Friday, January 23, 2015

A Jesuit Challenge




Back on January 7th, 2015, I published a thread (here) that linked to ten separate posts at Shameless Popery which were based on Edmund Campion's book, Rationes Decem /Ten Reasons (link to PDF copy).

[Edmund Campion (sainted by the Catholic Church), was a Jesuit priest who was imprisoned, tortured numerous times, hanged and then drawn-and-quartered, in late 16th England during the of reign of Queen Elizabeth I—for a online biography in a PDF format, see THIS LINK.]

After finishing Joe Heschmeyer's provocative series, I then read the 1914 edition of Campion's, Ten Reasons (English text by Joseph Rickaby; Introduction by John Hungerford). Rickaby's translation, with Hungerford's introduction, created a yearning in my mind for more. A prior Google search had yielded a number of related works that I ended up either downloading or purchasing. It is James V. Holleran's, A Jesuit Challenge (Google Preview)—which I finished reading yesterday—that I would now like to comment on.

I am a bit embarrassed to admit that I knew nothing about Campion, prior to my reading of Joe's ten part series. I was, of course, aware of the religious turmoil that permeated 16th century England; but this knowledge had come primarily via more general works on Christian history (e.g. González, Latourette, Sheldon, et al.). Important figures such as Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary Tudor and Sir Thomas More immediately come to mind when I think about 16th century England; however, if any of the numerous general histories I have read mentioned Campion, possible impressions left on me at the time were not retained. As such, I felt compelled to remedy this void in my knowledge of the period.

The late Dr. Holleran's contribution has proven to be an invaluable resource in filling in this void. His 81 page introduction is excellent. The previously unpublished manuscripts  of the four Tower of London debates between Campion and a number of Protestent divines (written by Catholics who had attended the debates), which Holleran provides in the book, gives one a fuller account than the highly edited 'official' version of 1583. Note the following:

...as historical documents, these Catholic accounts of the debates allow us to revisit the past and decide for ourselves whether or not official documents, endorsed and published by the government, are entirely trustworthy. These previously unpublished Catholic accounts, for example, supply us with information that was deliberately deleted from the government account of the same debates. (Page xi.)

Dr. Holleran has also given us a new edition of Campion's, "Challenge", a document he had written, "in less than half an hour", and sent to "Elizabeth's Council." This document spells out Campion's goals/purposes, and, "acknowledges that he was a Jesuit priest who had been ordered by his superior to go to England on a religious mission, not a political one." (See page 25 for quotes; pages 179-181 for the document.)

All in all, I highly recommend Holleran's book; it is informative, has a very useful bibliography, and is written in a balanced style that will appeal to both academic and lay audiences.


Grace and peace,

David


5 comments:

Ken said...

It is always sad to read of Christians torturing and excecuting other Christians or even heretics. That was a wrong chapter in Christian history from Justinian's harsh policies against Jews and Monophysites in Egypt and the Levant, etc. to the Zurich Council executing Felix Manz for re-baptizing himelf, to the exceution of Servetus in Geneva, to this example of Campion, to the Puritans and their witch trials. Terrible!

I wonder how we (or you) can be sure that the Roman Catholics who were at the debates are more accurate than the English official version?

How did they get the information out?

Does any of the information change the content of the debates, or is it just extraneous information?

Does the official version lie or contradict the other version, or just not give all the other details, but doesn't change the meaning of the content?

Rory said...

Ken, I am just wondering if you find this to be sad also?

"And Jehu and Jonadab the son of Rechab went to the temple of Baal, and said to the worshippers of Baal: Search, and see that there be not any with you of the servants of the Lord, but that there be the servants of Baal only. And they went in to offer sacrifices and burnt offerings: but Jehu had prepared him fourscore men without, and said to them: If any of the men escape, whom I have brought into your hands, he that letteth him go shall answer life for life. And it came to pass, when the burnt offering was ended, that Jehu commanded his soldiers and captains, saying: Go in, and kill them, let none escape. And the soldiers and captains slew them with the edge of the sword, and cast them out: and they went into the city of the temple of Baal,

And brought the statue out of Baal' s temple, and burnt it, And broke it in pieces. They destroyed also the temple of Baal, and made a jakes in its place unto this day. So Jehu destroyed Baal out of Israel:"

(4 Kings 10:23-28)

Before we of faith can make a sound judgment based on something besides revelation it seems to me like we ought to take note of verse 30: And the Lord said to Jehu: Because thou hast diligently executed that which was right and pleasing in my eyes, and hast done to the house of Achab according to all that was in my heart: thy children shall sit upon the throne of Israel to the fourth Generation.

Rory

Ken said...

The reference should be 2 Kings 10:23-30

No, because that is during the Old Covenant of Israel when it was a Theocracy.

No such thing anymore.

David Waltz said...

Hi Ken,

Sorry about my somewhat tardy response, but had a very busy weekend, and I am just now accessing the internet...

On the 31st, you wrote:

==I wonder how we (or you) can be sure that the Roman Catholics who were at the debates are more accurate than the English official version?==

Me: I think a couple of issues strongly suggest that the English official version was heavily edited, and biased: first, the earliest, non-official English accounts contain some of the information provided in the Catholic accounts, but left out in the official version; and second, the Continental accounts also suggest the same.

==How did they get the information out?==

Me: Catholic literature was under a ban, and in a number of instances, entire Catholic libraries in colleges and monasteries were being burned; even private correspondence was being confiscated. As such, the Catholic accounts survived underground in private collections.

==Does any of the information change the content of the debates, or is it just extraneous information?==

Me: The "content"—i.e. the subject matter of each of the debates—was the same in all the accounts.

==Does the official version lie or contradict the other version, or just not give all the other details, but doesn't change the meaning of the content?==

Me: My understanding of the matter is that the official version omits a number of details that strengthens Campion's arguments during the debates. One striking omission was his ability to read and write Greek (Campion had 8 years of philosophical training and 7 years of theological training, which included the Biblical languages and extensive readings of the Church Fathers).

Sincerely hope that I have been of some assistance...


Grace and peace,

David

David Waltz said...

Hello again Ken,

In your response to Rory, you wrote:

== No, because that is during the Old Covenant of Israel when it was a Theocracy.

No such thing anymore.==

Me: Though the Theocracy no longer exists, the question of the validity of the OT political and societal laws is open to various interpretations. IMO, Dr. Bahnsen's arguments concerning the application of most OT laws in modern society are extremely sound—the attempts by his detractors to deflect his scholarly treatments seem quite weak.


Grace and peace,

David