"Oh, what sights to behold in this church turned upside down"

Paulus de Kempenaer's Reckoning with the Roman Catholic Excesses

Eva L.E. Janssens

Abstract
This article focusses on a unique anti-Catholic illustrated broadsheet, De Rhoemse Kercke, from the Netherlands. Inscriptions with the initials of the makers corroborate that it was engraved by Robert Baudous (ca. 1574/75–1659) and published by Jac-ques de Gheyn II (1565–1629) in 1605. The engraving is accompanied by a poem long presumed lost. Commenting on the numerous pictured Catholic clergymen engaged in various abominable practices, this poem provides a unique glimpse into the thinking of its spin doctor – it is attributed to the theologian and emblematist Paulus de Kempenaer (Brussels, ca. 1554 – The Hague, 1618?). By analysing the iconography in relation tode Kempenaer's poem, this comprehensive study aims to unravel the purpose and intended audience of De Rhoemse Kercke.

Introduction

[1] A crowd squeezes its way through the entrance of a church that is labelled above the portal with the inscription "De Rhoemse Kercke", or: The Roman Catholic Church (Fig. 1). The busy interior is decorated with a plethora of statues of saints, candles, reliquaries and ex-votos dangling from a bier that connects the column capitals of the nave. The space is teeming with activity. Masses are taking place at various decorated altars. One of the priests elevates a host, exposing his bare buttocks (Fig. 1.1), while another blatantly knocks back a chalice of mass wine (Fig. 1.2). Furthermore, numerous stalls display all kinds of wares, throwing the church into a state of frenetic disarray. One of the stalls is run by a woman with multiple arms grabbing all the money she receives from the sale of indulgences and dispensations. Behind her, a repulsive creature peers fatuously, if not drunkenly, with one eye from under his tiara, a clear reference to the pope (Fig. 1.3). In the midst of the crowd, priests undisturbedly continue to administer sacraments such as Confirmation and Baptism. One can easily imagine that the noise in this space must be deafening. After all, the buzz is supplemented by different liturgical chants. At the high altar a group of monks is singing the requiem (Fig. 1.4) while several nuns, standing closer to the entrance, raise the hallelujah (Fig. 1.5).

1 Robert Baudous after an anonymous designer, De Rhoemse Kercke, 1605, engraving, 415 × 1445 mm. Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Rotterdam, inv. no. BdH 24786 (PK) (photo: Studio Tromp, Rotterdam)

1.1 | 1.2

1.3 | 1.4 | 1.5

[2] On the edge of the nave, a number of strange creatures made up of locust- and scorpion-like bodies with human heads guard the church (Fig. 1.6). Outside, on the far right, musical festivities prompt people to dance and sing around a calvary (Fig. 1.7). In the foreground, a procession leads along the entire nave of the church. This credulous company carries aloft the idol of a man on a horse sharing his cloak with a beggar, identifying this as a mock procession in honour of Saint Martin (Fig. 1.8). At the far left, a cartouche hanging in the tree near the church building summarises the thrust of the image: "O men, how long shall my honour be turned into shame? How long will you love vain words and seek after lies?" (Psalm 4:3).¹

1.6 | 1.7 | 1.8

[3] It should now be evident that this illustrated broadsheet from 1605 was published to mock various religious practices, as well as the behaviour of the representatives and adherents of the Roman Catholic Church. Both word and image convincingly deliver the message that true faith is the absolute antithesis of Catholicism. Along the entire width the three-plate engraving is bordered by 27 engraved Latin verses in cursive script (see Appendix 1), while the representation itself contains Dutch inscriptions and no fewer than 39 figures that correspond with a key. This key, a poem in 36 stanzas in Dutch, detailing the various figures and practices depicted, was long thought lost.² However, Heijbroek discovered a complete version of the poem, printed from four plates and glued to the engraving, in the print room of Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen in Rotterdam (Fig. 1; see Appendix 2).³

[4] A small signature, "P.D.K.", which appears below the last of the 36 stanzas, allows to identify the author of the Dutch poem. In 1863, Frederik Muller identified "P.D.K." with a certain "Peter de Kempenare, from Ghent, the well-known publisher of Verheiden: Images against the antichrist etc, 1602".⁴ Several authors repeated this attribution.⁵ The title page of Verheiden's publication, however, refers to "P.d.K" not as the publisher, but as the translator of Verheiden's Latin text. Although his full name is not revealed, a sonnet added after the preface and signed with the motto "Kamp-en-eere" refers to the author's surname: de Kempenaer.⁶ Thanks to more recent research, we now know that his first name was not Peter, but Paulus. "P.D.K." thus stands for Paulus de Kempenaer (ca. 1554–1618?), the Protestant theologian, emblematist and poet, who was born in Brussels (and never resided in Ghent).⁷

[5] Although Paulus de Kempenaer long remained a little-studied figure, he has received growing scholarly and public attention of late.⁸ After the substantial study of Alastair Hamilton in 1980,⁹ and Bostoen's analysis of de Kempenaer's religious attitudes and contacts with the poet Jan vander Noot (1539–after 1595),¹⁰ it is primarily the work of Daan van Heesch that finally brought de Kempenaer out of the shadows. In his fascinating article in Simiolus, van Heesch analyses de Kempenaer's idiosyncratic notebooks as important sources to reconstruct the historical reception of Hieronymus Bosch.¹¹ Although De Rhoemse Kercke is briefly mentioned, its iconography and poem fall beyond the scope of the article. The discussion of the iconography by Joseph Leo Koerner and Rianneke Houwen-Jelles's short description of de Kempenaer's key above all reveal the potential of an in-depth, but not yet existing study.¹² The layers of meaning that the key adds to the image are still not sufficiently explained. A close reading of the image in conjunction with the explanatory key is therefore an important objective of this article.

Paulus de Kempenaer and his milieu

[6] A reconstruction of de Kempenaer's life, which is largely based on the seven notebooks by his hand, shows a versatile man who maintained ties with leading intellectuals of his day. He was born in Brussels in about 1554 as the son of an apothecary. Given that de Kempenaer mastered several languages and was well versed in theology, we may assume that he must have enjoyed a solid education in these early days.¹³ Probably around the late 1560s he converted from Catholicism to the Reformed faith. By the time he resided in Antwerp, from about 1578 until 1584, he married and had his first child baptised in Protestant churches.¹⁴ In 1582 he started a diplomatic and political career as Secretary Extraordinary of the Council of Brabant by commission of François, Duke of Anjou (1555–1584). His contacts indicate that de Kempenaer slipped effortlessly into the humanist and artistic circles of the Antwerp elite. He was acquainted with prominent humanists like Plantin, Moretus, Lipsius and Ortelius and considered the painter Balthasar Flessiers and the poets Nicolas Oudartius and Jean-Baptiste Houwaert among his friends.¹⁵ Faced with the advance of Alexander Farnese, the Governor of the Spanish Netherlands, de Kempenaer's Protestant beliefs and support for William of Orange forced him to flee to the north in 1584.¹⁶

[7] We meet him again as an elder of the Dutch Reformed Church in Leiden in 1590.¹⁷ He was a regular participant in synods and did not shy away from theological controversy.¹⁸ As a good friend of the preachers Jacobus and Jan Arminius, he sympathised with the ideas of the Remonstrants.¹⁹ However, as an independent mind who professed an irenic, undogmatic Protestantism that mainly comprised a humanistic anti-Catholicism, de Kempenaer did not fit into any of the conventional confessional categories.²⁰ His theological writings above all show a man who strove for biblical piety and irenicism.²¹

[8] From 1593 until his death in about 1618, The Hague became de Kempenaer's main residence.²² His continuing commitment against Roman Catholic abuses and his anti-Spanish sentiment are reflected in his translation of Jacob Verheiden's Praesentium aliquot theologorum (The Hague 1602) which was issued under the title Af-beeldingen van sommighe in Godts-Woort ervarene mannen, die bestreden hebben den Roomschen Antichrist in The Hague in 1603.²³

[9] The satirical broadsheet depicting De Rhoemse Kercke appeared only two years later. Presumably this was not the first time de Kempenaer was involved in print production. An anonymous broadsheet on the losses of the Spaniards dated between 1597 and 1599 contains a verse that is very reminiscent of de Kempenaer's style (Fig. 2).²⁴

2 Anonymous, Clachte Alberti aen de Roomsse Senaet Over sijn tegenwoordige ellendige staet, 1597–1599, etching with engraved text, 277 mm × 210 mm. Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, inv. no. RP-P-OB-77.499 (photo: Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam)

Stylistic similarities that I have observed between the engraved calligraphy of the print and the handwriting we know from de Kempenaer's manuscripts support this attribution.²⁵ Moreover, the combination of two different script types and moduli to emphasise certain words was regularly used by de Kempenaer.²⁶ Finally, the anti-Spanish content and puns seamlessly match his literary style.²⁷ So, if de Kempenaer did indeed write these verses, this suggests that he may have contributed to prints more frequently than previously assumed. At any rate, his involvement in printmaking challenges Bostoen's claim that de Kempenaer was considered eccentric by his contemporaries.²⁸ Prints, in contrast to personal notebooks and emblems, were intended for an audience, and thus indicate that de Kempenaer was given a platform to spread his prophethood. Presumably it was even at the instigation of a publisher that de Kempenaer drafted his texts.

De Rhoemse Kercke: a collaboration of kindred spirits

[10] De Rhoemse Kercke resulted from a collaboration with several people in the printing business. This can be deduced from the inscriptions on the lower left of the engraving. "B. Rob. sculps." indicates the engraver, Robert Baudous (ca. 1574/75–1659), who originated from Brussels like de Kempenaer and had settled in Amsterdam in 1591. There he had first worked as an apprentice and assistant to the prolific printmaker Jacques de Gheyn II (1565–1629), before building a relatively limited publishing career of his own between 1610 and 1615.²⁹ The surviving body of his oeuvre includes some 120 prints, partly after his own designs and partly after other artists, such as Hendrick Goltzius.³⁰ In addition to the printing plates he engraved himself, his portfolio also included works by various other engravers, like Jacques de Gheyn I, Jacques de Gheyn II, Zacharias Dolendo and Jan Saenredam.³¹

[11] The other inscription, "D.G. exc.", indicating the publisher, provoked some discussion. According to Filedt Kok, "D.G." should not be interpreted as Jacques de Gheyn II (1565–1629).³² This Antwerp-born painter, draftsman and printmaker had emigrated to the northern Netherlands, where he entered the workshop of Hendrick Goltzius in Haarlem in about 1585. In 1592 he started his own business in Amsterdam and later moved to Leiden, making a name for himself as a printmakerthanks to various commissions.³³ As scholars agree that de Gheyn must have abandoned his publishing activities after moving to The Hague shortly after 1600,³⁴ it seems rather unlikely that he could have been responsible for the publication of this print from 1605. Nevertheless, if we look for a publisher who, as was customary at the time, brought together the engraver, designer and inventor, de Gheyn's name emerges as most plausible. To begin with, de Gheyn was evidently acquainted with de Kempenaer. In the latter's notebooks, several references to de Gheyn are made, dating between 1602 and 1618.³⁵ Recently, van Heesch discovered a note dating from 1602 in which de Kempenaer praises de Gheyn, as well as a note from 1606 in which he recalls a conversation with him.³⁶ In the year of the production of the print, they both lived in The Hague.³⁷ Furthermore, de Gheyn was in close relationship with Baudous, his own pupil. According to Van Regteren Altena, Baudous may even have collaborated on the engravings intended for the publication of Wapenhandelinghe van Roers Musquetten ende spiessen (Exercise of Arms). This military drill manual commissioned by the military authority around Maurice of Nassau (1584–1625) was issued by de Gheyn in 1607 – a last major undertaking in his publishing activities.³⁸ Hence, it seems very likely that de Gheyn was the binding factor between his fellow citizen, de Kempenaer, and his pupil, Baudous, who lived in Amsterdam.³⁹ One can easily imagine that he wanted to appeal to two like-minded artists who shared his Brabantine roots and migration background to produce a fierce anti-Catholic image.

An inverted church

[12] The World Turned Upside Down can be recognised as the overarching theme and shaping principle of De Rhoemse Kercke. On the left edge of the engraving, a woman representing Gospel (Evangelie) holds up draperies that previously hid the interior from our view (Figs. 1 and 1.9). With her eyes fixed on the company behind her, she lifts up a burning torch, whose glow illuminates their guises. With reference to Revelation 17, "Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot", Gospel encourages the personifications of Faith (Geloove) – a little child –, Election (Verkiesinge), Grace (Genade) and Charity (Bermherticheijt) to see the abominations performed in this church. Behind them strolls Rejection (Verwerpinge), who is robbed of her sight by Obstinacy (Obstinaetheijt), clarifying that those reluctant to see what Gospel shows, must remain in the shadows.⁴⁰

1.9

As the viewer's gaze is guided by the torch of Gospel into the interior, a scene of Catholic misconduct is uncovered. "Oh, what sights to behold in this church turned upside down",⁴¹ de Kempenaer fulminates vigorously. The notion of the Roman Catholic Church as 'inverted' ("Kerck-averecht") inscribes this print in a broader tradition of the World Turned Upside Down, a prominent theme in Late Medieval and Early Modern culture.⁴² All of the depicted activities, practices and ceremonies embody a kind of pseudo-religiousness, from which the beholder should turn away. As such, De Rhoemse Kercke portrays a negative exemplum, or exemplum contrarium, in which vice is put on stage to propagate virtue.⁴³

[13] For a start, the key encourages us to read the print in an unusual direction: from right to left. The very first scene commented on is the dancing group around the calvary on the far right, after which the text directs our gaze through the church to the left. This reverse way of looking, then, goes against the general pattern of expectation. And it is precisely this pattern of expectation that the theme of the World Turned Upside Down seeks to dupe.

[14] Another aspect that ties in with the theme of the World Turned Upside Down is the Latin poem below the image (see Appendix 1). When analysing these verses, it becomes clear that the metrical scheme corresponds to the antique tradition. The author, who could well be de Kempenaer himself, carefully designed his text according to the principles of the elegiac distich consisting of a dactylic hexameter followed by a pentameter.⁴⁴ Yet, although the elegiac distich was used in the antique tradition mostly for love poetry, the content of this poem rather emerges as hate poetry, turning the elegy into a mock-elegy.⁴⁵ It equals the pope to a monster, who as a child was suckled by Proserpina, Roman goddess of the underworld.⁴⁶ The verses proclaim that after Proserpina had sent him into the world, the pope unleashed his vile tricks and praised himself to heaven. To him, piety, religion and faith are merely means of accumulating money. In his temple of superstition everything is for sale. On that basis the text concludes that he cannot be the successor to Peter. On the contrary: the pope embodies "the money-grubbing Judas, who betrayed the heavenly master for a small sum of money".⁴⁷

[15] Besides the inverse reading direction of the image and the Latin mock-elegy, the formal characteristics of the image also conform to the principle of the inverted world. The supporters of De Rhoemse Kercke are carefully designed according to a grotesque idiom. Originally, the term 'grotesques' referred to frescoes that adorned the so-called grottoes, ruins of ancient Roman buildings, which later inspired ornamental frescoes in Italian palaces and villas in the sixteenth century (in Italian: grottesche).⁴⁸ Since these frescoes depicted figures composed of human, animal and plant elements, the term "grotesque" encompasses a wide range of whimsical and ludicrous motifs. Grotesque art can be described as embodying "distortions, exaggeration, a fusion of incompatible parts in such a fashion that it confronts us as strange and disordered, as a world turned upside down".⁴⁹ In the broadsheet, the grotesque portrayal of members of the Roman Catholic Church enhances the reading of the image as a world upside down, so that the risk of the exempla contraria being misunderstood is minimised.⁵⁰

[16] One merely has to imagine the same picture without its grotesque features. The resulting image would be limited to a neutral description of various religious practices. Yet by using the grotesque mode, the designer reverses the older pictorial tradition depicting Catholic church interiors, such as Rogier van der Weyden's Seven Sacraments Altarpiece (1440–1445; Royal Museum of Fine Arts, Antwerp) or Pieter Bruegel's depiction of Fides (1559). Indeed, Baudous himself made another print in that tradition, depicting a Catholic church (Fig. 3).⁵¹ A closer look, however, reveals his critique on the Roman Church. In this church filled with altarpieces and statues of saints, various practices take place: priests are busy administering the seven sacraments, while masses are celebrated in the side chapels. In the nave, a procession passes by and in the choir the pope is crowned. The accompanying key has been lost, but the title in particular reveals the anti-Catholic tenor of this print. The inscription Vera Imago Ecclesiae papisticae labels this a papist, or pernicious church, which forms an antithesis to its pendant, Vera Imago veteris Ecclesiae Apostolicae. Ware abcontrofeitung der alter Apostolischer Evangelischer Kirchen (Fig. 4).⁵² It is thus precisely in the comparison between these two churches that the criticism becomes palpable – a technique reminiscent of the earliest type of Reformation propaganda, mirroring two opposing images.

3 Robert Baudous, Catholic Service (Vera Imago Ecclesiae papisticae), ca. 1600–1625, engraving, 367 × 465 mm. Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, inv. no. Reserve FOL-QB-201 (8)(photo: gallica.bnf.fr / Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris)

4 Robert Baudous, Protestant Service (Vera Imago veteris Ecclesiae Apostolicae), ca. 1600–1625, engraving, 367 × 465 mm. Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, inv. no. RP-P-1893-A-18169 (photo: Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam)

De Rhoemse Kercke, by contrast, is a print that has freed itself from a comparative context and now exclusively displays the exemplum contrarium. It indeed does not need any comparison, as the grotesque helps the viewer to recognise the scene depicted as a negative example. The contemporary belief that ugliness was a sign of immorality obviously facilitated this. Note for example the stark contrast between the repulsive appearance of the adherents of the Roman Church and the beauty of the women representing the Gospel and Grace (Fig. 1.9).⁵³

[17] It is however important to understand that the grotesque – apart from highlighting the presumed stupidity, ignorance and narrow-mindedness of the Catholic clergy and their followers – is primarily for the pleasure of the eye. Let us examine, for example, the motley procession in the foreground. Clergy, nobles, laity and pilgrims, both young and old, male and female, have trooped up to join. Their distorted faces look foolish and ludicrous – and must have appeared hilarious to contemporaries who saw in them the 'true' face of the Roman Catholic Church. The procession is led by "Vrouw'-Ceremony" (Lady Ceremony; no. 26; Fig. 1.10) parading as the pope's courtesan, as de Kempenaer's text explains.⁵⁴ She is accompanied to her left by "Vrouw'-Pronckery" (Lady Vanity) and her servants, "Gansen-Graviteyt" (Stateliness), the Dutch word "gansen" referring to the goose peeping out of the back of the skirt, "Bedroch" (Deception), the woman with two faces, and "Loos vercieren" (False Fabrications), the woman with an ugly face carrying a tabletop.⁵⁵ According to de Kempenaer they urge the people to move to the papal church, while setting the table for the pope.⁵⁶

1.10

[18] A little further on walks a parish priest (no. 27) with an imbecile countenance carrying "d'wint-molenken" (a wind mill) – symbolising saintly folly – which, according to the poem, he gave to his wicked community to play with.⁵⁷ This little mill serves to distract the faithful, allowing him to preach all kinds of fables unhindered. The text proceeds to proclaim that this priest advises people to take the broad road, relying on the mass, the invocation of saints, confession and holy water for forgiveness.⁵⁸ He HThe sheepish sexton behind him gladly agrees with "Amen" and then indulges in the delicacies he carries with him.⁵⁹

[19] Further in the procession, a handful of strange musicians precede a company of women (Fig. 1.11). The first musician, with animal-like face, uses a saw to play a griddle from which "T'Vett' braesemken" (a fat bream) hangs.⁶⁰ Another musician is feeding the bird in his drum with a spoon while playing a flute with his other hand. His act, and that of the companion next to him – a nose player – vaguely recall depictions in Les songes drolatiques de Pantagruel, où sont contenues plusieurs figures de l'invention de maistre François Rabelais; et dernière œuvre d'iceluy, pour la recreation des bons esprits (Fig. 5).⁶¹

1.11

5 Two woodcuts with satirical figures, 154 × 106 mm, presumed engraver: François Desprez,in: Les songes drolatiques de Pantagruel, ou sont contenues plusieurs figures de l'invention de maistre François Rabelais (Paris: Richard Breton, 1565). Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, inv. no. RES-Y2-2173 (photo: gallica.bnf.fr / Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris)

This booklet, published by the Parisian bookseller Richard Breton in 1565, contained a collection of 120 woodcuts depicting grotesque creatures.⁶² However, they were not designed by Rabelais (ca. 1494–1553) – who had died twelve years earlier – as the title suggests, but probably by the Parisian engraver, woodcutter and embroiderer François Desprez.⁶³ Breton chose to exploit Rabelais's name in order to serve a market which was very keen on grotesque creatures reminiscent of the stories of this influential writer.⁶⁴ In his preface, Breton points out that these images can also serve artists: "Several good minds will be able to draw inventions from it as much for creating grotesques as for organising masquerades."⁶⁵ Although they are not overtly hostile or topical in nature, Vincent Robert-Nicoud has argued that "the monsters of the Songes drôlatiques can be analysed with reference to Protestant polemic".⁶⁶ Since both Breton and Desprez were Protestants, the book may well have circulated in Protestant art circles.⁶⁷

[20] Other small correspondences between De Rhoemse Kercke and Les songes also suggest that the designer could have been acquainted with Les songes. Behind an unsightly bride, her male company and "Vrouw'-Visch-vang" (Lady Fishing; no. 30), for example, strolls "Vrouw'-Dom-Clock" (Lady Cathedral Bell; no. 31), whose uplifted gown reveals a large cracked bell of which she holds the clapper in order to wake up those snoring (Fig. 1.12).⁶⁸ Although not a direct quote, Les songes at least shares an interest in depicting bell-shaped figures.⁶⁹ She is accompanied by blunt-nosed "Vrouw’-Pitancy (Lady Pittance; no. 32) personifying small treats with which convents were provided by benefactors in return for organizing memorial masses. Pittances often took the form of food and drink that could supplement the austere monastic meal.⁷⁰ De Kempenaer portrays Vrouw’-Pitancy as wrathful because she is lacking the tithe, grain or wine, which she is used to receive for her 'shorn children' (or monks).⁷¹ Next to her walks "Vrouw'-Gans-oor" (Lady Goose-Ear; no. 33). As de Kempenaer explains, she too makes a sour impression, now that the wine of Saint Francis, which she is accustomed to gulping down, has run out.⁷² Biblical references to Revelation 18 reinforce the idea that Babel's debauched life is at an end.⁷³

1.12

[21] These figures in their funny, grotesque, satirical form will initially have amused rather than horrified contemporary spectators of Protestant or anti-Catholic persuasion, which brings us to a kind of contradictio in terminis. While I have argued that, because of its satirical properties, the grotesque makes the print recognisable as an exemplum contrarium, it is that same form that, for the sake of the pleasure of looking at it, distracts from that core message. Already in the opening lines, de Kempenaer seems to reflect upon this range of mixed feelings associated with the grotesque. He refers to persons with a link to laughter and satire, like Epicurus, Democritus, Lucian, Rabelais, fools and jesters, as well as Zanni and Pantalone – character types of the Commedia dell'arte – and states that they cannot give him any pleasure, while he watches the abominations of the Church with sorrow.

Epicure u spott', Rabelais, Harlequin
Zani noch Pantalon, oock t'ghelach Democrite,
V guychel-pijp Lucaen, t'ghedroom Artemidoors min
Sotts, Marotts, nochs'ghecx sin,, als dier ooghe-spriete,
Drijven hier lust in my, Daer ick me[t] sulck' verdriete
Aenschou den grouwel groot, die Babel van nieuws baert.⁷⁴

Neither your mockery, Epicurus, Rabelais, Harlequin,
Zanni or Pantalone, nor the laughter of Democritus,
your ridicule, Lucianus, let alone the dreaming of Artemidorus,
nor the pleasure of a fool, a jester or a madman, they of the bulging eyes,
bring me to pleasure
while I behold with sorrow the horror that Babel reveals anew.⁷⁵

The reference to Democritus – the laughing philosopher – brings to mind the many contemporaneous allegorical representations in which he, along with Heraclitus – the weeping philosopher – watches a terrestrial globe which is, in some depictions, turned upside down.⁷⁶ De Kempenaer thus identifies here with the weeping philosopher. In doing so, he immediately sets the tone and function of the text. Apart from the occasional comic phrasing, a more serious, condemnatory undertone recalls that within the amusing, comic image there is a lesson to unpack. The text transforms the printed material into more than just a multimedia entity; it becomes a cohesive whole that exceeds the mere sum of its individual parts. It puts a stark filter over the gaze with which the viewer must read the image.

[22] This is expressed very clearly, for example, in the eschatological dimension of de Kempenaer's poem. By asserting that the world's end is near and the wrath of Satan has reached its climax, it urges thoughtfulness:

Daerin ons thoont Sathan (als Siel-Moorder vermaert)
Sijns haedts, toren en grim, op t'hooghst gheclommen heden,
En hem te haesten seer (als diens Rijckx-eyndt vernaert)
Om s'Werelts boosheyt groot, en ons Ondanckbaerheden
Te loonen elcx naer weerd': Daer Godts Gherechticheden
Ghehingen sullen niet, datmen veracht sijn Woort
Dwelck Hemel en Aard schiep, en ons t'sijner eer' bracht voort.⁷⁷

Wherein Satan (as a renowned soul killer) shows himself
to be ascended at the top of his hatred, wrath and anger
and hastens very much (as the end of his empire approaches)
to reward the world's great wickedness and our ingrates
each according to its value, as God's righteousness
will not allow one to despise his word,
[God] who created heaven and earth and brought us forth to his glory.

In de Kempenaer's opinion, people who follow the Roman Catholic Church are lost:

Doer haren yver blint, int gracht liggen versmoort
Sonder hulp' noch confoort,, door haer die Babels-Toren
Veel hoogher als Nimbroth, t'herbouwen nemen voren,
Doch ydelijck, als blint: Siet soo bring' ick aen dach
Haer tot een opmerck claer, t'Bedroch des Hoops Gheschoren:
Op dat elck een mach sien haer Spoocken, weerd' ghelach,
En t'kinder poppen-spel, t'Rhooms-Craem, t'Miracle ghewach,
Dwelc haer Stuyt-vossen loos, ons van nieuws so hooch roemen.⁷⁸

Through their blind zeal, they drown in the ditch
without help or consolation of those who intend to rebuild Babylon's tower
much higher than Nimrod,
vainly and blindly. Behold, I reveal to them
that their hope is a deceit,
so that every man may see their ludicrous ghosts,
the childish puppetry, the Roman Catholic market stall, the speaking of the miracle
that is so highly glorified by her liars.

[23] In what follows, de Kempenaer focusses on some of the thematic crown jewels in Protestant discourse. I will argue that his arguments are much indebted to an earlier, by then well-established Protestant rhetoric. Broadly speaking, his criticism centres around four hot topics of the time: lucre, papal tyranny, idolatry and superstition.

Lucre: "t'Rhooms-Craem"

[24] De Rhoemse Kercke shows several tables exhibiting all sorts of goods. The desk numbered 13, for example, visualises a table with a 'cross of indulgence', while de Kempenaer laments penitents conscientiously emptying their deepest purses (Fig. 1.13).⁷⁹ The representation of the Catholic Church as a market hall harks back to the ardour of early Reformation polemics which often accused the Catholic opponent of an insatiable hunger for money. The theme of the market stall is clearly visible in a German woodcut from 1546 (Fig. 6). The image, antithetically conceived, depicts the distinction between the 'Christian', Lutheran religion on the left side and the 'anti-Christian', Catholic religion on the right side. In the bottom right-hand corner the pope is selling indulgences. It must be a profitable trade, as the numerous coins on the table and the large money chest and sack of coins next to it prove.

6 Lucas Cranach the Younger, Distinction between the True Religion of Christ and False Idolatrous Doctrine of the Antichrist, 1546, hand-coloured woodcut, 351 × 585 mm. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin – Kupferstichkabinett, inv. no. 707-115 (photo: bpk / Kupferstichkabinett, SMB / Jörg P. Anders)

1.13 | 1.14

1.15

De Rhoemse Kercke, however, clarifies with even greater detail where the money comes from. Number 8 shows several grotesque creatures queuing up to buy candles from two cardinals and a hideous woman (Fig. 1.14). Picking up on the meat hanging under the table, the text denounces how the worship of saints is synonymous with the peddling of relics. Catholics are portrayed as whores and thieves who increase their wealth "through an ordinary donkey bone".⁸⁰

[25] Their greed is once again visualised in the peculiar multi-handed lady in the scene numbered 17 (Fig. 1.15). She personifies Simony, thirsting for all the income she can grab. Behind her appears the unwieldy, caricaturised, fat-bellied figure of the pope. His animal-like appearance, except for his tiara, is not even recognisable as pope. He is called "Sijn’ Heylicheyt Aerdts-God" (His Holiness, the Earthly God) who provides his stalls to increase the harvest of his daughter, Simony, and obtain all worldly riches.⁸¹ Several indulgences, jars, a slipper and a statue of a soul in purgatory are displayed on a table.⁸² The fifteenth stanza opens very ironically with the money that simony earns in mind: "Because this is the rock I will build my Church on."⁸³ The greedy nature of the pope is evidenced by comparing him with the "Soon des Verderfs" (Son of Perdition), referring to Judas, "whose eye was seen aiming at money and goods rather than Christ's kingdom".⁸⁴ His Church is thoroughly guilty of simony. Good works, indulgences and the permission to sin can all be obtained by money. "Yes, even a kiss on the papal slipper is auctioned".⁸⁵

[26] Next to scene 17, another market stall is run by Superstition (Fig. 1.15). She offers numerous goods for sale: consecrated church bells, crucifixes, a bull to sanction the eating of meat during Lent, a bull to marry and a paternoster. Avarice is the central target of criticism of the funeral mass taking place in the left compartment of the church (no. 21; Fig. 1.16).

Daer sy wenschen het ghelt in haer slippen t’sien sneeuwen,
Als Danae Copp-lerss’ dat viel int schoot vileyn.⁸⁶

They wish the money would snow into their draperies,
like coins fell into the shameful lap of Danae.

1.16

Scene 25 shows two Jesuits as actual merchants, counting out their money in the company of two other monks. On the ground we see terrifying creatures with human heads, locust bodies and scorpion tails. They refer to Revelation 9:3, which describes how these locust-like creatures descended on earth. De Kempenaer regards them as guardians of the Catholic market stall:

En soo yemant vernaert haer Winckels, met vergrouwen
Schreeuwen als beseten van s’gelts-Duvel beladich⁸⁷

And as soon as someone approaches their store,
they scream anxiously, possessed by the money devil

Interestingly, these apocalyptic guardians are depicted with crowns on their heads. It is not implausible that they represent submissive kings protecting papal rule, which brings us to another central theme.

Papal tyranny: "Haer Vijfste-Monarchy' toebuyghen alle Rijcken"

[27] Papal tyranny is indeed a very prominent target of criticism in De Rhoemse Kercke. It reflects an interest in papal history – a part of history that was picked out in detail by Protestant historiographers in order to show that the Catholic Church had a historical background full of questionable practices – and had cut off its roots to the original tradition of the Gospels.

[28] Let us look at the scene in which a crowd of clerics and laymen push their way through the main entrance of the church under the banner of Saint Michael and the dragon, subtly alluding to the militant nature of this Church (Fig. 1.17). One of the clergymen is labelled "Pepinus R(ex)", referring to the Frankish king Pepin the Short. His presence hints at the origin of the worldly sovereignty of the popes, since he had donated the exarchate of Ravenna and other Italian cities to the Holy See.⁸⁸ Pepin walks behind a man whose mitre is marked with the words "Bonifacio Pon(tifex) Max(imus)". He is carrying a lyre and, together with Pepin, holds a crosier on which a falcon sits. This raptor symbolises avarice. De Kempenaer compares Pepin to a beggar "who managed to send his falcon over the gold and silver to which he had long been eyeing".⁸⁹

1.17

The historical episode he brings to mind frequently appeared in Protestant pamphlets to denounce the deceitful origin of the papacy.⁹⁰ The sixth stanza states thatthe office of the Pope as Bishop of Rome, although originally intended as a pastoral office, became an authority above all other bishops.⁹¹ This refers to the year 607 during which Boniface III was recognised by the new Patriarch of Constantinople, Phocas, as caput omnium ecclesiarum.⁹²

[29] Already in 1545, Luther's Wider das Papsttum zu Rom, vom Teufel gestiftet (Against the Papacy in Rome, Founded by the Devil) had sketched the origin of the papacy by referring to this competition for the title of Ecumenical Patriarch. De Kempenaer proceeds by explaining how the pope asserted his authority.

De Coningen verblint, Keysers treed’ int slijcke,
Als die Heerscht over haer, in Barbaros ghebleken.⁹³

[He] blinded kings and led emperors into the mud,
since he rules over them, as has been shown in Barbaros.

As de Kempenaer does not expand upon this proposition any further, one may assume that he expected his public to be familiar with the legend about the humiliation of Emperor Frederick I, also known as Frederick Barbarossa, by Pope Alexander III.⁹⁴ The story recounts how Frederick was halted on the way to his coronation in Rome by a number of papal envoys who beseeched him to perform the officium stratoris et strepae. The officium stratoris consisted of the emperor leading the horse on which the pope was sitting by the bridle for a short distance. After having performed this task, the officium strepae required the emperor to hold the stirrup for the dismounting pope. However, legend has it that Frederick held the stirrup the wrong way round for the pope, who thereupon refused to crown Frederick.⁹⁵ By the mid-sixteenth century the legend about Frederick I had become a locus classicus for Protestant writers to demonstrate papal tyranny.⁹⁶ De Kempenaer's mention of it proves his familiarity with such Protestant tropes.

[30] For de Kempenaer, the subordination of secular power to spiritual power explains the historical expansion of the papacy. He then also refers to the pope's entourage during his own lifetime. The Jesuits, for whom de Kempenaer harboured an eternal hatred, are in his view the last straw for the spiritual authority of the pope:⁹⁷

T'van Jesu-wyt meyn ick. Die Cooplie auctentijcke,
Dier Gheest helsch-Duvels, doet Teyckens, ontsteeckt vieren
Des Twists, s’Werelt verderf’, t’rechte Quintessentijcque
Aller ghebroetselen Paaps, daer sonder viel s’Pauws rijcke;
Als d’leste handt-geweer, daer doer hy metter macht
Sijn Bull-craem en leering’, moortlijck, t’hanthaven tracht.⁹⁸

Far from Jesus, I mean.⁹⁹ These real merchants
have a hellish, devilish spirit, they do miracles,
light fires of strife, the world's destruction, the purest embodiment
of all papal broods, without whom the papal realm fell.
They are the last handgun by which he with power wants to maintain
his bull boot and murderous doctrine.

[31] De Kempenaer's thinking is in line with an anti-Jesuit rhetoric that was fueled by the Society's expansion and missionary work in the Dutch Republic after 1592, the so-called Missio Hollandica.¹⁰⁰ Furthermore, the prominent role of the Jesuits in international missionary work was a thorn in de Kempenaer’s side.

Daerover men oock siet dit boos Cayms-geslacht
Aenwenden all syn macht,, geest, vernuft en practijcken:
Op dat d’Ouwt-Babilon met d’Nieuwt weer in haer cracht,
Sy over d’Aerde rondt mochten haer Recht-snoer strijcken,
Haer Vijfste-Monarchy’ toebuyghen alle Rijcken
Die sy hun (verwaent-sott, buyten Gods woort) toeschrijven,
En daer toe in Iapan, Goa en Molucx wijcken.¹⁰¹

One can see this evil offspring of Cain
using all of its power, spirit, ingenuity and practices,
so that ancient and new Babylon may reign again with power.
They cover the earth with their guideline
all empires bend for her fifth monarchy
they ascribe to themselves (conceited and foolish, outside God's word)
and to that end they are diverting to Japan, Goa and the Moluccas.

[32] The reference to a fifth monarchy recalls the prophecy of the rise and fall of four monarchies, as described in the Book of Daniel. In Daniel 2, the prophet interprets a dream of king Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon. The vision of a statue with a head of gold, a torso and arms of silver, loins of bronze, legs and feet partly of stone and partly of mud would, according to Daniel, foretell how four empires would succeed each other, one worse than the other. The destruction of the statue by a large stone would signal that God would eventually destroy history. Daniel 7 describes a dream of the prophet himself. He reports to have seen four great beasts rise from the sea. The last terrifying animal, trampling everything with its paws, announces that four kingdoms would rise, the last of which would crush the entire earth. Using Daniel's prophecies as a blueprint for world history, several Protestant historians linked the four empires to those of the past: Assyrians and Babylonians, Medes and Persians, Macedonians and Romans.¹⁰² According to Luther, the pope would already have founded a second Roman Empire after the fall of the first Roman Empire – a fifth monarchy.¹⁰³ Although the theory of the Four Empires was rejected by Jean Bodin (1520–1596) in his Methodus ad facilem historiarum cognitionem in 1566 and even contested by Protestant writers like Calvin, de Kempenaer's poem makes it clear that he considered the work of the Jesuits part of this fifth monarchy.¹⁰⁴ From the following verses, we can distill that de Kempenaer believed it would once perish like the realms of old:

Satans Ambassadeurs, die als t’blixem haer spoeden
Tot Gods grooten dachs crijgh’, die Werelt t’saem te rucken
In haer Armageddon: maer t’sal hen niet ghelucken.¹⁰⁵

They are Satan's ambassadors, who rush to pull,
until God's last judgement, the world
into her Armageddon, but they will not succeed.

Idolatry: "Soo veel Af-godts"

[33] A quick glance at the papal church full of images and ex-votos makes it clear that idolatry is another major theme. A calvary in front of the church highlights the detrimental impact that images can have on believers. This rightmost scene shows a group of foolish women and men dancing around the image of the suffering Christ on the cross but ignoring it. De Kempenaer criticises them for denying Christ, who brought forth life through his death, and compares the Roman Church to Israel, which erased God from its heart while dancing around the Golden Calf and sought refuge with idols.¹⁰⁶ What he leaves unmentioned, though, is that all these dancers are portrayed with distinctive noses. Their ridiculous countenance is enhanced as they are completely absorbed in the music of a drummer and a bagpipe player who uses his own body as an instrument, which is indicated by the word Satticheyt, or drunkenness (Fig. 1.18). The iconography seems to allude to the woodcut Nose Dance in Gümpelsbrunn by Sebald Beham from 1534 (Fig. 7).¹⁰⁷ It shows people with large noses in a dance competition around a maypole. The trunks hanging on the maypole as one of the prizes for the best dancer express the popular notion that the size of a man's nose indicates the size of his male member. As Stewart remarked, the sixteenth-century viewer was well aware of the bawdy connotations to this nose dance.¹⁰⁸ The sexual connotation of the nose, for example, also features in François Rabelais's (ca. 1494–1553) magna opera, Gargantua (1532) and Pantagruel (1534).¹⁰⁹

1.18

7 Sebald Beham, The Nose Dance in Gümpelsbrunn, ca. 1534, woodcut, 272 mm × 358 mm. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin – Kupferstichkabinett, inv. no. 151-1891 (photo: Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett / Jörg P. Anders)

[34] Apart from Beham's nose dance, the iconography is also indebted to the Commedia dell'arte. As already mentioned, de Kempenaer explicitly refers to Zanni and Pantalone, the masked actors of the Commedia dell'arte. The male dancer depicted with puff trousers resembles Pantalone and demonstrates the designer's familiarity with early Commedia dell'arte iconography – as elaborated, for example, in Mascarades by Boissard and de Gheyn.¹¹⁰

[35] Another important scene commenting upon idolatry is depicted at the church portal where Oholah and Oholibah sit down in the company of Fury (Fig. 1.19). The two whores with their exposed belly and pubis figure in Ezekiel 23. Their characters are metaphors for the cities of Samaria and Jerusalem which forged political alliances with foreign nations instead of trusting wholly in the Lord. To ensure that they are equated with the Catholic clergy, the two whores are depicted wearing a biretta and a mitre and holding the papal keys. They sit on a pedestal marked with the words "De Rhoemse Kerke", below which Ezekiel 16:25 is cited: "offering yourself to every passer-by".

1.19

This visual representation aligns with the broader discourse of the time. From the mid-sixteenth century onwards, the analogy between idolatry and adultery became a focal point in a number of sermons and pamphlets dealing with the image debate.¹¹¹ The comparison drew on biblical passages in which God is depicted as a jealous husband, thereby framing the worship of images as a form of spiritual adultery. Undoubtedly, a humanist audience would have interpreted these two whores watching the dance around the Calvary as a clear reference to the idolatrous nature of the Roman Catholic Church.

[36] The twenty-seventh stanza states that "even in the pantheon there were never as many idols as one can find nowadays in a choir or chapel".¹¹² The engraving vividly highlights the abundance of images, which are primarily situated on and around the various altars depicted. Only one altar marked with the number 14 (Fig. 1.20) displays covered statues. This refers to the Catholic practice of covering images during Lent to avoid stimulating the senses.¹¹³ The retable is rather unusual. It depicts a fattened pig surrounded by the arma Christi. It can be read as an ironic inversion of the Lamb of God as well as a comment on the Catholic way of life.¹¹⁴ After all, equating Catholics to pigs was common in contemporary pamphlets. An interesting example is a passage from Wilhelmus Baudartius's (1565–1640) Apophthegmata christiana which first appeared in 1605.¹¹⁵ Baudartius, who was a Reformed pastor and a veritable polemicist, collected in this book several statements from both 'true' Christians and 'false' Christians (and even the Antichrist) – the former for emulation, the latter as a warning.¹¹⁶ One of them is from Saint Anthony the Great, whose attribute is a pig. According to Baudartius, Saint Anthony announced that the Church would be tainted by fornicators, adulterers and gobblers, after he had seen a vision of several pigs polluting and treading upon the altars. Baudartius saw this as a foreshadowing of the way of life of Catholics and in particular the popes, which he compared to pigs.¹¹⁷

1.20 | 1.21

[37] Of the several other altars in the Church, the altar of Marian devotion with a retable depicting the death of Mary and a sculpture of the Madonna is a particular eyesore for de Kempenaer (Fig. 1.21). He argues that it is inappropriate for the image of Mary to be displayed more prominently than the image of Christ, who must be given centre stage as the unique Redeemer. By recalling the biblical passage of the wedding at Cana, de Kempenaer explains that Mary was only able to ascertain that there was no more wine, whereas Christ performed the miracle of turning water into wine.¹¹⁸ Hence, the idolatrous nature of Mary's miraculous image is proven.

Superstition: "T'Miraeckel-Craem"

[38] Although Superstition is personified by one of the shop ladies to mock monetary gain, the condemnation of superstitious practices is commented upon in more detail. For de Kempenaer the label 'superstition' primarily forms a tool to expose the erroneous Catholic interpretation of various sacraments. It is easy to imagine that the image of the priest elevating a host in his bare buttocks (number 6) must have made many seventeenth-century spectators laugh (Fig. 1.1). The verses proclaim that "this antichrist" thought he could fashion a god out of bread. He decorated the thin wafer with gold and made everyone worship it, as if it would contain Christ's flesh and blood.¹¹⁹ Apart from the Realis Presentia, de Kempenaer also accuses the priest of keeping the wine to himself. In scene 14 a chalice lies toppled on the altar:

Ey lieve siet doch nu, Wat hier voor eenen dissche
Den Weerdt vermomt en stom, syn gasten int vasten deckt
Daer elck den Broodt-Godt hy gheeft, maer sy slaen misse
S’wijns dranck, door hem alleen reyn uyten Kelck gheleck[t]¹²⁰

Look, dear, what kind of table
the disguised and stupid landlord has set for his guests during Lent.
He gives them each the bread-god, but they lack
the wine, for only he drinks it pure from the chalice

The sharp accusation which follows makes it a plea for the use of the laity's cup.¹²¹

Deess’ Sacrament-schenders hebben valsch’ af-ghesned
Ondert’ decksel spottis: Dat leecken ghebaert heden,
Den Wijn verkeert in t’bloet […]

These sacrament-violators have incorrectly cut it off,
under the guise that it would have
a wrong effect in the blood of the laity.¹²²

[39] As such, superstition can be recognised as human fabrications which defer from the word of God. In the ninth scene we witness how a father and mother offer their baby to be baptised (Fig. 1.22). In the foreground, three children are kneeling to be confirmed (number 10). Next to them, the faithful are given a cross of ashes on their forehead (number 11).

1.22

In the poem these sacraments and ritual practices are under fire. Firstly, John the Baptist who used pure water for the sacrament of baptism is contrasted against the depicted bishop who uses chrism oil, salt and saliva – vain human inventions in order to repel the devil from the child.¹²³ Since the mid-third century the rite of exorcism was part of the Catholic baptismal office. The text expounds the Calvinist position, which denounces it as a papal relic.¹²⁴ Secondly, confirmation is called "the sacrament of the oil pot, which is lubricated on the tied child, seven years old now."¹²⁵ Finally, the symbolic cross of ashes is mercilessly turned down, by pointing out to the priests that the cross means something else.¹²⁶

[40] The twelfth figure group represents the sacrament of Penance. This Catholic sacrament was, alongside frequent communion, one of the pillars of the pastoral strategy of the Dutch Mission of the Society of Jesus and was particularly encouraged.¹²⁷ Therefore it was regularly the target of scorn from the Reformers, who denied the mediating role of priests in forgiveness.

Hebt inghevoert d’Oorbiecht’, elcx sond’ (hoe groot) vergheven:
(Niet naer Christi meyning’, door sijns Woordts verconden)
Maer d’ydel eyghen macht, als selfs sondich vol sneven:
Op dat mocht ghy elcx hert, gedacht, en secreet gronden,
En alsoo op u duymken draeyen s’Werelts ronden¹²⁸

[You] introduced confession. Every sin, no matter how huge, you forgive
(not according to the opinion of Christ, in the word explained),
but according to your own vain power, sinful and erroneous,
in order to fathom every heart, thought and secret.
And so, you turn the world upon your thumb.

[41] Purgatory is another human invention criticised by de Kempenaer. According to him there are "only two ways: heaven and hell", by arguing that "Abraham said clearly to the damned rich man that Lazarus found rest".¹²⁹ This last sentence refers to Luke 16:25 and is a fragment from the parable of The Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-26). De Kempenaer in fact appeals to a scriptural passage that had long played an important role in debates on purgatory. In the wake of the Council of Trent, during which the doctrine of purgatory was first elaborated, Catholic theologians eagerly collected biblical references that endorsed this new doctrine.¹³⁰ They pointed to the biblical image of the Bosom of Abraham into which Lazarus was brought by the angels after his death. The rich man, on the other hand, ended up in hell and – while being tormented – saw "Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom" (Luke 16:23). In Catholic eyes, this Bosom of Abraham was equivalent to the waiting place of saved souls.¹³¹ From a Protestant point of view, however, the biblical passage proved just the opposite, namely the non-existence of purgatory.¹³² In a sermon published in Leiden in 1588, the Protestant minister Jan Phyleus used the contrast between the destiny of the rich man and the poor beggar Lazarus to illustrate that one either goes to hell or to heaven.¹³³ In his reasoning, the Bosom of Abraham is simply a synonym for heaven and the statement that Lazarus is comforted must be interpreted as an eternal comfort of the soul, and hence as a denial of purgatory.¹³⁴ De Kempenaer's brief phrase about the peace Lazarus found – which as an isolated thought is difficult for us to understand today – not only proves that he was well aware of this Protestant discourse, but also considered his public to be.

[42] To conclude his long list of superstitious human fabrications, de Kempenaer also denounces miracles. The poem shortly refers to "hauntings in Berne".¹³⁵ This may hint at an incident in the Swiss city of Bern in 1507, where a Dominican novice, Johann Jetzer, was said to have witnessed several ghostly apparitions. One of these ghosts identified himself as a soul from purgatory, asking Jetzer to have masses read for his soul.¹³⁶ The entire Jetzer affair, which involved a notorious scandal with stigmata, attracted considerable attention, especially as Jetzer's confessions during the trial exposed the apparitions and miracles as a fraud.¹³⁷ It is not surprising that de Kempenaer recalled this story. It was widely disseminated through pamphlets and books in both Latin and German.¹³⁸ Erasmus mentioned it in his Colloquia familiaria (1518).¹³⁹ Within the Reformation context, various pamphlets depicted the Jetzer case as a prominent example of monastic abuses.¹⁴⁰ Notably the spirit claiming to be a soul from purgatory was a key element in this narrative. Callard accurately observed that for Protestants who rejected the notion of returning souls, the Bern apparitions offered a prime opportunity to dismiss them as "the faking of a fake, the staging of the non-existent phenomenon of a returning soul".¹⁴¹

1.23

In the context of the stigmata debate, the De Rhoemse Kercke print shows a unique iconography of Saint Francis receiving his stigmata from a jug of muscat wine (Fig. 1.23). Stigmata as incontrovertible signs of saintliness were often addressed by the Reformers. Both Lutheran and Calvinist writers labelled visual signs of holiness such as stigmata as heinous human fabrications.¹⁴²

Intended audience

[43] Now that the iconography and de Kempenaer's explanation of it have been elucidated, the question arises as to which audience De Rhoemse Kercke intended to address. The print itself can teach us a lot about the profile of its potential public. To begin with, its extensive size entails quite steep production costs, which suggests that it was only affordable for a select audience. This observation aligns with the content, which is too erudite to have served as a broad educational tool. Since, as explained above, de Kempenaer intersperses his text with allusions to all sorts of topics from a Protestant discourse, this implies that he had a specific audience in mind – one that was already familiar with these allusions, thus requiring minimal further explanation. Another striking feature is that the engraving uses a polemical visual language that had been widely tested over 75 years of religious controversy. Its criticism of the Roman Church echoes the tone of early Reformation polemics. The fact that these were wounds that were torn open several decades earlier does not diminish the likelihood that the image was still perceived as strongly polemical in the early 1600s and that it must have appealed to a public with strong anti-Catholic interests. Indeed, the print's explicitness – the depiction of whorish, gluttonous, and money-hungry clergymen engaged in wicked or superstitious activities – suggests that it did not primarily aim to persuade opponents; instead, it directly engages outspoken critics of the Roman Catholic Church.

[44] Someone whom I reckon to have acquired the print, although several decades later, is Alhardus Raedt (1640–1716), professor at Harderwijk.¹⁴³ In his Apologia veritatis adversus Maresium (1673), which is modelled on Johannes Coccejus (1603–1669) and Millenarianism, Raedt refers to the Latin verses that appear on De Rhoemse Kercke when he argues that the pope himself is the antichrist.¹⁴⁴ De Rhoemse Kercke thus seems to have circulated in a theological milieu also decades after its publication and was even employed in new religious debates.

[45] The decades-old theme of the print, then, must be seen in the context of the early Dutch Republic's mounting interest in its revolutionary roots. Indeed, Judith Pollmann has pointed to a growing fascination around 1600 with the early stages of the Dutch Revolt. Of note is that this revival was particularly pronounced among Flemish and Brabantian exiles and their descendants.¹⁴⁵ Pollmann explains their efforts to remember the Revolt and highlight a common Dutch struggle with their urge to integrate into a larger Netherlandish community.¹⁴⁶ Her analysis shows that within the Republic a common language and imagery inspired by decades of patriotic propaganda developed and shaped a new sense of Netherlandish identity.¹⁴⁷ The fact that De Rhoemse Kercke is the product of three exiled Brabantians must not be considered coincidental. In a reality in which the majority of the Dutch had not yet committed themselves to any particular confession, promoting a unified Dutch religious identity will have been all the more pressing for them.¹⁴⁸ De Rhoemse Kercke shows that this shaping of religious identity can be traced back to the early Reformation. In essence, De Rhoemse Kercke articulates how the Reformed Church distanced itself from the centuries-old practice of the Catholic Church, the religion of the Southerners. The scenes depicted must therefore be viewed in the light of a contemporary need to shape a unified religious identity within the Dutch Republic as opposed to the South.

Anonymity and authorship

[46] Interpreting this print in relation to identity formation automatically raises questions about the necessity to publish it anonymously. Why would the creators of such a print, which appeared in the Dutch Republic where the Reformed Church had driven back the Catholic Church, not dare to openly declare authorship? On De Rhoemse Kercke, the names of the publisher and the author of the text are concealed by the initials "D.G." and "P.D.K.". The name of the engraver Baudous, on the other hand, is a little easier to identify thanks to the inscription "B. Rob.". It should be noted, however, that the mention of an inventor is notably absent. A possible explanation can be found in the varying levels of appreciation of the different roles in the production process of a print. In those days inventors and publishers were generally considered more important than engravers, whose names were often omitted.¹⁴⁹ Whereas engravers could argue that their role had been to copy an inventor's design, inventors and publishers were held responsible for the underlying ideas.¹⁵⁰ Thus, in cases where a print expressed polemical views, caution was exercised in naming the inventor and publisher.

[47] Although, as argued above, this print will still have been perceived as polemical by Catholics, it should be noted that the thinking is in line with the teachings of the Reformed Church, which was already dominant in the Republic at the time. Yet, even there, it was not uncommon for prints with orthodox religious content to appear anonymously. This may stem from the fact that even in the fledgling Dutch Republic the Church wanted to limit public discussions as much as possible. The reasoning behind this was that a print, even if it attacked the right foe (the Jesuits in particular), could still contain inappropriate knowledge and instructions. Thus, even preachers had to obtain permission from the classis or synod before publishing books, theses or antitheses.¹⁵¹ In addition, of course, professional and personal reasons may have also played a role in the omission of names. The makers of the print who were exiles from the Southern Netherlands probably still had quite a few relatives there who did still adhere to the Catholic Church. In addition, the makers' diverse professional contacts may have made them reluctant to identify themselves as such. Hence, De Rhoemse Kercke should primarily be understood as a plea for a strong Dutch Reformed identity intended for a like-minded constituency, and less as a way for the makers to cast themselves in the role of exemplary Reformed believers.

[48] In the context of the sensitive role of an inventor, I want to raise the possibility that one of the listed makers was responsible for the design. After all, it often happened that one and the same person took on several roles in the Early Modern print production process. In this case, there are three options. De Kempenaer himself must definitely be excluded as a designer. Although he could certainly have supplied ideas to the designer, his own style, as visible in his notebooks (Fig. 8), deviates too much from the engraving of De Rhoemse Kercke.¹⁵² The same goes for de Gheyn (Fig. 9).

8 Paulus de Kempenaer, notebook, ca. 1617 – June 1618, 97 fols., 241 × 185 mm, p. 96: Maect u bereijt, drawing. Ghent University Library, ms. BHSL.HS.0940 (photo: Ghent University Library)

9 Jacques de Gheyn II, Heraclitus and Democritus, ca. 1600–1609, light brown paper, black chalk, heightened in white, 238 × 280 mm. Stichting P. & N. de Boer, Amsterdam, inv. no. 509 (photo: RKD – Nederlands Instituut voor Kunstgeschiedenis, Den Haag)

[49] Baudous, on the other hand, does qualify to be the designer of the image. Let us consider another large print published around the same time, on which Baudous is named as the engraver by his initials R. B. (Fig. 10).

10 Robert Baudous after Nic. Anglois, Tafereel oft onderwiisinge der eenvoudige, voorstellende twee verscheyden religien (Tableau or teaching of the simple, depicting two different religions), ca. 1600, engraving, 430 × 1875 mm. Atlas Van Stolk, Rotterdam, inv. no. 60692 (photo: Atlas Van Stolk / Bibliotheek Rotterdam)

It depicts the biblical story of the narrow and broad way (Matthew 7:13-14).¹⁵³ The detail of the cross-section of a Catholic church building (Fig. 10.1) is very reminiscent of the rendering of the church interior in De Rhoemse Kercke (Fig. 1). Indeed, the depiction of a church richly decorated with 'idolatrous' images, accommodating a priest elevating the host in front of the high altar and a procession in honour of Saint Martin almost forms a kind of miniature of De Rhoemse Kercke.¹⁵⁴

10.1

It should be noted that the design of the Tafereel oft onderwiisinge der eenvoudige (Fig. 10) is attributed by an inscription to "Nic. Anglois Inventor". Anglois could be a geographical name of origin. However, as there is no documentation about a certain Nic. Anglois or Nic. from England, the question can be raised whether this is a real name. Stylistic similarities with prints designed by Baudous are considerable, leading us to suggest that the name of Nic. Anglois could have served as a pseudonym for Baudous, who, for reasons I have outlined above, could have chosen to obliterate his role as inventor.

Conclusion

[50] De Rhoemse Kercke is one of the most elaborate satirical broadsheets on the Roman Catholic Church ever published in the Low Countries. It distinguishes itself from other ephemera by its size and complex content. The image, which should be read in conjunction with de Kempenaer's key from right to left, conjures up, as argued, the popular theme of The World Turned Upside Down. But whereas prints of the upside-down world often evoked fantastical images of non-existent realities, this print shows a typical Catholic church, which contemporary spectators and the creators had experienced firsthand not even that long ago. The practices of the Roman Catholic Church are denounced as wrong by both the poem and the grotesque style of the depiction. De Kempenaer's poem, which is explained in detail for the first time in this article, is most closely connected to this image. It provides an indispensable key to understanding the image and the communicative strategies at work in it. While the image amuses and amazes the human eye through its grotesque formal language, the text takes on a grim tone. For de Kempenaer, the various scenes frequently serve as gateways to topoi established in a much older Reformation discourse in which he assumed his audience was well-versed. As a product of a multimedia society, this broadsheet brilliantly meshes with older pamphlets and images. This interest in the early phase of the Reformation can probably be explained by the personal concerns and intentions of its makers. Indeed, as I argued, the print was most likely created through the initiative of de Gheyn II, who, with Baudous and de Kempenaer, formed a triumvirate of like-minded souls. Connected as they were by having fled from the South, they wanted to foster a unified Dutch Reformed identity in the North. A brilliant team that went all out to create a complex multimedia broadsheet for a learned audience – about which, I am sure, the last word has still not been spoken.

Acknowledgements
I am grateful to my supervisor, Prof. dr. Tine Meganck for her insightful and helpful comments. Furthermore, I would like to thank Ann Diels who collaborated on a first draft of this article. A short version of this paper was first presented at the Twelfth Annual REFORC Conference on Early Modern Christianity at KU Leuven in May 2023.

Reviewers
Anonymous

Local Editors
Lieneke Nijkamp, Rubenianum, Antwerp
Andrea Lermer, Zentralinstitut für Kunstgeschichte, Munich

License
The text of this article is provided under the terms of the Creative Commons License CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0.