2nd International Workshop (October 2011)

Religious Conflict, Religious Concord in Europe and the Mediterranean World

Saturday 29th of October 2011, 09:00-18:40

The University of Tokyo (Hongo Campus), Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia, Second floor, Grand assembly room


08:40-09:00  Reception of participants

09:00-09:10  Introduction by Katsumi Fukasawa (University of Tokyo, leader of the research project)

09:10-10:40  Pilar Jiménez Sanchez (Laboratoire CNRS-UMR 5136 FRAMESPA, Toulouse, France): « Les Cathares dans leur contexte. Pourquoi les bons hommes furent-ils mieux accueillis dans le Sud de la France ? ».
Commented by Tadao Inde (University of the Sacred Heart, Tokyo)

10:40-10:50 Coffee break

10:50-12:20  Alain Tallon (Université de Paris-Sorbonne, France): « Franchir les frontières confessionnelles au XVIe siècle : quelques exemples français tirés de procès d’inquisition italiens ».
Commented by Katsumi Fukasawa

12:20-13:30 Lunch

13:30-15:00 Éric Suire (Université de Bordeaux 3-Michel de Montaigne, France): “Printed religious books in South-West France in the 17th century : a vehicle for denominational tensions ?”.
Commented by Shunsuke Katsuta (Gifu University)

15:00-15:10 Coffee break

15:10-16:40 Taihei Yamamoto (Waseda University, Part-Time Lecturer): “The ‘Family of Love’ in Sixteenth-Century Netherlands: Humanists and the Restoration of the World”.
Commented by Tomoji Odori (Musashi University)

16:40-16:50 Coffee break

16:50-18:20 Hidemitsu Kuroki (Tokyo University of Foreign Studies): “Neither ‘Western’ nor ‘Orthodox’ : Establishing Greek Catholic Identity in the Ottoman Empire and Beyond”.
Commented by Yutaka Miyano (Gifu Shotoku Gakuen University)

18:20-18:40 Discussion and conclusion by Katsumi Fukasawa

19:30- Banquet (Restaurant Capo Pellicano, in Hongo Campus)

Abstracts of Papers

1. Pilar Jiménez Sanchez (Laboratoire CNRS-UMR 5136 FRAMESPA, Toulouse, France): « Les Cathares dans leur contexte. Pourquoi les bons hommes furent-ils mieux accueillis dans le Sud de la France ? » (“Cathars in their context. Why were the ‘good men’ better welcomed in the South of France?”).
In the 1160s in the South of France there appear the followers of a sect the members of which are called “good men” and are protected by the lesser nobility of some castra, such as the knights of Lombers, near Albi. Interrogated and judged as heretics by the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the good men dispute the catholic authority and the efficiency of the sacraments it confers. Thus they question, not only the model of Roman Catholic Church but also that of Christian society that the Roman institution claims to impose after the “Gregorian reform “. On the eve of the Crusade against Albigeois (1209), in the area including between Albi, Toulouse and Carcassonne, the rural and urban elites show hospitality and receptivity to the preaching of the good men. What reasons urge the aristocratic elites to welcome, protect, even embrace the dissidence and who were, in fact, these good men?
As everywhere else in the western Christendom of the 12th century, the affair of heresy in the South of France extends beyond the religious domain. It can be explained only by taking all the factors into account, i.e. political, social, economic and cultural, which participate in the quest for the establishment and the intensification of the princely powers on these territories.

2. Alain Tallon (Université de Paris-Sorbonne, France): « Franchir les frontières confessionnelles au XVIe siècle : quelques exemples français tirés de procès d’inquisition italiens » (“Crossing confessional boundaries in the 16th century: some French examples from Italian inquisitorial trials”).
Even if the jurisdiction of the Roman Inquisition, established in its new form by Pope Paul III in 1542, was not recognised in the French realm, some subjects of the Most Christian King or some Italians established in France were put to trial, some of them by contumacy, but mostly during their stay in Italy. Even if their number is so short that any statistical analysis would be vain, the variety of cases (from courtiers to a beggar, including clerics, soldiers and merchants) and the richness of the source itself, unknown in French historiography, allow us to consider all these cases as a whole to understand some ways of conversion or rather crossing confessional boundaries.
In a convergent way, they help to highlight several factors that explain conversion to the Reformation: anti-clericalism, whose role can not be overestimated, since the hatred of priests is expressed in a massive way, without any restraint; the lack of response to criticisms against the old religion, especially when they are expressed by derision and mockery; the role of the spoken word (discussions, sermons) largely prevailing over the writing; eventually, and above all, the fact that a real alternative to the Roman Church now existed, which was carried out concretely in the form of a visible Church. For many of these converts, contacts with countries where the Reformation had triumphed or simple awareness of their existence have helped the formalization of a latent dissent.
The dogmatic contents of the confessions of the convicts present a great diversity, even though they all enclose the major points of disagreement between the two creeds. It is especially striking, against the general trend of current historiography to emphasize the denial of religious choice, to see that most of the defendants have a clear conscience of breaking with one church and joining another: the irenic “third way”, nicodemism as a religion of individual conscience or even religious tinkering between the various denominations are hardly present and religious consciousness of the confessional identities seems to be very strong.
One last issue arises from these sources, even though they do not suffice to deal with it: convicts reconciled with the Roman church appear to have remained Catholic later, even when they had escaped inquisitorial coercion after their forced return. Historians must wonder, without simplification or anachronism, how these conversions under threat could last. One answer might be that forced conversion is acceptable to those to whom it is imposed, because it brings back to an order that is certainly oppressive, but also reassuring in its oppression itself.

3. Éric Suire (Université de Bordeaux 3-Michel de Montaigne, France): “Printed religious books in South-West France in the 17th century : a vehicle for denominational tensions ?”.
Did printed religious books play a role in conveying denominational identities in South-West France, where illiteracy was dominant? Do the publications which have been preserved enable us to identify two “religions”, and even, two cultures with specific characteristics and which coexist in tolerance, indifference or reciprocal hostility in the 17th century? At this point of our research, we have studied the printed production from twenty towns mainly located in Aquitaine. A printed religious book was defined as “a published text related to religion”. The 338 editions which have been registered represent 53% of the 635 editions made or ordered by the printer-booksellers of the towns chosen. Few ambitious texts can be identified among the texts we have consulted. Their impact was local. Their denominational affiliation was determined from the books’ titles, contents, or authors if they were known. 259 editions have been connected to the Roman Church, against 53 to Reformed Churches. The distribution is uneven, but in terms of relative values, Protestant texts are over-represented. The formal characteristics of the books are actually quite similar apart from a few slight differences; however, the limit between Catholic and Protestant texts is clear. This can be explained by the authors’ personalities, who are not mere believers but mainly militant men of the Church. The production curve shows two clear and distinct waves. Printed religious books gained momentum in the beginning of the century, had their first peak in the early 1620s, before declining progressively until 1660. From this low peak, they experienced a vigorous recovery and reached their best results between 1666 and 1680. Catholic books became dominant in the 1620s, and definitively outpaced their reformed rivals a few years before the Revocation. The Protestants seem to have worn themselves out in an unequal struggle, as the efforts they made regarding controversies suggest. Huguenot books represent almost 36% of the controversial literature published in the twenty towns of the South-West. As the Catholics’ victory became more obvious, a desire for reconciliation appears in our corpus. Controversy has only a marginal place in the second wave of printings which spread through the period 1661-1700: it only represents 8% of the Catholic publishing and 20% of the Protestant publishing. In both Churches, they turn away from the rival religion and focus on internal priorities, pastoral priorities. War apologetics give way to theology, which takes the forms of preaching, exegesis, or even catechism.

4. Taihei Yamamoto (Waseda University, Part-Time Lecturer): “The ‘Family of Love’ in Sixteenth-Century Netherlands: Humanists and the Restoration of the World”.
The “Family of Love” (Hůs-gesinnes der Lieften, Huis der Liefde, Familia Caritatis) was a religious group founded by Hendrik Niclaes in about 1540. The doctrine of this secret society was perhaps one of the most idiosyncratic religious thought even in the 16th century. Just like some revolutionary Anabaptist leaders, Niclaes thought that God sent him to establish the New Jerusalem on the Earth. According to him, one could be unified with God (godded), and of course, he believed that he became one with God. On the other hand, Niclaes did not permit his followers to disobey civil authority, which means that they had to practice a Nicodemic strategy in order to maintain their religious belief. Niclaes’ tendency toward universalism is one of the most outstanding elements in the doctrine of the Family of Love. Niclaes claimed that everyone, including Jews and Muslims, must join the Family, assuring their salvation as long as they obeyed him. In brief, the purpose of Niclaes was to restore oneness with God, bringing back a primordial innocence to the world decayed after the first sin by Adam.
Although the Family of Love was a secret society, it seems that this group attracted many people. Some humanists, such as Justus Lipsius Franciscus Raphelengius, Christophe Plantin and Benito Arias Montano had close contact with the society. Guillaume Postel, the French Orientalist, astronomer, Kabbalist and unorthodox Catholic thinker is also known to have had an interest in the Family of Love. Since Postel had been under house arrest in Paris due to his heretical beliefs since 1566, it was not possible for him to become a member of the Family. Postel also believed that God had given him a special mission just like Niclaes, and identified himself as the Angelic Pope. Based on these facts, many historians consider that his concern with the Familist group was only fleeting.
However, what was it that caused Postel to be interested in the Family of Love in the first place? First, there was similarity between the thoughts of Postel and those of Niclaes. Postel’s thoughts also contain a tendency toward universalism. He stressed that Christianity could be reconciled with other religions, and all people in the world should be united under one unified church. Once this true church had been established, Postel claimed, the world would be restored to its original innocence and he called this process “restitution of all things” or “the restoration of the world”, which resembles Niclaes’ own eschatological vision. Second, he had strong desire to spread his beliefs among those who made contact with him. R. Bainton suggests that he was at least partly successful in dissemination of his ideas in some followers of David Joris. In view of the similarity between Postel’s thoughts and those of Niclaes, no other religious group could have been a better candidate for the seedbed of his ideas than the Family of Love. Considering these facts, it seems that his interest in this society was rather strong at least one time. Postel was not a member of the Family of Love. Yet his idea, “the restoration of the world” created his sympathy for the secret society founded by another “prophet”.

5. Hidemitsu Kuroki (Tokyo University of Foreign Studies): “Neither ‘Western’ nor ‘Orthodox’ : Establishing Greek Catholic Identity in the Ottoman Empire and Beyond”.
The area of “Historic Syria” in the Eastern Mediterranean comprises extremely multifarious religious communities of Muslims, Christians, and Jews. For a period of fourteen centuries, these three monotheistic religions have coexisted in concord and conflict. Prior to eruptions of sectarian violence between Muslims and Christians in the mid-nineteenth century, there was a calm but profound movement of polarization –the Uniate Movement– within Christian communities in the area. This presentation focused on the case of Greek Catholics’ separation from the Greek Orthodox Church by following the locus of two clergies’ activities: Germanos Adam (1725-1809, Archibishop of Aleppo 1777-1809) and his disciple Maksimos Mazlum (1779-1855, Archbishop of Aleppo 1810-15, Patriarch of Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, and all the East 1833-1855).
Through the analysis, I emphasized on the fact that the process of establishing identity consisted of repulsions against many “others” and strategic adaptations to the web of power relationships, both of which were of a historically developed and multilayered nature. This drove the agents’ actions to become highly multifaceted, making them conscious of various actors and powers, both international and local.
We can observe four major axes of opposition against the activities and achievements of Germanos Adam and Maksimos Mazlum, the most fundamental being the Greek Orthodox church, represented by the word Phanariots, the privileged Greek class in Constantinople. Greek Catholics regarded themselves as Arabs who maintained Byzantine church traditions under the patriarchate of Antioch.
The second axis is the Latin missionaries. Despite the propagation of the Catholic faith as the driving force of the Uniate Movement, their intervention into the local Christian society caused a considerable reaction. The archbishop Adam was influenced by Gallicanism, which must have transferred to the patriarch Mazlum. Despite being European Catholics, the idea of decentralization was quite reasonable for those who planned the independence of Greek Catholics within the Ottoman Empire. The Uniate church was still an “Eastern” church, and did not become “Frank.”
The third axis is the Armenian Catholics, from among whom the “Patriarch of all the Catholics in the Ottoman Empire” was elected and under whose administration Greek Catholics were placed in the millet system from 1834 to 1848.
The fourth axis is the Muslims, as in the event of Aleppo in 1850. After the Mazlum’s death, the violence along this axis drastically erupted in Mount Lebanon and Damascus in 1860, which led to the formation of an official sectarian system in Mount Lebanon.
All these axes appeared interchangeably in the whirlwind of international and regional politics, in which the Ottoman central government; the Egyptian government of Muhammad Ali; the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith in Rome; and the diplomatic corps from France, Austria, Britain, Russia, and Prussia, among others, played major roles. Through this dynamic process, the Greek Catholic sect finally achieved its legal status in a plural society, importing the idea of Gallicanism and adapting it to the Ottoman government system. Moreover, throughout this process, Germanos Adam and Maksimos Mazlum manipulated their multi-identity strategically. Mazlum behaved in different ways in relationship to the four axes, and had two nationalities: Ottoman and French. Sectarianism is not a frame given from outside but is created in mutual relationships within a plural society, such as a kaleidoscope, in which many “others” appear and disappear.

Comments on Papers

1. Tadao Inde (University of the Sacred Heart)
Comment on Jimenez Sanchez’s Paper
I would like to look at two topics especially important in the arguments Ms.Jimenez-Sanchez developed in her speech and add my comments.
Firstly, the view that finds the origins of the Catharism in the Manichaeism of the late antiquity, a theory supported by many including contemporaries to recent scholars, is now perfectly denied. Rather, the first idea of this theory came to some churchmen in that period, intellectual bishops and monks who thought the presence of some laymen or clerks not accepting the authority of the Papacy, is a serious threat to the Western Church. We can also add that the appellation “Cathars” was initially applied, in the middle of XIIth century, by the abbot Eckbert to some “sects” he met in Rhineland. And there is actually no evidence confirming common characteristics among them.
Secondly, I found three interesting points in her speech in understanding the“ Cathar-phenomena” in Languedoc.
1) The birth of Cathar dissent was a reaction to the Gregorian Reform. After the beginning of this movement, the Catholic Church definitely assumed itself a unique “Institute” assuring salvation of people’s souls by sacraments, which could be given only by priests rigorously set in their hierarchy. However, notably after 1140, we see many groups emerging here and there in Europe, which, denying the established Church as above, insisted that only they were the true successors of Apostolic Tradition. “Cathars”, “Albigeois”, and “Good Men” were the appellations for the groups in Languedoc. But why did these groups in this region hold a firm anti-Catholic attitude? We know not all the sects in Europe were necessarily so. In Languedoc, the papacy under the Gregorian movement intervened in the reform of local churches more definitely than in other areas. It is because southern France was strategically important region for Rome as a part of vast areas spreading around the Mediterranean Sea.
2) The politics and feudal system in this region also deserve attentions. We would see the “great war” between the count of Toulouse and the count of Barcelona which continued almost through the XIIth century in major parts of Languedoc. This conflict allowed middle and small local seignories to act according to their political opportunism, in which protection (or persecution too) of dissidents was always an option. In addition, the traditional heritage system permitting divisions of estates by sons made it possible for many competing powers to exist side by side and each rival sons held different attitudes towards dissidents .
3) At the last the family relationship in this region was a benefit for the diffusion of Cathar churches. The role of women was unique in the organization; noble women offering aliment to Good Men; devout women living together in a house under the supervision of a Good Man. In the XIIIth century, once the familial network supporting heretic churches completely suppressed by Inquisitions, we can see a paradoxical results; frequent foundations of religious communities of nuns by the Catholic Church. As we can recognize few examples in other areas in this country within this period, there must be some relations between the suppression of heretics and the foundations of nunneries.

2. Katsumi Fukasawa (University of Tokyo)
Comment on Tallon’s Paper
Dr. Alain Tallon analyzed some interesting examples of conversion by an exploration of the inquisitorial sources, conserved in Rome and in Paris, in which he picked up six persons, Italians and Frenchmen, submitted to the court of inquisition.
It is true that the samples are not numerous enough to lead us to a general conclusion, but we can admit the quantity of samples is less important than their quality, when we make approach to the spiritual evolution or inner process of conversion. It is also true that the inquisitorial sources are neither neutral nor objective, as they are inevitably biased and stereotyped. Nonetheless, Dr. Tallon believes it is possible to sketch a typical conversion process through the testimonies of the accused.
He tries firstly to elucidate the mechanism of conversion from Catholicism to Protestantism. The first step consists in “disritualization” or “dissacramentalization” which, going from transgression of the fasting rule to abstention from the sacramental confession, results in general disinterest in Catholic ceremonies. Moreover, a kind of anticlericalism or hatred of the sacerdotal caste may lead to detachment, hesitation or doubt about the traditional religion. Encounter with convinced Protestants or attendance at their preaches invites some people to the second step, that of conversion, reinforced by discovering a organized church, even if this conversion is often less theological than emotional, based less on written texts than on imagery.
However, the threat of inquisitorial condemnation forces most of the accused to come back to the Catholic church, which corresponds to the last step, that of reconversion. It is certain that this return to Catholicism is sometimes calculating or self-interested, but it may not be hyprocritic, insofar as the “forced conversion may well be internalized at the end”, according to the happy expression of Dr. Tallon. All these analyses are interesting and give us new elements for reflection.
I should make nevertheless some reservations about his conclusion concerning denominational breaking. For Dr. Tallon, this breaking is total so as not to leave “neutral” space between the two denominations, because the accused persons try never to show themselves as “non-denominational” Christians, who should be neither Catholics nor Protestants. By emphasizing this point, he intends to criticize the thesis of Thierry Wanegffelen, Ni Rome ni Genève, which attempted to prove the existence of a vast “plain country” of the religious sensibility between the isolated bastions of denominational churches.
My personal opinion is that his criticism is not completely valid, insofar as the spheres of analysis are not exactly the same. One makes approach to the field of conscious and deliberate choice of a faith, while the other tries to penetrate that of rather unconscious and vague sensibility. The former is based on the inquisitorial sources, while the latter explores preferably personal documents, such as memoirs, correspondences, journals, livres de raison, classified under the name of “ego-documents”, now in fashion. It is useful in this regard to remark the same person does not necessarily say the same thing at the inquisitorial court as he says among his friends and relatives. Faced with inquisitors, the accused is obliged to choose, because it is difficult for him to declare that he is neither Catholic nor Protestant, for fear of being considered as the worst of the heretics. However, in an intimate conversation, he can be more freely undecided and fluctuating, especially when he is not entirely satisfied with Catholicism nor Calvinism. In other words, it is not impossible that the two opposite denominations are compatible and even reconciliable in one’s heart of hearts. From this viewpoint, if the forced conversion may sometimes be internalized without crisis of conscience, it is that the existence of a hidden, invisible basis of religiosity enables Christians of the sixteenth century to turn from one church to the other without total break. It is probably on this level of question that Wanegffelen has tried to found his analysis.

3. Shunsuke Katsuta (Gifu University)
Comment on Suire’s Paper
I am impressed with Dr Suire’s paper, which is based on very detailed and careful research. The main subject of the paper is the pattern of publication of religious books in south-western France in the seventeenth century. The paper sheds light on many interesting facts, out of which I would pick up the three following points:
The first is the correspondence, shown in this paper, between the publication pattern of the southwest and that of the whole country. In fact, the southwest seems to have been a special region in seventeenth-century France, in the sense that it was the stronghold of the Huguenots where violent confrontations between Huguenots and the central state occurred in the 1620s. I would ask why the pattern of this region could correspond with the national pattern.
The second point is about the contents of the books. Dr Suire says that the most important subject of these books was faith, as they were written chiefly by clergymen of both Catholic and Protestant sides. This makes an interesting contrast with the world of ‘the blue books’ explored by Robert Mandrou. These ‘blue books’ were mostly Roman Catholic in content, with deeds of saints as the main subject. They were written not by clergymen but often by printers. How is this undercurrent related to this study?
The third point is perhaps the most important for this research project, i.e., the change in the tone of these religious books around the middle of the century, when they stopped criticising the other side and began addressing laymen of their own churches. Why did this change happen?
If I venture to compare the case shown by Dr Suire’s paper with seventeenth-century England(Kari Konkola, ‘“People of the Book”: the production of theological texts in early modern England’, Proceedings of the Bibliographical Society of America, 94:1(2000)), it appears that England at that time was extremely rich in the publication of religious books. However, this is a preliminary observation and further case studies are necessary.
To my questions, Dr Suire replied at the workshop that few ‘blue books’ were circulated in the southwest of France, and that the ‘privatisation’ of religion seems to have begun in the middle of the seventeenth century.

4. Tomoji Odori (Musashi University)
Comment on Yamamoto’s Paper
According to Mr. Yamamoto’s thorough analysis, the Family of Love functioned as “a cross point of various religious thoughts” and especially as “a seedbed” for Guillaume Postel to spread his idea of cabbalistic “restoration of the world” and “the reconciliation of all religions”. It seems to us that Postel’s thought was very strange for average Christians of that day, but it was not an exception. The thought of “the Restoration of the World” based on the Christian Kabbalah was also embraced by some German Anabaptists and other radicals such as Augustin Bader from Augsburg, who claimed that the end of the world was imminent and the new kingdom of Christ is open not only to Christians but also to the Jews, Turkish Muslims and even heathens. Bader’s apocalyptic belief contained a “universalist” idea. And he had connections with some jewish intellectuals. Thomas Müntzer had also a universalistic view of religions. In some letters he argued that Jews and Turks can be elected by Got for salvation. And among mainstream Reformers there were some advocates of the “universalistic” thought. Zwingli is the best example. According to his works and sermons, it’s possible for even Non-christians to be elected and saved by the divine work of the Holy Spirit. The Work of the Holy Spirit is “unlimited” and the election of heathens can take place even without conversion to Christianity or baptism. Wolfgang Capito, the Reformer of the city of Strasbourg, had also a universalistic theology. According to his works, among the jewish people there can be found the chosen ones to enter the kingdom of heaven, because God had implanted a “semen benedictionis” or the “seeds of divine blessing” in their soul. It seems to me that the universalist idea of Hendrick Niklaes, the leader of the Family of Love, and of Guillaume Postel and his collaborators was not an isolated phenomenon in early modern Europe. In any case, we have to pay more attention to the cross-bordering or cross-boundary religious phenomena and the reconciliation efforts to establish a new order of co-existence of religions and that of the divided and hostile Christian confessions. Mr. Yamamoto’s study is a very good exsample to us.

5. Yutaka Miyano (Gufu Shotoku Gakuen University)
Comment on Kuroki’s Paper
Dr. Kuroki examined activities of the Greek-Catholic clergies. By doing so, Dr. Kuroki made it clear how the Greek-Catholic churchmen for own interests maneuvered between Rome and the Greek-Orthodox Church, and at last, got authorization from the Ottoman government. Moreover he argued that every confession group not simply suffered from their circumstance. In short, it is quite frequently that a relationship of groups each other is constructed by themselves on their initiative. The groups subjectively and strategically acted for own destination and drew a line by themselves. On the other hand, Dr. Kuroki also focused attention on the interchange of internal and international relations.
Hearing Kuroki’s speech, first, I had questions about the situation of the laymen. How the Greek-Catholic residents and Greek-Orthodox residents co-lived? For example, in Aleppo, did they live side-by-side? Or did both they live apart in different regions in the city? Was there any economic or social disparity between them except religious factors?
Secondly, it is important to know the situation of the Churches in the city. Dr. Kuroki wrote that in 1724 “both patriarchs were established in the Antioch patriarchate in Damascus. The Greek Catholic patriarch immediately left Damascus, moving to a monastery in Dayr al-Mukhallis in Lebanon”. But then, where the Greek-Catholic Christian laymen take sacraments, especially Mass? Moreover, in the city of Aleppo, did Greek-Catholic church have own churches and priests before authorization? Didn’t they run away from the city? If they ran away, how the Greek-catholic laymen took sacraments?
Thirdly Dr. Kuroki shows that the situation that Greek-speaking clergies were sent to eparchy as bishop provoked antipathy from the Greek-Catholic Christians, because the Greek-speaking bishops at ceremonies used the Greek language. But since when and how many times Constantinople sent Greek-speakers to Aleppo? Did the case happen frequently or not? Or was every bishop from Constantinople? In principle, in Eastern Christianity, a bishop is ordained by the Patriarch, to which the bishop-candidate belongs. In that case, in principle, Arabic speakers became bishops of Aleppo. If it was so, then antipathy or antagonism could happen, but not so sharply. And more, did every bishop from Constantinople speak Greek language, recognizing the antipathy of the Greek Catholic residents?