No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
The Austrian History Yearbook has published many articles illuminating the religious and intellectual history of Central Europe, but few if any have been as helpful as David Sorkin's “Reform Catholicism and Religious Enlightenment.” Not the least of his many services has been the provision of a critical bibliography that will be the essential starting point for anyone entering this fascinating but problematic world for the first time. Not only does he appear to have read everything of importance and much that is peripheral, he has also given us a balanced and judicious appraisal of the secondary literature. As the author of the standard work on Jewry in the period,1 he also brings to an old problem a new perspective and new expertise. Few scholars have sufficient range to allow them to write with authority in the same paragraph about Anglican latitudinarianism, North German Protestantism, the Haskalah, and Reform Catholicism, identifying what they had in common and what distinguished them from each other.
1 David, Sorkin, The Transformation of German Jewry, 1780–1840 (Oxford, 1987).Google Scholar
2 Palmer, R. E., Catholics and Unbelievers in Eighteenth-Century France (Princeton, N.J., 1939), 50.Google Scholar A similar conclusion was reached by Robert, Shackleton, “Jansenism and the Enlightenment,” Studies on Voltaire and the Eighteenth Century 57 (1967): 1395.Google Scholar
3 Michel, Antoine, Louis XV (Paris, 1989), 262.Google Scholar
4 Dale, Van Kley, “The Church, State, and the Ideological Origins of the French Revolution,” Journal of Modern History 51, no.4 (12 1979)Google Scholar, reprinted in Blanning, T. C. W., The Rise and Fall of the French Revolution (Chicago, 1996), 661.Google Scholar
5 Necheles, Ruth F., “The Curés in the Estates General of 1789,” Journal of Modern History 46, no. 3 (1974): passim.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 Palmer, , Catholics and Unbelievers, 26.Google Scholar
7 See the tables in Kiesel, H. and Münch, P., Gesellschaft und Literatur im 18. Jahrhundert (Munich, 1977), 203–4.Google Scholar
8 There have been many distinguished studies of the relationship between Pietism and the state in Prussia. The best remains Carl, Hinrichs, Preuβentum und Pietismus. Der Pietistnus in Brandenburg-Preuβen als religiös-soziale Reformbewegung (Göttingen, 1971).Google Scholar
9 Peter, Hersche, Der Spätjansenismus in Österreich (Vienna, 1977), 375.Google Scholar
10 Ferdinand, Maass, Der Josephinismus, Quellen zu seiner Geschichte in Österreich 1760–1790, vol. 1: Ursprung und Wesen des Josephinismus, 1760–1769 (Vienna, 1951), vol. 2: Entfaltung und Krise des Josephinismus 1770–1790 (Vienna, 1953).Google Scholar
11 Ibid., 384.
12 Ibid., 150–52.
13 Even Maass changed his mind somewhat, presenting Maria Theresa in a more activist light in his later work, Der Frühjosephinismus (Vienna, 1969).Google Scholar
14 Hersche, , Der Spätjansenismus in Österreich, 50–64.Google Scholar
15 Ibid., 64.
16 Ibid., 66–68.
17 Quoted in Blanning, T. C. W., Joseph II (London, 1994), 99.Google Scholar
18 Ibid..
19 Quoted in ibid., 93.
20 Max, Braubach, Maria Theresias jüngster Sohn Max Franz, letzter Kurfürst von Köln und Fürstbischof von Münster (Vienna, 1961), 147–64.Google Scholar