In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • A Real Presence: Religious and Social Dynamics of the Eucharistic Conflicts in Early Modern Augsburg, 1520–1530 by Joel Van Amberg
  • William Bradford Smith
A Real Presence: Religious and Social Dynamics of the Eucharistic Conflicts in Early Modern Augsburg, 1520–1530. By Joel Van Amberg. [Studies in the History of Christian Traditions, Vol. 158.] (Leiden: Brill. 2012. Pp. x, 270. $143.00. ISBN 978-90-04-21698-3.)

The Eucharistic Controversy was perhaps the most significant crisis to afflict early Protestantism, leading to the division between Lutherans and the reformed Protestants. In this study of the controversy in Augsburg, Joel Van Amberg presents the laity as critical arbiters in the struggle over doctrine. Opposition to the Catholic and Lutheran views on the sacrament—what the author deems “anti-corporealism”—represented a rejection of the “series of overlapping, mutually reinforcing hierarchies” (p. 4), religious and political, that came to dominate social, economic, and political life in late-medieval Augsburg. The revolutionary implications of anti-corporealism ensured, however, that it could never become the dominant faith within the city. Rather, by 1530, the author maintains, sectarian groups had already begun the move toward Anabaptism, redefining themselves around the rejection of infant baptism rather than the real presence.

There is much about the thesis that is attractive, but serious problems emerge on close examination of the three case studies that form the core of the book. A key figure is Hans Schilling, a radical preacher who “encouraged revolution ideas in the minds of some of his congregants” by providing them with the “religious vocabulary through which to express their discontent” (pp. 56–57). The problem is, we do not know what Schilling actually said. None of his sermons survived, and the comments preserved in chronicles and other sources—themselves very few in number—refer [End Page 345] to Schilling’s behavior rather than his words. Consequently, the author can only speculate on the content of the sermons. We are told that “the first three chapters of Luke provide some irresistible passages for a fiery populist preacher” (p. 59). These are enumerated, but there is no evidence that Schilling actually preached on these “irresistible” passages. Indeed, the author discusses the revolutionary content of Luke 6 all the while admitting that Schilling “would never get the chance to preach beyond chapter three” (p. 59). A report that Schilling “engaged in insulting talk” (p. 63) about reserving the host in the ciborium is used as evidence of his anti-corporealist theology even though the details of this “talk” are lacking. Schilling was supposed to have cut up a radish and distributed it to a group of people at a dinner in mockery of the sacrament. This act is provided as evidence of Schilling’s views on the Eucharist, although the author admits that this story only appears in a seventeenth-century text and is not corroborated by any contemporary source.

Similar difficulties emerge in the discussion of the career of Michael Keller. It is implied that, although it is “highly unlikely” (p. 87) that Keller and Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt ever met, Keller’s views on the Eucharist were influenced by Karlstadt during this studies in Wittenberg. Urbanus Rhegius’s brief response to a pamphlet by Karlstadt is taken as attesting to “an early sacramentarian community” (p. 95). Additional evidence is taken from a remark in a Strasbourg pamphlet about that author’s “brethren” in Augsburg. Caspar Huberinus’s note that there were many secret enthusiasts (schwermer) in Augsburg who had “schwermerische” books in their houses is taken as further proof; here the author translates “schwermer” as “sacramentarian” without giving any reason for choosing to identify these particular religious enthusiasts—the standard translation of Schwärmer—as followers of a particular Eucharistic doctrine.

We are on firmer ground when the author discusses the careers of Ludwig Hätzer and the proto-Anabaptist Eitelhans Langenmantel. Even here, it is uncertain whether either author is describing the sort of church community they wish to see established or an already existing sectarian church. In Hätzer’s case at least, the former seems more likely from the cited passages. In a pamphlet from 1527 Langenmantel clearly presents...

pdf

Share