The atmosphere of the Council of Trent was permeated by literature. Italian bishops at the time of Reformation were acquainted with the most significant humanistic literary culture of the sixteenth century. Antonio Sebastiano Minturno (1500–1574), an Italian bishop who actively attended the last phases of the Council, was author of two treatises on poetics, secular and sacred poems in vernacular (1559, 1561) and Latin poems. The importance of literature in his life can be seen in the network of his intellectual and political relations as well as in the use of poetry and literature in order to assert spiritual values and to represent the main events of his times. In particular, the Poemata Tridentina (1564), a collection of poems about the Council and its protagonists, can be read as a document of his spiritual life and of the catholic perception of the Council itself, since they are one of the rare literary works which explicitly deal with the Council of Trent as main theme. A different version of the paper was presented at the International Conference "More than Luther: The Reformation and the Rise of Pluralism in Europe" (Seventh Annual RefoRC Conference 2017, Wittenberg 10–12 May 2017).
This introductory chapter talks about how the transformation of belief, rather than the rise of unbelief, propelled Western thought into modernity. The resulting configuration has shaped the conditions of religion in a secular age. The explosion of religious conflict in the sixteenth century made belief an urgent problem in the Christian West. In addition, the chapter argues that the Reformation was not an engine of modernity; on the contrary, modern belief developed in reaction against the religion of Luther and Calvin as much as against the Council of Trent. However, despite their theological differences, Protestants, Catholics, and Anabaptists in the sixteenth century participated in a common project to make belief hard.
The many aspects of Catholic activity during the sixteenth century make it difficult to present a systematic bibliography for that period. Interest in the Reformation era has considerably increased among Catholic scholars during the last decades. We must therefore proceed to a severe selection. Only studies that deal with the most significant topics will be included. No breakdown of the material can be completely satifactory. As the main point, however, is to give as clear a picture as possible, one must distinguish three broad periods: before, during and after the Council of Trent. Subdivisions of the subject matter in each period will necessarily overlap. But we will reduce this to a minimum.
AbstractHow could a sixteenth-century Protestant reformer who championed sola scriptura defend against the charge of novelty? In particular, how did a reformer understand the post-apostolic church's regula fidei as a possible early counter-precedent to the scripture principle? And what does the answer to these questions tell us about the Reformation scripture principle? These are the principal questions with which this article is concerned. By looking at Martin Chemnitz's Examination of the Council of Trent, I show that Chemnitz rebutted the charge of novelty by returning the favour, that is, he rhetorically situated the Catholics alongside the early Gnostics since both believed in an oral tradition that differed substantially from scripture. Furthermore, I find that Chemnitz contended that Irenaeus’ and Tertullian's use of the regula fidei actually supported sola scriptura since these fathers never posited a substantial distinction between scripture and tradition and, in fact, held that the content of the rule was recorded in scripture. Chemnitz concluded that Protestants holding the scripture principle are the ones who are truly faithful to early church tradition in general and the rule in particular.
Projects began to emerge during the sixteenth century en masse by promising to relieve the poor, improve the balance of trade, raise money for the Crown, and thereby push England’s imperial ambitions abroad. Yet such promises were often too good to be true. This chapter explores how the ‘reformation of abuses’—a fateful slogan associated with England’s break from Rome—came to be used widely in economic contexts, and undermined promised public service under Elizabeth and the early Stuarts. The negative image of the projector soon emerged in response, reaching both upper and lower echelons of society. The chapter reconstructs the social circulation of distrust under Charles, and considers its repercussions. To do this it brings conceptual tools developed in social psychology and sociology to bear upon sources conventionally studied in literary and political history.
Throughout the sixteenth century and beyond, the Howards are usually described as religiously ‘conservative’, resisting the reformist impulse of the Reformation while conforming to the royal supremacy over the Church. The women of the family have played little part in this characterization, yet they too lived through the earliest stages of the Reformation. This chapter shows that what we see is not a family following the lead of its patriarch in religious matters at this early stage of the Reformation, but that this did not stop them maintaining strong kinship relations across the shifting religious spectrum.
This book offers a radical reinterpretation of the sixteenth-century Christological debates between Lutheran and Reformed theologians on the ascription of divine and human predicates to the person of the incarnate Son of God (the communicatio idiomatum). It does so by close attention to the arguments deployed by the protagonists in the discussion, and to the theologians’ metaphysical and semantic assumptions, explicit and implicit. It traces the central contours of the Christological debates, from the discussion between Luther and Zwingli in the 1520s to the Colloquy of Montbéliard in 1586. The book shows that Luther’s Christology is thoroughly Medieval, and that innovations usually associated with Luther—in particular, that Christ’s human nature comes to share in divine attributes—should be ascribed instead to his younger contemporary Johannes Brenz. The discussion is highly sensitive to the differences between the various Luther groups—followers of Brenz, and the different factions aligned in varying ways with Melanchthon—and to the differences between all of these and the Reformed theologians. And by locating the Christological discussions in their immediate Medieval background, the book also provides a comprehensive account of the continuities and discontinuities between the two eras. In these ways, it is shown that the standard interpretations of the Reformation debates on the matter are almost wholly mistaken.
Abstract
The article analyses the emergence of decorum (appropriateness) as a central concept of rhetorical theory in the early sixteenth-century writings of Erasmus and Juan Luis Vives. In rhetorical theory, decorum shifted the emphasis from formulaic rules to their creative application in concrete cases. In doing so, it emphasized a close analysis of the rhetorical situation (above all the preferences of the audience) and underscored the persuasive possibilities of civil conversation as opposed to passionate, adversarial rhetoric. The article argues that the stress put on decorum in early sixteenth-century theory is not just an internal development in the history of rhetoric but linked to far wider questions concerning the role of rhetoric in religious and secular lives. Decorum appears as a solution both to the divisiveness of language in the context of the Reformation and dynastic warfare of the early sixteenth century and as an adaptation of the republican tradition of political rhetoric to a changed, monarchical context. Erasmus and Vives maintained that decorum not only suppressed destructive passions and discord, but that it was only through polite and civil rhetoric (or conversation) that a truly effective persuasion was possible in a vast array of contexts.
ERASMUS AND JUAN LUIS VIVES ON RHETORICAL DECORUM AND POLITICS