CONFLICTS OF JESUITS AND SECULARS IN THE REIGN OF ELIZABETH
COLL. CHKI3TI. REGIS
BIB. MAJ. TORONTO
A HISTORICAL SKETCH '
OF THE CONFLICTS BETWEEN
JESUITS AND SECULARS
IN THE REIGN OF QUEEN ELIZABETH
WITH A REPRINT OF
CHRISTOPHER BAGSHAW'S 'TRUE RELATION
2-7 if OF THE FACTION BEGUN AT WISBICH1
AND ILLUSTRATIVE DOCUMENTS By THOMAS GRAVES LAW
LIBRARIAN ; SIGN7ET LIBRARY
LONDON:
Published by DAVID NUTT in the Strand 1889
31912
CONTENTS.
INTRODUCTION,
1. The Seminaries and the Jesuit Mission,
2. The Armada and its Consequences,
3. Disturbances at the Roman College,
4. The Prisoners at Wisbeach,
5. The Appointment of the Archpriest,
6. The Appeal and the Books,
7. The Judgment of Rome, .
8. The Sequel,
9. Bibliographical Notes,
A TRUE RELATION, .
The Memorial against the Jesuits, Censure of the Paris University, Letter of Dr. Dorel, .
PAGE
i
v
xv
xxviii
xxxviii
lix
Ixxxiv
cii
cxx
cxxviii
96 123 126
APPENDIX—
A. List of Priests imprisoned at Wisbeach, . .135
B. Letter of Blackwell to Cardinal Cajetan, . . 137
C. Letter of Henry Tichborne, S.J., 1598, . .139
D. Extract from Father Lister's Adversus Factiosos, . 143
E. John Sicklemore to Dr. Bagshaw, Aug. 1598, . 145
F. Letter to Dr. Bagshaw, June 4, 1599, . .146
G. John Mush to Dr. Bagshaw, May 1599, . .147
Contents.
H. John Blackfan, S.J., to John Floyd, S.JV Sept.
7, 1599, 149
/. Dr. Bagshaw to Mr. Thomas Bluet, April 27,
1601, . . . . . .150
J. Letter of the Archpriest Blackwell to his
Assistants, June 23, 1601, . . . 151
K. Declaratio Thomae Bluetti exhibita cardinalibus,
etc., 1602, . . . . .153
INDEX, .... 159
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION.
THE True Relation of the Faction begun at Wisbeach is something more than the story of a quarrel among Roman catholic priests of interest only to themselves. The quarrel was indeed fierce and prolonged and widespread, and could not but leave its mark upon the condition and character of the clerical body itself. But although on the surface it seemed principally concerned with matters of ecclesiastical government and discipline, this Eight Years1 War of the priests had its origin and its issue in political differences of no small historical importance. The faction led by the Jesuits contended for the Spanish succession and the subjection of England to the pope by force of arms. Their opponents were for the king of Scots whether catholic or protestant. The one party upheld the papal claim to depose princes, while the members of the other party came to protest that in case of any attempt to enforce such a claim they should be bound in conscience to defend their sovereign in defiance of all ecclesiastical censures. These same men aimed at securing some measure of toleration for their religion, and at establishing a modus vivendi with the state. The Jesuit zealots were for war to the knife, and for obvious reasons detested the thought of toleration.1 Their ecclesiastical scheme which gave most offence — the appointment of an archpriest — was mainly projected with the view of gaining vantage-ground for political action. These grave con-
1 See the interesting letter of Father Tichborne, infra, Appendix C. pp 141, 142.
ii Introduction.
tentions therefore caused as much anxiety at the court of Madrid as they did at Rome, and were watched throughout with eager interest by the government at home. The end of the struggle found the seminarists as a whole standing in a new relation both towards the pope and the English crown. There had meanwhile sprung up among the clergy a strong national party. The back of the great catholic reaction, in England at least, was already broken. A direct outcome of petty disputes about the morals and behaviour of certain Wisbeach prisoners in 1595 was the famous protestation of allegiance drawn up by thirteen of the leading secular clergy, January 3, 1603, the very day that Elizabeth was seized with her last illness. This was the significant though tardy response on their part to the bull of Pius v., and their virtual condemna tion of the insane act of John Felton, now beatified as a martyr, who had stuck that bull on the bishop of London's gate just thirty-three years before. Thus with almost her last breath the queen may be said to have won a decisive moral victory over her lifelong foes. If the winds and the waves had fought for her against the catholic Armada, this her final victory was given into her hands by the priests themselves. Catholic Europe, which had looked on for many years with pious hope and pride on the combined onslaught made upon protestant England by the forces spiritual and temporal of the pope and his seminarists, the Guises and the king of Spain, now witnessed with disgust a disaster more humiliating than the wrecking of Philip's ships. Priests, Jesuit and secular, were flying at each other's throats ; and ' designed martyrs ' and confessors were reviling each other in language not exceeded in bitterness or violence by the most hostile of the puritans. Protestant preachers were pointing at the scandal with derision, and statesmen were chuckling over the suicidal follies of men who had been boasting of adding new glories to
Dr. Bagshaw's Book. iii
the catholic Church. ' It was a pitiful thing,"1 cried one of the leaders in the fray, looking back upon his own battlefield, 4 that men dedicated to God's service in so higli a duty and holy a work ' should be turned aside, ' and fall the one upon the other, seeking to buffet and break heads with the laughter of all their enemies and the intolerable grief of their friends and superiors.1 No one knew better than Father Parsons what this buffeting of heads had cost the cause for which he spent his life.
To the ecclesiastical historian the episode is well worthy of attention. In the institution of the archpriest we have a novel experiment in church government, while the disturbances which arose out of it present some instructive examples on the one hand of the kind of discipline possessed by the clergy, and the procedure of the papal court on the other, at a time when a more than usual strain was laid upon their relations. The picture of prison life among the veterans of the pope's clerical army is unique. We learn something too of the manner of men who left the universities at home to join the papal seminaries abroad, what sort of training they there re ceived for their new vocation, and how they lived and acted as confessors for their faith and in expectation of martyrdom. Much has been written of the religious enthusiasm of these men, their undoubted courage and heroism under the rack and on the scaffold. We have here the reverse of the medal, but no less a faithful portrait.
Well-nigh a score of contemporary tracts, of which some detailed account will be given later on, were written upon these affairs. Dr. Christopher Bagshaw, whose book is here reprinted, is not the most respectable or the most impartial of the writers. His is however by far the most full and circumstantial narrative of the so-called 'Wisbeach Stirs,' or the earlier stage of the quarrel in which he was one of the
iv Introduction.
chief actors ; and his work possesses the further advantages of being written in English, and being in the form of a con secutive narrative, and not, as is the case with the majority of these books, an answer to a preceding work or an argumen tative disquisition on points of controversy. Moreover, although Dr. Bagshaw was a bitter partisan, and his tone towards his adversaries and his de facto superior nothing less than insolent, his statements of fact are the statements not of himself alone, but of his party. The Wisbeach prisoners on his side and the appellant priests give one version of the details with scarcely a variation. The archpriest, the Jesuits and their adherents, give, with almost equal unanimity, another. The main outlines stand out clearly enough. Whether this or that charge brought by the one set of priests against an indi vidual member of the opposite party be true or not, it may be impossible now to decide, and is often unimportant. But in any case this fact is both undeniable and important that a number of grave priests, among whom were men at one time respected as bishops, doctors, confessors and martyrs, unite in denouncing the principles and policy of the Jesuit missionaries as dangerous and criminal, while the responsible chiefs of the society are as outspoken and deliberate in exposing the vices which in their opinion had brought disgrace upon the secular clergy. From this point of view alone the literature is suffi ciently instructive. The leaders of the one faction in writing down the character of their opponents often enough betray their own ; and where a large part of the controversy turns upon questions of temper and conduct, the situation can only be fully appreciated when the ipslssima verba of the disputants are before us. No apology should therefore be needed for making a beginning of this study with the treatise of Dr. Bagshaw. The True Relation may be taken as a fail- specimen of its class. It should be followed perhaps by the
The First Decade of Elizabeth's Reign. v
Apologie of F. Parsons, which is a reply to some half-dozen works in Latin or English on the appellants' side, and by the answer to the Apologie by Dr. Humphrey Ely, professor of canon law at Pont-a-Mousson, whose Brief'e Notes is the only contemporary tract which can strictly be said to proceed from an impartial and independent hand. But, meanwhile, in order that the story may be as complete as possible within the limits of a single volume, and that this book may serve in some sort as a general guide to the literature of the subject, a number of notes and documents, drawn chiefly from other scarce tracts, or from inedited papers of the time, have been added in illustration of the author's text, while in the present introduction an attempt is made to fill up some gaps in Bagshaw's narrative and to tell, what he was unable to tell, the end of the story.
I. The Seminaries and the Jesuit Mission. When the Jesuit fathers, Parsons and Campion, entered England in the summer of 1580, Elizabeth was completing the twenty-second year of her reign. The young men at the uni versities could remember nothing of the days of queen Mary and the mass. For the first half of those twenty-two years the history of the Roman catholic church in England is a blank. Never had a church so completely gone down before the first blow of opposition. Some nine thousand parish priests were content, with good or bad consciences, to read the book of Common Prayer, and to preserve their livings. Several of their former bishops were dead, others were in prison or on parole, or fugitives abroad. There was no attempt on the part of Rome to fill up vacant sees or to provide for ecclesiastical organization and government. Every ecclesiastical movement was left to private enterprise. A few scholars wrote contro versial tracts in safety at Louvain. The laity at home were
vi Introduction.
left without pastors, guides or instruction. The nation, pes tered with religious troubles and the fires of persecution for the past thirty years, now enjoyed a short period of rest and growth. Thanks to the apathy or helplessness of the papal hierarchy, the national church was scarcely conscious of the revolution it had gone through. Pius v. for a moment indeed seemed to rise to the occasion. He ventured so far as to send a couple of priests into England with a commission to proclaim that attendance at the Anglican service was a mortal sin, and with faculties to absolve from heresy. But he soon betook himself to political intrigues with Ridolfi and the queen of Scots, and to stirring up rebellion in the north of England, with promises of aid to the insurgent earls. Early in 1570 came the fatal bull of ex communication and deposition. By this cruel act the harassed consciences of the unfortunate catholics were tormented ten fold. They were told by the vicar of Christ that it was a duty to rebel and a sin to obey the queen. Dr. Sander assured the pope and the Christian world that the insurrection of 1569 had failed only because of the ignorance of catholics on the doctrine of the bull.1 Henceforth, he promised, they should be better instructed. It was the pope now and not Elizabeth who was the aggressor. His money and indulgences, his soldiers and missionaries were at the service of any foreign invader or rebel at home. The bull identified in the mind of Eliza beth the religion of perhaps half her subjects with secret treason. The seminarists became in effect recruiting sergeants for king Philip. If many of the old catholics brought up in other traditions could be trusted to defy the papal curses, should it come to fighting, not so the converts. As to her own life, it was in constant danger from the assassin. It was the fault of Pius v. and his successors if the English government, in face of this imminent peril to the nation, refused to dis-
1 Sander, De Visibili Monarchia, p. 706.
The Seminaries, 1568-1580. vii
tinguish between allegiance to the pope and disloyalty to the state. Yet, notwithstanding the indignation of parliament, and its savage additions to the coercive legislation against catholics, the executive was for the next ten years surprisingly patient and tolerant. Bishop Challoner ventures to claim only three victims of the penal code as martyrs for their religion before the year 1581.1
Meanwhile William Allen, whose many noble qualities marked him out as the leader among the catholic refugees, had almost single-handed founded the seminary at Douai in 1568 ; and in 1574 he was able to despatch four young priests into England. Before another six years had gone by he had sent over as many as a hundred. These men were as a rule un distinguished by birth, learning, or abilities. They excited even less attention in the country at large than might have been expected ; and we know very little of their doings. One effect however of the foreign seminary was noteworthy. With its offers of board and education free to all comers, it served as a disturbing force upon the universities at home. Young men with catholic tendencies and ambitious of martyrdom, dis-
1 The list of Elizabethan martyrs given in bishop Challoner's Memoirs of Missionary Priests (1741-42), and generally accepted by Roman catholics, was approved in the ordinary process instituted by cardinal Manning in 1874, and by him forwarded to Rome in view of the further canonical steps to be there taken for their beatification. By an unusual procedure, the congregation of rites added to this traditional roll four martyrs, whom, with all others whose martyr doms were painted on the walls of the English college in 1582 by Circignani, Leo xm. beatified in December 1886. The four were Plumtree, the chap lain to the insurgent earls, who was hanged as a rebel in 1579; John Felton, already mentioned ; Dr. Story, the civilian, one of the worst instigators of the Marian persecution, who stoutly refused allegiance to the queen ; and Thomas Woodhouse, a priest, claimed by the Jesuits, who also, on the strength of Pius' bull, refused to acknowledge the right of Elizabeth to the crown. Challoner excluded these men because, in his opinion, they had not suffered purely on religious accounts. Some earlier martyrologists, as Wilson in his English Martyrologe (1608) and Richard Smith, the bishop of Chalcedon, in his official catalogue, prepared by order from Rome (1628), had indeed admitted Felton, Story and Woodhouse, but rejected the rebel chaplain.
viii Introduction.
contented and restless boys in quest of adventures, students who had got into scrapes at their colleges, ran away abroad. With them went, so Parsons tells us, ' poor serving men, soldiers and wanderers,1 1 not to speak of others whom curiosity and cupidity led to play the spy and sell their information to the government. All such deserters were welcome to the camp of the large-hearted and unsuspecting Allen. He soon had more on his hands than he could manage. With the aid of his friend Dr. Owen Lewis he projected a second establishment at Rome. Thither some picked scholars were sent from Douai as early as 1576,2 and two years later the colony numbered about thirty students. Dr. Maurice Clenock, bishop-elect of Bangor in queen Mary's time, was appointed rector, and two Italian Jesuits were chosen to take part in the direction of the college, one as procurator, and the other as prefect of studies. Cardinal Moroni was named protector of the college.
Events now occurred which, though not immediately con nected with the main subject of our story, showed the temper of the men we have to deal with, and led indirectly to results of the greatest importance. Dr. Clenock was, according to all accounts, a most incompetent ruler. The English students complained that he favoured his countrymen, the Welsh, who were a quarrelsome set, with whom it was impossible to live in peace. He gave each Welshman a room to himself, while the English had to put up with the narrowest corners. The Welsh were made comfortable in winter with new suits of clothes, while their fellow-students from England were left to shiver in the torn and worm-eaten cassocks of summer. Moreover, Welsh men were admitted into the college who were morally and
1 Briefe Apologie, fol. 20.
2 The names of some of these first students, William Holt, Ralph Standish, Thomas Bell, John Mush, Jonas Meredith, etc., will often occur in the following pages.
Rebellion at the Roma?i College, 1579. ix
intellectually unfit. Dr. Clenock, add the malcontents, ' evi dently designed that Welshmen, who at home serve the English, should rule them at Rome, and if England is soon to he converted, as all hope, these men would be promoted to the highest places, to the endless disturbance of the kingdom.'1 * In a few months the English scholars rose in open mutiny against their superior. They sent deputations to the pope and to the cardinal protector, demanding the dismissal of Dr. Clenock, and petitioning that the government of the college might be given to the Jesuits. The pope sternly bade them obey their rector or leave the college. Cardinal Moroni was equally firm. They must accept Dr. Clenock or go. The students were obstinate, and the cardinal lost his temper. He threatened them with imprisonment and whipping, and finally bade them 'go and be hanged.1 2 Meanwhile there was danger of bloodshed within the college walls. The students wrangled with the rector in the dining-hall. ' He began at the table,' writes one of the leaders of the English faction, 4 presently to revile some of our company with foul words, and [the Welshmen] preparing their knives in their hands to have strucken some of those that sat next to them . . . judge you what time we had to look to our selves.' 3 Orders came at last that Martin Array, John Mush, John Gore, and Richard Haydock should at once swear obedi ence to Dr. Clenock or lay down their cassocks and depart, and
1 The documents are printed in Tierney'sZW#(vol. ii. p. cccxlvi seq.} : 'Causae quare scholares Angli tantum abhorrent a regimine D. Mauritii,' etc., and 'Ad card, protectorem petitio scholarium Anglorum pro patribus societatis habendis.'
2 ' Abire in malam crucem,' a pious malediction which was literally fulfilled in the case of one of the ringleaders present, the ' Blessed Ralph Sherwin,' who was hanged, drawn and quartered at Tyburn, December I, 1581.
3 ' Yea, it w'ent so far (writes Allen), woe be to our sins, that as we were advertised mischief and murder had like to have been committed in ipso collegia, ' Letter to Dr. Lewis, 1 2th May 1579 (Douay Diaries, p. 78). See the full narrative in Haydock's letter to Allen, and compare Dr. Owen Lewis' letter also to Allen (Tierney's Dodd, vol. ii. p. cccl).
Introduction.
if they refused this be sent to prison. The rest of the faction cried out that they would all throw in their lot with the four, and go with them. Accordingly, early next morning, which was Ash AVednesday, thirty-three students marched out of the college, declaring they would go in procession with the cross before them to Rheims, or if needs be to England. They paraded the streets of Rome, going from church to church soliciting alms. The Jesuit preachers pleaded from the pulpits the cause of their too zealous friends. ' They (the fathers) were almost out of their wits for us,' says Haydock. A thousand crowns were soon collected. Messengers hastened to the pope to represent the scandal of such an exodus. Dr. Owen Lewis im plored his holiness to take pity on silly youths who thought it a mortal sin to obey any one but a Jesuit. The pope relented, and summoned his rebellious children to his presence. There was much weeping on both sides, and the students were sent back to the college and their requests granted.1 Father Alfonso Agazzari was soon after appointed the first Jesuit rector.
Allen had watched these tumults with a heavy heart. He feared the spread of the disorder to Rheims. Notwithstanding his ill-health he made a point of being present in hall at dinner and supper. He saw some sign that 'the Scottish nation begin to put in for it.' It was reported to him that Dr. Lewis had said to Lesley, bishop of Ross, ' My lord, let us stick together ; for we are the old and true inhabiters and owners of the isle of Britany : these others be but usurpers and mere possessors.1 One Hughes, 'of a bitter, odd, and incompatible nature,1 had written both to Allen and to Dr. Bristowe ' most plainly, that the Jesuits have been and shall be proved the council and counsellors of all these tumults,1 and though Allen did not believe this, but rather rejoiced that the college was put under the care of the society, he nevertheless
1 Dr. Ely's Certayne Briefe Notes, pp. 73-75.
The Jesuit Mission Projected, 1580. xi
apprehended ' new and endless stirs," and thus lie exclaimed bitterly, ' I shall be weary of my life.'1
The fears of Allen seemed about to be realised at once. In the autumn of 1579 William Holt and four other students joined the society, and were thus apparently lost to Allen and the English mission. A reaction set in against the Jesuits. They were accused of putting their sickles into other men's harvests, and of making use of their position in the college to entice the most promising pupils into their own order. Par sons, then at Rome, sent for Allen to help in making peace, suggested as a means of reconciliation that the Jesuits should be sent into England, and offered to go himself.2 Allen, who was free from all narrow jealousies and was already looking out for fresh auxiliaries, seized the opportunity of urging Mercurianus, the general of the society, to send his English subjects, or some of them, to take part in the mission. Long and anxious were the deliberations on this point. The chiefs of the society argued with caution and considerable foresight. The risks in England, they said, were greater than those in India. The fathers would be suspected of political aims, and thus bring greater odium upon the whole enterprise. There would be disputes with the secular priests, and there were no bishops to hold the balance or to exercise proper ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Would the ultimate gain be worth the inevitable loss of life ? The objections were overruled. Claudius Aquaviva, afterwards general, spoke warmly in favour of Allen's proposal, and asked to be himself sent into England. The pope promised to solve one difficulty by dispatching Gold well, bishop of St. Asaph, with the missionaries, as ordi nary of all England.3 The Jesuit mission was determined
1 Allen to Lewis, apud Tierney, vol. ii. p. ccclxx.
2 His letter is printed in Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen, p. 74.
3 Goldwell went as far as Rheims, but, terrified at the prospect, turned back at the last moment under pretext of ill-health, to the great disgust of the nuncio of France. — Letters and Memorials, p. 403.
xii Introduction.
upon, and Parsons and Campion were appointed to lead the way, April 14, 1580.1 Campion begged for a mitigation of the bull, which pressed heavily upon catholics, subjecting them to the ban of the church if they acknowledged the queen. He obtained this much, that 'rebus sic stantibus"* — as long as matters stood as they were — catholics should be permitted to render civil allegiance to their excommunicated sovereign. This cunning and suggestive proviso — ' rebus sic stantibus ' — is a key to much that followed. It was the business of the pope, the Guises and the king of Spain to see that the present situation should be brought to as speedy a termination as possible.2
Meanwhile the rules drawn up for the guidance of the fathers were, from a Roman catholic point of view, most edi fying. One of them, at least, represents an ideal which stands in such strong contrast to the facts as they are reported in Bagshaw's Relation and elsewhere that it deserves to be quoted here in full. Another affords some evidence that political action formed no part of the mission as originally planned by the Jesuit superiors: 'They (the fathers are told) must be most particularly careful not to give the slightest handle for a suspicion of avarice and greediness ; and therefore, except in great necessity, they must not ask or accept alms ; and when they have need, it will be better to accept them from one or two faithful and devoted men ; in fine, they must so behave that all may see that the only gain they covet is that of souls. . . . They must not mix themselves up with affairs of state, nor write hither news concerning the state, nor in England must they either speak or allow others to speak in their presence
1 A fuller account of this debate will be found in Simpson's Campion (pp. 97-99), taken from Theiner's Annales, vol. iii. pp. 219, 700.
2 ' The mitigation would thus be made to appear like a truce obtained upon false pretences by one belligerent party, only in order to gain time to recruit his forces for a new attack.' — Simpson, p. 130.
The Synod of South-war k. xiii
against the queen ; except, perhaps, in the company of those whose fidelity has been long and stedfastly proved, and even then not without strong reasons.11
The campaign of the two Jesuits ended, after eighteen months of stirring adventures and brilliant successes, with the execution of Campion and the flight of Parsons. But in that brief period more was done to give vitality to the catholic movement than had been done by all the old priests, the exiles and the seminarists for the past twenty years. The enthusiasm and rhetoric of Campion, the audacity of his ' Brag and Challenge,1 the ingenuity and cunning of Parsons, the rapidity and secrecy with which both worked their travelling press, and scattered tracts over the country, took the half hearted catholics by storm ; secret sympathisers hastened to declare themselves, and converts were made by the hundred. Meantime it was, apparently, as far as the fathers were them selves personally concerned, an accident, though an accident by no means unfavourable to their prestige in some quarters, that Dr. Sander had just landed in Ireland with a force of papal and Spanish soldiers, and that rumours were afloat of other more formidable designs on the part of catholic princes for the invasion of England, and carrying out what the pope had proclaimed as the ' Holy War.1 Some prudent men among the catholics, clerical and lay, on the other hand, suspected danger from the too close connection between the advent of the Jesuits and the newly threatened political combinations. Par sons felt the necessity of disarming these suspicions. A synod was convened at South wark in July 1580. The fathers there exhibited their instructions, and took solemn oaths before God
1 Inventaire des archives de la province des jhuites (No. 1085, Royal Archives, Brussels) : from a collection of Mr. Simpson's transcripts now in the possession of the Rev. Augustus Jessopp, D.D., to whose kindness, for the loan of these volumes and for much else, the editor is greatly indebted.
xiv Introduction.
that their mission was purely spiritual, and that they had no concern with or knowledge of affairs of state. As to Dr. Sander's expedition, they declared with apparent truth that they did not even know of it till they had reached Rheims on their way to England. How far Allen was at this time in the secrets of the pope and king Philip is somewhat doubtful. Mr. Simpson believes he was much disconcerted when the news reached him of this protest of the Jesuits.1 It is, however, clear that Campion was throughout quite innocent of meddling with politics. He believed that England could be converted with the rhetoric of his ' Ten Reasons.1 Parsons knew better. Campion, as his biographer suggests, could in good faith write the words : ' The day shall come, Elizabeth, the day that will show thee clearly who loved thee best, the society of Jesus or the brood of Luther.1 But Parsons probably ' laughed in his sleeve when he gave them the imprimatur. ,12 This born conspirator saw at a glance that England could be brought back to the pope by force only, and he lost no time in acting upon this conviction.3 Six months after the oath-taking at Southwark we find him in communication with the Spanish ambassador, and in correspondence with the queen of Scots. He wrote to the general for fresh hands, and caused F. Holt, a kindred spirit, and a little later F. Creighton, to be sent into Scotland to spy out the land and negotiate with the young king. Meanwhile 'he lost no opportunity,1 writes F. Knox, ' of acquainting himself with the political state and sentiments of the catholic body, and he enjoyed exceptional
1 Campion, p. 234 ; cf. p. 169.
2 Ibid.*?- 215.
3 Sir Francis Englefield gave forcible expression to this conviction in a letter to king Philip (Sept. 1596) : < Without the support and troops of Spain it is scarcely probable that the catholic religion will ever be restored and established in that country [England]. Even the seminaries, powerful as they are in pre paring men's minds for a change, must fail to complete their object without the aid of temporal force. "— Tierney, vol. iii. p. 49.
Plans of Invasion, 1581-1588. xv
means of gaining the information through the many catholic gentlemen who spoke to him on the subject when treating with him of their consciences."1 1 When Parsons recrossed the channel in 1582 the results of his dealing with consciences were speedily shown.
II. The Armada and its Consequences.
The political intrigues, the plans for the invasion of Eng land, and even for the assassination of the queen, which followed without intermission for the next seven years, until the pope and his champion received a temporary check in the defeat of the armada, are revealed in a new light in the Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen., a valuable collection of documents, many of which were edited for the first time by the late F. Knox.2 Allen and Parsons, the respective heads of the two missionary bodies, secular and Jesuit, were the soul of the new enterprise. When Philip procrastinated, or the pope was cautiously counting the cost, it was these men who pas sionately entreated and goaded them to war, drew up plans of campaign, named the catholics in England who would fly to the foreign standard, promised moral aid from the priests, and assured the invaders of success. The foreign princes seemed to depend for their information far more upon the reports of the Jesuits than upon those of their ambassadors. When F. Creighton returns from his mission to Scotland with letters from Lennox to the duke of Guise, he confers with Allen, the archbishop of Glasgow and the French nuncio. The nuncio communicates the plot to the cardinal of Como, entering into details as to ships and ammunition of war required, and the arms to be supplied to the catholics in England who were expected to rise, but he adds significantly, ' nothing can
1 So Tassis, the agent of Philip in France, expressly reported to his master. Letters and Memorials (Knox's Introduction, pp. xxxiii, xxxix).
2 Published by D. Nutt, London, 1882.
xvi Introduction.
be done just now owing to the illness of F. Robert [Parsons], a Jesuit who has arrived from England, where he has had this affair in hand for the last two years, and has in his mind all that should be done/
Parsons was soon himself again. In May he attends councils of war with the duke of Guise, F. Mathieu the provincial of the French Jesuits, and others, in the house of the nuncio at Paris. The plan of campaign there decided upon is dispatched by F. Creighton to the pope, while Parsons himself is deputed to carry it to Philip at Madrid. Mean while in a memorandum which had been forwarded to Rome by the nuncio, Parsons indicated not obscurely the part which the missionaries were to play ' At the proper time,1 he tells the pope, cthe principal catholics in England will receive information of the affair by means of the priests. But this will not be done until just before the enterprise, for fear of its becoming known ; since the soul of this affair is its secrecy.1 A little later in the year we have fresh light on the Jesuit instructions and the Southwark oath. The duke of Guise, who was then head of the enterprise, tells the nuncio (Nov. 6) that Mn eight or ten days he expects a Jesuit father, whom, after these troubles in Scotland, he had sent in disguise to the queen of Scotland, and who is on his way back to London; and from him he will hear what the said queen can promise on behalf of her friends in England and Scotland, and he will learn too what arrangements this father has made with the gentlemen in England about the affair on hand, and in what state it is.1 It is not necessary to enter into the various phases through which the conspiracy passed. In May 1583 the duke of Guise, the Scottish archbishop, and the nuncio were engaged in their plot for having Elizabeth assassinated by a catholic, who asked 100,000 francs for the deed. The troubles of France led in 1585 to Philip taking the holy war
Disappointments', 1588. xvii
into his own hands. About the same time the energetic Sixtus v. succeeded Gregory xm., and for the next three years the nego tiations which led to the armada are almost entirely in the hands of four men, Parsons, Allen, the pope and the king of Spain.
To the clerical promoters of the invasion its issue must indeed have been a severe blow. More bitterly disappointing than the loss of the Spanish fleet was the discovery by the exiles that they could no longer count upon the disloyalty of the catholic laity at home. The very men whom Allen and Parsons had boasted of as their trusted allies had taken up arms for the detested Jezebel. It was but a few years before that Allen or one of his lieutenants had issued an authoritative report to the pope, in order to show 'The easiness and opportuneness of the sacred expedition.1 6 Catholics,' says the writer, * are now better instructed by our men [i.e. better than at the rising of 1579]. Of all the orthodox in the realm there is not one who any longer thinks himself bound in conscience to obey the queen; and we have lately published a book especially to prove that it is not only lawful, but our bounden duty to take up arms at the bidding of the pope, and to fight for the faith against the queen and other heretics. As this book is greedily read by all catholics, it is impossible but that when the occasion serves they should enrol themselves in the catholic army. Because we still have, in spite of the number banished, nearly three hundred priests in various noblemen's and gentlemen's houses, and we are almost daily sending fresh ones, who, when it is necessary, will direct the catholics' consciences and actions in this matter/1 The effect of the Spanish defeat on the protestants, and on the neutrals or 'schismatics' was decisive. It was naturallv
1 Theiner, Annales, vol. Hi. p. 480 ; quoted in Simpson's Campion, p. 377.
b
xviii Introduction.
viewed by numbers as a direct intervention of Providence on behalf of the protestant cause. The line between protestant and papist was drawn more sharply. Waverers had to choose sides ; and the country at large, which twenty years earlier is said to have contained a great majority of secret catholics, now became protestant to the core. The effect on the semin arist clergy was no less marked. One of them, in a letter addressed to Mendoza the Spanish ambassador in France, has put on record the sentiments of the party. They too took the great disaster as a sign from heaven. 'We here con tinued,1 writes this priest, ' all this year past in assured hope of a full victory until last month. But alas ! and with a deadly sorrow we must all at home and abroad lament our sudden fall from an immeasurable high joy to an immeasur able deep despair. ... I do find and know that many good and wise men, which of long time have securely continued in most earnest devotion to the pope's authority, begin now to stagger in their minds, and to conceive that this way of re formation intended by the pope's holiness is not allowable in the sight of God, by leaving the ancient course of the church by way of excommunication, which was the exercise of the spiritual sword, and in place thereof to take the temporal sword, and put it in a monarch's hand to invade the realm with force and arms.'1 A strong reaction set in. Many of the clergy who had been kept in ignorance of these designs of 4 blood and force ' were shocked on discovering what had been going on. They had not relished the recent utterances of their master and chief when, in his tract in defence of Sir William Stanley's betrayal of Deventer to the Spaniards, he
1 ' The Copie of a Letter sent out of England to Don Bernardin Mendoza, ambassadour in French for the king of Spaine, etc.,' printed in 1588, reprinted in 1746. This letter is by some said to have been written by Richard Leigh, one of the martyrs. But this is impossible, for his postscript is dated ' Sep tember,' and Leigh was executed at Tyburn on the preceding August 30, 1588.
The Reaction. xix
declared that all acts of Elizabeth since her excommunication were 'void of the law of God and man; and that her subjects (in spite apparently of the supposed ' mitigation ' of the bull) were forbidden to obey or serve her in any way.1 They de nounced the 'vile, irreverent and violent speeches1 of the 'Admonition' of 1588, which, though probably penned by Parsons, was signed and promulgated by the cardinal of England. The affection and reverence of such priests for Allen personally led them to judge him in this matter too gently, and to lay the blame too indiscriminately upon his Jesuit friends and advisers. For the principles in question had been held and taught by the most eminent of the secular clergy abroad, by Drs. Webbe and Morton, Sander and Bristow, and all the chief founders and supporters of the Douai seminary. The answers given to the famous Six Ques tions propounded by the English government to Campion and his fellows in 1581 showed too that these early missionaries were, with very few exceptions, well tutored in the doctrine of the bull. But the political intrigues and conspiracies, the pro vocation to civil war and foreign invasion, which followed as a necessary consequence of the doctrine, and the attempts at assassination which in fact followed, led moderate men among the clergy to view the doctrine itself in a new light and to recoil from it. Clearly it was no longer possible for them to expect deliverance by the sword. Every fresh scheme of the pope had only led to the tightening of their chains. The catholic Englishmen who flattered and encouraged Spain, exaggerated
' The Copie of a Letter written by M. Doctor Allen : concerning the Yeelding up of the Citie of Dauentrie unto his Catholike Maiestie by Sir William Stanley, knight. Wherein is shewed both howe lawful, honorable, and necessarie that action was, and also that al others, especiallie those of the English Nation that detayne anie towns, or other places in the low countries, from the King Catholike are bounde upon pain of damnation to do the like. Imprinted at Antuarpe, 1587.' Edited, with an excellent introduction, by T. Hey wood for the Chetham Society, 1851.
xx Introduction.
the papal power and from safe retreats abroad poured insults upon the queen and her ministers, came to be regarded as the worst enemies not only of their country but of the catholic cause. The Jesuits especially became the objects of jealousy and resentment. They were accused of ambitiously seeking the aggrandisement of their order, of usurping the lead in the affairs of the mission, and of domineering over the seminarists with the view of drawing them on blindly to promote the aggressive schemes of king Philip, thus involving the whole clergy in the odium of their treason.
A large section of the secular clergy and the friends of the Jesuits were drifting asunder. While the former party was gradually, and to some extent unconsciously, shifting its ground and becoming more loyal, the Jesuit faction was growing more obstinate and fanatical in its attachment to Spain and its dreams of foreign conquest. The seminarist from Douai, Rheims or Rome, would after some years1 residence in his native country naturally shake off the foreign influences to which he had succumbed at college and recover something of the patriotism of his forefathers. He would become attached once more to the almost forgotten customs, liberties and quasi- independence of the ancient national church. The English Jesuits had no such tendency. Their traditions were of yester day. Their centre of gravity was in Rome. Not half a dozen of them even resided in England. Their policy was guided by superiors abroad, who aimed at getting the ruling power, ecclesiastical and political, into their own hands. For secur ing the necessary unity and centralization of the clerical forces, which they hoped to control in England, ancient canonical discipline and ordinary episcopal jurisdiction would more often be a hindrance than an aid to them. They needed ample freedom of action and extraordinary powers. It was, more over, not their interest to encourage ecclesiastical studies
Divergent Policies. xxi
outside their own ranks. Where secrecy and unity were essential, it was undesirable to multiply counsellors, and learning would lead to independence of judgment where the qualities most needful were docility, obedience, and reverence for their self-appointed leaders. The Jesuit therefore wished the secular priest to be content with ministering to the spiritual wants of the humbler classes, and to leave the direc tion of the rich and noble, the control of ecclesiastical policy, and above all the management of affairs of state, to picked men of the society. The gentry were to be taught to regard the Jesuits as their natural leaders, and to intrust their secrets and their alms exclusively to the fathers, who would know best how to utilize both for the greater glory of God. Let the catholics of England but place themselves unreservedly in the hands of Father Parsons, and they need never fear lest a pro- testant should succeed to the throne of Elizabeth. If the coveted supremacy could not in prudence be openly asserted it must be acquired by stealth. The acquisition, so it seemed to the Jesuits, would be hastened by the frequent lapses and scandals of their secular brethren. These scandals should by all means be hidden from the protestant public if possible,1 but it would be well to whisper in the ear of influen tial laymen the general untrustworthiness of the ordinary clergy, for the protection and warning of the laity themselves and for the greater credit and profit of the society.
This at least was the view which the conduct and aims of the Jesuits presented to the eyes of the more sagacious and more charitable of the secular clergy. Others expressed the same notions in coarser terms, or imputed to their rivals motives of a baser character.2 Mr. Mush, one of the most
1 See, for example, Parsons' eulogium upon the seminarists in reply to the proclamation of 1591 (Philopatris, pp. 198-819), where the queen, anticipating Parsons' later language, had described them as abandoned and dissolute youths.
2 As in the ' Memorial,' infra, p. 97 seq.
xxii Introduction.
respected of the missionary priests and a favourite disciple of Allen, addressing the pope in the name of the appellant clergy, traces the germs of the quarrel as far back as the second year of the Jesuit mission. 'At their first ingress,' he writes, 'the Jesuits so acted as to provoke the queen and magistrates to enact most cruel laws, before unheard of, against the seminarists. The fathers had even interfered with the government of the clergy. One of the Jesuits1 conducted himself as if he had been a legate a latere of the holy see. He took upon himself to convoke a quasi-provincial synod 2 of the clergy, and there to the trouble of our church and to the sorrow of cardinal Allen and of all good men, presumed to abrogate the ancient national fasts of Friday and certain vigils of the B. Virgin, which had been religiously observed from the very cradle of the English church.1 He presumed to interdict the priests from preaching, and prohibited and suppressed the acts of the twelve martyrs which had been approved and edited by command of Allen himself.3 As to Father Parsons, 'the principal author, the incentor and mover of all our garboils at home and abroad,' he is said to have ' fled from the mission like a dastardly soldier consulting his own safety,' but ' his intercepted letters, which talked of the invasion of the realm by foreign armies, and his political publications so incensed the English magistrates, that under the semblance of a just cause they rise up in vengeance against us and execute their laws. They exclaim that it is not the concern of religion that busies us, but under that cloak we are meditating politics and prac tising the ruin of the state. Meanwhile Robert Parsons stationed at his ease intrepidly conducts his operations, and we
1 Jasper Heywood, who came into England with William Holt in the summer of 1581, taking the place of Parsons.
2 In Norfolk, 1581. See Watson's Sparing Discoverie, p. 47.
3 Declaratio motuum ac turbationum ad S. D. N. Clementem octavum exhibita, ab ipsis sacerdotibus, etc., p. 8.
Father ParsoJis, 1588-1595. xxiii
whom the press of battle threatens, innocent of any crime and ignorant of his dangerous machinations, undergo the punish ment which his imprudence and audacity alone merit.1 x These words were printed in the year 1601. They exaggerate the political innocence of the secular clergy as a whole, and exhibit towards Parsons a personal animosity which recent events had greatly inflamed. Nevertheless they fairly express the senti ments which were finding voice among the clergy and giving strength to a large party rising up between 1588 and 1595. Allen himself was not altogether free from the influence of this reaction. Old age, growing infirmities and a new interest in some ecclesiastical studies, undertaken in Rome, may have in clined him to peace. He kept up an outward show of friendship for the society, but in secret he dreaded and lamented the selfish and ambitious policy which in his opinion threatened to ruin the work of the mission.
Meanwhile Parsons learned no lesson and lost no hope from the discomfiture of 1588. God was merciful, he said, and wished to preserve the withered tree of England to a third year. The first expedition of Caesar was unsuccessful but the second succeeded. Twice were the Israelites defeated in their attack made by the divine command upon the tribe of Benjamin, the third time they were victorious.2 King Philip was bidden to take heart and build another fleet. In 1589 Parsons left Rome for Spain to set about collecting funds for the foundation of more seminaries. In that year he established the college of Valladolid, San Lucar in 1591, Seville and Lisbon in 1592, and St. Omer for boys in 1593. The object of these institutions, says no less an authority than cardinal d'Ossat, was to instil
1 Ibid. p. 24. The passage here abridged is quoted at length in Berington's Memoirs of Panzani, p. 23.
2 Elizabethae Reginae Angliae edictum, promulgatum Londini, 29 Novemb. anni MDXCI — Andreae Philopatri ad idem edictum Responsio, 1593 (pp. 139, 140).
xxiv Introduction.
into the minds of the missionaries the Spanish political creed, and for that rather than the catholic faith they were, if neces sary, to suffer martyrdom.1 During the same period the college at Rheims, then under the presidency of Dr. Barret, alarmed at the accession of Henry iv., returned to Douai, whence it had migrated fifteen years before. Allen, under Jesuit advice, had appointed Barret as his successor at the college in 1588. The new president had a bad temper, no tact or administrative ability, and was entirely subservient to the fathers of the society. Under his rule the college rapidly declined. Students were drafted off to Rome and to Parsons1 new Spanish houses. Lectures were dropped, the course of studies abridged, the revenues fell away, and the Jesuits finally reaped the advantage.2
The society now had its grip upon all the seminaries. Parsons was practically the paymaster of Philip. Through the power of the purse, and with the help of his haughty and impetuous colleague, William Holt, he held in check the restless and impoverished pensioners of the Spanish king
1 Lettres, Nov. 26, 1601. D'Ossat, as Henry's ambassador at Rome, would look indeed with suspicion on Spanish schemes, but he was a man of rare pene tration and, withal, pious and devoted to his church. Moreover, he was not un favourably disposed towards the Jesuits.
It is nevertheless doubtful if the Jesuits made or retained many converts to their Spanish policy among the clergy in England after the Armada of 1588. Tierney (in. Ixvii.) prints an important memorial, addressed to the Spanish minister, Pegna, on the subject of the proposed invasion of England in 1597, and reporting that ' his catholic majesty hath for him in England no heretic, and for the catholics he hath only those who depend upon the direction of the jesuits^ who are few ; nor all these, for because the Jesuits dare not labour openly, as the secular priests do, to gain a great number. And of four hundred secular priests which are in the kingdom, there are not thirty which follow the fathers' direc tion to draw the catholics to embrace the designment of the catholic king, and so the greater part are for the king of Scotland his succession unto that kingdom.' The writer shows in many particulars a remarkable understanding of the political situation. He perhaps puts the number of clerical adherents of the Jesuit faction in England too low, but in any case they were in a considerable minority.
2 See note, p. 103 infra.
The Succession to the Crown. xxv
in Flanders.1 The reins of the ecclesiastical and political government of the English catholics at home and abroad seemed to be falling into his hands. In 1594 appeared his famous work on the succession to the crown of England, setting aside the claims of James as a heretic and suggesting the infanta of Spain as the lineal representative of John of Ghent.2 It was Parsons' wish, as he explained to Holt, that the infanta should strengthen her claim by marrying the cardinal Farnese, who was also a descendant of John of Ghent,3 and this sugges tion he communicated to the pope. The cardinal was to be secularized for the purpose. The audacity of this Jesuit manifesto aroused the indignation of the catholic supporters of the Scottish succession, and intensified on the part of the moderate priests their growing distrust of the society.
1 See note p. 114 infra, and compare 'The estate of English fugitives under the King of Spaine and his Ministers,' by Thomas Scarlet, 1596.
2 W. C, in his Replie to Parsons (fol. 68), insists against the Jesuit's denial that the scholars in the Spanish seminaries were made to subscribe to the infanta's title. Whether this was so or not the persuasive influences brought to bear upon favourite disciples are well illustrated in a letter written in 1596 by the Rev. Henry Bell from Madrid to his friend Holt. The young priest, who had been a short time on the mission in England, tells how, on his arrival at Valladolid he was sent on by Parsons with five other priests to Father Creswell at Madrid. There Creswell took them to kiss the hand of the king and the infanta, and singled out Bell from the rest for some talk with his majesty. ' For five or six days,' says the writer, ' Father Creswell carried us up and down to see noblemen and women, they sending their coaches for us and giving us great entertainment.' 'The noblemen were almost at strife who should have us to dinner.' Some of the grandees made great protestation, we are told, that their desire was not to conquer and possess England, but ' only to set up a king catholic in the country and have it their friend.' Mr. Bell adds, 'Here is gathering of soldiers every day for an armada ;' he reports the sending of ships from Lisbon to Ireland, the repulse of Drake and of Hawkins, and it is not sur prising that the flattered and gratified novice should conclude, ' I am already, God be thanked, received into the society.' — Douay Diaries, p. 398.
3 See Parsons' own abstract of this letter in Italian (Tierney in. Ivii.) and not the abridged translation, given by Plowden {Remarks on the Memoirs of Pan- zani, p. 350), which misses some important points. Parsons afterwards reported to Don Juan d'Idiaquez that he found the pope 'as warm in the cause of the infanta as could be desired.'
xxvi Introduction.
Two years later (1596) appeared the ' Memorial of the Refor mation in England," which was more prudently disseminated in manuscript only. In this 6 proud pamphlet ' Parsons, in case he should not ' himself live to see the reduction of England,1 set down some hints for the guidance of the government. The second Reformation was not, he said, to be huddled up as in queen Mary's time by a certain general absolution, whereby fallen priests were admitted to the altar with no other satisfac tion than to send away their concubines, and when matters went as a stage-play, men changing their persons and parts without changing their minds — the new Reformation was to be thorough. Perhaps it would be good not to press men's con sciences at the beginning for matters of religion, at least not for some few years. A ' Council of Reformation ' should at first be appointed to deal with ecclesiastical livings, church property, etc. With regard to the abbey lands, laymen are warned that it is not sufficient for the security of their consciences to say that the apostolic see had tolerated the retention of this property in Mary's time. The toleration was upon constraint and fear of further inconveniences. Restitution, or at least some equit able composition, must be made ; and if friends of the church may expect lenient treatment, enemies, persecutors and impious men must be dispossessed with rigour. Before the Council finishes its work it must establish in its place ' some good and sound manner of Inquisition.' ' Perhaps it would be best to spare the name of Inquisition at the first beginning in so new and green a state of religion, . . . but afterwards it will be neces sary to bring it in by that or some other name.' l Whether the form and manner of the inquisition should be that of Spain, ' whose rigour is misliked by some,' or that used in parts of Italy, ' whose coldness is reprehended by more,' or that of Rome itself, which takes a middle course, is not easy now to
1 Cf. pp. 51, 55, 98, 99.
Competitors for the Cardinalate. xxvii
determine ; but, in divers points, it is clear to Parsons that ' the diligent and exact manner of proceeding in Spain ' is abso lutely necessary.
The storm was gathering on every side. In England an anti-Jesuit party was rapidly forming and an ecclesiastical quarrel on a large scale was imminent. The refugees in Flanders were divided into factions, and Charles Paget and his friends were denouncing the fathers as intolerable tyrants ; while in the English college at Rome the students were once more ready to rise in revolt against their Jesuit masters. Allen died Oct. 16, 1594. There was at once a struggle for the suc cession to his dignity and power, which still further embittered the party feeling. The Jesuits coveted the hat for Parsons ; their opponents were for Allen's old friend, Dr. Lewis, while some few were in favour of Dr. Stapleton. Clement vm. had indeed intended to promote Lewis at the next creation of cardinals, but the bishop died, Oct. 1595. The pope then thought of Stapleton and summoned him to Rome. It might be supposed that the author of the Apologia pro rege catho- lico was sufficiently Spanish to satisfy the most ardent Jesuit partisan, but this was apparently not so. Father Agazzari was in alarm at the threatened danger and wrote earnestly to Parsons, then at Madrid, ' to remedy it by procuring the pro motion of some one about whose fidelity to the crown [of Spain] there can be no doubt,1 while Stapleton himself was in one letter after another assuring the same all-powerful Parsons that coram Deo he would always remain ' a true and trusty servant to his majesty of Spain. '* Meanwhile no cardinal of England was appointed. The English priests were left practi cally without a head and with scarce a shadow of organization or self-government.
1 Douay Diaries, p. ciii.
xxviii Introduction.
III. Disturbances at the Roman College. All eyes were now turned to the college at Rome. Since the disturbances of 1579, already referred to, the seminary had by no means enjoyed unbroken peace. Mush, who was one of the first scholars sent thither, declares that during his seven years of residence there were as many outbreaks. Five of these 'stirs1 are briefly described by Dr. Ely (pp. 73-77).1 In 1585 Sixtus v. had to send two bishops, one of whom was Sega, after wards cardinal, to quell a disturbance in which the malcontent^ were favoured by cardinal Mondovi, the protector of Scotland. The Italian rector, Agazzari, was on this occasion superseded by the English Jesuit, Holt. Parsons and Creswell in turn succeeded Holt. There was then a return to Italian rectors, first to Vitelleschi, afterwards general of the society, and in May 1594 to Fioravanti. The students now numbered in all about forty-seven, superintended by eight Jesuit fathers am two extern prefects. Mush, in his Declaratio, boldly tells the pope that on the death of Allen the fathers, no longer held ii. check by his authority, put forth all their strength to crush tht youths, or those who would not bow to their every whim, anc deliberately sowed divisions in the college on the principle o divide et impera. The Jesuits undoubtedly believed that thei opportunity to seize the helm was at hand. But they made tht common mistake of holding in too great contempt the men an the influences opposed to them. They committed errors c judgment and of diplomacy at every step, and it is curious t> observe that their most signal failures were made in respect t what has been considered their peculiar gift, the training c
1 Parsons (Apologie, fol. 49) refers to a treatise entitled : ' Brevis narrati eorum quse gesta sunt in Coll. Angl. de Urbe tempore tumultuum, an. 1594, 95 96, & 97,' written by Robert Chambers, who at one time ' followed the troubk some,' but afterwards favoured the Jesuits. He was subsequently confessor i some Englis nuns at Brussels. Is this treatise extant ?
Disturbances at Rome, 1594-1597. xxix
yath. If they succeeded in this better elsewhere, it may be tht elsewhere their aim was more purely scholastic or their ir.terials more pliable.
At Rome the problem was a complicated one. To oule or intimidate a number of spirited and somewhat uruly English lads into tame and passive instruments of a jeiit faction for the conquest of their country by Spanish aris, and for its conversion to the faith by the methods of the Inuisition, was no easy task. The scholars suspected the degns of their superiors and were prepared to resist. Forty- tfce, of whom eleven were already in priest's orders, sent a rcjectful supplication to Dr. Lewis, deploring the want of biiops or ordinaries in England, and insisting on the import- ane of the distribution of faculties being placed in the hands ofimpartial and experienced persons conversant with English ahirs, but above all not in the hands of the Jesuit fathers. Tey finally implored Dr. Lewis to take the duty on himself. Tey presented a similar petition to Cajetan, the cardinal pro- tecor, begging him to at least delegate as much of his powers toDr. Lewis as would enable him to decide matters of ordinary ooirrence. Cajetan was even persuaded to second their potion to the pope. It was, however, unsuccessful. The poe was resolute and bade them mind their books. He wifly refused (writes Parsons) to give faculties to the bishop an gave them to the protector. The students were convinced tht their object had been frustrated by the underhand opposi- tio of the Jesuits. The general, they said, was doublefaced an had hoodwinked them. The government of the fathers beame offensive to them. The old discipline of the college, 'followed by the blood of many martyrs, and suited to the chracter of Englishmen,1 had been, so the students declared, c?.jianged for a new system which was intolerable. The fathers arsaid to favour, coax and make presents to those who had been
xxx Introduction.
drawn to their side, and to treat harshly and unjustly the others whom they insult as ' low-born, obscure paupers, ne'er-do-weels.1 1 They are described as being without charity, meekness, fair- dealing or the capacity of government.2 The childish penances inflicted by them upon the students in public were ill-adapted to their character or age, and only excited ridicule and contempt.
The spy system was particularly odious to these English youths. This characteristic Jesuit institution may best be described in Dr. Ely's words : ' The second [cause of discon tent] is their spies, which the rectors have always in store, which by an honester name are called Angeli custodes. These spies, at recreation-time and in other places, speak liberally against their superiors, of their government and usage towards them, of their apparel, meat and drink, and against the strait keeping of them in, and against whatsoever they think is not well done in the college. And all this to sound their companions. Now if one or two hap to discourse, as he doth, against the superior, these spies carry the whole discourse straight to the rector. After a few days the others are called cor am nobw, and are either punished or rigorously reprehended for the same. These good fellows afterwards recall to mind before whom and in whose presence and what company they spake such things, and having discovered this good fellow, they from that day forwards hate him as a spy and a traitor. If this be a charitable way of government, judge you, and whether
1 The seminarists were often made to smart under these sneers at their assumed low birth. The scorn and ridicule with which Parsons in particular seemed to regard poverty in a priest, and his habit of taunting his opponents on that score, are notable features in his method of controversy. W. C. retaliates with what he calls the ' genealogies ' of some of the fathers. He tells us that Parsons himself was a blacksmith's son ; Garnet, ' a very poor and mean man's child ' ; Currey, the son of a tanner ; Oldcorn, an apothecary's apprentice ; Percy (alias Fisher), ' a poor boy sent over by a priest, one of our friends ' ; and Banks, a tailor's son (Replie, p. 87).
2 Foley, Records, vi. 19.
Jesuit Misrule. xxxi
this be true and practised continually or no, I refer to the conscience of as many of you (united brethren) as have been brought up in that seminary, and to the knowledge of all others that have been brought up therein, yea to those themselves that have been these good Angels. Nothing so contrary to an Englishman's nature as to be betrayed by him whom he trusteth. If such spies were in Oxford (whose colleges have as good statutes and ordinances for bringing up of youths, if they were put in practice — no displeasure to the fathers — as they have or can devise), if such spies, I say, were in our colleges of Oxford, they would be plucked in pieces."1 *
That there was gross misrule on the part of the Jesuits is evi dent. Their strong partisan, Dr. Barret, who had just visited the college, wrote confidentially to Parsons (10th April 1596) : 4 The rector (Fioravanti) will never be able to rule in this place. Many things I can tell you of that must be amended con cerning this college in the manner of government and con cerning better correspondence with the college of Douai, otherwise you will never have peace. Trust those that be your true friends.'2 The pope sent cardinal Toleto to arbitrate. The cardinal, who, as Mush remarks, ' knew the society well, being one of them,' took the side of the aggrieved scholars. Fioravanti was in consequence removed from the rectorship. Toleto however died in September of that year, and Agazzari, who had meanwhile again become rector, was able to confide to Parsons his sentiments of pious gratitude towards God who had thus, as in the case of Allen and Lewis, removed by death an opponent of the divinely-favoured order.
According to this same Agazzari, it was one of the chief aims of the discontented students to oppose themselves to the designs of the catholic king. < They speak (he tells Parsons)
1 Brief e Notes, p. 81. 2 Tierney, III. 74.
xxxii Introduction.
often and spitefully against the Book of Succession and against its author — Parsons, as they suppose — whose name they cannot endure. They delight in the failure of the Spaniards, as lately at Cadiz ; and they grieve over their successes as at Calais.1 1 Barret had given Parsons a similar report of the situation a few months before (April 10) : ' I find their heads full of false bruits and differences betwixt Jesuits and priests in England. Yea, the self-same faction that is at Brussels, to be here against the Spaniards and such as take that way.1 2 Parsons attempted to introduce his book into the college and to have it read in the refectory in place of the customary devotional works.3 A young divine, Jasper Lobery, flatly refused to read it. 4
But what, perhaps, more than all else helped to bring the rebellion to a head, was the charge of gross immorality brought against some of the English party by Father Harewood, the minis ter and vice-rector. Dr. Ely describes the circumstances in lan guage too plain for literal quotation. Harewood declared that he had discovered certain youths, whose names he would not at that time divulge, attempting an abominable crime. Insulting precautions against the commission, or for the more easy detec tion of this unnameable offence had previously been taken in side and outside the building, by the cutting down of a grove and otherwise, in Father CreswelPs time. The students now rose in indignation against the minister ; they violently erased his name from the college books, and petitioned the pope to send him to the galleys for so ' dishonouring and discrediting the college, themselves, and the nation.1 5 They in fact secured his removal.6 Dr. Ely adds that Harewood was less to be blamed than another father, 'who in revenge of the factious
1 Tierney, ill. 75. 2 Parsons' Briefe Apologie, fol. 55.
3 Butler's Memoirs, ii. 24 ; Tierney, in. 38.
4 W. C. Replie tmto a Certaine Libell, p. 69.
5 Briefe Notes, p. 83. 6 Ibid., p. 81.
Abominable Crimes. xxxiii
scholars, without respect of their honour or of the honour of our nation or of his own conscience, letted not to send about the world general articles against the scholars and priests of that faction, the which contained more grievous and abominable sins than Father Harewood discovered.' *
The truce established by Toleto was of short duration. Towards the end of 1596 the large majority of the students was in open revolt. Studies seem to have been entirely suspended. Thirty-seven youths, including four priests, accord ing to Parsons, ' took a corporal oath to stand by each other, and not to return to their obedience without the consent of the whole faction/ 2 They held meetings together and were not on speaking terms with the ten who adhered to the Jesuits. They made use of the pulpit to preach < seditious sermons ' against the society. On one occasion they broke out of the college and ran furiously towards the pope's palace. Four students, two of whom were priests, were expelled like criminals by an armed force in sight of the Roman people,3 the fathers all the while audibly giving vent to their triumph, and exclaiming, ' Victory ! Victory ! ' The pope at last commissioned cardinal Sega, a second time, to visit the college.4 The mutineers openly in sulted him and tore in pieces the proclamation he had
1 Dr. Gifford, in a letter to Parsons [May 20, 1597], alludes to the public charges against the scholars : ' Truth it is I never was one of the humour to rail either against some noblemen and gentlemen in these parts [Brussels] or to charge the scholars of Rome with horrible and enormous crimes of heresy, whoredom, sodomy, enmity to his catholic majesty and such like ; and in all places to cry out and declaim against them as men worthy of expulsion, gallies, prisons, degradation and the like, being not able to prove any such thing against them ' (Douay Diaries, p. 98).
2 Apologie, fol. 50.
3 They were, however, afterwards restored to the college.
4 W. C. asserts that Monsignor Moro was at first joined with Sega as visitor, but that the cardinal ' finding him inclined to equity and no whit partial to the Jesuits, he shaked him off, taking the matter wholly into his own hands ' (Replie. fol. 83).
xxxiv Introduction.
posted up in the hall to bid them keep the peace during the visitation.
The results of this pontifical inquiry may be read in Mr. Foley's Records^ where abstracts of the various memorials sub mitted to the pope on the occasion, together with the report of Sega himself, are printed.1 The memorial of the aggrieved scholars sets forth their complaints in great detail. They de mand the removal of the fathers from the government of the college. Upon their political grievances they are silent, perhaps under the circumstances prudently so. But they pre face their censures of the Jesuit misrule in the college by an attack upon the conduct of the fathers in England. The Jesuits are accused of systematically driving from his place or ruining in his reputation every priest who is not entirely sub servient to them. They are said to have obtained special faculties for absolving the holders of church property on condi tion of the penitent paying a sum of money in compensation. These privileges gain for them access to the houses of certain rich catholics, and much influence in consequence. The money is diligently collected by the fathers, but instead of distributing it, as it should be, for the benefit of the mission or the clergy in general, they apply it to their own uses. Should a secular priest perchance acquire similar faculties, he scarce ventures to use them for fear of the persistent hostility of the society. The retort of the Jesuits on this head is characteristic. If a pre ference, they say, is given to the society by the rich, it is because the fathers are religious, and having divested themselves of their own belongings are not likely to keep back what is due to others. They have, moreover, given proof that they can be safely trusted, whereas certain seminarists have been found to divert the funds, derived from the source in question, to their
1 Vol. vi. Diary of the Roman college.
The Po7itifical Inquiry. xxxv
own personal uses, and have left England with large sums in their possession. So much so that the seminarists themselves, in order to prevent unpleasant doubts, have preferred that the fathers should take charge of all such cases.
A memorial also proceeded from the minority of ten. These youths speak strongly in condemnation of the contempt for authority, the reckless detraction and dissolute behaviour of their companions, and call for the expulsion of the ringleaders. The report of cardinal Sega might have been written by one of the fathers. In his eyes the Jesuits are models of every virtue. The origin of the disturbances must be sought for, partly in the greed and ambition of the late bishop of Cassano, who egged on his partisans to create dissensions in the college in order to take revenge on the society; and partly in the machinations of Cecil and Walsingham, who, finding their brutal rage availed nothing against the constancy of the priests, had recourse to fox-like arts, and introduced spies into the seminaries to foment discord and rebellion, and by witch crafts and treachery sought to overturn these citadels of the catholic faith. The fathers of the society are by all means to be retained both in the college and on the mission. It was necessary, he writes, that there should be in England some priests to whom the charge and government of the catholics should be specially committed, and in whom laymen could safely put trust. This influence and authority unquestionably, in the opinion of the cardinal, belongs to the handful of Jesuits working in England, so much so that catholic laymen, terrified by the many and deplorable falls of the seminarists, will hardly hold intercourse with them unless they bear a recommendation, written or verbal, from the fathers.1 To rob England of their services would be to eclipse the sun of that afflicted church.
1 Parsons adopts this statement. See note infra p. 99.
xxxvi Introduction.
Meanwhile the general of the society, wearied with these continual difficulties, had serious thoughts of resigning the superintendence of the college. The Spanish party was in despair. Petitions poured in from Spain and from Flanders imploring the pope to prevent a step so fatal to the cause of the church. Parsons hastened to Rome (1597), and, strange as it may appear, in view of the prejudices against him and his policy, by his strength of character and diplomatic arts he contrived to win the confidence of the impulsive students, and in a short time effected an amicable settlement of the quarrel. He was now appointed rector a second time, and when secure of his authority got rid of the leaders of the late commotions by sending some at once as missionaries into England, and ten more to Douai, to there continue their studies in preparation for the priesthood.1 He complains indeed of some fresh dis orders towards the end of the year, but these were compara tively insignificant. Some scholars who had been in the habit of frequenting taverns and other disorderly places during the late mutiny persisted in the practice and were arrested by the papal police. They would have been carried to the public
1 Sega had suggested the dismissal of some whom he called c wanton or las civious colts. ' W. C. affects to doubt if these terms really proceeded from the cardinal, seeing that ' the chiefest of such as were to be dismissed, whom he termeth wanton colts, were to be addressed for our country, as they were ' (Replie, f. 83).
Many of the mutineers, however, subsequently became persons of consequence and much respected in their community, e.g., John Jackson, who 'stood candi date for a mitre' in 1635; Edward Bennet, one of the ringleaders, who was nominated with William Bishop for the episcopate in 1621, and on the death of Colleton became dean of the chapter ; Thomas Hill, formerly an Anglican clergyman and afterwards a benedictine monk, who wrote the Quatron of Reasons which George Abbot thought worth while to refute; and the better known Anthony Champney, an able controversialist, who has left a ' History of the Reign of Elizabeth to her 3ist year,' which deserves to be printed. The two Pitts', Henry and Robert, were also among the discontented. Three or four others, according to Mr. Foley, ' atoned for their conduct ' by eventually becom ing Jesuits themselves.
Decline of the Seminaries. xxxvii
prisons had not Parsons, so he tells us, secured the favour of their confinement to apartments in the college. He moreover contrived that their expulsion, which, for these and other offences, was subsequently decreed by the protector, should be effected without infamy ; and the six students, two of whom were in priest's orders, were quietly transferred to other colleges, and were liberally provided with money for their journey.
The laxity and discord which had now distracted the college for nearly twenty years made of it a strange noviciate for apostles bent on the conversion of England. There is an oft-quoted legend of the simple St. Philip Neri being wont to greet the English students in the streets of Rome with the words of the hymn to the Holy Innocents, ' Salvete flores martyrum ! ' If half the statements of Father Harewood be true the flowers must have lost something of their perfume. The declension of the young divines from their own ideal is admitted and deplored by Mush. Very rarely, he says, do those who are placed under the care of the fathers make the progress in learning which was expected of them, or retain their former piety or virtues. They go full of fervour, and return with spirits crushed and virtue gone, useless for the labours of the mission.1 This was not, as cardinal Sega would have us believe, the work of the ubiquitous spies of Elizabeth, nor was it, perhaps, as Mush supposes, entirely due to the intrigues and mismanagement of the Jesuits. A similar process of decline had been visible in the older seminary of Douai and Rheims, where the sinister influence of the society could not have been so directly felt. Dr. Worthington, the vice-president at Douai, in a memorial addressed to cardinal Cajetan in 1596 2
1 Declaratio, pp. 129, 130. ' Mittuntur ad eos (he exclaims) sancti, pacifici, pii, simplices, spiritu dei ferventes, sed per brevissimi temporis curriculum in collegio commorantes heu quantum mutati ab illis ! '
2 Douay Diaries, p. 369.
xxxviii Introduction.
traces the rapid steps by which his own college had deteriorated. Worthington is not indeed to be trusted as altogether an impartial witness. He in that same year made a secret vow of obedience to Father Parsons, and was virtually, as many others were at that time, l a Jesuit in disguise."* To attenuate the failure of his Jesuit friends, he is ready to befoul his own nest. While Allen ruled at Douai, he tells us, all was charity. No word injurious to peace, purity or piety was heard. This was the golden age. When Allen became often absent and often sick, and gave over the helm to others, then came the silver age. But when Dr. Bristow was dead and Allen promoted to the cardinalate, the age of brass, not to say of iron, suc ceeded. It was hoped that Dr. Barret would restore tran quillity. So far from this, that just before the cardinal's death there was even a question of dissolving the college altogether. Discipline had become relaxed, the students were imbued with a spirit of ambition and were divided into factions. All this, adds Worthington, was prior to the irruption at the Roman college. Out of five students sent thither from Rheims four were infected with sedition, ' and carried with them a vehement aversion to the government of the society .'
IV. The Prisoners at Wisbeach.
We must now turn from this picture of the rising genera tion at the seminaries to that of the veteran missionaries in their stronghold at Wisbeach.
The castle of Wisbeach in the isle of Ely belonged to the bishops of the diocese. It had been built, or rather rebuilt, by cardinal Morton, bishop of Ely, about 1480, but in the follow ing century had become neglected and somewhat dilapidated. The buildings were surrounded with four acres of ground protected by a strong wall and wide moat.1 They had been 1 Morris, Troubles^ ii. chap. xv.
The Prisoners at Wisbeach. xxxix
occasionally used for the confinement of state prisoners, and in 1579, when the country was alarmed at the threatened invasion of the papal confederates, the castle was set apart for the custody of certain influential priests, bishop Watson, abbot Feckenham, and half a dozen others whom it was thought prudent to remove to a safe distance from London or the chief centres of population. In 1585 the castle opened its gates for a few more of such ' capital doctors and priests,' who were thought to be 'busier in matters of state than was meet for the quiet of the realm.' * Meanwhile the queen's councillors were becoming embarrassed with the number of seminary priests falling into their hands. The parliament of 1585 had made it high treason for any English subject receiving Roman orders abroad to enter, or remain in, the kingdom. Already, between the years 1579 and 1585, twenty- three priests had been exe cuted. In this last year seventy-two more were taken from their prisons and shipped abroad. The government was warned against needless bloodshed. ' Too many executions,' it was said, ' move others to compassion,' especially when the victims protested on the scaffold that they died for religion and not for treason. On the other hand the banished men in great part returned — they could scarcely do otherwise ; they had taken their oaths to go on the mission, and there was no means of livelihood for them on the continent. Some who did not return did more mischief abroad. There was Edward Rishton, for example, who saved his life at his trial by the profession of tolerable opinions on the pope's deposing power, but when he got safe abroad edited, with violent additions of his own, the dangerous and treasonable De Schismate of the arch-traitor Dr. Nicolas Sander. If such men could not be hanged it were at least wiser to keep them under lock and key.
The seminarists were therefore henceforward officially divided 1 Simpson's Campion^ p. 165.
xl Introduction.
into two classes, some ' learned and politic and of great per suasion ' ; others ' simple, with neither zeal, wit, nor learning.' It was proposed to dispatch the first sort to Wisbeach, where they may be ' restrained from access and intelligence,' and to send the others into banishment, or keep them in the London gaols, ready, if need be, to be hanged. Economical con siderations had also some weight in determining the destiny of the prisoners. The less fortunate seminarist, unprovided with a Jesuit passport, with no rich friends or great talents, and therefore with an empty purse, became a burden upon the country and unprofitable to his keeper. Consequently we find the London prison certificates of this date significantly anno tated with marginal suggestions such as, 'meet for the gal lows,' ' meet to be banished,' ' able to bear the charges — meet for Wisbeach ' ; or, in the case of laymen, more contemptuously, 'meet for what place you please.'1 So in 1586 the keeper of Wisbeach shrewdly petitions Walsingham for ' some of the best priests,' that is the wealthiest.2 In dread of the armada a dozen priests, of whom William Weston, the hero of Bag- shaw's story, was one, were added to the select few at the castle, raising the total number of catholic prisoners to about thirty- five. They were, indeed, comparatively fortunate, for in the frenzy of joy which took possession of the nation in the autumn of 1588 the queen, as Lingard expresses it, 'celebrated her victory by the immolation of human victims.' Six new gallows were erected in and near London ; and throughout England twenty priests — all obscure persons of whom little or nothing is known — ten laymen and one woman were hurried from prison to the gallows. Weston himself had a narrow escape, for an agent of Walsingham had just reported him as 'the only Jesuit in England to be kept if not hanged' Some of the elder
1 Foley, Records, i. pp. 478-480. 2 Morris, Troubles, ii. p. 231.
Laxity of Prison Discipline. xli
priests at Wisbeach could not be brought within the compass of the statute 27th Eliz., for they had never been free from custody since the passing of the act.
Weston in an autobiography, of which all that is extant has been printed by F. Morris (Troubles , Second Series), gives, not withstanding some lapses of memory, a good account of prison life within the castle at this time. The picture, which is a surprising one, can be completed from the paper printed by Strype (Annals, iv. p. 274), and other contemporary writers. The prisoners were at first locked up in separate rooms, except for meals, when they met in a common hall with the keeper at one end of the table and his wife at the other. Half an hour before and after dinner and supper they were at liberty to take recreation in the garden. But no visitors were allowed at any time. If any catholic brought them alms, one or two had leave to go and fetch the money. Four justices of peace were re sponsible for their conduct, Mr. Thomas Gray being their keeper. Night watches were arranged within and without the walls. This rigorous restraint, however, lasted only three or four years (not six as Weston relates), and even then the priests managed to say mass in their chambers and were bold enough to decorate their improvised altars with pious pictures. Before Gray's death his custodianship, for some unexplained reason, became remarkably lax. Perhaps, the Spanish danger growing less, the justices exacted from him less vigilance, or perhaps he was more heavily bribed. The sagacious foresight of Cecil and Walsingham had even possibly suggested that if the priests were given rope enough they would hang them selves. The prisoners were now exempted from dining at the keeper's table. They set up a kitchen and pantry of their own, paying twelve shillings a month for their rooms — a high rent for those times. Friends sent them venison, wine and spices. Gentlemen and ladies came to dine, sup
xlii Introduction.
and visit them in their chambers. No day passed without a guest. They had leave to go out as they pleased. They be came popular with the tradesmen of the town, and with the poor, to whom they liberally contributed a portion of their superfluous alms. The priests formed themselves into a sort of college. Metham, the intended archbishop of York, gave lectures, it is said, on the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures. De bates were held on ecclesiastical affairs, and an active corre spondence kept up with friends abroad. In the eyes of simple catholics this ' sepulchre of priests ' became a holy place, like the catacombs of Rome to the early Christians. It was made a place of pilgrimage. Men came there with cases of conscience to be solved ; or to be reconciled to the church. Ursula Gray, the daughter of the keeper, himself a fierce puritan, was made a Roman catholic. A tenth part of the missionaries — and the most active part — were here in fact lodged with far more liberty and comfort, and with far more power to carry out their pur pose than those who were hunted over the country from one hiding-place to another. What is perhaps still more surprising is that the prisoners were permitted to keep lads, of ages varying from thirteen to eighteen, as attendants or pages. The names of thirteen of these youths and of the priests for whom they acted as servants are given in a paper preserved among the Harleian MSS. A few were, or pretended to be, natives of Wisbeach. Many were gentlemen's sons sent there probably for their education. When a stricter regime was restored, and these boys were put through a series of examinations, it turned out that the names and parentage which they had at first re ported were false.1 Thus, Thomas Everard, who had on a pre vious examination declared himself to be the son of a Norfolk yeoman, now admitted he was the son of Sir Thomas Knyvett
1 Compare the list (Harl. MSS. 6998, f. 226) printed by Morris, Troubles, ii. p. 266, with the State Papers, Dom. Eliz, (Sept. 1599), vol. cclxxii. n. 107.
Father William West on. xliii
of Buckenham castle, and was sent by his mother to wait upon Dr. Bagshaw. Another lad, known as Nicholas Clayton, four teen years of age, who was servant to the Rev. Christopher Thules, turned out to be Nicholas Bagshaw of Chapel le Frith, in Derbyshire, and a kinsman of the author of the True Relation. Similarly, the Rev. Lewis Barlow was waited upon by his relative, Robert Barlow, the son of a gentleman of Hathersage, Derby. No wonder that indignant complaints were made to the council that ' through the favour of the keeper, Gray, the prison was growing to be as dangerous as a seminary college, being in the heart and midst of England.'
Such was the life of the Wisbeach confessors when the famous ' Stirs ' began in the winter of 1594-5. An official list of the prisoners will be found in the Appendix (A), and some description of the men, as their names occur in the text, is given in the footnotes. Of the two leaders of the factions a few words may be said here.
William Weston was born at Maidstone in 1550. After taking his bachelor's degree at Oxford he was drawn to Douai and thence to Rome, where he joined the Jesuits in 1575. He completed his noviciate in Spain, and then in various colleges of the order, chiefly at Seville, he remained till in 1584 he was summoned, with Henry Garnet, at the strong recommendation of Parsons, to the English mission. He was to take the place of Hey wood as quasi-provincial or superior of the Jesuits (see note infra p. 12), but when he landed, there was no Jesuit, or none known to be such, in the country. Garnet and Southwell did not follow him till 1586 ; and when shortly afterwards Weston was captured and imprisoned Garnet in his turn became superior. Weston had a reputation for some learning and much piety. In the Spanish colleges he was frequently discovered in unexpected times and places upon his knees in prayer. He woke his companions at midnight with the sound
xliv Introduction.
of his self-flagellations, and gained from them the name of ' holy William."1 An undoubted zeal and an unusually stubborn will enabled him to retain a great command over his adherents at Wisbeach, while the moroseness and spiritual pride which seem to have accompanied his aggressive puritanism intensified the dislike of his opponents. On his arrival in England he had distinguished himself by making a convert of Philip Howard, earl of Arundel, and still more by his success in a new venture as leader of a band of exorcists. He went from one country house to another with a number of priests, among whom were Dibdale and Cornelius, afterwards martyrs ; Tyrrell the ' apos tate ;' Ballard, hanged for the Babington conspiracy ; Dryland and Thules, subsequently his fellow-prisoners at Wisbeach, the former his confessor and the latter an opponent ; and half a dozen more who cast out devils and performed many prodigies upon certain maidservants and others who finally, with the priest Tyrrell, cruelly betrayed them. But before their ex posure or dispersion the exorcists had made for their church at least five hundred converts, some say several thousands.
It is not flattering to the good sense of the English people, but so great was the renown which followed these supernatural exploits that a protestant minister, John Barrel, was tempted to imitate them, and did so with some profit. Weston recorded his triumphs over the evil spirits in a curious treatise, which Dr. Harsnet,1 who has fortunately quoted from it many passages,
1 ' A Declaration of egregious Popish Impostures to withdraw the harts of her Majesties Subjects from their allegeance and from the truth of Christian Religion professed in England, under the pretence of casting out of deuils. Practised by Edmvnds alias Weston, a lesuit, and diuers Romish Priestes, his wicked associates. Where-unto are annexed the Copies of the Confessions and Examinations of the parties themselues which were pretended to be pos sessed and dispossessed taken upon oath before her Majesties Commissioners for causes Ecclesiasticall. At London : Printed by James Roberts, dwelling in Barbican, 1603.'
This rare book by Dr. Samuel Harsnet, chaplain to the bishop of London,
The Casting out of Devils. xlv
calls the Book of Miracles. Eye-witnesses swore to the facts. They actually saw the devils gliding about in immense numbers under the skins of the possessed like fishes swimming. Dibdale took balls of hair, rusty nails, and pieces of lead from the cheek or body of the girl Friswood Williams. A number of the devils revealed their names and offices under the interroga tions of Weston ; and Shakespeare has perpetuated the memory of Modo, Mahu, Hobbididance and Flibbertigibbet, foul fiends who did homage to the relics of Campion and testi fied to the sanctity of Weston.1
There is no need to suppose, with Harsnet, that in all this there was deliberate fraud on the part of Weston. He was grossly superstitious and credulous even for his time, and may have been deluded by the tricks of Dibdale, and the malingering of im modest maidservants who ultimately confessed their share in the imposition. He apparently in all sincerity believed that Lord Burleigh's contemptuous rejection of the above-mentioned story of the visible devils which a spectator had on his oath repeated to the lord treasurer, could only proceed from a culpable shutting of the ears to the unwelcome but demonstrable evidence of the Roman creed. Tyrrell, however, declared that not only did the ancient priests, that is, the queen Mary priests, shake their heads, but ' the graver sort that were then imprisoned at Wis- beach ' were greatly offended, and foretold that in the end these
and afterwards archbishop of York, deserves to be reprinted, if only for its vigorous English and Rabelaisian wit. Apart from the accusations of indecency brought against the priests, which may be exaggerated or even false, there is much which bears the stamp of truth in the confessions of the accomplices. The quotations from the Book of Miracles are very instructive.
1 King Lear, Act iii., Scene 4; Harsnet, pp. 45-50, 180. A famous Spanish Jesuit tells, in a funeral sermon upon Weston, what F. Morris calls 'a capital story. ' In the midst of an exorcism a devil begged the father to let him enter queen Elizabeth. Weston refused, for, says More (Hist. S.J. p. 155), she was his queen, and he wished her no harm. ' Well, then,' the devil asked, ' may I come into you ?' ' As God pleases,' replied Weston. ' J had as soon go into a holy water pot,' said the devil. — Troubles, ii. 282.
xlvi Introduction.
proceedings would bring discredit upon the clergy and their calling.1 Nor is there any sure ground for asserting with Bagshaw that Weston was a hypocrite. He may have been cunning and underhand ; he had nothing of Campion's humour or geniality, nothing of Parsons1 knowledge of the world or common-sense, but he was fanatically in earnest with the saving of his own soul and the souls of others according to the strictest Ignatian method. It is safe, however, to say that his alleged austerities are not altogether credible. His friend and fellow- prisoner, Giles Archer, reports what the more sceptical Bagshaw omitted to record, that for seven years at Wisbeach Weston never went into a bed or ate more than one meal in the day. In the winter of 1598 he was removed from Wisbeach to the Tower of London, and there, it is said, continued to add to the hardships of his imprisonment self-inflicted tortures. The devils moreover whom he had specially provoked took vengeance upon him. He assures his superiors, at whose request he wrote his autobiography, that the demons struck him physical blows, audibly suggested suicide to him, and offered him a knife wherewith to cut his throat. They so roused him from sleep with their castigations that for fifty days, so he declares, he had but ten hours' sleep in all. It can therefore be only by a miracle that he escaped insanity. He was finally, on the accession of James, set free with other priests and sent abroad. He taught theology once more in Seville, and died at Valladolid in 1615. His skull is preserved as a relic at the noviciate at Roehampton.2
Dr. Christopher Bagshaw was a person of quite another temperament. He belonged to a Derbyshire family which has given some men of note, with indeed a marked hereditary character, to various religious denominations. He was im petuous, combative, outspoken and noisy. In defence of his 1 Harsnet, p. 254. 2 Morris, ii. 283.
Bagshaw and Parsons at Oxford. xlvii
church's creed he was no less zealous than Weston, and proved to be an active missionary and able controversialist. But he was little of an ascetic. He was proud of his English birth and Oxford training, and devoutly believed in the old English saying that 'an Englishman Italionate is a devil incarnate."* The crooked ways and intrigues of the papal court irritated him, and he probably preferred to meet, and if needs be to use, a direct lie, rather than to employ the amphibologies and equivocations which, partly from the pressure of the times and partly from the attraction of a theological novelty,1 his Jesuit rivals were just then seeming to revel in with a satisfaction that was inordinate. He was as ambitious of drawing to himself a party as was Weston himself, and when two such men with such opposite ideals and policy came together an explosion was inevitable.
Like most Englishmen of mark on the catholic side in his own generation Bagshaw had been bred a protestant. He obtained a fellowship at Balliol college in 1572, and in 1579 was made principal or vice-principal of Gloucester hall. It was at Balliol that he first came into conflict with Parsons, who was master of arts at the same college, and at that time reading Calvinistic theology. Parsons was unpopular. Dr. Squire, the master, who attributed certain lampoons directed against himself to Parsons'1 pen, owed him a grudge ; and archbishop Abbot, who was a fellow of Balliol, remembered that Bagshaw, whom he calls ' a smart young fellow ' and one who thought his penny good silver,1 had been ' with some despite swinged by Parsons, being dean of the college,1 and was in consequence 'most hot in prosecution of him."1 Parsons, as dean, had evidently exercised authority with indiscreet severity. He became suspected of leanings towards Rome. His enemies gave out that he had, as bursar, dealt dishonestly with the 1 See note infra p. 107.
xlviii Introduction.
college property, and that, moreover, he was of illegitimate birth, and therefore had intruded himself into the college in defiance of the statutes. They threatened to publicly eject him. Parsons despairing of justice and fearing disgrace obtained leave to resign.1 Some young men to hasten his departure had a peal of bells at Magdalen parish church rung, as they said, to ring him out. Parsons believed, as Abbot did, that this insult was a contrivance of Bagshaw, and he never forgave it.2 The two men carried their animosity with them into the catholic fold. When, in later years, Bagshaw told the story of this forced exit from Balliol, Parsons retorted that his opponent had himself been expelled by cardinal Buoncompagni from the English college at Rome. This statement has been repeated by a number of Jesuit writers and, on their authority, too easily accepted by independent historians.
Bagshaw, who did not join the Roman church till 1582, eight years after the secession of Parsons, brought with him to Rheims the reputation of an able man and a good Greek scholar. A few months after his arrival at the college we find him writing to his protestant brother John of his own ' un speakable comforts ' and many friends ; in characteristic language deploring the heretic's ' damnable case and beggarly atheism,' and holding out splendid inducements to him to come over (Nov. 1582, Col. S. P. CLV. n. 109). He was ordained priest in May 1583, and three months later he proceeded to Rome. His own story is that he went there with the leave and advice of Allen, to return or to stay as long as he pleased. But
1 He left England shortly afterwards with the intention of making medicine his profession, and apparently at that time had no intention of becoming a Roman catholic. See the statement of James Clark, Petyt MSS. xlvii. 44.
2 Compare the discrepant accounts given by Parsons (Apologie, fol. 192-4) and by Bagshaw with the reminiscences of archbishop Abbot, communicated in a letter to Dr. Hussy, printed in Bliss's edition of Wood's Athenae, vol. ii. p. 66.
Bagshaw at the Roman College. xlix
seeing the state of the college, the number of the discontented and the notorious injuries to which they were subjected, he resolved to return to Rheims. The Italian pain of the chest detained him. Allen wrote urging him to return. Agazzari, the rector, on the other hand begged him to remain and to be united to the fathers, for they were then in the thick of what Dr. Ely numbers as the third of the periodical disturbances. Buoncompagni, who was then cardinal protector of the college, 'asked me,1' writes Bagshaw, 'whether I would stay, and I told him, no. The cardinal said that I should resolve to depart. I answered, that day rather than the next. After this when I came to the pope himself of blessed memory, Gregory xin., he moved my stay unto me. I answered his holiness I had a firm resolution to go to my country, where upon he dismissed me with the rest with most fatherly words of affection and granted all the requests we proposed unto him/ He adds that Agazzari gave him favourable testimonials under the college seal.1 Nevertheless during his short stay at Rome he had grievously disappointed and offended the Jesuits. He had sided with the malcontents and even pro posed that the college should be handed over to the dominicans. At Rheims Bagshaw had shown himself well-disposed towards the fathers, and had defended them, so Dr. Barret tells us, against those ' who did not love the society as they should/ Agazzari had even expressed a wish to have him at Rome. He had started from Rheims with thirteen other picked scholars, and Barret despatched with them a remarkable letter to Agazzari,2 in which he describes them as among the very best men he had. Of one alone he had his fears — Bagshaw, for whom Agazzari had written. He had good
1 ' An Answear of M. Doctor Bagshaw to certayne poyntes of a libell,' etc., pp. 30-32.
a Dotiay Diaries, p. 331.
d
1 Introduction.
enough talents and was studious, but was irascible, unmanage able and restless.1 He could not brook correction, and would need all Agazzari's skill in government. But if his headstrong and immoderate temper could be kept under control he gave good promise and would be a credit to the college. This character of Bagshaw is the more to be relied upon as the writer professes to have a personal affection for him.2
When Bagshaw returned to Rheims (April 1585) we find him a doctor of theology. He contrived to obtain the cap on his road through Italy from the university of Padua. His talents and learning undoubtedly deserved it, but the Jesuits, always jealous of such academic honours, and who after wards obtained a papal decree putting obstacles in the way of their acquisition by the seminarists, dubbed him doctor erraticus and doctor per salium?
His stay at Rheims on this occasion can have been but very brief,4 for perhaps before the end of May and certainly before September he was already safe in the Tower, writing to the council that he has ' ever been free from all practices
1 ' Valde est iracundus et difficilis, atque inquietus ' (Dojtay Diaries, p. 331).
2 ' Quern unice diligo ' (ibid. ). Parsons, who did not love him, reports Bag shaw, in a memorial to the pope, as ' a man of suspected faith and unchaste living ' (Tierney, vol. iii. p. clvii).
3 Of this degree Parsons writes in the Apologie : ' Consider we pray you this man's talent in picking quarrels . . . and all this stir to make room for his Doctorship, which God knoweth in what corner of the world he got it and how worthily ; but certain it is, so far as we are informed, by ordinary commenda tion of his superiors he had it not ' (fol. 76). A. P. remarks upon this ' scorn ful speech ' : ' God and the world knoweth that he had his Doctorship at which this fellow gibeth, in no corner of the world, unless one of the most famous Universities in Italy be to be termed a corner of the world. For it is well known he took his Doctorship in Padua and he took it so worthily as this poor fellow might come learning divinity of him these many years. And it is certain, howsoever this fellow is misinformed that he had it by the ordinary commenda tion of his Superior who at that time was no other than his Holiness ' (A Reply to a Notorious Lib ell, p. 156).
4 Douay Diaries, pp. 205, 206.
Riots at Wisbeach. li
against her majesty,1 and praying for his release.1 He was probably soon afterwards despatched to Wisbeach, where he found full scope for his activity. He spent altogether four teen years in prison. After obtaining his freedom, and when the appellant controversy was over, he once more retired abroad and devoted himself to ecclesiastical studies at Paris. He there, on one occasion, engaged in a theological disputa tion with Dr. Featley, the chaplain of the English embassy, before a distinguished audience, and by his skill in contro versy won some compliments from his opponent.2 He died some time after 1625.
Writers on both sides of the Wisbeach quarrel agree that all was peace and edification in the castle up to the date of — the turning-point of English catholic history — the death of Allen. This is at least true of the earlier years. Even in 1593 Garnet, who visited the castle with some of his friends, was so enchanted with what he saw that he ' thought himselfc all that while to haue felt the ioyes of Heauen.'8 Yet in 1587, the year in which Weston arrived, the elements of rowdyism were already visible. George Potter, for instance, a recent importation from Rome and a comparatively young man, who had been described by Dr. Barret in the letter cited above as a scholar ' of an excellent disposition and most gentle manners," took part with three other priests in some schoolboyish and offensive rioting which called for the interference of the magis trates. It may have been scenes such as these (described in the note to p. 23) which gave to Weston his first opportunity
1 Cal. S. P. Dom. Eliz. CLXXIX. 61 ; CLXXXII. 3 and 4. His name appears in a note of prisoners in the Tower, erroneously dated May 27, 1585, for on that day the Douay Diaries register his departure from Rheims.
2 ' Transubstantiation Exploded, or an encounter with Richard the titularie Bishop of Chalcedon ... by Daniel Featley, D.D. Whereunto is annexed a publique and solemne disputation held in Paris with Christopher Bagshawe D. in Theologie and Rector of Ave Marie College,' 1638.
3 Infra, p. 6 1.
lii Introduction.
to pose as a censurer of his brethren. There was certainly at this critical moment especial need of decent behaviour and orderly rule among the clergy both inside and outside of prison. It was all-important for Weston as representing his order to secure the presidency within the walls of this Zion towards which the eyes of the faithful were so eagerly turned. His manoeuvring with this object, as pictured by Bagshaw, is natural and credible. He must become the leader, and must make it appear that he was reluctantly driven to assume the position. By a majority of suffrages and the aid of Garnet he succeeded, and the two parties which had been watching each other with increasing jealousy and distrust for the last seven years now broke out into open hostility. It may be well here to notice the shape which the story has gradually assumed under the hands of some modern writers of a conciliatory tendency. Father Morris, whose historical researches have added greatly to our knowledge of the sufferings of Roman catholics at this period, under one point of view at least, and whose statements will carry more than ordinary weight, refers in his Life of' Weston briefly and apologetically to what he terms this ' now happily forgotten discord.' The division at Wisbeach, he writes, ' had its origin in the strong desire of eighteen of the priests there confined to render their imprisonment as conducive as possible to their sanctification, but they adopted a means that the others had a perfect right to object to and keep aloof from as they judged best. These eighteen petitioned Father Garnet, then superior of the English Jesuits, that Father Weston might be charged to preside over them as their local superior, according to certain rules by which they proposed to frame their community life. This letter was written by them on the 7th of February 159|, and on the 8th of November, Dudley and Mush, two ancient missioners who had gone with Father
Origin of the Rupture. liii
Garnet's concurrence to Wisbeach as pacificators, were able to write to him and say that the division was an end.1 1
The readers of the following pages, or indeed of Parsons" Briefe Apologie, will be able to judge of the accuracy of this account. It is, to begin with, evident that those who rejected Weston's scheme of government did so, not merely in the exer cise of their liberty to decline a work of supererogation, but on the ground that the rule in question was proposed and carried out as a practical condemnation, and, as they protested, an unjust and scandalous condemnation, of the conduct of the minority. The scheme was suspected from the beginning as an attempt of the Jesuits to usurp a superiority over the seminarists to whose aid Allen had invited them. This superiority was moreover dreaded not alone from the dislike of the secular clergy to be ruled by religious, but because of the political projects which were foreseen to underlie the aim at ecclesiastical power. When Weston failed to obtain anything like a unanimous consent to his coveted ' agency,"1 he pleaded that a community life and a stricter discipline were for himself and his friends a necessity to preserve their own morals from contagion, and as a protest against the scandals of their fellow- prisoners with whom otherwise they would be deemed accom plices. The dissentients were further exasperated by the mode in which the Jesuit inveigled adherents to his faction. Mush, the ' pacificator,' the tacitly recognised leader of the northern
1 Troubles, Second Series, p. 264. With this account may be compared the less amiable misstatements of father Plowden : ' Of thirty-five catholic prisoners confined in Wisbich castle, ten or twelve, partly priests, partly laymen, sided with Bagshaw to disturb the tranquillity of the rest and to calumniate their friend F. Weston. Four of these men repented and atoned for their misbehaviour. It was remarked that most of the others died unhappily. One was struck with an apoplexy and died senseless in the prison. Others renounced their religion and practised the vile trade of informers and priest-catchers. Some of these were afterwards executed for various crimes ' (' Remarks on a book entitled Memoirs of Gregorio Panzani, by the Rev. Charles Plowden.' Liege, 1794, p. 117).
liv Introduction.
clergy, who was expressly invited to arbitrate between the con tending parties, declares, in his book to the pope, that Weston allured to his side some so-called 'covert Jesuits1 who were already bound by a secret understanding to the society, or were deceived by the pretence of higher sanctity ; and that he bribed others by distributing to them more than their share of the alms which came into his hands, or by holding out to them hopes of rewards and dignities to be given to them by favour of the Jesuits in the event of a successful invasion of the country.
The introduction of the hobby-horse, with probably some mummers or morris-dancers, into the castle hall at Christmas for the amusement of the ' designed martyrs ' brought matters to a crisis. Weston, shocked at such intolerable levity, with drew with his nineteen followers (for besides the eighteen priests on his side he had with him Thomas Pound, a recusant gentle man, who had in one of his many prisons been admitted into the society on the footing of a lay brother), and on the 2d of February he dedicated his disciples to the Virgin. A few days later the eighteen priests wrote from their retreat to Garnet the much-discussed letter, enabling him to confirm Weston in the leadership, which he, on condition of this confirmation, had already accepted, and to give his approbation to the new rules. These twenty-two rules imply what was elsewhere explicitly avowed by Weston and Garnet and emphasized by Parsons, as the justification of Weston's arbitrary measure, viz. ' the whoredom, drunkenness and dicing,*1 not to speak of the beat ing of priests to the shedding of blood and other enormities practised or tolerated by the fourteen priests of the minority. Weston now despatched Southworth to announce his resolu tion to live apart from the rest to Bluet, who had been for years the collector or treasurer of the imprisoned clergy, and was nominally the chief of his opponents. Bluet was at the same time required to give up to the majority the high table
Public Scandal.
and public kitchen. Bluet and Bagshaw protested. Weston withdrew, shocked the old-fashioned Dolman by turning the bishop of Ely's disused chapel into a buttery, made shift with a private dining-room, engaged a new brewer, laid in a stock of beer, and barred out his profane associates, three of whom had been, to use the favourite phrase, ' confessors in chains ' for twelve years, others for thirteen and fourteen, one for twenty- two, and another (it is said) for no less than thirty years.
The sensation created among catholics in London by the news of the schism, the story of the jesuited priest going mad with remorse, the attempts at peace made in vain at Easter- time by Dolman and Dr. Bavant, and again, later on, by Mush and Dudley, the temporary success of a second effort by these last when they had finally shamed Garnet into insisting upon Weston's surrender, the foolish squabbles and the worse out break which followed closely upon this momentary reconcilia tion, and the rest of the extraordinary details are sufficiently described in Bagshaw's narrative. But the question of how far AVestoiVs serious accusations against his brethren are well founded is not easily answered. He as a rule avoided mention ing names, preferring that the odium should attach indefinitely to the whole of the party opposed to him.1 On the one hand it is noteworthy that on both occasions when the affair was sub mitted to the judgment of two arbitrators, one of them inclined, at least, to the side of Weston. Bagshaw's account of the priest being found in the chamber with Mary the maid is not clear. He appears to be holding something back. But how ever hasty Dr. Bavant may have been in jumping to a conclu sion without examining the accused, he undoubtedly judged that some grave fault had been committed. On the other hand the habitual recklessness with which Parsons, either secretly to
1 These accusations appear to have been especially directed against three or four priests (Petyt MSS. xlvii. 113).
Ivi Introduction.
the pope or publicly in his writings, blackens the character of any individual who stands in his way, must make his denuncia tions more than suspected. He probably believed all the reports brought to him of the immoralities of men so widely respected as Colleton, Bishop, and Mush with as much sincerity as these or their associates believed that Parsons himself was the promoter of assassination, or that father Walpole had designed to poison the queen's saddle.
But though it may be difficult to suppose that a priest occupying the position of Bluet could have been an habitual drunkard, or that he administered sacraments in a state of in toxication and had at one time fallen drunk into the Thames, it is probable enough that there was some hard drinking at Wisbeach, perhaps gambling with the alms of the faithful, and still more probable that the priests occasionally came to blows. Insolent and abusive language seems to have been common. Bluet may have struck Ithell, who afterwards abandoned his profession, or Wigges, who at a later period went over to the Jesuit side. It is less likely, notwithstanding his alleged threat, that he at any time ' trounced ' Dr. Bagshaw.
The rupture within the castle had already lasted for nearly two years, the mutiny at the Roman college was at its height, and the missionary body seeming on the point of falling to pieces, when the heads of the clergy outside of Wisbeach, alarmed at the gravity of the situation, took counsel together for the saving of their cause. Bluet and Bagshaw for a moment fall into the background, and men of another character come to the front. One of these is John Colleton, a devout, earnest, melancholy and rather dull man, with some learning in canon law, who had already been acknowledged as leader of the southern clergy as Mush was of the northern. He was now about fifty years of age. He became eventually dean of the English chapter and vicar-general of the bishop of Chalce-
Colleton and Bishop. Ivii
don. In his youth, after leaving Oxford, lie had entered the noviciate of the Carthusians at Lou vain. He was not however suited for an order devoted to the choir. He was oppressed with an irresistible sleepiness, and was incapable of singing a note. His superiors tried upon him in vain six masters, and when the last, a famous musician, reported that he could ' as soon teach a cow to bellow in tune ' the fathers recommended the young novice to choose another state of life.1 He then went to Douai during the ' golden age " of the seminary, and thence was sent on the mission some years before the Jesuits entered England. He was put on his trial with Campion and others for the imaginary plot of which the scene was laid at Rheims and Home, but saved his life by proving that he had never been in either place in his life. His name may yet be seen cut on the walls of his chamber in the Tower of London, where he remained till his banishment in 1585. He returned to England two years later. His sufferings and zeal gave him great weight with his brethren, while his loyalty to the state was as un doubted as his fidelity to his creed.2
Another priest who now takes a prominent place in the story and who deserves special mention is William Bishop, the well-known theologian and man of letters, afterwards (in 1623) promoted to the episcopate with jurisdiction over the clergy of all England and Scotland.3 In the Menology of' England and Wales, recently published by authority of the Roman catholic hierarchy, his merits are commemorated on
1 See Colleton's own candid account (Just Defence, p. 298 seq.). Parsons had cruelly hinted that the good man had violated his vows of religion.
a Pitts, Angliae Scriptores. ' Vivit adhuc in vinculis clarus Domini Confessor anno domini 1611.'
3 Some account of Dr. Bishop is given in the notes to p. 82 infra, but for the lapsus pennae ' vicar apostolic ' read ' titular bishop of Chalcedon.' It is not clear, from the language quoted p. 84 infra, whether Bishop is described by Parsons as an ' incontinent person ' or merely as a ' maltster and horse courser.'
Iviii Introduction.
the 18th of April as of 'a servant of GocT deserving the veneration of the faithful. Practical talents of a high order however these men did not seem to possess. Their abortive attempt to form a voluntary association of secular priests with one or two heads was, however, very significant of the sense of their own helplessness and want of organiza tion. They saw well enough that without some better unity and discipline they must fall an easy prey to the schemes of a dozen Jesuits well drilled and backed by all the resources of a powerful society having its centre at Rome. They hoped at least that their project when laid before the Roman court would drive the pope more speedily to grant their request for episcopal government. Meanwhile the association was intended to provide funds, assign chaplaincies, settle disputes and pro mote good manners. Especially was it to aim at the twofold and difficult object of maintaining peaceful relations with the Jesuits, and of discountenancing disloyal publications and plots against the crown.
The news of what looked like a formidable combination against the society was at once despatched to Parsons at Madrid. He saw in it the ghost of the old English jealousy of Rome. The priests were aiming at a dangerous independence. They wanted the election of their own prelates. Their leaders were sinfully ambitious of mitres, and for this end were willing to purchase a treacherous peace with the government. It is characteristic of his indomitable energy and tenacity of purpose that, nothing daunted with the triple revolt against his dictator ship — in Rome, Flanders, and England — or with the vanishing chances of a Spanish conquest, he was ready not only to take command of the rebellious college at Rome, but to propose to Clement the eighth a novel hierarchical scheme by which he still hoped to ' carry under his girdle ' the seminary priests and lay the English crown at the feet of the pope.
The Demand for Bishops. lix
V. The Appointment of the Arclipriest.
The idea of an archpriest governing the secular clergy in subjection to the advice of a Jesuit superior seems to have been, on the part of Parsons, a sudden inspiration. He had himself felt and urged the need of bishops for the giving of confirmation, the blessing of holy oils, and for other pontifical functions. His aim had hitherto been merely to limit or con trol the episcopal jurisdiction. Even in this last year, 1597, he had drawn up a memorial, in which he advocated the appointment, not indeed of a regular hierarchy with ordinary jurisdiction, but of two bishops in partibus, the one to reside in Belgium and the other in England, exercising a concurrent jurisdiction over the whole country. These bishops were to have a number of assistants, who were in part to be chosen at Rome, and, under the name of archpriests or archdeacons, were to act as episcopal delegates in the provinces.1 Strange to say, the opposition to an episcopate of any sort came chiefly from the Roman court. The notion of a poor bishop wandering in disguise and hiding in garrets seemed to be re pugnant to the papal sense of dignity, or to be dreaded as likely to give scandal to the faithful.2 When in 1580 bishop Goldwell could not or dared not enter England, though com missioned to do so, there was no attempt to find a substitute for him ; and the bishop himself freely enough expostulated with Gregory xm. for his inaction or indifference in the matter. ' I cannot but marvel,' he wrote, ' that after God has given your holiness grace to, as it were, plant anew and support the catholic faith in that kingdom, you make so many difficulties
1 See Turnbull's notes to Sergeant's Account of the English Chapter (p. n), where the memorial is printed (p. 123).
2 Simpson's Campion, p. 106.
Ix Introduction.
about creating three or four titular bishops to preserve and propagate it/ It was perhaps a mistake on the part of Rome not to have filled up the vacant sees from the beginning, and so to have ignored the Elizabethan appointments. But to send in missionary bishops now, after raising such high hopes of the immediate reduction of the kingdom at the first onset of the seminarists and their allies, might have looked too much like a confession of defeat. It is, in any case, not probable that Gregory xiu., or Pius v., or Sixtus, was fearful of exaspe rating Elizabeth, or had any tender regard for the susceptibili ties of her protestant subjects.
Parsons was, however, quick enough to turn the petitions of the clergy and the hesitation of the papal court to his own account. To allow the priests a choice in the selection of their superiors, whether bishops or not, would be fatal to Jesuit ascendancy.1 But a master he was determined they should have. In hasty counsel with half a dozen of his friends at Rome, he hit upon George Blackwell as the man for his pur pose, and elaborated the device of the archpriest, which he recommended to cardinal Cajetan. Clement viu. very pro bably saw in the scheme, or in as much of it as was laid before him, no more than a means to put an end to scandalous dissen sions.2 But BlackwelFs one-sided and extravagant eulogium of the fathers (printed in the Appendix, p. 137), should alone have been sufficient to disqualify him for the delicate task of acting as peace-maker or judge in so heated a quarrel ; and if Parsons' primary object had been the restoration of ecclesi astical harmony and decorum, he would have seen this himself. But political expediency was with him before everything. Elizabeth's death could not be far off, and it was all-important
1 He is reported to have admitted as much.
2 So at least thought Lingard (History, 6th edit., vol. v. ch. ix.), remarking, however, that ' the projectors of the measure had a great political object.'
Political Objects. Ixi
to Parsons that at that critical moment the whole influence of the catholic body should be concentrated in the hands of one man attached to his party. A memorial drawn up in favour of the archpriest proclaimed that ' the principal reason of the institution was not only to preserve union during the lifetime of the queen, but much more, to procure a catholic successor after her death, in conformity with certain briefs which his holiness has already most prudently addressed to the catholics.''1 This object was well discerned by cardinal d'Ossat and by the English government ; and even Pasquin at Rome is said to have made fun of the jesuifs state-craft by the satirical advertisement, ' If there be any man that will buy the kingdom of England, let him repair to a merchant in a black square cap in the city, and he shall have a very good penny worth thereof." 2
Blackwell was now about fifty years of age, and it was just twenty-four years since he had abandoned his fellowship at Trinity college, Oxford, and gone over to Douai. His charac ter and abilities had hitherto gained for him great respect. Ely, who knew him well and had been with him at Oxford, at Douai, and on the mission, writes of him : ' If the bishop or archbishop had been made by election, I should have given my voice to him as soon as to any man I know in England ; ' but adds, ' Honores mutant mores, if all be true that is set down in the priests'1 appeal, quantumque mutatus ab illo. It is not the same M. Blackwell I knew him to be ... in those his
1 Lingard, vol. v. p. 313. Tierney also (iii. 47) quotes, from a Stonyhuist paper, the statement : ' La stessa institutione (del arciprete) fu drizzata speci- almente alia promotione delli disegni del re di Spagna contra quel die alhora era il vero pretensore, et adesso e il possessore, di nostra corona. '
2 Colleton prints this in large type (Just Defence, p. 241). But Parsons, or the scribe employed by him, writes from Rome (June 1602) : ' It is a ridiculous fable that was written by Pasquin ; we hear of no such matter here ' (Cal. S.P. Dom. Eliz. CCLXXXIV. 89).
Ixii Introduction.
answers and doings he showeth neither quietness, modesty, nor learning ; but rather haughtiness, severity, and much indiscre tion, tossing the censures of the church like tennis balls for every default, threatening the taking away of faculties, suspen sion, interdiction, or excommunication. Worthily was he checked in his holiness1 last bull for his over-much severity' (Briefe Notes, p. 104).
The new constitution was notified to Blackwell in a letter addressed to him by the protector, Cajetan. The more sacred the cause, remarks the cardinal, the more violent are the at tempts of the devil to spoil it. In England Satan has not feared to assail catholics and some missionary priests 'who hitherto have shown themselves leaders or chieftains of the rest,"* in order to make them to bicker one with another and break down the wall of union. Similar mischief had recently been essayed at the Roman college, but was there remedied by the high wisdom and fatherly love of his holiness. With the view of spreading elsewhere the peace and quietness there now enjoyed,1 the pope 'hath by special commandment given charge unto us that we should employ ourselves for the procur ing of this end with all diligence . . . forasmuch therefore as some men think it would not a little avail for this purpose if a subordination were established among the English priests — and the reasons yielded by the priests themselves for this same object were approved by our holy father.2 We following the most godly and most prudent will of his holiness, have decreed to ordain the same ; and for the directing and governing those priests of the English nation who converse in the kingdoms of
1 ' Great peace,' remarks Colleton in a marginal note (p. 5), 'when two cannot speak together without a third, nor the students of one chamber recreate with their fellows of another chamber.'
2 Colleton notes : ' We know not to this day who were these priests, or what were the reasons they yielded.'
The Constitutive Letters. Ixiii
England and Scotland, or shall hereafter reside there, while this our ordination shall continue, we choose you, to whom for the time we commit our stead and office/ The cardinal pro ceeds to grant to Black well ' the title and authority of an arch- priest over all the seminary secular priests, with faculties to direct, admonish, reprehend, and also chastise those priests, to remove them from one residence to another, to determine con troversies and repress schisms." He nominates six assistants, viz. Drs. Bavant and Henshaw, Nicholas Tirwit, Henry Shaw, George Birkhead, and James Standish. Finally, he reminds the archpriest that the principal intention of the pope and himself is to secure peace and concord between brethren and priests, particularly with the fathers of the society, for ' whereas they have no kind of jurisdiction, nor pretend to have over the secular priests,1 it seems a manifest stratagem of the devil, designed for the overthrow of the whole English cause that any catholic should excite emulation against them, when contrari wise all affection and reverence should be shown them."1 The more private letter of instructions which accompanied the document, commanding the archpriest in all grave affairs to take counsel with the superior of the Jesuits, bears the same date, March 7, 1598.
How so important a measure, involving the institution, as Ely declares, of a jurisdiction unheard of in the previous annals of the church, came to be promulgated without bull or brief or any papal document, by the mere letters of a cardinal whose office of protector, as such, gave him no canonical supe riority, has had no sufficient explanation. It was reported by some that the pope would not himself impose the new order for fear of having his authority set at nought.2 Others saw
1 ' Would this were true,' remarks Colleton.
- Signer Acarisio declared to Bishop and Charnock that he had heard this explanation from the pope's own lips. Colleton, p. 34.
Ixiv Introduction.
grounds for believing that the measure was intended to be only temporary ; and on trial, to be withdrawn or made permanent, according to the wishes of the clergy.1 It was certainly the interest of Parsons not to give the appointment too fixed a character, and to keep the power which made and could un make the archpriest in the hands of a friendly cardinal. But in any case, it was the absence of any proper credentials on the part of the protector which gave to the priests, who were afterwards known as the 'appellants,' their main ground for disputing the canonical validity of the ' Constitutive letters.'
The letters reached Blackwell, May 9, 1598. He at once sent for Colleton and Charnock, and formally announced to them his appointment and powers. They were permitted to see but not to take copies of the letters. Blackwell was detected in quoting, as part of his commission, faculties which he did not possess, a procedure which Parsons afterwards j ustified on the ground that the archpriest could truly say he had these powers, seeing that he had only to write to Rome to obtain them. The suspicions of the priests were aroused. They feared some new trick of Parsons, and with reason doubted if the orders really proceeded from the pope. In the first place, says Colleton (p. 33), ' the clergy had quite recently received assurances from Clement, that he would not appoint any govern ment in the country before the good priests in England (so gracious were his holinesses words) should advertise him what kind of government were fittest and best sorted with the miseries of our church.1 It was notorious that the appointment was made without the consent or even knowledge of any but a handful of priests at Rome. Moreover, it did not appear likely that the pope, if he were made acquainted with the facts, would inflict upon the suffering church a superior with such
1 Relatio Compendiosa, pp. 25, 26.
Validity of the Letters Disputed. Ixv
excessive penal powers ; or, for the appeasing of the present dissensions, would set over the secular clergy a ruler who was a creature or the nominee of the adverse party in the quarrel. For the archpriest could remove at will priests from their residences, and this, while it enabled him to give profitable and influential posts to his favourites, would often involve the destitution or capture of those who were in his bad graces. He could take away their faculties without trial, and this under the circum stances meant starvation ; and while he had no authority what ever over the Jesuits, he was bound to consult their superior. This appeared tantamount to placing the seculars under the entire control of Garnet.1 Was it probable, too, they argued, that the pope would unnecessarily exasperate the English government and risk the increase of persecution by imposing upon the priests a scheme which had so evidently emanated from the busy brain of that notorious traitor, Parsons ? 2
In fact, the letters were founded upon false information, and this was enough to destroy their validity. But above all, it was argued with considerable force, on strictly canonical grounds, that the appointment of a prelate possessed of a juris diction and faculties in some respects exceeding those of a bishop, and extending over the subjects of two separate king doms, could not be validly instituted without apostolic letters duly attested ; and furthermore, to receive such a superior unless he produced authentic papal credentials would consti tute on the part of the clergy a grave offence. What, asks Champney, would be thought of an English nobleman sending
1 Or, as another priest less temperately expressed it, ' All catholics must hereafter depend upon Blackwell, and he upon Garnet, and Garnet upon Parsons, and Parsons upon the Devil, who is the author of all rebellions, treasons, murders, disobedience, and all such designments as this wicked Jesuit hath hitherto designed against her majesty, her safety, her crown, and her life ' (Sparing Discoverie, p. 70).
2 Relatio Compendiosa, p. 29.
Ixvi Introduction.
letters into Ireland to proclaim the establishment there of a new government on the strength of his bare word that he was empowered to do so by the queen ; and what of those who submitted to his claim, and placed themselves at his disposal P1 The reasons which induced a number of the clergy to ' stand off' are detailed with abundant references to legal and theological authorities and with wearisome iteration in half a dozen treatises. A paper in the Petyt MSS. (xlvii. 93) gives at length thirty reasons to show ' That we cannot in conscience, policie, nor equitie, admitt of Mr. Blackw. archipresbyterie."1 Colleton reduces these reasons to five, but takes three hundred pages 4to to develop them. Ely, a professed canonist, treats the question with more conciseness and vigour, and insists, in replying to Parsons and Lister, that Blackwell was an intruder and unjust possessor, and all that he did was of no force, and that the * united priests,1 as Parsons calls his adherents, were punishable for receiving the archpriest before his appointment was confirmed by the pope's brief.2 ' Mary,' he exclaims, ' if you can show me that a protector hath, without bulls by the
1 Copies of certain Discourses ) pp. 21-30; cf. Relatio Compendiosa, pp. 17-26. It was argued on the other side that the dissentient priests were bound to believe the cardinal on his word, and that they could not but admit it to be morally certain that the pope had given to Cajetan the requisite authority. Yet, without impugning Cajetan's veracity, it was possible to suppose he had mistaken or exceeded his powers. A somewhat parallel plea was set up, two centuries later, by Dr. Milner and his ultramontane friends, in opposition to the rescript of monsignor Quarantotti bidding catholics accept the veto proposed by the British government. Pius vii. with his cardinals was in captivity or exile, and the clerical partisans of the ' schismatical bill,' writes Milner, 'through gross falsehoods and malicious representations . . . fraudulently obtained ' the rescript which on that account was pronounced ' irregular.' In this document, Quaran totti, secretary of the propaganda, declares : ' We who in the absence of the supreme pastor are placed over the concerns of the sacred missions, and for that purpose are invested with ftill pontifical powers . . . do decree ,' etc. It turned out that Quarantotti was in error as to the powers delegated to him. His action, at least, was subsequently disavowed by the pope. The appellant priests had ground for hope that Clement vm. would thus disavow Cajetan.
2 Brief e Notes, pp. 116-150.
The Office of an Archpriest. Ixvii
express commandment of his holiness, instituted a new dignity which was never in England or in the church of Christ before, then will I burn my law books and quit that profession, for it is against law, against custom, and against the style of the court of Rome. Be not offended if I term it a new dignity, never heard of before in Christ's church since Christ's ascension. I mean for the ampleness and extension of his jurisdiction. For an archpriest to have as great and ample, yea, greater, jurisdiction over all the priests of two realms as had all the bishops of those realms when they were catholic, is new and extraordinary. It is a mockery that you [Parsons] call it an ancient dignity in Chrises church. Who knoweth it not ? The question is not of the ancientness of the dignity but of this new and never-before-heard-of j urisdiction and authority. It is an ancient dignity in Christ's church, you say. I confess, but with all I say, it is the lowest and basest dignity in Christ's church. It is such as followeth. His jurisdiction did not further extend than the church. His office is to govern the choir, to see that the service be decently said ; and in the bishop's absence he must sing mass upon holy and festival days. It is his office to begin the service or to appoint another to begin it. To his office it appertaineth to see that sick persons die not without confession and receiving the blessed sacrament . . . An archpriest's authority extendeth no further than the church's door. . . . None but the pope, and that by his bulls, can institute or erect a new dignity or office in God's church.1
This firm position, however, was only taken up at a later stage of the controversy when the appellants were arguing in self-defence against the charge that they were guilty of schism and had incurred excommunication.
They at first proceeded tentatively and with caution. They asked Blackwell to send to Rome to make further inquiry of the pope's wishes, or to obtain satisfactory confirmation of the
Ixviii Introduction.
letters. He scouted the proposal and insisted that his appoint ment was final and without appeal. They then determined to send a deputation to Rome on their own account. Colleton summoned Bishop from Warwickshire, and proposed that he and Robert Charnock should undertake the somewhat perilous journey. Before starting the two priests had more than one interview with Black well. He would not prohibit the journey, but warned them significantly of the prisons that awaited them.1 They protested that they did not reject his authority, but merely asked for delay until they could ascertain more certainly the pope's mind.
The delegates were poorly equipped for such a mission. They had no recognised chief. They had little opportunity to confer together or to agree on a definite policy. They ran the risk, especially if they carried with them compromising papers, of being captured as priests by the pursuivants before they could cross the Channel. There is not a sign of their having any understanding with the queen's council. When the queen, a few years later, so much as lifted a little finger on their behalf, the fact and the consequences were plain enough. The priests had not the forethought to secure the protection or aid of the French king. They went without commendatory letters from Black - well, and probably made their way, as a rule, through even catholic countries in the disguises adopted by them in England.
Their commission was generally to give information to the pope of the true state of affairs in England, to do their best with Parsons and the pope to obtain a withdrawal of the arch- priest's appointment, and to get bishops in his place. But each of their friends had his say, and the delegates imprudently burdened themselves with many impolitic complaints and peti tions. The principal objects of the deputation, as conceived
1 See Charnock's letter to Bagshaw, with Bishop's postscript, infra, p. 83, note. The deputies did not leave England until after August 9.
The Mission to Rome. Ixix
by wiser heads, are well expressed in a letter written by Mush to monsignor Morro or Moro, a prelate who had shown some friendliness towards the aggrieved students when he had visited the Roman college with cardinal Sega, at the time of the recent commotions. The writer, in the name of many other priests, petitions, 1st, for bishops, to be elected by the common suf frages of the clergy and not by Jesuits only ; 2dly, that the government of the English college should be intrusted to English priests, or at least to some religious order other than that of the Jesuits ; 3dly, that the pope should prohibit and suppress all books dealing with matters of state which tend to increase the rigour of the penal laws ; 4th, that the clergy should be permitted to make for themselves certain rules adapted to the special circumstances of the mission, such as were proposed by the association.1
The news of the intended embassy had reached the pope through Parsons, who was in communication with Bellar- mine, afterwards cardinal, then in attendance upon Clement vin. at Ferrara. The pope bade Bellarmine write to Parsons for further particulars, telling him to let the two priests know that if they presumed to come to Ferrara they should at once be thrown into prison. This Bellarmine did on October 17, and Parsons, in the belief that the priests would travel through Flanders, forwarded the letter there, but it did
1 The letter, dated 27th' May 1598, is printed in the Declaratio Motuum, pp. 122-142. Parsons, whose object was to misrepresent and caricature the petitions of the ' ambassadors,' pretends to believe that this temperate and able letter was never sent to Rome ; but see Mush's remarks to Bagshaw, infra, Appendix G. Mr. Gillow (Diet. vol. i. p. 475) inadvertently describes the recipient of the letter as Thomas More, the agent of the clergy in Rome. The clergy had no agent in Rome at this time, and More was not appointed to that office for many years later. Parsons calls the prelate in question ' Mon signor Morra, now bishop ' (Afol. f. 1 68), and A. P., in his Reply, refers to him as ' Mon Seignior Morto (sic), a bishop in Italy who was joined with doctor Lewes, bishop of Cassana, in many affairs of the church ' (p. 313).
Ixx Introduction.
not reach them, as they travelled by way of France.1 Cajetan also wrote from Rome (November 10) to Blackwell, charging him, in the name of the pope, to send information as to the character of the deputies and of the other priests of their party.
Bishop and Charnock reached Rome in safety on Decem ber 11, and went at once to the English college. Parsons received them with undisguised anger, and was with difficulty prevailed upon to grant them the usual hospitality accorded to pilgrims. The next morning he informed Martin Array and Dr. Haydock that they were nominated by the archpriest as his proctors, and that on his behalf they were to treat with the deputies. ' On that day,1 writes Haydock, ' we gave them their welcome in such sort as I suppose their former brags ... are prettily abated;' and he boasts that they ' remained melancholy all that night.'2 After five days they were expelled the college, on the ground that they had attempted to disturb the peace of the house, and . were spreading false information regarding English affairs. These charges are, however, vehemently denied by the appellants. The very day they were dismissed the college they visited the vice-protector, Borghese. Cajetan
1 Mr. Maziere Brady (Episc. Succession, iii. 58), followed by Mr. Gillow (art. Charnock), says that the pope sent word to the deputies that whenever his commands should reach them they should stop their journey, but that they nevertheless persisted in their design. The statement in the text is made on the authority of Parsons' Apologie, f. 120. Compare A. P. Reply, pp. 231-241.
2 Letter of Haydock (dated December 19), reporting his proceedings as proctor, in the Petyt MSS. Three out of the first five letters written by the two proctors — the last is dated February 20, 1599 — are preserved in this collection, vol. xlvii. ff. 123-135. With these letters, and Parsons' account of the transac tions at Rome during the next five months (Apologie, chap, ix., and his letter to Bishop and Charnock, October I5995 printed in the Copies of certain Discourses'), must be compared John Bennet's censure upon this letter, and Dr. Bishop's own answer to it, both printed in the Copies ; an Answear ttnto the particulars objectea in the Apology against Master Doctor Byshope, printed with Ely's Briefe Notes, and the I4th chapter of the Reply to a Notorious Libell by A. P., which last contains much valuable information.
The Deputies Imprisoned, Dec. 1598. Ixxi
was away from Rome with the pope. Borghese promised they should have an audience of his holiness before they were judged. But the cardinal assured Haydock, the proctor, who had immediately followed them, that the pope would certainly punish them as they deserved. Cajetan, whom they saw on his return to Rome, December 21st, told them to draw up their case in writing. They now made an attempt to gain the good offices of d'Ossat, but, as they brought no letters from the French king, the ambassador let them know that he could not act officially, but would do what he could as a friend to gain for them the desired audience of his holiness. The pope had meanwhile returned from Ferrara on December 20. The overflow of the Tiber, which put half Rome under water, gave the priests a few days1 respite. But after nightfall, on December 29, the feast of St. Thomas a Becket, they were surprised by Parsons rushing breathlessly into their lodgings with the news that the papal officers were at the door to carry them to prison, but that he (Parsons) had interceded for them that they should be spared so public an infamy and be committed instead to his own custody in the English college. By this means, remarks Tierney, Parsons1 main object of preventing the pope from getting information was secured.
The two priests were at once made close prisoners, ' in the best rooms of the college,' says their gaoler. They were locked up in separate apartments, of which Parsons kept the keys. They were not permitted to say or hear mass. They were allowed no writing materials, and every scrap of paper they had brought was taken from them.1 Parsons assisted at the
1 From these papers Parsons reduced the demands of the deputies to eleven articles, which he gives, with his own interpretation and inferences, in a docu ment entitled ' Puncta principalia et secreta quae habent in mandatis duo sacer- dotes inquieti ex Anglia venientes ut ex literulis et memorialibus patet quse secum attulerunt 29 Decembris 1598' (Petyt MSS.).
Ixxii Introduction.
ransacking of their baggage, and held up to the derision of bystanders ' a nightcap, with a border of black silk two fingers deep, a dozen of silk points fine socks, a sword, and a dagger."1 Charnock's handkerchiefs and ' night coifs,' says Parsons, c were so wrought with silk and gold lace as they might seem to serve for any secular prince in the world, and the socks of his feet were of so fine holland, as the commissary said he was well assured that his holiness never wore such for his shirts.1 1
The news of this strange treatment reached cardinal d'Ossat. In a paper, written and signed by Bluet and preserved in the Petyt collection,2 it is said that the ambassador ' went to the pope and told him that in the imprisonment of these two men he had done that whereof no example could be given in any age. " For," saith he, " if they had come in their own names they had deserved to be heard ; but now, coming in the names of so many, and to be imprisoned unheard, is such an example as never was seen. Therefore, I beseech your holiness, give them audience." Whereupon the pope promised that they should have audience. But forthwith cometh the Spanish ambassador (suborned by Parsons) and dissuadeth the pope from what he had promised, saying that the two priests were seditious, and for that cause came to sow sedition ; and further said that if he would give them audience he would alienate his master, the Spanish king, from his affection to his holiness. Hereupon he denied audience again. The second time the French ambassador came and urged as before, and again audi ence was granted, which being known to the Jesuits they pro cured the said Spanish ambassador to come again to dissuade the pope, affirming that it was a matter of greater importance
1 A. P. Reply, p. 328.
2 It was printed by Watson in his preface to the Important Considerations, Parsons in his Manifestation laughs at the story. W. C. (p. 72) refers to Nicholas Fitzherbert, formerly cardinal Allen's secretary, as able to vouch for its truth.
The Trial. Ixxiii
than he conceived, and that he should not give the audience if he intended to entertain his master's good will. By this means they were excluded from doing their message.'
The judicial proceedings which now took place in the college were curious. The prisoners were, in the first instance, examined by Parsons and Acarisio, canon of St. John Lateran, the papal fiscal. Charnock's examination began on the 4th of January and ended on the 4th of February. That of Bishop, which was conducted separately (for the deputies were allowed no intercourse of any kind with each other) began on January 10, and was over on the 25th of the same month. They were allowed no counsel; but Father Tichborne, the Jesuit prefect of studies, was deputed to act as their notary. Parsons made much of the discrepancies in the motives assigned by the two priests for their mission ; and they complained that their depositions were inaccurately taken down by the notary, and that Parsons altered or amended them as he pleased.
It was a point of importance to deprive the commission of all appearance of authenticity and to strip the delegates of their assumed character as appellants to the Roman see. They represented, it was urged, no one but themselves or a mere handful of discontented men. They came with no credentials beyond a number of 'tickets or scrolls,11 generally without seals or addresses — scraps of paper — such as one would not deign to use, so said a cardinal, as a cover for the meanest vessel. Mr. Bishop, writes Parsons, 'being asked about his mission, who sent him ? with what authority ? why he and his fellow were sent above the rest? and other like points, was somewhat troubled in answering, saying, Nescio quisfuerit, etc. I know not who was the first author of this mission, nor know I for certain why we two were chosen for this mission above the rest.
1 Apologie, f. 133.
Ixxiv Introduction.
. . . These are his own words, and by this we may perceive what an authentical mission and commission this was ' (ApoL f. 132). Parsons, however, suppresses Bishop's answer to the first questions, Who sent him, and with what authority ? This answer, which is not wanting in dignity, is supplied from Bishop's own copy, by his apologist in Ely's book, and was as follows : —
' There was not in England either prince or catholic magis trate to give us any customary letters of credence. Nor any noble lay catholic could write for us to his holiness without imminent danger of his liberty and life. And we have no other ecclesiastical prelate besides M. archpriest, who neither was confirmed in that authority, nor was it to be expected that he should write in our commendation, knowing full well that we went about the moderation of his power. Whom, nevertheless, we gave to understand of our enterprise, and he would not prohibit it. We bring with us the humble petitions of nine- and-twenty l learned and virtuous priests, which were for the most part addressed unto his holiness in form of supplication. Seven of the ancientest of them committed the charge of pre senting of them unto us, as their letters do bear witness. Neither are small pieces of paper, brought out of an island where most narrow search is made at every port, to be smally esteemed ; which of purpose we made choice of for the faster conveyance, misdoubting nothing less than that the virtue of a testimony shall lie in the largeness of the paper wherein it was written. As soon as we came into a catholic country, we got letters of commendations from the right R. bishop of Paris, in
1 Compare with this the report of Martin Array : ' These men being pressed upon their oaths to say how many they knew assuredly to be of their party . . . they answered, "some twelve they knew, but presumed of more," which made the commissary to laugh and yet to be angry also, to see such per versity of a few ' (Letter of Jan. 1 8. Petyt MSS.).
Charges of Ambition. Ixxv
the name of cardinal Gondy, his uncle, unto cardinal Aldo- brandino, his holiness' nephew. Thus furnished we came, pre suming that his holiness'' grave wisdom and experience would not stand upon such formalities with us coming out of a country where was neither magistrate nor notary catholic. Neither were the humble requests of fewer priests than they to be contemned, considering with what peril of their lives, and with how small worldly recompense they had a long time laboured in our blessed Lord's vineyard, principally when some of them were of the most ancient, best qualified, and best esteemed priests of England.'
As a proof that the deputies were ambitious of securing for themselves bishoprics, Parsons alleged that one of the papers found upon them was addressed ' To your LL? If the fact were admitted, it could hardly be regarded as furnishing evi dence against either of the two priests. But they both stoutly denied it, and repeatedly asked, but in vain, for a sight of the document, which Charnock challenged as a forgery. John Bennet, indeed, supposes that the superscription in question was that of a letter to Charnock written by Bagshaw, who was accustomed to address his friend by an alias beginning with the letter L. Bagshaw wrote his m with a long downward stroke, which resembled, or could be made to resemble y. Hence, it was suggested that, by supplying a second Z, the innocent 'To WJr. L" could by an adroit penman be easily converted into the incriminating ' To fir LL."1 1
The conclusion of these grave contentions and proceedings was duly reported to the pope, who then commissioned the two cardinals, Cajetan and Borghese, with the fiscal, to hear the whole depositions read in presence of the prisoners, and to learn if they had anything else to say ; for it was evident that
Copies oj certain Discourses, p. 127.
Ixxvi Introduction.
there was much in the papers found upon them which had not yet been touched upon.
The cardinals accordingly held their court on the 17th February in the English college. The prisoners, who were, as before, called in separately, swore that they had nothing to say. They were justified in this, says John Bennet, seeing that they were commissioned to speak jointly and in concert, not separately. After a time they were again summoned, and this time together, with the two proctors. The two deputies, who had not seen each other for seven weeks, embraced. The proc tors now delivered up in dumb show a libel which was read by Tichborne. The accused asked at once for a copy, that they might make answer to it. Thereupon the proctors threw them selves upon their knees before the cardinals, and begged that in the interests of peace and charity the request might be refused. The cardinals refused accordingly.1 The proctors wrangled awhile with the prisoners, and charged them with insisting that the cardinal protector should be changed. The two priests were then solemnly admonished by the cardinals, who declared that they found no grave fault in them save that they had taken this journey unadvisedly, and had thereby given great scandal to many in England. The priests expressed their regret that any such scandal should have been taken, and were then recommitted to their chambers to await the sentence of the pope.
The indiscreet eagerness which Bishop had shown to reply to his prosecutors1 libel was the cause of the continued strict-
1 There is a copy of the libel, ' Objecta de seditione,' etc., in the Petyt MSS.. and with it the original draft in Charnock's handwriting of the answer, drawn up by him at a later time, entitled ' The Aunswer to the Lybell wch Mr- Richard Haddocke D. of Diuinity and Mr- Martin Aray both preists and proctors for the Archpriest preferred to the two Cardinals Caetan and Burghesius 17 Febr. 1599, in the English Colledg at Rome, agaynst the two preists Mr> William Bishop and Rob. Charnock, at what tyme (notwithstanding it was earnestly desyred by them that then they myght make their aunswere unto it), they could not have it. '
Sentence of Banishment. Ixxvii
ness with which these helpless men were still kept apart and under restraint. But shortly after the trial they were on one occasion, by the indulgence of Parsons and with due precau tions, permitted to meet and take recreation with the students. Bishop was guarded by the minister or vice-rector of the college and by Father Owen, the confessor ; Charnock, by Father Tichborne and Parsons himself. The prisoners were then stationed between their guards on opposite sides of the college for an hour and more. They were told that this was to be the beginning of their liberty. But the experiment seemed to have been considered dangerous, for they were again kept in close confinement for another six weeks.
Meanwhile a papal brief was issued, dated April 6, approv ing, confirming, and giving the fullest authority to the letters of Cajetan appointing the archpriest. On April 21 the sen tence of the cardinals was pronounced upon the two priests. Bishop was banished to Paris, and Charnock to Lorraine. They were forbidden, under severe penalties, to return to England, Ireland, or Scotland, and they were put upon their oaths to observe these injunctions. They were not to travel together or to leave Rome on the same day ; and, notwithstanding their entreaties to be allowed at least the consolation of each other's company on the road, it was sternly refused them. They were not given a penny for their maintenance in exile. Charnock remained for a short time at Pont-a-Mousson, a guest of Arthur Pitts, the dean of Liverdun. He was also befriended by Dr. Ely and Father Darbyshire, but could get no sufficient means of support. He therefore soon joined Bishop at Paris, and took his degree of bachelor in divinity at the Sorbonne. His reasons for considering his sentence as no longer binding are given in a letter to cardinal Borghese, printed in the Relatlo Compendiosa. Pitts wrote in his favour and com mendation to Blackwell, April 11, 1600 (Petyt MSS. xlvii.
Ixxviii Introduction.
Bishop's apology will be found in Ely's book. But the arch- priest was not easy to appease. Charnock had no sooner quitted Lorraine than the archpriest fell upon him with his censures : ' Rob. Charnock having rashly violated this decree [of banishment] I hereby declare him suspended and warn all the faithful to avoid him, and nullify all his acts as a priest ' (Col. S. P. Dom. Eliz., cccxxv. 115). They both, however, found canonical pretexts for evading their punishment, and of returning to England before a year had gone by. Bishop took the opportunity of his sojourn at Paris to obtain his doctor's cap, in spite of the apparent prohibitions of the brief of 1597.1 During the nine months which had elapsed between the departure of the two ' ambassadors ' and the arrival in England of the brief of confirmation, the exasperation of party feeling had reached a point at which all decency and self-respect seemed thrown aside. In the winter of 1598-9 there came a crisis in the quarrel at Wisbeach, which had now raged, almost without intermission, for four years. Bagshaw and Bluet had no interest in concealing their aversion to the Jesuits and their policy, even if concealment had been possible. The schism among the prisoners, the scandalous charges brought by the one faction against the other, the licence which prevailed in disregard of prison discipline, were the talk of the whole country. The puritans were murmuring, and the government could remain passive no longer. Weston and several of his friends were removed to the more rigorous custody of the Tower. This was said to have been the treacherous work of Bagshaw, and Parsons charged him with procuring his own removal to London in order to treat with the council as soon as he heard of the imprisonment of the two messengers at Rome. Bagshaw's own statement, that he was sent for by the
1 See note p. 109, infra.
Bagshaw' s Dealings with the Council Ixxix
council, oddly enough, on suspicion of being concerned in the alleged conspiracy of Father Walpole and Squiers to poison the queen, is abundantly confirmed by the state papers. He was, indeed, sent to the Gatehouse in October 1598, before the arrival of the deputies in Rome, and he remained a prisoner in London until the following February. But although Bagshaw could truly affirm that his visit to London was under compul sion, and had no such motive as that alleged by Parsons, there can be no doubt that, in order to free himself from suspicion, or to obtain for himself and his friends the favour of the government, he gave valuable information regarding the points at issue between his party and that of Parsons and the arch- priest. Harsher measures towards Weston and his adherents, then in custody, or, rather, more lenient dealings with priests who could be trusted as hostile to the Spanish claims and willing to betray any plots against the throne, were the natural results. The memorandum endorsed ' 19 October 1598 — Bag shaw of Fisher's coming from Rome,'' etc. (Hist. MSS. Report, xi. pt. vii. p. 263), was probably intended for the council ; and another paper (also belonging to the Petyt collection) contain ing ' Heads of instructions for Fisher on his being sent to Rome to oppose the Jesuits, and to deal with Cardinal Toleto to prose cute his purpose for removing them out of the English college of Rome and out of England,'' is subscribed : 6 From D. B. to Mr. Wade, in presence of the B. of L. and Mr. Lieft,1 which certainly looks like a communication made by Dr. Bagshaw to the clerk of the council, the bishop of London, and perhaps the lieutenant of the Tower.
Other priests, about this time, made on their own account certain tentative overtures to the government. In April 1599, the notorious William Watson, an erratic, vainglorious, and not altogether veracious priest, who had, however, suffered a severe imprisonment and cruel tortures from Topclifte, wrote
Ixxx Introduction.
6 to the attorney general, or, in his absence, to William Waad,1 a long epistle in which he pleaded for his liberty, on the ground of having been maligned and persecuted by the Jesuits because of his opposition to their designs. Watson states that he had made sundry collections for a book ' which was meant to go only among catholics to show what men the Jesuits were, and whereunto their ambitious Spanish pretences did incline/ After consulting Bagshaw, he wrote, before he was appre hended, fifteen sheets ' dialogue-wise,' with a preface dedicatory to the queen, ' all of which were perused, as I was told (says Watson), of her majesty, my lord of Essex, my lord chamber lain, Mr. Secretary, Mr. Comptroller, and others, but especially Sir John Stanhope, who, I think, by the bishop of Limerick or Mr. UdalFs [or IthelFs] means, was first made privy unto it, and acquainted her majesty therewithal, to my most comfort of her so gracious acceptance of my poor mite, her highness keeping one copy and my lord of Essex another of the sum or contents of the whole work. The epistle to her majesty Sir Robert Cecil saw in my lord of Essex's hands, and disliked only, or rather doubted (as was told me), of this word toleration, that her majesty would not grant it. It was sent back to alter it : 1 did so, and returned it again (the very day that I was taken on) ; my lord of Essex using these honourable speeches, that he could wish with all his heart that we might have liberty of conscience.1 His clerical brethren thought the projected work, which was mainly an answer to Parsons' book on the succession, very necessary, and by none so fit to be handled as by himself. He adds that promises had been made him on the part of the queen that no Jesuit should know of the printing, and that he should be free from all imprisonments ; yet he had been stripped of all his money, writings, and books, and now ' laid close in prison.1
Watson was not altogether trusted by the wiser men of his
The Outlook at Wisbeach, 1598-99. Ixxxi
own party among the priests, and the attorney-general evidently had his own suspicions of the man. The queen's councillors, indeed, were embarrassed by an excess of secret information, and did not always know whom or what to believe. When many priests, for example, assumed the reality of Squiers' plot, Cecil could hardly be sure that Bagshaw was not, as Squiers asserted on his examination, an accomplice of Walpole. One imaginative informer discovered that the whole of the Wisbeach quarrel was a pretence — a trick devised by Bagshaw in concert with Parsons, the better to blind the government to their ulterior designs.1 An absurdity like this may have been laughed at by Cecil, but there were reasons enough to warn him against entering upon any general understanding with the appellants, or rendering to them as a body active assistance in their conflict. The government therefore proceeded warily, and it was not for two years after this date that an approach to such an understanding was effected.
On the removal of his friend from Wisbeach to London, Bluet, disheartened with the outlook of affairs, had made a con fidant of Richard Blunt, then keeper of the castle. Of the curious conversation which ensued the keeper wrote a memorial, of which a copy, * lost or negligently left among papers,"1 fell into the hands of Parsons, who gives in the Apologie (f. 152) what purports to be the whole of it verbatim. Another report of the same conversation, very largely differing from that printed by Parsons, and entitled ' Information of the keeper of Wis beach Castle,' is preserved among the Petyt MSS., and has been recently printed by Mr. Macray in the eleventh report of the Hist. MSS. Commission (pt. viii. p. 266). Bluet, it appears, ' with tears in his eyes,' communicated to the keeper his fears lest letters should come from Rome commanding the priests to
Cal. S. P., Dom. Eliz., CCLXXXVI. 57.
Ixxxii Introduction.
obey Weston, who would then swear them all to be true to the infanta of Spain, ' as Parsons had caused the priests that were in Spain to be sworn,1 but Bluet protested that ' before he would take such an oath he would be starved to death in the castle of Wisbeach.1 He also, according to Parsons1 version, begged the keeper if he were writing to Wade, the clerk of the council, to warn him not to put trust in Ralph Ithell, a priest, who had been a Jesuit for eight years, still favoured that faction, and was even now (so said Bluet) in correspond ence with Father Gerard, who had broken from the Tower.
The news that Bagshaw was free from danger, and perhaps in favour with the council, seemed to revive the spirit of his party at Wisbeach. One of Parsons1 correspondents from the castle reported that Bluet on one occasion claimed for Bagshaw a portion of the common funds from Archer of the opposite party, who refused it, and that Bluet thereupon fell into a great rage, and ' swore before God that he would call the constable, which he did, but when he [the constable] came in, he [Bluet] had but little to say to him, but entertained him courteously with a pot of beer.1 He nevertheless threatened Archer that he would write to the council. In the winter, when Weston was got rid of, Bluet announced that he would now come into commons, but the remnant of the Jesuit faction resolutely held out, refusing to break bread with their oppo nents unless they submitted to the archpriest and to Weston's prison rules.
Meanwhile Blackwell, impatient of any delay in the complete recognition of his authority, had called upon all the priests to make a formal submission to him. Many respectfully declined to do so until they had certain knowledge of the validity of his appointment. They had sent messengers to Rome for information, and would await their return. Meanwhile they would yield outward obedience. The Jesuit, Lister, now fanned
The Malcontents submit to the Archpriest. Ixxxiii
the flames by the publication of the violent and imprudent treatise (see p. 85 infra and Appendix D), in which he denounced these men as guilty of the crime of schism, and as ipso facto excommunicated. The word was given to shun their ministra tions, to treat their absolutions as invalid, refuse them alms, and shut the doors against them, as men ' having the plague sore.1 They were, to use the language of to-day, boycotted without mercy. The censures of the archpriest had just fallen heavily upon Colleton, Mush, and Heborne when the brief of April 6, forwarded by Parsons to Garnet, arrived in England.
The malcontents were true to their pledges. Further resistance was now indeed no longer possible. Garnet wrote to Parsons acknowledging the receipt of the brief on the 19th of May, and on that same day, at four in the afternoon, Colleton and Mush sat down to supper with the archpriest. They stayed with him all night, amicably discussed the whole matter, and finally made their entire submission. They moreover under took to bring in all the rest, including the party at Wisbeach. Edward Bennet, Benson, Anthony Champney, and even Watson surrendered at once. Garnet therefore wrote once more to Parsons : ' The customer [i.e. Black well] is much comforted by the conforming of the sodalitians who humble themselves to him,"1 though he added doubtfully, ' I know not how matters pass in Warwickshire where the worse crew is."* The leaders felt there might be some difficulty with Bagshaw, and there were suspicions of the fidelity of Robert Drury. But the hesitation was scarcely for a moment. Colleton and Mush were at Wisbeach for the three days before Whitsunday (May 27-29), and procured the submission of the terrible doctor, who had by this time returned from his London prison to Wisbeach, where (as one of his opponents reports to Parsons), he ' hath in some sort obtained his desire, for now he reigneth
Ixxxiv Introduction.
king in Mr. Pound's chamber . . . yet he is at last constrained to yield his obedience to our superior with the rest of his confederates.1 1
VI. The Appeal and the Books.
Not the least surprising of the many strange features of this history is BlackwelFs conduct when at last peace was restored, and all his subjects without exception had made public recog nition of his authority. He now proclaimed that it was not enough that his former opponents should make their submission. They must confess their previous action had been schismatical, and make due satisfaction for their sin before receiving absolu tion.2 The inculpated priests protested that there had been no schism, and that reparation was rather due to those who had been falsely charged with such a sin. Black well pretended that he had received instructions from Rome to the effect that the priests in question were schismatics. He went further. He formally approved the statement, made public by a Jesuit theologian of the name of Jones, that any one who maintained the contrary proposition, viz. that the priests were not schis matics, would himself incur the censures of the Church.
This was enough to lead to the renewal of the feud in an intensified form. For more than three years from this time confusion little short of anarchy reigned in the missionary camp. Bagshaw has briefly touched upon the immediate sequel, and there is no need to enter here more fully into the details. All proposals to submit the question in dispute to arbitration, all overtures of peace except upon his own terms, were contemptuously rejected by Black well. When the ag grieved priests sought and obtained from the theological faculty of the Paris university a decision which declared them
1 Apologie, f. 151. 2 See note to p. 89, infra.
Renewal of the Feud. Ixxxv
to be innocent of any sin of schism or disobedience in having withheld their submission to the archpriest before the arrival of the brief, Blackwell forbade any priest, under pain of sus pension, ipso facto^ or any layman, under pain of interdict, to defend that decision. The clergy were forbidden under severe penalties to publish any writings, to hold meetings, or to get names subscribed to any public document on the subject. Many priests defied these censures as tyrannical and invalid. Laymen scarcely knew who had faculties to absolve them and who had not. A second formal suspension of Colleton and Mush, 17th October 1600,1 drove their friends in despair once more to seek for redress 6 at the infallible seat of the holy apostle St. Peter/
With the setting out of this able and powerful appeal to Rome, dated from Wisbeach, November 17, 1600, and signed by thirty-three priests, Bagshaw's True Relation comes to an end, and our story enters upon a somewhat new phase.
The appellants, as they were now called, who had hitherto stood in some fear of BlackwelFs threats against those who should presume to publicly defend themselves, now rushed into print. They appeared to hold that, while their appeal was out, the archpriesfs authority was in abeyance. They determined at least that this time the pope should know the facts. Mush therefore undertook to address his holiness directly in his well-written Latin treatise, the Dedaratio Motuum, in which he printed the text of the appeal. Bagshaw at the same time prepared his Relatio Compendiosa, which contains less of narrative and rhetoric than the preceding book, but gives the principal letters and documents, including the whole of Lister's tract, upon which the controversy turned. This he in form addressed to the cardinals of the Inquisition. Mean-
1 Infra, p. 93, note.
Ixxxvi Introduction.
while there appeared in English, for the information of the catholic laity at home, the Copies of certain Discourses, issued, it is said, under the editorial care of Dr. Bishop, and contain ing letters and treatises by Bishop himself, Parsons, Champney, John Bennet, Mush, and others. These three works, and especially the two Latin books, were acknowledged by the leaders of the party as representing their case. The Declaratio and the Copies, which were published in the early part of the year 1601, were briefly and, as the appellants considered, con temptuously noticed in a letter of Blackwell to his assistants, June 23. The letter was printed and answered by John Bennet in his Hope of Peace — a title adopted apparently in ridicule of the archpriest's words, 'our endeavours were for peace."1 Bennet's tract displays scant respect towards his superior, and is by no means a model of good taste. It was followed very shortly by the True Relation, which was also in great part occasioned by Blackwell's letter, described by Bag- shaw as 'a sheet of paper fraught with neither wit, honest dealing, discretion, or learning,' and 'containing as many shifts and lies almost as lines/1 Blackwell is now openly derided as an ' archpriest of clouts,' ' a beggar on horseback,' ' a Jesuitical idol,' and ' a puppy to dance after the Jesuit's pipe.' As month after month passed away without bringing any response to the appeal from Rome, the controversy grew more bitter. It was now the turn of the secular priests to c whet their tongues' against the Jesuits ; but if the appellants so far dealt in print the heaviest blows, their adversaries who held the purse strings knew how to retaliate. The lot of the appel lants at this moment was not an enviable one. Half of them, as usual, were in prison. Under the circumstances this was
1 The letter will be found as Bennet printed it infra, Appendix J. It is indeed difficult to reconcile Blackwell's fourth paragraph with truth. Compare the language of his decrees quoted in the notes to pp. 87, 89, infra.
The Brief of 1601. Ixxxvii
often the safer place, as securing for them food and lodging. To be deprived of his priestly faculties would at least matter less to the inmate of a gaol than to a resident chaplain or an itinerant priest depending for his sustenance upon the alms given to him in return for his masses and absolutions. But even the confessors in vinculis were not out of reach of the archpriesfs rod. William Clark, then suffering for his alle giance to the pope in the Clink prison, had signed the Wis- beach appeal. Black well, on February 20, 1601, sent two com missioners, Robert Barwise and Anthony Rouse, into the gaol to call the prisoner to account, and on receipt of these officers'* report he abrogated Clark's faculties on the ground of his ' hav ing refused to answer respecting a seditious letter l signed with his name, and dated November 17."* This sentence of the arch- priest, duly countersigned by the two reverend commissioners, is preserved among the Petyt MSS. The incident, a curious example of an imperium in imperio, is not without dramatic interest. Two priests — their own lives forfeited to the laws — boldly enter into the queen's prisons, there hold a miniature court of inquisition, and pass sentence of spiritual death upon an unfortunate brother in durance for their common cause. A word from the doubly condemned man might have consigned his new judges to the gallows.
The year 1601 passed away before any word from the pope reached the appellants in England. Early in January 1602 appeared the Apologic, written by Parsons in the assumed name of 'priests united in subordination to the archpriest,' with the Permissu superiorum announced prominently on the title-page. Immediately after the issue of this volume Black- well published (January 26) a papal brief which was dated
1 ' Seditious letter ' and ' seditious libel ' were the favourite terms which Blackwell applied to the appeal.
Ixxxviii Introduction.
August 17 of the previous year, and which he had held in his possession and suppressed for more than three months. His motive for this extraordinary conduct did not seem far to seek. The brief strictly prohibited any further writings on the con troversy. Blackwell, it is said at Parsons'* persuasion, waited to give the Jesuit the last word.1 So obvious a trick led to the treating of the document by both parties as so much waste-paper.
The tone of the brief was paternal and conciliatory. If the pope had written such a letter two years earlier it might have produced some effect. But even now he appears to be but imperfectly acquainted with the facts regarding the origin of the quarrel. He sadly laments the dissensions and the bitterness shown by both sides, and asks the appellants what reasons they had to refuse obedience in the first instance to the cardinal's letters, which ' they surely should have obeyed/ He declines to receive the appeal. He had, on the other hand, learnt with grief that when, on receipt of the former brief, the priests had submitted, Blackwell had insisted that they should make satisfaction, and so had opened the wounds anew. He exhorts the archpriest to mingle gentleness with severity, and reminds him that his authority was given to him for edification and not for destruction. By apostolic authority he suppresses Father Lister's Treatise of Schism, and forbids under pain of excommunication any writing, calculated to foster the present discords, being edited, divulged, or retained.
1 ' For it (the brief) being sent towards him from Rome shortly after the i;th August, and coming to his hands about Michaelmas, he kept it close and suppressed it until towards the end of January following, that in the mean season the goodly piece of work of their Apologie might be hatched : and then, peeping out with an antedate, might seem to the simple to have been made before the brief (Preface to Ely's book, p. 4. Compare the prefaces of Colleton and A. P. ; also Tierney, iii. p. civ. )
Parsons' Apologie. Ixxxix
Finally, he utterly extinguishes and abolishes the name of schism, forbidding the very mention of the word.1
Parsons1 Apologie , approved by Blackwell in spite of this decree, was an attack upon the appellants generally. It is the old story, he says, ot the jealousy of secular priests against religious. The unquiet and discontented priests were im patient of discipline or control, they were disobedient to superiors, they raised scandalous seditions at Rome, in Flanders, and in England. They have treacherously dealt with the heretical council ; they have slandered good men, and highly offended God. They were guilty of ingratitude towards the society of Jesus. Parsons gives his own version of the Wis- beach stirs, the affairs at the Roman college, and the establish ment of the 'subordination.1 He reviews in particular the Declaratio and the Copies, and bitterly inveighs against the wilful passion, the falsehood, the shamelessness, the rancour of malice displayed in these two libels, especially in the calumnies ' laid upon F. Parsons, without all foundation or regard of Christian and priestly modesty.1 A month or two later he wrote an Appendix, in the preface to which he pretends to have heard of, but not to have seen, the recent brief. He now reminds the appellants that their books are prohibited ' as they treat expressly and principally everywhere the matter of schism forbidden by his holiness1 brief (as to us it is written) under pain of excommunication ipso facto ' ; but as for himself or those in whose name he is writing, ' we obeying, as our duty is, shall not so much as name the same in this or other our writings.1 He proceeds to deal with the * twins,1 viz. the Hope of Peace and the Relatio Compendiosa, which had ap peared simultaneously, with what must have greatly shocked
1 'Ac nomen schismatis, hac de causa, inter vos penitus extinguimus et abolemus, et ne ulJam amplius illius mentionem faciatis, vobis sub iisdem paenis interdicimus et prohibemus.'
xc Introduction.
Father Parsons, 'a false inscription and a feigned place of printing, with the printer named under a devised name (at which our brethren make no scruple).' Colleton, who had some time before begun a book, but had desisted partly out of deference to the archpriest's decrees, and partly because he believed the measures taken to prosecute the appeal would have been more speedily successful, now at the instance of his brethren once more took up his pen and published, with his own name, his Just Defence of the slandered Priests. Dr. Ely, a little later, wrote from abroad his temperate censure of the Apologie. These two English books may be added to the two Latin works as fairly representing the position taken up by the accepted leaders of the party. Another serious and valu able reply to the Apologie, dealing largely with matters of fact, was published by a priest writing under the initials A. P. But meanwhile wilder spirits intervened. William Watson, with his intolerable style, his exaggeration, conceit, and even doubtful sincerity, played fast and loose into the hands of his opponents. He wrote or edited in rapid succession Important Considerations, a Sparing Discoverie of the English Jesuits, Dialogue between a Secular Priest and a Lay Gentleman, and his Decacordon of Quodlibetical Questions. A priest, under the name of Philalethes, reprinted and ridiculed BlackwelFs letter in favour of the society which had been written five years earlier, and Anthony Copley, a layman, joined in with an Answer to a Letter of a Jesuited Gentleman. These violent invectives, chiefly directed against the Jesuits for the political plotting which was alleged to be the true cause of all the dis sensions between the priests as well as of the extreme rigour of the penal laws, goaded Parsons to a retort as venomous as the attack. His Manifestation of the great folly and bad spirit of certain calling themselves Secular Priests treats mainly of Bagshaw's True Relation, the Memorial, and the books of Watson and Copley.
The Important Considerations. xci
The most notable of these later writings on the side of the appellants was the Important Considerations. It forms, however, an exception to the general character of Watson's productions both in matter and style. Indeed it has so little of Watson's manner that it is not improbable that he was the writer of no more than the prefatory epistle, which is signed with his initials. The book itself professes to be 'published by sundry of us the secular priests,' and is a brief, and, on the whole, fair historical survey of all the rebellions, plots, and 6 bloody designments ' set on foot against England by the pope or others, mainly at the instigation of the Jesuits. But if, urges the writer, her majesty had not been ' depraved, irritated, and provoked' by these ungodly and unchristian practices, 4 most assuredly the State would have loved us, or at least borne with us, and where there is one catholic there would have been ten, there had been no speeches amongst us of racks and tortures, nor any cause to have used them ; for,' he con tinues, with considerable exaggeration ' none were ever vexed that way, simply for that he was either priest or catholic, but because they were suspected to have had their hands in some of the said most traitorous designments.' Watson at least could not pretend to have clean hands in the matter of political intrigue. He had himself been active enough as a partisan on the Scottish side, and this bias no doubt added the greater bitterness to his hostility to Parsons.
The controversy, however, had rapidly degenerated from questions of canon law or national politics to the grossest personalities. Philalethes reminds Blackwell that his father was ' a pewterer by Newgate in London, a man of an honest occupation, it is most true, but not the best neighbour to dwell by,' and he excuses himself for this 'scornful jesting' on the ground that ' it is not amiss to put sometimes a peacock in mind of his feet.' Bagshaw at his worst is less insolent than
xcii Introduction.
Philalethes to the archpriest. But neither could equal the scurrilous abuse indulged in by Anthony Copley. This catholic gentleman describes Parsons as ' a man who being the mis begotten of a ploughman . . . hath accordingly demeaned himself first in begetting two bastards, male and female, upon the body of his own sister between the age of seventeen and three and twenty, which was the cause he ran away (as fearing the sheet, etc.), and so became a Jesuit ; secondly, or rather formerly and continually, by being a common ale-house squire, and the drunkennest sponge in all the parish where he lived ; thirdly for being a heretic of the family of love all his life till he became a Jesuit.1 1
Such language gave Parsons a great advantage. He was at this moment, in private to the pope and cardinals, casting aspersions upon the characters of the appellants, which were probably quite as unproven as the worst of Copley or Watson against himself. But the Jesuit, in his Apologie at least, had kept his temper under better control. His misrepresentations were framed with more art. He was a master in the suppres sion of the true and the suggestion of the false. He could, moreover, write better or more forcible English than his adversaries, none of whom, with the exception of Ely, could in this respect approach him. His sarcasms and ridicule were well aimed and went home, and he lectures all the appellants, whom he does his best to identify with Watson and Copley, with a well assumed air of moral superiority. He warns them that for defaming the fathers of the society they were 'in a damnable state of mortal sin,1 and bound to restitution even were it with the loss of their own good names — that the canon law says of any one who should publish by word or writing a contumelious thing and not be able to prove it,
1 For this and similar quotations see Bell's Anatomic^ p. 71, etc.
Parsons Manifestation. xciii
flagettetur, let him be whipped, and that for defaming a whole religious order there is a special excommunication, the absolu tion of which is reserved to the pope. He is indignant with 4 the brave and bold protestation ' of the writers, that ' if the pope should come in person with an army under pretence to establish catholic religion by force, they would oppose them selves against him, and spend the best blood in their bodies in that quarrel.' 'Behold,1 exclaims Parsons, 'valiant soldiers, brought up in the pope's seminaries, braving against him ! Who would believe this to be spoken by priests except they avowed themselves authors of the book.1 1
But Parsons is at his best in hitting off the personal weak nesses of his enemies. ' If,1 he writes of Copley, ' he be the man we do guess . . . some of us knew him first a little wanton idle-headed boy in the English college, so light witted as once (if we remember well) he went up with a rose in his mouth to preach or make the tones (as there they call them) before the college out of a pulpit. After that he fell to such devotion as he not only took the oath of the college to be a priest, which now we see how well he hath observed, but also pretended to be an augustin friar, and proceeded so far therein as the friars every day expected his entrance, but how far he proceeded therein for one or other obligation we will not affirm, for we are more fearful of conscience to avouch things we know not for certain than he seemeth to be to protest and swear matters that he knoweth to be false ' (fol. 96).
Watson had in one of his books begged of catholics a charitable remembrance of his 6 poor sinful soul.1 So Parsons jeers : 'That you may know better this sinful lad and his poor sinful soul indeed . . . you may take a scantling of him both in body and soul by this narration, and thereby make a guess
Manifestation, f. 16. The quotation is from Watson's Quodlibets.
xciv Introduction.
how poor, defections and sinful he is in the one and other. For as for his body and outward feature (if you know him) you will hardly think him a creature to talk so much of " natural blazons,"" or enamorados of ladies' beauties, or of " royal damsels of rare aspect," himself being so wrong shapen and of so bad and blinking aspect as he looketh nine ways at once, as scarcely he can discern anything that toucheth not his eyes,1 which yet we object not as nature's defects, but as rather representing the state of his mind, which seemeth by this filthy description of Venus and her posteriory so often mentioned, as also by the wanton imaginations of pleasing objects and sweet blissful cheeks, and other such lascivious apprehensions, contemplations, and desires, no marvel that he cry out so hideously against Jesuits that are sworn enemies to the very thoughts thereof. . . . His coming out of England and the manner thereof we know nothing, nor greatly doth it import, only we know that he came to the English seminary at Rheims in France a poor little begging boy, where, being taken out of charity, his first allowance was for a good time pottage only, and licking the dishes which other men had emptied before him, after that again he was admitted to make beds, sweep chambers, and other like offices belonging thereto, in which kind he served especially one M. Boast, a good priest and a holy martyr since, which if he had known then or suspected that the squint-eyed boy (for so he called him) would have proved so wicked a man, he should never have come (no doubt) within his chamber door. And yet further you must note that all this while, Wil. Wat., besides his poor estate, was the most
1 A description of Watson is given in Kennett's MSS. (xvi. p. 500 ) : ' William Watson, priest, is a man of the lowest sort [i.e. in stature], about six and thirty years of age, his hair betwixt a brown and a flaxen. He looketh asquint and is very purblind, so that if he read anything he putteth the paper near to his eyes. He did wear his beard at length, but information is given that now his beard is cut.'
William Watson. xcv
contemptible and ridiculous thing in all that house for many years, for that his grace was in tumbling and making sport to others, for which his body (if you know him) was fitly made, and so he passed by the name of Wil. Wat or Wat Tumbler. But at length after divers years, pretending much devotion and humility, he was upon compassion made priest and sent into England, where for a time he used himself not evil, but by little and little falling to liberty and sensuality, and not having either sufficient wit or learning (but especially grace) needful for the government of such a charge, he fell into divers great disorders and absurdities, whereof one was his foul fall by going to the protestant church, and thereupon the discovery of many catholics to the persecutors, whereof M. Bishop (if you remember) speaketh in his depositions at Rome 1598, and we have made mention thereof in our Apologie, and the matter is notorious." l
One more sentence, although already quoted by Tierney, may be here reproduced as a specimen of the tone adopted by Parsons towards his reverend adversaries, and that, as we have seen, after the pope had under pain of excommunication pro hibited all writings which should tend to widen the breach or add fuel to the flames. ' And here now,' he writes in reference to the Sparing Discoverie, ' the very multitude of these out rageous libels, with the immensity of hatred, hellish spirit and poisonous entrails discovered therein, do force us, against our former purpose, to cut off and stay all further passage and pro ceeding in this horrible puddle of lies, slanderous invectives, and devilish detraction ; for that the very looking them over doth weary the heart of any true Christian ; and consequently, whereas before we had determined with ourselves to give you some taste or examples out of them all, yet now finding the
Manifestation, ff. 83, 84.
xcvi Introduction.
multitude to be without end, and the quality so base, vile, and malicious as the venom of any lost or loose tongue, armed with audacity and defended with impudency, stirred up with envy, and enraged with fury, and bounded noways by any limits of conscience, piety or fear of God, can vomit or cast out, to defame their brethren — finding this, we say, we have thought good to cease here, without further stirring the loath some rags of so filthy a dunghill." 1
A reply to the Manifestation, and a defence of Watson in particular, put out justifies et innocentice permissu, by a priest who signs his preface with the initials W. C., bears on its title-page the date 1603. But we must now return to the more important events of the spring and summer of 1601.
Before the greater portion of these passionate writings had been published, and before the long-delayed brief in reference to the appeal of 1600 had even reached England, a decisive step had been taken through the enterprise of the aged Bluet, which for the first time turned the fortunes of the day in favour of the appellants. On July 1, 1601, he wrote to his friend Mush as follows : ' The case standeth thus : — I have by opening the cause unto their honours and to Caesar obtained that four principal men shall be banished after a sort to follow the appeal, doctor Bagshaw, Bluet, Champney and Barneby, all prisoners. They shall be here with me on Wednesday next. A month they shall have within the realm of liberty to ride abroad for money amongst their friends, and then choose their port to be gone with some countenance. I hope no man will be offended with this plot of mine, but with their purses assist us. It hath cost me many a sweat and many bitter tears ere I could effect it. I have in some sort pacified the wrath of our prince against
Manifestation, f. 94. Tierney, iii. p. ccviii.
.Bluet's Plot. xcvii
us, and of her council, and have laid the fault where it ought to be, and proved that the secular priests are innocent for the most part.1 1
The circumstances which gave rise to the 'plot' Bluet later on described more fully in his Dedaratio, drawn up for the information of the cardinals Borghese and Arrigoni.2 Early in the year thirty-six priests, including Bluet himself, had been, under circumstances of considerable hardship, trans ferred from Wisbeach to Framlingham Castle. The arch- priest, ' adding affliction to affliction,' had prohibited catholics from giving them alms. Bluet therefore obtained from the keeper leave of absence for ten days in order to visit some catholics in London, where he had not been for twenty-four years, and to take counsel for the remedy of the evils to which this command of the archpriest had exposed them. He went to one of the London gaols where there were seven priests confined. In their delight at seeing him the exclamation escaped them — ' It is Father Bluet.1 The keeper overheard the name and asked if it was ' Bluet of Wisbeach,1 and at once re ported his presence to the royal commissioners. The bishop of London sent for him, and finally received the queen's orders to keep him in free custody. The old man probably found himself lodged more comfortably during the three or four months which he now spent with Bancroft than he had ever been before, even in the laxest days of Wisbeach. The bishop, he said, showed him letters and books of Parsons, Holt, and other Jesuits, inviting the king of Spain to invade England, and urging individuals to assassinate Elizabeth. Roman catholic ecclesiastics in high place undoubtedly encouraged or
1 The letter, or rather all of it that Parsons cared to quote, is printed in the Apologie, f. 1 08.
2 An English abstract of this document will be found in the Calendar of State Papers. The original Latin of the first part is printed in the Appendix.
g
xcviii Introduction.
connived at projects for killing the queen, and the late F. Knox has explained the principles of casuistry by which these divines would probably have justified the act.1 But there is no conclusive evidence that Parsons or the Jesuits in England had their hands in any such attempt. Nevertheless Bluet believed the charge, and lets the cardinals know he believed it. He merely declares the innocence of the secular priests.
A supplication was now offered to the queen protesting the fidelity of priests and catholics in general, petitioning for the suppression of Parsons' book on the succession and similar writings — as if the government had not already done its best to suppress them, — and pleading for liberty of conscience. Bluet records Elizabeth's verbal answer. Parsons refers to it as incredible. To others the keen appreciation of the situation, the humorous irony of the speech, and the delight shown in teasing her victims, will not appear inconsistent with the queen's character. After reading and re-reading the suppli cation, she is said to have burst out : ' These men, perceiving my lenity and clemency towards them, are not content, but want everything, and at once. The king of France, truly, may without peril of honour, life, or kingdom, grant liberty of religion to the Huguenots, but it is not so with me, for if I grant this liberty to catholics, by this very fact I lay at their feet myself, my honour, my crown, and my life. For their chief pastor pronounced sentence against me whilst I was yet in my mother's womb. Moreover Pius v. has excommunicated me and absolved my subjects from their oath of fidelity ; and Gregory xm. and Sixtus v. have renewed the same at the instance of the king of Spain that he may enlarge his own borders, and so to my peril it remains.2 As to him who now
1 Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen, Introduction, p. 1.
2 The French king expressed to the nuncio his surprise that the pope ' used no good means to the queen to deal more favourably with the catholics.' The
The Queens Speech. xcix
holds the helm, I have nothing to complain, but that he is Clement in deed as well as name. He found France disturbed with tumult, civil war, slaughter, and homicide, all which, as far as in him lay, he reduced to peace, embracing king and kingdom, so that they now enjoy a rich peace. In this he showed himself to be worthy of his place, worthy to be called vicar of Christ, doctor, and master of the nations.'
To this speech no one dared reply. But subsequently Bluet made bold to request leave for himself and four or five other priests to go to Rome to prosecute their appeal and explain to the pope the true state of affairs. The queen referred the matter to her council, and it was finally decided — partly indeed through fear that the priests might make use of their liberty to turn traitors and join the Jesuits, but chiefly in order to save appearances — that a sentence of banishment should be pronounced against them.
Bluet declares that the queen at his request mitigated the captivity of many priests, and even bade the judges, when going on circuit, not to take the lives of priests unless proved guilty of treasonable practices.1
Added to this official declaration of Bluet is a series of complaints of Parsons1 political actions and writings. He tells, for instance, how Parsons provoked king Philip to prepare a second expedition against England, and promised to send with the fleet twelve priests to induce the people to rise. Four of these embarked, but a fifth, a prudent and learned man, said,
nuncio replied that it would do no good, but rather irritate her. The king answered, ' Yes, so as he would assure her they should not practise against her as they had done.'— Sir H. Neville to Cecil, Oct. 24, 1599 (Winwood, i. 126).
1 This statement has been suspected of exaggeration, as in fact four priests, not to speak of two catholic laymen, were executed in the spring of 1602, and one, William Richardson, on February 17, 1603. On the other hand Father Rivers, the London correspondent of Parsons, in referring to this last execution, adds that the chief justice 'would have put four more to death at Bury, but the queen forbade it' (Cal. S. P., Dom. Eliz., CCLXXXVI. 52).
Introduction.
6 Father, if you will send me into England with the Bible in one hand and the sacred missal in the other, as becomes a priest, I will go willingly and shed my blood in defence of the gospel and catholic faith, but I will not ascend an enemy's fleet armed against my beloved country,1 etc. Parsons there upon expelled the priest from the college without his viaticum. He, however, reached England, was eventually captured and condemned. Bluet wrote to his new friend, the bishop of London, and the priest was reprieved, brought to London, and there kept as a nominal prisoner.
The letter of July 1, already quoted, in which Bluet begged Mush to keep his arrangement with the privy council a secret, seems to have fallen into Parsons' hands. The appellants scarcely took a step which was not at once known to their opponents. The month of freedom allowed to the ' banished ' men extended to six weeks and was well spent. On Septem ber 6th a correspondent of Black well informs him that ' this day our embassadors for Rome depart, if Mr. Colleton's scribe can make an end of such things as he is in copying out.1 It was reported that Mush, Champney, and Barneby were to go at once to France, and to remain there till they were joined by Bagshaw, and by Bluet if his age permitted him to travel. They were said to have collected £600 in money and another ^400 in jewellery. They set out provided with passports from the government. Nevertheless the vigilant officials at Dover apprehended them on suspicion, and compelled them to send back to London for fuller credentials.1 We hear of them again at Paris, where they appear to have remained some time. Their object was to obtain the support of the French king, and, if possible, of the papal nuncio at Paris. Parsons, who had insisted that they would never dare to come on to Rome, and were insincere in their pretence of prose-
W. C. Replie, f. 78.
The Banished Priests at Paris. ci
outing the appeal, made every effort to thwart them.1 The English agent at Paris, Ralph Winwood, was evidently not well pleased to be the protector of priests, and owned himself perplexed how to reply to the frequent inquiries addressed to him. He pretended to some that the liberty of these men proved how false were the libels of their sect that any priests were persecuted for religion only. To others he pointed out that the priests were not the first who had been banished, and that the ' pursuit of these quarrels (followed on both sides with so much acrimony) doth show their turbulent and seditious spirits, and how incompatible liberty of conscience would be with the repose of her majesty's government, since in the persecution (as they term it) they prosecute one another with this deadly hatred. They are gone to Rome,1* he writes to Cecil (Jan. 6, 1602), 'to try the justice of their cause by the teeth ; where, which party soever shall gain, the common cause must needs lose, whose nakedness will be discovered, and shown displayed to the view of the world.1 2
Villeroi, the French minister, took exception to the word 4 banishment ' in the passport. Winwood declined to meddle with the matter pro or con, but warned the priests to use her majesty's gracious favours soberly and discreetly. He was pleased, at least, to reflect that the French king would be under an obligation to Elizabeth, seeing that the Jesuits' pretensions for their re-establishment in that country, whence they had been expelled, would be hereby much weakened, and the nuncio in despair how further to advance them.
1 Copley, in a postscript to his book, finished November 31, 1601, writes— ' Since the departure of the three B-ees [Bluet, Bagshaw, Barneby] onward into their exile and defence against these hornets, you have heard, I daresay, of the fatal auguries which have been blown out of the Jesuitical trunk after them (to wit) how that no sooner shall they enter into Rome but straight they shall be clapt up into the inquisition or sent away to the gallies. . . . Brag is a good dog on the Jesuits' side ' (Answer to a Letter, etc. Cf. W. C. Replie, f. 80).
2 Winwood's Memorials, i. p. 373.
cii Introduction
The three priests referred to by Winwood as leaving Paris about the 1st of January 1602 were Bluet, Mush, and Champney. They were accompanied, or shortly afterwards joined, by Dr. John Cecil ; and the four arrived together at Rome on February 14. Barneby had meanwhile returned to London. Bagshaw remained at Paris to watch the interests of the party there.
VII. The Judgment of' Rome.
The deputies learnt caution from the experience of the previous embassy of Bishop and Charnock. They declined to go near the English college, or to have anything to do with their adversaries, ' except by way of civil salutation."1 ' We are safe,' they wrote after a few weeks, ' under the protection of the king of France, otherwise we had been fast at the first. Parsons is very badly disposed and strongly backed by his society and the Spanish, yet I hope we put him to his trumps. He hath defamed us with pope, cardinals, and all the town, yet his credit weareth out apace, and he becometh to be thought a very Machiavelian, and not worthy of credit in anything he raileth against us. Yet none list to displease him.1 1
The obstacles to be surmounted by the four priests were considerable. Parsons and his friends at Rome had the ad vantage in possessing a practical knowledge of the ways of the papal court and of personal friendship with many of the cardinals ; for, as Mush, who seems to have taken the lead in the commission, wrote, ' every day I must attend in courts ... all goeth piano, piano, and friends do more than the equity of a cause.1 Eight months had to be spent in repeated
1 Tierney, iii. p. clvii. — Simon Dig by wrote to Cecil (March 18) that Parsons was so troubled with the coming of the priests ' that he will speak to none of his friends' (Cal. S. P., Dom. Eliz.).
The Four Priests at Rome. ciii
interviews with cardinals and ambassadors, and the writing and presenting of endless memorials, before the final pontifical judgment could be elicited. The successive steps of the negotiation are recorded by Mush in a diary1 which has lain, until quite recently, undiscovered or unexamined, among the manuscripts of the Inner Temple. On their arrival in Rome the priests received word from Philippe de Bethune, the French ambassador, that he had instructions from his king to assist them, but that they must keep quiet for a time. Cardinal d'Ossat sent a message to the same effect, and counselled them to present themselves first to the pro tector (Farnese)2 and vice-protector (Borghese), lest by the neglect of such courtesies these cardinals should be made their enemies. One of the first visits made by the deputies was to Chiesa Nuova ; for the fathers of the oratory, follow ing the traditions of their founder, maintained a sympathetic interest in the affairs of the English mission. Tommaso Bozio, the author of De S\gms Ecclesice, in which much is made of the Elizabethan martyrs, was ' very friendly and comfortable. ' Cardinal Baronius, the superior, was also friendly, but willed them to keep that to themselves.
On February 20th they went to the inquisition, where the commissary received them courteously, but, says Mush, 'he found great fault with certain English books which had been delivered him, containing much bad matter. These were laid to our charge by him, but we disclaimed from them, as in truth we were not privy to the making or divulging of them, nor did know the author or what they contained. The two Latin books we stood to, and the commissary commended them.''
1 Petyt MSS., No. 538, vol. 54, ff. 190-199.
2 Cardinal Cajetan died in 1599, and was succeeded as protector by cardinal
Odoardo Farnese.
civ Introduction.
It was in this matter of the books that the deputies found their greatest difficulty. It must be remembered that the four priests had left England before any of Watson's works — perhaps before the True Relation — had issued from the press. Bagshaw at the end of this book (p. 133 infra) wrote : ' We are here constrained to break off for fear of some danger of an intended search.'' It has been suspected that this was a ruse. The ' intended search ' was probably no more than the summons to London which he received when it was decided that he should form one of the company of banished priests to prosecute the appeal. If this be so, it is likely enough that he may have been constrained to bring his book to an abrupt close, and to have either hurried it through the press at the last moment before quitting England, or to have left his manuscript to be printed off under the care of others after his departure. The travellers had crossed the Channel before Blackwell had pub lished the papal brief which prohibited further publications on the subject, and they were a month in Rome before they even got a sight of Parsons' Apologie. But as fast as the more violent books on the appellants1 side appeared in Eng land they were forwarded to Parsons, who made use of them against the deputies. He was able to extract passages, such as that quoted above, denying by implication the pope's deposing power, or professing loyalty to the queen in spite of any possible excommunication which might be pronounced against her. These propositions, which were undoubtedly held and afterwards publicly proclaimed by the leading appellant clergy, would to a Roman cardinal savour strongly of heresy. Parsons had, in his answer to the queen's proclamation of 1593, maintained that the deposing power was an article of faith.1 The recent communication of the appel-
1 Philopatris, Responsio ad Eliz. (dictum, p. 149.
Audience of the Pope. cv
lants with the privy council and an heretical bishop could also be made to bear a very ugly look, and give colour to the charges against their orthodoxy. That they were sincere, however, in their assertion that they were not privy to the publications of Watson is evident from their confidential letters addressed to Edward Bennet and their other friends in Eng land. On the 4th of March they wrote, ' Here is objected with us the printing of certain books containing heresy and evil sounding propositions ; they are said to be divulged in the name of the secular priests. Our answer is, and most truly, that we neither knew nor consented to the printing of any such. If any of our brethren therefore have committed any such error, it is necessary that he acknowledge it and satisfy for it." Watson had sent a copy of his Quocttibets, one of the books in question, to Bagshaw, who replied (February 7) that he and his friends in Paris disliked the style as being too bitter.1
It, however, soon became clear that in the universal opinion of the Roman princes and doctors the appellants were free from the guilt of schism in their dealing with the archpriest ; and thus success in the main object of their appeal seemed already assured to them. It was, in consequence, all the more necessary for their adversaries to shift the point at issue. The priests had charged the archpriest and his Jesuit advisers with libel, misgovernment, and tyranny. In case, then, that the appellants should be regarded as innocent of the guilt of schism, or as unjustly treated in the occurrences of 1598-99, it was the policy of Parsons to exhibit them as men who, on other grounds, were utterly unworthy of sympathy or redress.
On the 24th of February the French ambassador obtained from Clement a promise to give the priests audience. The pope asked the ambassador who they were, and how they came out
1 Hist. MSS. Commission, nth Report, pt. vii. p. 300.
cvi Introduction.
of England, complained of their books, and said he had heard they were contentious and troublesome. On March 5 the audience took place. ' The pope," writes Mush, < answered to all the points of our speech, said he had heard very many evil things against us, as that we had set out books containing heresies, that we came to defend heretics against his authority in that he might not depose heretical princes, etc., that we were not obedient to the see apostolic and the archpriest con stituted by him. For a toleration or liberty of conscience in England — it would do harm, and make catholics become heretics, that persecution was profitable to the church, and therefore not so much laboured for to be averted or staid by toleration . . . [some words erased] offended that we named her queen whom the see apostolic had deposed or excommunicated.1* ' So that we knew not how to name her. . . . He asked what reasons we had to refuse the archpriest. Our protestations of obedience to him he called verba and parole. All we proposed seemed to dislike him.' The pope finally resolved that the cardinals Borghese and Arrigoni should hear and examine their case, and he commanded the priests ' to impart their affairs to no more cardinals but to them two.1
The appellants accordingly delivered their two Latin books to these cardinals with other documents, and Father Parsons was desired to put a statement of his objections in writing. Meanwhile two proctors, Mr. Parker, and Giles Archer of Wisbeach notoriety, arrived from England to act on behalf of the archpriest. Several weeks passed as before in repeated visits to cardinals, for the pope's restriction in this matter seems to have been subsequently relaxed. They frequently visited d'Ossat, who expressed his satisfaction with the memo rials drawn up by them. Bellarmine received them graciously, ' read their two books,' ' found fault," says Mush, ' with ours for bitterness, but none with Mr. Lister's treatise, but seemed
Activity of Parsons. cvii
to excuse it.1 The cardinal, however, admitted that the account in the Declaratio Motuum of his letter to Parsons in 1598, which led to the order for the imprisonment of the two deputies, was ' very true.1
On one occasion the appellants came face to face with Parsons. He ' marvelled we were so strange as not to come to the college nor to converse familiarly with him and others on his side. He said he was glad of our coming to Rome, for now all would be ended.1 Parsons was at this moment exhibiting his gladness in the Manifestation, the first copy of which found its way into England about April 27. The activity and ver satility of the Jesuit kept men of every party on the alert. He managed to persuade Edward Drummond, then at Rome as secret agent for James vi., that the appellants were hostile to his king, and under that impression the Scotsman was driven to make complaint to the French ambassador, and urge him to withdraw his protection from them. Parsons1 proceedings were meanwhile carefully watched by the English government. An intelligencer writes of him, ' He has notice in 12 or 14 days of all that happens in England. He receives his letters on Wednesday, and on Thursday calls his secretaries — Walpole, Stephens, Smith, and John Wilson — who write continually till midnight on Saturday. They break open any letters they like, but think it a mortal sin if any of theirs are intercepted.11 The agents of Cecil were at least as industrious and un scrupulous as the Jesuits in their methods of obtaining news. There was no difficulty in getting at the account of matters as told by the appellants. Dr. Bishop, as well as Bagshaw, was in communication with Bancroft from Paris. Francis Barneby was at his elbow in London. But Thomas Phelippes, the spy and decipherer of Cecil, thought it well to supply his
1 Cal. S. P., Dom. Eliz., Add., xxxiv. 40, but wrongly dated 1601.
cviii Introduction.
master with the views of the other side, and at regular intervals for six months he forwarded to him letters or abstracts of letters which he had, with unusual facility, inter cepted.1 4The reports,"* says Mr. Foley, who prints the substance of them in the first volume of his Records, ( are well written, probably by a catholic, and evidently one friendly to the archpriest's cause." They are, in fact, presented by Mr. Foley as giving quasi-independent observations. But it is rather more than probable that they were written by, or under the direction of, Parsons himself. They all proceed from the same hand, and two of the series were printed many years ago by Tierney from rough drafts, in Parsons* own handwriting, now preserved at Stonyhurst college.2 Parsons, as a skilful general, was perhaps not unwilling that certain of his despatches should go through the enemy's hands. There is nothing inconsistent with this supposition in the fact that he is spoken of in the third person, or that statements are made which he must have known to be false.
The months of April and May were taken up with the pre senting of statements and counter-statements by both parties. The cardinals apparently intended to deliver their judgment piecemeal. On April 11, Borghese made known to the appellants his holiness'' 'definition of the controversy on the point of schism.'' He pronounced the priests who had delayed to receive the new subordination before it was confirmed by his brief to be free from all schism and disobedience, and that the confessions made to these priests during that delay were valid and in no case to be iterated. He promised that they should have a brief to this effect before their departure. ' Laus Deo ! ' piously ejaculates Mush. The deputies were naturally elated. It was their first success, and they prepared a formal Latin
1 CaL S. P., Dom. Eliz., CCLXXXIV. 4, 25, 88, 89, and CCLXXXV. 46.
2 Tierney, iii. pp. clxi, clxxvi.
A lleged Immorality of the Appellants. cix
letter to announce it to the chiefs of their party in England.1 Parsons was indignant. He denied the accuracy of their report, and insisted that it was in flat contradiction to the brief of the preceding August. The priests showed their letter to the two cardinals, and through them to the pope, for their approval, before despatching it, and irritated their judges by asking to have their judgment in some authentic form. The exasperation was heightened by Parsons complaining that his adversaries had gone through the city crying victory ! and the wrangling continued until the cardinals lost all patience, and Arrigoni declared, as Mush candidly reports, that they ' on both sides were terribiles?
There still remained for discussion the Gravamina of the appellants against the government of the archpriest, their petition for his removal, with their proposed remedies, on the one side, and the examination of the books charged with heresy on the other. Parsons met 'the Gravamina first with a denial of the facts, and then with a defence of them. He drew up and presented a memorial in the name of the archpriesfs agents, setting forth the most grave scandal and irreparable injury which would accrue to the church if any change in the existing ecclesiastical state were conceded to the importunity of these turbulent priests, whose success in the present instance would encourage them to make further demands, would be a source of triumph to protestants, and a concession to men 4 whose morals and whose practices have degraded them in the eyes of the catholics.' Another memorial, also written by Parsons, insists that the discontented priests were not more than thirty in all, that half of them had been among the mutineers at the English college, that all were noted for ambition, sedition, and dissolute lives, and had been recently guilty of ' manifest conspiracy with the public enemy of the 1 Addressed to Colletonand Heborne, and printed in thefast Defence, p. 291.
ex Introduction.
faith,' a conspiracy begun tentatively and by degrees towards the end of 1598, and of late openly and publicly to the great prejudice of catholics. In yet another paper, entitled 'An account of the morals of some of the principal appellants,1 he enters into more particulars regarding the character and conduct of eleven priests whom he names. Tierney, who possessed a copy made from the original, in Parsons1 hand writing, thus describes it — ' After a pathetic declaration of the unwillingness with which he enters on so painful a topic, the writer proceeds to state the reasons that have induced him to sacrifice his feelings to the public good ; calls God to witness that he has no enmity to gratify, no intention to injure the unfortunate subjects of his address ; and then at once passes to the immediate object in view, the lives and character of his principal opponents. The parties here noticed are Cecil, Bagshaw, Bluet, Watson, Clark, Colleton, Charnock, Calverley, Potter, Mush, and Champney. Among these, however, the first place in infamy is assigned to the present deputies of the appel lants. Cecil is a swindler, a forger, a spy, the friend of heretics and persecutors, and the betrayer of his brethren. Bagshaw is a sower of sedition, an expelled and degraded student of the Roman college, a man of suspected faith and unchaste living, the author of the opposition to Blackwell and the corresponding agent at the present moment between the appellants and the English government. Bluetts qualifications are of a different order.1 . . . Champney and Mush, though treated with less virulence than their companions, do not entirely escape.2 Both, says the writer, have been candidates for admission into the society, and both have been rejected on account of their impracticable tempers. Hence the enmity of each to the
1 These are given in the note on Bluet, infra, p. 13.
2 Mush had been already sufficiently defamed by Stand ish. See note to p. 51, infra.
Bishop Bancroft and the Books. cxi
fathers, and hence Mush, in particular, yielding to the sugges tion of an impetuous and resentful disposition, has been led to join with the heretics against his brethren, and to assist in writing these books which have at once defamed the society and scandalized every orthodox catholic.' He further en treated 'the pope's permission to deal with them in such a manner as to make them feel the enormity of their crime, and to be thankful for any future indulgence/ * It is not surprising if, as Anthony Tracy reports to Cecil, the result of Parsons' twenty days' work was ' such as to incense the pope and make cardinal Borghese, one of the commissioners and his chiefest friend, to say he had a diabolic spirit.' 2
On the 3d of May the two cardinals laid before the appel lants seven or eight books all in English, and ' unknown to us,' writes Mush. Few things more affronted the Jesuits than this resolute refusal on the part of the deputies to accept the re sponsibility of books written without their knowledge or after they had left England. Father Rivers, one of Parsons' London correspondents, assures him that when this denial reached the ears of Bancroft, the bishop declared that * most of the books ' were written before they went, and that ' he had their hands to every page of the same, and this he meaneth to publish to the world as soon as he shall hear they are departed from Rome.' 3
1 Tierney, iii. pp. clvii, clxiii, note.
2 From Venice, May 3. Cal. S. P., Dom. Eliz., CCLXXXIV.
3 Letters of F. Rivers, Foley's Records, i. p. 42. Parsons by no means reserved his scandalous tales for privileged communications to pope and cardinals. The rev. John Copley, some time a secular priest and afterwards a clergyman of the church of England, relates that Parsons read publicly to the scholars in the Roman college, and in Copley's own hearing, a letter, disclosing ' the horrible sin of one William, a priest, that had many years lived too familiarly with a tailor's wife.' The tailor, it was reported, went about the streets of London, pistol in hand, with intent to shoot the sacrilegious adulterer ; and this priest, said Parsons, 'was an earnest appellant.' Upon inquiry, however, Copley could never get confirmation of this story. — ' Doctrinal I and Morall Observations, by John Copley, Seminarie Priest' (Lond. 1612), p. 104.
cxii Introduction.
Another Jesuit, probably Richard Blount, reports: 'The Manifestation and Appendix [to the Apologie] are here very current and are greedily read by protestants as well as catholics with good liking of all, and Mr. Bancroft had one delivered unto him, which he took in so good part that he told the gentleman (which was a protestant) that if he had brought him £1 00 he could not have done him a greater pleasure, and, scratching his elbow, said that this was what he looked for all this while, viz., that one should write against another.11 He hopes that Parsons has meanwhile received a later book of Mr. Colleton, ' no whit inferior to Watson's Quodlibet in many things, as malice, pride, want of learning, etc., but as for folly and falsehood I think it at least equal, if not superior.1 2 ' It passed the approbation of my Lord of London,1 adds Rivers, ' and Thomas Mann, his familiar, a stationer, printed the same.1 3
1 F. Rivers writes of the bishop, ' he termeth both sides knaves, but the appellants good instruments to serve the State ' (Foley, i. p. 42).
2 Foley's Records, i. p. 39. Rivers, a month later (28th July), gives a more favourable account of the Just Defence from a literary point of view, ' as written with a curious style, judiciate words and great gravity, the same being also speedily bought by the ministry, who fill up their pulpits with priests' dis cussions ' (Ibid.) p. 45).
3 It is probable that some of Watson's books or the later publications of the appellants were printed with the help of the bishop, but it is very unlikely that this was the case with the earlier works, or at least the four books printed before Bluet had come to an understanding with the privy council. Bennet seems to deny the fact altogether. He writes in the Reply to the Apologie : ' This fellow [Parsons] his affirmation that M. Bluet had conference with the bishop of London, council, and queen herself, for the printing and publishing of " these Libels" (as he termeth them), said to be printed at Roane is most false. For these books were not printed by any such means, but at the charge of the priests and in most secret manner. And their charge was double in regard of the printer's danger,' (p. 332) ; and again (p. 333), ' The priests never had any print, but to their double, yea treble charge, and by great friendship of a gentleman got their books printed, they themselves neither know where nor by whom, but as it should seem by some mean and needy printer who in con' sideration of being well paid adventured to print them.' William Jones, a printer, got into trouble with the Speaker in May 1604 for bringing before the House of Commons information against the bishop for having treasonably pro tected the printers of popish books. — Cal. S. P., Dovi. James, vili. 21-25.
Judgment of the Inquisition. exiii
He makes bad guesses as to the authorship of the more recent publications, of which the deputies at Rome protested that they knew nothing, thus : ' Mush is thought to be the author of the Dialogue, Bluet of the Important Considerations, Bagshaw of the Sparing Discoverie, and divers others. Watson was but the prolocutor in adding the prefaces, as he confesseth.1
When confronted with the passages, thirty-nine propositions in all, which Parsons delated as erroneous, scandalous, or hereti cal, the appellants maintained that the passages were not fairly quoted, nor were any of them contrary to the faith, but they nevertheless expressed their own disapproval of the proposi tions ; and, according to Parsons or his secretary, one of the deputies said that ' Watson deserved to be whipped about the streets of Rome.' Mush in particular repudiated Watson.
On the 21st of May Champney and Mush met the two pro curators of the archpriest and two Jesuit fathers in presence of cardinal Borghese, for a conference upon the eleven Gravamina adduced by the appellants. Of this conference we have varying accounts. Parsons reports that all present were moved to shame, and that the cardinals found the charges self-contradic tory. The appellants, on the other hand, relate that seven of the Gravamina which were discussed so completely bore out the general complaints on their side that it was deemed un necessary to go into the rest.
On the 17th of June Dr. Cecil had a favourable audience of the pope ; and about the same time M. Bethune let Mush see a letter from the French ambassador in England, which conveyed an express message from Elizabeth thanking the ambassador at Rome for his good offices in aid of the appellant priests. But, a few days later (June 27), the deputies learnt to their great mortification that the pope, who had at last, in consequence perhaps of Dr. Cecil's audience, become alive to the gravity of the issues involved in the quarrel, had committed the whole
h
cxiv Introduction.
cause to the judgment of the inquisition. 'Thus,1 exclaims Mush, ' we were after five months to begin again.'
Dr. Cecil was commanded by the pope to make the other four cardinals of the inquisition — Borghese and Arrigoni were themselves members of the congregation — acquainted with the state of the question. Thomas Fitzherbert and Archer did the same on behalf of the archpriest and Jesuits. They found that one at least of these cardinals, Domenico Pinelli, came to the subject with a fresh and unbiassed mind. He was very inquisi tive, ' asked from whence we came, who sent us, if any of us had been at the Roman college, how many priests were with us, and,' strange to say, ' if Father Parsons was alive.'' ' A few days later,1 adds Mush, he proposed ' to make us a dinner, and invite also F. Parsons that we might agree. We thanked him, but refused to have any dealings with F. Parsons.' Pinelli's chief objection to the appellants was their familiarity with the heretical magistrates in England and their seeking the protec tion of the king of France. Cardinal Sfondrati, however, spoke also in condemnation of Parsons' dealings in matters of state.
It was not till the 9th of August that cardinal Borghese delivered to the priests the report of a congregation of the inquisition held on the first of the month and approved, so the cardinal said, by the pope. Parsons, it now appeared, had been successful in persuading the court that any change in the present form of government was undesirable. He had succeeded also in obtaining a condemnation of the books written by the appellants, and a prohibition of all treating with heretics to the prejudice of catholics. But in all else the Jesuits and the archpriest were losing ground. The illustrious lords were of opinion that the archpriest had inflicted great grievances upon the priests by proclaiming them to have been guilty of disobe dience and schism, and on that account depriving them of their faculties, prohibiting them from defending themselves, from
Both Parties Discontented. cxv
meeting together, collecting suffrages, or from going to Rome to make appeal to the holy see. The archpriest, however, was somewhat to be excused — not, as Parsons instructed his secre tary to report, on account of ' his great zeal ' — but from his ignorance of law and his having probably acted on the advice of others.1 He was enjoined not to exceed his faculties, as it appeared he had done, both in inflicting penalties and censures, and by proceeding against laymen over whom he had no juris diction. The faculties of the priests are therefore to be restored, and the archpriest is never to proceed against them in future without consulting the cardinal protector. Blackwell was, moreover, to be admonished to be more faithful in the distribution of alms intended for the relief of his brethren, and finally he was to be prohibited from communicating with the Jesuits in the affairs of his office.
While the archpriest was thus reprehended no censure was passed upon the conduct of the appellants in regard to their appeal. Their books, however, said to have been printed in England and at Rouen, and to contain many things offensive to the Jesuits, and even many propositions which savoured of heresy (hceresim sapientia), were utterly to be condemned.
The priests were not content. They urged that the prohi bition to communicate with an heretical government might be captiously taken or misunderstood. They had hoped at least that a like prohibition would have been placed upon conspiring with the enemies of the state. They desired that the arch- priest should be given specific instructions to render an account of alms distributed by him, and especially did they with justice demand that Parsons'" books should be condemned and pro hibited as well as their own.
1 ' Turn quia non est jurisperitus, turn etiam quia verisimile est plura ex his fecisse ex aliorum consilio.' The acts of the congregation were in the hands of Tierney, but he unfortunately only prints a few extracts, vol. iii. p. clxxvii.
cxvi Introduction.
Parsons was still less content. He had hoped to prevent any censure of the archpriest, or any reference to the money matters which too nearly touched the honour of the society.1 He had in vain urged that the appellants should be disgraced. He now bent all his efforts to avert the condemnation of his own books, and above all to get expunged the clause which prohi bited the archpriest from taking counsel with the superior of the Jesuits. This last was indeed the essential point in the conflict. It was the obligation to consult the Jesuits attached to the office of the archpriest which gave odium to the appoint ment, which otherwise, as a temporary scheme of government, might have presented little objection beyond its novelty and the manner of its institution. It was this which justified Bluet's ' appeal to Caesar." The object for which the Jesuits had been striving, remotely since 1580, and fiercely and undis- guisedly since Allen's death, would be utterly frustrated if the proposed concession were made to the secular clergy.
The contest now turned upon the terms of the papal brief, which was to be framed on the basis of the report of the inquisition. The wearied but patient pontiff once more con sidered the objections on both sides, and summoned a special congregation for their settlement on the 6th of September. He ordered the Apologie to be examined, also the Supplication of Father Southwell. If, asked the appellants, they were to be blamed, as they had been even by the pope himself, for using civil speeches to Elizabeth or recognising her sovereignty, what was to be thought of Southwell who addressed her as ' most clement and sovereign lady under God ? ' This, at
1 The brief admonishes the archpriest to generously Wh& faithfully distribute to the poor, and especially to prisoners for their faith, the abundant alms which are collected. Blackwell afterwards admitted to Colleton that during the period of his rule he had divided these alms equally between the two bodies, the society and the secular clergy, by which means each Jesuit received from twelve to fifteen times as much as a secular priest.
The Draft of the Brief. cxvii
least, is Parsons' account of their complaint against this apparently harmless work. More formidable was the new petition now put forward by the deputies that some of their own party should be appointed assistants to the archpriest, and that the archpriest should not act without their consent. The further the investigation went the more favourable to the appellants were the results. When at the last moment it became evident that the clause prohibiting the archpriest from taking counsel of the Jesuits would appear in the brief, Blackwell's procurators begged that the pope would say that the fathers of the society had themselves petitioned to be relieved of the duty of giving such advice.1 This the pope very properly refused to do.
From the 12th of September, when monsignor Vestrio received instructions to make a draft of the brief, there was much manoeuvring on all sides to get a sight of it. For four weeks more the appellants were in a fever of anxiety. The pope would not let the French ambassador know its contents unless he took an oath of secrecy, which he declined. Parsons was said to have spent four or five nights together in confer ence with cardinal Farnese. There was some mystery about the delay in issuing the document ; and when, finally, it was pub lished after the Spanish ambassador had had a long audience of the pope, it was surmised by the deputies that the first draft had contained some prohibition against ' dealing in state matters,' and that the clause was deleted at the last moment at the instance of the Spanish ambassador. Mush in this supposition may have been mistaken. Clement himself could not, with consistency, have said anything just now to dis courage the clergy from interfering with affairs of state. The appellants were not aware that at this moment Garnet held in
1 Tierney, iii. p. clxxxii.
cxviii Introduction.
his hands briefs which the pope had sent to his nuncio in Flanders, addressed to the English clergy and laity, to the effect that none should consent to any successor to Elizabeth ' when soever that wretched woman should depart this life,1 however near in blood, who would not submit himself to the apostolical see. Nevertheless, the remonstrances of the appellants were not in vain ; and it is not improbable that it was in great measure in consequence of their representations that we find, a few months later, on the accession of James, both the pope and the general of the Jesuits doing their best to stay all attempts at insurrection or violence.
Meanwhile the diary and correspondence of the deputies reveal what they call a stratagem or plot of Parsons, and which they appear to regard with the utmost dismay. The story is told in the diary with much detail. Briefly, it seems that Parsons, when nothing more was to be gained by fighting, naturally desired to mitigate the scandal by bringing about a public reconciliation. The unwilling deputies were to be entrapped into some show of embracing Parsons in the presence of a number of cardinals and others at an audience of the pope. The pope was himself a party to the 6 stratagem,1 for he had declared that the priests should not pass out of his chamber door till he had made them all friends. The deputies did not, until they were within the palace, discover the trap laid for them. After distant salutations had been exchanged, they placed themselves as far off as possible. They prayed, writes Dr. Cecil,1 to God and our Lady to divert this ' malheure ' from them. Their prayers were answered. The audience was postponed, and next day the terrified priests flew to their friend M. Bethune, who persuaded the pope to
1 Letter to J. Hill, esq., in Paris, August 7. Hist. MSS. Commission, eleventh report, pt. vii. p. 299.
Publication of the Brief, Oct. 1602. cxix
abandon his charitable intention of making the adversaries 'join hands.'
The brief was dated October 5. Copies were delivered to the contending parties on the 12th. The report of the inquisition was substantially adopted, but with some important modifica tions. All books on either side are equally condemned and pro hibited, without any distinction and without any reference to heretical {propositions. Lest new contentions should arise, the archpriest is forbidden, as before, to communicate the affairs of his office to the provincial of the society or to other Jesuits in England, or to any of the same religious at Rome or elsewhere ; and this not because the pope entertains any sinister suspicions of the Jesuits, for he knows them to be led by motives of sincere zeal and piety, and to truly seek the things of God, but the pro hibition is made for the sake of peace, and is approved by these religious themselves. Further, it is ordered that three of the appellant priests should in succession be appointed assistants of the archpriest as soon as vacancies should occur to admit them. Finally, in a long paragraph declaring the penalties to be incurred by anyone who should by any kind of book, tract, or letters, injure the good name of a catholic or renew the present contentions by defending or attacking one side or the other, there is introduced a clause which subjects to the same penalties those who, ' under any pretext, participate or com municate with heretics to the prejudice of catholics.' l
Neither party was entirely satisfied with the result. The Jesuits made the most of this last clause and of the recognition of their own pious motives, and at once intrigued to get rid of or evade the sentence which forbade the archpriest to consult them. The appellants, if they had not secured the removal of the archpriest or a condemnation of Jesuit statecraft, had
1 ' Denique qui cum haereticis in prejudicium catholicorum quovis pretextu vel causa participaverint aut communicaverint.'
cxx Introduction.
obtained more than they expected in the designation of three of their number to the post of assistants to the archpriest. This alone was a sufficient answer to Parsons'1 aspersions upon their characters, for it could hardly be suggested that for the sake of securing a present peace the pope would run the risk of handing over the government of the English church to men of doubtful faith and disreputable lives.1
The pope had treated the deputies during their stay in Rome with generosity, and had supplied them with money. They received their passports from the cardinals Aldobrandino and Borghese on the 22d and 23d of October, and from the French ambassador on the 31st. On the 25th of December a pursuivant brought Bluet to the bishop of London, with whom he was once more to be committed as a prisoner, and the bishop next day writes to Cecil, 4 1 will take from him as fast as I can all points of importance and send them to you."1 In the opinion of the bishop there was 'like to be another appeal from a pope who is chaplain to the king of Spain to a pope the true vicar of Christ.' 2
VIII. The Sequel.
The deputies on their return to England were met by the cruel mockery of the proclamation which had been issued on November 5, and which was virtually the royal response to the
1 Of those who had signed the appeal, Colleton, Mush, Edward Bennet, John Bennet, John Boswell, Cuthbert Trollop, Richard Button, and Roger Strickland became assistants of the archpriest, and, later on (with the exception of Mush who was then dead), canons of the episcopal chapter.
2 Letters to Cecil, Cal. S. P. , Dom. Eliz. , CCCLXXXVI. 16, 1 7. The appellants, on their side, evidently did not allow the report of the inquisition, or even the terms of the brief, to interfere with the freedom of their intercourse with the bishop of London. As late as October 27, Dr. Bishop wrote from Paris to Bancroft reporting the progress of the appeal and asking leave for some of his party to go to the bishop safely for the settling of better correspondence (Hist. MSS, Commission, eleventh report, pt. vii. p. 301).
The Queens Proclamation, Nov. 5. cxxi
papal brief. The queen began by regretting that her late for bearance and clemency in relaxing the execution of the penal laws had been so notoriously abused by her unfaithful subjects, who sought the utter ruin of herself and her kingdom. Both secular priests and Jesuits had of late invited the king of Spain to invade Ireland. Moreover, ' almost all the secular priests by yielding their obedience to a new kind of subordination among them have in effect subjected themselves to be wholly directed by the Jesuits (men altogether alienated from their true allegiance to us and devoted with all their might to the king of Spain).1 They all profess that the queen's subjects are bound to fight against her and to join any forces the pope may send ; or if any are of a milder way of thinking it is enough for them to incur the hatred and persecution of the rest. She touches on the recent dissensions, admits that the appellants not only protest against these plots for the invasion of the kingdom but offer themselves to be the first to discover and take means to withstand all such traitorous designs. Yet, however much they may be at variance with the Jesuits and their faction, these priests, ' masking themselves under the vizard of pretended conscience,"* labour day and night to withdraw her subjects from their due obedience to the laws, and ' knit them to our mortal enemy the pope, increasing thereby his numbers and diminishing ours.' Furthermore, they carry themselves with so great insolency that they do almost insinuate ' that we have some purpose to grant a toleration of two religions within our realm."1 God knows the queen's innocency of any such imagination ! Their said conceit of such a toleration and intolerable presumption has come to such a pass that ' they dare adventure to walk in the streets at noon days, to resort to prisons publicly and execute their functions in contempt of our laws.' Therefore all Jesuits and secular priests are ordered (within a specified date) to depart the realm, except such as shall meantime
cxxii Introduction.
present themselves to the lords of the privy council, acknow ledge their duty and allegiance, and ' submit themselves to our mercy, with whom we will . . . take such further order as shall be thought to us most meet and convenient.1
Not utterly disheartened by the offer of this small measure of mercy, Dr. Bishop drew up and with twelve other priests signed the solemn protestation of allegiance already referred to. They here confess that the queen has as full authority, power, and sovereignty over all her subjects as any of her predecessors ever had. They admit and deplore divers conspiracies against her majesty and the state, and sundry forcible attempts to invade and conquer her dominions, ' under we know not what pretences and intendments of restoring the catholic religion by the sword,' by reason of which violent enterprises the queen had been moved to ordain and execute severer laws against catholics than ever would have been thought of if such hostilities had not been undertaken. They, however, protest that in such at tempts, howsoever or by whomsoever projected, under pretence of restoring the catholic religion, they will defend her majesty, they will detect and reveal any conspiracies known to them, and will earnestly persuade all catholics to do the same. Moreover, if upon any excommunication denounced, or to be denounced against her majesty, the pope should excommunicate everyone who would not forsake the aforesaid defence of her majesty, and take part with such conspirators or invaders, they think themselves and all lay catholics ' bound in con science not to obey this or any such censure/ Yet they acknowledge the bishop of Home as the successor of Peter, and to have as ample authority as that apostle, and no more ; and they conclude : * For as we are most ready to shed our blood in defence of her majesty and our country, so we will rather lose our lives than infringe the lawful authority of Christ's catholic church.'
Oath of Allegiance. cxxiii
It is said that this protestation was never seen by Eliza beth. She died March 24, 1603.
When the news of James"1 accession reached Garnet he threw into the fire the briefs which he had held in his posses sion for a year or more, and which called upon all catholics to do their utmost to prevent any protestant succeeding to the throne.1 It was just thirty-three years since the bull of deposi tion was fulminated against Elizabeth, and the war which it challenged was virtually decided before this last hostile brief was consumed in the flames.
That there was any further resort to violence was due to the faithlessness of James. Without the provocation or the excuses of Elizabeth, he threw away the opportunities of granting such a measure of toleration as he had repeatedly led catholics to expect. His breach of faith drove extreme men on both sides to desperation. Watson, Clark, and Copley (which last in the meantime had been reconciled to Parsons) were led into the insane plot of 'the Bye,1 for which the two priests suffered the penalty of traitors. Zealots on the Jesuit side planned the gunpowder plot ; and Garnet, who had been privy to, if he had not aided and abetted, a treasonable correspondence with Spain on the part of his friends Catesby, Tresham, Winter, and his brother Jesuit Green way in the last year of Elizabeth, and who knew enough of the gunpowder plot, apart from the con fessional, to make him legally and morally responsible for its concealment, followed his old enemies to the scaffold.
The immediate outcome of this last plot was the imposition upon catholics of the oath of allegiance, framed by bishop Bancroft with the assistance of Christopher Perkins, formerly a
1 But not before he had shown them to Catesby and Thomas Winter, and they in turn had let them be seen by Percy. Catesby argued ' if it was lawful by force of the pope's briefs to have kept the king out, it was as lawful now to put him out when he had declared himself the enemy of catholics.'
cxxiv Introduction.
Jesuit priest. It is said that the ex-jesuit had craftily suggested the insertion in the oath of the words which condemned the papal claim to the deposing power as a doctrine ' false, damn able, and heretical/ in order to create or intensify divisions among catholics. If so, it may be questioned whether he did not over-reach his object. The dissensions caused by the oath were serious enough, but it was at least impolitic for the state to define or insist upon others defining a doctrine as ' heretical.' The term served to divide catholics less than if it had been omitted, for it gave the pope colourable ground for condemning and prohibiting the oath. Many catholics who could subscribe Dr. Bishop's protestation of allegiance, or go the length of declaring the doctrine of the deposing power to be false and odious, would shrink from pronouncing a tenet, held at that time by, probably, a majority of their brethren, and un doubtedly by the pope himself, to be technically heretical.
Two appellants, Robert Drury and Roger Cadwallader, who had signed Dr. Bishop's protestation, and are now by the recent decree of Leo xin. entitled venerable martyrs, died rather than save their lives by taking the oath after its condemnation by Paul v.1 Nevertheless, to the surprise of all men and the scandal of many of his former friends, Blackwell, released from the pressure of his Jesuit advisers, took the prohibited oath, and by circular letter urged his assistants and the clergy subject to him to do the same. So it came about that the archpriest, then a prisoner in the Gatehouse, was deposed from his office by the pope. He died adhering to his position in spite of Bellar- mine's arguments and the papal decrees.
The course and results of the appellant controversy were undoubtedly of national importance. The kingdom owed perhaps more than is generally admitted to the appellant
1 Clement vin. died in 1605 after a reign of thirteen years. Cardinal Borghese was elected pope (Paul v.) May 16 of that same year.
Results of the Conflict. cxxv
priests for the failure of the later Spanish attempts, and (not withstanding the Watson episode) for the peaceful accession of James. By their firm resistance to a policy of aggression and violence, and their known readiness to divulge any treasonable projects, they thwarted the Spanish faction at every point. The views which they were the first to broach in opposition to the deposing power, and which ultimately prevailed among the clergy in general, were at least indirectly a gain to the country on the side of liberty and peace.
One marked and immediate result was the breaking down of the Jesuit ascendancy in affairs either political or ecclesiastical. Other events, indeed, concurred to this same result, or at least served to secure it firmly when once gained. At the very time the appellants were pursuing their appeal, a number of English benedictines from Italian and Spanish monasteries were entering England, and contemplating the erection of a college of their order at Douai. Their advent upon the mis sionary field excited in the Jesuits the fiercest jealousy and resentment. Parsons drew up a memorial setting forth as usual the crimes of his new adversaries. They were men, he said, who were notorious for their share as students in the rebellions and disorders of the Roman college. They had entered among the benedictines only to vex and oppose the Jesuits. They had in England sided with the appellants, they were in treaty with an heretical government, and one of them at least had defended the oath of allegiance.1 ' I think it is the devil," wrote Father Creswell to Dr. Worthington, 'who attempts now by lewd persons under pretence of a monk's cowl what he could not before effect by appellants1 cloaks.1 Once more the inquisition had to interpose and to compel the com-
1 Additional MSS., British Museum, No. 21203, fol. 16. Compare Weldon's Chronological Notes, pp. 72-75.
cxxvi Introduction.
batants to terms of peace. It was not long after this that a band of franciscan friars, for the most part simple-minded men, coveting martyrdom and caring little for politics, also joined the mission. The existence of such formidable rivals made it impossible for the Jesuits to recover their former position. They continued to grasp at power, and especially to aim at the control of the seminary at Douai, but this served only still further to weaken and divide the clerical forces of the mission. The assumption of Jesuit leadership was at an end, and with it went all hope of a political dictatorship of any kind.
Another consequence of the appellants1 success, though not so immediately visible on the surface, was the changed attitude of all catholic parties towards the civil government. The brief of Clement destroyed by Garnet was the last of the belligerent manifestoes issued from Rome. The holy see appeared at last to be converted to the views of the appellants. Bluet's 'appeal to Caesar' in 1601 established a precedent which could not be ignored. The pope himself, on the accession of James, was, indeed, the first to treat with the heretical sovereign. He commissioned Dr. Gifford, the principal opponent on the continent of the Jesuit policy, to go into England to see the king, and to offer to withdraw from the country any priests whom James might name as troublesome. The Jesuits them selves, though they still made complaint of others having dealings with or giving secret information to the council, quickly learnt from their opponents the advantage of the practice. Garnet did not indeed reveal the treasonable plans of his friends in 1602, nor did he or Father Green way give notice of the gunpowder plot ; but when Watson and Clark, acting in the spirit of the briefs referred to, engaged in their treasonable conspiracy, Father Gerard, who was in their secret, despatched a friend to give information to the government.
Triumph of the Appellants. cxxvii
He had however been anticipated by Blackwell and Garnet, who found means to reveal it to the bishop of London. The Jesuits, moreover, learnt to appeal to Caesar in matters more purely ecclesiastical. When, after a series of petitions and missions to Rome, the representatives of the secular clergy were on the point of securing the long desired episcopal government, their adversaries as a last resource employed Toby Matthews, a convert of Parsons, devoted to the society and said to be himself a secret Jesuit, to alarm the king by giving information of the project to the lord keeper. Williams saw through the device. 'I am afraid,1 he wrote to Bucking ham, ' that Toby will prove but an apocryphal and no canonical intelligencer, acquainting the state with the project for the Jesuits' sake rather than for Jesus1 sake.'1 Neverthe less, whatever their motive, these parleyings with the privy council constituted a new departure which was in the long run profitable both to the catholic community and to the state.
The triumph of the appellant party was complete when, in 1623, the pope, no longer able to resist the entreaties of the clergy for episcopal rule, could find no fitter person to preside as bishop over the united kingdoms of England and Scotland than William Bishop 2 — the former chief of the appellants, the prisoner of Parsons, and the author of the protestation of allegiance — at the head of whose newly erected chapter was placed the steadfast and long suffering John Colleton.
1 Tierney, v. 90-93 j Lingard, History, 6th edit. vii. 279.
2 It was originally intended that there should be four bishops in England, but on James announcing his determined hostility to the arrangement, Gregory xv. compromised the matter by appointing only one. The Scottish catholics success fully protested against the bishop exercising jurisdiction in Scotland.
cxxviii Introduction.
IX. Bibliographical Notes.
The following are the titles in full of the chief contemporary works written on both sides of the appellant controversy. Many of these volumes are exceedingly rare. Of the few copies extant some are imperfect, or the books themselves are imperfectly described by bibliographers. A few notes are therefore here added respecting their general character, their contents, and, where necessary, their supposed authorship.
I. ADVERSUS FACTIOSOS in Ecclesia [1598].
By FATHER THOMAS LISTER, S.J. Of this short tract, gener ally referred to as the Treatise on Schism, enough is said below in the notes to pages 84-86. A third part of the treatise is printed in the Appendix D.
II. DECLARATIO MOTVVM ac Tvrbationvm quse ex Con-
troversiis inter lesuitas iisq; in omnibus fauentem D. Georg. Blackwellum Archipresbyterum et Sacerdotes Seminariorum in Anglia, ab obitu illmi Cardlis Alani piae memoriae, ad annum vsque 1601.
Ad S. D. N. Clementem octauum exhibita ab ipsis sacerdotibus qui schismatis, aliorumq; criminum sunt insimulati.
Videbunt recti et Icetabuntur : et omnis iniquitas oppilabit os snum. — Psal. 106.
Rhotomagi apud lacobum Molaeum, sub signo Phenicis 1601.
By JOHN MUSH, of whom some account is given in the note to page 51, infra. This book, the first published in support of the appeal, must have appeared early in the year. It consists of 140 numbered pages in 4to besides the title leaf and two pages of errata for which the author pleads excuse on account of the printer's ignorance of Latin. The last page of the text is, how-
Bibliographical Notes. cxxix
ever, wrongly numbered 142, the numbers 88 and 89 being omitted. At the top of the first page is a repetition of the title with some variation : ' Ad S. D. N. Clement. 8. vera et succincta narratio prse- cipuarum rerum controuersarum inter P. lesuitas iisque in omni bus obsequentem D. Georg. Black./ etc. The text of the appeal occupies pages 95-119- The tract concludes with the copy of a letter (pp. 121-142) addressed,, fad Rmum D. Morrum' — i.e. monsig- nor Morro, an Italian prelate, dated ' 27 Maii 1598/ and signed ' Joannes Musheus, Presbyter Romanus.' This important letter was written at the request of Anthony Heborne, and sent to Bagshaw and Bluet at Wisbeach (May 28), for their consideration and amending, ' for/ says Mush, perhaps too modestly, ' I am out of use in writing Latin/ (Hist. MSS. Commission, Rep. xi. pt. vii. p. 263 ; cf. note to p. Ixix. supra.)
III. THE COPIES OF CERTAINE DISCOURSES, which were extorted from cliuers as their friends desired them, or their aduersaries driue them to purge them- selues, of the most greeuous crimes of schisme, sedition, rebellion, faction, and such like, most uniustly laid against them for not subscribing to the late authoritie at the first sending thereof into England.
In which discourses are also many things discouered concerning the proceedings in this matter abroad.
Dicit piger, Leo est in via. — Prouerb. 26. The slothful excuse themselues saying There is a Lyon in the way.
Imprinted at Roane by the heires of la. Walker, 1601.
190 pages, 4to. Contains : —
1. The preface to the reader, 6 pages, signed ( Yours in all true hartie affection.'
2. ' Certaine considerations to satisfie such as either are, or may be, by any sinister informations or ill conceipts incensed against vs, or alienated from vs because we have not yeelded ourselues to the designments and wills of others, in subscribing to the late authoritie/ pp. 1-8.
cxxx Introduction.
3. ' Other reasons to the same purpose, by another, under the forme of a Letter/ pp. 9-1 6.
4. ' Maister Champney's Letter of the same argument to a reverend friend of his/ pp. 17-46. This is signed by Champney.
5. 'The copie of a letter written by F. Rob. Parsons, the Jesuite, 9 Octob. 1599, to M. D. Bishfop], and M. Ch[arnock], two banished and consigned Priests, the one in Fraunce the other in Lorraine by the suggestions of F. Parsons for presuming to goe to Rome in the affaires of the Catholicke Church/ pp. 49-67.
6. ' A censure upon the Letter which F. Parsons writ the 9 ot October 1599. . - • Given by M. I. B [i.e. Mr. John Beimel],1 pp. 68-135.
7. ' Doctor Byshops Answere to Fa. Parsons Letter of the 9 of October 1599.' Ends, ( I tak my leave the 10 of Aprill, anno 1600,, yours in his praiers, William Bishop/ pp. 136-177.
8. ' A Letter of Mr. MV. [i.e. Mush] to Father Parsons/ dated 'London 13 of November 1600, yours as you are to our Church, I. M./pp. 178-186.
Mr. Gillow, in his Dictionary, places the work among the pub lications of Dr. Bishop, to whom, he remarks, it is generally attri buted, referring to Tierney in. p. clvi, note ; but Tierney in this passage speaks only of the authorship of the several Discourses, and says nothing of the editor or publisher. Among other works of Dr. Bishop, Dodd mentions f A defence of the king's honour and his title to the kingdom of England/ but does not say whether it was printed or manuscript, Latin or English. Mr. Gillow states that it was written during the controversy on the oath of allegiance and in answer to Parsons' Conference on the Succession.
No other work on the appellant disputes except the letter here printed in the Copies can with certainty be ascribed to Anthony Champney. This learned theologian acquitted himself so much to the satisfaction of the secular clergy in his negotiations at Rome in company with Dr. John Cecil in 1602, that the two were again despatched as agents on a similar mission to the pope in 1606. Champney took his degree of doctor of divinity at the Sorbonne,, became in 1619 vice-president of Douai college, and in 1637 suc ceeded Edward Bennet as dean of the English chapter. His controversial works are well known.
Bibliographical Notes. cxxxi
IV. THE HOPE OF PEACE by laying open such doubts and manifest vntruthes as are divulged by the Arch- priest in his Letter or Answere to the Bookes which were published by the Priestes.
Zacha. 8. — Veritatem tantum et pacem diligite. Lone truth onely and Peace.
Imprinted at Franckford by the heires of D. Turner, 1601.
By JOHN BENNET. A well-printed tract of 45 pages 4to. The preface (4 pages) begins ' Two bookes haue beene lately set foorth by the priests in the necessary defence of their good name and fame/ and ends ' yours in all true hartie affection, I. B.' ' The copie of M. Blackwell his letter' (pp. 5-10) which follows the preface is printed in the Appendix infra. The tract, though mainly contro versial, contains some interesting biographical notices. That it was not printed at Frankfort but in London, Bennet (in his ' Reply to the Appendix of the Apologie/ printed at the end of A. P.'s book), admits ; and he justifies the common and innocent practice by the example of St. Peter, who did ' in a manner date his first epistle from Babylon . . . though no man doubted but that he was then in Rome.' He, however, denies on the authority of the person who paid for the expenses, not improbably Bennet himself, that the book was printed ' by the favour of the Bishop [of London] and permission of his pursuivants ,' as 'this fellow' Parsons asserted.
John Bennet and his brother Edward were gentlemen of inde pendent fortune and strong character, and took a very active part on the side of the appellants. Dr. Barret wrote from Douai to Parsons in 1596, of one of the brothers : ' This Benet is the greatest dissembler and most perilous fellow in a community that ever I knew ' (Douay Diaries, p. 386). Both brothers were held in high esteem by the secular clergy. John was despatched to Rome in 1621 as agent of the clergy, with Mr. Farrar, to petition for a bishop and to persuade the pope to grant a dispensation for the proposed match between prince Charles and the infanta of Spain. He left in manuscript a work of which two copies exist in the archives of the ' Old Chapter,' entitled, ' Narratio historica ea summatim complectens quae ab initio regni Elizabethae ad religion-
cxxxii Introduction.
em et jurisdictionem in Clero Anglicano ad presentem annum 1621 declarandum spectare videntur ' (Gillow, Diet.}. Edward, who in 1621 was nominated by his brethren for a bishopric, succeeded Colletoii as dean of the chapter in 1635.
V. RELATIO COMPENDIOSA TVRBARVM quas Jesuit* Angli, vna cum D. Georgio Blackwello, Archipresbytero, Sacerdotibus Seminariorum populoq; Catholico cociuere ob schismatis et aliorum criminum inuidiam illis iniuriose impactam sacro sanctae inquisitionis officio exhibita, vt rerum veritate cognita ab integerrimis eiusdem iudicibus lites et causae discutiantur et terminentur.
Judica me deus et discerne caussam. — PSAL. 42.
Rhothomagi, per lacobum Molaeum sub signo Phsenicis.
By DR. BAGSHAW. 103 pages 4to, but numbered inaccurately 102. The preface is addressed ' Ad Illmos et Rmos D.DOS sacro-sanctae Inquisitionis Presides/ and is signed ' Illmis Dnibus Vris Addictissi- mi, qui in Anglia pro fide laborantes schismatis sunt accersiti.' On page 7 begins the narrative : ' Origo et progressio prsesentium turbarum quae inter jesuitas et sacerdotes cum haud mediocri scan- dalo existunt.' The last of the several documents printed in this volume is the letter to cardinal Borghese (pp. 87-96) dated from London, Nov. 4, 1600, and signed ' Robertus Charnocus, Presbyter Anglus.' The signature so stands as to appear to be the proper termination of the book, which has in consequence been sometimes erroneously ascribed to Charnock. Thus in Sotheby's sale cata logue of Tierney's books it is set down as ' auctore Charnoco/ though Tierney himself had rightly attributed it to Bagshaw. Dodd also makes Bagshaw the writer, but by a strange mistake adds, ' under the name of Mush.' There is nothing to show that Mush had any hand in it, and his name certainly nowhere appears in connection with it. Charnock's letter is followed by three pages of text, the appeal to the cardinals of the inquisition, and one page of errata.
Bibliographical Notes. cxxxiii
VI. A BRIEFE APOLOGIE or Defence of the Catholike Ecclesiastical Hierarchic, & Subordination in England, erected these later yeares by our holy Father Pope Clement the Eyght ; and impugned by certayne libels printed & published of late both in Latyn & English by some vnquiet persons vnder the name of Priests of the Seminaries.
Written and set forth for the true information and stay of all good Catholikes, by Priests vnited in due subordination to the Right Reuerend Arch-priest, and other their Superiors.
Heb. 13. vers. 17. — Obedite prcepositis uestris et subiacite eis etc. Obey your superiors, and submit your selues unto them.
1 Thess. 5. — Eogamus vos fratres corripite inquietos. We beseech yow brethren represse those that are vnquiet amongst yow.
Permissu Superiorum.
By FATHER PARSONS. Contains altogether 500 pages 8vo.
The numbering of the folios of the text is full of errors, and the last should be 222, and not 232 as it is printed.
Following the index or table of contents is ' A Table of certayne principal deceyts, falshoods and slaunders conteyned in the libels set foorth by the discontented priests which in this our Apologie more at large are confuted/ with ' A list of the principal persons that are iniured by these libels and defended by our Apologie.' Then follows the preface (6 pages) addressed ' to the Catholikes of Eng land most worthy of this honorable name/ etc.
This important volume is one of the rarest of the whole series. There is no copy in the British Museum. Parsons prints in it a number of letters or extracts from letters which are not to be found elsewhere; and although his statements, if unconfirmed, are to be received with as much caution as those of Watson, the position which the Jesuit held, his diplomatic ability, his masterful style, and the hard blows which he dealt to his opponents, give his writings an interest such as attaches to no other in the same degree.
cxxxiv Introduction.
VII. AN APPENDIX TO THE APOLOGIE lately set forth, for Defence of the Hierarchic and Subordination of the English Catholike Church, impugned by certaine discontented Priestes.
Wherin two other books or libels of the impugners, the one in English the other in Latin, no lesse intem perate then the former, are examined, and considered, by the Priestes that remaine in due obedience to their lawful superior.
August, lib. 17- contra Faustum Manicheum, cap. 4. — lam puto sufficere, qua? dicta sunt ad stitdiosos commonendos, et ad calumniosos conuincendos. We think that sufficient hath byn sayd now, both to warne good and vertuous men, as also to confute those that delight in slaunders and calumnia tions.
Imprinted with License.
By FATHER PARSONS. A tract of 56 pages 8vo. Begins with a preface ' to the godly, staied and prudent reader,' and consists almost entirely of a criticism of the Hope of Peace. The second book referred to is the Relatio Compendiosa. In a supplementary note at the end of the volume the author withdraws an accusation he had made in the Apologie against Bagshaw and others, viz., that they were the cause of the apprehension and execution of ' M. Thomas Bensted, a martyr.' The Appendix appeared, as has been said, many weeks after the Apologie, but the two books are some times (as far as I know in all extant copies), bound in one volume. Lowndes in describing the Apologie has overlooked the Appendix. Parsons printed an edition or an abridgment of both these books in Latin, which I have not seen. Straker announced a copy in his catalogue of 1853, thus : Apologia pro Hierarchia Ecclesiastica Clemente P.P. VIIL, his annis apud Anglos instituta cum Appendix \sic~\j 2 vols. 12mo, Permissu Superiorum, ] 601-2.
VIIL A TRUE RELATION, etc.
The original edition consists of 190 pages of text, 8vo, with 6 pages of preface. It is here reprinted verbatim et literatim, except
Bibliographical Notes. cxxxv
that two or three long paragraphs have been subdivided. The headlines have been added by the present editor. The British Museum Catalogue of English books printed before 1640 (sub voce Weston) queries W. Watson as the author. Dodd was certainly correct in ascribing it to Bagshaw (Church Hist. ii. 67). The type, paper, and printer's device seem to proceed from the same press as the Sparing Discovery and the Dialogue.
IX. IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS, which ought to move all trve and sovnd Catholikes, who are not wholly lesuited, to acknowledge without all equiuocations, ambiguities, or shiftings, that the proceedings of her Majesty, and of the State with them, since the begin ning of her Highnesse raigne, haue bene both mild and mercifull.
Published by sundry of vs the secular Priests, in dislike of many treatises, letters and reports, which haue bene written and made in diuerse places to the con- trarie : together with our opinions of a better course hereafter, for the promoting of the Catbolike faith in England.
Newly imprinted, 1601.
Quarto. Text,, 43 pages ; preface, 25. The text begins ' Right worshipful and our very dear friends. We your ancient teachers and spiritual Fathers the secular priests in England/ and is signed ' your true friends the secular Priests.' The writer or writers sub mit ( to the censure and judgment of our holy mother the Catholike Church ' . . . ' whatsoever is written or contained in these Bookes.' ' The Epistle generall in stead of a Preface ' is written in Watson's peculiar style, and is signed ' W. W.' It is characteristically addressed to ' Lords, ladies, earles, countesses, vicounts, vicountesses, barons, baronesses, knights, ladies, gentlemen, gentlewomen, bachelors, virgins, marled, single.' ' Give me leave (he asks) by an epistle patheticall in one generall passage to speake unto you all alike, in two adoptive surnames, Catholike and English, with sentences Apostrophall as of great weight and warinesse as the worth of the
cxxxvi Introduction.
matter exacteth at my worthlesse hands.' The point of his preface lies in the sentence : — ' though no appeal had been, we all of the secular cleargie . . . una voce do utterly disclaim and renounce from our hearts both archpriest and Jesuits as arrant traytours unto their Prince and countrey : whom to death we will never obey : no, if the Popes Holinesse should charge us to obey in this sense, to advance an enimie to the English Crown, we should never yeeld to it : as by no law of nature of nations or of man to be compelled thereunto : no more than to commit adulterie, incest, or to murther our selves, our children, our parents, etc.'
If the rest of the book is attributed to any other hand than Watson it is chiefly because it is comparatively free from Watson's extravagancies of style and statement. Watson, however, in re plying to criticisms made upon the book, appears to completely identify himself with the author (Quodlibets, pp. 334-361). The importance of the matter has led to the treatise being frequently reprinted. The ' Considerations ' were reprinted without the preface in a collection of several treatises concerning the Penal laws in l6?7, and again in 1688.
The Epistle was separately reprinted in 1689 in a ' Brief histori cal account of the behaviour of the Jesuits and their Faction for the first twenty-five years of Q. Elizabeth's reign,' and in the third volume of Gibson's ' Preservation against Popery.' More recently, 1831, the Rev. Joseph Mendham reprinted the complete work with a preface of his own.
X. A SPARING DISCO VERIE of ovr English lesvits, and of Fa. Parsons1 proceedings vnder pretence of promoting the Catholike faith in England : For a caueat to all true Catholiks, our very louing brethren and friends, how they embrace such very uncatholike, though lesuiticall deseignments.
ECCLES. 4. — Vidi calumnias quce sub sole geruntur, et lachry- mas innocentium, et neminem consolatorem.
Newly imprinted, 1601.
By WILLIAM WATSON. Octavo, 70 pages of text, with 'an Epistle to the Reader,' by W. W. In this epistle, composed in
Bibliographical Notes. cxxxvii
Watson's most extravagant style, occurs the laboured description of the portrait of Venus,, which brought him under Parsons' lash. He suggests, though he does not positively state that ' the ensuing discourse, advisedly void of passion/ etc., was written by another ; and for his own pains in editing it he craves from his readers only ' a charitable remembrance of my poor sinful soul in their catholic religious devotions,' but he cannot let pass any of his brethren's works that may fall into his hands, ' without an exhortative epistle unto all true hearted English catholicks to beware of Jesuiticall poyson.' The text is more in the style of the True Relation than of Watson's writings, and was not unnaturally suspected by the Jesuits to have proceeded from the doctor's pen. It consists, first, of a number of anecdotes illustrating the several charges against the Jesuits summarised in the Memorial, their practices of equivo cating, their methods of attracting novices and riches to their order, their use of calumny to destroy their enemies, etc. ; and, secondly, of a sketch of Parsons' own career (pp. 39-70) ; the whole ending with the prayer which the author proposes to add to the Litany, ' A machinationibus Parsoni libera nos Domine.'
XL A DIALOGVE betwixt a Secvlar Priest and a Lay Gentleman, concerning some points objected by the lesuiticall faction against such Secular Priests as haue shewed their dislike of M. Blackwell and the Jesuit proceedings.
Printed at Rh ernes, MDCI.
Octavo, 134 pages and 20 pages of preface. In the pre face, signed as usual W. W., Watson again suggests that the book was not written by himself. ' Amongst many letters and trea tises [he writes] that have come unto my hands concerning the question betwixt the Secular Priests and the Jesuits, one of the most moment, pyth and substance (in mine opinion) is the ensuing Dialogates discourse.' Although the book covers much the same ground as the Sparing Discovery, it is, as the title indicates, less a direct attack upon the Jesuits than a defence of the secular priests against the accusations of the former. Parsons, in his Manifestation (f. 94), says that though W. W., ' to wit, Wyly Wat
cxxxviii Introduction.
tumbler/ put the preface to the book, ' the author thereof is esteemed by many to be M. Mush, one of the chief appellants gone to Rome ; and for the little substance thereof it may be well enough, though we doubt not but he will deny it when he cometh thither/ Parsons wrote this at Rome after the arrival of Mush ; but in any case it is impossible to ascribe the authorship of the Dialogue to Mush.
XII. AN ANSWERS TO A LETTER OF A IESUITED GENTLEMAN, by his Cosin, Maister A. C.
f Appeale concerning the-< State
V. lesuits Recta Securus. Newly Imprinted, 1601.
By ANTHONY COPLEY. 124 pages 4to. Sig. A — Q 2. Begins p. 3, without preface, in a style imitating or resembling that of Watson : ' Good Cosin, I have received your letter of the first of the present, written in a spirit too derogative from the innocence of the Appealant Priests, and supererogative in the praise of the Jesuits as it were above Jesus.' The Letter, ending on p. 120, is dated ' London, this last of November 1601,' but it is followed by 3 pages of postscript. The writer submits the whole of his discourse ' to the censure of holie church.' Dodd, followed by Mr. Gillow and by Mr. Cooper (in the Diet, of National Biography), ascribes this book — strange to say without expressing any doubt — to Anthony Champney, to whose compositions it bears no resemblance. Mr. R. C. Christie, in his notice of Copley (also in the Diet, of Nat. Biography) rightly attributes it to Copley, and mentions a second tract of the author, entitled, ( Another Letter of Mr. A. C. to his Disjesuited Kinsman concerning the Appeale, State, Jesuits. Also a third letter of his, Apologeticall for himself against the calumnies contained against him in a certain Jesuiticall libell, intituled ' A manifestation of folly and bad spirit,' 1602, 4to (Bodleian). Some of the calumnies in question have been quoted above, p. xciii. There is no copy of this second tract in the British Museum, nor does it appear to have been known to Tierney or Roman Catholic
Bibliographical Notes. cxxxix
bibliographers. Copley had published in 1595 ' Wits, Fittes, and Fancies, . . . also Loves Owle'; and in 1596fA Fig for Fortune. Recta Securus. A. C., London, 4to.' There is no notice of Copley in Mr. Gil low's Dictionary.
XIII. A DECACORDON OF TEN QVODLIBETICALL QVESTIONS concerning Religion and State :
Wherein the Authour framing himselfe a Quilibet to euery Quodlibet, decides an hundred crosse interro- gatorie doubts, about the generall contentions betwixt the Seminarie Priests and lesuits at this present.
ECCLES. vii. — Noli amare mendacium aduerssus fratrem tuum,
neque in amicum similiter facias. Do not hue a lye against thy brother, neither do the like
against thy friend.
Newly Imprinted, 1602.
By WILLIAM WATSON. 4to. This is the largest and the most characteristic of Watson's books, containing 36l pages, and 10 pages of preface. He gives his name in full in the last paragraph, submitting himself and this work to the censure of the Roman church, ' with the other ten volumes,' which he declares he has ready for the press. The long involved sentences, the newly coined words, and the affected style, render the book tedious reading, but it abounds in curious information and personal anec dotes, which represent in a coarse and exaggerated form the generally accepted traditions of the extreme anti-Jesuit party.
XIV. A MANIFESTATION OF THE GREAT FOLLY
and bad spirit of certayne in England calling them- selues Secular Priestes.
Who set forth dayly most infamous and contumelious libels against worthy men of their own religion, and diuers of them their lawful Superiors, of which libels sundry are here examined and refuted.
By priestes lyuing in obedience.
cxl Introduction.
2 TIM. 3. — Their folly shalbe manifest to all men.
Luc. 11. — The uncleane spirit went foorth and took seaven spirits more wicked then himself, and all entring dwelt there, and the ending of those men was worse than the beginning.
Superiorum permissu, 1602.
By FATHER PARSONS. 4-to. The preface to the Catholike Reader, 5 pages. The contents 1 page. The text Sig. A — Ff 2. 230 pages numbered in folios.
The several chapters are entitled : —
Ch. 1. fThe manifest folly and apparent bad spirit of the
wryters of these libels/ etc. Ch. 2. ' Their folly and passionate spirit/ etc. Ch. 3. ' Their folly and presumptuous spirit/ etc. Ch. 4. ( Their folly and unshamfast spirit in uttering so open and manifest untruthes and contradictions to their owne discredit.'
Ch. 5. ' Their folly and malignant spirit in objecting certain books to F. Persons, which, if they be his, cannot but give him much credit and commendation ; with a brief confutation of a fond pamphlet set forth in answere to the book of succession/ Ch. 6. ' Their folly and deceaved spirit/ etc. Ch. 7. ' Of five other books, or rather absurd and scandalous libels come forth since the answering of the former two/ etc.
Ch. 8. ' Certayne directions unto Catholikes/ etc. ; ' with an examination of divers notorious and infamous lyes of W. W. in his book of Quodlibets.'
The five books referred to in Chapter 7 are the Sparing Discovery, the Dialogue, Copley's Answer, the Memorial, and the Quodlibets. The books ( foolishly and malignantly ' ob jected to F. Parsons are his Philopatris and Warnword, the authorship of both of which he tacitly admits ; the book on the succession, which is now proved to be his (Tierney, iii. 31-35), and the MS. Memorial for Reformation, which no one doubts to be by him.
Bibliographical Notes. cxli
XV. AN ANSWERS MADE BY ONE OF OUR BRETHREN, a secular Priest, now in prison, to a fraudulent Letter of M. GEORGE BLA.CKWELS, written to Cardinall Caietane, 1596, in commendation of the Jesuits in England.
Newly Imprinted, 1602.
By ' ANDREAS PHILALETHES/ a priest. Forty pages,, i.e. 8 of pre face and 32 of text, in 8vo. The preface purports to be by another hand than the rest of the book. Its style is a caricature of Wat son's. ' I here commend unto you/ it begins,, ' (good Catholike Reader) this Treatise following,, penned by a Catholike Priest/ The editor then referring to the ' vanity and falsehood ' of Black- well's letter, which is in this book printed and answered, continues,, ' which two qualities together with his [Blackwell's] rude pre sumptuous Epistolizing to Graces, 'doe so anatomize the man, as I could not let him passe uncoated with a Preface, agreeing to the Treatise.' ' I have here laid before your eyes the Crow, Blackrvell suited in fables, set upon a stake, in pale proper, pinyoned, as it were the while, until you may blazon him the Cras croaking foule in her own pure naturals . . . this Black-wel-mand-statist . . . imagined himself to be Monos, though in very deed hee is but a Jesuit's Spanified Moiiopolos, that is in plain English (abstract from all Hyperboles and Rhetorical figures) the extortional tythes and imposts, or rather the very dregs ... of all the Jesuits, Machiavellian drifts, Prothenian plots and Catelinian counter mined conspiracies,' etc. The text, which is in the form of an epistle to Blackwell himself, taking up and replying to his Letter paragraph by paragraph, is comparatively sober. The writer, who has not been identified, signs himself, ' Your ancient acquaintance and loving friend, ANDREAS PHILALETHES.'
XVI. A IVST DEFENCE OF THE SLANDERED PRIESTES Wherein the reasons of their bearing off to receive MAISTER BLACKWELL to their Superiores
cxlii Introduction.
before the arriuall of his Holines Breue, are layd downe, and the imputation of disobedience, ambition, conten tion, scandall, &c., is by able arguments and authorities removed, the obiection of the aduerse part sufficiently answered, and the Pope's sentence in the controuersie truly related. By JOHN COLLETOX.
Curam habe de bono nomine, hoc enim mains permanebit tibi quam mille thesauri pretiosi et magni. — ECCLESIASTICI Ca. 41, vers. 15. Have care of thy good name, for this mill remayne longer vnto tliee then a thousand treasures precious and great.
Newly imprinted, 1602.
Quarto. 303 pages, with 8 pages of preface and 4 of table of contents. The most learned and weighty of all the works written on the controversy. It was published about June 1602 after the two cardinals had given their decision upon the question of schism in favour of the appellants. Colleton gives translations of the principal documents and letters which had been printed in the Latin books, and carries on the story to the date of his going to press. He argues the case mainly as a theologian and canonist, but the honesty of the man and the prominent part which he took in all negotiations with Blackwell at home, especially at times when other principal appellants were absent abroad, give a par ticular value to his narrative of facts. He writes, as we have seen, in the opinion of one Jesuit critic, 'with judiciate words and great gravity/ but it must be admitted with more earnestness than brilliancy or grace. His book is remarkable for the number of theological authorities referred to and cited, including more than fifty canonists and schoolmen. Many of these works were not likely to be found in any library in England to which he could have got access even with Bancroft's assistance. Dr. Bishop and Bagshaw were probably giving help from Paris. When the volume reached Rome Parsons promptly delated the author to the inqui sition on the ground of his having transgressed by its publication the papal decree of August 1601, and thereby incurred excom munication. Blackwell seems to have, before long, recognised the
Bibliographical Notes. cxliii
worth of Colleton, for, on his own deposition by the pope, he con stituted or attempted to constitute his former opponent as interim archpriest.
XVII. (1) CERTAINE BRIEFE NOTES VPON A BRIEFE APOLOGIE set out vnder the name of the Priestes vnited to the Archpriest.
Dravvne by an vnpassionate secular Prieste friend to bothe partyes, but more frend to the truth.
Whereunto is added a seuerall ansvveare vnto the particularities obiected against certaine Persons.
Forte est vinum,fortior est Rex, sed svper ornnia vincit veritas et manet in Mternum. — 3 ESD. 3.
Imprinted at Paris, by PETER SEVESTRE. With Priuiledge.
AN ANSVVEAR of M. DOCTOR BAGSHAW to certayne poyntes of a libell called An Apologie of the Subor dination in England.
3.
AN ANSVVEARE vnto the Particulars objected in the Apology against Master DOCTOR BYSHOPE.
4.
AN ANSVVERE made by me CHARLES PAGET, Esquier, to certayne vntruthes and falsity es, toching my selfe, contayned in a booke, intituled a briefe Apologie or defence, of the Catholike Hierarchic & Subordination in Englande, & cet.
The ' Briefe Notes' by DR. HUMPHRY ELY, another of the more important as it is, historically, the most interesting and
cxliv Introduction.
impartial of all these books, appeared about the same time as the treatise of Colleton. Prefixed to it is the approbation of two doctors of the Sorbonne. This is followed by an anony mous ' Generall Preface ' in commendation of the author, ' a very ancient wise and learned priest living in honour and at his ease far from his native soil/ and justifying the publication of the book in spite of the brief of August 1601, with which Parsons ' very peartly playeth at bo-peepe/ To this is added ' The Opinion of Mr. Rob. Parkinson,' formerly confessor of cardinal Allen, extracted from a letter, dated May 31, 1602, making in all 25 pages. 'The epistle of the author to his friend M. D. W[orth- ington]/ who had sent a copy of the Apologie to Ely, occupies 8 pages and is signed H. F. The ' Briefe Notes' is separately paged 1-312, including an ironical address ' To the United Priests,' the supposed authors of the Apologie (pp. 1-5) and another Pre face (pp. 6-53). Dr. Ely had formed one of the band of mission aries who entered England in 1580 with Parsons and Campion. He taught canon law at both Douai and Rheims under Allen before he received his appointment as professor at Pont-a-Mousson. The archpriest and some of his principal supporters among the secular clergy were personal friends of Ely, who was intimately acquainted with only Edward Bennet and Bluet among the appel lants. He disapproved of the hard things said against the Jesuits in the later books, but avoided entering into the controversy until his sense of justice constrained him to expose the Apologie, and to show that the Jesuits were both the ' occasioners and reiiewers' of the troubles. Unlike Colleton, the professor had some sense of humour; and though occasionally diffuse, he, as a rule, writes clearly and forcibly, while his use of quaint similes and old- fashioned phrases gives to his style a character of its own.
The treatises which follow Ely's ' Notes/ and were bound with his book, are separately paged but have no proper title-page. They treat of the Apologie only as far as it concerns themselves. Bagshaw's answer, 43 pages, is signed by himself. The answer made on behalf of Dr. Bishop (19 pages) is by an anonymous friend. Lastly Charles Paget speaks for himself in 24 pages. The book consists of 431 pages in all.
This volume is extremely rare. The fathers of the London Oratory, followed by Mr. Cooper (Dictionary of National Biography},
Bibliographical Notes. cxlv
speak of the copy in the Grenville library, British Museum, as ' probably unique/ Mr. Gillow says more correctly that 'only four or five copies' are known to exist, though others may be found in private libraries. There is a copy in the Bodleian, one in the Signet library, and another in possession of the present writer. Dr. Ely says comparatively little of the political offences of the Jesuits in his book, but writing to one of the privy council (Aug. 30, 1()02) he speaks plainly enough. He declares that the secular priests and catholic gentlemen on behalf of whom he writes will suffer imprisonment, rack, or death in defence of their lawful prince against any opponent, ' be he Spaniard, French, Scot or whosoever else/ This they have often testified in words and by printed books. Their plight is miserable indeed : ' at home afflicted for our conscience, abroad persecuted for our fidelity to our prince/ If the queen knew this, she would surely of her clemency make a distinction between them, her natural children and subjects, ' and those unnaturall Bastardes who do attend to nought else but conquestes and invasions/ He offers to come to London upon the least intimation that his correspondent would grant him audience. (Mr. Macray's report of Petyt papers, Hist. MSS. Commission, xi. pt. vii. p. 298.)
XVIII. THE JESUITES CATECHISME or Examination of their doctrine. Published in French this present yeere 1602 and nowe translated into English. With a Table at the end of all the maine poynts that are dis puted and handled therein.
Printed Anno Domini 1602.
A translation of the work of ETIENNE PASQUIER, the eminent lawyer, who, says his biographer, hated a Jesuit rather more than he hated a Huguenot. Quarto, 258 leaves with 20 unnumbered pages of preface, and 4> pages of a table of contents at the end. The preface is dedicated ' To all English Catholicks that are faithfull subiects to Queene Elizabeth, our most dreaded Soueraigne : The Secular Priests that are diuersly afflicted doe wish all pros- peritie, iustice, peace, ioy, and happines in our Lord lesus Christ/
A-
cxlvi Introduction.
The ' Jesuits' Catechism/ so called to distinguish f the new devices and instructions and plottings from the sincerity of the ancient and approved form of Christ's Catechism/ is a savage attack upon the institution of the Jesuits, their history, and the life of their founder, who was not at that time canonised or even beatified, in the name of ' the secular priests/ by one who, although he expresses regret at the bitterness of Watson's treatises inasmuch as they seem to have shocked catholics, is no less bitter himself. Its professed object is to warn English catholics, from the example of the recent troubles in France, that to receive Jesuits into a kingdom is to receive ' vermin which at length will gnaw out the heart of the state both spiritual and temporal ' — that the English government must look sharply to the attempts of the Jesuits to rule the clergy, for if they prevailed ' it would not be long before the country were brought into a general combustion.' They themselves had said, in so many words, that cardinal Allen and father Parsons as Moses and Josue had long since out of doubt possessed the realm of England had not the disobedience of some and their most dis pleasing murmuring hindered it.' ' Blessed was that disobedience, and happy was that murmuring/ cry the writers of the preface, 'that delivered this kingdom from such uncatholic and most traitorous designments.'
In the British Museum catalogue W. W. is queried as the author of this translation, but the preface does not exhibit any decided traces of Watson's peculiar hand. There are no data whereby the date of publication can be fixed to a month. It was, however, written after the appearance of the Manifestation,
XIX. A REPLY TO A NOTORIOUS LIBELL, Intituled A BRIEFE APOLOGIE, or defence of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchie, &c. Wherein sufficient matter is discouered to giue all men satisfaction, who lend both their eares to the question in controuersie betveene the lesuits and their adherents on the one part, and the Saecular Priests defamed by them on the other part. Whereunto is also adioyned an answere to the Appendix. PSAL. 26. — Mentita est iniquitas sibi, Imprinted Anno 1603.
Bibliographical Notes. cxlvii
By ROBERT CHARNOCK [?]. 390 pages 4to. Mr. Gillow ascribes this work to Thomas Bluet, remarking: ' The preface is signed A. P., i.e. A Priest, and though it is not certain that Bluet was the author there is strong internal evidence,, and it is known that he was engaged in this controversy. From some statements in the book it is clear that it was written in l60'2, in all likelihood before Bluet went to Rome. It is one of the most important works in the Archpriest controversy/
But some of these suppositions are certainly incorrect. The book cannot have been written before Bluet went to Rome, for this was in January or February 1602, and the author refers to the preceding works of Colleton and Ely, which were not written until the middle of that year, as well as to Parsons' Manifestation (pp. 186, 326). It is extremely improbable that Bluet, when at Rome,, in the teeth of the difficulties made about these books, would have troubled himself to write against the Apologie, which was as far as he was personally concerned even then an old story. Far more probable is the suggestion of Tierney, who (according to Sotheby's sale catalogue of his books) in a MS. note to his own copy attributed the work to Charnock. The details which are furnished in the book itself regarding the embassy to Rome in 1598-9, and in reference to Charnock in particular, bear out this suggestion. I do not know where Tierney' s copy now is, or what his grounds for the attribution were. Charnock, like Colleton and other leading appellants, signed Dr. Bishop's protestation, but in obedience to the pope refused to take the oath of allegiance in the terms proposed by James. The author, whoever he was, had been in oral communication with the nuncio of Flanders, from whose lips he received a denial of Parsons' suggestion that he, the nuncio, had written to the pope against Bishop and Charnock, or had advised their imprisonment. This, if we exclude from the authorship the four deputies at Rome in 1602, almost certainly restricts us to Charnock., Bishop, Bagshaw, or Barneby, who alone of the appellants had the opportunity to speak to the nuncio in question.
In the present work, for convenience sake, reference has been made to the writer of the Reply under the initials with which the preface is signed, but A. P. there says that although Ely and Colleton have learnedly handled its principal points, 'yet upon
cxlviii Introduction.
the earnest desire of some who have seen this reply in my hands I emboldened myself without the authors privity to publish it.' Although the title-page bears the date 1603, there is nothing to show that any part of the book was written after the brief of November 1602. The editor in his preface refers indeed to ' the last years brief of the 17 of August l6'01,' and excuses himself for issuing the book in spite of it on the ground that Parsons had nullified the prohibition by the publication of the Apologie, Appendix, and Manifestation.
A Reply to the Appendix of the Apologie by J. B. (i.e., as before stated, John Bennet), occupies pages 341-387, and is followed by 2 pages of the ' Contents of the Chapters/ etc. It was written after ' 20 July 1602,' the date assigned in page 373 to the judgment of the Inquisition, which is referred to as clearing the priests from disobedience.
XX. A REPLIE VNTO A CERTAINE LIBELL, latelie set forth by FA: PARSONS in the name of vnited Priests, intituled A MANIFESTATION of the great folly and bad spirit, of certaine in England, calling themselues secular Priestes. With an addition of a Table of such vnchari- table words and phrases, as by him are vttered in the said Treatise, as well against our parsons, as our bookes, actions, and proceedings.
Pro imtitia agonizare pro aniina tua, et vsque ad mortem certa pro iustitia, et Deus expugnabit pro te inimicos tuos. — ECCLESIAST. cap. 4.
Noli esse humilis in sapientia tua, ne humiliatus in stultitiam seducaris. — Ibidem, cap. 13.
Justitia?, et innocentise permissu, Anno Dom. 1603.
232 pages, 4to. ' An epistle to the priests,' 2 pages; ' preface general to catholicks,' 2 pages; the Eeplie 214 pages, concluding with 12 pages of the 'Table of passionate and uncharitable words,' all numbered in folios. The author signs both prefaces with the initials W. C. Mr. Gillow ascribes this book, without any expres sion of doubt, to William (sometimes called Francis) Clark. The initials by themselves are no sure guide. It may be worth noting
Bibliographical Notes. cxlix
that in fol. 67 the author, making a mock profession of faith, writes, ' Ego, F. B. do professe/ etc., and in the Errata tells his reader, e for F. B. read W. C.' On the supposition that, by a slip of the pen, he had in fol. 67 betrayed his real initials, there is much in the book which would well suit Francis Barneby. In Sotheby's sale catalogue of Tierney's books it is ascribed, but surely not on Tierney's authority, to Anthony Copley. The author was certainly a priest, and was present and interposed in the quarrels at Wis- beach in the summer of 1596. See the passage quoted in the note p. 41, infra. Neither Clark nor Barneby indeed was a prisoner, and I am not aware of any evidence to show that either was residing as a visitor, in the castle at this time. The writer also (fol. 97) lets us know that when a student at Rheims he heard during a period of three years Dr. Gifford preach. Gifford was at Rheims from 1582 to 1595, and within this time both Clark and Barneby spent exactly two years there ; the former from Aug. 6, 1587, to Aug. 18, 1589; the latter from Jan. 13, 1591, to Jan. 19, 1593. The data again, if we must stand to the initials W. C., may fairly enough fit William Clargenett or Clarionet, one of the anti- Jesuit faction at Wisbeach, who was ordained priest and sent upon the mission from Rheims in 1585. The writer of the book was, in any case, well acquainted with all the incidents of the conflict, and puts on record many details not preserved in the other books. He follows the Manifestation closely with his criticisms, and warmly defends Bluet, Bagshaw, and Watson from Parsons' attacks. He has the worst opinion of the Jesuits, supporting the principal charges of the memorial, and not disguising his own suspicions that the fathers had got rid of Allen and the Bishop of Cassano as well as Sixtus v. by poison.
Lowndes (sub voce Parsons) makes a jumble of the two preced ing titles, thus : — c Replie to a Libell called a brief Apologie of the Hierarchic by W. C. (William Charke),' and this is copied literatim into Halkett and Laing's Diet, of Anon. Literature. l Charke ' is probably a misprint for Clarke.
To this list may be added a work which, though not strictly speaking the production of either party to the quarrel, gives a general criticism of the literature from the protestant point of view :
cl Introduction.
XXI. THE ANATOMIE OF POPISH TYRANNIE :
wherein is conteyned a plaine declaration and Christian censure of all the principall parts of the Libells, Letters, Edictes, Pamphlets and Bookes, lately published by the secular priests and English hispanized Jesuites with their Jesuited Arch-priest ; both pleasant and profit able to all well affected readers. London, 1603. 4to.
This was written by the Rev. THOMAS BELL, a clergyman of the church of England, who had been for many years a seminary priest. His signed dedication of the book, addressed to Toby Matthews, bishop of Durham, is dated 24 Jan. l602[3], but he says in his preface that his whole work was compiled and ready for the press by October 10, 1602. He quotes passages from all the English books described above. From this it appears that the books of A. P. and W. C. with the imprint of 1603 were not only written but published before the date of the brief (Nov. 1602) which pro hibited such publications. The objectionable practice of publishers post-dating the works issued by them seems to have been at least as old as the days of Elizabeth. Bell gives his own opinion (p. 160) that ' the seculars are overmatched, and that howso ever they brag that they will have audience or else die for it one after the other, yet are they more like, many of them, if they go to Rome, to be cast into their holy, most holy Inquisition, for Parsons hath now by reason of their writings matter enough to work upon.'
Amid the new interests and fresh topics of contention which arose after the accession of James, the story told in the sup pressed books was soon forgotten or ignored. In John Pitts1 De Anglice Scriptoribus there is scarcely an allusion to the controversy. The abbreviated title of Colleton's work, there given, might mislead the reader to the supposition that this zealous priest had written to defend the clergy from the slanders of protestants. Father More in his history of the English Jesuits, and Dodd in his church history, touch briefly
Bibliographical Notes. cli
the outlines of the story from opposite points of view. Dodd indeed in his history of Douai college, and later on, Berington in his edition of the memoirs of Panzani, revived in a more hostile spirit the old complaints of the mischief wrought by Jesuit ambition and statecraft, and evoked replies in a similar tone on the part of the society. But no new facts were brought to light ; the old books had already become rare, and by a tacit understanding the subject, as one that was dangerous or discreditable, was practically dropped. Father Plowden in replying to Berington does not venture to defend the principle of Parsons1 policy on the ground that the deposed Elizabeth was not a legitimate sovereign, or that insurrection was under the circumstances justifiable. He shuts his eyes to the plain facts. ' I, who have searched,1 he writes (p. 147), ' through volumes of MS. records and letters written by them, have not yet discovered a trace, a symptom, of any plot or contrivance to dethrone or to destroy Elizabeth in which the founders of the seminaries, or any of their friends or dependants, had the smallest concern.' Canon Tierney by his annotations upon Dodd's history, and by the printing of numerous unedited documents which were saved at Stonyhurst and in other Roman catholic repositories from the wreck of the seminaries abroad, once more gave the matter the prominence it deserved. Mr. Foley further contributed to its elucidation by printing a portion of Parsons1 and Rivers1 correspondence (Records, vol. i.). But the interesting contemporary tracts still remained un edited. Mr. W. B. D. D. Turnbull at one time announced his intention of republishing some of the more important historical books of the kind, but he went no further than the re-editing of Sergeant's Account of the English Chapter (1706).
The biographical notices in the Dictionary of the English Catholics, now in course of publication by Mr. Joseph Gillow, are necessarily brief, but in so far as the archpriest controversy
clii Introduction.
is concerned no writer has treated the subject with more impartiality and candour.
Meanwhile the Royal Commission on historical MSS. has called attention to a mass of valuable papers, quite unknown to Tierney and other Roman catholic historians, preserved in the library of the Inner Temple. A number of these papers evidently formed one of the collections in the hands of the appellant writers. Many bear the indorsement of Bluet. As the missionaries can have had no safe depository for such docu ments in England, it is not surprising that they all fell, perhaps at the time of the raid upon Watson and Clark, into the hands of some government officials. In any case they eventually became absorbed into the large collection of books and MSS. made by Sir William Petyt, keeper of the records in the Tower in the reign of queen Anne. After his decease they came into the possession of the hon. society of the Inner Temple, of which Sir William Petyt was at one time the treasurer.
Mr. Riley's description of a portion of this collection appeared in the second report (1871). For the facilities afforded me in the examination and use of these papers I have to express my warm thanks to the Masters of the Bench of the Inner Temple and to their librarian. Mr. Macray has more recently issued a supplementary report, describing a further batch of appellant papers in the same collection (eleventh report, pt. vii. 1888), but this unfortunately did not appear until after the greater part of this introduction was through the press. I have therefore been able to examine and make use of little more than Mush's diary of the proceedings at Rome in 1602. There is undoubtedly much valuable matter yet to be gathered from these papers, as well as from others on the same subject long preserved at Stonyhurst college, in the archives of the archbishop of Westminster, and in other Roman
Bibliographical Notes. cliii
catholic repositories, but which have not yet seen the light. The appellant papers in the Petyt collection at least deserve to be printed in extenso. They are the necessary complement to the Records of ilie English Catholics published by the fathers of the London Oratory.
Finally I have to gratefully mention my obligation to many friends who have lent me, or furnished me with extracts from, rare books not to be found in Edinburgh. Especially I beg to thank his grace the archbishop of Canterbury for the loan of the two ' Latin books ' from the library of Lambeth, and the authorities of the Bodleian for the loan of Parsons' Apologie, before I had the good fortune to procure copies of these books for myself. To my friend the Rev. W. E. Addis I am also much indebted for some useful corrections as the sheets were passing through the press.
A TRUE RELATION
True relation of the faction begun
a lefuite, 1595. and continued fince by Fa. Walley>
alias Garnet, the Prouinciall of the lefuits in Eng
land, and by Fa. Parfons in Rome, with
their adherents :
Againft vs the Secular Priefts their bre
thren and fellow Prifoners, that difliked of nouel-
ties, and thought it dijhonourable to the auncient Eccle-
fiafticall Difdpline of the Catholicke Church , that
Secular Priefts jhould be gouerned by
lefuits.
Newly Imprinted, i 60 i.
To the true Catholick Reader.
/N such bookes as some of our brethren haue bin lately constrayned to set out for your satisfaction ; there is often mention made of the contention at Wisbich begun 1595. Of this contention, there haue gone many reports : and as yet the truth thereof hath not bin so fully published, as it is conuenient : the indirect course of our new aduersaries considered. Such as are infected with our English lesuitisme, do ascribe all the blame in that behalf e vnto vs, that are secular Priests : in that me could not be brought to alter our old orders for the aduauncement of Fa. Weston a lesuite to become our Gouernor or Agent ; as his faction tearrned him. To make this matter therefore as cleare as the sunne, and that no indiscreete Catholike may be ignorant of the truth herein, if he will not wilfully shut his eyes, or stop his eares, as our Archpriest would haue them ; we haue thought it our duties to deliuer vnto you from point to point (as in the sight of God} the beginning and proceed ing of those garboyles then amongst vs. And at this time, we are the rather moued so to do : because it hath pleased Maister Blackwell our sayd Arch-priest, very lately to send to his twelue Assistants to be di- uulged a certaine Censure, or (we know not what to tearrne it) a sheet of paper, fraught neither with wit, honest dealing, discretion, or learning ; but in effect with as many shifts and lyes almost as lines, in derogation not only of some of the said bookes set out by our brethren, tearming the same (as if either he himself e, or some of his commaunders the lesuites had made them) to be seditious bookes : but likewise taketh vpon him, to touch the said contention, not in many words, but with muchfollie and great vntruth. We will be bold by way of Preface, a little to touch them.
4 A True Relation.
These are his words. The Jirst point (sayth lie, meaning the diuision at Wisbich) was a thing long since ended with great edifica tion, and by the meanes principally of those which are most condemned. It toucheth the greater and belter part of that company. It nothing concerneth our authoritie : it being more auncient, and hauing orders taken at the attonement by their oivne consent. It is well knowne at Rome by whose meanes they were disanulled. Neither is it more un fitting for those which lined in one house to institute rules for such as voluntarily demaunded and accepted them then to procure a sodality abroade. Thus farre our Arch-priest : and it is all he writeth to his assistants of this matter : which we the rather note to shew the extremity of his pride, in supposing by such an answer e to the sayd bookes con cerning that diuision to wipe away those imputations Sf matters, wher- with Fa. Garnet, fy Fa. Weston, 8f he himselfe in some sort are charged. That which here he sayth either touching our contention at Wisbich, or any thing whereof he hath written to his sayd assistants against the sayd bookes, is fully answered in print by one of our brethren, a true Catholick Priest : We hartily pray you to procure the booke, and then iudge of our Arch-priest as you finde him. In the meane while and because this our treatise may come to your hands before the other, although the history following doth sufficiently confute his words by vs now cited : yet will we giue you some little tryall of our new Gouernors wisedome and sinceritie, by that which here he writeth.
The Jirst point (sayth he) was a thing long since ended. And what then maister Blackwell ? will you reason thus ? It was long since ended : ergo, maister Garnet and maister Weston, the firebrands of that garboile with their factious adherents are not to be blamed as our brethren haue writ of them in their sayd booke ? But we beseech you sir vpon your small credit tell vs, is that contention long since ended ? Nay rather (speake man) is it ended as yet ? It was in effect : whether it were meete, and according to the auncient ecclesiasticall Discipline, that a lesuite should haue the commaundement ouer secular Priests. And is this point yet decided ? There was we confesse (as we thought) an end made amongst vs 1 596. by maister Mush, and maister Dudley,
The Author's Preface.
and that with edification : but it fell out farre othertvise. The edifica tion you make mention of was nothing sutable to that edification, whereof the Apostle speakelh : but was much more agreeable to the building of Babell that tower of confusion. For whilest we of the vnitie were quiet, and supposed all had bin well : maister Garnet, and his subiect maister Weston, were so moued, that they had bin disappointed of their sayd gouernment amongst us, as like prowde Nymrods and boisterous hunters they cast about how to bring vs under them by another stratageme, as by the historic it will appear.
When he also further sayth, that the end he mentioneth was made by the me anes principally of those which are most condemned : he meaneth maister Garnet and maister Western to be those principall persons ; or else his speech is senselesse : and then also he writeth most falsely. For true it is, that the end which we supposed had bin made, was compassed by maister Mush and maister Dudley full sore against the harts and good likings of the sayd two lesuites. Mary if he meane such an end of the sayd contention as they two propounded to them seines, which was but an interim to a further mischief e, such an end, as then they respected and sought after, and do now perswade themselues to haue found it (whilest maister Garnet ruleth the roast) then indeede Fa. Garnet and Fa. Weston may truly be sayd to haue bin the especiall contriuers of it : otherivise it proceedeth from incredible boldnes to pretend them to be authors of any good peace, who breathe forth nothing but dissension and cruelty.
And where he sayth (as we suppose) that maister Garnet and maister Weston, are two men now most condemned : it is true that they are indeed condemned for their MacJnuilian practises against their brethren : being (vnder pretence of their Fatherhoods) so puft vp with pride and arrogancie, as it is scarse probable to relate. But yet some exception may iustly be taken to his words, in that he sayth, they are most condemned. For in good sooth, we thinke his maistership as farre too blame as either of them, or more : in that being a secular Priest, he doth so tyrannize ouer his owne brethren by calling, and hath not the wit to see, how he is abused and made a puppie to daunce after their pipe, and to execute what they do commaund him.
A True Relation.
But it followeth forsooth : that the said diuision toucheth the greater and better part of that company. A lack alack, doth it so ? It toucheth indeede the greater part : and that very neerely : for it shewed them for the time to be very factious : such as secretly banded, and combined themselues with a lesuite against their fellow prisoners and brethren. And therefore in that hee sayth those conspiring companions were the better part, he speaketh like himself e very vntruly, as we in our iudge- ments do esteeme of honest men. Mary in his sense, and according to the common saying, the veryer knaues, the better luck : they may well be reckoned the better part : because none are iudged vertuous or of any estimation that oppose themselues against the lesuites, or refuse to worship their lesuiticall Idoll, our Arch-priest. And yet we will be content to let them go for once as he would haue them : so he ioyne those words with the other that follow : and to this effect. The sayd contention toucheth the better part, and therefore it concerneth neither himself e nor any of his louing assistants, nor their impregnable authoritie. But in good sooth, maister Blackwell, speake truly man : doth not that con tention in some sort touch your high authoritie ? Was it not the ground of it? If we had yeelded to Fa. Westons agencie, had you bin euer aduaunced as you are ? Did not our garboyles beget your greatnes ? If maister Weston had preuailed with vs, maister Garnet would haue wiped your nose for dealing like a yong prince abroade as you do. And therefore indeed in a right good sense, wee are your good maisters, and so you ought to esteeme vs. But if we should deale more seriously with you, and vrge you to set dotvtie, wherein the said great part was, or is the better : what durst you say, if you haue any sparke of the feare of God before your eyes ? Are they better learned? for shame you will not say it. Are their Hues more sincere ? I hope you will charge vs with no dishonestie : or if you dare, we defye you : being in our Hues we trust blameles before men, and euery way as honest as your selfe at the least.
As touching the orders you speake of ; they were yeelded vnto (it is true) by our consent, and that most willinglie : but as for maister Weston, it so stroke him to the hart to yeeld vnto them, as he fell downe presently before the company into a swoune : such was his pride, and so
The Author's Preface.
vwtvilling he was to be ouer-ruled for the time. And whereas our Arch- priest saith : that it is well knowne at Rome by whose means the said orders were disanulled : we are glad to heare it, and haue taken some little paines in this treatise to make it also as well knowne here in England. If his meaning be that we of the Vnity did first disanull them, he sayih vntruly, and they in Rome are falsely informed. No, no, those orders crossed too much the lesuites deseignements to haue any long continuance, where they had any factious creatures to infringe them.
But that which followeth, is worthie some especiall consideration. Neither was it more unfitting (sayih maister BlackwellJ for those which lined in one house to institute rules, for such, as voluntarily demaunded and accepted them, then to procure a sodality abroade. In good faith we are sory, that we are compelled to disclose this fe Howes falshood, a)id how much he is sunne-burnt with lesuitisme. It is a world to see how artificially he doth smooth ouer in this place diuers false, and some very absurd points. And Jirst consider, we pray you : whether it was as Jit for Priests in prison to choose a lesuite to rule them, as for other Priests abroade, to desire to haue a Bishop to gouerne them : and whether suiteth better with the auncient discipline of the Catholick Church for secular Priests to sue to the Prouinciall of the lesuites to haue a lesuite for their head : or for others to sue to his holynes to assigne them a Bishop. But let this passe : and proceede we to the rest : and when you heare the truth in a word, then consider the mans sinceritie. It will appeare vnto you by the history following, that Fa. Weston had bin laboring for a superioritie ouer his brethren for the space of seauen yeeres. To that purpose he had insinuated himselfe by hypocrisie, and vnequall distribution of money into the fauors of the yonger sort, such as were either themselues lesuites, or else inclining thereunto. The Rules he speaketh of were of Fa. Westons owne making. And all this was done secretly, the grauer sort of the company being neuer acquainted with it. When they had continued their busines, as you haue heard : they pretend themselues to be more holy, then the rest of vs whom they misliked : and that therefore, in respect of the sinnes that raigned amongst vs ; they would no more either eate or drinke with vs, but
8 The Author's Preface.
would haue their diet by themselues. And in conclusion, they seuered themselues from vs, and dealt as you shall perceiue in this treatise at large ; more like Donatists, then Catholick Priests. And all this iniquitie doth this lesuiticall Arch-priest couer in the sayd words, so Clarkly masked with good tearmes, without any regard either of conscience or common honesty, but to abuse the world, for the better vpholding of his owne credit : which being gotten by falshood, is still yet so mainteined. But we keepe you too long from the story it selfe : and therefore refer ring you for this matter to the sayd printed discourse, in answere both of it, and many other points, we commit you by our prayers to Almighty God, who open your eyes and harts, that you may truly discerne betweene wolues and true pastors of your soules, and accordingly to imbrace them, as heretofore you haue done, and we hope will do hereafter.
A true relation of the fa&ion
begun at Wisbich.
IN the yeare 1579. M. Saunders was dispatched from Rome to Ireland : and not long after the Pope sent other forces thither.1 About the same time also, the King of Spayne intending to assayle Portugall, vpon the death of King Henry the late Cardinall, prepared an Army and a Nauy (as it was pretended) for England. And to countenance the same, he procured by Cardinall Alexandrino his meanes, the renouation of the Bull published by Plus quintus against her Maiestie : and printing of them to the number of 1500. at the least, he was content they should be spread abroad.2 Not long after Father Parsons, and two other lesuites his subiects, Father Campion and Father Cotham, came into England* with such
1 Dr. Nicolas Sander, fellow of New college, Oxford, who wrote to Dr. Allen in 1577 that ' the state of Christendom dependeth upon the stout assailing of England,' proceeded from Spain to Ireland as nuncio of Gregory xni. to stir up war against Elizabeth. The pope spent 230,000 scudi upon the expedition, sent five ships full of soldiers and munitions of war, and a plenary indulgence to all who should join or assist the insurgents (Theiner, Annales EccL iii. 217 J Simp son's Campion, p. 102). Sander died, it is said, wandering among the mountains of Ireland, in misery and want, at an uncertain date between 1580 and 1583.
2 Sander, or his editor, Rishton (Anglican Schism, Lewis's Translation, p. 305), states as one reason why catholics in general still continued to obey the queen, that they were ignorant that the apostolic letters of Pius were again issued and confirmed by his successor, Gregory xin.
3 Father Parsons landed at Dover in * a captain's uniform of buff, trimmed with gold-lace, with hat and feathers to match,' on June 1 1, 1580 (Simpson's Campion, p. 122). Campion followed, as ' a merchant of jewels,' on the 25th. But Thomas Cottam, formerly of Brasenose college, Oxford, did not belong to the mission. He had been discharged from the society of Jesus on account of his weak health,
10 The first Prisoners at Wisbeach.
a noyse, as niooued great expectation in some, and diligent caution to be had of their proceedings by others. These things hapning thus together : her Maiestie and the State (as fearing the worst) disposed of the affayres in the Realme accordingly : and thought it conuenient to carry a hand more hardly vpon the Catholicks. So as in the yeare 1580. Doctor Watson Bishop of Lincolne, Doctor Fecknam Abbot of West minster, Doctor Young, maister Metham, Doctor Oxenbridge, and maister Bluet, were sent to remayne as prisoners in the Castle of WisUch,1 where they liued in great vnitie and brotherly kindnes : every man intermedling only with his owne affayres and priuate meditations. They were all in commons with the keeper : and for their recreation, had a Garden there to walke in, and to solace themselues as they thought good. Such money as was sent to any particular man he had himselfe the disposition of it as he thought it con uenient, that which came for the common vse, was by all their consents deliuered still to mayster Bluet, who diuided the same to euery man alike. There was then no affectation of superi ority, but euery man yeelded of his owne accord that duty and
with a promise, however, that he should be received back if he recovered, and he came into England in the same month of June in company with Dr. Ely, Edward Rishton, and others, simply for change of air. He was committed to the Marshalsea a few days after his arrival, was tried for treason with Campion, and executed May 30, 1582 (Challoner, Missionary Priests, i. 102).
1 Bishop Watson, Abbot Feckenham, and Dr. Young, master of Pembroke college, Cambridge, had been in various prisons, or in private custody under more or less restraint, since the beginning of the reign, and Metham since about 1575. Andrew Oxenbridge, doctor of laws, is not commemorated by Sander or Bridgewater in their lists of sufferers for the faith. He subscribed at Wisbeach, May 14, 1583, a very ample protestation of allegiance to Elizabeth as his sovereign de jure 'against the bull, if any, be it of Pius V., Gregory, or any other Pope heretofore or hereafter,' and declared the deposing power under any pretext to be 'a traitorous article ' (Strype, Annals, in. i. 276). Besides the six prisoners mentioned by Bagshaw, there were in the castle at this time two others, Wind- ham and Wood (Report to the Privy Council, i6th Oct. 1580, printed by Father Morris, Jroubles of our Catholic Forefathers, ii. 227). Dr. Richard Wood had been confessor to the late Queen Mary (Dodd, ii. 108). A certain Ralph Windon, fellow of St. John's, Oxford, is said to have been at one time imprisoned in Wis beach, but the Windham named in the Report is more probably the Dr. Nicholas Windham, or Wendon, who is described later on (infra, p. 32).
Their Unity and Brotherly Kindness. 11
precedencie which to euery one was due, the keeper hauing the commaundement ouer them all.
Afterwards within about three yeares, eight or nine Gentle men were likewise sent to remayne there as prisoners, vpon certayne speeches that the Duke of Guise had some intendment against England? whereby the number of the prisoners in creased, without any disturbance at all to the foresayde vnity. These Gentlemen liued at their owne charges, and as most dutifull children demeaned themselues towards their fellow prisoners, and spirituall fathers. If at any time some little indiscretion hapned in any, a word (especially of his ghostly father) was more then sufficient to reforme it : or if vpon such like an occasion Bishop Watson were mooued to reprooue this or that, his answere was, What ? are we not fellow prisoners ? Are we not at the commaundement of an other ? Shall I adde affliction to one that is afflicted ? Are we men who professe our selues to be examples to others in suffering for our con sciences, and shall we not be thought then able without con trollers to gouerne our selues? Be content: I will not take vpon me to reprooue my fellow prisoners. And indeed this was the course that euery man held : so as by submitting themselues one to an other, euery man had a commaunding power one ouer an other, such was the most Christian and brotherly affection amongst them. In this sort they liued till all were either dead or gone, but maister Metham and maister Bluet, which was for the space of about sixe or seauen yeares.
Afterwards (vpon new attempts by Babington and his associates against her Maiestie, and by reason of the rumours of the King of Spalnes preparations) aboue thirtie priests that were prisoners elsewhere, were in the year 1587 (as we re-
1 The story of the Duke of Guise's * intendment,' 1582-84, is fully and candidly told by Father Knox in his introduction to the Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen (pp. xxxiv.-lxxi.). It included a plan for the assassination of Elizabeth (May 1583) by the hand of a secret catholic near her person. The proposal — described by F. Knox from the Record Office transcripts of certain papers in the Vatican archives which had never before been printed — was approved by the archbishop of Glasgow, by the nuncio at the French court, by the cardinal of Como, by King Philip, and, as the editor admits, 'perhaps by the Pope himself.'
12 Arrival of Father Weston, 1587.
member) sent likewise to Wisbicli. In which number was maister Edmonds, alias Weston, a lesuite : a man, who after Heywoods departure out of England, was sent hither by Par sons from Paris to bee his substitute, or Prouinciall : Vpon whose apprehension maister Walley, alias Garnet, by order from Fa. Parsons, did succede him in that office.1 This com pany had scarsely consorted themselues with maister Metham and maister Bluet by the space of a weeke, but Fa. Weston (hauing in him the reliques of his late prouincialitie) began to cast about how he might aduance himselfe aboue his brethren. To which effect, entring amongst his best acquaintance into a great commendation of discipline, he offred to their considera tions a very simple man one maister Dryland (a Seminary priest, and his ghostly father 2) for a fit person, to take vpon him the direction and ouersight of the whole companie : add ing, that if they thought that there were any thing in him (the sayd Weston) worthy the reckening of, he would imploy the same at their commaundement to the assisting and direct ing of him the sayd Dryland for the full supplying of any defects in him. This motion finding little successe, it being very absurd to make choyse of a head, that must borrow his discretion and directions of an other (as at this day our Arch- priest Blackwell dotli of Fa. Garnet the lesuite) he the sayd Weston gaue it ouer for about three weekes. And then he
1 It is not correct to describe Weston and Garnet as Provincials. The English Jesuits were at that time governed by a Prefect of the mission resident in Rome, i.e. F. Parsons until his death in 1610, and afterwards F. Thomas Owen until 1618. The Prefect appointed the local superior or Vice- Prefect. On Parsons' retirement from England in 1581 he was succeeded by Jasper Hey wood as Vice- Prefect, who, on his banishment in 1585, was succeeded by Weston, as Bagshaw relates. When Henry Garnet and Robert Southwell landed on the Norfolk coast in July of the following year, Weston (says Dr. Oliver, Biography S. y., p. 84) was the only English Jesuit in the country. Before Garnet's death their number reached to forty. Vitelleschi raised the mission in 1519 to a Vice- Province, F. Blount being named the first Vice-Provincial (ibid. p. vi.).
2 Christopher Dryland was ordained and sent on the mission from Rheims in 1582. He was seldom out of prison, and was finally banished in 1603. He subsequently joined the Jesuits in Rome. See the 'Note of certain priests im prisoned at Wisbeach' (1587) printed in the Appendix.
Contests for Superiority. 13
began againe (though in a more generall sort) to insist very grauely vpon his sayd pretended discipline : ayming with all his skill at his owne particular preferment : for thus the case stood. Maister Bluet (being a man that had bin chiefely mi- ployed in the affaires of that house) was iunior to maister Metham : and he the sayd maister Metham (hauing more lately entred into the society of the Jesuits then maister Western) was thereby (notwithstanding that otherwise he was farre his auncient) yet his inferior according to the rules of that calling. Now one of these three (if there should haue bin a gouernour chosen) being supposed to be the fittest amongst all the rest for such a place : maister J Veston gessed, that in that choyse they would haue omitted maister Bluet in respect of maister Metham ; and him the sayd maister Metham in regard of him- selfe, and that so they should haue bin driuen to haue chosen him the sayd Weston. But it fell out otherwise : for in their consultation it was thought that maister Bluet, by reason of his long experience in that house, and of his acquaintance in that towne, together with the generall knowledge had of him with all Catholicks in England, in respect of his long dealings with the common money, could in no sort be omitted : 1 So as they con-
1 Thomas (wrongly named by Dodd, Richard) Bluet, had been for some time a clergyman of the Church of England, in the diocese of Exeter. He passed over to Douai in 1577, and in the following year returned as a priest upon the mission. He was soon afterwards captured, and had at this time been in prison for sixteen years, a confessor for his faith. He is said to have been much respected by the clergy for his learning and ability (cf . Dottay Diaries, p. 149). His character, however, given by Parsons in a memorial drawn up for the pope and cardinals, is thus summarised by Tierney (in. p. clvii.) : 'A drunkard, a brawler, he has at one time hurled a priest down stairs, and at another fallen intoxicated into the Thames ; in one instance he has been prevented from mur dering a fellow-prisoner only by the interference of his companions, and in another has attempted, but in vain, to administer the sacraments whilst reeking and staggering from the effects of a drunken debauch.' In the ' Relation ' sent to Parsons from Wisbeach (Apologie, f. 72), it is asserted that, ' when M. Wigges, an ancient master of art, and priest, spoke but one word in misliking of certain over- hard speeches and dealings of M. Bluet towards M. Ithel, another priest, he was beaten twice by the said M. Bluet's fist, as all can testify that were then present.' According to Mr. Gillow (Bibliogr. Dictionary, ii. 244), Bluet, after his release from prison, laboured for many years on the mission with great zeal.
14 The Jesuits lay their Plots.
eluded, that if they must be driuen to haue any such gouernment ouer them, it was most expedient to choose them all three.1 Whereupon maister Weston perceiuing that he could not get the whole regiment to himselfe, gave that attempt ouer : vnder pre tence, that he being a lesuite, was forbidden by the rules of his order, and others his superiors, to meddle in matters of gouernment. But it is here to be obserued : that the lesuites long before this time, hauing gotten the regiment of the English Seminary at Rome : our countriemen of that order no sooner came into England, but presently (as the sequele declared) they began to lay their plots how they might bring the secular priests heads vnder their girdles. For notwithstanding their said rule (of not intermedling with gouernment) mentioned by Fa. Weston, they haue so many wayes to qualify it, as indeed it is but a
1 * All the company,' writes F. Parsons, ' in that time of peace, having no special superiors, referred themselves and their affairs to the direction of three men, who were F. Edmund [Weston], M. Metham, and M. Bluet, which last was in very good tune all the time that M. Metham lived, for the great respect he bare unto him.' Bagshaw is said to have been disliked by both Metham and Bluet on account of his quarrelsome temper, and he, on his part, according to Parsons, had an equal dislike to Bluet, ' reporting everywhere in corners most contumeliously of M. Bluet's hasty, rude, and fiery nature.' For this Bluet pro tested ' that he would trounse him (for so were his words), and this falling out grew to such an excess one day in a good priest's chamber that had long been sick, and liveth yet to testify to the same, that good F. Edmund was forced to fall upon his knees, and with much entreaty to make them friends again' (Apologie, f. 70). The same authority declares that when Bluet afterwards lacked the stay of Metham's good counsel, he fell by age and wearisomeness of his long imprisonment into impatience, and would ' not only revile and threaten men, but strike and beat them also as occasion was offered. ' Bagshaw is said to have now taken the opportunity of flattering the old man, and of defending his excesses, and thus from enemies they became fast friends.
Father Constable ascribes the origin of the division to three men whom he affects not to name. ' The first [Bagshaw] had been sent away from Rome for his misbehaviour, etc.' At Wisbeach ' he was presently for playing the Doctor. An unfortunate case of one striking a priest happening in the prison, he gave such a decision upon it that F. Weston was obliged to oppose it. The opposition enraged the Doctor, and he flew into excessive revilings of the holy man. The second in the faction was a doctor of physic [Norden], a catholic in profession, but turbulent and scandalous in his manners. He who had given the blow to the priest was the third [Bluet], formerly a Presbyterian parson, now a catholic, but little altered, especially as to excesses in drink and anger ' (Specimen of Amendments, p. 89).
Cunning and Hypocrisy of Weston. 15
mask to couer their sleights with, till opportunitie doth serue them. Whereof Fa. Weston hairing sufficient intelligence and skill, did not from time to time (almost by the space of seauen yeares) omit to put the same in practise.1 He laboured, as cunningly as he could, to creepe into the fauour of the yonger sort. When strangers came, it should escape him narrowly, but he would be the first that should bid them welcome : and no friendship could be held with him, except he might make the collation at such times vsuall. In which collations he would seldome omit to insist vpon the commendation of order and discipline : which being things in themselues of great worth, he was still therein to them that vnderstood him not very plausible. Being a man as impatient as some of his fellowes, and of as haughty a spirit as any man can be : it was wonderfull to consider, what humblenes and simplicitie he would pretend. His sighs and zeale seemed to be extra ordinary : as though the perfection of true mortification had bin the only thing he aymed at. Marry, with all this hypo- crisie he deceiued none, but such as did not looke more narrowly into his proceedings : a righter Pharisee cannot easily be found. In ye middest of his humilitie nothing troubled him more, then that maister Doct. Bagshaw (being a Doctor of Diuinitie) should haue place before him at the
1 ' How can it be imagined,' asks Parsons, ' that this man [Weston] would so ambitiously seek government over his fellow-prisoners, . . . what profit could the Jesuits get thereby, what preferment, or what other probable reason can there be to make this fiction likely ? ' The author of the Reply to the Manifes tation (ff. 4-6), argues at length that the Jesuits found in the circumstance of Wisbeach the fittest and most convenient means * for the secret compassing of this design, that their policy might not presently be spied before the matter were cock sure.' 'Could there be a better means devised,' he asks, 'than first to begin in that place where the gravest and best deserving priests of our country were in durance for God's cause ; by the presence of whom the very house was a Sion unto our country and a Lantern unto all Catholics abroad ? For why ; if once they had settled their government there without check or control, what priest durst to have gainsaid their dominion abroad, but straightway he should have had his mouth stopped with the voluntary submission of these grave priests and designed Martyrs ? . . . Let him read the annals of the primitive Church, and he shall find what authority the actions and examples of Confessors in prison carried with the Christians of those days. '
16 Met ham discerns underhand Practises.
table : insomuch as the better to content him, we were driuen to place him at the tables end with him. The lesuites abroad hauing gotten the greatest part of cotribution for prisoners into their hands, much was sent to be distributed, by this good father: wherewith (through his vnequall dis tribution of it) he laboured nothing more, then how he might draw, and binde men vnto him, to make his side and faction strong inough against the time, he had occasion to vse them. These & many other such his vnder-hand practises being well discerned by maister Metham and others, he the sayd maister Metham was very much mooued, and did greatly lament the same. This maister Metham was a vertuous learned Priest, who when he was prisoner in the Tower vowed to become a lesuite ; as admiring that calling, because he was not acquainted with their courses : but afterwards at his being in Wisbich, he found by wofull experience that all was not gold that glistered. Sundry times he hath sayd to some of our company, not without teares in his eyes, Keepe this fellow downe asmuch as you can, meaning Fa. Weston : by labouring to be popular, he becometh the ringleader of all mutinies in the house, which in time will breede faction against you. This house will come to vtter shame through his folly. I pray God that I dye before it commeth to passe, for I do foresee such a mischiefe. Thus maister Metham.1
Cardinall Alane^ when the lesuites first came into England,
1 Thomas Metham, said to be the son of Sir Thomas Metham, a noted recusant of Yorkshire, was sent from abroad upon the English mission in I574> and imprisoned in the Tower in the following year. He was received as a member of the society of Jesus by Mercurian, the general, whose letter, dated May 4, 1597, is given by More (Hist. Prov. Angl. S. /., p. 141). An important memorandum printed by F. Knox in the Letters and Memorials (pp. cvi, 303) shows that Metham, of whom little is otherwise known, was held in high esteem at Rome and by the cardinal himself. From this paper, which contains suggestions for ' filling up the churches and offices of the king and kingdom of England ' in the event of the success of the Armada, we learn that the cardinal was to be archbishop of Canterbury, but that, although Owen Lewis, bishop of Cassano, was spoken of for the archbishopric of York, 'Allen judges that it would be better filled by a certain Thomas Metham, a priest, who is now a prisoner in England, and has been many times in prison, and with great danger to his life, on
Cardinal Allen and the Jesuits. 17
told sundry of his friends, that certainely they (the sayd lesuites) would rayse great garboyles in this countrey, by seek ing to disgrace secular priests, and to aduance themselues aboue them. He had great experience of the ambition which raigned in many of that societie, and therefore indeuoured (as he might conueniently) to represse that humor in our English lesuites, which kept them within some reasonable compasse whilest he liued.1 But afterwards they heard no sooner of his death, and shortly after of the death of Doctor Lewys Bishop of Cassane (of whome they stood in some feare, suspecting he should haue bin made Cardinall in the others place) but their insolencie burst foorth as a flame that had bin long suppressed. They depraued both those worthy persons now dead very slaunder- ously, charging the Cardinall to haue bin but a simple man, and of no great worth ; and the Bishop to haue bin a factious person in Rome : and all this (forsooth) because sometimes they both had crossed sundry of their lewd attempts. Fa. Weston at Wisbich (as a man who had long trauailed with his imaginary
account of religion.' Alban Dolman wrote to his friends at Rheims, Feb. 1579, that the oath of supremacy had been offered to Metham and that ' Yf the byght sheepe of London [Aylmer] may hange hime it is looked for he will ' (Dottay Diaries, p. 149). Parsons (Apologie, f. 70) declares that Metham had a great dislike of Bagshaw's restless turbulent nature, ' as he said he had a wind mill in his head.3 On the other hand, Metham's name appears in a curious list of about a hundred persons, including eighty priests, ' infamed and evil spoken of by the Jesuits ' (Petyt MSS., xlvii. f. 95), which in some degree confirms the state ment in the text. He was about sixty years of age when he died at Wisbeach, June 28, 1592. (Foley's Records, i. 482, and ii. 608-613.)
1 In like manner John Mush, in a memorial addressed to Clement vui., declares that the cardinal used often to say complainingly of the Jesuit fathers that they sought more the interests of their society than the peace of their colleges or the good of the country (Declaratio Motuum, p. 9, quoted by Knox ; Douay Diaries, p. c). Parsons (Apologie : Table of Deceytes, f. 3) calls this statement ' a notorious untruth' ; but it is impossible any longer to deny the fact that the cardinal came at last in some measure to distrust his Jesuit allies, and to disapprove their schemes. Charles Paget, addressing the Jesuits (in his Answer to the Apologie, p. 20), writes that the cardinal ' began in his latter time to mislike yours and F. Persons violent humors in such sort as if he had lived he would have curbed you shorter for meddling either in matters of state or in the seminaries or missions of priests. And this was seen by his causing F. Cresswell to be removed from the government of the English college at Rome [1592],
18 The Hobby-horse at Christmas.
discipline) hearing of these mens deaths, and being as he thought, backed sufficiently by his confederates, began to bring forth the fruits thereof. He lifted vp his coutenance, as if a new spirit had bin put into him, and tooke vpon him to con- troll, and finde fault with this and that : (as the comming into the Hall of a Hobby-horse in Christmas) affirming that he would no longer tolerate these and those so grosse abuses, but would haue them reformed.1 At this his pride and vanitie some of vs greatly maruayled, but the reason thereof (which we then knew not) was this. We were then prisoners in the house
whose indiscreet and tyrannical behaviour deserved the same. And for the which act both he and F. Persons used against the said cardinal, among their secret friends and followers, such uncivil and irreverent speeches as ever after there was but hollow liking between them.' But more important than any of these statements is the direct evidence of Agazzari, the Jesuit rector of the English college at Rome, 1596-97, in a letter written Sept. 25, 1596, quoted by Berington (Memoirs of Panzani, p. 38), and printed in full in the Douay Diaries (P- 3§7> cf- xcviii). Agazzari regarded the unlocked for death of Allen, his former friend, as an almost miraculous interposition of God's hand, and a great and visible sign of his love for the society, the college, and the cause of England. ' For,' he adds, 'so long as Allen walked aright in this matter, in union with, and fidelity to the Company, as he used to do, God preserved, prospered, and exalted him, but when he began to leave this path, in a moment the thread of his plans and his life were cut short together.' This characteristic letter was written to F. Parsons himself. Compare also the statement in the Hope of Peace (p. 21) : 'Doctor Haddock, who pretended that he was the cardinal's nephew, moved in spirit after the cardinal's death, writ unto a worshipful knight in Spain these words to my remembrance : Profecto bene mortuus est, si enim vixisset et sibi et patrise suae maximum dedecus peperisset. He is dead in a good time, for if he had lived he had most greatly dishonoured himself and his country. And why master Doctor ? Forsooth he was carried away against the Jesuits.' On the other hand, see the letter of Thomas Audley to Bagshaw, 26th June 1595? printed in the Letters and Memorials (p. 378), from which it appears that the cardinal to the last moment implored his seminarists to avoid all differences with the fathers, for dissensions and emulations (so he wrote) ' would bring his gray hairs with sorrow to the grave. '
1 The hobby-horse, one of the principal performers in the Morris dance, was represented by a man equipped with as much pasteboard as was sufficient to form the head and hind-parts of a horse. In this fashion he exhibited his skill in burlesque horsemanship and jugglery (Douce's Illustrations of Shakespeare, vol. ii. p. 467). ' During the reign of Elizabeth the Puritans made considerable havoc among the May-games by their preachings and invectives. Poor Maid Marian was assimilated to the whore of Babylon, Friar Tuck was deemed a
The Letter to Garnet. 19
to the number of 34. whereof by his foresayd practises he had allured vnto him 19. who by his direction had chosen him to be their head, and giuen him the name of their Agent. Where upon this grand senior thus promoted, withdrew himselfe to his chamber by the space of a fortnight, of purpose (as we after wards perceiued) to rowze himselfe, and to deuise some such new orders and lawes, as he thought most conuenient for the gouernment of his subiects, which being resolued vpon by him, he did dedicate them vpon Candlemas day to the blessed Virgin, as himselfe afterwards confessed. You must vnder- stand, that he did not proceede thus farre, without Fa. Garnets priuity and consent. Howbeit, his sayd subiects being ignorant thereof, they poore fooles must needs write a letter to his fatherhood, to craue his approbation of their sayd election. Besides, Fa. Weston had so practised vnder hand with some of his sayd 19. subiects, as this his new preferment must be ob truded vpon him, whether he would forsooth or not. And accordingly the sayd letter was framed : signifying to maister Garnet, that he the sayd maister Weston was as a man taken with the palsey of the mind, and would in no wise accept of their election, except that he by his commaunding authoritie, would bid him rise vp and walke before them in the way of the righteous.1
remnant of Popery, and the hobby-horse an impious and Pagan superstition, and they were at length completely put to rout as the bitterest enemies of religion. King James's ' book of sports restored the lady and the hobby-horse, but during the Commonwealth they were again attacked by a new set of fanatics ' (Ibid., p. 463). Father Weston might have said with Bomby in Beaumont and Fletcher's Women Pleased, Act iv. —
' I do defy thee and thy foot cloth too, And tell thee to thy face, this profane riding, I feel it in my conscience, and I dare speak it, This unedified ambling hath brought a scourge upon us.' 1 This letter, Feb. 7, 1595, preserved at Stonyhurst, is printed by Tierney (vol. iii. p. civ). Parsons translates the first portion of it (Apologie, f. 72). The writers begin : ' We have conferred among ourselves these days past (venerable father and brother) how to bring in some better discipline for avoiding of these evils, or appearance of evils, or open scandals, that have fallen out among us within these seven years, or at least ways to avoid the peril of such scandals. ' They urge that they need a law for the protection of their own weakness, and
20 Weston desires Separation of Commons.
With this letter they sent also the sayd lawes or rules, being in number 22. whereof some of them were ridiculous, and some of them very scandalous.1 These things (as we coniecture, for the distinct times were kept close from vs) being sent to Fa. Garnet ; the new Agent after he had withdrawne himselfe from the rest of the company by the space of a fortnight, directed maister Southworth a Priest,2 and our fellow-prisoner vnto maister Bluet, to signifie vnto him, that Fa. Weston desired him to allot to him, and to his company being 19. the high table in the Hall : and that leauing the ordinary Kitchin to
not only a law, but 'a judge, a corrector and censurer over us.' 'And whom think you,' they add, 'do we desire for this: your Edmund or rather ours.' Parsons continues : ' This and much more they write in that letter, alleging many reasons of their demand, and how that F. Edmund had wholly refused and could not be persuaded unto it, but yet that without his yielding therein, either by entreaty or commandment, it was impossible for them to live in any quiet or security of conscience.' The statement here italicised has been repeated by many Jesuit writers. In the passage covered by Parsons' 'etc.,' Weston, so far from wholly refusing the office, distinctly accepted it, on condition that his superior consented. He says, ' Proinde hoc dictamen tanti momenti et ponderis, addo et gravaminis, quo ego magis oneratus quam honoratus ero, sic mihi assume si ita vultis, et ita oportet fieri, ut, annuente patre meo, vobis placeam j renuente vero, mihi ipsi satisfaciam,' and, in accordance with the fact, Parsons himself (as Tierney points out) has endorsed the letter containing this quotation : * Literse sacerdotum in castro Wisbicensi ad P. Garn. 1595, pro confirmanda electione P. Edmundi.' Garnet, with these words of Weston before him, boldly reported to his general ' I lie obfirmatissime renuit? So Constable : ' His humility made him absolutely refuse the place ' (Specimen of Amendments^ p. 90).
1 Garnet, in his report of the affair to Aquaviva, his general, July 12, 1595 (printed by Tierney, vol. iii., pp. cv-cix) gives some of these rules : * Each one is to behave so as to give edification to others : — If any one should commit scandal (which God forbid) or show levity or immodesty, especially towards women, he should allow himself to be judged and punished as the community may determine. They should abstain from quarrelling and brawling. They should not contend for places at table. They should be present at public prayers and exhortations.' On the supposition that they were not needed, such rules, framed for confessors and divines daily looking for death, might with reason be described as ' ridiculous,' and even ' scandalous.'
2 Christopher Southworth, of the diocese of Chester, son of Sir John Southworth, a constant recusant and prisoner for his faith, entered the college at Rome in 1580, and was sent into England in 1586. In the following year he was imprisoned in the Counter, London, and soon after transferred to Wisbeach.
Whoredom, Drunkenness, and Dicing. 21
them, he the sayd maister Bluet, with the rest (but twelue in number) would be content to prouide themselues of another. What meane you by this message, quoth maister Bluet ? Can not the Hall and Kitchin serue vs all now, as heretofore they haue done ? No, sayth maister Southworth, we are determined (20. of vs) to draw our selues into a more strict order of life : and haue therefore resolued to keepe commons together amongst our selues, thereby the better to auoyd such sinnes, as whore- dome, drunkennes, and dicing, the same being too ordinarie with some in this house. What, quoth maister Bluet: hath Fa. Weston sent you vnto me with this message ? and he answering, yea : He the sayd maister Bluet went to Fa. Weston, who iustified the sayd message : sauing that he qualified the mentioning of the sayd crimes with humme and hah : saying at the last (as though butter would not haue melted in his mouth) indeed we reuerence you, and maister Doct. Bagsliaw : but amongst the rest, there are some enormities, which we would be glad to auoyd : l and do therefore purpose to impose vpon our selues a more strict order, leauing you and others, to follow such courses, as you shall thinke good. With this his answere, maister Bluet being somewhat moued : Haue you kept your chamber (sayth he) all this while, for this ? Shall we haue a new Donatus amongst vs, to reuiue againe that pestilent schisme ? Can you name any in the house, worse then your selues ? Well, well : I pray you leaue this course : it is naught. Be content to eate and drinke with vs still : for, assure your
1 In a letter to Garnet in January of this year the partisans of Weston had reduced their charges against the rest to ten heads, of which Parsons quotes the first five : ' (i) Idleness and lazyness, and a great ceasing from good study and exercise of vertue ; (2) brawling, chiding, and contumelious slanders, etc. ;
(3) fighting among themselves and buffeting even to the effusion of blood, etc. ;
(4) beating of priests little esteemed, or rather defended ; (5) banquetting, eating, compotation, etc.' (ApoL, f. 71). According to Garnet's report to Aquaviva, the * compotations ' took place during the religious exercises ; and he adds, what Parsons in his book omitted ' for brevitie's sake, ' dishonest dealing with money and suspected familiarities with women : 'in publicis litaniarum aut exhortationum exercitiis multorum sive compotationes sive clamores, in recipiendis aut tradendis pecuniis non optimam fidem, et quod caput est, suspectas cum feminis familiaritates. '
22 Appeal to the Keeper for a Kitchen.
selfe, we will neuer yeeld, that you should haue any seuerali roomes graunted vnto you ; thereby to seuer your selues from vs. And so after many other speeches, for that time they parted. When maister Bluet had imparted vnto vs the sayd message, and his sayd discourse with Fa. Weston, it did very much grieue vs all, as foreseeing what publick scandale it would grow vnto : and therefore diuers of vs dealt with them particularly, that they would desist from that their purpose, and be content that we might liue together still, like prisoners, and louing brethren, as we haue done before. But all was in vaine : they inlarged their calumniation and slaunders of vs, and began to spread the same abroad to our great discredits : and would in no wise be stayed from the course they had begun. Howbeit, we hindered as long as we could their publick separation from vs, by keep ing our old places, some of vs, at euery table : so as they could not choose, except they would haue forborne their dinners and suppers, but that they must needs sit amongst vs. Whereupon Fa. Weston sent the sayd Southworth to our keeper, with the like message in effect to the former, concerning their intent (for the auoyding of sinne) to keepe commons by themselues, apart from the rest : and therefore to intreate him, that they might haue a roome assigned them, to make a Kitchin of, and some other places meete and conuenient for them ; offering him some large consideration for his good will therein. But he con sulting with some of the grauer sort, disliked their attempt : and reiecting their suite, commaunded them to continue in peace and quietnes, as the State had appointed, and as he found them, at his first comming to be their keeper : vnlesse they could shew vnto him against the rest, some capitall crimes which might warrant him to graunt their separation : for (sayd he) I am a Justice of peace, qualifyed to take notice of such
1 ' Our first gaoler [Thomas Gray] having been removed by a most dreadful death,' says F. Weston, 'another [William Medeley] was chosen in his place who wished to be considered as a gentleman, being sprung from the same family, according to his own account, as William Cecil, the Lord Treasurer, by whose goodwill and authority he obtained an excellent position, being made by
Mr. Southworth's Craft. 28
case, the Queene could not make him a competent iudge : and that the crymes were such and so great, as in conscience they could not keepe company with vs. Why (sayd maister Medlye) what crymes are those so horrible, that the Queenes authority cannot reach to take knowledge of ? Maister Bluet can tell you (sayth maister Southworth) for I haue signified them vnto him. Very well quoth maister Bluet : I see the old prouerb verified now in you : An Englishman Italionate, is a Diuell in carnate. If you told me the causes why Weston and you do attempt to make this schisme and diuision in the house, why may not your slaundering toong vtter the same to maister Medlye our keeper ? Must I be your Bedle to proclayme youi lyes ? But maister Medly, this Italionated companyon hath this craft in his budget : if I should now relate vnto you what he hath told me of this matter, then would he being meerely lesuited, deny it, and so turne the blame vpon me, that I tell ing it you publickly, do slaunder the house, and not he, nor his fellowes, that told it but secretly. Vpon this, and such like communication, maister Medlye fell to the commendation of the quiet behauior of those prisoners, which were first sent to Wisbich : 1 saying, that it was nothing, but the turbulent spirits,
him Justice of the Peace. This man, being appointed as keeper and governor of the prison, was in hopes that, in consequence of his authority over the laity, he would be able in like manner to hear and pass judgment in the case of ourselves and our causes if any difficulties were to arise. He had moreover (though he never ought to have had them) persons who strenuously favoured all his endeavours and designs, saying that, in consequence of the civil laws of the kingdom and the decrees of the Queen, all the negotiations and disputes among priests (excepting matters of faith and religion) had to be put an end to and decided . . . ' It is at this point that an unfortunate mutilation of the original MS. interrupts F. Weston's autobiography. (Morris, Troubles, ii. 263,264.)
1 Medeley must refer to the period anterior to 1587. The characters of several priests who were transferred to Wisbeach in 1587 are given in the official report of that year, printed in the Appendix (A). Portions of this document were printed by Father Morris (Troubles, ii. 237), who, however, charitably omits the description of Francis Tillotson. In or before September of the same year the keeper, Gray, had to complain to the Council of mutinous conduct on the part of several prisoners. The justices of the Isle of Ely were thereupon commissioned to examine the charges and assist the keeper in maintaining order. It appears
24 Two Priests escape from Prison.
and humour of youth, that wanting due wisdome, discretion, and grauitie, thrust them into these noueltyes.
Much iangling they kept both at this time and afterwards for seuerall roomes : but fayling of their desire therein, they grew to a great dislike with the keeper : and to be reuenged vpon him, procured in short time two Priests to escape from him out of prison, which they knew would grieue him much.1 Besides, the ordinary Chappell belonging to the Bishop of Ely, lying fitly by them, they aduentured of themselues to dedicate the same to Bacchus for their Buttery : and enter-
that Charles Borne and Nicholas Scrope, gentlemen, were the principal offenders, and they were supported by four priests, George Collinson, Isaac Higgins, Nicholas Knight (or Knighton), and George Potter. Scrope rebelled against the removal of his bed by the keeper to another chamber, retaliated by taking forcible possession of the keeper's own bed, threatened his life, and beat his wife and servants. The conduct of Borne was such that the Commissioners put him in irons. Collinson, a young seminarist from Rheims, used bad language, ' abused his keeper's bed as Scrope before,' bounced upon the boards over Gray's head while his family was at prayers, and was, moreover, guilty of grossly indecent conduct in the presence of the keeper's wife and six other women. Higgins and Knight, who also had recently come from the seminary, climbed the castle wall with Scrope, and cried to the town to enter the castle for their relief. George Potter, whose real name was Stransham (Douay Diaries, p. 193), is the only one of these young priests whom we find still at Wisbeach in the Stirs of 1595* In addition to general charges of violence and insolence the following particulars are recorded against him by the Justices : * Item — He refuseth to go to his chamber at his hours, and tarrying while the keeper and his family went to their evening prayers, he said there should no prayer be said there, but he would out- whistle it, which he performed between his fingers and his mouth. And laying his hand upon the Bible said that the prayer therein said was the prayer and service of the devil ' (P. R. O. Dom. Eliz., vol. ccm., No. 38, iv.). In a later paper printed by Strype (Annals, iv. p. 274), from Lord Keeper Puckering's MSS., and dated 1594, the 'Jesuits and seminary priests' are too indiscriminately reported to be ' all young and lusty people, disposed to mirth and viciousness with women ; known to attempt them as well with deeds as words, with enchanted almonds ; as the keeper's maiden and his two daughters have been in a whorish manner, one of them run from thence and hath had children from her husband ; and overthrown in popery, of a modest fair young wife.'
1 There may be some confusion of memory as to the date of this escape from prison. Two years later (Feb. 17) 1597) Medeley wrote from Wisbeach to Secretary Cecil : ' I pray you to inform the Lord Treasurer that during my absence in London on a subpoena, two priests named Geo. Potter and Wm. Parry escaped from Wisbeach Castle by beating out the iron bars of their windows, and
F. Garnet approves of the Agency. 25
tayning an other Brewer (one Palmer) laid such Beere in it as they thought meete. It is not almost credible what brablings were about these matters : and with what malice and impietie they did also prosecute vs, by seeking to blemish our good names, as though they had quite forgot that we were Catholick Priests, and their fellow prisoners. The common enemy could not haue vsed vs much more despitefully.
By this time Fa. Garnet hauing perused the sayd rules and letter, returned his approbation of them in a generall letter to that company, and alluding to a point mentioned in their letter to him, commaunded his subiect Fa. Weston as an hypo- criticall paralytick, to take vp his bed and walke : that is, he gaue him leaue to accept of the Agency, imposed forsooth by them vpon him : but vnder-hand sent to Fa. Weston himselfe a priuate letter ; wherein he admonished him in any sort so to take vpon him that his new Prelacy, as both his the sayd fathers name for auoyding of enuy might be concealed : and
letting themselves down by their bed cord. I will spare no cost for their appre hension and have laid wait along the coast of Norfolk to stay their passage over sea. . . . These priests were of the meanest condition of all the company, and Potter broke from prison before in Gray's time.' Medeley here certainly speaks as if this was the first occurrence of the kind in his time. (P. R. O. Dom. Eliz., CCLXII., No. 42 ; Calendar, p. 361.) Parry and Potter were of opposite parties, the former belonging to the Jesuit and the latter to the anti-Jesuit faction. It may be presumed that at this moment they were on speaking terms.
On the other hand the case of a single prisoner, whose escape is said to have been advised by Weston's friends, and whose recapture is ascribed to Bagshaw within three months after the pacification, can only refer to Tillotson, the 'amorous priest' (Appendix A) who, on March 31, 1596, was in the Gatehouse, Westminster, with Hall, the former Wisbeach porter. Hall extracted from Tillotson, and reported to the Attorney General, how ' Mr. Tilletson came over the castle wall with a rope about midnight and went to the waterside, where he met Ellis with a boat, when they rowed together to Willingham, in Cambridge shire, where they landed and went on foot to Rampton, three miles from Cam bridge, to Mrs. Allcock, a recusant, who had been to Tilletson at the castle. There they took horse and rode to Mr. Skrogg's house within two miles of Bedford, but he durst not receive them ; thence they went to Mr. Willowes's, three miles beyond Bedford, where they lodged that night and were taken.' Ellis is said to be Tillotson's ' man, who dwelt at Wisbeach, and some time came to the castle (his wife being laundress to Mr. Tilletson, and a recusant).' (Cal. S. P., Dom. Eliz. CCLVI., No. 1 1 6.)
26 Mr. Dolman visits the Castle.
that it might seeme to proceede wholy, from the importunity of those that had chosen him. All these particulars were at this time vnknowne vnto vs : they played fast and loose in corners (as you see) buying and selling of vs (as honest men as themselues) at their pleasures.
Whilest they were thus in this garboyle with vs, animated therein by Fa. Garnet: it hapned that maister Dolman (a graue Priest) L came to Wisbich, with some contribution for the whole company : who perceiuing and lameting what a breach he found of our auncient vnity, did endeuor for the space almost of a weeke, to haue reduced vs thereunto againe, being earnestly desired by vs all so to do. At this his being there, maister Southworth drew him with importunitie into his chamber, and did shew vnto him their foresayd letter, and rules, which they had sent to Fa. Garnet, entring into a long discourse with him, concerning their purpose, to separate them selues from vs. Whereunto maister Dolman aunswering, that in so doing, they would assuredly be the occasion of great scan- dale : he replyed, that their company were resolute to go through with it.
1 Alban Dolman was an old priest who has been by some identified with the 'Thomas' Dolman who is mentioned by Wood and Dodd as a fellow of All Souls', Oxford, ejected in the first year of Elizabeth's reign. Charles Paget says of him in a letter to the Queen of Scots (quoted by Mr. Gillow) : ' He is of comely personage, and when attired like a gentleman, you would deem him a Justice of the Peace. ' Bagshaw in his Answer to the Apologie naturally speaks highly of him as ' a man well known for his singular solicitude towards afflicted catholics, and of long time a special provider for prisoners, in which respect he was and is a great moat in the Jesuits' way, which are said to seek themselves and not Christ or his' (p. 21). He adds that none could more fitly have been chosen as arbiter on account of his great experience, judgment and sincerity. He is said by Mr. Gillow to have possessed a mild disposition, and to have been always spoken of with great respect. From the houses which he frequented it would appear that he had been on friendly terms with the Jesuits. His name is now chiefly remembered from its having been borrowed by Parsons for his Con ference on the Succession, said on the title-page to be ' published by R. Doleman ' ; ' a trick,' remarks Dr. Ely, 'which brought that priest into some danger ' (Brief e Notes, p. 58). Parsons in his Manifestation of course denies the ' trick,' and at the same time, more suo, lets us have his own modest opinion of Mr. Dolman : ' The author of the book neither knew any priest to be named Dolman when he wrote that book, nor so much as thought on him, but alluding to the word of the
Consents to act as Mediator. 27
We had heard before of the sayd letter and rules sent to Fa. Garnet : but (as we then told M. Dolman) we could neuer come to the sight of them : and therefore we desired him to be a meanes, that we might haue the perusing of them. Where- unto he did very willingly yeeld ; as thinking our motion therein very reasonable : and thereupon going to maister Southworth, he so preuayled with him, as that he the sayd maister Dolman brought them vnto vs : which when we had read, we were much perplexed, finding our credits to be greatly touched by them. Howbeit, maister Doctor Bagshaw, in a very mild and charitable sort, did then desire maister Dolman, that by his mediation he might haue conference with Fa. Weston: promising, that he would be a meanes, that this controuersie should be ended to his honor & credit, and to a further increase of amity and charity, then euer there had bin for a long time amongst vs. Maister Dolman being a glad man to heare so much from him, dealt with Fa. Weston accord ingly : whome he found so stiff'e, as he could by no meanes perswade him to admit of that godly offer : notwithstanding it was made vnto him thrice ; and so oft pressed by him the
Scripture, vir dolorum, he called himself Dole-man, in respect of the grief and sorrow he bore in his heart for the affliction and calamity of his country. After wards it fell out that there was a priest in England called Dolman, who being drawn by these men to favour their faction, as it seemeth, was persuaded also to complain that he was made to be the author of the book which no man yet, we think, that knoweth him and hath read the book will easily believe or accuse him of, his talent being known to be far inferior to such a labour, and consequently the complaint is both fond and ridiculous.' If we may judge of Dolman's literary abilities from a letter of his preserved in the Douay Diaries (pp. 149, 150), it is true enough that he could hardly have written the book in question. That it was written by Parsons himself has been proved once for all by Tierney (iii. p. 34). The authorship is, in fact, shown to have been ' distinctly and unequivocally acknowledged ' by the Jesuit. It is however curious to observe the different turn to this interpretation of Doleman given by Parsons at a later date, Oct. 18, 1603, in a letter to James I., when it was the writer's object to persuade the king that the principal catholics had all along supported the Scottish succession. They merely suggested a Spanish Succession in the book (says Parsons) in case James was not inclined to become a catholic, as a ' last spur of irritation that way ; ' and the name was chosen * to insinuate the grief and sorrow they felt in being forced to come to this last means,' etc. (Ibid., p. Ixxiii; cf. More, p. 161.)
28 The Buttery in the old Chapel.
sayd Dolman. Whereby maister Dolman gathered, that Fa. Weston had receiued some commaundement from maister Garnet, to take vpon him his sayd Agency: and for the better contenting of Doctor Bagshaw and his friends (being somewhat moued, that maister Weston had so oft refused con ference) told them so much : adding, that he thought maister Weston his sayd refusall to be thereupon grounded : it being vnlawfull for him to reiect, or call into question that, which his Prouinciall had imposed vpon him. But afterwards he the sayd maister Dolman imparting to maister Weston what he had sayd to Doctor Bagshaw and his friends, maister Weston flatly denyed that he had receyued from maister Garnet any such approbation or commaundement, either by letter, or otherwise. With which his aunswere, maister Dolman acquainting vs, we did the more maruaile why he disdayned the sayd offer of con ference. Howbeit, seeing their courses, we sayd that we would not impeach any order, which they theselues thought meete to liue vnder : only we desired to Hue in commons together with them, that the world might not take notice of any such schisme amongst vs : but this was reiected. Whereupon maister Dolman demaunded of Fa. Weston whether they meant to keepe any more strict or large dyet by themselues, then the rest ? who answered, that they did not. Why then (quoth he) haue you taken another Brewer ? Maister Weston aunswered : it was, for that he brewed better Beere then ye other. Vpon occasion of these speeches betwixt them, maister Dolman told him, that by reason of the choyse of the sayd new Bruer, the Townesmen began to talke at large of their great breach in the Castle : and further sayd, that some scandale was already growne, by appointing the said Chappell for their Buttery. To which last point maister Weston replying, aunswered : that he thought (as the case stood now in England ) they might vse things heere as they found them : which words of his gaue maister Dolman occasion to shew the contrary, both out of S. Thomas and out of Nauarre, in his Commentaries De spoliis.
It were too long to set downe what then passed amongst vs, at this time of maister Dolmans being with vs : but he perceiued such
A Jesuitical Trick. 29
opposition to his godly motions, as that he desired to haue some ioyned with him : and that he might then depart, and returne with his Colleague, named by them one Doctor Eaum 1 a fort night after Easter. Hereunto we all willingly yeelded : and so after sixe dayes trauayle amongst vs, he bade vs farewell. But consider now a lesuiticall trick that hapned.2 As maister Dolman was going to horseback, maister Southworth met him in the Porters lodge, and told him with great vehemencie of spirit, that Fa. Weston had greatly abused both him the sayd maister Dolman, and the whole company : in that he had re- ceiued a fortnight before a letter from Fa. Garnet in approba tion of their choyse to haue him for their Agent : 3 and had kept the same in his hands so long, without making his company acquainted with it : which he tearmed to be double dealing,
1 John Bavin, or rather Bavant, of the diocese of Chester, was, according to Dodd (vol. ii. p. 59), one of the first fellows, and first professor of Greek in St. John's College, Oxford. He was there tutor to Edmund Campion and Dr. Gregory Martin. An interesting letter of Campion from Bohemia, showing the affection which he entertained for his old master, then at Rome, is printed by Simpson (Campion, p. 86 ; cf. Douay Diaries, p. 315). Bavant was made doctor of divinity at Rome, spent some time at Rheims with Allen, and returned to England in June 1581. He was subsequently, in 1598, appointed by Cardinal Cajetan one of the assistants to the Arch priest.
2 The 'Jesuitical tricks' were not all upon one side. Hall, in his report quoted above, referring to the contention among the priests 'last Michaelmas,' says that a ' Mr. Laiton seemed to bear great sway amongst them, and I thought favoured Edmundes's authority, as Mr. Caverley — understanding that Laiton was in town and purposed to have come to the castle — came to me, being then porter there, and asked me to signifie to Mr. Barloe, a priest of the house, a special friend of Laiton and Caverley's adversary, that my master had received a warrant from Council for apprehending Laiton, whereby he might not come to the castle. They wanted to bar him the place, because he caused the contro versy among them. I gave the message to Mr. Barloe, though knowing it at the time to be false, and Laiton did not come to the castle at the time, but he has been there since. I do not know whether he is a priest or not. '
3 Parsons says (Apologie, f. 66) that Garnet yielded to the requests of the eighteen with these limitations : ' First, that he [Weston] should not be called their Superior, but their Agent. Secondly, that he should have no voice in determining anything, especially for the reprehension or punishment of any man that should offend against the rules of that congregation, but that all should be done by the voices of the major part without him. Thirdly, that he should not take any place or precedence at the table or elsewhere in respect of this office. '
30 The Scandal becomes Public.
as indeed it was in them both. But maister Souihworih pre tending his great discontentment in that respect, perswaded maister Dolman to returne back to maister Weston^ and then hearing the sayd letter read, and perceiuing that it was ambi guously written, so as the time did not serue him to enter into any discourse of it (hauing a great iourney that night) he departed, without making any of vs acquainted with the sayd letter : much meruailing (as since he hath confessed) to finde so grosse a falshood in maister Weston.
In the meane time that we were in expectation of maister Dolmans returne with his Colleague, it was a world to heare the people, that before had honored and admired vs, so long as we kept vnity and integrity, how they changed their opinions of vs, especially of the lesuites, tearming them in all ordinary assemblies, prowde, ambitious, and vindictiue persons, per- turbers of states, countries, and commonwealths. What would these men do (say they) if they had all in their hands : that being in a Gaole, dare take vpon them to rayse vp such tumults and garboyles? Certaine good men relating these things to maister Weston^ desired him humbly vpon their knees, to consider what scandale he gaue to the world, and how God and his truth were much blasphemed by this dissen- tion : but he, with great contempt and irrision aunswered, that he waighed not any mans iudgement : let them alone (sayth he) caeci sunt $ duces ccecorum : if it be a scandall, it is scan- dalum per accidens, which I care not for : this matter is gone further then may be controlled by man : you shall see it with hands and scales confirmed, ere it be long. With this fathers obstinacy many were discontented : and maister Bluet did thereupon thinke it conuenient to write to maister Perpomt,1 and to desire him (hauing bin a prisoner before at Wisbich) to
1 Gervaise* Pierrepoint, and his brother Henry Pierrepoint, of Holme Pierre- point and Thoresby, Nottinghamshire, ancestor of the earls of Kingston, were among the first members of the secret Association of wealthy catholic laymen organised by George Gilbert in 1580 to guide and assist the missionaries. While Gilbert accompanied Parsons on his first journeys in that year, Pierrepoint per formed the same dangerous service for Campion (Simpson, pp. 157, 187). He
A Priest falls out of Ms Wits. 31
moue maister Weston by his letter to some better quietnes. But the sayd maister Perpoint being now altogether lesuited (which maister Bluet knew not of) shewed his letter to Fa. Garnet, who taking it in euill part, writ himselfe thereof to Fa. Weston, aduising him, that seeing maister Bluet had begun to write abroad of the affayres in that place, they should not now spare either him or any of the rest, to requite them with the like. So as thereupon maister Weston stirred vp a young Priest very well learned, to write a bitter, rayling, and an vnghostly letter to a Gentleman in London (a lay brother of that society) against Doctor Bagshaw and maister Bluet: to the intent that the sayd lay brother (being well esteemed amongst all the chiefest Catholicks) should blaze and spread the same abroad, to their exceeding discredits. But Doctor Farbeck l being about that time in London, and knew very well the affayres then at Wisbicli : vpon the sight of this letter by a Noble man, dealt very roundly with the sayd lay lesuite, for the indignity and vnchristian dealing offered to those two per sons secretly behinde their backs, where they could not defend their innocencie. He did at that time after a sort, satisfye the Gentleman so farre forth, as the spirit of that generation will be qualified in such a matter : and besides so informed the Noble man of such things as he knew, as that he was pleased with some disdaine to teare the letter in pieces. But the poore Priest that was vrged against his conscience to write it, being admonished thereof, fell out of his wits, and threatned to kill those that set him on worke : whereby they were driuen to in- treate their keeper to shut him vp in a close chamber, where he remayned a tweluemoneth, and confessing willingly, that for
was more than once confined in the Tower, and was a fellow-prisoner with Weston at Wisbeach some time before the death of Metham. In April 1600 he got into trouble again for being found in possession of the letter written by Parsons to the earl of Angus (Cat. S. P., Dom. Eliz., CCLXXIV., Nos. 110-116). 1 ' Dr. Farbeck is a doctor of physic, and commonly lies in term time at his chamber in the New Rents in Holborn ; he is thought to be a recusant, and about once in two or three months visits the priests, but chiefly Dr. Bagshaw. (Examination of Hall, the porter, March 31, 1596; Cal. S. P., Dom. Eliz.^ CCLVI.) He was buried at Wisbeach, Nov. 14, 1598.
32 Mr. Dolman consults JDr. Windham.
abusing his penne against innocents, he was thus tormented : he asked the sayd parties forgiuenes. You haue heard per- aduenture of a Machiuilian maxime : detrahe audacter, aliquid adhcerebit : and here you haue seene the practise of it.
Maister Doleman (as you haue heard before) being departed from vs, hath reported vpoii occasion, how carefully he im- ployed himselfe on our behalfe. I met (sayth he) with a deere friend to you all : a man well knowne to be excellently well learned in both lawes, and for his vertuous wisdome and other singular good parts in him well beloued, and greatly esteemed of all that know him. I meane Doctor Windam : l vnto whom,
1 This appears to be Nicholas Wendon of Trinity college, Cambridge, arch deacon of Suffolk in 1559, and afterwards a canon of Norwich. In Cooper's Athens Cantab, he is said to have been ' admitted an advocate of the court of Arches, 4th October 1567, having previously commenced LL.D. in some foreign university, as is supposed.' He was also rector of Witnesham, Suffolk, although a layman, and was ' accustomed to appear in public in a cloak with a Spanish cape, having a rapier by his side. ' He is said to have declared himself a catholic in 1575 or 1576 (Dr. Jessopp's One Generation of a Norfolk House, p. 55). In a list of exiles in the Low Countries in 1576, 'Mr. Wendon, an archdeakon, somme tymes of Suffolke' is mentioned as having gone towards Rome (Douay Diaries, p. 301), and at a later date the same person, apparently, is recorded as one of the pope's pensioners, and in priest's orders : ' Doctor Wendon, prieste, hath xiiii crownes by monthe.' We hear of him again, or of one corresponding with his description, in a letter of this same Dolman, which reached Rheims Feb. 1579 : * The Suffolke and Norfolke gentlemen that were committed for there consciens in her Mau prograce remayne style prisoners in ther country, excepte D. Wyndam that is close prisoner in the fleete,' with which agrees the entry in Foxe's list of prisoners, anno 1579: ' D. Windam, LL.D., 50' in the Fleet. From the Fleet he was perhaps removed that same year to Wisbeach (see note supra, p. 10). Dodd gives no place in his biographies to this Dr. Nicholas Wendon or Windham, but, on the authority of Wood (Hist, and Antiq. of Oxford, vol. ii. pt. i. p. 145), gives some account of Ralph Windon, fellow of St. John's college, Oxford, who is said to have been sent on the mission from Douai, and afterwards imprisoned in Wisbeach. The registers of the college, however, contain no such name. They indeed make mention of a William Wendon, a priest and doctor of divinity, who lived at the seminary for some time, and obtained a canonry at Cambrai in 1578 (Do^iay Diaries, p. 26). But there is no trace of his having returned to England, and he died abroad. Dol man's friend, 'learned in both laws,' can only be Nicholas Wendon, LL.D., again described by Bagshaw in his Answer to the Apologie (p. 16), as 'a most excellent and renowned lawyer.' His career, however, has not hitherto been traced further than his exile in 1576.
Dr. Windham's Opinion. 33
I opened plainly and sincerely the whole matter, and craued it earnestly at his hands, that he would take some paynes therein, and for the loue he bare the generall cause, the especiall affec tion he had to your company, which I know is as great as he can giue and you desire, and for the old acquaintance and loue, that was between vs beyond the seas, he would aduise and instruct me what to deliuer vnto you. How much he lamented this controuersie amongst you, I am not able to expresse. After three dayes aduisement, he told me, for any that liued together as you do (presupposing he vnderstood your state very well) to diuide themselues from the boord, from the rest of the company (things so standing as they do now) though their purpose were right good, was both against charitie and pollicie. Whereupon hearing his great mislike, I made some hastie re- turne, and let Fa. Weston, with some of his company, vnder- stand his resolution, with mine owne therein. Thus farre maister Dolman. This his returne was within tenne dayes after his departure, and before the time limited to him and his Colleague to deale in our causes. Vpon which his sayd speeches and communication with Fa. Weston concerning Doctor Win- dams opinion : Would God (sayd maister Weston) with most earnest affection (as it seemed) that you maister Dolman were as well able to perswade the rest, as you haue done me. For mine own part, I mind to giue ouer and meddle no further, but to commend the cause wholy to God : assuring you, if I could do the least of this house good for his soules health, by laying my head vnder his feete, I would most willingly do it. I pray you talke with some of our company, and see whether you can perswade them. And thus farre this dissembling lesuite (by maister Dolmans report) very well putting Father Garnets aduise in practise, so to enter into his course of gouernment, as that it might be thought to be imposed vpon him in effect against his will. But how found maister Dolman this Agents subiects ? Fa. Weston could haue told him, like a crafty com- panyon, if he had list to haue saued the poore old mans labour. For he no sooner moued them to reunite themselues, but they startled thereat, and sayd, they were still resolute to proceede
34 Grave Charges of Immorality.
in the course which they had vndertaken : and would heare nothing to the contrary.
At this time (as we remember) of maister Dolmam being at IVisbich, maister Bluet entred into speech with maister Weston in his the sayd maister Dolmans presence, concerning both their desire of seuerall commons, and also their rules and lawes before mentioned : and sayd vnto him : that it seemed very strange that he should persist as he did, in defence of these his proceedings. To whom maister Westons ghostly father aun- swered : that as he, and Doctor Bagshaw, had caryed away the glory and fame of all that was heretofore lawdably done in that Castle: so from henceforth Fa. Weston would indure it no longer, but would haue the same ascribed to himself e, and to the lesuites. Fa. Weston halfe ashamed of this so plaine a confession, tooke vpon him to mend it: saying, that their intent of separation was, rather to auoyd such sinnes as were in the house, as whoredome, dronkennes, and dicing, then for any such cause, as the party before had mentioned. And being further vrged to speake plainly, whether he knew him- selfe of any such sinnes to be in the house, he aunswered, that he spake not in particular, but in generall of them.1 Where- unto maister Bluet replying, affirmed, that in saying as he did, and charging no man in particular, he inuolued the whole house as guiltie of those sinnes, and was a detractor thereby in the highest degree. He also the sayd maister Bluet proceeded further in effect, as followeth. If there be such enormious sinnes amongst vs, haue we not ghostly fathers to reforme them ? or can you name any that herein hath bin refrac-
1 Parsons and Garnet seem to take pride in this position of Weston and his friends. * They deduced,' says Parsons (Apologie, f. 71 ), ' all their disorders to ten principal members, disguising notwithstanding their speech by general terms, lest it might fall into the enemy's hands, and touching no man in particular.' So Garnet writes to Bagshaw in the following October that they, the separatists, had never written to him a word, 'quo cujusvis fama loederetur.' That is, no one of their dozen opponents was injured in character by the grave charges of immorality brought against them as a body, because no one in particular was named. (See the letter of Garnet, with Tierney's note, in his Dodd, vol. iii. p. cxiii., and compare W. C.'s Replie to the Manifestation, f. 7.)
Mr. Bluet's Discourse. 35
tarious ? Is not the sacrament of healthful! penance a suffi cient remedie for men in our cases, to keepe vs from such enormities? If the meanes appointed by Christ, haue not sufficient force to remedie these euils : what extraordinary grace or power can we expect from your supposed authoritye and lawes to effect the same ? Againe, if such sinnes were in the house : either some particular men were guilty of them, or all : if some, why are they not denounced, that the rest may know, as well those that committed them, as those that fauour or defend them in such their turpitudes ? And whereas we are prisoners heere against our wils, and therefore cannot choose but of necessity must dayly conuerse and be together, by order and commaundement of the State, and condition of the prison : how dare you (except you will incroach vpon her Maiesties authority) thus violently attempt to separate her subiects, promulgate lawes, execute punishments, and make your selfe in effect to haue as full power as the Pope hath himselfe ? In that you seeme without his authority to make a new order of Religion, or I know not what, with bands, lawes, rules, and punishments, except your power be more then we can dreame of: you incurre thereby the sentence of excommunication : and by the lawes of this Realme, it is well knowne, that omnis coitio in the kingdome not prescribed by her Highnesse, is subiect t< a very heauy censure. When lames and lolin priuatly and therefore vnlawfully sought by mediation of their mother, the right hand and the left : the rest of the Apostles did worthily dislike that attempt : but when Peter and these two were called vp to Mount Tabor to behold Christ in his Maiestie ; all the rest tooke it in good part, and neuer grudged, because they were called thither by lawfull authority. Besides, if you and your pretended subiects wil keepe no com pany with vs, because of our sinnes (as you pretend) be your surmises true or false : yet (as you proceede) you ioyne therein with the Donatists ; who because they would not defile them- selues (pure creatures) with other mens sinnes, departed from the Church, and perished in their foule schisme and heresie. In the proceeding of this discourse there were sundry interrup-
36 Arbitration of Dr. Bavin and Dolman.
tions : but the summe was, that maister Westou did little re gard it : notwithstanding his pretence of yeelding mentioned before, if his companie would be thereunto perswaded.
When maister Dolman was to depart, he moued maister Weston and others, that forasmuch as he had acquainted them already both with Doct. Windams opinion and his owne, con cerning the intent of his company for diuiding themselues in Commons from their brethren : he might with their good fauours be released of his promise or coming againe after Easter. But they would in no sort yeeld thereunto : but desired him in any wise, as he loued them, to keepe the time appointed. Which made some of vs to meruaile, knowing now by maister Dolman, that Fa. Garnet had approued maister Westons Agency : although neither then nor since we could euer obteine a copy of his letter to that effect. Howbeit afterwards we perceiued his drift herein : which was to make tryall, if by any possible meanes he could winne of the sayd Arbitrators ; to determine that some other order, then formerly had bin vsed in that place, was necessary to be appointed. For then presently by way of a consequent depending vpon Fa. Garnets authority, he would haue ob truded vpon vs his owne Agency : or at the least haue gotten some aduantage against vs, to haue depraued vs to those, who would not consider, that the admitting of maister Weston for our head, we had thereby submitted our selues to Garnet, and should so haue become meere subiects to the lesuites.
At the time appointed our two Arbitrators, Doctor Bauyn and maister Dolman comming to Wisbicli : we found him the sayd Bauyn much more stiffely lyned with lesuitisme, then euer we could haue suspected. He being in maister Bluets chamber, and demaunding the cause why they were sent for : aunswere was made, that their presence was desired for the examining and deciding a fact of great scandale and deformitie : yea a flat schisme (as we thought) begun, and prosecuted in prison by Fa. Weston: and to reduce vs againe to our auncient vnity. To this Doctor Bauyn sayd, that he would do his best indeuour, to set quietnes amongst vs : and further told vs ; that he had with
Conferences with Bluet and Weston. 37
clisdaine read Father Westons lawes and platforme, and was fully resolued to casheere them, whatsomeuer came of it : but yet (quoth he) you must haue some order and forme of gouern- ment amongst you. It was aunswered him; that we had desired their company, but to "iudge, whether the breach they had made, was lawfull or no : iudge that first (quoth we) and then we will friendly conferre, what is meete to be done here after. We are in prison, and sometimes close prisoners, not in case to speake one with an other : and perhaps must be, as heretofore we were at the Keepers dyet : what shall we then trouble our selues, with rules, orders, or common wealthes ? Are not the Canons of Councels, the lawes of the Church, and the sacrament of penance sufficient for Priests, that are in prison for the Catholick faith ? Did the Bishop of Lincolnc when he liued here, trouble himselfe with any such matters : or hath this yonker amongst vs, a lesuite, more wit, grace, experi ence, and authority, then he had, being the Popes Legate ouer all England? To admit these his new lawes and penall statutes, were to confesse in effect, that we had liued inordin- atly, vntill this lesuiticall youth came to reforme vs. No, no, they shall haue no such aduantage against vs : it is the But, they ayme at, to make the simpler sort of Catholicks beleeue, that we secular Priests are no body, nor able to do any thing for our selues, except the lesuites may haue the commaunde- ment ouer vs, to direct and commaund vs, as they thinke good. After such communication had in maister Bluets chamber, maister Dolman and he went to maister Weston, and his ad herents, to know wherein they would commaund their seruice. But maister Weston after the new fashion, desired them first to fall downe and pray with him : which done, he arose ; and framing his countenance as though he would haue wept, sayd vnto them thus in effect. Your comming hither maketh vs glad, and heauy : glad, if that you will assist vs in that we haue begun ; and so we will giue you prayse and bene diction : but if you will crosse our designements, and con- demne our indeuors, you shall giue vs very great cause of sorrow. Aduise therefore your selues very well what you do :
38 The United threatened with Starvation.
for the matters are of great importance, which we put into your hands. Then Doctor Bauyn (to pay maister Weston with his owne coyne) pretended to be so mooued with his words, as if he likewise could scarsely haue refrayned from teares : which maister Dolman and we observing, we doubted to finde him but an halting Arbitrator. Besides it seemed, that they were halfe vnwilling, to commit their former designements to these mens arbitrement : had it not bin for feare, that else the world would haue condemned them : and therefore they laboured them in secret, with all their might and maine to approoue their enterprises. Whitest we were in consultation (sayeth maister Dolman) good Lord, how were we dealt with vnder- hand, to allow wholy of their doings, and to reprooue the others. Many iarres hapned in these conferences. One of them that stood for the vnity, told the Arbitrators that a brother of the separation, threatned him, and all the rest that stood against maister Weston, that if they would not submit themxelues vnder the lesuites obedience, and Hue vnder their statutes and lawes, they should stance, and not haue a morsell of bread to put in their mouthes.^
When Doctor Bauyn and maister Dolman grew to the con sideration of Fa. Westom rules, and other his designements, he the sayd Doctor Bauyn did vtterly reiect them. Marry withall lie made mention of a certaine draught and forme of discipline, which was more beneficiall to the lesuites, then their owne : and such a one (as he himselfe hath confessed) the lesuites abroad had agreed vnto. In this platforme, eight (besides maister Weston) were to haue bin chosen out of the brethren of the separation, and two of the vnited to make vp tenne : which tenne should haue gouerned all the rest ; maister Weston being appointed euer for their mouth. So that as before in
1 Compare the statement in the Relatio compendiosa (p. 99) : ' Jesuita; tandem et archipresbyter eleemosynas quse per universum regnum in incarcera- torum sustentationem et alios pios usus, a fidelibus erogantur, in suas prius manus deportandas curant quam in egenos distribuantur : ese autem ad carceres mittuntur aim mandate, ut illi sacerdotes, qui ab Us non slant , earum non fiant participcs. '
The Proposed Reconciliation. 39
his owne common wealth called the Agenage,1 he was maister Agent : so in this other of Doct. Bauyns (tearmed the tenne men, and the mouth) this our deuout lesuite was to haue bin called in proper speech, maister mouth. In communication about this new plat forme of Doctor Bauyns, there grew some heate betwixt him, Doctor Bagshaiv^ and maister Bluet : both of them with great earnestnes, and very forcible arguments impugning the same, which Doctor Bauyn tooke in euill part, but was afterwards wel inough appeased. Then after a day or two our said Arbitrators (hauing taken great paines this way and that way) agreed together vpon a forme of pacification, to be offered vnto vs all : the principall effect whereof was : that we should reconcile our selues generally one to an other, re mitting freely and wholy each to other, all pretended or sup posed iniuries past, vttering the same in order by some short word or speech, without any rehearsall, debating, or reasoning of any matters past, and without any condition, or exception for the time to come. This pacification being first shewed to Doctor BagsliaW) and maister Bluet, they did most ioyfully re- ceiue it : and desired the Arbitrators very instantly, that for Gods sake, they would go forward with it. Afterwards they went to Fa. Western, and maister Southworth, and deliuering them the copy of it, they seemed very willing to accept the same : so as an hower the next day after dinner was appointed for the mutuall reconciliation of all the company, according to the effect of the pacification before mentioned. Against which time maister Dolman being in the Gallery ready to go into the Hall to dinner, Fa. Weston drew him aside to a window, and vsed these words vnto him : I trust (maister Dolman} this re conciliation shall not preiudice our determination, of diuision of Commons : to whom maister Dolman aunswered, that all their breach was about that matter : and that therefore, he and his fellow could in no sort like thereof, nor permit the same. Then sayth maister Weston very sharply, you do vs great
is not a misprint. It occurs four times in this tract, pp. 23, 30, 35, and 41, original edition (pp. 45, 50, 59, infra). Compare 'these troublesome Agens' in Parsons' Apologie (f. I2ib) and Agenist in Bagshaw's Answer (p. 18).
40 Articles of Peace.
wrong. I meane you no wrong, quotli maister Dolman, but all the good I can wish or deuise : yes mary do you (sayth he) and so you would confesse, if you saw but our extract : which con- teyneth three sheetes of paper of the enormious crymes, that we haue to charge them withall. But I pray you (sayth he) let vs intreate maister Doctor Bauyn, and you to stay this re conciliation, vntill to morrow : for we haue certaine Articles to shew you first, that cannot so soone be made ready. Vnto this motion the Arbitrators condescended, hoping it would haue turned vnto the best: but it fell out quite contrary. For they found that nothing would content them, except they would agree vnto the separation of Commons.
The Articles exhibited concerning vs, together with our Articles which we were constrayned thereby to offer to our said Arbitrators, we haue thought good here to set downe. First theirs (which are rather indeed Interrogatories to examine ye Arbitrators, then matters that do much touch vs) and then our owne : which we offer to all men, to be censured, as they shall think good.
1 Whether (say they to the Arbitrators) will you stay the time to examine those Articles, which any may be accused of ?
2 Whether you thinke it secure for vs, that Hue and meete together many times in the day (not hauing the meanes to auoyd each other) to haue those things proposed, and examined, and whether you can compasse our quiet ?
3 That whosoeuer doth come to declare any matter, shall submit themselues to you, as to their Ordinary, to declare without all equiuocation, or lying, any thing, whereof you thinke necessary to the manifestation of the verity.
4 That you do take the promise of euery one that is called before you, to behaue themselues with modestie and good tearmes.
5 This supposed : we are all for our parts contented, that they obiect, what they can against vs.
6 We require also, that they shall giue their consent, that they are all contented, to heare what may be layd out against them.
The Arbitration Jails. 41
7 Euery thing being heard : that you pronounce sentence against those, that you shall finde culpable.
When our sayd Arbitrators had perused these Interroga tories, no maruaile though they troubled the, being so con trary to their expectation : and deuised of purpose to breake off' all hope of reconciliation by their meanes : and such like wise, as by lesuiticall shifts might haue bin prolonged, if they had list, for we know not how many yeares. With these Articles we were no sooner acquainted : but presently we set downe these fower in some sort to aunswere them.
1 We require that sufficient satisfaction may be made for the slaunder and diffamation of vs by their breach and letter : if sufficient causes cannot be proued for their so doing.
2 We require that euery accusation be set downe in writing vnder the accusers hands, sub pcena talionis, if it be not proued.
3 We will aunswere in all things according to the order in the Canon law : supposing these men to be our lawfull ludges.
4 We will susteine any censure, with this condition, that being censured by these men, we may be secured thereby from all other censures concerning that matter.
When these our Articles were deliuered to Fa. Weston, and he with some others had perused them : they began Jirst (sayth maister Dolman) to take exceptions against the fourth Article : and in the end against them all, plainety shewing indeed, that they liked nothing, but their owne designements, being resolued to proceed in them : let it fall how it should either back or edge, as the common prouerb is. Whereas we (by the testimony of the sayd maister Dolman) professed our selues very desirous of re conciliation : and offred our readynes to aunswere any matters that might be obiected against vs : protesting that we would only indeuor to maintains our owne credits, without any re crimination at all.1
1 With this may be compared the following passage from the Replie to the Mani festation (f. 7) : ' Thirdly, I answer, that of my own knowledge, being present at the ripping up of these matters, general leave was given by the united part unto the separated to say what they could, and accuse whom they could of any
42 Dr. Savin turns his Tippet.
But the truth is, that our sayd Arbitrators saw so many inconueniences that would haue followed, if they had entred into this course, as they by no meanes would be drawne vnto it : but still insisted to haue lapped vp all discontentments in their sayd generall reconciliation. Whereunto we for our parts, were all of vs well inclined : insomuch as maister Dolman him- selfe protesteth, that he will euer charge maister Weston and his company, to haue bin the causes that the sayd good worke so greatly vrged by him and Doctor Bauyn, was not effected by them. For (sayth he the sayd maister Dolman} all our motions were irkesome vnto them : and two or three, one after another came vnto me: and told me, that except I would remoue my opinion touching the breach of commons., they wished me to be gone. Whereupon he writ a letter to our whole company, and concluded thus. As before God I spedke it in conscience, I am throughly perswaded : you, that shall vnder pretence of sub mitting your seines vnder a head, and to Hue vnder an order, diuide your selues from the rest, shall do a thing s\nfull. This is my minde : this is my censure. And so the good old man de parted from vs.
After his departure, notwithstanding that Doctor Bauyn, to our owne knowledge was very resolute against our diuiding of Commons ; as maister Dolman and diuers others can also witnes : yet we know not, how afterwards it came to passe (through their lesuiticall practises with him) but (as we haue heard) within two dayes he turned his tippet, and incouraging
such crime sub pcena talionis, and they would admit any competent or indifferent judge to have the hearing and censuring of the delinquents ; and they refused to join any such issue with them. Furthermore, myself being present and witness unto all this, I went unto Fa. Weston and asked him if he would accuse any man in particular, and he refused : whereupon I told him that he and the rest of his company were then bound to clear them of such unjust suspicions, which if they would do, either by word before witness, or under their hands, the refusing part would suffer them to go forwards with their course begun, which if they refused to do, being in conscience bound thereto (as I told him my opinion was they were), then could they not suffer them to proceed in that manner unless they would willingly undergo such infamy as thereby redounded unto them. . . . But all was in vain. He refused and rejected all offers with out regard to my motion. '
Garret makes a Secret Confession. 43
them to take their owne course, went his way like a charitable Priest, and neuer bade vs farewell. We would be loth to do him iniurie, if this matter hath bin misreported vnto vs : but this we do affirme, that since that time his credit hath so increased amongst the lesuites, as now he is become one of their Archpriests assistants : and that within a day or two after his departure from Wisbich, maister Weston and his com pany, entred into an actuall and publick schisme : they refused either to eate or drinke with vs : they left the Hall altogether : they made the Chappell their Buttery, maister Sramstons1 lodging their Kitchin, and their Agents chamber their Re fectory.
Whilest Fa. Weston and his consorts were talking, as you haue heard before, of certain great matters which they had against vs, why they could not keepe company with vs any longer : he the sayd good father, to shew what good stuft'e they had in store, called one Garret^ forth, and perswadeth him to vnfold to the Arbitrators his owne confession, that vnto Weston his ghostly father, he had made a yeare and a halfe before. This demy-Iesuite, although the thing seemed most absurd and irreligious, obeyeth willingly to vnfold to the Com missioners, either what he had vttered in his confession of one of his fellowes, or at the least, what he had deuised between him and maister Agent. AVell : propter bonum societatis, he commeth most sadly (as if he had bin compelled) and telleth the that he is most vnwilling to vnfold that which turneth to the diffamation of a Priest : but yet for disciplines sake, which was seene decayed in the house, and for the obedience which he ought vnto his ghostly father, he will informe them of that, which may giue the light to proceede, as they
1 Thomas Bramston, a seminarist from Rheims, was ordained in 1585, and sent upon the mission in the following year, with eighteen others, seven of whom (including William Watson) were hanged (Douay Diaries, p. 30).
2 Alexander Garret or Gerard, a fellow-student of Bramston at Rheims, sent on the mission in 1587. He was, according to Mr. Gillow (Biog. Dictionary), the son of William Gerard of Ince, county Lancaster, by Jane, daughter of Sir Alexander Osbaldeston. His elder brother, Thomas Gerard, was also a prisoner at Wisbeach, and is said to have died there sometime before April 29, 1598.
44 The Priest and the Keeper's Maid.
thought good. Marry he will not haue it knowne, but vnto themselues in secret. This protestation made, he sayth, that one of maister Medtye his men, an heretick told him, how that a Priest (and named him)1 was in the greene chamber (which was the keepers lodging) talking with Mary maister Medlyes mayde : and that the Porter 2 (who was in loue with her) was by maister Southworth willed to go vp to the greene chamber, for that there was such a Priest talking with Mary : who in all
1 Can this be Francis Tillotson before mentioned, the ' great persuader of women ' ? Tillotson eventually abandoned his profession, and became a govern ment spy. In 1608 he supplied sensational intelligence which Lord Salisbury described as 'unlikely and absurd,' adding, 'I know this priest is a knave.' (Foley's Records, i. 509.)
2 This was Edward Hall (p. 25, note). The unfortunate man got into trouble shortly afterwards for unguarded speeches in favour of his prisoners, and before the end of the year was himself confined in the Gatehouse, Westminster. The facts of the case illustrate some features of prison life at Wisbeach, and are otherwise instructive. On Dec. 21, 1595, we find Foxley, a shoemaker, and Wagg, a butcher, at Wisbeach, giving evidence before the keeper, Medeley, that one day in Weedon's alehouse they had asked Hall ' what all the babbling and great noise which the papists made at dinner-time meant,' and that Hall had replied ' It was foolish to call it babbling, as it was but reading certain chapters of the bible in latin ; ' others reported how Hall had declared ' it would not be well in England till there was a mutiny.' The shoemaker and butcher heard the word ' mutiny,' but could not say what was meant. Further information was given a little later to Mr. Palmer, the Queen's chaplain, by Williams, a servant. Williams deposed that on St. Luke's Day last (Oct. 18, 1595) he had visited his friend Hall at the porter's lodge, where they were joined by two priests, Calverley and Meredith, and Peter Garnett, a joiner, who since had become a recusant, and had fled the country. On Calverley remarking that ' they were prisoners there, and accounted to be dead men, as they looked for nothing but death,' Hall remarked, 'No, no, Mr. Calverley, 38 is at hand.' Hall did not explain his meaning, but Williams, hearing afterwards that he had been carried up to London on some misdemeanour, had thought of this speech, and voluntarily betrayed it. Hall meanwhile was put through an examination by the Attorney General, who elicited from him some interesting information regarding the state of matters at Wisbeach. He denied all remembrance of having uttered the speech '38 is at hand,' which seems to have given unnecessary alarm to the government as indicating the 'foreknowledge of some dangerous event.' The words probably referred to some prophecy current among the priests that the 38th year of Elizabeth's reign (iyth Nov. 1595-96) would bring them relief or victory. See the Calendar of State Papers, Dom. Eliz.y 1595-96 (pp. 13, 20, 142, 185, 192, 194), where, however, some of the documents are wrongly dated, and the index is inaccurate.
Accusations filling three Sheets. 45
hast went vp, and finding the Priest not in the chamber with Mary, he looked into the Study within the chamber, and found him there with an english booke in his hand, whereat he was offended. Now (sayth maister Western) you see matter suffi- ciet for to leade you to giue sentence with vs. Indeed (sayth Doctor Bauyn) this is a matter that moueth me to be willing to giue my iudgement : what thinke you maister Dolman ? The Romanes being Pagans (quoth maister Dolman) would not con- demne S. Paul vpon the request, and accusations of the lewes, before they heard Paul defend himself in a publick place : and shall we here codemne a Priest, and in him 12. more, vnheard, vnexamined, and no place of defence left them ? Maister Ba. I will not do it : but I will heare what the Priest can say for himselfe. I do not thinke (quoth Bauino) that we can do so : for this matter is vttered to vs in secret, not to be opened againe. How then, shal we pronounce an externall sentence (quoth maister Dolman) as we are externall iudges, and con- demne these 13. but it must be knowne ? Well, well, this is very strange : and so that matter was dasht.
If maister Agent and Doct. Bauyn had proceeded with the rest of their supposed enormious crimes against vs (so many as filled vp three sheetes of paper) and that M. Dolman would haue bin aduised by the : you see what a prety course of iustice would haue bin held in these assises. What all those seuerall accusatios were, we could neuer haue the fauour to be informed : either by M. Agent or his assistants. You may suppose they were not great, in that we had been receyued with great applause, as companyons with them of their holy order : if we would but haue yeelded to Fa. Ed. Westons Agenage, thereby admitting a kinde of Fryer to be the head of secular Priests : as rare a deuise, as lightly hath hapned. But to returne where we left. A separation is made, and maister Agent is in his ruffe, sitting in a corner with his obedient subiects. If we should haue tearmed him Vsher of their new Hall, which was his owne chamber, and maister Brampston in the like respect, their chiefe maister Cooke, hauing good opportunitie, though he had lyen in his bed, to haue ruled
46 The Public Separation.
the roast : the phrases had not bin very improper. Howbeit, such manner of conceits were then farre from vs : our hearts being very greatly replenished with griefe, to see so many of our brethren Catholicke Priests, and imprisoned for the same cause with vs, so irreligiously to separate themselues from vs. Besides : we were otherwise set on worke by them, in laboring to defend our selues from their diuelish practises in slaundering of vs : as though we had bin the men, that had made the faction, and not they : whereas it was most apparant to those that would not shut their eyes, that we swarued not one lot from that course which had bin held both by vs, and our very honorable & reuerend predecessors in yt prison : as me that detested such childish innouatios. Furthermore, our sayd griefe was greatly increased, in that we were daily aduertised from our friends abroad, how many Catholicks in euery corner (otherwise very graue and zealous) began to fauour this new deuise : being possessed with a conceit, that we (formerly reputed their deere and louing fathers) were become on the sodaine, without any change at all in vs, persons of great licentiousnes ; such as could neither indure any good order nor holesome discipline. Lord (thought we) whither do these things tend : or what will become of the most auncient and Catholick Romane Religion ; if the old and constant professors thereof do begin to delight in change and innouations ? And here by the way, we would gladly haue it obserued, that as well in all the aforesaid garboyles, as in the rest that follow here after : we that stoode for vnitie, haue alwaies been in effect meerely passiue, standing still vpon our defence : our aduer- saries (for so our brethren did make themselues) practising their best actiuitie to hurt and wound vs.
For to keepe their hands and tongues in vre, this Gentlema our said new Agent was no sooner inuested in his lesuiticall authoritie, but presently he sendeth abroad certaine reasons (fiue in number) to his friends, least he should (forsooth) haue been mistaken in his said publicke separation from vs. In which pretended reasons, many points being childish, and many false, we hold them not fit to be here inserted : only we
The Beginning of New Garboils. 47
haue mentioned tliem, because they clriue vs againe to our Apologie, by incountring them with fiue others, which we will also pretermit : the fact it selfe attempted by the Agent and his confederats being so absurd, and schismatically handled, as whosoeuer doth well know it, his owne reason and Judgement (if he haue any) are sufficient to condemne it.
You haue heard at large before of our troubles, which Doctor Ba. and maister Dolman would gladly (wee are per- swaded) at the first, haue compounded, but as the matter fell out, their paines therein, did not only, not end them, but through maister Agents lesuiticall skill in shifting and false glosing, were the beginning of other new garboyles. For he hauing gotten into his hands certaine writings and letters of Doct. Bauyns, did pretend and giue it out amongst his friends, that he and his adherents had been very willing to haue entred into any good pacification, had we not been so obstinate as no reason would content vs. He shewed some Priests of the said Doctors letters, wherein (as it should seeme) he affirmed, that their separation was in effect, no separation. Besides, it was giuen out, that we vtterly refused to haue the crimes obiected against vs, sifted by the arbitrators and looked into. Againe, they said, that we hauing giuen the said Com missioners full authoritie to decide all matters betwixt vs, did for feare, or because we would be still wilfull in our disorderly courses, reuoke the same : so as thereby nothing could bee effected. Also they quarrelled with vs concerning our yeeld- ing to haue receiued such new lawes, as the Arbitrators should thinke good to impose vpon vs. All which particulars, with many more such like, being most falsly layd to our charges, they went from hand to hand, farre and neere, and were re ceiued by such Catholicks, as began to be infected with lesuitisme, as if they had been true : thereby taking occasion to depraue vs exceedingly. Insomuch as the good old Father maister Dolman was driuen to write diuers letters, for the cleering of the said false accusations, and was so earnest in them, as these and diuers others such like sentences fell some times from his pen : Detrahere, aut detrahentem aiidire quid
48 The Distraction of Catholics abroad.
horum Jit damnabilus non facile dixerim : it is hard to say, whether is the greater sinne to be a slaunderer, or giue ear vnto him : sub Christi specie daemon inique lates ? thou art disguised (Sathan) in the habite of Christ ? O secula nostra, hoc phari- saismo plenissima! our times are pestered with pharisaicall hypocrisie !
By these and such like courses which this Jesuitical faction did thus practise against vs, the Catholickes abroad were greatlie distracted : some leaned to vs, but more inclined to them : it being the fatall calamitie of our Nation to be too much addicted to faction and nouelties. They of the new guise, sent vs word that in opposing our selues against the Jesuits, wee laboured but in vaine, and lost thereby our reputa tion : that order being of such excellencie, as it might not be withstood. An other writ vnto vs a long discourse, dated the 26. of lune 1595,1 how vnwilling the lesuits are to take vpon them anie superiority: that Father Westons Agencie was not worthie to be tearmed by the name of superiority, because it was not praeesse sed prodesse : that Cardinall Allen a little before had willed sundrie Priestes that came for England, to acknowledge the lesuits for such men, as had beene their superiours and maisters : and that therefore, they should make no difference but keepe peace with them, and goe vnto them for their aduise and direction. And afterward in the same letter, the Catholickes (saith he) are so wholie affected to the society, fy haue them in such estimation, that whosoeuer shall shew himselfe tofauour anie part against them, or not so throughlie to affect them, yea though he be one of our owne coate (meaning a Priest) hee shall be lesse gratefull and welcome to them. And a third : in his letter dated in August 1595. the same yeere, writeth thus vnto vs : / can assure you, that in the generall opinion of the best sort of Catho-
1 This letter was written by the Rev. Thomas Audley to Bagshaw himself, and is printed in the Letters and Memorials of Allen (p. 378) from the original in the archives of the archbishop of Westminster. The original is endorsed, ' Thomas Audley to Bagshaw, movinge him to like of the Jesuits. What charge Cardinall Allen gave that the preists in England submitt themselves to the Jesuits. That the Jesuits are allready in such creditt as what priest soever shall oppose himselfe against them shall discreditt himselfe.'
Letters received from the Friendly. 49
lickes, the. tide is against you; and if you loue me, contend not with Father Weston.
This and much such like stuffe wee receiued from the fanci- full. But on the other side, they that plodded in the old steps of antiquitie, and had a great disgust of nouelties, did now and then write vnto vs, after another sort : Sometimes they signified vnto vs with great indignation, the abuses offered vnto vs, how our fellow prisoners of the faction did write in such manner against vs, and they were in horrour to thinke of it: and how also the gallants abroad (being at libertie) did insult vpon our miseries, treading vs vnder their feet, as though no secular Priest were worthie to be named the same day, that mention is made of a holie Jesuit. And some of great fame said vnto others, that Father Westons separation from vs, was so odious, as they thought it expedient in their opinions, that seeing they deuided themselues from our table, wee should deuide our selues from their prayers. An other moued vs to this effect : that seeing the old sigillum Salomonis, and our Sauiours direction failed, wee would inuent some new pentacle to binde these furious spirits (meaning the lesuiticall faction) which will do much hurt, if God be not mercifull, and men prouident. An other also in one mans person describeth vnto vs, the right qualities of our English Jesuits, as wee our selues haue found by experience, and the world in the end shall trie them. The man he writeth of, is now one of the assistants to the Archprelate : and these are his words : he is the Jesuits Cursitor, alwaies in motion for them, either for gathering of monie, or for harkening after newes. If he can learne of any legacy giuen to your house, he seeketh by all the meanes he may, to conuert it from you to their vses, so (as I verilie thinke) there is not of a Priest a greater enemie to your companie then he is. Notwithstand ing if he talke with anie, yea, that he likes not, he will most palpablie flatter him; but behinde his backe hee will most monstrouslie detract him. Let him be told againe of it in such sound manner, as with no face he may denie it ; then hee looketh awhile vp to the heauens, and after answereth : hee remembreth no such matter. Neuertheles for humilities sake,
D
50 Some of the Faction draw back.
he will say he will render what satisfaction you will : and so with that gesture, and this hypocrisie, hee will shuffle ouer all matters, be they neuer so Joule, that he shall be charged with. O Lord graunt him better grace. And some there haue bin, who haue by their letters, bin so farre from disliking of our proceedings at that time : as in lulie 1595. they moued vs earnestlie to con tinue, as wee had begun, and in no wise to giue place to faction, and nouelties : adding that they had not talked with any, that were either of learning or iudgement, which did not greatlie con- demne father Weston for his vnquietnes : deeming him either to be growne into great melancholines, or els vnto too much sim- plicitie. We spare to trouble you with more to this effect ; our purpose onlie being in this point to let you see the diuision in the Church : procured by this breach amongst vs then at Wisbich. Whereof a godlie father writing thus generallie vnto vs al, saith : if' through the continuance of your dissentions and discord, you will so greatly terrifie vs, as zve shall think : our holie anchor drayling ajloote : our visible Church to be hid vnder a bushell : our forme (through the great good conceit wee abroad had of you) of heauen, to be now a Jigure of hell: looke then hereafter for smal commiseration fy pitty, when too late you shall lament your incurable woe, which by giuing the full reynes to your passions, you haue indrenched and implunged your selues into.
But howsoeuer at this time, many Catholicks were growne to be of Father Westons faction : yet it seemeth that some of themselues, who best knew the impietie of it, & what a danger ous scandall it gaue to the Catholicke cause, began to draw backe, as repenting verie much that euer the said Agenage was attempted. For if M. Perpoint the lay lesuit, be an honest man, and his report to M. Dolman true, made in lulie 1595. M. Garnet himselfe vpon occasion said : that he was neuer willing with the breach or diuision of commons : which being made plaine to him the said M. Perpoint to be as false as God is true, his owne letters testifiyng the contrarie, he the said M. Perpoint answered, that he was well assured of it, thatM. Garnet did now vtterlie mislike it. Whether this last cause was true or
An odious Opinion on Detraction. 51
no, it doth not much concerne vs, because no man is able to bind vpon any Jesuits word, they haue so manie shifts, and so little conscience in speaking truelie, except it be one of them- selues to another. Otherwise their manner is, to frame their speeches, according to their companie : alwaies applying them- selues to the times and occasions, as they fall out : if their disseignements proue wel, they take the contriuing of them to themselues : if not, there is none will more condemne them : vtterlie renouncing them, as hauing neuer liked them, or con sented vnto them. Some further experience hereof, you shall finde in the processe following concerning this good Prouinciall.
You haue heard before in some sort, how we were vsed by the aforesaid faction amongst vs at home, and by their ad herents abroad in deprauing vs, and slaundering vs, farre beyond the limits of all Christianitie. They charged vs to be straglers, backbiters, liuers vpon rapine, extortioners, impugners of order, men of confusion, violent persons, deteyners of other mens goods, and with we know not how manie other impieties : whereof our consciences beare vs witnesse, wee were as cleare and free as the best lesuit in Christendome. Neither durst the diuell himselfe haue bin so impudent (as we suppose) to haue fraught their hearts with these conceits of vs, or framed their tongues to haue vttered them, had hee not first inueagled them with this most odious opinion : That detractio in generall (so that a singuler person be not named) is no offence. Vpon which ground, they ranne a great while, not daring to touch vs with any particularities till at the last in plaine termes, they laid theft in effect to some of our charges.
Now these and such other like reports, flying farre and neere against vs, as though we had bin not Catholike Priests, but diuels incarnate, it pleased God to moue the discreeter sort of Catholickes in the North, to send vnto vs about a quarter of a yeere (after the aforesaid separation of commons) two learned Priests, M. Mush,1
1 John Mush held a very high place among his secular brethren. He does not appear to have had a university education, but after spending six months at Douay in 1576 he passed to the English college at Rome, where he lived for seven years, and distinguished himself by his abilities. In 1583, the thirty-first
52 Arbitration of Mush and Dudley.
and M. Dudley? to see and vnderstand how matters went with vs, and whether wee were such men, as the reports (made by
year of his age, he was sent into England, where he resided chiefly in Yorkshire, his native county (Foley's Records, vi. 69, 134). He was a great favourite of Cardinal Allen, and was granted special faculties for the mission, being, it is said, the only one, with perhaps the exception of Colleton, who had the power to subdelegate (Tierney, vol. iii. p. cxlvi, «.). Allen's letter to Mush, urging him to preserve peace between the Jesuits and secular clergy, is often quoted (see Letters and Memorials, p. 356). He became a leader among the Appel lants, was one of the thirteen priests who signed the Protestation of Allegiance to Elizabeth (Jan. 31, 1603), and was subsequently appointed an assistant to the archpriest. As Mush, according to Dodd, 'was a master of style in the latin tongue, his brethren borrowed his pen upon several occasions ' (ii. 115). Dodd ascribes to him, besides the famous Declaralio Motimm, a treatise against Thomas Bell, the chief of the Yorkshire missionaries, who had abandoned his faith ; and an account of the sufferings of Catholics in the northern parts of England. He was the spiritual director and the biographer of Mrs. Anne Clithero, who was pressed to death, according to law, for refusing to plead (Life and Death of Margaret Clitherow, the Martyr of York, now first published from the original MS., by W. Nicholson, London, 1849). Bishop Challoner, who speaks with respect of Mush's missionary labours, says, that ' after having suffered prisons and chains, and received even the sentence of death for his faith, he died at length in his bed in a good old age, in 1617' (Missionary Priests, vol. i. p. 189). In contrast with this estimate of his character we must set the following declaration, made on oath by the Rev. Ralph Standish : ' De Mutio mihi retulit nobilis qusedam foemina Catholica, et cognatione mihi conjuncta, vehementerque questa est, se vidisse hunc Mutium in amplexibus et osculis cum filia sua super lectum, unde valde timebat mater filiae suse periculum ; cumque non haberet ad quern confugeret remedii causa, conquesta est apud patres in castro Wisbicensi detentos, qui tamen pro auctoritate, aut ex imperio, nihil facere poterant.' Mr. Turnbull, who quotes this passage in his edition of Sergeant's History of the English Chapter (p. 13), remarks that Standish, with a view to exalt the fathers of the society at the expense of the secular clergy, made similar and ' even worse ' charges against other priests, including ' the venerable and venerated confessor, John Colleton.' Certainly these men, if innocent — as it may be safe to say they were, though the alternative be to condemn a fellow-priest of calumny and perjury — suffered something more than chains and the rack. Parsons ridicules 'Dr. Dodipol Mush,' as he was nicknamed, for having been 'a poore rude serving man.' He declares that his opponent, when a young man, had made a vow to enter the society ; that the fathers prudently deferred his admission ' to a better satisfaction of his nature and behaviour,' but now that he had run so desperately to the other extreme, it became a question of conscience whether he was not guilty of ' secret apostasy from religious vocation ' (Manifestation, ff. 95, 96).
1 Richard Dudley, described by Dr. Barret as ' magnse nobilitatis adolescens,' was eldest son and heir of Edmund Dudley of Yanworth, Westmoreland. He
New Articles rejected by Wcston. 53
our aduersaries) went of vs. These two, both of them very dis- creete and zealous persons, men of great traueile and paines in their vocations, and of especiall estimation in the parts of their abode, for their great wisedome, learning, and sinceritie, com- ming vnto vs, and finding such garboyles amongst vs : they so demeaned themselues, as on all sides, we were content to impart our griefes vnto them, and to be aduised by them. Whereupon, after the debating of manie things, hauing considered with themselues, what course it were best to hold, for the repayring of the rent that was amongst vs (so scandalous and offensiue to all true Catholickes) they drew twelue articles, wherof one was, that wee should all ioyne againe in commons in the common Hall : and the rest did containe such other orders, as they thought meete for quietnesse to be obserued by the whole companie. Which articles, they first offered to M. Weston and his fauourers to be perused, allowed, and subscribed by them : but they albeit they shewed then no dislike of them, yet they intreated M. Mush and M. Dudley to carrie the same, first vnto M. D. Bagsliaw and M. Bluet (hoping as the euent declared) that they would presentlie haue reiected them, as they had done before D. Eauyns ten men and the mouth : whereby hee himselfe, and his adherents might haue more iust colour likewise to disclame them. But contrarie to his expectation, wee of the vnitie, hauing well considered them, did presentlie without any further delay, subscribe vnto them verie willinglie and readilie. Whereat maister Agent and his subiects were much amazed : and in fine it pleased the good Father vtterlie in effect to reiect them : saying, that hee and his, had certaine rules of their owne approued vnto them, which they must follow, & minded not now to alter or change them, for these which they offered or any such like.
had been educated in London for the law, but, abandoning his family and inheritance, went abroad to Rheims in June 1583, and was shortly afterwards sent by Allen, with Bagshaw and a dozen others, to Rome, where he was ordained priest in 1588. After spending some months at Valladolid, he crossed over to England in September 1589. At the date of his visit to Wisbeach he was thirty-two years of age. (Letters and Memorials, p. 204; Foley's Records, vi., 160.)
54 The Articles approved in London.
Hereupon maister Mush and maister Dudley (supposing they should not be able to doe any good amongst vs) left vs : and took their iournie towards London, of purpose to conferre with the Catholickes there, about these matters and scandals amongst vs. At their coinming to the Citie, they found the laytie generally, and likewise manie of the Cleargie, exceeding stiffely bent to iustifie maister Weston-9 with all his proceedings, and to condemne vs, especiallie D. Bagshaw, and maister Bluet, as men of no worth, vnrulie, disordered, and disobedient per sons, not to be fauoured or respected by any. Besides, such a prejudicial opinion, they perceiued to have possessed mens hearts, through their admiration of lesuitisme, as if the Catholicke faith had neuer beene trulie preached, nor any good order rightlie established, or practised, by vs poore secular Priests, or any of our predecessors: before these yonkers thrust theselues, with high lookes and great bragges into our labours, and that it might be sufficient for vs, if we might haue but some curate- shippes to say Masse, and so much fauour as to attend vpon them, to know their maistershippes pleasures what they would commaund vs.
These two godlie Priests, seeing the violence of this streame, offered at the first but little resistance : but as though they had inclined to the imputations against D. Bagsliaw and maister Bluet, drew forth their said articles before mentioned : and hauing read them in the hearing of some principall Catho lickes, addicted as you haue heard, desired their iudgements of them : who (thinking they had beene maister Westons rules) did answere verie readilie, that they wrere reasonable, discreet and godlie : such as no honest Priest would, or could refuse to admit & allow of. And these be the articles (quoth maister Mush) that D. Bagshaw and the rest of the vnited companie haue very willinglie subscribed vnto : but haue beene verie per- emptorilie reiected by Father Weston and the ninteene his ad herents : whereby you see, that matters goe not at Wisbich, as (I well perceiue) you haue beene informed. Here they that were so readie to condemne vs, began to blush, and hold downe their heads, being willing to heare and know, what before (like
Garnet's proud Answer. 55
proper iudges condemning Catholicke Priestes vnheard vpon an imagined opinion that the lesuits could not doe amisse) they would not indure to heare mentioned. So as after true know ledge, taken of the estate and disposition of both sides, and remebring what letters Father Weston & his adherents had sent abroad against D. Bagshaiv and maister Bluet, and the rest of the thirteene vnited to the effect, that no Catholicks should send them any reliefe, or countenance them, that therby through want, they might be compelled to yeeld to the regiment imposed vpon them by Father Garnet:1 they repented them of some courses, which formerly they had held against vs : and desired verie instantlie these two learned Priests to goe backe againe to Wisbich, and to spare no paines vntill they had brought vs all to peace & concord, giuing them great thanks, praise, and bene diction, for that which they had done alreadie. Whereunto they answered, that they could be well content, to spend if it were their Hues to bring that to passe ; but at Wisbich, they thought they could doe no good, except they could first per- swade him to order, who had been the authour and contriuer of those nouelties (which had procured such garboyles there) and that was (as they were informed) Father Garnet the Pro- uinciall of the lesuits. If we can (sayd they) bring him to argue with vs touching that action, we doubt not, but that we shall preuaile with him : and then our trouble is in effect at an end before we begin : Eius est soluere, cuius est ligare ; his letters to maister Weston fy his fauourers, were the cause of their separation, and a word from him, will be sufficient to reunite them.
Now (as God would haue it) it so fell out, that according to their desire, they met with maister Garnet, who at their first incounter, seemed to be inexorable, affirming that he saw no reason why the lesuits might not gouerne, and haue as well the preheminence ouer all the secular priests in England, as they
1 So A. P. in his Reply to the Apologie (p. 85) : ' The lay gentlemen by whose charity the Castle had been relieved were dealt withal by the Jesuits, or their factious adherents, to withdraw their charity from all those who would not subject themselves to F. Weston.'
56 Jesuit Statecraft condemned.
had at Rome, ouer the English Seminarie.1 With which proude answere they were somewhat sharpened, and entred more roundlie into farther communication with him : no whit fear ing to tell him what they thought, aswell of his said wordes vnto them, as of other the Jesuits proceedings in matters of state, succession of the Crowne, and such like (hauing latelie perused maister Parsons booke of titles :) 2 and also what
1 The words here attributed to Garnet rest only on the authority of his opponents, as is remarked by Tierney (iv. 45), who, however, thinks the statement not improbable. Parsons, at least, in his Domestical Difficulties, cites and adopts the extraordinary language of Cardinal Sega, who, when there was a question of removing the Jesuit fathers from the college at Rome, assured the pope that the society was essential to the existence of religion in England, and that the fathers were necessary to support, correct, and restrain the secular priests, who already, by their vices and their apostasies, had become objects of aversion or of distrust to the catholics. Were the fathers to be removed, added the cardinal, * the people would be left without advisers, the clergy without guides ; the salt would be taken from the earth, and the sun blotted out from the heavens of the English Church ' (Tierney, ibid. , cf. p. clxii).
2 The full title of this book was : ' A Conference about the next succession to the Crowne of Ingland, divided into two partes. Whereof the first conteyned the discourse of a civill lawyer, how and in what manner propinquity of blood is to be preferred. And the second, the speech of a temporall lawyer, about the particuler titles of all such as do or may pretende within Ingland or without, to be the next successior. Whereunto is also added a new and perfect arbor or genealogie of the discents of all the kinges and princes of Ingland, from the Conquest unto this day, whereby each man's pretence is made more plaine. Directed to the Right Honourable the Earl of Essex, of her Majesties privy councell, and of the noble order of the Garter. Published by R. Doleman. Imprinted at N. with licence, MDXCini.'
This treatise, proposing the Infanta of Spain for the English crown, gave great offence to the party of peace. Dr. William Gifford, writing from Brussels to Thomas Throgmorton, June 5, 1595, calls the book 'the most pestilent ever made,' and adds, ' I have given an abstract of Parson's book to the nuncio, who is mad with him, and says he could not have done anything more disgust ing to the pope' (CaL S. P., Dom. Eliz., cclii. 66). The book, or a com pendium of it, was accordingly sent to cardinal Aldobrandino. For this Dr. Gifford was denounced by Father Holt and his party as a traitor to the King of Spain, and a favourer of the Scottish faction, 'although,' writes Gifford to a correspondent at Rome (Aug. 8, 1596), 'at the same time they sent it to Eng land, printed by two thousand copies, and had dedicated it to the Earl of Essex ; whereby it is evident that they would have their doings rather known to the heretics and arch-heretics than to the see apostolic.' He adds, 'Tell the cardinal plainly that never anything was written which hath made such a broil as hath this book ; the authors, by the king's ministers, persecuting all that
Garnet yields to the Arbitrators. 57
account the secular Priests haue had with all true Catholickes, before his societie was borne, and must still haue of necessitie, except God in his secret Judgement, doe purpose some greater ouerthrow to the Catholicke faith, then they relying vpon his mercie, did any wayes expect. Manie words passed betwixt them, and some in such heat, as he threatned to be euen with them for their good wils to the Jesuits : but in the end hee was content to yeeld vnto them, and bidding them farewell, did write his letters to maister Weston, D. Bagshaw and some others, of his pleasure and purpose, that the said Agencie should be committed to their further consideration, to be either retained, or disanulled, as they should thinke meete : very hartilie desiring them so to compound all matters amongst themselues, as that hereafter they might Hue in quietnes.1
Amongst many fayre florishes, vsed by him to maister
speak or mislike with it ; a thing far unfit to proceed from Father Parsons, a Jesuit, printed by Father Holt, a Jesuit, who have in England and every where professed that, by order of the society and his holiness, they were com manded not to meddle with any matter of estate : and was not this hundred years a matter of estate of greater importance handled by any man than is this, the translating of a realm to a new race, and which needs must be begun, main tained, and ended with infinite blood ' (Tierney, iii. xcv.). Parsons, in a paper dated June 15, 1599, printed in full by W. H. Hall in his Index Expurgatorius Anglicamis (pp. 23-32), declares that Allen had ' read over the book more than once, and that with much attention,' and gives at length the cardinal's opinion in approval of its argument. Parliament, in 1595, made it high treason to possess a copy.
1 One of these letters of Garnet, dated Oct. 8, 1595, is printed by Tierney (ibid. cix). It is written in a very conciliatory spirit, especially towards Bag- shaw, whom he addresses as ' amantissime domine,' adding, ' equidem omnes vos ea charitate atque amore complector qua par est ; te imprimis cui me semper charum esse summis votis expetiviS His defence of his own conduct in the affair of Weston's Agency, and his statement of the motives which led to the separation, are not in accordance with the facts, or with the account written by himself, three months earlier, to his general. He still declines to interfere with the arrangement of Weston, but implores the prisoners, for the love of Christ, to let catholics understand that in this separation of bodies there was the closest union of hearts. He begs Bagshaw to let Weston and his friends live in the manner they wished, while, on the other hand, with amazing inconsistency, he now exhorts his opponents to continue to live as they hitherto have done, as becomes learned and pious priests : * Vos interim vivite ut vultis ; id est, ut presbyteros doctos ac pios decet, quod hactenus fecistis.'
58 Wcston falls in a Swoon.
Doctor Bagshaw, he writeth thus : Edmundum men tibi socium $• adiutorem adhibeo. In this busines, I assigne vnto you, as your companion avid assistant, my beloued maister Edmonds. And againe : hisce ego literis eum veliementer moneo fyc. by these my letters to you, I do earnestly admonish him (maister Edmonds) alias Weston, and also in the name (yfour Lord lesus Christ, and in the vertue of his obedience, commaund him, that he apply his minde seriously to the propounding and establishing of some rules, whereby an honest and jirme friendship may grow and continue amongst you. And in an other of his letters to a friend of his in Wisbich at that time, he sayth after this sort : / do determine, that if an agreement be not now made, to write to the 20. that Fa. Edmonds may Hue priuatly as the rest, all or some by course performing that which was laid vpon him. What he writ to Fa. Weston we know not : but craftily inough, we are assured by his practises towards vs since : being as meere a lesuite, as if he had bin spit out of Fa. Parsons mouth.
The aforesayd two godly Priests, hauing wrought with maister Garnet as you haue heard, returned to Wisbich, where notwithstanding the sayd letters, they found Fa. Weston ex ceeding loth to lay downe the scepter of his Agencie, casting out some words, as though he had not bin bound in that case to the obedience of his Prouinciall. Howbeit maister Mush, and maister Dudley so vrged him before all the company, that sundry of his owne adherents, perceiuing how the matter went, began to draw back from him, and sayd, they would haue peace with their brethren, and diuide themselues no longer from them. Whereupon (quoth maister Weston) very pitifully: Ha, my maisters, will you forsake me thus ? I would neuer haue left you, but sith it is so, I am content to giue ouer : and thus speaking, corruit inter manus discipidoru, he fell downe as if he had bin in a swoune, and much ado there was in recouering him.1
1 This statement was first made by Mush in the Dedaratio Motimm : — ' mutus subito et obstupefactus in terram quasi exanimis corruit, non sine justo, ut puta- batur, dei judicio ' (p. 20). Parsons denounced it as an impudent fiction and a most injurious and notorious lie, ' refuted by authentical testimonie of all the quiet prisoners' (Apologie: Table of Deceytes No. 17, and f. 80).
Touching the Stolen Pewter. 59
This entrance towards our vnity being made, then many things came in course to be debated, and particularly the report of theft published abroade by them of the Agenage : viz. that maister Bluet and maister Potter had riotously deteyned from them so much Pewter, and other furniture, as amounted to the value of 17. pound, and that they could haue no iustice for the recouering of it. And first for the better triall thereof, Fa. Weston, maister Bluet, and maister Potter, were required by the sayd two Priests, that they would cause all the Pewter, and other kitchin furniture which they had in their hands, seuerally to be brought forth : which was done by them all accordingly. Then maister Mush and maister Dudley, sent for a Pewterer, and willed him to view all the sayd Pewter, and kitchin furni ture, and to tell them truly, what he iudged it to be worth : which vpon due consideration, and view had of it by the sayd party, he affirmed it to be all scarce worth foure pound. Well then (sayd maister Mush) yesterday, you maister mine (naming the partie) exclaimed that we had not the courage to say with Saint lolin Baptist, non licet tibi habere, but now we aunswere, that although we are not comparable to Saint lohn Baptist, yet as Priests we must tell you playnely : non licet, it is not lawfull for you to infame and belye your fellow-prisoners, as we find you haue dealt with M. Bluet, and M. Potter?- For we saw your letters abroade, wherein you charged them two, to with-hold from you 17. pound value in Pewter and kitchin furniture : and now we see, that all that both you and they haue, is scarce worth 4. pound. And therefore we say againe with Saint lohn Baptist : non licet. You ought not so to haue belyed them, but are bound in conscience to aske them for- giuenes : and with your second letters to reuoke this slaunder that you have so raysed against them : which if you shall refuse to do, we must be glad to do it for you. Now it is to be
1 Thomas Pound, the Jesuit lay brother, was apparently the author of this accusation. ' Touching the pewter stolen, that matter was publicly convinced for a notorious calumny before Ma. Mush and Ma. Dudley, with great shame and check to his pupil Ma. Pond, who urged the matter against Ma. Potter and others' (W. C.'s Replie to the Manifestation, p 10).
60 Peace concluded, Nov. 6, 1595.
obserued, that when maister Weston and his adherents diuided themselues from vs, and made maister Brampstons chamber their kitchin, they found an oport unity to go into the common kitchin, and tooke from thence such Pewter and other furni ture, as had bin prouided, and euer before vsed for the com pany in the common Hall ; and afterwards thought it a kinde of theft, that any was deteyned from them, but that they might haue had all.1
These matters and others likewise, these two good Priests hauing compounded amongst vs, they fell to the draught of new Articles, increasing the said 12. after much discussing of them on all sides to the number of 19. Whereunto we all sub scribed in the yere 1595. the 6. of Nouember ; and so after our long dissensions, a generall peace was concluded to our great contentment, we dare be bold to say it ; and maister Weston and his friends returned vnto vs againe, and tooke their com mons with vs in the common Hall, as before their breach made they were accustomed.2 Now we being all of vs thus reunited, not long after it pleased maister Garnet to write an other letter
1 Parsons has preserved another anecdote of this domestic inspection : ' When M. Mush came to make the peace, he being led about (saith the Relation) to see the orders of this lesser number, was shewed 6 or 7 butteries for 13 persons, they not suffering the 20 to have any. And further, the party that directed him, after he had shewed him all these, he brought him to a chimney where also there was good ale, and said, Here is another buttery. Nay, said M. Mush, there is the devil, whereof that place was called afterwards merrily by some " the devil in a corner." ' — (Apologie, f. 82).
2 Two days later (Nov. 8) Mush wrote what Parsons characterises as * a very kind letter ' to Garnet in his own and Mr. Dudley's name. It is printed by Tierney (ibid. cxiv). The two peacemakers thus describe the scene they had just witnessed : ' Such humiliation, one at another's feet ; such wringing, clip ping and embracing ; such sobs, tears, and joyful mourning, — that for joy also our hearts were like to burst among them. And, verily, father, neither among themselves, nor to our sight, they appeared, after, the same men they were before. We thought it one of the joyfullest days that ever we had seen.' They add : ' We are yours, good sir, from our hearts ; and we beseech you to write to the whole company some sweet and comfortable letter at your best leisure, of the joy you have of their union, and that you would in particular write friendly to Mr. D. Norden, that from hence you and yours do forgive and forget all matters past of discontentments among you. . . . Remember us, we pray you, to our dear friend father Thomas Lisfter]. . . . '
General Rejoicings. 61
to maister Doctor Bagshaw, dated the 17. of Nouember 1595. Wherein it is very strange to consider, what ioy he pretendeth in that behalfe, whereas indeed, we are able to affirme it vpon our owne knowledges, that the ouerthrow of maister Westons agencie went to his heart : we meane vexed him, and angred him exceedingly. But heare the diuelish Politician how he transformeth himselfe into an angell of light. When the blessed joules in heauen (sayth he) did sing with one consent, Glory be to God on high, you at Wisbich preached, and restored comfort and in earth peace to men of' goodwill : then no doubt the princes went before, the singers followed after, and in the middest were the damsels playing on their tymbrels. Also he telleth vs, that as there is a ccelestiall Hierarchy in Heauen, so we had then an other at Wisbich, which all England did reuerence : which the Queene of Saba admired : and which many from the -uttermost borders of the earth came to see and behold : adding, that those men were blessed together with our seruants that stood in our presence, that heard our wisedome, and beheld our mutuall loue. Hereunto also, it may please you, that we adde some other words of his written to maister Doctor Bagshaw two yeres before, after himselfe had bin with vs at Wisbich in the yeare 1593. concerning his iudgement of our whole company at that time : / assure you (sayth he) that the being with you hath wrought such effect in the harts of all that were with me (being indeed three or four Gentlemen, whom we afterwards tearmed his Deacons, and Subdeacons) that they neuer saw place or per sons which more delighted them : and for mine owne part, I tell you very sincerely, that it was the greatest comfort to be amongst you, which I had these whole seauen yeeres. Testis enim mihi est Deus, quomodo cupiam omnes vos in visceribus lesu Christi: Which sentence of S. Paule being read that very day in the Epistle in the Church, when I came first vnto you, with other many most comfortable sentences, I was both not a little recreated, with a conscience of an vnfeyned loue towards euery one of you, and moued to tlianke God almighty, Super communicatione vestra in Euangelio Christi a prima die vsque nunc : consider ans quia qui ccepit in vobis opus bonum, perficiet, sicut est mihi iustum
62 Garnet's Sincerity suspected.
sentire de omnibus vobis : And (that which contented me most of all) comforted with an assured hope, that you are they, who in your singular charities will haue me dayly in corde $• in vinculis vestris, <§r in defensione $ confirmatione Euangelij socium gaudy vestri. Hitherto maister Garnet then : and now againe in the letter before mentioned he professeth : that being at that time with vs, he thought himselfe all that while to haue felt the ioyes of Heauen. Now we referre our selues and our cause to your considerations, to iudge as God shall mooue you : If he the sayd Garnet did thinke then truly of vs, and writ sincerely as he thought, what cause had his subiect maister Weston before the yere 1593. or afterwards, we continuing as before we were, to moyle and make a faction amongst vs for the setting vp of his Agency, as though we had bin not such men, as maister Garnet sayth he found vs, but as Fa. Weston to colour his ambition reputed vs, that is, persons of all disorder, licen- tiousnes, and confusion. And againe if maister Garnet at his being with vs three or foure dayes, did thinke himselfe all that while in Heauen : what a hell did he afterwards finde in his conscience, when he had bin the chiefe cause that Father Weston and his adherents did separate themselues from vs. Moreouer if the sayd letter congratulatorie for our vniting pro ceeded from maister Garnets hart : and that thereby we were indeed in his opinion so charitable, so wise, and so admirable persons : how iustly may all Catholicks, that tooke part with the sayd separators from vs, and factious against vs, blame and condemne themselues, in that we continuing our former courses without alteration, either in our conuersation, or in our regi ment (if it may so be tearmed) from the time that maister Garnet was with vs, vnto the very instant of our sayd recon ciliation : the ioyning againe of maister Weston and his ad herents vnto vs, is now reckoned by him the sayd maister Garnet to be a matter so glorious both to God and men, as he hath described it.1 But we will proceede.
1 While Bagshaw was thus commenting on the contradictions of Garnet, Parsons with equal justice was exposing similar inconsistencies on the part of Bagshaw and Mush (Apologie, ff. 78-80). Bagshaw especially laid himself open to such
Wcston shifts his Place at Table. 63
The aforesayd Agencie being thus ouerthrowne, and a peace concluded amongst vs, we for our parts, were replenished with great ioy : but you are farre deceiued, as we our selues were, if you thinke as we then thought : that either maister Garnet, maister Weston, or their lesuiticall crue, did take this so great a foyle in good part : we afterwards perceiued to our griefe, that maister Weston would neuer haue yeelded to haue ioyned in commons with vs againe, except maister Mush, and maister Dudley vnder-hand had consented vnto them, that if afterwards he and his company should thinke it conuenient to separate themselues againe from vs, they should haue these, and those roomes, such a table in the Hall, such a place for their Kitchin, and such other roomes, as they held conuenient for them : all which they set downe particularlie vnder their hands, and left the same sealed vp with them : which God knoweth, wee neuer dreamed of. Besides, maister Weston did not long sit at the vpper Table with vs, and below maister Bluet, and Doctor Bagshaw, where his due place was, but that he desired, and had it easily graunted vnto him, that he might leaue his said place, and sit in some other as he thought good. Whereupon as disdaining to sit where he did before, he bound himselfe after wards to no certaine place, but sate (you must thinke) for humilities sake, now here, now there, as he list. Moreouer notwithstanding our sayd reunion, such abroade as had de- praued vs poore Priests, and charged vs as you haue heard : did
criticism, for, in a letter to Garnet on the pacification (Tierney, ibid, cxvi) which Parsons does not fail to quote, he not only thanked his correspondent for his prayers and his 'letters full of solicitude, sincerity, and charity,' but warmly commended Weston for the prudence and amiability with which he conducted the negotiations for peace : ' Gratulor tibi Edmundum nostrum, qui in hoc negotio componendo, et obedienter erga te, et amanter erga fratres, et propter "eos qui foris sunt prudenter se gessit.'
But, exclaims Parsons, ' If it be true that F. Edmund behaved himself so well in making peace, with what truth or modesty can he [Bagshaw] tell all the world now in print that Father Edmund was so unwilling to do it that he said he would rather cast himself down from the Castle walls and that he was so astonished by the very treaty thereof that he was mute and beside himself. ' The particular words here quoted by Parsons from the ' Latin book ' occur, however, in the Dedaratio Motuum (p. 20), which was written not by Bagshaw but by Mush.
64 Renewal of Heart-burnings.
continue (to shew their constancie in their former good wils towards vs) Justifying in their common assemblies, what before they had reported of vs. Maister Dolman who dealt like a very honest man, to haue compounded all strifes amongst vs, as is before expressed, was likewise very sharply galled by them, because he deemed their sayd separation from vs to be a sinne, and that he had before greatly blamed them for making the Chappell at Wisbich their Buttery. Which particulars being reprochfully cast into his teeth, he maynteyned his former assertions : adding, that by their sayd pj-ophaning that Chappell, they were scandalous, sacrilegious, irregular, and excommunicated persons. Whereof maister Garnet hauing notice, he desired maister Doctor Bagshaw, by his letter to pacific and stay maister Dolman, from these or any such like speeches, which might tend to the renewing of the memorie of our former breach. Which maister Doctor Bagshaw vndertooke, putting him the sayd Fa. Garnet, notwithstanding in minde how vilely he the sayd maister Dolman had bin dealt with, by such as he the sayd Garnet had great interest in : in that first Fa. Parsons had set out the booke of Titles in maister Dolmans name, which (not withstanding that he detested the contents of it) might haue brought him into great danger : and secondly, for that one (a lesuite) vnder his commaund, had very cunningly thrust him out of a place, where of long time he had found great entertayne- ment, and so wrought, as four e pound yerely haue since bin deteyned from him, which was giuen vnto him, as a legacy by will.
Againe : within some quarter of a yere, after our sayd established concord, great hart -burning grew, and many slaunderous speeches were cast abroade against some of vs by maister Weston and his old friends, concerning a priest and prisoner with vs, his escape from Wisbich : who being aduised so to do by some of that crue, and with Fa. Westons priuitie, his taking againe was ascribed by them to maister Doctor Bagshaw and some others : which gaue not only them occasion, but many of their friends abroad to write and rayle against vs exceedingly. Not long after, viz. in September, maister
Lewd Assertions of Father Archer. 65
Archer J a lesuite (that liued with vs in prison) gaue an other occasion of very great garboyles by affirming that the stewes in Rome were there cum approbations (testified vnder the hands of Doctor Norden? maister Buckley? maister Meredith*
1 Bagshaw means by 'Jesuit ' an adherent of Western. Giles Archer was not a member of the society. He was ordained at Rheims in 1587. In the winter of 1598-99 he was sent with Weston and Pound to the Tower. He subsequently managed to get free from prison ; and in 1602, from April 5 to October 18, we find him a guest of the college at Rome (Foley, Diary and Pilgrim Book, p. 575), where, as we shall see, his accusers followed him.
2 Norden, a priest and doctor of medicine already mentioned (p. 60, note), made himself especially obnoxious to the Jesuit party. He is described as a man of violent temper and language ; and his sudden death, which took place just after the dispute mentioned in the text, was a triumph for his opponents which they celebrate in their writings as a divine judgment on their side. God took up the controversy, writes Parsons, by ' cutting off M. Norden strangely ' (Apologie, f. 80). Bagshaw, in his Answer (p. 19), defends his friend, and adds, * A strange and marvellous death must be ascribed to D. Norden who yet as he had ever lived honest and sincere, so he died in prison for the confession of his faith of an apoplexy in quiet and Christian manner, referring his cause to be discerned by God betwixt him and his factious detractors." A. P. {Reply, p. n) also indignantly denies Parsons' assertion that the doctor was stricken with dumbness till he died ; and writes, ' It is well known that he died of a lethargy, and that he spake many times after he was first taken therewith, and died in all points as became a Catholic priest, as there are many to witness who were present.' Mush, in a letter to Garnet already quoted, gives Norden a favourable character : ' He is sharp, you see, and bitter when he imagineth to have an adversary, but yet kind enough again when he findeth courtesies and thinketh he is beloved. . . . We find him most tractable, and no man of that side yielding more frankly to concord and pacification than him ' (Tierney, ibid. cxvi.).
3 This Buckley, called ' Father Buckley ' in the official list of Wisbeach prisoners, was either, as bishop Challoner supposes, John Buckley, alias God frey Jones, a franciscan, who was hanged at St. Thomas Waterings, July 12, 1598, and is enrolled in the catalogue of martyrs; or more probably, as F. Morris believes, Sigebert Buckley, the sole survivor of the benedictine monks of Westminster, who in 1607 perpetuated or restored his order in England by solemnly clothing two secular priests with the benedictine habit in the Gatehouse prison. He died, aged 93, in 1610. Father Buckley belonged to the anti-jesuit faction. (Morris's Troubles, ii. 271 ; Gillow's Dictionary.} In 1596 he had been already, according to Tierney, ' a confessor in chains ' for nearly thirty years.
4 Jonas Meredith, another of the party opposed to Weston, was a seminary priest of mature age and experience. He crossed the channel on his way to Douai in 1574 with eleven others, including John Colleton, William Holt, and George Blackwell. He returned to the college in 1577 after a year's labour and imprisonment in England, when the diarist records of him : ' in spiritual! messe
66 A fond and false Distinction.
and Doctor Bagshaw :) that the stewes were as lawfull in Rome, as any Citizen there: (testified vnder the hands of Doctor Norden, maister Buckley, and maister Meredith-) that the stewes were in Rome, as lawfully as any Magistrate in that Citie : (testified vnder the hands of Doctor Norden, and Doctor Bagshaw :) that the stewes were in Rome as lawfully as the Pope himselfe, or any order of religious men (testified vnder the hands of Doctor Nor den, and Doctor Bagshaw :) and that they were most necessarie (testified vnder the hands of Doctor Nor den, maister Buckley, and Doctor Bagshaw.) Which very lewde assertions, comming to Fa. Westons eares, and vnder- standing how they were impugned by maister D. Norden, he the sayd M. Weston, did take vpon him by a fond and false distinction to defend them. Whereupon maister Doctor Bag shaw being drawne into that opposition, diuers long treatises passed betwixt him, and Fa. Weston: he the sayd maister Doctor Bagshaw impugning those lewde positions, and maister Weston with all his shifts and skill laboring to defend them.1
multum lucri fecit ' (p. 124 ; cf. pp. 7, 124, 289). In 1585 he was banished from England (with Colleton, Rishton, and others) after a second imprisonment. A third visit to England brought him to the Gatehouse, Westminster, and thence to Wisbeach. At this date (1596) he had been about twelve years in prison.
1 These propositions of Archer were taken very seriously by the Appellant priests. They were set down in the Declaratio Motuum addressed to the pope, and may be seen on the back of a draft letter (also written to the pope and signed by Cecil, Bluet, Mush, and Champney) among the Petyt MSS., vol. xlvii., f. 276. The ' fond and false distinction ' of F. Weston is stated as follows : ' Responsio et distinctio Patris Edmundi qui tune erat in carcere Wisbicensi — Magister Archerius vult dicere et intelligere lupinaria esse Romte cum approbatione seque licita atque aliquem civem, magistratum, ordinem religiosorum vel papam, sed non peccatum simplicis fornicationis. Postera die dixit idem Archerius se velle defendere istas propositiones contra quemcunque et se deliberate et ex animo istas asseruisse. Dictus Egidius Archerius assertor harum propositionum Romam venit et manet in Collegio Anglorum.'
Parsons (Apologie, f. 80) refers to these charges as ' false accusations laid upon M. Archer, a venerable priest, whom since they have caused to be put into the Inquisition of the Tower of London,' and declares the argument was used by him simply ad hominem to confute Norden, who had laid down a general proposition that ' toleration could not be without approbation. ' To which Bagshaw rejoins (Answer, p. 20) that this denial ' is so without the compass of human modesty as it seemeth a very league with hell against truth and honesty. '
The final Disruption at Wisbeach. 67
About these points, there grew such parts-taking and hatred, as that the sayd orders established amongst vs by maister Mush and maister Dudley -, (in that they crossed these and such like demeanors) were in the latter end of the yeare 1596. vtterly cashierd and reiected.1 So as notwithstanding we kept com mons still in the Hall together : we lined (God knoweth) there with great disquietnes : many of our old friends abroad being so farre drawne to lesuitisme, as that they blamed vs, and tooke part with them in defence of these so abhominable absurdities.2
And now it may please you to leaue vs in our sayd troubles and discontentments, and to be aduertised of the beginning of
1 Parsons quotes from the Relation of Wisbich the following account of this renewal of hostilities : D. Norden, they say, ' having been mulcted often times by force of the rules for his foul tongue, and lastly desiring to see the Authentical Copy which was in the hands of the better part, when he had got them into his fingers (notwithstanding he had promised upon his word to restore them faith fully) he ran away with them to D. Bagshawes chamber, and so after they could never be put in ure again ' (Apologie, f. 80).
A. P. in his Reply (p. 154) lays the blame on the Jesuits, and asserts that they would not keep the new rules. ' If he [Norden] tore the paper or burned it, they tore the rules and cancelled them before, when they refused to stand to judgment according as the rules between them had ordered it.'
2 The sequel of the story is thus told by the opposite faction : ' These 13 then that were of the other party (or rather some two or three heads that incensed the rest) being most violent and passionate men as they shewed themselves to be by beating a priest of the other side \inarg. M. Wigges : See the Relation of Wisbich) 1601] and defending it to be scarce a venial sin ; fell to more out- ragious dealing than before, and among other things they joined with the jailor being an heretic, and by that means vexing and afflicting the other side extremely both in word and deed, writing also divers treatises with most untemperate and furious words, which are yet extant, until God stroke one of the chief actors in this kind [marg. D. Norden] with a strange accident of repressing his tongue by dumbness until he died. Another of them \inarg. M. Ithel] played the Apo- stata and made himself Chaplain to the B. of London, with whom he is to this day. Two more brake out of prison, but one was taken again. Two other passed to the better side, so as they remaining only 7, were yet so divided among themselves as in the year 1597, one writeth \tuarg. F. Edm. in his letter to F. O., 1597] that they did eat and take their diet in 4 several places, having notwithstanding first driven out of the common hall, by help of the jailor, the other part though far the greater' (Apologie, f. 67). This story of the subdivision of the party in question is contradicted in the Reply by A. P. (p. 156).
68 Beginning of a more bitter Tragedy.
a more bitter tragedie. Whilest after our said peace we were lulled asleepe for a time in Wisbich, by maister Garnets in- chaunting letter of congratulation, and exercised with the un- iust afflictions of our brethren, as before we haue touched : he the sayd maister Garnet with his complices bestirred themselues, and that secretly, so as then we did not suspect, or looke for any further plots to be in contriuing against vs. We will be bold to acquaint you with one of their notable stratagemes, which argueth more wit and foresight, then playne dealing or honestie. It appeareth that by the lesuites practises here amongst vs, in disgracing and abusing the secular priests very shamefully, there was some rumor thereof in Rome, to the great impeachment of the lesuites credits there, being then as turbulent in that Citie in their dealing with our English Seminary, as they had bin, and were still firebrands amongst vs. For the better incountering of which rumor, it being thought inconuenient, that any of their owne calling by com mending themselues, should take vpon them that office, a secular priest was found out, a man of a quicker penne, then either of wisedome or sinceritie : who being well acquainted with all the iarres and quarrels betwixt vs, and the lesuites ; and hauing written himselfe a letter vnto vs, as presuming to aduise men of farre greater experience then himselfe, concern ing our troubles about the sayd Agencie : this man (we say) did so harden his forehead, or in his simplicitie was so seduced, as contrary to his owne conscience he writ the tenth of January 1596. to Card. Caietane, Protector of the English Seminary, in the behalfe of the lesuites, a most false and impudent letter. Wherein amongst many other things, he assureth the Cardinal!, that of his owne knowledge, for twenty yeeres, there had not bin any dissension betwixt the secular priests and the lesuites : and that the reports made against these good Fathers, con cerning their ambition, were so farre from the truth, as that indeed the lesuites were in all places most notable examples to the secular priests of singular humilitie, gentlenes, patience, pietie, and charitie. The letter it selfe with some obseruations vpon it, you shall finde amongst other things to this story
The Clergy project an Association. 69
annexed.1 With this cunning trick of these good Fathers, we were not then acquainted : it was well handled of them, that they had got so false a brother fro amongst our selues to fit their deseignements so aptly, that is so lewdly, according to their desire.
After that maister Weston had begun his said Agencie, as hath been before mentioned, our brethren abroad of the grauer and wiser sort, began to foresee : that if the same did continue, maister Garnet would shortly after, as well by M. Westons example in Wisbich, as also by the example of the Jesuits gouernment of the Seminarie at Rome, challenge, and take vnto himselfe, ere it were long, the Prelacie and gouernment ouer all the Priests in England. For the preuenting whereof, as also there being many Catholicke Priests in England, and many wants, as of authoritie of confirmation for the full accom plishing of the effects of Baptisme, and of holy oyle, being of so necessarie imployment, they thought it conuenient to deuise certaine orders, for a general association,2 amongst all secular
1 The letter which was not annexed by Bagshaw for the reason given by him in his concluding paragraph is now printed in the Appendix from the translation edited by Andreas Philalethes in * An Answere made by One of our Brethren, a Secular Priest now in prison, to a fraudulent Letter of M. George Blackwel's, etc. : Newly imprinted 1602.' See a.\so_fust Defence (p. 21), where, in answer to Blackwell's statement in this letter that for twenty years he had never heard of any dissension among the clergy which was not easily blown over, Colleton remarks : ' For the space of the latter two years, immediately before he [Black - well] wrote the said letter, not only the whole realm was grievously scandalised, but the pulpits rung also everywhere with the greatest contentions which were between the Jesuits and priests at Wisbich. And these scandalous stirs were so little unknown to Master Blackwell as himself indited a general letter unto them persuading to mutual peace and concord. '
2 Tierney, who had seen a copy of the rules of this Association or Sodality among the Stonyhurst MSS., says : ' It was projected by Mush and Colleton on the principle of a voluntary association soon after the pacification at Wisbeach. It was to have had two independent branches, one in London, the other in Lancashire.' Its affairs were to be 'entrusted to the management of a person, to be called the "Father" aided by two assistants and a secretary, all to be elected annually by the majority of the members. Their duties were to administer the funds of the society, to assign relief to its indigent brethren, to preside at the meetings, and determine the disputes of the fraternity. Other matters were to be decided by a plurality of voices. The members were to
70 Mr. Standish shifts his Sails.
Priests : and in the end concluded to referre the estate of our Church here, together with their reasons and most humble supplication to the Popes Holines, that it might stand with his good pleasure (if he thought it conuenient) to graunt vnto them that they might haue some Bishop or suffragane here : as he had yeelded heretofore to our brethren in Ireland. In these consultations, one master Standish a Priest was a great intermedler, no man being therein more forward then himselfe : but finding in the end so many fitter men in all respects then himselfe for any imployment or extraordinarie preferment in that companie : he shortly after shifted his sayles, & going to
employ their influence in procuring permanent missions for the clergy belonging to the congregation : they were to be guardians of each other's fame, the cor rectors of each other's failings, and were each to seek, by prayer and recollection, to improve themselves in the virtues of their state.' The Reply to the Manifesta tion makes mention of other objects of the sodality (f. 8). It was ' for the pro vision of such as came newly and rawly over ; for the disposing of them abroad to their better security ; for the provision of prisoners in durance ; for the better relief to Cath. abroad in matters spiritual ; for the particular good of every priest ; and for the checking of some exorbitant and unnatural courses taken by the Jesuits against their prince and country; to abolish such meddlings in those affairs, as impertinent to our function and vocation, and to strengthen and enable our selves in these matters by a mutual union : this, I say, was the end of our Sodality which we imparted unto the Jesuits that they should see our sincerity and honesty in those proceedings : but we were too sincere and plain to deal with such crafty crowders ; for they well perceived that this course would discover much of their juggling in matters of state, and also put an everlasting block or bulwark against their intended superiority.'
Colleton also gives an analysis of the rules, which provided among other things (he says) for preaching monthly and catechising weekly, of adventuring upon any danger for saving or comforting a soul in extreme necessity, . . . of declining all such occasions as might breed variance with others, especially with the fathers of the society (Just Defence, p. 123). The chief opponents of the Asso ciation among the secular clergy were Dr. Bavant, Mr. Blackwell, and Mr. Tirwit.
Tierney thinks there was much that was faulty in the machinery of the pro posed institution, and that some of its rules were impracticable. ' Still its object was laudable ; its effect, moreover, could it have been perfected, must have been to raise the character and restore the influence of the clergy ; nor did it contain anything to justify the violent and offensive language with which Persons, both in manuscript and print, in England and to the pope himself, continually assailed its projectors ' (vol. iii. p. 45, note}.
The Association is opposed. 71
the Jesuits, did acquaint them with the whole course that the secular Priests had taken, and intended to proceede in. Whereof they (the Jesuits) hauing full notice (as we gesse by the euent) sent into Spayne, to admonish Father Parsons of all the premisses, aswell concerning maister Westons said Agencie, and the ouerthrowe of it, as of the enterprise, which our brethren the secular Priests here had in hand : and like wise to impart vnto him, an other course deuised by them, & to be better managed and brought to passe by his great policie, wisedome and credit. What answere Father Parsons returned vnto them, wee can but also gesse. But we thinke wee may con- iecture it, by that which followed, viz. that he would thinke of the matter, and that they should send one to meet him at Rome with further instructions, for his better proceeding to the accomplishment of their desires. Now you haue heard before, what a way they had made alreadie for themselues, and for the repayring of their credit in Rome, by maister Blackwdl his false letter mentioned, very well knowing, that if any meanes might be had to aduance their credits, and set them aloft, it must come from thence, and therefore laid that machiuilian ground for Father Parsons their only hope to work vpon afterwardes : which as you see fell out, as they could haue wished at that time.
Also the said Father Parsons (then as wee suppose) or shortlie after, hauing taken notice what our brethre the secular Priests were in hand with in England, did send to some of the best account amongst them, and likewise to some others that in any sort, they should not proceed in that course : assuring them that it would be very offensiue to his holines, because of this knowledge, the very same in effect, hauing heretofore beene offered to his consideration, hee did vtterlie reiect the same as inconuenient in all respects as things stood for England. Besides to our further abuse, and to keep vs occupied witli our own conceits, that wee might not somuch as suspect any thing of theirs : wee in our plaine dealing acquainted them with our whole drift, and purpose. Whereunto for a time, they craftilie
72 Mr. Standish despatched to Rome.
applauded : l as hoping shortlie, by their former courses to haue it dasht : but afterward perceiuing that their owne purposes could not so soone be compassed : (as wise men in their genera tion fearing the worst) the they mightilie opposed them selues, and depraued ours.2 And then maister Blackwell himselfe amongst others could write a discoursing letter with very much earnestnes and rhetoricall arguments against so ambi tious a cogitation, as once to thinke of any one mans Soueraignty ouer all his brethren, during the times of our persecution.
Howbeit wee continuing resolute in our former purpose, but prosecuting the same with great dulnes, maister Garnet and his followers, dispatched the saide maister Standish, our false brother to Rome in the latter end of the yeere 1596. there to expect Father Parsons comming. We will here leaue this honest man about his busines in that Citie, and put you in mind, that after Cardinall Aliens death, the students in the English Colledge there, felt no lesse oppression by the Jesuits their tyranizing gouernours, then wee did at home : because we withstood their deseignements in aspiring to the like soue- raigntie ouer vs here. It may be that hereafter some of our brethren, will set out those tragedies at large, which indured long, and will appeare to all men of indifferencie to haue beene verie intolerable.3 In the meane while you shall vnderstand
1 ' When the matter was broken to Father Garnet, for understanding his liking and opinion in the same : he answered that it was the best thing which was taken in hand in all this Queeri s time, if it could be effected. Likewise when the affair was communicated to Father Weston, he seemed to like it very well ' (Colleton, p. 123).
2 According to the Declaratio Motuum (p. 25), Parsons, ' suo nimirum pede alios metiens,' unscrupulously asserted that the projectors of the Association sought not the good of the church but bishoprics for themselves. They, on the other hand, accused Blackwell of opposing their scheme from similar motives of personal ambition, seeing that his only chance of promotion lay in the favour of the Jesuits.
3 A brief but impartial and curious account of the several disturbances which took place at the English college at Rome, 1578-1596, is given by Dr. Ely, who spent four months in the house with Allen (Notes upon the Apologie, pp. 73-93)- Compare on the Jesuit side Father Hunter's Modest Defence of the clergy
Memorial against the Jesuits. 73
that two or three, being of likelihood more grieued then the rest, or hauing a greater sense of our calamities, both at home and abroad, then manie others : did write a treatise of the lesuits dealing, & naming it a memoriall, dedicated the same in Latine to his holines in the yeere 1597. about which time Father Parsons being come to Rome, was in the middest of all his machiuilian plots, and vnder pretence of compounding the stirres in that Seminarie, first so dealt, as in verie short time by cousoning the Rector, he got that place for himselfe, and now enioyeth it.
The imputations laid vpon the lesuits in the saide memoriall (the effect whereof you shall finde at the end of this historic) ! were so verie sharpe, and touched their freehold so neerely, as no meruaile if Father Garnet bestirred his stumps 2 to salue their credits by all the meanes and wayes he could deuise. And therefore he held it best to write his letter to all the secular Priests : wherin after certaine flourishes, how much they Avere beloued and honoured by him and all his brethren of the societie, he intreateth very earnestlie their testimonies in their behalfe, against those reports made of the lesuits in the said memoriall. And that hee might obtaine a faire shew of many hands, hee was content to play small game before hee would sit out (as our English prouerb saith :) and therfore he commendeth to them such a triple answere, as he thought would fit the most. Although (saith he) we are not so well known to many of you., as you all peraduenture will pronounce the whole contents of the said treatise to be false : yet one of these
and religious (pp. 44-66), in answer to the History of Doway College, by R. C., i.e. Tootle alias Dodd (pp. 11-13). A number of original documents bearing on the subject are printed by Tierney (Dodd, vol. iii. pp. Ixxiii-cv), and by F. Knox in the appendix to the Douay Diaries (pp. 368-375). A full report, favourable to the Jesuits, on the disturbance of 1595-96, was drawn up by cardinal Sega, who made a visitation of the college at the command of the pope. A translation of the original in the Vatican library is printed by Mr. Foley (Records, vol. vi. pp. 1-66).
1 Infra, p. 96.
2 Parsons resents this disrespectful language, ' a style fitter for Ruffians and souldiers than for sacred and anointed priests, if they were priests that write this ' (Manifestation, f. n).
74 Testimonials in favour of the Jesuits.
three answers may Jit all your turtles. Some may say all is false: other that they themselues haue nothing to accuse the lesuits with, and doe not therefore beleeue the said reports to be true : and the rest may affirme without any scruple, that for their parts, they neuer dreamed of the said memoriall, nor doe in any sort approue the same. And the better to perswade them thus to answere, he sweareth by more then his little honesty, that there is not a true word in it. There is a saying amongst such lawyers as are of experience, that they seldome fall out to be the honestest men, who are driuen so oft to seeke testimonials for the approuing of their good behauior. But that is no matter with them, and peraduenture, that conceit here holdeth not at Rome, so as maister Garnet did content himselfe with his owne course, and made such haste therin, as before August the same yeere, the testimonial he got, was with Fa. Parsons in the English Seminary. And here we cannot omit one thing, which indeede made vs a little merry in the middest of our sorrow, how good Fa. Parsons was troubled with one mans sub scription to the sayd testimoniall. For thus he writeth : as he pretendeth from Naples, primo Augusti 1598. to the sayd party. After I saw a particular testimony of your owne hand in latine, concerning the memoriall giuen vp against the societie, I could haue bin content you had not written it : but either haue sub scribed simpliciter, as many other auncient and graue Priests did to the cunning letter, as it was written (being very modest and most true) or that you had sayd nothing at all: as well you might haue omitted: the memoriall being writ and sent from Flaunders, whitest you were yet in Italy : and so that it was done, and exhibited, Te neque consentiente, neque conscio (for those are only the words of testimony that you giue) was not needefidl: the thing being euident of it selfe, and your parti cular writing so bare a thing vnder the common letter, was to detract from all the letter before : and for the matter it selfe (which was most abhominable, false, and slaunderous,) you leaue it indifferent to be beleeued, or not beleeued fyc. Were it not that you might hereby perceiue what packing, and practising is amongst these fellowes for the maintenance of their owne
Standish attends upon Parsons. 75
credit : l and how swift they are in the expeditions they take in hand : we would haue made no mention hereof, because thereby our owne dulnes may iustly be condemned, who all this while had not sent our messengers to Rome, for the information of his holynes, as touching our estates here, and the common desire of vs secular Priests, for a Bishop as before is mentioned. In which slow proceeding, we will leaue our brethren for a time, and returne to maister Standish attending vpon Fa. Parsons in Rome.
After this good Father had gotten the Rectorship of the English Seminary, it then pleased his Worship to proceede with the cause commended vnto him by his subiects in England, Fa. Garnet and the rest. We doubt not, but that in the
1 One of these attestations, drawn up in favour of Father Holt and the society by the English catholics in Belgium, November 1596, is printed by Tierney (vol. iii. p. Ixxxix). It is signed by eighteen clergymen, fifty-one officers and soldiers of Sir William Stanley's legion (including Guy Fawkes), eight private gentlemen, four lawyers, and six ladies.
In illustration of the complaints made by Bagshaw regarding the methods by which these testimonials were got up, Tierney prints also (ibid. p. xc) a letter of Dr. James Younger of Douay, who himself, under pressure, had signed one of the documents. He writes to Dr. Gifford, ' We hear by Dr. Worthington that certain who term themselves chief and principal of our nation have written unto the pope that they are tyrannized by an English Jesuit here in Flanders, with like tyranny they have complained to be used by Jesuits in England against our seminary priests. ... To give a counterbuff to these mens proceedings who have thus reported against the Jesuits, Dr. Worthington hath taken in hand this worthy journey, as to travel up and down from place to place to get every mans hand who will not be counted a miso-jesuit to subscribe to a bill drawn up by him and his therein to clear Father Holt from all crime as likewise the Jesuits in England.' He adds that it is not reckoned enough to say we know nothing of the matter, 'we must also say that we disallow and disprove, and count slanderous all that the other parties object against the Jesuits. To this we oppose that in conscience we cannot, seeing we know not the causes by which the others are moved to write to the pope : we offer to write to the president a blank wherein he may testify in all our names that which in conscience he thinketh may be said. This is not yet enough. . . . Father Alfonso must have our names to use when necessity shall require. If this be refused, then general speeches are used that we are Scottilini generis, unde sequitur nos non favere jesuitis ; ergo nee Hispanis ; ergo nee causa catholicse : quo si recte innectantur invitae colligationes, dicam ego, ergo Sarmentitii sumus, fidei proditores, digni flammis et aeternis ignibus.'
76 The Pope shamefully deceived.
meane time he had conferred with his friends, and was resolued of the plot he meant to effect : the execution whereof was in manner as followeth. Standish that honest man must haue accesse to the Popes holynes, accompanyed with two runna- gates, both of them Priests, Doctor Haddock, and maister Martin Array.1 These must take vpon them, and so they did, that they were men deputed from the secular Priests in England., most humbly to intreate his Holynes that he would be pleased by his most preheminent Authority, to appoynt a superior ouer the Church of England. And the rather to perswade him thereunto, they affirmed like very lying wretches, that there was such great dissension betwixt the secular priests and the laytie, as great inconueniences would certainely insue, except one were placed amongst them, that by his authority might reforme and reconcile them. Now it is too well knowne, that the strife which was heere, rested betwixt vs and the lesuites ; no one lay Catholick (for ought we know) being at enmity with any other secular Priests, then with some few of vs, that were at Wisbich, and one or two more abroad that tooke our parts : and the dislike that such lay persons had of
1 Richard Haydock — son of Vivian Haydock of Cottam Hall, Lancashire, who after the death of his wife became a priest — studied at Douai and Rome, and was sent into England in 1580. He was back in Italy again in 1596. A spy describes him at Rome, in 1601, as ' Parson's coachman, for that he keepeth his coach and horses, and are at his command.' He died in 1605. (Foley, Diary of English College, pp. 131, 379.)"
Martin Array accompanied Haydock on the mission from Rome. He found himself before long in a London gaol, but, as Father Southwell wrote to Agaz- zari, 'he [in 1586] procured by money to be pardoned his life, but shall be banished,' or, in the words of another report, he was 'for a round sum bought from the shambles ' (Morris, Troubles, ii. pp. 164, 309). The two priests acted as the proctors of the archpriest in the affair of the delegates to Rome in 1598-99, and consequently met with no favour at the hands of the appellants. They are described in the Dedaratio Motuum (p. 31) as 'cowardly deserters of God's camp. ' Haydock is said to be an idler in Rome who had been compelled to leave England from his lax and disedifying mode of life, and more than once had been dismissed or threatened with dismissal from the house of cardinal Allen on account of his turbulence. As to Martin Array, they point with sus picion to ' the unwonted benevolence of the heretics,' which obtained for him a discharge from prison.
An Ungodly Shift 77
vs, was procured by the false practise of the lesuites : we our selues, otherwise hauing neuer offended them, nor interteyned any quarrell with them, God is our iudge. His Holynes hear ing and marking well their suite, demaunded of them, in expresse tearmes, if that which they had sayd vnto him, pro ceeded from the desire and consent of his louing Priests in England, affirming that otherwise he would in no sort giue any eare vnto them. Whereunto maister Standish, very well instructed before by Father Parsons, and sufficiently assisted by the sayd two lying Priests, answered, that what he had pre sumed to deliuer to his Holynes, he had done it most assuredly by their consent. If Ananias was iustly charged with lying to the holy Ghost, in telling Saint Peter an vntruth, being re plenished with that holy spirit, we see no cause, why we may not so charge this dishonest companyon with all his assistants (Fa. Parsons and the rest) in that they lyed so apparantly to Saint Peters successor the Popes Holynes, who we doubt not, but that he is likewise indued with the spirit of God in such plentiful! sort, as the excellency of his high calling doth require. For it is well knowne, and may be proued most euidently, (if any dare be so shamelesse as to deny it) that if you except Fa. Garnet, and some one or two of his adherents, the rest of the Priests in England generally were altogether ignorant of that deuise. Insomuch as the sayd Standish after his returne into England, being asked by certaine Priests, how he durst presume so impudently to abuse his Holynes with so intolerable an vntruth, he excused himselfe in this sort, viz, that when he sayd, he had the consent of the secular Priests in England to make that motion, his answere therein was made by him Caute, that is, subtilly, or by equiuocation, meaning to him selfe, viz. as he supposed, or presumed; which words he kept in his minde and vttered not. By which vngodly shift, the tyranny wherewith now we are oppressed, was hatched.1
1 The appellants make a great point of this ' false information.' In their book to the pope they write, ' Et qui jam laqueum pararant fratribus non verentur, non erubescunt hujus modi confictis mendaciis tuoe Sanctitatis sapientia et boni, tate abuti, ac tarn nefanda mendaciorum injuria ipsam Petri sedem afficere '
78 The Tyranny hatched.
By this so false and lesuiticall a sleight, the Popes Holynes being abused as you haue heard, committed that matter (so propounded vnto him) to the further consideration of Cardinall Caietane, protector of the English Seminary, and to Cardinall BurghesiuS) which was the very plot Fa. Parsons before had layd : the sayd Cardinall protector,1 being one, with whom he
(Declaratio Motuum, pp. 31, 32 ; cf, Relatio Compend. p. 23). Besides Stan- dish, Array, and Haydock, Parsons mentions William Baldwin, a Jesuit recently returned from England, and Mr. Thomas Allen, who were specially consulted by the pope (Apologie, ff. 98, 99), 'Well,' sarcastically remarks Dr. Ely, 'it seemeth good to these 6 Englishmen to give the Priests in England a Superior of their own order, who should not be a Bishop, whose dignity being Culmen dignitatis, the highest order in God's church, would have obscured and dimmed (as your brethren say) the estimation of the fathers in England, but an Archpriest whose ordinary office and dignity is the lowest in God's church' (p. 102). Parsons declares that Baldwin and Standish came from England expressly to demand some ' subordination,' the one on behalf of the society, and the other on behalf of the seculars. Colleton denies this in regard to Standish. ' The second falsehood uttered [i.e. in Blackwell's letter] was that Master Standish (whom the Jesuits employed in negotiating this business with his Holiness, as is confessed in the Apologie, and who had at that time given his name to be one of their order) told his Holiness (but by what kind of equivocation or strange subintellection we know not) that he had the consents of the priests in England, and came in their names to intreat the appointing of a superior : whereas in truth he never acquainted the body of our clergy with his going, and less with the business he went about. Nay, he was so cunning in cloaking his intention that even to those priests (who were not also above two or three) from whom he could not conceal his journey, he pretended the cause of his voyage to be a long desire he had to visit the holy places, and perhaps to enter into religion, forget ting therein the advice of St. Paul, Non ambulantes in astutia, not walking in craftiness, intending one thing and making semblance of another ' (Just Defence, p. 22).
1 Henrico Gaetani, or Cajetan, was created cardinal by Sixtus v., and made protector of the English college in 1587. He was employed in important legations in France and Poland, and during his absences from Rome he was represented by vice-protectors — by cardinal Toleto in 1593, and after his death by cardinal Borghese, 1596. Cajetan returned to Rome in 1597, suffering greatly from the gout, and died of fever in December 1599- Bagshaw should have stated that the cardinal was at this time named protector of the English nation as well as of the seminary.
Camillo Borghese, afterwards pope Paul v., was born at Rome in 1552. He was a learned canonist. Clement vin. sent him into Spain as legatiis a latcre, and in 1592 appointed him his vicar in Rome. In 1600 Borghese was made one of the cardinals of the Inquisition. He also enjoyed the dignity of pro tector of Scotland.
Blackwell named Archpriest of England. 79
the sayd Parsons had especiall familiaritie and friendship ; and by reason of his protectorship ouerruled the other Cardinall as he thought good : so as they two being appointed for this seruice, Parsons deseignement was in effect thereby accom plished. Well it had hapned to vs, if his Holynes had bin at that time indued with that worthie gift of the holy Ghost, tearmed discretio spirituum : that when he made this deputa tion to the Cardinall, he might haue sayd to the aforesayd false wretches : why haue you lyed to the holy Ghost, that thereby, either some extraordinary calamitie might haue fallen vpon them, or his Holynes haue taken some other course for the inflicting vpon them such punishment as they deserued. But the matter passed as you haue heard : and Parsons must contriue it as he thinketh it conuenient, which he did in sort as followeth. One must gouerne all the Priests in England., but Parsons durst not name a lesuite for that purpose : that had bin too grosse dealing, he must then be a secular Priest, there was no remedie. And who should that be, but maister Blackivdl) who was knowne to be a chiefe parasite of the lesuites, and would be sure, if he might haue this authoritie by them, neuer to do any tiling, that might in any sort displease them. Whereupon Blaclxvell is named for the Arch-priest of England : assistants are appointed to wayt vpon him : a letter with the Cardinals consent is framed by Father Parsom, dated the seauenth of March 1598. rules are made, and one in effect you may be sure, that maister Arch-priest and his assistants shall do nothing in any matter of importance, without the lesuites consents.1 All things thus dispatched, maister Standish
1 Colleton printed the ' Constitutive Letter ' of the cardinal in Latin and English in his Just Defence (pp. I, 5). It will be found also in Dodd and Tierney. Certain private instructions accompanied the formal letter. Both were received by Blackwell, May 9, 1598. The direction that the archpriest should 'in causes of greater importance use the advice of the superior of the Jesuits ' formed part of the instructions, a summary of which, and of all other official letters and papal breves addressed to Blackwell, which subsequently came into the hands of the archbishop of Canterbury, is given in the valuable little tract entitled, ' Mr. George Blackwel (Made by Pope Clement 8 Archpriest of England), his Answeres upon Sundry his Examinations : Together with his Approbation and
80 The new Authority called in Question.
(as wee thinke) is sent back with this stuff 'e into England ,• and euen when our two messengers were ready at the last to go towards Rome, he arriueth : maister Black-well receiueth his authoritie, and publisheth the same for want of a Cryer by his owne letters : requiring all Priests to subscribe vnto it.
Hereof when sundry of vs had notice, we conferred together as we could : and finding that the Cardinals directions were not warranted, by any Breue from his Holynes : we feared some false packing by Father Parsons. Also some of our brethren talking with maister Elackivell, about the Cardinals constitu tions, tooke him directly with a manifest forgery, in pretending certaine to haue come from the Cardinall which he was driuen to confesse, were of his owne making.1 Besides we considered, that if the Pope were made acquainted with the sayd Cardinals designements ; what he did, or allowed therein, was vpon false suggestion, (for as then wee did not certainely know, how Standish had played the lesuite by Parsons aduise as is before expressed). Againe, wee perceiued by the Cardinals instructions, that maister Blackisoell was made no better in deede then an Arch-priest of cloutes, being limited to do nothing, but as it should please maister Garnet. And it could not sinke into our heads, that his Holynes being throughly acquainted with these plots, would euer haue bin drawne to haue yeelded, that his Clergie of England should be ouertopt, and controuled by the new vpstart lesuites. We also did easily see into what danger this subordination would bring vs, being left in effect to Father Parsons directions. For these, and sundry other considerations, we desired that we might not be vrged to subscribe to the sayd authoritie, vntil wee might either see the Popes Breue to ratifie it, or haue time to know his Holynes further pleasure : when we should haue informed him the truth in these matters. Vpon our stay herein, (which seemed to vs so reasonable,) it is scarse
taking of the Oath of Allegeance : And his Letter written to his Assistants and brethren, mooving them not onely to take the said Oath, but to advise all Romish Catholikes so to doe. Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the King's most Excellent Maiestie, 1607.'
1 Compare the Relatio Compendiosa^ p. 25.
Certain Letters of Thanks to the Pope. 81
credible, how we were slaundered and abused : insomuch as through such and many other iniuries offred by the Arch-priest and lesuites vnto vs, we were compelled to appeale to his Holy- nes. But we were still too slow and dull in our proceedings, and indeede wanted money, and other fit oportunities to make such quick dispatch as we desired. Whereupon Father Garnet, and maister Blackwell abounding in all things, and perceiuing our intent, they presently dispatched their cursitors into euery part of the Realme, to get hands to certaine letters (drawne either by them, or by their direction) of thankesgiuing to the Pope, and Protector, for their singular care ouer the Church heere, in appointing vnto them so excellent a forme of gouern- ment : with much more to this purpose. And such a course was taken with our poore brethren, who many of them had neuer heard of this matter before, as partly through ignorance in some, through threatning and feare in others, and by faire promises to many ; a number of hands were gotten to the sayd letters.1 This exployt thus effected, they sent the sayd letters
1 The famous letter of thanks, ' Olim dicebamur, ' is printed in the Relatio Compendiosa (pp. 33-35), where examples are given of the way in which certain signatures to it were obtained. It is said, for instance, that when a pious priest, a prisoner, declined to put his name to the document, Garnet sent him a message, saying, ' You will not for old friendship's sake refuse me this,' and thereupon added his name without his permission or knowledge. Compare Colleton,
pp. so-sa- it would be interesting to know how many names in favour of the new sub ordination were actually obtained. Tierney (iii. 49), followed by Turnbull {English Chapter, p. 16), reduces the number, on the strength of admissions made by Parsons and Garnet, to 57, not including the archpriest and his assistants, out of an estimated total of 400 priests. But Garnet, giving the signatures of 57 secular priests and 12 Jesuits to the ' Olim dicebamur,' asserts that 24 seculars and 6 Jesuits in addition had given power to others to subscribe for them, and remarks that there could be no doubt 34 more would subscribe if they could be reached. See Father Plowden's Remarks on the Memoirs of Panzani, p. 336, and Parsons' Apologie, ff. 105, 106. On the other hand there is no sufficient ground for Plowden's statement that ' the great bulk ' of the clergy ' contentedly acquiesced ' in the new form of government. Few, indeed, may have had the courage or the means to actively side with the appellants, but it may fairly be inferred from the comparative paucity of these signatures in the face of the strong inducements there were to sign, that the large majority of the priests regarded the institution in question with suspicion and dislike. Colleton
82 Mr. Bishop and Mr. Charnock.
with all speecle to Rome, and procured by their messengers as they went, other letters, from sundry persons beyond the seas to their friends in that City to depraue our enterprise as much as possibly they could, affirming that what our messengers, when they came thither, should propound against the subordi nation in England, did proceede only from a few that were factious, and that it would be very dishonorable to his Holynes former proceedings, if they should finde any fauour or counten ance there.
With these aforesaid Machiuilian practises, wee were not then acquainted, but as honest and plaine dealing men ; when our said messengers, maister Bishop and maister Charnock, two learned Priestes,1 were readie to goe to Rome to prosecute our
(p. 159), quoting a letter of Blackwell, in which the archpriest complains 'the laity had need to stick to him for the priests were fallen away,' gives his own opinion that ' hardly twenty besides the assistants in all England ' could, if put upon their oaths, declare themselves contented with the new government.
Martin Array, acting as Blackwell's proctor, wrote from Rome, Feb. 1599, that ' the Protector said well neer 200 had written to him agaynst the sedition ' (Petyt MS., xlvii. f. 97). This may be the exaggeration of a partisan ; or it may include correspondents from Flanders and elsewhere on the continent. The statement is, however, confirmed by Parsons in a letter to Bishop and Charnock (Copies ofcertaine discourses, p. 57). Tierney's estimate of the total number of priests in England at the time is perhaps rather over the mark. A report of Father Holt in 1596 sets down the missionaries as ' over 300,' and the surviving ' Queen Mary priests ' at ' about 40 or 50 ' (Douay Diaries, p. 378). In 1593 there were in England eight Jesuit priests; in 1598, sixteen (Foley, vii., Ixvi.).
1 William Bishop, doctor of the Sorbonne, afterwards bishop of Chalcedon, and Robert Charnock, son of William Charnock of Blacklach House, Leyland, co. Lancaster.
Dr. Bishop, eldest son and heir of John Bishop of Brailes in Warwickshire, left Oxford after three or four years' residence at the university, settled his estate on his younger brother, and joined Allen at Rheims, whence he proceeded to the college at Rome. He entered upon the English mission in 1581, his 26th year. Before 1598 he had twice been imprisoned and twice banished. He took a leading part throughout the Appellant controversy, and drew up and signed the protestation of loyalty offered to Elizabeth in 1603. On the death of Harrison, the third archpriest, Dr. Bishop was appointed by Gregory xv. Vicar Apostolic, with ordinary jurisdiction in England and Scotland. He was con secrated in Paris June 4, 1623, landed at Dover July 21, and died near London, April 16, in the following year. He is said to have been beloved by both clergy and laity for his modest and peaceful disposition (Wood's Athena}. He was
Deputies despatched to Rome. 83
causes there: we acquainted our Archpriest therewith and desired, (if so it might stand with his pleasure) to sende some thither also, that might be furnished to answere for him, if we should be thought to informe amisse. This motion of ours, was so greatlie disdained by his maistership, as wee thinke the highest Cardinall in Christendome, could not with greater con tempt haue reiected ye meanest Priest his sute yl liueth. And relying vpon Father Parsons, and his other said plots, hee pre sumed to tell vs plainelie (to the great preitidice of iustice in the Court of Rome) that if we sent any thither, they should not be heard, but finde that entertainement, which they little expected. Howbeit wee neuer imagined, nor could in deed thinke, either of those messages which they had sent before, or of that which followed : but rather supposed he had vsed such speeches vnto vs of purpose to stay vs from proceeding in our former determination.1 And therefore we dispatch them hence, who being gone, our Archpriest chafeth : the Prouinciall his
the author of many books of controversy, and edited, with additions of his own, the De Anglicc Scriptoribus of his friend John Pitts. Dodd (ii. 361) ascribes to him a MS. ' in the keeping of Mr. Bishop of Brayles, ' described as ' An Account of the Faction and Disturbances in the Castle of Wisbich, occasioned by Father Weston, a Jesuit.' Challoner, in his Memoirs (ii. 121), speaks of Dr. Bishop as ' a person of an apostolic spirit and life,' and reckons him among the confessors of the faith.
Of Charnock's career less is known. He was educated at Oxford, and after wards spent six years at the English college at Rome, where he was ordained priest. He returned^to England in 1587. Several of his letters relating to his delegation to Rome, including a long one in Latin, addressed to cardinal Bor- ghese (printed in the Relatio Compendiosa, pp. 87-96), are preserved among the Petyt MSS. (vol. xlvii.).
1 Charnock writes to Bagshaw, Aug. 9, 1598 : ' Good Mr. B., we labour here as much as lyeth in vs to doe to bring our matters to some good pass, and yf we cannot doe as we would doe, we will attribute it to God's disposition, & think that all thinges are not rype. Absurdyties are dayly committed hereabout, & so gross as they are to be wondered at. P'chance the prysons are not as yet made ready for vs, wch are threatnd vs, yf we goe to appeale, . . . what will come after thes bitter threatnings God knoweth, I hope the officer [archpriest] doth speak thus but ad terrore, wch will take litle effect in me resolute to suffer in a iust cause. ' In a postscript to this same letter Dr. Bishop writes, ' Ysteday I was sent for to the archp'sbiter to heare a large discourse in the p'sence of two laie gentelmen onlie. . . . He pleaded mightilie that no appellation could be
84 The Jesuits whet their Tongues.
good maister, clappes him on the backe and egges him forward : the rest of the lesuits whet their tongues and prepare their pens to speake and write what they can falselie deuise against vs to make vs odious : 1 so as presentlie, we are become a by-word in their mouthes, & are nothing with them but Rebels, Apostataes, and what they list to report of vs. One Lister 2 a Jesuit writeth a booke to proue vs al schismatikes.
made dulie from the autoritie he is invested in, wch he affirmed was absolute, not dependinge any whit at all vpon the likinge or gaine sayinge of priests here. Againe, that he had received certaine adv'tisment that whosoeuer should be employed or adventure to goe and coplaine or grives should be fined and im prisoned, order alreadie beinge given to that ende ' (Petyt MSS. xlvii. ff. 298, 299).
1 ' The messengers were reported, the one to be a Maultster and Horse-courser, the other for an incontinent person. O tongue liberty whither runnest thou ? O Father Parsons how credulous are you in bad matters ? Let but this latter be proved, notwithstanding you said (who perchance counteth such a saying no bad policy) that a priest sware it, and two other priests took their oaths that they heard him sware it, and we do all here yield ourselves without further conviction to be traitors to God and his church and crave the faggot ' (Colle- ton, p. 38). It was not, however, the Jesuits only who attempted to prejudice the Roman court against the deputies. The president of Douai college and three of his assistants wrote a joint letter to cardinal Cajetan (Oct. 25, 1598), accusing the messengers of insubordinate and factious intentions, and asking ' that some example of severe correction should be used upon these two ' as a warning to others. Dr. Worthington also wrote from Brussels, hoping that this 'new sedition be repressed by his Holiness with some severity.' Other letters to the same effect, written while the unfortunate deputies were on their way to Rome, are quoted by Parsons (ApoL, ff. 123-127).
2 Thomas Lister (alias Butler), a native of Lancashire, was sent in his 2Oth year to the Roman college, with an excellent character from Dr. Barret, 1579. He entered the Jesuit noviciate in 1583, and was made D.D. at Pont a Mousson in 1592. On the English mission he generally resided with Father Oldcorne at Henlip. The sheriff of Herefordshire reports in June 1605, 'When the Queen was dead North the priest came out of Monmouthshire in all haste into Here fordshire, signifying that catholics were up in arms there : and stirred as ear nestly as he could the catholics of Herefordshire to do the like. And Lister one of the Jesuits with his companions were as busy in Worcestershire, telling them that the catholics in Herefordshire were in arms.' He was afterwards ban ished, with forty-five priests and Jesuits, in 1606, but returned and became superior of the Oxford district in 1621 (Foley's Records^ iv. 270, seq., vii. 1440). Garnet's private opinion of his character (in 1597) is indicated in a letter to the General, quoted from a Stonyhurst MS. by Tierney (vol. iv. p. cxxv) : ' Angor animi ac dubius atque anceps haereo quid [cum] illo agam, cujus omnis morbus non tam cerebri infirmitate, quam ex animi perturbatione ac levitate proficiscitur. '
Father Lister's Treatise of Schism. 85
who had appealed to Rome, and both maister Blackwell and Father Garnet subscribed vnto it. In this booke, besides the tearmes before expressed, we are said to Jiaue fallen from the Church, and the spouse of Christ : to haue troden vnder our feete our obedience due to the highest bishop : to haue lost our faculties, whereby we ought to haue wonne soules vnto Christ : to haue made our selues irregular : to haue incurred the sentence of excommunication : to haue giuen a scandall to all good men : to be in all mens mouthes as infamous persons : to be as publicanes and sinners, and to be nothing better then soothsayers and Idolaters.1
1 Mr. Gillow (Dictionary, ii. 393), says of this treatise, described by Dr. Ely as ' the biting, passionate, and slanderous book,' that it was ' apparently only circulated in MS.' The appellants commonly speak of it as 'published' (Hope of Peace, p. 36 ; W. C., Reply, f. 81), and 'sent abroad, not only in England but into remote places beyond the seas' (A. P., Reply, p. 342). The ' innocency, fame and good name ' of the appellants, says Dr. Ely (p. 274), * was blotted and blemished both at home and in foreign countries by Fa. Lister's book, the copies whereof flew over into strange countries, sent and dispersed everywhere by the Fathers.' Its proper title is Adversus factiosos in Ecclesia. Bagshaw incorporated the whole of it in his Relatio Compendiosa, where it occupies no more than twelve short pages. The small size of the treatise, and the fact that the pope suppressed it and the Jesuits became ashamed of it, may account for the disappearance of the printed original, if printed it was. There is a MS. transcript of it among the Petyt MSS. The first four sections treat of Schism in general ; .the fifth lays down the various penalties incurred by schismatics ; the sixth and seventh, entitled Factiosorum subterfugia and Factiosorum criniina, will be found in the Appendix, infra (D).
The issue of this tract formed the first of the six grounds upon which was based the solemn Appeal of the 33 priests, who thus refer to it : —
'The reasons of which appeal are these that ensue. First, for that your reverence hath often approved the too great injuries and reproach which the fathers of the society, in word and deed, most wrongfully laid upon us ; as, namely, when Father Lister, Jesuit, composed and had set forth a Treatise of Schism against us, ... in which, beside other unseemly speeches, he hath these slanders in the fifth paragraph : —
" These factious persons are stricken down -with the dolour of their own ruin, in that they have resisted the pope's decrees. They have lost their places among priests : they are debarred the practice of their holy function : their judgment is to be contemned, and already they are condemned by the holy apostolic church. And in the conclusion, or seventh paragraph, these : —
" I. Ye are rebels.
"2. Ye are schismatics, and are fallen from the church and spouse of Christ.
86 The two Deputies imprisoned at Rome.
We haue now brought this story to the setting out against vs of the sayd treatise of schisme : and for the rest do referre you for a larger discourse to the bookes lately printed and published by some of our brethren. Therein you shall finde that by Father Parsons practises, our sayd messengers no sooner came to Rome., but within sixe or seauen dayes they were cast into prison, and could neuer be suffred to come to the Pope. Whilest they were in prison, his Holynes Breue is procured for the confirmation of maister Elackwels authoritie. Afterwards the poore men are set at libertie, but kept asunder, and banished into diuers Prouinces, not to repayre into England,
"3. Ye have trodden under foot the obedience you owe to the pope.
"4. Ye have offended against all human faith and authority by rejecting a jnoral certainty in a moral matter.
"5. Ye have run headlong into excommunication and irregularity.
"6. Ye have lost the faculties by which you shoitld have gained souls to Christ.
"7. Ye have raised up so great scandal in the minds of all the godly, that, as infamous persons, you are tennised in every maris mouth.
" 8. Ye are no better than soothsayers and idolaters, and in regard ye have not obeyed the Church, speaking unto you by the highest bishop, you are as ethnics and publicans. "
' When after the publishing of these detestable untruths, we made petition to your reverence, to know whether you did approve these defamations against us, you answered under your own handwriting as followeth, March 26, 1599 '• — " I allow of the said discourse and censure. George Blackwell, Archpriest." Furthermore, when at another time we made humble request to your reverence for the revoking of the said slanderous treatise, you wrote back this answer, April 1599: — "Your request is that we should call in the treatise against your schism, and this is unreasonable, because the medicine ought not to be removed before the sore be thoroughly cured. If it grieve you, I am not grieven thereat. George Blackwell, Archpriest. '" (Tierney, vol. iii. p. cxxxiii. The original Latin will be found in the Declaratio Motuum, pp. 95-119.) The appellants also make complaint of the public approbation given to the book by F. Garnet.
Colleton writes (Just Defence, p. 197) : ' Father Lister accused us of a foul crime : the infamy was divulged in all parts of the Realm, and in many places beyond the seas : our company grew thereon to be shunned : our benefactors were put in fear that their souls would find smart in the next world for harbour ing of us in their houses : several means were practised and attempts given to remove us and not to leave us where to hide our heads. Father Garnet the superior of the Jesuits affirmed that we ministered and received sacraments in deadly sin, that we gave poison in lieu of medicine, that we were such by the opinion of all the learned as his brother Lister, had censured us to be, that our criminous, sinful, irregular, and excommunicate state was so plain and notorious as none under sin could forward or assist us in the exercise of our functions.'
The Clergy submit to the Brief. 87
vntill they should haue leaue from Rome.1 The sayd Breue comraeth hither : wee being informed thereof, submit our selues to our Arch-priest : shewing our selues to be farre from schismaticks ; and such was our desire of peace, as we were well content to remit all the former slaunders imputed most falsely vnto vs.
Besides, for the auoyding of further contention, we desired our Arch-priest, (whome now we reuerenced as we were bound in dutie) to take such order, as that hereafter there might not be so much as once mention made of the sayd pretended schisme. Whereunto he yeelded very willingly, and made a Decree to that effect : promising to be a meanes that our sayd two brethren might be released of their banishment. His dealing with vs in this kinde sort did very much comfort vs, because we being men, who still had bin afflicted, any thing seemed a great benefit to vs. But shortly after we well per-
1 Parsons devotes the ninth chapter of his Apologie to a justification of the extraordinary treatment to which the two deputieswere subjected at Rome, inreply to the account drawn up, as Tierney remarks, ' under the eye of Dr. Bishop him self,' in the Declaratio Motuum. The same subject is discussed by Colleton (pp. 34-40), and, with further information, by A. P. in his Reply to Parsons (pp. 229-265). A number of original and unedited documents on the matter will be found in the 47th volume of the Petyt MSS.
Dr. Ely's expressions of indignation against Parsons are worth quoting. The Jesuit, referring to the imprisonment of the two priests, had euphemistically remarked ' that his Holiness took order that they should be retired to the English college.' 'Retired (quoth you),' exclaims Ely, ' from such retirement Libera nos Domine. If close prison be but a retreat, I know not what prison- ment is ! You do well to cover and mitigate so great injustice with so mild and favourable a term. Certes, they are retired to the English college, as M. Bishop was retired in England to the Marshalsea, and there put in close prison by a heretical Justice of the peace. . . . Cloak and disguise it so well as you can now, the posterity hereafter will wonder to hear or read that two catholic priests coming as appellants to Rome out of an heretical country, in which they maintained constantly, with danger of their lives, the honour and preservation of that See, and one of them had suffered some years' imprisonment, with banish ment afterwards, for the article of S. Peter or his successors' supremacy over all other princes and prelates, that these priests (I say) should, before they were heard what they had to say, be cast into prison, yea and imprisoned in the house and under the custody of their adversaries. Never was there heard of such injustice since good S. Peter sat in the chair.' (Briefe Notes, p. 107.)
88 Blackwell revives the Quarrel.
ceiued, that our former appellation and sending to Rome with our refusall in the meane time to bow vnto him, did stick in his stomack. For whether prouoked by the malitious lesuites, or stirred vp by his owne pride, and rancor to be reuenged vpon vs, now that we had submitted our selues vnto his gouern- ment, he renewed the remembrance of the old sore, contrary to his sayd decree, and that vnder the pretence of a letter that should come vnto him from Rome, from two lesuites, Tichborne, and Warford : 1 wherein he sayd, it was expressely set downe, that we were iudged in Rome to be schismaticks before the obteyning of the sayd Breue, in that we did not subscribe to his authoritie, when the Cardinals first letters were intimated vnto vs. And vpon this false ground (except these two lesuites and some one or two more of that crue had so iudged vs) he writ his letters abroade to that effect, as well what forsooth he
1 Henry Tichborne, said to be the brother of Sir Benjamin Tichborne, some time sheriff of Hampshire, went over to Rheims in 1583, and joined the society in his I yth year (Oct. 1587). In 1597 he was prefect of studies in the English college at Rome, and afterwards was appointed confessor and professor of moral theology in the seminary at Seville founded by Parsons. He died at Seville in 1606, ' with a great repute of sanctity and learning ' (Foley, Collectanea, PP- 77S> T456). Mr. Foley mentions, but does not print, a letter of this pro minent member of the society to a brother Jesuit, Mr. Thomas Darbyshire, which found its way to the hands of the government, who, no doubt, gave to it the consideration it deserves. As the letter throws light upon the political differences which were at the bottom of the quarrel between the Jesuits and the appellants, it has been reproduced in the Appendix (C). It will be seen that the writer's only fear was ' liberty of conscience at home ; ' for this meant ' the expulsion of the society.' Toleration, he sees, will ' disanimate princes from pursuing our enterprise ; ' and Spain ' would then stoop to a peace which would be our ruin.' . . . Sir Thomas Tresham, as a friend to the State, is held by us as an atheist, and all others of his humour.' So zealous and pious an opponent of peace could only regard the appellant movement with religious horror.
William Warford, formerly fellow of Trinity college, Oxford, became a catholic at Rheims in 1582, and was ordained priest two years later at Rome. In 1591 he went upon the English mission, but, in 1594, returned to Rome, joined the Jesuits, and was made penitentiary at St. Peter's. In 1599 he left Rome for Valladolid, where he died in 1608. He wrote, under the name of George Douley, certain devotional works, and left behind him an inedited account of some recent English martyrs with whom he was acquainted (Oliver's Biography, S. J., p. 217). The manuscript, which was unknown to Challoner, is preserved at Stonyhurst.
He demands Satisfaction. 89
had receiued from Rome, (concealing the names of the sayd two Machiuilian lesuites) as also that he would receiue none to his fauour or absolue them, which would not acknowledge that they had sinned, and giuen a great scandale by their sayd prolonging to acknowledge his authoritie.1 When we heard hereof, it grieued vs much to see the weakenes of our new Gouernour : but more in that we perceiued what new troubles and dissen sions would thereby insue. We did write therefore both to him and to his assistants, that they would be pleased, the old con- trouersie amongst vs might lye buryed still in the graue of obliuion, and not to be againe now renewed. But they shut their eares to our humble suites, and reiect vs with contume lious and reprochfull words, for presuming so rashlie (forsooth) to intermeddle with any thing that they had resolued of. Notwithstanding because they were our brethren, and many of
1 'We have,' wrote Blackwell, 'received a resolution from our mother city that the refusers of the appointed authority were schismatics ; and surely I would not give absolution to any that should make no conscience thereof. . . . And therefore my direction is that they make account thereof, and do make satisfac tion before they receive the benefit of absolution.'
The aggrieved priests in their Appeal declare the divulging of this resolu tion to have been the 'too too unlucky fact ' which was 'the total cause of our new debates.' 'And,' runs the appeal, 'according to the purport of this dispersed resolution (which albeit by your own affirmance you received it either from Father Warford or Father Tichborne, two English Jesuits resident at Rome, yet your reverence did so propose and grace the same, as many did, and as yet some do, believe that the said resolution came as a definitive sentence from the see apostolic), yourself would not restore Mr. Benson to the use of his faculties, neither upon his own humble suit nor mediation of his fellow-prisoners, who also had and then did suffer very hard imprisonment with great constancy, unless he would first agnize and testify under his hand that he was grieved for his adherence to the schismatical conventicle ; your reverence being pleased to dub our company with so hateful a name. Also, in your letter to another priest [Mush], bearing date the 22d of February 1600, thus you write : — " I determined that hereafter whosoever had faculties fare he should first be content to recall his peevish opinion " — terming the opinion peevish that doth not hold us for schismatics.
' Furthermore, your reverence affirmed (which shook and galled the new peace not a little) that assertion of Father Jones, a priest of the society, to be true ; avowing all those to incur presently the censures of holy church who should stiffly defend that we were no schismatics ; which position you again ratified in your letters given the I4th of March 1600.'
90 Arbitration scornfully rejected.
them before that time some of our inferiors ; we aduentured once againe to intreate this fauour at their hands, that two or three of the best learned amongst them, might be appointed to conferre of this matter with as many of vs : that so the contro- uersie might be compounded, before it brake out any further.1 How this was taken at our hands, it is scarcely credible : they tearmed our supplication a tumultuous expostulation, being fraught (as they sayd) with the forgetfulnes of our duties, and with the spirit of pride and presumption. And hereupon euen now, that we were become his subiects, after we had vnder- standing of the Popes Breue, and looked to haue bin greatly cherished and defended from iniuries by the strength of his soueraigne authoritie, we are againe as sharply prosecuted with imputations of schisme and rebellion as we were before, which caused vs to propound the question in controuersie amongst vs, to the famous Vniuersitie of Paris: hauing offered to them before, but in vayne, if it pleased them to ioyne with vs therein. That worthie company after due consideration, determined the matter on our side. Whereof the Arch-priest being informed, addresseth out his owne edict, and condemneth therein their sayd iudgement : inflicteth great censures vpon those Priests that should at any time maynteine that deter mination : and spareth not likewise to mulct the laytie (ouer whom for ought we know he hath no authoritie at all) as many as should incline to the imbracing and fauoring of it.2
1 The conditions of the proposed conference are given in the Relatio Com- pendosia (p. 65). Garnet and Lister, and any others of the society whom they might choose, were to represent the Jesuit side against three secular priests on the other. The arbitrators were to be two or three of the senior assistants of the archpriest, together with Mr. Dolman. If the seculars were judged guilty of schism they were to beg pardon of the archpriest and fathers of the society on their knees. If, on the other hand, no such fault had been incurred, the fathers, and Lister in particular, were to withdraw the treatise De Schismate, and to make due satisfaction for the injury done.
2 The Censure of Paris and the archpriest's ' edict ' will be found in the author's appendix (infra, p. 123). Three days after Blackwell had issued his edict he wrote exultingly to Garnet (June I, 1600) : ' Colleton, by my censure, is defeated of all his triumphs. He hath twenty sheets ready for the print to disprove us : but he saith " I will take heed not to incur the pain of the censure lest I lose
Oppressions of the Archpriest. 91
When we saw this our Arch-priest with his assistants thus peremptorilie bent by strong hand to oppresse vs : and without either conscience, or consideration of morall honestie to spreade abroade againe to our discredits their former calumniations, and very grosse and palpable slaunders : we thought it our best course if it were but to heape coales vpon their heads, to commend vnto them this consideration : whether it might not stand with their good liking to send two Priests to be chosen by them, with two others of ours to Rome, to know his Holynes opinion and direction in this cause so hotly impugned by them : the same being the assured rule for the ending and finall de termination of it : adding, that if we were condemned for schismaticks, for delaying our obedience, as is before expressed, till we knew his Holynes pleasure, we would most willingly subiect our selues to the heauiest censures that might be im posed vpon vs : and if cleared, the least satisfaction that they would thinke good to award vs, should fully please and content vs. But this our last suite was more disdained (if it were possible) then either of the former : and so farre the Arch- priest was from yeelding vnto vs herein, or to affbord vs other wise the least shadow of his fauour, as he cast abroade his decrees, that our sayd deferring to receiue his authoritie before the Breue came, was schisme, and prohibiteth any vnder grieuous paynes, either by word or writing to affirme the contrary.1
my faculties, which are greater than Mr. Blackwell will or can give me.' Now questions are moved whether they may defend their own private opinion, that they were not schismatics, or whether they may not utter so much. I answer that I will not have any more speech in defence thereof ; and so much the words imply directe aut indirect e. They be at their wits' ends, and cry out "Sharp, sharp." It is hoped that I will not signify the matter to Rome. Charnock must be censured with suspension a divinis et amissionis factiltatum : for he hath brought in with him an answer, as I am told, of three sheets against Father Parsons' Reply ; and this made by no doctor Bishop.' (Stonyhurst MS., printed by Tierney, iii., cxxxii).
1 Blackwell's decree quoted in the appeal is as follows : ' We, by our authority received from his holiness, do pronounce and declare that those first letters of our institution did truly bind all the catholics in England ; and that those, who have any ways wittingly impugned our authority, were truly dis obedient to the see apostolic and rebellious against our office instituted by the same see. .
92 The Appeal of the Thirty Priests.
Whereupon we were compelled, as hauing no other refuge at all, to appeale againe to the infallible seate of the holy Apostle Saint Peter : thinking with our selues that thereby (at the least till the cause were decided) our aduersaries would haue forborne the prosecution of their malice against vs. But the humor they are possessed with, being altogether lesuiticall, that is violent and implacable, they ceased not but still continued, contrary to all course of law & iustice, euery day more and more to wound and oppresse vs. Our sayd appellation subscribed with the hands of 30. Priests,1 men of good desert and reputation, they
' We forbid all priests, in virtue of holy obedience, and under pain of sus pension and interdict (the absolution whereof we reserve to ourselves), I add also, the loss of all their faculties, to be incurred ipso facto (the laity likewise, under pain of interdict to be incurred ipso facto}, that none of them presume in anywise by word or writing, directly or indirectly, to defend that former disobedience, the cause of so great perturbation of peace amongst us.
' Instructed by long experience, what great inconveniences have grown, to the upholding of discord, by those privy meetings, which in former years we have prohibited so far as they have been the nourishment of schisms [we] do therefore once again strictly forbid all such assemblies, commanding all our assistants and other reverend priests that they advertise us of all such meetings and assemblies which tend not to the furtherance of piety and hospitality or civility and peace. And we prohibit, under pain of suspension from divine functions and loss of all faculties, that no priest in anywise, by word or writing, go about to seek or give any voices for what cause soever, before the same be communicated with us or with two of our assistants.'
1 The formal conclusion of the Appeal with the thirty original signatures runs as follows : 'In the name of God, Amen : In the year of our Lord, 1600, thirteenth indiction, the i;th day of the month of November, and in the ninth year of the papacy of our most holy Father Clement, by the providence of God the eight of that name,
' WE, English priests, whose names are underwritten, finding ourselves aggrieved in the premises and fearing more grievous oppressions in the time to come, do make our appeal and provocation to the see apostolic, and ask of you, Master George Blackwell, the first, second, and third time, instantly, more instantly, and most instantly, our apostles or dismissory letters, submitting our selves and all we have, persons, faculties, goods, and rights, to the tuition, protection, and defence of our most holy Father Clement the Eight and to the see apostolic. And we make this appeal in our own names, and in the names both of the clergy and laity ; of which latter there are many hundreds, whose names for just causes are concealed, that adhere unto us by means of the con^ troversy of schism or in any of the aforesaid matters, or dependence or prosecu tion thereof, or after any other sort ; desiring, if there be anything to be added, taken away or changed, as the form of the law shall require.
Ten are forthwith Suspended. 93
tearme an infamous libell, and presently vpon the sight thereof, defactO) do suspend and depriue tenne of them from their facul ties : eight of them being prisoners at IVisbich, and two others, both of them persons of extraordinary note and worth.1
' Given at Wisbeach, the year and day of the month, indiction, and the year of the papacy as above.
Thomas Bluet. John Mush. John Bingley.
Christopher Bagshaw. William Watson. John Boswell.
Christopher Thules. William Clark. Robert Thules.
James Taylor. John Clinch. Cuthbert Trollop.
John Thules. Oswald Needham. Robert Benson.
Edmund Calverley. Roger Strickland. Richard Button.
William Cox. Robert Drury. Francis Foster.
James Cope. Francis Montfort. Edward Bennet.
John Colleton. Anthony Hebourne. John Bennet.
George Potter. Anthony Champney. William Mush. '
Colleton, who gives the document in English (pp. 192-203), adds : ' Since the making of this Appeal there are others -who have subscribed thereunto and given their names, as Master Doctor Norris, Master Roger Calwallador, and Master Jasper Lobery, besides some others, who, for fear of the extremities used against the appellants, durst not (their friends being few and their state mean) manifest themselves to our Archpriest, but sent their Appeals by our brethren that are gone to Rome.'
1 The archpriest wrote a letter, March 10, 1601, by which, says Colleton (p. 183), 'he suspended and interdicted eight of the prisoners at Framlingham and myself.' The greater part of the Wisbeach prisoners had before this time been transferred to Framlingham.
Mush, Anthony Heborne, and Colleton himself had been suspended April 4,
1599, a few days before the arrival of the brief confirming the archpriest's authority. On their submission to the brief they were restored to their faculties, but Mush and Colleton were again suspended, I7th October 1600, before the appeal, in spite of the caution attributed to the latter by Blackwell (supra, p. 91, «.). A letter from Mush on his first suspension, addressed to Bagshaw at Wisbeach, will be found in the Appendix (G).
Blackwell's decree suspending Robert Drury, afterwards venerated as a martyr (Challoner, anno 1607), is preserved among the Petyt MSS. : ' Universis catholicis Anglis salutem. These are to give you to understand, and are to declare, That Mr. Robt. Drury, Priest, hath incurred the pains of suspension and of the loss of all his faculties, not in respect of Appeal (which I do not deny any one), but for his disobedient breach and contempt of my fourth and fifth penal decrees published 18° Octob : anno Dni 1600, of which he taketh notice by his subscription to the letter and the pretended Appeal dated 17 Novembris
1600. And to this my declaration I have subscribed with mine own hand and thereunto set my seal. This 1 7th of December 1600.
' GEORGIUS BLACKWELLUS, Archipresbiter Catholicorum Anglorum.'
94 A Beggar on Horseback.
There hath bin of long time an old saying in England : that set a begger on horseback, and he will ride a gallop : our said new gouernors sitting in their thrones, and scorning that any should refuse to worship them, can finde no limits for the stay of their fury, but still runne on from one mischiefe to another. For, our cause thus depending, they forbid all the lay Catholicks to keepe vs company, to relieue vs, or to suffer vs to execute any spirituall function with them : affirming, that whosoeuer shall be present at one of our Masses, or assist vs therein, doth commit a great sinne : and that to receiue the sacraments at our hands, is loco medicaminis, to receiue a deadly poyson. None may confesse their sinnes vnto vs, and none may heare vs preach, at the least of those (which are too many) that yeeld themselues to the direction and pleasure of such absurd commaunders, and wicked condemners of their brethren, notwithstanding we be exempted from such their prohibitions by our appellation, and do therefore still inioy the full libertie of our Priesthood. The course they hold against vs, or at the least their stomack, may appeere vnto you, by that which a lesuite hath written concerning vs, to one of his friends : Detest (sayth he) my deere mother the cursed crue of the disobedient to lawfull authoritie : if you ~know any, either of our coate, or of the lay sort., that be tainted with this pestilent poyson, eschue his com pany, as you would auoyd one that hath a plague-sore running" vpon him, assuring your selfe, that if such rebellious persons do not submit their necks to the yoke of their superiors, that vnlesse God shew them some extraordinary fauour (which in such cases he vsually denyeth to such malitious Rebels) their reuolt and Apostasie from the Catholicise vnitie, will be the iust reward of their obstinacie and malapert opposition against their ordinary. God be mercifull unto vs poore men : some of vs are prisoners, and are daily in the Magistrates hands to be cut off, and finish our miseries at their pleasures ; and on the other side, where we should finde comfort, we are dealt with, as you see : and all is either because we are readie to offer our Hues for the Catholick faith, or refuse, till we may be heard by the Popes Holynes : to acknowledge our selues to be Rebels, Schismaticks, contemners of the See Apostolick, Ethnicks, Publicanes, Idolaters, Aposta-
Now for our Conclusion. 95
taes, and what not ? because we did not at the first subscribe to our Archbishops authoritie, but appealed as you haue heard. Which accusations, we trust no man liuing by learning or argu ments shall be able to prooue against vs : and in the meane time, God is our witnes, how free we are in foro conscientice, from any of these wicked imputations. In the aforesayd processe with these our aduersaries, some of our brethren haue bin as carefull to defend vs from schisme by writing, as they haue bin busie to accuse vs : and amongst sundry of our dis courses to that effect, two haue bin lately published in print, which we desire you would procure : x and hauing duly perused them, then thinke and iudge of us as you shall finde cause.
Now for our conclusion, if any Jesuitical humorist, shall blame or seeke to discredit vs, because in the premisses of this Narration we haue forborne to vse any sharp speeches against our common enemyes, we thinke it conuenient for the preuent- ing of their malitious collections, to yeeld vnto you our reasons thereof. First, the story gaue vs no occasion so to do. Secondly, we reteyne still the opinion which we have signi fied to his Holynes, that the lesuiticall persecution begun against vs, is much more grieuous vnto vs, then that which we are subiect vnto from the State.2 Thirdly, we haue found by experience, that the rayling course which the lesuiticall crue haue taken and vsed in many of their treatises against her Maiestie : and the proceedings by the lawes of the Realme : hath done the Catholick cause exceeding much hurt. Fourthly, as our case standeth, and for ought we see, if the pretended holy Fathers may haue their willes, we shall be driuen to relye more vpon her Highnes fauour for our temporall reliefe, that
1 Bagshaw probably means the two English books which had preceded his own : The Copies of cerlaine discourses and The Hope of Peace. The latter we have already seen him heartily recommending in his Preface (sttfra, p. 4).
2 The reference is to the Dedaratio Motuum, where the writer, enlarging upon the insults and injuries received by the appellant clergy from the Jesuits, concludes : idque adeo quidem ut multd nobis grauior esset persecutio quam contra nos excitarunt patres Jesuitse and Archipresbyter, quam quae a communis hostis insidiis nobis quotidie immineret (p. 37). Compare p. 57, where the pope is told how the heretics make merry over the sight of priests appealing to the holy see being subjected to as great indignities at the hands of a single Jesuit in Rome itself as ever they suffered for defending that see in England.
90 A Prayer.
we perish not with famine, before we be cut off by her lawes, then vpon all the world besides. And lastly, howsoeuer we dissent from the State in the profession of our Religion-: yet we are her Maiesties borne subiects, and vassals, and ought not for any cause, as we are perswaded, to withdraw in that respect, our duties, loue, and allegiance from her Highnes, or our natiue Countrie : much lesse to slaunder, or seeke the cruell ouerthrow of both, as our trayterous aduersaries of the societie, not indeede of lesus, but of the Diuell, and their adherents haue done. And thus praying to God with all our hearts, to heape vpon her Maiestie all temporall and heauenly blessings, and vpon our state sufficient wisedome and prouidence, for the good continu ance of it : and vpon our Countrie all prosperitie and happines, and vpon the Church a dayly increase of zeale for the propaga tion and maintenance of the Catholick faith, and vpon our lesuiticall aduersaries such riches of his mercie, as seeing the height of their owne pride, and the extremities of their pro ceedings, they may become humble in their owne eyes, and desist from their very prowde Machiuilian and cruell deseigne- ments : and vpon all Catholicks sufficient grace to take heed of those that are the authors of schisme and contention : delight ing in nothing, but in factions and nouelties : and vpon our selues constancie to continue in his obedience, and patience, to be able to indure whatsoeuer calamities shall happen vnto vs for our profession of the truth, and the discharge of our con sciences : we take our leaues, and do heere end for this time.
The memoriall mentioned Page 52.1 is hard to be got : few or none of vs that are secular Priests could euer come vnto the
Page 73 of this edition.
The Memorial against the Jesuits. 97
sight of it. Certaine abstracts of it are common. We haue seen two : whereof one hath annexed vnto it certaine obserua- tions of the lesuites cariage of themselues in Rome : and both are as followeth.
An abstract of the memoriall sent by certaine Englishmen out of the Low-country es, to the Popes holmes Clement the eight, against the lesuites labouring in the English Vineyard, September 1597.1
The inscription of the memoriall.
A briefe declaration of the miserable state of Catholicks in England.
After the Preface, it followeth in these words.
THe lesuites that are in England, desirous either to bring vnder bondage, or vtterly to beare downe the Cleargie of the Church of England, haue dared to attempt it by a wonderfull stratagem. First, their will is, that in euery Catho- licks house, (and such houses are in steed of the Church) either
1 In a letter to the nuncio of Flanders, six assistants of the archpriest (May 2, 1 60 1 ) referred to this document as 'a most detestable memorial written and given up to his Holiness in name of the English people.' But they add ' who or how many were the authors we cannot certainly say, but all men do suspect that it came from the same shop or forge (though secretly) which the former platform of Association did. This infamous libel the most of all our secular priests not only denied constantly to be theirs, but confuted also every article therein contained, and by their common letters to Cardinal Caetan, our Pro tector, they delivered these good Fathers from those unworthy slanders and calumniations.' (Apologie, f. 91.)
The Memorial, commonly called ' Fisher's Memorial,' is said to have been drawn up in 1597 by the Rev. Robert Fisher, in the house of Dr. Hugh Griffith, provost of Cambrai, from letters and notes written chiefly by Charles Paget and Dr. William Gifford, then dean of Lille and afterwards archbishop of Rheims. This Fisher had visited Wisbeach, and travelled to and fro, according
98 The Memorial against the Jesuits.
they themselues may be the Pastors, or others deputed by them in their roomes. And if happilie there be any, that do deny the faculties graunted by them ; or will not take notice that such assemblies, or companies of Catholicks depend on them ; or will not obediently (as it were at a beck) execute those things, that they haue commaunded ; such shall be censured either as Apostataes, or Hereticks, or taynted at least with some infection of heresie. So holie, so godly, so religious would they seeme to be ; as nothing is holie, that they haue not sanctified ; no doctrine Catholick, and sound, that commeth not from them ; no dispensation auailable, that is not graunted by them: and which is worse, they haue
to his own statements, on the business of the anti-Jesuit party in England and abroad. He narrowly escaped apprehension at Brussels. At Liege he left behind him his bag, in which Dr. Barret discovered ' a little compendious note of all their articles against the Jesuits at Rome.' This was duly reported to Parsons, and accordingly when Fisher arrived in Rome he was arrested and put through a severe examination on oath by the papal fiscal. He then represented himself as converted to the Jesuit side, and from his sworn depositions or con fessions Parsons derived a large part of his charges against the appellants. But Parsons himself describes Fisher ' as one of the most exorbitant disorderly fellows in the Roman stirs,' and deprives his confessions of much of their value by the cautious qualification, ' albeit we will not affirm all to be true which he said ' (Apologie, ff. 94-97). Dr. Ely says, 'the miserable fellow being apprehended and fearing the gallies or the gallows, to save his life and limbs, was ready to swear and forswear . . . such things as he knew would best please the offended persons ' (Briefe Notes, p. 165) ; and Bagshaw, in his Answer to the Apologie (p. 27), declares that Parsons threatened ' to put hot irons to his (Fisher's) arms if he would not confess what he would have.'
The Memorial and the extracts from letters upon which it was founded were first circulated in Latin by the Jesuits themselves in order to shame their adversaries by the apparent extravagance of the charges contained in them, and to secure counter memorials from their friends. A. P. maintains, further, that the Jesuits made an English translation ' for women to see it and understand it ; ' but it probably did not appear in print before its publication by Bagshaw in his book. Cf. A. P. Reply to the Apologie, pp. 166-171 ; Plowden's Remarks on Panzani, p. 109; Turnbull's English Chapter, pp. 22-24. Parsons touches briefly on some points of the Memorial in his Apologie, but in his Manifestation he takes up the abstract here printed, quoting and contemptuously denying each article of accusation, especially those of the ' Certayne Chiefe points.' W. C., in his Reply (ff. 13-26), once more goes over the whole ground, justifying the several charges, and bringing forward a number of facts in confirmation of them.
Their Tricks to degrade the Clergy. 99
beaten into the heads of the most, that the Masse is not rightly, and orderly celebrated of any, but a lesuite.1
When any of the Cleargie graunteth a dispensation in any case ; by and by there is doubt made of his power and author ity ; some question ariseth of his life, and conuersation ; as if his Priesthood, and calling were not certaine, or assured.2 It is not inough for the Cleargie to liue a godly, and an holie life, vnlesse withall they will acknowledge the lesuites to be their superiors ; thus some man shall be tormented, another some turmoyled, a third some troubled : for who so gathereth not for and with them only, he shall be iudged altogether to scatter. And that they may the better set this their deuise abroch, they cause to be made knowne to all men the faculties
His statements have some biographical interest, and are at least curious as exhibiting the current gossip of his party.
Father Plowden admits that Dr. Gifford, ' though liable to passionate prejudice,' ' possessed learning and other good qualities ; ' that ' it was re corded of him that he was charitable to the poor,' and when promoted to the archbishopric ' he governed his diocese with repute till his death in 1629.' This vigorous opponent of the Jesuits and their policy seems, indeed, to have been endowed with a singularly gentle and amiable disposition. He had been a friend and admirer of St. Charles Borromeo, and acted for some time as the cardinal's theologian at Rome. After holding the deanery of Lille for ten years, he relinquished it to enter the order of St. Benedict, which he did at Rheims in 1608, taking the name of Gabriel of St. Mary. A pleasing descrip tion of his character will be found in the ' Discours Funebre sur la mort de feu Monseigneur le Reverendissime Gabriel de Ste. Marie Archeuesque Due de Reims, premier Pair de France and Legal ne du S. Siege Apostolique, par Dom Guillaume Marlot, Docteur en Theologie, etc. Seconde edition. A Reims, 1630.' Charles Paget, Gifford 's political ally, was a man of a very different stamp— quarrelsome, treacherous, and vindictive.
1 As to this last assertion W. C. remarks somewhat diffidently, ' Sure I am, and I think all the world knoweth it to be true, that they have such tricks and policies to put some such extraordinary conceits into catholics' heads that I see not but in some part this assertion may be verified,' and adds that the fathers get their friends to proclaim that any catholic, coming to confess or communicate to a Jesuit for the first time, will receive a plenary indulgence. But whether they have such extraordinary privileges, W. C. cannot say (f. 13).
2 Parsons, in his ' Story of Domestical Difficulties' (quoted by Tierney, iii. p. clix), declares that catholic laymen, alarmed at the moral ruin of so many of the seminarists (tot tantisqiie naitfragiis]^ would hold scarcely any intercourse with these priests unless they were specially recommended by the Jesuits ; nisi apatribus societatis vel voce vel scriptis vel denique signo fuerint comprobati.
1 00 The Memorial against the Jesuits.
graunted vnto them by his holynes the Bishop of Rome ; and they giue it out, that the most vnlearned lesuite doth farre excell the most learned secular Priest, both in faculties, and priuiledges. And it is noysed about, as it were by the common cryer that they haue power from his holynes to graunt to all, and euery one, all and singular their faculties ; insomuch as it shall not be lawfull and safe for any to vse their priuiledges though graunted them many yeres before fro his holynes, but with the leaue, and consent of these Fathers of the societie. And when they do giue out their faculties, they do not bestow them on learned, godly, or holy men ; but on vnlearned, vn- godly, and irreligious ; nay seditious persons, such as follow their humor, stoupe at their beck, and stand bound euer after vnto them.1
Further they endeuor, that by all meanes possible, both those almes which are giuen for the reliefe of them that are in prison, or any other poore afflicted whatsoeuer ; as also whatso-
1 Until the appointment of the archpriest, Garnet had authority to grant or subdelegate faculties to secular priests as well as to members of his own body. No one among the former, except Mush, and perhaps (as Tierney thinks) Colleton, possessed such a power, and this ceased with Allen's death. Garnet, in a letter to Parsons, quoted by Tierney (vol. iii. p. cxli), laments the new rule by which Blackwell was to communicate faculties to the seculars, and Garnet to his own subjects only. His words throw some light upon the complaint in the memorial. Referring to the restriction in question, he writes : ' It will be a matter of some triumph unto such as chiefly sought to have our faculties abridged. . . . By this also have I lost the chief est means I had to win the favour of good honest priests. . . . And verily it will be no small prejudice to the common necessities when no one can communicate but the archpresbyter alone, who cannot so easily be met withal. ' He makes a similar complaint in a holograph letter (preserved among the Petyt MSS., vol. xlvii. f. 116) addressed to John Payn, attributing the regulation to the envy of other priests, but boasts that yet the Jesuits have in other respects ampler faculties than they had before. W. C. accuses the Jesuits of denying to the secular clergy the power to grant dis pensations from fasting in Lent, thus compelling priests to seek such faculties yearly at their hands. The fathers, however, may have been right as to the fact. At least no such power is mentioned among the ' facultates concedendte sacer- dotibus in Angliam euntibus cum remissione ad Archipresbyterum ' granted by cardinal Cajetan, Feb. 2, 1599. (Petyt MSS. xlvii. 137)- It is obvious what a great advantage, in this fierce struggle for maintenance and power, would be held by any man possessing extraordinary faculties in or out of the confessional.
Their Misappropriation of Alms. 101
euer is paid in cases of dispensation, may come to their hands.1 Heretofore (when Priests had the collection of these almes) prisons were therewith maintayned ; the want in Colledges was supplyed ; the banished Catholicks (whose goodes were forciblie taken from them by Hereticks) were yerely succoured : but now, what is done with them we know not. Prisons and Colledges are depriued of them ; the banished haue them not ; the Priests see them not : but there are hired herewith seditious persons ; deuisers of fables, slaunderers of their brethren, and skorners of the Saincts are herewith enriched ; these, and such as these, re- ceiue large stipends of their labours.
And yet so great a masse of monies cannot be consumed, with so small charges, and expences, but that the Fathers also bestow much vpon themselues. For they go indeed in great gallantrie ; no lesuite goeth but to visit any one, or trauelleth from one place to another, but he is richly apparrelled, he is attended on with a great trayne of seruants, as if he were a Baron, or an Earle;2 which is not necessary, but playnely
1 The diversion of the alms of the faithful into Jesuit channels became an increasing source of complaint on the part of the seculars and their superiors. Birk- head, who succeeded Black well as archpriest, writes in 1609 : ' Even those who have been thirty years in England are now destitute, and call to me for places of residence. Want of relief will be the bane and ruin of many of our brethren.' And again, ' more workmen do daily come over, and think much they have not relief from me, which I assure you they should if I had it. But exceeding little cometh to my hands. The great gobbets go when the distributors please, who are all for our opposites ; for I have as yet small favour amongst them. I believe it is done to weary me. My old assistant, Dr. Bavant, told me that he, sending to the places of their residences within his circuit, received no other answer about the collections than that he should make none there at all, because they meant to bestow their alms only upon the fathers.' (Tierney, v. 7 n.) This is ascribed, in a memorial addressed to Paul v., to the frequent calumnies spread by certain catholics that many secular priests, even the leaders among them, were in the habit of treating with heretics and betraying their affairs to the government. Holtby, for instance, writing to Parsons, May 6, 1609, mentions Finch, a priest, ' and some four or five more not yet discovered ' as ' intelligencers for the bishops, with Mr. Colleton, Mush, R. S[mith], Bishop, and others.' (Ibid. p. 25.)
2 ' This paragraph also our good father shuffleth off with an interrogation, sc. whether in our conscience this be true?' writes W. C, and proceeds to give some instances which curiously illustrate the ways and means of the Jesuit missionary in and out of prison. As to Father Heywood, all catholics know
102 The Memorial against the Jesuits.
ridiculous and absurd. The secular Priests themselues do go also Gentlemen-like because of danger ; but not arayed in that sumptuous manner, nor guarded with so many attendants, as the lesuites. They wrangle ; and reproue the Priests garments, and spendings ; whereas the expences of one lesuite were able to mayntayne twentie Priests plentifully, and richly. Neither by this meanes also could so great a quantitie of almes be wasted, but that (as the report goes) much treasure is con- ueyed beyond the Seas, but to what purpose, we know not, vnlesse it be bestowed vpon their bodie, their corporation, or societie.
Besides they desire (as some conceiue) that England should be conuerted of none but lesuites only. For they will admit
well that ' his port and carriage was more baron-like than priest-like. . . . Was he not wont to ride up and down the country in his coach ? Had he not both servants and priests attendants that did hang on his sleeve in great numbers ? Did he not indict councils, make and abrogate laws? Was not his pomp such as the places where he came seemed petty courts by his presence, his train and followers ? ' Garnet is said to have spent not less than ^"500 a year. The ' mighty and extraordinary excess of Father John Gerard,' we are told, was notorious. His church stuff was worth ^200. A lady gave him a vest of needlework valued at 100 marks. 'Myself have known him to have two geldings in a gentleman's stable at 30 pound a gelding, besides others elsewhere, and horses of good use.' During his confinement in the Clink prison he kept a private table continually with a great store of dainties and much resort daily. Besides he paid his ordinary commons at the common table and chamber rent. ' Let those who have lived at the Clink but judge what this would come to in the year.' He ordinarily kept his gelding in town and his man. ' He rode into the country at his pleasure and returned, which I think you will suppose cost his purse well in bribes to such as were his keepers if to no other. He also maintained two houses in the town with servants in them. . . . Sure I am and such as lived with him in the Clink were of opinion that he could not maintain all this I have spoken of under 400 or 500 pounds by the year. See the pomp of a young Baronet at the least.'
Father Oldcorn, ' was but a petty Jesuit in this kind,' yet his apparel cost 30 or 40 pounds. He had eight good horses at one time. An ordinary Jesuit will spend more than five seculars, and will go only ' to places of account where their entertainment may be good and with the best. . . . And such as have heretofore been secular priests, and were then wont to go on foot sometimes and visit poor people willingly to relieve them and comfort them, becoming afterwards Jesuits have been so a cockhorse that it must be thought no small favour to be worthy of their presence, and that not without their attendants and other ceremonies ; Witness this Ma. Bancks, Ma. Blunt, and others now Jesuits' (ff. 14, 15).
Their Hostility to Douai College. 103
no fellow-laborers : and they vse the same meanes they hereto fore vsed in the Colleclges, to disswade many for the order of their calling, counselling them by all meanes to enter into their societie ; and this they dayly attempt by flatterie, by gifts, and rewards, & sometimes by threatnings. They neuer send one scholler out of England to the Colledge at Doway to studie there, but hinder what they may them that are going thither. They care not for that Colledge, because they cannot draw it into their societie : nay they haue laboured by all meanes vtterly to dissolue it.1
Moreouer, they challenge vnto themselues a spirituall Monarchic ouer all England, as it may appeare by a certain contention in the prison at Wisbich, in which there were, and
1 The grievances here complained of by the memorialists as existing in 1597 were felt far more keenly a few years later. Dr. Richard Barret, who had suc ceeded Allen in the presidency of the college then at Rheims, died in May 1599. He was incompetent for the position, and, as his latest biographer remarks, ' his complaisance to the Jesuits prepared the way for later encroachments, as he not only succeeded in alienating the sympathies of the most influential of the clergy, but lost the respect of those whom he governed by his display of ill-temper and his disobliging spirit (Gillow, Bibliogr. Diet.}. W. C. declares that Barret grew weary of the Jesuit yoke, and ' cried they had burst his back . . . and this not long before he died.' On his death the college petitioned for a superior of their own choice. This was refused through the influence of Parsons, who pro cured the appointment of Dr. Thomas Worthington, long known as ' a blind and unyielding partisan' (Tierney, v. 4-7). Worthington had two years before placed himself under a vow of obedience to Parsons. ' His first step was to dis card the confessor of the house, and to substitute a member of the society. . . . By degrees the old profession was removed ; the ancient institution of theological lectures was abolished ; youths only just emerging from their studies were taken from the schools and thrust into the chairs of divinity ; and while men notorious for their party predilections were associated with the president in the manage ment of the house, a negotiation was actually opened with a view to surrender the establishment to the society. In the meanwhile the effects of these and other innovations were already manifesting themselves in England. Subjected to no probation, trained to no discipline, the scholars were, in many instances, hurried through an imperfect course of study, and despatched with the hasty gleanings of a few weeks' or months' instruction to enter on the duties of the mission. As they came without learning, so they not unfrequently came without virtue and religion. Scandals of course ensued. The enemies of religion looked down with triumph on what was passing. The adversaries of the clergy sought to create a prejudice against the whole body of the secular priesthood. Unfortunately they
104 The Memorial against the Jesuits.
are in hold for the profession of their faith 32. Priests, dayly looking for their death. These liuing a long time a godly, and an holy life, did eate altogether, studied altogether, vsed euery day to preach, to dispute, to intreate of cases of conscience, to expound the scriptures ; and exercised the same studies, as they were wont to practise in the Vniuersities : all were of one minde ; all of one heart ; all as brethren ; one bearing with another. The towne of Wlsblch loued them ; all the land praised them ; the hereticks admired them ; the keepers of the prisons greatly affected them : so that they inioyed euery day more and more libertie. Their maintenance came to them from all places, yea the very Ministers (though hereticks) very often helped to relieue them. Many yeeres lined they in this godly, holy, and
were but too successful. The catholics, filled with a vague suspicion of danger, gradually closed their doors against every member of the clergy with whom they were not personally acquainted. To increase the evil, Dr. Worthington from Douai still continued to pour in his illiterate recruits. . . . Idleness and destitu tion, and the associations consequent on their poverty, were now added to their other misfortunes. A feeling of recklessness grew up amongst many of them ; apostacies and immoralities followed ; and all the evils resulting from the degra dation of its ministers seemed about to descend upon religion.' An instance is given in the career of a Rev. Mr. Chambers. He entered Douai as an alumnus in June 1605, was ordained priest six months later, and sent upon the mission. ' Here (writes John Bennet, apud Tierney) he fell into the hands of the pursui vants, apostatised, became a servant in one of the cathedrals, and, having been ultimately detected in the commission of an odious felony, terminated his life on the gallows. ' Birkhead remarks : ' A monstrous scandal it was. ... If he had been relieved at first, he had never played that part.' He was debauched by the heretics, and 'protested at his death that he was never infected with that abominable sin until he joined with them.'
W. C. complains that all the youth of good family, wealth or talent were sent by the Jesuits to their seminary at St. Omers. ' Since the erecting of this seminary, what gentleman's son (he asks) hath been sent over by any Jesuit in England but to that house ? ' The right of presentation originally belonged to the archpriest and superior of the Jesuits in England, but was gradually extended to other members of the society. So that the patronage of Douai passed almost exclusively into their hands.
The diary of the college relating to this period of decadence and misgovern- ment, subsequent to the return from Rheims to Douai in 1593, is extant in MS. in the archives of the archbishop of Westminster, but unfortunately remains un- printed. A mass of interesting documents on the subject has been collected in the fifth volume of Tierney's Dodd.
Their fawning upon the Rich. 105
deuout kind of life, vntill a lesuite, one Edmunds by name (in spired we know not with what spirit) gaue to some occasion to doubt of the well imploying of the almes receiued. This foundation laid, he so insinuated himselfe with faire demeanour and false deuises into the hearts of many, as that he deuided the Priests into two parts, whereof the one part drew to him, the other stood against him.
They vse also to fawne vpon men of noble birth, especially if they be rich, and inueigle them by all faire meanes to sell all that they haue, and enter into their Societie. Women also are induced by them to become Nunnes, and to leaue such goods as they haue, to them. Which thing many that are godly-wise allow not. For such rich Laitie (all circumstances considered) are able to further more the establishing of the faith in Eng land, then the lesuites consider of. For such as they, might giue maintenance to Priests ; enrich the prisons of Catholicks with their gifts ; help the afflicted : they may more freely, and with lesse danger speak of the Catholick religion, and faith ; more commonly argue and discourse with hereticks. But the lesuites consider not, that these, and such other things may be done, and would be done by them without any difficultie. But in this manner do they make merchandise of the conuersion of England ; thus do they dispose of the last wils of the sick ; thus loue they to intermeddle with the manages of many, with their temporall goods, and indeed with all things : Alwayes taking that course with all men, that something happen to their share, hauing minde indeed of nothing, but their owne gaine. They skorne to come to any one, but where they may be daintily, and costly entertayned : l they looke not after the
3 ' Dainty and costly entertainment ' cannot easily be associated with the harassed and hunted lives of such men as Henry Walpole or John Gerard. But to all the fathers, in their moments of rest or of hiding, the doors of the best catholic houses in England were open, while they were as a rule closed or opened with mistrust to other priests, or at least to those who did not bring with them some certificate of approval from a Jesuit. As an illustration — not by any means of the charges adduced in the memorial, but of the mode in which the bounty and alms of the rich flowed in upon the favoured society — it may not be out of place to quote a few lines from the biography of Anne, countess of Arundel
106 The Memorial against the Jesuits.
cottages of the poore, nor minister their help to them, be there neuer so much need.
and Surrey, written by her Jesuit confessor. ' And first, to begin with priests ' (writes the author in a chapter on her * charitable deeds to priests and religious persons,' 1593-1630), ' although she had little or no acqttaintance with any of the sectilar clergy, yet at several times, to my knowledge, she has given good sums of money for their relief, and ivotild have done more had not less discretion of some made abate something of her accustomed liberality towards them. And how willing she was to have helped any of them in just occasions is manifest by what she did for the delivery of Mr. Blackwell, the first archpriest.' The writer goes on to relate how she procured Blackwell's escape from a dangerous hiding-place, where he was watched, by bribing the pursuivants. ' She was so charitable to religious persons that besides what she gave to particulars she met with by accident, there was no order in England of which she had notice but at one time or other received some considerable alms from her, nor scarce any college or religious house of our nation [in Flanders, Italy, or Spain]. But to none nor to all the rest together was she so beneficial and bountiful as to those of the society of Jesus. For, besides her keeping ever some of them in her house for the space of more than forty years, and the relieving in sundry occasions divers other particular persons of them, she gave every year very large alms to their com munity here in England, and continued it to her dying day. And to the end they might not want that, or a better means after her decease, she sent at several times 2500 pounds beyond seas, thereto put in bank and increased till her death, and then the profit thereof to be employed for their use and maintenance here. ' The money was lost ; but yet, not discouraged, she bought for them the house in Ghent. ' Not only to those of the society of our nation was she so beneficial as has been said, but to others also of the same society of other nations, as unto Father Mutio Vitelleschi, then general of the order,' etc. That which made her so specially affected to the society, we are told, was the good opinion of it she had heard from her grandmother, Lady Mounteagle, and the good reports she heard of Father Campion and Father Parsons, also the conversation she had with Father Gasper Heywood soon after her conversion. ' But afterwards meeting with some who buzz'd many things against them, she was not a little alienated (as she has often told me) until being informed of the truth by Father William Weston, who reconciled the earl, her husband, but chiefly by Father Southwell, she remained so well satisfied that ever after she continued a most constant friend and perpetual benefactress. . . . The very last night of her life she told me, who am a Jesuit, and helped her to die, that nothing did then more comfort her than what she had done for the society, and in particular the setting up the college in Gant.' ( The Lives of Philip Howard, Earl of Arundel, and of Anne Dacres, his wife. Edited by the Duke of Norfolk. London, 1861.)
With this may be compared an account of the ' entertainment ' given to the fathers, often half a dozen at a time, in a quaint and in many respects pleasing biography of Mrs. Dorothy Lawson (born in 1580, died 1632), daughter of Sir Henry Constable of Burton Constable, written by Father Palmer, S. J., the lady's confessor (p. 46, seq., Newcastle, 1855).
Their Delight in Equivocation. 107
Moreouer, they are so delighted with equiuocation, or a subtile and dissembling kind of speech, as that to the scandall of others they are not ashamed to defend it in their publick writings. There were read before the Judges on the bench in open Court, and in the hearing of all the people the letters of a certain lesuite named Southwell, wherein equiuocations were most absurdly defended, which gaue cause of laughter to the hereticks, and occasion of scandall to the Catholicks. They take pleasure also to scatter rumors, and to suggest certaine
' A certain Jesuite named Southwell ' was the well-known poet and martyr Robert Southwell, who had been hanged at Tyburn two years before, Feb. 20, X595> after suffering with marvellous patience and fortitude, at the hands of the monster Topcliffe, tortures more horrible than perhaps any which were inflicted upon his fellow-victims. At his trial Southwell was charged with having instructed Anne Bellamy, who betrayed him, that if she were asked at any time, by a pursuivant whether there was a priest in her house she should deny the fact, and, if need be, on her oath. Southwell defended his position at the bar, citing the example of Jesus, who had said that no one knew the day of judgment, ' neither the angels nor the Son,' i.e. that Jesus had no such knowledge as he could communicate to others. At this the judges and the court, we are told by the Jesuit historian, Bartoli (Inghilterra> ii. 70), 'made a show of being highly scandalised, and would have stopped their ears.' This was apparently the first occasion on which the theory and practice of equivocation were brought into public notice in England. There is no extant treatise on the question by Southwell himself, but he had evidently written one, and the notoriety of his case led to the composition of a tract, of unknown authorship, but corrected and prepared for the press by Garnet, in defence of Southwell's thesis. This tract, written between 1592 and 1595, was found in the lodgings of Francis Tresham at the time of the Gunpowder Plot, and the identical copy so discovered, with the annotations in Garnet's handwriting, is now in the Bodleian library. It was edited with a preface by D. Jardine in 1851. The author (p. 4) informs us that * Mr. Southwell himself wrote long since a particular instruction of this matter, and no better defender could we have of Mr. Southwell than Mr. Southwell himself, if either that writing were easy to be found,' etc. ; and pro mises ' that other labour of Mr. Southwell shall be (God willing) with convenient leisure published.' He refers in another place (p. 46) to 'that Blessed Father Southwell, his doctrine, whom some would glad with their calumniations fetch out of heaven if they could.' The original title of the MS. was : 'A Treatise of Equivocation, wherein is largely discussed the Question whether a Catholicke or any other person before a magistrate, beyng demaunded uppon his oath whether a Prieste were in such a place, may (notwthstanding his perfect knowledge to the contrary) without Periury and securely in conscience answere, No, wth this secreat meaning reserued in his mynde, That he was not there so that any
108 The Memorial against the Jesuits.
nouelties in the eares of Catholicks, yea to forge and inuent things that are not, insomuch as they are commonly held now adayes great lyars ; and it is come to that passe, that though they sweare, men will not beleeue them.
All Vniuersitie men, and such as haue taken any degree in schooles (and such in our countrey are most regarded) they hate most, despise, contemne, and reproch.1 It is a common report
man is bound to detect it.' The question is of course answered frankly and plainly in the affirmative. Garnet ingeniously altered the title to : ' A Treatise against Lying and Dissimulation newly overseen by the author, and published for the defence of Innocency and the instruction of Ignorants.' B'lackwell approved and gave his Imprimatur to the tract as ' valde doctus et vere pius.'
Parsons gives his own opinion briefly in the Apologie (ff. 199, seq.), and reports a discussion which took place on the question between Mr. Thos. Bensted, ' a martyr,' and Dr. Bagshaw, in the course of which the Doctor declared 'he never could abide equivocations.' Parsons accordingly notes in the margin ' He that sticketh not at lies never needeth to use equivocations ; ' and referring to Southwell's speech at the bar, denounces ' these good fellows,' i.e. his clerical brethren, who, ' conspiring with the persecutors, have sought to disgrace him ever since for the same, and not only him, but his whole order. Examples of the extent to which Garnet and Tresham themselves carried the practice of equivocation will be found in Mr. Jardine's volume referred to above. Parsons discusses the question more fully in ' A Treatise tending to Mitigation towards Catholicke-Subiectes in England . . . against Thomas Morton, Minister . . . by P. R., 1607,' where he devotes 255 pages to a defence of his doctrine. A learned answer to this treatise was published by Dr. John Barnes, a benedictine, in a volume entitled Dissertatio contra j&qnivocationes (Paris, 1625). The author insists against Parsons that the doctrine so far from being ' estab lished these forty years by the practise of the whole Christian world, and by the common teaching of the schools of theology,' as the Jesuit had maintained, was in fact a novelty devoid of authority : ' recentiorum minutorum theolo- gorum sententiam, a qua theologi veteres abhorrent ' (p. 3).
1 Parsons attributes the authorship of this ' calumniation ' to Bagshaw himself. Dr. Ely devotes several pages to the subject (Brief e Notes , pp. 84-94). ' The fifth cause of discontent,' he writes, ' is that the Rectors (yea our English Rectors) in the Roman College have no respect of such graduates as are made in our Universities in England, but will make more of a boy, and give him better countenance and place him higher at the table, than to a batchelor or a M. of Art which cannot be but a great corrisive to such graduates, and a great fault in government, especially of English Fa., who either do or should know what esteem learning and degrees take in schools. . . . But the Fathers, whether it be under the colour of making them humble, or for some other cause best known to themselves, do give very little or no credit or countenance at all to graduates. And another thing (which hath been noted of some men), they never sent any from that college into England with any degree of schools on their back, two
Their habitual Use of Calumny. 109
in England, that had it not bin for the pride, and ambition of the lesuites, there had eare this bin graunted some toleration in Religion.
To conclude, omitting all other things (which are very many) I wil only rehearse one, which I haue heard of many ; that it is come to this passe now, that the Catholicks stand in more feare of the lesuites, then of the hereticks. For the
only excepted [tnarg: D. Barrett, D. Stillington], who, being specially favoured and loved of Father Alfonso, were made Doctors in Rome before their mission, but were both stayed at Rhemes.' . . .
' To the man you note in the margin (who complained of the disgrace of degrees), when he was sent from Rhemes to Rome, I said thus to him — Master Bagshawe, you are going to Rome, and in your company such and such (naming 2 poor scholars that served him and the rest at the table), when you come there, you shall see these boys (your servants here) as well clothed, lodged and served as yourself, peradventure more in favour and better liked of the superior than you and to sit higher at the table than you, can you abide this ? think on it for so it will happen, as it did indeed. Which made him, Master Stafferton, Warford (now a Jesuit), Fixer, D. Cicill, and others having all been Graduates and of good account in Oxford to dislike and storm at it, as many others have done since and still will do till graduate be better respected.'
Immediately after peace was made at the Roman college, and a few weeks before the date of the Memorial, Clement vm. issued a decree, Sept. 19, 1597, prohibiting any English divine from taking the degree of doctor until, in addition to the usual four years occupied in theological studies, he shall have spent an additional four years in perfecting and consolidating these studies. Moreover, the candidate was to provide himself with a certificate of approval from the rector of the seminary in which he was educated, as well as from the cardinal protector or his vicegerent.
' The promulgation of this decree,' says Tierney, ' produced considerable excitement among a large portion of the clergy. Connecting it with the late events in the English college, they regarded it as a species of retaliation, and persuaded themselves that it was a scheme devised by the Jesuits for the purpose of degrading the secular clergy ' (iii. 40). Tierney himself thinks the tendency of the regulation was rather to redeem the body from disgrace by providing that the substance and name of learning should be united. Dr. Ely, however, who says the decree was not printed till three years later, i.e. till 1601, points out with much indignation the practical inconveniences and hardships of ' this buggy bull.' He suspects that the object was to prevent others from following the example of Bagshaw and other students, who, leaving the English college without degrees, took them afterwards on their own account at some foreign university. These were called in derision Italian doctors. Bagshaw was nicknamed doctor erraticus or per saltum. ' God be blessed,' exclaims Ely, ' that some of us were Doctors before these men [the Jesuits] came to govern the court and country, else might we have gone beg our bread and many a one blow their nails besides.'
110 The Memorial against the Jesuits.
hereticks (say they) can but chasten the bodie only ; but the lesuites wound both their bodies, and their good name.1 They do not indeed directly cause Priests to be apprehended, but in directly. That is, hauing spread some reports of them, whereby their good name is taken away, so as they stand suspected either of heresie, or of some other heynous offence,2 no Catholick enter- tayneth them, and so consequently, they are driuen to pouertie, how can they escape the hands of the hereticks ? And albeit they lye in prison, and bonds, and are many wayes tormented, if they be not crowned with the glory of martyrdome, they shal neuer be purged from that former suspition, but shall be ac counted euery day more and more, as hereticks.
1 W. C. names several catholics upon whom the Jesuits had cast ' their continual infamies. ' But he adds, ' a whole volume would be little enough to comprehend the catalogue of such gentlemen and priests as have tasted of this kind of whip from the Jesuits and their followers.' Among the martyrs he mentions the case of the franciscan ' Jones, alias Buckley, as notorious. I myself was particularly acquainted therewith, and his letters writ to Fa. Garnet, after his condemnation, may be a sufficient testimony. ' Harrington was so oppressed with such calumnies that, having the offer of a means of escape, he neglected it, saying that ' he must be hanged to prove himself honest. ' He was hanged in 1 594. Mr. Fixer was forced by their slanders to leave England, and finally, through their bad usage, lost his life with grief and sorrow. Mr. Pibush [mart. 1601], during his stay in Gloucester prison, ' was calumniated by them as inconstant in his faith and suspicious of revolt : myself am witness thereof.' Mr. Plasden was so wronged by Mr. John Gerard and others that he could not be received amongst his old acquaintance in London. By which means he fell into the officers' hands and was executed [1591]. Mr. Wingfield was called into suspicion for Southwell's apprehension. Witness their dealings with Mr. Edward Bennet, ' whom they so defamed with the note of espiall and the like that he was thrust out of his residence, and the calumniation so generally spread in the country about him that, had not an old gentlewoman taken pity on him, he would have been reduced to extremities.' ' Verilie,' says the writer, ' I think the third priest now in England hath not escaped their spiteful tongues.' ' Mr. George Beesley [martyr 1591] was notoriously abused by them.'
The list in the Petyt MSS., referred to above (p. 17, «.), contains the names of fourteen martyrs cum phirimis alus, said to have been defamed by the Jesuits.
2 Dr. Gifford, writing to two English priests who had opposed themselves to the proceedings of Father Holt, says : ' They (the Jesuits) have of late spread a report at Brussels, and a certain one returning to Douai has proclaimed it in public, that you are guilty of heresy, fornication, and an unmentionable crime (nefandi scekris]^ and that his holiness had at one time resolved to condemn you to the gallies, but had spared you for the honour of our nation. Although very many repudiated such a calumny with horror, it nevertheless obtains credit with some ' (quoted by Turnbull, English Chapter, p. 6).
Certain chief Points of A ccusation. Ill
Certayne chiefe points of' accusations, wherewith many English men haue iustly charged the lesuites vnto the Pope, and diners Cardinals : taken out of the Memoriall and other letters: some of them dated at Rome 8. of Nouember 1597.1
Touching the lesuites in England.
THe Fathers of the Societie do dissent among themselues, Fa. Henrie the superior, and Fa. Edmonds, in the Prison at Wisbich, and there are 26. Articles of their dissension.'2
1 The history of these articles is told by Parsons in his Manifestation, as follows : —
' The second and third catalogue of slanders . . . were written by some of their own friends, and this very secretly and covertly underhand, and by them sent to Rome, thereby to incense the flame of the Roman sedition when it was on fire, with order to spread the said slanders abroad, but in no wise to discover the authors thereof. These they now divulge in print, under the title of " Certain Chief Points. "
* And further where it is said that many Englishmen gave up these false accusations, we find but two named in the latin original, to wit Ch. P. and W. G., who by these men are guilefully omitted in the English, and by us also should not be mentioned but that we are forced in some sort to figure their names by the first letters for testimony of the truth : for seeing they denied the same afterwards by many protestations to many, and one of them before a public magistrate, and the matters objected being so absurd, impious, and apparently false in themselves we would willingly have held silence therein. . . .
' We must note that these calumniations which here they set abroad were certain brief articles collected by some of our fathers in Rome out of a great mass of seditious letters, which, at the making up of the peace and ending of the strife in the city, were partly discovered and exhibited voluntarily upon scruple of conscience by those that had been troublesome, and partly found by chance, or rather perhaps by God's providence, the better to confirm the said peace within the college, which letters had been written and sent thither by the fore- said two friends, C. P. and W. G., out of Flanders for the intent before men tioned of increasing those troubles. ' ' These documents, ' adds Parsons, * were put together in a good large book yet extant,' entitled 'Acta Seditiosa Cfaroli] Pfagetti] et G[ulielmi] G[iffordi], etc., Romse, anno 1596 & 1597, contra Patres societalis. ' They were then sent to Gifford, hoping to move him at the sight to some retractation ' (ff. 5, 6).
The marginal references to some of the sources from which the extracts were drawn, and which Parsons accuses the author of the Relation of unfairly sup pressing, are supplied in the following notes.
2 This article is attributed to ' Ch. P., in colloquio cum P. Bonard, ut patet ex ejusdem literis, 27 Sept. 1597.' (Manifestation, f. 9.) Parsons points
112 Certain chief Points of A ccusatio n .
If any Priest haue a conuenient place of residencie, the Jesuits will not cease vntill they haue cast him out, and that by wicked meanes, by defaming him, and bringing him into suspition.
That the lesuites are the firebrands of all seditions.
That the lesuites by right or wrong seeke simply and absolutely the Monarchic of all England?-
They are enemies to all secular Priests.
They are the causes of all the discord in the English Nation.
They are called of the schismaticks horse -leaches, or bloud- suckers.
That Fa. Parsons, and Sir Fra. Inglefeild Knight, deuised the complot to set the Cardinals Aldobrandinus, Caietane, and the Bishop of Cassana together by the eares : and to fall foule one vpon an other.2
out that it stands in contradiction to the common charge that the Jesuits are too much united, the one obeying the other's beck. W. C. retorts that they are like ' Sampson's foxes, who were all tied together by the tails, running with their heads divers courses, yet all into the Philistines' corn,' and adds that * Sixtus Quintus of famous memory was wont to say of them (as divers of credit in Rome reported) Qui tangit unum tangit omnes. . . . Witness the jars between Fa. Crighton and Father Parsons for Scottish and Spanish affairs, the like between him and Fa. Haywood in England, etc. . . . This point is so evident to all the world, as I assure myself no one religious order in God's church cometh near unto them, therein : witness their daily expulsions out of their order and the multitude departing from them yearly ' (Reply, f. 22).
1 This is evidently borrowed from Dr. Gifford, who, writing from Brussels to Tho. Throgmorton at Rome that Parsons and his faction, Stanley, Holt, etc., are instruments of mischief, and deal for the ruin of the nation, adds, ' Parsons seeks the simple monarchy of England per fas et nefas.'1 (May 17, 1595. CaL S. P., Dom. Eliz., CCLII., No. 8.)
2 This article also appears to have emanated from Dr. Gifford. In a letter to Throgmorton, then residing with the bishop of Cassano, Gifford writes from Brussels, May 20, 1595 : ' Surely the device of setting by the ears Cajetan, Cas sano and the principal of the Jesuits comes from Verstegan [Parsons' agent and correspondent at Antwerp] and the old knight [Englefield] with Parsons in Rome ' (CaL S. P., Dom. Eliz., CCLII. 16). Aldobrandino, the pope's nephew, had been vice-protector of the college in 1586.
Dr. Owen Lewis, bishop of Cassano, in the kingdom of Naples (cf. supra, p. 17), formerly a fellow of New college, Oxford, left England in 1561, and was made professor of canon law in the university of Douai and canon of Cambrai. He gave much help to his friend Allen in the establishment of the seminary at Douai, and was chiefly instrumental in founding that of Rome. At Rome, Gregory xni. and Sixtus v. employed him in important offices; and in 1580,
The Firebrands of Sedition. 113
N. wrote to Cardinall Allen, that Fa. Holt stoode guiltie, and might be accused by him of such infamous matters, as he durst not make metion of in his letters.
St. Charles Borromeo, who afterwards died in his arms, made him one of the vicar-generals of his diocese at Milan. He was consecrated bishop in 1588. Dodd speaks highly of his piety and ecclesiastical virtues (ii. 43 ; cf. the opinion of Dr. Champney, quoted by F. Knox, Douay Diaries, p. xcvii). In the early days of the college at Rome, when the English students broke out in mutiny against their Welsh rector, Dr. Maurice Clenock, Dr. Lewis warmly supported his friend and countryman, so that, when finally the cause of his opponents triumphed and the care of the college was committed to the society, 'he conceived,' says Father Plowden, ' a violent disgust against the Jesuits, which he seems to have retained to his death. ' He was, moreover, ' soured with the expulsion of his nephew, Hugh Griffin [or Griffith], from the college for disorderly behaviour.' He lost credit at Rome, according to the same authority, by his connection with the ill- advised projects of the adventurer Stukeley, and by the confidence which he placed in Lesley, bishop of Ross, ' whose flattering letters to Queen Elizabeth had given great dissatisfaction. ' He is accused of having formed a party, which, by secret correspondence or otherwise, left no means untried to harass the superiors of the college and to create disturbances among the scholars. Even tually, when his influence was weakened and his party discountenanced, he is said to have 'retired in disgust to Milan.'
Many years later, on the death of Allen, the old party animosities were revived. The friends of the bishop of Cassano made interest to obtain for him the cardinal's hat, and the friends of the society were as keen in canvassing for Parsons. To the intrigues and the quarrels which ensued Dr. Gifford refers in another letter (Cal. S. P., ibid. 66) : 'Owen and the rest laugh at Cassano's being cardinal, and it is thought that it will be rather Cajetan [Stapleton ?] or Parsons, They accuse Cassano of being Scottish, and plot his ruin and utter overthrow. I wish our countrymen would end this controversy about a cardinal, as it causes much faction. A letter was subscribed in favour of Parsons, but Fitzherbert hindered it. Sir Fr. Englefield causes all this broil by favouring first one and then the other. No trust should be given to the king of "Spain's ministers, but Cassano should build on the pope.' To the credit of Parsons, it must be said that he was clear of any personal ambition in the matter. This is admitted by Dr. Ely, who, however, insists that Parsons did all in his power to prevent the red cap falling to his rival. Ely prints, on the other hand, a querulous letter received by him from Dr. Lewis, March 10, 1595, in which the bishop does not appear to much advantage. ' We have lost (he writes) our good Card. Allene, he made me executor of his will with 3 cardinals, and we ever have been friends though some evil disposed did seek to separate us for their own gain and ill purposes. And now there is such a stinking stir in Flanders, Spain, and Rome, to make Fa. Parsons cardinal and so by consequent to exclude me that it is almost incredible. . . . The doers of this are but 2 or 3 of our nation which tumble all up and down. All the rest, best and wisest, do love and honour me ' (Briefe Notes, pp. 94-96).
114 Certain chief Points of Accusation.
That Fa. Holt did not only intend, but would indeede giue wretched England in Conquest to himselfe and his fauorites.1
1 William Holt, of Oriel college, Oxford, was ordained at Douai in 1576, and joined the Jesuits two years later. In 1581 Parsons sent him into Scotland on a secret mission, bearing letters from Queen Mary to her son. Holt was caught and imprisoned, and was only saved from the rack by the intervention of James, who had him expelled the kingdom. For a short period he was rector of the English college at Rome, but in 1588 he was sent to Brussels as an agent of Philip II. and administrator of the funds which the king assigned, by way of pensions, to the English exiles in Flanders. He was, says Tierney, ' a zealous advocate of the Spanish succession,' and 'a man of character and talent, but the austerity of his manner was embittered by the violence of his politics ; and the "tyranny" of Father Holt became a topic of loud and unceasing complaint among the members of the opposite party. ' What is called ' the English Faction ' besieged the pope with petitions for his removal, while the partisans of Spain and the society were as urgent with memorials in his favour. The cardinal archduke Albert was presented with an indictment containing thirty-six grave charges against Holt; which were examined by Oliver Manareus, the Jesuit provincial, and J. B. de Tassis, the agent of King Philip. Upon the private report of Manareus, founded, Tierney thinks, ' not so much on the evidence of facts as upon a wish to prevent an enquiry,' the archduke declared the charges to be unfounded, trivial, or doubtful, and Holt, being simply admonished to be more conciliatory in manner, was able to hold his enemies in defiance. In ' A brief note of the practices that divers Jesuits have had for killing princes and changing of states ' furnished to the English government, in 1597, Charles Paget goes so far as to accuse Holt of conspiring to assassinate Elizabeth (Cal. S. P., Dom. Eliz.y CCLXVII. 67). Holt was on the other hand warmly defended by Allen to the end. Jesuit historians credit this distinguished member of their society with patience, equability of temper, and a remarkable spirit of forgiveness. Dr. Oliver declares that slander and persecution 'never ruffled the peace of his innocent and upright soul.' The account given by More (Hist. S.J., pp. 268- 272) and followed by Foley (vii. 1231 seq.) should, however, be compared with the letters of Manareus himself, addressed to F. Duras, assistant of the society.
In these letters (printed by Tierney, vol. iii. p. xciv, seq.}, written with a moderation and impartiality which shocked and distressed Father Parsons, Manareus has much to say in defence or excuse of the English ' nobles,' as he calls the opponents of Holt. Dr. Gifford, indeed, and his schemes he detested — hominis ingenium et molimina detestati sumus. Paget he thought superior to the rest in talents and prudence ; and that he might have been won over, had he been kindly treated by Holt. Paget had been accused — probably by Hugh Owen, who was to Holt what Paget himself was to Dr. Gifford — of various crimes to the duke of Parma, but on investigation had been honourably acquitted. Attempts had been made to deprive the and- Spanish leaders of their pensions or to remove them from Flanders (see letters of the duke of Feria and of Parsons : Tierney, iii. liii, Ixvii). Manareus admits there was cause for dissatisfaction
Tyranny and Insolence of Father Holt. 115
That Fa. Holt and his companions had gathered such an infinite masse of money from the Catholicks in England, for dispensations, or vnder the colour of expending it to their vses, as many credibly affirmed it to exceede the summe of 50000. pounds english, which make two hundreth millions of Italian Scutes.1
with the alienation of funds from the objects for which they were collected. Yet he finds the ' nobles ' valde humanos, even when he has cause to reprehend them, whereas Hugh Owen and his party are ' most bitter, headstrong, proud, menacing, and foul-mouthed.' Manareus trembles when he has occasion to confer with this angry and abusive ally of Holt. As to Holt himself, the good father is so impetuous and carried away by such strong passions that, since his exculpation, he goes about boasting that now « he no longer cares for what the others may think or wish,' and thus adds to the general exasperation. He is, in fact, a man ' indisposed to peace, and unable to control himself if he fancies him self in the least degree injured.' Manareus, therefore, is strongly of opinion that the father should be removed. Holt was withdrawn from the province a year or two afterwards, and died at Barcelona, 1599.
1 The original Latin (derived from a letter of Gifford to Robert Markham, 8th August 1596) puts the number of scuti at ducenta millia. Parsons, of course, derides Bagshaw for the slip of the pen by which ' thousands ' are turned into ' millions.' But it was, he adds, this accusation which opened the eyes of cardinal Borghese, when he was employed by the pope as vice-protector in ' compound ing the stirs.' Parsons declares he would grant the rest of the charges if it could be proved that the Jesuits had received 200 pence from England for the society and not for the English. Gentlemen, such as Charles Bassett and George Gilbert, had left money, the latter 800 crowns, for the house of pro bation of S. Andrea in Rome, but the general, Aquaviva, ' would never suffer a penny to be admitted for ought but Englishmen in necessity and for the use of the English cause. ' ' The college at Rome had 2000 crowns in gold of this gentleman's money left to the arbitrament of the society, but the society not a penny ' (Manifestation, f. 9). Gilbert died in 1583, and Bassett in the following year. W. C. in his Reply (pp. 24-26) and Watson (Quodlibets, pp. 85-91) relate some curious facts and rumours on this subject, and name several persons who had been induced to part with their estates or large sums of money to the society. Father John Gerard had the reputation of being a great practiser in these ' conycatching and cozening tricks.'
In a memorial setting forth the grievances of the secular clergy, and addressed to Paul v. by the archpriest Harrison and his assistants in 1619, the petitioners write : 'This brings into our memory what the illustrious Allen so much complained of, towards the latter end of his days, against the rectors of the seminary in Rome, who had so many ways of drawing students into their society ; as also against Father Parsons, who put his brethren upon the same method in the Spanish seminaries, where, though he pretended they were
116 Certain chief Points of Accusation.
That the lesuites haue driuen certaine excellent men to desperation, inforcing them to leaue England, and to enter into some religious order, or to take some other miserable course.
That the lesuites in England by certayne cunning sleights, hauing gotten into tlieir hands all authoritie, good estimation, and all the stock or treasure of money, do what they list at home and abroade. They thrust out, and let in, hire, and buy, intercept letters, and maintayne factions as they please them selues.
That Fa. Holt in Belgia, and Parsons in Spayne, haue con tinued these nine whole yeres, to the great griefe of the Nobilitie and Clergie : and haue procured themselues to be continued the Kings seruants.
That there are many things in the dealings of these Fathers which offend good men : viz. the contempt of Nobilitie : the turning away of Students from the Cblledge at Doway : the attempting to bring the most flourishing kingdome of England into a Prouince : the polling and pilling of Catholicks in Eng land, vnder the colour of holy vses by intolerable fraude : a con- tinuall enterdeale with hereticks, and men of suspected religion.
There must be care taken that the Priests in England may haue either equall or greater faculties then the lesuites, seeing their pride by reason of their large faculties is fenced (as it were) with authoritie.
That the English Nobles which are in Belgia, wonder that his Holynes suffreth lesuites in England, who are the fire brands of all contentions especially in any place of authoritie, and that these ten yeers and more, notwithstanding the
founded to propagate the English clergy, and upon this view procured large benefactions for their subsistence, yet the greatest part of those charities were employed in fitting up young men for the society.' This important paper is translated from the unpublished portion of the Douai Diaries by Tierney (vol. v. p. ccxxii, seq. ). Compare also the ' Information ' drawn up by Colleton, then vice-archpriest, and his nine assistants concerning the regular clergy in general : eleemosynas quas catholicis captivis et sacerdotibus in vinea laborantibus sus- tentandis inservire deberent, sibi solis approprient (Dodd, iii. 146), and a similar statement of Mush in a letter to More, the agent of the clergy in Rome (Tierney, iv. clxxix).
Insatiable Ambition and Pride. 117
miserable clamor and lamentations of our Nobles and Gentle men, who be oppressed vnder the yoke of slauery and their tyrannic.1
The lesuites do withstand any mans comming out of Eng land into Belgia, vnlesse they know him prepared to write, to speake, to do what they will : and that he sweare to be ruled by them : and herein they exercise notorious tyrannie.
Other infinite matters of this nature are omitted, which are conteyned in the letters that are kept vpon record : Taken out of letters dated at Rome, 8. Nouember 1597.
Concerning the whole Societie, and the lesuites at Rome.
THe lesuites are so ambitious, as not content with the bounds which their Fathers placed, in their vnsatiable desire they haue alreadie swallowed vp Kingdomes and Monarchies.2
That being led by this ambition, they go about to change
1 Among the intercepted letters in the Record Office is one, dated Nov. 1596, from a Mr. ' Robert Dyaper to the Rev Father St.,' who writes : ' I came to Douay, etc. — all courses are now to be employed in Ireland, where is assured hope of conquest and nobody to hinder. . . . Owen and Father Holt rule all courses for England. Every Englishman is carried before them, and they dispose of them as they list : now they will trust none but Irish, being good Catholics' (Dom. Eliz,, CCLX. 114).
2 This ' absurd contumelious speech, ' according to Parsons, was taken from a letter written by Dr. Gifford to Edward Tempest, a priest of the college at Rome, 1 3th April 1596. W. C. refers to Parsons' 'proud pamphlet of Reformation intermeddling with all estates ' as fortifying the suspicion intimated in this article as regards England. 'Do not, 'he asks, 'their late attempts in Ireland show as much for that kingdom ? I will not omit their stratagems in France, in Scotland, and that which is reported of Japonia and other places in the Indies, where they keep to themselves the whole dominion, and will admit no other clergy, but play bishop, priest, and monk themselves ' (f.2o). The ' proud pamphlet ' at that time only existed in MS., and was entitled : ' A Memorial of the Reformation of England, containing certain Notes and Advertisements which seem might be proposed in the first Parliament and National Council of our country after God, of his mercy, shall restore it to the Catholic Faith, for the better Establishment and preservation of the said Religion : Gathered and set down by R. P., 1596.' It was first published by Edward Gee in 1690 from a copy presented to James ir.
118 Certain chief Points of Accusation.
the forme of the Hierarchie, or supreme gouerment of the auncient Church by disordered packing.
That this pride and ambition of the lesuites, is the cause of seditions not only in England, in the very prisons there, in the Low Cuntries, and in Italy, but all the world ouer.
That this their ambition hath taken footing not only in Prouinces and Cities, but also in priuate families : it separ- ateth brethren one from an other, and the husband from the wife, inflaming them with rancor and enuie one against another.
That men must giue way to the time (as in the controuersie at Rome) least while they set a damme against the streame of this their pride, the raging course thereof do burst asunder all the bands of honestie and modestie, and carry away headlong many with the force thereof.
That if this ambition do remayne vnpunished, the age that is to come shall see that it will bring into bondage not only Prelates, but the very Princes and Monarches themselues, whom yet she flattereth in her infancie.1
They beseech the Pope 2 that he would lay the axe to the roote of the tree, and cut off this pride of the Societie, spread ing it selfe farre and neere, least if once it arme it selfe with the authoritie of his Holynes, it powre forth a full reuenge vpon all others to their destruction, and make an infinite slaughter and massacre of soules, which they haue already begun to attempt in wretched England, to the great decay of the common cause.
That the Priests of England can finde in their banish ment no harbour safe enough from this their ambition, vnlesse they haue first receiued the marke of this beast in their fore head.
That the Pope can commaund nothing in all his Mandates but the lesuites finde meanes to frustrate it by the secular power, to the great scandall of many.
1 Gifford in a letter to Tempest.
2 In the original ' rogat W. Gifford pontificem. '
The Intercepting of Letters. 119
That the reuenge of these lesuites hath neuer an end but with the death of their aduersaries, and their reproch after their death.
That the lesuites (meaning them of Rome) do vse to intercept all manner of letters of all men whosoeuer, not forbearing the packets neither of the Cardinals nor of Princes.1
1 ' That the Jesuits use to intercept all manner of letters (writes W. C., f. 21) is so general an acclamation in foreign countries that it seemeth not to be clean void of verity, though for my own part I cannot say that I have seen them intercept any Card, or princes packets. But for experience of this matter, con cerning meaner mens letters, many a score will bear witness with me that it is too usual among them not only in Rome but also in the Low Countries and in England too, and some letters by this good Fa. in his Apologie approve as much.'
The practice seems to have been common on both sides. An ' intelligencer ' writes from abroad, apparently to Cecil (Oct. ? 1601), that the archpriest and his assistants are bound to write to the pope and protector every six months,
* but there is scarce any week but they write to Parsons. Their letter passeth by divers conveyances and with such caution, as for my life I could never come to the intercepting of any of them, albeit I have used therein no small vigilance. But there is one Laborne in England, a priest, that saith he durst undertake to intercept them air (Foley, v. 736, from S. P. , Dom. EKz. , Addenda, xxxiv. 42). Father Anthony Rivers writes to Giacomo Creleto (probably Parsons) March 9, 1603: 'My cousin [Garnet] and Ortelio have and do acquaint you with a secret which I have imparted with them for the intercepting of letters. Be alert, for we are eager set, and very barren of good intelligence from these parties ' (Foley, i. 56). What does F. Rivers mean by this secret
* for the intercepting of letters ' ? Mr. Foley remarks on the ' singular fact that this very letter, in spite of Father Anthony's secret, was intercepted by the Government spies,' as if to suggest that Rivers meant to say, in defiance of his grammar, that he had discovered a plan for preventing his own letters being intercepted.
The intelligencers who intercepted letters on behalf of the government would perhaps for a consideration be accessible to both of the contending parties. Garnet seems to have had some friend in the bishop of London's house who sup plied him with copies of documents or kept him well informed on the doings of his clerical enemies. An instructive illustration of the alleged habit of tampering with the confidential correspondence of others, with which Parsons at least is charged, will be found in the story of his first opening and then suppressing an important letter intrusted to him by Lord Montague for presentation to the pope (Tierney, v. 16). John Mush, when assistant to the archpriest Birkhead, complained vehemently of the manner in which his letters to Rome were waylaid and opened by his opponents. In his letter to More (Aug. 19, 1611), referred to above, he wrote : ' We suffer great difficulty in sending to you and receiving from you, and very often our watchful friends intercept both yours and ours, for
120 Certain chief Points of Accusation.
N. calleth God and his Angels to witnes,1 that the greatest part of the Nobilitie and Clergie in England both at home and abroade do bewaile with sighes and teares their miserable estate, in that they suffer more grieuous things vnder these new Tyrants the lesuites, then in their dayly persecutions.
That the persecution of the lesuites is more grieuous to the Catholicks then of the hereticks in England, in this respect^ because they suffer vnder them for their vertue, but vnder these in the name of treacherie and vnfaithfulnes.
The lesuites haue so persecuted some Priests that are now Martyrs, as that their death hath bin imputed partly to the hereticks, and partly to the lesuites.
That it is a knowne position among the lesuites (diuide and gouerne) and therefore those Fathers at Rome do both stirre vp, and maintayne dissensions.
That the lesuites Confessors are wont to abuse the con sciences of their penitentiaries to their owne commoditie.
That of 300. Priests which haue entred into England, scarce sixe or seauen haue fallen away. But of twentie lesuites eight haue reuolted : which is a notable slaunder, seeing there can not be found one of them to haue reuolted which were sent in by the Societie.2
they are more vigilant in this evil office than the heretics. They have their hire lings for this purpose in France, Flanders, Italy and Rome.' Birkhead himself had referred to the same grievance two years earlier, remarking to More that he had much ado to quiet Mr. Mush on account of his letters being thus opened. ' Surely,' he wrote, ' if such dealing be not left, and if they [the Jesuits] will run on still to endanger so stout a confessor, I shall one day be moved, even against my own inclination, to complain to our supreme pastor for redress of the same ' (apud Tierney, iv. clxxvii, n.).
1 ' Deum testatur VV. G. et angelos ejus.' — W. Gifford in a letter to Markham.
2 There is some obscurity in the last sentence of this article, and the statistics are not quite accurate. At the time in question, not '300' but probably 500 (F. Holt says 600) priests had entered England, and many more than 'six or seven ' had ' fallen away.' Perhaps sixty or seventy would be nearer the mark. The late canon Estcourt was at some pains to compile a list of these renegade priests, but he found the number multiply so far beyond his expectations that, as he admitted, he threw up the task in disgust. It is not, however, easy to ascer tain the exact number. For an ' apostata ' would commonly adopt the lucrative profession of a spy, and it would then be his interest to conceal his altered
Persecution of Priests and Martyrs. 121
That the Jesuits in the Low-countries are so cruell, as that they haue not only brought many excellent men to a miserable end, but haue reproched them after their death.
character from his former companions, and to communicate when necessary with the officers of the government under some assumed name. Some, no doubt, like Thomas Bell, returned to the church of England from conviction ; others became dissolute in morals, and so grew weary of their missionary functions ; many succumbed under the threat or the sight of the instrument of punishment. But the government was never sure of a convert obtained by terror ; and priests who had disowned the pope, or perhaps played the spy for a time, would frequently return to their church or even die as martyrs. The lapses of many such men, which were often unknown to their clerical brethren, have been only recently revealed to us in the State Papers. Thus, while letters from England were describing in glowing terms the constancy of John Hart and the holy joy with which he received news of his sentence to death, he himself, in hope of pardon, was writing from his prison to Sir Francis Walsingham (Dec. 1581), treacherously offering, by means of his intimacy with Dr. Allen, to discover all his designs. He escaped the gallows, was banished, became a Jesuit, and shortly afterwards died abroad (compare Douay Diaries, p. 348, and Cat. S. P., Dom. Etiz., CL. 80). Even Father Henry Walpole, some months before his execution, after severe torture, had in misery and terror declared in writing that he would go to church and there preach, and that he would employ henceforth all his powers in her majesty's service (Dr. Jessopp's One Generation, pp. 260, 262).
There is, however, no reason to suppose, as the memorialists assert, that the Jesuits furnished, in proportion to their number, more deserters from the priestly ranks than the secular clergy. On the contrary, the Jesuit missionary, being as a rule far better protected from poverty, in or out of prison, than his secular brother, was thereby the more secure from one of the severest temptations to abandon his calling. Moreover, a weak member of the society could fly or be withdrawn from danger to a safe refuge abroad. The secular, even if banished, must soon return to get bread, though at greater risks than before. There had been about thirty Jesuits in all employed in England before 1597. Parsons declares that not one of his order sent upon the mission by his superiors had fallen away. He may have meant to exclude from his reckoning those who had become Jesuits after they had entered the country, and those who had come for health or on business not immediately connected with the mission. W. C., however, after some sarcastic observations on the distinction, insists that he could ' note above eight of the order who had incurred that disgrace ' of apostacy (f. 22). When it was thrown in the teeth of the appellants that one of their friends at Wisbeach had openly apos tatised, Charnock retorted that the apostate had been many years a Jesuit, and had perhaps learned bad ways in the society (Petyt MSS., xlvii. f. 142). One famous renegade among the trained members of the society was F. Langdale, of whom F. Hey wood wrote to Allen in 1583, ' Tho. Langdale, formerly of our society, and now, I believe, an apostate, gives us much trouble, and in the county of York seduces crowds.' Another, who gave still more trouble, was
122 Certain chief Points of Accusation*
That nothing doth so vex the English Catholicks as the contempt and hatred of the President that now is : l and the slaunderous reproch falsely imputed to the renowned Cardinals, Tolet^ and Alexandrinus.
That the lesuites do eagerly wayt for the death of the Pope, and of the renowned Cardinall Tolet^ that they might bring vpon all those that slaughter and bloudshed, which they long since assayed against as many as haue dared to oppose theni- selues against their tyranny.
The chiefe remedie wherein the state of all controuersies at Rome dependeth is, that the affaires of all the Colledges be committed to an assemblie of honorable Cardinals that are regular, both to looke into, and to determine of. For there is nothing that these tyrants more feare, then that they should be compelled before the Cardinals to render an accompt of their dealings. Neither doth any thing giue them greater libertie of their insolencie, then that they are free welnie from being called before any Judgement seate.
See you see (quoth N) my letters secretly and effectually, because the enemy, if he be not preuented, flattereth himselfe in an assured hope of a Monarchic. While the iron is hote, strike : worke out your busines while your Patrones liue. Your enemies seeke but to gayne the time ; and if they once set free themselues from the streights wherein they are yet incombred, they will (belieue me) domineere most tyrannously.
F. Christopher Perkins, a man of learning and repute. He befriended young William Cecil at Rome, returned with him to England, and afterwards, seceding from the church of Rome, was presented by Lord Burleigh with the deanery of Carlisle. A little later he assisted in drawing up, for the destruction of his former friends, King James's oath of allegiance (Wood's fasti, i. 166).
1 Orig. 'proesentis pontificis.' This, with the following article, is taken from letters to Tempest, Sept. 1596.
2 Francis Toleto, the first Jesuit who was created a cardinal, died Sept. 1596. He had acted as vice-protector of the college in the absence of cardinal Cajetan, and gave offence to the Jesuit rector and other members of the society by the part he took in favour of the aggrieved students. If the Jesuits did not ' eagerly wait for ' his death they at least regarded it, as they did the death of Allen and the bishop of Cassano, in the light of a special providence for the college and a blessing for the society. See Agazzari's letter in the Douay Diaries, quoted above, p. 18.
The Censure of Paris University. 123
The lesuites seeke also the gouerment of the Colledge at Doitoay, neither feare they any bridle wherewith they can be curbed, but only, that the lesuite Rectors should be made sub- iect to the regular Congregations.
The lesuites by their Machiuilian practises go about to procure the dissolution of the Colledge at Doway.
The tyranny and insolencie of the lesuites is horrible, especially of those that liuing in Eelgia^ do reproch, disgrade, depriue whome they list : and I feare (quoth he) do indirectly betray some vnto the enemy.
The Censure of' Paris before mentioned for our iustification, in suspending our obedience to maister Blackwels authoritie, vntill we knew his Holynes further pleasure.
IN the yeare of our Lord 1600. vpon the third day of May, it was proposed to the faculty of the Diuines of the Vniuersity of Paris, that by the letters of a most illus trious Cardinall, an Ecclesiasticall Superior was constituted in a certaine Kingdome with the title and dignity of an Arch-priest, to haue authority and Jurisdiction ouer all other Priests residing in that Kingdome. This Cardinall did also declare in those his letters, that he did it according to the wil and good liking of the Pope. Notwithstanding, many of these Priests refused to subscribe to the authority of the sayd Arch-priest, before he had obteyned letters from the Sea Apostolick, conteyning the tenor of his confirmation, as well because that kind of gouern- ment was altogether new in Gods Church, and hitherto neuer heard of, that an Arch-priest should haue charge of a whole Kingdome, and such iurisdiction ouer euery Priest in that llealme : then also, for that it seemed to them by certaine words of the Cardinals letters, that the Arch-priest and his authority was graunted by false information : then lastly, because they noted great partiality in the choyse of the Arch-
124 Decree of the Archpriest.
priest and of his counsellors. Vpon which and some other reasons, these Priests sent messengers to the Pope, for laying open vnto him these their difficulties : and therewithall to signifie their greatest readynes, as in this matter, so euermore in all other, to obey his Holynes.
The Arch-priest and those who are of his side accuse the other Priests of schisme, in that they deferred to obey the Car dinals letters, which moreouer he sayd were written accord ing to his Holynes minde and pleasure.
The Question then is, whether these Priests be schismaticks ? and if not, whether they did commit at the least some grieuous sinne ?
The head and chiefe men of the faculty of Diuinity in Paris chosen out of the whole company, assembled together in the house oftlie Senior Bedle in the yeare and day aboue written, after full and maturest consideration had of the matter, gaue this censure.
First, that those Priests, who vpon the aboue-named causes deferred to obey, were no schismaticks.
Secondly, that they committed no sinne at all in that fact in it selfe considered.
By commaundement of 'our Deane and masters deputed and selected by the whole facultie of Diuinity in Paris De lacourt.
The rash and vnaduised aunswere of Mayster Blackwell to the Censure of Paris.
Reuerendi Patres fy Fratres.
WHereas after the condemnation at Rome of the two Embassadors together with all their complices here ; and also the Pope his Breue confirming the Cardinals letters, as validas ab initio, and vtterly condemning and in-
Condemnation of the Censure of Paris. 125
ualidating all thing done to the contrary : Some vnquiet per sons haue secretly sought to the Vniuersity of Paris, and thence pretend to haue or haue receiued a resolution, that they neyther incurred schisme, nor any sinne in their proceedings here against mine authority. Whereas also it is manifest that after notice had from their Ambassadors of the Pope his expresse will made knowne vnto them partly by their imprisonment, partly by the testification of the two Cardinals, Caietan, and Burghesius, to whome their cause was committed : which also the aforesaid two Ambassadors did certifie hither by their letters, exhorting all heere to the quiet acceptance of their superior, as being ordayned by his Holynes speciall knowledge and absolute order, without dependence of their consent : that yet notwithstanding this perfect knowledge they repugned and stood still obstinate in their disobedience : so that the pretence of seeking to know the Pope his will was altogether friuolous in those which re- mayned heere. And thereby it appeareth, that the information giuen of the cause to the Parisians was altogether wrong, and (as it may be thought) fraudulent. For so long as they re fused not their superior appoynted by the knowne will of the Pope, they neuer were condemned as schismaticks : and since and whilest they acknowledged their superior they were neuer censured, but only as seditious in opposing against the Pope his order, and in disturbing the wished peace and tran quillity of the Cleargie and Laity of the Catholicks, and yet could neuer be freed from one of these two crimes. Propterea, In Dei nomine Amen. Nos Georgius Blackwellus Archipres- byter Anglicc, fy Protonotarius Apostolicus ex authoritate nobis sufficienter <$• legitime commissa prcecipimus stride in virtute obedienticc, <§* sub poena suspensionis a diuinis, fy amissionis omnium facultatum ipso facto incurrendarum, omnibus ecclesias tic-is personis : omnibus autem laicis Catliolicis sub pcena inter- dicti similiter ipso facto incurrendi, that neither directly nor indirectly they mayntayne or defend in word, or in writing the censure of the Vniuersity of Paris (whether it be truly giuen or forged : whether vpon true information or otherwise) as being preiudiciall to the dignity of the See Apostolicall, and ex-
1 26 Letter of Dr. Dor el
pressely contrary to his Holynes Breue : and to the sentence iudicially giuen by the two Cardinals appoynted iudges in our cause : and to our common peace so much wished for by his Holynes. And this we inuiolably commaund to be obserued vnder the paines afore specified, and greater also, according to his Holynes pleasure. Yet hereby we intend in no wise to dis grace the most famous Vniuersity of Paris. For we hope verily, that eyther there is no such censure of theirs : or else, that it was procured by wrong informations, and without mani festing the sentence of the two Cardinals : and the expresse confirmation of his Holynes of those first letters, by which our authority was deriued vnto vs, which (God willing) we will speedily procure they shall receiue from the Court of Rome. And so nothing doubting of your duties towards your superiors, I leaue further to instruct, or exhort you, beseeching God to blesse vs all. 29. Maij. 1600.
Georgius Blackwellus Archipresbyter Anglice <Sf Protonotarius Apostolicus.
A reioynder of Moist er Darrell Deane o/'Agen,1
in defence of the censure of Paris,
against M. Blackwell.
Reuerendi Patres <§* Fratres.
THere is come vnto my hands the sentence of M. George Blackwell Arch-priest, in condemnation of the censure and iudgement of the Catholique, auncient, and re nowned Vniuersity of Paris. Wherein was also thrust a very
1 What appears to be the original of this letter in the Petyt MSS. (xlvii. fol. 233) is clearly signed John Dorel. But Dodd (ii. 64) gives an account of a Dr. Barrel or Dorel, whose Christian name, according to the Diaries (pp. 4, 273) and the register of the university of Douai, was Thomas ; and this Thomas must be identified with the dean of Agen. Darrel was educated, says Dodd, at New college, Oxford, and ejected in the first year of Elizabeth. For a time he settled at Louvain, but in 1569 he joined Allen at Douai, and, having means of his own, became a great benefactor of the English college. He took his degree of bachelor of divinity at Douai in 1572. Subsequently ' in a journey to Rome he
Defence of the Censure of Paris. 127
peremptory Prouiso, but most necessary to auoyd reprehension : that no man should vndertake eyther by word or writing to defend the sayd censure. I deemed it not impertinent in few words to runne ouer the sayd sentence, to shew in part the in- sufficiencie of it, as well for the honor of the sayd sacred faculty of Paris (which for the worthy schollers it hath brought forth, is highly esteemed throughout all Christendome) as for the aduertisement of the abouenamed Arch-priest, that he may hereafter be somewhat better aduised ere he thunder out his censures : and do not vainely perswade himselfe, that he can either tye the toongs, or stay the pennes of men by any such vnreasonable writ, vnlesse he take some more sober and con siderate course of proceeding. And for breuities sake to omit the friuolous preambles that are partly vntrue and wholy to small purpose : the first of importance is, where he sayth, That the information giue vnto the Parisians, was altogether wrong, and (as it may be thought) fraudulent. His reason is : for that they, who liked not his election at the first stood still obstinate in their disobedience, after perfect notice of the Popes breue in confirmation of it, sent them by their Ambas sadors (who for honors sake (you must thinke pardye) he al waves so tearmeth) how sound and true this assertion is, all England (as I think) knoweth right well. Sure I am, the
became acquainted with a French bishop who persuaded him to go along with him into Gascony, where he bestowed a considerable benefice upon him and made him his chaplain and preacher.' Agen, however, is on the north bank of the Garonne and not, strictly speaking, in Gascony. So great was the charity of Dr. Dorell, says the diary of the college, which elsewhere calls him Darell, that ' the venerable man ' educated at his own cost two youths (one of whom was William Bagshaw of Derbyshire) sent to him from Rheims in 1590.
Cooper (Athen. Cantab. , ii. 383), in a notice of the Rev. John Darrel, the protestant exorcist, says, ' contemporary with this John Darrel was another of the name, a secular roman catholic priest of considerable ability who was a prisoner in York castle. Wood calls him dean of Agen. He corresponded on various religious points with Edward Fairfax, the translator of Tasso, and published a tract relative to the dispute between the seculars and Jesuits.' The tract was doubtless the letter in the text. Wood had no information except from the True Relation. Dodd makes no mention of a John Dorel, but neither does he ascribe to Thomas the authorship of this letter.
128 Letter of Dr. Dor el
common fame spread in all countryes betwixt England and Rome, (where the English are resident) approued also by sundry letters out of England, and from other coasts, was, and is cleane contrary : viz. that they, who before suspended their iudgements attending his Holynes resolution, as soone as they were by the Popes breue certified of his pleasure, submitted themselues to the Arch-priest, and acknowledged his authority. And that I stay not about needlesse proofes in so notorious a matter, the very next words after in this his rescript, declare as much. Mary I must needs confesse, that they are so clarkly and clearely set downe, that they may perhaps couer some pretie equiuocation. These be his words. For so long as they refused not their superior, appoynted by the knowne will of the Pope, they were neuer condemned as schismaticks : and since, whilest they acknowledged their superior, they were neuer censured, but only as seditious, in opposing against the Popes order, &c. The sense in common vnderstanding must needs be: that at first, so long as they had not certaine notice by the Popes breue of his will, and therefore refused to accept the new Magistrate, they were not condemned as schismaticks. After ward they vnderstanding of the Breue, acknowledged their superior : and therefore were not censured as schismaticks, but only as seditious. By the latter part of which sentence, it is most euident and cleare by his own expresse declaration : that after certaine knowledge of the Popes commaundement, they acknowledged their superior ; and therefore were not censured, but only as seditious. What can be more contrary to that which he sayd before ? There, he auoucheth boldly, that after certaine notice giuen of the Popes will, they stood still obstin ate in their former disobedience here, that after intelligence had, they acknowledged their superior. I dare not aske you, whether part of this flat contradiction you will beleeue, because both cannot be true : for you must either hold (contrary to the rules of reason) both parts to be true, or else discredit him, that within the compasse of a few lines affirmed them both. But no maruayle : for I am almost astonished, to see so many foule ouersights in this one poore sentence. Let that contra-
Defence of the Censure of Paris. 129
diction passe: and marke an other in the same end of the sentence. They are censured only as seditious, sayth he : in opposing against the Popes order. What order was that, I pray you ? Was it any other, then that they should receiue Maister Elackwell for Arch-priest, and obey him ? No surely : how then did they oppose against that order, who in that very time acknowledged their superior, as in the same period he hath himselfe set downe ? What a wilfull peruersenes is this, and blinde desire of slaundering others, to censure those for sedi tious, whom they know and do confesse to haue acknowledged their superiors.
But not to stand vpon these contrary points (which giue but small grace vnto a graue sentence) I may not omit that strange proposition conteyned in the former part of the sentence. It is: that they who liked not of his authority, were not, before they receyued certaine notice thereof, by his Holynes breue, condemned as schismaticks. This is so ap- parantly false, and so contrary vnto euery ones knowledge, that I much muse what he meaneth, and where the starting hole, and euasion lyeth. If he vnderstand only, that they were neuer condemned by sentence of iudge, it may then passe : for so indeed they could neuer haue bin iustly. But to say, that he and his fellowes did not so call them, so report of them, and so write of them, and in a rude rayling pamphlet in latine so denounce them to the wide world, were (as I take it) to make open profession, that he had made shipwrack of verity, modesty, and honestie. Hauing thus briefely examined the preamble, I come now to the sentence it selfe : wherein I will yet be more briefe. Me thinks he seemeth not a little to abuse that great authority committed to his charge : ad ocdificationem non ad destructionem. For following his letters patents, and the right order of correction, he is to punish enormous faults after they be committed, vsing also before brotherly admonition : to try whether in the spirit of lenity, the party may be amended. But he contrarywise goeth about by new decrees to make faults (which passeth his Commission for ought that I euer yet could see) and to punish faults without
130 Letter of Dr. Dor el.
any warning most grieuously. But you will say : that it is for some heynous cryme, or else he would neuer haue bin so terrible and hasty to reuenge ? well : let vs heare what enormous fault it is ? Mary sir, if any maintaine in word or in writing directly or indirectly, the graue, Catholicke and learned iudge- ment of the famous Vniuersitie of Paris, although it be vpon due information truly giuen (for so much his words seeme to import) when he saith : whether it be truly giuen or forged, whether vpon true information or otherwise) if he be of the Cleargie, he is presently to be suspended, and to lose all his faculties (the greatest penaltie that he could lay on him) if of the laitie : he is ipso facto, interdicted. I passe ouer, that for a light offence, or rather none at all, he hath ordained a grieuous punishment, contrarie to that rule of Justice : Pro ratione delicti, sit plagarum modus. But this would I faine know, for the instruction of many others : how he commeth by the authoritie to interdict any of the Laitie. Sure I am, that in his letters patents, and the Popes breue, he hath no author itie giuen him, but ouer Priests only : whom neither can he interdict, much lesse any of the Laitie, ouer whom he hath no iurisdiction at all, for ought I haue yet heard : let him then take heede, that casting out those censures which belong not to him he doe not himselfe incurre the true censures of his superiours : and for censuring others vniustly fall into the iust indignation and displeasure of almightie God. But he taketh it otherwise : and deemeth the Vniuersitie of Paris to haue failed much. Let that be his opinion.
But whether is likelier to faile, trow you : either one Bachelor in Diuinitie, or many Doctors : one as yet raw, and little practised in the discipline of the church : or many, of long time daily conuersant in Ecclesiasticall affaires : one hasty man (as it seemeth) and in the heate of faction : or diuers graue aduised men, free from all passion and affection ? If he thinke by the priuiledge of his titles, to be any whit holpen : the Vniuersitie of Paris haue in their facultie present diuerse Protonotaries Apostolicke and Archpriests, and many greater officers of their bodie, as Archdeacons, Chancellors, or Vicar
Defence of the Censure of Paris. 131
generals : that I may omit Bishops, who are commonly resident in their Diocesses. But perhaps some will say; albeit our Archpriest be surmounted in all other respects : yet in reasons and proofes, he passeth them all. Let vs therefore come vnto his reasons which are three in number, and barely auerred ; but not one of them proued. The first is, that the censure of Paris is preiudiciall to the dignitie of the Sea Apostolike. Prone that good sir. For without proofe, that assertion will be taken for fond : and I in a word, will proue it also to be false : for they say, it was neither schisme nor sinne in that doubtfull case of the Archpriests election, to seeke vnto the Popes holines for certaine resolution, where they are so farre off from derogating any whit, from the dignitie of the Sea Apostolicke, that they doe highly commend it ; acknowledging the right of appella tion from all inferiour courts to appertaine vnto the Court of Rome, which is a speciall prerogatiue, whereby we proue against heretikes the supremacie of that Sea. This first worthie argument then, is drawne perhaps a contrario sensu.
The second is, that their censure was contrarie to the Popes breue. As iust as lermaines lippes. For their censure onely was : whether it were schisme or any sinne, before there was any breue, and wholy abstracting from the breue : How could it then be opposite to that, with which it did nothing at all meddle, or any whit concerne ? The third and last reason is : that their censures were contrary to the sentence of the two Cardinals. No such matter good sir: For the Cardinals sentence was onely against two by name, and for no other matter, as the sentence expresseth, then for that they had exercised controuersies with some other men of their owne order (which also how true it is, let them iudge, that know their conuersation), therefore they thought it expedient, that they should not returne into the Countrie for a season without leaue. Now let them consider who are of higher capacitie then my selfe: how this sentence is opposite vnto the censure of Paris : that in doubtfull causes to appeale or sue vnto Rome, is neither schisme nor sinne : for my wit is too simple to reach vnto it. Well to draw towards an end. After that this good
132 Letter of Dr. Dor el
man had in ouer great haste taxed the censure of the Vniuer- sitie of Paris, as preiudiciall vnto the dignitie of the Sea Apostolicke, and contrarie to the Popes breue and Cardinals sentence : he forsooth (and if you list to beleeue him) telleth you that he meaneth not to disgrace that most famous Vni- uersitie. Surely, if he thought, that he could disgrace it, he deceiued himselfe fowly. For the grace, credit, and renowne of the vniuersitie of Paris little dependeth vpon the verdit of so base and meane a Magistrate, and contemneth the bald vnlearned reprehensions of such simple Clarkes. If they meane in substantiall arguing, to coape with so honourable a com panion : let them put downe plainely the case, as it was pro posed vnto them, with their censure, and withall in Latine (as they may vnderstand it) without passion disproue it like Diuines : and then it may be, if they see any thing worth the answering, that they will giue sufficient satisfaction to the world of their censure. In the meane season it must needes bee small honour vnto the Archpriest and others of his band, to oppose themselues against the most learned, catholicke and famous Vniuersitie of Paris, as he himselfe acknowledgeth it : who doe still auouch, and will vphold their censure for iust and true in any place, wheresoeuer it shall be called in question : which me thinkes should much moue all good Catholickes, not so stifly to backe that side against other innocent men, who after so long and fruitfull trauels for our Countrey, are now for nothing (as it were) mightilie wronged in their good names and credits.
I for my part, who alwaies haue most tenderly loued the Catholicke cause, am most sory to see such pitifull dissension about trifles : and doe most earnestlie in visceribus Domini nostri lesu Cliristi request and require the Archpriest, and those that are ouer passionate on that part, to content them selues with the submissio of others vnto the Popes Holines Breue (which was a high poynt of perfect obedience, consider ing what slender audience was giuen vnto those whom they sent) and leaue off that fruitles iangling, whether they sinned before or no : or what kind of sinne it was. Who would not
The Author breaks off in fear. 133
haue thought, but that vpon the receite of the Popes Breue, and obedient acceptance thereof, all would haue been quiet and appeased: one forgiuing another, if ought before had passed amisse : and all ioyning together in defence of each others credit and good name, which was and is most necessarie for the maintenance of the common cause and comfort of all Catholicks. Well at the length yet, for Gods honour, and the holy Churches good, and your owne quietnes, returne vnto that Christianlike and brotherly peace and charitie, so much desired of all entire and deuout Catholicks : which that our louing Sauiour may giue you grace to doe, my humble prayers haue alwaies been, and shall neuer, I hope, fayle. Thus in all dutie and affection, recommending my selfe to your good prayers, I desire to be partaker of your fruitfull trauailes. At Agen the 4. of August.
Your humble brother and seruant in our Lord : lohn Dor el.
We were here constrained to breake off, for feare of some danger by an intended search : so as we haue omitted M. Black-nods letter, mentioned pag. 49. l with answere vnto it : which together with some other matters you shall receiue ere it bee long. In the meane while we commit our selues to your faithfull prayers : and you by ours, vnto Almightie God.
1 Sttpra, p. 68.
APPENDIX A.
A Note of certain priests imprisoned at Wisbitche.1 (State Papers, Dom. Eliz., Vol. cxcix. No. 91.)
1. f George Potter ats Transham a Seminary prieste was sent from Newgate to Wisbitche beinge a great seducer of her Matf subjectf and a very daungerous man.
2. Willnl Edmondes a Jesuite a very daungerous man & in especiall accoumpte amongest the papistf was sent thether from the Clinke & was suspected to bee a greate practiser of treasons.
3. Xpofer Drylande a Seminary prieste was a great practiser wth parry £ Nevell in their treasons & was made prevy of their pretence to kill the Queene & shoulde haue Ministred the Sacra ment to them but hee told them it was not lawfull to kill her, neStheles hee concealed it.
4. f Doctor Bagshawe a Seminary prieste was firste sente to Cambridge to bee conferred withall & so to bee reformed, but hee was very obstinate & doeth very muche harme & mischiefe as is knowen by experience in Staffordshire, hee is a moste daungerous man.
5. Leonard Hide a most daungerous & presumptuous seminary prieste who beinge sent to the Tower willed the Comissioners to shewe him fauoure that hee mighte shewe them fauoure another daye, hee was remoued from Newgate to Wisbitche & is a great practiser & writer of l?es abroad for traiterous causes.
6. t Fraimcis Tailor a Seminary priest was sente from the Gate house to Wisbitch, hee was Abingtons prieste that was executed, and was suspected to bee prevye to his treasons.
1 This document is placed among the State Papers of 1587, many years too early. It contains the names of all the prisoners whom we know from other sources to have been confined at Wisbeach in 1595-6, The priests belonging to the anti-Jesuit party are marked thus f. The Christian name of Taylor (No. 6) was not Francis, but James. In an earlier list of priests in the Harleian MSS. (A.D. 1588), James Taylor (Worcester) and Jonas Meredith (Essex) are noted as ' Priests that will take the Queen's part.' Taylor signed the Appeal of 1600.
135
136 Appendix A.
7. f Frauncis Tillettson an Amorous prieste makiiige muche of Catholikes wyves & a greate psuader of women.
8. fWillrn Wigges prieste a moste trayterous seducer of the Queenes Matf subjects from the trueth, and from their due obedience, hee is a desperate man, & told the Comissioners that hee had said masse & would say masse & that hee hoped to say masse in poules. hee hath greater power & authoritie then the ordinary sorte of priests haue for consecracion of Challices Aulter stones & suche like.
9. t Ithell ats Vdall a condempned prieste for Babingtons con- spiracie, a moste daungerous man who corrupted many younge gentlemen in the Innes of Courte & did practise wth young Abington to say masse in the Tower.
10. Philip Strangwitch a Seminary prieste is a greate psuader of the Queenes subject^ hauinge done much harme aboute the Innes of Courte & is a greate practiser by Ires abroad duringe this time of his imprisonmente.
11. John Greene a Seminary prieste a very obstinate puerse man & a traiterous seducer of her Matf subjects and a greate defender of the Popes supremacie.
12. Xpofer Southworth sonne to Sr John Southworth a Seminary prieste a man of especiall accoumpte amongest the papists who doe much relie upon him & hath diuers tymes intelligence from beyonde the Seas & dispseth it abroade.
13. f Xpofer Thules ats Ashton a Seminarie prieste taken at Mr Abingtons house that was executed, and suspected for his treasons.
14. Nutter ats Rowley a Seminary pieste a very perilous man and desperate to attempte any mischiefe & therefore especially to bee regarded, hee soughte under coloure of reformacion to obteyne libertie.
15. f Jonas Merideth ats Farmer a Seminary prieste was first taken in a Ship wth the Earle of Arondell attemp tinge to fly the realme & is a greate psuader to papistrie.
16. Lewis Barloe a Seminary prieste was in company wth the Abingtons when they were soughte for & was prevy of their con spiracies & escaped from them the same day they were appre hended & liued allmoste halfe a yeare amongest the Outlawes in Monmouthshire & did after greate hurte aboute London untill hee was taken and then was the Causer of Mr Tirrell his revolte.
17. Willnl Parry a Seminary prieste of greate obstinacie & puersitie & a most traiterous seducer of her Matf subjects.
18. Bramstone a Seminary priest remoued from the Marshall- seys to Wisbitch, a greate psuader of her Matf subjects to papistrie and a busie man in causes of State.
Appendix B. 137
19- t Thomas Blewett ") ., ,
20. fEdmond Coverley *hese be^ f11 Seminary priests but
21 Bolton > because ! naue not nacl to doe wth
22 t Clarg-enett I them * cannott sett downe their con- 23.' Haberley ) versacions-
24. Giles Archer N
25. fWoodroffe
26. Chaddocke
27. Edmond braddocke
these bee likewise Seminary priests >• but unknowen to mee for that I did not examine them.
28. Bickley
29. Garrett
30. Powell
31. f Buckley sometime a Monke in Westm.
32. Thomas Pounde a layman, a very obstinate man and a great mainteyner of priestf and other bad psons.
(Endorsed} A Note of the priests and others that are in Wisbitch Castle.
APPENDIX B. Letter of BLACKWELL to CARDINAL CAJETAN, 1597.
(From a translation printed by Andreas Philalethes in ' An Answere made by one of our Brethren., etc.., 1602.')
Let your Amplitude pardon our just grief; we confess surely that it is a royal thing to hear evil when thou doest well. We know, notwithstanding (which is to be lamented) that very great detriment may come to our progress in that business of religion, by the feigned calumniations of evil willers towards us. Let it be lawful therefore unto us to stir the horns of the false accusation made against us. For if it be sufficient to accuse, who shall be innocent ?
There are (as I hear) little equal, or altogether ignorant es teemers of our matters, who have not gently whetted the edge of their wit and style and the sharpness of their voice against us. They say (but rashly) that we Priests in England are tossed with divers dissensions amongst our selves and with the Fathers of the Society of Jesus ; and, that more freely in lying they may wander, they report the said Fathers to seek no other thing almost amongst us, than how by the contempt of the rest of the Priests, greater authority and dominion in the Clergy might daily grow unto them. A heavy accusation, but most full of falsehood, and therefore (as I
138 Appendix B.
trust) it will be silent, being overcome by this my testimony, although very slender. I, hedged with the divine mercy, have now fulfilled more than twenty years in the cure of souls amongst us Englishmen, and in preaching the Catholic Roman truth : and hitherto I remember not any dissension amongst us, the breath whereof did at any time a little more grievously move us. Then surely we are compassed with many infirmities ; but (praise be to God) in so great a course of most wicked time we have been so covered with Divine grace, that nothing (that I know) hath hap pened which at any time hath cast us from the state of mutual peace and brotherly concord.
As touching the other part of the accusation, which is built up more injuriously against the reverend Fathers of the Society of Jesus, that surely will most easily shrink, being pressed with its own weight of falsehood. So far absent are these godly Fathers from all appearance of dominion that they have fashioned unto us an example, in every place, of notorious humility, gentleness, piety, and charity. Surely we should be very unthankful if we should not prosecute them with honour, as our Fathers ; embrace them with love, as our friends ; worship them with duty, as beneficial ; imitate them by study, as masters; acknowledge them with affection of godliness, as the chief helpers and most fierce defenders of the health of our country, and of the Church tossed with us by divers tempests. They that discommend them know neither themselves nor them. For who are they amongst us which help priests coming from beyond the seas but the Fathers of the Society of Jesus ? Being cast without the doors, by them they are received : being in ragged apparel by them they are clothed commodiously and trickly : wanting both meat and drink and money, by them they are upheld : and not knowing where to remain (because they are strangers) they have from them horses and other things necessary for their journey, most readily prepared, and places also most prudently appointed, where in recovering the lapsed, in confirm ing of Catholics, in spreading abroad the worship of God, they may labour laudably. Neither is their charity concluded within these bounds : for we ourselves (who now for many years have borne the weight of the day and heat) liberally profess that we have had much ease and consolation out of their fountains in our necessity. If your Amplitude knew how much money these Fathers have spent of their own patrimonies (for most little things those are which come unto them by alms) in such and other offices of godli ness ; and how promptly they always run to refresh the Saints that are kept in prison, and others inwrapped and oppressed with divers difficulties of things and times, I doubt not but the same would presently restrain the unbridled boldness of these men, who,
Appendix C. 139
being tossed with the pricks of envy, have diminished anything from the estimation and charity of the Fathers.
Envy is the companion of virtue ; but,, as smoke, so she prevaileth indeed in the beginning, and by and by vanisheth, the things being lightened whereby she was envied. Therefore I am led into a great hope that it will come to pass that the beams of your Amplitude will most willingly dissipate (by the truth of things now opened) those clouds which malicious men have cast upon the shining brightness of our country. In explicating of these our injuries, these my silly letters have proceeded further than I had determined, but not more sharply than I ought. I am made unwise, but they that are accusers of their brethren have com pelled me, for we should rather have been commended of them : but we go not a birding for human praise — he shall be allowed whom God shall commend. That which resteth is, we submit, with the greatest humility of mind that we can, the defence of our cause against all assaults of men that think not well of us, to your protection : hoping that your Amplitude will foresee that the license of slanderers may not so freely run up and down unpunished, as hitherto it hath done, to our ignominy, the offence of good men, and the loss of the Catholic faith,, whose immovable strength (that I may use S. Cyprian's words) hath hitherto remained by God's grace amongst us, and her stable and unshaken virtue against all the incursions of barking floods against it. God preserve your Amplitude most long in safety and health.
At London, the tenth of January, 1596[-7]. The most humble servant of your
most illustrious Lordship,
GEORGE BLACKWELL.
APPENDIX C.
Letter of HENRY TICHBORXE, S. J., written from Rome, to THOMAS DARBYSHIRE, S. J., at Pont-a-Mousson, 2 Feb. 1598.
(State Papers, Dom, Eliz., Vol. CCLXII. No. 28.)
The Reasons that moveth us in these parts to have hopes more than ordinary of the conversion of our country are very pregnant, First, the high degree of credit our principal pillars and agents have both in R[ome] and Sfpain]. In R[ome] F. Pfarsons] with the pope himself so accepted that he will not suffer him to use any other compliments of Kingling or other ways in his presence
140 Appendix C.
than is usual for cardinals. His nephew hath assigned him his day of audience and sendeth his coach for him daily. He hath composed these desperate controversies between the fathers and scholars, and let out the corrupt blood with that dexterity as hath got him the fame of an expert physician, and hath triumphed so over the crew of malcontents that whereas before his coming to R[ome] the young youths were so averted from the S[paniards] that they could not abide their sight, and would not move their hats to the ambassador, he brought them to digest the one and respect the other. And to confirm me rather in this opinion I find that, with great difficulty and the clamorous reluctations of our whole order, he hath avoided the red cap. F. C[resswell] in S[pain], and F. H[olt] in Flanders have, with the princes they deal, no less credit than he here.
The second support of these our hopes is the continual conflu ence of the rarest and best wits of our nation to the seminaries and their constancy in following their missions and procuring to be qualified for their return, which is, in the sight of man, mar vellous to see that the rigour of the laws, conceived and contrived in those cases, and the vigilant eyes and the severe execution thereof, these ten or twelve years practised, hath been the foun dation of all this our credit abroad and an invitement to men to adventure, for God's sake and the saving of souls, their skin and bones.
It is then observed that where before these laws [were] published we had but two seminaries, and these but indifferently furnished of people or provisions, since that time for two we have eight. One here [Rome], the number 70; one in Douai, the number 120; one in St. Omers, the number 80 ; one in Valladolid, the number 63 ; one in Seville, the number 65 ; in St. Lucar and Lisbon, two residences furnished proportionable and for our missions, where before those Acts there returned not passed 7 or 8 yearly at the most, now the number of them that return yearly is counted to be some 40 or 50. The number of adventurers and labourers in England is lifted to five hundred, besides them of our society which are some 150 in England and abroad:1 besides Capuchins and other religious the number of 100.
These evident testimonies of missions and commissions, and of the particular intelligencies of all preparations and pretensions of
1 The number of English Jesuits and religious is here much exaggerated. But in the abstract of this letter in the Calendar of State Papers, by the omission of the words ' and abroad ' the statement becomes absurd. It may be mentioned also that the Calendar, in the preceding sentence, affixes the numbers of the students through out to the wrong college, thus : ' There are 70 scholars at Douay ... 65 in St. Lucar ; and in Lisbon two residences,1 etc.
Appendix C. 141
our Council at home sent continually to F. P[arsons] by express messengers, that all such that seek to contradict or oppose against him are either discarded or discredited, and all they can say or project to the contrary held for inventions and entertain ments. The only thing that is feared will be the interruption of this our settled hopes or diminution of our credit is a report which hath been here very hoole [sic] of liberty of conscience at home, which is supposed to proceed from some deeper brain than our ordinary wits are wont to yield ; and because I know it will be to you grateful and withal a caveat to take heed of such companions that gape after that liberty I will set you down the discourse pro and con, and reasons used on both parts in their Memorials for the procuring of approbation and good liking for their designs.
And first it was on both parts for a maxim concluded that partial or proportionable execution of the la\vs served for nothing else but to make such as reaped benefit thereby reputed for spies and men of too large a conscience, and in fine so hard to dis tinguish therein by the rule of more moderate execution that haply they that least deserved it were most hardly dealt with. It rested, then, that of liberty, by some public altering and repealing of laws or some solemn security under the prince's word. It is objected on the one part, and much feared [on] ours, that this is the only means to discover the defeat and nakedness of our cause and to show that that, which we are fain to daub with such glorious colours, is but a mere chimera and bare shadow ; that there is no such numbers of men affected to our party as we would enforce ; that a more mild and moderate course were more fitting ; that it is observed in all histories that religion was never planted or restored by arms ; that suffering and submission must needs in time work pity and commiseration ; that liberty granted will be a badge, and, as it were, a livery coat to distinguish be tween stamps and plain wearing Catholics that are desirous to give Caesar that which is Caesar's and God that which is God's ; that the way to take away, on all parts, jealousies, suspicions and a labyrinth of perplexities is for the one part to give what testi mony or pledge may humbly be devised of their innocency and sincere submission, the other of their humanity, nobility and clemency, that for the obtaining this liberty they offer no other conditions than Cardinal Allen doth in his Apologie, Tertullian and Justinus Martyr.
Reply was made by ours that this means was so dangerous that what rigour of laws could not compass in so many years, this liberty and lenity will effectuate in twenty days, to wit, the dis- furnishing of the seminaries, the disanimating of men to come and others to return, the expulsion of the society, a confusion as in
142 Appendix C.
Germany, extinction of zeal and fervour, a disanimation of princes from the hot pursuit of the enterprise. Our rejection will leave us hopeless and helpless and will fall out with us as with the sheep that made peace with the wolves on condition they should remove the dogs. So that the circumstances and conditions necessarily implying the removal of the company (which by their rule may admit no like conditions) and are our dogs, we shall be left as a prey to the wolves that will besides drive our greatest patron [the king of Spain] to stoop to a peace which will be the utter ruin of our edifice, this many years in building.
It was further opposed that colour of matter of state was pre tended, but the work was utterly to extirpate and cut out by the roots all memory of the Catholic religion, that the danger of such alterations in a settled course the discredit might light upon the devisers and makers of such laws if such mutations should now follow doth demonstrate that this discourse of liberty is but an invention of busy heads and neither for to be allowed nor accepted if it might be procured nor in itself possible to be procured for the former raising [sic].
Answer was made that wise men consider the end of the laws and are not always tied to the same means, but, like skilful physi cians, use cupping or cutting not but when otherwise the humours cannot be removed by potions and purgations, so that when Lycurgus' laws may accomplish their ends they put into the scabbard the sword of Draco's laws till the exigencies of times otherwise require. Seeing then, that by a benefit bestowed, by repealing rigorous laws, by using bounty and beneficence, by giving a limited and conditional liberty, the end of the law may take place which is to convert the State from perils and pertur- bances, to purge it of practitioners and intestine and domestical enemies, to flank it and fortify it from all foreign invasions, it is thought that no private love of estimation or affection to their own plots with wise and grave men should hinder so clement a mutation.
To this, reply was made in a word, that the world did see the end was not so much conservation of the State as hatred of religion ; it being further demanded with what credit the part persecuting could be induced to such alteration, or what security might be required or given of the part so beneficially dealt with.
Answer was made that the intercession of princes, in religion Catholic, yet friends to the State, might make that alteration most honourable. Their words likewise given for the security might be caution sufficient, other particularities concurrent, as none to be admitted or permitted to the benefit, but such as be men known, fast and faithful to the State, should be approved, none but such as shall take oath to be free from matters of State,
Appendix D. 143
and bound to reveal what they know to be prejudicial thereto. And here by the way I must advise you that Sir T. Trish[am], as a friend of the State is holden among us for an atheist and all others of his humour either so or worse. Thus you have what was argued on both parts ; but the libertines with their reasons with just disdain rejected so that I think hereafter they dare no more open their mouths. R[orae], this 2 of February 1598. — Yours ever assured, HENRY TWETCHBURNE,
of the Society of Jesus.
[Endorsed] — All molto Rd° padre il pad
Thomaso derbeshire de la Compa de Giesu. A Mosseponte.
APPENDIX D.
The Concluding Sections of FATHER LISTER'S Treatise Adversus Factiosos.
(From the Relatio Compendiosa collated with the Petyt MS.} § 6. — Factiosorum subterfugia.
1. Principio, factiosi isti ostendunt noui superioris authoritatem non satis promulgatam esse. Deus bone, quam peccant isti ! Tot enim literae a sedis Apostolicae mandate profectae sunt, vt nemo prudens hac de re possit dubitare. Moralem ergo habemus hac de re certitudinem, quam in omni re morali satis esse omnes omnino indicant.
2. At Bullam nullam aut Breue Pontifex confecit. Ineptis- sime. Quis enim sacrorum canonum hoc vnquam praecipit ?
3. Verum 11011 est receptum a subditis. Falsum, quia maior, melior, et doctior sacerdotum pars, iam subscripsit ; atque eorum nomina ad summum Pontificem transmissa sunt. Praeterea accep- tatio subditorum ad superioris Ecclesiastici ius stabiliendum non est necessaria: vti Ecclesiae consuetudo satis docet. Quid? receptio nonne requiritur ad legem stabiliendam ? Ita sane. Sed non est eadem legis, et superioris ratio : quia lex est iudex inani- matus ; atque perpetuam, nisi tollatur, vim habet. Non ita est de vivo atque mortali superiore. Quare eadem gravamina a lege et superiore non inferuntur.
4. Adijciunt subditorum consensum ad superioremEcclesiasticum stabiliendum requiri. Non ita est. Primo, quia summus Pontifex non semel, sed saepissime eiusmodi subditorum iura (si iura dicenda sunt) varijs in locis sustulit. V. gr. : In vniuersa Gallia mos fuit,
144 Appendix Z).
vt capitula episcopos eligerent. Sed hoc, tempore Francisci primi, sublatum fuit, ac nominatio regibus Galliae commissa. Sed quorsum hie haeremus ? Potest summus Pont, pro suae potestatis amplitudine illud vbique locorum statuere quod maiori Ecclesiae bono conuenerit. Ad haec, in Anglia omnia iura nomination um, electionum, et praesentationum, quae in regibus, academijs, et capitulis fuerunt, per haeresim destructa suiit. Postremo ; Superior iste datus fuit, ex papalis potestatis pleiiitudine, quod hoc tempore persecutions minime expedire putauerit tot annos clerum qui in Anglia est, sine obedientia, atque ordine alijs regnis recepto, vitam hanc periculosissimam viuere debere.
5. Sed dicant fortasse, pontificem hoc decreuisse lion sano aliorum consilio incitatum. O Meiidacium ! Quid ? Numquid fac- tiosis istis licebit in re grauissima tarn impune, tamque impudenter mentiri ? Proferant si uertim est suos testes, aut alia argumenta, quae sapientem conuincant. De stultis enim non ita curaiidum est quid sentiant quidue effutiant.
6. At non est omnino certum, schisma in aliquo particular! ccetu admissum, excommunicationem annexam habere. Principio ; nullum est schisma ita particulare, quiii in totius Angliae contu- meliam vergat ; vt supra apertissimis rationibus conuicimus. Ad haec, verba Gregorii 4tj- supra allata, ita manifesta sunt, ut nescio an quisquam sanae mentis de his dubitare possit. Tandem Bulla Coenae excommunicauit omnes schismaticos, vtique proprie sic voca- tos. At satis ostendimus hos factiosos ex eorum esse numero ; ergo sunt omnino exclusi ab Ecclesia dei, per excommunicationem maiorem.
7. Aliud obijcere possunt, se rebellare quidem sed aduersus particulare praeceptum [MS. particularem presbyterum]. Deus bone ! Numquid non Gregorius 4. agit ex professo contra huiusmodi? Ipsius verba testantur [MS. legantur] quae supra posuimus.
8. Reijciunt solum nouo subesse officio. Atque idcirco rebelles sunt in Pontificem, qui illud officium instituit : atque dum Domino Blackwello subesse nolunt, neque sedi Apostolicae, quam nunc Clemens 8US gubernat, subesse velint. Ergo vt supra ostendimus schismatici sunt.
9. Spem suam abijcere possunt fore nimirum vt Pontifex senten- tiam mutet. Verum interea temporis cur nunc superiorem, virum omni eruditione, prudentia, probitate conspicuum non recipiunt ? Nimirum quia rebelles, et schismatici sunt. Atque in more positum est vt mali subditi bonos superiores odio prosequantur. Verumne ? Vtique longe verissimum.
10. Ad extremum, in suum sempiternum dedecus, legatos factiosos ad Pontificem factiosi isti destinarunt : vt superiorem nihil eiusmodi merentem deponat. Sed frustra. Non enim sine crimine
Appendix E. 145
deponi potest ; et quod crimen in homine integerrimo, ac notissimse virtutis, et sapientiae reperturi tandem sunt ? Nihil profecto crim- inis, praeter illas infamiae notas, quas homini summre probitatis, suis illi mendaciis aspersuri sunt.
§ 7. Factiosorum crimina.
Nunc vos appello factiosos, qui tarn lyncei estis, vt ex nulli omnino peccatis crimina confingere possitis, vt in vestra tandem crimina oculos conijciatis.
1. Vos Rebel! es estis.
2. Schismatici estis,, atque excidistis ab Ecclesia et sponsa Christi.
'•}. Obedientiam Pontifici summo debitam proculcastis. 4. Contra omnem fidem ac authoritatem humanam deliquistis, eo quod moralem rejicitis in re morali certitudinem.
?). In excommunicationem atque irregularitatem irruistis.
6. Perdidistis facilitates, quibus animas lucrari debuissetis Christo.
7. Tantum concitastis in animis piorum omnium scandalum, vt tanquam infames per omnium omnino ora volitet.
Quid plura ? In Christi summum vicarium atque in Christum ipsium iudicem ac vindicem vestra inobedientia ita peccastis, vt cum Samuele propheta, dicere in vos possimus : Quasi peccatum ariolandi cst repugnare et quasi scehis Idololatrice nolle acquiescere. Videte obsecro vos, nihilo meliores ariolis, ac idololatris, et qui ecclesiam per pontificem summum vos alloquentem non audistis, tanquam ethnici estis et publicani. Atque hie finem dicendi facio, illud obnixe deum praepotentem deprecatus, ut in animos vestros gratiae suae vin tandem influat, ne ad sempiternum exitium cum ethnicis et idololatris protrusi, huius tantae inobedientiae atque scandali paenas immortales luatis.
APPENDIX E.
Abstract of a letter from Jo. SICKLEMORE to Dr. BAGSHAW, Aug. 3, 1598.
(From Mr. Macrays Report of the MSS. of the Inner Temple, Hist. MSS. Commission, xi. pt. vii. p. 267.)
With reference to the proceedings at the college at Rome, strongly urges Bagshaw to submit to the judgment of others, especially ' of the right reverend ff. Per[sons] whose shooues I wish myself worthie to kisse . . . whose learning, wisdome,
146 Appendix F.
labours, goodwill to our common cause, England hath tried, France ex ore infantinm et lactentium testifieth (to confound inimicum et idtorem), Spaine with erected colledges largelie witnesseth, and Italic in Rome in self (sic) with established peace most highly commendeth ; finallie, credite, yea familiaritie with the holiest, most potent, most glorious, most godlie, maketh most famous.' ' The greatest griefe in this matter is the publishing of defames : ' what was done herein in the College was by commandment of the Protector ; what was done in England was through Bagshaw and others who exhorted it against the will of the superiors. Only some few priests at present know hereof, and no one is named ; ' it is an easie matter as yet to drowne all before it be imparted eyther to catholyke or heretyke. For God's sake let us follow if. Gar[net] his counsaile in this, which is wholie to conceale the enormous and beastlie offences: he is wholie bent to yt, that is the mind of our assigned superior Mr. Blackwell, of his coadjutor, and our dearest friends/ Otherwise the persons will be known and publicly punished, and thereupon must ' fall a publike infame both of our cause, churche and clergie.'
APPENDIX F.
Letter to Dr. BAGSHAW, June 4 [1599]. (From the original in the Petyt MSS., xlvii. f. 155.)
This letter herinclosed I Red soffi 3 weeks sence the date long synce yt was written, the pty remayneth still at Mount Martyr and would gladly haue some company to establyshe somethinge there abouts. Mr Cunstable is yet in Scotland and meaneth to retorne shortly to Parris. There is 110 thing establyshed at Mynion Colledge for lack of company. Therefore would to God ther meight be som course taken for the good to com here after, for yf yt be not speedyly furnyshed w* som that may make a foundation, yt will be vtterly ouerthrowne for euer. Mr Pud. tould me that at his reto[r]ne out of the contry he would goe w* some other but whether his determination will hould God knowes for synce his goeing out of Towne the brevie for Mr Blak : cam, and what that may alter know not. they say Mr John is an assistant and all men saue only you haue yelded. yt is sayd here that yf you do not you vtterly ouerthrow your selfe and I know not what. But what you haue to do in those matters you know best. I assure you I fynde great alteration in many synce the coming of the brevie. It is here reported by a priest that cam lately from Rome that Parsons hath intercepted certayne
Appendix G. 147
letters of Do. Jeffords [Gifford] \vch were to you, wherin he should writ vnto you that Parsons had prepared certayne knyves to cutt the King of Scotts his throte & that the Arche Duke was a man of currishe nature & many such other babies, & that Parsons will strayne all the Freends he hath but he will fetche him to Rome to answere the matter personally. The pty that brought this newes was taken 2 nyghts agon in the Marshallsey in Mr Cham- panyes chamber,, his name I know not. I doe not thinke but Mr Doc. Jeff, is wyser than to haue any of his letters intercepted neyther do I thinke he would medle or make w* the Arch Duke. But these plottings of Parsons will never be lefte tyll by som or other he be vnmaskt. God for his mercyes sake make him an honest man or soone take him to his mercy.
Extraordynary newes her is none. I would as a poore Freend and your well wilier be glad to here from you some tymes yf so you please. You may direct my letters to Mr Bensons in the Whyt Fryers next to Mr Blands the wood mongers. Mr Dabscot hath bine at Cambridg & spoke wth the pty who is contented at his retorne to com to London wth him and to confer w* Mr Wright & to take what course he will. Direct him. I most humbly & hartely thanke you for all your most loueing and liberall kind nesses all wayes showed to me and accknowledg my selfe for euer bound vnto you & rest during lyfe yours in any service may lye in me. And so craueing pdon for these my rud lynes & all other necligences I most humbly & hartely comend me to your good selfe, Mr Blawet & Mr Cauerly & all the rest of your good com pany, to whose prayers I most hartely comend me this 4th of June.
[At foot in another hand] : Parsons must be layd owt in his coolers.
[Addressed^ : To the Right Reuerend & his most worshippfull Freend Mr Doctor Bagshaw these be dd.
The seal bears the letters T >|< P (?).
APPENDIX G.
Letter of JOHN MUSH to Dr. BAGSHAW, May 1599. (Petyt MSS. XLVII. f. 204.)
Adm R. D., — I am sorie we mett not at London, now I would haue come but that I could not then haue reached home into the Northe before Whitsoiiday. The next Tearme God wylling I will se you, for either then wyll we make an ende of thes scando-
148 Appendix G.
lous troubles or I wyll seeke to saue one out of thes flames vnder a frers hoode. Here I receive a messenger from London, for my returne.1 What wylbe the next newes, I knowe not but of iieces- sitie backe I must. We offered to yeald vpon verie reasonable conditions, wch all were refused. And Mr Collingto, myselfe, & Mr Heberne suspended ab omni vsu facultatu. I send this inclosed to Mr Barlow to procure testimonie & handes for my good be- hauiour and wyll him to deliuer them to you. Send them wth those you can procure for my creditt to Mr Collingtoii, that I may haue them kept for me. Desire Mr Cauerley to copye me out my letter to Mr Morus y* is sent back by Fa. Parsons & come into the Bisshop of Londons hand. I thanke them. Jesu what vile rumors & slanders ar cast alouer touching you ? Slander & detrac tion are no faultes. But we beginne to be in the same predicament w* you. For Gods sake be warye of yor toung, that no aduantages be taken of you. And be sure of them you imparte yor mind vnto. It is said you ar notably circumuented by on you trust, one of or owne coate who dealeth verie connyngly wth you. me thinke you should be wise & experienced ynough to knowe before you belieue. Yor sonne Richard is saife yett troubled w* an ague since his deliuerye. he wyll forsake the land. As I returne this way you shall knowe, what or businesses were of this posting backe againe. Thes new officers ar so straitely that by no meanes we can speake meete or se them. Comend me to yor good selfe & all in haiste this Friday postridie Ascens. — Yors most assured,
Jo. Mu.
Since yor departure Wrade haith had all the priestes in prisons before him his cheefest questions & threates were about this Arche & accepting of him. A plott as he saieth of Fa. Parsons, to make all priests co-operate for bringing in the Infanta to be or Queene. Yor sonne and I wounder they make no proclamation against y*. but I muse they ar so senseless, as not to thinke vpon some tolleration wrt conditions wch might free vs from this jelosye.
[Addressed] — To the Right Worship1 & my very frend M1' D. Bagshawe thes. Wisbitche.
[Endorsed'] — A Ire from Musshe how his, Mr Collingtons, & Mr Heburns faculties are taken fro them.
The B. of Londo hath his Ire to ye Cardinal.
Dr. Bagshaw is revyled & betrayed.
1 On returning to London in response to the message referred to, Mush learned the contents of the brief, and made his submission accordingly. See p. Ixxxiii, supra. The preceding letter (F.) was written two or three weeks later.
Appendix H. 149
APPENDIX H.
Letter of JOHN BLACKFAX, S. J., to JOHN FLOYD, S. J.
Sept. 7, 1599.
(From a copy in the Petyt MSS., xlvii. f. 203.) Jhs.
Pax Chfi, etc., — My lovinge Father, it were good yow shold sometimes remember yor frends wth a word or two, that they might reioyce wth yow at yor good, or helpe to bemoane yor evil), and comfort yow if any desolacon befall, but now shortly we hope we shall enjoy yor owne selfe : for the sickness yow feared is all together asswaged here, blessed be God therefore ; and the worst pte of other fugitives have returned.
I sende yow here a letter as I take it from Rome, and wth it certain paps thence, that were addressed to this College : wch are in number fower : there goeth also a letter of Fa. Bells death :. the newes yow may doe well to impte to Fa. Sor.
Besydes these there were written to me owt of England other newes pticular : that the E : of Essex in Ireland had yet done nothinge to count of: whereof the Queue & Coimcell are sorely displeased : and that abowt midd July there were 4000 souldiors redye to be sent to him for supplye. Now is the tyme for the Spaniards to strike, if ever they will do any thinge.
Fa. Garnett also wrytes that the obstinate priests in England were very hott sett to be revenged on the Fa: and the Archp1' till the breve came from the Pope : and had framed a horrible letter against them, in wch they threaten to gett them attacked of the statute of prmunire wth many other the like. The copye of wch letter wlh the hands of the chiefe of the priests sett thereto, Fa: Garnett sayth, he gott owt of the Bp. of London's howse. There were of that faction in Wisbich, gott owt of the castle under ye prtence of flyinge, but they are knowen to be at libertye, and in favor to, and so might other of that faction to, but that they will not admitt it owtwardlye for their creditt. But after the publish- inge of the Popes Breve diverse of them came in wth theyr due submission : to witt, Mush : Heyburne : Collington : Ed. Bennet &c. : so y* they reckon that those wch stand yet finally owt, I meane of those y* be abroade, are these followinge : Wm. Clarke : Richard Butler : Jn° Boswell : Francis Montfort, and one Foster, that came lately into England from Rome : And y* I wonder at most Robert Drurye ; although I thinke it impossible but that before this time he be come in. Fa. Lister who (God be praised)
150 Appendix I.
is alive, beinge consulted by a certaine priest by letter, what he thought of those that stood owt, wrote a large, learned and pithy discourse : wherein he proved they were schismaticks : wch went to their harts. Wch opinion, now after the notification of the Popes Breve, is much confirmed, especially concerning such as hold owt after the notification of the same. They say all the Catholicks doe allredy avoyd them as such : wch will be cause, I hope, that this question and controversye will be sone ended. The psecution, they say, is, as it were, altogether ceased : there is neyther search nor inquisition made after anye: but rather there have been diverse pticular favors shewed of late vnto Catholicks. I beseech God, turne all to his glory and the good of or con try e. Comend me to allmighty God in yor prayers : Fa. Berthistle hath pticular need of yor prayers, who is sicke of tertians ; the rest are in good health. At Valledolid this 7 of SepteV: 1599- JN° BLACKFAN.
Al Pr Jn° Floydo de la Compa de Jesus en Baluerde.
APPENDIX I.
Dr. BAGSHAW to Mr. THOMAS BLUET [1601].
(From the original holograph, with note of Bluet, in the Petyt MSS., xlvii. f. 227.)
FATHER THOMAS, — If your letters had not come safe to vs by Jhon Lowe, we had not written agayne by him as we haue. For fear of afterclapps we haue sent our letter to Mr Blackwell againe, wch when yow haue subscribed deliver. Mr Newton hath beene here. He dd his money to L. Vertourmanus, & beinge not fully informed was a little warye. We have discoursed wth him to the full. He [pr]omiseth to have care & remembrance of yow. He went away but a litle before the cominge of Thomas.
In my letters by John, I wrote y* Will"1 Br. and Shee & we stande in reasonable good termes. I pray yow concurre. Yow knowe the vncertaynty of the man, & therefore euer keepe the bridell in your hande.
I wrote vnto you likewise to remooue some of vs or some of them.
If you can procure the banishemet of vs together wth Mr Barn- bye it would be very gratefull but wth conditions not to disavowe our cowntry, or wth any other not covenient restriction.
For the reporte of recantinge bringe it to some heade. We have worde of it frome one Mrs Kempe of Kent. A Catholique who was heere told her he knew the cotrarye.
Appendix J. 151
I wrote likewise to be instructed fully for Parsons hancle in Essex's matter.
Mr Calverley hath written abowte our howse matters. The pride of Bickley, Greene & Bramston must be rebated, or else our estate is not tolerable. Mr Barnby hathe his share almost as farre as the rest, he hathe 27s. the other 37. Mr Aitoime hath 40s. owt *of Mr Bennetts monye. I pray yow thanck them who have care of vs.
It is somethinge to sustayne the hope of this place, yett your letters have well encowraged our people & I pray you from time to time lett vs heare. Your twoe letters did well. If you observe it hereafter, the one may be showed, the other imparted only to some. Wth the 7s. for his horse we have given Thomas abowte xxs. a marke for his horse meate & his owne chardges.
We remeber you & your designes in particular. Your missale is not worthe the sendinge & there wanted a messanger. And now yowse see a miracle, a letter from one who hathe broken his necke downe a payre of stayres.
April 27. Yours while his necke is whole,
C. B.
Addressed : To his wor11 and especiall friende Mr Thomas Bluett.
On the back is the following note : Mr Parsons abowt 3 yeares since was tempering and hatching a plotte to set up Essex against her Matie. Hereof he brake wth a priest, & acquayting hym wth ye helpes y* he shuld haue out of Spayne and ye Lowe Gentries, moved ye said priest to be his messinger of this matter vnto ye Earle. But ye priest refused to be a dealer in any such cause, & yet gaue him good words, lest otherwise he might haue poured hym to haue been sent to ye Galleys. The said priest told me this much ; & I having written of it to Dr. Bagshawe, he desyred here to be better instructed. Tno. BLUET.
APPENDIX J.
Letter of the ARCHPEIEST BLACKWELL to his ASSISTANTS, June 23, 1601.
(From the Hope of Peace, p. 5.)
My very Reverend and very loving Assistants, — To my great sorrow two Books have been set out by our dear Brethren, whom all you love in the bowels of Christ and whom I have sought by all Fatherly means to win and reduce to unity. Great reason it has been that a thing propounded to the Pope his holiness should
152 Appendix J.
not with so great scandal of our cause and joy of our adversaries, have first been divulged to all sorts of people, before it could pos sibly come t6 his sight and censure, and perhaps never meant to be presented to him, although means must be made by me that it may come to his reading, and the view thereof will grieve him much, because he loveth and everywhere desireth peace.
It cannot be liked of, that we should write one against another, and therefore no other answer shall be sent now than this. And my desire is, that all good Catholics, according to their duties, do think well of their superiors, and, if they have any doubt, do sus pend their judgments until they hear the full deciding of the cause, for herein is touched the credit of all superiors in the world.
The principal points they touch are these : —
1. The division at Wisbeach.
2. The sedition of the College at Rome, and the government
of the other Seminaries.
3. The institution of our authority.
4. The censuring them of schism.
5. The usage of the two agents they sent to Rome.
6. The decrees I made and the execution of them.
1. The first point was a thing long since ended with great edification, and by the means principally of these which are most condemned. [It toucheth the greater part and the better part of that company there.] It nothing concerneth our authority, it being more ancient, and having orders taken at the atonement by their own consent. It is well known at Rome by whose means they were disannulled, neither was it more unfitting for those which lived in one house to institute rules for such as voluntarily demanded and accepted them, than to procure a sodality abroad.
2. The second point concerneth the superiors there, whose authority is greatest and most dangerously contemned, who have the hearing of the causes and by great reason ought to make orders for the Seminaries, which they that complain never built.
3. The third point is clear by his holiness' Breve, and no less could be done than to accept the authority and to execute it when it came at the first. For I have learned to obey, and I signified then how unfit I was to have so great a charge, and am ever ready to depose it for the love of God, and the profit of His Church, upon the least knowledge of my Superiors will and command ment : for my delight is not so much in it, as these authors do affirm, neither was it published at any time with untruths by any such unseemly means, which might give shew of any little ostentation.
Appendix K. 153
4. The matter of Schism was according to my opinion which now I retain yet with submission to holy Church, what I shewed them was done in charity for their better instruction and speedy reformation, which also was sent them by me in secret, and therein no particular person was named. It was but an arbitrary matter, discussed among the learned, which bringeth no loss of credit to either part. I gave them all express liberty to think what they would herein, for it is but a matter of opinion, and therefore not worthy to make a matter of contention, which part soever was true. I sought by learned discourses and censures not so much the forwardness of my opinion as of their amendment. What I sent them to view was in manner of a fatherly admonition, and not as a matter to stir up or to feed a farther dissension. Our endeavours were for peace. Happy shall we be and blessed for this so goodly a labour. Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the sons of God ; to whose protection I commend you all, humbly desiring you to pray for me, and so I take my leave this 23 of June, l6'01.
G. B.j Archpriest Augl. PronoL Apostolicus.
APPENDIX K.
Declaratio THOM.E BLUETTI sacerdotis Angli. Exhibita Illmis et Rmis Dfiis BITRGHESIO, et AURIGONIO S. R. E. Cardinalibus die — Martij Anno Dili 1602.
(State Papers, Dom. Eliz., Vol. CCLXXXIII. f. 70.)
De causis aduentus ipsius Londinum e carcere de Framingham et itineris Romam versus.
Gustos carceris Wisbicensis, auaritia et malitia ductus, a consili- ariis Reginae procurauit auctoritatem et potestatem transferendi triginta sex incarcerates sacerdotes (quorum unus erat Franciscanus, alter Capucinus) ad Castrum de Framinghem, quod distat inde itinere quatuor dierum. Hanc uero translationis causam pendebat, quod eiusdem prouinciae nobiles (quibus cura eiusdem Castri com- missa erat) nimis fauere uidebantur duobus aut tribus sacerdotibus, ita ut ipse custos non potuit frequenter perficere, quae iussa erant a senatu Reginae, uiz., incarcerates omnes ita astricte obseruaret, ne quis eos ulla ratione alloqueretur ; Huius auctoritatis virtute remouit inde incarcerates omnes. Quod, ut facilius et securius praestaret (ut praetendebat ipse) sexdecim manicas ferreas fieri curauit, quibus sacerdotes bini ac birii (latronum instar) copula- rentur, et ita securius conducerentur, milites quoque triginta, requirit.
154 Appendix K.
Hums rei indignitate commoti nobiles (licet Protestantes) re- sponderunt barbarum hoc esse factum et spectaculum indignum iiec ferendum, ut tot sacerdotes vincti latronum instar per prouin- cias pedibus tantum itineris conficereiit, quare taiitum illi coiices- serunt triginta milites, modo custos ipse stipendia illis solueret, eo quod incarceratorum traiislatio propter suum lucrum, ac commodum ab ipso fuit procurata, quam conditioned ipse omnin6 repulit, quod tantas impensas facere noluit, sed data et interposita fide duorum sacerdotum (qui ex primariis incerceratorum erant), uiz., quod ad diem praefixum omnes ad carcerem nouum se praesentarent, libere dimisit : quod in Anglia, in carceribus siue extra, ssepe consuetum est, ut in uerbo sacerdotis possit quis libere ad tempus abesse, licet agatur de uitse periculo ; quod ego multoties praestiti.
Tandem post quintum diem omnes per gratiam Dei uenimus ad Castrum et sic fidem datam carceris custodi sancte persoluimus. Castrum uer6 inuenimus ruinosum, inhabitabile (quod per annos fere octuagiiita desertum manserat) quare hac de causa coactus erat custos carceris omnes in diueris pagis ac villulis duobus fere mensibus collocare : et quia Archipresbyter (ut afflictionem adderet afflictis) prohibuerat eleemosinas afferri ad manus incarceratorum, eo quod ad Suam Sanctitatem appellassent, ut fame et inopia coacti juri appellationis omniiid cederent ; hac temporis occasione data, ut remed[ium] his malis afferrem, a custode licentiam ad decem dies obtinui, vt nonnullos Catholicos inuiserem, ac cum illis agerem de his malis, et periculis, in quibus confratres mei ratione istius mandati Archipresbyteri versabantur ; Londinum veni, et quia per annos uiginti quatuor vrbem illam non videram, nee ubi aliquis Catholicus habitaret, noueram, ad carcerem mihi olim cog- nitum ueni (erant ibi septem sacerdotes, quasi in libera custodia) ut ex illis intelligerem quomodo cum Archipresbytero, ac reliquis Catholicis de his negotiis conferre possem, unus interea ex illis sacerdotibus statim me uidens, prae gaudio (ut uidebatur) accla- mauit : ' Pater Bluettus est :' hoc nomine a custode illius carceris audito (stabat enim post tergum) secret6 interrogat num iste est Bluettus Wisbicensis, de quo tarn multa audiui ? Respondit pres byter, ipse est. Hoc audito subduxit se custos carceris uolens commissariis Reginae (qui Inquisitores in negotiis ecclesiasticis uocantur) indicare Bluettum Wisbicensem in urbe existere.
Quo perspecto periculo, timens ego, lie excubiae per vrbem dis- ponerentur, ut me tanquam fugitiuum comprehendereiit, tutius et coiisultius judicaui commissariis significare me in vrbe esse propter causas necessarias et negotia incarceratorum, meque paratum esse ad rationem reddendam illis aduentus mei in vrbem : quo audito ille, quern Protestantes episcopum uocant, et qui primus est inter commissaries, famulum suum misit, qui me ad ipsum perduceret :
Appendix K. 155
ad quern cum veneram, causam aduentus sciscitanti, respond! me Londinum venisse de licentia custodis carceris ad ea peragenda, quae incarceratis confratribus erant necessaria (eram enim quaestor eleemosinarius per aimos multos quod bene noverant Regina et •Senatus) meque reuersurum esse intra decem dies. Qua accepta satisfactione, statim ad Reginam se contulit cui omnia ordine narrat : quo audito iussit me Londini in libera custodia seruari, quod fuit ab initio quadragesimae usque ad finem mensis Julii eiusdem anni.
Archipresbiter uerb nullo modo me ad coiispectum ipsius admit- tere uoluit, sed prohibuit, ne missas omnin6 celebrarem, confessiones audirenij aut conciones apud populum haberem, im6 strictis- sime prohibuit, ne quis Catholicorum eleemosinas mihi praeberet, sacris, aut conscionibus adesset, ita quod ab initio quadragesimae usque ad finem Julii ne unum quadrantem de eleemosinis populi recepi, quamuis optime noueram duodecim millia librarum Angli- canarum spatio trium annorum praeteritorum fuisse a nobilibus Catholicis donata ad sustentationem incarceratorum : atque hoc Archipresbiter non tantum mihi, sed caeteris presbyteris eo fecit, ut hac ratione me, ac confratres meos appellantes cogeret appella- tioni renuntiare : omni enim ratione ac totis uiribus conatus est Archipresbiter cum Jesuitis, lie negotia ista ad aures Saiictitatis Suae peruenirent, ut notum est omnibus Catholicis.
Interea temporis Londinensis, in cuius potestate de mandate Reginae eram, plurimas, ac diuersas mihi litteras, ac libros patris Personii, patris Holti, et aliorum Jesuitarum Anglorum ostendit, in quibus perspicue apparebat, ipsos Regem Hispaniarum ad regnum Anglicanum inuadendum (quasi sibi de jure debitum) inuitare, et alios plurimos priuatos homines sollicitare, ut Reginam, uel ueneno, aut gladio de medio tollerent. Ista Londinensis mihi pluries com- municauit, et quid ego de his sentirem interrogauit, et utrum sacer- dotes seculares essent eiusdem sententiae, et opinionis de Regina e medio tollenda, et regno trail sferendo ?
Addidit praeterea Reginam, et ordiiies, siue consiliarios maximas et grauissimas habuisse ratioiies promulgandi leges istas durissimas contra Jesuitas, presbyteros Seminariorum et reliquos Catholicos, eo quod reputabant omnes conscios et reos esse omnium huiusmodi molitionum, cum essent discipuli Jesuitarum sub ipsis in Seminariis educati.
Cui respondi, seculares sacerdotes ex mea certa scientia nunquam conscios fuisse huiusmodi molitionum, im6 neque primaries in Anglia Catholicos, quod rationibus, apertissimis et demonstrationi- bus maiiifestis probaui, et hac maxime appellatione nostra ad Sanc- tissimum Papam, apud quern iiostras iustissimas querelas exposituri eramus, nosque innocentes sacerdotes per plurimos annos dilaniari,
156 Appendix K.
torqueri, suspend! non propter religionem, aut fidem Catholicam aut justitiam, sed propter huiusmodi proditiones (vt vos Protes- tantes clamatis). Intulit Londinensis, iiihil aliud conantur, idque sub specie religionis, quam regiium transferre & gente Anglorum et a legitimis haeredibus ad Hispanos, ut ex litteris et libris, inuasion- ibus luce clarius constat. Haec etiam mea responsa ipsi Reginae communicauit, et ita, post varias collationes et conferentias, Regina judicibus mandauit, ut a sanguine sacerdotum abstinerent, nisi aliquem inuenirent harum molitionuni reum (solent enim Judices prouinciarum antequam ad tribunalia in prouinciis ascendunt, in- terrogare Reginam, quid fieri velit in negotiis Catholicorum).
Hinc facturn est ut Reginae, ad mansuetudinem inclinatae, petitio ex parte Catholicorum oblata fuit pro aliquali conscien- tiarum libertate, cum hac protestatione, ut sacerdotes, et laici fideli- tatem illi praestareiit in omnibus, quae ad temporalia sua spectarent. In qua petitione auditum insuper fuit, quod omnes huiusmodi moli- tioiies, libelli, siue contra Reginam, siue contra regni principes et nobiles, viz. Liber Successionis, siue Titulorum, et alii quicumque siue Latine, uel Anglice scripti supprimerentur. Hac supplicatione iterum, atque iterum lecta in haec uerba prorupit : — c Isti homines meam leuitatem et clemeiitiam erga illos sentientes his contenti non sunt, sed omnia simul, et semel habere volunt. Rex (inquit ilia) Gallorum reuera potest sine omni periculo honoris, uitae, et regni concedere Hugonottis libertatem religionis : at nobiscum 11011 ita est ; nam si Catholicis concessero hanc libertatem, eo ipso facto, et rneipsam, honorem, uitam et coronam illorum pedibus subiicis : quoniam summus pastor eorum contra me sententiam tulit, dum adhuc in utero matris essem (intellexit sententiam Clementis Septimi de matrimonio Henrici et matris). Insuper inquit Pius Vs. me excommunicauit, et subditos a sacramento fide- litatis absoluit, Gregorius item XIIIs- et Sextus Vs. ad instantiam Regis Hispaniarum (quo pomosria sua dilataret) eamdem renoua- runt, et sic adhuc pendet cum nostro periculo. Quod uero pertinet ad eum qui modo gubernacula tenet lion est quod conquerar sed ut nomine, ita et re Clemens est ; Inuenit Galliam tumultibus, bellis ciuilibus, caedibus, et homicidiis refertam, quae omnia ipse, quantum in eo erat, ad pacem reduxit, regem, et regnum amplexus est, ita ut iam pace gaudent opulenta : in quo suo facto cstendit se dignum loco suo, dignus, qui uocetur vicarius Christi, doctor, et magister gentium/
Et sic petitio ilia nullum alium sortita est effectum, quia non erat quisque qui replicare ausus sit.
Hinc alia a me oblata fuit petitio, ut mihi, ac quatuor, uel quin- que aliis sacerdotibus, siue in carceribus, siue extra, licentiam con- cederet, Romam eundi ad huius nostrae Appellationis causam
Appendix K. 157
prosequendam,, ac ut Sanctitati Suae exponeremus,, quo in statu res nostrae essent in Anglia. Quam petitionem ipsa Consiliariis suis remisit, ut maturius deliberareiit, an expediret. I Hi de hac peti- tione consultantes in hanc disputationem veniunt, de differentia antiquorum et recentiorum sacerdotum, hoc est, de his, qui sacris fuerunt iiiitiati uel temporibus Henrici, aut Reginac Mariae (quos omnes Antiques Sacerdotes vocant), et de his,, qui fuerunt sacris initiati post mortem Reginae Mariae, quos uocant recentiores siue Seminaristas. Antiquis enim sacerdotibus non est crimen Isesee Maiestatis, quod sint sacerdotes et quod sint in regno : neque illi crimen laesae Majtis, ac periculum vitae incurrunt, aut amissionem bonorum, qui eos recipiunt uel alunt in domibus suis, tantum si fuerhit deprehensi sacrum celebrantes, tarn celebrantes, quam audientes mulctam soluunt uel in sere, uel in corpore.
Sed recentioribus sacerdotibus (quos Seminaristas uocant, uel Jesuitas) est crimen laesae majestatis, quod sint sacerdotes et quod sint in regno : Et similiter est crimen laesae majestatis cum amis- sione omnium bonorum tarn mobiliuin, quam immobilium eis, qui eos alunt uel hospitio excipiunt uel communicant cum illis siue spiritualiter, siue temporaliter.
Huius differentiae causam hanc fuisse omnes dixerimt, propterea quod antiqui sacerdotes pacifice et quiete semper vixerunt. Et Regina Maria mortua antiqui episcopi ac sacerdotes hanc nostram receperunt, et collocauerimt in throno regni et eamden Reginam unxerunt : Et quamuis ilia eos omnes e sedibus suis remouit propter fidem aiitiquam, et in eorum sedibus alios subintroduxit ; tamen illi, siue in carceribus, siue extra pacifice semper se gesser- unt, nee quicquam aduersus coronam, aut dignitatem tentarimt. Sed isti recentiores siue Jesuitae, siue Seminaristae longe aliter : Intrauerunt enim regnum sub specie religionis ac pietatis, secreto tamen tractant de morte principis et ruina patriae suae, eamdem in praedam exteris principibus offerentes, sicut euidenter apparet ex libris, litteris, actionibus procuratis a Personio, Holto, et aliis Anglis, tarn intra quam extra regnum.
Haec est enim uera causa discriminis et differentiae inter illos, sic enim inuemmus : Attamen (inquit unus eorum) uidemus saeculares sacerdotes (quos Seminaristas vocant) abhorrere et detestari huius- modi molitiones et actiones, et ide6 Jesuitas grauiter arguunt, sicut in eorum appellatione et libro ad Papam dedicato palam est, et cum eorum sacerdotium sit unum cum antiquis, fides una, et professio eadem, et qualitates et conditiones conueniunt, nullam ego (inquit) uideo rationem., cur ipsi istis priuilegiis cum antiquis sacerdotibus non gaudeant. Quare mihi expedire uidetur, ut per- mittantur isti sacerdotes pacifice Romam proficisci ad appellationem prosequendam et ad manifestandam huiuscemodi Summo Pontifici :
158 Appendix K.
qui si fecerit illis justitiam et judicium, qui taiitos labores pro eius dignitate tuenda sustinuerurit, sperare quidem possumus et nos justitiam ab illo posse inuenire. Et sic finite Consilio concesse- runt mihi potestatem aceersendi quatuor sacerdotes ex his, qui erant in carceribus, siue extra : concesserunt quoque nobis liber- tatem per septem hebdomadas uisitandi pareiites, cognatos, et amicos Catholicos ac pecunias colligeiidi necnon omnia alia, quae erant ad iter necessaria.
His tamen nobis ita concessis, aliqui eorum persuaserimt Reginae non esse securum tot sacerdotes regiio liberos et quasi amicos dimittere, ne eius dementia abutentes sese in transmarinis locis cum Jesuitis coniungant et molestiam et periculum regno faces- sant, Et ide6 expedit (inquit ille) ut seiitentia exilii in illos ad eorum terrorem feratur, cui consilio Regina acquieuit.
Multos quoque alios sacerdotes ad instantiam et petitionem meam, uel liberos ex uinculis uel ex strictioribus ad mitiora remisit. Si in hoc benefacto et fraternae charitatis officio peccaui penes Illmas Dominationes Vestras, erit judicium, habetis confitentem reum, animaduertite ut libet : E contra, si ego uinctus, et eo tempore captiuus, uermis et noil homo, im6 opprobrium hominum, et ab heri et nudiustertius omnium peripsema in oculis Reginae : tantum impetraui apud principem; quid Sanctitatis Suae aucto- ritas, adnitente Christianissirno Rege, ad consolationem Catholi- corum, et afflictissimae gentis ualere potest ? Quid bella et arma ? quid classes et inuasiones ? quid libri acerbissime in principem et proceres scripti ualuere per hos uiginti annos ? Vos ipsi audistis, et nos nostro magno malo et uidimus et sustinuimus. Semper tamen uestigiis Patrum ac Martyrum inhaerentes, uidelicet, Rof- fensis, Mori, et sanctorum episcoporum nostrorum qui tantum pro fide Apostolica et Romana, ac nuius Sanctae Sedis auctoritate in uinculis, et carceribus animas suas nobis praesentibus Deo tradi- derunt. Pacem amplectimur, eorum enim haeredes sumus, non Regnorum licitatores, sicut fidei nostrae commiserunt, sicut testa- mento cauerunt, sicut morientes adiurauerunt, ita tenemus.
INDEX.
ABBOT, George, abp. Cant., xxvi «, xlvii,
xlviii ;/.
Abington, Edw., executed, 135, 136. Acarisio, papal fiscal, Ixiii, Ixxiii, Ixxv. Agazzari, Alfonso, S.J., x, xxvii, xxviii, xxxi,
xlix, 1, i8«, 75 «, 76 M, 109 n, 122 n. Agen, 126, 127 n. Aitoune, Mr., 151. Albert, archduke, 114 «. Aldobrandino, cardinal, Ixxv, cxx, 56 n, 112. Alexandrine, cardinal, 9, 122. Allcock, Mrs., recusant, 25 n. Allegiance of catholic priests, cxxi, cxxii.
— oath of, cxxiii-cxxv, cxxx, cxlvii, 122 n.
protestation of, cxxii, cxxiv, cxxxvi,
cxlvii.
Allen, Thomas, 78 n.
Allen, cardinal William, viii, cxlvi, cxlix,
16 and «, 29, 53 n, 57 «, 72, 76 «, 103 ti,
113, 122 ti, 141.
founds Douai seminary, vii, 112 n.
on the Roman mutiny, ix «, ix-xi.
proposes Jesuit mission, xii.
— in the secrets of Philip, xiv, xv, xvii.
Letters and memorials of, xv, n ;/.
defence of Stanley, xviii, xix n.
his admonition, xix.
a priest's treachery against, 121 n.
absences from the seminary, xxxviii.
change of view in old age, xxiii.
— his opinion of the Jesuits, 17 and n, 48 «, 52 n.
• — defends Holt, 114 «.
results of his death, xxvii, xxviii, 17, 113.
— Jesuits' opinion of him, 18 n. Alms, collection of, xli, cxv, cxvi and «.
refused to anti-Jesuits, Ixxxiii, 38, 55,
154-
— • misappropriated, xxxiv, 100, 101, n6«. Ambition, charges of, Ixxv, 72 n.
Angel guardians, xxx.
Angus, earl of, 31 n.
Antwerp, 112 n.
Apostasy, charges of, 67 n, 120, 121 n.
Appeal, right of, 131.
Appeal of thirty-three priests, Ixxxv. 92, 93.
quoted, 85 «, 89 n, 92 n.
Appellants, Ixviii seq., Ixxxiv seq.
Appellants submit to archpriest, Ixxxiii, 87, 149, 150.
their number, 74 and «, 81-82 «, 92 n.
— their condition, Ixxxvi-vii, 86 n.
— ten suspended, 93.
charged with sedition, Ixxxix.
ready to fight against the pope, xciii.
their alleged immoralities, cix-cxi, cxx.
— their writings, Ixxxiv-xcvi, civ, ex, cxi, cxii, cxix, cxxviii seq. See also Books.
— propose conference with archpriest, Ixxiv, 90 n.
— negotiations with the queen, xcvi-xcix,
IS5-I58;
banished, xcvi-xcix.
at Paris, ci.
four, at Rome, cii seq.
have audience of Pope, cv.
— their gravamina, cxiii.
discontented with report of inquisition,
cxv.
— refuse to shake hands with Parsons, cxviii.
— obtain brief from Clement, cxix.
some made assistants to archpriest, cxix,
cxx «.
results of their conflict, cxxiv-cxxvii.
See also Deputies ; Priests (Secular).
Aquaviva, 'Claudius, general S. J., xi, 20 w,
115 n. Archer, Giles, priest, xlvi, Ixxxii, cvi, cxiv, 137.
his lewd assertions, 65, 66 K.
— biographical notice of, 65 n. Archpriest, office of, lix, Ixiii, Ixvii, Ixxiv, 76,
78 n.
political motive in appointment of, i, Ixi,
Ixiii.
— validity of the appointment questioned, Ixiv seq., 143 seq. , 152.
— the pope thanked for, 81. See Black- well.
Armada, of 1588, ii, xv, xvii, xviii, xl, 16 n.
— preparations for a second, xxv n, xcix. Array, Dr. Martin, priest, ix, Ixx, Ixxiv >,
Ixxvi «, 76, 78, 82 «.
— notice of, 76 n. Arrigoni, cardinal, xcvii, cvi, cix. Arundel, Anne, countess of, 105-106 n.
160
Index.
Arundel, earl of, 136.
Ashton. See Thules, Christopher.
Assassination, schemes of, xvi, xix, xcvii-
xcviii, 114 n. Assistants to archpriest, cxvii, cxix, cxx, 49,
79- _ Association of the secular clergy, Iviii, 69-70
«, 97 w.
of catholic laity, 30 ;/.
Attorney general, Ixxx, 44 n. Audley, Thomas, priest, 18 «, 48 n. Aylmer, bp. of London, 17 «.
B (F), cxlix.
Babington conspiracy, xliv, 136.
Babylon, cxxxi.
Bagshaw, Dr. Christopher, xliii, xlvi, liii «,
lv, xci, ci ti, cxxix, cxxxv, cxlii, cxlix,
15, 21, 25 «, 28, 31, 31 », 34, 39, 48, 53 «,
63, 64, 66, 67, 115 », 135. his books, iii, iv, lv, Ixxxv, civ, cxiii,
cxxxii, cxliii.
— his character, iv, 1, ex, 14 «, 146.
biographical notice of, xlvi-1.
at Oxford with Parsons, xlviii.
at the Roman college, xlix, 109 n.
— his doctor's degree, 1, 109 n. his handwriting, Ixxv.
accused of treachery, Ixxviii.
at Wisbeach, Ivi, Ixxviii, 53-55, 57, 58,
61, 62 «, 63 «, 66 «.
— relations with the privy council, Ixxviii, Ixxxi, Ixxxii, 133.
prisoner in London, Ixxix, Ixxxi.
consulted by W. Watson, Ixxx.
— submits to archpriest, Ixxxiii. signs appeal, 93 «.
finishes his ' True Relation,' Ixxxv, civ,
J33- • derides Blackwell, Ixxxvi.
— selected for banishment, xcvi. goes to France, c.
— remains at Paris, cii.
— disapproves ' Quodlibets,' cv. detests equivocation, 108 n,
dislikes ' Italionated ' Englishmen, xlvii,
23-
spreads ' defames,' 146.
accuses Parsons of falsehood, 66 n.
his inconsistencies, 62 n.
letters from Garnet, 57, 58, 61.
letter from Charnock, 83 «.
from Sicklemore, 146.
• from Mush, 147.
to Sicklemore, 145.
to Bluet, 150.
Bagshaw, John, xlviii. Nicholas, xliii.
Bagshaw, William, 127 n.
Baldwin, William, S.J., 78 «.
Ballard, priest, xliv.
Balliol college, xlvii.
Bancroft, bishop of London, xcvii, c, cvii,
cxi, cxiirc, cxx, cxxiii, cxliii, 119 «, 148,
149, 154-156. Banishment of priests, xxxix, xcix, c, ci, cxxi,
115 n, 148.
Banks, S.J., xxxn, 102 n. Barcelona, 115 n. Barlow or Barloe, Lewis, priest, xliii, 29 «,
136, 148.
Barlow, Robert, page, xliii. Barneby, Francis, priest, xcvi, c-cii, cvii,
cxlix, 151.
Barnes, Dr. John, O.S.B., 108 «. Baronius, cardinal, ciii. Barret, Dr. Richard, president of Rheims,
xxxi, xxxviii, xlix, li, cxxxi, 52 n, 84 «, 98 «,
109 «. his bad temper, xxiv.
— incompetency, 103 n. liarwise, Robert, priest, Ixxxvii. Bassett, Charles, 115 «.
Bavant (Bavin), Dr. John, lv, Ixiii, 29, 39, 40, 45, 47, 53, 101 n.
— biographical note on, 29 n.
arbitrator at Wisbeach, 36, 38.
' turns his tippet,' 42.
excuses the separation, 47.
— opposes the association, 70 ;/. Beatification of English martyrs, vii ;<•. Bedford, 25 n.
Beesley, George, martyr, now.
Belgium, lix, 75 H, 116, 117, 123.
Bell, Henry, S.J., xxv, 149.
Bell, Thomas, Anglican clergyman, some
time seminary priest, cl, 52 n, 121 «. Bellarmine, cardinal, cvi, cvii, cxxiv. Benedictines, English, attacked by Jesuits,
cxxv. Bennet, Edward, xxxvi n, Ixxxiii, cv, cxx n,
cxxx-cxxxii, cxliv, 93 n, non, 149. John, priest, Ixx n, Ixxv, Ixxvi, cxx n,
93 n, 105 «.
— notice of, cxxxi.
his books and letters, Ixxxvi, cxlviii.
Bennett, Mr., 151.
Benson, Robert, appellant priest, Ixxxiii,
93 «, 147- Bensted, Thomas, priest, martyr, cxxxiv,
108 n.
Berington, rev. Joseph, cli. Berthistle, father, S.J., 150. Bethune, Philippe de, French ambassador,
ciii, cv, cvii, cxiii, cxvii, cxviii. Bickley, priest at Wisbeach, 137, 151.
Index.
161
Bingley, John, priest, 93 n.
Birkhead, George, archpriest, Ixiii, 101 «,
104 «, 119 n, 120 n. Bishop. JoTin, of Brailes, 82 n. Bishop, Dr. William, xxxvi «, Ivi, Ixiii n,
Ixxxvi, xcv, cii, cxx «, cxxx, cxlvii, 87 «,
101 n.
biographical notice of, Ivii, 82 n.
Parsons' opinion of, 84 «.
summoned for mission to Rome, Ixviii,
83 n. imprisonment and trial at Rome, Ixx-
Ixxvii, 82, 84 «, 86, 87 «.
banished by the pope, Ixxvii-lxxviii.
his doctor's degree, Ixxviii, 91 «.
in Paris, cvii.
— his protestation of allegiance, cxxii, cxxiv, cxliv.
— letter to Bagshaw quoted, 83 n.
— writes to bishop Bancroft, 120.
his books, Ixxviii, Ixxxvi, cxxx, cxliii.
Bishoprics, priests charged with coveting,
Ixxv, 72 n.
Bishops, want of, v, Iviii-lx, cxxxi. right of election of, 143-144.
— appointed, cxxvii.
Blackfan, John, S.J., letter to John Floyd, S.J., 149-
Blackwell, George, archpriest, lx, Ixv n, Ixx, Ixxvii, Ixxviii, cxxviii, cxxxiii, cxxxvii, cxlii, 12, 65 n, 91 «, 92 «, 146, 150.
character of, Ixi.
protected by lord Arundel, 106 n.
approves the association, 70 n.
favours the Jesuits, 68, 71, 137.
attacked by Philalethes, cxli.
appointed archpriest, Ixii.
his faculties, Ixiv, 100 «, 130.
detected in forgery, 80.
grounds of opposition to, Ixvi.
his authority confirmed, Ixxvii, 86.
submission of malcontents to, Ixxxii seq.,
87.
renews the quarrel, Ixxxiv.
pretends instructions from Rome, Ixxxiv,
88, 89 n.
approves Lister's book, 85, 86 n.
denies right of appeal, 83 n.
promises release of banished deputies, 87.
rejects arbitration, 90.
oppresses the clergy, 91-93.
mulcts laity, 90.
his distribution of alms, cxvi n.
refuses alms to prisoners, 154, 155.
threatens Colleton, 90 n.
suspends ten appellants, 93.
suspends Drury, 93 «.
suspends Charnock, Ixxviii.
Blackwell, George, continued: —
condemns decision of Sorbonne, 124.
his censures, Ixxxv, 3, 4, 6, 7, 90, 93 «.
derided and insulted, Ixxxvi, xci, cxli,
i, 6, 79, So, 94.
withholds the pope's brief, Ixxxvii-viii.
approves the ' Apologie,' Ixxxix.
gravamina of appellants against, cix.
reprehended by pope and inquisition,
Ixxxviii, cxiv, cxv.
forbidden to consult Jesuits, cxix.
number of his adherents, 81 «.
takes prohibited oath, cxxiv, 79 n.
deposed by the pope, cxxiv.
letter to cardinal Cajetan, 137.
letter to his assistants, 151.
See also Archpriest. Elands, Mr, woodmonger, 147. Blount, father, vice-provincial S. J., 12 n. Bluet, Thomas, priest, liv, Iv, Ixxii, ci n, ex,
cxii n, cxvi, cxxix, cxliv, cxlix, 11-13, 2I'
23- 3i. 39, 63, 66 n, 93 n, 137, 147.
— biographical notice of, 13 «.
accused of drunkenness, Ivi, 13 n ; strik ing a priest, 14 n ; stealing pewter, 59.
at Wisbeach, Ixxviii, Ixxxi, Ixxxii, 10,
i3, 30, 34-37, 53-55-
treats with the queen, xcvi-c, 153-156.
at Rome, cii, cxiii.
return to London, cxx.
letter to, 150.
his alleged writings, cxiii, cxlvii.
his Declaratio^ 153.
Blunt, Rich. , keeper of Wisbeach castle, Ixxxi.
Richard, S.J., cxi, 102 n.
Boast, priest and martyr, xciv.
Bodleian library, cxxxviii, cxlv.
Bolton, priest, 137.
Bonard, P., in ».
Books (in general), iii-v, Ixvi, Ixxxv-xcvi, ciii-cvi, cxi, cxii, 4, 86, 95.
— prohibited or condemned, Ixxxviii, cv, cxiv, cxix.
Books (in particular) : —
Adversus factiosos (Lister), Ixxxiii,
Ixxxviii, cxxviii, 85 and n, go.
Anatomic of popish tyranny, cl.
Answer to a jesuited gentleman (Copley),
xlii, xc, cxxxviii.
Answer to Blackwell's letter (Phila lethes), xc, xci, cxli.
— Apologie (Parsons), liii, Ixxxvii, Ixxxix, xcii, civ, cxi, cxxxiii, 87 n.
Appendix to Apologie, Ixxxix, cxi,
cxxxiv. Apologia pro rege catholico, xxvii.
— Apologia pro hierarchia (Parsons), cxxxiv.
162
Index.
Books (in particular), continued: —
Brief Notes (Ely), v, xc, cxii, cxliii, 87 «,
108 n. Conference on the succession, xxv, xcviii,
56 and n, 156. Copie of letter to Mendoza, xviii.
— Copie of letter, by Allen, xix.
Copies of certain discourses, Ixxxvi,
cxxix, 95 n. Declaratio motuum, Ixxxv, Ixxxix,
cxxviii, 63 n, 87 «, 95 1 Detection of Romish impostures (Hars-
net), xliv, xlv. Dialogue betwixt a secular priest, etc.,
xc, cxiii, cxxxvii.
— Dissertatio contra aequivocationes, io8«. Hope of peace, Ixxxvi, Ixxxix, cxxxi,
cxxxiv, 95 n.
— Important considerations, xc, xci, cxiii, cxxxv.
— : — Jesuits' catechism, cxlv.
Just defence (Colleton), xc, cxii, cxiii.
— Manifestation (Parsons), xc, xciii, xcv, cvii, cxi, cxxxix, 98 », in n.
Memorial against the Jesuits, 111-121.
Memorial of the reformation (Parsons),
xxvi, cxl.
Philopatris, xxi », xxiii «, cxl.
Quodlibets, xc, cv, cxxxix.
Relatio compendiosa, Ixxxv-vi, Ixxxix,
cxxxii, cxxxiv, 85 «.
Reply to ' Apologie ' (A. P.), xc, cxlvi, cl.
Reply to ' Manifestation ' (W. C.), cxlviii.
cl, 41 n, 98 ».
Sparing discoverie, xc, xcv, cxiii, cxxxv.
Supplication (Southwell), cxvi.
Treatise of equivocation, 107 n.
Treatise tending to mitigation, etc.,
108 «. True relation, Ixxxv, Ixxxvi, xc, civ,
cxxxiv. Borghese, cardinal Camillo, Ixx, Ixxi, Ixxv,
Ixxvii, xcvii, ciii, cvi, cviii, cxiv, cxx, cxxiv-
cxxxii, 78 and n, 83 «, 125. Borne, Charles, Wisbeach prisoner, 24 n. Borromeo, St. Charles, 99 n, 113 n. Boswell (or Bosevile), John, cxx n, 93 «, 149. Bozio, Tommaso, ciii. Braddocke, Edmund, priest, 137. Brady, Mr. Maziere, Ixx n. Bramston, priest, 43 and », 45, 60, 136, 151. Brief (papal), first, on archpriest, Ixxvii,
Ixxviii, Ixxxiii, cxliii, 86. 87, 90, 127, 131,
132, 146, 149, 150, 152. second, on appellants, Ixxxvii, Ixxxviii,
cxlviii. final, or third, on appellants, cxvii,
Brief (papal) on succession to throne, cxviii,
cxxiii and «, cxxvi. Bristowe, Dr., x, xix, xxxviii. British Museum, cxxxiii, cxxxv, cxxxviii,
cxlv, cxlvi. Brussels, xxxii, xxxiii n, 84 », 98 n, now,
112 «, 114 n. Buckenham castle, xliii. Buckley, father, 65, 66, 137.
John, 65 n.
Sigebert, 65 «.
alias Jones, O.S.F. , now.
Bull of Pius v., ii, vi, xii, xix, 9 n.
of Gregory xin. , 9 n.
Buoncompagni, cardinal, xlviii, xlix.
Bury, xcix.
Butler, alias of Lister, 84 n.
— [or Button], Richard, 149. Button, Richard, priest, cxx «, 93 n. See
also Butler.
C. (W.), xcvi, cxlviii, 98 n.
Cadiz, xxxii.
Cadwallader, Roger, appellant, martyr, cxxiv,
93 «• Cajetan, cardinal Henry, xxix, xxxvii, Ix,
Ixii, Ixvi n, Ixx, Ixxi, Ixxv, Ixxvi, ciii, 29 n,
68, 78 and «, 84 n, 97 «, 100 «, 112, 122 «,
125, 131.
Blackwell's letter to, 137.
Calais, xxxii.
Calumny, use of, 109.
Calverley, Edmund, priest, ex, 29 », 44 n,
93 «» J37, 147. !48, 151- Cambrai, 32 n. Cambridge, 135, 147. Campion, father Edmund, S.J. , v, xii-xiv,
xix, xlv, xlvi, Ivii, cxliv, 9, 29 «, 30 », 106 «. Capuchins, 140. Cardinalate of England, competitors for the,
xxvii, 113 «.
avoided by Parsons, 140.
Carthusians at Louvain, Ivii.
Cassano, bishop of. See Lewis.
Catesby, cxxiii and n.
Catholics in England, xvii, Ixxxv, 97.
Caverley. See Calverley.
Cecil, Dr. John, priest, cii, civ, ex, cxiii,
cxviii, cxxx, 66 n, 109 n, sir Robert, afterwards lord Salisbury,
Ixxx, cxx, 24 n, 44 n, 119 n.
William, lord Burleigh, xxxv, xli, xlv.
22 «, 122 n.
younger, 122 n.
Chaddocke, prisoner at Wisbeach, 137. Chalcedon, bishop of, li «, Ivi. Challoner, bishop, vii, 52 », 83 n. Chambers, rev. Robert, xxviii n, 104 «.
Index.
163
Champney, Dr. Anthony, xxxvi «, Ixiii, Ixv, Ixxxiii, Ixxxvi, xcvi, c, cxxxviii, 66 «, 93 «,
II3 H, I47.
biographical notice of, cxxx.
his character by Parsons, ex.
Chapel-le-Frith, xliii.
Charles, prince, afterwards Charles II., cxxxi.
Charnock, Robert, Ixiii «, Ixiv. Ixxv, cii, ex.
cxxx, cxxxii, cxlvii, 82 «, 91 «, 121 n.
biographical note on, 83 n.
his character, 84 n.
deputy at Rome, Ixvi «, Ixviii, Ixx-lxxiii,
82. banished, Ixxvii, Ixxviii.
— William, 82 «. Christie, Mr. R. C. , cxxxviii. Church lands, xxvi. Circignani, vii n.
Clargenett, William, priest, cxlix, 137. Clarionet. See Clargenett. Clark, James, xlviii «. William (or Francis), priest, Ixxxvii,
cxxiii, cxxvi, cxlviii, cxlix, 93 «, 149. Clayton, Nicholas, page, xliii. Clement vin., pope, Iviii, Ixiv, Ixvii «, cv,
cxvi, cxxiv, cxxvi, cxxviii, cxxxiii, 17 «,
76, 78 «, 156.
intends hat for Lewis, xxvii.
on the Roman college, xxix.
on the archpriest's appointment, Ixiii.
his decree on academic degrees, 109 n.
high opinion of Parsons, 139.
at Ferrara, Ixix.
French ambassador's audience of, Ixxii.
Elizabeth's opinion of, xcix, 156.
his reception of appellants at Rome, cvi,
cxiii, cxvii, cxviii, cxx. See also Brief. Clenock, Dr. Maurice, viii, ix, 113 n. Clergy. See Priests, secular. Clinch, John, priest, 93 «. Clink prison, Ixxxvii, 102 «, 135. Clithero, Margaret, 52 n. Colleton (or Collington), John, priest, xxxvi n,
Ixii n, Ixiv, Ixvi, Ixviii, Ixxii ;/, c, cix n,
cxvi », cxx n, cxxxii, cxlvii, cl, 52 «, 65 n,
66 ti, 69 «, 70 n, 81 n, 86 n, 101 n, 149.
his life and character, Ivi, Ivii.
signs appeal, 93 n.
— submits to archpriest, Ixxxiii. his faculties, 100 «.
— suspended, Ixxxiii, Ixxxv, 93 «, 148.
his writings, xc, cxii, cxliii, 90 «.
Collinson, George, priest, 24 n.
Como, cardinal of, xv.
approves assassination of Elizabeth,
ii n.
Confession, violated seal of, 120. Constable, father, S.J., 14 n.
Constable, sir Henry, 106 ».
See also Cunstable. Cope, James, priest, 93 n. Copley, Anthony, cxxiii, cxlix.
his character, xcii, xciii.
his books, xc, ci n, cxxxviii, cxxxix.
rev. John, cxi «.
Cornelius, priest, martyr, xliv.
Cottam, Thomas, priest, 9 «.
Coverley. See Calverley.
Cox, William, priest, 93 n.
Creighton, father, S.J., xiv-xvi, 112 n.
Creleto, Giacomo, 119 n.
Creswell, father, S.J., xxv «, xxviii, xxxii,
cxxv, 17 «, 140.
Crimes, abominable, xxxii, xxxiii, 104 «, 146. Cunstable, Mr., in Scotland, 146. Currey, father, S.J., xxx n.
DABSCOT, Mr., 147.
Darbyshire, father Thomas, S.J., Ixxvii, 88 ».
letter of Tichborne to, 139.
Darrel, rev. John, protestant exorcist, xliv, 127 n,
(or Dorel) Thomas, dean of Agen, de fends censure of Paris, 126 seq.
biogr. notice of, 126 «.
Delacourt, 124.
Deputies (the two), sent to Rome, Ixvii, Ixviii, 82, 83.
threatened, Ixviii, 83 n.
— imprisoned, Ixxi, 87 n.
— tried, Ixxiii.
— sentenced to banishment, Ixxvii, 86. Deputies (the four). See Appellants. Detraction, an odious opinion on, 34 «, 51. Deventer, or ' Daventrie,' xviii, xix n. Devil (the), cause of the dissensions, Ixii, Ixiii.
wishes to enter Q. Elizabeth, xlv n.
Devils, exorcised, Ixiii.
— do homage to Campion, xlv n. — - beat Weston, xlvi.
Dibdale, priest, martyr, xliv, xlv.
Digby, Simon, cii n.
Dodipol (Mush), Dr., 52 «.
Doleman, R., pseudonym of Parsons, 56 n.
Dolman, Alban, priest, Iv, 17 «, 90 n.
biographical notice of, 26 n.
— mediates at Wisbeach, 26-29, 30, 32-34, 36-42, 45, 47, 48, 50, 64.
— his name adopted by Parsons, 64.
Thomas, fellow of All Souls', Oxford,
26 n.
Dominicans, the, xlix. Donatists, 8, 21, 35. Dorel. See Darrel. Douai, xliii, Ixi, cxliv, 117 «, 126 «•
164
Index.
Douai, benedictine college at, cxxv.
English college at, vii, xix, xxxi, xxxvi,
Ivii, 84 », 116, 140.
decline of, xxxvii-viii, 103 n.
hostility of Jesuits to, cxxvi, 103, 123.
Douley, George, 88 n.
Dover, c, 82 n.
Drake, xxv n.
Driland or Dryland, Christopher, priest, xliv, 12 and w, 135.
Drummond, Edward, cvii.
Drury, Robert, appellant, martyr, Ixxxiii, cxxiv, 149.
suspended by Blackwell, 93 «.
Dudley, Edmund, of Yanworth, Westmore land, 52 n.
Richard, priest, biographical notice of,
52 n.
arbitrator at Wisbeach, Hi, 4, 5, 52-55,
59, 60 *, 63.
Duras, father, S.J., 114 n.
Dyaper, Mr. Robert, 117 «.
EDMONDS or Edmunds, (alias of Weston),
105. 135- Elizabeth, queen, ii, v, Ix, Ixxx, xcvii, cxxiii,
cxxxvi, cxlv, cl, cli, 10 n, 18 ft, 113 n, 149. right to crown denied, vii n, xix, cvi,
156.
plans for assassinating, xvi, xcvii, n n.
conspiracies against, cxxii.
prophecy concerning, 44 n.
devil wishes to enter, xlv n.
succession to her throne, xxi, cxviii.
priests driven to rely on her favour, 95,
96. negotiates with Bluet, xcviii, xcix, 155-
158.
protestation of allegiance to, ii, cxxii.
her opinion of pope Clement, xcix.
on the seminarists, xxi n.
on toleration, Ixxx, xcviii, cxxi.
bids judges spare lives of priests, xcix.
thanks French ambassadors for helping
appellants, cxiii.
her proclamation, cxx-cxxii.
Ellis, ' Tillotson's man,' 25 n. Ely, bishop of, xxxviii, Iv.
justices of the isle of, xxxviii, 23 n.
Ely, Dr. Humphry, xxxii, xlix, Ixxviii, cxliii,
cxlvii, 72 n.
his impartiality, v, cxliv.
on Jesuit system of education, xxviii,
xxx.
on the archpriest, Ixi, Ixiii, Ixvi, 78 n.
befriends Charnock, Ixxvii.
on suppression of second brief, Ixxxviii n.
on Parson's detractions, 84 n.
Ely, Dr. Humphry, continued: —
on imprisonment of the deputies, 87 «.
on Fisher, 98 «.
on the Jesuits' dislike of doctors, 108 «,
109 n.
on Parsons and the hat, 113 n.
his book, xcii, cxliii.
his letter to a privy councillor, cxlv.
England, Ixi, Ixxvi, 112, 118, 120. Englefield, Sir Francis, xiv «, 112 «, 113 n. ' Englishman Italionate,' xlvii, 23. Equivocation, theory and practice of, xlvii,
107 and n.
Essex, earl of, Ixxx, 56 «, 149, 151. Estcourt, canon, 120 n. Everard, Thomas, page at Wisbeach, xlii. Excommunications defied, cxxii. Exorcists, a band of, xliv.
F. (H.), cxliv.
Faculties of the clergy, Ixxxv, cxv, 91 ;;,
100 «.
Fairfax, Edward, 127 «. Farbeck, Dr., 31 and n. Farmer. See Meredith. Farnese, cardinal protector, xxv, ciii, cxvii. Farrar, Mr., cxxxi. Fast days in England, xxii. Fawkes, Guy, 75 «. Featley, Dr., Ii.
Feckenham, abbot, O.S.B., xxxix, 10. Felton, John, ii, vii n. Feria, duke of, 114 n. Ferrara, Ixix, Ixxi. Finch, a priest, 101 n. Fioravanti, S.J., xxviii, xxxi. Fisher, bishop (Roffensis), 158
rev. Robert, Ixxix, 97-98 n,
Fitzherbert, Nicholas, Ixxii n, 113 n.
Thomas, cxiv.
Fixer, priest, 109 n, no n.
Flanders, xxv, xxxvi, Iviii, Ixix, Ixxxix, 74,
82 «, 120 n, 140. factions in, xxvii, 75 «, in n, 113 «,
114 n.
nuncio in, cxviii, 97 n.
Fleet prison, 32 n. Flibbertigibbet, exorcized, xlv. Floyd, father John, S.J., letter to, 149. Foley, Mr., xxxiv, cviii, cli, 88 n, 119 «. Foster, Francis, priest, 93 «, 149. Foxley, shoemaker, 44 n. Framlingham castle, xcvii, 93 «, 153. France, xvi, Ixviii, xcix, c, 117 », 120 «, 144,
146, 156.
Francis, the first, of France, 144. Franciscan friars in England, cxxvi. Frankfort, cxxxi.
Index.
165
French ambassador, Ixxii. See also Bethune.
GABRIEL of St. Mary, 99 «.
Gaetani. See Cajetan.
Garnet, alias Walley, father Henry, S.J.,
xliii, lii-lv, Ixv, cxvii, cxxvi, 4-6, 19, 20
and », 26, 27, 29, 33, 36, 63, 64, 68, 77, 81 «,
107 «, no «, 119 w, 146, 149.
his parentage, xxx n.
his visit to Wisbeach, li.
his report to Aquaviva, 20 n.
letters of Weston's partisans to, 20 and «,
21 n,
approves Weston's agency, 25, 29 «.
on the charges of immorality, 34 «.
on the division of commons, 50.
negotiates with arbitrators, 54-57.
— his 'proud answer," 55, 56 n. letters to Bagshaw quoted, 61.
— his sincerity suspected, 62, 69, 72 «. sends Standish to Rome, 72.
procures testimonials for Jesuits, 74.
procures thanks to pope, 81.
approves Lister's book, 85, 86 «.
on Lister's character, 84 n.
— Blackwell's letter to, 90 «. his faculties, 100 n.
his expenditure, 102 «.
on equivocation, 108 n.
burns brief on succession, cxxiii.
— treasonable correspondence of, cxxiii. Garnett, Peter, a joiner, 44 ».
Garret. See Gerard.
Gascony, 127 n.
Gatehouse prison, Westminster, Ixxix, cxxiv,
44 «, 66 «, 135. Gee, Edward, 117 «. Gerard (or Garret), Alexander, priest, 43 and
». 137- John, S.J., Ixxxii, cxxvi, 102 «, 105 n,
no », 115 n.
Thomas, priest, 43 n.
William, of Ince, 43 «.
Ghent, Jesuit house in, 106 «.
Gifford, Dr. William, xxxiii «, cxxvi, cxlix,
56 «, 57 w, 73 «, 97 «, no n, in «, 112 n,
114 «, 117 «, 120 n, 147.
his character, 99 n.
Gilbert, George, 30 «, 115 n.
Gillow, Mr. Joseph, Ixix n, Ixx n, cxxx,
cxxxviii, cxlv, cxlvii, cxlviii. Glasgow, archbishop of, xv, xvi, n n. Gloucester, no n.
hall, Oxford, xlvii.
Goldwell, bishop of St. Asaph, xi, Ixi. Gondy, cardinal, Ixxv. Gore, John, seminarist, ix.
Gray, Thomas, keeper of Wisbeach prison,
xli, xliii, 22, 23 «, 24 n, 25 ;/.
Ursula, xlii.
Greene, John, priest, 136, 151. Greenway, father, S.J., cxxiii, cxxvi. Gregory the thirteenth, ix, x, xii, xvii, xlix,
lix, Ix, xcviii, 9 «, 10 n, n «, 112 n, 156.
the fifteenth, 82 n.
Griffith, Dr. Hugh, provost of Cambrai, 97 n.
(or Griffin), Hugh, 113 «.
Guise, duke of, xv, xvi, 11 and n.
Guises, the, ii, xii.
Gunpowder plot, cxxiii, cxxvi, 107 n.
HABERLY, priest at Wisbeach, 137. Haddock. See Haydock. Halkett and Laing's Dictionary, cxlix. Hall, Edward, porter at Wisbeach, 25 », 29 «,
31 n, 44, 44 «. Hampshire, sheriff of, 88 «. Harewood, father, S.J.,xxxii, xxxiii, xxxvii. Harrington, priest, martyr, no «. Harrison, third archpriest, 82 «, 115 n. Harsnet, Dr. Samuel, xliv, xlv. Hart, John, priest, lapse of, 121 n. Hathersage, Derby, xliii. Haydock (or Haddock), Dr. Richard, ix and
n, x, Ixx, Ixxi, Ixxvi n, 18 n, 76, 78 n.
notice of, 76 «.
Vivian, 76 n.
Haywood. See Heywood.
Hawkins, xxv n.
Heborne (Hebborne, or Heyburne), Anthony,
priest, Ixxxiii, cix «, cxxix, 93 n, 148, 149. Henlip, 84 n. Henry iv. of France, xxiv, xcviii «, c, ci.
— protects appellants, cii. Henshaw, Dr., priest, Ixiii. Herefordshire, sheriff of, 84 n. Heresy, propositions savouring of, cxiii-cxv. Heretical magistrates, treating with, cxix,
cxxvi. Heywood, Jasper (or Gasper), S.J., xxii «,
xliii, 12 and «, 101 «, 106 n, 112 «, 121 n. Hide, Leonard, priest, 135. Higgins, Isaac, priest, 24 n, Hill, J., esq. , cxviii n.
Thomas, priest, xxxvi.
Hobbididance, a devil exorcised, xlv. Hobbyhorse at Wisbeach, liv, 18 and n. Holt, father William, S.J., rector of English
college at Rome, viii «, xi, xiv, xxiv, xxv
and «, xxviii, xcvii, 56 «, 57 n, 65 n, 75 n,
82 n, now, 112 n, 114, 116, 117 n, 120 »,
140, 155, 157.
accusations against, 113, 115.
biographical notice of, 114-115 «•
Holtby, father, S.J., 101 n.
1G6
Index.
Howard, Philip, xliv, 106 n. Hughes, a Roman student, x. Huguenots, xcviii, cxlv, 156. Hunter, father, S.J., 72 n. Hussy, Dr., xlviii «.
IDIAQUEZ, don Juan d', xxv n.
Indies, 117 n.
Infanta of Spain, xxv n, Ixxxii, cxxxi, 148.
Inquisition, cxix, 78 n.
proposed for England, xxvi.
cardinals of, Ixxxv, ciii, cxiv, cxxxii.
Invasion of England, xiv «, xv.
Ireland, Ixvi, Ixxvii, 70, 149.
papal attempts in, xiii, xxv n, cxxi, 9 n,
117 n.
Italy, 118, 120 n. Ithell, Ralph (or Udall), priest, Ivi, Ixxx,
Ixxxii, 13 n, 136. becomes chaplain to bishop of London,
67 n.
JACKSON, John, priest, xxxvi n.
James vi. of Scotland, xxv, xlvi, cvii, cxviii,
cxxiii, cxxvi, cl, 19 «, 27 «, 122, 147. Japan, Jesuits in, 117 n. Jesuits, their English mission, xi-xiii, xxii,
xxxiv, 10. their numbers, 12 «, 82#, 112, 121 «,
140.
— their policy, xxii.
— their privileges, 99 n, 100, 116.
charges brought against them by the
seculars, xxii, xxxiv, 4-7, 15 n, 49, 51, 78, 103-123.
— their relations with Allen, xxiii, 17 and n, 122 n.
— their relations with the archpriest, Ix, Ixv, cxvi, cxvii, cxix.
their statecraft, xii, xvii, Ixi, xci, xcviii,
cxxi, cxxvi, 56, 158. misgovern the college at Rome, xi,
xxviii-xxxviii, Ixxix, 68, 98 «, 115 », 120.
— misappropriate funds, cxvi, 38 n, 116 and n.
accumulate wealth, 101, 105, 115 n.
— intercept letters, 119 and n.
degrade the clergy, 97-99, 103-105.
— delight in equivocation, 107.
— contemn university graduates, 108 and n. habitually use calumny, 109, no and n.
— hostile to benedictines, cxxv.
— ' covert' Jesuits, liv. apostates, 121, 122 n.
— accused of assassination, xcviii, xcix, cxlix.
testimonials in favour of, 74, 75 n.
— Blackwell's eulogium of, 68, 137-139.
Jesuits, continued'. —
— their zeal and piety, xxxv, cxix, 48, 56 n.
their benefactors, 106 n.
penalties incurred for calumniating, xcii,
xciii. providential death of their opponents,
xxxi, 1 8 », 122 n.
archpriest forbidden to consult, cxix.
lose their ascendancy, cxxv.
John of Ghent, xxv. John, Mr., 146, 150. Jones, father, S.J., Ixxxiv, 89 «.
— (alias Buckley), O.S.F., no n.
William, printer, cxii n.
Justin Martyr, 141.
KEMPE, Mrs., of Kent, 150.
Kingston, earls of, 30 n.
Knight (or Knighton), Nicholas, priest, 24 n.
Knox, father, xiv, xv, xcviii.
Knyvett, Sir Thomas, xlii.
LABORNE, a priest in England, intercepts
letters, 119 «. Laiton, Mr., 29 n. Lancashire, 69 n.
Langdale, Thomas, S.J., his apostasy, 121 n. Lawson, Mrs. Dorothy, 106 n. Leigh, Richard, priest, xviii n. Lennox, xv. Leo xiii., vii n, cxxiv. Lesley, bishop of Ross, xi, 113 n. Letters, intercepting of, cvii, 119 n, 146-147. Lewis, Dr. Owen, bishop of Cassano, viii »,
ix. n, x, xxvii, xxix, xxxi, Ixix, cxlix, i6«,
17, 112, 113 «, 122 n.
notice of, 112 n.
Liberty of conscience. See Toleration. Liege, 98 n.
Limerick, bishop of, Ixxx. Lingard, Dr., on the archpriest's appoint ment, Ix, Ixi.
Lisbon seminary, xxiii, xxv«, 140. Lister, Thomas, S.J., Ixvi, cxxviii, 60 n, 90 «,
149-
notice of, 84 n.
his treatise on schism, Ixxxiii, Ixxxv,
Ixxxviii, cvii, 84, 85 n, 86 n. Liverdun, Ixxvii.
Lobery, Jasper, xxxii, Ixxvii, 93 n. London, xl, Iv, c, cxlv, 31, 54, 55, 69 «, 154. bishop of, Ixxix, 67 n.
See also Bancroft. Lorraine, Ixxvii, Ixxviii, cxxx. Louvain, v, Ivii, 126 n. Low Countries, 118, 119 «, 121, 151. memorial sent from the, 97.
Index.
167
Lowe, John, 150.
Lowndes' manual corrected, cxxxiv, cxlix.
MADRID, ii, xxv «, xxvii.
Mahu, a devil, xlv.
Maidstone, xliii.
Manareus, Oliver, provincial S.J., 114 «,
115 n.
Manning, cardinal, vii n. Markham, Robert, 115 n, 120 n. Marlot, Dom Guillaume, 99 n. Marshalsea prison, 10, 87 «, 136, 147. Martin, Dr. Gregory, 29 n. Martyrs, vii, xxii, xxiv, xxxix, xl, xcix, ciii. — said to be persecuted by Jesuits, no n,
1 20.
'designed,' 15 n.
their beatification, v'nn.
Mary, the virgin, liv.
Mary, the keeper's maid at Wisbeach, Iv, 44,
45-
Mary Tudor, queen, xxvi, 10 n. Mary, queen of Scots, vi, xiv, xvi, 26 «, 114 n, Mass (the), 99.
Matthews, Toby, bishop of Durham, cl. Medeley, William, keeper of Wisbeach prison,
22 and n, 23, 24 «, 25 n, 44 and n. Memorial, the, against the Jesuits, cxxxvii,
cxlix, 73, 97 seg. Mendham, rev. Joseph, cxxxvi. Mendoza, Spanish ambassador, xviii. Mercurian, general S. J., i6«. Meredith, alias Farmer, Jonas, priest, viii n,
44 n, 65, 66, 135 «, 136.
— biographical notice of, 65 «. Metham, Thomas, priest, intended arch bishop of York, xlii, 10-13, 14 n, 16, 17 n,
31 n.
biographical notice of, 16 n.
sir Thomas, 16 n.
Milan, 113 n.
Milner, bishop, Ixvi «.
Modo, a devil, xlv.
Mondovi, cardinal, xxviii.
Monmouthshire, 84 a, 136.
Montague, lord, 119 n.
Montfort, Francis, priest, 93 n, 149.
Montmartre, 146.
More, Thomas, agent of the clergy, Ixix n,
116 «, 119 «, 120 «, 148. Moro (or Morro), monsignor, xxxiii «, Ixix
and n, cxxix, 148. Moroni, cardinal, viii, ix. Morris, father, S.J., xli, Hi. Morro. See Moro. Morton, Dr., bishop of Ely, xix, xxxviii.
Thomas, 108 «.
Mounteagle, lady, 106 «.
Mush, John, priest, viii n, ix, xxi, Hi, liii, Ivi, Ixxxvi, c, cvi, cxxviii, cxxxii, cxxxviii, 4, 5, 17 «, 51, 60 », 66 «, 67, ioi «, 116 «, 119 «.
— biographical notice of, 51 «, 52 n. arbitrates at Wisbeach, Iv, 53-65.
— projects association, 69 n.
— signs appeal, 93 n. his faculties, 100 n.
— suspended, Ixxxiii, Ixxxv, 93 n.
— submits, 149.
at Rome, cii-cxviii.
— his diary, ciii.
— repudiates Watson, cxiii.
— on the Jesuit missionaries, xxii. on decline of Roman college, xxxvii.
— letter to Moro, Ixix.
— letter to Bagshaw, 147.
— letter intercepted, 120 n.
— letter from Bluet to, xcvi.
letter from Blackwell to, 89 «.
calumniated by Standish, 52 «.
his character, by Parsons, ex, cxi.
— his opinion of Parsons, xxii.
his book, Ixxxv, 52 n.
Mush, William, priest, 93 n. Mynion college, 146.
NAPLES, 74.
Needham, Oswald, priest, 93 n. Neri, St. Philip, xxxvii. Neville, sir Henry, xcix «, 135. Newgate prison, xci, 135. Newton, Mr., 150.
Norden. priest and doctor of medicine, 60 n, 66 and n.
— biographical notice of, 65 «.
— his character, 14 «, 67 n. his sudden death, 65 n, 67 n.
Norfolk, synod in, xxii n.
Norfolk coast, 25 n.
Norris, Dr., priest, 93 «.
Nuncio at Paris, xv, xcviii n, c, n n.
Nutter, alias Rowley, priest, 136.
OATH of Allegiance. See Allegiance. Oldcorne, father, S.J., xxx n, 84 n, 102 n. Oliver, Dr., his opinion of Holt, 114 n. Oratory, the Roman, ciii.
the London, cxliv.
Ortelio, 119 n.
Osbaldeston, Alexander, 43 n.
Jane, 43 n.
Ossat, cardinal d', xxiii, xxiv », Ixi, Ixxi,
ciii, cvi.
Oxenbridge, Dr. Andrew, 10 «. Oxford, xxxi, xlvii, Ivii, Ixi, 84 n, 88 «, 109 n,
126 n.
168
Index.
Owen, Thomas, S.J., Ixxvii, 12 n. Hugh, 113 «, 114 n, 117 n.
P. (A.), his book, xc, cxlvi.
Padua, university of, 1.
Paget, Charles, cxliv, 26 «, 97 #, in w.
— denounces the Jesuits, xxvii, 17 «, 114 n.
— his answer to Parsons, cxliii.
his character, 114 n.
Palmer, father, S. J., 106 «. a brewer, 25.
the queen's chaplain, 44 n.
Panzani, memoir of, cli.
Paris, li, Ixxvii, Ixxviii, c, ci, cxx n, cxlii, 146.
— bishop of, Ixxiv.
university, decree of, Ixxxiv-v, 90, 123-
126.
Parker, Mr., proctor for Blackwell, cvi.
Parkinson, rev. Robert, cxliv.
Parliament of 1585, xxxix.
Parma, duke of, 114 «.
Parry, William, prisoner at Wisbeach, 24 n, 25 n, 135, 136.
Parsons, Robert, S.J., said to be a black smith's son, xxx n.
career at Oxford, xlvii-xlix.
missionary in England, xii-xv, 9 n.
plans the invasion of England, xv-xvii.
Mush on his conduct, xxii.
founds Spanish seminaries, xxiii.
on the royal succession, xxv, xxxii, Ixxx,
56, 64.
— proposes inquisition for England, xxvi.
avoids the cardinalate/xxvi, 113 n.
on the Roman tumults, xxviii, xxix, 73.
— quells disturbances, xxxvi, 140.
— opposes the association, 71.
— suggests appointment of archpriest, Ix, 78.
illtreats the two deputies, Ixxi-lxxvii, 83,
86.
justifies his treatment, 87 n.
receives vow of obedience from Worth-
ington, xxxviii, 103 n.
sets cardinals by the ears, 112.
opposes appellants at Rome, cii, cv-cvii.
writes the ' Manifestation,' cvii.
his correspondence from Rome, cviii.
— his memorials to the pope, cix-cxi.
on the appellants' book, cxiii.
his partial success, cxiv.
his discontent, cxvi.
— his ' Apologie ' examined, cxvi.
— wishes to embrace the four priests, cxviii.
— attacks benedictines, cxxv. on bishops, lix.
on Wisbeach stirs, liv, 27 n, 34 n, 65 n.
Parsons, Robert, S.J., continued: —
on Bagshaw, 1, Ixxviii, Ixxix, ex, 17 n.
on Mush, 52 n.
on Bluet, 13 n, 14 n.
on Dolman, 27 n.
on Fisher, 98 n.
on Bishop and Charnock, Ivii «, 84 n.
on Colleton, Ivii n.
on Copley, xciii.
on Watson, xciii, xciv.
on immorality of appellants, xcii, xcv,
cv, cix, ex, cxi n.
on equivocation, 108 n.
on lapsed Jesuits, 121 n.
on slanders against the society, xcii, 1 1 1 « .
his scandalous tale, cxi n.
his contempt for poverty, xxx n.
— political actions and writings, xiv, Ixxx, xcvii, xcix, c, 147, 151, 155.
— expels a nonpolitical seminarist, c.
— prepares knives for king of Scots, 147. has hand in Essex's plot, 155.
calumnies laid upon him, Ixxxix.
— Copley's account of him, xcii.
regard of pope for him, 139.
his credit in Europe, 145.
his comment on the dissensions, iii.
his books, xxv, xxxii, Ixxx, Ixxxix, xc,
cvii, ex, cxii, cxxxiii, cxxxiv, cxi, 56 and n,
64 ; and passim. Pasquier, Etienne, cxlv. Pasquin on Parsons, Ixi. Paul v., cxxiv, 78 n, 101 «, 115 n. Payn, John, 100 n. Pegna, Spanish minister, xxiv n. Percy, alias Fisher, S.J., xxx n.
Thomas, cxxiii.
Perkins, Christopher, ex-jesuit, cxxiii, 122 n.
Persecution, xci, 141, 155.
Peter, St., cxxxi, 87 n.
Petyt MSS., Ixvi, Ixx n, Ixxii, ciii, clii, no«.
Phelippes, Thomas, decipherer, cvii.
Philalethes (Andreas), xc, xci, xcii, cxli,
69 n. Philip n., king of Spain, ii, vi, xiv «, xvi,
xx, xxiii, xxiv, xcix, n «, 114 n, Pibush, priest, martyr, no n. Pierrepoint, Gervaise, lay Jesuit, 30 and n,
31, So-
Henry, 30 n.
Pinelli, cardinal Domenico, cxiv. Pitts, Arthur, priest, Ixxvii.
Henry, xxxvi n.
John, cl, 83 «.
Robert, xxxvi n.
Pius v., vi, Ix, xcviii, 9, 10 «, 156.
Pius vii., Ixvi «.
Plasden, priest, martyr, now.
Index.
169
Plowden, father, S.J., liii #, cli, 81 n, 99 «,
113 n.
Plumtree, rebel chaplain, vii n. Poisoning, Jesuits suspected of, cxlix. Pont-a-Mousson, Ixxvii, cxliv, 84 n, 139. Pope, the, averse to bishops in England, lix. alone can institute new dignity, Ixiii.
— right of appeal to, 131.
— supremacy of, 87 n.
his commands said to be frustrated by
the Jesuits, 118. deposing power of, civ, cxxii, cxxiv,
cxxv.
Portugal, Henry, king of, 9. Potter, George (alias Stransham), priest, li,
ex, 24 n, 25 n, 59, 93 n, 135. Pound, Thomas, lay brother, S.J., liv, Ixxxiv,
59 n, 65 «, 137. Powell, priest, 137. Priests, secular, xx, xxi, cxxxv, cxxxvii,
cxxxix, cxlv, cxlvi, 76-81.
— number of, in England, xvii, cxiv«, 82 n, 1 20 n, 140.
many banished, xxxix, cxxi.
their reverence for Allen, xix.
— outside Wisbeach, Ivi.
— queen Mary priests, xlv, 82 n, 157.
— new party of, xxiii.
their political attitude, xvii-xxiii, xxiv «,
88 «, 139-144- attempt to form an association, Ivii, 69-
7i-
said to be at variance with laity, 76.
jealous of Jesuits, Ixxxix.
— degraded by Jesuits, 97-100.
— - persecuted by Jesuits, 95 and n, no, 112, 118.
— need testimonials from Jesuits, 99 n. — • Cajetan on their dissensions, Ixxii.
— Blackwell on do., 137. — • Elizabeth on do., cxxi.
— thirty-three, subscribe appeal, 93 n. — • pronounced innocent of treason, 155. See also Appellants.
Prison certificates, xl. Prisoners, Ixxxvii.
treatment of, xxxix-xliii, 153.
Privy Council, Ixxx-lxxxii, civ, cxlv.
priests' dealings with, Ixix, Ixxviii,
Ixxxix, cxxvi-cxxvii.
Proclamations of Elizabeth, civ, cxx -cxxii. Prophecy current among catholics, 44 n. Pud., Mr., 146. Puritans, the, Ixxviii, 18 n.
QUARANTOTTI, monsignor, Ixvi n. RAMPTON, near Cambridge, 25 n.
Rheims, x, xlviii, Ivii, xciv, cxliv, cxlix, 82 n.
English seminary at, xx, xlix, 1, 103 n.
decline of, xxiv, xxxvii, xxxviii.
Richard , 148.
Richardson, William, priest, martyr, xcix n. Ridolfi, vi.
Rishton, Edward, priest, xxxix, 10 «, 66 n. Rivers, Anthony, S.J., xcix «, cxi, cxii «, cli,
119 n.
Roehampton, xlvi. Rome, li, Ixiv, Ixvii, ci, cxxvi, cxxx, cxxxi,
cxlii, cxlvii, 4, 7, 17, 68, 84 «, 86, 88, 113 n,
i49) 156, 157-
— students parade streets of, x.
— mission of two deputies to, Ixviii, 80, 82.
— their treatment at, Ixx-lxxvii, 86, 87 n. — • four appellants at, cii-cxx.
— • stews in, 65, 66.
— • English Jesuits at, 89 «.
— letters intercepted at, 119 and n. — • influence of Parsons at, 156, 157.
English college at, xx, 115 n.
— foundation of, viii, 112 n.
— danger of bloodshed at, ix.
— disturbances at, ix, xxvii, xxviii, xxxiii, xxxiv, 72-73 «, 108 n, 140, 152.
— Holt rector, 114 n.
— Parsons rector, xxxvi.
— complaints of students, xxvii, xxix, xxxiv, 108 n.
— seminarists of ' low born,' xxx ; ' wanton colts,' xxxvi n.
— Bagshaw at, xlix.
system of spies at, xxx.
students accused of unnatural crime,
xxxii, xxxiii n, no n, 146.
grove at, cut down, xxxii.
— Jesuit misrule at, xxxi, 68, 72 and n.
— students opposed to Spanish faction, xxxi.
— pontifical inquiry on, xxxv.
— names of mutineers at, xxxvi «.
— students expelled from, xxxvi, xxxvii.
decline of, xxxvii.
cardinals' court held in, Ixxvi.
— appellants decline to visit, cii. Rouen, cxxviii, cxxix.
Rouse, Anthony, priest, Ixxxvii. Rowley. See Nutter.
S. ANDREA, church of, in Rome, 115 n.
San Lucar seminary, xxiii.
Scarlet, Thcmas, xxv n.
St. Omer's college for boys, xxiii, 104 n, 140.
St. Peter's at Rome, penitentiary of, 88 n,
Sander, Dr. Nicholas, vi, xiii, xiv, xix, xxix,
170
Index.
Schism, priests charged with, Ixxxiii, Ixxxiv,
85, 88, 89 «, 90, 94, 149-150. • decision of Paris university on, 124.
— Blackwell on, 91, 153.
— Lister's treatise on, 143-145.
name of, abolished by the Pope, Ixxxix.
appellants freed from, at Rome, cv, cviii.
Scotland, Ixxvii, 82 «, 117 n.
• Jesuits sent into, xiv, 114 n.
— - cardinal protector of, xxviii, 78 n.
jurisdiction over, Ixiii, cxxvii.
Scottish faction, x, 56 n, 75 n.
Scots, king of, i.
Scrope, Nicholas, prisoner at Wisbeach, 24 n.
Sega, cardinal, xxviii, xxxiii, xxxv, xxxvi n,
Ixix, 56 n, 73 n.
Seminaries, the foreign, vii, xiv n, 140, 152. Seminarists, number of, vi, xx, Iviii, cxxxix, MO, 157-
— Parsons' eulogium of, xxi n, xxiv n. Sergeant's account of the English chapter,
lix «, cli.
Sevestre, Peter, cxliii. Seville, xliii, xlvi.
— seminary of, xxiii, 88 n, 140. Sfondrati, cardinal, cxiv. Shakespeare and the devils, xiv and n. Shaw, Henry, priest, Ixiii. Sherwin, Ralph, priest, martyr, ix n. Sicklemore, John, his letter to Bagshaw, 145. Sixtus v., xvii, xxviii, Ix, xcviii, cxlix, 78 n,
112 «, 156.
Skrogg, Mr., 25 n.
Smith, Richard, bishop of Chalcedon, vii »,
li«.
R., priest, 101 n.
secretary of Parsons, cvii.
Sorbonne, the, Ixxvii, cxliv. Southwark, synod of, xiii, xiv, xvi. Southwell, Robert, S.J., xliii, 12 «, 76 n, 106
n, no n.
— on equivocation, 107 n. his book, cxvi.
Southworth, Christopher, priest, liv, 20 and
«, 21, 22, 23, 26, 30, 39, 44, 136.
sir John, 20 «, 136.
Spain, i, Iviii, Ixxx, 113 n, 116, 139, 149, 151,
i57» IS8- adherents of, among the clergy, xxiv n,
Ixxxii, cxxi.
— opposition to, xxxii.
— seminaries in, xliii, 115 «, 140, 146.
— inquisition of, xxvi.
king of, xii, Ixxii, xcviii, cxx.
Spanish ambassador, xiv, Ixxii, cxvii.
faction, xxxvi, cii, cxxv.
Speaker of house of commons, cxii.
Spies employed by Cecil, xxxv, 119 «, 120 «.
Spy system in Jesuit colleges, xxx. Squiers, plot of, Ixxiv, Ixxxi. Squire, Dr., xlvii.
St father, 117 n.
Stafferton, seminarist, 109 n. Staffordshire, 135.
Standish, James, priest, Ixiii, 70, 75-77, 78 «, 80.
Ralph, priest, viii «, ex n, 52 n.
Stanhope, sir John, Ixxx.
Stanley, sir William, xviii, 75 n, 112 n.
Stapleton, Dr., xxvii, 113 n,
Stephens, secretary to Parsons, cvii.
Stillington, Dr., 109 n.
Stonyhurst college, cviii, cli.
Story, Dr., vii n.
Strangwitch, Philip, priest, 136.
Stransham. See Potter.
Strickland, Roger, priest, cxx «, 93 «.
Stukeley, adventurer, 32 n.
Suffolk, county of, 32 n.
Synods of clergy, xiii, xxii n.
TAILOR, Francis, priest, 135.
— (or Taylor), James, priest, 93 n, 135 «. Tassis, J. B. de, Philip's agent, xv «, 114 n. Tasso, 127 n.
Tempest, Edward, priest, 117 n, n8», 122 n. Tertullian, 141.
Throgmorton, Thomas, 56 «, 112 «. Thules, Christopher (alias Ashton), priest,
xliii, xliv, 93 n, 136. • John, priest, 93 n.
— Robert, 93 n. Tiber, overflow of, Ixxi. Tichborne, sir Benjamin, 88 n.
Henry, S.J., Ixxiii, Ixxvi, Ixxvii, 88,
89 n.
• notice of, 88 «.
— • his letter to F. Darbyshire, 139. Tierney, canon, Ixxi, cxxx, cxxxii, cxxxviii,
cxlvii, cxlix, cli, 82 n. Tillotson, Francis, priest, 23 n, 25 «, 44 «,
136.
Tirwit, Dr., priest, Ixiii, 70 n. Toleration, priests petition Elizabeth for,
xcviii, 156.
• Jesuits opposed to, i, 88 «, 141.
• the pope's opinion on, cvi.
the queen's innocence of, cxxi.
Toleto, Francis, S.J., cardinal, xxxi, xxxiii,
Ixxix, 78 n, 122.
• notice of, 122 n.
Topcliffe, Ixxix, 107 n.
Tower of London, the, xlvi, 1, li n, Ivii,
Ixxviii, 16, 31 n, 65 n, 66 «, 135, 136.
• lieutenant of, Ixxix.
Tracy, Anthony, cxi.
Index.
171
Transham. See Potter, George. Tresham, Francis, cxxiii, 107 n, 108 «.
sir Thomas, 83 «, 143.
Trollop, Cuthbert, priest, cxx «, 93 «. Turnbull, Mr. W. B. D.D., cli, 52 «. Tyburn, ix », xviii », 107 «. Tyrrell, priest, xliv, xlv, 136.
UNIVERSITY degrees, 1, 108 and «. Udall.
VALLADOLID seminary, xxiii, xxv «, xlvi,
53 «, 88 «, 140, 150.
Venus described by Watson, xciv, cxxxvii. Verstegan, Parsons' agent, 112 «. Vertourmanus, L., 150. Vestrio, monsignor, cxvii. Villeroi, French minister, ci. Vitelleschi, F. Mutio, general S. J., xxviii,
12 n. 1 06 n.
WAAD or Wade, William, clerk of the coun cil, Ixxix, Ixxx, Ixxxii, 148. Wagg, butcher at Wisbeach, 44 n. Walker, Ja., heirs of, cxxix. Walley. See Garnet. Walpole, secretary of Parsons, cvii.
— Henry, S.J., Ixxxi, cvii, 105 n.
— alleged conspiracy of, Ixxix.
— lapse of, 121 n.
Walsingham, sir Francis, xxxv, xl, xli, 121 «. Warford, William, S.J., 88, 89 n, 109 «.
— notice of, 88 «.
Warwickshire, priests in, Ixviii, Ixxxiii. Watson, Thomas, bishop of Lincoln, xxxix,
10, n, 37.
— William, priest, xci, xcii, cv, ex, cxxv, cxxvi, cxxxiii, cxxxv, cxxxvi-vii, cxxxix, cxli, cxlvi, cxlix, 43 n, 93 «.
his overtures to the government,
Ixxix, Ixxx.
— submits to the archpriest, Ixxxiii. his books, xc.
— his character by Parsons, xciii-xcv. — ' deserved to be whipped,' cxiii.
— his plot, cxxiii. Webbe, Dr., xix. Weedon's alehouse, 44 n.
Welshmen in the college at Rome, viii, ix. Wendon, Nicholas. See Windham.
— William, 32 n. Westminster, archbishop of, his archives,
104 n. Weston, William, S.J., xl, xlvii, li, Hi, liii,
Ixxxii, cxxxv, 3, 4, 5, 69, 71, 72 «, 83 «,
105, 106 », in, (alias Edmondes) 135.
Weston, William, S.J., continued:—
• his autobiography, xli.
• biographical notice of, xliii-xlvi.
his book of miracles, xliv.
• his exorcisms, xlv.
• — - his life at Wisbeach, liv, lv, 6-67.
— charged with pride, hypocrisy, etc., 6, 7, 13. 15, 16, 30.
• praised for prudence and amiability,
63 n.
• accusations against his brethren, 34, 64.
• assumes 'agency,' 25.
— his rules, 37, 38.
— separates from opponents, 43.
— rejects proposals of peace, 41, 42 «, 53.
— yields to Garnet, 57, 58.
— his swoon, 6, 34, 58 and n, 64.
— in the Tower, Ixxviii, Ixxix. Whoredom, etc., charges of, xxxiii «, liv, 21,
34- Wigges, priest, M.A., Ivi, 13 «, 67, 136.
— beaten by Wisbeach prisoners, 67 n. William, a priest, too familiar with a tailor's
wife, cxi n.
Williams, Friswood, a girl exorcised, xlv. • the lord keeper, cxxvii.
— a servant, 44 n. Willingham, Cambridgeshire, 25 «. Willowes, Mr., 25 n.
Wilson, John, S.J., vii «, cvii. Windham (Wendon, or Windam), Dr. Nicho las, 10 «, 32, 33, 36.
— biographical notice of, 32 «. Windon, Ralph, fellow of St. John's, Oxford,
10 «, 32 n.
Wingfield, priest, no n. Winter, Thomas, cxxiii n. Winwood, Ralph, ci, cii. Wisbeach castle, xxxviii.
• used as a prison, xxxix-xl.
first prisoners at, 10 and «, 23.
laxity of discipline in, xli.
keepers of, xl, Ixxxi.
• pages at, xlii.
place of pilgrimage, xlii.
• unity and brotherly love in, 10, u.
— riots at, 23-24 n.
— new prisoners, list of, 135.
— character of prisoners, 24 «.
— arrival of Weston, 12.
— origin of the rupture, lii-liv. contests for superiority, 13.
• Jesuit plots, 14-16.
• Christmas amusements, 18.
separation threatened, 20.
• character of anti-jesuits, liii n.
• whoredom and drunkenness, 21 and n.
appeal to the keeper, 22.
172
Index.
Wisbeach castle, continued : —
the chapel, 24.
escape of prisoners, 24, 67 n.
Garnet approves the ' agency,' 25.
Dolman's visit and mediation, 26, 27.
Jesuitical tricks, 29 and n.
a priest goes mad, 31.
Dr. Windham mediates, 32, 33.
charges of immorality, 34, 41-42.
Bluet's discourse, 35.
Dr. Bavant attempts arbitration, 36.
conferences, 37.
the united threatened with starvation, 38.
reconciliation proposed, 39.
— seven articles of peace, 40. arbitration fails, 41.
Dr. Bavant turns his tippet, 42.
the chapel made a buttery, 43, 60 «, 64.
scandal of the priest and maid, 44, 45.
Gerard's confession, 43.
features of prison life, 44 n.
separation of commons effected, 43-46.
new garboils, 47.
scandal and distraction of catholics, Iv,
30, 46, 48-50.
arbitration of Mush and Dudley, 52.
new articles rejected by Weston, 53.
— approved in London, 54. Garnet yields, 57.
— question of stolen pewter, 59. peace concluded, 60.
Wisbeach castle, continued: —
rejoicings, 60 n'.
renewal of the feud, 64.
— final disruption, 67 and n.
— pulpits ring with the scandal, 69 n.
— a crisis in the quarrel, Ixxviii.
the dissensions said to be a pretence,
Ixxxi. affairs in winter of 1598-9, Ixxxii.
— the keeper's report, Ixxxi, Ixxxii.
malcontents submit to Blackwell, Ixxxiii.
• — - eight prisoners suspended, 93.
appeal dated from, Ixxxv, 93 «.
comments on the contention, 103, 149,
152.
— book on the stirs, by Dr. Bishop, 83 n. Witnesham, Suffolk, rector of, 32 n. Wood, Dr. Richard, 10 n. Woodhouse, Thomas, martyr, vii n. Woodroffe, priest, 137. Worcestershire, 84 n.
Worthington, Dr., vice-president of Douai, xxxvii, cxxv, cxliv, 75 «, 84 n, 103, 104 n.
vows obedience to Parsons, xxxviii, 103 n.
Wright, Mr., 147.
YORK CASTLE, 127 «.
Yorkshire, 52 n, 121 n. '
Young, Dr., master of Pembroke College, 10.
Younger, Dr. James, of Douai, 75 n.
CORRECTIONS.
Page 12, note, 1. io,Jor 1519 read 1619. ,, 52, note, 1. 15, for Anne read Margaret. » 75? !• 3 from foot, for catholicse read catholica. ,, 82, note, 1. 7, for f. 97 read i. 135.
,, 82, note, 1. 2$, for Vicar Apostolic read bishop of Chalcedon. ,, 95, note, 1. 7, /0rand read et.
Printed by T. and A. CONSTABLE, Printers to Her Majesty, at the Edinburgh University Press.
31B12
Ill
'
111, m
i ill
i!j IHIIl'i'i'li'
"1
f A\VJ V WT V V>k\V
SSffl
.&v*ntA
1
JaP
mi
w*$$®i3$$ ftasB®¥»w$w |«M»
^Stew «Sff«:
.;^v^\w/: