguese America, underlining the role played by Portugal. He also knew that the Church could only accomplish its ultimate goal of establishing the promised divine kingdom on earth if universal evangelization was accomplished. Thus, he knew how important, how fundamental, it was to create a theological device through which Brazilian “barbarians” could be considered a unique category, instead of immediately being classified as gentiles—which required admitting that it was impossible for them to be saved. Therefore, today, when we read Chapter IX of Volume III of the Clavis in which Vieira explains the moments of “return” (conversion), we observe clearly how he envisaged the “return” of three different groups to the “true faith” before the establishment of the divine kingdom on earth: gentiles, “barbarians,” and Jews. Such a universal view of religion as the one found in the Clavis Prophetarum is probably one of its most important features, and certainly one of the most important intellectual contributions made by Vieira to Western civilization, supporting the claim that the Clavis Prophetarum—relatively unheralded among the theological treatises of its time—should be considered today as one of the most important works of the seventeenth century, and studied accordingly. Biblioteca Casanatense ms. 706 (Title) De universali Evangelii praedicatione ad ultimum Ecclesiae statum et Regni Christi consummationem praevia. Chapter 1 ANTT, Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122 St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 De Regno Christii in Terris Consummato De Regnum Christi in Terris Consummato. Liber Tertius An liceat rerum tempora serutari et de illis aliquid fratuere? Liceat ne futurarum rerum tempora serutari, et de hic aliquid fratuere? Non licere fecurorum tempora scruturii quae suadere videantur Chapter 2 Quaestioni resolutio Non licere futurorum tempora scrutari, quae suadere videantur Quaestonis praecedentis resolutio: illis affirmativa para aferitux, et probatur Objecta contra statutam doctrinam expediuntur Chapter 3 De universalis Evangelii praedicatione ad ultimum Eccelsiae statem et Regni Christi consommationem praevia De Universali Evangelij praedicatione ad ultimum Ecclesiae statum, et Regni Christi consummationem praevia An Evangelium praedicatum hodievit vel aliquando fuerit in orbe universo? Chapter 3, Quaestio 1 An Evangelium praedicatum hodie sit, vel aliquando fuerit in Orbe universo? Quaestio I Quaestio I Quaestio prima. An Evangelium praedicatum hodie sit, vel aliquanto fuerit in Orbe universio? Chapter 3, Quaestio 2 Contrariae aliquorum Patrum sententiae fundamentum evellitur. Quaestio II Contraria aliquorum Patrum Sententia fundamentatum evellitur—Quaestio II Quaestio secunda. Contrariae aliquorum Patrum sententiae fundamentum evellitur Dilutio argumenti ab ipso textu Dilutio argumenti ab ipso textu (continued on next page) TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM Section 690 APPENDIX Biblioteca Casanatense ms. 706 ANTT, Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122 St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 Chapter 3, Quaestio 3 Obtruditur difficilis locus D. Paulis, cujus difficultas aliter quam solet expenditur et juxtamentem Apostoli declaratur. Quaestio III Obstruditur difficilii locus D. Pauli, cuyus difficultas aliter quam solet expenditur et iuxta menteni Apostoli declaratiar— Quaestio III Quaestio tertia. Obstruditur difficilis locus D. Pauli, cujus difficultas aliter quam solet solet expenditur, et juxtamentem Apostoli declaratum Expositio prima Expositio Prima Expositio prima Expositio secunda Expositio Secunda Expositio secunda Propositae quaestionis occasio aperitur Ubi De insigni Judaeorum odio adversus D. Paulum, et ejus causa Proposita quaestionis occasio apresitur ubi De insigni Judaeorum odio adversus D. Paulum et ejus causa Propositae quaestionis ocassio aperitus: ubi de insigni Judaeorum odio adversus D. Paulum; eijusque causa Purgat se Paulus a calumnis Judaeorum Purgat se Paulus a calumnis Judaeorum Purgat se Paulus a calumnij Judaeorum Docet Evangelium Gentibus praedicari non solum licere, sed oportere: et quare? Docet Evangelium Gentibus praedicarii non solum licere sed oportere et quae? Docetur, Evangelium Gentibus praedicare non solum licere, sed oportere et quare? Ora Judaerom oppilat Nodum tandem dissolvit Nodus dissolvitur Ora Judaeorum oppilat Ora Judaeorum occluduntur Chapter 3, Quaestio 4 Praedicatio Evangelii in universum mundum qua extensione mensuranda? Quaestio IV De utraque extensione Evangelii por omnem terram et Gentes quid Prophetae prenuntiaverint? Chapter 3, Quaestio 5 Qualis futura sit et debeat esse Evangelii praedicatio? Quaestio V ANA T. VALDEZ Section Praedication Evangelii in universum mundum Quaestio quarta. Praedicatio Evangelii in uniquae extensione mensuranda?—Quaestio IV versum mundum qua extensione mensuranda De utraque extensione Evangelii peronnem terram, et Gentes quid Prophetae praenuntiaerint? Qualis futura sit, et debeat esse Evangelii praedicatio. Quaestio V De utraque extensione Evangelii persomnem terram, et gentes quid Prophetae praenuntiaverint? Quaestio quinta. Qualis future sit, et debeat esse Evangelii praedicatio? 691 (continued on next page) ANTT, Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122 St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 De Praedicatione muta per creaturas De praedicatione muta per creaturas De praedicationie muta per creaturas? Pro defendenda non nullorum saltem Philosophorum excusabilitate nobile argumentum Pro defendenda non nullorum saltem Philosophorum excusabilitate nobile argumentum Pro defendenda non nullorum saltem Philosophorum excusabilitate nobile argumentum De praedicatione vocali per famam De praedicatione vocali per famam De praedicatione vocali per famam De praedicatione per proprios Evangelii Ministros De praedicatione per proprios Evangelii Ministros De praedicatione per proprios Evangelii Ministros De His, qui non crediderunt Evangelio, quia non audierunt, quid porro statuendum? Caput IV. De hic, qui non crediderunt Evangelio, quia non audierunt, quid porro statuendum? De hic qui non crediderunt Evangelio quia non audierunt quid porro statuendum. Quaestio sexta Salutis media omnibus Adultis a deo provisa: et qualia? Utrum Barbari in silvis metriti, qui nihil de Deo audierunt, eumque invincibiliter ignorant aeternis pro peccatis suis paenis mancipandi sint? Utrum barbari in sylvis nutriti qui nihil de Deo audierunt, eumque invincibiliter ignorant, aeternis pro peccatis suis paenis mancipandi sint? Confirmartur praedicta sententia ex Authore Barbaro adhuc puero Confirmatur praedicta sentential ex Author barbaro adhuc puero Invincibilis de Deo ignorantia in Barbaris reperiri defenditus, et demonstrater Invincibilis de Deo ignorantia in Barbaris reperiri, defenditur, ac demonstratur? Opinio P. Suarij invincibile totius Legis naturalis ignorantiam omnino negantis P. Suarii opinioni invicibilem totius legis naturalis ignorantiam omnino negantis (continued on next page) TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM Chapter 4 Biblioteca Casanatense ms. 706 692 Section Section Biblioteca Casanatense ms. 706 ANTT, Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122 St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 Opinio P. Granado invincibilem de Deo in homine ignorantiam nequaquam admittentis Utramque ignorantiam tam de lege quam de Authore naturae invincibilendadi in Barbaris ostenditur Utramque ignorantiam, tam de lege, quam de Authore naturae invicibilem dari in Barbaris ostenditur De Lege naturae majus dubium Patris Suarii opinioni respondetur, et Divus Paulus ab eo allatus genuino sensu exponitur P. Suarij opinioni respondetur et D. Paulus ab eo allatus genuino sensu exponitur Refutatus opinion P. Granado, et de barbarie Brasilensium exhibetur illi vera notitia Contrariae opionionis Authoris responsio, quamtus moderatior non admissa et quare Contrariae opinionis Authoris responsio, quamvis moderatior non admissa et quare? Quaestionis pars altera. Utrum peccata cum Dei ignorantia invincibile commissa plectenda sint qua paena, et quo in loco? Quaestionis pars altera. Utrum peccata cum Dei ignorantia invincibili commissa plectenda sint, Sua paena? Et quo in loco? Plectenda esse temporalli paena Pro loco paenae Limbi puerorum ex Patrium conjectura proponitur Pro loco paena limbi puerorum ex Patrium conjectura proponitus Corum qui pro his animabus quantum apud inferos locum necessario assignandum putantum contentio refellitur Eorum qui pro his animabus quantum apud inferos locum necessario assignandum putant, contentio refellitur 693 Plectenda esse temporali paena ANA T. VALDEZ Opinio P. Granado invincibilem de Deo in homine ignorantiam necquaquam admittentis Biblioteca Casanatense ms. 706 Chapter 5 Evangelii propagatio ad complementum quod postulat omnium Gentium fides, quibus mediis promovenda sit? St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 Utrium omnibus necessaria ad salutem media Deus sufficienter provideat? Utrum omnibus necessaria ad salutem media Deus sufficienter provideat Salutis media omnibus Adultis a Deo provisa: et qualia? Salutis media omnibus adultis ad Deo provisa, et qualia? Cogitatio Authoris circa Barbaros mitius de bonitate Dei sentientis Cogitatio Authoris circa barbaros mitius de bonitate Dei sentientis Proponitur difficultas in hac materia omni admiratione major Proponitur difficultas in hac material omni admiratione major Resolvitur declaratur, expenditur et probatur Resolvitur, declaratur, expenditur et probatur Diluitur non levis objectio Diluitur non levis objectio In Christo et per Christum duplex salvandi genus In Christo, et per Christum duplex salvandi genus Conclusio, et Confirmatio totius quaestionis Conclusio, et confirmation totius quaestionis Evangelij propagatio ad complementum quod postulat omnium Gentium fides quibus medijs promovenda sit? Evangelii propagatio ad complementum quod postulat omnium gentium fides, quibus mediis promovenda sit? Et quibus instrumentis urgenda eadem Evangelii propagatio? Primum, et supraemum, instrumentum Christius ipse Secundum instrumentum Viri sanctitate insignes TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM Chapter 6 ANTT, Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122 694 Section Section Biblioteca Casanatense ms. 706 ANTT, Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122 St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 Tertium instrumentum Saecularium Principum favor Chapter 7 Caput VII. A quibus instrumentis urgenda eadem Evangelij propagatio? Utrum effectus seu fructus Evangelicae praedicationis aliquando futurus sit adeo copiosus ut eam suscipiant omnes homines, et totus mundus quantus est, christiannus fiat? Primum et supremum instrumentum Christus ipse Primum et supremum instrumentum Christus ipse P. Suarii prima conclusio Secundum instrumentum Viri Sanctitate insignes Secundum instrumentum viri sanctitate insignes Secunda conclusio Tertium instrumentum: Saecularum Principum favor Tertium Instrumentum Saecularium Principum favor Ejusdem conclusionis fundamenta refelluntur Utrum effectus seus fructus Evangelicae praedicationis aliquando futurus sit a deo copiosus ut cam Suscipiant omnes homines et totus mundus quantus est, Christianus fiat? Caput VIII. Utrum effectus seu fructus Evangelicae praedicationis aliquando futuris sit adeo copiosus ut eam suscipiant omnes homines, et totus mundus quantus est Christianus fiat? Sententia oppositu fundamenta refellunter Universalis totius mundi conversio ad fidem quo tempore simul sed quibus divisim temporibus adimplenda sit? ANA T. VALDEZ Chapter 8 A quibus instrumentis urgenda eadem Evangelii propagatio? Conversionem universalem non unam tantum fore, sed duas omnino diversas Prima universalis conversio ante adventum Antichristi completa Capita ex quibus duae conversiones universales sunt eruntque diversae, multipliciter enumerantur 695 (continued on next page) Biblioteca Casanatense ms. 706 ANTT, Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122 St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 Maldonati Sententia quam P. Cornelius sequitur, solide expenditur, ac refutatur Utrum totus aliquando mundus proprie, ac vere futurus sit Christianus Finis Chapter 9 Universalis totius mundi conversio ad fidem quo tempore simul vel quibus divisim temporibus adimplenda sit? Caput IX. Universalis totius mundi conversio ad fidem quo tempore simul vel quibus divisim temporibus adimplenda sit? Conversionem universalem non unam tantum fare, sed duas omnino diversas Conversionem universalem non unam tantum fore sed duas omnino diversae Prima universalis conversio ante adventum Antichristi completa Prima universalis conversio ante adventum Antichristi completa Capita ex quibus duae universales conversiones sunt, erunt que diversae, multipliciter enumerantur Capita ex quibus duae universales conversiones sunt, erunt que diversae multipliciter enumerantur (continued on next page) TRACKING ANTÓNIO VIEIRA’S CLAVIS PROPHETARUM Utrum hoc tempore, quod proxime dictum est, vere complendum sit oraculum Christi de uno ovili sub uno pastore? 696 Section Section Biblioteca Casanatense ms. 706 ANTT, Conselho Geral do Sto. Ofício, ms. 122 Utrum hoc tempore, quod proxime dictum est, vere complendam sit oraculum Christi de uno Ovili sub uno Pastore? Maldonati sententia quam P. Cornelius sequitur, solide expenditur ad refutatur Maldonati sententia quam P. Cornelius sequitur solide expenditur ac refutatur Utrum totus aliquando Mundus proprie ad vere futurus sit Christianus Utrum totius aliquando Mundus proprie, ac vere futurus sit Christianus? ANA T. VALDEZ Utrum hoc tempore quod proxime dictum est, vere complendum sit Oraculum Christi de uno ovili sub uno Pastore? St. Bonaventure, Franciscan Institute, ms. 28 697 Albert Leo Schlageter: First Soldier of the Third Reich or Catholic War Hero? JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER* The author examines the efforts of Germany’s Catholic fraternities to stake their claim to the legacy of Albert Leo Schlageter. The centrality of the Schlageter mythology to Nazism is well reported. After his execution by French occupation authorities in the Rhineland on May 26, 1923, Schlageter would be celebrated by the Nazi party at the time and later as “The First Soldier of the Third Reich.” Less well known is the attempt of Germany’s Catholic fraternities to lay their claim to the fallen Schlageter, who had at one time been a member of Germany’s largest Catholic fraternity. In their publications and memorials, Catholic fraternity brethren insisted that Schlageter be celebrated as a Catholic hero. They conversely denied any connection between their fallen fraternity brother and Nazism, no doubt aware that, through the Weimar period, their episcopal authorities had prohibited Catholics from belonging to the Nazi party or any affiliate organizations. How Germany’s Catholic fraternities attempted to accommodate their Schlageter legacy to a changed state of affairs when Adolf Hitler came to power in early 1933 reveals much about the broader dilemmas faced by Germany’s Catholics at this time. Keywords: Albert Leo Schlageter; German Catholic fraternities; German Catholicism; National Socialism; Weimar Germany O n May 26, 1923, on the outskirts of Düsseldorf, a twelve-man firing squad belonging to a French occupation army executed Albert Leo Schlageter, a German veteran of World War I, a holder of the Iron Cross, and a former member of the Freikorps. Earlier in the month, a French mil*Dr. Roethler is a Senior Lecturer in both the Department of History and in the interdisciplinary General Studies Degree Program, University College, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, email: jsr97@txstate.edu. This paper evolved from a panel presentation delivered at the Spring Meeting of the American Catholic Historical Association, April 6, 2013, Stonehill College, Easton, MA. The author offers his sincere gratitude to Dr. Charles Robert Gallagher, S.J. (Chair Commentator), Dr. Martin Menke (co-presenter) and to the anonymous reviewers for their invaluable input. 698 JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 699 itary tribunal had condemned Schlageter to death, after Schlageter and conspirators belonging to a former Freikorps unit had attempted to sabotage the delivery of coal from the occupied German Ruhr region to France.1 The French occupation of the Ruhr, which transpired after the German government had failed to meet the reparations obligations demanded by the Versailles peace settlements, was condemned throughout Germany, thus making Schlageter’s actions widely popular with the German people. Schlageter’s execution provoked a public outcry throughout Germany that raged for years. In 1931, with the foreign occupation of German territory at an end, a national committee supervised the erection of a monument in Schlageter’s honor at the site of his execution in Düsseldorf. 2 The ceremony dedicating the monument became a national event attended by thousands. The centrality of the Schlageter mythology to the early propaganda of the National Socialists is well known.3 Nazi polemicists deployed the image of the martyred Schlageter to powerful effect both immediately after his execution, and again, when Adolf Hitler came to power in early 1933. On June 23, 1923, on the same day as Schlageter’s burial in his home town of Schönau, Hitler proclaimed before a crowd of at least 20,000 at Munich’s Königsplatz that “Schlageter’s death should show us that freedom will not be won by protests, but by action alone.”4 As explained by historian Jay Baird, the official rituals of the Third Reich would remember Schlageter as a “hero who made a blood sacrifice for the rebirth of Germany.” From the party’s earliest beginnings to its high point in power, Nazi mythology elevated the fallen hero Schlageter to the lofty realm of Nazi immortals.5 1. The Freikorps were a grouping of paramilitary organizations consisting mostly of former World War I veterans, deputized by Germany’s new republican government in late 1918 to crack down against left-wing revolutionaries at home and against enemies in Germany’s near abroad, particularly Poland and the newly independent Baltic states. Many of their members later served the cause of Nazism. An early, if still largely authoritative account can be found in Robert G. L. Waite, Vanguard of Nazism: The Free Corps Movement in Postwar Germany 1918–1923 (New York, 1952). 2. The committee, called the Außschuss für die Errichtung eines SchlageterDenkmals, consisted mostly of Catholic public figures and organizations. See Peter Derichsweiler, “Das Schlageter-Ehrenmal in Düsseldorf kommt,” Academia 42, no. 7 (November 15, 1929), 222. 3. Waite, Vanguard of Nazism, pp. 233–38; George L. Mosse, The Nationalization of the Masses: Political Symbolism & Mass Movements in Germany from the Napoleonic Wars through the Third Reich (New York, 1975); J.W. Baird, To Die for Germany (Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1990); and Derek Hastings, Catholicism and the Roots of Nazism: Religious Identity and National Socialism (Oxford and New York, 2010). 4. Baird, To Die for Germany, p. 26. 5. Ibid., p. 40. 700 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER As Baird has also pointed out, however, the Nazis were “but one of several groups competing for control of the Schlageter legacy.”6 It is the intent of this article to consider the role of Germany’s Catholic fraternities in staking their claim to the Schlageter legacy. At the time of Schlageter’s execution in 1923, Germany’s Catholic fraternities were among the most prominent institutions in what contemporary observers and later historians of this period have described as Germany’s Catholic milieu.7 Since approximately the middle of the nineteenth century, Germany’s Catholic fraternities had been the focus of life for Catholic students at a time when Germany’s Catholic minority population experienced widespread discrimination from German authorities and from Germany’s non-Catholic population, principally in Protestant-ruled and dominated German principalities and states in the German Confederation and Empire, successively. Throughout the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Germany’s three major Catholic fraternity organizations, the Cartellverband der katholischen deutschen Studentenverbindungen (CV), the Kartell-Verband der katholischen Studentenvereine Deutchlands (KV), and the Verband der wissenschaftlichen katholischen Studentenvereine Unitas (Unitas), had served as training grounds for leadership in the Catholic Center Party.8 Their alumni were also strongly represented in Germany’s Catholic episcopate.9 Throughout the late 1800s and early 1900s, Germany’s Catholic fraternities openly opposed Germany’s more established 6. Ibid., p. 32. Others included the Jungdeutsche Orden and the Stahlhelm. See Christian Fuhrmeister, “Ein Märtyrer auf der Zugspitze? Glühbirnenkreuze, Bildpropaganda und andere Medialisierungen des Totenkults um Albert Leo Schlageter in der Weimarer Republik und im Nationalsozialismus. Zeitenblicke 3 (2004), No.1., accessed Jan. 29, 2015, http://www.zeitenblicke.de/2004/01/fuhrmeister/Fuhrmeister.pdf. 7. Hermann Bahr, “Im Zeichen Weimars,” in Wiederbegegnung von Kirche und Kultur in Deutschland, eine Gabe für Karl Muth (Munich, 1927), p. 291. In the English-language historiography, see Margaret Lavinia Anderson, David Blackbourn, Noel Cary, Margaret Stieg Dalton, Lovell Ellen Evans, Michael Gross, Robert Anthony Krieg, Thomas O’Meara, Mark Edward Ruff, and Helmut Walser Smith, among many others. For recent German-language contributions, see Olaf Blaschke, Thomas Großbölting, and Anthonius Liedhegener, among others. 8. During the Imperial and Weimar periods, prominent Catholic fraternity alumni in German national politics included Georg von Hertling, Ludwig Windthorst, Adolf Gröber, Felix Porsch, Ernst Lieber, Franz Hitze, Konstantin Fehrenbach, Joseph Mausbach, Wilhelm Cuno, Wilhelm Marx, and Heinrich Brüning. Hertling, Fehrenbach, Cuno, Marx, and Brüning all served as German chancellors during this period. 9. These alumni included Cardinal Michael von Faulhaber, head the Munich-Freising Bishops’ Conference, and Cardinal Adolf Bertram, head of the Breslau Bishops’ Conference. Faulhaber and Bertram arguably were the two most influential clerical voices in Germany throughout the Weimar period. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 701 nationalist fraternities.10 Unlike their nationalist counterparts during this period, Germany’s Catholic fraternities prohibited their members from participating in mensur fencing, a ritualized duel that the Catholic episcopate had banned on religious grounds. The CV, the KV, and Unitas fraternities allowed as members only practicing Catholics. As reported in fraternity newspapers and other fraternity accounts, members were expected to attend Mass regularly; the sacraments of confession and communion were integrated into fraternity functions. Membership in Germany’s Catholic fraternities did not end at graduation, but was typically life-long. Catholic fraternity alumni continued to pay fraternity dues, contribute their thoughts to national fraternity newspapers, and serve in positions of fraternity leadership. They remained deeply embedded in fraternity social life. At a time when fraternity students comprised approximately sixty percent of Germany’s student population, the national fraternity organization to which Schlageter belonged briefly following his return from World War I, the CV, ranked second among Germany’s national fraternities in total membership, trailing only the nationalist-oriented Deutsche Burschenschaft (DB).11 Since the close of the Second World War in 1945, the powerful resonance of Schlageter’s “martyrdom” in the early mythology of Nazism has received widespread attention in the historical literature. By comparison, Schlageter’s reception in Germany’s Catholic milieu has seen comparatively minimal coverage, even if Schlageter’s Catholic faith was a matter of public knowledge, and even if authorities in Germany’s Catholic hierarchy were seemingly ambivalent in their attitudes towards Nazism at the time 10. For a recent study of fraternity relations on German campuses during the late Imperial period, see Lisa Fetheringill Zwicker, Dueling Students: Conflict, Masculinity, and Politics in German Universities, 1890–1914 (Ann Arbor, 2011). For a recent study that focuses specifically on Catholic students and academics during the Imperial period, see Christopher Dowe, Auch Bildungsberger: Katholische Studierende und Akademiker im Kaiserreich [Kritische Studien zur Geschichtswissenschaft, Bd. 171] (Göttingen, 2006). For a recent cross-national study on elite student culture in Germany and Great Britain during the early 1900s, see Sonja Levsen, Elite, Männlichkeit und Krieg: Tübinger und Cambridger Studenten 1900–1929 [Kritische Studien zur Geschichtswissenschaft, Bd. 170] (Göttingen, 2006). 11. By 1931, the three major Catholic national fraternal organizations enrolled approximately 18,000 members at a time when the German fraternity movement more broadly enrolled some 79,000 students. The Deutsche Burschenschaft or DB continued to hold first place with approximately 11,600 members. The Catholic CV followed closely with approximately 10,000. See Hans Jürgen Rösgen, Die Auflösung der katholischen Studenten Verbände im Dritten Reich, [Dortmunder Historische Studien, Bd. 15] (Bochum, 1995), pp. 179–80. 702 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER of Schlageter’s execution and later. In his broader study on the relationship between the Catholic Church and the embryonic National Socialist movement in Munich, Derek Hastings has attempted to resolve the potential tension in Schlageter’s dual identity as both Nazi and Catholic hero, by pointing out that Nazi propagandists did not shy away from Schlageter’s devotion to his Catholic faith; rather, these propagandists embraced and celebrated Schlageter as a warrior Christian. In the immediate aftermath of Schlageter’s execution, for instance, the Nazis held a Catholic memorial for Schlageter at Munich’s St. Boniface Abbey. The memorial was presided over by Abbot Alban Schachleiter, an early Nazi supporter, and a member of the CV. According to Hastings, Schachleiter lent the Nazievent considerable credibility with Munich’s Catholics generally, and with Munich’s Catholic fraternity members specifically. Hastings writes: “The lesson to be learned from Schlageter’s brief but heroic life was that his Nazi and Catholic identities were not in conflict, and his religious principles were precisely what helped to make Schlageter a model Nazi. . . .”12 Starting with Hitler’s assumption of power in January 1933, Schlageter would be celebrated as “the first soldier of the Third Reich.” For this, among other reasons, Schlageter’s legacy is clearly relevant to historians seeking to address the question of Catholic complicity in the later crimes of the Third Reich.13 Devotion to the German fatherland, anger over the outcome of World War I and especially the postwar peace settlements, hostility to Germany’s postwar democratic government, and animosity towards communists and Jews, as Hastings and many others have rightly pointed out, were all attitudes that Hitler’s supporters and many Catholic Germans shared. Many young Catholic Germans like Schlageter were impressed by Hitler’s patriotism and his call for a national renewal following Germany’s national humiliation at the end of 1918. Around the time of Schlageter’s death in 1923, all but one of the Munich chapters of the Catholic CV fraternity belonged to the local affiliate of the Deutscher Hochschulring (DHR), a nationwide university organization dominated by German nationalists and early Nazi supporters.14 In a July 1921 article 12. Hastings, Catholicism and the Roots of Nazism, p. 131. Stefan Zwicker makes brief mention of the Catholic reception to Schlageter in “Nationale Martyrer”: Albert Leo Schlageter und Julius Fučík, Heldenkult, Propaganda und Erinnerungskultur (Paderborn, 2006), pp. 108–13. 13. See Carl Amery, Suzanne Brown-Fleming, Daniel J. Goldhagen, Michael Lukens, Michael Phayer, Kevin Spicer and Gordon Zahn, among many others. 14. Individual affiliates were sometimes known by the acronym Hochschulring deutscher Art (HdA). Peter Stitz, Der CV 1919–1938. Der hochschulpolitische Weg des Cartellverbandes der Katholischen deutschen Studentenverbindung (CV) vom Ende des 1. Weltkrieges bis zur Vernichtung durch den Nationalsozialismus (Munich, 1970), pp. 44–46. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 703 appearing in the fraternity’s national newspaper, Academia, CV member Rob Thieron from the fraternity’s Kiel chapter wrote that he was optimistic that the two organizations could rise above Germany’s confessional and political fault lines to support the German patriotic cause.15 That said, not all of Germany’s Catholic fraternities were impressed by the DHR. Representing the third strongest Catholic fraternal presence on Germany’s campuses, the Unitas fraternity prohibited its members from participating in DHR activities as early as 1922, with its leadership worrying that the DHR seemed to be promoting German nationalism as a kind of “Ersatzweltanschauung” or substitute religion. Unitas members also expressed their unease with the openly stated antisemitism of the DHR, with one Unitas writer declaring that “when the people turns to God, and not against the Jews, only then will it be saved.” Even more acutely, Unitas members detected an evident anti-Catholic element within the DHR that reminded them uncomfortably of the pre-war years when the nationalist fraternities taunted their Catholic cohorts with the charge that their confessional loyalties mattered more to them than their devotion to the German fatherland.16 The moment of truth for Catholic fraternity collaboration with the DHR came in November 1923, when members of the Munich affiliate of the organization participated in Hitler’s attempt to seize control of the Bavarian government and use it as a base to march on Berlin. A front page article in Academia in the immediate aftermath described the “sad events of the eighth and ninth of November” and reported that, as the Putsch unfolded, students had gathered at the University of Munich and hailed Hitler and his supporters as liberators from “Jewish and Jesuit slavery”—in so doing, making a clear slur against the Catholic Church. The demonstra15. Rob Thieron, RBo, R-G, Kiel, “C.V. und Hochschulring deutscher Art,” Academia 34, no. 5 (July 25, 1921), 97. 16. An early DHR slogan ran: “Wir kämpfen gegen Internationalismus jeder Färbung,” or “We struggle against internationalism of every shade.” In German nationalist nomenclature, socialism was referred to as a “red” international and Catholicism as a “black” international; as was the evidently the case with the DHR’s slogan, nationalists frequently grouped the two together. In 1921, a Unitas contributor wrote: “Sind das nicht Töne, wie sie uns vor dem Kriege aus gewissen Ecken immerfort um die Ohren wehten?” (Aren’t these the tones that before the war out of certain corners pained the ears?”) “Hochschulring deutscher Art,” Unitas 61, no. 3 (April 1921), 61–62. Together, the non-color wearing Catholic fraternities, Unitas and the KV, equaled or exceeded the membership of the CV. In 1930, the number of active members and alumni in the CV, the KV, and the UV were, respectively, 16,080, 12,746, and 3,384. See Rösgen, Die Auflösung der katholischen Studenten Verbände im Dritten Reich, p. 180. 704 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER tors later marched through the streets shouting insults directed at Michael von Faulhaber, Archbishop of Munich and Freising. An active CV fraternity alumnus and frequent participant in CV fraternity functions during the Weimar period, Faulhaber had in the recent past called into question the legitimacy of Germany’s postwar government; but the cardinal early on condemned Hitler’s uprising, thereby provoking attacks against his person and the Catholic Church more broadly in the local Nazi and Nazi-sympathizing press.17 In the face of these attacks, Catholic fraternity members closed ranks behind their fraternity mentor and archbishop. An exodus of CV chapters from the DHR, which continued to condone public attacks against the Catholic Church and its institutions, soon followed. From this point forward, for the remaining life of the Weimar Republic, Germany’s Catholic fraternities were in unison in expressing their hostility to the Nazi Party and its affiliated organizations, with Catholic fraternity governing bodies threatening sanctions against members who also participated in Nazi organizations or activities.18 In opposing Nazism on Germany’s campuses, Germany’s Catholic fraternity authorities followed the lead of the Catholic episcopate, which generally (if not universally) condemned Nazism up to Hitler’s nomination as German chancellor in early 1933. In so doing, Germany’s episcopal authorities warned all Catholics, and especially young Catholics, to stay away from the Nazi party and its affiliate organizations.19 As will be explained and documented below, Germany’s Catholic fraternities also had their own well-articulated reasons for opposing Nazism. The connection between Schlageter and Nazism therefore presented a profoundly awkward problem for Schlageter’s Catholic fraternity. Could the Nazis claim Schlageter as one of their own? Was Schlageter a registered member of the Nazi party at the time of his death, as Nazi supporters later claimed? If so, where did the martyred Schlageter stand with Catholics generally and with his Catholic fraternity specifically? Through the Weimar period, Schlageter’s Catholic fraternity brethren pointed out repeatedly that their fallen hero was deeply devoted to his Catholic faith up until his last moments alive. As an unwavering patriot who was willing to pay the ultimate price to defend the German father17. “Die Novembervorgänge an der Münchener Universität,” Academia 36, no. 5-8 (December 15, 1923), 17-18. Stitz, Der CV 1919–1938, p. 47. 18. Stitz, Der CV 1919–1938, p. 81. 19. “Die Beschlüsse der 61. CV-Versammlung, zusammengestelt von Dr. Hermann Hagen, Th, München, Academia 45, no. 6 (September 15, 1932), 137–38. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 705 land, Schlageter seemed to represent the ideal role model for Germany’s Catholic fraternities during a period when they continued to refute charges made by a skeptical German student body (and a skeptical German public more broadly), that had called into question their national reliability from the time of the founding of the German Reich in 1871. In repeatedly claiming Schlageter as a Catholic hero and more specifically a Catholic fraternity hero, Germany’s Catholic fraternities conversely denied claims made in the right-wing press and elsewhere that Schlageter had been intimately connected with the Nazi cause, with a prominent national leader of the CV in July 1931 explicitly insisting that Schlageter’s alleged membership in the Nazi party was out of the question. As far as Germany’s fraternities were concerned, the conflicting portrayals of Schlageter—devout Catholic or fanatical Nazi—could not be reconciled. This was the case, at any rate, until Hitler’s assumption of power in early 1933. A Catholic War Hero Born on August 12, 1894, Albert Leo Schlageter hailed from the village of Schönau, nestled in the Black Forest, in the heavily Catholic southwestern corner of Germany, as the sixth of eleven children produced by Joseph and Rosina Schlageter. The family had been rooted in this scenic region of rolling hills and evergreen forests for centuries. By his own account, Schlageter felt called to the Catholic priesthood throughout his formative years. After completing his primary schooling, Schlageter earned admissions to the Berthold college preparatory school in the nearby city of Freiburg, where he earned his diploma. The next step for Schlageter would have been to enroll at a university to study theology, but less than two weeks before his twentieth birthday, World War I broke out in August 1914. On December 16, 1914, Schlageter volunteered with Field Artillery Regiment 76 in Freiburg. In early 1915, Schlageter departed with his unit for the Western Front, where he saw action in, among other places, Flanders, Arras, Champagne, Verdun, the Somme, and Artois. 20 Schlageter was wounded twice, each time returning to his unit. In June 1917, Schlageter was promoted to the rank of lieutenant. In April 1918, he earned the Iron Cross, First Class, the most prestigious award in the German Army.21 Throughout the war, if his letters accurately depict his true mindset, Schlageter remained immune from the cynical nihilism that would infect so many other German soldiers in their long, brutal, and ultimately doomed 20. Herrmann Hagen, “Albert Leo Schlageter,” Academia 46, (May 15, 1933), 12–17. 21. Ibid. 706 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER war effort.22 In a letter penned to his former preparatory school mentor and priest Rat Lang on March 30, 1915, in language reminiscent of the later war novels of Ernst Jünger, Schlageter described the war experience as both “terrible” and “beautiful.” Through the war, Schlageter’s Catholic faith seems likewise to have been unshaken. On April 25, 1915, Schlageter reassured Lang that he remained committed to studying for the priesthood at the war’s end. As he explained: “I have prayed to the Holy Spirit and the dear Mother of God for her support. . . . I have made mistakes and have sinned. But nothing suits my nature more than theology.” In April 1916, Schlageter wrote that the men in his unit had confidently trusted their fates to the “almighty hands” of God. After having been in the war now for over three years, in January 1918, Schlageter reassured his parents in a letter that he continued to honor the Catholic sacraments of confession and Communion.23 When the war ended in November 1918, the German Army released Schlageter from active service. In January 1919, Schlageter enrolled at Freiburg University, near his ancestral homelands, although, contrary to his stated childhood wishes, he declared his major to be political economy, and not theology. On January 7, 1919, Schlageter pledged the CV fraternity chapter Falkenstein. As was standard for CV fraternity chapters, Schlageter’s trial membership period with Falkenstein would presumably last two semesters, during which time he would have been expected to learn fraternity traditions and protocols. As was the case with the other fraternities in the CV national network, Falkenstein members were required to wear fraternity colors and regalia at university functions.24 Schlageter would not remain at Freiburg or with Falkenstein, however. In March 1919, Schlageter left both school and fraternity and joined up with the Freikorps. The reasons for Schlageter’s departure from Freiburg are not clear. Perhaps attempting to merge Schlageter’s story with the standard Freikorps narrative, Schlageter’s biographers 22. The most striking representation of this mindset remains Erich Maria Remarque, All Quiet on the Western Front (1928), a book later vilified in Academia by CV spiritual advisor Fr. Erhard Schlund, OFM, in part, because it seemed to suggest that German soldiers in World War I were largely atheists. Erhard Schlund, “Der Kriegsroman und die Religion im Kriege,” Academia 42, no. 4 (August 15, 1929), 87–90 23. Manfred Franke, Schlageter: Der erste Soldat des 3. Reiches (Cologne, 1980), pp. 20– 22. See also Deutschland muß leben: Geßammelte Briefe von Albert Leo Schlageter, ed. Freidrich Bubendey (Berlin, 1934). 24. As a “color-wearing” fraternity, the CV was sometimes seen as a provocation to the nationalist fraternities who had started the tradition. Not all Catholics were comfortable with the practice. The KV and Unitas fraternities typically did not require members to wear colors. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 707 have suggested that the war veteran grew restless in the confining spaces of Freiburg’s lecture halls, that he was unable to assimilate to the routine of student life, and that he jumped at the opportunity to seek adventure and glory with the Freikorps.25 In a letter penned to his parents on March 16, 1919, Schlageter offered a seemingly more mundane, if no less compelling explanation for his departure, when he complained that he was laboring under the exorbitant costs of living faced by many German students at the time, and expressed concern that Germany’s university graduates faced dismal prospects in Germany’s postwar economy.26 In 1933, quoting an undated and un-cited letter purportedly written by Schlageter to a fraternity brother after his departure, a writer for the KV fraternity presented another reason—no doubt popular with many of Schlageter’s fraternity supporters—namely, that the young Catholic hero could not abandon the fatherland in a time of continued threats from within and without.27 Serving with the Freikorps, Schlageter saw action against Communists, Poles, and Baltic nationalists on Germany’s eastern frontier, where fighting continued to rage well after the formal conclusion of World War I at the end of 1918. Schlageter’s unit helped local allies wrest the Latvian city of Riga from Bolshevik sympathizers on May 20, 1919.28 His unit later fought against Polish partisans in East Prussia, Pomerania, and Upper Silesia. Schlageter’s Freikorps adventures later led him to participate—perhaps revealingly, as far as debates concerning Schlageter’s connection to the rightwing cause in Germany were concerned—in the ultimately doomed Kapp Putsch against the Weimar government that had deputized his paramilitary organization in the first place.29 Even more remarkably, in the aftermath of 25. See Baird, To Die for Germany, p. 15. For earlier portrayals, see Franke, Schlageter; Rolf Brandt, Albert Leo Schlageter: Leben und Sterben eines deutschen Helden (Hamburg, 1926) and his Schlageter: Leben und Sterben eines deutschen Helden (Munich, 1923). 26. Deutschland muß leben, pp. 43–44. For a broader overview of the privations faced by German university students at this time, see also Konrad H. Jarausch, Deutsche Studenten: 1800–1970 (Frankfurt am Main, 1989) and Michael H. Kater, “The Work Student: A SocioEconomic Phenomenon of Early Weimar Germany,” Journal of Contemporary History, 10 (1975), 71–95. 27. “Ich kann noch nicht zurück, das Vaterland braucht mich noch, er schrieb on seinen Leibburschen.” Unnamed author, “Schlageter’s Vermächtnis,” Akademische Monatsblätter 45:6 (May, 1933), 241–42. 28. Riga had been inhabited by ethnic Germans for many centuries. The city was also occupied by the German army during the last years of World War I. After the war, the city was besieged by Latvian nationalists, local Bolsheviks, and ethnic Germans and their allies. 29. The Kapp Putsch was launched by the Freikorps and elements of the German military command in March 1920. Schlageter was attached to the Marine Brigade von Loewen- 708 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER the Kapp events, that very same Weimar government sent Schlageter’s unit to the Ruhr to suppress a communist-inspired insurrection. The existence of the Freikorps violated the postwar Versailles peace settlements that had drastically reduced the size of Germany’s armed forces. Under pressure from the Western allies, and also aware of their inherent unreliability in the aftermath of the Kapp events, the German government ordered the disbanding of all Freikorps units in the summer of 1920.30 Nonetheless, Schlageter and other members of his now deactivated unit continued to fight against Polish partisans, as Germany’s border with its newly established eastern neighbor remained contested during the League of Nations administered plebiscites in this tumultuous period. In 1922, Schlageter’s cover with his clandestine Freikorps unit was exposed, thereby rendering his recent activities as a secret agent useless. As a civilian, he subsequently opened an import-export business in Berlin with another veteran and former leader of his Freikorps unit, Karl Guido Oskar (codename “Heinz”) Hauenstein.31 According to one account, the business was likely a front for an illegal weapons trading ring.32 Starting in January 1923, Schlageter found a new arena for battle against Germany’s enemies, when the French army occupied the Ruhr in response to the German government’s failure to meet its postwar reparations obligations. The German government denounced the French action as illegal, and continued to pay German coal miners left idle by the occupation. It also instructed local German officials to refuse all cooperation with the French occupying authorities, and it likewise urged the local population to respond to the French occupation with passive resistance. Some local merchants responded to the call by refusing to sell goods or provide services to occupying French soldiers. Reportedly, taxi cab drivers refused to give French soldiers rides, and wait staff in local cafes refused to serve them.33 For Schlageter and his former Freikorps colleagues, resistance of the non-violent variety against the hated French occupier was not enough. feld, tasked with occupying the city of Breslau. Infamously, the German Army would not intervene, and Germany’s government fled, leaving Berlin’s socialist leadership to thwart the attempted takeover with a general strike. Although guilty of treason, hardly anyone associated with the Putsch was seriously punished. 30. Waite, Vanguard of Nazism, p. 182. 31. Around the same period of time (June 1922), Hauenstein had been linked to but never convicted of the murder of Foreign Minister Walter Rathenau. 32. Baird, To Die for Germany, p. 20. 33. Baird, To Die for Germany, p. 20. Alfred E. Cornbise, The Weimar in Crisis: Cuno’s Germany and the Ruhr Occupation (Washington DC, 1977), pp. 180–81. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 709 Having infiltrated the region clandestinely, for the next two months, Schlageter and his comrades attempted to sabotage the rail bridges linking the Ruhr to France; they also surveilled French collaborators and French agents in the area. On the evening of March 15, 1923 Schlageter and his conspirators dynamited a rail bridge near the train stop of Calkum, linking the cities of Duisburg and Düsseldorf. The bomb in fact rendered only minimal damage. Nonetheless, in the first week of April 1923, after the French occupation authorities had arrested numerous other Germans implicated in the bombing, local German police authorities themselves issued a warrant for Schlageter’s arrest. What happened next might always remain a matter of conjecture. On April 7, 1923, Schlageter checked into a hotel in Essen, also under French occupation, inexplicably under his own name, even though he was armed and carrying explosives. By that time, two of his captured comrades had evidently alerted the French authorities to his whereabouts. Two days prior, the local police office in Kaiserswerth (a suburb of Düsseldorf) had issued an announcement seeking any information about the whereabouts of a young man identified as one of two perpetrators sought for the March 15 bombing, with the last name “Schlagstein” or “Schlageten,” “1.6 meters tall, thin, dark blond, clean shaven,” who did not speak in the local Rhineland dialect.34 Whether Schlageter was aware that an accurate description of his person was now in public circulation when he checked into the hotel is unclear. According to one account, Schlageter at this critical moment did not help his cause when he became intoxicated in the hotel with an unknown female companion, who upon presumably discovering Schlageter’s identity and his weapons cache (which was in full view when the police arrived) then alerted the authorities. The French arrested Schlageter in the hotel on the same day.35 Schlageter’s actions had inflicted no known deaths or injuries; nonetheless, the French judgment against Schlageter was swift and severe. After a trial held on May 8 and 9, a French military court sentenced Schlageter to death. On May 26, waving aside clemency appeals from the Red Cross, Pope Pius XI, German Chancellor Wilhelm Cuno (a Catholic fraternity alumnus, but unaffiliated with either of Germany’s two major 34. Franke, Schlageter: Der erste Soldat des 3. Reiches, p. 53. For those unfamiliar with the German language, Schlageter’s dialect, likely a variant of the Schwäbisch or Alemannic dialect spoken throughout southwestern Germany, would have made him instantly identifiable as an outsider in the Rhineland. 35. Baird, To Die for Germany, p. 29. 710 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER FIGURE 1. Propaganda commemorating the execution of right-wing German nationalist Albert Leo Schlageter by French occupation forces in Düsseldorf, Circa May 26, 1923. Image reproduced with permission of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Digital image created by Photo Archives/USHMM, using digital camera. For the arguments against its authenticity, see: http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/gef%C3%A4lschtes-bild-von-der-erschiessungschlageters-1923-nach-news-photo/545922483#geflschtes-bild-von-dererschiessungschlageters-1923-nach-der-dieses-picture-id545922483 Catholic parties), the Queen of Sweden, the Archbishop of Cologne, and Schlageter’s parents, the French military authorities blindfolded Schlageter, tied him to a stake, forced to him to his knees and executed him by a twelve-man firing squad. A French officer administered the coup de grâce with a pistol.36 The fragmented parties on Germany’s volatile political spectrum could agree on little in the 1920s. But nearly all of Germany’s mainstream parties found common ground in condemning France for Schlageter’s execution.37 Chancellor Cuno attempted to send a wreath bearing the colors of Germany’s republic to Schlageter’s funeral, although—tellingly and presciently 36. Ibid., p. 25. 37. Even Karl Radek, in a speech dated June 1923 delivered to the Executive Committee of the Communist International, managed to find reasons to condemn Schlageter’s execution. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 711 for Germany’s future—the wreath was returned to the chancellor bearing instructions to use it instead to bury the “Jewish republic.”38 The Kölnische Volkszeitung, Germany’s leading Catholic newspaper, conceded that it could not condone the illegal violence perpetrated by the fallen Catholic hero. But because this violence had been directed against France’s illegal occupation of German territory, the writer of the article concluded, “. . . the French have only themselves to thank.”39 According to numerous accounts, crowds of admirers gathered along the route used by the train bearing Schlageter’s body for burial in his home town. A former British intelligence official described Schlageter’s grave in the months that followed as a “place of pilgrimage.”40 The Catholic Fraternities, Schlageter and the German Catholic Milieu Upon Schlageter’s execution, the national CV organization hailed its prodigal son as a fallen Catholic hero, with numerous individual fraternity chapters throughout Germany and in neighboring Austria holding memorials in Schlageter’s honor. On August 1, 1923, an article appeared in Academia that addressed the fallen Schlageter as a “[d]ear friend and fraternity brother.” The article went on to laud Schlageter’s previous services in the Baltic republics, in Upper Silesia, and in the Ruhr. Even if these actions were fought for different reasons against different foes, all three were seen as consistent with Germany’s national honor. As the author proclaimed: For us you were the example of German faith to the death. The CV is proud to be able to name you among its own. The cross that adorns your grave is for us a symbol that you supported, suffered and struggled not just for your fatherland, but also for your [Catholic] worldview.41 Celebrating Schlageter as a Christian German, the article reproduced numerous letters written by Schlageter to his family from the time of his capture until his execution. The excerpted letters reflected Schlageter’s deep German patriotism and his conviction that he had participated in a just and righteous cause. The excerpted letters also reflected Schlageter’s sincere 38. Baird, To Die for Germany, p. 29. Who exactly sent the wreath back to the chancellor is unclear. 39. Ibid., pp. 24–29. 40. Waite, Vanguard of Nazism, pp. 237, 305. 41. “Uns bißt Du das Vorbild deutscher Treue bis in den Tod. Der Cartellverband ist stolz, Dich dein Seinen nennen zu dürfen. Das Kreuz, das Dein Grab schmückte, ist uns Sinnbild dafür, das Du nicht nur für Dein Vaterland sondern auch für Deine Weltanschauung gekämpft, eintratest und littest.“ “Albert Leo Schlageter,” Fl, Academia 36, no.1–4 (August 1923), 5–6. 712 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER devotion to his family and his continued fulfillment to his final hour of Catholic religious obligations, for instance, documenting that Schlageter’s last wish, communicated to prison chaplain and CV fraternity alumnus Father Hermann Fassbender, that he wished to make a final confession and to receive communion. The article concluded by announcing that CV fraternity chapters had taken part in Schlageter observances in Freiburg, Schönau, Nuremburg, and Würzburg, and that the fraternity had established a bank account for the donation of funds to be used for the construction of a Schlageter memorial in Schlageter’s native principality of Baden.42 The question of Schlageter’s legacy continued to preoccupy CV fraternity discussions through the 1920s. CV members were well aware of Schlageter’s national appeal. However, Schlageter’s actions did not go without criticism. Until the early 1930s, many Catholics through their press organs and other public forums had criticized Schlageter for taking matters into his own hands. Some Catholics feared that Schlageter’s violent actions had jeopardized the safety of the heavily Catholic population still under Allied occupation in the Rhineland. They also worried that his actions had undermined the policy of passive resistance that had been engineered by a government led by a Catholic politician and which had the strong support of both the Catholic Center party and the strongly Catholic-influenced Christian trade unions. Germany’s Catholics were also aware, uneasily, that Schlageter’s actions had given encouragement to various right-wing organizations, including the National Socialists, which many feared posed a transcendent threat to Catholic interests in Germany. Many of the older fraternity members also expressed concern about the emergence of what they disapprovingly dubbed a “Schlageter cult.” More mundanely, but perhaps most embarrassingly as far as the Catholic fraternities were concerned, many German Catholics were also aware that Schlageter’s connections with his CV fraternity chapter had been severed for at least three years prior to the early months of 1923, when his highly publicized trial and execution had made him a national household name.43 Nonetheless, on November 15, 1929—six years after Schlageter’s execution—as Allied occupation armies began their final withdrawal from the German Rhineland, the CV played a central role in erecting a Schlageter memorial in Düsseldorf, with Dr. Peter Derichsweiler, a CV alumnus and 42. “Albert Leo Schlageter,” 5–6. 43. Stitz, Der CV 1919–1938, p. 89. Dr. Oskar Türk, “Die Einweihung des SchlageterNationaldenkmals in Düsseldorf am 23. Mai,” Academia 44, no. 3 (15 July 1931), 72. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 713 FIGURE 2. Schlageter National Memorial (Schlageter-Nationaldenkmal), Düsseldorf, appearing in Academia, July 15, 1931. Photograph reproduced with the permission of editorial board, Academia. member of the committee responsible for its construction, declaring proudly in Academia, “The Schlageter Memorial in Düsseldorf is coming.”44 The memorial would be dominated by a towering cross, Derichsweiler explained, to bind Schlageter with his comrades who had died in the years 1914 to 1918 in service of the German national cause. In the same article, Derichsweiler announced that Clemens Holzmeister, an Austrian architect, a professor at the Düsseldorf Art Academy and an alumnus of the CV, had been chosen to supervise the design and construc44. This Derichsweiler should not be confused with Albert Derichsweiler, former CV member, National Socialist squad leader from 1933–1934, Circle Führer for the western German region from 1934 to 1936 and thereafter, a Führer of the entire Nationalsozialistischer Deutscher Studentenbund [National Socialist German Student Union] or NSDStB. Coincidentally, Peter was later beaten in the streets of Berlin by Nazi partisans on the occasion of the Jewish New Year in 1931. “Ein CVer von Nationalsozialisten niedergeschlagen,” Academia 44, no. 6 (October 15, 1931), 167. 714 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER tion of the monument. Noting that the German people faced financially difficult times, Derichsweiler stressed that a simple and sparing monument would be the most appropriate means to honor Schlageter’s legacy.45 In the spring of 1931 construction of the Schlageter monument was complete. On May 23, 1931, as reported in Academia, considerable public fanfare accompanied the dedication of the monument, as the Catholic community in Düsseldorf held a memorial service for Schlageter and the others who fell fighting against the French occupation of the Ruhr. Dr. Oskar Türk, a CV alumnus and a prominent figure in the CV’s national leadership, asserted in Academia that “the memorial was an uplifting, deeply religious and historical hour for all participants.” He continued: The fallen belonged to all orders of the German people, but at the top stood our brother Schlageter, who took responsibility for his deed like a man and faced his death staring God courageously in the eyes. We did not want to celebrate this day with loud cheers or with a noisy event, but with a quiet prayer to God. 46 After the memorial, a subdued procession, “three quarters of an hour long,” moved its way through the crowded streets of Düsseldorf. Former German Chancellor Cuno later addressed the crowd in attendance. Türk described the towering cross (in the eyes of many observers, meant to duplicate Golgotha) erected at the site of Schlageter’s death as a sacred symbol of “reconciliation and redemption.” Announcing that every Catholic and especially every member of the Catholic academic community could take pride in the fact that Schlageter belonged to the CV, Türk declared: “We must announce our loyalty to Schlageter. He was one of our own, whose ideas were pure and his will strong.”47 45. P. Derichsweiler, Mitglied des Arbeitsauschusses im Ausschuß für die Errichtung eines Schlageter-National-Denkmals, “Das Schlageter-Ehrenmal in Düsseldorf kommt,” Academia 42, no. 7 (15 November 1929), 222–24. 46. “Die Gefallenen gehörten allen Ständen und Schichten des deutsches Volkes an, aber an der Spitze habe unser Cver Schlageter gestanden, der männlich seine Tat verantwortet und seinem Tode durch Gott gestärst mutig ins Auge gesehen habe. Nicht mit lauten hurras und mit einer lärmenden Veranstaltung sollten wir deshalb diesen Tag begeben, sondern mit einem stillen Gebet zu Gott.” Dr. Türk, “Die Einweihung des Schlageter-Nationaldenkmals,” 68. 47. Ibid. “Wir müssen aber auch unsere Treue zu Schlageter bekunden. Er war einer der Unsrigen, dessen Idee rein und der in seinem Willen stark war wie selten einer.” JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 715 Nazism, Germany’s Universities and the Choices Faced by the Catholic Fraternities As Germany’s Catholic fraternities attempted to solidify their claim to the legacy of their fallen warrior through the 1920s, they more broadly confronted formidable choices on Germany’s college campuses. Through the period, they believed that their recent service in World War I had given them the right to claim parity and recognition among Germany’s other student organizations (a claim that Schlageter’s sacrifice had seemingly substantiated). However, Catholic fraternity members now witnessed a rising tide of ultra-nationalist, anti-democratic, antisemitic, and pro-Nazi support among their fellow students. Nazi support was especially strong in Germany’s nonCatholic fraternities. Starting in the early 1920s, many of these fraternities had already stated their intent to exclude Jews from their membership rolls. They also collaborated strongly with the Nationalsozialistischer Deutscher Studentenbund or NSDStB, which starting with its founding in 1926, represented National Socialist interests on Germany’s campuses.48 Through the 1920s and early 1930s, the nationalist fraternities reinforced and reiterated the Nazi message in their fraternity publications and at their official fraternity functions, leading Hitler later to proclaim that nothing had confirmed to him the righteousness of his cause more convincingly than the early emergence of National Socialism on Germany’s college campuses.49 Where would Germany’s Catholic fraternity members stand as National Socialist supporters became increasingly vocal and mobilized on Germany’s college campuses? As Catholic fraternity publications pointed out repeatedly during this critical period, Catholic fraternity members strongly respected Germany’s Catholic bishops on crucially important questions pertaining to doctrine and politics. This was certainly true concerning the repeated warnings made by their episcopal authorities to stay away from National Socialism. As the CV confirmed at its sixty-first national assembly in 1932, Germany’s Catholic bishops had the right in all points of belief to determine what worldviews were consistent with the Catholic Church, and they also had the right “to place prohibitions against 48. Michael Stephen Steinberg, Sabers and Brown Shirts: The German Students’ Path to National Socialism (Chicago, 1973), p. 6. 49. Gerhard von Schäfer, “Studentische Korporationen im Übergang zum deutschen Faschismus,” 1999 Zeitschrift für Sozialgeschichte des 20. und 21. Jahrhunderts, 3 (1988), 104– 29, here 116. Jürgen Schwarz, Studenten in der Weimarer Republik: die deutsche Studentenschaft in der Zeit von 1918 bis 1923 und ihre Stellung zur Politik (Berlin, 1971), p. 17. Geoffrey J. Giles, Students and National Socialism in Germany (Princeton, 1985), pp. 18–19. 716 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER certain powers.”50 No doubt, Catholic fraternity members and alumni understood that to be good Catholics meant respecting the Catholic hierarchy. But they also formulated their own strongly articulated reasons for opposing National Socialist influence on German campuses. The profound unease of the Catholic fraternities with the rising influence of National Socialism on German campuses was especially evident when the German student committees governing structure, the Deutsche Studentenschaft, known by the acronym DSt, began to turn away from the democratic principles of its founding, and towards the extreme nationalism of the NSDStB and its supporters starting in the late 1920s. Among other things, the DSt stated its open opposition to Germany’s existing republican government, even going so far as to display symbols and regalia at university functions that were associated with Germany’s monarchy before 1918. The DSt also accepted Austrian fraternities that had incorporated in their bylaws the so-called “Aryan principle” that banned Jews or their descendants, even if they were culturally and linguistically Germans, even if they were citizens of Austria or Germany, and even if (and this was most disturbing to the Catholic fraternities) they were converted Christians. In 1930, the KV and Unitas fraternities withdrew from the DSt following its national convention, with their leaders announcing that As long as the German Student Body is not able to achieve a loyal relationship with the present state and its symbols, and as long as the inner contradiction between the Aryan principle in Austria and the principle of civic citizenship in the Reich is not resolved, the KV and Unitas are unable to stand in its support.51 When the CV national leadership insisted on remaining in the organization, ostensibly to counteract the rising influence of National Socialism, a press war erupted in the Kölnische Volkszeitung and at least two fraternity newspapers, with supporters of the KV and Unitas charging that the CV had betrayed Germany’s Catholics by failing to maintain a united Catholic front against the nationalist right and in support of the Weimar Republic.52 50. “Die Beschlüsse der 61. CV-Versammlung, zusammengestelt von Dr. Hermann Hagen, Th, München, Academia 45, no. 6 (September 15, 1932), 137–38. 51. “Solange die DSt ein loyales Verhältnis zum heutigen Staat und seinen Symbolen nicht hergestellt hat und solange der innere Widerspruch, der sich as der Auswendung des arischen Prinzips in Österreich und dem Staatsbürgerprinzip in Reichsdeutschland ergibt, nicht ausgeräumt ist, vermögen KV und UV die heutige Deutsche Studentenschaft nicht zu unterstützen.” Stitz, Der CV 1919–38, p. 81. 52. Stitz, Der CV 1918–38, p. 83. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 717 Be that as it may, through the 1920s and early 1930s, direct criticism against Nazism appeared frequently in the publications of all three national Catholic fraternities.53 Within the CV fraternity, spiritual advisor and Franciscan theologian Dr. Erhard Schlund was especially active in warning young Catholics away from Nazism, which he had done as early as his 1924 publication, Neugermanisches Heidentum im heutigen Deutschland.54 In 1927, Schlund took aim in Academia at Nazi racial science, basing his opposition to the doctrine on both scientific and theological grounds.55 When it came specifically to the question of Germany’s Jews, Schlund left a complex and seemingly conflicted legacy. For much of his career, Schlund found common ground with Nazism in seeing Jews as inherently alien to the German national community. For instance, in an article appearing in Academia in July 1930, Schlund repeated a number of stereotypes against Germany’s Jews shared by many, if not most German Catholics; for instance, Schlund called attention to the allegedly disproportionate influence wielded by Jews in German society and culture. In the same article, however, Schlund argued against a central tenet of Nazism by reminding his Catholic fraternity readers that the Golden Rule prohibited the targeting of Jews based solely on alleged racial differences.56 Schlund continued his public offensive against Nazism through the early 1930s. At his fraternity’s sixtieth annual convention in Koblenz held in July 1930, Schlund warned that the National Socialists threatened to elevate state, nation, and blood over God and Church.57 In the February 15, 1931 edition of Academia, Schlund argued that National Socialism was a false doctrine and incompatible with the tenets of the Catholic Church, 53. Among others: “Die katholische Jugend gegen den National-Sozialismus,” Akadem. Monatsblätter 43, no. 1 (October 1930), 388–89. Dr. Berning (A.H. Unitas-Marburg), “Die Konservative Wendung in der Jugend und die rechtradikale Gefahr,” Unitas 70, no. 11/12 (August–September, 1930), 181. This article also appeared in its entirety in the Akadem. Monatsblätter 43, no. 1 (October 1930), 93–99. Prof. Dr. V. Tischleder, Münster, i.W., “Der katholische Staatsgedanke als Echo der ursprünglichen gefundenen katholischen Wesensmitte,” Akadem. Monatsblätter, 44, no. 1 (October, 1931), 120–26. August Nuß Hr, R-F, Ndm, Berlin, “Der politische Radikalismus auf den deutschen Hochschulen,” Academia 45, no. 2 (June 15, 1932), 42. Privatdozent Dr. H. Kaupel, Münster, i.W. (A.H. Unitas-Frisia), “Prinzipien zum antisemitischen Kampf gegen das Alte Testament” Unitas 72, no. 5 (February 1932), 56. 54. Dr. Erhard Schlund, O.F.M., Neugermanisches Heidentum im heutigen Deutschland (Munich, 1924). 55. Dr. P. Erhard Schlund, Ve, O.F.M., “Zur Rassenfrage,” Academia 40, no. 3. (July 15, 1927), 56. 56. Erhard Schlund, O.F.M., Ve, CV-Seelsorger, “Die Religion in Programm u. Praxis der Nationalsozialist. Deutsch. Arbeiterpartei,” Academia 43, no. 3 (July 15, 1930), 56. 57. Stitz, Der CV 1919–38, p. 96. 718 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER warning that membership in both the National Socialist party and the CV was incompatible. As he reminded his fraternity cohort, the CV would not tolerate within its ranks official Nazi party representatives, National Socialist writers or publications, public agents of the Nazi party, or the wearing of National Socialist uniforms or other insignia.58 Reconciling Schlageter’s Catholic Fraternity Legacy with Nazism: An Abrupt Turn It should come as little surprise that until Hitler’s assumption to the German chancellorship in early 1933, Schlageter’s Catholic fraternity cohort would attempt to deny any connection between their hero and Nazism, even when Nazi supporters insisted that Schlageter had been a registered member of the Nazi party starting in 1922 and even as Nazi propagandists throughout the period continued to celebrate Schlageter as a Nazi hero.59 In his article appearing in the July 15, 1931 edition of Academia celebrating the completion of the Schlageter national memorial, Dr. Türk argued that those making the allegation concerning Schlageter’s Nazism did so with the clear intent of making Schlageter serviceable to the current priorities of the Nazi party.60 Pointing to an inquiry about the subject of Schlageter’s supposed Nazi connections made by the fraternity leadership to Father Fassbender, who spiritually tended to Schlageter while he was in prison and was present with Schlageter in his last moments alive, Türk insisted that there was no evidence that Schlageter had ever been connected with the Nazi party. Türk did concede the validity of a report appearing in the June 3, 1931 edition of the Kölner Stadtanzeiger, in which a former French criminal commissioner testified that, after his capture, Schlageter and his other captured comrades had confessed that they were former members of the Freikorps organization Oberland. But as Türk explained, “. . . these Freikorps organizations had nothing to do with the political organization of the National Socialists.”61 Otherwise, as far as 58. Stitz, Der CV 1919–38, p. 97. 59. Türk, “Die Einweihung des Schlageter-Nationaldenkmals,” 66–73. 60. “In ähnliche Weise ist behauptet worden, daß Schlageter eingeschriebenes Mitglied der nationalsozialistischen Partei gewesen sei. Dies geschieht zu dem Zwecke, um Schlageter für die heutige nationalsozialistische Partei dienstbar zu machen.” The author’s use in the first sentence of the passive subjunctive, a verb tense unavailable in the English language, conveys the tone that he is strongly skeptical of the underlying claim. Türk, “Die Einweihung des Schlageter-Nationaldenkmals,” 68. 61. “Diese Freikorpsorganisationen hatten aber mit der 1923 bestehenden politischen Organisation der nationalsozialisten nichts zu tun.” Türk, “Die Einweihung des SchlageterNationaldenkmals,” 68. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 719 Türk was concerned, Schlageter’s membership in the Nazi party was flatly out of the question.62 The CV continued in its attempts to solidify its seemingly exclusive claim to Schlageter’s legacy in the following year, 1932, when CV leader Hermann Hagen assembled a series of essays that had appeared previously in Academia. Among other things, Schlageter’s defenders in the CV continued to defend Schlageter’s supposedly impeccable moral character. They also continued to argue that their Catholic hero had joined the Freikorps, protected Germany’s eastern borders, and later tried to undermine the French occupation of the Ruhr, doing everything within his power to minimize the loss of human life, all for the same essential motives, including his commitment to the German fatherland, and his deep devotion to his Catholic faith.63 When it came to the ongoing contest over the Schlageter legacy, however, President Paul von Hindenburg’s decision to nominate Hitler to the German chancellorship on January 30, 1933, would change the calculation drastically for Germany’s Catholic fraternities. On March 23, 1933, the German parliament passed the Enabling Act, which suspended the Weimar Constitution and granted Hitler dictatorial powers. Five days later, in a startling turnabout, Germany’s Catholic bishops lifted the ban on Catholic membership in the National Socialist party, reminding their followers that their theological tradition had taught Catholics to obey their legitimately constituted authorities.64 More quietly, the bishops lifted the ban out of apparent fear for the thousands of Catholic civil servants serving in the Reich government, who would now lose their jobs if they did not join the Nazi party.65 While they may not have said so explicitly, the bishops also hoped (vainly, as it turned out) that cooperation with Hitler would help secure a long sought Concordat between the Vatican and Berlin that would supposedly obligate the Führer to respect Catholic interests in Germany. 62. Ibid. “Auf eine Anfrage, die an die Bbr Schlageters, der kath. Strafanstaltspfarrer Fassbender und Dr. Derichsweiler vom VO [=Vorortsaußschuß] aus ergangen ist, haben diese beiden Bbr, auch Pfarrer Fassbender, der Schlageter auf seinem letzten Gange begleitet hat, ausdrücklich festgestellt, das von einer Zugehörigkeit Schlageters zur nationalsozialistischen Partei keine Rede sein konne.” 63. Stitz, Der CV 1918–39, p. 89, citing H. Hagen (Hrsg.), A.L. Schlageter, Gesammelte Aufsätze (aus der Academia), München 1932—CV-Flugschrift 13. 64. Guenter Lewy, The Catholic Church and Nazi Germany (Boulder, Co, 1964, 2000 edition used here), p. 65. 65. Robert A. Krieg, Catholic Theologians in Nazi Germany (New York and London, 2004), p. 3. 720 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER On April 3, 1933, just five days after the bishops lifted their prohibition, both the CV and KV fraternities retracted their rule that Catholic fraternity membership was incompatible with membership in the Nazi party or affiliate Nazi organizations.66 As explained in Academia on April 15, 1933, Germany’s bishops had announced that their former warnings against National Socialism were no longer necessary and they further admonished their followers “to be faithful to the rightful authorities and to fulfill” their civic duty. The article concluded: “We Catholic academics greet this announcement with open hearts.”67 On May 5 and May 8, respectively, in spite of the increasingly obvious signs that Hitler intended to do away with confessional organizations on Germany’s campuses altogether, the KV and CV affirmed their willingness to abide by the principle of Gleichschaltung or “coordination” that Hitler was now demanding from all university organizations.68 From this point forward, the Catholic fraternities would seek to implement the Führerprinzip or “leadership principle” in their fraternity governing structures. In so doing, they overrode the principle of democratic governance that had been with the fraternities since their founding. By this time, the cover of Academia included both the traditional symbol of the fraternity as well as the swastika. From this point forward, articles in support of Hitler’s government now dominated fraternity publications.69 In this profoundly altered context, the CV leadership felt compelled to make an embarrassing retreat from its long held position on Schlageter and his alleged connection to Nazism. Faced with an imminent threat to its very existence, the CV leadership now understood that, in spite of its previous denials to the contrary, it would be embarrassing and even dangerous to deny Schlageter’s Nazi party affiliation, especially if one had in fact really 66. Rösgen, Die Auflösung der katholischen Studenten Verbände im Dritten Reich, p. 173. 67. “CV und Nationalsozialismus,” Academia 45, no. 12 (April 15, 1933), 351. 68. Rösgen, Die Auflösung der katholischen Studenten Verbände im Dritten Reich, p. 173. In 1934 and 1935, facing a Reich law that effectively banned any campus organization with a confessional identity, the CV, KV and Unitas fraternities all self-dissolved. Various alumni organizations affiliated with the fraternities remained in existence until 1938, when they were shut down by order of the SS and the Gestapo on the occasion of Germany’s annexation of Austria. 69. P. Planz, “Unitas und Gegenwart,” Unitas 73, no. 8/9 (May/June 1933), 85–86. Edmund Forschbach, “Aufruf des Führers an den CV,” Academia 46, no. 3 (July 15, 1933), 58. Dr. Eduard Eichmann, Mm, Ae, Bd., “Das Reichskonkordat und wir,” Academia 46, no. 4 (August 15, 1933), 90–91. Dr. G. Frh. Von Pölnitz, München, “Katholisch und Deutsch,” Akadem. Monatsblätter 45, no. 7 (June 1933), 289–90. “Die Verfassung der CV,” Academia 46, no. 6/7 (October/November, 1933), 147–48. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 721 FIGURE 3. Twenty-third slide from a Hitler Youth slideshow about the aftermath of WWI, Versailles, how it was overcome and the rise of Nazism, circa 1936 or later. Photo Credit: United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, courtesy of Stephen Glick. existed. At the end of a six-page article written on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of Schlageter’s execution in May, 1933, CV leader Hagen, who in previous years had repeated in the strongest possible terms the episcopal warnings against Nazism, tersely addressed the issue of Schlageter’s membership in the Nazi party. Hagen reminded his readers that the CV had always stood proud of Schlageter, and that the CV had played a central role in raising the Schlageter national memorial in Düsseldorf two years earlier. He nonetheless conceded that “in these days, the National Socialist Worker’s party celebrates Schlageter likewise as one of its own and as the first who sacrificed his life for the Third Reich.”70 Concerning the question of Schlageter’s membership in the Nazi party, Hagen asserted that there had been no convincing answer until the leader of Schlageter’s Freikorps unit, Hauenstein, had gone on record in a recent edition of Der Reiter gen Osten to confirm that in October, 1922, Schlageter had been in possession of “membership card number 1” of the Berlin Eastern Group of the 70. “Die Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter-Partei feiert in diesen Tagen Schlageter ebenfals als einen der Ihren und als das erste Todesopfer des Dritten Reiches.” 722 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER NSDAP. 71 Hagen concluded: “. . . therefore the question of Schlageter’s membership in the NSDAP is explained.”72 While proclaiming that the CV and the National Socialists both had the rightful claim to honor Schlageter, Hagen also insisted that Schlageter and the heroes and fighters like him belonged to the “entire German people” whose best characteristics Schlageter embodied. Henceforth, the memory of Schlageter would be shared by the soon to be dissolved CV and the National Socialist regime.73 Conclusion: First Soldier of the Third Reich or Catholic Fraternity War Hero? Through the Weimar period, Germany’s Catholic fraternities demonstrated through their pronouncements in their newspapers and other publications that the connections between Germany’s Catholic milieu and Nazism were neither obvious nor convincing. This would seem especially true in light of their repeated attempts to deny any connection between their fallen Catholic martyr, Schlageter, and Nazism. At the same time, however, the willingness of the Catholic fraternities in the months immediately after Hitler’s assumption of power in 1933 to merge the legacy of their Catholic war hero with the “First Soldier of the Third Reich” mythology promoted by the supporters of Nazism represented a startling if not shocking about-face; the fraternities thereby demonstrated that like many other Catholic Germans in this period they were willing to accommodate a regime that was already by this time committing crimes against its own people in the form of arbitrary arrests, harassment of opposition figures (including notable Catholics),74 the opening of the Dachau concentration camp, and an early public boycott against Jewish businesses. In the meantime, the question of Schlageter’s actual connection with Nazism might never be entirely resolved. Representing a long-standing authoritative account, Baird has accepted that in 1922 Schlageter joined the 71. Der Reiter gen Osten was a publication that Hauenstein had helped found in 1929; it was the publishing organ of the Bund der Freunde Schlageters, a Nazi affiliated organization. The journal tried to publicize the exploits of the Freikorps. Regarding Schlageter’s membership card, see discussion in Conclusion below. According to multiple sources, the actual number was 61. See Franke, Schlageter: Der erste Soldat des 3. Reiches, p. 110. 72. Hagen, “Albert Leo Schlageter,” 17. 73. Ibid. 74. Through February and early March of 1933, members of the SA disrupted Catholic Center party meetings and on February 22 severely beat Catholic political luminary Adam Stegerwald. Around this time, the SS had shut down Catholic press organs in Cologne and was also applying pressure to Catholic youth and labor organizations. See Richard J. Evans, The Third Reich in History and Memory (Oxford and New York, 2015), p. 96. JEREMY STEPHEN ROETHLER 723 Greater German Workers’ party, traditionally assumed to be a front for Hitler’s NSDAP, which at that time was banned by the Prussian authorities in Berlin and could therefore not operate under its actual name. Baird also reported that in November 1922, Schlageter, Hauenstein, and other Freikorps comrades traveled to Munich to hear Hitler speak. Baird did point out that the Nazi movement in 1922 was conflicted about a number of fundamental goals, and that many party members disagreed on ideology, tactics, and even Hitler’s leadership role. Relying on the testimony of Ernst von Salomon, another Schlageter Freikorps comrade, Baird also pointed out that Schlageter was critical of the Nazis in letters supposedly penned in the Ruhr just before his execution in 1923.75 In any event, with the Nazi party platform still in flux this early in its history, Schlageter’s brief party membership in Berlin was not as significant as Nazi propagandists later claimed. Writing in 1980, German historian Manfred Franke told a somewhat different story. In his own research, Franke pointed out that since Salomon was trying to refute allegations concerning his Nazi connections after the war, his entire testimony concerning Schlageter’s supposed doubts about Hitler and his party has to be considered suspect. By the same token, however, Franke remained skeptical that definitive proof concerning Schlageter’s actual connection to the Nazi party might ever be found. Among other things, he took aim at a fragmentary 1922 list supposedly produced by the Nazi Party (accepted as authentic in many other accounts), found in the former Berlin Document Center of Germany’s national archives, which clearly indicates Schlageter’s name. On the same list, immediately after Schlageter, is the name “Heinz Oskar Hauenstein.”76 Franke contended that the list itself proves nothing, suggesting that it would not have been beneath the Nazis to fabricate the document for propaganda purposes.77 Franke also pointed out that, according to his own investigations, Schlageter’s surviving relatives, including his sister, a niece, and a cousin, along with an associate from Schlageter’s college preparatory school and army days, all strongly denied that Schlageter had been a member in the 75. Baird, To Die for Germany, pp. 21–32. The letters described by Salomon have never been found. 76. The list appeared as early as 1934 in the account of Friedrich Glombowski, Organisation Heinz (O.H.). Das Schicksal der Kameraden Schlageters, nach Akten bearbeitet (Berlin, 1934), p. 109. According to Franke: “Diese Liste, von der auch in Bundesarchiv eine Photographie existiert, ist ein Fragment und beweist absolut nichts. Sie enthält zwar den Namen Albert Schlageter, kann aber eine für Propagandazwecke eigens geschriebene und damit gefälschte Aufstellung von Namen sein oder auch ein Auszug aus dem Mitgliederverzeichnis einer anderen Partei.” Franke, p. 111. 77. Franke, Schlageter: Der erste Soldat des 3. Reiches, p. 111. 724 ALBERT LEO SCHLAGETER Nazi party. While Schlageter may have sympathized with the Nazi call to liberate German territory from foreign occupation, according to these accounts, he otherwise remained fundamentally uninterested in politics.78 Representing the latest (and likely not the last) iteration in the Schlageter controversy, Stefan Zwicker (2006) agrees with Franke, if for different reasons, in contending that Schlageter’s actual Nazi affiliations may never be definitively proved.79 In his 2007 review of Zwicker’s book, however, Christian Fuhrmeister still contends that the evidence in support of Schlageter’s Nazi membership remains compelling. Moreover, he concludes that Schlageter’s rejection of the Weimar Republic and his forcefully nationalistic positions evident in his letters and in his actions provided ready-made materials for Nazi propagandists to exploit both before and after Hitler came to power in 1933.80 To bring this discussion full circle, in his participation in the Kapp Putsch in 1920, in his refusal to stand down after Weimar authorities tried to disband his unit in the same year, in his disregard for his government’s directives to resist the French occupation of the Ruhr in 1923 with non-violent measures only, and in his willingness to associate with Freikorps comrades (most notably Hauenstein and Salomon) who would go on to serve the cause of Nazism, Schlageter exhibited many of the values shared by many, if not most, Nazi supporters in his time and later. It is no doubt clear that up to his last moments alive, Schlageter remained a devout Catholic. But by the same token, virtually all of Schlageter’s significant actions starting in 1920, which were indicative of his broader propensity to perpetrate violence on his own terms, represented clear violations of Catholic moral teachings, as the more circumspective members of Schlageter’s faith must have realized. We may never ascertain the true nature of Schlageter’s connection to Hitler’s party. We may also never be able to assess objectively the propaganda laden claim that Schlageter deserved to be hailed as the “First Soldier of the Third Reich.” But the competing claim that Schlageter represented a Catholic fraternity war hero or a Catholic hero more generally, in the final estimation, is likewise problematic in the extreme. 78. Ibid., pp. 111, 147. Frank’s evidence consists of a letter between Schlageter’s sister and niece written in 1977, preserved in the Berlin Document Center, and an unpublished interview conducted with Schlageter’s preparatory school and army associate, Dr. Ernst Ruch. The date of the interview is unspecified. 79. S. Zwicker, “Nationale Martyrer,” pp. 50–53. 80. Christian Fuhrmeister: Rezension zu: Zwicker, Stefan: “Nationale Märtyrer” Albert Leo Schlageter und Julius Fucik. Heldenkult, Propaganda und Erinnerungskultur. Paderborn 2006, in: H-Soz-Kult, 01.02.2007, accessed Jan. 31, 2015, http://www.hsozkult.de/publicationreview/id/rezbuecher-8724. “People are Suffering; People are Christ, and We Are Responsible”: Sister Mary Emil Penet’s Campaign for Social-Justice Education in the 1950s DARRA D. MULDERRY* In 1955, Sister Mary Emil Penet, I.H.M., chairman of the national Sister Formation Conference (SFC), received a $50,000 grant from the Ford Foundation to support an SFC initiative to upgrade bachelor’s curriculum for the 93,000 sisters who staffed U.S. Catholic schools. Penet recruited fifteen sisters with graduate degrees to design a new, “model” liberal-arts curriculum for sisters with an original sequence of courses in philosophy and the social sciences that would prepare sisters to be “apostles of social justice.” Dubbed the Everett curriculum, the new program included the social-justice sequence, and the SFC recommended it to all 377 orders in the U.S. When, a decade later, the Second Vatican Council asked religious institutes to re-write their constitutions, the curriculum had already influenced many sisters’ ideals. This piece illuminates the intellectual and social sources behind Sister Mary Emil’s vision for sisters—a vision dually rooted in the pro-labor “Catholic Action” movements of the Depression era and the neo-Thomist philosophy of her mentors at Marygrove College and St. Louis University. Key Words: U.S. Women Religious; Catholic Sisters; Nuns; Catholic Higher Education; Social Justice; Catholic labor movement. E arly on the morning of July 14th, 1956, Father Neil McCluskey, S.J., the education editor for the Catholic weekly America, arrived at a quiet campus in Everett, Washington, to visit sixteen Catholic sisters engaged in an ambitious—and unusually well-funded—effort to improve teacher education for the 93,000 sisters who served in U.S. Catholic schools. *Darra D. Mulderry, PhD, is an instructor in the history department at Providence College in Providence, Rhode Island, email: mulderry@providence.edu. The author wishes to thank Ms. Donna Wesley and Sister Joan Glisky, I.H.M., of the I.H.M. Archives in Monroe, Michigan, for invaluable research assistance, and Mrs. Phyllis Cardullo and Dr. Joshua P. Cohen for their suggestions in the final stages of revision of the article. 725 726 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” Sister Mary Emil Penet, I.H.M., the chairman of the national Sister Formation Committee (SFC), had invited Father McCluskey to serve as an advisor for the sisters at Everett as they developed a new, “model” bachelor’s curriculum intended to strengthen sisters’ academic preparation for teaching elementary and secondary school. The SFC planned to recommend the new curriculum as the new gold standard in sisters’ education to all 377 U.S. teaching orders. Sister Mary Emil and a group of like-minded sisters in the National Catholic Educational Association (NCEA) had established the SFC in 1954 to help religious orders catch up with U.S. states’ recent upgrades in degree requirements for public-school teaching. The SFC’s initial focus had been to help orders meet the new state standards (requiring pre-service bachelor’s degrees, rather than bachelor’s degrees earned-while-teaching), by persuading bishops, parishes, and sisters’ superiors to commit more resources to sisters’ education. By 1955, the SFC had succeeded in their lobbying effort. The majority of women’s orders had committed to educating their young sisters in fulltime pre-service bachelor’s degree programs, abandoning the longtime practice of sending sisters into classrooms after only a few semesters of college and having them complete their degrees part-time over the course of many summers.1 Sister Mary Emil subsequently turned the SFC to a new project, one that she was even more passionate about: strengthening the content of sisters’ education in the liberal arts. With a PhD in philosophy, Sister Mary Emil was one of a small minority of U.S. sisters who had earned any kind of advanced degree. She recruited fifteen other sisters with graduate degrees to spend the summer of 1956 in Everett designing a bachelor’s curriculum “by Sisters and for Sisters” that would, in her words, “update and liberalize” education for the tens of thousands of sisters who made the enormous network of U.S. Catholic schools possible.2 This unprecedented effort to strengthen the academic content of sisters’ education in all 377 U.S. teaching orders was 1. The Sister Formation Committee (later, The Sister Formation Conference) was established as a section within the College and University department of the National Catholic Educational Association (NCEA) in 1954. For a detailed history of the founding of the SFC, see Marjorie Noterman Beane, From Framework to Freedom: A History of the Sister Formation Conference (New York, 1993). 2. Sister Mary Emil, “Proposed Study and Curriculum Project to be Carried on by the Sister Formation Conferences under the Auspices of the Fund for the Advancement of Education—A Memorandum for Dr. Eurich,” September 21, 1955, and Sister-Formation Committee, “Press Release,” April 28, 1956, folder 273, The Fund for the Advancement of Education (TFAE) Collection, Archives, The Ford Foundation, New York, New York (hereafter, TFAE-FFA). DARRA D. MULDERRY 727 FIGURE 1. Sister Mary Emil Penet, I.H.M., 1947, teaching novices (L to R: Sr. Jane Lademan, Sr. Rose Bernadette Vanooteghem, Sr. Bernetta Booms) at the Monroe, MI motherhouse (credit IHM Archives). Sister Mary Emil’s brainchild, but was entirely funded by a grant from the Ford Foundation.3 In a move widely celebrated in the Catholic press, Sister Mary Emil and her assistant on the project, Sister Xaveria Barton, I.H.M., had, in the fall of 1955, secured a $50,000 grant from the Ford Foundation’s Fund for the Advancement of Education to underwrite a two-part initiative to strengthen liberal arts education for sisters. The first part was a nine-month study of current education in a large sample of orders; the second, and culminating, project was the 1956 summer curriculum-writing workshop at Everett. The Ford Foundation had launched The Fund for the Advancement of Education (TFAE) in 1950 to support programs in the liberal arts, especially for future teachers. In an early statement that revealed the TFAE 3. Sister Mary Emil was the leading force behind the design of the Everett Curriculum, but the efforts of another founder of the SFC, Sister Ritamary Bradley, C.H.M., were as instrumental to the early activities and success of the SFC as Sister Mary Emil’s. Sister Ritamary edited the SFC’s publication, the Sister Formation Bulletin, and later would help disseminate the new curriculum for sisters. However, Ritamary, who was a professor of English at Marycrest College in Davenport, Iowa, was unable to participate in the Everett workshop due to other obligations. 728 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” founders’ Cold-War related concerns, they argued that the liberal arts, in contrast with mere “technical” studies, nurtured democracy by teaching critical thinking and humanistic values (and inoculating against passive acceptance of authoritarianism). “Perhaps the greatest single shortcoming of our school system,” the founders had assessed, “is its tendency to concern itself almost exclusively with the dissemination of information.” Curriculum for democracy needed to do more; only the liberal arts, in their view, honored the universal human potential to “achieve a satisfactory personal philosophy and sense of values” and to “analyze problems and to arrive at conclusions on the basis of rigorous thinking.”4 In her 1955 application to TFAE, Sister Mary Emil had left no doubt that the SFC’s vision of the best teacher education aligned with TFAE’s. “Like most public school teachers,” she wrote, sisters were enrolling in too many “education” courses at the expense of subjects in the liberal arts. This resulted, she added, in “superficiality in the training of Sister-teachers. . . .” The curriculum that the SFC planned to develop, she assured the foundation, would counter this drift.5 But first, she explained, SFC representatives needed to travel to a large sample of orders to gain a more precise picture of the proportions of education courses that sisters in hundreds of separately administered orders were actually taking. Upon receiving the TFAE funding, therefore, Mary Emil used the first installment of grant money to purchase a used Chevrolet that she and three other SFC sisters could use to drive across the U.S., from motherhouse to motherhouse, interviewing superiors about perceived “strengths and deficits” in current sisters’ education. By the spring of 1956, the SFC sisters had driven more than 25,000 miles and gathered data from 125 orders in 32 states.6 Sister 4. The founders of TFAE suggested that students who merely absorbed information and professional skills without accompanying studies in the humanities and social sciences would be more susceptible to conformity with authoritarian systems. The liberal arts developed the “critical thinking” skills necessary for citizens of democracies to solve current “human and social problems.” Quoted in “1949 Research Committee Report,” January 6, 1954, Box 032235, TFAE-FFA. See also Benjamin Fine, “Education in Review: Ford Foundation is Expected to Play a Major Role in Future Research and Inquiry,” The New York Times, April 29, 1951. For more on the debates about the connection between liberal education and education for democracy in the 1950s, see Philip Gleason, Contending with Modernity: Catholic Higher Education in the Twentieth Century (New York, 1995), pp. 152–63. 5. Sister Mary Emil, “Tentative and Informal Abstract for Dr. Eurich of Proposed Study to be Made by the Sister-Formation Committee under the Auspices of the Fund for the Advancement of Education,” p. 1, 1954, folder 273, TFAE-FFA. 6. Letter from Sister Mary Emil to Dr. Alvin C. Eurich (director of TFAE), May 14, 1956, folder 273, TFAE-FFA. In correspondence, the SFC sisters refereed to the automobile as “the SF car,” or “Raphael” (after the “Angel of Happy Meetings”). DARRA D. MULDERRY 729 Mary Emil had also selected the fifteen “preeminent sister educators” for the upcoming workshop, all sisters with graduate degrees in major subject areas, and had invited a series of consultants, including McCluskey, to make short-term visits to the summer-long workshop. A piece in McCluskey’s magazine entitled, “Watch Those Sisters!” reported on the main purpose of the SFC’s upcoming curriculum effort. The study and curriculum-writing workshop, the editors of America proclaimed, would ensure that the 93,000 sisters who served as educators for four million children were “continually assimilating the best in new methods and studies.”7 Although the SFC’s curriculum project, like their effort to ensure that all young sisters earned pre-service bachelor’s degrees, was, as the piece in America suggested, largely assimilative (in conformity with trends in public-school teacher education), what Fr. McCluskey was about to learn on his one-day visit to Everett was that the new curriculum that Sister Mary Emil intended would contain original dimensions, too. What none of the pre-workshop publicity pieces about the workshop had mentioned, but which Sister Mary Emil had hinted at in pre-workshop meetings and in speeches that she gave in the early 1950s, was that the new curriculum would do more than provide sisters with a rigorous liberal arts education. The new curriculum, and, specifically, an intensive sequence of courses in philosophy and the social sciences, would, she hoped, prepare U.S. sisters to play a new role in Church and society. On the morning that Fr. McCluskey visited, the sisters were in the seventh week of deliberations and halfway through writing the curriculum. Early in the summer, they had decided upon the main contours of sisters’ bachelor’s studies, and made the conventional decision that the humanities, the social sciences, and the physical sciences would be the major areas of study (with inclusion of a few pre-professional courses and a co-curriculum in art and music). More unusually, however, they had determined that the number of courses in philosophy and the social sciences would surpass the usual number required of lay students. By the week of Fr. McCluskey’s arrival, the Everett group had finished drafting the recommendations for courses in the humanities curriculum (literature, theology, philosophy, and foreign languages) and were nearing completion of the recommendations in the social sciences. Course descriptions for sociology, political science, and economics were in place, and they had prepared to devote July 14th to discussions about the “place of geography in the curriculum.” 7. “Current Comment: ‘Watch Those Sisters!’” America 94, no. 13 (December 24, 1955), 346. 730 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” The first morning session opened with presentations from the geography committee: Sister Mary Mangan, S.L., a professor of history, Sister Yolande Schutte, F.C.S.P., a professor of sociology, and Sister Xaveria, also a professor of sociology. According to the minutes from the morning session, a number of sisters commented that the dearth of geographical knowledge among sister teachers was one of the most serious deficits in Catholic education. Without more education in geography and related social fields, one participant said, teaching sisters were failing to develop the “world mindedness” that the current pope, Pius XII, was encouraging. Another added that instruction in “social geography” was crucially important for U.S. citizens in the postwar years because it would help them recognize their “obligation” to “share over-abundance” and to “spread technical assistance programs to the rest of the world.”8 Halfway through the session, when the sisters asked Fr. McCluskey for his impressions thus far, he demurred, stating that he would, for now, “rather listen.”9 After further discussion about which geography courses to recommend, Sister Mary Emil, as chairman of the workshop, finished the day’s session by offering a brief summary of how the geography-related courses would fit in with a core set of courses in philosophy, theology, and social sciences. The geography and other social-science and history courses, she stated, would form a sequence that would enable sisters to teach “social justice and allied virtues.” The courses in philosophy and theology would convey to sisters the “divine necessity” for teaching guiding principles of social justice, and the courses in history, economics, political science, sociology, and geography would help sisters and their students understand the modern world’s complex problems and possibilities so that they could act effectively. The “simple theme” that formed the unifying thread of this philosophy-theology-social science sequence, she finished, was: “‘[P]eople are suffering; people are Christ; and we are responsible.’”10 When the sisters again turned to Fr. McCluskey for his impressions, he replied, “[T]he time [is] gone when the sisters were not only, not of the world, but not in the world. . . . ‘Welcome back to the world, Sisters!’”11 8. Minutes, July 14, 1956, Everett Curriculum Workshop, Series 2, Box 1, Sister Formation Conference/Religious Formation Conference Collection, Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin (hereafter SFC/RFC Archives). 9. Sister Formation Workshop Newsletter, Number 32, July 14, 1956, Series 2, Box 1, SFC/RFC Archives. 10. Minutes, July 14, 1956, Everett Curriculum Workshop, SFC/RFC Archives, Series 2, Box 1. 11. Sister Formation Workshop Newsletter, Number 32, July 14, 1956, Series 2, Box 1, SFC/RFC Archives. DARRA D. MULDERRY 731 Although there is no record of Sister Mary Emil’s response to McCluskey’s exclamation, she was likely pleased that he had noticed, approvingly, that the new curriculum would promote sisters’ engagement in the world. An examination of Sister Mary Emil’s writings and speeches reveals that even before she had applied to the Ford Foundation for money, her dream was to educate all teaching sisters to educate the laity to work for the social and economic transformation of society according to Catholic principles of social justice. In 1953, she had delivered a speech to an audience of Catholic educators in which she had called for a new education for sister-teachers that would enable them to fulfill a former pope’s unfulfilled agenda. In “Catholic Action and Sister-Education,” she proposed that with a stronger intellectual development, sisters could become the army of Catholic teachers who would finally encourage and enable the laity to carry out Pope Pius XI’s 1931 call to work actively for “generalized social reconstruction” according to norms of “social justice.”12 Pius XI, she reminded her audience, had, in the midst of the Great Depression, urged the laity to address injustices endemic to new industrial economies. Relatively little had been done to fulfill this call to what Pius XI referred to as “Catholic Action,”13 she continued, because so few Catholics, including sisters, read papal encyclicals on the rights of labor.14 “Not three percent” of today’s sisters, 12. Sister Mary Emil Penet, “Catholic Action and Sister-Education,” n.d., typescript, “Presentations made by Sister Mary Emil Penet, IHM, for Sister Formation” folder, I.H.M. Archives, I.H.M. Motherhouse, Monroe, Michigan (hereafter Monroe Archives). This speech is undated; however, because Sister Mary Emil refers to “88,000 teaching sisters” in the U.S., one can confidently date the document to 1953. The references are from Pope Pius XI’s encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (see note 14 below). 13. Piux XI inherited the term “Catholic Action” from his predecessor, Pope Pius X (r. 1903–14), who had used it more broadly than Pius XI to refer to a vision of the Church in which the laity, under the direction of the hierarchy, would actively work for social, economic, and political transformation. See L.J. Twomey, “Blessed Pius X: A Great Social Apostle,” Catholic Mind, 49 (October, 1951) 694–96. 14. In Rerum novarum (usually translated as “On the Condition of Labor”), Pope Leo XIII had broken away from prior nineteenth-century popes’ position that the proper role for the Church in the industrial-era standoff between capital and labor was to condemn socialism and urge management and labor to be charitable toward one another. Although Leo reiterated that there was a God-given right to property, and he adamantly opposed communist solutions to the problems of the industrial age, he stated that there were limits to the right to property, and advocated for government support of a “living wage,” decent hours, and tax policies that helped the property-less acquire property. Forty years later, in the midst of the Great Depression, Pope Pius XI had issued Quadragesimo anno in honor of the fortieth anniversary of Rerum novarum; there he reiterated Leo’s position and suggested additional ways that public and private entities might together tackle social and economic injustice. See 732 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” Sister Mary Emil estimated, were familiar with the papal teachings on social justice, because they were “too busy taking the ranks to the corner, and laying out vestments for the parish Mass, and learning cube root the week before [they] teach it.”15 If, on the other hand, sister teachers finally began to receive an education that would enable them to do so, they, with their already formidable numbers and their role as teachers, would be optimally positioned to motivate the laity to fulfill Pius XI’s call to action for socio-economic justice.16 The subsequent year, in one of the first articles that appeared in the SFC’s main publication, the Sister Formation Bulletin, Sister Mary Emil again referred to sisters’ untapped potential to play a crucial role in not only Church—but world—history. With the proper education, sisters would be able, she hinted (with the phrase, “in these days of emerging struggle”), that sisters—who outnumbered priests by more than three to one—could educate the laity to counter effectively communists’ appeals to citizens of the developing world. “What the mendicants were to the thirteenth century, what the new orders of men were to the counter-reformation,” she proclaimed, “the teaching Sisters could be in these days of a real and emerging struggle.”17 In these 1953 and 1954 pieces, Sister Mary Emil had described the new role, but not the content of education that she had in mind for sisters. However, by the time she filed her application with the Ford Foundation in 1955, she had formulated a schema of the “ideal curriculum” that she believed would educate sisters as experts in the social teachings of the Church.18 In the lead-up to Everett, during the study phase of the sisters’ education initiative when she and three other SFC sisters had conducted interviews in 125 orders, they had asked every superior a question intended to nudge them into teaching the papal social encyclicals to young sisters if Aaron I. Abell, American Catholicism and Social Action: A Search for Social Justice, 1865–1950 (Notre Dame, 1963), pp. 73–75, and Paul Misner, Social Catholicism in Europe: From the Onset of Industrialization to the First World War (New York, 1991), p. 72. 15. Sister Mary Emil Penet, “Catholic Action and Sister-Education.” 16. Ibid. 17. Sister Mary Emil Penet, “The Sister-Formation Movement and the Pastoral Outlook,” Sister-Formation Bulletin, vol. I, no. 2, December 1954. 18. Sister Mary Emil hinted at the most original content she hoped to create in one brief paragraph of her 16-page proposal to TFAE. There, she stated that the new curriculum for sisters would educate the teaching sister “as a particular type,” and that study of the Church’s social teachings would be central to the shaping of sisters’ new role. Sister Mary Emil, “Proposed Study and Curriculum Project.” DARRA D. MULDERRY 733 they weren’t already doing so: “What specific curricular arrangements can be made to prepare the Sister-teacher to present the social program of the papal encyclicals as part of the education for democracy?”19 Sister Xaveria explained in her report on the interview data that she, Sister Mary Emil, and the other SFC researchers had discovered that few orders taught the encyclicals, and only two orders offered their sisters “highly developed sequences which made a special effort to achieve a curricular integration of empirical social sciences and Christian social philosophy.” They continued to include the question, however, chiefly for heuristic purposes, and the approach had been productive. One of the “fruitful outcomes of the discussion” that usually followed, Xaveria wrote, was that “the mere inquiry into the presence of a social philosophy-social science sequence in the curriculum interested some communities in an attempt to introduce it.”20 Additionally, Sister Mary Emil discussed her ideas for the most original content of the new sisters’ curriculum at a meeting in the fall of 1955 that she and Sister Xaveria held with Dr. Timothy S. Stinnett, the director of National Commission on Teaching Education and Professional Standards, the secular educational nonprofit that had launched the movement to upgrade degree requirements for public-school teachers in the late 1940s. She described for Stinnett the new curriculum for sisters that would contain rigorous studies in ethics combined with studies in the social sciences so that all teaching sisters would be able to provide students with the tools to work for social justice. Dr. Stinnett’s response, as recorded in notes taken down by Sister Xaveria, provides further indication that Sister Mary Emil’s focus was on social justice. Stinnett commented, in a thinly veiled reference to the McCarthy era, that, “[In recent years] . . . the whole teaching of social justice has been so curtailed by intimidation, that we soon won’t have any social justice—we are in the most dangerous position relative to our future that we have ever been in . . . the Right now is climbing into predominance, perhaps at the expense of Justice [sic].” If the sisters carried out their plan to design a curriculum that would introduce discussion of social justice in social-studies curriculum, he speculated, it might even serve as a basis for reform of curriculum in public schools: “The Catholic schools, not having to fear the same kind of surveillance as public 19. Ibid. 20. Sister Xaveria, in her final report about the study phase of the curriculum project, said that the sisters “made a special point” of asking this question in every convent, and had discovered that most of the communities were “doing nothing at all in this field.” Sister M. Xaveria, I.H.M., “The Situation in Sister Education,” Report of Everett Curriculum Workshop (Seattle, 1956), p. 6. 734 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” FIGURE 2. The Everett Workshop sisters with guests, Summer, 1956, Everett, Washington. Reproduced courtesy of Department of Special Collections and University Archives, Marquette University Libraries, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. schools, and having the great prerogative in the social studies, would fly under the public radar just enough to be able to innovate—could well be [sic] the pilot project in the teaching of the social studies.”21 Dr. Stinnett also accepted Sister Mary Emil’s invitation to serve as one of the visiting consultants at the Everett curriculum workshop. Having worked out her most innovative curricular aspirations ahead of time, in June of 1956, Sister Mary Emil arrived at the Everett Workshop with a proposal for a sequence of courses in philosophy and theology, followed by a sequence in the social sciences, and she circulated a hand-drawn chart that clarified the connections among the fields.22 Sister Mary Emil aspired to provide sisters, who far outnumbered priests and brothers, with an education as extensive as the ones that priests received, but with a specialized knowledge about the social teachings of the Church that would turn sisters into leaders in the frontline fight for social justice for the disenfranchised. 21. Notes from meeting with Dr. T.M. Stinnett, dated September 9, 1955, “Miscellaneous Records,” Series 3.1, Box 2, SFC/RFC Archives. 22. Sister Mary Emil, “Social Science” Chart, Everett Workshop Working papers, Series 3.1, Box 2, SFC/RFC Archives. DARRA D. MULDERRY 735 All of Sister Mary Emil’s suggestions, with a few revisions offered by other workshop participants, made it into the final curriculum in spite of some initial resistance from a few of the participants who balked at Sister Mary Emil’s presumption that her initial plan was already ideal. Sister Thomas Albert, O.P., described the source of the tension in a letter home to her superior in Connecticut: “Sr. Mary Emil is a very intense person who, without realizing it, tends to do everyone’s thinking for her. This does not always go well with the ‘fifteen eminent educators’ who, thank God, have minds of their own!” The main problem, as Sister Thomas Albert saw it, was that “many of us feel that Sr. M.E. has thought out every last jot and tittle of the final report even before we start to discuss it.” She was quick to add, though, that the conflict was not causing any terrible “unpleasantness,” but “only a (healthy) under-the-surface tension,” and, “we manage to hold our own and there is a good ‘esprit de corps’ among us.”23 Likewise, Sister Thomasine Cusack, O.P., in a letter home to her superior in Illinois, described some of the participants as feeling, in the early days of the workshop, “. . . rightly or wrongly I can’t be positive yet, that the whole summer business had been ‘cooked up’ for us, the report already written, by Sr. Emil in her zeal. . . .” Sister Thomasine, too, expressed confidence that the participants would work through any “difference in outlook.” The many “joyous aspects” of the workshop outweighed any tensions, she observed, and added, “Sr. Emil is a good soul and straight.”24 The participants appear to have resolved the conflict when Sister Mary Emil assented—in the face of complaints from some participants that the humanities, particularly literature, were getting short shrift—to incorporate “humanistic elements” into the social science courses. The group also added courses in psychology to Sister Mary Emil’s proposed sequence in the social sciences, but her originally suggested sequences of related courses in philosophy, theology, and the social sciences retained the substance, and the central role in the new curriculum, that she had presented to the group early on.25 Moreover, the workshop’s final report, which contained essays by every participant, reflected the other participants’ enthusiastic embrace of the “social justice” mission. Sister Thomasine, who was a professor of economics, offered a robust defense of sisters’ study of the social sciences 23. Sister Thomas Albert (Corbett) to “Dear Mother,” June 21, 1956, Sister Thomas Albert (Corbett) folder, Dominican Sisters of Peace Motherhouse Archives, Columbus, Ohio. 24. Sister Thomasine Cusack to “Dear Mother and Sister Peter,” June 16, 1956, Dominican Motherhouse Archives, Sinsinawa, Wisconsin. 25. Chart entitled “Configuration of Work in the Behavioral Sciences,” Series 3.1, Box 2, SFC/RFC Archives. 736 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” as a prerequisite for effective social action in societies with modern economies. “[I]f human needs, aspirations, and institutions are to be reformed, improved, or simply stabilized, they must first be understood,” she said, and the social sciences provided insight into the workings of modern institutions.26 Sister Thomas Albert, a political scientist, ultimately offered one of the most eloquent justifications for the major sequences in philosophy, theology, and the social sciences (with the added “humanistic elements”), stating that studies in philosophy, theology, and the humanities would shape the young sister’s “social conscience,” while the social sciences would shape her “social consciousness”: The education of a Sister should both awaken her social consciousness and further form her social conscience. Social consciousness is aroused by a heightened awareness of human interdependence and human suffering; social conscience accepts the responsibilities which this interdependence engenders.27 Cultivation of sisters’ social conscience and social consciousness, the Everett sisters agreed, would equip sister educators to prepare the laity for action for social-justice. That August, the workshop sisters finished the 138-page curriculum report on schedule, and in the fall of 1956 Sister Mary Emil dispatched copies to all U.S. women’s orders, bishops, and the libraries of Catholic colleges and universities. She also promoted what quickly became known as “the Everett Curriculum” by publishing articles explaining the rationale for the curriculum in a number of Catholic periodicals. In these pieces, she explained that the new curriculum would, in addition to enhancing sisters’ capacity for critical thinking, help sisters fulfill “a clear duty laid upon us by the social encyclicals of the Popes” by educating sisters to educate the laity in Catholic ethics and the social sciences. “It was one of the primary and initial purposes of the workshop,” she wrote, “to explore the resources in our moral doctrine for grounding, unifying, and motivating the various social sciences . . . [in order to] devise a teacher-training program which would impress upon the instructors of four million American children a deep sense of social responsibility and some knowledge of how to proceed in the discharge of that responsibility.”28 26. Sister Thomasine Cusack, O.P., “Economics,” in Report of the Everett Curriculum Workshop, p. 65. 27. Sister Thomas Albert, “Sociology,” in Report of the Everett Curriculum Workshop, p. 61. 28. Sister Mary Emil, I.H.M., “Sister Formation Curriculum Workshop,” The College Newsletter: Official Organ of the College and University Department of the NCEA, Vol. XX: 2 (January, 1957), 6–9. DARRA D. MULDERRY 737 Under Sister Mary Emil’s leadership, the SFC also offered representatives from all teaching orders numerous opportunities to learn more about the curriculum as they planned bachelor’s studies for their young sisters. Two orders that had volunteered to implement the Everett curriculum immediately in programs for their young sisters served as “demonstration centers” that representatives from other orders could visit, and the SFC hosted conferences in six geographical regions, at which representatives of hundreds of women’s orders gathered to read and discuss the curriculum. Additionally, in the summers of 1957 and 1958, the SFC arranged for some of the Everett participants to lead workshops on the Everett Curriculum at Marquette University, and representatives from dozens of orders attended. Finally, under the editorship of Sister Ritamary Bradley, C.H.M., the Sister Formation Bulletin spread the word about the main elements of the curriculum to communities across the U.S and in dozens of foreign countries.29 U.S. Sisters’ Turn to Social-Justice Ministries A number of historians of Catholic women religious have paid a good deal of attention to U.S. sisters’ turn to work for “social justice” in the mid1960s, soon after the closing of the Second Vatican Council (1962–65). When the church fathers at this momentous council called upon all religious orders to update their institutes by adapting their “manner, of living, praying and working . . . to the modern physical and psychological circumstances of the members and also . . . to the necessities of the apostolate, the demands of culture, and social and economic circumstances,” many U.S. orders, in their subsequent writing of new constitutions, redefined their ministries in terms of work for social justice.30 During and after the Council, U.S. sisters became activists in the civil rights, anti-poverty, and antiwar movements. Although most sisters continued to work in education or health care, a significant minority launched new works in homeless shel29. Beane, pp. 84–85. 30. Lora Ann Quinonez and Mary Daniel Turner, The Transformation of American Catholic Sisters (Philadelphia, 1992); Gene Burns, The Frontiers of Catholicism: The Politics of Ideology in a Liberal World (Berkeley, 1992); Patricia Byrne, “In the Parish but Not of It: Sisters,” in Byrne, et al., Transforming Parish Ministry: The Changing Roles of Catholic Clergy, Laity, and Women Religious (New York, 1989). See also Sister Marie Augusta Neal, S.N.D. de Namur, Catholic Sisters in Transition: From the 1960s to the 1980s (Wilmington, 1984), and Amy L. Koehlinger, The New Nuns: Racial Justice and Religious Reform in the 1960s (Cambridge, 2007). The quote from the Council is from The Decree on Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life [Perfectae Caritatis] (October 28, 1965), § 1–3, in The Sixteen Documents of Vatican II, ed. Charles Dollen (Boston, 1965). 738 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” ters, programs for new immigrants, rehabilitation centers, and literacy centers, all in the name of work for social justice.31 Although a few historians note in passing that the Everett Curriculum encouraged sisters to study new subjects that would help them engage more effectively in the Church’s work to reduce suffering in the world, they have missed evidence that Sister Mary Emil’s central goal in organizing the Everett workshop was to train sisters as leaders of action for social justice. Nor do they note the Everett Curriculum’s likely influence upon American orders’ post-Vatican II direction.32 To take one example, Lora Ann Quinonez, C.D.P., and Mary Daniel Turner, S.N.D.deN., in their history of the transformation of the American sisterhoods during the Vatican II and post-conciliar years, The Transformation of American Catholic Sisters, suggest (while making no specific mention of the Everett Curriculum) that the SFC introduced sisters to new theologies that readied them for a concerted turn to social-justice related ministries, drawing a straight line between the meaning that sisters imputed to “social justice” in the 1950s and the meaning that they ascribed to the term in the 1960s.33 That link obscures significant differences between Sister Mary Emil’s understanding of “social justice,” and the directions in ministry taken by women religious after Vatican II. An examination of Sister Mary Emil’s social and intellectual development, including the mentors who most inspired her vision for the sisterhoods, illuminates the meanings that she ascribed to “Catholic Action” and “social justice,” and helps explain why she believed that studies in philosophy, theology and the social sciences constituted a necessary foundation for Catholic action for social justice. It also reveals the continuities and ruptures between Sister Mary Emil’s hopes for sisters in the postwar years and the new direction chosen by sisters in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. As clarified below, Sister Mary Emil formed her ideas about social justice in Depression-era Detroit when many Catholics in the urban upper Midwest associated social justice chiefly with support for labor unions and government regulation of banks. In addition, as a student at Marygrove College in the 1930s, Sister Mary Emil was exposed to an idiosyncratic curriculum, instituted by a former Jesuit seminarian, that required the study of “natural-law” based Thomistic philosophy and the social sci31. Neal, Catholic Sisters in Transition, and Carole Garibaldi Rogers, Poverty, Chastity, and Change: Lives of Contemporary American Nuns (New York, 1994). 32. Koehlinger, The New Nuns, p. 68. 33. Quinonez and Turner, The Transformation of American Catholic Sisters. DARRA D. MULDERRY 739 ences, and, more specifically, a Thomistic justification for a “right to livelihood” for all members of society. She extended and developed the latter ideas in the late 1940s when, as a PhD student in philosophy at St. Louis University, she wrote a dissertation in which she expounded upon justicerelated, natural-law-based limitations on the right to property. Contexts for Sister Mary Emil’s Vision of a New Role and New Education for Sisters A former student of Sister Mary Emil recalls her stating, in a “Philosophy of Character” class that was designed at Marygrove College in the 1950s, “Everybody’s life has a virtue that his or her life is organized around, and mine is social justice.”34 The meaning that Sister Mary Emil ascribed to the term “social justice” when she made this declaration, and the content of the new role that she imagined for sisters when she secured $50,000 to shape the Everett curriculum, cannot be understood apart from the social, political, and religious-educational contexts within which she developed them. Sister Mary Emil formed a lasting vision of the main elements of a “just” society and the Christian’s obligation to create such a society in two overlapping contexts: 1) Depression-era Detroit’s pro-labor Catholic community and 2) a small women’s Catholic college, Marygrove College, run by an order of sisters, the Immaculate Heart of Mary Sisters of Monroe, Michigan, that advocated women’s leadership in social causes. Between the 1930s and the 1950s, Sister Mary Emil would extend with little change her New-Deal liberalism, except to frame it within a postwar internationalist, Cold War context. “Catholic Action” in Depression-Era Detroit Sister Mary Emil, born Elizabeth (“Liz”) Gertrude Penet in Detroit in 1916, was the eldest child of tailor Emil Penet, an immigrant from Belgium, and Nellie (Houben) Penet, a Dutch immigrant. In the absence of evidence of her parents’ political and social affiliations, it is difficult to gauge how Liz’s mother and father influenced her ideas about social justice, but her four years of study at Marygrove College in Detroit where she undertook the curriculum in philosophy and social sciences instituted by the college’s first lay president, Dr. George Hermann Derry, clearly shaped her later ideals and commitments. 34. Sister Amata Miller, I.H.M., interview with author, Detroit, Michigan, June 15, 2008. Notes are on file at PC Archives. 740 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” In the spring of 1936, Penet’s senior year at Marygrove, as President Franklin Roosevelt galloped toward a reelection landslide in spite of sharp challenges from Huey Long, Francis Townshend, and Detroit’s own “radio priest,” Fr. Charles Coughlin, Marygrove students held their seventh annual Catholic Action Crusade. The multi-day event featured orations by twentyfive Marygrove students on two topic areas: “Leo XIII and Pius XI on the International Financier” and “The Faith: The Only Enduring Foundation for Fairer Distribution of Wealth.” Titles of the students’ speeches included “What is Social Justice?,” “How did the Money-Changer Affect the Depression?,” and “How Do We Prove that the Annual Living Wage is a GodGiven Right?” All the orations suggest that the student orators prescribed solutions to the Depression rooted in papal social teachings. Elizabeth Penet was the only student to deliver three speeches—one in Esperanto and two in English. She, like other speakers, expounded upon her preferred solutions to contemporary economic distress in Prima Mona Principaro (“The First Monetary Principle”), “How Congress Should Recover Its Constitutional Power of Money-Control,” and “The Sodality and Catholic Action: Doctrine and Devotion in the Crusade of the Lay Apostle.”35 The phrase “Catholic Action,” ubiquitous in Catholic high schools and colleges in the 1930s and 1940s, most often referred to students’ charitable service projects and their occasional campaigns for “moral decency” in movies. However, Marygrove students, like a significant minority of Catholic-Action activists elsewhere, identified Catholic Action most of all with Catholic “social action,” the application of principles found in the “social encyclicals” to contemporary economic problems, especially inequality.36 Pope Pius XI had put the term into broad circulation in the late 1920s 35. “Bishop Attends Marygrove Catholic Action Crusade,” The Watch Tower XIV: 25 (June 4, 1936), 4. 36. “The sodality,” short for the Sodality of Our Lady, had originated in medieval Europe as a men’s organization, but was revived in the late 19th century as a network of devotional and service clubs for lay people, mainly teens. In the late 1920s, Daniel A. Lord, a Jesuit priest stationed in St. Louis, Missouri, expanded the teen membership when his superiors asked him to take over publication of the main U.S. publication of the sodality, The Queen’s Work. Lord appealed to young people by making The Queen’s Work more colorful and lively and writing more than three hundred spiritual musicals performed by high school students. He also wrote hundreds of pamphlets in which he urged teens and young adults to nurture their faith and engage in Catholic Action. Most of the projects undertaken by members were charitable endeavors or campaigns for “moral decency” in films, but some chapters of the sodality— mainly in the upper Midwest—engaged in advocacy for workers’ rights. At a 1936 Sodality Convention in Detroit that Liz Penet (who was a member of the Sodality) may have attended, 500 high students instituted a survey of wages paid to young people in local stores, voted to publicize the wage scales, and pledged to shop only at the stores that paid higher DARRA D. MULDERRY 741 when he called upon lay persons to involve themselves more actively in the Church’s “apostolic” work of social, economic, and cultural reconstruction according to Catholic “truth.”37 Soon after, American Catholics were affixing the label to a wide variety of lay activities, everything from “boycotting morally indecent movies to conferences on world peace.” The “capacious concept” included most church-sanctioned lay social and service activities, chiefly charitable endeavors, and, especially in urban areas in the 1930s, campaigns to improve industrial work conditions and wages.38 This pro-labor strand of Catholic Action that gained prominence in 1930s Detroit likely took hold because of the city’s dramatically high unemployment rate; a disproportionate number of the city’s Catholics were workers in the ailing automobile industry. Within a year after the stock market crash of 1929, the automobile industry collapsed, giving Detroit the highest rate of unemployment of any major city in the U.S. By 1932, the year that Liz Penet turned sixteen, approximately half of Detroit’s workers were out of work, and the failure of the city’s second largest bank due to highly unscrupulous business practices led Detroit’s newspapers and citizens to excoriate the banking industry.39 Two of Detroit’s most influential clerics, too, publically supported social-liberal reforms and blamed bankers for causing the Depression, and undoubtedly shaped Liz Penet’s analysis of the crisis. Bishop Michael Gallagher, bishop of Detroit from 1919 to 1937, who gave the opening address at the Marygrove Catholic Action Crusade during Elizabeth’s senior year of college, voiced strong support for federal insuring of bank deposits and vast government-funded public works projects as early as 1932 when Hoover was still president.40 Gallagher may have been predisposed to support labor unions and government regulation of banks because his strong Irish nationalism likely carried an attendant hostility toward British bankers.41 How- wages to workers. See Leslie Tentler, Seasons of Grace: A History of the Archdiocese of Detroit (Detroit, 1990), p. 435; Rev. Thomas F. Gavin, S.J., Champion of Youth: A Dynamic Story of a Dynamic Man (Boston, 1977), pp. 23, 85–97, 100–01, 106, 108; Daniel A. Lord, Played by Ear (Chicago, 1956), pp. 260–305. 37. Gleason, Contending with Modernity, p. 153. 38. Ibid., pp. 153-58. 39. Tentler, Seasons of Grace, pp. 313–14. 40. Ibid., 315. 41. Gallagher’s parents were Irish immigrants and, although he was raised in rural Michigan, he attended seminary in County Limerick, Ireland. It is unclear whether Gallagher’s support for Irish nationalism arose during his upbringing or during his years of study in Ireland. Tentler, Seasons of Grace, pp. 302–03, 314–15. 742 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” ever, his support of social-liberal reforms was likely most prompted by the overwhelming number of his flock who were unemployed industrial workers, and his fear that workers in desperate straits might turn to the programs presented by the communists who regularly marched in the streets of Detroit. In his address at the Marygrove Catholic Action Crusade in May 1936, the one at which Liz delivered multiple speeches of her own, Bishop Gallagher openly advocated monetary reform and encouraged the young women of Marygrove to champion social-democratic—rather than communist—solutions to current economic problems. After beginning his address with an affirmation that women were able to understand “the fundamentals of the money problem” every bit as well as men, he called upon the Marygrove women to counter the rhetorical seductions of communists trained in the Soviet Union and sent to every corner of the world. “Catholic youth,” he declared, “must show at least as much zeal in the cause of truth, as the Communists show in the spread of error.”42 In the student speeches that followed the bishop’s opening remarks, Penet and other Marygrove students blamed bankers for causing the Depression, and issued pro-labor, anti-communist positions similar to Gallagher’s. However, the students’ calls to Congress to reverse the economic downturn by printing more money also corresponded with the ideas promulgated by another local clergyman, Detroit’s “radio priest,” Fr. Charles Coughlin, who Bishop Gallagher supported. In his popular weekly radio address, Fr. Coughlin lambasted the international banking network for causing the Depression, and Congress for failing to seize their constitutional prerogative to print more money.43 Although nowhere in Sister Mary Emil’s papers does she refer to Fr. Coughlin by name, the titles of her Crusade speeches, especially, “How Congress Should Recover Its Constitutional Power of Money-Control,” suggest that she supported some of Fr. Coughlin’s prescriptions for Depression in the mid-1930s. (This was prior to Fr. Coughin’s notorious turn, in late 1936 and early 1937, to delivering blatantly anti-Semitic rants in which he substituted “international Jews” for “international bankers.”44) Bishop Gallagher, and perhaps Fr. Coughlin, informed Penet’s conviction—one that permeated the Everett 42. “Bishop Attends Marygrove Catholic Action Crusade,” p. 4. 43. For more about Coughlin’s turn against Roosevelt in 1936–37 and his articulation of conspiracy theories about anti-worker alliances among bankers and representatives in Washington, D.C. see Alan Brinkley, Voice of Protest: Huey Long, Father Coughlin, and the Great Depression (New York, 1982). For more about Coughlin’s relationship with Bishop Gallagher, see Tentler, Seasons of Grace, pp. 319–42. 44. Brinkley, Voices of Protest, pp 266–273. DARRA D. MULDERRY 743 Curriculum Report—that if Christians wanted to help re-shape modern society, good will would not be enough: they needed to know something about economics as well. Natural Law Philosophy as Solid Grounding for Social-Justice Norms and Obligations While Liz Penet’s association of social justice with New Deal socialliberalism was influenced by the economic plight of the majority of Detroit’s Catholics and the Church’s aversion to communist atheism in the 1930s, the views of the president of Marygrove also strongly shaped her worldview. Her preoccupation with philosophical arguments that grounded policy proposals in the papal social encyclicals and a natural-lawbased philosophy of human rights is traceable to idiosyncratic elements of the Marygrove curriculum that were instituted by Dr. Derry, president of the college from 1927 to 1937. In 1927, Mother Domitilla Donohue, the major superior of the I.H.M. (Sisters, Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary) order that had founded Marygrove College, had made the unorthodox choice of Dr. Derry as the first lay president of a U.S. Catholic college. Mother Domitilla reportedly chose Derry because his prior experience, which included chairing the political science department at Bryn Mawr, demonstrated his support for rigorous liberal-arts education for women and the education of women for social leadership. His positions aligned nicely with the I.H.M. congregation’s longstanding commitment to educating women as leaders of civic reform.45 Upon assuming the presidency, Derry, in concert with Marygrove’s faculty—most of them I.H.M. sisters—developed a curriculum called “The Marygrove Idea” that emphasized training in philosophy, the social sciences, and public speaking as preparation for civic engagement. Three of the most innovative elements of the Marygrove Idea would strongly influence Penet’s intellectual and moral commitments for the rest of her life. First, under the curriculum, all students were required to complete a few courses in the area of “Social Leadership.” Penet’s transcript indicates that she fulfilled those requirements with courses in “Educa- 45. Sister M. Rosalita Kelly, No Greater Service: The History of the Congregation of the Sisters, Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Monroe, Michigan (Detroit, 1948). The college had introduced a social science course as early as 1921 and during the 1920s allowed for fieldwork and research in areas such as “labor, trade, employment and public health.” Tentler, Seasons of Grace, p. 462. 744 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” FIGURE 3. Dr. George H. Derry. Photograph by Davis B Fillmer. Reproduced courtesy of Marygrove College Archives, Nancy A. McDonough Geschke Library, Marygrove College, Detroit, Michigan. tional Sociology,” “Social Orientation,” and “Social Leadership and Personal Power.”46 Further, all students at Marygrove were required to study the papal social encyclicals in the light of St. Thomas Aquinas’s and other scholastic philosophers’ grounding of social rights (including “the right to a living wage”) in natural law. Why Dr. Derry was deeply committed to fostering higher education for women in particular is not known, but his years of education as a Jesuit seminarian, which included graduate-level studies in philosophy at Johns Hopkins University, explain the depth of his interest in St. Thomas Aquinas’s natural-law philosophy. Rigorous study of Thomistic philosophy was most extensive among Jesuits, an order that required more years of studies in philosophy than most other men’s orders—and much more than in women’s orders. Although Derry had ultimately left the Jesuit community before his ordination as a priest, later 46. “Permanent Record of Sister Mary Emil/Elizabeth Gertrude Penet,” Monroe Archives. DARRA D. MULDERRY 745 marrying and having four children, he subsequently completed his graduate studies at the Catholic Institute of Paris. In a series of academic appointments (including a professorship at Cornell University) that he assumed before he arrived at Marygrove, he taught philosophy and political science. At Marygrove, however, Dr. Derry went well beyond instituting course requirements in philosophy and the social sciences in his efforts to educate young Catholic women for informed social action for social justice. He composed and mimeographed dozens of detailed outlines of his social and economic philosophy on legal-length paper and distributed these “Marygrove Bulletins” to all of the students at the college. Sister Mary Emil kept one of those bulletins, “The Marygrove Idea: Bulletin XXIX,” in her files for the rest of her life, and some of its arguments infused her proposals for the Everett curriculum twenty years later. In Bulletin XXIX, Derry laid out an explication of what he termed “The Marygrove Movement,” which he subtitled, “The Leonine Renaissance, or the Papal Programme of Catholic Action.” When the popes spoke of “Catholic Action,” he wrote, they did not mean merely “any good work undertaken by Catholics,” but “a definite and specific programme logically and consistently developed throughout the last sixty years”—in the industrializing world—and pertaining to “fairer distribution” of the earth’s resources.”47 He then proceeded to explain, through a series of philosophical deductions that spanned nine pages, how and why the modern popes had taken the view that “Social Reconstruction,” not charity alone, was central to the Christian calling. “Social justice and human rights,” he wrote, were “the basis of all Social Reconstruction.”48 The Scholastic philosophers had demonstrated that every rational human being can deduce that all human beings deserve the “natural rights” of “life, learning, liberty, livelihood, and law” as well as sub-rights deducible from these major rights. The right to livelihood included ten such related sub-rights, among them a right to “MINIMUM ANNUAL LIVING WAGE [sic],” “better distributed private property,” and the right to “ORGANIZE, bargain collectively, and STRIKE.” “Explaining and promoting the policy of ‘distributism,’” Derry added, was “the dominant objective of the whole Papal programme” because the popes had deduced that “you can’t save souls when BODIES are dying of starvation.”49 47. “The Marygrove Idea: Bulletin No. XXIX,” dated June 29, 1935, 1–2, Papers of Sister Mary Emil Penet, Monroe Archives. 48. Ibid., 1. 49. Ibid., 2. 746 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” FIGURE 4. Detail of Bulletin XXIX from Dr. Derry’s “Marygrove Idea.” Reproduced courtesy of Marygrove College Archives, Nancy A. McDonough Geschke Library, Marygrove College, Detroit, Michigan. Penet mastered these arguments and appears to have taken great pleasure in doing so. “I was much influenced by Dr. Derry, all of whose teachings I embraced,” she recollected in a brief autobiographical statement written in her later years.50 One of Penet’s schoolmates, later a religious sister herself, remembers how the 20-year-old Liz Penet was one of the only students at Marygrove able to rise to Dr. Derry’s level in his dialogues with the students about the bulletins at the weekly assemblies that he held for the entire student body. “I still remember her pounding Dr. Derry with questions, and I enjoyed to no end their back and forth—her questions, his responses, her cross-questions. I loved listening to the argument and counterargument,” recalls Letitia O’Connell, I.H.M. The rapidfire intellectual sparring apparently exhilarated Elizabeth Penet, causing her to fall into a lifelong love affair with philosophy that would permeate the substance and style of her teaching throughout the next five decades. In her later work as a high school teacher, a college professor, and a professor at a seminary in the 1970s and 80s, she would include the idea that the papal encyclicals commissioned all lay Catholics to work for workers’ rights to a decent livelihood, and that Thomistic philosophy provided the best argument in favor of these policies. Former students from her college philosophy classes in the 1950s also recall that when they would pipe up with an answer to one of Sister Mary Emil’s questions, she would say, 50. “Life Sketch,” p. 1. DARRA D. MULDERRY 747 “‘Okay—now prove it.’”51 Twenty years later in her grant application to the Ford Foundation, when she mentioned that the Catholic tradition had something uniquely valuable to contribute to American democracy, she meant that Thomistic natural law, as worked out by Catholic thinkers, presented the soundest proof that human nature itself required all humans to support everyone’s right to livelihood and the accompanying limits on property rights that that entailed. The speeches that Sister Mary Emil, then Elizabeth Penet, had written for the Catholic Action Crusade in college were the culmination of a philosophy and social-science curriculum in which she excelled (her transcript shows nearly all A’s). In her view, the Marygrove Idea had prepared her to make air-tight arguments that could effectively counter the arguments of the communist fifth column. She embraced Derry’s teaching that the Christian democratic world was in a death struggle with the atheistic communist world, and that Catholics educated in Thomistic philosophy and the social encyclicals could save democracy by helping to forge a social liberalism that would ward off socialism by reforming laissez-faire capitalism. Penet also seems to have absorbed some facets of her highly engaging, even mesmerizing, oratorical style from Dr. Derry. One can detect some elements of Sister Mary Emil’s style in Dr. Derry’s description of the Marygrove curriculum in a college catalog from the mid-1930s (although she never used capitalization the way that he did): “OUR PURPOSE . . . is the production of personal POWER; DRIVING POWER, or ambition, the indomitable desire to succeed, to excel, to rise above the ranks; all college activities lead the student to an early determination of a lofty aim in life, and to a career motivated by the ideals of Catholic Action and by the crusading spirit of the lay apostle.”52 In the early 1920s Dr. Derry had worked as a Chautauqua-style guest speaker at public and private educational institutions all over New England. Among the notables who praised Derry’s lectures at the time was the governor of Massachusetts, who described him as having a “vigorous and logical mind” and a “command of elegant diction.”53 51. Sister Joyce Duroskso, I.H.M., interview with author, August 27, 2012, notes on file at College Archives and Special Collections, Philips Memorial Library, Providence College, Providence, Rhode Island (hereafter, PC Archives). 52. Quoted in Tentler, Seasons of Grace, p. 482. 53. “Geo. Hermann Derry, Ph.D., Lecturer, Brain-Builder, Apostle of Self-Help” (Boston, 1920/29), Promotional Pamphlet, Redpath Chautauqua Collection, University Libraries, Special Collection, University of Iowa. Accessed at http://digital.lib.uiowa.edu/ cdm/compoundobject/collection/tc/id/15748/rec/4 on June 3, 2016. 748 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” The Marygrove curriculum under President Derry likewise educated students to build and declaim arguments justifying fairer distribution of private property as an obligation in social justice. When, nearly twenty years after she graduated from Marygrove, Sister Mary Emil said that sisters, if educated in Thomistic philosophy, the social encyclicals, and social science would be the leaders of Catholic Action in “these days of emerging struggle,” she meant the Cold War-era competition with the Soviets over hearts and minds in the developing world. Teaching Catholic Action and the Extension of Penet’s Studies of Thomistic Philosophy Upon commencement from Marygrove, Elizabeth had enrolled in law school at the University of Detroit, primarily, she said in later years, “in order to please my father.”54 Although she did well in her studies, she had a “very unhappy year,” mainly because of her persistent struggle with a call to religious life that she had felt since high school. This call had, at first, she wrote, “horrified” her, and she had resisted for years. According to a threepage “Life Sketch” that she typed up for her order’s archives in 1985, that struggle ended in the spring of her first year of law school, when she “stopped fighting,” and decided that after completing the academic year, she would enter the I.H.M. community. Her father, although disappointed, accepted her decision, and “in spite of the preliminary struggle,” she said, “once I arrived . . . I never doubted my vocation.”55 After eighteen months of spiritual formation, her community assigned her to high school teaching for the next eight years. According to her former students, her commitment to Catholic Action for social justice—and to the Thomistic rationale for such action—were immediately and always apparent in her classes. Former students in her courses in history, sociology, economics, philosophy, and Latin recall her awesome intelligence, intense enthusiasm for all of the subjects that she taught, and her ever-present dry wit and crystalline logic. They also remember the emphasis that she placed on keeping up with current events and absorbing and acting on the principles of social justice enunciated in the social encyclicals.56 Her former students from St. Mary’s, a co-educational Catholic high school in Akron, Ohio, describe her organizing groups of students to distribute pro-union leaflets to the 54. “Life Sketch,” p. 1. 55. Ibid. 56. Sister Joan Glisky, I.H.M., interview with author, Monroe, Michigan, June 16, 2008, notes on file at PC Archives. DARRA D. MULDERRY 749 workers at the local Goodrich Plant in the 1940s—all in the name of Catholic Action. “Akron was then the rubber capital of the world,” one former student recalls, adding that, “some of the employers didn’t want their workers joining the United Rubber Workers, and Sister Mary Emil got us out there distributing pro-union leaflets.”57 Another described how “Sister Mary Emil not only taught us Catholic social doctrine and the philosophical justification for work for social justice, she organized Catholic Action for social justice by having groups of us students head down to the local Goodrich tire plant.” “My father, who was a union man and all,” Joyce Durosko, later Sister Joyce Durosko, remembers, “was shocked that a sixteen-year-old was mingling with older working-class men, and asked me not to go. Sister Mary Emil, though, she got me going.”58 Whenever Sister Mary Emil’s name comes up at high school class reunions, Durosko adds, class members talk about the emphasis she placed on their responsibility to think about fair distribution of resources. “Right up until today, class members, especially the men in our class, some of whom became C.E.O.’s and are now retired, mention that Sister Mary Emil would talk about social justice and how they never forgot it, and how it affects the way they treat their employees.” Sister Mary Emil even prompted a few students to change their political affiliation. One of her former students, Sister Mary Laubacher, said that even though she (Mary Laubacher) came “from a long line of Republicans who considered FDR and Al Smith enemies of America,” Sister Mary Emil’s instruction about Catholic social thought, particularly her teaching that Catholic Action required standing up for workers’ right to livelihood, ended up nudging her away from the family ideology.59 Mary Emil’s social-liberal stance (one in line with President Truman’s domestic initiatives in those years) was evident in the leaders and the specific causes that she supported. “She admired Saul Alinsky,” Sister Jane Mary Howard remembers, recalling the Chicago community organizer, and “she was certainly a supporter of the Democrats in those years.”60 And Sister Jo Sferella recalls that Sister Mary Emil, in addition to supporting strongly a living wage, “was also gung ho about health care. I remember her speaking with 57. Sister Josephine Sferella, I.H.M., interview with author, Monroe, Michigan, August 26, 2012, notes on file at PC Archives. 58. Interview with author [notes on file at PC Archives]. 59. Sister Mary Laubacher, I.H.M., interview with author, Monroe, Michigan, June 16, 2008, notes on file at PC Archives. 60. Sister Jane Mary Howard, I.H.M., interview with author, Monroe, Michigan, August 23, 2012, notes on file at PC Archives. 750 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” my Dad, an Italian-American laborer, asking him about the job benefits that he had, or lacked, and what his opinion was about that. She believed the workers ought to have health benefits.”61 Former high school students and novices in her order also remember Sister Mary Emil exhorting them to study sociology and economics and to keep up with current events. If one was going to accomplish social reconstruction according to Catholic principles of social justice, she believed, one had to learn about the world by reading works of social science and current periodicals. And, she led by example. “She was up on current events and thought we all should be,” recalls Sister Letitia. “She always read the New Republic and would have me go to the library every week to collect the latest issue of this and other weeklies to bring to her.”62 A list of periodicals and bulletins to which Sister Mary Emil subscribed in the late 1950s further indicates her longstanding commitment, nurtured by Dr. Derry and the I.H.M. sisters who taught her at Marygrove, to keep up with economics, labor’s interests, and international affairs. In 1960, the list of change-of-address notices that she filed for bulletins and periodicals she subscribed to at that time provides further evidence that she read voraciously and favored general interest periodicals as well as the latest newsletters from labor-advocacy groups. The forwardingaddress list included bulletins from the Ohio AFL-CIO, The Hat Worker, the National Committee on Monetary Policy, and the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions as well as The Economist, the Congressional Record, Catholic Management Journal, Worldview: A Journal of Religion and International Affairs, and the Herald Tribune.63 Sister Mary Emil’s convictions that Catholic Action entailed work for social justice, that a just society offered all members access to work that provided a decent means of livelihood, and, finally, that the most sound (because logically uncontestable) justification for commitment to social reconstruction was natural-law philosophy: all of these were originally cultivated at Marygrove. As described above, she animatedly disseminated these teachings to high school students in courses in history, sociology, economics, and philosophy in Detroit and Akron in the 1940s, and carried these same ideas into her plan for sisters’ education in the mid-1950s. 61. Interview with author. 62. Interview with author, June 16, 2008. 63. “List of Periodicals sent to Sister Mary Emil to whom notice of change of address has been mailed, Series 3.1, Box 2, Miscellaneous Records,” SFC/RFC Archives. DARRA D. MULDERRY 751 However, her conviction that natural-law philosophy provided the firmest grounding for universally resonant norms of economic and social justice seems to have deepened—and her dream that sisters might become an army of church workers who taught the laity the rudiments of natural-law based social justice philosophy seems to have formed—when, following eight years of high school teaching, she attended St. Louis University to earn a Ph.D. in philosophy. Like all sister teachers in all orders, Sister Mary Emil received her upcoming apostolic assignment every August on a piece of paper placed in an envelope and put under her dinner plate.64 On the day of assignment in August, 1947, as she later told it, she was surprised to see just one word, “Study,” on the piece of paper in the envelope. When she subsequently met with Mother Theresa McGivney, her superior, to find out what (and where) the order planned to send her to study, she was overjoyed to discover that she would be given three years to earn a Ph.D. in philosophy at St. Louis University, a Jesuit university in St. Louis, Missouri.65 Sister Mary Emil relished the opportunity to immerse herself in philosophical studies at SLU, and managed to finish all of her coursework, her graduate exams, and a 700-page dissertation in the three years allotted. The topic of her thesis appears to have stemmed from ideas in Bulletin XXIX of Dr. Derry’s Marygrove Idea, for she delved into study of Scholastic theologians’ writings about justice-related limitations on the right to property. In “Property and Right in Representative Catholic Moralists of the Thirteenth to Seventeenth Centuries,” she argued that while modern theologians tended to discuss Christians’ duties to the poor in terms of “charity” alone, St. Thomas Aquinas and other Scholastic theologians reasoned that in addition to charity, there were obligations in “justice.” In addition to a “duty in charity to assist the known and present needs of one’s neighbor,” the Scholastics deduced, natural law dictated a distinct and important “legal-justice obligation,” that is, an obligation in social-justice, “to give superfluities to the common good.”66 Aquinas, Mary Emil wrote, had adopted some of the logic behind this thinking from the early Church fathers, who had taught that “the earth was God’s, and that the sharing of 64. Sisters learned about their transfer to a new school or a new grade in August, just weeks before they began teaching. Sisters were told that this protocol enhanced piety by nurturing humble acceptance of superiors’ decisions. Sister Amata Miller, I.H.M., interview with author, Detroit, Michigan, June 16, 2008, notes on file at PC archives. 65. Sister Mary Emil Penet, “Life Sketch,” September 17, 1985, Monroe Archives. 66. Sister Mary Emil Penet, Property and Right in Representative Catholic Moralists of the Thirteenth to Seventeenth Centuries (St. Louis, 1950), p. 679. 752 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” it which he makes with men, since it includes all men commonly, must bring in a certain just necessity that all should actually attain such a share.” Aquinas then “synthesized this with Aristotelian elements to make this a rounded theory of what was right in the matter of property,” firming up the teaching that “superfluous goods belong to the poor in a kind of justice as well as in charity.”67 Sister Mary Emil called for a revival of the Scholastics’ conviction that there were duties in justice, not just charity. Conclusion It is difficult to measure the precise impact that the Everett Curriculum had on sisters’ studies nationwide, but there is evidence that while most women’s orders created variations upon, not replicas of, the Everett curriculum, a significant number of orders directed their sisters to enroll in more courses in philosophy, theology, and the social sciences. Nearly every issue of the Bulletin in the late 1950s reported the establishment of new sister-formation programs in line with the main contours of the Everett workshop’s recommendations. Sources also indicate that many orders began to require more courses in philosophy and the social sciences than they had before.68 Marillac College in St. Louis, Missouri, which, in the late 1950s, educated sisters from more than forty different orders, adhered closely to the Everett Curriculum recommendations in those years. Sister students at Marillac in the late ’50s were required to take “Sc 1: Modern Society,” a course which included studies of social structure and social change and readings from the papal social encyclicals. Marillac sisters also undertook a bevy of other courses in philosophy and other social sciences.69 However, ten years later, when the majority of U.S. women’s orders made “social justice” central to their orders’ new mission statements, the most dramatic changes in their ministry were the new avenues of direct service in which they engaged. A sizable minority of sisters left school teaching to take up avenues of direct-service ministries in which they aimed to serve the poorest in society. Sister Mary Emil, who lived to see 67. Ibid., pp. 3–4. 68. For evidence that sisters were enrolling in more philosophy and social science courses than before, see Letter from Mother M. Xavier, Provincial Superior of Sisters of St. Mary, Kenmore, New York to Sister Mary Emil, dated November 2, 1956, and Letter to Sister Judith from “a novice mistress,” dated January 18, 1957, re-printed in “Comments on Everett Report,” courtesy of Providence Archives, Seattle, Washington. See also Kennelly, The Religious Formation Conference: 1954–2004 (Silver Spring, 2009), p. 46. 69. See Marillac Bulletin, 1957–1960 (Normandy, MO, 1957), Marillac College Papers, Daughters of Charity Provincial Archives, Emmitsburg, Maryland. DARRA D. MULDERRY 753 these changes, was dismayed by the dissipation of teaching orders’ corporate ministry in education.70 Although she strongly approved of activism for social and economic change, Sister Mary Emil believed that sisters would do best to work collectively as an army of intellectual motivators and educators of lay activists. The scattering of energies, in her view, hobbled sisters’ overall apostolic effectiveness. Even though Sister Mary Emil did not embrace all of the effects spawned by the reforms she helped to catalyze, she played an important role in spurring sisters to look beyond convent walls to engage with the world in work for socio-economic justice. She believed that if sisters studied the papal encyclicals, philosophy, theology, and the social sciences, they would, in turn, motivate more Catholics to battle systemic oppression with public policy that diminished inequality. She succeeded in her effort to reform sisters’ education to include study of the Church’s social teaching and all of the subjects that she considered most important. However, by the early 1960s, just when more U.S. sisters than ever before were enrolled in pre-service bachelor’s programs and undertaking more courses in theology and social science, a new class of theologians rose to prominence. Thinkers such as Henri de Lubac and Yves Congar had moved away from more abstract Thomistic proofs to articulate more experiential descriptions of God’s relationship with the world.71 Likewise, in the field of psychology, “humanistic” psychologists were placing more emphasis upon subjective experience than objective theory. Just when sisters were enrolling in more theology and social-science courses, in other words, the Thomistic philosophical architecture that Sister Mary Emil expected would continue to be the central lessons in philosophy and theology courses slipped out of fashion. The sisters who benefited most from Sister Mary Emil’s efforts to upgrade their education fully embraced the Everett curriculum’s emphasis on social justice. However, as they encountered new theology and psychology that prioritized the “concrete” and experiential over the “abstract” and theoretical, and as they simultaneously witnessed and participated in the civil rights movement, they sought roles as frontline activists.72 They also redefined their mission not as a mission to teach natural-law philosophy, but to witness and describe God’s presence in the world. 70. “Life Sketch,” p. 3. 71. See, for example, Sister M. Daniel Turner, S.N.D. de Namur., “The American Sister Today,” in The Changing Sister (Notre Dame, 1965), pp. 297–306. 72. See essays about social action written by sister-scholars in the mid-1960s in Sister M. Charles Borromeo Muckenhirn, ed., The Changing Sister (Notre Dame, 1965) and Sister M. Charles Borromeo Muckenhirn, ed., The New Nuns (Notre Dame, 1967). 754 “PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE ARE CHRIST” There was continuity between Sister Mary Emil’s vision for women’s religious life and the consequent metamorphosed ethical vision that emerged in the 1960s and 1970s. However, the very fields that Sister Mary Emil helped open to sisters—theology and the social and behavioral sciences, in particular—stimulated sisters to change in ways that Mary Emil did not anticipate. Sister Alice St. Hilaire, a Sister of Providence who benefited from the Sister Formation Conference’s efforts to provide sisters with pre-service bachelor’s education in the 1950s, describes the relationship between Sister Mary Emil’s Thomism and U.S. sisters’ post-Vatican II moral vision this way: Sister Mary Emil had an intact view that she had formed in a visionary way. Her vision was all-encompassing, completely integrated, and immovable. She knew where each piece fit into the whole, and everything worked together. She had a dream of an ideal . . . I think that she ran way ahead of us. But then it was as if she stopped in the midst of what she envisioned and we came up and then ran by.73 Although by the 1970s Sister Mary Emil would bemoan the movement of many religious sisters away from corporate educational endeavors—and many sisters did, in a sense, “run past her”—sisters nonetheless became the apostles for social justice that she had hoped they would become. The battalions of sister-philosophers did not materialize, but a significant number of U.S. sisters became engaged thinkers who were, and are, devoted and visible leaders in work for social justice. 73. Sister Alice St. Hilaire, S.P., telephone interview with author, October 18, 2004, notes on file at PC Archives. Meryem Ana Evi, Marian Devotion and the Making of Nostra aetate 3 RITA GEoRGE-TVRTkoVIć* The Vatican II document Nostra aetate calls devotion to Mary a key point of Christian-Muslim encounter. But this statement is not footnoted, so one might wonder about its basis in history and tradition. How did Marian devotion make it into the document’s brief list of connections between Islam and Christianity, along with one God, judgment day, resurrection of the body, and Abraham? This article suggests that the Council Fathers’ knowledge of popular devotion to Mary at shared shrines like Turkey’s Meryem Ana Evi played a role in its inclusion.1 Keywords: Mariology, Islam, Vatican II, popular piety, Louis Massignon I have seen [Muslim devotion to Mary] with my own eyes in the city of Ephesus, in a place called Panaga kapulu, namely the ‘House of Mary’— our lady Mary. Here for ten years, we have seen 100,000 Muslims annually and the same number of Christians . . . venerate together the Virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus! . . . If a heavenly dialogue has happily already begun with the Blessed Virgin Mary and Muslims, why would we not express hope for an earthly dialogue with them?2 Archbishop Joseph Descuffi, C.M., of Izmir, Turkey, at Vatican II Council, September 29, 1964 There is a site near Ephesus which a venerable tradition holds to be the “Home of Mary,” the place where the Mother of Jesus lived for some years. It is now a place of devotion for innumerable pilgrims from all over the world, not only for Christians, but also for Muslims. Pope Francis at Turkey’s Presidential Palace, November 28, 2014 *Rita George-Tvrtković is Associate Professor (theology) in the Department of History, Philosophy, and Religious Studies at Benedictine University in Lisle, Illinois, email: rgeorge-tvrtkovic@ben.edu. 1. Meryam Ana Evi is Turkish for “Mother Mary’s House.” 2. Acta Synodalia Sacrosancti Concilii Vaticani II, 6 vols., 2 appendices, and indices (Vatican City, 1970–98), vol. III, pars II, Congregationes Generales XC–XCV (1974), p. 54. “. . . fructus experientiae decem annorum quod vidi oculis meis in civitate Ephesina, in loco dicto Panaga 755 756 MERYEM ANA EVI, MARIAN DEVOTION hat is so special about the House of Mary (Meryem Ana Evi in Turkish) that it was mentioned at the Second Vatican Council in 1964 and again by Pope Francis in 2014? Actually, several other popes besides Francis (Leo XIII, Pius X, Pius XII) have referenced this Marian shrine near Selçuk (Ephesus), Turkey, which is popular with both Christians and Muslims. Other popes have visited (Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI).3 And not one but three Vatican II Council Fathers mentioned it while debating a draft of the document Nostra aetate (On the Church’s Relation to Non-Christian Religions) on September 29, 1964. One of the bishops who spoke that day listed several international locations with Marian shrines shared by Christians and Muslims, including India, Pakistan, Mozambique, Egypt, Iran, and Turkey, but Meryem Ana Evi is the only site explicitly named by all three.4 Soon after these speeches, the next draft of Nostra aetate was expanded to include this line: “they [Muslims] honor Mary, His virgin mother; at times they even call on her with devotion.” The fact that ordinary Christians and Muslims throughout the world share a devotion to Mary, a devotion that includes traveling to and praying at Marian shrines, seems to have impressed popes and council fathers alike, which in turn has influenced the Catholic church’s view of Islam, as well as grassroots interfaith dialogue. W Meryem Ana Evi (referred to by the Council Fathers as Panaga Kapulu, “Doorway to the All Holy”) is now visited by nearly one million people every year. Some visitors are tourists, but many are pilgrims, mostly Christians and Muslims who come to honor the Virgin and ask her to intercede on their behalf. While Christianity and Islam disagree about Mary’s identity—for the former religion she is Theotokos, God-bearer, Kapulu sc. Domus Mariae, Dominae Nostra Mariae. Iam abhinc decem annos, vidimus quasi centum millia musulmanorum, per annum, iungi sese eodem numero christianorum et cum eis, quod est unicus locus in mundo ubi hoc evenit, venerare Mariam Virginem, matrem Iesu!. . . . Ergo, si iam feliciter, cum B. Virgine Maria et Musulmanis dialogus divinus incepit, quare nos cum eis dialogum terrestre. . . .” All translations of Latin and French in this article are my own, unless otherwise noted. 3. In November 2006, Pope Benedict XVI celebrated Mass at Meryem Ana Evi, ending his homily with the following prayer: “Mary, Mother of the Church, accompany us always on our way! Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us! Aziz Meryem Mesih’in Annesi bizim için Dua et. Amen.” His full speech is on the Vatican website: https://w2. vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/homilies/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20061129_ ephesus.html. 4. The three bishops who mentioned Turkey were Maronite Archbishop Pietro Sfair (Titular Bishop of Nisibis) of Syria, Archbishop Joseph Descuffi, C.M., of Izmir, Turkey , and Archbishop Yves-Joseph-Marie Plumey, O.M.I. of Garoua, Cameroon. Plumey listed the other locations, Acta Synodalia vol. III, pars III, p. 16. RITA GEORGE-TVRTkOVIć 757 while for the latter she is mother of the prophet Jesus (‘Isa)—they both agree that she is a virtuous virgin favored by God.5 And just as different Christian denominations disagree about Mary, so too do different Muslims disagree about who Mary is, or whether she—or any other saint (wali, “friend of God”) for that matter—could intercede on someone’s behalf.6 For example, while South Asian Muslims regularly visit the shrines of martyrs, Sufi masters, and saints like Mary, this practice is condemned by other Muslims, who say it encourages praying to people rather than to God, which is considered shirk (associating partners with God), one of the greatest sins in Islam.7 In fact, the same Muslims who are critical of Marian shrines might also take issue with the line in Nostra aetate which suggests that Muslims “call on Mary,” saying that true Muslims invoke no one but God. Despite these concerns, hundreds of thousands of Muslims do visit the House of Mary every year. Some Turkish Muslims even go so far as to say that three visits to Meryem Ana Evi are equivalent to the hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca).8 What is so attractive about this site? Many pilgrims to the House of Mary are Muslim and Christian women who come with petitions related to childbearing. They light candles in the shrine, drink holy water from the spring, and attach strips of cloth with prayers to a nearby prayer wall. The shrine itself reflects the dual identity of Mary’s devotees: one 5. Qur’anic verses referring to Mary’s virginity include 66:12, 3:47, 19:20–22, 3:47. Just as Jon Levenson questions the idea of a shared Abraham in Inheriting Abraham (Princeton, 2012), so too does Timothy Winter question the idea of a shared Mary in “Pulchra et Luna, Some Reflections on the Marian Theme in Christian-Muslim Dialogue,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 36, no. 3 (1999), 439–69. 6. For an introduction to the Islamic Mary, see Suleiman Mourad, “Mary in the Qur’an: A Reexamination of Her Presentation,” in The Qur’an in Its Historical Context, ed. Gabriel Reynolds (Oxford, 2008), pp. 163–74; Jane Smith and Yvonne Haddad, “The Virgin Mary in Islamic Traditions and Commentary,” The Muslim World 79 (1989), 161–87; Aliah Schleifer, Mary the Blessed Virgin of Islam (Louisville, 1997); and Winter, “Pulchra et Luna.” One key difference, of course, is that the Islamic Mary stands as proof of Jesus’s humanity, not divinity. One of the most common Qur’anic titles for Jesus is “`Isa ibn Maryam” (Jesus, son of Mary), which stresses his human roots and denies his divinity. 7. The veneration of Christian saints (including but not limited to Mary) by ordinary Muslims is common in places where Christians and Muslims have lived together for centuries (e.g., Lebanon, Egypt, Syria). Debate about visiting saints’ shrines and tombs (ziyara) is not new; Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328) distinguished between proper and improper ways to do so, implying that the practice was widespread enough for him to comment on it. For more on this topic in medieval Islam, see Christopher Taylor, In the Vicinity of the Righteous: Ziyara and the Veneration of Muslim Saints in Late Medieval Egypt (Leiden, 1999). 8. Heather Abraham, “The Shrine of our Lady of Ephesus: A Study of the Personas of Mary as Lived Religion” MA thesis, Georgia State University, 2008, pp. 38–39. 758 MERYEM ANA EVI, MARIAN DEVOTION room is decidedly Christian, complete with an altar, statue of Mary, icons, candles, and sanctuary lamps, while an adjacent room is adorned more simply, with verses from Sura 19 (named Maryam) of the Qur’an. The Marian devotion shared by ordinary Christians and Muslims at Ephesus and around the world seems to have captured the imagination of a few Council Fathers as they deliberated Nostra aetate. At that time, some Catholics were beginning to see the Virgin more as a bridge than a barrier between Islam and Christianity. In earlier centuries, Mary was more often a barrier; for example, in 1571 she fought the Ottomans as “Our Lady of Victory” during the Battle of Lepanto, while in the eighth century she used her mantle to protect Constantinople against invading Arabs.9 In the 1950s, however, she was becoming less of a barrier and more of a bridge, but Catholics disagreed about what kind of bridge. There were two (not necessarily mutually exclusive) possibilities: was she a one-way bridge to conversion, or was she a two-way bridge to dialogue and friendship? The first idea, that Mary could be a one-way bridge to conversion from Islam to Christianity, has a long pedigree. This idea remained strong in the 1950s, when she was implored in Catholic efforts to convert all manner of infidels, from Muslims to Communists. Perhaps the best expression of “Mary as bridge to conversion” at this time can be found in the writings of popular media personality Bishop Fulton Sheen, whose 1952 book The World’s First Love includes a chapter entitled “Mary and the Moslems.”10 The hope that Mary could help convert Muslims to Christianity endures even today among some Catholics.11 The second idea, that Mary could be a two-way bridge to dialogue and friendship between Muslims and Christians, was also expressed during the fifties, in particular by the French Catholic Islamicist Louis Massignon and his students, two of whom were among the framers of Nostra aetate: Georges Anawati, O.P., and Robert Caspar, M.Afr. Given the longer pedigree of the “Mary as bridge to conversion” idea, it might seem surprising that “Mary as a bridge to dialogue” would be stressed more at Vatican 9. For more on the militant Mary, see Amy Remensnyder, La Conquistadora: The Virgin Mary at War and Peace in the Old and New Worlds (Oxford, 2014), and Bissera Pentcheva, Icons and Power: The Mother of God in Byzantium (Pennsylvania State University Press, 2006). 10. Fulton Sheen, The World’s First Love: Mary, Mother of God (New York, 1952). 11. For one example of a traditionalist Catholic website proposing this idea, see Fr. Ladis J Cizek, “Our Lady Will Convert Muslims,” EWTN, accessed Nov. 10. 2017, http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=331944&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=. RITA GeorGe-tvrtković 759 II. Yet dialogue is indeed stressed, especially in Nostra aetate, where conversion is not mentioned.12 This article centers on the years leading up to Nostra aetate, the document that—together with Lumen Gentium—articulates the first official Catholic teaching at the conciliar level on the relationship between the Church and Islam. First, the pre-conciliar context will be discussed, in particular the two groups writing about Mary and Islam during the 1950s: those who saw her mainly as a bridge to conversion (Bishop Fulton Sheen), and those who saw her mainly as a bridge to dialogue (Louis Massignon and the framers of Nostra aetate). The founding of the shared Marian shrine of Meryem Ana Evi in the 1950s will also be described, along with its connections to Nostra aetate. Finally, the development of Nostra aetate’s theology of Islam as it pertains to Marian devotion will be considered. One caveat: this article distinguishes between “bridge to conversion” and “bridge to dialogue” because each of the two groups mentioned above stressed one over the other in their writings. However, is important to note that conversion (mission) and dialogue are related. In fact, the 1991 Vatican document Dialogue and Proclamation attempted to clarify the correct relationship between the two, especially among those who might incorrectly read Nostra aetate as replacing mission with dialogue. Dialogue and Proclamation states that the two are not in tension, but rather are “both authentic elements of the Church’s evangelizing mission. Both are legitimate and necessary. They are intimately related, but not interchangeable.”13 Before the Council The 1950s have often been called the “Marian decade.”14 It began with the November 1, 1950 proclamation of the Assumption, but the entire decade was marked by Marian devotional practices such as sodalities, rosaries, processions, novenas, scapulars, shrines, and May crownings. Some of these rituals had already been popular for decades or even centuries, but they reached a zenith in the years immediately preceding the 12. While Nostra aetate emphasizes dialogue, it does not completely ignore mission; §2 mentions the duty to proclaim Christ and the necessity of Christian witness. 13. Dialogue and Proclamation (1991), by the Council for Interreligious Dialogue & Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, §77. 14. Pope John XXIII dubbed the decade a “Marian era” in 1959. See Paula M. Kane, “Marian Devotion Since 1940: Continuity or Casualty?” in Habits of Devotion: Catholic Religious Practice in Twentieth-Century America, ed. James O’Toole (New York, 2004), pp. 89–119. 760 MERYEM ANA EVI, MARIAN DEVOTION Second Vatican Council. Pope Pius XII (r. 1939–58) observed that “piety toward the Virgin Mother of God is flourishing and daily growing more fervent.”15 In fact, Pius claimed that it was the vitality of grassroots Marian devotion which moved him to write to the world’s bishops, asking them to confirm the sensus fidelium regarding Mary’s Assumption.16 Mary was not only at the center of this decade, but also in the forefront of the mind of Pius himself, who some have called “the most Marian pope in Church history.”17 During his tenure, not only did he issue several Mary-centric encyclicals, but he also declared 1954 a “Marian Year” to mark the one-hundredth anniversary of the Immaculate Conception.18 This year was filled with special prayers, papal radio messages, pilgrimages, “holy hours,” and an encyclical instituting yet another Marian feast, the Queenship of Mary.19 Furthermore, during this year Catholics were encouraged to make a special effort to visit local and international Marian shrines such as Lourdes, and to seek Mary’s intercession on behalf of persecuted Christians in Communist countries.20 Mary was seen as a weapon against a powerful non-Christian enemy.21 In the past, that non-Christian enemy was Islam; in the 1950s, it was Communism.22 Also during the Marian year, Pius XII did two things to demonstrate his recognition of the special connection between Christians, Muslims, and Mary. First, in a L’Osservatore Romano article, he explicitly referred to Turkey’s House of Mary as a shared Christian-Muslim pilgrimage site: “The holy House should be a Marian center which is unique throughout the world, a place where Christians and Moslems of all rites and denominations and of all nationalities can meet each other to venerate the Mother of Jesus, and make true the prophecy, ‘All generations will call me blessed.’”23 15. Pius XII, Munificentissimus Deus [Apostolic Constitution Defining the Dogma of the Assumption], (November 1, 1950), §2, Acta Apostolica Sedis 42 (1950), p. 753. 16. Pius XII, Munificentissimus Deus, §8–9. 17. Frank Coppa, The Life and Pontificate of Pope Pius XII: Between History and Controversy (Washington, DC, 2013), p. 11. 18. The Marian year was proclaimed by Pius XII in his 1951 encyclical Fulgens Corona. 19. Ad caeli reginam. For more on the Mariological documents of Pius XII, see Matthew Rocco Mauriello, “Venerable Pope Pius XII and the 1954 Marian Year” (Dayton, 2010). 20. Pius XII, Fulgens corona, §33–34, 39, 41–43, respectively. 21. Nathan Mitchell, The Mystery of the Rosary: Marian Devotion and the Reinvention of Catholicism (New York, 2009), p. 239. 22. See Jonathon Herzog, The Hammer and the Cross: America’s Holy War against Communism (Palo Alto, 2008). 23. April 24, 1954, L’Osservatore Romano. RitA GeorGe-tvrtković 761 FIGURE 1. Mosaic on exterior front façade of Chiesa San Pio V in the Aurelio district of Rome, completed in 1954 by Joseph Stracota. The mosaic depicts Pope St. Pius V, the Madonna, and scenes of the Battle of Lepanto. The church was consecrated in 1962 by Cardinal Luigi Traglia. Photo taken by David Collins, SJ, and reproduced here with permission. Second, he commissioned a mosaic of Pope Pius V (r. 1566-72), the pope who first instituted the Feast of Our Lady of Victory; the mosaic features Mary, Pius V, and a rosary in the foreground, and sinking Ottoman ships at the Battle of Lepanto in the background. The mosaic was installed in 1954 at Rome’s Church of St. Pius V (see Figure 1).24 These two acts of Pius XII during the Marian year are noteworthy for capturing the tension between the various ways Christians, Muslims, and Mary have related through history: is Mary a barrier (as highlighted by the pope’s commissioning of the Lepanto mosaic), or is she a bridge to either conversion or dialogue (as highlighted by his recognition of Meryam Ana Evi as a shared shrine)? Does Pius contradict himself, or is he accurately expressing the paradoxes inherent in Catholic thinking on this subject? 24. According to the parish website, the mosaic was designed by Joseph Strachota. 762 MerYeM ANA evi, MAriAN DevotioN With the overall Marian context of the 1950s clear, we can now turn to two views of how Mary can be a bridge, and their respective proponents at this time: Mary as bridge to conversion (Bishop Fulton Sheen) and Mary as bridge to dialogue (Louis Massignon). Fulton Sheen: Mary as Bridge to Conversion The idea of Mary as a one-way bridge to conversion is not new. For example, in the medieval Iberian illustrated manuscript Cantigas de Santa Maria, a Moor is shown venerating an icon of Mary and then getting baptized.25 The idea of Mary as a bridge to conversion is repeated yet again in the twentieth century by the popular American Catholic media personality Archbishop Fulton Sheen (d. 1979). In his 1952 book, The World’s First Love: Mary, Mother of God, Sheen encourages missionaries to mention Mary explicitly to Muslims, for the express purpose of converting them: It is our firm belief that Moslemism [sic] will eventually be converted to Christianity—and in a way that even some of our missionaries never suspect. It is our belief that this will happen not through the direct teaching of Christianity, but through a summoning of the Moslems to a veneration of the Mother of God. . . . Because the Moslems have a devotion to Mary, our missionaries should be satisfied to expand and to develop that devotion, with the full realization that Our Blessed Lady will carry the Moslems the rest of the way to her Divine Son.26 In this passage, Sheen is describing a reality about which missionaries in Asia and Africa already knew: that many ordinary Muslims revere Mary. Sheen was simply asking the missionaries to harness this devotion as a tool for mission. He believed that the Muslim devotion to Mary could be used a stepping stone to their conversion. Today, this type of missionizing would be criticized by some as disingenuous.27 The fact that Sheen wrote an entire chapter about Mary converting Muslims is not surprising given his evangelizing bent. In addition to his popular TV and radio shows, Sheen was national director for the American 25. Cantiga 46. MS El Escorial T.1.1. 26. Sheen, The World’s First Love, p. 208. 27. “Dialogue and Mission,” §18-20, by the Secretariat for Non-Christians (1984), states that missionaries should refrain from using “tactics” and should never be dishonest or coercive. In his article “Evangelizing Islam,” First Things, January 2011, Gabriel Said Reynolds discusses the controversial “CAMEL” method of evangelizing Muslims used by some Protestants; the acronym refers to teachings of the Qur’an closest to the gospel (the M is for Mary). Some have criticized this method of evangelization as deceptive. RITA GEORGE-TVRTkOVIć 763 Society of the Propagation of the Faith from 1950 to 1966. In 1951, he created a “World Mission Rosary” with color-coded sections: yellow for Asia, white for Europe, red for the Americas, blue for Oceania, green for Africa. Sheen said that green was selected to represent Africa for two reasons: first because of its forests, but second because green is the color of Islam, the special target of missionaries on that continent. Sheen had personally visited African missions (he went to Kenya and South Africa in 1960), and perhaps it was at this time that he first saw shared shrines to Mary, or at least heard about them from locals.28 Such shrines were not only in Africa; Sheen soon learned from missionaries in India, Nepal, and Pakistan that Asian Muslims (and Hindus) also have a devotion to Mary. In a different chapter of the same book, World’s First Love, Sheen shares the following account: Our missionaries report the most extraordinary reaction of these peoples as the Pilgrim statue of Our Lady of Fatima was carried through the East. At the edge of Nepal, three hundred Catholics were joined by three thousand Hindus and Moslems [sic], as four elephants carried the statue to the little Church for Rosary and Benediction. . . . At Karachi an exception was made by the Moslems to favor her; whenever the Christians there hold a procession, they are obliged to cease praying whenever they pass a mosque. But on this occasion they were permitted by the Moslems to pray before any mosque along their way.29 Clearly, the evangelization strategy Sheen was suggesting—using Mary as a missionary tool among Muslims—was influenced by the knowledge of lived religion that was shared with him by his colleagues throughout the world. But Sheen’s use of Mary as a tool for conversion was not unique to him; rather, it was representative of broader Catholic views at the time. During the 1950s, Mary was seen as an evangelizing tool against all the “godless,” be they Muslims or Communists. In fact, Sheen wrote a 1951 article about the double Communist-Muslim threat, expressing concern that “Communism and Moslemism may unite against Christianity.”30 But eventually, Sheen came to believe that certain Islamic doctrines (e.g., belief in one God, belief in Mary as virgin mother of Jesus) made Muslims less 28. Thomas C. Reeves, America’s Bishop: The Life and Times of Fulton Sheen (San Francisco, 2001), pp. 264–65. 29. Sheen, World’s First Love, pp, 193–94. 30. Kathleen Riley, Fulton Sheen: An American Catholic Response to the Twentieth Century (Staten Island, 2004), pp. 248–49. Fulton Sheen, “The Sword, the Hammer, the Sickle, and the Cross,” Worldmission 2 (Winter, 1951), 3, 6. 764 MerYeM ANA evi, MAriAN DevotioN of a threat than Communists, although Muslims still remained a target of his evangelizing efforts.31 Indeed, Sheen came to believe that these doctrines made Muslims better (meaning easier) candidates for conversion to Christianity than Communists. In any case, Sheen’s recognition of the Virgin as a key part of his mission strategy was thanks to his colleagues in the field, who shared with him their firsthand knowledge of Islam as a lived religion. If the missionaries had not told him about their experiences, Sheen most likely would never have known that Mary is revered by many African and Asian Muslims. Louis Massignon: Mary as Bridge to Dialogue At the very same time that the American Bishop Fulton Sheen was writing about Mary as a tool for evangelization, the French Orientalist Louis Massignon was presenting a somewhat different image of her as a bridge to dialogue. Massignon was an Islamicist whose encounter with Muslims had had a profound effect on his own spiritual life.32 As a young man traveling in the Middle East, his interactions with Muslims at a personal level, and with Islam at a scholarly level, impressed him so deeply that he had a conversion experience. But surprisingly, this conversion was not to Islam, but rather back to his own Catholic faith, from which he had become estranged.33 Massignon’s encounter with Islam revitalized his practice of Christianity, and he eventually became a priest of the Arabicspeaking Melkite Catholic Church. He also co-founded in 1934 (with Egyptian Christian Mary Kahil) the Badaliya society, a group originally made up of Christians who wanted to pray for and offer their lives as “substitutes” (badaliya means substitution in Arabic) for Muslims; the language of the founding documents is somewhat ambiguous but does suggest they hoped Muslims would convert.34 But by the 1950s, Badaliya had become 31. Riley, Fulton Sheen, pp. 248–49. 32. Book-length biographies of Massignon include Mary Louise Gude, Crucible of Compassion (Notre Dame, 1997) and Christian Destremau and Jean Moncelon, Louis Massignon (Paris, 1994). For Massignon’s theology of Islam, see Christian Krokus, The Theology of Louis Massignon: Islam, Christ, and the Church (Washington, DC, 2017). 33. This was common among French intellectuals of the time; see Anthony O’Mahony, “Louis Massignon: A Catholic Encounter with God and the Middle East,” in God’s Mirror: Renewal and Engagement in French Catholic Intellectual Culture in the Mid Twentieth Century, ed. Katherine Davies and Toby Garfitt (New York, 2015). 34. For example, Badaliya’s founding documents state this goal: “que l’Islam comprenne la réalité et efficacé de la crucifixion . . . Ce but qui est la manifestation du Christ en Islam,” as cited by Amira El-Zein in “L’autre dans la spiritualité massignonienne,” in Louis Massignon: Au Coeur de Notre Temps, ed. Jacques Keryell (Paris, 1999), p. 41. Scholars disagree RitA GeorGe-tvrtković 765 FIGURE 2. Louis Massignon. Photo is licensed under the Creative Commons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Massignon#/media/File:Louis_Massignon.jpg more genuinely interfaith; its members, which now included both Christians and Muslims, gathered regularly to pray, converse, and pilgrimage together.35 Dialogue, not conversion, had become their main goal. Massignon’s personal faith journey also affected the direction of his scholarship. The primary focus of his academic work became “crossover” figures which he believed connected Islam and Christianity in some way. First among these was the subject of his dissertation: the Christ-like about whether this means conversion or not. Jean-Jacques Pérennès, in Passion Kaboul: Le père Serge de Beaurecueil (Paris, 2014), ch. 2, says conversion was not intended. However, biographers Destremau and Moncelon disagree in their work Louis Massignon, p. 246. Also, some Muslims in the 1950s accused Massignon of attempting to convert them (El-Zein, “L’autre dans la spiritualité,” p. 41). For an English translation of correspondence related to Badaliya’s founding, see Dorothy Buck, Louis Massignon: A Pioneer of Interfaith Dialogue. The Badaliya Prayer Movement, 1947–1962 (London, 2016). 35. For a discussion of Badaliya’s development into a more equally interfaith group, see Anthony O’Mahony, “Louis Massignon, the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus and the Christian Muslim Pilgrimage at Vieux-Marche,” in Explorations in a Christian Theology of Pilgrimage, ed. Craig Bartholomew and Fred Hughes, (Aldershot, 2003). The group’s evolution continues; in 2003, Badaliya was resurrected as an international, interfaith prayer group based in Boston. 766 MERYEM ANA EVI, MARIAN DEVOTION Mansur al-Hallaj (d. 988), a Sufi mystic who was crucified. Other crossover figures included Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad, and the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus, whose story is found both in the Qur’an and in early Christian tradition. As the years went on, Massignon’s writings focused more and more on these shared figures and their associated shrines (Our Lady of Fatima in Portugal, Seven Sleepers shrines in France and North Africa). By the 1950s and 1960s, the bulk of his scholarship centered on them.36 It must be noted that many of the crossover figures which were so central to Massignon’s research, like Fatima and Hallaj, were more important to minority Muslim communities like Shi’i and Sufis than to Sunnis, and therefore some of Massignon’s ideas regarding these figures were considered marginal or suspect by Sunnis. Even though Massignon died on October 31, 1962, just days after the Second Vatican Council began, many scholars consider his influence on its views of Islam to have been significant. Several of Massignon’s colleagues and protégés were active participants at the Council, including bishops, periti, and even Pope Paul VI himself.37 In fact, the two periti most responsible for writing Nostra aetate’s section on Islam—Georges Anawati and Robert Caspar—had been Massignon’s students, and both explicitly declared his direct influence on their own thinking.38 And Pope Paul VI, 36. This is clear when one examines the table of contents of Opera Minora, the three-volume compendium of Massignon’s scholarship: Opera Minora, vol. 1–3, ed. Y. Moubarac (Beirut, 1963). Earlier writings focus on Islamic theology, Arabic philology, and history. Later writings center mainly on interreligious themes, such as the ChristianMuslim connections present in the shrine of Our Lady of Fatima in Portugal. Eventually, he expands to include dialogue with Indian and Japanese religions. One could argue that Massignon’s approach to interreligious dialogue is somewhat distinct from post-Vatican II approaches; for example, he focused more on mystical prayerful sympathy with Islam than on theology. 37. Jacques Waardenberg lists three groups influenced by Massignon, including “Catholic Orientalists,” p. 171 in Muslims as Actors: Islamic Meanings and Muslim Interpretation (Berlin, 2007). Several scholars report that Montini was a member of Massignon’s Badaliya, including Christian Krokus, “Louis Massignon’s Influence on the Teaching of Vatican II on Muslims and Islam,” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 23:3 (2012), 329–45, and Andrew Unsworth, “Louis Massignon, The Holy See, and the Ecclesial Transition from Immortale Dei to Nostra Aetate: A Brief History of the Development of Catholic Church Teaching on Muslims and the Religion of Islam,” Aram Society for Syro-Mesopotamian Studies 20 (2008), pp. 299–316. 38. Georges Anawati, “Excursus on Islam” in Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, volume III, ed. Herbert Vorgrimler (London, New York, 1968), pp. 151–60. Anawati names Massignon, p. 152, as the primary reason for the sea change in Catholic attitudes towards Islam. See also Robert Caspar in “La vision de l’Islam chez Louis Massignon et son influence sur l’église,” in L’Herne Massignon, ed. J. Six (Paris, 1970), pp. 126–47. RITA GeorGe-Tvrtković 767 who promulgated Nostra aetate in 1965, had a long association with Massignon stretching back to the 1930s.39 While a few scholars have questioned the extent of Massignon’s influence, 40 most have affirmed what Anawati, Caspar, and others have concluded: that Massignon had a singular effect not only on the Council, but also on Catholic views of Islam more broadly.41 Andrew Unsworth calls the theology of Islam found in Nostra aetate a “paradigm shift” in how the Catholic Church viewed Islam,42 a shift which paralleled the evolution of Massignon’s own views. For while his earliest scholarship expressed the traditional Catholic theology of Islam (e.g., his 1914 article in the journal Moslem World), over the years his position changed dramatically. By the end of his life, not only were Massignon’s ideas accepted by a small group of progressive Catholic Islamicists, but amazingly, by 1965, “the Council too had adopted his vision.”43 Massignonian ideas can be seen in several Vatican II documents—not only Nostra aetate 3, but also Lumen gentium 16, the latter of which discusses the salvation of non-Catholics. According to Unsworth, the three most important Massignonian theologoumena found in these documents are: that Muslims can achieve salvation; that Christians, Muslims, and Jews believe in the same God; and that Abraham is the common father of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.44 All three claims have become significant components in the developing Christian theology of Islam, although all have been contested at various times during the reception of Vatican II.45 The third 39. Krokus, “Louis Massignon’s Influence,” pp. 334–36. 40. Gavin D’Costa, Vatican II: Catholic Doctrines on Jews and Muslims (Oxford, 2014), acknowledges Massignon’s importance, but includes him in a broader complex of influences, p. 187. See also Julian Baldick, “Massignon: Man of Opposites,” Religious Studies 23.1 (1987): 29–39. 41. See for example Krokus, “Louis Massignon’s Influence,” and Neal Robinson, “Massignon, Vatican II, and Islam as an Abrahamic Religion,” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 2/2 (1991), 182–205. 42. Unsworth, “Louis Massignon,” p. 310. 43. Ibid., p. 310. 44. Ibid., pp. 304–5. 45. Even the second claim (one God) has been contested in the years following 9/11, even though this was not an issue historically. Despite disagreements regarding Muhammad, Christ, and the Qur’an, most early and medieval Christian theologians acknowledged Islam as monotheistic. For more on early Christian Arabophone views of Islam, see Sidney Griffith, The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque (Princeton, 2008). For more on mainstream medieval Latin views, see Rita George-Tvrtković, A Christian Pilgrim in Medieval Iraq: Riccoldo da Montecroce’s Encounter with Islam (Turnhout, 2012). For more on the contested reception of 768 MerYeM ANA evi, MARIAN DEVOTION claim has been particularly influential, spreading far beyond Christian circles. In the last fifty years, it has become common parlance among both scholars and laity to call Judaism, Islam, and Christianity “Abrahamic faiths,” and many books and articles have been written to support, challenge, and further nuance the term “Abrahamic.”46 In any case, the idea of a shared spiritual (if not genetic) patrimony in Abraham most likely originates with Massignon, who was using the term as early as 1949.47 One additional Massignonian theologoumenon present in conciliar documents which Unsworth does not mention but which is equally significant to the development of a Christian theology of Islam can be found in the line cited above: “they [Muslims] honor Mary, his virgin mother; at times they even call on her with devotion.”48 Given Nostra aetate’s focus on commonalities, and Massignon’s preference for crossover figures, it is not surprising that the document would include mention of Mary. The mere presence of the line on Marian devotion cannot, of course, be attributed solely or even mainly to Massignon. After all, Council Fathers such as Maronite Patriarch Sfair and Archbishop Descuffi argued that the Virgin Mary should be mentioned in Nostra aetate on doctrinal grounds.49 However, the emphasis on devotion to Mary—rather than on doctrines about Mary—does suggest some Vatican II, see Gauvin d’Costa, “Interpreting the interpreters,” in his Vatican II: Catholic doctrines on Jews and Muslims (Oxford, 2014), pp. 10–58 where he characterizes the two groups who have received Nostra aetate as “weepers” and “cheerers,” and criticizes them both for misrepresenting what the council actually taught. 46. One example of a book which supports the idea of Abrahamic faiths is F. E. Peters, The Children of Abraham (Princeton, 1982); one book which challenges and further nuances the idea is Jon Levenson, Inheriting Abraham: The Legacy of the Patriarch in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (Princeton, 2012). 47. Massignon, “Les trois prières de Abraham,” Opera Minora, vol. 3, ed. Y. Moubarac (Beirut, 1963), pp. 811–12. English translation in Testimonies and Reflections: Essays of Louis Massignon, ed. and trans. Herbert Mason (Notre Dame, 1989), pp. 3–20. 48. One could argue that this is neither unique to Massignon, nor a new theologoumenon, since early Eastern Christian writers such as Jacob of Edessa (d. 708) and medieval Latins such as William of Tripoli (d. c. 1276) and Nicholas of Cusa (d. 1464) discuss Mary, and Marian devotion, as a commonality between Christians and Muslims. For more on the Mariology of William and Nicholas, see Rita George-Tvrtković, “Bridge or Barrier? Mary and Islam in William of Tripoli and Nicholas of Cusa,” Medieval Encounters 22.4 (2016): 307–25. But Massignon’s scholarship stressed the devotional aspects of Mary over the theological. 49. See the speeches of Sfair and Descuffi, and an excellent discussion of their influence on drafts of Nostra aetate §3, in D’Costa, Catholics Doctrines on Jews and Muslims, pp. 197–200. For a more general discussion of Mary at Vatican II, see Etienne Fouilloux, “Marie aiu concile Vatican II (1959–1964.” in Théologie, histoire et piété mariale: Actes du Colloque Université catholique de Lyon, 1–3 octobre 1996, ed. Jean Comby and Sylvie Robert, (Lyon, 1997), 47–62. RITA GEORGE-TVRTkOVIć 769 Massignonian influence.50 For in the 1940s and 1950s, the Frenchman wrote several articles highlighting the similarities between the Christian devotion to Mary and the Muslim devotion to both Fatima and Mary.51 In one of these articles, Massignon emphasized the parallels he saw between the Muslim devotion to Fatima, daughter of Muhammad, and the Catholic devotion to Mary, mother of Jesus. In 1955, he wrote about a Shi’i festival, Mubahala, which is connected to Fatima. Massignon entitled the article “La Mubahala de Medine et L’Hyperdulie de Fatima.”52 The choice of the French word hyperdulie is significant, because the Latin equivalent, hyperdulia, has been traditionally used by Catholics to refer to the special veneration reserved for the Virgin Mary. Hyperdulia is higher than dulia (standard veneration of saints), but less than latria (worship of God alone).53 By calling the Muslim devotion to Fatima hyperdulie, Massignon was implicitly connecting it to the special devotion Christians have for Mary. But the Mary-Fatima connection is not only implicit in the title of the article; in the text itself Massignon says explicitly that Fatima and Mary are not only comparable but complementary: “Fatima consists of the human guarantee of divine inaccessibility; [she is the opposite of] Mary, the superhuman hostess of divine immanence.”54 He then goes on to contrast the divine fiat given to Mary at the Annunciation with a similar fiat given to Fatima on the “Night of Power,” the holiest night of Ramadan. In these few lines, Massignon goes beyond comparative theology.55 By sug50. D’Costa notes that Massignon’s focus on devotion was shared by Pope Paul VI, Daniélou, and de Lubac, “all of whom emphasized adoration and prayer as traits to be highly valued in Islam,” Vatican II: Catholic doctrines on Jews and Muslims, p. 186. 51. Three of these articles are cited in the notes below. 52. Massignon, “La Mubahala de Medine et L’Hyperdulie de Fatima,” Opera Minora, vol. 1, pp. 550–72. 53. On hyperdulia, see for example Thomas Aquinas, ST III.25.5 and ST II.II.103.4. 54. “Fatima se trouve constituée l’otage humain de l’affirmation de l’Inaccessibilité divine—face à Maryam, hôtesse surhumaine de l’immanence divine.” Tandis que le “kun” (fiat) chez Maryam c’est l’Annonciation par un ange d’une Naissance dans le temps (selon les chrétiens: Incarnation)—le “kun” chez Fatima c’est le Rappel, par le Ruh-al-Amr (Esprit de Dieu dans la Nuit de Destin) d’un destin dans la prééternité, la marque créatrice, Fitra, prédestinant les Elus à la Pitié paternelle du Rahman Rahim,” Massignon, “Mubahala,” p. 567. Emphasis is Massignon’s. 55. Comparative theology is the theological subdiscipline founded by the Jesuit scholar of Hinduism Francis X. Clooney in the 1980s. In Comparative Theology: Deep Learning across Religious Borders (Blackwell, 2010), Clooney defines comparative theology as “acts of faith seeking understanding which are rooted in a particular faith tradition but which, from that foundation, venture into learning from one or more other faith traditions. This learning is sought for the sake of fresh theological insights that are indebted to the newly encountered tradition as well as the home tradition,” p. 10. Clooney’s project has an interesting precedent in a book co-written 770 MERYEM ANA EVI, MARIAN DEVOTION gesting the complementarity of Mary and Fatima, Massignon seems to be attempting a kind of theological synthesis between Christianity and Islam, a synthesis likewise hinted at by the hyphenated title of David Burrell’s recent book Towards a Jewish-Christian-Muslim Theology.56 Massignon also wrote two articles in 1956 which both explicitly connect the Muslim devotion to Maryam and Fatima to the Christian devotion to Mary. The first, “La notion du vœu et la dévotion musulmane à Fâtima,” focuses on the Shi’i Muslim devotion to Fatima, and the fact that some Shi’i Muslims (especially pregnant women) call on Fatima to intercede for them in the same way they call upon prophets, Sufi masters, or imams for assistance.57 Once again, Massignon’s article title is significant for its use of the word “devotion” to describe how some Muslims approach Fatima. It should be noted that for Muslims, the only acceptable “devotion” is to God alone; the praise given to human beings such as prophets (even Muhammad) should be of a lesser order, if given at all. Intercession (shafa`a) is generally discouraged, but nevertheless still practiced quite regularly at the popular level. Devotion to Fatima, Mary, and other saints remains a contested point in Islam.58 Massignon’s second article from 1956 discusses Fatima’s connection to the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.59 Interestingly, the article begins with a quote from Fulton Sheen: “Just as Esther was a ‘figure of Mary’ for Israel before the First Coming [of Christ], Fatima might be a ‘figure of Mary’ for Islam before the Second Coming.”60 Massignon elaborates on Sheen’s idea by Massignon’s students Anawati and Louis Gardet, Introduction à la Théologie Musulmane: Essai de Theologie Comparée (Paris, 1948), to which Massignon wrote an introduction. 56. David Burrell, Towards a Jewish-Christian-Muslim Theology (Chichester, West Sussex, 2014). Burrell’s book is explicitly rooted in Clooney’s notion of comparative theology, but in places moves towards synthesis, like Massignon; see especially pp. 159–89. Throughout the book, Burrell vacillates between the language of comparative and constructive theology, but at the end seems to take a step further: “Yet [my approach] stems from a live appreciation of the inherently fruitful prospect of comparative theological inquiry, here inspiring bold engagement in a ‘creative hermeneutical’ inquiry,” p. 189. 57. Massignon, “La notion de Voeu et la dévotion musulmane à Fatima” Opera Minora, vol. 1, pp. 573–91. These heterodox (usually Shi’i) practices would be frowned upon by most Sunnis. 58. For more on the history of Islamic devotion and pilgrimages, see Taylor, In the Vicinity of the Righteous. 59. Massignon, “L’Oratoire de Marie à l’Aqça [Al Aqsa], vu sous le voile de deuil de Fatima,” Opera Minora, vol. 1, pp. 591–618. 60. Massignon, “L’Oratoire de Marie,” begins with a quote from Sheen: “Comme Esther [avant le Premier Avènement] a été une ‘figure de Marie’ pour Israël–Fatima peut être ritA GeorGe-tvrtković 771 in the third section of his article (entitled “Practical Devotions Dedicated to Mary and Fatima”), by noting that Shi’i literature recommends ziyarat (lesser pilgrimages) to Fatima shrines, and prayers to her. Shi’i prayers describe Fatima using phrases reminiscent of those used by Christians for Mary such as “queen of women,” “virgin mother,” and “unpolluted.”61 Massignon notes that one particular Shi’i prayer “is like the Stabat Mater.”62 He also claims that the Qur’an calls both women prophets (it does not).63 Strangely, Massignon does not mention that Muslims disagree about Mary’s prophethood, with most denying it.64 He concludes the article by saying unequivocally that “Fatima was, for the Shi’ites, a figure of Mary.”65 Massignon’s focus on shared Christian-Muslim devotion to Mary in the 1950s not only influenced the direction of his students’ scholarship, but also their activism. For it was during this same decade that one of Massignon’s students, Archbishop Joseph Descuffi of Turkey, began promoting the shrine which was to be mentioned by several bishops at Vatican II: Meryem Ana Evi.66 Creating Meryem Ana Evi As has already been noted, no fewer than seven popes have either visited or mentioned Meryem Ana Evi in the last century. Yet despite all this attention from twentieth- and twenty-first century pontiffs, were it not for two nineteenth-century religious women—the German mystic Anna Katharina Emmerick and the French nun Marie de Mandat-Grancey—it is doubtful that any popes or bishops would have known about the House of Mary, and thus the line on Marian devotion might not have made it into Nostra aetate at all. The establishment of Meryem Ana Evi was sparked by a popular book published in 1880, The Life of the Blessed Virgin, which recounts the private pour l’Islam (avant le Dernier Avènement), ‘une figure de Marie,’” p. 591. I do not know where Massignon found the quote he attributes to Sheen. 61. Massignon, “L’Oratoire,” pp. 603–09. 62. Ibid., p. 605. 63. Ibid., p. 606. 64. Notable exceptions include Ibn Hazm (d. 1064) and Al-Kurtubi (d.1273). See Schleifer, Mary the Blessed Virgin of Islam, pp. 73–74. 65. Massignon, “L’Oratoire,” p. 608. 66. For more on the connections between Descuffi, Massignon, and the shrine, see Florence Ollivry-Dumairieh, “50 ans après Vatican II, la contribution de Louis Massignon au renouvellement du regard porté par l’Église sur l’islam,” Théologiques, vol. 22, no. 1 (2014), 189–217. 772 MerYeM ANA evi, MAriAN DevotioN FIGURE 3. Exterior of the Meryem Ana Evi, “The House of the Virgin Mary” near Ephesus, Selçuk in Turkey. Photographer: Martin H. Fryc. Note that the photo shows not the original house of the Virgin Mary, but the chapel built many years later beside it. Photo is licensed under the Creative Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:House_of_the_Virgin_Mary.jpg revelations of Anna Katharina Emmerick (d. 1824). Chapter 17 includes a detailed description of the House of Mary in Ephesus, possibly the first modern reference to such a house being located in this city (there are many medieval descriptions of a House of Mary, but in Jerusalem).67 After reading Emmerick’s book, Marie de Mandat-Grancey (d. 1915), a Daughter of Charity stationed at a French Naval Hospital in Izmir, Turkey, convinced two local Lazarist priests to help her find the house, and financed the expedition with her personal family fortune. They eventually found the house in 1891. Sr. Marie purchased the property in 1892 in her own name (with the permission of her order), and went on to restore, develop, and promote the shrine after that.68 67. Medieval descriptions of shared Christian-Muslim shrines throughout the Holy Land abound, including those of Burchard of Strasbourg, Riccoldo da Montecroce, and Felix Fabri. For Burchard’s description of Our Lady of Saydnaya (near Damascus), see John Tolan, “Veneratio Saracenorum,” in Sons of Ishmael, ed. John Tolan (Gainesville, 2008), pp. 101–12. 68. For a hagiographical account of Marie de Mandat-Grancey, see Carl G. Schulte, The Life of Sr. Marie de Mandat-Grancey & Mary’s House in Ephesus (Charlotte, 2011). RITA GeorGe-Tvrtković 773 The foundations of the House of Mary were being laid at the very same time that Pope Leo XIII was promulgating a series of Marian encyclicals. During the 1880s and 1890s, the link between Mary and Islam—for Catholics—was still Lepanto’s “Our Lady of Victory.” As Leo stated repeatedly in these encyclicals, Catholics believed the Virgin would help Christians to defeat the present Ottoman “menace,” just as she had done at Lepanto in 1571. It is likely that Vincentians stationed in Turkey at this time (including Mandat-Grancey and the Lazarists) shared Leo’s vision. When these French Catholic missionaries founded the House of Mary, they probably never dreamed that Muslims would someday visit the shrine. However, the House of Mary was always an ecumenical destination: Armenians, Catholics, Greek Orthodox, and Protestants came early on.69 In fact, there had been a tradition of local Orthodox Christians (called Kirkindje, after their village) making a pilgrimage to this site annually on Assumption Day (August 15), decades before Sr. Marie and the Lazarists “rediscovered” it.70 Initially, the local government opposed the creation of the House of Mary.71 They forbade Sr. Marie from building a church, school, or shrine at the site. But eventually a small shrine was built, only to be abandoned during the two World Wars. Soon after the Second World War, however, the shrine experienced a revival. This was due to two factors: first, the Marian decade already discussed, and second, the “Turkization” or nationalization of the site. In 1953, the Turkish government replaced the shrine’s old Greek name with a Turkish one, Meryem Ana Evi. With the support of both governmental and church authorities like Archbishop Descuffi (also a Vincentian), the site developed rapidly. Another champion of the new shrine was Massignon himself. In 1952 in Paris, he founded the Association des Amis d’Éphèse et d’Anne-Catherine Emmerick and encouraged the use of the name “Our Lady of Ephesus” for the site.72 With this moniker, Massignon wanted to emphasize the shrine’s provenance in (actually just outside) Ephesus, a city which is important in the history of Mariology: it was here that the Council of Ephesus (431 AD) 69. Eugène Poulin, La Maison de la Sainte Vierge: La véritable histoire de sa découverte (Istanbul, 1999 [1905]), p. 162. 70. Abraham, “Our Lady of Ephesus,” p. 31. Boyer D’Agen, “Maison de Marie à Éphèse,” La Nouvelle Revue 16 (1902), 41–44, also mentions the Kirkindje. 71. Manoël Pénicaud, “La Maison de la Vierge à Éphèse: De la fondation à la patrimonialisation d’un sanctuaire « international,” European Journal of Turkish Studies, 19 (2014), 6–7. 72. Ibid., p. 9. 774 MERYEM ANA EVI, MARIAN DEVOTION defined Mary as Theotokos (God-bearer). Massignon also claimed that certain patristic theologians had identified Ephesus as the place of Mary’s Dormition.73 Despite all these reasons, the choice of Ephesus as the location for a shared Christian-Muslim shrine remains somewhat ironic, since the Ephesian title of Mary, Theotokos (“God-bearer”), emphasizes the aspect of her identity about which Muslims and Christians most fundamentally disagree. Given that one of the stated goals of Massignon’s Association des Amis d’Éphèse was to “orient thoughts and pilgrimages towards the holy saints of Ephesus,” it is likely that he also wanted to stress the name “Our Lady of Ephesus” because he hoped to connect Meryem Ana Evi to other Christian shrines in the area such as the sixth-century Basilica of St. John and the Cave of the Seven Sleepers. The story of the Seven Sleepers had become a major crossover point for Massignon, who wrote several articles about its importance to Christian-Muslim relations.74 Massignon was probably aware that archaeologists had recently discovered the ruins of a mid-fifth-century church under the Ephesian Cave of the Seven Sleepers; this church had been popular both as a pilgrimage destination (attested to by medieval Latin and Greek accounts), and as a burial site (attested to by the archaeological evidence).75 Massignon seemed anxious to encourage a return to the ancient tradition of pilgrimage to Ephesus; he did this by highlighting connections between all the Christian shrines in the region.76 In any case, because of their enthusiastic promotion of the House of Mary throughout the 1950s, Descuffi and Massignon were praised as “entrepreneurs of pilgrimage.”77 Pope Pius XII even wrote Descuffi a letter in 1957, commending him for developing the site.78 And by the late 1950s, Christians were indeed flocking to Meryem Ana Evi—reportedly as many 73. Massignon provides little patristic evidence for his claim; he mentions only Epiphanius in “L’oratoire,” p. 595. 74. Just one example: “Le Culte Liturgique et Populaire des VII Dormants Martyrs d’Ephese,” Opera Minora, vol. 3, pp. 119–80. 75. Franz Miltner was the Austrian archaeologist who conducted the excavation in 1926; see Ernest Honigmann, “Stephen of Ephesus and the Legend of the Seven Sleepers,” Patristic Studies, Studi e testi, 173 (1953), 125–68. For more on Ephesus in general, see Clive Foss, Ephesus after Antiquity: A Late Antique, Byzantine, and Turkish City (Cambridge, 1979). 76. Indeed, Massignon explicitly connects Mary, the Seven Sleepers, and Ephesus: “sans qu’il se rende compte que ce mystère de la Dormition distincte de la Mort est posé à Ephèse, pour S. Jean, et les VII Dormants, ce qui incite en faveur de la Dormition de Marie à Ephese,” “L’oratoire,” p. 607. 77. Pénicaud, “La Maison de la Vierge à Ephèse,” 9. 78. A letter of Pope Pius XII to Descuffi on July 22, 1957 praises him for building Meryam Ana Evi. RITA GeorGe-tvrtković 775 as 100,000 a year.79 It was also during this same decade that a “massive and spontaneous influx” of Muslim pilgrims began to visit the shrine, too.80 Rome, however, did not oppose them. In fact, Pope Pius XII explicitly declared the House of Mary “open to all people, even non-Christians, who have a special devotion to the Virgin Mary.”81 Perhaps Pius’s invitation here could be seen as evidence that he did not see mission and dialogue as incompatible, an idea in line with the 1991 document Dialogue and Proclamation cited above. The House of Mary rapidly evolved into a popular pilgrimage destination thanks to a complex mix of historical, theological, and political factors.82 Popes such as John XXIII and Paul VI, who had mourned the decimation of Christian communities in Turkey earlier in the century, surely welcomed the presence of a new Christian shrine in that country. Turkey’s secularist government (laiklik) has also been influential; it encouraged the growth of the site in the 1950s, and today has officially sanctioned it as an interfaith destination by placing a multi-lingual placard out front. The placard, written in Turkish, English, French, and German, lists Qur’anic verses associated with Mary so that all visitors, whether religious pilgrim or secular tourist, will know of Mary’s significance to Christians and Muslims.83 Foreign policy considerations may have also played a role,84 along with the approbation of local ecclesiastical authorities such as Descuffi, and the compelling ideas of Louis Massignon. Together, all these factors helped to create Meryem Ana Evi as an explicitly interfaith pilgrimage destination. The Making of Nostra aetate §3 The development of Meryem Ana Evi in the 1950s influenced the development of Nostra aetate in the 1960s. The link between the shrine and 79. According to Descuffi, who reported that the House of Mary had 100,000 Muslim pilgrims and 100,000 Christian pilgrims per year for the past decade during his Sept. 29, 1964, intervention, Acta Synodalia vol. III, pars III, p. 54. 80. Pénicaud, “La Maison de la Vierge à Ephèse,” 9. 81. In his letter to Descuffi, the pope says the House of Mary is open “à toute personne, même nonchrétienne, ayant une dévotion spéciale à la Vierge Marie,” as cited in Pénicaud, “La Maison de la Vierge à Ephèse,” 9. Massignon refers to the pope’s words in a September 2, 1962, letter to Plumey. I am grateful to Fr. Maciej Michalski, archivist at the Oblate General Archives in Rome, who sent me copies of the unpublished Plumey-Massignon correspondence of 1962, filed under Media & Edition (Different Issus—Correspondence: 1949 –1965) B-43S2. 82. Pénicaud, “La Maison de la Vierge à Ephèse,” p. 16. 83. Ibid. 84. Füsun Türkmen and Emre Öktem, “Foreign Policy as a Determinant in the Fate of Turkey’s Non-Muslim Minorities: A Dialectical Analysis” Turkish Studies 14 (2013), 463–82. 776 MERYEM ANA EVI, MARIAN DEVOTION the document can be seen when examining the Acta Synodalia, the official written records of the Second Vatican Council proceedings. At General Congregation 90, held September 28-29, 1964, the Council Fathers deliberated on the text which was to become Nostra aetate (at this time, it was still called De Iudaeis); the September 1964 draft was the first to include a reference to Islam.85 The reference is brief. After discussing Judaism at length, the draft goes on to affirm a few key elements of Islamic doctrine and practice: We also and above all embrace the Muslims, who worship one personal and recompensing God, and who come near to us in religious feeling and many aspects of human culture.86 This passage affirms that Muslims worship one God, and also acknowledges—very generally—Muslim piety (“religious feeling”). Furthermore, the phrase “above all” suggests that in the eyes of the Church, Islam is closer to Christianity than any other religion (except Judaism, which is discussed at greater length, and in this draft is mentioned before Islam). But nothing specific is said about shared beliefs or practices, and there is no mention of Christ, Mary, or Marian devotion. Two bishops from Muslim-majority countries, Sfair (Syria) and Descuffi (Turkey), responded to the draft at length, encouraging the addition of key theological points including the Qur’anic understanding of Christ as “Word and Spirit of God” (Sura 4:171), and the acknowledgement of Islam as an Abrahamic religion (rather than a Christian heresy as had formerly been believed). But what is most pertinent here is that three bishops (Sfair, Descuffi, and also Yves Plumey, OMI) mention shared Marian devotion as proof of the affinity between Christianity and Islam, and all of them name the Turkish House of Mary as a concrete example of this.87 Yves Plumey, OMI, a French missionary stationed in Cameroon, was the first Council Father that day to expand on specific doctrinal points 85. Proceedings from General Congregation 90, September 28–29 1964 are in Acta Synodalia, vol. III, pars III, pp. 9–55. 86. The Latin text of this first draft is in Acta Synodalia vol. III, pars VIII, pp. 637–42. The short section on Muslims, p. 639, reads: “Sic amplectamur imprimis etiam Musulmanos qui unicum Deum personalem atque remuneratorum adorant et sensu religioso atque permultis humanae culturae communicationibus propius ad nos accesserunt.” 87. Bishop Yves Joseph Marie Plumey, OMI, of Garoua, Cameroon, Acta Synodalia, vol. III, pars III, pp. 15–17; Maronite Archbishop Pietro Sfair (Titular Bishop of Nisibis) of Syria, pp. 41–43; and Archbishop Joseph Descuffi, CM, of Smyrna (Izmir), Turkey, pp. 53-55. ritA GeorGe-tvrtković 777 related to Islamic Mariology.88 He also mentions Muslim devotional praxis: [Muslims] piously visit Marian sanctuaries, take part in processions honoring her, devoutly honor her images, often name their daughters after her, and implore her protection everywhere: these things are very frequently reported in India, Pakistan, Mozambique, Egypt, Iran, Turkey, and most especially in Ephesus, where the government kindly approves and allows the opportunity.89 Why does Plumey—a French missionary in Africa—take special note of a shrine in faraway Turkey? The connection appears to be Massignon, with whom Plumey, a fellow Frenchman and Breton, corresponded before the Council. Plumey wrote Massignon a letter on August 10, 1962, because he was interested in learning more about the joint Christian-Muslim pilgrimage to a Seven Sleepers shrine in Vieux Marché, Brittany, which Massignon had founded. Plumey hoped to replicate the pilgrimage in Cameroon, where he says Christian-Muslim relations were strained at the time. 90 Massignon replied on September 2, 1962, a few weeks before the Council began. In that letter, Massignon manages to touch on every major crossover point, not only the Vieux Marché pilgrimage, but also the Seven Sleepers, Abrahamic faiths, interreligious hospitality, and the House of Mary.91 Plumey was not a scholar of Islam like Massignon, but as a missionary in Cameroon, a country with a significant Muslim population, he evidently cared greatly about local Christian-Muslim relations, and therefore it is not surprising that he was interested in learning more about rituals that might bring Christians and Muslims together in positive ways. After learning about the House of Mary from Massignon, it appears that Plumey began to see Mary as a possible bridge to dialogue and fraternity in Cameroon. This was the opposite of the approach of Sheen, who, though likewise influenced by stories of grassroots praxis, nevertheless chose to see Mary mainly as a bridge to conversion. While the post-Vatican II Church 88. Plumey, “The Muslims, more than all other non-Christians, understand the mystery of Christ. Heirs of Abraham, they fully recognize Jesus as first in holiness among the prophets, virginally born of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and Mary herself as the greatest daughter of Abraham. They fervently uphold both Mary’s virginity and Jesus’ virginal birth.” Acta Synodalia, vol. III, pars III, pp. 15–16. 89. Plumey in Acta Synodalia vol. III, pars III, p. 16. 90. Plumey, private letter to Massignon, August 10, 1962. 91. In his September 2, 1962 reply to Plumey, Massignon quotes Pope Pius XII’s letter to Descuffi, which says that the House of Mary is open to anyone with a devotion to Mary, even non-Christians. 778 MERYEM ANA EVI, MARIAN DEVOTION came to understand dialogue and proclamation as complementary, as noted above, Sheen’s writings stress only the pre-Vatican, non-dialogical view: that of conversion, and conversion alone. The final speech of the September 29, 1964 session was given by Archbishop Descuffi. In it, he repeats and expands upon the theological points already brought up by Sfair and Plumey. But Descuffi adds the testimonial with which this article begins, stating that he has personally witnessed, over a period of a decade, Muslims and Christians sharing a devotion to Mary at Meryem Ana Evi. It would seem from this speech that Descuffi is providing the Council with a glimpse of the sensus fidelium at work in a specific place, for he begins by citing his own experience (“I have seen with my own eyes”). It is not too surprising that Descuffi would mention Meryem Ana Evi, since the shrine is located in his diocese. But it is surprising that two other Council Fathers also referred to the Turkish shrine on this day—including Bishop Plumey, who was stationed in faraway Cameroon. Why didn’t any of them (especially Sfair, who was born in Syria) mention other shared shrines such as Our Lady of Saydnaya in Syria, given its longer tradition of shared popular devotion? Descuffi and Massignon had been promoting the House of Mary in Ephesus among the laity for a decade.Were they now promoting the shrine among the bishops at the Council?92 It seems that the three bishops’ speeches on September 28–29 were compelling, for the second draft of Nostra aetate was greatly expanded. While only a few lines were added on Hinduism and Buddhism (§2), two full paragraphs (§3) were added on Islam.93 Several periti—all Francophone churchmen and Islamicists—were highly influential in expanding Section 3.94 These periti included Robert Caspar, Joseph Cuoq, Jean Lanfry (all members of the Missionaries of Africa Order, a.k.a. the White Fathers), Georges Anawati, OP, and Jean Corbon.95 The amended text of 92. For more on the connections between Descuffi, Massignon, and the House of the Virgin in Ephesus, see Krokus, “Louis Massignon’s Influence,” p. 337, and Pénicaud, “La Maison de la Vierge,” pp. 8–10. 93. The first and second Latin drafts are published side by side in Acta Synodalia vol. III, pars III, pp. 637–42. 94. The influence of Dominicans and White Fathers was explicitly affirmed by Cardinal Bea at the Council in October 1964.See D’Costa, Vatican II: Catholic doctrines on Jews and Muslims p. 193. 95. For more by and about the periti involved in writing Nostra aetate 3, see especially Anawati, “Excursus on Islam;” D’Costa, Vatican II: Catholic doctrines on Jews and Muslims; and the forthcoming book, The Genesis and Development of Nostra Aetate, by Thomas Stransky, CSP, and John Borelli. RITA GeorGe-Tvrtković 779 November 18, 1964, looks very similar to the final version of Nostra aetate promulgated in 1965: it outlines key aspects of the Islamic doctrine of God; praises the Muslim practices of prayer, fasting, and almsgiving; and distinguishes clearly between the Islamic Jesus (a prophet) and the Christian Christ (son of God).96 But most relevant to our discussion here is the addition of the line: “They also honor Mary, His Virgin Mother; at times they call on her with devotion.”97 Naturally, the expanded draft benefitted from the scholarly knowledge of the periti. But the inclusion of the line on Marian devotion seems to have been influenced at least partly by the three bishops’ speeches on September 29, all of which referred to popular Marian devotion in general and Meryem Ana Evi in particular.98 Even the same Latin word, devote “with devotion” was used, both in the draft and in Plumey’s speech. Could it be argued that the evolution of the line on Marian devotion in Nostra aetate is an example of the sensus fidelium at work? Bishops Plumey, Descuffi, and Sfair all mentioned shared Marian devotion in their speeches, and made a direct link between popular piety and what they wanted Nostra aetate’s theology of Islam to look like. A 2014 document of the International Theological Commission (ITC), “Sensus Fidei in the Life of the Church,” notes the long tradition of the Church relying on the sensus fidelium to confirm doctrine—Mariological doctrines in particular.99 The document mentions four cases in history where Mariology was influenced by the sensus fidelium: Mary’s perpetual virginity, Mary’s divine motherhood, the Immaculate Conception, and the Assumption.100 Could the idea that Christians and Muslims share a devotion to Mary also be added to this list? 96. For a discussion of the theological considerations that influenced the draft, see D’Costa, Vatican II: Catholic Doctrines on Jews and Muslims, especially pp. 186–206; and John Flannery, “Christ in Islam and Muhammad, a Christian Evaluation: Theological Reflections on Tradition and Dialogue” in The Catholic Church in the Contemporary Middle East, ed. Anthony O’Mahony and John Flannery (Melisende, 2010), pp. 331–52. 97. “Matremque eius virginalem honorant Mariam et aliquando eam devote etiam invocant.” Acta Synodalia vol. IV, pars IV, p. 692. 98. Unsworth suggests that Anawati and Caspar “drew directly upon Descuffi’s intervention while drafting Nostra aetate 3,” in “Louis Massignon,” p. 315. 99. The document defines sensus fidelium as follows: “the faithful have an instinct for the truth of the Gospel, which enables them to recognize and endorse authentic Christian doctrine and practice, and to reject what is false. That supernatural instinct, intrinsically linked to the gift of faith received in the communion of the Church, is called the sensus fidei,” §2. 100. Historically, these can be seen in the following eras: the Patristic period (§24, Mary’s perpetual virginity and §26, Mary’s divine motherhood), medieval period (§27, Immaculate Conception), modern period (§38-39, Immaculate Conception), 20th c. (§41– 52, Assumption). 780 MerYeM ANA evi, MAriAN DevotioN Based on the description of sensus fidelium found in the ITC document, and its use throughout history, is it plausible to conclude that the speeches of Plumey, Descuffi, and Sfair expressed the sensus fidelium of ordinary Catholics at the time, as it pertained to shared Christian-Muslim devotional practices at Marian shrines? Of course, their sentiments had to be affirmed by other bishops, which they were.101 However, it must be noted that the speeches of Plumey, Descuffi, and Sfair were rather onesided, in that they only focused on Marian devotions promoting positive Christians-Muslim relations. The bishops ignored the other side of the tradition, for example Our Lady of Victory/Our Lady of the Rosary (invoked against Muslims since the 1571 Battle of Lepanto), or Croatia’s Gospa Sinjska (Our Lady of Sinj), whose intercession, it is believed, led to the miraculous defeat of Ottoman forces at the siege of Sinj in Croatia on August 15, 1715, and is still celebrated in Sinj annually on the feast of the Assumption. Did the bishops—and therefore does Nostra aetate—present an incomplete or even imbalanced sensus fidelium which sees Marian devotion only as a way to bring Muslims and Christians together? What about those times in history when Marian devotions and shrines have been used to increase divisions between Islam and Christianity? Conclusion The history of Christians, Muslims, and Mary is complicated. This can be seen even during the Marian decade, when some Catholics stressed Mary’s role as a bridge to conversion (Sheen), while others stressed her role as a bridge to dialogue (Massignon). Pope Pius XII clearly saw her as both, as is evidenced by his simultaneously positive comments about the shared shrine Meryem Ana Evi and his commissioning of the triumphalist Lepanto mosaic. It seems that the tension between dialogue and proclamation, between bridge and barrier, is expressed well in the actions of Pius XII here. This tension, and this complex history, should not be ignored or minimized. While Nostra aetate “urges all to forget the past,” history must still be taken into account, and revisionist histories in particular must be avoided, even as today many practitioners of dialogue promote the Virgin as a bridge to understanding. 102 101. D’Costa, Vatican II: Catholic doctrines on Jews and Muslims, p. 200, suggests that “many Fathers would have been moved by their accounts, especially given their own devotion and revelation to Mary and also the protracted controversy about Mary that had taken place earlier at the Council.” 102. Nostra aetate, §3. RITA GEORGE-TVRTkOVIć 781 Despite Nostra aetate’s praise of the Muslim devotion to Mary, Catholics must be careful not to over-emphasize her positive role as a point of commonality between Christians and Muslims, given the complicated history of her use both as a bridge and barrier.103 While the Catholic theology of Islam which has developed since Nostra aetate has leaned increasingly towards seeing Mary as a bridge to dialogue, it is important to remember the history of her use as a barrier, and that the idea of Mary as bridge represents but one end of a wide spectrum of Christian views on Mary vis-à-vis Islam—views which have constantly shifted depending on her polemic or irenic usefulness at a particular time and place. Nostra aetate §3 seems to express the sensus fidelium on shared Marian devotion at the grassroots level, at least during the 1950s. And the continued popularity of Turkey’s Meryem Ana Evi today suggests the longevity of the shared shrine idea. It will be interesting to see how current changes in Catholic devotional practices (e.g., a decline in rosary use in certain circles) will affect shared shrines particularly, and Christian-Muslim relations more generally, going forward.104 Even though pro-dialogue Muslims today often promote Mary as a bridge—for example, the Australian Muslims who in 2002 named their house of worship “Virgin Mary Mosque” to underscore their commitment to interfaith dialogue—what about younger Catholics, or other Christians, who do not have a devotion to Mary at all? Just as the sensus fidelium seems to have influenced the Catholic theology of Islam in 1965, how might a changing sensus fidelium, which today in some quarters deemphasizes Marian devotion, affect the Catholic theology of Islam, and Christian-Muslim dialogue, now and into the future? 103. Her role as a bridge has been repeated frequently of late by Catholics and Muslims alike. Consider just two examples: Mona Siddiqui in Ch. 4 on Mary in her book Christians, Muslims, and Jesus (New Haven, 2014), and Cardinal William Keeler’s 1995 speech “How Mary Holds Christians and Muslims in Conversation,” Origins: CNS Documentary Service 25, 36 (February 29, 1996). 104. Interestingly, the decline in the devotion of the rosary among Catholics after the Council coincides with the post-conciliar rise in Catholic understanding of other religions, including Islam. Forum Essay KATHLEEN M. COMERFORD; GIAN PAOLO BRIZZI; JOHN PATRICK DONNELLY, S.J.; SIMONA NEGRUZZO; MAURIZIO SANGALLI; PAUL F. GRENDLER The Jesuits and Italian Universities, 1548–1773. By Paul F. Grendler. (Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 2017. Pp. xvii, 505, $34.95. ISBN 9780813 229362) INTRODUCTION BY KATHLEEN M. COMERFORD (GEORGIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY) Paul Grendler’s latest volume is both a broad and deep study of Jesuit higher education in the early modern Italian states. It proceeds chronologically and geographically, recounting the relationship between a given local university and the nearby Jesuit college(s). The Jesuits created relationships with Italian universities almost immediately after they were founded: they were first employed at the University of Rome in 1537, and initially associated with the University of Padua in 1542 when they founded a college in that city while studying philosophy, logic, and theology. By the 1550s, Ignatius and his aides concluded that Italian universities were insufficient preparation for anyone wishing to become a Jesuit. Thus, the Society had to develop its own universities. Among the obstacles they faced were the entrenchment of existing universities, resistance of political and religious authorities, leadership, internal squabbles, external tensions, the purposes of an education, and the necessity of degrees. The first Italian educational institution the Society established was in Messina (1548), on the island of Sicily. The Jesuits envisioned a collegiate university rather than one on the model of existing Italian foundations. Those institutions, answerable to civic authorities, awarded licentiates and doctoral degrees in advanced subjects, most frequently law, to a largely lay student body. Conversely, collegiate universities employed clergy teaching lower-level subjects to largely clerical student bodies. Failed negotiations with the political leadership of Messina forced the Jesuits to scale back and create only a college. This qualified failure did not result in an immediate 782 FORUM ESSAY 783 change in procedure. Jesuits continued to push for a collegiate university led by a member of the Society, a position which was formalized in the Constitutions (1558). In the remaining decades of the sixteenth century, the Jesuits attempted to create collegiate universities in Catania, Turin, and Padua. In the early seventeenth century, they shifted away from the collegiate model in Parma (where, for the first time, they participated in a state-run university), and Mantua. Foundations in Fermo and Macerata, where Jesuits taught limited subjects and had to share the teaching of theology with mendicants, demonstrated a new, more flexible approach and willingness to play smaller roles in the universities. The failures in Palermo and Chambéry, where the Society tried to control the educational institutions at which they taught, taught them the lesson they needed to cooperate, not take over. Later seventeenth-century cases show that this approach was generally more successful. Jesuits taught peaceably at several universities they did not seek to dominate: Ferrara, Pavia, and Siena all employed Jesuit mathematicians, hired as distinguished scholars, to teach at their civic universities. In these cities, Jesuits created individual, not corporate, relationships with local universities. In all cases, support for the Society from political powers and from Rome mitigated conflicts, but no larger overtures developed. On the other hand, problems with existing institutions had not evaporated. In Bologna, the long-established university sought to maintain a monopoly over higher learning. In the 1630s, wars led to the collapse of philosophy and theology teaching in Mantua and threatened the stability of the college in Parma; in both cases, Jesuits moved to the college in Bologna. There, the university professors considered them a threat, and restricted the subjects which they could teach, until the papacy intervened decisively in the 1670s. Nevertheless, the Jesuits remained in Bologna, and expanded through the eighteenth century. A crisis with Rome developed later. In 1696, in a departure from the Constitutions and the Ratio studiorum (but in accord with northern European Jesuits), Roman Jesuits began to teach canon law. The university reacted angrily, and won the battle: Jesuits could not have a chair in the subject. However, the Jesuit Roman colleges, which had more students than the university, continued to offer instruction in canon law under other names, and first amended the Constitutions (1730– 31) and later expanded their degree offerings to include doctorates. The conclusions to these different cases are complex. First, “[t]he Jesuits succeeded when they cooperated with rulers to create new civicJesuit universities.” However, underpinning, and often undermining, the 784 FORUM ESSAY success of the Jesuit/civic endeavor was “[t]he strong civic tradition of Italian universities,” which stood in the way of both the collegiate model and the Jesuit agenda to teach more philosophy and theology than their university counterparts wanted.1 Finally, the Jesuits were flexible and learned from their failures and successes, both in terms of the alliances they formed and the decision they made to back off from the necessity of governing the universities at which they taught. This book is certain to produce lively and inviting discussion, and we offer what follows as a beginning. COMMENTS OF GIAN PAOLO BRIZZI (ALMA MATER STUDIORUM—UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA) This monograph, the latest in Paul Grendler’s inexhaustible historiographic work, is a culmination of his wide-ranging research on the history of the culture, education, and cultural institutes of the Italian states. Italian universities have been an important focus of his previous work and it was inevitable that he would address the issue of the encounter—or clash— between universities and Jesuits in the sphere of public education. Grendler has chosen to trace events characterizing the fluctuating nature of this relationship by examining separately the history of individual universities (Messina, Parma, Perugia, etc.). He includes chapters on the features of philosophical and theological culture proposed by the fathers of the Society of Jesus, and on the roles certain Jesuits agreed to take on as professors at certain universities. Not included in this study are the universities of Sardinia that, for numerous reasons, were exemplary cases.2 Here, two policies were adopted that concretized relations between Jesuits and the universities. In the case of Cagliari, Jesuits were granted complete autonomy in teaching courses in theology, philosophy, and literature, as provided in the Ratio Studiorum (Plan of Study). In Sassari, Jesuits had complete control of the University for over a century and gave external professors, who they chose, teaching posts in law and medicine, but maintained the functions of Rector and Chancellor. 1. Paul F. Grendler, The Jesuits and Italian Universities, 1548–1773 (Washington, DC, 2017) pp. 440–43; quotes from 440 and 442. 2. Grendler omits Cagliari and Sassari because they were part of the Kingdom of Aragon, although this omission is not fully justified given his inclusion of Chambéry, which belonged to the Province of Lyon. FORUM ESSAY 785 In order to build a picture of the causes that often led to conflictual relations between universities and Jesuits, one aspect creating friction is referred to in particular. The work of Jesuits in public education was legitimated by series of privileges conferred on the Society of Jesus by various pontiffs (Paul III, Julius III, Pius IV, Gregory XIII). This gave rise to a university law, ex iure pontificio, detached from general law and incompatible with the law in force in universities. Other points arise from reading this work, particularly involving the time period in the title. The years 1548–1773 span from the Messina experience to the suppression of the Society of Jesus. In fact, analysis of Jesuituniversity relations is well documented for the early modern age, up until 1650–1670, and is a period Grendler is particularly familiar with. However, documentation is rather more sporadic for the later years, which were rich in upheavals in relations between the Jesuits and universities. One aspect that could be seen as a turning point were the reforms in public education introduced in the 1720s, and which led, in many cases, to a reduction in the role of Jesuits in the sphere of public education. However, addressing universities individually, foregrounding corporative resistance of faculty members and the diffidence of city magistracies, does not allow us, in my opinion, to grasp fully the role played in the sphere of higher education by Jesuit Colleges in Italy. Above all, it should be noted that the institutional model of their schools was not immediately comparable to that of the universities. Universities were the product of different historical circumstances and had different organizational and institutional characteristics. These included such features as variations in the lifetimes of corporate bodies (collegia studiorum, universitates scholarium), differing influence of State or city government power, differences in the range and stability of courses offered (the numbers of chairs that could range from a handful to over a hundred), international recruitment for some, and regional for the majority. Such differences became evident during the Napoleonic years when numerous universities were downgraded to gymnasium or lyceum status. In the case of Jesuit Colleges, the schooling system was founded on a highly centralized form of governance regulated by a disciplined hierarchy. Their schools enjoyed financial stability and independence thanks to property incomes and this guaranteed the provision of a public and free education. The curriculum provided to students was divided into lower and upper courses of study which provided graded educational courses and in itinere exams. School calendars and teaching programs were standard in all Colleges. There were 786 FORUM ESSAY no signs of corporativism, and the selection of professors was carried out on a meritocratic basis. Tight disciplinary control of students and professors characterized life in the Jesuit schools. The success of the Jesuits should be seen not in the contrasts with individual universities, but in the features described in this book. These features signified a large degree of modernization in the governance, management, and organization of public education, and were the forerunners of changes that would mark educational reform in the Enlightenment. After the suppression of the Society of Jesus, this was both the material and immaterial legacy left by Jesuit schools. COMMENTS OF JOHN PATRICK DONNELLY, S.J. (MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY, EMERITUS) Paul Grendler has published prolifically on higher education in Italy and on the role of Jesuits in early modern Italy. This work is his masterpiece: 519 pages covering twenty Jesuit universities in Italy chronologically. The dates are somewhat misleading; they stretch from the first Jesuit Italian university in Messina, Sicily, to the papal decree abolishing the Jesuit order in 1773. This book covers the story of Jesuit universities to roughly 1650. Little attention is paid to Jesuit schools in the late seventeenth century and still less in the eighteenth century. The main focus is on the founding of the universities. Most of the Jesuit schools were more like modern high schools and undergraduate colleges. The students who went on usually sought training for law, medicine, or theology. Grendler’s main focus is on the battles between the Jesuits and opponents of their new schools; their main enemies were professors at previous universities in the city who feared for their jobs. Less than five percent of the Jesuits had a doctorate. A new Jesuit school would draw off many of their students mainly because the Jesuit schools charged no tuition. Often the Jesuits negotiated funding from the city government. The Jesuits had no families to feed and usually were somewhat frugal. They could also draw support from wealthy Catholics. In their struggle to get their new universities legalized, the Jesuits usually had strong support from the local nobility. The financial support from city governments was usually small. City governments sometimes promised financial help for new Jesuit universities, but often did not carry out the promise. Grendler several times lists the courses being taught in Italian Jesuit schools, giving the topic, the times, and the teachers’ names for the courses. FORUM ESSAY 787 Grendler does examine the impact of the Jesuit Ratio Studiorum of 1599, which remained in force for several centuries. The early Jesuit colleges were famous for their theater productions: plays, concerts, dancing, but Grendler does not devote much attention to these. Many of their graduates went on to law and medical schools. When the Jesuits tried to introduce courses in canon [church] law, law schools and civil governments were often upset. Not many individuals get much attention: only two have their pictures in the book, Antonio Possevino, S.J. (1533–1611, p. 97) and Cesare Cremonini (1559–1631, p. 127). Cremonini was a bitter opponent of the Jesuits. He gave an oration to the Venetian Senate which bitterly attacked the Jesuits, and he made a printed summary available. He claimed that contrary to law the Jesuits had set up a college at Padua, where the University of Padua was the traditional university of the Venetian state. The new Jesuit school was destroying the official university. This resulted in frequent fights between the students of the traditional university and those of the new Jesuit school. On December 22, 1591, the Venetian Senate voted that the Jesuits could only educate young Jesuits. Each chapter ends with a short summary. The text ends with an excellent conclusion followed by an appendix with biographical sketches of four important Jesuits. The work concludes with two pages of archival sources, and twenty-six pages of secondary sources. This is a well-researched study of an important subject which will be a guide for decades to come. COMMENTS OF SIMONA NEGRUZZO (ALMA MATER STUDIORUM, UNIVERSITÀ DI BOLOGNA) Paul F. Grendler’s scientific output is crowned by this impressive study—one which must be considered comprehensive—on the relationship between the Studia generalia and the Company of Jesus in the ancien régime Italian states. A specialist in Italian history in the early modern age, Grendler produced a pioneering investigation of the Roman Inquisition and subsequently dedicated himself to the history of the culture, education, and educational institutions, realizing a praiseworthy synthesis on Italian universities during the Renaissance and a monograph on that of Mantua. Now, as if to put the final seal on his itinerary research, he has revisited this work with the precise intention of investigating the points of convergence and/or the disagreements that, for almost two centuries, marked the relations between the Italian universities and Jesuit educational activity. The latter was developed in three contexts: 1) in the individual commitment of 788 FORUM ESSAY teaching a specific discipline within the Studia; 2) in the management of some Chairs of higher courses in the colleges of education; and 3) in the running of new university foundations. The volume is structured in fifteen chapters. After the first one— which deals with the relationship entertained by Ignazio di Loyola and his earliest disciples/companions with the universities of Paris and Padua—the narrative focuses in chronological sequence on various geographical areas where the Jesuits tried to join existing universities or open their own, describing the culture and history of each place that welcomed them. The references to the founder and to the very origins of the Company—well rooted in the fervid Parisian university atmosphere of the early decades of the sixteenth century—seem relevant. Although it acted as a stimulus and as a catalyst for the whole Ignatian experience, Paris was not at first conceived of by the Jesuits as a special apostolate instrument. Their active involvement, only developed later, transmitted from a Paduan setting already pervaded by reformist stimuli, that would subsequently prove resistant to any contamination by Jesuitical activity thanks to the watchful gaze of the Republic of Venice. If the role of the Jesuits in the development of higher education in the Italian states is now well established, less well-known and recognized is their contribution to the whole of the university circuit, particularly in Studia like Parma and Mantua where they were able to assume full control. Likewise less well-known is their contribution to stimulating the traditional didactic forms that, in many areas, seemed to be stagnating. Grendler therefore proceeds by assessing the experiences of several cities, where this relationship between Jesuits and university developed in different ways, tracing a map extending across the whole of the Peninsula, from Chambéry to Messina, from Turin to Macerata, from Perugia to Rome, but that—inexplicably— does not touch the Sardinian cities of Cagliari and Sassari (notwithstanding an abundance of bibliographic references dedicated to them). Similarly, he does not consider the college of Brera which, in Borromean Milan, directly received from the archbishop the privilege of conferring degrees in his stead—a college which, thanks to its position in the chief city of the archdiocese, constituted a counterpoint to the Studium Papiense, thus triggering a no small degree of ecclesiastic interest by the diocese of Padua. The reasons that led to the conflict between institutions—at times more manifest, at times latent—are to be sought in the juridical bases of the educational activity of the Society of Jesus. These bases derived from the concession of broad and specific privileges by a succession of popes, FORUM ESSAY 789 who put the Jesuits in a favorable condition to compete (if not indeed to counteract) the Studia, which, by granting of academic degrees, were governed by common law. In describing the relations that existed between the universities and the Jesuits, Grendler’s analysis of these political realities makes more apparent both the diffidence of local authorities and the corporate hostility of the academic bodies towards the Society, particularly with respect to the concrete influence exercised on the university system by the Jesuit modernization of the Modus Parisiensis. The Jesuits, in turn, contributed to this competition with the Italian universities thanks to their own distinctive methods: the free tuition and openness to non-Jesuit students; the uniformity of the controlled and centralized Jesuit method (the Ratio atque institutio studiorum constituted a difficult model and exerted a tangible influence, contributing to a deprovincialization of local academic realities, inserting them into a broader circuit); and the application of an educational project, which, in the higher courses—at times by completion of required courses and examinations, at times by abuse of power—altered the disciplinary practices. For the latter, the changes were indeed decisive and manifest by the first half of the eighteenth century—perhaps the period least of all examined by Grendler. By this point, the Jesuits modified the traditional order of the teaching of philosophy to alter the traditional sequence of logic, physics, and metaphysics, by adopting a new pattern, according to which metaphysics immediately followed logic but preceded physics, thereby making metaphysics a basic preparatory discipline and thus preponderant in the philosophical curriculum. In actual fact, the choice of fitting the discussion between the chronological limits of the opening of the Primum ac Prototypum collegium in Messina (1548) and the suppression of the Society (1773), results in a close-knit description up through the late decades of the seventeenth century, after which it loosens, leaving some sections suspended, such as those discussing the contribution and the reaction of the Society to university reforms beginning in the early eighteenth century—or those stimulated by dissemination of new scientific knowledge. The picture painted by Grendler would have achieved greater completeness by shifting the terminus ante quem to the French Revolution— which might have made it better able to account for the contribution that the Jesuits made to the Italian universities. 790 FORUM ESSAY COMMENTS OF MAURIZIO SANGALLI (UNIVERSITÀ PER STRANIERI DI SIENA) Paul Grendler’s book is an exceptional tapestry that treats the specific topic, but also permits a broad overview of the social, political, and religious problems of the period. Of course, the topic is the relationship between the Society of Jesus and the various Italian contexts during the period 1548–1773. The overview allows for greater understanding of the coexistence of an order of clerics regular that was shaped by a period of great turbulence within western Christianity, alongside governments of the territorial states, the ruling classes, and the medieval, corporate structure of universities. Examples such as Messina, Turin, Palermo, Chambéry, Bologna, Rome, and Perugia all show the variety of pre-existing conditions and approaches. Considering the great diversity of contexts in which the Jesuits established educational institutions, the way in which they operated (often flexible and accommodating yet calculating) is noteworthy. The wide geographical and chronological range of the specific cases examined permits the educated reader to establish comparisons and draw some plausible conclusions. The book debunks some myths and stereotypes about the Society of Jesus. First of all, in Italy, they experienced many more failures than successes. Their disappointment in Padua (an exceptional but “justifiable” case) represented a sort of model for ways to hinder the establishment of a Jesuit college. Indeed, in twelve out of sixteen cases, the Society had to give up. Secondly, opposition to them not infrequently came from other ecclesiastical institutions and individuals, be they different religious orders, corporations of secular clergy (cathedral canonries), or hierarchs (bishops, archbishops, cardinals). This was also true—perhaps especially so—for the Papal States. Grendler quite rightly notes the “strong civic tradition” of Italian universities (and the ruling classes). This resulted in corrupted connections between the urban elites and institutions of higher education; universities became instruments of favoritism and social stability. As a result, Italian universities became increasingly provincial and lost their status on the international stage. The foreign origins of the Jesuits proved problematic for their integration, as did the organizational and educational models which were so different from the Italian norm. Paradoxically, the Jesuits active in Italy during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were mostly Italian, and they came from the very same ruling classes that had previously obstructed the Society’s initiatives; in fact, Jesuit colleges had come to be considered the means to achieving the élite’s social goals. Nevertheless, the FORUM ESSAY 791 Jesuits continued to be attacked and their establishments continued to fail, and there must be larger reasons for that. Perhaps the sustained opposition can be attributed to two sources. The “black legend” rapidly arose around the Society of Jesus, and although it was largely due to prejudices and falsehoods, it nevertheless generated a diffident and even hostile public that scotched its endeavors. This—in some ways—is indicative of how the Counter-Reformation did not achieve homogeneity in Italy, despite what some scholarship has concluded. Rather, its impact was superficial and Grendler touches upon this at the end of his book. Another (and demonstrable) source for opposition could be found among the university faculties, the colleges of doctors in law, medicine and theology, and the civic authorities and ruling classes that had oversight over the universities. Some historians have posited this as a conflict between “the Past” and “Modernity,” but the situation was far more complex. In fact, both counterparts exhibited elements of novelty and historical continuity. The Jesuits, because of the founders’ Parisian experience, sought a collegiate model: the humanities, philosophy, and theology would prevail in institutions that offered lodging and teaching. In Italian universities, the humanities were often seen as preparatory studies for programs in law and medicine. Furthermore, students at Italian universities played a major role in the life of the institutions (and so it is no surprise that Grendler reports many episodes of harassment against the students of Jesuit colleges). It may seem paradoxical, but here the Italian universities anticipated the future better than the Jesuit colleges: “collegiate universities were quasi-clerical and semi-religious institutions. Italian universities were civic and lay enterprises” (p. 51). On the other hand, the Jesuits were “herald[s]” of a new and more modern pedagogical method: they taught twice per day, for an hour-and-a-half in order to review the lesson; they also usually taught on Saturdays, which was certainly a shock to those habituated to the Italian system. The Jesuits only really succeeded when they found a place for themselves within a larger institution (claiming control over the “arts faculty”), or when they served a prince’s needs for a bureaucracy by founding a civicJesuit university. This participation in the development of the modern state is evidence of their “smart” strategy. Eventually, the order’s administration allowed their members to teach in departments that they did not control, most often in mathematics or the sciences. Certainly the Jesuits were more flexible in how they governed or managed than the typical Italian university, which had ossified by the late sixteenth century. With fewer interna- 792 FORUM ESSAY tional scholars teaching at the Italian university, the Jesuits sometimes were the only foreign teachers. Grendler’s rich and vast work has many other positive qualities which space prohibits me from discussing at this time. I do hope that he will continue enlightening us by bring his knowledge and experience to the study of the Jesuits within a wider, European context. Such a study might solidify our hypothesis of the Society of Jesus’ smart strategy in response to the authorities of urban, national, and religious institutions in different cities on the continent. RESPONSE OF PAUL F. GRENDLER (UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO) I thank Professor Nelson H. Minnich for opening the pages of The Catholic Historical Review to a discussion of my book. I thank Professor Kathleen Comerford for her good summary, and I am grateful to the four distinguished scholars who took the time to write thoughtful comments on a long book. All five have made major scholarly contributions to the history of the Jesuits and Italian education. There is some criticism that the book concentrates on the period 1550 to 1670 and neglects the later period. This is only partially accurate. The battle between the University of Rome and the Roman College over the teaching of canon law occurred around 1700 (chapter 11), and the book contains material concerning the Jesuits and the University of Perugia and the Jesuits in Mantua in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. And there is information on individual Jesuits who taught in the universities of Ferrara, Pavia, and Siena in the eighteenth century. Nevertheless, the book offers less information on the eighteenth century because the situation was settled: the Jesuits did not make any new attempts to enter Italian universities in the eighteenth century. They accepted the status quo, which was that some universities were willing to appoint a tiny number of individual Jesuit professors, but nothing more. Professor Brizzi correctly points out that educational reforms of the 1720s (in the Duchy of Piedmont-Savoy) sharply reduced the role of Jesuit pre-university schools. This was the beginning of Enlightenment educational reforms that produced extensive change in Italian university education from the 1780s to 1815, some of it imposed by French conquerors. It is a period that merits more attention from scholars with a better command of the sources for that period than I have. FORUM ESSAY 793 Another criticism is that the book should have included the Jesuitcivic universities of Cagliari and Sassari in Sardinia. I omitted them for three reasons. The focus is on the relations between the Jesuits and Italian state and city governments. Sardinia was ruled by the Kingdom of Aragon until 1718 when it passed to the Duchy of Piedmont-Savoy. Second, there already is much excellent scholarship on these two universities. Third, it would have made a long book even longer and more difficult to publish. American, English, and Canadian university presses commonly refuse to publish works longer than 150,000 words, and force authors to mutilate their books to get them published, which I refuse to do. I am grateful to Trevor Lipscombe and the Catholic University of America Press for publishing a book of 220,000 words with footnotes. Professor Negruzzo mentions that the Jesuit Brera school of Milan conferred degrees when Carlo Borromeo (d. 1584) was archbishop of Milan and, thus, it competed with the University of Pavia. This was true; all Jesuit schools had the right to confer degrees in theology and philosophy, and the Brera school and the Roman College did in the sixteenth century. But Italian Jesuit schools then stopped; they conferred very few degrees after 1600 because of the opposition from universities. I agree with Professor Brizzi that the institutional model of Jesuit schools was not comparable to Italian universities, a point that the book might have emphasized more. I also realize that the Society viewed preuniversity schools and Jesuit universities as a continuum. When I began to study Jesuit education, I hoped to discuss Jesuit pre-university schools and universities in a single volume. But there were significant differences between the attitudes of civic authorities toward Jesuits teaching in universities and Jesuit schools, and the archival material is immense. So I decided to divide the topic. The next book will study Jesuit pre-university schools in Italy, a much happier story for the Jesuits. My books usually focus on concrete results rather than large historiographical issues. But with the reader’s indulgence, a couple will be raised. Professor Sangalli is correct: the Catholic or Counter Reformation did not sweep everything before it in Italy; some Italian civic institutions and traditions stoutly resisted. In a land saturated with Catholicism and home to the Papacy, the most learned religious order had little success in entering established universities or creating new ones. It was a surprising failure. Another thought: Jesuit education was the culmination of Renaissance education. The Jesuit lower school curriculum was a well-organized version of the Renaissance humanistic curriculum that Italian and northern Euro- 794 FORUM ESSAY pean pedagogical humanists created. The Jesuit university studied Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas intensively, an inheritance of late medieval and Renaissance university scholasticism. And while Jesuit lower schools played a major role in bringing the humanities into the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, their upper schools and universities faltered in Europe, in part because they clung to Aristotle longer than they should have. A major theme of the book is the difference between two kinds of universities. In the northern European collegiate arts (=philosophy) and theology university, mostly clergymen taught young clerics seeking bachelor’s and master’s degrees in philosophy and theology, religious orders played major institutional roles, and little law and medicine were taught. In the Italian law and medicine university, lay professors taught older lay students seeking doctorates in law and medicine, while theology was largely ignored or taught “off campus” in monastic houses. Both models are to some degree still with us today. The Jesuits tried to insert the northern collegiate university into the Italian law and medicine university and generally failed. On the other hand, Martin Luther was a very popular Augustinian hermit friar who taught biblical studies at a small German collegiate university dominated by his religious order. He began a curriculum rebellion that grew into the magisterial Reformation. If he had been an Italian teaching theology at an Italian university, would anyone have paid attention to what he said in his lectures? The interaction among Church, state, and university, and the relationship amng priest, prince, and professor, have seldom been easy. Church and state have often differed over the governance and purpose of universities. The story of the Jesuits and Italian universities is a fascinating part of that long history. Book Reviews GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS Christian Historiography: Five Rival Versions. By Jay D. Green. (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press. 2015. Pp. xxvi, 236. $34.95 paperback. ISBN 978-1-48130263-0.) Jay Green, Professor of History at Covenant College, Lookout Mountain, Georgia, has written a survey of five current approaches to combining the Christian faith with the practice of history. The first approach Green characterizes as taking religion seriously. In the twentieth century, he explains, the general drift of academic history was toward the treatment of religion, if at all, in naturalistic terms as one among many objects of social scientific research. Even the massive achievement of Perry Miller in reappropriating the Puritans for mainstream American history was performed at the expense of concentrating on their mind rather than on their faith. Hence some Christian historians have reacted by treating religion as irreducibly religious. This method, Green urges, enables the Christian faith to foster empathy for historical agents. A second approach consists of the application of a Christian worldview to historiography. This way of integrating faith and learning has been championed by two Reformed scholars who have worked with distinction at the University of Notre Dame, Mark Noll and George Marsden. Noll’s Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (1994) classically deplored the neglect of academic work such as history writing by conservative Protestants; Marsden provided a program for remedying the deficiency. History, in the third place, has been treated as a moral guide. In a more miscellaneous chapter on this subject, Green points out how historians of the right and the left have exploited the past to provide sanction for their political opinions. Yet the author believes that it is right to link morality with history, not least because it is probably in the last resort impossible to divorce them. There are, he proposes, responsible and irresponsible ways of doing it. Fourthly, Green reviews techniques by which history has been deployed as a form of Christian apologetic. The Christian faith, commentators have argued, carries the credit for generating Western civilization or, more narrowly, American freedom. Green raises two objections to this strategy. On the one hand, it encourages historians to stretch the evidence to fit their preconceived notions; on the other, it assumes that cultural advances are the fruit of religious faithfulness. The author clearly dissents from this point of view. Equally, he objects to the fifth way of practicing Christian history—history within a providentialist framework. The doctrine of providence, he contends, is essential to Christianity, but discerning a superintending providence is not. Christians, marked as they are by finitude and sin, cannot hope to see the hand of God in the past. Indeed (and this is where the book is most original) 795 796 BOOK REVIEWS the very doctrine of providence rules out providentialism. The book of Job, for example, teaches that the ways of the Almighty are inscrutable. Green therefore mounts a Christian critique of placing events within a providential scheme. The author, as this summary suggests, does not stand back from assessment, but his main purpose is expository. The five viewpoints are explained with clarity and appropriate illustration. Although the coverage is largely Protestant, Catholic authors such as Lord Acton (inevitably), Christopher Dawson (who is held up for admiration), and Brad S. Gregory (among contemporaries) find their place in the analysis. The conclusion is that Christian historians should understand their work as a vocation, however secular their subject-matter. Christian historiography is a holy task which ought to be done well. Few will want to disagree. University of Stirling DAVID BEBBINGTON Ehe, Liebe und Sexualität im Christentum: Von den Anfängen bis heute. By Arnold Angenendt. (Münster: Aschendorff Verlag. 2015. Pp. 324. €19,90. ISBN 978-3-402-13146-6.) A German priest with a distinguished career in early medieval religious and liturgical history, Arnold Angenendt is now devoting his retirement, it seems, to producing volumes showing how history (especially Christian/Catholic history) is relevant to issues facing the Church and western society today. One of these is Ehe, Liebe und Sexualität (Marriage, Love, and Sexuality in Christianity: From the Beginning to Today). The work of Angenendt could be compared to that of popular Catholic historians or moral theologians who want to reflect on history, but it is to be distinguished from pure popular history or theology, for Angenendt is a genuine historian who knows his sources and how to use them. Angenendt provides a model for those serious scholars who wish to make a turn to a more popular genre and for those scholars of faith who wish to see their academic work have some impact on the broader Christian community. Angenendt covers a remarkable amount of material. The majority of the book is a treatment of issues of marriage, love, and sexuality in historical sequence from ancient Greece and Rome up until today. He chooses certain issues in particular on which to focus, including perceptions of and protections for women, conceptualizations of the marital relationship, notions of sexual pollution in cultic situations, and sexual sins (in the Christian tradition) such as homosexuality and masturbation. Prior to his historical treatment, however, Angenendt utilizes recent statistics, often from UNICEF reports, to illuminate the global situation. For the western reader, some of these statistics are disturbing. Instances of rape, arranged marriages of minors, female circumcision, murders of first wives to allow marriage of a second, and killings of someone, often the widow, to accompany a man to his grave—all these shock the western and Christian sensibility. That is precisely Angenendt’s point. He wants to argue that such practices shock and disturb us because of Christianity’s influences in the realm of love, sexuality, and gender. BOOK REVIEWS 797 Christianity does not get off the hook in Angenendt’s account. He recognizes problems and inconsistencies, which he puts forward even in his chapters on the Bible and early Christianity, maintaining a disparity between the Old Testament’s Edenic portrayal of the equality of the sexes and a notion of male headship to which women must be submissive. His account of the medieval period unveils numerous ambiguities and tensions. On the one hand, the period affirmed consent as the basis of marriage, thus making the woman an equal partner in agreeing to a marriage; on the other, women were often subject to familial economic concerns. On the one hand, the Church denounced spousal abuse and protected women from brutality; on the other, many husbands treated their wives poorly. The point for Angenendt, however, is that Christianity did affirm the equality the sexes and conceived of marriage as a partnership; the point is that, when given the chance, the Christian Church did protect women from savage husbands. What Angenendt wants his readers to understand is how unusual such a situation is in the history of the world. While historians expert in each era will undoubtedly find things to criticize (I found some in his treatment of the high medieval period), overall this book offers a historically-grounded work to appreciate Christianity’s contribution to gender equality and a notion of marriage as a partnership with the relationship of the spouses at its core. It also offers Catholics a historical perspective to think through difficult questions in the Roman Church today, such as celibate priests, birth control, and the participation of those in second marriages in communion. ATRIA A. LARSON Saint Louis University MEDIEVAL The Manly Priest: Clerical Celibacy, Masculinity, and Reform in England and Normandy, 1066-1300. By Jennifer D. Thibodeaux. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2016. Pp. viii, 230. $59.95. IBSN 978-0-8122-4752-7.) This important study refocuses the scholarly discussion of medieval church reform on issues of gender, convincingly arguing that in the eleventh through thirteenth centuries “the language of manliness was used to enforce an ascetic standard of the male body as the emblem of clerical life” (p. 151). Building on recent scholarship on medieval masculinity, the book’s first three chapters reconstruct the origins of this reformist discourse and explore its impact on elite clerics and their families, particularly their sons. Here, Thibodeaux weaves together evidence from polemic and law with an abundance of case-studies that illustrate, often quite poignantly, the difficult choices facing married clerics in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries. Turning in Chapter 4 to the married clergy’s discursive counterattack on the reformers, she shows how such men mined the same body of scriptural and theological texts to justify their “natural right as men” (p. 86) to marry and father children, and to cast celibate ascetics as unmanly sodomites. Chapters 5 and 6 move us forward into the thirteenth century, showing how the reformers’ assault 798 BOOK REVIEWS on clerical marriage and fatherhood affected the parish clergy. Thibodeaux’s work on the Norman episcopate demonstrates the importance of local support for reforming agendas; whereas bishops unsympathetic to the war on Nicolaitism often turned a blind eye to married clergy in their dioceses, reformist prelates—notably, the archbishop of Rouen Odo Rigaldus (r. 1248–75)—used legal and pastoral means to apply pressure to unchaste priests. But even the most reform-minded bishops needed to tread with care in this area, given the persistent staffing problems of the later medieval parish system. Further, Thibodeaux makes it clear that not only were many thirteenth-century priests still living— unrepentantly so—in quasimarital unions, but that their parishioners often cared little about such arrangements, provided the priests did their spiritual work well. Thibodeaux marshals an impressive amount of evidence in support of her thesis, presents her evidence clearly and accessibly, and carefully supports her historiographical interventions. She has a knack for putting a human face on historical discourse, as well as an eye for memorable detail: thus, we learn that more than half of the twelfth-century canons of St. Paul’s, London were the sons of priests (p. 71) and that priests’ sons defended their right to ordination by pointing to what they termed the “adulterous union” (p. 107) of the Virgin Mary and Joseph. Whereas most previous studies of ecclesiastical reform have focused on the eleventh and twelfth centuries, her coverage of a longer period enables Thibodeaux to appraise the reform movement’s strategies and relative success over time. While the relatively narrow geographical focus allows for a more richly contextualized study, however, the book falls short of being truly comparative in the last three chapters, due simply to the unevenness of surviving evidence for England and Normandy. Latinists may also wish for more consistent incorporation of the original sources’ language into the main text’s discussions, especially given the use of endnotes rather than footnotes. But this is not to detract from this study’s significance as a contribution to the history not only of clerical masculinity, but of ecclesiastical reform, family, and parish life in the central Middle Ages. The Manly Priest deserves a wide readership among medievalists, and would be an excellent addition to courses focused on the history of gender and sexuality, marriage, or medieval Christianity. University of Puget Sound KATHERINE ALLEN SMITH Cross and Culture in Anglo-Norman England: Theology, Imagery, Devotion. By John Munns. [Bristol Studies in Medieval Culture.] (Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK: The Boydell Press. 2016. Pp. xviii, 333. £60.00; $99.00. ISBN 9781783271269.) John Munns describes his book as a “cultural history of an image, in which a period of English religious culture and society will be explored through one particular imaginative lens” (p. 5). The result is a truly impressive interdisciplinary study of a period of art history that has long merited more scholarly attention. As the title suggests, the book is divided into three interdependent parts: the theology of the cross, the image of the cross, and the way of the cross. It takes as its starting point BOOK REVIEWS 799 the changes that occurred in crucifixion imagery during the eleventh and twelfth centuries, attributing them to a constellation of phenomena that developed in and from the writings of St. Anselm, encompassing theological and political changes, and the influence of art and events from outside England. Part I focuses on the period c.1066 to c.1170, exploring the development of Anselm’s affective devotional processes and practices, his theory of salvation and the debates that arose over the nature of the Eucharist, and the role of images in encouraging a more personal and mimetic devotion to the cross. Part II moves on to the variety of cruciform and crucifixion imagery that Christians would have encountered in England during the eleventh and twelfth centuries, with chapters on public monuments, liturgical images, and narrative cycles in manuscript illumination. Part III focuses on ethics and aesthetics in the period c.1170 to c.1215, assessing the influence of Thomas Becket’s Christo-mimesis and his promotion of aspects of Anselm’s theology on visions of the cross, and exploring the rise of pilgrimage and the cult of relics in England after Becket’s martyrdom, as well as the profound changes brought about as a result of the Third and Fourth Lateran Councils and the Crusades. The division of the book into three parts provides a convenient way for Munns to organize his material, but his analysis is scrupulous in providing the background to specific historical and art historical developments, as well as the larger national and international contexts in which they took place. One can quibble with certain elements of the analysis. Some mention of the proto-mystical nature of the Ruthwell Cross, for example, would have been helpful in the sections dealing with the Anglo-Saxon background to the development of Anglo-Norman crucifixion imagery. Some discussion of materials and techniques would also have been relevant to his mapping of the shift in depictions of the body of Christ on processional and altar crosses in chapter 4. The overall argument, however, is convincing. Throughout, Munns argues for the active role of art and images in the changes that occurred throughout the period covered. Far from being a simple reflection of events outside of itself, art shaped attitudes towards religion, devotion, political, and social events. Images provided models of spiritual balance that could be imitated by the faithful; they helped to define attitudes toward kingship and the divine right of kings; and, toward the end of the twelfth century, they helped to shape people’s attitudes toward Jews and Judaism—attitudes that, Munns notes, included support and friendship as well as violence and antisemitism. The book is beautifully illustrated, and there are only a few minor editorial errors. Cross and Culture in Anglo-Norman England is a monumental work of scholarship that will long be a primary point of reference for medievalists in a variety of fields. University of Leeds CATHERINE E. KARKOV 800 BOOK REVIEWS Mendicant Cultures in the Medieval and Early Modern World: Word, Deed, and Image. Edited by Sally J. Cornelison, Nirit Ben-Aryeh Debby, and Peter Howard. [Europa Sacra, Vol. 19.] (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols. 2016. Pp. xviii, 322. €90,00. ISBN 978-2-503-55554-6.) The stated purpose of this book is to “revisit, revise, and enhance our understanding of the ways in which words, deeds, and images shaped and represented mendicant religious culture in Italy and abroad” (p. xii). The eleven articles are focused on the time between the early thirteenth and the seventeenth centuries, primarily in Italy but not confined to the birthplace of Francis. The book offers a smorgasbord of information about mendicant theologians and preachers, church leaders, missionaries (in particular William of Rubruck’s mission to the Mongols), medieval women, sacred places, and religious objects. We get a significant glimpse of the many aspects that make up the various mendicant cultures of the Dominican and Franciscan world of the later Middle Ages and beyond. There are five noteworthy articles that deal with the world of images, that is, the art and architecture that show how the followers of Saints Dominic and Francis produced through stained-glass, fresco paintings, sculpture, church architecture, and other media, the full flowering of mendicant spirituality. We are introduced to the spirituality of the mendicant churches such as San Francesco in Assisi; Santa Croce, San Marco, and Ognisanti in Florence; and Santa Maria di Castello in Genoa. Three articles in this volume deal with issues of medieval Christians’ relations with Islam and Muslims. Nirit Debby’s article shows how the iconography of Francis, Clare, and John of Capistrano and their encounter with Muslims (the Sultan, Saracens, and Turks) reflects the Franciscan concern for Christian-Muslim relations at the church of Ognisanti during the seventeenth century. Ashley Elston’s article introduces us to Taddeo Gaddi’s painting (Santa Croce) of the scene of Francis before the Sultan in relation to other medieval paintings of this same scene. John Zaleski’s article on the canonization of Catherine of Siena by Pope Pius II explains the pontiff’s concerns with the Ottoman Turks and his desire for a crusade against them. Preaching was a major focus of these mendicant orders, and therefore it is no surprise that half of the articles in this volume are concerned with mendicant sermons and preaching. The Dominicans receive more attention here, as three articles deal primarily with the Order of Preachers’ vocation as preachers. One article offers a commentary on the understanding of the role of friar preachers based on two texts (Vitae fratrum ordinis praedicatorum and Bonum universale de apibus), and two articles are focused on particular Dominicans: Bartolomeo Lapacci Rimbertini and Marco di Pietro Succhielli. The latter two articles give us an excellent view of individual preachers’ preaching activity and sermon collections (and in the case of Succhielli, his sermon diary). It would have been helpful to balance the book with an article or two on individual Franciscan preachers besides the presentation of Bernardino of Siena and John of Capistrano covered in the last article in the volume. BOOK REVIEWS 801 Four articles of the volume deal with gender issues, in particular the experience of medieval women inside the spaces of churches, in convents, and on the streets. We wish to highlight the article on penitent women written by Beverly Kienzle and Travis Stevens because of its balance of Franciscan and Dominican women, its focus on how four women lived the apostolic life, and how their mendicant biographers presented them. A “Works Cited” section in which each author offers a list of primary and secondary sources accompanies each article. One criticism is that there is no index provided at the end of the book. Otherwise, this is an extremely valuable contribution to the world of medieval mendicant studies and medieval spirituality. University of Saint Thomas Saint Paul, Minnesota STEVEN J. MCMICHAEL, O.F.M. CONV. Europe after Wyclif. Edited by J. Patrick Hornbeck II and Michael Van Dussen. [Fordham Series in Medieval Studies.] (New York: Fordham University Press. 2017. Pp. x, 313. $55.00. ISBN 978-0-8232-7442-0.) While the emerging younger generation of students of Wyclif, Wycliffites, and Hussites has emphasized as much as their predecessors Wyclif’s seminal role in the philosophical and religious thinking of the late medieval period, they have seen him and his followers less as proto-Protestants through a retrospective glass, and more as integral participants in fourteenth- and fifteenth-century Europe-wide debates. Europe after Wyclif is a welcome addition to the literature on the European context of the evangelical doctor. The editors introduce the theme by citing a letter of Pope Martin V which firmly located the root of the heresies which had infected central Europe in England; Thomas Netter’s massive refutation of Wyclif, written in the 1420s, was in part an attempt to assuage English shame at having allowed the infection to fester. Netter’s work, compiled when Hussite fortunes were at their peak, was certainly addressed to a European readership. John van Engen considers the many diverse communities in which it might have been read, together with multiple other influences on their religious ideas and practices: brothers and sisters of the common life, Brigittine communities, the congregations who heard Vincent Ferrer and Bernardino of Siena preach, the masters of Paris and Prague Universities. This essay is a strong corrective to a binary analysis of controversies between Hussites and their various opponents; it is a pity its message is obscured by an overallusive style and a structure which is difficult to follow. The other contributions are largely confined either to English or Bohemian themes. Kathleen Kennedy locates a group of English vernacular bibles in a surprisingly cosmopolitan context, suggesting that their owners were higher clergy who traveled extensively in the 1430s and 1440s. Mishtooni Bose draws attention to the fortunes of Guillaume de Deguileville’s jeu de savoir in the English versions of his work, The Pilgrimage of the Sowle and The Pilgrimage of the Lyfe of the Manhode. Jennifer Illig recognizes a liturgical order in the English Wycliffite sermons, emphasizing their concern with the reception of communion at Easter rather than with transubstantiation. Fiona Som- 802 BOOK REVIEWS erset places Wyclif’s focus on the sin of consenting to another person’s sin in the context of a moral theology deriving from Peter the Chanter. Louisa Fouroughi analyses the tract Chrystys Wordys, found only in a late fifteenth-century manuscript, which associates biblical translation with the idea of an English nation. Mary Raschko reassesses the Wycliffite gospel harmony Oon of Foure as one variety of several methods of presenting the gospels, in this case highlighting its use as moral guidance. Other contributions link Wyclif with the Hussites: Ota Pavlíček presents a particularly clear account of Wyclif’s early reception in Prague, and Paulína Cermanová traces the progress of English and Bohemian apocalyptic thinking through the proliferation of manuscripts of the Wycliffite Opus Arduum among the Czechs. Luigi Campi compares Wyclif’s determinism with the much cruder version of Peter Payne. Ian Levy considers the responses of Catholic theologians to the challenge of Hussite utraquism, and Pavel Soukup explains the implications of the various labels given to the Czech reform party, Wycliffites, Hussites, and the more diplomatic Bohemians, conferred on them in the more propitiatory atmosphere of the Council of Basel. These papers concentrate on the Anglo-Bohemian axis which formed the main path by which Wyclif’s ideas affected continental thinkers. While it would be interesting to trace their effect in Italy, France, and Spain—where Wyclif’s philosophy was not entirely unknown in the fifteenth century (as numerous manuscripts attest)—this book is a good beginning to the task of assimilating them in the main currents of thought of a particularly lively age. Oriel College, Oxford JEREMY CATTO Women in the Medieval Monastic World. Edited by Janet Burton and Karen Stöber. [Medieval Monastic Studies.] (Turnout: Brepols. 2016. Pp. ix, 377. €90,00. ISBN 978-2-503-55308-5. This excellent volume collects the work of fifteen scholars from ten countries who focus on subjects including history, spirituality, archeology, art, and architecture. It is not, as the editors put it, “a comprehensive history of female monasticism in medieval Europe” (p. 9) for good reasons that this brief review tries to demonstrate. Rather, the book presents new research, much of it quite exciting, from different eras across a wide swathe of Western Christendom. The geographical scope ranges from Ireland to the west, Sweden to the north, Transylvania to the east, and Iberia and Italy to the south, and together the studies take in the entire Middle Ages, from the sixth century to the sixteenth. Most contributions have regional and chronological foci, even when regions are large and the time-span is in centuries. (The most notable exception is Anne Müller’s discussion of the symbolic meanings of space, which ranges from the era of Caesarius of Arles to the thirteenth century, with examples from across western and central Europe.) Several themes emerge: the relationship of women and their communities to male authority figures, from the Mass priest to bishops and kings; the place of women’s BOOK REVIEWS 803 communities within pan-European monastic federations, especially the Cistercians; patrons and patronage; the internal workings of nunneries and lived experience in the spaces within them; and women’s contributions to monastic and other forms of cultural life. Even in more focused studies, the accent is on diversity. Regarding Cistercian nuns in northern Italy, Guido Cariboni notes an “extreme variety [. . .] of origins, social extractions, relations with the ecclesiastic structure, and aims” (p. 69), while Carmen Florea concludes that “Transylvanian women living in a monastic life in the Middle Ages . . . had several choices they could opt for when deciding to join a religious order” (p. 224). Sprinkled throughout are remarks with broad application, like Erin Jordan’s bracing reminder, “Clearly, the physical presence of a woman was not in and of itself regarded as polluting. If so, nunneries would never have had patrons” (p. 294). And there are genuine insights, too, like Anne Müller’s conclusion, “Social behavior, rituals, religious practice, art, and decoration (such as painting, wall hangings, pictures, and images), as well as atmospheric qualities . . . it was all of these elements combined that created the space of the religious, both male and female, and were vital for definitions of the sacred” (p. 320). What generalizations can we draw? Very few, for reasons already alluded to and nicely summarized by the last two chapters of the book. Matthias Untermann examines placement of the choir in nuns’ churches in the medieval German lands during the central Middle Ages. He finds no fewer than seven configurations, whereas for male communities, there were only three. To conclude the volume, Hedwig Röckelein offers an interim report on an evolving research tool on women’s religious houses, “Female Monasticism’s Database” (http://femmodata. uni.goettingen.de). This ambitious project aims to create a complete repertory of European women’s monastic communities founded from ca. 400 to ca. 1500. There are already more than 3,000 entries, but Röckelein notes that “houses in the German-speaking part of Europe dominate the corpus of the database, while other European regions are underrepresented” (p. 358). She goes on to explain the kinds of information in each entry and plans for expansion and new research projects. It says a great deal that my 1997 book on women’s monasticism warrants exactly one mention in the entire book. The scholarship since has been plentiful and, as this collection demonstrates, extremely rich. Much wonderful work on the subject is being done—and much remains to be done. University of Pittsburgh BRUCE L. VENARDE 804 BOOK REVIEWS EARLY MODERN EUROPEAN Repertorium Poenitentiariae Germanicum, X: Verzeichnis der in den Supplikenregistern der Pönitentiarie Leos X. vorkommenden Personen, Kirchen und Orte des Deutschen Reiches 1513-1521. Edited by Ludwig Schmugge. 2 vols. (Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 2016. Pp. xxiv, 424; vii, 237. €129.95. ISBN 978-3-11047012-3.) Pope Leo X (Giovanni de’ Medici) reigned for more than eight years in a time of turmoil. He inherited the Fifth Lateran Council from his predecessor, Julius II, and brought it to a conclusion. Leo condemned Martin Luther but was unable to end his challenge to the ecclesiastical status quo. Part of the revenue from the indulgences which so offended Luther went into extensive art patronage. His political endeavors included sustaining the Medici regime in Florence once it had been re-established. None of these things appears in this latest volume of Repertorium Poenitentiariae Germanicum. Here, instead, we see the Roman Curia transacting routine business. The Apostolic Penitentiary dealt with spiritual matters; and it was more accessible to Christians, both clerical and lay, than were many other curial offices. German petitioners appear in these extracts from the registers of the Penitentiary requesting favors the pope could grant through his curia. The first volume of the book provides these extracts, which often are telegraphic in their brevity. The second volume provides multiple points of access through detailed indexing even to the level of Latin terms. Aside from the foreword (Vorwort), the first volume begins with a brief introduction (Einleitung). Ludwig Schmugge, the editor, has provided more detailed discussions of the Penitentiary in previous volumes and other publications. Ten volumes of registers are described, followed by a precis of the layout of a register. The remainder of the introduction lists the persons involved, from the cardinal Major Penitentiary to the procurators listed in the records. Two sets of abbreviations, both necessary for understanding these extracts, follow. One indicates the diocese involved, from Utrecht to Prague, while the other expands the abbreviations commonly used in the Penitentiary’s registers. We know that some grants were not registered, but we have no idea whether requests were declined. The extracts from the registers fall into five categories. De matrimonialibus is most pertinent to the laity, since the making and unmaking of marriages usually applied to them. Many were requests for dispensations to marry or remain married within the restrictive bounds of consanguinity (blood kinship) or affinity (sexual contact, marital or extramarital). De diversis formis and De declaratoriis pertain to either special favors granted to individuals or confraternities or to cases involving crimes falling under canon law. These are so various in nature that the extracts are the most detailed in the registers. Concessions De defectu natalium and De uberiori removed obstacles to illegitimate children, especially those of clergy, pursuing ecclesiastical careers. These tend to be so common as to be recorded very briefly. Dispensations De promotis et promovendis removed other obstacles to ecclesiastical BOOK REVIEWS 805 careers, especially to those not of the appropriate age for ordination. Also covered were injuries or scars marring the physical perfection of an ordinand. A few dispensations fall under the heading De confessionalibus. These allowed recipients to choose a priest other than the one in their parishes to minister to their spiritual needs. The duty of receiving communion from the “proper priest” in Eastertide usually was omitted from this concession. The index volume provides name of petitioners and curial functionaries tied to the sequential numbers assigned to each extract. Places are indexed by name and diocese. Patron saints and other dedications, including such Marian references as the Seven Sorrows, are listed. So are religious orders, hospitals, and confraternities. Dates of registration appear, as do the taxes or fees exacted for the registration of concessions. The index by words provides access not just by Latin vocabulary but, through specialized terms, a form of subject indexing. One caution: indulgence may mean remission of punishment and not a grant of spiritual pardon. This series remains a very useful tool, covering pontificates from that of Eugenius IV (1431–1447) to that of Leo X (1513–1521), a period concluding with the Reformation revolt. This will probably be the last volume of the Repertorium. Rutgers University THOMAS M. IZBICKI Henry VIII and the Anabaptists. By Albert Pleysier. (Lanham, MD: University Press of America. 2014. Pp. xii, 167. $29.00 paperback. ISBN 978-0-76186296-14.) The current consensus is that a split opened up in Henry VIII’s reign between conformist evangelicals and those who supported the more radical Swiss reformers. Whereas evangelicals rejected the sacrifice of the Mass but clung to a belief in the Real Presence, a small minority of radicals known as “sacramentaries” denied that Christ was really, objectively and bodily present in the bread and wine, claiming that the Eucharist was but a “sign and a memorial” and that Christ was only figuratively present. And in time these radicals came to prefer a church organized entirely on Swiss lines. After Acts of Parliament in 1539 and 1543 reaffirmed Henry VIII’s belief in a largely conventional, if idiosyncratic Catholic theology despite his proscription of the pope and the monasteries, around forty per cent of evangelicals no longer conformed, while followers of the Swiss reformers went into exile. After Henry’s death, the brakes came off. With the enactment of Religious Settlements of 1552 and 1559, Swiss theology largely prevailed in the Church of England in the shape agreed in the Zurich Consensus of 1549, but stripped of the Swiss view of clerical dress and church organization. The gap Albert Pleysier has spotted and seeks to fill is that this version of history leaves out the Anabaptists, the most extreme of the radical reformers. Clearly as he shows, there were Anabaptists living and preaching in England. How many nobody knows, but around sixty or so can be found, whether English-born, Flemish, Dutch, 806 BOOK REVIEWS German, or Swiss, and in the 1530s the bookseller John Gough was famously caught importing books from Antwerp for an Anabaptist conventicle in London. Everyone in authority agreed (or pretended to) in Henry’s reign that sacramentaries and Anabaptists were beyond the pale. They were repeatedly denounced and persecuted, often lumped together in royal proclamations and other instruments of repression despite their significantly differing beliefs. Unlike sacramentaries, Anabaptists rejected infant baptism. Those whose beliefs can be nailed down can be closely linked to the writings of Melchior Hoffman. But in Henry’s unstable consciousness, these separate heresies amounted to the same thing. And when in 1538 the reformed coalition cobbled together by Thomas Cromwell as the king’s “vicegerent in spirituals” collapsed and new battle-lines were drawn that fell little short of a full-scale heresy hunt, many moderate evangelicals became confused with the radical fringe. After Cromwell’s plan to marry Henry to Anne of Cleves went dramatically awry, the vicegerent was himself executed as a traitor and alleged “sacramentary,” swiftly followed by Robert Barnes, a mainstream Lutheran used by the king as an ambassador in his negotiations with the Schmalkaldic League, who was burned at the stake. No one knew for what specific heresy Barnes was condemned. Those who retrospectively accused him of Anabaptism were out to blacken his name. Pleysier works chiefly from the multi-volume calendar of Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII and Hughes and Larkin’s classic edition of Tudor Royal Proclamations. He tracks down all the evidence known from printed sources for the activities of genuine Anabaptists in England and offers valuable insights into their beliefs gained from William Barlow’s writings and a general pardon issued after the annulment of the Cleves marriage, where (for once) Anabaptist doctrines were clearly distinguished from those of sacramentaries. Experts may find relatively little that is new in the book, but students will find it a helpful guide to the more radical strands of the English Reformation and to some of Henry VIII’s religious diplomacy. Clare College, Cambridge JOHN GUY El Índice de libros prohibidos y expurgados de la Inquisición española (1551–1819). By Jesús Maetínez de Bujanda. (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos. 2016. Pp. xxxii, 1227. ISBN 978-84-220-1883-4.) This study of the wide ranging censorship of the Spanish Inquisition is divided into two parts. Two-thirds of the text is devoted to a catalogue of the authors and titles (where no author is attributed) censored in whole or in part from the first index to the last. One-third takes the form of a detailed introduction to every aspect of the preparation of each of the indices. The author, a recognized authority in the field who has worked extensively in the Inquisition’s archives, discusses the membership of the drafting committees, their debates over individual publications as well as the complex and often cumbersome procedures to enforce their prohibitions. The Spanish Inquisition censored works prior to 1551, but the surge of perceived heretical books and pamphlets produced by the Protestant Reformation created a sense of BOOK REVIEWS 807 urgency demanding a more systematic approach. The mid-sixteenth century saw the proliferation of indices in Catholic lands throughout Europe. The Spanish Inquisition differed from its counterparts elsewhere in an important respect. It was not a purely ecclesiastical body but a royal council that always insisted on its right to decide what works should or should not be forbidden or expurgated. The Roman or papal Inquisition, for example, banned the works of Galileo and Copernicus. The Spanish Inquisition never did so, although this by no means indicated that it approved of such theories as the author point out. It also took measures to prevent the Spanish bishops from engaging in any form of censorship. Each of the indices established diverse categories ranging from the complete prohibition of a work to modest expurgations. Many of Spain’s prominent literary works fell under the Inquisition’s scrutiny from Miguel de Cervantes, whose celebrated Don Quijote had several passages expurgated as were the works of a leading figures in the eighteenth-century Spanish Enlightenment, the Benedictine, Benito Feijóo. In general, Spanish writers were treated with “benign ambiguity” according to the author. He has also ably described broad changes over time in censorship patterns. The obsession with heretical works receded by the eighteenth century to a new concern, the threat posed by the writers of the French Enlightenment, such as Voltaire and Diderot, whose works were duly banned. The emphasis shifted again following the outbreak of the French Revolution when the Inquisition became a kind of political police obsessed with stopping the flow of revolutionary publications into the kingdom and yet again in the last phase of its existence when it used its censoring powers to defend the absolutist King Ferdinand VII against the attacks of Spanish liberals following the overthrow of their 1812 constitution. This brief overview cannot do justice to this major work. Its depth of research, its range of analysis and its mastery of the complex operation of the Inquisition’s censoring will be of interest to historians of the institution, literary scholars and to students of the intellectual history of early modern Spain. University of Toronto Emeritus WILLIAM J. CALLAHAN Missioni, saperi e adattamento tra Europa e imperi non cristiani. Edited by Vincenzo Lavenia and Sabina Pavone. (Macerata: Edizioni Università di Macerata. 2015. Pp. 218. €14,00 paperback. ISBN 978-88-6056-434-4.) In 1552, a future Jesuit was born in the provincial Italian town of Macerata on the Adriatic side of the Apennines. He lived there for eighteen years before traveling westward over the mountains to Rome for his novitiate. But his destiny lay in the East and, by the time he was twenty-five years old, he would leave Europe on a one-way trip that would take him all the way to Beijing. Matteo Ricci (d. 1610) was the most famous early Jesuit to visit the Ming Empire, and a man whose shadow still colors popular and academic considerations of Christianity in China. It is therefore not surprising that the four hundredth anniversary of his death would 808 BOOK REVIEWS be commemorated around the world, and especially in his place of birth. This slim volume represents some of the contributions to a conference organized by the University of Macerata marking not only the famed Jesuit’s death, but also the 2012 Italian translation of Ronnie Po-Chia Hsia’s biography of Ricci, Jesuit in the Forbidden City (Oxford, 2010). The volume’s editors have cast their net wide with their title, “Missions, Knowledge, and Accommodation between Europe and non-Christian Empires,” seeking to encompass their book’s disparate contents. For while Matteo Ricci clearly dominates some of the contributions, other chapters stray far from China and concern later periods. The seven articles fall into three groups: a first dedicated to Ricci in his Chinese and Jesuit milieux; a second concerned with Christian and/or Western texts translated into Chinese; and a third dealing with empires, broadly, in Europe and Asia. These topics, and the way that the different scholars approach them, are all useful contributions to the growing field of extra-European Jesuit studies, as well as Sinology and European intellectual history. But together they do not have the coherence that one expects from an edited volume, and make no new argument as a whole. The first set of articles includes a contribution by R. Po-Chia Hsia on Ricci’s efforts to publish in Chinese, an analysis by Girolamo Imbruglia of the mission strategies developed by Ricci and Alessandro Valignano (1539–1606) in light of the Spanish experiences in Peru and Mexico, and a chapter by Ana Carolina Hosne on the “geo-strategic” considerations of Jesuit missionary activities in South America and East Asia. The second group contains an essay by Elisabetta Corsi on the introductory physics text written by Giulio Aleni (1582–1649) in 1623, and an analysis by Xie Mingguang of the Chinese collaborators of Nicolas Trigault (1577– 1628) in the writing of his language manual for missionaries in 1626. The final set includes the editors’ contributions: a chapter by Sabina Pavone on the attempts to maintain a French presence at Beijing after the suppression of the Society of Jesus in the late eighteenth century, and an analysis by Vincenzo Lavenia of the publishing history of and Jesuit influence on Lazzaro Soranzo’s Ottomano (first ed. 1598), a text which prescribed strategies for defeating the Turks. While some of these texts deal with the history of books, and others take on questions of imperial politics, the articles in this volume do not dialogue with each other. While it would be too much to call for an end to the entire genre of “conference volumes,” it is evident that those whose contributors speak in concert and reformulate their texts under firm editorial guidance are the only ones which merit widespread distribution. For the others which strain for coherence, like this one, the publication of articles separately in academic journals is preferable. Michigan State University LIAM MATTHEW BROCKEY BOOK REVIEWS 809 “Kommt, um die Liebe zu lieben. ” Maria Magdalena von Pazzi. Edited by Michael Plattig and Edeltraud Klueting. [Karmel Paperbacks, Vol. 1.] (Münster: Aschendorff Verlag. 2016. Pp. 128, €14,80 paperback. ISBN 978-3-40212100-9.) This first collected edition of the Karmel Paperbacks was published by the Research Institute of the Carmelite Province of Germany, founded in 2016 in Mainz. In addition to the well-known and well-researched mystical experiences of the saint and mystic Maria Magdalena de’ Pazzi (1566–1607), this short study explores the mysticism of the saint through the biographical dimension of this mysticism and de’ Pazzi’s spiritual development (p. 78). Although addressing an academic audience, due to its brevity the study is merely an introduction to the life and mystical experience of the saint. Offering references to present-day concerns, the well-written volume manages to inspire its reader intellectually as well as spiritually. In his first article (pp. 10–47) Plattig examines the life of saints in the social situation of Maria’s Florentine home during the Renaissance and also considers changed concepts of piety and mysticism between the medieval period and sixteenth-century ideas of spirituality (p. 13). In his second contribution, Plattig analyzes de’Pazzi’s mysticism (pp. 48–78) (see “Mystagogue,” p. 74), underlining love as a key element of her spiritual development and characterizing her mysticism as daily practice. In his article Bruno Secondin investigates1 (pp. 79–105) the question of the current relevance of de’ Pazzi. In comparison, he highlights the unifying moment of the believer’s desire for reforms in the Catholic Church of the twenty-first and sixteenth century. Moreover, he stresses the neglected role of the Holy Spirit for de’ Pazzi’s mysticism. The edition concludes with a reprint of Pope Benedict XVI’s letter on the occasion of the 400th anniversary of de’ Pazzi’s death in 2007 (pp. 106–11), and excerpts of de Pazzi’s writings Quaranta Giorni and the Revelatione e Intelligentie (pp. 112–25). The study is a recommendable introduction to the life, spirituality, and mysticism of de Pazzi. University of Hamburg ELISABETH FISCHER 1. Bruno Secondin, “Rinnovarela Chiesa. Con cuore amante e parole audaci. L’attualità di Maria Maddalena de’Pazzi,” Carmelus, 63 (2016). 810 BOOK REVIEWS English Benedictine Nuns in Exile in the Seventeenth Century: Living Spirituality. By Laurence Lux-Sterritt. (Manchester: Manchester University Press. 2017. Pp. xxvi, 291. £75.00. ISBN 978-1-5261-1002-2.) It is only recently that women religious have been reintegrated into the historiography of the early modern world. Laurence Lux-Sterritt suggests that thanks to the Reformation and their subsequent exiled existence in mainland Europe, English women religious were doubly neglected until the ‘Who Were the Nuns?’ project and a simultaneous mini-boom in research recovered the story of these c.4000 women. To this research can be added Lux-Sterritt’s own deeply interesting study of the English Benedictine convents that were founded at Brussels, Cambrai, Dunkirk, Ghent, Paris, Pontoise, and Ypres during the seventeenth century. Splitting the book into two distinct sections, Lux-Sterritt’s first four chapters focus on the nuns’ goal of physical and mental death to the world. Chiming with historians of early modern European convents, Lux-Sterritt judges enclosure a fragile physical entity, but nonetheless psychologically difficult, requiring the nuns to break with family, friends and, ultimately, the world. In the second chapter, she takes these ideas further, venturing that the English convents theoretically represented the perfect separation from familial influence, being as they were in exile. However, although there was less aristocratic interference than in other European houses, Lux-Sterritt asserts that the English convents still relied on familial financial support, as well as for recruitment. Moreover, English nuns remained dependent on secular interactions for their survival, whether through benefactions or, to ease the pressures of exile, the acceptance of boarders or establishment of schools. In this way, Lux-Sterritt argues forcefully, English Benedictine nuns helped to keep the flame of faith alive in their homeland and historians must consider the nuns part of the English mission. The book’s second half focuses on the nuns’ stated aim of dying to themselves. Concentrating on how nuns strove to control their emotions and passions in order to achieve their spiritual goals, Lux-Sterritt explores the gap between the theory and the reality of their lives. Although there was a general Catholic experience, she argues that each individual’s mystical experience was personal and unique. Benedictine nuns operated in a liminal space, between the national and the international church, an environment where “the individual fed the collective and vice versa; it is often difficult to determine where the one stops and the other begins” (p. 253). Unlike the findings of Nicky Hallett in her work on the English Carmelite convents in exile, Lux-Sterritt judges that extreme asceticism was not the norm in English Benedictine houses. Nevertheless, the author does find differences between those who followed a more sensory Ignatian spirituality rooted in the Spiritual Exercises, and those who followed the Benedictine Augustine Baker’s meditative guidance. Although not within the scope of this book, it would be interesting to know whether Protestant spiritual diaries were as intense as those outlined by Lux-Sterritt. One also wonders how different the female experience was from the male; for example, “the aura of a mystical quest, a mission in enemy territory” (p. 142) is very much dis- BOOK REVIEWS 811 tinctive of the Catholic Reformation idea of the Church Militant engaged in a daily battle against sin rather than a distinctive experience of English Benedictine nuns, or Lucy Knatchbull’s offering to God of “her memory, her understanding and her will” (p. 146), the very prayer of the then recently canonized Ignatius of Loyola, is indicative of a Jesuit-led spirituality rather than a distinctly female one. Overall, Lux-Sterritt fully convinces the reader of her central argument, that it was impossible for the nuns to achieve total death to the world—if not of the world, they were still in it and had to make appropriate choices about the level of interaction. This is a patiently written, accessible book that pleasingly foregrounds the religious experience of exiled English nuns; its focus on one order a particular strength rather than indicative of any narrowness. In short, it is a wholly welcome addition to the recent historiographical movement. Durham University JAMES E. KELLY The Enlightenment through the Nineteenth Century. Edited by Alan J. Hauser and Duane F. Watson. [A History of Biblical Interpretation, Volume 3.] (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2017. Pp. xii, 428. $60.00. ISBN 978-0-8028-4275-6.) This volume comprises an “introduction and overview” by the editors, followed by thirteen more focused contributions: Michael C. Legaspi, “The Term `Enlightenment’ and Biblical Interpretation”; William Baird, “An Overview of Historical Criticism”; Travis L. Frampton, “Spinoza and His Influence on Biblical Interpretation”; Christine Helmer, “Schleiermacher as New Testament Scholar”; Darrell Jodock, “Biblical Interpretation in the Work of F.C. Baur and the Tübingen School”; Jeffrey F. Keuss, “David Friedrich Strauss and Ludwig Feuerbach: The Rise of Sturm und Drang in Biblical Scholarship”; James A. Sanders, “Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible: Masoretes to the Nineteenth Century”; J. W. Rogerson, “Wilhelm De Wette and His Contempraries”; Bill T. Arnold and David B. Schreiner, “Graf and Wellhausen, and Their Legacy”; Dirk Jongkind, “The Text and Lexicography of the New Testament in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries”; J. G. D. Dunn, “The Quest for the Historical Jesus and its Implications for Biblical Interpretation”; Carter Linberg, “Biblical Interpretation in Continental and American Pietism”; and Thomas H. Olbricht, “Biblical Interpretation in North America Through the Nineteenth Century.” Overall, this is volume is a useful resource for “raising consciousness” among both professional biblicists and more general readers concerning the complex history underlying contemporary biblical studies and the ongoing relevance of that history. I view the essay of Dunn a model in this regard for its clarity, concision, and highlighting of the lessons today’s questers for the “historical Jesus” might learn from their eighteenth- and nineteenth-century predecessors. At the same time, I found a variety of problematic features to the volume, both general and more specific. The editors’ lengthy “introduction and overview” recapit- 812 BOOK REVIEWS ulates the content of the following contributions in what seems excessive detail, such that one experiences a sense of déjà vu reading the contributions themselves. Various of the essays (e.g., that of Jongkind) consist largely of a catalog of obscure names that leaves readers without the necessary context for appreciating those figures’ persons and activities. Contrary to what its general title appears to promise, the volume’s focus is, in fact, far more restricted, concentrating as it does on (mostly “liberal”) Protestant biblical scholarship in England, Germany, and the United States, with a hardly a nod to Catholic or Jewish (Spinoza excepted) treatments of the Bible in the period under review (there is an odd reference [p. 307] to E. Renan’s Vie de Jésus of 1863 as the first “thorough Catholic treatment” of the figure of the historical Jesus, given that Renan had broken with the Church already in 1845). Nor is the volume comprehensive even with regard to Protestant Bible scholarship of the era in question. Thus, there is virtually no reference to the nineteenth-century Netherlands as a key locus of critical biblical study (in this connection, there is an egregious oversight in the entry on Graf and Wellhausen, which completely ignores the major contribution of the Dutch scholar Abraham Kuenen (1828–91) to the definitive formulation of the pentateuchal “Documentary Hypothesis,” notwithstanding the fact that his contribution was acknowledged by both Graf and Wellhausen and is amply documented in the relevant literature). In short, one is left wondering why the volume—its general title notwithstanding—adopts so restrictive a perspective in its handling of eighteenth/nineteenth-century Bible study. The volume could also have profited from a more rigorous proofreading that would have eliminated perplexing errors that disfigure several of its presentations. Two divergent death dates, e.g., are given for both Lessing (1812 [p. 81] versus 1781 [p. 98]) and Schleiermacher (1832 [p. 285] versus 1834 [p. 306]). Wellhausen’s commentary on the Minor Prophets is attributed both to him and to his publisher G. Reimer (compare pp. 272 and 273). The double mention of C. F. Houbigant in a sentence that occurs on p. 222 makes no sense in context. In sum, this volume, with the bibliographies appended to each contribution, will hopefully encourage interested readers to dig deeper into the hidden treasures of earlier biblical scholarship. Those readers should, however, be aware that the guide to such endeavors given them in this volume is not without its problems, both of form and content. The Catholic University of America CHRISTOPHER BEGG Johann Prokop Schaffgotsch: das Leben eines böhmischen Prälaten in der Zeit des Josephinismus. By Rudolf Svoboda. [Beiträge zur Kirchen und Kulturgeschichte 25.] (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Edition. 2015. Pp. 343. €63.50. ISBN 978-3-631-65740-9.) In 1785 Johann Prokop Schaffgotsch (1747–1813) was appointed by Emperor Joseph II to the newly founded bishopric of Budweis (České Budějovice), in Bohemia, where he remained for almost thirty years. For Rudolf Svoboda, church BOOK REVIEWS 813 historian in the Theological Faculty at the University of South Bohemia, České Budějovice, Schaffgotsch’s career provides an opportunity to explore internal church reform in a Central-European Habsburg context. This version of his work, with its useful five-page summary in English, is the second edition of Svodoba’s study of Schaffgotsch, with a shorter version first published in 2009 in Czech. In practice the book falls into three parts. In the first section, which takes up a quarter of his text, Svoboda outlines the broader intellectual, political, and theological context, both thematic and interpretative, of Schaffgotsch’s age. He returns to these concepts in the final section of the book, where he places Schaffgotsch within specific streams, as a proponent of the Catholic Enlightenment and of a certain form of Josephinism. The substantial middle section of the book provides an account of Schaffgotsch’s life, from his noble origins in Prague and education in Vienna, via his service to the Church in a variety of roles that included vicar general in Königgratz (Hradec Králové) and cathedral canon in Olmütz (Olomouc), to his episcopal duties in Budweis. As bishop of Budweis, Svoboda stresses, Schaffgotsch adopted a modest lifestyle and threw himself into his priestly responsibilities, which included preaching often, participating in processions, distributing the sacraments, and, remarkably frequently, blessing bells. The extensive archival research on which the study is based enables Svoboda to correct many errors that have found an extended life in earlier studies of Schaffgotsch, while providing a nuanced and judicious narrative of his role as a churchman. Frustratingly, Schaffgotsch wrote little beyond the administrative material required by his episcopal office. Yet Svoboda successfully uses those sources—for example, Schaffgotsch’s pastoral letter of 1786 to the clergy and laity of his new diocese, the report on his diocese sent to Leopold II in 1790, and the description of the visitation he undertook between 1805 and 1810—to present a picture of a bishop with many traits of the Catholic Enlightenment, including rejection of baroque piety, insistence on improved practical and moral education for the parish clergy, and a commitment to a devotional life that he himself practiced. Schaffgotsch was Joseph’s man. He was born into the Bohemian branch of a Silesian noble family, educated in Vienna under the influence of reforming minds such as Cardinal Christoph Anton Count Migrazzi, experienced with the demands of clerical education, and appointed to one of Joseph’s new diocesan creations, which was largely financed by funds from dissolved religious institutions. But no fighter, Schaffgotsch was able to divide and balance his loyalties to the Habsburg state and Rome. Indeed the dissolution of Joseph’s General Seminaries—centralized state-run seminaries for the training of clergy—provided Schaffgotsch with the opportunity to create his greatest legacy: the Philosophical Lyceum and integrated Theological Institute and Seminary at Budweis. As Svoboda points out, Schaffgotsch fully filled his central duty to provide his parishes with capable clergy and to train their successors. Well-liked, committed, and determined, Schaffgotsch is almost too quiet a subject for the historian eager for revealing friction and conflict. Svoboda makes a 814 BOOK REVIEWS fine case, however, for his subject’s relatively trouble-free existence as demonstrating what a co-operative course that steered between tradition and talent, between baroque piety and inward devotion, and between Vienna and Rome, could achieve. Yale Divinity School (Research Scholar) RONA JOHNSTON GORDON LATE MODERN EUROPEAN Die Zentrumspartei im Kaiserreich: Bilanz und Perspektiven. Edited by Andreas Linsenmann and Markus Raasch. (Münster: Aschendorff Verlag. 2015. Pp. 515. €49.90. ISBN 978-3-402-13135-0.) What a difference a generation makes. Ignored by historians as recently as the 1970s, German political Catholicism has attracted enough attention since that time to generate a library of monographs. The literature has been exhaustive: period-histories of the Center party; parliamentary studies; biographies; documentary collections; socioeconomic studies; regional and institutional analyses; church-state relations; and Catholic relations with Bismarck, Hitler, Social Democrats, and Jews. Central to all have been three issues: the viability of the concept of a gluey Catholic “milieu”; the place of that milieu at the frontier of “tradition and modernity”; and the self-understanding of the Center party as both a Catholic sanctuary and a crossdemographic “people’s party” (p. 14)—at once both reclusively self-limiting and expansively engaged in the saga of contemporary German history. What more needs to be done? Quite a bit, argue the editors of this worthwhile volume. How the Center party got itself together locally, how it communicated with voters, clerics, and deputies, and its activities in the “Catholic diaspora” (p. 11) all have been wanting of attention. The Center party’s memory culture, its rituals, its discussions of alterity, and its transnational place in the history of democratization all deserve more systematic consideration. And despite the attention recently paid to such aspects of Catholic history as piety, apparitions, and the construction of gender, historians have shied away from applying the methods of the “history of everyday life” and the “cultural turn” specifically to political Catholicism. Based on a conference held in Mainz in the fall of 2014 on the Center party in the Kaiserreich, this book gathers twenty-one essays in response to a call to open “new perspectives on Center-party historiography” through a dialogue with both “representatives and critics of a cultural history of politics” (p. 14). The resultant essays are grouped under seven rubrics: the provenance and contours of the purported “Catholic milieu”; the Center as a policy-shaped party (particularly social and colonial policy); intra-regional contestation; relations with “the others” (from Bismarck to local Protestants and Jews); transnational ties; transgenerational memory; and whether political Catholicism still exists today. Although many of the essays offer valuable contributions, few are methodologically innovative. “Everyday life” and the “cultural turn” seem limited here to BOOK REVIEWS 815 things like the self-understanding of the Catholic nobility. Not surprising is Tina Eberlein’s and Markus Raasch’s discovery that nobles saw themselves as models of Catholic manhood, particularly in their engaged and loving fatherhood. More intriguing is Barbara Jahn’s exploration of these families’ efforts beyond 1945 to reaffirm their distinctive relevance. Whereas the East Prussian Protestant nobility was decisively weakened by the ravages of war followed by Communist land reform, Catholic nobles in the West retained property, investment possibilities, and such signs of social deference as one family’s third generation of presiding over the annual Catholic Conventions (Katholikentage). Accepting that noble cross-denominational solidarity was now both possible and necessary, Catholic nobles supported the new Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and embraced the Federal Republic as many of them had never embraced the old Weimar Republic. Conservative resistance to Hitler enabled nobles to cast themselves, uncritically and en masse, as “the conscience of the nation” (p. 466); and Catholic nobles compounded this claim by also noting the “special role” (p. 465) afforded by the embattled prior history of the Catholic milieu. The division of the country increased the capacity of the Catholic Church to influence West Germany’s institutional structure; and nobleCatholic men’s clubs, including many with famous Center-party forbears, retained considerable prestige in the postwar era. In the older historiography, the solidarity with which Catholics identified with and voted for the Center party rendered them the quintessential example of imperial society’s division along multiple sociological fault lines into self-standing “social/moral milieus” (Rainer Lepsius). According to theorists who sought to understand why Germany’s “special historical path” (Sonderweg) climaxed not in liberal capitalism but in Nazism, the sharply bounded milieus fatally stunted the capacity of German society to cope constructively with problems of modernity. Since the 1970s, the explanatory burden ascribed to milieus has led to repeated scrutiny of the concept. Thus, Wilfried Loth, who first challenged the idea of a closed Catholic milieu thirty years ago, repeats his case in this volume. The Center was a political party; as such, it functioned as a way to negotiate with others, and not just as a way to stand distinctively apart. Moreover, underscores Loth, the Center overcame within itself other kinds of sociological fault lines: urban/rural, class, pre/post-industrial. Loth’s critique, however, hardly does away with the reality that the Center, to employ another favorite concept of the older historiography, functioned as a form of “negative integration”—at once compelling Wilhelmian society to engage with organized political Catholicism, without overcoming either the animus against itself, or the oppositional mentality it developed as a result. Other articles in the present volume underscore various additional aspects of the “milieu” issue. Thus, Karsten Ruppert focuses on the Katholikentage, the annual mass-meetings of the faithful, which, if not technically party rallies, nevertheless served both to raise awareness of the religious dimensions of sociocultural politics and to provide Center-party leaders with an opportunity to profile their role in Catholic solidarity. Stefan Gerber’s path-breaking study of the Center party in 816 BOOK REVIEWS overwhelmingly Protestant Thuringia reveals the party’s desire to be “present at the periphery” (p. 270), but also its enduring prioritization of its defensive identity as a “Tower” of Catholic solidarity over its claim to seek common ground with religious Protestants. Recent Bismarck biographer Christoph Nonn reiterates the wellknown distinction between the Iron Chancellor’s motives in the Kulturkampf and those of the secularizing liberals: for Bismarck, writes Nonn, the issue was a fourth war of German unification, this time against a domestic opponent whose Guelph, Polish, and international connections raised the specter of collusion with both the French and Austrian losers of the prior decade’s wars. Faced with such implacability, Catholics would seem to have had little choice but to build their “Tower.” The Center Party’s organizational maturation from a party of traditionminded notables to a party of modern mass mobilization is a theme that cuts across the book’s seven rubrics. Beware, however, of simplistic dichotomies, for innovation could also serve tradition. In “diasporic” Thuringia, notes Gerber, the Center’s youth organization (Windthorstbunde) sponsored “political schooling” through mock-“parliamentary evenings” in which rank-and-file participants were divided into Centrist, Socialist, and Conservative-Agrarian caucuses. By arguing out the issues of the day, declared the local Center-party newspaper, participants learned to appreciate their “pure and immaculate party” (p. 277). Here as in heavily Catholic regions, members of the clergy were deeply involved in the intricate network of rank-and-file Catholic gatherings and associations (Katholikentage, Windthorstbunde, Volksverein) that rallied and empowered the Catholic milieu; but the smaller social capital of the diasporic laity may have resulted in a more obdurate, traditionbound political Catholicism (p. 281). Before generalizing, however, witness Baden. Despite being two-thirds Catholic, it too lacked a Centrist-oriented nobility or bourgeoisie. But as Michael Kitzing’s colorful essay shows, with churchstate/school issues dominating the decades-long clash of National Liberals and Center, clerical leadership of Baden’s party led not to hidebound traditionalism but to populism, consummate organization, a powerful press financed through “Catholic entertainment supplements” (p. 177), and eventual common ground on social issues with Social Democrats. While the Center’s broad social base underscores the potential for internal divisiveness, differences were minimized via a generalized commitment to a social policy based on the Christian dignity of every station. As Winfried Becker reiterates, Centrists as early as the 1870s defined Christian social rights as God-given and therefore prior to state authority, but necessarily in need of legislative translation into state-mandated protections in the workplace. The low-hanging fruit here involved limitations on Sunday, child, and female labor. More daring were the Center’s early advocacy of the right to form “corporative associations” and the need to create labor arbitration commissions (pp. 100–101). When internal differences later arose over the significance and details of Bismarck’s social insurance projects, Centrist parliamentary deputies rearticulated their joint commitment to a Christian social policy while sometimes voting diversely. Still, Becker credits the Center party with having given the “decisive impetuses” for social insurance and labor protection BOOK REVIEWS 817 legislation: with its early social policy, the Center “enduringly shaped” a crucial aspect of politics outside the sectarian realm (pp. 126–127). According to Ingo Löppenberg, militarism and colonial policy were a second secular area where the “essence of political Catholicism” (p. 133) mandated clear and consistent positions. Matthias Erzberger’s famous parliamentary exposé of inhumane practices toward native peoples in Africa, which led to the so-called Hottentot elections of 1907, thus becomes, for Löppenberg, part of the longer narrative of opposition to the Wilhelmian government’s course. Centrist publicists and politicians, writes Löppenberg, criticized militarism by detailing its domestic socioeconomic dislocations as well as its moral cultural deficits, including its exposure of young German draftees to hazing, drinking, fornication, and extra-religious codes of discipline. Political Catholicism stood instead for a civilian model of integrity that also included parliamentary prerogatives over military budgeting and legislation. Party leader Adolf Gröber warned about the moral and economic costs of the prewar naval arms race, whose colonial futility and potential disastrousness for Germany had been noted by Catholic publicists as early as 1884. Löppenberg finds here consequential continuity with Catholic opposition to Prussian militarism during the unification era. Although he grants that countercurrents later turned some important figures in the party into advocates of colonialism and the navy, he adds that episodes of Centrist support generally led to electoral setbacks, rethinking, and further parliamentary anti-governmental critiques. Löppenberg thus tacitly challenges the depiction of the Center as the expedient political beneficiary of “battleship building,” a key feature of the Kehr-Wehler historiographical school’s version of the Sonderweg theory. For a party that built its reputation by combatting the use of nationalism as an excuse to abuse Catholics’ civil rights, attitudes not just toward colonial subjects but also toward domestic Poles and Jews are especially revealing. Arne Thomsen’s fascinating essay explores how Catholic unity was shattered in Silesia by ethnic matters. As Thomsen shows, one faction of German Catholics vigorously defended Polish Catholics who resisted repressive acculturation, even when the latter was being promoted by Breslau’s powerful Cardinal Georg Kopp. Schools again were a focusing issue, spurring even German clerics to protest against efforts to ban the Polish language from religious lessons. But the relative unity on that question gave way to controversy over draconian governmental steps to curb the growth and occupational advancement of the Polish-speaking population. These issues led to intermittent splintering, rival electoral candidacies, and increasing enmity. Markus Raasch approaches the debate about Centrist attitudes toward Jews by comparing the rhetorical culture among deputies of noble stock—forty percent of the Reichstag caucus in the Bismarckian era—toward Jews and Socialists. His conclusion: While Centrist nobles used “Jewish” as pejoratively as they used “Socialdemocratic,” these nobles showed tolerance toward the former but not the latter. For the Centrist non-noble majority, minority rights for Catholics required defending minority rights in general: these deputies consistently voted not to renew Bis- 818 BOOK REVIEWS marck’s Anti-Socialist Law. Most noble deputies, however, justified the contrary vote by excepting revolutionaries from their defense of civil rights. While Raasch agrees “unequivocally” (p. 335) with Olaf Blaschke that Catholic noble deputies were “anti-Semitic precisely because they wanted to be good Catholics” (p. 318), these nobles could see no redeeming benefit in political intolerance toward Jews that could justify the risk of its extension to Catholics. In his own contribution to this volume, Blaschke focuses on providing not answers but questions regarding the Center in a transnational context. Can nineteenth-century national parties be studied as elements of globalization? Can religion? Was the Center part of an ultramontane “Black International,” as opponents charged? Did papal centralization, enjoined beliefs, and more “disciplined” standards of clerical education reflect a broader trend toward global uniformity? How did parties (and presses) based on political Catholicism in various countries, especially countries (like Germany) with Catholic minorities, influence each other? What epochal transnational processes, networks, and claims were at work in the origins and histories of these parties? Further essays in this volume engage additional regional histories and later elements of the Center’s memory culture, including Erzberger’s selfless statesmanship in November of 1918 (Christopher Dowe), and visual references to Catholic symbolic practice as tools of local resistance and accommodation to Nazism (Christiane Hoth). As for whether “political Catholicism still exists” (p. 483), CSUpolitician Norbert Geis offers an affirmative reply, citing lay Catholic activism, vibrant transnational ties, and the continuing salience of what he asserts were Catholic-inspired postwar achievements: an interdenominational (but mostly Catholic) party, Germany’s social market economy, its “cooperative separation” of church and state (p. 491), and European integration. SPD-politician Wolfgang Thierse prefers to give a more general answer, citing the importance of all religious voices, including Jews and Muslims, in what has become an immigration-inclusive society (Einwanderungsgesellschaft, p. 501). It is Loth, however, who provokes deeper reflection on the connection between political Catholicism’s current status and its historical origin. Writes Loth: far from being pre-existing sociological realities, political Catholicism and the wellorganized Catholic milieu were time-bound, “transitional phenomena” that afforded diverse Catholic groupings a collective “path . . . to modernity”—a path, however, that “necessarily” eroded the “coherence and substance” of the Catholic collective (p. 40). This epochal characterization of political Catholicism helps underscore its larger significance for German history: if not (in Loth’s contested view) a cause of a Sonderweg, political Catholicism was still a vital symptom of the larger problem of modernistic adaptation that lay at the Sonderweg’s core. But if so, then Blaschke’s call for transnational comparisons becomes all the more urgent— for the history of the Center party, as I have also argued elsewhere, thereby moves from the periphery to the core of modern German history. College of the Holy Cross NOEL D. CARY BOOK REVIEWS 819 Defending the Faith: An Anti-Modernist Anthology. Edited and translated by William H. Marshner. (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press. 2017. Pp. xii, 340. $34.95 paperback. ISBN 978-0-813-228969.) The Modernist crisis that affected the Catholic Church at the beginning of the twentieth century is now well forgotten, not only by the general public but also by the faithful. The threat, however, was one constantly feared and always invoked by the ecclesiastical authorities, at least until the Second Vatican Council, to warn and even condemn theologians suspected of deviation from orthodoxy. At the origin of this crisis is the increased number of attempts to get the Church out of the intellectual torpor she had locked herself in, frozen, since the beginning of the nineteenth century, in an uncompromising position regarding modernity. From the 1880s onwards, through the various branches of religious sciences, researchers, French ones in particular, such as Louis Duchesne in history, Alfred Loisy in exegesis, and Édouard Leroy in philosophy and theology, suggested adapting the Church’s discourse to the spiritual and intellectual needs of their contemporaries. The views, sometimes daring, put forward by these men, who were primarily concerned with restoring the Church’s lost influence, came up against the determined opposition of theologians who defended orthodoxy. In Defending the Faith. An Anti-Modernism Anthology, William H. Marshner publishes, with an introduction by C. J. T. Talar, who sets the general context, eleven articles (five relate to Loisy’s exegesis, two to George Tyrrell’s religious philosophy, and four to Leroy’s concept of dogma). These articles were written between 1903 and 1906 by Pierre Batiffol, rector of the Catholic Institute of Toulouse; Marie-Joseph Lagrange, O.P., founder of the Biblical School of Jerusalem; Eugène Portalié and Léonce de Grandmaison, Jesuits; Eugène Franon; and Joannès Wehrlé. A first observation on the subtitle: Antimodernist Anthology: Certainly, but in that case by anticipation. This suggests that the authors anticipated with great perspicacity the condemnation that would only be carried out in 1907 by the encyclical Pascendi. Yet, unless I am mistaken, the word “Modernist” does not appear in any article. Their purpose was more limited. They warned (without linking them together, precisely what the Pope’s theologians were to do, to define Modernism as “the crossroads of all heresies”) against the possible drifts of Loisy’s evolutionism, Tyrrell’s pragmatism, Le Roy’s immanentism. Second observation: Eight articles appear in the Bulletin de Littérature Ecclésiastique de l’ Institut catholique de Toulouse, two in the Revue biblique, and one in Études. Ten articles out of the eleven gathered thus come from directed journals, the first by Batiffol, the second by Lagrange (with support from Batiffol). This is no accident. These two friends are not conservatives. They work, one as a historian, the other as an exegete, trying to find a via media between the prudence of some and the audacity of others. 820 BOOK REVIEWS Their caution can be explained by two considerations. On the one hand, they believed that making public opinion aware of research that might have uncertain conclusions might unnecessarily disturb the faith of the faithful, “especially the impressionable Youth,” and on the other hand, and perhaps, above all, that they feared being themselves the target of Roman censors. They thought they could protect themselves by denouncing those whose daring they criticized. Vainly, since a book by Batiffol on the Eucharist was inscribed on the Index, and he was forced as a result to resign his position as rector, and Lagrange’s superiors forbade him to publish his comments on Genesis. In essence, these articles reveal the difficulty of communication that existed at the time between historians and theologians on one side, and philosophers and theologians on the other side. The atmosphere of suspicion prevented a dialogue without controversy and without judgment of intentions from being established serenely. On the first point, Lagrange is formal. He wrote to Batiffol about L’Évangile et l’Église: “If this historical construction holds, dogma is destroyed. [. . .] Despite Mr. Loisy’s good will to agree on everything, it is believed that, after reading it, there is an irreducible opposition between history and dogma.” On the second point, it is the refusal to admit that a philosophical approach other than scholastic intellectualism, “proclaimed true and infallible for eternity” (Franon), could offer a renewed approach to dogmatic theology. Behind the denunciation of historicism in one case, of the philosophy of action in the other, what is at stake is the question of how to escape historical relativism in order to save the absolute character of Revelation. These articles are therefore essential documents both to understand the intellectual stakes of the Modernist crisis and the difficulties encountered by those who tried to propose solutions acceptable to the ecclesiastical authority at the time, as notes C. J. T. Talar correctly in the introduction: “They did not always possess the resources to answer adequately.” The main interest of these articles is therefore historical. They bear witness to the situation of theological reflection in the early twentieth century and above all, the impossibility of a serene debate between theologians to answer the questions posed by the evolution of knowledge and mentalities. LOUIS-PIERRE SARDELLA Lyon, France AMERICAN Sacred Violence in Early America. By Susan Juster. [Early American Studies.] (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2016. Pp. xvi, 267. $55.00. ISBN 978-0-8122-4813-5.) Does religion inspire violence? In her new book, Sacred Violence in Early America, Susan Juster does not attempt to answer that question directly. Instead, she BOOK REVIEWS 821 analyzes evidence from dozens of early modern European and American writers that demonstrate the prevalence of words and stories that were often deployed to destroy some facet of the religious “other.” This potent and destructive rhetoric, Juster argues, “formed and shaped behaviors that communities enforced on God’s behalf.” This study is thus a brilliant and jarring reminder that it was words—in the form of imagery and linguistic formulations—that promoted, celebrated, or justified violence in the name of faith were commonplace, and at times inspired action, on both sides of the Atlantic. Juster focuses on four common tropes found repeated in religious texts: blood sacrifice, holy war, malediction, and iconoclasm. In the chapter on blood sacrifice, she describes the pervasiveness of violent religious imagery that even today shocks with its gruesomeness. Stories of decapitations and dismemberments, babies slaughtered in front of mothers pleading for mercy, and human body parts dangling on meat hooks and cooking over fires were commonplace in Protestant depictions of both martyrdom and Catholic New World conquest. Yet these descriptions of brutality were not always literal representations of actions or desires. Some, for example, were linked to a broader debate about Transubstantiation and what it meant to consume Christ in the Mass, thus highlighting a critical theological difference between Protestants and Catholics. In the chapter on holy war, Juster demonstrates how this rhetoric shaped the horrific violence against Native Americans that started chiefly in the 1640s and was brought to “truly astounding levels in the last third of the seventeenth century.” Again, however, there was complexity, with Protestant thinkers disagreeing about whether God would truly want “His” people to take up arms against one another. Behind basic religious labels lay a much more complicated story of the limits of defense of faith. One of the highlights of this book is the chapter on malediction—blasphemy or a “sin of the tongue,” as described in the Catholic Encyclopedia—and the “word magic” that punished the blasphemer with grotesque (and at times, humorously ironic) physical afflictions of supernatural origin. Such fables of the “terrible power of words to wound” speak not only to historical circumstances but to contemporary ones as well. Yet the record of prosecutions for blasphemy illustrate another point: change was possible. For example, consider the years around the English Civil War, when groups like the Ranters reveled in profanity and challenged prevailing orthodoxies with abandon. The religious experimentation of these years eventually led to a loosening of blasphemy laws (the last execution for blasphemy took place in England in 1695). As Juster shrewdly notes, there was often a disconnect between the existence of these laws and their enforcement. The final chapter, on iconoclasm, is a fascinating consideration of the targeted destruction of religious objects. Killing humans in God’s name gave some early modern Christians pause. But “killing” their tools of worship—statues, books, or entire buildings—presented less of a moral conundrum. Iconoclasm was thus a “safe” outlet for the impulse to commit sacred violence. 822 BOOK REVIEWS Sacred Violence in Early America is an intense and disturbing read, but Juster’s beautiful and organized prose keeps the reader engaged. And the author strives to demarcate the world of rhetoric and the world of action. At times, however, a reader easily can lose track of that all-important line that separates historical events from violent fantasies. Readers looking for a chronological treatment of specific historical incidents influenced by religious factors will not find it here. But those who seek to answer different questions—of the expressed and creative violence of certain early modern religious ideas, of their pervasiveness in print culture, of common formulations of religious enemies—will not be disappointed. State University of New York at Purchase LAURA M. CHMIELEWSKI BRIEF NOTICE Kaufmann, Thomas. A Short Life of Martin Luther. Translated by Peter D. S. Krey and James D. Bratt. [Reformation Resources, 1517-2017.] (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2016. Pp. xi, 146. $18.00 paperback. ISBN 978-0-8028-7153.) This brief introduction to Luther’s life and thought is a translation of Kaufmann’s Martin Luther, published in German in 2006 and now in its fifth edition. In just over 100 pages, Kaufmann manages to cover in surprising depth Luther’s biography, theology, self-understanding, and subsequent influence on history. While some details and nuance are lost in this truncated genre, Kaufmann presents both a coherent picture of Luther and a thoughtful consideration of the ways in which he remains enigmatic. The first two chapters focus on the varied history of Luther interpretation and Luther’s life and times, respectively. The third chapter, the longest by far, covers his theological endeavors. Kaufmann frames Luther’s theology not in loci, but instead within his context and vocations: his biblical translation and publishing, his work as a professor and a preacher, his worldview and concerns, his roles as father and citizen, and his views of the church. A final section in this chapter also takes on the pointed issue of Luther’s apocalyptic expectation and the combativeness it engendered against all who disagreed with him. A brief epilogue reflects on Luther’s faith and its consequences for Christianity. The translators must be commended for making Kaufmann’s German read clearly—and even elegantly—in English. This little book is a readable and discerning treatment of a complex subject, and the author’s reflections on Luther’s legacy give readers much to consider. A helpful timeline of Luther’s life, a map of sixteenth-century Germany, and a reprinting of the Ninety-five Theses add to its usefulness as a primer on one of Christian history’s most controversial figures. ANNA MARIE JOHNSON (Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary) Notes and Comments ASSOCIATION NEWS The 2017 elections have resulted in Kathleen Holscher of the University of New Mexico becoming the Vice-President for 2018 and President in 2019; Jeffrey Burns of the University of San Diego and Marian Barber of the Catholic Archives of Texas becoming Executive Council member for 2017–20; Carolyn Twomey of Boston College as Graduate Student Representative for 2017–19; and Stephanie Jacobe of the Archives of the Archdiocese of Washington as chair of the Election Board. The 2018 ACHA Annual Meeting will be held on January 4 to 6 at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, D.C. Registration closes on December 15, 2017. For more information on this meeting, please visit the ACHA website, www.achahistory.org. The 2018 Spring Meeting will be held at Mount St. Mary’s University in Emmitsburg, Maryland, on April 12 to 15. CAUSES OF SAINTS On September 23, 2017 Father Stanley Francis Rother of the Glenmary Home Missioners, born in Okarche, OK on March 27, 1935 and killed in Guatemala on July 28, 1981, was beatified in a ceremony in Oklahoma City, the first American to receive the designation of martyr. On October 9, 2017 Pope Francis authorized the Congregation for Saints’ causes to promulgate the following decrees: acknowledgement of the martyrdoms of the Servants of God Tullio (baptized Marcello) Maruzzo (1929–81), a professed priest of the Order of Friars Minor and Luis Obdulio Arroyo Navarro (1950–81) of the Third Order of St. Francis, both killed in hatred of the Faith on July 1, 1981 near Los Amates, Guatemala; recognition of the heroic virtues of the Servants of God: Donizetti Tavares de Lima (1882–1961), a Brazilian diocesan priest; Serafin (baptized Alojzy Kazimierz) Kaszuba (1910–77), a Ukrainian professed Capuchin priest; Magin Morera y Feixas (1908–81), a Spainish professed priest of the Congregation of the Holy Family of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph; Maria Lorenza Requenses de Longo (1463–1539), Spanish foundress of the Hospital of the Incurables in Naples and of the Capuchin Nuns; Françoise du Saint Esprit (born Caroline Baron, 1820–82), French foundress of the Third Order of Saint Francis of Montpellier; Elžbieta Róža Czacka (1876–1961), Ukrainian foundress of the Congregation of the Franciscan Sister Servants of the Cross; and Prince Francesco Paolo Gravina (1800–54), Italian lay founder of the of the Congregation of the Sisters of Charity of Saint Vincent. 823 824 NOTES AND COMMENTS On October 15, 2017, at a Mass in St. Peter’s Square, Pope Francis canonized as saints thirty-five persons listed earlier (CHR, 103, no.2 [2017], 379). On November 18, 2017, in a ceremony in Detroit, MI, the Wisconsin-born Capuchin friar Venerable Solanus (baptized Bernard Francis) Casey (1870-1957) was beatified. EXHIBITION From September 14 to December 27, 2017, the Newberry Library in Chicago is presenting an exhibition on the theme “Religious Change, 1450-1700.” Using 150 items from the Library’s collection of Bibles, tracts, poems, maps, music, and works of art, the exhibition explores religious change through the eyes of those who experienced it in Europe and the Americas: preachers and teachers, travelers and traders, writers and printers. CONFERENCES On November 22–24, 2017 the Accademia Ambrosiana of Milan sponsored the Dies Academicus 2017 in the Biblioteca Ambrosiana with a conference on the theme “Schiavitù del corpo e schiavitù dell’anima. Chiesa, potere politico, e schiavitù tra Atlantico e Mediterraneo (sec. XVI–XVIII).” The inaugural address by Tamar Herzog was on “Schiavitù: una prospettiva globale.” Session I: “Il mondo atlantico: schiavitù e affrancamento” contained four papers: “La trattattistica teologicogiuridica nei contesi coloniali” by Carlos Zeron; “Schiavitù e impero: un dibattito globale nel mondo portoghese del Cinquecento” by Giuseppe Marcocci; “The Debate on Natural Slavery and Legal Slavery in Iberian Theologian-jurists of the Modern Age” by Pedro Calafate; and “Riflessioni dei canonisti post-tridentini sulla schiavitù” by Isabelle Poutrin. Session II: “Il mondo Mediterraneo: schiavitù, conversioni, pratiche religiose” had five papers: “Schiavitù mediterranea e vita religiosa” by Salvatore Bono; “Benedetto il Moro dalla Sicilia al Nuovo Mondo” by Giovanna Fiume; “Corpi e anime in schiavitù: schiavi musulmani nella Malta dei Cavalieri di San Giovanni (1530–1798)” by Emanuel Buttigieg; “Trasvase de religiones en el mundo mediterráneo del Setecientos” by Maximiliano Barrio Gozalo; and “Gesuiti, schiavitù e conversioni nel Seicento” by Emanuele Colombo. Session III “Schiavitù dell’anima: da Milano al Brasile” also had five papers: “Schiavitù dell’anima nei sermoni di Federico Borromeo” by Marzia Giuliani; “La schiavitù nei sermoni di Viera” by Alcir Pecora; “Lessico sulla schiavitù nella sermonistica brasiliana dal Cinquecento al Settecento” by Marina Massimi; “Schiavitù del corpo e schiavitù dell’anima: confraternite nell’America portoghese nel Settecento”by Caio Boschi; and “Agar in Brasile: la migrazione dei simboli in Antonio Viera” by Andrea Celli. On May 10 to 13, 2018, the International Congress on Medieval Studies at Western Michigan University will hold a special session on “The Church’s Medieval Liturgy; Lex Credendi, Lex Orandi, Lex Vivendi, Lex Aedificandi.” How medieval persons expressed their faith in prayer, art, architecture, religious communities, chivalry, crusades, and everyday life, embracing an incarnational view of reli- NOTES AND COMMENTS 825 gion, will be explored in various papers. For more information, please contract Richard Nicholas at Nicholas@stfrancis.edu or tel. 815-740-3522. PERSONALS Father John W. O’Malley, S.J., of Georgetown University received on October 3, 2017 the Ganss Award from the Institute for Advanced Jesuit Studies of Boston College, and at a ceremony on January 5, 2018 at the annual meeting of the American Society of Church History in Washington, D.C., he will receive the 2015 Philip Schaff Prize for his book Trent: What Happened at the Council (Cambridge, MA: Belknap/Harvard, 2013). PUBLICATIONS A forum on “Communities and Religious Identities in the Early Modern Francophone World, 1550–1700,” appears in the issue for August, 2017 (vol. 40, no. 3), of French Historical Studies. Following an introduction by Sara Beam and Megan Armstrong (pp. 381–82) are six contributions: “Reflections on Community and Identity,” by Barbara B. Diefendorf (pp. 383–90); “Storied Place: Land and Legend at Notre-Dame de Garaison,” by Virginia Reinburg (pp. 391–407); “Praying against the Enemy: Imprecatory Prayer and Reformed Identity from the Reformation to the Early Enlightenment,” by Christian Grosse (pp. 409–23); “Who Goes There? To Live and Survive during the Wars of Religion, 1562–1598,” by Jérémie Foa (pp. 425–38); “Conversion, Family, and Authority in SeventeenthCentury Saumur,” by Scott M. Marr (pp. 439–56); and “Catholic Marriage and the Customs of the Country: Building a new Religious Community in SeventeenthCentury Vietnam,” by Keith P. Luria (pp. 457–73). Historical Studies, the journal published by the Canadian Catholic Historical Association, contains the following four articles in its Volume 83 (2017): “Emancipation vs. Equity: Civic Inclusion of Halifax Catholics, 1830–1865,” by Terrence Murphy (pp. 7–24); “Father James T. Foley: Irish-Canadian Priest and Journalist,” by Frederick J. McEvoy (pp. 25-45); “Strict Neo-Thomism in the Catholic High Schools of the Archdiocese of Toronto, 1940–1960,” by Joe Stafford (pp. 47–65); and “Essential Recovery, Rural Resilience, and Energizing Communities from St. Peter’s Abbey in Muenster, Saskatchewan,” by Christopher Hrynkow, Brigid Ward, and Caitlin Ward (pp. 67–88). Bound within the same covers is Volume 83 (nos.1–2, 2017) of Études d’histoire religieuse, Revue publiée par la Société canadienne d’histoire de l’Eglise catholique: “Loin des yeux, près du cœur! Autorité, distance et pragmatisme chez les Sœurs Missionnaires de Notre-Dame d’Afrique (18691894),” by Catherine Foisy (pp. 5–18); “Une mission féministe ou une mission de femmes? Les Sœurs des Saints Noms de Jésus et de Marie au Pérou et au Brésil (1960-1985),” by Dominique Laperle (pp. 19–41); “Saint Zotique de Montréal: Itinéraire d’une dévotion ultramontaine (1845–2005),” by Michel Dahan (pp. 4360); “Judith en 1951: le statut de l’infigurable dans l’œuvre d’Ozias Leduc,” by Mathilde Bois (pp. 61–77); and “Splendeurs et misères des nefs historiques ou 826 NOTES AND COMMENTS comment assurer la pérennité des églises classées du Québec,” by Édith Prégent (pp. 79-95); there is also an “Étude libre” by Christine Hudon: “Connaître et comprendre le passé pour réfléchir au devenir de la société Québécoise. La contribution de Serge Gagnon à l’historiographie religieuse” (pp. 97–110). LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Dear Editor Minnich and Msgr. Trisco, It is time for a belated complaint regarding CHR’s publishing (in vol. 102, no. 3, 2016) Maurice Finocchiaro’s review of my Setting Aside All Authority: Giovanni Battista Riccioli and the Science against Copernicus in the Age of Galileo (University of Notre Dame Press, 2015). Finocchiaro seems to have overlooked much of the content of the book, including the table of contents. Finocchiaro notes in his review that “there is at least one popular myth about the Copernican revolution that continues to be widespread: that conclusive proof of the earth’s motion was provided by Copernicus himself, or the telescope, or Galileo’s Dialogue.” He then states, “The aim of this book is to criticize this popular myth.” I do use this myth here and there as a point of contrast to the work of Riccioli or others, but the person who reads the book finds a small number of lines spent on that myth, and finds most pages covering technical matters, such as what telescopes show or what Brahe or Riccioli measured, or reporting what this or that person said, such as what Francesco Ingoli said. Indeed, a quarter of the book consists of appendices, containing translations of different material, including Ingoli’s essay to Galileo. Finocchiaro translated Galileo’s reply to this essay, and he has characterized Ingoli’s essay as the chief direct basis for the 1616 decision by church authorities to reject Copernicus. Yet Finocchiaro overlooked the essay, which is listed in the table of contents. The person who reads Setting Aside finds that it is not about criticizing a myth, but about the scientific arguments against Copernicus and the technical basis for those arguments. Finocchiaro writes that my book is seriously flawed. “To begin with,” he says, “Graney makes it sound as if the untenability of the popular pro-Copernican myth were his novel contribution, whereas it is well known among scholars.” Yet the person who reads the book will find me stating on page 141 that this myth “is continually challenged by scholars of the history of astronomy, who have long been well aware that it is false insofar as the scientific evidence in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was by no means strong enough at the time to demonstrate the truth of the Copernican heliocentrism,” etc., and will also find a half-page quotation from historian of science Kerry Magruder illustrating this point. Finocchiaro states, “Graney elaborates the opposite thesis: that as late as 1651, the anti-Copernican arguments were not only stronger than the pro-Copernican ones but also included some that were conclusive, thus ‘demonstrating’ the geostatic geocentric thesis to be ‘absolutely true’ and the heliocentric geokinetic idea to be ‘absolutely false’ (pp. 5–6, 162).” The person who reads the book will find that what NOTES AND COMMENTS 827 Finocchiaro criticizes as Graney’s elaboration is actually Riccioli’s. Indeed, it is from Riccioli’s words that Finocchiaro takes the “absolutely true,” “absolutely false,”and “demonstrating” terms he quotes. He adds, “Graney’s justification of his alternative myth is mostly a series of omissions, distortions, exaggerations, superficialities, sophistries, biases, equivocations, inconsistencies, false dilemmas, strawman fallacies, and so forth,” but provides no support for this assertion. Finocchiaro runs through a nine-step summary of Riccioli’s star-size argument, and then hangs his “omissions, distortions, etc.” point on the eighth step, the claim of absurdity of stellar sizes. He says that “Graney” does not appreciate the difficulty with the truth of that eighth step and does not realize that the burden is on the anti-Copernicans to tell us why such stellar size is absurd. But the person who reads the book will see that this is not for “Graney” to realize; it is not Graney’s nine-step argument. It is Riccioli’s, Ingoli’s, and Brahe’s. It is also Peter Cruger’s. The person who reads the book finds, for example, on p. 52 Cruger summarizing the nine-step star size argument and stating, “I therefore do not understand how the Pythagorean or Copernican Systema Mundi can survive.” Perhaps Finocchiaro’s confusion here stems from the fact that he overlooked what Cruger is saying. Finocchiaro says I ignore “common-sense” arguments, and cites Galileo’s idea that there is no absurdity in a Copernican universe with “some stars,” as Finocchiaro says, being vastly larger than our sun, any more than it is absurd in the animal kingdom for a whale to be vastly larger than a tadpole. But as is noted with Cruger and in multiple other places within the book, the issue is not with “some” stars being vastly larger than our sun. Rather the issue is with “all” stars being vastly larger: the sun being the one solitary tadpole in a universe where everything else ranges in size from dolphin to blue whale. Finocchiaro is an outstanding scholar. I have used his work regularly. Still, this review should not be in the CHR and does a disservice to your readers. The phrase “series of omissions, distortions, exaggerations, superficialities, sophistries, biases, equivocations, inconsistencies, false dilemmas, straw-man fallacies, and so forth” ought to have raised a warning flag. I direct you to the review in America Magazine by David Collins at Georgetown University near you in D.C. for another view of Setting Aside from a Catholic source: https://www.americamagazine.org/ issue/culture/how-far-stars. Jefferson Community & Technical College Louisville, Kentucky CHRIS GRANEY Maurice Finocchiaro replies: Dear Editor: This is a response to Graney’s letter to the Catholic Historical Review, complaining about my review of his book Setting Aside All Authority (Notre Dame, 2015). I appreciate the fact that the journal is giving me the opportunity to respond. In my review of Graney’s Setting Aside All Authority, I interpreted its main 828 NOTES AND COMMENTS theme to be the criticism of a common myth: that the Copernican revolution was slowed down only by intellectual dogmatism and/or religious obscurantism, which led many to reject the proof of the earth’s motion provided by Copernicus, the telescope, and/or Galileo’s Dialogue. Moreover, I criticized Graney’s criticism as amounting to the construction of the opposite myth: that until the second half of the seventeenth century, the scientific arguments clearly favored the thesis that the earth stands still at the center of the universe. Graney complains that this is not his major theme, although he admits paying some attention to it. His major theme, he now tells us, is “the scientific arguments against Copernicus and the technical basis of those arguments.” However, this description is not very helpful. First, one would want to know why Graney examines this topic. I would say that Graney examines it in order to criticize the common myth about the Copernican revolution, and to advance his own thesis. Second, one should reflect on what exactly is involved in examining the scientific arguments against Copernicanism and their technical basis. I wonder whether Graney is aware that such an examination involves primarily two activities: interpretation of anti-Copernican arguments aimed at understanding them; and evaluation for the purpose of determining their correctness and strength. Now, regarding the interpretive issue, I admit that Graney’s presentation is usually (although not always) helpful, and occasionally even insightful. However, regarding the evaluative issue, he is usually (although, again, not always) biased, one-sided, and injudicious in favor of the anti-Copernican arguments and against the pro-Copernican ones. Thus, the difficulties mentioned or implied in my review remain. Third, on the evaluative issue, Graney’s letter provides evidence that he is not clear or aware that he is engaged in evaluation. In fact, his letter claims that his book merely reports the evaluations of the anti-Copernican historical agents. However, the reader of the book easily perceives that Graney is usually adopting the assessments of these anti-Copernicans, and thus implicitly engaged in evaluation. Occasionally, he is even explicit about this. For example, in the first chapter, after quoting Riccioli saying that the earth’s rest “absolutely must be asserted as true” and the earth’s motion “absolutely must be asserted as false” (p. 6), Graney comments that “what is remarkable about Riccioli’s analysis is that he was right” (p. 8). Graney’s unawareness or uncritical attitude regarding evaluation may be at the root of the book’s flaws. Graney’s letter also complains about my assertion that his book is full of such flaws as “omissions, distortions, exaggerations, superficialities, sophistries, biases, equivocations, inconsistencies, false dilemmas, straw-man fallacies, and so forth.” He says I provide no support for this assertion. On this issue, I admit that I did not provide a full justification of this judgment. However, it is obvious that this cannot be done in a brief book review. In any NOTES AND COMMENTS 829 case, my review did provide some support for my judgment, and here now I am happy to provide some additional support. In my review, my discussion of the book’s main theme did provide some examples of distortion, exaggeration, and bias. As sketched again above, Graney’s book exaggerates the strength of the anti-Copernican arguments and the weakness of the pro-Copernican arguments. In so doing, he is showing bias toward the antiCopernican side, and thus distorting the logic of the controversy. Regarding the flaw of sophistry, it too was implicitly illustrated in my review, specifically in my discussion of the star-size argument. The main issue involved the argument’s premise that the large sizes implied by Copernicanism are absurd. Graney tends to ignore the fact that the burden of proof rests on the proponent of an argument. Thus, he conceals the fact that, without supporting the absurdity, the star-size argument is groundless and the anti-Copernican are begging the question. However, he stresses that the Copernicans responding to this argument appealed to religious considerations, e.g. God’s omnipotence, to deny any absurdity. This enables Graney to insinuate his sophistical claim that the Copernicans lapsed into religious argumentation, whereas the anti-Copernican stuck to scientific argumentation. Occasionally, rarely (pp. 80, 137-38), Graney describes anti-Copernicans as also engaged in similar theological considerations, but tries to make it look as if they were merely responding to the Copernicans’ theological arguments, rather than elaborating an essential part of their own star-size argument. Another flaw, which I did not illustrate in my review, was superficiality. The most serious example is perhaps Graney’s account of Galileo’s criticism of the mechanical objections to the earth’s motion. Graney never discusses the lengthy details of Galileo’s analysis, based on such principles of modern physics as conservation, composition, and relativity of motion. Instead Graney limits himself to discussing a two-page passage where Galileo describes a crucial experiment to be made in a cabin under deck on a ship, both when the ship is motionless and when it is moving forward at constant speed. This short-cut deprives readers of a deep understanding of the details of Galileo’s criticism, the principles of the new physics, or even the details of the anti-Copernican objections. Finally, let me now illustrate the flaw of omissions. In 1665, fourteen years after his Almagestum Novum, Riccioli published Astronomiae Reformatae Tomi Duo, which was something like a summary or abridged edition of his earlier book. It happened to receive much greater discussion, especially in Italy and especially with regard to one particular mechanical argument which Riccioli had invented. This argument began by accepting Galileo’s law of acceleration of falling bodies, and taking at face value the rhetorically playful passage on semicircular fall in the Dialogue; then, after various questionable steps, it arrived at the conclusion that the earth can’t rotate. In 1665–1669, this argument engendered a dispute producing nine books. The consensus was that Riccioli was wrong. Moreover, in his Apologia . . . pro Argumento Physico-mathematico contra Systema Copernicanum (1669), Riccioli 830 NOTES AND COMMENTS himself seemed to admit that he no longer held that the scientific arguments against the earth’s motion were conclusive, but that he continued to believe the geostatic thesis for religious reasons. (On this topic, omitted from Graney’s book, see Paolo Galluzzi, “Galileo contro Copernico,” Annali dell’Istituto e Museo di Storia della Scienza, vol. 2, issue 2 (1977), 87–148.) Finally, perhaps I may be allowed to end on a note analogous to that with which Graney ends his letter. That is, to see that my critical attitude toward Graney’s book is not unique, the reader may also want to consult the review published in a relatively technical source, the Journal for the History of Astronomy, 47 (2016), 222–24. University of Nevada, Las Vegas MAURICE A. FINOCCHIARO Periodical Literature GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS Understanding the Shift in Gaudium et Spes: From the Theology of History to Christian Anthropology. Dries Bosschaert. Theological Studies, 78 (sept., 2017), 634–58. il magistero e il ministero di Paolo Vi sulla pace. Pietro card. Parolin. Istituto Paolo VI, notiziario n.73 (June, 2017), 32–44. exulta, lusitania felix. lettera apostolica di Pio Xii per il titolo di dottore evangelico a sant’antonio di Padova (1946). Genesi ed evoluzione. luciano Bertazzo. Il Santo, lVi (3, 2016), 335–86. culto dei santi francescani in Marmilla e alcuni gosos in loro onore. Mauro Badas. Collectanea Franciscana, 87 (1–2, 2017), 202–30. la vida en el colegio de doncellas nobles de Toledo. Ángel santos Vaquero. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 149–61. les lyonnais et saint Bonaventure (fin du XVe-XViiie siècles). Fabienne Henryot. Revue historique, 141, no. 682 (apr., 2017), 267–95. la riforma come promessa di comunione. dal Consensus Tigurinus alla Concordia di Leuenberg. Fulvio Ferrario. Archivio Teologico Torinese, XXii (2, 2016), 253–67. The Meaning of “Quaker History.” Jeffrey dudiak. Quaker History, 106 (spring, 2017), 1–21. l’Évolution du culte des saints martyrs au XXe siècle, avant le concile Vatican ii. Philippe Beitia. Ephermerides Liturgicae, cXXXi (apr.-June, 2017), 129–61. old souls, new World. Marilynne robinson. Harvard Divinity Bulletin, 45 (spring-summer, 2017), 22–35. ancienT Gli epistolari cristiani dei primi cinque secoli e il trasformarsi delle lettere. clara Burini de lorenzi. Augustinianum, lVi (June, 2016), 175–93. ehe, scheidung und Wiederheirat in der alten Kirche: Historische Betrachtungen. Peter Bruns. Forum Katholische Theologie, 33 (2, 2017), 81–97. The Jew of celsus and adversus Judaeos literature. James n. carleton-Paget. Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum, 21 (aug., 2017), 201–42. schlafende und Träumende in der frühchristlichen Kunst. Jutta dresken-Weiland. Römische Quartalschrift, 111 (3–4, 2016), 204–23. 831 832 PERIODICAL LITERATURE Apud beatum Petrum vigilemus. Die nächtliche Verehrung der Märtyrergräber in Rom. Stefan Heid. Römische Quartalschrift, 111 (3–4, 2016), 224–51. Shaping Church-State Relations After Constantine: The Political Theology of Hilary of Poitiers. Eric Wickman. Church History, 86 (June, 2017), 287–310. La fede degli iniziati. L’itinerario dei credenti nelle Catechesi Mistagogiche del IV secolo. Americo Miranda. Augustinianum, LVI (June, 2016), 119–43. This Kind Only Comes Out by Prayer (and Fasting): Fasting, Ritual Efficacy and Magical Thinking in Early Christianity. Brandon Walker. Journal of Ritual Studies, 31 (1, 2017), 43–52. Il posto di Ambrogio di Milano tra i misericordes nostri. Luigi F. Pizzolato. Aevum, XCI (Jan.–Apr., 2017), 221–40. Heavenly Visions: Experiencing Euphemia’s and Hippolytus’s Martyria. Fernando Gorab Leme. Journal of Early Christian Studies, 25 (Fall, 2017), 359–82. The Wise and Foolish Virgins: Representations of Vestal Virginity and Pagan Chastity by Christian Writers in Late Antiquity. Sissel Undheim. Journal of Early Christian Studies, 25 (Fall, 2017), 383–409. Palladius of Helenopolis: One Author, Two Ways to Write. Yuliya Minets. Journal of Early Christian Studies, 25 (Fall, 2017), 411–40. Syrische Fragmente des Kommentars Cyrills von Alexandrien zum 1. Korintherbrief. Konrad F. Zawadzki. Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum, 21 (Aug., 2017), 304–60. Gli organizzatori della spiritualità bizantina: Basilio de Cesarea—Gregorio di Naziano. Francesco Trisoglio. Rivista di Storia e Letteratura Religiosa, LII (3, 2016), 537–49. La Vita di Macrina e le Omelie sul Cantico dei Cantici di Gregorio di Nissa. Roberta Franchi. Augustinianum, LVI (June, 2016), 57–83. La catedral de San Agustín de Hipona. J. A. Fortea. Revista Agustiniana, LVII (Sept.-Dec., 2016), 473–522. Prosper von Aquitanien und Papst Leo der Große. Der Primat des Papstes im Spiegel einer zeitgenössischen Chronik. Jan-Markus Kötter. Römische Quartalschrift, 111 (3-4, 2016), 252–71. Mistranslations of Josephus and the expansion of public charity in late antiquity. Mark Anderson. Early Medieval Europe, 25 (May, 2017), 139–61. Syrische Asketen und Asketinnen in Ägypten im frühen 6. Jh. Michael Kohlbacher. Ostkirchliche Studien, 65 (2, 2016), 271–90. Christliche Explikationen in der Gesetzgebung Justinians I. Karen Piepenbrink. Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum, 21 (Aug., 2017), 361–82. The military, the clergy, and Christian faith in sixth-century Gaul. Laury Sarti. Early Medieval Europe, 25 (May, 2017), 162–85. PERIODICAL LITERATURE 833 Des notes marginales sur le schisme des Trois Chapitres dans le plus vieux manuscript du De baptismo contra donatistas. Warren Pezé. Revue d’Études Augustiniennes et Patristiques, 62 (2, 2016), 293–334. Eutichio, monaco e patriarca nella tormenta (e Gregorio Magno). Giorgio Cracco. Rivistia di Storia e Letteratura Religiosa, LII (3, 2016), 569–90. MEDIEVAL L’anachorèse au cours des temps (3). Le Moyen Âge. Christophe Vuillaume. Collectanea Cisterciensa, 79 (2, 2017), 122–48. La Iglesia de Toledo en la Edad Media: organización institucional y formas de vida religiosa. Estado de la cuestión archivos y descripción de manuscritos. Enrique Torija Rodríguez. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 31–47. Ein gallischer Liber Pontificalis? Bemerkungen zur Text- und Überlieferungsgeschichte des sogenannten Catalogus Felicianus. Matthias Simperl. Römische Quartalschrift, 111 (3–4, 2016), 272–87. Adomnán, two saints, and the paschal controversy. Gilbert Markus. Innes Review, 68 (May, 2017), 1–18. Dal seggio abbaziale alla cattedra vescovile. Nardò: una Chiesa Latina nel Salento bizantino. Benedetto Vetere. Rivista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia, LXX (Jan.June, 2016), 3–33. The ecumenical synods in the eastern Byzantine and post-Byzantine iconographic tradition. María Kazamía Tsernou. Rivista di Storia e Letteratura Religiosa, LII (3, 2016), 517–36. Hwaetberht, Sicfrith and the reforming of Wearmouth and Jarrow. Conor O’Brien. Early Medieval Europe, 25 (Aug., 2017), 301–19. In the words of the apostle: Pauline apostolic discourse in the letters of Boniface and his circle. Shannon Godlove. Early Medieval Europe, 25 (Aug., 2017), 320–58. Niger fluvius: aguas oscuras y dioses infernales. El caso de Endovélico. Antonio Carlos Ledo Caballero. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 7–17. Anti-Jewish Rhetoric in Byzantine Hymnography: Exegetical and Theological Contextualization. Bogdan G. Bucur. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 61 (1, 2017), 39–60. The Codex Sinaiticus Liturgicus Revisited: A New Edition and Critical Assessment of the Text. Alexandra Nikiforova and Tinatin Chronz. Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 83 (1, 2017), 59–125. Die Doppelsynode von Konstantinopel 869/70 bzw. 879/80. Christian Georg Schöberl. Ostkirchliche Studien, 65 (2, 2016), 291–314. Bishop Leodoin of Modena and the Legal Culture of Late Ninth-Century Italy. Michael W. Heil. Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, 134 (2017), Kanonistische Abteilung 103, 1–69. 834 PERIODICAL LITERATURE Kingship and hospitality in the iconography of the palatine church at Alt’amar. Igor Dorfmann-Lazarev. Rivista di Storia e Letteratura Religiosa, LII (3, 2016), 479–516. Medieval Miracle Accounts as Stories. Robert Bartlett. Irish Theological Quarterly, 82 (May, 2017), 113–27. Die Kanones des Konzils von Poitiers (1078) (mit Textedition): ein Versuch. Beate Schilling. Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, 134 (2017), Kanonistische Abteilung 103, 70–130. Qui sanctos coluit, se sicque colendo beavit. Abt Ulrich III. (von Eppenstein), der Kult der hl. Fides in St. Gallen und des Gallus im friulanischen Moggio. Walter Berschin. Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung, 125 (1, 2017), 1–13. Une compilation historiographique attribuée à Méthode (Trèves, début du XIIe siècle). Klaus Krönert. Revue d’Études Augustiniennes et Patristiques, 62 (2, 2016), 335–67. Was There Just One Petrus de Cardona? Adam J. Kosto. Zeitschrift der SavignyStiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, 134 (2017), Kanonistische Abteilung 103, 146–77. Les peintures murales du rond-point à Notre-Dame-la-Grande de Poitiers: un programme iconographique et épigraphique très élaboré. Robert Favreau. Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, 60 (Apr.-June, 2017), 139–53. Harbingers of the future: Marriage cases during the Pontificate of Innocent III and Lateran IV. Constance M. Rousseau. Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, 134 (2017), Kanonistische Abteilung 103, 178–203. Papa et pecunia: Innocent III’s combination of reform and fiscal policy to finance crusades. Matthew E. Parker. Mediterranean Historical Review, 32 (June, 2017), 1–23. Earthrise: The Franciscan Story. Julia McClure. Medieval History Journal, 20 (Apr., 2017), 89–117. The “Legenda versificata” as the oldest surviving Life on Francis of Assisi. Paul Bösch. Collectanea Franciscana, 87 (1–2, 2017), 5–37. Francis of Assisi, “Religious genius”. Raniero Cantalamessa. Collectanea Franciscana, 87 (1-2, 2017), 39–64. Agiografia e biografia. Qualche nota sulla giovinezza di Tommaso d’Aquino e sulla sua reclusione. Andrea Tilatti. Cristianesimo nella Storia, 38 (1, 2017), 85–111. “Scholasticism Is a Daughter of Judaism”: The Discovery of Jewish Influence on Medieval Christian Thought. George Y. Kohler. Journal of the History of Ideas, 78 (July, 2017), 319–40. Agency, exchange, and power in scholastic thought. Richard Sturn. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 24 (Aug., 2017), 640–69. PERIODICAL LITERATURE 835 La basilica conventuale di San Francesco a Rieti. Tra memoria storica e linguaggi artistici. Prima parte. Ileana Tozzi. Città di Vita, LXXII (May–June, 2017), 317–26. El Rey en las Partidas de Alfonso X: Su Vicariato Divino y su caracterización bajo esquemas de sacralidad. Plácido Fernández-Viagas Escudero. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 61–80. La legislazione per le Clarisse del 1263: la regola di urbano IV, le lettere di Giovanni Gaetano Orsini e di san Bonaventura. Aleksander Horowski. Collectanea Franciscana, 87 (1–2, 2017), 65–157. La liturgia procesional de completes en el ámbito de los monasterios femeninos de la Orden de Predicadores en Castilla. Mercedes Pérez Vidal. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 81–99. I Papi per Dante e Dante per i Papi. Vittorio Capuzza. Antonianum, XCII (Apr.Sept, 2017), 327–49. The Flight of the Master of Lombardy (13 February 1308) and Clement V’s Strategy in the Templar Affair: A Slap in the Pope’s Face. Julien Théry-Astruc. Rivista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia, LXX (Jan.–June, 2016), 35–44. Marguerite in Champagne. Sylvain Piron. Journal of Medieval Religious Cultures, 43 (2, 2017), 135–56. El papel del clero regular en la ordenación del paisaje. El caso del monasterio de San Julián de Samos. Estefanía López Salas. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 19–29. Poder regio y control del espacio: monarcas y monasterios de Castilla (c. 1312– 1390). Juan Antonio Prieto Sayagués. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 117–31. Von der Macht zur Herrschaft. Das kanonische Recht als Standard im Reich Ludwigs IV? Mathias Schmoeckel. Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, 134 (2017), Kanonistische Abteilung 103, 204–61. I senseri dei Pellegrini e l’organizzazione dei viaggi da Venezia per la Terra Santa. Sergio Baldan. Studi Veneziani, LXXIV (2016), 15–46. Handling Knowledge: Holy Bodies in the Middle English Mystery Plays. Helen Cushman. Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, 47 (May, 2017), 279–304. Configuración patrimonial del monasterio de monjas dominicas de San Juan de Quejana, patronazgo del linaje de Ayala (1378–1524). Agurtzane Paz Moro. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 101–15. Sympathy for the Lord: The Host and Elements of Sympathetic Magic in Late Medieval Exempla. Andrea Maraschi. Journal of Medieval Religious Cultures, 43 (2, 2017), 209–30. The Concealed Saint: The Writings of Inés De Moncada (1388–1428). Boncho Dragiyski. Journal of Medieval Religious Cultures, 43 (2, 2017), 231–53. 836 PERIODICAL LITERATURE Pre-modern Interfaith Dialogues with Special Reference to Nicholas of Cusa. Michael J. Langford. Medieval History Journal, 20 (Apr., 2017), 118–47. Holy Blood, Holy Cross: Dynamic Interactions in the Parochial Complex of Rothenburg. Katherine M. Boivin. Art Bulletin, 99 (June, 2017), 41–-71. Pittenweem Priory and the conventuality question. Anthony Lodge. Innes Review, 68 (May, 2017), 19–37. El cardenal Joan Llopis, política y mecenazgo al servicio de los Borja (1454–1501). Álvaro Fernández de Córdova Miralles. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 133–48. SIXTEENTH CENTURY Humanist Lives of Classical Philosophers and the Idea of Renaissance Secularization: Virtue, Rhetoric, and the Orthodox Sources of Unbelief. Ada Palmer. Renaissance Quarterly, 70 (Fall, 2017), 935–76. The Sistine Ceiling with regard to Jews and Turks, and Michelangelo[’s] two journeys to Venice. Andrea Donati. Studi Veneziani, LXXIV (2016), 57–91. Murder at the Vatican: An unsolved Renaissance mystery casts light on the dark world of extortion, revenge, and power politics at the heart of the Catholic Church. Catherine Fletcher. History Today, 67 (Oct., 2017), 56–67. La obligación de rescatar cautivos y la Orden de Santiago (1517–1535). Pedro Andrés Porras Arboledas. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 195–219. Erasmus’ Apophthegmata in Henrician England. Ágnes Juhász-Ormsby. Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook, 37 (1, 2017), 45–67. Martin Luthers Reformation und das Recht. Martin Heckel. Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, 134 (2017), Kanonistische Abteilung 103, 277–322. The Emperor’s Boot, or Perceiving Public Rituals in the Urban Reformation. Philip Hahn. German History, 35 (Sept., 2017), 362–80. Aux origines du Thesaurus Linguæ Sanctæ de Sante Pagnini (Lyon, 1529). Elodie Attia. Bibliothèque d’Humanisme et Renaissance, LXXIX (2, 2017), 343–63. Michelangelo’s Pietà as Tomb Monument: Patronage, Liturgy, and Mourning. Emily A. Fenichel. Renaissance Quarterly, 70 (Fall, 2017), 862–96. Il convento dei cappuccini di Pietrarubbia: uno dei primi insediamenti dell’Ordine (1531). Giuseppe Santarelli. Collectanea Franciscana, 87 (1-2, 2017), 159–202. Hispanic Conciliarism and the Imperial Politics of Reform on the Eve of the Council of Trent. Xavier Tubau. Renaissance Quarterly, 70 (Fall, 2017), 897– 934. Au printemps 1537, de quelle couleur sera l’Eglise de Lausanne? Olivier Labarthe. Bibliothèque d’Humanisme et Renaissance, LXXIX (2, 2017), 323–42. PERIODICAL LITERATURE 837 La satire de la Révélation dans le Cymbalum mundi. Alain Mothu. Revue de l’histoire des religions, 234 (Sept., 2017), 457–83. ¿Fue san Ignacio un místico? Manuel Ruiz Jurado. Estudios Eclesiásticos, 92 (Apr.– June, 2017), 327–44. Engagement et appartenances: les vies des magistrats Étienne de Lestang (1510– 1581) et Antoine de Lestang (1541–1617). Michel Cassan. Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes, 171 (Jan.–June, 2013), 227–47. En torno al retablo mayor del monasterio de San Jerónimo de Granada: sus artifices, proceso constructivo, iconografía y modelos visuales. José Policarpo Cruz Cabrera. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 163–76. La diócesis de Astorga, el padre Flórez y la epigrafía medieval. Alejandro Celso García Morillo. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 177–84. Jaime Prades y las imágenes sagradas. La defensa de su adoración y uso. Darío Valendia Onofre. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 185–94. Advocating for Poor Relief in Zurich: Heinrich Bullinger’s Contributions to Religious Ideals and Policy Reforms. Esther Chung-Kim. Church History, 86 (June, 2017), 311–38. The necessity to work, according to John Calvin’s duty of stewardship. Caroline Bauer. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 24 (Aug., 2017), 689–707. Il Cristo ‘tedesco’ di Tiziano nella chiesa evangelica luterana a Venezia. Fabrizio Biferali. Studi Veneziani, LXXIII (2016), 241–47. The 1553 succession crisis reconsidered. Paulina Kewes. Historical Research, 90 (Aug., 2017), 465–85. “ut memoria eorum perdatur”: La biblioteca di Giangirolamo Monferrato e l’Indice dei libri proibiti di Paolo IV. Antonella Ghignoli. Rivista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia, LXX (Jan.–June, 2016), 45–71. “Persecutors under the Cloak of Policy”: Anti-Catholic Vengeance and the Marian Hierarchy in Elizabethan England. Robert Harkins. Sixteenth Century Journal, XLVIII (Summer, 2017), 357–84. Les droits fragiles. L’insécurité juridique des huguenots au temps des guerres de Religion. Jérémie Foa. Revue d’histoire moderne et contemporaine, 64 (Apr.– June, 2017), 93–107. ‘Scho refuseit altogidder to heir his voce’: Women and Catholic Recusancy in North East Scotland, 1560–1610. Catherine McMillan. Records of the Scottish Church History Society, 45 (2016), 36–48. Il pittore Giovanni Battista Ponchini “dal secolo alla chiesa”. Vincenzo Mancini. Studi Veneziani, LXXIV (2016), 309–20. 838 PERIODICAL LITERATURE The Holy Maid of Wales: Visions, Imposture and Catholicism in Elizabethan Britain. Alexandra Walsham. English Historical Review, CXXXII (Apr., 2017), 250–85. The Disputed Origins of Dutch Calvinism: Religious Refugees in the Historiography of the Dutch Reformation. Jesse Spohnholz and Mirjam G. K. van Veen. Church History, 86 (June, 2017), 398–426. Sprach- und Religionsgeschichte im Monument. Der Obelisk auf der römischen Piazza del Popolo. Martin Wallraff. Theologische Zeitschrift, 73 (1, 2017), 91–104. Custodian of wisdom: the Marciana Reading Room and the transcendent knowledge of God. Jarrod Michael Broderick. Studi Veneziani, LXXIII (2016), 15–94. Il coro della basilica di S. Giorgio Maggiore. Sergio Baldan. Studi Veneziani, LXXIII (2016), 287–320. Vita Consacrata, Famiglia, Misericordia: una risposta nell’iconografia musicale di Caravaggio. Barbara Aniello. Gregorianum, 98 (1, 2017), 145–73. “Retrato inédito” del Cardenal Fernando Niño de Guevara. Francisco Javier Cimorra Pena. Isidorianum, XXV (2016), 335–51. Grazio Maria Grazi tra Bellisario Bulgarini e Federico Borromeo. Scuola, erudizione e collezionismo librario tra Siena, Venezia, e Milano (XVI–XVII sec.). Marco Cavarzere and Maurizio Sangalli. Studi Veneziani, LXXI (2015), 45–120. Deviant ideas, prohibited books and aberrant practices: reflections of the Roman Inquisition in the societies of the Venetian Ionian Islands (sixteenth-seventeenth centuries). Stathis Birtachas. Mediterranean Historical Review, 32 (June, 2017), 41–64. SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES El franciscano Pedro Selleras (1555–1622) se quedó fuera del santoral. José Ignacio Gómez Zorraquino. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 263–73. Personality and destiny. Francesco Borromini: portrait of a tormented soul. Gabriele Cipriani, Luca Cipriani, and Marco Di Fiorino. History of Psychiatry, 28 (Sept., 2017), 352–57. Pierre De Bérulle (1575–1629) and the renewal of Catholic spiritual life in France. Keith Beaumont. International Journal for the Study of the Christian Church, 17 (2, 2017), 73–92. Whose city? Civic government and episcopal power in early modern Salisbury, c. 1590–1640. Catherine Patterson. Historical Research, 90 (Aug., 2017), 486– 505. I governatori pontifici di Comacchio (1598-1796) e le loro carriere. Ancora sul potere politico dei papi. Andrea Gardi. Cristianesimo nella Storia, 38 (1, 2017), 113–81. PERIODICAL LITERATURE 839 Seals of Moravian Premonstratensian Canonries in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Martina Bolom-Kotari. Analecta Praemonstratensia, XCII (1-4, 2016), 65–101. Obediencia a reyes herejes y no cristianos en Francisco Suárez. Potestad del papa al respecto. Pablo Font Oporto. Gregorianum, 98 (1, 2017), 61–74. Reawakening the “Old Evangelical Zeal”: The 1617 Reformation Jubilee and Collective Memory in Strasbourg and ulm. Christopher W. Close. Sixteenth Century Journal, XLVIII (Summer, 2017), 299–321. un fénix para los años de hierro. Lope de Vega y la Orden des los Dominicos. Julián González-Barrera. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 233-45. Nuns, Family, and Interfamilial Dynamics of Art Patronage in Post-Tridentine Roman Convents. Marilyn Dunn. Sixteenth Century Journal, XLVIII (Summer, 2017), 323–56. Elizabeth Melville, Lady Culross: new light from Fife. Jamie Reid Baxter. Innes Review, 68 (May, 2017), 38–77. William Laud and the Parliamentary Politics of 1628–9. Mark Parry. Parliamentary History, 36 (June, 2017), 137–58. ‘I was no “master of this work” but a servant to it’: William Laud, Charles I, and the making of Scottish ecclesiastical policy, 1634–6. Leonie James. Historical Research, 90 (Aug., 2017), 506–25. De Tirlemont a Riudarenes: política y religion en la crisis hispánica de 1640. Xavier Torres Sans. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 221–31. Ergänzungen zu den Provinzialkapiteln der Böhmischen Zirkarie und der kaiserlichen Provinzen 1641–1727. Karel Dolista (†) and ulrich G. Leinsle (Eds.). Analecta Praemonstratensia, XCII (1–4, 2016), 102–313. The Reception of the 1643 Solemn League and Covenant. Jamie McDougall. Records of the Scottish Church History Society, 45 (2016), 49–65. La “Véronique” de Zurbarán. Victor I. Stoichita. Rivista di Storia e Letteratura Religiosa, LII (3, 2016), 609–25. Presbyterian Conventicles in the Restoration Era. Neil McIntyre. Records of the Scottish Church History Society, 45 (2016), 66–81. Die Commenda perpetua von Asola. Die Erfolgsgeschichte einer im 17. Jahrhundert gefälschten urkunde Kaiser Heinrichs VI. und die Fälschungen von Kaiserurkunden in dem Geschichtswerk des barocken Stadthistorikers Lodovico Mangini. Bettina Pferschy-Maleczek. Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung, 125 (1, 2017), 14–39. Archibald Pitcairne and Scottish Heterodoxy, c. 1688–1713. Alasdair Raffe. Historical Journal, 60 (Sept., 2017), 633–57. 840 PERIODICAL LITERATURE L’enseignement des langues anciennes au collège de l’Oratoire du Mans au XVIIIe siècle: une remise en cause du latin et de grec. Thierry Gonnault. Anales de Bretagne et du Pays de l’Ouest, 124 (2, 2017), 57–73. Liberal Jansenists and interest-bearing loans in eighteenth-century France: a reappraisal. Arnaud Orain and Maxime Menuet. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 24 (Aug., 2017), 708–41. The Poisoned Will of Jean Meslier: A French priest’s shocking attack on religion called for the fall of altars and the heads of kings. Morgane Guinard. History Today, 67 (Oct., 2017), 12–14. The Study of Pagan Religions in Enlightenment Scotland: The Case of Thomas Blackwell (1701–1757). Felicity Loughlin. Records of the Scottish Church History Society, 45 (2016), 82–98. Se (re)faire musulman. L’accès des pauvres itinérants aux droits de la conversion (Espagne, XVIIIe siècle). Thomas Glesener. Revue d’histoire moderne et contemporaine, 64 (Apr.–June, 2017), 129–55. Abt Georg Lienhardt von Roggenburg (1717–1783). Studien zu seinem literarischen Werk. Teil III: Ordensrecht und Ordensgeschichte. Ulrich G. Leinsle. Analecta Praemonstratensia, XCII (1–4, 2016), 5–64. José Álvarez (1723–1800), maestro mayor de obras del Arzobispado de Sevilla. José Manuel Higuera Meléndez. Isidorianum, XXV (2016), 353–84. “I Believe Because it is Absurd”: The Enlightenment Invention of Tertullian’s Credo. Peter Harrison. Church History, 86 (June, 2017), 339–64. The tombstone of an Ecumenical Patriarch in Muswell Hill, London: Meletios II (1700-80, r. 1768-9). Julian Chrysostomides, Richard Clegg, Charalambos Dendrinas. Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, 41 (Oct., 2017), 229–38. The Suppression and Restoration of the Jesuits, and the Irish Scene. Thomas J. Morrissey. Milltown Studies, No. 76 (Winter, 2015), 100–17. Scanlan destroyed: a Hanoverian perspective. Alasdair Roberts. Innes Review, 68 (May, 2017), 88–98. Espolios y vacantes en el siglo XVIII: El caso particular de un arzobispo de Sevilla. Carlos L. Ladero Fernández. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 247–61. NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH CENTURIES (EASTERN HEMISPHERE) Los conventos de frailes agustinos de Ávila en el primer tercio del siglo XIX. Jesús Gascón Bernal. Revista Agustiniana, LVII (Sept.–Dec., 2016), 407–72. The First Missionaries of the Church Missionary Society in Sierra Leone, 1804– 1816: A Biographical Approach. Katrina H. B. Keefer. History in Africa, 44 (2017), 199–235. PERIODICAL LITERATURE 841 Ornamentalism in a European Context? Napoleon’s Italian Coronation, 26 May 1805. Ambrogio A. Caiani. English Historical Review, CXXXII (Feb., 2017), 41–72. ‘As an Episcopalian I have been brought to the Cross of Christ’: Edinburgh’s Episcopalian Evangelical Mainstream, 1806–1886. Eleanor Harris. Records of the Scottish Church History Society, 45 (2016), 3–35. La Armada y la Iglesia en tiempos de Independencia: la Asociación de Jesús Sacramentado de Cartegena, 1808–1814. Juan José Sánchez Baena and Antonio Irigoyen López. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 319–32. Influencia del catolicismo en la Constitución gaditana: análisis del juramento y la representación eclesiástica por Andalucía. Amelia Sanchis Vidal and José Ramos Rovi. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 307–17. Historiografía de la Compañía de Jesús restaurada en España (1815–2017). Manuel Revuelta González. Estudios Eclesiásticos, 92 (Apr.–June, 2017), 301– 26. L’Exarchat bulgare, une institution orthodoxe ottomane? Bernard Lory. Ostkirchliche Studien, 65 (2, 2016), 353–66. “Admiration . . . for All That Is Sincerely Religious”: Louis Veuillot and Catholic Representations of Islam and Empire in July Monarchy France. Joseph W. Peterson. French Historical Studies, 40 (3, 2017), 475–507. The Paris Catacombs: Remains and Reunion beneath the Postrevolutionary City. Erin-Marie Legacey. French Historical Studies, 40 (3, 2017), 509–36. The Scottish character and identity of the Presbyterian tradition in New Zealand: from almost pervasive to barely remembered. Stuart Lange. Records of the Scottish Church History Society, 45 (2016), 117–31. I testamenti di Pio IX. Sergio Pagano. Rivista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia, LXX (Jan.–June, 2016), 73–100. L’extraordinaire chrétien chez les Zouaves pontificax: Joseph-Louis Guérin (18381860), mort en odeur de saintité. Laurent Gruaz. Revue de l’histoire des religions, 234 (Sept., 2017), 485–517. Il cristianesimo tra la fine dell’era Tokugawa e l’inizio della Restaurazione imperiale Meiji. L’ultima persecuzione. Angelina Volpe. Urbaniana University Journal, LXX (2, 2017), 151–86. La corona de España y la Semana Santa de Sevilla: Alfonso XII y la procesión del Santo Entierro de 1877. Devoción, monarquía y sentimiento. José Gámez Martín. Isidorianum, XXV (2016), 385–424. Oxford House Heads and Their Performance of Religious Faith in East London, 1884–1900. Lucinda Matthews-Jones. Historical Journal, 60 (Sept., 2017), 721–44. 842 PERIODICAL LITERATURE Revolution, Illuminismus und Theosophie. Eine Genealogie der “häretischen” Historiographie des frühen französischen Sozialismus und Kommunismus. Julian Strube. Historische Zeitschrift, 304 (Feb., 2017), 50–89. “It is not good for the man to be alone?” Irish Protestant Missionary Bachelorhood and Changes in Missionary Marriage. Trends in the Late Nineteenth Century. Catherine Jamieson. Gender and History, 29 (Aug., 2017), 387–404. La carrera eclesiástica de Juan Francisco Muñoz y Pabón en el Seminario Conciliar de Sevilla. Manuel Martín Riego. Isidorianum, XXV (2016), 425–62. Claiming Their Own Space: Australian Women Missionaries in Korea, 1891– 1900. Hyaeweol Choi. Australian Historical Studies, 48 (Aug., 2017), 416–32. The Trial of Faith of Saint Thérèse. Michael Champagne, CJC. Teresianum, LXVII (2, 2016), 395–433. Portraits of Kalaupapa Residents by Father Joseph Julliotte, SS.Cc. Stuart W. H. Ching. Hawaiian Journal of History, 50 (2016), 146–49. Organizing Meiji Women: the role of the Japanese chapter of the Women’s Christian Temperance Union for individual activists, 1900-1905. Tomoko Seto. Women’s History Review, 26 (Dec., 2017), 975–93. Continental European Baptists in the Twentieth Century. Albert W. Wardin, Jr. Baptist History and Heritage, 52 (Spring, 2017), 44–52. Génesis e identidad del grupo fundacional de la ACN de JP [Asociación CatólicoNacional de Jóvenes Propagandistas], (1904–1909). Pablo Sánchez Garrido. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 389–400. Hindu Widows as Religious Subjects: The Politics of Christian Conversion and Revival in Colonial India. Sharleen Mondal. Journal of Women’s History, 29 (Fall, 2017), 110–36. A Controversial Neutrality and Thwarted Peace Efforts: The Month and Pope Benedict XV’s Great War Record. Konrad Grech. Melita Theologica, 66 (2, 2016), 5–31. La Institución Teresiana en la Liga Católica de Mujeres Campesinas. Francisca Rosique Navarro. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 363–87. Missionary Critiques of Empire, 1920–1932: Between Interventionism and Antiimperialism. Genevieve Dorais. International History Review, 39 (3, 2017), 377–403. The Diaries of Barthélémy Boganda, Priest and Politician in French Equatorial Africa (1910–1959). Klaas van Walraven. History in Africa, 44 (2017), 237–64. La Biblioteca Ostolaza en Deva y el obispo Mateo Múgica (Polémica en 1930 en torno a unos libros y sus autores). Miguel Ángel García de Juan. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 333–47. PERIODICAL LITERATURE 843 Judaismo-nacionalismo-comunismo: un conflicto entre carlismo, nacionalismo vasco y jerarquía católica durante la II República. Roberto Muñoz Bolaños. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 349–61. Carlo Maria Martini dall’Istituto sociale alla Compagnia di Gesù (1936–1944). Alberto Guasco. Rivista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia, LXX (Jan.–June, 2016), 101–29. The Map Rome, 1942. Kate Wiles. History Today, 67 (Sept., 2017), 4–5. Padre Samuele Doimi (1916–1971) promotore degli studi antoniani e della teologia ai laici. Antonino Poppi. Il Santo, LVI (3, 2016), 387–462. Giuseppe Dossetti e David Maria Turoldo. Frammenti di un dialogo a distanza. Mariangela Maraviglia. Cristianesimo nella Storia, 38 (1, 2017), 247–69. Don Lorenzo Milani e la Lettera a don Piero. Genesi e redazioni. Federico Ruozzi. Cristianesimo nella Storia, 38 (1, 2017), 183–220. ‘In what orbit we shall find ourselves, no one could predict’: institutional reform, the university merger and ecclesiastical influence on Irish higher education in the 1960s. Ann Nolan and John Walsh. Irish Historical Studies, 41 (May, 2017), 77–96. Church and State in Ireland: Perspectives of Vatican II. Patrick Hannon. Irish Theological Quarterly, 82 (May, 2017), 97–112. L’Istituto ecumenico di Tantur (1963-1978). Appunti e problemi per una storia. Alberto Guasco. Cristianesimo nella storia, 38 (1, 2017), 221–46. AMERICAN Huguenot Refugees and the Meaning of Charity in Early New England. Adrian Chastain Weimer. Church History, 86 (June, 2017), 365–97. The Bishop Controversy, the Imperial Crisis, and Religious Radicalism in New England, 1763–74. Peter W. Walker. New England Quarterly, 90 (Sept., 2017), 306–43. Scots Kirk Jamaica. Stephen Mullen. Records of the Scottish Church History Society, 45 (2016), 99–116. Land of Promise: The First Fifty Years of Baptists in the Pacific Northwest. Michael Kuykendall. Baptist History and Heritage, 52 (Spring, 2017), 19–32. Infidel Deathbeds: Irreligious Dying and Sincere Disbelief in Nineteenth-Century America. Bradley Kime. Church History, 86 (June, 2017), 427–57. Arthur Ernst Michel, 1862–1955: His Life and Ministry. Milton L. Rudnick. Concordia Historical Institute Quarterly, 90 (Summer, 2017), 9–26. “The Roar of Thunder and the Sweetness of a Woman”: Gender Construction and Ritualized Acts in Late Nineteenth- and Early Twentieth-Century American Revivalism. Leah Payne. Journal of Ritual Studies, 31 (1, 2017), 27–41. 844 PERIODICAL LITERATURE Experiences in the Parsonages of The Lutheran Church in Southern Illinois During the War Years of 1917–1918 Described by an Eyewitness at the Request of the Officers of the Historical Society. Justus Christian William John Lohrmann. Concordia Historical Institute Quarterly, 90 (Summer, 2017), 39–50. Pragmatism, Religion, and John Foster Dulles’s Embrace of Christian Internationalism in the 1930s. Beran Sewell. Diplomatic History, 41 (Sept., 2017), 799– 823. LATIN AMERICAN Los Carmelitas descalzos de México, según el Libro de las Profesiones del conveno de San Sebastián (1586–1813). J. Carlos Vizuete Mendoza. Teresianum, LXVII (2, 2016), 365–93. Family Rupture among Conversos and the Inquisition Tribunal in 1640s New Spain. Rafaela Acevedo-Field. Latin Americanist, 61 (Sept., 2017), 385–414. Vox populi, vox Dei: Catalina de San Juan, ‘la Niña Santa’de la Angelópolis (India, 1605?—Puebla de los Ángeles, México, 1688). Maria Luisa Ortega Hernández. Colonial Latin America Review, 26 (June, 2017), 219–54. Terminal harmony: rituals of death and social cohesion in colonial Puebla de los Ángeles. Ericka R. Hosselkus. Colonial Latin American Review, 26 (June, 2017), 176–99. El rey y el gran inquisidor: religión y política en los escritos de B. Monteagudo y C. Henríquez (Buenos Aires, 1810–1820). Jimena Tcherbbis Testa. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 275–92. Soledad Acosta de Samper: catolicismo y modernidad en Colombia siglo XIX. William Elvis Plata Quezada. Hispania Sacra, 69 (2017), 295–305. Disputas e tensões entre a instituição católica em São Paulo e a ditadura militar. Ney de Souza. Franciscanum [Bogatá], LVIII (July–Dec., 2016), 375–405. ‘God even blessed me with less money’: Disappointment, Pentecostalism and the Middle Classes in Brazil. George St. Clair. Journal of Latin American Studies, 49 (Aug., 2017), 609–32. Other Books Received Bever, Edward, and Randall Styers (eds.). Magic in the Modern World: Strategies of Repression and Legitimization. [The Magic in History Series.] (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press. 2017. Pp. vi, 208. $74.95 cloth.) Caravale, Giorgio. Beyond the Inquisition: Ambrogio Catarino Politi and the Origins of the Counter-Reformation. Trans. Donald Weinstein. (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. 2017. Pp. xvi, 419. $60.00 cloth.) The original Italian edition, Sulle traoce dell’eresia: Ambrogio Catarino Politi (14841553) (Florence. Leo S. Olschki, 2007), was reviewed by William V. Hudon, ante, XCV (April, 2009), 349-50. Donald Weinstein died after completing the translation of this book. Several items published in the last ten years have been added to the bibliography. Chesterton, G. K. ABCs of the Christian Life: The Ultimate Anthology of the Prince of Paradox. Foreword by Peter Kreeft. (Notre Dame, IN: Ave Maria Press. 2017. Pp. x, 180. $16.95 paperback.) Fredriksen, Paula. Paul: The Pagans’ Apostle. (New Haven: Yale University Press. 2017. Pp. xii, 319. $35.00 cloth.) Hart, David Bentley. The New Testament: A Translation. (New Haven: Yale University Press. 2017. Pp. xxxviii, 557. $35.00 cloth.) I am myn owene woman, wel at ese. In Memory of Margaret Jennings. (Leuven, Belgium: Peeters. 2017. Pp. vi, 45. €15,00 paperback.) Included in this booklet is a reprint of Jennings’ article “Eyewitness: Ranulph Higden and the Troubling Events at Chester Monastery” (pp. 21-42), which was originally published in 2010. Jenkins, Philip. Crucible of Faith: The Ancient Revolution That Made Our Modern Religious World. (New York: Basic Books. 2017. Pp. xxxii, 303. $30.00 cloth.) Kosek, Joseph Kip (ed.). American Religion, American Politics: An Anthology. Foreword by Jon Butler. (New Haven: Yale University Press. 2017. Pp. xvi, 255. $30.00 paperback.) A collection of thirty-five documents ranging in time from 1630 to 2008. Kugel, James L. The Great Shift: Encountering God in Biblical Times. (New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 2017. Pp. xvi, 476. $30.00 cloth.) Kurien, Prema A. Ethnic Church Meets Megachurch: Indian American Christianity in Motion. (New York: New York University Press. 2017. Pp. xiv, 279. $35.00 paperback.) On the encounter of the Mar Thoma church of Kerala with American evangelicals. 845 846 OTHER BOOKS RECEIVED Lamb, Charles, and Elizabeth Hogan. Notre Dame at 175: A Visual History. (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. 2017. Pp. xix, 175. $45.00 cloth.) Larson, Edward J., and Michael Ruse. On Faith and Science. (New Haven: Yale University Press. 2017. Pp. vi, 298. $30.00 cloth.) Lent, Jeremy. The Patterning Instinct: A Cultural History of Humanity’s Search for Meaning. Foreword by Fritjof Capra. (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. 2017. Pp. 569. $26.00 cloth.) Pearce, Joseph (ed.). Death Comes to the War Poets: A Verse Tapestry. (South Bend, IN: St. Augustine’s Press. 2017. Pp. vi, 63. $19.00 cloth.) Shea, John. Seeing Haloes: Christmas Poems to Open the Heart. (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press. 2017. Pp. xiv, 79. $18.95 cloth.) Tremayne, Peter. Penance of the Damned. A Mystery of Ancient Ireland. (New York: Minotaur Books. 2017. Pp. xiv, 338. $27.99 cloth.) Weddle, David L. Sacrifice in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. (New York: New York University Press. 2017. Pp. xii, 247. $30.00 paperback.) Williams, Paul L. Among the Ruins: The Decline and Fall of the Roman Catholic Church. (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. 2017. Pp. 366. $24.00 cloth.) Wycliff, Don, and David Krashna (eds.). Black Domers: African-American Students at Notre Dame in Their Own Words. (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. 2017. Pp. xii, 376. $29.00 paperback.)