Review

Reviewed Work(s): Finding the Middle Way: The Utraquists' Liberal Challenge to Rome and
Luther by Zdeněk V. David
Review by: Thomas A. Fudge
Source: The Catholic Historical Review, Vol. 90, No. 4 (Oct., 2004), pp. 782-784
Published by: Catholic University of America Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25026737
Accessed: 11-02-2019 15:26 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Catholic University of America Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The Catholic Historical Review

This content downloaded from 147.231.59.70 on Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:26:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 782 BOOK REVIEWS

dence through a particular lens of her particular prejudice and theoretical dis
position. In other words, she sees what she wants to see.

For example, in her treatment of "The Nativity with Annunciation to Shep

herds" by Dosso she states,". . . Dosso's figure of the saint [Joseph] is visually
emphasized through its reverberations with the figure of God the Father above.
These are set in motion by the similarities in the two figures' physiognomies
and in the direction of their postures and heads" (p. 46). This particular inter
pretation would be stronger if other figures in the painting did not also have
similar physiognomies, postures, and even haircuts and beards. One wonders if
Dr. Wilson might not be reading a bit too much into an artist's repetitive stylized
technique.
In another instance Dr. Wilson interprets the staff placed between the legs of
St. Joseph as,"... a visual metaphor for Joseph's surrogate paternity .. "(p. 32).
She repeats this interpretation several times in the text neglecting the fact that
an equally valid reading of this imagery could be one emphasizing his biologi
cal paternity, if the staff is considered in a generative way. This interpretation
would, of course, be heretical, yet nevertheless possible.

Dr. Wilson's work is important, interesting and well documented. If she had
concentrated on the more obvious works in which Joseph is treated as a single
saint and more iconically, she could have demonstrated her ideas just as force
fully and validly. However, she chose also to consider visual representations of
Joseph in narrative scenes that allow for more ambiguity and variety of inter
pretation as to the role and nature of the saint in the visual hagiography.

John Tokaz, O.F.M.Cap.

St. Joseph's College
Standish, Maine

Finding the Middle Way: The Utraquists' Liberal Challenge to Rome and
Luther. By Zden?k V David. (Washington, D.C: Woodrow Wilson Center
Press. Order from The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. 2003. Pp.
xxiii, 579. $65.00.)

Hussite religion (1500-1621) has often been ignored. This book changes that.
Ten years of dedicated research have yielded this impressive study adding con
siderably to knowledge of Central European religious history. The achievements
of Bohemian Christianity are vigorously underscored. Utilizing the comparative
paradigm of the post-Reformation Church of England, a thorough revisionist
study emerges. Attempting to forge a path between Roman and Reformation
Churches, David argues that Jan Hus and Hussitism were not Protestant. The
corollary?Hussite religion eventually became Roman Catholic?is likewise chal
lenged. I find those arguments refreshing. The book expertly charts the unique
development of Utraquist Christianity.

This content downloaded from 147.231.59.70 on Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:26:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 BOOK REVIEWS 783

Some assertions are problematic. Claiming virtually all Bohemia was Hussite
is exaggeration. Distinctions between T?borites as heretics and "Utraquists"
(David's term of choice) as mere schismatics is artificial. I do not accept that the
term "Hussite" is improper. Jan Hus was a heretic. It is misleading to suggest that
Paul De Vooght virtually vindicated Hus. Whatever De Vooght's conclusions en
tailed, he regarded Hus as heretical. Francis Oakley's suggestion that Hus was al
most orthodox is meaningless. A theological hair's breadth separated Francis of
Assisi and Valdes, yet the former is a saint, the latter an arch-heretic. Being a lit
tle heretical is like being a little pregnant. John Paul II did not recently?and
rightly so?lift the stigma of heresy from Hus. David seems undisturbed that his
select group of Hussites desired episcopal consecration for their priests but
only from bishops in communion with Rome despite the fact that the Roman
Church considered Hussites heretical and the Hussite movement going back to
Jakoubek of Stribro regarded Rome similarly. Bishops ordaining Hussites were
themselves suspect. David suggests the ambiguity is not problematic.

Considerable space is devoted to Luther without any clear understanding of

what Luther meant by foith (sola fide) either on the part of the Utraquist the
ologians David champions or of David himself. The same might be said for the
red herring of sola scriptura. In my opinion, the theological acumen of Bile
jovsky and Bydzovsky, David's heros, put together would scarcely fill a cup
when set next to Martin Luther. David argues that papal judgment cannot be ad
mitted in governance while papal sacerdotal power remained indispensable.
While theologically popes were necessary, they could not be trusted with ad
ministrative and judicial powers. This does not prevent the conclusion that Utra
quists needed no authentication from Rome. Curiously, they sought it diligently
nonetheless. This clashes with David's repeated declarations that Utraquists
were secure in their own identity.

Early modern Utraquist religion lacked sufficient inner vitality?unlike either

Luther or the Roman Church?to ultimately flourish. T?borite religion in the
hands of David fells well outside the purview of the Bohemian Reformation
properly speaking. The assumption is fatal. Introducing ideas like "orthodox
Utraquism," "sound Utraquist tradition," "traditional Bohemian piety," and "tradi
tional Bohemian Utraquism" and the assumption that good Utraquists must be
lieve in apostolic succession not only create false distinctions, they reveal more
about authorial perspective than realities of Czech religious practice. This re
stricts David from fulfilling his intention of investigating the subject "in a man
ner as free as much as possible from preconceived notions ."Further, Tridentine
theology is rejected as authentic Catholicism.

Playing the liturgical card, David argues liturgy indicates the iceberg tip of
faith. The claim is ambitious. Contrary evidence abounds indicating popular re
ligion in this period was often much removed from official religion. Ecclesiastical
practice sometimes had little relevance for popular beliefs structures. Lutheran
pastors engaging in magical rituals to stimulate crop growth is one example.
Later, the argument emerges that grassroots reality did not correspond with

This content downloaded from 147.231.59.70 on Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:26:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
784 BOOK REVIEWS

official declarations. It appears that David argues absence of evidence is not ev

idence of absence. In handling evidentiary material, David reads between the
lines and even against the grain which he openly advocates. It is challenging to
agree that the "four articles of Prague" were procedural, not doctrinal.

Palacky judged the Utraquist middle way irrelevant and so it was, eventually,
though David makes a herculean effort to demonstrate the converse. He high
lights the dysfunctional character of Czech nobles and consequential incompe
tence. I suggest that this critique must be applied to Utraquist religion and its
theologians as well. What David ruefully calls the "unhappy and even perverse
outcome" of Hussitism could be anticipated. To postulate, as David does, that
events such as Vatican Council II, were potentially direct outcomes of Utraquism
is difficult.

These criticisms are severe but most reservations are embedded early in the
book. Many are rooted in fundamental differences of interpretation I have with
the author on the broader subject of Hussite Bohemia. The second half is more
compelling. Zden?k David is an excellent and insightful historian and his book
a worthy contribution, based upon sound acquaintance with the sources, lav
ishly documented, filling an important gap in the religious historiography of
Central Europe. It achieves notable distinction. Three-quarters of the text ap
peared previously in various journals, but this compilation is welcomed.lt stands
without antecedent or peer.
Thomas A. Fudge
University of Canterbury
Christchurch, New Zealand

Early Modern European

Religion and Superstition in Reformation Europe. Edited by Helen Parish and
William G. Naphy. (Manchester and New York: Manchester University
Press. 2002. Pp. x, 239. $24.95.)

This collection of nine essays purports to offer a discussion of "superstition,"

both as a historiographical concept and as a matter of religious debate in the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. While one might presume such a loaded
term to be a historiographical dead horse, Parish and Naphy warn against its lin
gering power. Unfortunately, their introduction confuses as much as it clarifies;
they fail to supply solid conceptual background such as one might gain from
Dieter Harmening's Superstitio. Moreover, the essays gathered here have no
common theme beyond a concern with Reformation issues; they do not mean
ingfully explore the scope and significance of this general concept among early
modern thinkers and polemicists. Basic questions regarding links between Re
formation attacks on "superstition" and emerging Enlightenment attitudes re
main unraised. Hence despite scattered points of value, the volume as a whole
is disappointing.

This content downloaded from 147.231.59.70 on Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:26:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms