Dr. Christina Traxler

Negotiating Faith.
Religious Consent and Peacemaking in Fifteenth- and Sixteenth-Century Europe

In the past years, the anniversaries of two pathbreaking events in the history of European Christianity were commemorated worldwide: the Council of Constance (1414–1418), which condemned the Bohemian reformer Jan Hus as a heretic and led to the Hussite Revolution, and the beginning of the German Reformation in 1517, which paved the way from uniformity to religious plurality in the modern period. Both fifteenth-century Hussites and sixteenth-century Reformers faced military aggression (“crusades”) but also attempted to negotiate the theological differences in order to reach doctrinal agreements. In both periods, political authorities urged the feuding parties to find compromise through religious colloquies. As the papacy hindered the convocation of the planned general councils of Basel (1431–1449) and Trent (1545–1563) and thus obstructed an international and traditional means of peacemaking, the initiative to reach a religious consensus by national or regional religious colloquies rested with the respective emperors, Sigismund and Charles V. Theological debates between Hussites and Reformers and orthodox Christians were not simply informal meetings of experts but deliberately staged. Many groups—theologians, canonists, princes, popes, curia, emperors, councils, universities, city officials, and local nobility—intervened with different theological, political, or strategical interests in these encounters. Accordingly, the procedure and organization posed specific challenges.

Purpose, scope, and impact of the project

The project examines in a comparative way the parallels and differences of regional religious colloquies in the fifteenth and sixteenth  centuries, which were essential parts of both reformations and a new feature in managing religious conflicts. Despite the striking parallels of the two reformation movements, and the fact that most of these theological colloquies have individually been studied carefully by experts in medieval and Reformation history and theology, no efforts have so far been made to analyze the organization of the theological debates between Hussite and “Catholic” theologians in the early fifteenth century and the discussions between orthodox Christians and Reformers in the mid-sixteenth century in a comparative way. My project attempts to bridge this gap by arguing for a clearer understanding of the transition period (Schwellenzeit) between late Middle Ages and early modern period and for continuities between the two epochs. I will restrict the medieval part of my study to the negotiations between the colloquy of Pressburg in March 1429 and the Council of Basel (1431–1449), culminating in the agreement on the so-called Compactata in 1436. A major source of my research in this first phase of my project will be a detailed study of the important, although yet unpublished Refutacio articulorum per Boemos in concilio Basiliensi propositorum, a treatise composed by the Viennese professor of theology and leading anti-Hussite expert Thomas Ebendorfer (Vienna, National Library, CVP 4704, fol. 20r–147r). Since Ebendorfer was a member of the conciliar delegation to Bohemia and thus had first-hand experience of Bohemian Hussitism, his text is a good example of a negotiating strategy within the group of experts that shaped the colloquies. This analysis shall also prepare an upcoming edition of the treatise.

A defined number of sixteenth-century colloquies seem especially relevant for a comparative analysis with the Hussite debates in the 15^th century. For the purposes of my study, the three religious colloquies (“Reichsreligionsgespräche”) in Hagenau (1540), Worms (1540/41), and Regensburg (1541), which were initiated and supported by Emperor Charles V, seem particularly promising. The colloquies were framed by the first years of the Reformation and the planned Council of Trent (1545–1563). The Colloquy of Hagenau focused on procedural questions like choosing representatives, voting, decision making, and the lingua franca of the discussions. Thus, it laid the foundations for the ensuing fruitful theological debates. These debates were eventually realized at the Colloquy of Worms and the Colloquy of Regensburg. Thus, the years 1540 and 1541 were an enormously productive period of discussion, conciliation, and compromise. The records and acts (Acta) of those three meetings have been edited only recently; they provide an invaluable rich array of texts and sources.

The leading research questions for my comparative analysis are: What were the initial situations and starting points of religious colloquies in fifteenth and mid-sixteenth centuries? Who commenced these colloquies? What characterized the choice of the place and the circumstances? Who selected the participants and based on which criteria? What were the controversial topics under scrutiny, and what were the required methods, rules, or criteria for the discussions? Which “judges” were the participants willing to accept? How did the theologians on both sides prepare for the colloquies? What was the role of theological argumentation as compared to more psychological factors (including bias, temper, mood, mutual esteem) and other non-argumentative communication (like defamatory actions)? What was the role of the public, politics, and social hierarchies and relations? How were these events publicized, promoted, and reclaimed? How compulsory were the results, and how were they sanctified? And who ultimately decided what qualified as “success” or “failure,” which resulted in further steps or definitive actions?

By comparing procedural similarities and differences in methods, dynamics, interests, and negotiations in these debates, I intend to broaden the traditional interpretation of the theological differences between the denominations by introducing an adapted model of assessing the religious disputes that pays greater attention to the dynamics of procedure and communication, the role of the participants, and political expectations. Besides highlighting the importance of religious colloquies in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, this comparison will shed new light on the religious and cultural transformations occurring at the threshold to modernity and ultimately demonstrate the similarities and continuities between the Hussite and Reformation periods. The comparison may show that—despite all differences—the Hussite and Reformation periods shared important features. Analyzing the phenomena of these debates in both reformations may also foster greater appreciation for the growing role of secular authorities and the expertise of trained theologians in shaping religious structures in the modern period.

Consequently, the entire project will generate insights into the dynamics of religious dialogue, which entails more than just the pure theological controversies. Furthermore, it will reveal valuable information about how the responsible elite in the medieval and early modern periods tried to organize religious dialogue and to resolve religious dissent by testing the possibility of non-violent discourse (“gewaltfreier Diskurs”) instead of resorting to authoritative institutions, such as the pope, councils, universities, Reichstag or other tribunals, or even war.

My postdoctoral project is cross-epochal, inter-disciplinary, and inter-confessional and combines religious studies and history, the Middle Ages and the early modern period.