Preferred Citation: Gleason, Elisabeth G. Gasparo Contarini: Venice, Rome, and Reform. Berkely:  University of California Press,  1993. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft429005s2/


 
Chapter Five After the Storm

In Another World: Bologna, 1542

On 27 January 1542, Paul III appointed Contarini legate to Bologna. On 25 March the new legate made his solemn

[71] Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci , ed. and trans. Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith (New York: International Publishers, 1971 ), 328-29.


277

entrance into the city,[72] where he was to reside until his death five months later. In contrast to the dearth of Contarini's correspondence from the preceding fall, a wealth of his letters from the Bolognese period has been preserved,[73] enabling us to follow his activities almost day by day.

Bologna, with over fifty thousand inhabitants, was second only to Rome in importance among the cities of the papal state. At the head of its government was the cardinal-legate whose "primary duties were justice and information."[74] In addition to being the chief judicial officer with power over life and death, he was the link between the central and local governments, responsible for gathering and transmitting back to Rome information about all aspects of city life. Bologna's civic institutions included various appointive and elective councils, with the highest prestige attached to a hereditary senate of forty nobles, the Reggimento, which in theory governed together with the legate.[75] In actuality, the power to govern Bologna was not evenly balanced: the senate was the dominant force in local affairs, with the legate as a supervisory rather than commanding official.[76]

Two conflicting views have been advanced about Contarini's appointment to Bologna—that he was chosen for "the most important and at the same time most honorable legation of the entire papal state"[77] because the pope wanted to make manifest his continuing trust in him, or that he was sent into exile[78] in a provincial city. While neither

[72] Reg ., 231 (no. 885).

[73] A total of 225 letters written by Contarini between 25 March and 17 August 1542 have been published by Alfredo Casadei, "Lettere del Cardinale Gaspero Contarini durante la sua legazione di Bologna."

[74] I am grateful to Prof. Laurie Nussdorfer for allowing me to read and quote her unpublished paper "Civic Institutions and Papal Control in Sixteenth-Century Rome and Bologna," presented to the Sixteenth-Century Studies Conference, St. Louis, October 1986. The quotation is from p. 3.

[75] Mario Fanti, "Le classi sociali e il governo di Bologna all'inizio del secolo XVII in un'opera inedita di Camillo Baldi," Strenna storica bolognese 11 (1961): 157. I thank Prof. Nussdorfer for this reference.

[76] Paolo Colliva, "Bologna dal XIV al XVIII secolo: 'governo misto' o signoria senatoria?" in Storia della Emilia Romagna , ed. Aldo Berselli (Bologna: University Press of Bologna, 1977), 2:13.

[77] GC , 798. Dittrich here echoes Beccadelli's "Vita": the pope "creò il Cardinale Legato di Bologna, ch'è la più honorata Legatione, che la Chiesa habbia nel Stato suo" (Monumenti Beccadelli 1[2]:39). Pastor, "Correspondenz," 352-53, also accepts Beccadelli's view, calling the legation to Bologna "the most honorable and important that the pope could bestow" (diese Legation war die ehrenvollste und bedeutendste, welche der Papst zu vergeben hatte).

[78] For example, by Simoncelli, Evangelismo italiano , 45, 115, and passim. Giorgio Cracco in his review of the "Lettere" considered Contarini's legation to Bologna as "an administrative office not of prime importance, [which] signified an intense humiliation [for Contarini] and the victory of the conservative faction of the curia" (in Bollettino dell'Istituto di storia della società e dello stato veneziano 3 (1961): 307.


278

view, taken by itself, is satisfactory, the two are not mutually exclusive. Politically, the initiative in Rome had passed to the more intransigent cardinals. After his return from Germany, Contarini had no power base and no strong constituency at the papal court. His vision of church reform did not coincide with that of the men who did have power in the curia and who were trying to close ranks in the crisis besetting the church by fighting heresy through legal and institutional means, including the inquisition and eventually the index. Though personally admired, he was no longer able to function as a planner of Roman strategy because of his own lack of success. Appointing him to Bologna was a shrewd tactical move by Paul III, who thereby avoided the semblance of dropping Contarini. As legate, the latter would have a conspicuous and honorable[79] but circumscribed part in papal government, at a safe distance from the milieu in which he had become increasingly ineffective.

Contarini had barely reached Bologna before he was plunged into the midst of affairs. He had to deal immediately with cases of violence, involving vendetta, homicide,[80] and the murder of two Florentine students in a brawl.[81] Local quarrels, disputes among families, assaults, and lawsuits claimed his time.[82] As the mouthpiece of the pope, he had to announce to the Bolognese senate a rise in the extremely unpopular and resented salt tax, and to negotiate with the senators and other magistrates who tried to get it reduced or paid in a lump sum.[83] Although the legate's task was to transmit the pope's decisions in this dispute, we get a glimpse of his sympathies in a letter to Guido Ascanio Sforza di Santa Fiora, grandson of Paul III and papal chamberlain, to whom he mentioned the poverty of the peasants on the nobility's estates and the rise in taxes, adding: "I would not like us to oppress them too much."[84]

[79] Pole to Contarini, Viterbo, 29 Jan. 1542, expressed his delight at the unexpected appointment: "Sia laudata la bontà divina, la quale così expressamente nelli honori di V.S. Reverendiss. vole monstrare, che tutti vengono dalla mano soa, essendoli conferiti a un tale tempo, quando o non era causa di aspettare tanto, o pocha speranza, come ho notato neli altri honori de V.S. Reverendiss. praesertim Ecclesiastici, & in questo adesso non so quando le persone potevano havere manco causa di expectare per le resone, che sa V.S. Reverendissima" (Ep. Poli 3[2]:49). Paolo Sadoleto called the Bolognese legation "honorable"; see Fragnito, "Evangelismo e intransigenti," 27n.23.

[80] Casadei, "Lettere," 85 (no. 5).

[81] Ibid., 91 (no. 12).

[82] Ibid., 256-57 (no. 167); and Ep. Poli 3:ccl-ccli.

[83] Casadei, "Lettere," 101 (no. 33) and 106-7 (no. 45).

[84] "Non vorrei che troppo noi gli oppressimo . . . "(ibid., 252 [no. 156]).


279

Even though the subject of almost all his letters is official business, Contarini's private thoughts and personal concerns find expression in many. His inner peace is evident; despite the recent disappointments, he does not write as an embittered or hostile man, but as one who has accepted the will of God in his own life. This quality shows itself at the very beginning of his legation in a letter to Alfonso Avalos, marquis del Vasto, the Spanish governor of Lombardy, a missive that illuminates Contarini's attitude of this period:

I sincerely thank God in his goodness, the fount from which all good things come, for having deigned to enlighten the mind of Your Excellency with his light and for infusing his Holy Spirit in your breast, having regard not only of your private good (which I have at heart virtually as much as I do my own), but even more of the good of innumerable others who will share and enjoy the gifts and talents given you from above. These are the true interior reformations which only God can bring about, and not merely the exterior reformations which men can effect. Blessed be God, and Jesus Christ be thanked without end.[85]

The note struck here and repeated in other letters is one of resignation to the course of events, which may not be comprehensible to men, or controllable by their efforts, but which have an inner meaning known only to God.

His belief in a divine plan for the church and the world gave Contarini tranquillity. Rather than fretting about the past, he now devoted himself to fulfilling his duties to the best of his ability. "I am overwhelmed by affairs, and from morning to night am always [giving] audiences and [involved in] business matters,"[86] he wrote to the legate of the eastern part of the papal state, Rodolfo Pio di Carpi. Three weeks later, he struck a wistful chord: "Here I am [engaged] in continuous business affairs and [lead] a life very different from that in Rome, but provided that it is done well, which I try to do as much as I am able, all is for the praise of God."[87] The mention of his presumably

[85] ". . . Molto ringratio la bontà divina, fonte donde ha origine ogni bene, che si havesse degnata de illuminare la mente di V.ill.ma S. del lume suo, et infundere nel suo petto il suo santo Spirito, non solamente considerando il bene suo privato, il quale però mi è a cuore poco meno del mio proprio, ma più il bene de infiniti altri, li quail sono per essere participi et di godere di questo dono et talento dato a lei di sopra. Queste sono le vere riformatione interiore, quale solo Dio puole fare, et non solamente exteriore, quale possono fare li homeni. Sia benedetto Iddio, et senza fine ringratio Iesu Christo" (29 Mar. 1542, ibid., 87 [no. 9]).

[86] "Io sono pienissimo di facende, et dalla mattina alla sera me ne sto sempre in audienze et negocj . . ." (2 Apr. 1542, ibid., 94 [no. 19]).

[87] "Io sono qui in continui negoci, vita molto diversa da quella di Roma . . ." (to Carpi, 20 Apr. 1542, ibid., 110 [no. 50]).


280

more leisurely life in Rome was the expression of a passing mood. More typically, Contarini reported: "Praised be God, I am well, and do not lack business affairs here, of which I gladly take care, and which do not oppress me at all."[88] Again, he wrote to Carpi: "Through the grace of God, I am well, engaged in continuous and not unpleasant work, for which I have the great help of the vice-legate [Benedetto Conversini, bishop of Iesi]."[89] And to Sadoleto, with whom there was no need for reticence, he remarked: "As usual, I attend to government affairs, devoting myself entirely to the active life, in which I have no other aim than to do my duty for the honor of God and of our lord [the pope] who has honored me with this charge. If I am up to it, let the Divine Majesty be thanked for that; if I fail, may He pardon my fault. Rest assured, Your Reverence, that there is no lack of goodwill, thanks be to God."[90] These are not the expressions of a beaten-down person, but of a serene and above all resigned man whose deep trust in God is as evident as is his sense of duty to his earthly lord and to the church. A careful reading of Contarini's letters from Bologna makes sweeping generalizations about his exile, alienation, or bitterness impossible.[91]

The vita activa , the life of action about which Contarini wrote, included matters familiar to him from the time of his career in the government of Venice. As a young man, he had dealt with problems of flood control in the Po basin. Now he faced disputes between subjects of Ferrara and Bologna over attempts of the latter to divert and channel the river Reno, causing floods and damage in Ferrarese territory.[92] Despite his diplomatic experience, Contarini was not able to negotiate a settlement on this matter with the duke of Ferrara; it remained a nagging issue for his successors.

A recurring topic in many of his letters is Contarini's worry about

[88] "Io, Iodato Dio, sto bene, et qui non mi mancano facende le quali esequisco volentierj nè mi gravano punto . . ." (addressee missing, ibid., 237 [no. 125]).

[89] "Io per la gratia di Dio sto bene all'usato in continue et non dispiacevoli occupationi, nelle quali ho un gran solevamento della persona di mons. Vicelegato . . ." (ibid., 253 [no. 158]).

[90] "Io all'usato attendo alli negoci di questo governo, tutto volto a questa vita attiva, nella quale altro obietto non ho che satisfare all'honor di Dio et di N.S. che mi ha honorato di questo carico, nel quale, se bastarò, sia da ringratiarne sua divina Maestà, et mancando, da perdonare alla mia imperfettione. V.S. r.ma stia pur sicura che buon volere, ringratiato Dio, non manca" (5 July 1542, ibid., 256 [no. 165]).

[91] Contarini's secretary, Ludovico Beccadelli, was of a different mind about his stay in Bologna, disliking the pressure and the kind of business there, and even referring to it as "this hell"; see Fragnito, "Gli 'spirituali,'" in Gasparo Contarini , 298n.139.

[92] Casadei, "Lettere," 116 (no. 62), 122-23 (no. 75), 127 (no. 84), 222 (no. 96), and 246 (no. 143).


281

another looming Habsburg-Valois conflict. Paul III decided to remain neutral and prohibited the recruitment of soldiers for either side in the papal state. The enforcement of this prohibition was not easy for the legate, since it required prompt, reliable information from all parts of the Bolognese territory as well as manpower that he did not have. Contarini's request for an increase in the number of Swiss soldiers in Bologna was not granted, despite his argument that they were necessary for the maintenance of order.[93] His fear of war is evident, especially since he knew that the French were trying to use Mirandola as a power base in northern Italy.[94] He regarded peace everywhere, whether among families in Bologna or in Italy and Europe generally, as an immensely desirable good. In the last letter of this collection, written when his final illness had already begun its course,[95] he expressed his willingness to go on yet another mission to Spain in the cause of peace.[96] His worry and pessimism about Germany notwithstanding,[97] Contarini was trusting that God would help "poor Christendom" and that some good might result from his own efforts.[98] To that end, he repeated what he had said when he embarked on his journey to Regensburg—that something which seems impossible to men is possible to God.[99] This attitude of quiet surrender to God's unfathomable ways is very striking in Contarini's last letters.

Yet there was no passivity in the exercise of his office. His diocese of Belluno continued to occupy his thoughts, as did the long-postponed visit to his flock, which in the end was never to take place.[100] As vice-protector of several religious communities, including the Benedictines

[93] Ibid., 244 (no. 139).

[94] Ibid., 123-24 (no. 76), 125 (no. 80).

[95] On 17 August 1542 he wrote to Cardinal Farnese that he was indisposed since the day before; see ibid., 284 (no. 223).

[96] Ibid., 285 (no. 225).

[97] His personal disappointment aside, Contarini was pessimistic about the course of German events: "Prego Iddio che non lasci rovinare quella provincia di Germania, come par che sia per fare, che con quella il resto della Christianità staria pur troppo male" (ibid., 275 [no. 205]). He saw clearly how critical the situation in Germany was: "dalle cose di quelle parti [Germany] pende tutta la salute della Christianità" (281 [no. 218]).

[98] Ibid., 284 (no. 224).

[99] The tone of Contarini's letter to Cardinal Farnese of 11 August is striking. He expresses thanks for the love the pope has shown him by appointing him once again to the emperor, "an undertaking which I know to be only a little less difficult than the extremely difficult one to the Lutherans in Germany," adding: "as for the hardship of the journey, I do not regard it as much, having dedicated my remaining years to the service first of God, then of His Holiness. To me it suffices to obey promptly" (ibid., 282 [no. 219]).

[100] Ibid., 248 (no. 146), 251 (no. 153), 257 (no. 167), 260 (no. 176), and 275 (no. 205).


282

of the Cassinese Congregation and the Franciscans, Contarini wrote many letters of counsel and direction. They reveal some of his characteristic attitudes, as, for example, this to the friars of the monastery of St. Anthony in Padua, whose discord about an election he tried to end: "We do not want to command you, [since] we desire that your reformation be entirely voluntary and proceed from you, as we see that you, too, desire, and we wish even more than you do that it be more than voluntary, because nobody can be good if he is not good from his own will."[101] Contarini did not in the least change his mind that persuasion was distinctly preferable to coercion, with good example as the most effective means for moving men's hearts: "We see clearly that the life we members of the clergy lead has given great scandal to the Christian people, and from it have arisen the many tumults and troubles we now face. Our duty is to realize this and return to a life that will edify the people by our example, and to remedy the scandal that has already been caused," he wrote to the Franciscans in Venice.[102] Even plainer is his assertion that the wrath of God was provoked to a great extent by the life of bad secular and regular clergy,[103] and that their decadence affected everyone.

Contarini's tolerant attitude, so striking in 1541, remained unchanged. Even as the inquisition was being reorganized in Rome, he remained extremely wary of labeling someone's views as heretical. When the Augustinian hermit Giuliano da Colle, who preached the Lenten sermons of 1542 in Parma, was accused of spreading heresy, Contarini warned that "great caution is necessary before [articles of faith] are condemned as heretical."[104] At a time when the curia was becoming increasingly suspicious of the Capuchine general Bernardino Ochino, the legate invited the friar to Bologna and expressed his pleasure at the thought of being in Ochino's company.[105] Another

[101] Ibid., 118 (no. 68): "Non vogliamo commandarvi, desiderando che la vostra riformatione sia in tutta voluntaria et che venga da voi come vedemo che desiderate et noi più che voi desideriamo che sia più che voluntaria, chè niuno puote essere buono se non è buono per voluntà."

[102] Ibid., 129 (no. 90): "Vediamo chiaramente che il vivere di noi religiosi ha dato grande scandolo al populo christiano, donde sono nasciuti tanti tumulti et travagli come toccamo con mano. Nostro debito è di ricognoscerci et redurci ad una vita in edificatione del populo con lo exempio nostro che ricompensi al scandolo già dato."

[103] Ibid., 96 (no. 24).

[104] Letter of 18 April 1542 to Badia: "Et circa questo io sono del'istesso parer vostro, ciò è che ci bisogni gran consideratione prima che si dannino [gli articoli] per hereticj" (ibid., 105 [no. 42]). For da Colle, see Pietro Tacchi-Venturi, Storia della Compagnia di Gesù in Italia , 2d ed. (Rome: Civiltà Cattolica, 1950), 1(1):465-66.

[105] Casadei, "Lettere," 93 (no. 18).


283

suspect of heresy, Filippo Valentini, was appointed Contarini's auditor and therefore a member of his household. These instances confirm his openness to theological questions that were being discussed with passion on all sides, as well as his sympathy with the thought of spirituali more radical than himself, some of whom later embraced Protestantism.

Daily involvement in government affairs left Contarini little time for literary activities during the months in Bologna. Beccadelli mentions that the legate "wrote for his private study many beautiful annotations to all the epistles of St. Paul, and the Catholic epistles, on which he was still at work when death supervened."[106] These annotations were included in Contarini's collected works as Scholia in epistolas Divi Pauli .[107] It is not possible to establish when he began the Scholia or commented on specific epistles, since so far no manuscript of this work has come to light. Judging from internal evidence, it was probably composed gradually as the result of his reading and meditation on the letters of St. Paul. It is tempting to examine above all his comments on Romans, and to read them in the light of the discussions about article 5 in Regensburg, though at present to do so would be methodologically indefensible. The only support for such a reading is tenuous at best: a sentence in a letter of Cristoforo Madruzzi, prince-bishop of Trent, mentioning that Contarini had written about healing his wound caused by the emperor's defeat in Africa with study of the Bible.[108] Nothing else supports the supposition that this study was focused on St. Paul, or that its result was the Scholia .

There is little secondary literature on this work and its sometimes contradictory theological ideas. Dittrich surmises that Contarini's purpose was "to highlight the rich content of the Pauline epistles and make it accessible to wider circles," adding that "therefore he purposely omits the learned apparatus, strives for the greatest possible brevity, clarity, and comprehensibility, and avoids almost all references

[106] Beccadelli, "Vita," 59: "Scrisse anchora per suo studio particolare molte belle Annotationi sopra tutte le Epistole di San Paolo, et Catholiche, le quali tuttavia haveva in mano, quando della morte sopravenuto fu." Pole's friend Alvise Priuli in a letter to Beccadelli dated from Viterbo, 13 March 1542, refers to Contarini's "brief exposition" on the epistles of St. Paul. See Maria Cristina Pauselli, "Note sugli Scholia di Gasparo Contarini ad Efesini e Galati," Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 83 (1992): 132 n. 18.

[107] Opera , 435-530.

[108] ". . . Et quum in calce litterarum suarum D. V. Rma. scribat, se huic vulneri, quando tempus supersit, studio sacrarum litterarum mederi, non opus est, ut multa verba consolatoria in medium afferam" (Trent, 22 Dec. 1541, in Monumenti Beccadelli 1[2]:210). Dittrich, GC , 839, suggests without any further evidence that the result of these studies might be the Scholia .


284

to the theological movements and disputes of his time."[109] If Contarini meant to help readers without a theological education, he fulfilled his intention very imperfectly, since his choice of verses to be annotated reflects the flow of his own ideas rather than an attempt at a systematic explanation of the main themes found in the epistles. In the absence of other information, we are left with Beccadelli's statement that the Scholia was the result of Contarini's private study, meant primarily for himself.

What insistently occupied his thoughts was justification, about which he did not change his mind after Regensburg. Dittrich has singled out the many passages of the Scholia where this topic is mentioned,[110] and even a casual reading of the text shows Contarini returning to it again and again. The annotations of Romans, as might be expected, contain repeated statements about our justification by faith (per fidem , 1:6), through faith in the blood of Christ (per fidem in sanguine Christi , 3:24), and through the imputation of Christ's justice and his merits (4; 5:12). Sometimes Contarini summarizes an entire epistle or a chapter, as, for example, 2 Corinthians 5: "Christ's justice is given to us and imputed to us. That is the essence";[111] or in his introduction to Hebrews (which he accepts as Pauline): "All saints were wholly justified by faith and through faith. That is the essence."[112] In Ephesians 1:3 we read: "Everywhere Paul tries to show that we are grafted into Christ through faith and charity."[113] Such statements abound in the Scholia , tantalizing the reader. But they are disembodied, as it were, since we lack any information about their context. They remain pieces of a puzzle still to be assembled and understood.[114]

If the genesis of the Scholia and the exact time of its composition are not known, the contrary is true for a small work written in June 1542, the Catechesis sive Christiana instructio .[115] An abundance of precise information about its context exists, beginning with the letters of Mo-

[109] GC , 839.

[110] Ibid., 840-42.

[111] Opera , 469.

[112] Ibid., 515.

[113] Ibid., 483.

[114] Hünermann, Theologische Entwicklung , uses the Scholia cautiously for the same reason: its relation with Contarini's other works is unclear, as is its chronology. Pauselli, "Note sugli Scholia, " is the most recent and detailed examination of Contarini's annotations to Ephesians and Galatians. It compares his exegesis with those of some of his contemporaries, both Catholic and Protestant, as well as with selected patristic sources, especially St. Augustine, without, however, establishing lines of dependency, and concludes that he was eclectic (pp. 152-53).

[115] Opera , 533-545, now superseded by the edition in Firpo and Marcatto, Processo 3:190-221. The printed editions are discussed on pp. 47-61, and the manuscripts on pp. 61-70.


285

rone's vicar in Modena, Giovanni Domenico Sigibaldi, who reported the spread of heretical ideas in his diocese to the absent bishop.[116] While Morone was on his diplomatic missions in Germany, Sigibaldi worried already in 1540 that the whole city was infected with heresy, like Prague, and that "in shops, on street corners, in houses, and so forth, everyone (as I hear) disputes about faith, free will, purgatory, the Eucharist, and predestination."[117] Controversies among preachers contributed to the volatile religious atmosphere in Modena; Augustinians were especially suspected of introducing "novelties" such as doubt about the existence of purgatory.[118] In the winter of 1540-41 conflicts between various groups in the city intensified, the secular authorities now becoming involved.[119] Morone's vicar was not the man to deal firmly with an increasingly complex problem as the circle of men suspected of heresy grew wider. It came to include the so-called Academy of Modena, an informal group of intellectuals who met for common reading of classical texts and discussions of scientific and philosophical subjects that of course included the religious issues of the day. Among these men the writer Ludovico Castelvetro, the physician Giovanni Grillenzoni, the priest Giovanni Bertari, and Contarini's auditor Filippo Valentini stand out.

Massimo Firpo has discussed the growing religious tensions in Modena in some detail and shown that Morone repeatedly counseled patience, charity, and humanity in dealing with those suspected of unorthodox views in general, and with members of the Academy in particular.[120] When he was finally able to return to his diocese in May 1542, he was shocked to find not only that heresy had made serious inroads among the people, but also that the Academy had played an important role in the spread of heterodox ideas. "In this the common opinion of the entire city concurs," he reported to Cardinal Farnese.[121]

Against this background Morone conceived the idea of requesting members of the Academy to draw up a confession of faith. After they sought various pretexts for avoiding to do so, Morone tried to

[116] The most recent and fullest examination of the background to the Catechesis is by Firpo, "Spirituali."

[117] Ibid., 47.

[118] Susanna Peyronel Rambaldi, Speranze e crisi nel Cinquecento modenese (Milan: Franco Angeli Editore, 1979), 212-22, discusses the religious unrest due to preachers.

[119] Firpo, "Spirituali," 48-50.

[120] Ibid., 55-57. Morone's attitude toward those suspected of heresy was very similar to that of Contarini.

[121] Quoted in ibid., 59n.58.


286

convince them to subscribe to a catechism that had been printed on Giberti's order in Verona in 1541. That attempt proved unsuccessful, and the accademici , in turn, suggested texts that Morone found unacceptable.[122] Eventually he turned to Contarini for help and counsel on how to ascertain what the members of the Academy actually believed "concerning purgatory, the sacrifice of the mass, the real presence of Christ in the sacrament of the altar, adoration of the host, auricular confession, the legislative authority of the church, intecession and invocation of saints, and the glory of the blessed."[123] The friendship, closeness, and even affection that had developed between the two men made it easy for Morone to confide in Contarini, and for the latter to take a sincere interest in the affairs of his younger, always deferential, but also more practical colleague.[124] Morone paid a brief visit to Bologna during the first week of June, bringing Contarini information in person about the situation in Modena. Within a few days Contarini completed and sent to Morone a confession of faith, the "Articuli orthodoxae professionis," which appeared under the title Catechesis sire Christiana instructio in Contarini's collected works of 1571.

Although this little work, consisting of forty-one questions and answers, was ostensibly written for general use and even translated into German,[125] it was actually intended for the Modenese accademici . They are not mentioned in the work, for Contarini did not want to single them out for censure and so alienate them further. Instead he adopted the transparent strategy of addressing the issues they had raised and giving broad definitions of articles of faith in the hope that the accademici would accept them, remain in the church, and make interference in Modena by Roman authorities unnecessary.

The first question asks what it is to be a Christian, and Contarini offers a very simple reply: "To be a Christian is to be a member of Christ, incorporated into him through faith and the sacraments

[122] Ibid., 62-64.

[123] Morone's detailed letter to Contarini of 21 May 1542 is printed in Ep. Poli 3:cclxvii-cclxxi; and in part in Firpo, "Spirituali," 60-61n.63; and Fragnito, "Gli 'spirituali,'" 268n.41.

[124] The growth of their friendship and the changes in Morone due to Contarini's influence are remarkable. The solicitous and kind tone Contarini adopted in his correspondence with Morone is exemplified in Casadei, "Lettere," 113 (no. 57), 120 -21 (no. 73), and 224 (no. 100). In writing to his friend Ermolao Barbaro on 5 July (ibid., 256 [no. 166]), Contarini mentioned Morone, "with whom I am joined by a love and affection as great as it is possible to express."

[125] Christoph Monfang, Katholische Katechismen des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts in deutscher Sprache (Mainz, 1881 ), includes this version.


287

of faith."[126] From the beginning, the necessity of the sacraments is stressed. The definition of the term sacraments is entirely traditional: they are "visible signs of invisible grace." Contarini refers to the authority of St. Paul and Thomas Aquinas,[127] affirms the existence of seven sacraments, and proceeds to define each. He treats the Eucharist extensively, linking its discussion with that of the mass. As he had done in Regensburg, so he now also upholds the teaching of the Fourth Lateran Council: "After the consecration there is not the substance of bread and wine under the visible signs, but thc true body and blood of Christ, as is manifest by the opinion of the entire church and all the doctors."[128] What is immediately striking here, of course, is the omission of the word transubstantiation , on which Contarini had insisted so vehemently in Germany. There he had defended a solemnly promulgated dogma which the Lutherans denied. Now he was addressing men whom he regarded as fellow Catholics in the hope of keeping them in the fold despite their mistaken ideas. He presumed the existence of a broad consensus between himself and them, and therefore made his formulations as noncontroversial as possible, consistent with his preference for gentle persuasion instead of coercion.

The Modenese arc further instructed about the nature of the Eucharist as Contarini takes on specifically Protestant tenets. He affirms the presence of Christ's body and blood in the host, deriving from this the necessity of its adoration;[129] states that "the mass, as all ancient and modern doctors teach, is a sacrifice"; and emphasizes the utility of offering the mass for the living and the dead.[130] As he had done with the Eucharist, however, so now in discussing the mass Contarini gives a definition into which it was possible to read a number of meanings. To the question concerning the manner in which the mass is a sacrifice, he replies that

the mass is a sacrifice of praise, a sacrifice of thanksgiving: it is a sacrifice because it is the remembrance of that unique sacrifice by which Christ offered himself to the father for us through the Holy Spirit; it is also a sacrifice because it is the oblation through which we offer Christ and his sufferings (as Augustine says in Book Ten of The City of God , and by which we offer the entire

[126] Firpo and Marcatto, Processo 3:190.

[127] Ibid., 192 (question 5).

[128] Ibid., 196 (question Il): "Post consecrationem non est sub sensibilibus illis signis substantia panis seu vini, sed verum corpus Christi et eius sanguis, quod perspicuum est et sensu totius ecclesiae et doctorum omnium."

[129] Ibid., 198 (question 15).

[130] Ibid., 199 (question 16), 200-202 (questions 18-20).


288

church through Christ to almighty God, in order that through Christ we may draw close to Him, the supreme good of all goods.[131]

Obviously, this politic if diffuse statement avoided forcing the reader to choose between the mass as sacrifice or as memorial service.

Seven articles are devoted to the sacrament of penance. The Modenese accademici were familiar with the sharp differences in the views of Catholic and Protestant theologians on this subject. Contarini is seeking to base his explanation on an uneasy blend of elements from the New Testament, Thomas Aquinas, and canon law. Beginning with the lapidary definition of penance as the sacrament "whose form and perfection is the absolution by the priest,"[132] he goes on to instruct the reader that it derives its power "from faith in the sufferings of Christ, as St. Thomas says. For, as the Apostle [Paul] says in several places (as in Eph. 1:7), the remission of sins and reconciliation with God does not happen except through Christ and his merits, to whom we are joined through faith as we accept the spirit by whom we are either made a new creation, as in baptism, or raised again and given new life, as in the sacrament of penance."[133] Neither Romans 1:17, the great Protestant proof-text for justification by faith, nor Contarini's own unchanged views of twofold justification are mentioned. Clearly, he was steering the Modenese away from the controversies about justification by referring to the views of St. Thomas. But in the very next sentence faith in the merits of Christ as the keystone in reconciling man and God appears, opening the possibility for the Modenese to accept Contarini's formulation.

He also insists, however, on the juridical character of penance when he defines the priest as judge in article 25, or discusses satisfaction in a remarkably diffuse article 26. His conception of the church as a visible community governed in an orderly fashion by law can be seen in the

[131] Ibid., 199-200 (question 17): "Missa est sacrificium laudis, est sacrificium gratiarum actionis, est sacrificium quia est memoria unici illius sacrificii quo Christus se pro nobis obtulit patri per spiritum sanctum; est etiam sacrificium quia est oblatio qua offerimus Christum eiusque passionem, ut inquit Augustinus in decimo De civitate Dei, et totam ecclesiam per Christum Deo omnipotenti, ut ei inhaereamus per Christum tanquam supremo omnium bono."

[132] Ibid., 204 (question 23): "Sacramentum poenitentiae, cuius forma et perfectio est absolutio sacerdotis."

[133] Ibid., 204 (question 24): "Unde vim habet sacramentum poenitentiae? Responsio. A fide passionis Christi, ut dicit beams Thomas. Nam, sicuti dicit Apostolus in pluribus locis ut in epistola ad Ephesios c. I, [7 ], remissio peccatorum et reconciliatio cum Deo non fit nisi per Christum et eius merita, cui coniungimur per fidem ut accipiamus spiritum per quem vel nova creatura efficiamur, ut in baptismate, vel resurgamus et reviviscamus, ut in sacramento poenitentiae."


289

next few articles, which clarify such issues as the validity of confession made to a layman or to a priest other than one's own parish priest, absolution given by a sinful and personally unworthy priest, or the existence of purgatory. In each case straightforward and traditional answers are given, as might be expected of a man for whom the necessity of institutions to guide and supervise human society was self-evident and beyond doubt.

Contarini the former Venetian statesman did not deny his deep respect for a hierarchically ordered society when discussing ritual, ceremonies, and manmade regulations. While acknowledging that Christ gave his followers no rules on these matters, Contarini derives their necessity from reason. Article 35 explains that proper order and obedience to authority must exist in the church for the good of all its members, and article 37 makes reference to an array of patristic writers and doctors of the church in support of the Christian hierarchy and the monastic life. But Contarini is careful not to define the latter as a good work. The monk is likened to a traveler who strains all his forces in the ascent toward his goal, which is the perfection of charity.[134]

The cult of the saints, "the most living and noblest members of Christ,[135] is endorsed, with the veneration of their images justified by reference to the decrees of the Seventh Ecumenical Council in 787, which declared them to be "as the books of the uneducated"[136] because they move believers to the veneration and imitation of those depicted. This article contains a rare mention of art by Contarini. Indeed, his attitude toward art generally is almost puritanical and makes one wonder what he thought about the great artists of his time, about Raphael or Michelangelo, whose works he had certainly seen: "We cannot approve of the practice of those who use pictures and images of the saints to set off the skill of the artist and offer vain or even base delight to those who look on the images, and do not have a basis in the church's teaching for allowing these images but in fact abuse the church's teaching in order to give lascivious or secular delight."[137]

[134] Ibid., 216 (question 37).

[135] Ibid., 218 (question 38): "Sancti sunt viventia et nobilissima membra Christi. . . ."

[136] Ibid., 219 (question 39): "In septima Synodo, sub Constantino et Hyrene, decretum fuit imagines tanquam libros idiotarum esse, ut aspectu etiam doctos moveant et excitent ad venerationem et imitationem optimorum hominum, in ecclesia admittendas et venerandas, non quidem ut eis veneratio defferatur, sed sanctis per eas."

[137] Ibid.: "... non probandum censemus eorum usum qui in picturis et imaginibus sanctorum, ut artificis peritia ostendatur et delectatio vel vana vel turpis ex earum aspectu videntibus offeratur, nullam habent rationem institutionis ecclesiae in imaginibus admittendis, immo ea abutuntur in lasciviam vel inanem oblectationem."


290

Two articles address specific matters that had been disputed in Modena. Article 31 concerns whether Christians who have died rise up to heaven immediately or wait until the resurrection of their bodies. Contarini answers that those who have died "freed from the bonds of sin and washed in the blood of Christ from the stains of sin" immediately reached blessedness in soul and spirit.[138] The mention of this esoteric issue indicates that he knew the opinions of Camillo Renato, a Sicilian Franciscan who preached in Modena in 1540 before his imprisonment and trial for heresy and eventual escape to Switzerland. Among Renato's teachings was that physical death is followed by "the provisional death or sleep of the soul" until the last judgment and the resurrection of the body (psychopannychism),[139] which Contarini considered erroneous.

The final article was probably written against the opinion of the Modenese priest Giovanni Bertari, who held that someone who prays without understanding what he is saying sins and blasphemes.[140] Contarini recognizes that praying in a language which is not understood shows good intentions, and that the simple people should be encouraged to say prayers even if they do not understand them—meaning, of course, prayers in Latin. Still, he makes the commonsense statement that it is preferable and more useful to comprehend the prayers one recites.[141] A heartfelt "The end. Praise be to God!" concludes this work.

The history of Contarini's articles leading to their acceptance and signing by the Modenese accademici after the cardinal's death has been told expertly and in detail by Massimo Firpo.[142] Our concern here is with the significance of the articles for understanding Contarini's thought. Besides furnishing yet another proof of his irenic and conciliatory approach to dissenters or doubters, they offer evidence of his political sensitivity in the extremely delicate situation of the spirituali at almost the precise moment when the Roman Inquisition was

[138] Ibid., 209 (question 31): "Qui ex hac vita decedunt soluti a vinculis peccati et abluti in sanguine Christi peccatorum maculas . . . confestim ad beatitudinem perveniunt animo et spiritu . . ."

[139] See George Huntston Williams, "Camillo Renato (c. 1500-?1575)," in Italian Reformation Studies in Honor of Laelius Socinus (1562-1962), ed. John A. Tedeschi, Proceedings of the Unitarian Historical Society 14, pts. 1 and 2 (1962-63): 133; according to Williams, Renato presumably held before his trial "that the souls of the saints and the others justified have not yet entered heaven and will not enter in fact until after the last judgment . . . and do not yet enjoy the delights of paradise nor the vision of the highest God."

[140] Firpo and Marcatto, Processo 3:220n.171.

[141] Ibid., 221.

[142] Firpo, "Spirituali," 80-111.


291

being organized. Both he and Morone tried by all means possible to avoid a major eruption of heresy-hunting in Modena, and they were aided in this by two prominent Modenese, Cortese and especially Sadoleto, who ultimately played a key role in persuading the accademici to sign the articles.[143]

In his dealings with the Academy, Contarini assumed the role of mediator rather than that of its protector. On several occasions his patience was tried, as when he wrote to Morone: "It seems to me that I see in them [the accademici ] such an arrogance and pride, mother of all evil, joined to great ignorance, that I think very ill of them . . .. I do not believe that they can be brought back by humanity and courtesy."[144] Another time, when he was irritated by what he considered their quibbling over the fine points of Latin instead of engaging in discussion of substantial issues, he burst out: "I care little about being censured, especially in what concerns the Latin and Ciceronian language, which I have forgotten already many years [ago], and I do not think any more about it."[145] Despite these annoying instances, though, his basic aim remained unaltered: to keep in the Catholic church a troubling and troubled group of intellectuals who were attracted to Protestant ideas.

This episode depicts where Contarini stood in 1542. His attitude toward the accademici was in conformity with the more inclusive Catholicism of Renaissance prelates rather than that of the men who became champions of the Counter-Reformation. The church to him was a mother, "mater ecclesia," able to encompass an enormous variety of people and opinions provided they agreed with broad, comprehensive articles of faith that left many specific questions open. His mentality was not that of the inquisitor or the intolerant guardian at the gate, scrutinizing the minutiae of a man's convictions. Contarini the aristocrat persisted in his assumption that there was such a thing as a common ethos among the educated elite of Italy. To its members, including the Modenese accademici , he attributed the same goodwill that he himself brought to discussions of religious issues. But as had happened in Regensburg, so now, too, he was mistaken in thinking

[143] GC , 809-10, 816-17; Douglas, Sadoleto , 165-67; Firpo, "Spirituali," 100-102.

[144] Letter of 13 July 1542, Reg ., 353 (Inedita, no. 89); text corrected by Firpo, "Spirituali," 84: ". . . a me pare vedere in costoro una tale arrogantia et superbia, madre di ogni male, adiuncta cum grande ignorantia, che penso di loro ogni male; . . . né penso che per via de humanità et gentilezza si possino raquistare."

[145] Firpo, "Spirituali," 83: "Poco mi curo d'essere censurato, massime nella lingua latina et ciceroniana, che già molti anni mi ho scordato né più vi penso."


292

that men would be willing to stop arguing about doctrine for the sake of peace and concord. Ironically, this attitude separated him not only from the conservative members of the curia and the college of cardinals, but also from the more radical spirituali , whether in Modena or in Viterbo with Pole.

Less than a decade after Contarini's death Francesco Negri, a Protestant exile from Italy, wrote bitingly about men "who seem to have founded a new school of Christianity arranged according to their fashion, where they do not deny that justification of man is through Jesus Christ but then do not want to admit the consequences that necessarily follow from this."[146] Negri's criticism goes to the heart of what troubled some of the spirituali about Contarini. There is no doubt that Pole, while continuing to profess his friendship and devotion, tried to avoid a showdown over theological questions. Instead he repeatedly turned a deaf ear to Contarini's requests for replies to his writings, especially those dealing with justification and related issues. How do we interpret Pole's unwillingness to support Contarini or to debate his ideas? Why did he retreat to bland phrases about his hope to discuss the issues orally at some other time?[147]

One modern answer, given with verve by Paolo Simoncelli, posits a breakup of the spirituali after Regensburg into a moderate wing led by Contarini and a radical one with Pole at its head. In this view, an ever-widening rift developed between the two groups with every new doctrinal challenge, from the article on justification to the catechism for the Modenese in 1542, and finally to the thorny issues of penance and atonement.[148] Contarini is presented as a figure increasingly isolated between the intransigent curialists on the one hand and the radical spirituali on the other, a man of moderation when such a stance was no longer possible in the charged religious atmosphere following his "defeat" of 1541. Although he supposedly tried to draw nearer the group of Viterbo both politically and doctrinally, he ultimately proved to belong to the orthodox rather than the radical side, since unlike the radical spirituali he accepted Lutheran premises without their conclusions.[149] Basically, we are back to Negri's statement.

[146] Francesco Negri, Della tragedia . . . intitolata Libero arbitrio , 2d ed. (n.p., 1550 [actually 1551 ]); cited by Firpo and Marcatto, Processo 1:248n. 13.

[147] Simoncelli, Evangelismo italiano , 105-6, 120, 122-23.

[148] Ibid., 113-24.

[149] Ibid., 126. For a somewhat different view, see Tommaso Bozza, Nuovi studi sulla riforma in Italia , vol. 1:Il Beneficio di Cristo (Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1976), 80, who thinks that Contarini belonged "to the left wing of the church."


293

I would like to argue for a somewhat different interpretation of the evidence by positing greater closeness between Contarini and Pole, as well as a less sharp division of the spirituali into the two groups described by Simoncelli. My evidence will be Contarini's last treatise, "Cardinali Polo de paenitentia" (To Cardinal Pole Concerning Penance), written the month before his death.[150] In this short work he "admitted" the consequences mentioned by Negri, and tried to explain his views. Contarini was neither stuck in some "moderate" position from which he was unable to budge, nor did he think of himself and Pole as moving along such different theological tracks that a gap had opened between them which he had to bridge by seeking to draw closer to the English cardinal. In Pole he continued to see a kindred spirit whom he believed to share identical concerns for reform of the church. Because he died unexpectedly after a brief illness, he had no time to give his ideas definitive shape. Although his last little work can in no sense be considered his testament, it is emblematic of the views he held at the end of his life, in the particularly delicate situation of the summer of 1542, and deserves closer examination.[151]

The occasion for the composition of "De poenitentia" were the queries and reservations Pole had expressed about the articles touching on penance, apparently above all article 25,[152] of the catechism for the Modenese which Contarini had sent to Viterbo. Pole returned his comments and annotations to Bologna, together with the request for a fuller explanation of Contarini's ideas about penance. Unfortunately, this letter of Pole's is lost, as is his reply to "De poenitentia.[153] The relation between the two cardinals during these months has to be reconstructed for the most part from Contarini's treatise. He addresses Pole as a friend who, like himself, accepts justification by faith and is facing the necessity of deciding what the implications of this belief are on the pastoral level. Unlike his previous retreat into exclamations about the riches of the wisdom of God, Contarini now is at pains to work out a coherent and convincing position. He stresses his closeness

[150] The treatise was written after 22 July 1542; see GC , 820. Pole acknowledged its receipt on 8 August; Ep. Poli 3:60; and Firpo, "Spirituali," 75.

[151] Text in Reg ., 353-61 (Inedita, no. 90). Contarini's autograph in ASV, A.A., Arm. I-XVIII, 6461, fols. 132r-144r, is used here to correct the printed version, which has paenitentia rather than poenitentia as in the manuscript.

[152] Firpo, "Spirituali," 74.

[153] In a letter of 27 August, three days after Contarini's death, Pole's friend Alvise Priuli asked Beccadelli to keep the last letters of Pole and Vittoria Colonna to Contarini; cited by Firpo, "Spirituali," 76n. 113.


294

to Pole, whom he sees struggling with problems that both would like to discuss further: "I see that Your Reverence wishes a fuller explanation from me, which I likewise would like from you about that which you say concerning satisfaction toward God, the church, and one's neighbor."[154]

Contarini begins by stating that the Lutherans have built everything on the foundation of their faith, which is the belief that Christ by his passion has given full satisfaction to God for all our sins: "Whoever is grafted into Christ through faith has remission of his sins and full satisfaction for them, because that [the satisfaction] of Christ becomes his." From this the Lutherans deduced that no other satisfaction was necessary; all else, like purgatory or indulgences, they considered only as means of exacting money from the people, and saw religious vows as mere hypocrisy.[155] As this teaching spread to Italy, it met with two different reactions. Those who defended the church opposed this doctrine and stressed the necessity of works to such an extent that they contradicted the very basis of Christian belief, while those who accepted it became Lutherans and presumptuously abandoned the teaching of the Catholic church, "believing their wits more than the opinion of all modern theologians as well as the ancient authors." Contarini and Pole should flee these alternatives: "I exhort both of us to steer clear of this Scylla and Charybdis, and to pass safely between them without abandoning the teaching of the church, but believing in it more than in our own wits."[156]

This is a reiteration of the same principle Contarini had embraced in Regensburg, that the magisterium of the church must take precedence over personal opinions. But what did the church teach about penance that Christians must believe? This tract includes one of the most frequently cited passages in all of Contarini's writings, one that has often been lifted out of context and used as evidence for his full agreement with the key Lutheran doctrine of justification by faith alone: "The foundation of the Lutheran edifice is most true, and we must not contradict it in any way, but must accept it as true and catholic, indeed as the basis of the Christian religion."[157] Yet upon reading further we find his affirmation that the doctrine of justification sola fide , the basis of not just the Lutheran but the Christian edifice, is solidly rooted in Catholic theology, especially that of St. Thomas. The Lutherans have done nothing more than dress this ancient teaching of the church in

[154] Reg., ,354.

[155] Ibid.

[156] Ibid., 355.

[157] Ibid., 358.


295

new words and boast that they alone have understood correctly what St. Paul wrote.[158]

Because he did not consider justification by faith a Lutheran innovation but rather an ancient doctrine, Contarini saw no dilemma for the Catholic who held fast to it, as he himself did without uncertainty or doubt. But Pole realized what some of the attendant problems for Catholics were, if Contarini's summary correctly represents what Pole wrote: "I see that you say that the sinner is completely reconciled with God by Christ, and that there is no need to add anything of ours, and then you say that he has offended the church and himself; the offense against himself is nothing other than the offense against natural law written by God in our hearts. Strengthened by the words of Your Reverence I have undertaken to elucidate [further] what you have said and what I have."[159] Judging from this passage, Pole raised the question of how far sin was an offense not only against God, but also against the church and one's own nature.

Having decided against employing the language of scholastic philosophy,[160] maybe because he knew that Pole did not like to use it, Contarini in his treatise nevertheless adheres to the substance if not the terminology of Thomistic doctrine. He explains that because sin is a threefold transgression, it requires more than one kind of satisfaction. The sinner can simultaneously offend against divine, natural, and human law. The benefit of Christ's suffering on the cross has given satisfaction for transgressions against divine law, but what about transgressions against the the others? For example, adultery offends against all three kinds of law, as does murder.[161] Contarini considers a most significant divergence of Protestantism from Catholicism to be the Protestant teaching that stops short of requiring appropriate satisfaction for sins. While recognizing the right of civil authorities to impose punishment, the Protestants have skipped over the norms of natural law and all that follows from them, including the doctrine of purgatory. The mistake of the Protestants distorts the ancient and accepted doctrine of

[158] Ibid., 354.

[159] Ibid., 360-61:". . .vedo, ch'ella dice, che il peccatore per Christo e perfectamente reconciliato cum dio, ne vi bisogna che vi pongamo del nostro, poi dice che ha offeso la chiesia et se stesso; l'offensione di se stesso non è altra che l'offensione della lege naturale scritta nelli nostri cuori da dio, pero confirmato io dalle parole di V.S. mi son posto a fare questa dechiaratione delli sui detti et delli mei."

[160] "Io riferiro la doctrina di San Thomaso, ma non usero gia il modo suo di parlare, et la dilatero piu di quello che e stato facto da lui" (ibid., 356).

[161] Ibid., 358.


296

penance in the Christian church, which has always taught that only God forgives our sins through the merits of Christ but that punishment due to sin remains. The sinner must render satisfaction for the transgressions of the positive law of church and state and for offenses against his neighbor. This is necessary because of God's justice.[162]

Repeating his conviction that Catholics and Lutherans shared the crucial doctrine of justification by faith, Contarini ultimately finds the Catholic answer to its consequences in a Thomistic view of atonement. He plainly states toward the end of his treatise where he stands: "We have explained how to guide ourselves in accepting and rejecting the Lutheran structure by basing our treatise on the doctrine of St. Thomas, that is, by following his guidance."[163]

He was not "stranded intellectually" because of his inability to "bridge the gap between two doctrines which led in contrary directions," as a sensitive and thoughtful scholar maintained.[164] To him, the two doctrines were compatible. Contarini was schooled in the theology of St. Thomas, but also in the political world of Venice, and in "De poenitentia" he combined categories of ideas drawn from both spheres. We have repeatedly seen his conviction that a hierarchical order was necessary for all aspects of human society, whether religious, ecclesiastical, or civil. Applying this thinking to sin, he had no difficulty conceiving it as an act that simultaneously offended a number of norms in descending order of gravity. On the highest level, that of Christian reality, sin was an offense against God for which no human action could merit God's forgiveness. The sinner's hope was in the benefits of Christ's death rather than in any action he could perform himself.[165]

But as one descended from that level to the realms of ecclesiastical and civil society and the moral universe of each individual, sin assumed a different import, depending on its context. As a matter of justice,

[162] "Questa paena l'homo reconciliato cum Dio per li meriti della passione di Christo et per virtu della absolutione del sacerdote resuscitato in Christo per il spirito de Christo, che ha de novo recevuto, la patisse o qui over in purgatorio, patientemente laudando dio et amando piu la iustitia de dio, che il suo commodo" (ibid., 359, corrected with ASV, A.A., Arm. I-XVIII, 6461, fol. 114v).

[163] "Hor dechiarato che habiamo, a quale modo ci devemo governare in acettare et reiicere questo aedificio luterano, fundando questo nostro discorso sopra la doctrina di San Thomaso, cioe prendendo lo indice da lui" (ibid., 360).

[164] Fenlon, Heresy and Obedience , 65.

[165] Reg ., 358: "Per Christo perfectamente etiam siamo liberati dalla obligatione et reato della paena aeterna, ne qui ci bisogna opere nostre ne compagno alcuno, a solo Christo havemo questa obligatione, da lui solo devemo cognoscere questo beneficio."


297

divine and secular, satisfaction had to be made at each level of transgression. This was a matter not of theology but of equity. Contarini's categories of thought were scholastic, even if his language was not, but they were also political. As a Venetian magistrate, he had dealt with criminal transgressions without doubting that they required satisfaction if the authority of the state was to be preserved. So, too, atonement for breaking the norms of natural law to him was a self-evident necessity. Men were not free to disregard the laws of reason and society because Christ died for all on the cross; forensic justification of the sinner still required that the demands of justice be met.

Pole understood this argument. But he did not think in scholastic terms, and he was obviously loath to engage in a debate that would call his friend's intellectual assumptions into question. Maybe Pole could intuit that Contarini's explanation was not only intellectual but deeply personal as well, combining the thoughts of a Catholic and a Venetian statesman. Pole's unwillingness to explain his views fully might be attributed to his realization that he and Contarini, whom he did not want to alienate, quite literally spoke different theological languages. Pole was not interested in his friend's hierarchical ordering of the consequences of sin or his entire logical and Thomistic argumentation. He offered another way, that of applying "two rules, of Scripture and of experience,[166] to the questions under discussion. It is obvious that his ideas pointed to a much greater scriptural orientation and subjectivism than did Contarini's—a fact that later on did not escape the inquisition.[167]

It would be a mistake to view Pole in the summer of 1542 as some sort of crypto-Protestant who distanced himself from the "moderate" Contarini because of doctrinal disagreements. Both men, after all, remained in the church and submitted themselves to its teaching. Their differing ways of dealing with the implication of sola fide had a great deal to do with their political aims as proponents of reform and their respective temperaments. Contarini was more open, direct, and anxious for consensus among the spirituali , while Pole was more subtle, circumspect, and even enigmatic. When he became the leading figure among the spirituali after Contarini's death and curial conservatives came increasingly to mistrust him and his circle, these qualities stood him in good stead. He was also the better theologian of the two. If

[166] To Contarini, Viterbo, 1 May 1542, in Ep. Poli 3:53.

[167] Fenlon, Heresy and Obedience , 67-68.


298

one accepted the structure of Contarini's argument, which moved from theology to philosophy through reasoning by analogy, then it was possible to agree that he had reconciled the necessity of penance with justification by faith alone. But Pole was more aware than Contarini of the theologically unsystematic way in which this reconciliation was accomplished. His criteria of "Scripture and experience," although not spelled out, ultimately offered more intellectual freedom to the Christian than Contarini's uneasy alliance of sola fide and scholastic reasoning.

Contarini's biographer Franz Dittrich, an apologist for Catholicism in the Kulturkampf of nineteenth-century Germany,[168] throughout his volume insists on the absolute Catholic orthodoxy of his subject. In discussing "De poenitentia," however, he is constrained to admit that Contarini's explanation of satisfaction "does not entirely agree with Catholic dogma."[169] Dittrich's reason for this statement lies in Contarini's "protestantizing conception of justification," which downplays human cooperation with divine grace, and his continued use of such phrases as "per fidem in sanguine suo," which are open to misunderstanding.[170] Dittrich measures Contarini's orthodoxy by the standards of Tridentine decrees, which is methodologically inappropriate. "De poenitentia," which satisfied neither Protestants nor Catholics, is a signal example of Contarini's religious thought. He had found a personally acceptable solution that because of its hybrid nature could not be transposed to the pastoral level. Here, maybe better than in any other single piece of writing, we see the Achilles' heel of the spirituali . Not of the "radical" or "moderate" spirituali , but of all those spirituali who did not want to break with the Catholic church.

Contarini's reputation has stood high ever since his death 450 years ago. Contemporaries eulogized him as a virtuous and learned man,[171]

[168] Kurt-Victor Selge, "Conclusione del convegno," in Cavazzana Romanelli (ed.), Gaspare Contarini e il suo tempo , 243-44.

[169] GC , 822.

[170] Ibid., 823: "Erscheint schon diese unhaltbare Begründung der katholischen Satisfactionstheorie als die Folge einer zu grossen Annäherung an den protestantischen Rechtfertigungsbegriff, so beweist auch im übrigen diese Abhandlung, daß Contarini trotz aller Erfahrungen, die er gemacht, trotz alles Widerspruches, den er gefunden hatte, seinen protestantisirenden [sic ] Rechtfertigungsbegriff in nichts geändert hat."

[171] The early eulogy by the Venetian patrician Michele Barozzi (1535-59), in VBC, Cod. Cicogna 2978/28-I, was an extravagant humanistic piece "in praise of famous men" and gives little idea of how precisely Contarini was remembered by men who knew him. It is doubtful that it was delivered before the Venetian Senate, as Hackert thinks (Staatsschrift , 1). For other early mentions of Contarini, see Giancarlo Morel, "Gasparo Contarini negli appunti del Mazzuchelli," Atti dell'Accademia delle scienze di Torino 108 (1968-69): 279-303.


299

while later historians, both Catholic and Protestant, developed the image of the cardinal as a spiritual, serious, and irenic churchman intent on healing the schism in Western Christianity. In a nineteenth-century novel we find him in the character of a wise but crafty Catholic who almost succeeds in converting the young German Protestant hero;[172] in another guise he appears, unexpectedly enough, in a forgotten, or at least hitherto unrecorded, opera entitled Contarini .[173] The most recent Italian scholarly works interpret him, as we have seen, as the leader of the spirituali , whose unsuccessful mission to Regensburg supposedly marked his personal defeat together with that of the moderate and conciliatory proponents of reform at the papal court. A recent American work, by contrast, goes so far as to state that his appointment in 1535 marked the beginning of the Counter-Reformation.[174]

In these pages, another image of Contarini has emerged. First, he should not be cast in the mold of a major theoretician of Catholic reform. An examination of his writings shows that he was not an original thinker in either philosophy or theology. His most characteristic theological insight about the centrality of justification by faith had its basis not in theory but in his personal experience. Although he never wavered in this belief, he did not succeed in expressing it in such language and With such reasons as to convince those who did not share his deeply personal theological ideas. Most of his writings were pièces d'occasion rather than carefully crafted works, and they failed to sway readers who began with different theological premises.

Second, the "defeat" of Contarini as the result of the colloquy of Regensburg has been overdramatized. Had his mission been perceived in purely negative terms by Pope Paul III, it would be very difficult to explain the appointment of not just one but three spirituali cardinals in June 1542, all of them friends of Contarini. Morone, Badia, and Cortese were men whose voices strengthened the politically liberal element in the college of cardinals. It is inconceivable that a pontiff as

[172] Friedrich von Uechtritz, Albrecht Holm: eine Geschichte aus der Reformationszeit (Berlin: Verlag von Alexander Duncker, 1852-53). "Contarini" is the the title of chap. 3, 1(3):231-71. At the end Contarini, although a powerful cardinal of the Roman church, trembles at the thought of being suspect to the inquisition.

[173] By Henry Hugo Pierson (1815-73), in Chambers's Biographical Dictionary , ed. Wm. Geddie and J. Liddell Geddie (Edinburgh and London: W. & R. Chambers, 1931), 743.

[174] John C. Olin, Catholic Reform from Cardinal Ximenes to the Council of Trent, 1495-1563: An Essay with Illustrative Documents and a Brief Study of St. Ignatius Loyola (New York: Fordham University Press, 1990), 19: "It is at this point in 1535 when Paul III brought Gasparo Contarini to Rome that the Counter-Reformation in one sense of the word may be said to have begun."


300

shrewd as Paul III would add to the college at this crucial juncture men whose views had been totally discredited. Cardinal Farnese, the pope's alter ego in the conduct of politics, remarked to Pole that if Contarini could have picked cardinals himself, he certainly would have made the same choices.[175] Contarini added to the almost extravagant expression of his joy at the appointment of his friends an affirmation of his confidence that the pope was executing God's design for the good of the church. "My pen is carried away by my emotion," he concluded.[176] Hardly the sentiments of a bitter or isolated man!

Finally, the significance of the unsuccessful colloquy of Regensburg for the history of Italian Evangelism has been exaggerated. After July 1542, the pope and his advisors quite deliberately and realistically abandoned a course of action that they had adopted under pressure from the emperor and that had led nowhere. But there was no sudden change of attitude at the papal court toward the spirituali , nor did they abruptly fall from favor. Contarini was appointed legate to Charles V in August 1542. According to one report, Paul III, in conversation with Cardinal Sadoleto, spoke about Contarini and said "so many good things about his goodness and virtue, that it seemed as if he were speaking about St. Augustine. He added that the court was greatly mistaken in reputing Msgr. Contarini as pro-imperial, for in his embassy to Germany he had sufficiently demonstrated where his sympathies lay, and whether he was a pro-imperial or a true churchman. He even said that this last was Contarini's true title."[177] Ironically, it was not the pope but the emperor who in the end repudiated Contarini: Charles V did not accept him as legate, probably because of his firm stand on transubstantiation in Regensburg.

The main reason the spirituali initially lost ground and influence was not their "defeat" by ideological opponents, but the fact that their ideas on how to solve the crisis in the church had not worked. Moreover, once the reorganized Roman Inquisition began to function, their religious views became increasingly suspect. This suspicion naturally grew stronger after a number of them fled to Protestant states or cities. Another important factor was the death during the 1540s of some of their most conspicuous members: Fregoso died in 1541, Contarini in 1542, Giberti in 1543, Sadoleto, Bembo, and Badia in 1547, and

[175] Pole to Contarini, Rome, 2 June 1542, in Reg., 234 (no. 895).

[176] Reg ., 234 (no. 896).

[177] Carlo Gualteruzzi to Ludovico Beccadelli, Rome, 7 Aug. 1542, quoted in Fragnito, "Evangelismo e intrasigenti," 27-28n.26.


301

Cortese in 1548. Church leaders of the next generation were men of the Counter-Reformation whose outlook was quite different. By and large they shared a militant attitude toward Protestantism and considered its adherents as heretics to be combated rather than as Christian brethren with whom Catholics could or should discuss their faith. The old church of the Renaissance was about to disappear, and with it the religious openness that had characterized many of its leading figures, including the spirituali cardinals. It was not a matter of fanatics replacing proponents of toleration, but of legalistic bureaucrats succeeding more latitudinarian prelates who had been educated in the spirit of Renaissance humanism.

Contarini died in Bologna on 24 August 1542. Before long a mythology grew up around the visit to the dying cardinal of Bernardino Ochino, general of the Capuchins, who a few days later defected to Calvin's Geneva, and maintained that Contarini had encouraged him to flee from Italy. But the shape of Contarini's whole life and thought makes this improbable. He died as he had lived, as a Christian, a Venetian, and a cardinal. The government, society, and political world of Venice in which he was formed gave his ideas their distinctive character and defined the categories into which he ordered reality. He can best be understood as a zentiluomo veneziano , a Venetian gentleman, who had internalized and idealized the traditional values of his homeland so that they became the filter through which he saw the great political and religious issues of his time. He was a Venetian patrician first, and a Roman cardinal second. Most of all, he held a view of the church and embodied in his person ideals of civilitas and humanitas that became irrelevant in the fast-approaching age of religious wars. Contarini can be a wonderful partner in a dialogue with modern interlocutors who care about questions of political and religious order, of liberty and authority. His thought still invites them to meditate on unresolved issues and on thinkable alternatives to the course of events in church and state, then and now.


303

Chapter Five After the Storm
 

Preferred Citation: Gleason, Elisabeth G. Gasparo Contarini: Venice, Rome, and Reform. Berkely:  University of California Press,  1993. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft429005s2/