Reframing Reformation: Understanding Religious Difference in Early Modern Europe ed. by Nicholas Terpstra

Abstract

Reviewed by: Reframing Reformation: Understanding Religious Difference in Early Modern Europe ed. by Nicholas Terpstra Susan Mobley Reframing Reformation: Understanding Religious Difference in Early Modern Europe. Edited by Nicholas Terpstra. Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2020. 334 pp. This is a collection of twelve essays, organized into three thematic sections. It opens with an essay by the editor that lays out the framework of the volume: to survey various instances of religious difference and, by drawing upon modern cultural and social research, to broaden the understanding of what the Reformation was and how it impacted people of the Early Modern era. [End Page 201] The first section, "Framing Difference," includes four chapters that explore ways in which Europeans identified and negotiated religious differences not only within Christianity, but also between Christianity and other religions. Three authors examine how polemics (in oral, print, and visual form) were used to diffuse or to define religious difference, while another author examines the impact of global Catholicism on definitions of sainthood. The second section, "Mobilizing Difference," contains three essays that examine examples of how Europeans utilized or emphasized religious and/or cultural differences to promote the conversion of people to Christianity (for example, in Portugal and New Spain) or to advance programs of moral and religious reform within Europe. The third section, "Transcending Difference," includes four chapters that reflect upon how particular individuals (such as Guillaume Postel) or religious groups (such as the Quakers) sought to bridge gaps between Christians of various confessional identities or to find common ground with peoples of different cultures and religions (like the New England Puritans). The volume is visually appealing and nicely organized. The essays in each section, while addressing often very disparate topics, relate directly to the stated theme and provide diverse reflections on the broader impact of the Reformation, as defined by Terpstra in the first essay and reiterated by several contributors, and explore consequences and experiences of religious "difference" during the Early Modern era. Works cited are listed at the conclusion of each article, but no distinction is made between primary sources and secondary works. All printed works are lumped together under the category "Printed Sources." This makes it challenging for readers specifically searching for primary sources. In the essay by Marvin Lee Anderson, it is sometimes unclear when the author is referencing evidence or contemporary scholarship. For example, Anderson includes quotations from several books by a contemporary scholar, without always clearly distinguishing when a quotation comes from Jakob Boehme, the 17th-century thinker featured in his essay (such as p. 291 n. 34, 292 n. 39) or instead when it represents the words of the modern scholar being referenced (such as p. 295 n. 50). [End Page 202] Particularly during this present moment when Reformation positions at institutions of higher education are steadily decreasing, any effort to explore new approaches to the study of the Reformation era in order to demonstrate its staggering complexity and significance is most appreciated. However, there is a danger of overextending the term "Reformation" so that it loses all meaning. If the objective of this collection is to "move beyond the magisterial mainstream to see what reform looked like on or from the margins" (19), it succeeds. If the objective is to "call into question the iconic historical purview perpetuated by the magisterial and mainstream narrative" (281) and to completely reconceptualize the sixteenth century, this volume is less constructive; substituting the "margins" for the "mainstream" is not necessarily an improvement. These essays might be of interest to readers who specialize in the Early Modern period, but are less approachable for the non-specialist or undergraduate student. Susan Mobley Concordia University Wisconsin Mequon, Wisconsin Copyright © 2022 Johns Hopkins University Press and Lutheran Quarterly, Inc.