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

4 John Donne and Paolo Sarpi Rendering the Council of Trent Jeffrey Johnson hen John Donne made out his will on December 13, 1630, he bequeathed to Henry King, his close friend and executor, “the twoe Pictures of Padre Paolo and Fulgentio wch hange in the Parlour at my howse at Pauls” (Bald 563). The paintings of these two Venetians, the one of Paolo Sarpi (who in 1606 was appointed state theologian to the Republic of Venice) and the other of Fulgenzio Micanzio (Sarpi’s initimate associate), are unusual among Donne’s art collection because they are portraits of contemporary subjects, and he displayed them in the parlor, the most public room in the deanery of St. Paul’s. It seems likely that the portrait of Sarpi and the companion picture of Micanzio were copies of the ones known to have been made in 1607 at the request of Sir Henry Wotton. During this time Wotton was the English ambassador to Venice, and after his return to England he was in the habit of presenting copies of these paintings to his friends.1 The portrait of Sarpi, in particular, may or may not have been the now familiar image showing the black spot on his right temple that represents the wound he suffered from a murderous assault commonly thought to have been ordered by the pope in October 1607. According to the historical accounts by R. C. Bald and, more recently, by Dennis Flynn, it seems probable that Donne met Sarpi during his trip to Venice in 1605. Donne had been licensed to travel abroad with Sir Walter Chute on February 16, 1605,2 and it was during this trip that Donne visited with his friend Henry Wotton, who would surely have put him in 90 W contact with Sarpi. Although by 1605 Sarpi had not yet become theological counselor to the Republic of Venice, he was, as Bald points out, by the time of Donne’s visit “already a man of influence in affairs of state, and was in contact with many learned Protestants throughout Europe” so that Sarpi was “such a man, in other words, as a visitor to Venice like Donne would be eager to meet” (151). The likelihood that, through Wotton, Donne did meet so prominent a figure as Sarpi, coupled with the portraits noted above (and their prominence in Donne’s art collection), seems to indicate that Donne held the Venetian in rather high esteem. However, the lack of any mention of Sarpi in Donne’s extant writings (other than his will) raises questions concerning the nature of Donne’s apparent admiration for Sarpi and the extent of any influence Sarpi may have had on Donne. One discernible, and intriguing, point of intersection for Donne and Sarpi is their mutual criticism of the Council of Trent. Sarpi (in his History of the Council of Trent) and Donne (throughout his extant sermons) both condemn the council on the grounds that it not only failed to reunite Christendom in western Europe but that it finally only succeeded in establishing irreconcilable divisions between Roman Catholics and Protestants. At first blush, Donne and Sarpi seem to share decidedly similar views regarding both conciliarism and, as a consequence, the council’s failure to discover an alternative policy to the controversies that necessitated the council, other than the one that simply protected and reaffirmed papal absolutism. Such significant points of similarity lead Frances Yates to espouse that Donne “held a theological position similar to that of Sarpi” (135). A closer examination, however, reveals otherwise. Donne and Sarpi, in fact, arrive at some similar conclusions from profoundly distinct philosophical and theological foundations. Sarpi’s deep pessimism regarding the limitations of the human intellect and the affinities he has for the doctrines of predestination and human depravity stand in contrast to Donne’s own brand of philosophical idealism and conflict theologically with Donne’s insistence on the unity that is attained in the visible Church as it conforms itself to the Trinity. The purpose of this study, therefore, is not only to highlight the similarities between Donne and Sarpi as interpreters of the Council of Trent but finally to disclose the departures in their renderings of the council and its rulings. Both Sarpi and Donne argue for religious reform, yet neither pursues a Reformation that can be strictly identified as either Protestant or Catholic/Counter; each seeks, in his own way, a reformation of a more...

Share