you, that our commands, in the said letters, are "not to be regarded. Surely, this newes did "trouble us; and that so much the more, because having had experience of your obedience, (most dearely beloved sonnes), who, to the end ye might obey this holy see, have godly and valiantly " contemned your riches, wealth, honour, libertie, yea and life itselfe; we should never have sus"pected that the trueth of our apostolique letters "could once have been called into question among 66 66 66 you, that by this pretence yee might exempt "yourselues from our commandements. But we "do herein perceive the subtiltie and craft of the "enemie of man's saluation; and we doe attribute "this your backwardnesse, rather to him than to your owne will. And for this cause, wee have thought good to write the second time vnto you; and to signifie vnto you againe, that our apostolike letters, dated the last yere, on the tenth "of the calends of October, concerning the prohi"bition of the oath, were written, not only vpon "our proper motion, and of our certaine know 66 66 66 ledge, but also after long and weightie deli"beration vsed, concerning all those things which "are contained in them; and that, for that cause, 66 66 yee are bound fully to observe them; rejecting "all interpretation perswading to the contrary. "And this is our meere, pure, and perfect will; being always carefull of your salvation, and alwayes minding those things which are most profitable vnto you. And we doe pray without "ceasing, that he that hath appointed our lowli แ "nesse to the keeping of the flocke of Christ, would enlighten our thoughts and our counsels; whom wee doe also continually desire, that he would "increase in you, (our beloved sonnes), faith, constancy, and mutuall charitie and peace, one to "another. All whom we doe most loveingly blesse, "with all charitable affection. "Dated at Rome, at Saint Marke's, under the signet of the Fisherman, the X of the calends "of September 1607; the third yeere of our "popedome." CHAP. XLVIII. THE CONTROVERSY RESPECTING THE LAWFULNESS OF THE OATH. To all who are interested, either in the history of the times, to which these pages relate, or in the history of the pretensions of the popes to temporal power, this controversy is of singular importance. This, however, is not the place for detailing its particulars: the combatants, who principally distinguished themselves in it, were cardinal Bellarmine and father Preston, an English Benedictine monk, who assumed, in this controversy, the surname of Widdrington. Each wrote as a scholar and a gentleman. The objections to the oath were numerous; but, as we have already said, and must repeat in this place, the cardo causa, the hinge, on which the merits of the case principally rested, was the lawfulness of the absolute denial, expressed in the oath, of the pope's divine right to the power of deposing sovereigns from their kingdoms for heresy. This is placed beyond controversy by a letter from father Wilford to father Leander*, who, at the time when it was written, was employed in framing such an oath of allegiance as should satisfy both the British government and the English catholics. "Look over the oath which usually is exhibited to "catholics in Ireland, examine other forms of oath "in catholic countries, add to them, augment them, "and endeavour to form them in that kind and "those words, which may content and secure his majesty, as is most just and reasonable to be done, yet take heed of meddling with the deponibility "of princes; for that article will never pass here. If this point of the oath could be helped, and this petra scandali taken away, and the catholics freed "from it, how many thousand of benedictions would "the catholics heap upon his majesty." 66 To this objection to the oath we shall afterwards advert; some other of the objections to it must now seem very extraordinary. Two of this description are mentioned by Dr. Bishop, as those, which principally deterred him from taking this oath. In a manuscript, with an extract of which the writer has been favoured, the doctor writes, that "he had "been taken, on the day before, to the archbishop " of Canterbury, to express to his grace his opinion the lawfulness of the oath :-.' I told him, says Dr. Bishop, that after most diligent exami 66 upon 1 * Dated Rome, May 9, 1635. Clarendon's State Papers, vol. i. p. 272. nesse to the keeping of the flocker' enlighten our thoughts and or "wee doe also continually d "increase in you, (our belo "stancy, and mutuall ch "another. All whom w "with all charitable "Dated at Rom signet of the F "of September popedome." THE C Tc of h any reasons cted to the inces cannot be therefore be deprived of • bold their principalities causes. neither the pope, nor any an absolve the party taking it from heath which I said I could not affirm upon for (to say nothing of his holiness), the " to whom the oath is taken, may unquesCanterbury argued, in his usual manner, against monably absolve me from it. The archbishop of "my objections: he said that the framers of the oath "had not the intention, which I ascribed to them; "and that the words bore another meaning: Ianswered, that there was a clause in the oath, which "said, that the words were to be taken in their "plain and obvious meaning, and not otherwise; "wherefore no person, who took the oath, could "rely upon any other interpretation of the words."" It is wonderful that such objections to the oath could be gravely urged: the word "princes," could only mean princes, civilly independent of the pope; the word " absolve," could not be meant to include the absolution of those, who were enwhom, therefore, it must always be competent to titled to the performance of the obligation, and to absolve from that obligation. It is observable that THE ENGLISH CATHOLICS 201 s divine right to the power of Heir kingdoms for heresy. by a letter from o at the THE ENGLISH CATHOLICS. 203 ribed to the English roman-catholics, ighteenth year of his late majesty, positions to which Dr. Bishop obatholics who take it, renounce, upon pinion that "princes," excommunicated pope, may be deposed; and they declare, oath, that they cannot be absolved of it, ough the pope'" or any other person," should dispense with it. A But, whatever may be the thought of the groundlessness of the objections to the oath,-still, as they proceeded from feelings of conscience, the refusal of the oath did honour to those who made the objection. We may say of them, what we have said of the priests, who refused to subscribe to the denial of the pope's deposing power, expressed in the six articles tendered to them by the ministers of queen Elizabeth*:-it was an error-a lamentable error--but it was a triumph of conscience over persecution. It reflected honour on the whole catholic body: the page of history does not produce higher proof of a general conviction of the sacred obligation of an oath. When the want of this conviction is objected,-(but what gentleman now objects it?), -to a catholic, he may confidently appeal to these two facts, as an unanswerable refutation of the charge; he may ask confidently, what stronger refutation of such a charge, hath been, or can be produced? * Ch. xxiv. s. 2. |