Reform statt Reformation: Die Kirchenpolitik Herzog Georgs von Sachsen, 1488–1525 by Christoph Volkmar (review)

Abstract

Reviewed by: Reform statt Reformation: Die Kirchenpolitik Herzog Georgs von Sachsen, 1488–1525 by Christoph Volkmar Ralph Keen Reform statt Reformation: Die Kirchenpolitik Herzog Georgs von Sachsen, 1488–1525. By Christoph Volkmar. [Spätmittelalter, Humanismus, Reformation, 41.] (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. 2008. Pp. xiv, 701. €119,00. ISBN 978-3-16-149409-3.) Long considered one of the most steadfast magisterial opponents of the Reformation, Duke George of Saxony has been wrongly identified with resistance to every kind of reform, according to Christoph Volkmar’s scrupulously detailed revision of a Leipzig dissertation directed by Enno Bünz. Countering a century-old view originating with the work of Felician Gess, Volkmar presents the work of Duke George as a lifelong program of religious reform, almost to the point of subordinating secular affairs to ecclesiastical ones. The two goals of Volkmar’s study are, first, to examine the influence that territorial rulers held over the churches in their jurisdictions before the Reformation, and second, to see the extent to which George used this power against the Reformation while his peers were exercising it in favor of evangelical reform. In Volkmar’s reconstruction of his diplomatic career before the outbreak of the Reformation, George was highly committed to improving the quality of piety in his territory and active in his support of the hierarchy. Dedicated from an early age to religious matters, George was actively involved in church reform from the beginning of his ducal reign onward. Aspects of his reformist priorities included supporting the canonization of St. Benno of Meissen and arbitrating a dispute over a Marian pilgrimage in Rötha near Leipzig, in both cases exercising patronage rights inherent in his position but, in Volkmar’s view, seldom previously invoked. The bulk of the monograph establishes, on the basis of scrupulous investigation of mostly unpublished sources, that a reform agenda was well underway before the outbreak of disruptions in Ernestine Saxony. Volkmar highlights the extent to which ducal diplomacy functioned as an alliance with the episcopal hierarchy in Dresden. The George who emerges is something of a model of Catholic magisterial reform, addressing the needs of the Church as part of his duty as a ruler. Volkmar’s revision provides a context for George’s opposition to Protestantism—according to Volkmar’s interpretation, the necessary reforms were already well underway and likely to have been impeded by interference from outside the territory. [End Page 148] Volkmar sets the ecclesiastical policy of George in a new perspective, describing an administration focused on church reform through collaboration with the hierarchy of the region. The canonization of Benno of Meissen and the remodeling of St. Anne’s Church were components of an agenda that, we are led to assume, would only have been derailed by influence from Wittenberg. As a solid foundation for such collaboration, the Albertine court established new channels of communication with the bishop of Meissen, an intentionally modern (for its time) model for ecclesiastical diplomacy in the decades to follow. Researchers will have to return to the sources to judge whether the recalcitrant George is actually a construction of confessional historians favorable to the Reformers and scornful of any and all forms of opposition to them. The dominant characterization of George as reactionary will no doubt continue within the confessional historiography in which individuals are assigned larger-than-life roles. Possibly the real George will be found between the extremes of reactionary and reformist. But all specialists in early-modern Catholicism will be grateful for an examination as detailed and well organized as the one we have here. Ralph Keen University of Iowa Copyright © 2012 The Catholic University of America Press