The Protestant Reformation of the 16th century effected a profound religious transformation of European societies and has shaped the modern world in many respects.¹ The trigger for this revolution in Western Christianity was the indulgences controversy. The papacy’s growing need for income—not least because the Renaissance popes were generous patrons of the arts—turned the devout practice of indulgences into fundraisers. The indulgence campaign to support the re-building of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, organized in Germany by the worldly Cardinal Albrecht von Brandenburg (1490–1545) and preached by the Dominican friar Johann Tetzel (c. 1465–1519), provoked the opposition of Martin Luther (1483–1546), an Augustinian friar and professor of theology at the recently founded University of Wittenberg in Saxony. On October 31, 1517, Luther published a series of propositions on the power and efficacy of indulgences, which came to be known as the 95 Theses. This text—written in Latin—was an invitation to an academic debate. Contrary to Reformation mythology, Luther did not himself nail the pages to the door of Wittenberg castle church, which was also the university church. The theses may instead have been published at the door of this church (which served as an official noticeboard for the university) by a clerk.

Luther objected to the contemporary practice of indulgences because he saw it as undermining the seriousness of penance and conversion in a Christian’s life. However, the scope of the 95 Theses went far beyond this legitimate concern and questioned the role of the Church (and particularly of the pope) as a sacramental mediator of divine grace, especially in the Sacrament of Confession. The 95 Theses found extraordinary resonance in humanist circles of the time, and the debate did not remain confined to academia, as Luther originally intended. The pamphlet was widely circulated in German translation, and this was facilitated by the new general availability of printing. As I discussed in the previous entry, there was a broad, though diffuse, sense of the need for reform in the Church, and the 95 Theses was to become a catalyst for change.

The young Luther tended to scrupulosity, and his overwhelming sense of God’s majesty and of his own sinfulness tormented him with the existential question: “How can I be just[ified] in the sight of God?” While lecturing on the Sacred Scriptures between 1513 and 1518, Luther found his answer in the Apostle Paul’s Letter to the Romans 1:17: “The just shall live by faith”—or, as he would add, by faith “alone.” This message was not in itself novel: St. Bernard of Clairvaux had said much the same in his sermons nearly 400 years earlier. But Luther offered a radically new understanding of faith and of justification. For Luther, our justification is entirely the work of God, through the merit of Christ, and it consists in being declared righteous rather than an interior renewal and sanctification. This justification is received by the sinner through faith, which Luther essentially defines as trust (fiducia) in God’s promises.² Luther’s strong emphasis on divine agency in the process of justification led him to draw a sharp conceptual distinction between faith and works. He certainly wanted the faith of Christians to bear fruit by living according to God’s commandments, but he rejected the idea that, for those who were justified by God’s gratuitous gift, an increase in divine grace could in any way be merited by good works.

Reformation Liturgies

On the basis of his theology of justification by faith, Luther launched a sweeping critique of the Catholic sacramental system. In particular, he rejected the sacrificial character of the Mass—which for him embodied the erroneous idea of a “work” offered to God for the benefit of the living and the dead—and condemned the Roman Canon. However, Luther changed the ritual shape of the Mass only gradually and in many Lutheran church orders some elements that had a popular appeal were retained, including Eucharistic vestments and the elevation of the consecrated species (Luther retained an albeit subjective notion of Christ’s presence in bread and wine for those who receive the sacrament in faith).³ Luther would even allow for Latin as a liturgical language where it could be understood, for instance, in preparatory high schools (Gymnasien). Consequently, in central and northern Europe, contrary to the well-known adage lex orandi lex credendi, outward similarities in liturgical practice covered a widening chasm of doctrinal differences. Other Reformers, such as Huldrych Zwingli (1484–1531) in Zurich and John Calvin (1509–1564) in Geneva thought that Luther had still retained too much of medieval theological and liturgical tradition, and went much further in their rejection of Catholic worship, including the use of Latin.⁴

The Protestant Reformation in England was implemented on the parish level through the Book of Common Prayer, published in two editions under King Edward VI (1549 and 1552), the latter of which was revised under Queen Elizabeth I (1559).⁵ The Prayer Book was largely the work of Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556), Archbishop of Canterbury, and the rationale behind his changes to the traditional liturgy was the Reformed theology of justification. In particular, Cranmer aimed at removing the idea that there is any human merit contributing to man’s salvation, in particular the Mass as a sacrificial action.⁶ The Offertory rite was removed, and the Canon of the Mass, while retaining much of its structure, was rewritten in such a way as to remove any aspect of the Eucharistic sacrifice as distinct from Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. There was to be no elevation of the consecrated host. While the 1549 Prayer Book thus broke with liturgical tradition in many ways, the communion service still resembled the Mass and contained a number of ambiguities that appeared to allow for a Catholic interpretation. Cranmer’s second edition of the Prayer Book in 1552 definitively embraced Reformed theology. The minister, no longer wearing traditional Mass vestments but only a surplice, presided by standing at the left side of a wooden table instead of an altar. These ritual changes were motivated by the intention to avoid any association with the Catholic Mass and its sacrificial character, a doctrine that was rejected in the authoritative Articles of Religion of 1562 (finalized in 1571).⁷

The Rocky Road towards Trent

It can be argued that the pope and his curia initially saw Luther’s grievances above all as an attack on papal authority and underestimated its explosive potential for Catholic thought and practice. However, the increasingly radical consequences Luther and his followers drew from his theology of justification by faith alarmed bishops and theologians alike. Why did it take the Catholic Church so long to formulate a robust response? The reasons for this delay can be found in the upheavals of the later medieval period and in the entanglement of Church and state at the time.

The residency of the papacy in Avignon (described by some contemporaries as a “Babylonian captivity”) from 1309 to 1377 and the papal schism from 1378 to 1417, with two and, at some point, even three claimants to the papal throne, brought forth the theory of conciliarism. While there were different strands of conciliarist thought, at its heart lay the claim that, in a situation of profound crisis, such as the papal schism, a general council of the Catholic Church was superior to the pope and had the authority to resolve this crisis. Conciliarism was on the wane in the 15th century, largely because it proved unable to carry out the reforms it had proposed, and the popes of the Renaissance gained new self-confidence. However, conciliarist thought was still current in the 16th century, especially in France, and Luther himself called for the convocation of a council to be held in Germany in his address To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation of 1520. There was concern among the pope and his curia that calling a council would lead to a revival of the conciliarist movement. Moreover, the most recent ecumenical council, Lateran V (1512-1517), may not have served as a convincing precedent, because its protracted deliberations were not followed by an effective implementation of the desired correction of abuses and revival of sound practice.⁸

Convoking the Council at Trent ⁹

Pope Paul III (1468-1549) seemed ill-prepared to galvanize the dispersed initiatives for reform within the Catholic Church. Elected to the See of Peter on October 13, 1534, the former Cardinal Alessandro Farnese was steeped in the culture and politics of the Renaissance. However, Paul III realized the gravity of the situation and from the first months of his pontificate took steps towards an ecumenical council. The convocation of the council was severely delayed by the antagonism between the two major Catholic rulers of Europe, King Francis I of France (1494-1547) and the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V (1500-1558), who as Charles I was also King of Spain. Both were committed Catholics, but their ongoing political and military conflicts frustrated the pope’s intentions. The location of the council proved to be contentious as well, as Charles V wanted it to meet in Germany, where the crisis had taken its origin, and hoped for a participation of Protestant leaders. The city of Trent was chosen because it was part of the Holy Roman Empire and hence could be considered on German territory, but it was also on the southern side of the alps and culturally Italian.

The council was able to assemble only after Charles and Francis agreed to the Peace of Crépy on September 18, 1544, and its opening was celebrated on Gaudete Sunday, December 13, 1545. Pope Paul III wanted to give priority to responding to the doctrinal challenges of the Protestant Reformers by clearly formulating Catholic teaching. Emperor Charles V, who took strong interest in the proceedings of the council, saw a more urgent need to reform the Church’s discipline. As a compromise, it was resolved that matters of doctrine and of Church reform were treated in parallel. The council began by working through the major issues raised by the Protestant Reformers: canonical scriptures, justification, sacraments, and so on. Calls for renewed liturgical discipline were heard already during the council’s first period from December 1545 to March 1547. However, the question was resumed in earnest only in its last period, from January 1562 to December 1563, alongside the deliberations about the doctrinal decree on the sacrifice of the Mass.

In my next entry, I will consider the conciliar debates on liturgical questions and the resulting decisions.

Editor’s Note: The first entry of this series can be found here: Trent and Its Liturgical Reform: The Western Church at the Threshold of the Early Modern Period (Part I)

_{Image Source: AB/Wikimedia Commons. Luther before Cardinal Cajetan during the controversy over his 95 theses, by Ferdinand Pauwels, 1870.}

1. Euan Cameron, The European Reformation, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012) offers an excellent historical overview.
2. See Alistair E. McGrath, Reformation Thought: An Introduction, 4th ed. (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012), 121-122.
3. See Bryan D. Spinks, Do This in Remembrance of Me: The Eucharist from the Early Church to the Present Day (London: SCM Press, 2013), 246-271, and Helmut Hoping, My Body Given for You: History and Theology of the Eucharist, trans. Michael J. Miller (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2019), 223-235.
4. See Spinks, Do This in Remembrance of Me, 272-312.
5. These different editions can be compared in The Book of Common Prayer: The Texts of 1549, 1559, and 1662, ed. Brian Cummings (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).
6. See Francis Clark, Eucharistic Sacrifice and the Reformation, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1967), 177-205.
7. The Thirty-Nine Articles are found conveniently in Documents of the English Reformation 1526–1701, ed. Gerald Bray, corrected reprint (Cambridge: James Clarke & Co., 2004), 285–309. The Elizabethan settlement did not succeed in establishing a middle way between Catholicism and Puritanism, and by the end of the 18th century, the Church of England was constituted by various parties with different doctrinal beliefs and liturgies, which have been labeled “Low Church” and “High Church.” This protracted history lies beyond the scope of this series; see the overview of Spinks, Do This in Remembrance of Me, 313-346.
8. However, Nelson Minnich has shown that Lateran V had an impact where bishops implemented some of its reforms. More importantly, its decrees helped to organize and support Trent’s reform agenda. See Nelson Minnich, “The Last Two Councils of the Catholic Reformation: The Influence of Lateran V on Trent,” in Early Modern Catholicism, ed. Kathleen Comerford and Hilmar Pabel (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001), 3-25.
9. This brief summary is indebted to Robert Bireley, The Refashioning of Catholicism 1450–1700: A Reassessment of the Counter Reformation (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1999), 45-49.