In the history of early modern French Catholicism, Jansenism looms large. Often, the focus on the conflict between the Jansenists and the Jesuits leads us to assume that the French clergy were divided into two camps, with little overlap between the two. Christopher Lane, in his excellent monograph, Callings and Consequences, points to the concept of vocational rigorism and in the process adds much-needed nuance to our view of the French clergy, whether Jansenist or Jesuit. As part of the “rigorist turn,” Lane argues, both clergy and laity began to pay greater attention to the choice of vocation. Reformers believed that the elimination of disorder in society depended on vocational choice. If Catholics ignored the calling that God chose for them, religious or otherwise, then not only would this choice lead them to sin and jeopardize their salvation, but it would also upset the foundations of an orderly society.
Lane uses primarily French prescriptive texts (dating from the mid-seventeenth century through the eighteenth) to examine this concept, including printed sermons, spiritual handbooks, and catechisms. These sources demonstrate the development of a particular strand of rigorism, overlapping with, but distinct from, Jansenist rigorism. Jansenist theologians were rigorist on issues like grace, confession, and withholding absolution for habitual sinners; other theologians—often Jesuits—were rigorist about vocation. This astute observation thus shifts the concept of rigorism away from its exclusively Jansenist context and views it as a broader current within early modern French Catholic thought.
After a brief review of the biblical and medieval views of vocation, the first chapter brings us into the sixteenth century, with the Council of Trent and the writings of Ignatius Loyola and François de Sales. The foundations of vocational rigorism can be found here, and then Lane demonstrates how the concept evolved further in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The four remaining chapters examine the four attributes of vocational rigorism that Lane has identified. The first of these is urgency, which is what set post-sixteenth-century views apart from those of earlier centuries and began the “rigorist turn.” Seventeenth-century clergy wrote about vocational choice in terms of sin and salvation. If a person chose wrongly—either ignoring a call to enter a clerical or religious state or entering into such a state when they were not called to it—then they would be more likely to commit sin simply because they were on the wrong path. Thus, correct vocational choice took on a sense of urgency for young people hoping to avoid sin and earn salvation.
The second attribute of vocational rigorism, as defined by Lane, is inclusiveness. Clerical writers emphasized that all individuals should take care to search out their correct path, whether it be with the secular clergy, a religious order, or marriage. The third attribute is method—the way the authors recommended individuals should go about discerning their vocation. Here, Lane shows well the messiness of the process—he notes that any conscientious person trying to find advice on vocational choice would likely end up confused and anxious. This attribute highlights the concept of rigorism—vocational reformers insisted that, like a good confession, vocational discernment was extraordinarily difficult to do perfectly. This was all the more reason to give it special time and attention. The most helpful suggestions to come out of this convoluted advice were that a spiritual director was needed, and that the process should begin early. Children were to be encouraged to develop habits of holiness that would serve them well once they reached adolescence and began to seek out guidance on vocation in earnest.
The final attribute—liberty—places the concept of vocational discernment within controversies about parental authority. It is well known that church and state were often at odds over this issue, with the state giving parents nearly unlimited control over their children's choice of estate and the church arguing that anyone entering a clerical or religious state should do so only of their own free will. The solution for the vocational reformers was to bring parents into the process. They reminded parents that they should follow God when it came to the choice of estate for their children and warned them against considering worldly wealth instead of eternal reward. For the most part, the vocational reformers adroitly navigated the church and state conflict by reminding parents that their duty was still to God; instead of pitting parents and children against each other, the writers pointed both in the same direction.
At just 117 pages of text, the book provides a good introduction to the concept of vocational rigorism but raises many questions for further research. In his conclusion, Lane argues that the concept has persisted into the modern day and remains an important aspect of the pastoral care of youth within Catholicism worldwide. This seems to require additional source material to adequately address, as does the suggestion that today's views on the relationship between the individual and the community can be productively examined through the lens of vocation. Questions about the early modern period remain as well. Although Lane uses catechisms to good effect, showing that these issues could have penetrated the discourse at the parish level, the reach of the concepts in everyday life deserves greater attention. How much did non-elites know about these prescriptions, and were there similar currents about choice of profession or trade that could have influenced or interacted with the ideas coming from the top down? How were young men and young women taught differently when it came to ideas about vocation? All in all, Lane's welcome spotlight on this little-known concept is sure to stimulate further research and greater understanding of the impact of Catholic thought in the early modern period.
