E. Italian Evangélisme and the Doctrine of Justification
E. Italian Evangélisme and the Doctrine of Justification
The Evangélisme movement gained momentum between the years 1536 and 1540, particularly in cities such as Venice, Modena, Verona, Lucca, Siena, and Naples. The dissemination of reforming ideas was aided by travelling preachers, whose traditional values (e.g., prayer, repentance and devotional practice in the vein of De Imitatione Christi) and fresh, Protestant-friendly emphases, such as salvation grounded in faith alone, was embraced by the laity.95
It was at the grassroots that Italian religious renewal gained crucial indigenous recognition. For instance, The Oratory of Divine Love (also called the Theatines), an informal society of devout Catholics, dedicated themselves to improving moral life in Rome and beyond.96 There were also the Barnabites, or Clerks Regular of St. Paul, whose members preached, heard confessions, and visited hospitals.97 The Capuchins, which started as an attempt to renew the Franciscan Order, also arose during this period.98
What had started below was given a boost from the top when Pope Paul III proposed a papal commission on reform, de emendanda ecclesia, which sought to strengthen the integrity of curial offices.99 Through its main exponents, Cardinals Contarini, Cortese, Pole, and Morone, the commission influenced “the higher reaches of the Roman Church.”100 McNair even argues persuasively that Vermigli himself served as a theological consultant to Contarini and the Commission during this time (1536–37).101 Meanwhile the urge to piously reform was also reflected in the upper echelons of the church hierarchy by the Spirituali, which included most of the above-mentioned prelates, as well as other intellectuals, noblewomen and ecclesiastical powerbrokers.102 So significant was this group that none other than Michelangelo was converted through its ministry, particularly by the influence of Pole and Valdés.103 These prominent leaders gathered at Pole’s residence in Viterbo (the so called Ecclesia Viterbiensis), where they studied the Bible alongside the commentaries of Bucer on Matthew and Romans and of Luther on the Psalms,104 and the Beneficio di Cristo.
Perhaps the most public exponent of Italian Evangélisme was Cardinal Gasparo Contarini (1483–1542). He is especially important in understanding Evangélisme’s interest in the doctrine of justification. While much can be said about his career as an imperial diplomat, his elevation to the cardinalate, his advocacy of the new Jesuit order, and his involvement in the Colloquy of Regensburg, we will confine ourselves to the parts of his story that most directly relate to the soteriological focus of Evangélisme. 105
By the latter half of the 1530s, when Pope Paul III had made Cardinals of Contarini (1535) and Reginald Pole (1536), a commitment to justification by faith alone had solidified in these men and in several of their colleagues in the Roman Curia.106 Central to this conviction was the notion, gleaned from the study of Scripture, of God’s sufficiency in salvation.107 As the study of the Bible increased, so too did the concern for the doctrine of justification, which sent people probing yet more deeply into the Bible.108 This cycle fueled the engine of Italian Evangélisme. A suitable slogan arose among those so convinced, one that was familiar to Contarini and Pole: “Dominus opus habet.”109 It is God who works—the Lord is ultimately responsible for salvation, not men. At the end of the day, man would stand before God, “with only his faith in the cross and the merits of Christ to offer him hope of salvation.”110
The seriousness of Contarini’s view of salvation was tested in 1541 when Charles V convened a colloquy at Regensburg. On April 21, the Holy Roman Emperor announced the names of the Catholic and Protestant debaters. Philip Melanchthon, Martin Bucer, and Johann Pistorius presented the Protestant position, with John Calvin present on the sideline, while representing the Roman Catholic side were Johann Eck, Johann Gropper, and Julius Pflug. Also present but inactive was the Catholic Dutchman, Albert Pighius, who would become an important interlocutor of Peter Martyr on the topic of justification.111 Cardinal Contarini presided as papal legate on behalf of Pope Paul III.112 The theological meeting, which started on April 27, came to be called the Colloquy of Regensburg.
A sufficient amount of material has been published concerning the Colloquy of Regensburg’s aims and outcomes, so it is unnecessary to retell the full story here.113 The primary lesson for our purposes concerns the agreement reached between Catholics and Protestants on the doctrine of justification, as reflected in the fifth article of the final Regensburg Book.114 Such agreement illustrates the relative freedom with which Catholic theologians were allowed to consider and formulate the doctrine of justification in the early decades of the sixteenth century.115 This was so at least until 1542, when the Italian Inquisition started, or, more definitively, until the first period of the Council of Trent (1545–47), during which the Decree on Justification was written (January 13, 1547).116 In response to the question of whether justification is forensic (based upon an iusitia alienum) or an ongoing work of love and charity (based on an iusitia inhaerens), Regensburg asserted that it was both. In justification, the Regensburg Book asserted, God imparts righteousness by the Holy Spirit and he forensically imputes Christ’s righteousness.117 Such imputation is necessary to make one right before the throne of God’s justice since the imperfection of one’s inherent righteousness falls short of the divine standard. This clear statement of imputation is responsible for making the fifth article a significant concession by the Catholic side that was mostly acceptable to Protestants.118
Robert Ives suggests that the key statement of Article 5 is probably, per fidem vivam & efficacem iustificari peccatorem.119 Here the living and efficacious faith of the sinner is defined as the movement of the Holy Spirit by which one enjoys the “remission of sins and reconciliation on account of the merits of Christ, through the free goodness of God.”120 Since the merit of Christ is the ultimate ground of justification, it is “not on account of our own worthiness or works.”121 Precisely because of this emphasis on Christ’s righteousness, which is imputed to the believer, the Protestants at Regensburg could embrace the final version of Article 5.122
Although conservative Catholics such as Eck were not pleased with the Protestant flavor of the article, some from the Catholic camp approved. Foremost in this group was Contarini. Writing later to Contarini, his confidant Reginald Pole “likened the formula to a partly concealed pearl, always possessed by the Church, but now accessible to everyone.”123 Expressing wonder over the Catholic endorsement of the article, Calvin wrote to Farel on May 11, 1541,
You will be astonished, I am sure, that our opponents have yielded so much. . . . Our friends have thus retained also the substance of the true doctrine, so that nothing can be comprehended within it which is not to be found in our writings.124
It is important to note that Article 5 does not teach duplex iustificatio (double justification). Some interpreters have confused this with the concept of duplex iustitia (double righteousness). Frank James makes this error when he asserts, “Pighius supported the doctrine of double justification as articulated at the Colloquy of Ratisbon/Regensburg (1541), which he attended.”125 Unlike the standard duplex iustificatio of Catholic teaching, which is built upon initial justification of the sinner (iustificatio impii) by faith apart from preparatory works and a second justification (iustificatio pii) by works (operum)—expounded on the basis of the epistle of James, chapter 2—the final draft of Article 5 teaches that there is only one justification,126 the ultimate ground of which is the merit of Christ (accepti per ipsius merita). Accordingly, justification is a work for which God is ultimately responsible, something he accomplishes by simultaneously imparting the Holy Spirit and imputing Christ’s righteousness.127 As we shall see, this is the essence of Peter Martyr’s doctrine.