The Reform of Catholicism (1480–1620) (review)

This slim volume is a welcome translation of La réforme du catholicisme (1480–1620) (Paris, 2002), with additional annotation by the translator, James Farge, to make it suitable for English-speaking audiences and to expand the critical apparatus for those seeking further information.

As Bedouelle notes, the purpose of the book is to address (although not fully answer) a “clear, but not very simple, question” (p. 1): Why did reform within the Catholic Church take so long to begin, and why at last did it succeed? He traces the roots of reform back to the fourteenth century in a brief survey that helps illustrate the larger point: church reform comes in two basic varieties, institutional and “mystical,” by which he means “the way of prayer, sanctity, and sacrifice” (p. 16). After several fits and starts, these methods led to Lateran Council V and the Council of Trent. By the time of Trent, very different approaches to reform both outside and within the Catholic Church were available.

Bedouelle summarizes several pre-Tridentine movements, but calls one development at the Council of Trent “The Key to Reform” in chapter 6: Pope Paul III’s agreement to consider matters of discipline and doctrine simultaneously. The ambitious reform agenda set by the participants at Trent did produce many successes, yet also exposed areas in which no resolution was possible. Bedouelle focuses on the role of bishops. The definition of the episcopacy began with strong statements in favor of a sacramental priesthood and continued with an examination of the bureaucratic and hierarchical nature of the position. What was the source of the authority of the bishop? What did that authority consist of? These questions were only partially addressed, both because there was no agreement on their answers and because the Council “did not consider it necessary to construct an exhaustive theology of the Church” (p. 79).

Beyond the Council, too, the ambition of reform was obvious: the terminus ad quem of the book is 1620 because many reforms took place after 1563, including the new catechism and service books, a revised Vulgate, a continually maintained Index of Prohibited Books, and new institutional offices and/or practices including the Congregation of Rites, the Congregation of the Missions, a redesigned system of nuncios, a call for increased local synods and visitations, and the creation of the diocesan seminary. Such initiatives called for not only strong papal support but also a corps of “Agents of Reform” including enthusiastic bishops (St. Charles Borromeo is Bedouelle’s example), committed leaders of religious orders (Ss. Teresa of Ávila, Robert Bellarmine, and Francis de Sales), and cooperative heads of state.

The final chapter summarizes the responses to the initial question: reform within the Catholic Church took so long to begin because of the necessity of dealing with both doctrine and discipline. Earlier movements attempting to focus on only one aspect failed, but for different reasons and therefore did not produce an immediate lesson in how to do it better the next time. It finally did succeed because it embraced reaction (against those who left and rejected doctrine) and renewal—remaining essentially the same in doctrine.

Bedouelle’s definitions and explanations, and Farge’s translations, are clear and succinct; the author discusses, but does not labor, the importance of terminology such as Reform, Counter-Reform, Catholic Restoration, and Catholic Reform. The historiographical introduction succeeds in making a specialized vocabulary, and a sometimes heated professional debate, accessible to a non-specialized audience. The added editorial apparatus is well pitched, neither becoming ponderous nor expecting too much of the reader. It should therefore serve well as an introductory text for undergraduates as well as the interested general public.