Preview: Newman and the Greek Fathers: Indwelling of the Spirit, Part II

On Monday, September 30, we'll conclude our discussion of Newman's discovery of the Greek Fathers's teaching on the Indwelling of the Spirit on the Son Rise Morning Show. Please tune in at my usual time, about 6:50 a.m. Central DST/7:50 a.m. Eastern DST here or catch the podcast later.

Reading the last paragraphs of Father Ker's discussion of how the Greek Fathers led Newman to the doctrine of the Indwelling of the Spirit reminded me of a July 2017 Eighth Day Institute event timed to coincide with the 500th anniversary of what is regarded as the beginning of the Protestant Reformation (Martin Luther's posting of his 95 Theses). 

The topic was "The Patristic View of Salvation: Justification by Faith Alone?" A Protestant (Lutheran) scholar, a Catholic scholar, and an Orthodox Christian scholar each presented and then responded to each other's academic papers on this subject, and other related papers were offered.

The odd thing was that we never really discussed, nor did anyone cogently defend, Martin Luther's doctrine of "Justification by Faith Alone"--in fact, we hardly mentioned it. That was because the representative speakers were reflecting on the "patristic view of salvation" so they spoke about Deification, not "Justification". The Director of Eighth Day Institute commented to members/attendees after the conference:

[The plenary speakers] all found the same emphasis of participation in Christ, or deification, as the Orthodox put it. . . . So while it was remarkable to see the united understanding of salvation as participation in Christ, that emphasis distracted us from the question of justification. I think there are two ways to look at this failure. On the one hand, it’s really not such a failure. The speakers heeded the admonition to return to the Fathers. And they just didn’t find much on the issue of justification. Instead, they found participation, union, and deification. And I mostly agree with all three speakers who indicated that this pre-Reformation emphasis on participation might be the way to get past the dividing issue of justification. . . .

Father Ker concurs that Newman found something similar when he studied the Greek Fathers. Newman had already changed his mind about the Calvinist doctrine of double predestination; moreover, Ker states that Newman "disagrees with Evangelicals who consider [the justification of the sinner] as a state, not of holiness or righteousness, but merely or mainly of acceptance with God'." (p. 36)

In addition to quoting several sermons ("The Law of the Spirit", "The State of Salvation", "The New Works of the Gospel", etc) Father Ker cites Newman's 1838 Lectures on Justification (reissued with an advertisement and corrective notes in 1874).

In a 1985 article for Christendom College, Richard Penaskovic called them a "forgotten classic" arguing that not only did Newman outline a Via Media for Tractarians between the Evangelical view and what he thought of as the "Romanist" view of Justification but he also offered a "powerful new synthesis of St. Paul and the Greek Fathers, especially St. Athanasius" to speak "of grace in highly personal categories" as it is present in the Christian heart and soul. Saint Augustine of Hippo, one of the four great Western Fathers, through his interpretations of Saint Paul's letters, was also an important influence on Newman.

Quoting these lectures, Father Ker sums up Newman's view on the indwelling of the Spirit as the source of the sanctification of the Christian, noting that he had rediscovered the "central New Testament doctrine of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, a doctrine that was second nature to the Eastern Fathers who knew nothing of the modern problem of justification":

"The presence of the Holy Ghost shed abroad in our hearts, the Author both of faith and renewal, this is really that which makes us righteous, and . . . our righteousness is the possession of that presence." Justification, then "is wrought by the power of the Spirit, or rather by His presence within us" while "faith and renewal are both present also, but as fruits of it" (Justification, pp. 137-138) . . . justification and renewal are "both included in that one great gift of God, the  indwelling of Christ" through the Holy Spirit "in the Christian soul" which constitutes "our justification and sanctification, as its necessary results" (ibid, p. 112) (Selected Sermons, p. 37)

What Newman learned from the Fathers of the Church about the Indwelling of the Spirit and deification he poured into his sermons and his pastoral care as both an Anglican minister and a Catholic priest, urging his congregations to be aware of this indwelling and be willing to cooperate with its Grace and inspiration for the faith, hope, and charity it imparted.

Saint John Henry Newman, pray for us!

Preview: Newman and the Greek Fathers: Indwelling of the Spirit, part I

On Monday, September 23, we'll continue our Son Rise Morning Show series on Newman and the Fathers of the Church. In this episode, we'll take a look at another of the lessons Newman learned by reading the Greek Fathers of the Church at my usual time, about 6:50 a.m. Central DST/7:50 a.m. Eastern DST. Please listen live here or on the podcast later.

The late Father Ian Ker edited Selected Sermons by Newman for the Paulist Press "Classics of Western Spirituality" series. In the section of his Introduction titled "The Influence of the Greek Fathers", Father Ker highlights the impact they had on Newman's thought as demonstrated by excerpts from the Parochial and Plain Sermons and other works. 

The first two areas we looked at were 1. The Incarnation and 2. The Resurrection and Pentecost.

The third area he identifies is Newman's emphasis on the Indwelling of the Spirit. 

We'll treat this topic in two episodes: the first focused on what Newman learned from the Greek Fathers about the Indwelling of the Spirit and the second (on September 30) on what this meant for his understanding of the doctrine of Justification.

Father Ker states:

Newman had discovered for himself in the New Testament and the Fathers the great forgotten doctrine of the indwelling in the soul of the Holy Spirit, and through the Spirit of the Father and the Son as well . . . (p. 34)

and cites PPS "The Communion of Saints":

{168}IT was the great promise of the Gospel, that the Lord of all, who had hitherto manifested himself externally to His servants, should take up His abode in their hearts. This, as you must recollect, is frequently the language of the Prophets; and it was the language of our Saviour when He came on earth: "I will love him," He says, speaking of those who love and obey Him, "and will manifest Myself to him ... We will come unto him, and make our abode with him." [John xiv. 21, 23.] Though He had come in our flesh, so as to be seen and handled, even this was not enough. Still He was external and separate; but after His ascension He descended again by and in His Spirit, and then at length the promise was fulfilled.

There must indeed be a union between all creatures and their Almighty Creator even for their very existence; for it is said, "In Him we live, and move, and {169} have our being;" and in one of the Psalms, "When Thou lettest Thy breath go forth, they shall be made." [Psalm civ. 30.] But far higher, more intimate, and more sacred is the indwelling of God in the hearts of His elect people;—so intimate, that compared with it, He may well be said not to inhabit other men at all; His presence being specified as the characteristic privilege of His own redeemed servants.

In one of Newman's Sermons on Subjects of the Day (another Anglican collection) on "Christian Nobleness" he describes again the effects of the Ascension and Pentecost on the Church as Jesus has returned

to His redeemed in the power of the Spirit, with a Presence more pervading because more intimate, and more real because more hidden. And as the manner of His coming was new, so was His gift. It was peace, but a new peace, "not as the world giveth;" not the exultation of the young, light-hearted, and simple, easily created, easily lost: but a serious, sober, lasting comfort, full of reverence, deep in contemplation.

Ker comments that Newman considers the true sign of a Christian is her awareness of this Presence, as it "should be at the heart of [her] moral and spiritual life". Without this Presence, "human life in its fullness is impossible . . ." (p 35), for without Christ in the shrine of our hearts we have "a self where God is not":

a home within [us] which is not a temple, a chamber which is not a confessional, a tribunal without a judge, a throne without a king;—that self may be king and judge; and that the Creator may rather be dealt with and approached as though a second party, instead of His being that true and better self of which self itself should be but an instrument and minister. ("Sincerity and Hypocrisy" p. 226)

Before mentioning tribunal and judge, Newman already spoke of the indwelling of the Spirit in the Christian's "innermost heart, or in his conscience"--which tempts me to discussing the connections between this theme and Newman's excellent statements about the formation, authority, and centrality of Conscience--but I have resisted that temptation (almost)! 

Nevertheless, mention of the heart recalls Newman's motto as Cardinal, "Cor ad Cor Loquitor" (Heart Speaks to Heart), and Ker concludes this part of his discussion of the "Indwelling of the Spirit" in the Christian heart with an excerpt from what he calls a "remarkable sermon", "The Thought of God, the Stay of the Soul" as Newman "makes the heart the focal point of human life and argues that only a personal God can fulfil its longings" and warns that "Human affection and love can only center the heart on what is 'perishable'" because:

Life passes, riches fly away, popularity is fickle, the senses decay, the world changes, friends die. One alone is constant; One alone is true to us; One alone can be true; One alone can be all things to us; One alone can supply our needs; One alone can train us up to our full perfection; One alone can give a meaning to our complex and intricate nature; One alone can give us tune and harmony; One alone can form and possess us.*

Quoting yet another PPS, "The Law of the Spirit", Ker states that Newman insists we were completely redeemed "only when the 'dreadful reality' of original sin was overtaken by a 'new righteousness,' a 'real righteousness' which 'comes from the Holy and Divine Spirit,' so that our 'works, done in the Spirit of Christ'", done out of obedience are hallowed and made holy. (p. 36)

Then Father Ker turns to how this doctrine of the Indwelling of the Spirit helped Newman as an Anglican see the contrast between an Evangelical theory of Justification and the Catholic Christian view of Deification or Divinisation as taught by the Greek or Eastern Fathers of the Church. That's argument we'll trace on the last Monday in September.

Saint John Henry Newman, pray for us!

*See Gaudium et Spes, paragraph 22:

22. The truth is that only in the mystery of the incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light. For Adam, the first man, was a figure of Him Who was to come,(20) namely Christ the Lord. Christ, the final Adam, by the revelation of the mystery of the Father and His love, fully reveals man to man himself and makes his supreme calling clear.

Book Review: Dermot Fenlon's Study of Cardinal Pole and the Reformation

This book has been a challenge and a delight to read. A challenge because of the very careful research and scholarship Fenlon conducted requiring careful reading and attention, and a delight because he was a wonderful writer, thus making it a compelling read. As an example of the latter, here is his opening description of Reginald Pole's eventful life in the Preface:

Reginald Pole is a figure who slips into two overlapping historical perspectives. The first opens upon the history of Tudor England, the second upon that of the European Counter Reformation. In England, Henry VIII initiated two conflicting movements in the religious life of his country. The first began with his book on the sacraments and his attack on the Reformation, in the service of which he enlisted More and Fisher. The second began with his repudiation of papal jurisdiction, in the course of which he executed, among others, More and Fisher. The protagonists of the first movement became the victims of the second: they found a hagiographer in Reginald Pole. . . . (ix)

I could go to second the second paragraph of that Preface, but I think you get the idea of Fenlon's concision and balance in composition.

Several years ago, I listened to and commented upon a lecture by Eamon Duffy on Reginald Cardinal Pole in which Duffy addressed the need for a new biography of Pole (which this book is not: neither new nor a biography), in spite of Thomas F. Mayer's Reginald Pole: Prince and Prophet, recently published by Cambridge University Press in 2000 and available in paperback. In my 2019 post, I asked:

So why does Duffy want a new biography--or perhaps one that's more accessible (price!)--than this recent effort?

Duffy's main issue is that Mayer has no sympathy for his subject: he did not like Reginald Cardinal Pole and Duffy says it shows: in fact, Duffy states, Mayer "loathed Pole"! Duffy also cites Mayer's entry for Pole in the new Dictionary of National Biography, noting the same problem.

Duffy believes that Reginald Pole was "a holy man; a troubled man" and that Mayer judges him too harshly. Mayer thought he was a hypocrite and a sham! Duffy opines that Mayer's biography of Pole is "dense" and "elusive" . . . 

The reason I bring this point up is that Fenlon is sympathetic to Pole and his circumstances. He does acknowledge Pole's reticence and reserve, his taciturnity and the silence that seemed to indicate his consent to what others were saying, but Fenlon appreciates Pole's situation. He notes that reserve and seeming compliance with Henry VIII's Great Matter, when Pole was asked to help find support for Henry's point of view and finally asked, like More, to be exempted from this process on the grounds of conscience. Finally, he had to respond after the executions of More and Fisher, to what Henry VIII had done to the Unity of Church. His family was in danger after he wrote that letter to Henry, but so was Pole, even though he was on the Continent. The same situation--and response from Pole--occurs when he is asked to help lead the Council of Trent while he holds a view of personal Justification and Salvation that is similar to Martin Luther's at the same that he wants to maintain the Unity of Church and his own unity with the Church in all (other) ways. He stays silent until he has to speak.

Fenlon carefully guides the reader through the Italian and Roman landscape of the Reformation era (responding to calls for curial and Church reform and examining Lutheran objections) and the Counter-Reformation era (after it was clear to Pole and others that reunion with the Lutheran and Calvinist (etc) dissenters was impossible. Then Pole assents to the Catholic doctrine of Justification as defined by the Council of Trent. 

As I read Fenlon's recounting of this long crisis in Pole's life, I thought of Philip Hughes's description of Pole's character in Rome and the Counter-Reformation in England:

Hughes demonstrates that for all [Pole's] knowledge and love of Jesus and His Church, he lacked "irascible passion"; he was too ready to be a victim--and that he had "a temperament that instinctively turned from the hard, unpleasant realities of a problem to the ideal way in which it ought to be solved." (p. 43) Although Pole was a man of action and ready to promote reform and renewal, Hughes claims that he lacked audacity: he was not bold and he could not be stirred to righteous anger. Therefore, he wasn't able to take crucial action in a crisis. 

If Pole was "too ready to be a victim" he certainly became a victim of Pope Paul IV, the former Cardinal Carafa. On page 249 Fenlon describes the future pope's tendency to suspicion:

Suspicion, it would seem, was endemic to Carafa's mind. It could be forgotten for a while in a violent upsurge of emotional generosity: but under impulse it would start smoldering again. His temperament was absolute: equivocation seemed to him the mark of treachery.

Fenlon notes that as a Cardinal, Carafa could be persuaded to calm down and reconsider his suspicion of another. But as pope, "charged with the responsibility of protecting Christendom" (pp. 249-250), he could not be moved. Fortunately for Pole, neither could Queen Mary I, who refused to let Pole return to Rome to face the Inquisition, so that he remained her Archbishop of Canterbury, trying to re-establish Catholicism in England.

A most rewarding read; of course I bought my copy from a second-hand bookseller. It came to me unmarked and pristine. I've made my usual notations and the book kind of curled on its spine. I'm searching for a copy of Fenlon's paper, "The Counter Reformation and the Realisation of 'Utopia'" in Historical Studies: Papers Read in the Ninth Conference of Irish Historians, ed. J. Barry, 9 (Dublin, 1973).

Vittoria Colonna and Pole's "Spirituali" after Trent

I've nearly finished reading Father Dermot Fenlon's book about Reginald Cardinal Pole, the Lutheran doctrine of Justification, the Council of Trent, and the Counter-Reformation in Italy (and in England, to a lesser extent). One figure among the spirituali Cardinal Pole gathered around him in Viterbo is Vittoria Colonna, who died on February 25, 1547. According to the old Catholic Encyclopedia:

She was the daughter of Fabrizio Colonna, lord of various Roman fiefs and grand constable of Naples. Her mother, Agnese da Montefeltro, was a daughter of Federigo da Montefeltro, first Duke of Urbino. In 1509 Vittorio was married to Ferrante Francesco d'Avalos, Marquis of Pescara, a Neapolitan nobleman of Spanish origin, who was one of the chief generals of the Emperor Charles V. Pescara's military career culminated in the victory of Pavia (24 February, 1525), after which he became involved in Morone's conspiracy for the liberation of Italy, and was tempted from his allegiance to the emperor by the offer of the crown of Naples. Vittoria earnestly dissuaded him from this scheme, declaring (as her cousin, Cardinal Pompeo Colonna, tells us) that she "preferred to die the wife of a most brave marquis and a most upright general, than to live the consort of a king dishonoured with any stain of infamy". Pescara died in the following November, leaving his young heir and cousin, Alfonso d'Avalos, Marchese del Vasto, under Vittorio's care.

Vittoria henceforth devoted herself entirely to religion and literature. We find her usually in various monasteries, at Rome, Viterbo, and elsewhere, living in conventual simplicity, the centre of all that was noblest in the intellectual and spiritual life of the times. She had a peculiar genius for friendship, and the wonderful spiritual tie that united her to Michelangelo Buonarroti made the romance of that great artist's life. Pietro Bembo, the literary dictator of the age, was among her most fervent admirers. She was closely in touch with Ghiberti, Contarini, Giovanni Morone, and all that group of men and women who were working for the reformation of the Church from within. For a while she had been drawn into the controversy concerning justification by faith, but was kept within the limits of orthodoxy by the influence of the beloved friend of her last years, Cardinal Reginald Pole, to whom she declared she owed her salvation. Her last wish was to be buried among the nuns of S. Anna de' Funari at Rome; but it is doubtful whether her body ultimately rested there, or was removed to the side of her husband at San Domenico in Naples.

She wrote many Petrarchan sonnets to Michelangelo on religious themes; here are two "Recomposed by Anna Key" on Dappled Things, and you may find a translation of a poem he wrote to her on this page ("XII/ To Vittoria Colonna/A Matchless Courtesy)

Here's another biographical source, focused on her poetry.

In Father Dermot Fenlon's Heresy and Obedience in Tridentine Italy: Cardinal Pole and the Counter Reformation, Vittoria Colonna appears last in Chapter 13, "The Tridentine decree and the end of the Viterbo circle", pages 213-217. Fenlon describes how she wanted to help protect Alvise Priuli so he could peacefully achieve "simple acquiescence in the doctrine [of Justification] put forward at the Council" and remain in the Church, as she had. On page 215, he comments that "With her death, the Viterbo circle came to an end". In later chapters, the effect of her death on Cardinal Pole's last years is mentioned, but her efforts to help Priuli is her last dated correspondence.

Image Credit (public domain): Sebastiano del Piombo - Vittoria Colonna (?)

Pole and Pate in Tridentine Italy on the Doctrine of Justification

As I'm reading Father Dermot Fenlon's Heresy and Obedience in Tridentine Italy: Cardinal Pole and the Counter Reformation, I just read about one Richard Pate, the Bishop of Worcester appointed by Pope Paul III in 1541 after Henry VIII dismissed the incumbent Italian bishop, Cardinal Jerome Ghinucci in 1535 (the Pope was acting as if nothing had changed!). Bishop Richard Pate would not really take up his see until Queen Mary I came to the throne and was one of the co-consecrators of of Reginald Cardinal Pole in 1556 as Archbishop of Canterbury.

Like many during Henry VIII's reign, and beyond, he had an interesting career. According to the old Dictionary of National Biography (published 1885-1900), he had one great advantage: one of his uncles was Bishop John Longland of Lincoln, his mother's brother, as he was the:

son of John Pate by Elinor, sister of John Longland [q. v.], bishop of Lincoln, was born in Oxfordshire, probably at Henley-on-Thames, and was admitted on 1 June 1522 a scholar of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, whence he graduated B.A. on 15 Dec. 1523, according to Wood (Fasti, ed. Bliss, i. 63). This degree having been completed by determination, he went to Paris, and there graduated M.A. On 4 June 1523 he was collated by his uncle to the prebend of Centum Solidorum in the church of Lincoln, and he resigned it for that of Cropredy in 1525. He appears to have resided for some time at Bruges, as John Ludovicus Vivès, writing from that city on 8 July 1524 to Bishop Longland, the king's confessor, says: ‘Richard Pate, your sister's son, and Antony Barcher, your dependant, are wonderfully studious’ (Brewer, Letters and Papers of Henry VIII, vol. iv. pt. i. p. 203). In 1526 he was made archdeacon of Worcester. On 11 March 1526–7 he had the stall of Sanctæ Crucis, alias Spaldwick, in the church of Lincoln, and on 22 June 1528 the stall of Sutton cum Buckingham in the same church. On this latter date he was also made archdeacon of Lincoln upon the death of William Smith, doctor of decrees. . . .

He served Henry VIII as Ambassador to the Court of the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, and heard Katherine of Aragon's nephew express his complaints about "the course adopted by the king of England, and energetically defended his own action on behalf of his aunt, Catherine of Arragon (sic). Subsequently he accompanied the emperor to the Low Countries."

Peter Marshall, in Religious Identities in Henry VIII's England, according to Wikipedia notes that Pate in 1537 [perhaps influenced the Emperor?] ". . . was removed from that position, after he had advocated for the legitimate status of Princess Mary; but he was reinstated in 1540.[2]" He also notes that that Pate was thought lukewarm toward the king's marital matters, and was recalled to England soon after that reinstatement (p. 235). But he stayed on the Continent and went to Rome, where he was named the Bishop of Worcester as noted above. On page 238 of the same volume, Marshall notes that Pate and his chaplain, Seth Holland, were attainted as traitors by Parliament in 1542.

As Pope Paul III's Bishop of Worcester, Richard Pate attended the Council of Trent. When Reginald Cardinal Pole left the first session of the Council of Trent because of illness, Pate remained as one of the spirituali of Pole's community, and he argued for a more Lutheran doctrine of Justification. (Chapter 9. The 'spirituali' at Trent)

Fenlon states on page 149 that on 9 July 1546 Pate argued "'faith alone' was the instrument of justification, while seeming to imply as well, that good works performed after justification were not meritorious, although they remained necessary as being in accordance with the will of God." Later that month, on 20 July, Pate supported the statement that "justice increased to the extent faith increased; good works were the fruit of justification, and a sign to man that his salvation was assured." (pp. 149-150) Fenlon also comments that Pate was "significantly more opposed to the doctrine [on Justification] was about to define . . . [than] any other prelate present at Trent" (p. 150), and after a detailed survey of Pate's educational, clerical, and diplomatic career (pp. 149 to 160) concludes that Pate "was convinced of Luther's orthodoxy on the fundamental question of salvation". (p. 150).

How Pole and Pate will respond to the Doctrine of Justification as defined by the Council of Trent, I have yet to find out. This is a post in medias res. The next chapter is 10. Pole's Protest!

The Dictionary of National Biography continues his life story:

Pate attended the council of Trent as bishop of Worcester, his first appearance there being in the session which opened on 21 April 1547. He was also present at the sittings of the council in September 1549 and in 1551. He remained in banishment during the reign of Edward VI. In 1542 he had been attainted of high treason, whereupon his archdeaconry was bestowed on George Heneage, and his prebend of Eastharptre in the church of Wells on Dr. John Heryng.

On the accession of Queen Mary he returned to this country. His attainder was reversed, and on 5 March 1554–5 he obtained possession of the temporalities of the see of Worcester (Rymer, Fœdera, xv. 415). . . .

Historian Jack Scarisbrick describes how Pate finally took up the see of Worcester in this 2019 Catholic Herald article:

. . . Worcester was very complicated. For a while in 1554 there were four people with the title of bishop: the long-since-resigned Hugh Latimer; his successor Thomas Heath, future archbishop of York, who was deprived of his see in 1551 by the Protestant regime and replaced by one Thomas Hooper (who was eventually burnt, along with Latimer and Cranmer).

Heath was restored to Worcester by Mary – only to be soon translated to York, thus making way for Pate – and enabling the latter at last to take up residence in the see of which he had been pastor in absentia for 13 years.

The Dictionary of National Biography entry concludes:

Queen Elizabeth deprived him of the temporalities in June 1559, and cast him into prison. He was in the Tower of London on 12 Feb. 1561–2, when he made his will, which has been printed by Brady. On regaining his liberty he withdrew to Louvain, where he died on 5 Oct. 1565. Mass is still said for him every year at the English College, Rome, on the anniversary of his death. 

One of the figures in Holbein's celebrated picture of ‘The Ambassadors,’ now in the National Gallery, is believed to represent Pate (Times, 8 Dec. 1891).

I wonder if that annual Mass is still celebrated at the VEC in Rome? 

The identity of the figures in Holbein's The Ambassadors I think is settled now (and one of them is not Pate!) according to The National Gallery in London.

Next Week: The First Annual Florovsky Week

Eighth Day Institute will host its first annual Florovsky Week:

Please join us for the inaugural Florovsky Week

Honoring Fr. Georges Florovsky with a week of prayer, papers, iconography workshop, fellowship, 

a festal banquet with inaugural Florovsky Lecture & plenary dialogues on

THE PATRISTIC VIEW OF SALVATION

​Justification by Faith Alone?

Fr. Georges Florovsky, a 20th century Russian Orthodox priest, tirelessly insisted on a return to the common heritage of all Christians in the first 1000 years of the Church's history as a path to recovering a common language for progress toward overcoming the divisions of Christendom. In his honor, this week is organized to promote such a return to the sources for Christian unity.

The three main speakers, each representing a different branch of Christianity, are:

HANS BOERSMA - Protestant

J. I. Packer Professor of Theology at Regent College

Author of many books, including Violence, Hospitality and the Cross: Reappropriating the Atonement Tradition 

KENNETH HOWELL - Catholic

Academic Director of the Eucharist Project

President of the Pontifical Studies Foundation

BRADLEY NASSIF - Orthodox

Professor of Biblical and Theological Studies at North Park University

"Leading academic expert on Evangelical-Orthodox dialogue."
~New York Times

The schedule is here. From Tuesday evening through Friday, the event will be held at Newman University. On Saturday, the presentations will be held at St. George's Orthodox Cathedral.

I'll be making a presentation the first afternoon:

3:30 p.m. Wednesday, July 11, 2018

Group 1-Eck 124 (on the campus of Newman University)

~Malcolm Harris- Good Pope John’s (Not So) Secret Agenda to Reunite Christianity

~Stephanie Mann-Reformation and Counter-Reformation: The Catholic Mission in England and Why it Failed

~Angie Gumm-Unwitting Ecumenicalism: Annum Sacrum and Pope Leo XIII's Consecration of the World to the Sacred Heart of Jesus

Reformation and Counter-Reformation: The Catholic Mission in England and Why it Failed

After the theological ideas of Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other Protestant Reformers spread on the Continent and in the British Isles, the Latin Rite Catholic Church mounted a Counter-Reformation campaign. Religious orders like the Society of Jesus (the Jesuits) and the Capuchins (a Franciscan order) succeeded—as even James R. Payton, Jr, recognized in Getting the Reformation Wrong: Correcting Some Misunderstandings (IVP Academic: 2010)—in taking back some territory and bringing back some Protestant converts to the Catholic Church. In one country, however, all the efforts and sacrifices of clerical and lay martyrs seemed to have failed. I propose to discuss why Catholics, in spite of (and sometimes because of) tremendous plans, sacrifices and heroism, failed in their mission even to obtain freedom of worship in their native land throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The presentation will include stories of those martyred saints who died in that failed mission and analysis of the tangle of religion and politics during the long Reformation era.